Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 4, 2021 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:31:43

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #124

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Eaters for the 4th of May.
	May, there we go.
	Sorry, I had to think about that.
	2021.
	I'm joined by Josh.
	Hello.
	Today we're going to be talking about the fact that the Biden administration has admitted that Trump was right about everything by the looks of it.
	Caitlyn for California.
	So Caitlyn's bid to become the governor of California, Caitlyn Jenner there.
	and also the corpse labour party which i'm not even sure why it still exists looking at the statistics of the their polling coming up to this election but anyway before we get into that let's do a little bit of shilling because there's also some good content i want to show here so the first thing being the sebastian gorker interview so the sebastian gorker interview with carl in which they discussed um a whole range of things but i think the best thing i saw out of it was them talking about why are there no conservative theorists i mean you think about it like the number of leftist theorists you can find.
	I mean, go to any party.
	There's any number of them doing stupid talks about stuff.
	But you go to the Conservatives and there's no one.
	I mean, especially in Britain.
	I mean, the Americans have got a much stronger branch there, but the British Conservative Party, nada.
	But anyway, it's a really interesting conversation.
	It's going to be premium and it'll be live on the website at 3pm.
	So there's also going to be some clips on, I think it's YouTube and Twitter, but there's also some spicy stuff that we couldn't put on YouTube because Sebastian is a spicy boy who likes to say things that YouTube doesn't like.
	So you'll only find the exclusive stuff like that on the website, as I say.
	Also, we have an interview with Nick Buckley, who is the Reform UK candidate for Greater Manchester, before I get shot for calling it just Manchester.
	And we'll have that up sometime in the afternoon today, but we're not sure because we haven't set it up yet.
	But anyway, go over to lotuses.com, sign up to watch the Sebastian Gork interview at 3pm.
	It is worth your time.
	Without further ado, let's get into it.
	So, the Biden administration admitting that Trump was right.
	There's been a few knocks of this, but it turns out it's not just one thing, there's a whole bunch of things.
	Although mainly, I must say, on immigration.
	And we covered this previously, as you can see Carl here, talking about the fact that there was a massive increase in illegals trying to cross the US-Mexico border.
	And it was, what, like four times the number it had been under Trump in the same few months that he's been in office.
	And of course, expected to only explode because the warmer weather attracts people to...
	Yeah, so I actually looked into some of the numbers of it because I wrote an article about it and it seems like even based on historic numbers it's at its all-time high and that's coming from both the data that the border guards have collected and just anecdotal reports from the people who are actually working there as well.
	Yeah, I mean, not to mention they openly gave statements about the fact that they're now using, what is it, the catch and release policy, which is not a policy, it's a policy of having no border, is what that is.
	I'm not blaming the border guards or anyone down there for having to do this, in case you don't know, we got told when we were doing this, that they'll catch the illegal migrant who's crossed the border, and because the areas that keep them are full, there's nothing you can do, so you just release them, you document that you saw them, and then you leave.
	It's like, right.
	I mean, that's just the policy of having no border then.
	Because if you cross and you're going to be questioned by someone, then you can just walk off.
	Well, was there anything stopping you?
	Yeah.
	And supposedly there can just be an endless stream of people crossing the border.
	And as long as you don't have the infrastructure there to support the numbers of people, then there's going to be a steady flow of people undocumented coming into America.
	So Trump, sensible policy, build the wall, stop it, shut down the illegal immigration, perfectly reasonable.
	Biden's policy, exactly the opposite, or at least his messaging especially, being, no, no, no, please come.
	So they did.
	And as we documented, if you just go and ask them at the border why you're here, well, new administration, new messaging.
	That's why we came.
	Because Biden says we can come.
	Anyway, but he also has done some other stupid stuff.
	So here you can see the Guardian reporting that the migrants view the US with hope and caution after Biden scraps Muslim ban.
	This is the terrorist hotspot ban.
	You remember that Biden and Obama, when they're in office, were the ones who drafted this ban, and then Trump put into action when he got into office, and the media tried to smear it as a Muslim ban, because the majority of the countries that have hotspots for terrorism are Muslim-majority.
	And that's not Trump's fault.
	Like, that's the country's fault for being a complete asshole.
	So the examples he gives is Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen.
	I mean, you tell me if they're full of terrorists or not.
	I mean, would you think, oh, no, no, we'll have mass immigration from police places?
	Of course not.
	So Biden lifted that, because of course he would.
	Why not?
	And then there's also the fact that Biden began to stick for admitting that he did want to keep in a new level of refugees.
	So if we go to the next link, this is the New York Times reporting that he'd broken a campaign promise.
	So the Biden administration will keep its cap on refugee admissions at the low level set by the Trump White House, walking back an earlier pledge.
	And they gave a statement in here in which they said that the move to keep it at the lower levels was remains justified by humanitarian concerns and is otherwise in the national interest.
	I mean, true.
	I agree.
	Like, trying to lower the number of refugees because you have too many refugees is humanitarian.
	Like, you have no reason to take massive amounts of refugees.
	I mean, they were still taking 15,000.
	That was the cap Donald Trump brought it down to.
	It was up 100,000 when Obama left ISIS. So really that high, I guess?
	Yeah, so good job Trump bringing it down to a reasonable level.
	And the Biden administration in their campaign said they wanted to up it to 64,000 and then realized, oh wait, no, Trump's actually right.
	Like, why would you want to mass import loads and loads of refugees?
	Like surely you want to give refugee status to people who are legitimately fleeing governments and so forth, that are trying to kill them, and then you keep them and maybe you can use, you know, to further regime change or something like this.
	Or just to save their lives.
	Pertently reasonable, but that's not what was happening.
	I mean, 100,000 people, that's a lot of people to be fleeing from world governments.
	Anyway, so they didn't get a lot of thanks for this from the progressive left.
	So you can see here this was the main opponent, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
	Completely and utterly unacceptable.
	Biden promised to welcome immigrants, and people voted for him on that promise.
	I don't buy it.
	No.
	Like, who's voting for him?
	Because they love mass immigration.
	Like, come on, do a referendum on that issue.
	Let's see how it goes.
	Upholding the xenophobic and racist policies of the Trump admin, not racist