Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 30, 2021 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:31:26

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #99

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Eats for Tuesday the 30th of March 2021.
	I'm joined by Callum, and before we begin, we have, of course, wonderful premium content on lotuses.com, if you'd like to go over and check that out.
	In addition, we do loads of other news reporting.
	And this afternoon, we will be recording the Brave New World Book Club.
	I know there's been a long time in the making.
	Normally we're going to do more regular book clubs than we have been doing recently, but this one required a few premium podcasts to lead up to because it's going to be the best Brave New World analysis you'll ever see.
	Anyway, let's get into the news.
	I love it.
	Anyway, so the trial of Derek Chauvin, or the George Floyd trial, is known.
	For some reason.
	Irritatingly, people don't seem to like that term.
	They're saying that it's Derek Chauvin on trial, that's true, but it is George Floyd who is the name that is known, so it became known the George Floyd trial.
	Anyway, so the case started, so they did the jury selection, and now, I think it was, what was it, Monday, they started the actual proceedings.
	And I want to first just go over, so we gave our perspective in a previous episode of looking at the defense's argument and what people think.
	What is likely to be the case.
	Yeah, this is Vox.com, so a leftist outlet giving their, you know, leftist viewpoint on it.
	I wanted to go through it because some of the stuff in here I just found strange.
	So just to lead up before we actually get into the case.
	So they argue in here that the defence is arguing that the trial is, quote, not about race, and then they say, however, this line of questioning for prospective jurors suggested otherwise, asking them their views on racism, policing in communities of colour, and Black Lives Matter movement.
	I'm like, I'm not really sure the Black Lives Matter movement necessarily has anything to do with race from his perspective here.
	Like, I'm sorry, racial nationalists who have a viewpoint on this think that everything's about race.
	But I think his viewpoint is if you have involvement with racial nationalism or extreme views on race, then you shouldn't be included in this.
	Not that this trial necessarily has nothing to do with race.
	Well, the conclusion is already assumed.
	If you happen to be a Black Lives Matter supporter, Yeah, so the argument from these folks is victim black, perpetrator white, therefore guilty, therefore racist, which is just not an argument, I'm sorry to say.
	Well, there's just no evidence that Derek Chauvin is a racist.
	None so far that I've seen.
	So they also say that the prosecution struck out prospective white jurors who expressed police-friendly views or had negative thoughts about the Black Lives Matter protests.
	So that's the prosecution trying to say that this guy is guilty.
	They got rid of white jurors on the basis that they were pro-police or had negative views about Black Lives Matter.
	Which, again, I'm actually in agreement with both sides here.
	This seems to be a proper procedure to get rid of jurors who will have a biased opinion on the case.
	Because, of course, this is an incredibly difficult case to find an honest jury who has no opinion on it.
	But this is the best you can really do, in my view.
	To not be aware of George Floyd and Black Lives Matter, you would have to be living under a rock.
	Yeah, so I presume you get the people who are living out in the cabin in the woods.
	I guess that would work.
	But they also mention in here that the trial is the first trial in Minnesota history to be entirely live-streamed.
	This is apparently because of the COVID regulations around the whole thing.
	Live-streamed from a nuclear bunker?
	So there's limited seating inside, so they want everyone to be able to view what's going on.
	Yeah, but it's also a fortress, where they put barbed wire and they have armed guards around.
	Yeah, but they're meaning more the family, for example.
	There's just not enough seating to put them all in there.
	But the courthouse has become a bit of a war zone.
	And for one side of the argument's reasons.
	Yeah, it's not the Blue Lives Matter people who are at threat of besieging the court.
	We want justice for Derek Chauvin.
	Like, that's not going on.
	Anyway, so they also mention here, so among the 15 selected jurors, we do know that six are people of colour.
	One black woman, three black men, and two mixed-raced women.
	I just find this weird, because this is the point we got back to, which is if you argue that this and this and this can be enough to kick someone off the jury.
	You can see Vice already looking here that if you're black, you'll vote with the black man, and if you're white, you'll vote with the white man.
	Because they then go on to say, despite the jury being majority white, the jury is actually more diverse than the county and city.
	It's just like...
	Like, the case is not about race in the sense that there was no racial discrimination going on here to the evidence.
	Like, there is no evidence of that.
	But it's always about race for the left.
	Yeah, so they've got to mention that, nah, the jury's majority white.
	Therefore, there's a problem here.
	But then they also have to admit that, actually, it's more non-white than is proportional to the city.
	So, presumably, they're arguing to get rid of non-white jurors.
	But, nah, there's narrative money.
	They're the ones who want representation.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, so let's get to the stream.
	So we can't play the whole thing.
	You can go watch the whole thing in your own time.
	It's like seven hours for the first day, and then so on and so forth.
	But the early segments, I think it's like the first hour and a half or something, is the opening statements, if you're interested in just watching those parts.
	Which are the parts we're going to go over, because the rest of it is just witnesses and things like this, which is finicky.
	So I wanted to play the first clip, which is just a cut-down version of the prosecution's argument, without arguing that Derek Chauvin is guilty of murder.
	And let's just play it.
	That for the first four minutes and 45 seconds, you learned that Mr.
	Floyd was calling out, crying for his life.
	And ladies and gentlemen, not just Mr.
	Floyd, you're going to hear and see that there were any number of bystanders who were there who were also calling out to let up and get up, such that Mr.
	Floyd would be able to breathe and to maintain and to sustain his life.
	But then for the remaining four minutes and 44 seconds, Mr.
	Floyd was either unconscious, breathless, or pulse-less.
	And the compression, the squeezing, the grinding, went on just the same.
	For the total of 9 minutes and 29 seconds.
	There are any number of things that this case is not about.
	Maybe an infinite number of things the case isn't about.
	I'll tell you about them.
	For example, you will hear that George Floyd was a big guy.
	He was over six feet tall.
	Every police conduct witness we bring to you on the stand, every use of force experts will tell you that his size is no excuse for any police abuse.
	You're going to hear, obviously, that he struggled with drug addiction, that he had high blood pressure, they'll talk about heart disease, and we will tell you about that heart disease that he had.
	What you will learn is that George Floyd lived for years, day in and day out, every day, with all of these conditions, until the one day, on May 25th, when he ended the 9 minutes and 29 seconds, and that was the only day he didn't survive.
	That he went into that circle of 9 minutes and 29 seconds was the only day he didn't come out again.
	You will learn that.
	It's not an excuse for what happened in the 9 minutes and 29 seconds.
	So he continuously focused on the 9 minute and 29 seconds, as he calls it, and doesn't really give much attention to the surrounding parts of the story.
	And this makes sense, I imagine, because he wants to focus just on what did Derek Chauvin do in that section in which he's got the knee on George Floyd.
	And that's the inappropriate part, and therefore we can get him on that.
	And might not want to focus on the surrounding aspects of what led up to that, because, well, that doesn't look too good for George Floyd.
	There is one good argument in there that I think was worth of note, and I think is the best argument for the prosecution, which is he mentions, I don't know if you could see it in the slide, there is a point in which the officer next to him says that we're going to check the pulse, and then he mentions that he can't find a pulse.
	And this is after he's become limp, and he tells Derek Chauvin accordingly.
	I don't know how verbal it was, but he is said to have said that to him.
	And then the action was that he continued to keep them in the hold.
	So the question is, is that appropriate or not?
	You know, you were told that this guy's pulse seems to have stopped, and yet you didn't do anything about it.
	Is that inappropriate, or is it that, I don't know, you didn't hear him, or some other reason, right?
	That's the best argument I can see from their point of view here.
	They also try and give the argument that from the autopsy list, they say that the cause of death listed in the autopsy is listed as homicide.
	Now, the complexity here is that homicide is not the same in the autopsy world as apparently it is in the legal world.
	So apparently what this means is that the autopsy person is saying that this came from human action.
	So it's not a mistake.
	It's not an accidental death.
	It's not suicide.
	It's homicide.
	A human did this.
	But that doesn't necessarily tell you the cause of death being either his heart, as the defense will argue, or the asphyxiation itself.
	He also says they're going to bring on medical experts to testimony that he died of asphyxiation.
	And that's the prosecution side of it.
	So I wanted to give them an honest take of what their side is, just so we're not living in a bubble or anything.
	Sure.
	And then there's the defensive side, the side that is more favoured by people who think that this is not what the mainstream media makes it out to be.
	So he takes you through the steps that led up to this incident because he wants to give you the full rotter and therefore it makes the conditions look like George Floyd largely did this to himself because that's their argument.
	So there's a few different places in which this whole incident takes place.
	The first part is in the store.
	In the store, he says that, look, he paid with a fake $20 bill.
	The store operators were able to give evidence that he was acting seemingly intoxicated, either with drugs or with alcohol.
	We find out this is definitely drugs.
	So then he leaves.
	He goes to his Mercedes.
	So then we have witness testimony that he is recorded to have taken pills in the Mercedes and couldn't even stay awake within the Mercedes.
	They were trying to wake him up.
	One of the, I think it was his girlfriend in the car, called a friend to come and pick them up because they weren't convinced they could keep George Floyd awake because he was clearly high.
	And then the police turn up.
	They find him intoxicated.
	There's allegations about whether I put a pill in his mouth when the police turn up as well to hide drugs.
	and then they pull him out of the car they then move him over to the next location which is the car itself, try and get him into the car he's struggling with the car a ridiculous amount, keeps saying I don't want to go in because I'm claustrophobic or this reason or that reason when he's getting pushed in he's saying I can't breathe, he's saying I can't breathe when he's standing up as well there's a whole bunch of weirdness going on there
	they also later investigated the car itself where he was in before he gets put on the floor and the FBI said that they were able to find crushed pills which were meth or fentanyl found inside the car and they had George Floyd's saliva on, so that seems to be evidence that he did put pills in his mouth so that seems to be evidence that he did put pills in his mouth when in the Mercedes before he was moved So then the next part is, of course, him being on the floor, the arguments about that.
	And then there's the part about what they did with it.
	So he mentions that they called an ambulance as soon as they noticed that when they tried to get him in the car, he banged his nose on the plexiglass and apparently there was blood running down his nose.
	So they said, okay, get EMS out here.
	We'll take him to the hospital.
	Also, he's delirious and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
	Yeah.
	And then after a while they decide to make what they said was a code 3 call which is get there ASAP. Come and pick him up as soon as you can so you can get him out of here because there's a threat to his life.
	And then they move George Floyd a few blocks, try to resuscitate him, took him to the hospital, pronounced dead.
	And then there's the last part which is what actually killed him.
	For the defense.
	Because there's two parts of this.
	Was Derek Chauvin's actions in the time in which he had his knee on George Floyd appropriate?
	And what caused the death?
	Because even if it wasn't appropriate, well, if he didn't kill him, he didn't kill him, right?
	So the defense makes the argument here that the evidence they suggest shows that he died of his heart being bad, not because of suffocation.
	So let's just play their side of the argument here.
	Dr.
	Baker found none of what are referred to as the telltale signs of asphyxiation.
	There were no bruises to Mr.
	Floyd's neck, either on his skin or after peeling his skin back to the muscles beneath.
	There was no petechial hemorrhaging.
	There was no evidence that Mr.
	Floyd's airflow was restricted and he did not determine to be a positional or mechanical asphyxia death.
	The autopsy revealed many other issues, including coronary disease, an enlarged heart, what's called a paraganglioma, which is a tumor that secretes adrenaline, swelling or edema of the lungs.
	The state was not satisfied with Dr.
	Baker's work.
	And so they have contracted with numerous physicians to contradict Dr.
	Baker's findings.
	And this will ultimately be another significant battle in this trial.
	What was Mr.
	Floyd's actual cause of death?
	The evidence will show that Mr.
	Floyd died of a cardiac arrhythmia that occurred as a result of hypertension, coronary disease, the ingestion of methamphetamine and fentanyl, and the adrenaline flowing through his body.
	All of which acted to further compromise an already compromised heart.
	So the argument here being, wow, he had a bad heart, he has blockages in his heart, he's got heart problems, he's got the...
	Numerous health issues.
	Yeah, he's taken meth, he's high on fentanyl.
	The toxicology report, as we reported, was, what was it, four times the amount that would kill an average person?
	So, extremely high amount of fentanyl inside of him.
	And then there's, you know, no evidence that the knee produced any bruising on the skin or the muscle blow where his neck was.
	No blockages or anything like that.
	Yeah, so the argument is, well, we're looking at this, like, almost certainly he actually just died of his heart having an irregular heartbeat that then causes death.
	There is a defense from the defense side about the drug overdose, because this is pretty solid.
	I mean, you've got four times the amount that would kill a person.
	The toxicology report even lists if the normal person had been found like this, we'd say he'd OD'd.
	And the defense was that George Floyd is a man who had taken fentanyl for a long time.
	He had engaged in all of it.
	Therefore, he would have built up a tolerance to fentanyl.
	And therefore, an amount that would kill a normal person wouldn't necessarily kill him.
	And therefore, this is not a good argument for saying that he died due to his own actions.
	It's like...
	Not really sure that's a great defense.
	Well, no, I could buy that.
	If you've got a habitual user of a substance and they're found with the amount that would kill a normal person, you could say, well, you might not kill them because, you know, Mithridates style, he may have been dosing himself for years and above tolerance.
	But it's four times the amount that would kill a regular person.
	Yeah.
	How tolerant is this guy with the terrible heart and the tumour that produces extra adrenaline and all these other problems that he's got?
	I mean, the prosecution is trying to claim that he died because of the actions of George Floyd, sorry, because of the actions of the police officer, and this had no impact.
	And I'm just like, there's no way this had absolutely no impact.
	I can't believe that he can build up a tolerance that a normal person doesn't have.
	But four times the amount that would kill someone...
	I, you know, I'm no expert in taking fentanyl or drugs, but the idea that wouldn't have any impact on the situation just seems wrong.
	And the fact that, I mean, we've seen, we've watched the body cam footage that was released from Chauvin, so we know that he was sat in the car when he was being unmolested.
	He was just sat in the car saying, I can't breathe, can lay me on the floor.
	Yeah, so this is the other surrounding parts of the defence's side in which they're saying, well, he's saying I can't breathe and so on and so forth when he's not on the ground.
	So when he's on the ground saying this, I'm meant to take that differently.
	And then there's the argument about should he have put him in that hold that they did?
	And the defence is saying, well, the police department says we should.
	This is part of the training.
	It's to prevent them from moving in a different way that would, you know, if they vomited or something, choke them.
	Yeah.
	Or, you know, if you didn't keep them down, then they might get up and run into traffic or something like this.
	Because it's for someone who's delirious, someone who's in a bad way.
	Which he seems to have been through the reports of other people at the scene.
	Yeah, so I'm trying to give as neutral as I can a view on this, which is just that's the two sides arguments about this.
	Go watch the full thing.
	Go watch the full body cam footage.
	Go watch the full opening arguments.
	And this is probably going to go on for a week, but that's the case as it is, just to update people.
	And I suppose we should now go into the response to the trial.
	Yeah, the response to the trial has been very strange.
	And I guess the first place to start is, before the trial, moments before the start of the trial, his family and legal team gathered outside of the courthouse to call for accountability by taking a knee?
	Which, I mean...
	The Colin Kaepernick thing, I remember at the time thinking that you take a knee when you're pledging submission to something, so that's not really a very noble way of protesting, if you're saying that Black Lives Matter and all that sort of thing.
	And this has just been folded into the George Floyd trial, but the thing is...
	The optics are terrible on it.
	And I really...
	I don't want to make jokes about it, but it just looks really bad to me.
	The Colin Kaepernick, I believe, was taking the knee for the flag.
	Yeah.
	And then George Floyd is killed by someone taking a knee on him.
	That's the argument from his family.
	So in response, they start taking these.
	It is strange.
	It's really bizarre.
	I mean, it's like the Christian cross, or it's like, this is our symbol of Jesus, our prophet, him dying.
	Yeah, but I mean, at least the point of Jesus' death is the suffering on behalf of mankind, as Christians view it, right?
	So there is at least a kind of redemptive aspect to Jesus on the cross.
	So Jesus isn't going to be like, oh, I'm offended by crosses, because no, that was the point.
	You know, you're meant to remember that.
	But that's not what's...
	I mean, would BLM not argue that this is sort of, you know, a show of martyrdom, that he's died in this way?
	They could, but then they're essentially saying that George Floyd is the same as Christ.
	They would.
	But, I mean, they keep drawing him like that.
	They do keep drawing him like that.
	So they took a knee for 8 minutes and 46 seconds, which was the original time that people, like, used.
	I don't know why it's changed to, like, 9.15 or whatever.
	9.29.
	9.29, whatever it is.
	But this is the length of time for the video.
	And so we get to hear from them.
	Today starts a landmark trial.
	There will be a referendum on how far America has come for its quest for equality and justice for all, said the attorney, Ben Crump, who's the one that you first showed, the black attorney.
	We're not asking for anything extraordinary.
	We're asking for equal justice under the law.
	Okay, but if it turns out that through all of the various reports and Examinations that, in fact, George Floyd did die of a drug overdose.
	Are you just going to simply go, well, we wanted equality under the law.
	The law has been done.
	Derek Chauvin didn't kill George Floyd.
	I retract everything that I said.
	Because that would be justice.
	That would be justice.
	If he has died of a drug overdose.
	If that were the case.
	I mean, don't get me wrong.
	If Derek Chauvin had damaged his trachea or whatever and stopped him from breathing and that was the reason that he died, fair enough.
	You know...
	Send him to jail, whatever the punishment is to be.
	That's fine.
	That would be fine too.
	I don't care.
	But the point is that this seems essentially to be asking for something of a lynching.
	It doesn't matter what the truth really is.
	What matters is they get their pound of flesh, and it happens to have come in the form of Derek Chauvin.
	There's already a pre-approved outcome for them, and if it's not met, regardless of the facts...
	Then it's a referendum on America.
	That's the thing.
	America is a racist state that doesn't have equality and justice for all if Derek Chauvin isn't found guilty.
	So, you know, that's interesting.
	Of course, the usual sort of race grifters turned up.
	Al Sharpton turned up, which you can imagine went well.
	Oh, another thing by Ben Crump, by the way.
	He says, please do not be distracted.
	What killed George Floyd was an overdose of excessive force.
	Not very catchy.
	I mean...
	I just...
	I don't want to start making jokes.
	It's kind of a macabre thing to make jokes about.
	But, like, what a terrible bit of messaging that is.
	He also refuted the characterisation of the trial as a difficult one, saying repeatedly that the murder case is not hard when you watch that torture video of George Floyd.
	If this trial is hard, we have two justice systems in America, says Floyd's nephew, Brandon Williams.
	One for white America and another for black America.
	And of course, Al Sharpton said, Chauvin is in the courtroom, but America is on trial.
	They don't care what the outcome is doing.
	They don't care.
	They do not care.
	They have come to the conclusion that Chauvin is a racist and it was definitely the neon that killed him.
	There is no room for doubt here and if doubt is found and Chauvin is not convicted then in fact America is a racist country but then that's Al Sharpton's entire position on everything so I don't see why we should expect anything different.
	Anyway, one of his brothers said apparently that Minnesota had offered George Floyd so much, and George Floyd came to the city to make a better way for himself.
	The truth was he was killed in the streets.
	Hmm.
	Interesting how they know the truth before the trial's been done and the evidence has been given.
	Anyway, Crump posted on Twitter, we know if George Floyd was a white American citizen, no one would be saying this is a hard case.
	He didn't say this on Twitter, sorry.
	He said this in a press conference.
	But honestly, I was not impressed with his little press conference either.
	It just seemed like amateur hour race grifting, frankly.
	But I don't think he's wrong there.
	He's right.
	If George Floyd was white, no one would be accusing Chauvin of murder.
	They'd be like, oh, that was a druggie who died of an overdose.
	Well, there have been cases of this before.
	I remember when everyone was surprised that this happened.
	At the same time, people circulated an incident from Texas in which the cops did exactly the same thing and the suspect died and it was white.
	Yeah.
	Well, there we go.
	See, like I said, it wouldn't be a difficult one.
	Everyone would be like, well, he's a druggie.
	And Crump put out another Twitter statement saying, everything you hear today will attempt to assassinate George Floyd's character.
	But remember, this is the trial of Derek Chauvin and not George Floyd.
	Hmm.
	Hmm.
	Well, I mean, technically that is true, but the question of George Floyd's character is actually germane to what has happened, and trying to pretend that George Floyd may have not been responsible for his own particular situation when it comes to the amount of drugs in his system, or his Bad health that may have contributed to his death.
	It kind of is a referendum on George Floyd as well, as an individual.
	I mean, the idea that everything you hear today will attempt to assassinate his character, but is any of it false?
	Yeah, that's the thing.
	The facts might make George Floyd look like a bad person.
	Anyway, let's go to the next one, which is just this sort of thing that's being passed around.
	Now, this is the left-wing slash Black Lives Matter view of George Floyd.
	A father, a brother, a son, grieving the recent loss of his mother, a basketball star, the type of person who walked colleagues to their cars, committed to his church and a mentor to young men, a human being.
	Mentor to young men?
	He's a drug addict.
	No, no, no.
	George Floyd is not necessarily a two-dimensional person either.
	I can believe he's a son, a father, a brother, blah, blah, blah, blah.
	But the idea is he's a mentor to young men.
	The Cooney Homes Housing Project.
	Well, maybe he was.
	But the thing is, I don't think I would use George Floyd as a model to follow.
	We have just a thing on the next one.
	In 2009, Floyd was arrested for first-degree felony charge due to assault and armed robbery to a part in 2007.
	He spent five years in prison for breaking into this lady's house with the intent to rob her.
	He wore a blue uniform to look like a government employee to gain the lady's trust.
	And as soon as she realised that he was impersonating a government worker, she tried to shut the door, but he forced his way into the house.
	A truck pulled up, five people exited and went into the lady's house.
	He put a gun to her stomach, and his friends ransacked the place.
	I mean, he's six foot six.
	She was just a little lady.
	Pregnant, apparently.
	Not finding any cash, Floyd and the men took the jewellery and the lady's cell phone and fled the scene.
	And that was how he found himself in jail for five years.
	Yeah.
	I mean, none of that, just to point out, like, none of this is, you know, warranted a death sentence.
	No, of course not.
	It's this narrative of, like, he's Jesus, he's a mentor of young men, he's a great guy.
	Right, so, according to the toxicology report, he was, of course, intoxicated with fentanyl, methamphetamine, traces of cannabinoids, morphine at the time of his death.
	These were not the principal factors behind his death, apparently.
	But the underlying conditions means he won't do well with stress, all this sort of stuff.
	But the thing is, after he served five years in Harris County Jail, he moved to Minneapolis from Texas in 2014.
	And he intended, apparently, to start a peaceful life.
	The decision to change apparently cost him his life.
	Leaving all the violence and robbery acts behind, he pledged to lead a better life as he shifted to the new city.
	In his initial days, Floyd found a job as a bouncer at a local restaurant, and he made attempts to change his behaviour, and a recent video showed Floyd encouraging children and teenagers to stop gun violence.
	So it's not to say that he didn't look at his past life and what's currently going on in the black community and said, look, actually maybe I've been part of the problem, maybe I've got some life advice that I can share with younger people.
	Because it looks like he did.
	Yeah, but did he stop any of the things he said that were causing this price to be bad?
	Well, I mean, he didn't stop taking drugs.
	But he also didn't stop breaking the law.
	No, he did.
	No, he gave the counterfeit $20 bill to the clerk, for example.
	Good point.
	Okay, he stopped robbing people and being violent to people.
	He stopped violently robbing.
	Yes.
	Just, yeah, okay.
	He stopped violently robbing people, which, I mean, that's something.
	It is something, but it's, again, I really hate this view of, like, he's basically an angel, and I'm just like, I'm sorry.
	I'm not saying he's an angel.
	All I'm saying is that he's not beyond redemption, because I don't think anyone should be beyond redemption.
	I mean, this doesn't deserve a death penalty, either way.
	Well, no, no, no, obviously.
	But the point is, he seems to have at least done something to say...
	Well, you know, maybe we don't have to be exactly as we are being right now.
	You know, maybe things can improve.
	But anyway, the response to this from, like, the Twittersphere, we may as well look at because it's just amusing.
	This one is someone called Sonny Hostin.
	As a former prosecutor, I have never seen a case for such clear-cut evidence of murder as in the Chauvin trial.
	Murder on video.
	We all saw it.
	The world saw it.
	What does it say about our society if Chauvin is acquitted?
	It says that black lives don't matter, period.
	There we go.
	That's what it'll say.
	Black lives don't matter.
	It's a referendum on America.
	It's a referendum on race.
	It's also just like, what a stupid prosecutor you are then.
	You just saw the, let's say, observers who were watching this take place, took their footage.
	That was enough for you.
	You're not going to watch the footage from the officer's side.
	You're not going to care about any of the conversations that happened over radio.
	The medical reports, none of that matters.
	I've seen the footage.
	Hang him.
	Yeah, I'm emotionally charged.
	Hang Chauvin, you know.
	Nazia Avzal put this tweet out, and I actually agree with almost all of it, to be honest.
	The Derek Chauvin trial starts today.
	This is not the George Floyd trial.
	He is not here.
	True.
	What Floyd was convicted of before his death is entirely irrelevant.
	True.
	Chauvin and the other cops did not do a background check before they stood on his neck.
	They didn't stand on his neck, but true.
	And Floyd was the victim.
	True.
	But the victim of what?
	Well, the question is, is it Derek Chauvin or is it George Floyd?
	Because that's really what the debate is over.
	And, I mean, there seems to be fairly adequate evidence that Chauvin didn't act in a way that wasn't sanctioned by the police department.
	So...
	But this really is kind of a larger question, isn't it?
	It's not just, you know, about George Floyd.
	It's really about whether a black man, and by extension the black community...
	Are responsible for their own actions.
	And I hate to have to say this because it seems inappropriate given how it's the death of a man who was, you know, doubtless suffering, had a rough life.
	I mean, assuming everything we know is true, but at the end of the day, if it turns out that it is about the fact that he was overdosed on drugs and had terrible health, and that's the thing that killed him because he was suffering from a lack of breath and whatever it is, because he took something, because the cops arrested him, and we saw all of this through the body cam footage, then it's about whether...
	He can be held responsible for his own actions.
	Is he a victim of freedom?
	Like, he was free to do what he wanted to do, and if he decided to take drugs to a point that killed him, if that turns out to be the case, then what's the response?
	I mean, the leftists here want everything to be regulated in your life perfectly so the state says it.
	So they'll take the view that, oh no, we should get rid of people's ability to take such free choices.
	He shouldn't have such abilities to do things.
	Yeah.
	I mean, well, let's just carry on because we can look at what a proud socialist on Twitter has to say about it.
	This is quite a well-seen tweet from Ryan Knight with a hammer and sickle in his bio.
	It does not matter that George Floyd had drugs in his system because he is not on trial and fentanyl did not put a knee on his neck for over nine minutes.
	It may have done, actually.
	It could well be that fentanyl was the reason that he couldn't breathe.
	And so it does matter, actually, Mr.
	Communist.
	Derek Chauvin did, and he is a cold-blooded killer, period.
	Case closed.
	That's the kind of justice you can expect from the communists.
	You're a cop.
	I think you're a cold-blooded killer.
	Case closed.
	Even though it could be that literally Derek Chauvin had no method of preventing George Floyd from dying.
	It could be that if you'd done nothing, just sat him in the car and just looked at him, George Floyd may well have died from this overdose anyway, so Derek Chauvin couldn't have done anything.
	It would still be the cops fault, wouldn't it?
	It would still be his fault, though, because this guy's a communist and he hates the cops.
	And I found this amazing one on The Independent as well.
	This next one.
	This is supposed to be the trial of Derek Chauvin.
	It's not the trial of George Floyd.
	And everyone keeps saying this, but it's like, hmm, it depends what the reason for George Floyd's death was.
	You know, we're not saying we know either way, but there is significant evidence to indicate that.
	I mean, de jure, it might be okay, you know, Derek Chauvin, but de facto, it's a debate about who killed him.
	Yeah.
	And if George Floyd overdosed, then it wasn't the police.
	But anyway, the thing is, it doesn't matter.
	Even if everything the worst right-wing pundit says turns out to be true, it doesn't matter.
	The price of being a flawed character is not execution.
	No character trait deprives a person of their right to life in due process.
	Nothing that George Floyd or any other unarmed black person killed did justifies extrajudicial killing.
	Nothing.
	But if you didn't kill him and George Floyd died of an overdose, then this ages really badly.
	And this whole thing ages really badly.
	But this is the current narrative of the left.
	And don't get me wrong, obviously, having committed a crime is not an excuse for a cop to kill you.
	But the question is not, you know, is that acceptable?
	The question is, did Derek Chauvin kill George Floyd?
	And it may well be the answer's no.
	I mean, it could be the answer's yes.
	I don't know.
	Yeah, I mean, we don't have a stake in this either way.
	No.
	But I don't know what these people are going to do when they're taking such a bold stance of, nah, like, this guy is a killer, nothing else matters, the facts can go to hell.
	Yeah.
	I mean, you should see some of the protests about it.
	It's like people just yelling, you know, just huffing and puffing into the microphone going, yeah, everything's evil, everything's racist, everything's bad, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
	And it's like the fact that the court is currently built up like a goddamn military base because they're expecting essentially to be attacked in the same way that Antifa and Black Lives Matter have attacked previous institutions and federal buildings, things like this.
	They know what's going to happen because what's going to happen is the facts are going to show that George Floyd is responsible for his own death.
	Derek Chauvin followed police procedure, didn't do anything wrong, is going to be the sort of thing the media will be like, right, that's it.
	America's a racist country.
	We've had this referendum.
	It's two-tier justice system.
	Black people can't get justice and everything's going to explode.
	There is one other thing I People are going to die over the fact that Derek Chauvin may well not have killed George Floyd.
	People will die over that.
	They already have.
	They already have.
	But more people will die over that because Black Lives Matter are going to take this as if this is a racial judgment against black people when really it's a character judgment against George Floyd's behavior and the fact that he's responsible for his own actions.
	I mean, they can't think any other way.
	And it's insufferable, because we're trapped in this...
	I can see what's going to happen.
	I can see exactly what's going to happen.
	There are going to be no surprises with any of this.
	We're trapped on this railroad now, where we know that the evidence isn't going to be sufficient to convict Derek Chauvin of murder.
	It is going to imply that George Floyd is responsible for his own death and the black community and Black Lives Matter and the leftist activists in the media and the left-wing politicians are going to be like, right, that's it.
	Proof positive that America is still essentially like a Jim Crow state.
	Like George Floyd takes fentanyl.
	Racism did this.
	Yeah.
	I mean, that's the level of argument you're at.
	And it's just really like...
	Honestly, I'm kind of sad.
	I feel bad for the people who are going to be killed because of this.
	I'm sorry.
	You probably just, you know...
	Someone crossing the street doesn't know what's going on.
	Yeah, David Dorn style.
	You're just chilling out and then someone...
	Oh, look, there's a big gang of angry Black Lives Matter protesters.
	Daniel Aronson style.
	You know, like, it's...
	You know people are going to die from this.
	And then thousands more people are probably going to lose loads of property over this because they'll be smashing things up, burning things down.
	It's not like we haven't seen plenty of this over the past year or so.
	So, I mean, it's just sad.
	And it's insufferable.
	And I genuinely feel quite bad for all the people who are involved in it but are not, like, you know, responsible for any of it.
	Like, there's no way they're going to be persuaded.
	There's just no way.
	The only other thing I wanted to mention was an argument I was given by a friend the other day.
	So Stephen Crowder did his stream yesterday on the whole trial.
	I imagine he'll do it on the end as well.
	And they mentioned in there that they played the full footage of the body cam.
	And when George Floyd is stood up complaining that he can't breathe or things hurt and whatnot, I don't know anything about medical stuff.
	That's why I'm asking if anyone does in the audience.
	He mentions then that his stomach hurts, he can't breathe, blah, blah, blah.
	So my friend mentioned to me, well, could it be that if this is the heart that killed him, could that be the moment it starts happening?
	Because why is he saying that other things hurt and he can't breathe at that point?
	In which case, when you get him on the ground, it's basically already ticking.
	Yeah, it's way beyond the point.
	Again, I don't know, but if anyone does, please let us know.
	I don't either.
	I've heard no one else raise it.
	Yeah, but that's what it looks like, isn't it?
	When he's in the van and he's just sat there and he's like, I can't breathe, I can't breathe, I'm claustrophobic.
	And it's like, this guy's on his way out, man.
	He looks like he's in a really bad way.
	I mean, I've seen people taking massive...
	I've never seen an overdose, but I've seen people taking large amounts of drugs.
	You know, when someone takes a large amount of drugs, they don't look good.
	You know?
	It's like, right, okay.
	But the problem, I just...
	It's just going to go badly.
	Everything from here on out is going to go badly.
	Because I honestly think there's only one way this can really go.
	I hope I'm proven wrong.
	I mean, I hope the evidence shows that Chauvin did it or something.
	Because, right, okay, Chauvin killed him.
	Right, great.
	Okay, we have proof.
	This is...
	I don't know what evidence they'd find since Floyd wasn't injured.
	His neck wasn't damaged.
	I don't know how they're going to prove that...
	The knee on the back of his neck is the thing that killed him.
	Maybe the rep to argue that he should have made a decision after hearing that there was no pulse, for example.
	Could be.
	And then they convict him on that.
	Yeah.
	Sure, fine.
	I mean, honestly, if Chauvin does turn out to have killed him, that is probably the best possible outcome for people who are not involved in any of this.
	Because if it turns out that Chauvin didn't kill him and the court is like, well, we have to rule this way, then it's just everything's going to blow up and everyone knows it.
	Everyone can feel it.
	That's the price of justice.
	I guess it is.
	The Price of Justice is a bunch of people dead because of Black Lives Matter.
	Because George Floyd was a drug addict.
	Yeah.
	Unfortunately, yes.
	I mean, do you want the rule of law or do you want what the mob want?
	Yeah.
	That's what I mean.
	That's why I'm hoping that the rule of law finds it just happens to have been Chauvin.
	But no evidence that he was a racist, and not really much evidence that I can see that he killed him.
	So, anyway, let's move on to something a bit more light-hearted, shall we?
	A white pill?
	Yeah, no, not a white pill.
	Get my hopes up.
	A Christ pill, actually.
	Christ pill.
	Yes.
	But not from someone called Lil Nas X, who I'd never heard of, but he recently caused a storm with a particular viral video and has become very, very famous.
	And I think this is a very interesting person and a very interesting thing that's happened.
	So this is a chap called Montero Lamar Hill, and he was born in Georgia in 1999.
	So he's 21.
	And that's, I think, that's important.
	Remember just how young this person is.
	He's younger than me.
	Yeah, exactly.
	I wouldn't trust this person with any kind of decision-making capacity because he's only 21.
	And, I mean, it strikes me that becoming ultra-famous this young is probably bad for a person and gives you a distorted view of the world.
	But anyway, Montero was apparently named after a car called the Mitsubishi Montero.
	I'm not surprised he changed his name to Lil Nas X. I would have done the same, to be honest, if I was named after a car.
	But anyway, his parents divorced when he was six, and he grew up in a housing project with his mother and grandmother for three years when he was young.
	So at nine, he moved in with his father, who was a gospel singer, and he was living in Atlanta, and he was like, look, if I'd stayed there, I'd have fallen with the wrong crowd, because there's a lot of bad stuff that goes down in Atlanta.
	So he didn't.
	He started using the internet heavily around the time when memes started to become their own form of entertainment.
	So around sort of 2010, sort of 2011, 2012, that sort of time.
	You know, when sort of like old rage memes and stuff were being popularized.
	And apparently he spent much of his teenage years alone and turned to the internet.
	Particularly Twitter, creating memes that showed his disarming wit and pop culture savvy.
	So he is a product of the internet, but a product of Twitter.
	He's never known a life without the internet, without social media, and without using things like Twitter.
	And apparently around 16 or 17 he came to accept that he was gay.
	As you can imagine, if his dad's an evangelical and he's living with his dad, you can imagine how his dad has treated this at certain points in his life.
	But he's a musician and played trumpet until he was worried about looking uncool.
	Then he attended the University of West Georgia for a year before dropping out to pursue his musical career.
	As he says, I was doing Facebook comedy videos, then I moved to Instagram, then I hopped on Twitter, where I really was a master's.
	First place I could go viral.
	So he's basically been someone who's been clout chasing his whole life because he wants to be a famous musician.
	And now he's achieved it.
	So good for him.
	As of February 2021, he had 5 million followers on basically each platform.
	So he's pretty big, pretty famous.
	So I thought I would look at just what some of his music was about.
	His first song was called Donald Trump, and it was released in 2018.
	It's written in Cyrillic as well.
	It's what?
	Written in Cyrillic?
	Yeah, you see the letters there, they're Russian.
	Oh yeah, oh yeah.
	But yeah, this was released in 2018 and basically it's about a gun that he has called Donald Trump because the gun hates black people and so does Donald Trump.
	And in this song he describes going around and shooting black people.
	Just like Donald Trump does.
	Just like Donald Trump does.
	Anyway, yeah, so that's basically it.
	I need a reason why I should clap.
	Yeah, that's what Donald Trump does.
	He just drives around, saying the M-word, shooting people.
	Yep.
	That's Donald Trump's life.
	Jesus Christ.
	Yeah, so the next song he released was called Old Town Road, where he apparently romanticizes the life of a cowboy.
	The character is unfulfilled by a hedonistic life of consumerism, substance abuse, and adultery.
	He also has dissatisfaction with the indolence of his peers, feeling no need to heed their advice.
	With nothing left to believe in or follow, the rider heads out, and the only destination being the open road.
	I mean, if we had to take from his lyrics an impression of his mindset, he sounds like someone who doesn't really know what he's doing and doesn't have any particular roots or ties to anywhere.
	I agree.
	Sorry, I'm just laughing as I hear you in the chat being like, yeah, he shot me in 2017.
	Funny we could get justice.
	But the point is, I find this interesting.
	Unfulfilled by a hedonistic life of consumerism, substance abuse and adultery.
	Yeah, I imagine you would be eventually.
	Anyway, so we come to this Montero Call Me By Your Name song, which is the one where it's really blown up, and it's because of this very provocative imagery.
	Is he being raped by the devil?
	No, he's giving the devil a lap dance.
	Stunning and brave.
	Maybe this was 1990s.
	This would be impressive.
	But you are not breaking new ground here.
	Like Little Britain, the only gay in the village.
	Yeah, he literally is.
	Mifanwi, I have come out as gay.
	Oh, well you can join my book club that's all gay.
	It's a really, really old hat.
	But anyway, he portrays both Adam and the snake in the Garden of Eden.
	The two kiss and merge as the snake seduces Adam using its third eye.
	In the next scene, he's in chains at the Colosseum by virgins of himself, wearing Mary Antoinette wigs, and he's stoned after his execution.
	And he starts to ascend to heaven before grabbing onto a pole, which sends him to hell as a pole dancer.
	And then he proceeds to give Satan a lap dance as he wears thigh-high boots with stiletto heels and Calvin Klein underwear.
	Then he snaps Satan's neck, takes Satan's horns, and crowns himself with them as his eyes glow and wings emerge.
	Edgy.
	I'm Satan now!
	Bravo.
	I mean, who doesn't want to be Satan, right?
	But what this really is is a fantastic marketing scheme, because what he started doing is selling Satan shoes at satan.shoes.
	And if you...
	I mean, it's just like, am I meant to be shocked by this?
	Okay, I mean, I actually kind of admire the entrepreneurship of that.
	Like, I'm going to make a music video and we need to make money.
	Well, we'll sell Satan's shoes at the same time.
	Guy knows how to hustle, I guess.
	I mean...
	It's like Game of Girl Bathwater.
	It kind of is, yeah.
	It's just provocative against the Christians.
	I mean, they're quite nice looking shoes, I guess.
	But the thing is, John, if you can scroll down a little bit, you can see the shoe turns, right?
	And so you can see it's got a bronze pentagram on it.
	And you can see all of the Paradise Lost imagery.
	Keep going down to the bottom, John.
	So you get a nice look at the shoe.
	Good salesmanship.
	Nice website as well.
	Very nice.
	Great salesmanship.
	Keep going down.
	And you notice all the Milton imagery.
	And at the end of it, he's like, better to reign in hell than serve in heaven.
	They seem to have worked.
	I mean, sold out.
	There's only one pair left.
	Absolutely.
	You've got a Twitter lottery to get the last pair.
	And you see it's got Luke 10.18 there, which is a reference to Satan being cast out of heaven.
	And yeah, so it's really treading old ground.
	Yeah.
	It's really old ground if we're going back to Milton.
	But it's also not new in modern day pop culture.
	I mean, the Christians are just like, well, we don't like it.
	Reminds me of a post I saw.
	It was like 4chan.
	Someone posted, ask a Satanist anything.
	And the first response was, how's eight years school going?
	Right, so these shoes sold out in under a minute, apparently, which is very popular.
	I mean, there weren't that many of them, as far as I'm aware.
	And the interesting thing about these shoes, apart from having a bronze pentagram and an upside-down cross on them, again, edgy, is that apparently they contain a drop of human blood in each one.
	I said, okay, but whose blood?
	I assume his.
	Well, we assume, but we're not told.
	It's just murdering kids out back, right?
	Yeah, well, I don't know.
	But that's the point, right?
	It's the point of the whole thing, the imagery, the drop of human blood, the upside down cross, the pentagram, the 1666, all this sort of stuff.
	It's basically to provoke Christians into thinking, oh, isn't this, you know, dangerous and subversive?
	But then it just seems really over the top.
	And it was done by...
	Your Christian parents will hate this.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Exactly.
	Hey, fellow kids.
	Do you want to show the man?
	You know, join Satanism.
	Mom, Dad, I'm a Satanist.
	He's like, yeah, I don't care, Timmy.
	Do your homework, Tim.
	Sorry, what's his name?
	Montero.
	But anyway, so these were part of a collaboration between a New York art-based collective called MSCHF, and were made using Nike Air Max 97s.
	They were sold at about $1,000 a pair, and...
	Oof.
	Yeah.
	Going to go for $666?
	Exactly.
	Not even $666.
	Cheek.
	Which is sad, really.
	I was expecting more edge.
	But anyway, yeah, so they contain two fluid ounces of red ink and one drop of human blood.
	Wow.
	That's so edgy.
	You know, Gwyneth Paltrow is selling vagina candles that blow up.
	Like, I mean, I've got a drop of human blood here.
	Big deal.
	I just don't care.
	Have you not seen how phenomenally degenerate culture is at the moment?
	Ooh, I'm so impressed.
	Ozzy Osbourne bit the head off a goddamn bat.
	No, but him having a pastor for a father, he sort of probably thinks this is the edgiest thing ever.
	Sort of like the Christian kid who's like, maybe I'll take a drink.
	And then drinks and it's like, haha, I've done it, Dad.
	Smoke the reefer.
	I'll never do that.
	But again, he's only 21.
	What does he know?
	He's like, oh yeah, this will show my Christian parents.
	Oh, God.
	We're here again.
	But anyway, apparently it upset a lot of Republicans on Twitter, according to Pink News.
	And being an internet personality, Montero decided to dunk on them.
	And these are just the best dunks that Pink News are living for.
	Right?
	Needless to say, conservatives are furious.
	Nick Adams, an author and occasional Fox News commentator who's been endorsed by Trump, hit out with both the rapper and Cardi B, claiming that both artists couldn't last 30 seconds in a debate with conservative commentator Candace Owens.
	So, he's not, like, saying, ah, this is an affront to my religion.
	He's saying you couldn't out-debate Candace Owens.
	Probably true.
	Doubtless true.
	But, like...
	It's nothing to do with Christianity, is it?
	It's not him being like, how dare you profane the Lord?
	Because obviously, why would they?
	The atheists and non-Christians have been doing this for decades now.
	Decades!
	Like, it's not new or edgy in any way.
	I mean, look, he doesn't even mention this.
	And so, Montero goes, you can't last 30 seconds in bed with your wife.
	Okay?
	But that doesn't change the fact that you couldn't last 30 seconds of the debate with Candace Owens, does it?
	You know, that doesn't change the fact that this is really old hat, does it?
	Next person was rapper Joyner Lucas.
	Hit out with him for the music video, suggesting it was inappropriate because he counts children among his fans, where he responds, I literally sing about lean and adultery in Old Town Road.
	You decide to let your children lessen.
	Blame yourself.
	The Cardi B defense.
	I'm an adult entertainer.
	I do perverse sexual things for adults.
	Don't let your kids watch.
	Cardi B doesn't let her kids watch, and he's right.
	You shouldn't let your kids watch either if you find it to be inappropriate for their age.
	Can't disagree with him there, but the fact still remains he still couldn't out-debate Candace Owens.
	Uh, he also epically shut down Caitlin Bennett, a conspiracy theorist and gun rights activist.
	When she tweeted that she was thankful to be blocked by him, he replied, I still see your tweets, S-pants.
	Because apparently, like, I don't know much about this Caitlin Bennett woman, but the left just keeps saying that she cracked herself.
	And it's like, okay, but when?
	And it's like, They just say about it.
	I think it's just a meme.
	I don't actually know.
	Yeah, it's just a meme.
	She's a lady who turns up on campus with guns and is just like, well, Second Amendment rights, let's have a debate.
	Yeah.
	It's not very radical.
	No, not terribly radical.
	And the South Dakota governor, Kristi Noem, objected to him releasing these shoes and she said, our kids are being told that this kind of product is not only okay, it is exclusive.
	But do you know what's more exclusive?
	They're God-given eternal sulfur.
	Finally, finally, a Christian has come to challenge the theological notion that maybe you shouldn't worship Satan.
	We're in a fight for the soul of our nation.
	We need to fight hard.
	We need to fight smart.
	We have to win.
	And he replies going, you're a whole governor and you are on here tweeting about some damn shoes do your job.
	Yes.
	So what you're saying, then, is that all the satanic imagery, the massive amount of effort that you put in for the shoes, for the website, to put blood in the shoes and all of this meant nothing.
	Just a pair of shoes, bro!
	Just a pair of shoes.
	All this effort, the video of me twerking on Satan, whatever it is, is just a pair of shoes.
	No big effort, no big mythology that I've built around it.
	And so it's like, wow, he's actually a grifter!
	And John makes a good point.
	When are we getting the Mohammed trainers?
	Because our...
	I could make so many shoe-bombing jokes.
	But we probably shouldn't.
	But yeah, and so, I mean, maybe she considers that to be her job, providing, I guess, what she would call spiritual direction.
	Not being a Christian, I don't really care either way.
	Obviously not being a Satanist, I don't care about that either.
	I actually find the whole thing kind of cringe.
	You provoked the Christians to come out, or one Christian at least, to come out and say Christian things.
	And then you're acting like, oh, what are you doing, bro?
	It's just some shoes.
	Okay, well, take the pentagram off them.
	Are they just the same shoes?
	Take the upside-down cross off them.
	Are they still the same shoes?
	Take off the biblical references.
	Are they still the same shoes?
	Or were you desperately trying to provoke a reaction, and then when you got one, pretending like you weren't trying to provoke a reaction?
	It's just childish.
	Anyway, so this, of course, comes because he feels that his entire teenage years were spent hating himself because what the S you all preached would happen to me because I was gay.
	So I hope you're mad, stay mad, and feel the same anger you teach to us to have towards ourselves.
	Sorry, what do they actually preach about gays in the United States?
	I thought it was just that they burn in hell.
	There is that, but there is also the negative aspects of the gay lifestyle that are real and do manifest themselves.
	Which is the fact that there's basically no monogamy in the gay community.
	There's extremely high rates of anal cancer and things like this.
	And it's like, look, these are just really unpleasant facts, but they're kind of true.
	And, I mean, you sit there going, well, what would happen to you because you're gay?
	Well, who knows?
	You're only 21.
	I guess we'll check back when you're 25 and see how things are going.
	But like, you know, I'm not saying...
	It's not like it isn't a different lifestyle.
	Yeah, but it's not like...
	It's not to condemn it.
	It's just saying there are different things.
	But you must be aware of the consequences of living a certain kind of lifestyle.
	Because there are consequences.
	The statistics show this, and it's like, okay, well, I'm sorry that studies suggest that there are negatives and drawbacks to being gay.
	I'm not saying you can change yourself or anything like that.
	In fact, he wrote a letter to his 14-year-old self.
	You know, I can totally understand that he will have, you know, having a gospel singing father, been told you can't be gay and, you know, God will judge you, go to hell.
	He probably didn't bring up any of the sort of real world problems, but may have done.
	But anyway, he said, dear 14 year old Montero, I wrote a song with our name in it.
	It's about a guy I met last summer.
	So the whole point apparently is about a guy you met.
	I know we promised never to come out publicly.
	I know we promised never to be that type of gay person.
	I know we promised to die with the secret, but this will open doors for many other queer people to simply exist.
	Oh, God, yeah, if only there was...
	He's calling himself queer, is he?
	If only there was a queer advocacy movement that had any kind of traction at all.
	It's not like every single company doesn't have a fucking rainbow flag everywhere.
	Oh, if only someone would go back in time and put you back in the 1980s where there may have been some stigma about it.
	One day, being gay will be legal.
	One day, people won't reject me for what I am.
	Oh, boy.
	But yeah, it just feels so empty.
	This also reminds me of a quote from Douglas Murray's book.
	What is it?
	The one about being gay, women, trans.
	What is it?
	We have it at the bookshop somewhere.
	Whatever.
	Anyway, it's one of Douglas Murray's books where she's talking about identities.
	And he makes the distinction because Douglas Murray is gay, but it's not a huge deal of his life.
	He doesn't sit there going on about it all the time.
	Yeah, so he makes the distinction.
	He's like, there are gays like me, and then there are queers.
	And he just then rants for two paragraphs about how he hates queers, because queers are the kind of people who make everything in their life about being gay.
	Yeah, which is what this guy's doing.
	I mean, this guy literally calls himself queer and is saying that he's coming out public to be that kind of gay.
	Yeah, I mean, it's just a dick in the ass, bro.
	We're not bothered about it.
	No one really cares, mate.
	Yeah, literally, no one gives a damn, dude.
	Like...
	Again, maybe if you were back in the 80s and you have the satanic panic about Dungeons and Dragons, or maybe in the 90s with Marilyn Manson, and there's probably something going on in the early 2002, but by that point, everyone just didn't care.
	But he says, you see, this will be very scary for me.
	People will be angry.
	They will say I'm pushing an agenda, but the truth is I am.
	The agenda...
	Checkmate.
	We wanted a mission.
	Yeah.
	The agenda to make people stay the F out of other people's lives and stop dictating who they should be.
	Yeah.
	Libertarianism.
	Got it.
	Sending you love from the future.
	Great.
	Good.
	Job done.
	Gay people can be accepted in public life.
	Don't worry, guys.
	We've legalized being gay now.
	Yeah.
	Thank you, man.
	Yeah.
	Not everywhere.
	I mean, like, don't travel.
	Like, don't go to certain Arabic-speaking countries, obviously.
	But, like, in America, you'd be fine.
	And European countries, you'd be fine.
	Probably South America, too.
	You know what I mean?
	Like, a lot of the world really doesn't care.
	And I don't think you'll ever speak about those people who do care.
	I mean, it's literally the Simpsons meme, like the one with Lisa where she turns up to the football team and she's like, I want to be the first girl on the football team and Ned's like, yeah, we really have three girls.
	Yeah, that's right, a girl.
	Yeah, you can join the girls.
	It's like, America, I'm gay.
	And it's like, yeah, you and everyone else, mate.
	Yeah, exactly.
	I mean, I can't even imagine why anyone would care about this.
	But anyway, this created a massive social media furor, and like Pink News were right on the sea, yeah, yeah, Nas owns the world and we love it.
	It's like, well then there's nothing stunning and brave about coming out as gay, is there, if the news outlet for gay people are like, yes.
	But the funny thing is Nike were like, wait a minute, this isn't on brand.
	Not the gay part.
	Yeah, the Satanism part, right?
	It's weird.
	We didn't sign this off.
	And so they're suing MSCHF, the production studio, for making and selling these Satan shoes.
	I mean, I honestly am shocked that Nike didn't endorse this.
	Yeah, me too, to be honest.
	I imagine they'd be like, yes, queen.
	Yeah, exactly.
	I can't believe that Nike's Twitter account were like, yeah, exactly.
	Yes, queen, rainbow flag, Satan symbols, whatever.
	And then a link to the merch store.
	But that's the new symbol of the LGBT movement, the Satanist pentagram.
	We talk about optics.
	Basically is.
	I mean, you know, good for them if that's what they think is good.
	Or maybe they're jumping in front of the LGBT movement being like, no!
	Keep the Satanists out.
	But that's the thing.
	I'm sure that Nike have put up their own rainbow flag of diversity and tolerance.
	So, like, what is their argument here?
	Don't profane the name of our Lord Jesus.
	What are they going to say?
	I can't believe this wasn't endorsed by Nike.
	This is a Christian gay server.
	Get off.
	Anyway, so yeah, they sued M... Well, in money.
	Well, yeah, but money, John.
	John's like, well, they're doing it for money.
	Yeah, sure, but they were going to make a lot more money if they were just selling these shoes.
	Just do the deal.
	Yeah, just do the deal.
	They'd make loads of money, doubtless.
	Yeah, no, no, of course.
	But the point is, I can't believe that they didn't just get an approval from Nike.
	But yeah, apparently this is done without the proven authorisation, and the company said it was no way connected with the project.
	And everyone's like, oh, they're distancing themselves.
	I mean, I would too, to be honest.
	It's cringe.
	Someone in the chat is like, well, they were suing because, you know, only Xinjiang blood is allowed in our shoes.
	But this is the point, right?
	So it's so weird.
	But anyway, yeah, so that's that basically.
	It's like, okay, this is really, like, it's weird and cringe because it seems so out of time.
	This is a bizarre marketing.
	I mean, I guess it worked.
	You know, he's got millions of followers.
	They're all enjoying their pentagram shoes with a drop of human blood in, I'm sure.
	Nike's suing because they don't approve.
	He's finally allowed to be publicly gay.
	I think it might just come down to the amount of people that live in the West who are young and believe SJW nonsense.
	So they will happily just run along with everything that sounds like, yes, we're fighting the system, even if the system is in wholeheart approval of what you're doing.
	I mean, like, haha, guys, we're coming out as gay!
	And then the system's like, yeah, we've been doing that for 20 years.
	More flags, please.
	Here's a flag, yeah.
	But they just want to be part of that.
	I'm on the right side of history.
	I'm fighting the power.
	But in reality, you're doing literally nothing.
	But there's literally no power to be fought.
	That's what I mean.
	Yeah.
	Instead, it's something we just, you know, the power that be, the establishment, just makes money off the stuff.
	Yeah.
	So, I mean, keep it going.
	Nike's only complaint is that you didn't get authorization to sell these shoes.
	Maybe you can just sign a contract with them.
	I'm sure they'll be up for it.
	But anyway, right, let's go to the video comments.
	Hey guys, I'm from New Zealand and have been watching since 2015.
	Salute, comrade.
	I want to know whether you think Britain should take an interest in its former colonies.
	What alliances should exist?
	Trade deals.
	Travel visa deals.
	In New Zealand we have easier access to travel visas for Australia due to our proximity and our country's histories.
	I'm of the opinion that Britain should take more interest in its cultural heritage and maybe the Commonwealth should mean something more than empty words.
	Well, I mean...
	The story does mean more.
	Like, Commonwealth citizens when they come to the UK, if you come from Canada, for example, can vote in our elections.
	There's not nothing.
	No, it's not.
	And I didn't even realise that was allowed.
	Yeah, it's pretty weird.
	Yeah.
	But I mean, the question is really, do you want Britain having an active involvement in the government of your country?
	Because, like, things are not brilliant here.
	Things are not...
	Yeah, well, they're not brilliant in Canada either.
	Or in New Zealand, yeah.
	Yeah, that's true.
	Everything's falling apart everywhere.
	So, I mean, I guess we could all fall apart together.
	I mean, I do approve of Kantuk.
	I think it actually is a better idea.
	Sure.
	So, the book we had from Robert Conquest, The Century of Terror, whatever the name was, I've forgotten that.
	Reflections on a Ravaged Century.
	There we go.
	So, the last part of it, he's arguing about, well, maybe we should leave the EU, which is sort of like, ah, I've got some good news for you, but...
	Yeah, but then he's like, well, what would you replace it with to make economic growth and to strengthen our position in the world?
	And Kanzuk is the argument he makes, and he makes some pretty good arguments for it.
	It's like, well, look, if we're going to join up with anyone to make a union in which we can have better economic power, then why would you join up with a bunch of Europeans who you basically have nothing in common with over the Anglo-Saxon Kanzuk nations, which have the same common law, the same history, the same blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
	The same leftist infection.
	The same lack of faith in their own history.
	Then we can work together to get rid of them.
	Exactly.
	There's been a weird thing going on with David Lammy, and we're probably going to do a premium podcast on it, but he's claiming that he's English.
	And this is very interesting, because it's caused a couple of other people to come out interestingly and claim that they're English.
	And so, okay, but you guys have spent all of this time saying the English are evil.
	And that you hate the English.
	And that Britain's bad.
	The Empire is bad.
	Everything that they've ever done really is kind of bad.
	And you're like, yeah, we're proud Englishmen.
	It's like...
	What moral impulse are we working from here?
	What's the animating principle?
	People pointing out as well that the Commonwealth is not Kanzuk.
	Yeah, sorry, I should make the distinction.
	But that's the unique thing as well.
	The other parts of the Commonwealth, we don't have as much in common.
	With the Kanzuk nations, it's unbelievable that we have so much in common and yet don't exploit that to its maximum capacity.
	I mean, I don't know what...
	Robert Conquest suggests that we should essentially have...
	What was it?
	It was sort of like everyone has to vote on the New Year's and everyone has to agree before it passed.
	We should have a group of us which all agree to the same laws.
	Sounds terrible.
	Not a European Union style, but like the British government, the Canadian government, the Australians and New Zealanders would all have to agree on something for us to all follow it.
	That sounds terrible.
	It sounds unworkable.
	Well, he also includes the United States in his argument.
	God, that sounds even worse.
	No, it'd be amazing.
	I don't think it's going to work.
	They've all got to agree on rules.
	We can't even agree on the same rules as Scotland.
	No, but we've been able to get rules on, you know, what can be trade deals, for example.
	So we should not have tariffs on this product between any of us.
	Okay, yeah, big free trade zone.
	That'd be fine.
	Yeah, I mean, that's essentially what he's arguing.
	But that's how the European Union began.
	Exactly.
	He doesn't argue on the basis of political union.
	He says any attempts to do such a thing should be vetoed outright by any one member.
	And even if the Kanzuk nations agreed, he adds America because America is...
	I'm not going to give that up.
	Like, why would they give up their sovereignty to the rest of the Anglo nations?
	It's not going to happen.
	So, I mean, I think it's not a bad idea.
	I have no idea what the unintended consequences will be.
	I don't know.
	It's so weird.
	It's like, you've got, like, a bunch of bananas, and it's a really old bunch of bananas.
	They're going black, they're rotting, and they're all falling apart.
	It's like, oh, let's put these bananas back and smush this back together.
	It's like...
	I guess.
	Well, that's your view of the Anglo world falling apart.
	Yeah, but it is.
	But us being separate hasn't stopped this?
	But it's not going to make it stop.
	Well, I'm not saying it's going to make it stop, but I would like to have greater ties with, like, the Canadians, the Australians, and New Zealanders to fight back against SJWs, for example.
	Yeah, but they voted in Trudeau and Jacinda.
	Yeah, and we voted in the Tories, so...
	Yeah, exactly, exactly.
	We at least didn't vote for Corbyn.
	But there are alternatives, and if you're just not going to fight, then what's the point, you know?
	Well, I guess, but, like, I don't know, man.
	Like...
	I am very, very cynical about these things.
	And I think that we have too many problems that we're not addressing, and we can't really cement until we address them.
	And so anything that we do will be the equivalent of just putting a plaster on a gaping chest wound.
	It's like, well, we'll stitch that up.
	There you go.
	Everything's fine now.
	It's like, okay.
	We are still dying, though.
	Yeah, I don't agree.
	I mean, on the economic front, at least, we can probably agree on that.
	If we can make agreements with the Kansuk nations that we should have no tariffs on X, Y, and Z, then what's there to oppose, you know?
	Yeah, but that's great.
	But the thing is, it doesn't address the underlying problem, which is, why are we doing what we're doing?
	You know, why are we...
	Good.
	Why are we something to be proud of?
	Why are we something to push forward into the world?
	And you can see that there isn't anything.
	We've abandoned the moral high ground on every single subject, which is really infuriating because actually we could claim the moral high ground on a lot of different subjects.
	But it would require us to say to racial activists, sorry, we don't care about your concern and we think you're wrong.
	And they'd be like, yeah, but we're racist.
	I'm like, no, we don't think that's racist.
	We think that's the morally right thing to do to, I don't know, abolish slavery or whatever, you know, free speech, all these other things.
	But we've seeded all of these arms and gone, yeah, you're right, you're right.
	We'll abolish free speech.
	We'll abolish this.
	We'll abolish that.
	When you say we, you mean the political class?
	The political class, the public dialogue, what the nation is currently sort of going through.
	You know, like, Piers Morgan quit Good Morning Britain, and now there is literally nothing, nothing that is in favour of being pro-British.
	And it's like, that's so weird, because you would think that in every country, all of their TV personalities would be pro that country.
	Why would you have people who just actively agents against the stability and, like, moral dignity of the nation, and there is no one to fight in that corner anymore?
	Yeah, because they're all the alternative.
	I mean, for an example, like a mirror image of us, I would imagine.
	I mean, it's not obviously a complete mirror image or anything, but an alternative would be like rebel media in Canada.
	Like, clear upstarts trying to argue that, you know, Canada, good.
	Like, we're going to be patriotic, so on and so forth.
	I don't know so much about New Zealand or Australia's situation.
	I guess Sky News Australia would be the alternative.
	Yeah, and hopefully we get GB News over here.
	But why would you not want stronger ties with those kind of groups, for example?
	Oh, it would be great, but I think that the...
	The moral fire has gone out.
	I don't think they can win.
	I don't think the public are into it.
	I think the public have been sufficiently shamed.
	I don't think they have.
	The fact that this goes on every day, day after day, and they've been having the same thing drilled into them over and over and over, and nothing has been done.
	There aren't major protests.
	There is no kind of pushback against any of this from anywhere, and any pushback that is It's just racist, racist, racist.
	And then the person collapses in.
	And what is Brexit then?
	Brexit is our sort of last desperate cry.
	But I don't think there's going to be enough.
	Yeah, there'll have to be others.
	But that's the nature of politics.
	Honestly, I'm much more sceptical.
	Anyway, let's move on because I don't want to waste our evening on this.
	Hello, everyone.
	I enjoyed the Zoom call on Friday, so thanks for having it.
	So, I'm just here to say that the guy who got arrested for writing Islam is questionable on a wall, that was on his own wall, so apparently you don't even have the protection of your own property.
	My question is, from the Christian perspective, are the SNP satanic?
	Thanks.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	I mean, how are they going to stop themselves arguing for lowering the age of consent towards zero from the leftist perspective?
	I don't think there is one, so, yeah, Satanists.
	Probably, but...
	That's enough, isn't it?
	Well, yeah, I mean, like...
	I can only assume that the Christians probably would look at the SNP as being basically satanic.
	Because, I mean, what are they doing that's pro-Christian?
	Nothing.
	But, I mean, the idea of being pro-Christian.
	I mean, imagine, go out into the street and just ask a random person, Hi, are you pro- or anti-Christian?
	They'll be like, What?
	You know, I don't know what you're talking about.
	Why are you even asking me this question?
	This means nothing to me.
	There's no fire there.
	No, that's two different things.
	The argument that England is a non-religious state, for example, it's a non-Christian state, in the sense that people don't report themselves as Christian, that's true.
	But if you ask someone, you know, should we start transitioning every child, for example, the public don't agree with the SGW nonsense.
	Of course they don't.
	I'm not saying they agree with the SJW nonsense.
	What I'm saying is they don't realise that they need to be fighting it.
	I don't know how much of that is true or not.
	Well, let's hope I'm wrong.
	I find it interesting, though.
	Sorry, before we go on to the next one.
	I do find it interesting how the guy had written it on his own wall.
	If he'd defaced public property or something, okay, fair enough.
	The cops could arrest him for that.
	But if you can't even write Islam as questionable on his own wall...
	The stuff that's going on in Batley at the moment with the teacher, who's currently in hiding in fear of his own life...
	This should be something that the other communities in this country should be able to look and point and go, Muslim community, this is your problem.
	What are you going to do?
	But we can't do that.
	But that's the thing.
	You're looking at this from the perspective like there is no way to fight back, and yet you look across to France that's been through much worse over the last few years and has come out on the other side looking golden.
	Let's see the Conservative Party go, right, Islamo-leftism is in trouble now.
	Because the British people are right.
	I'd love them too.
	I'm not defending the Conservatives here.
	I'd love them too as well, but they're never going to do it.
	And that's the only way that it could be done.
	The Muslim community has to understand that this would be a community thing.
	It's not just an individual thing.
	It is a group thing.
	And that can't be done in the way that things are now.
	I think that's something definitely the public would agree on.
	Let's say a Muslim community is not perfectly integrating into British culture and needs to change.
	That might be a racist statement.
	That might be a hate crime.
	I don't give a toss.
	But that's the point!
	But that's a problem with the law.
	That's something that can be changed.
	We just need people in place to do it.
	And the moment we don't.
	But there appears to be very little way of informing the public that this is the case.
	Because it seems, even now, that people don't really understand how little they are allowed to say.
	This is why hopefully GB News and set up a TV station and broadcasting to every home, maybe they'll start changing, at least informing people.
	But until then, man.
	By the way, it's illegal to say anything online.
	Yeah, just so you know.
	Don't post something on Twitter because you might end up going to jail.
	But anyway, let's go for the next one.
	Hey guys, have you ever thought about investing in more narrative-based media?
	I don't think it's a coincidence that Hollywood has the kind of cultural sway that it does, and it's because right now they're kind of the only game in town when it comes to the danger and romance and sex appeal, and I think those things all ought to be considered useful tools in the toolkit if we want to maximize our potential impact.
	Not that it's y'all's personal responsibility, but I think it's something that all of us should be thinking about.
	People love stories.
	Yeah, I think that's a great point.
	For us, personally, it's just about lack of resources.
	But we are trying to do it, for example.
	I mean, like Bode and the editor, hopefully the content they make will be that kind of narrative focus.
	Yeah.
	I mean, it'll be more historical, that's the thing you're making, but...
	Yeah, but there'll still be moral points within it.
	Yeah.
	There'll still be a point to the whole thing.
	But yeah, for us, it's just time and money.
	But, you know, things are going well.
	People are signing up to the website.
	We're producing content.
	So, yeah, I mean, give us some time, hopefully.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Hey guys, so it's the third day of Passover and it scares me how the holiday of freedom contrasts this year with the removal of our freedoms in America, such as guns and voting.
	On this holiday, we remember the miracles that God did to free the Jews from Egypt.
	We also think about our own personal Egypt, things that enslave us, such as Addiction and bad habits.
	What's an Egypt or an enslavement that you feel like you've broken free of recently?
	Thanks.
	Sugar, obviously.
	But, I mean, I think it is.
	I think, like, genuinely, like, there's an addiction to sugar.
	Because, honestly, the first few days of having no sugar, you can feel, like, this, like, white cold and sweat that creeps across you.
	And you get, like, shakes.
	And you feel the need to eat it.
	It's a genuine addiction.
	What about you?
	Nothing.
	What, my view of sugar?
	No, your view of a personal bondage that you've had to escape.
	I don't really have any bondage I can think of in my life that I have to escape.
	Sorry.
	I did notice she mentioned, what was it, Passover or whatever.
	There was a post we saw on Aston Villa.
	I still can't go over how this is real.
	So, Aston Villa has a Facebook page, and they posted something that was like, Happy Passover or whatever, with a Jewish star.
	And it had, what was it, like 40,000 reacts.
	37,000 of them were angry reacts.
	And then when you check the comments, it was just all Muslims being like, Free Palestine, Free Palestine, Free Palestine.
	And I don't agree with their viewpoint, but what I actually kind of love about that story is that's very subversive.
	Like, whenever you get a post that's promoting, like, critical race theory or some such nonsense, if every single time it got 30,000 angry reacts, I mean, they'd start getting the message, wouldn't they?
	They would.
	They would.
	I mean, but that doesn't happen in Britain, does it?
	We need more organisation.
	We do.
	Let's go for the next one.
	Good evening from within the lockdown zone.
	Today's update brings us eight new locally acquired cases and fears the lockdown may be extended.
	Meanwhile, in South Australia, we see protests outside the Chinese consulate.
	G'day guys.
	After the last 12 months and the lockdowns we've seen, do you think there are any circumstances in which a forcible quarantine can be morally justified?
	Cheers.
	I mean, maybe if it was, like, literally black death levels of people dying, sure, but not when it's 20% of 82-year-olds.
	I saw the statistics for Gibraltar.
	So what was it, like a 2% death rate for people who get the virus?
	And then overall, they've had a 0.2% of the population has died because of this virus.
	That's it.
	Or at least within 28 days of a test of this virus.
	Yeah, and that's over the entire year.
	So over the entire year, Gibraltar lost 0.2% of the population.
	Which is like 15 people, right?
	I think it was like 50-something, but it's the case of like, okay, bad.
	I mean, no one's pro-death, obviously, for the idiots listening.
	But, I mean, with 0.4, 0.6, 1.2...
	Does it justify a total lockdown of everything?
	Probably not.
	I mean, what percentage does it actually justify?
	I mean, I think that's something you actually have to think about before you just say, let's just do lockdowns because people might die.
	It would have to be like 30% of the population with bodies piling up in the streets.
	For me to find it morally justified, it would have to be an absolute, like...
	Black Death, you know, it would have to be really, really bad, but it's not really, really bad, and so I don't think it's justified.
	Was that the last video comment, John?
	Great.
	Chris says, if acquitted, BLM riot and anger against racist police.
	If convicted, BLM riot and anger against racist police.
	They have put themselves in an anger, anger situation.
	Yeah, they kind of have.
	That's kind of the point.
	Yeah.
	It's almost as if the whole thing is about them being revolutionary socialists who just want a revolution.
	Well, yes.
	And yeah, Christian points out here, the fact that the city gave the Floyd family $27 million kind of suggests that we know the results of the trial before it even began.
	Yeah, I did see the defence were arguing for them to delay it, because it's like, well, this is going to affect the jurors, but they didn't agree, so it's going ahead.
	So, if it turns out that George Floyd did overdose to death, then his family's got a massive payout.
	For nothing.
	Well, for the privilege of having him overdose.
	Yeah.
	That's mad.
	That's just mad.
	I'm sure they'll give the money back.
	Yeah, I'm sure it won't destroy their lives either.
	Here's a huge amount of cash.
	Oh, brilliant.
	I'm going to spend this wisely.
	Chris says, Floyd could rotate his head while on the ground.
	To do so, it required enough space to move his chin and jaw between himself and the ground, as bone is not malleable.
	If this was possible, there was no restriction or compression on the front side of his neck, i.e.
	he could have used his chin to prop his throat up if that was the restriction.
	If the chin can spin, the air gets in.
	LAUGHTER But, I mean, he's sat there going, I can't breathe, I can't breathe, I can't breathe.
	How are you saying that, then?
	I don't know.
	Like, I just...
	I'm very black-pilled on things today, I've got to say.
	Feeling very...
	I'm just...
	Things are going really badly.
	Like, they're going badly, and it looks like they're about to get worse.
	Really much worse.
	And...
	I don't know, man.
	It's depressing.
	We must march through hell.
	Yes.
	Well, I guess you've got to keep going, haven't you, if you're marching through hell.
	That's...
	Yeah, we've got the right shoes for it.
	Good point, Vicky.
	At least we've got our human blood shoes.
	How many terrorist attacks did the French go through?
	They went through hell, and now they're on the other side of Islamo-leftism is destroying the West.
	And I'm just like, okay, if that's what it takes, that's what it takes.
	Why can't we just copy them again?
	Uh, Chris says, morning gents.
	Do you see the interview Joyce, George Floyd sister disavowing the violence committing in the name of her brother and saying all lives matter?
	I think it was on the BBC.
	I did not see that.
	Although I did see the BBC, uh, Washington or whatever, American correspondent, Essentially, I should have got the clip.
	I forgot to get the clip for this.
	But he basically just says, well, America is a racist country that has a two-tier policing system.
	And if Derek Chauvin isn't convicted, that's basically proof.
	I was like, so thanks, BBC. That's a neutral objective.
	It's not true.
	What if he's not convicted?
	Well, everything I just said was a lie, and the United States is a bastion of tolerance and inclusivity.
	No, no, it's still a racist country and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
	The BBC is promoting the George Floyd defence view of the United States, which is that it's institutionally racist and can't change.
	Not the George Floyd view, the BLM view.
	Sorry, the BLM view.
	So this is also the point we mentioned a long time ago, which is when the Chinese make their propaganda, and you see it in English, their propaganda is always America is a racist, white supremacist country.
	And it's entirely the same as the Democrat propaganda.
	So when you put the Democrats in charge and they're having to argue against the Chinese, I mean, what have they got?
	What are they going to say?
	They're going to say, well, the Chinese are right about all this.
	Biden, your country is human rights abuses and racist and blah, blah, blah.
	Yes.
	That's a good point.
	I saw Xi Jinping had come out and said, look, don't lecture us on human rights.
	I was like, well, yeah, presumably because he was like, because we won't listen.
	Why would he?
	I've got other things to do.
	I'm currently in the middle of a genocide.
	Shut up.
	Don't lecture on human rights.
	No, I can't make the joke.
	Obviously China doesn't care about human rights.
	I mean, why would you even bring it up?
	Anyway, Drew says, do you think BLM or other social justice leftists mistake justice for retribution or revenge or vengeance?
	I know they're two different words, but they don't seem to understand the word justice as you or I do.
	Yeah, I mean, that's the point, isn't it?
	That's why they're like, yeah, if Derek Chauvin doesn't get convicted, then, you know, there's no justice to tear.
	It's because you want revenge for something that maybe he didn't do.
	Ash says, May,
	I think, is a generous way of putting it.
	Yeah, I mean, I've heard the same about China, where apparently people just don't help if you're lying on the street and you need help.
	Well, I did see someone making a good point.
	You've seen that clip from, what is it, like Washington DC or something, where there's two girls breaking into the guy's car as the Uber driver because they want to steal his car.
	Taze him.
	Taze him, drives off, ends up killing him, and then their only concern is, oh, my phone's in the car.
	Can we get the phone out?
	And then CNN characterise it as an accident.
	Yeah.
	I mean, when we look at clips of China where people are just driving past dead bodies or whatever or just have no interest in helping someone who's fallen down, can we really talk when that sort of thing goes on?
	No, not really.
	That's my point.
	All of English-speaking civilization is just slowly melting down.
	Hey, should we form cans?
	Why?
	Can't fight against it.
	Because there's the other point someone made, which is a lot of these clips you keep seeing of random Asian women just being attacked in the street for no reason.
	The people doing it all seem to come from one community, not going to lie.
	There's another one.
	An Asian man was choked unconscious on a subway by a diversity-enriched person.
	Yeah.
	Okay, there is a problem, but it does seem to be disproportionate, at least in the United States.
	Yeah.
	Lachlan says, Pharmacology degree here.
	Opioids such as fentanyl acting on the Moo opioid receptor will cause desensitization of the high over prolonged usage.
	However, they will cause much less desensitization elsewhere, such as in the brainstem, where they will suppress breathing, etc.
	The reason so many people OD is because they keep taking more and more to hit the same high.
	While suppressing the breathing reflex more and more since desensitizes slower.
	Basically, the Floyd defense saying he took loads, therefore he can take it, is partially true, but mostly false.
	Yeah, because the defense as well seemed to give the impression that because he's got some tolerance, it had no impact whatsoever as well, which is, ah, come on.
	Like, there's no way.
	Yeah, I don't know.
	Hey Carl, listening to the George Floyd trial, I get the feeling that the Nuremberg trial will be fairer than this will be.
	Well, I mean, from the point of view of the prosecution, sure.
	I mean, just saying, at least the Nazis had death camps that we could point to and be like, they're bad guys.
	I don't actually agree that the Nuremberg trial was unfair.
	Like, I don't know if you've ever seen the details of it.
	I never watched it, actually.
	I never looked into it.
	So, like, they gave them lawyers, for example.
	Like, they gave them lawyers and were arguing, yeah, they should be able to give their own argument about why they didn't do nothing.
	And the Russians were just outraged.
	They were just like, what are you talking about?
	We're just gonna hang them now!
	And the English were like, no, we will have a fair trial.
	They will give their case about why they didn't do nothing.
	And we will point out to the death camps and bring in the witnesses saying that they did this and that.
	And then we'll hang them.
	Yeah, and it's like, well, it's not unfair.
	I mean, they literally did build the death camps and kill loads of people.
	It is the proper thing to do.
	You are right.
	Whereas the Soviets were just like, nah, just hang them now.
	I mean, just like the BLM guys.
	Surprise, surprise.
	So, James says...
	I'm not familiar with the case.
	I'm going to guess it's because it wasn't done by a police officer.
	Anyway, let's move on to Satan's shoes.
	A little-known fact is that Lil Nas X Satan worship was caused by the black community's rejection of homosexuality.
	Also, you do not need to pay $666 for blood shoes or Nike shoes after they move to production to China have the blood of slaves on them.
	That's true.
	And they were $1,000.
	And not even endorsed by Nike, which again is shocking.
	I've been alive long enough to remember when coming out as gay satanist was edgy and novel.
	Not anymore, you aren't special, Montero.
	Well, I mean, that's pretty special.
	Not many people are named after a car.
	It's like Nike a lot.
	It doesn't have the Nike-branded swish of blood.
	It's certain kinds of blood, little gnat.
	It can't be an Americans.
	We're not having black blood in our shoes, honestly.
	That would be racist.
	We need Muslim slave blood.
	Nike, a tolerant company with the LGBT logo in their profile.
	Doug says, if he wants to be really edgy, just make a set of shoes with a picture of Muhammad on them.
	I'm sure they'll treat the angry Muslims as just stupid conservatives whining as well.
	Just a pair of shoes, bro.
	Just a pair of shoes.
	Don't know what you're upset about.
	Also, look at this amazing website where I quote Milton.
	Oliver Ray, as a Christian myself, I'm not offended by little Naz's video.
	It validates what I believe about homosexuality that is Satan's temptation.
	Thanks for proving my point, Naz.
	That's the thing!
	I mean, how bad optics did you have to go?
	Stupid.
	I'm gay and a Satanist, and these are one and the same.
	I mean, if anyone else is destroying the optics of the LGBT crowd, it's you.
	I mean, the word wholesome just can't be applied to any of it.
	That's the point.
	Rolf says, wait, is Nike trying to fight for our souls or our souls?
	Ha ha.
	Are they confused?
	Awesome Well says, note the all-seeing eye gesture applied by Lil Nas holding the shoe across his face.
	2009 called.
	It wants its Illuminati meme back.
	So, have you not noticed that the black celebrity community in America seems to genuinely believe in the Illuminati?
	I hadn't noticed it, no.
	You haven't noticed this.
	I'm joking.
	No, it's really funny.
	A lot of them seem to actually believe in the Illuminati.
	I don't know anything about it, obviously.
	I've just watched videos where black celebrities are literally saying, well, I want to get into the Illuminati, or the Illuminati told me to do this, or whatever it is.
	And it's like really famous celebrities, like Nas and stuff like this, like really big famous rappers.
	And it's like, okay...
	So the 1800s called?
	Yeah.
	It wants its scapegoat back?
	Like, what are you talking about?
	I mean, maybe.
	Okay, so tell us more about the Illuminati.
	I mean, I'm interested.
	Let's see.
	What do they say to you?
	Anyway, Jeremy Clark says, I haven't had any time to upload a video comment, but can you answer this?
	What is a moral?
	What is ethics?
	Because I feel you've been using them as synonyms when they aren't.
	I can answer that, Jeremy.
	An ethical system, ethics, is an overarching system that dictates the pattern of your life.
	And theoretically, this branch out into what you think society should be, and moral, when you use it, I guess, in just a regular sentence, in a moral choice, is one of those dilemmas in which you find yourself when on this ethical path that you have to make a decision about.
	Do you do X or do you do Y? That's the moral choice.
	So yeah, they're not synonyms.
	I haven't been using them as synonyms.
	And there's the explanation.
	I've been working very hard at this.
	I can just pull that off the top of my head.
	The thing is, I didn't used to know that either.
	It's not even self-evident when you read about these things.
	You've got to spend quite a lot of time thinking about it, really.
	Robert Dunn says, hey lads, consistently great show.
	Oh, thank you.
	So my mother lost her leg recently due to a surgery complication.
	Damn, I'm sorry to hear that.
	So she's an old school conservative, so I put her onto your show and now she's a fanatic.
	Well, hello Robert's mother.
	We hope you're okay.
	We like the mums.
	Yeah, we do like the mums.
	It would be so cool to give her a shout-out, maybe a hello, Eileen.
	Hello, Eileen.
	Thank you for joining us.
	Ignacio says, Hey, Carl, I heard you say on another podcast that children belong to their parents.
	Yes.
	And I find that very objectionable.
	Well, then you're wrong.
	LAUGHTER If children really are the property of their parents, I find it difficult then to try and limit what psychotic parents do to their property.
	Well, there are regulations, what you can and can't do to your own property.
	And really, you're not wrong.
	You end up contradicting with, well, if it's my property, I can treat it anywhere I like.
	But it's the same as dogs, cats, pets.
	Children aren't fully actualized human beings, and they never will be, and they shouldn't be given free reign and control of their own lives because they make terrible, terrible mistakes.
	And the alternative to being owned by their parents is that they're owned by the state, and the state does not care about those kids at all.
	So in most cases, I think that it would be preferable for the children to be owned by the parents who mostly love them, than the state who absolutely does not give a damn.
	And I'm not saying there's a perfect answer either, but it's kind of one of those unfortunate conundrums in life.
	And you're right.
	Like he says, I've seen too many parents use their kids as a weapon during that argument.
	It disgusts me.
	Yeah, that's something that can happen.
	And it's something terrible that parents do.
	But the duty of care, as you say, I think comes from the fact that the kids are the property of the parents and the parents are responsible for them.
	And if the parents don't own the kids, why do they have a duty of care to them?
	Enjoy your social worker coming around and saying, well, you refuse to transition your kid.
	That's right.
	The state is taking your child and then forcibly transitioning them against your will, which is what's actually happened at points, isn't it?
	Well, the one in Canada was the mother agreed, the dad didn't.
	Yeah.
	Therefore.
	And he was arrested.
	Yeah.
	So Crowder got hit by Damocles' seven-day sword of anti-wrongthink.
	Glad you guys escaped from these greener pastures.
	Yeah, I'm glad too.
	It means we can curate what we put up and we don't have to be worried about accidentally saying one wrong thing during a live stream.
	Scott says, I was wondering about your thought of a British constitution.
	Well, I mean, we used to have one.
	Many years ago, in the before times, before COVID, and Tony Blair.
	It's clear why a First Amendment is important.
	What are your thoughts on a British Second Amendment?
	It would be nice to have a right to defend yourself, let alone own firearms in Britain.
	Well, you can own firearms in Britain, you just can't own them for self-defense.
	Yeah.
	You can own them if you want to go duck hunting or something.
	If you apply for a license and you say self-defense, instantly blacklisted.
	Mad!
	You have to say I'm doing it for sport.
	You're definitely doing it for sport.
	It's insane.
	It's just insane.
	But yeah, I mean, it would be lovely to have a First Amendment.
	And, you know, that would be nice to have a Second Amendment too.
	But instead, you are in fact owned by the government.
	And so your property, your body, your own personal property is not under your own charge of defense.
	And so you don't need a gun.
	Let's hope that you'll never need one, eh?
	Anyway, so thanks for everyone for joining us.
	If you want more content from us, you can go to lowseas.com, sign up, become a premium member, and support us and help us grow.
	And, of course, get access to all of our premium content.
	What?
	People in the chat, it's like BB equals before Blair, AB, all buggered.
	Well, that's true.
	To be honest, that is all British politics.
	Yeah.
	It's like everything seems to focus around Blair's time in office.
	Yeah, and now the Conservatives are like, hi, Tony, what do you think about this COVID stuff?
	Why are you phoning him?
	But the post-Blair period is defined by him.
	I mean, whoever's in charge.
	It could, you know, brown all the rest of it.
	We're living in the shadow of Tony Blair's grinning mug.
	I mean, it shows you how much of an impact he had.
	Unbelievable, man.
	It's disgraceful.
	And the fact that conservatives are not like, right, we're just winding all this back until, you know...
	Especially when he's denouncing it as well.
	Yeah!
	You see Tony being like, yeah, what was it?
	What was the statement about...
	Millions of Muslims have views that are incompatible with the modern world.
	That was his statement.
	That's Tony Blair.
	Yeah, we're seeing that in battle, aren't we?
	You know, we're kind of seeing that at the moment.
	Thanks, Tony.
	Glad you allowed millions of them to move here.
	I'm sure this won't cause problems in the future.
	Anyway, like I was saying, get a lot of these.com, get access to all of our fantastic reporting, sign up, become a premium member, support us, get access to our premium content.
	We're going to go record the Brave New World podcast.
	So hopefully that'll be up later this week.

▲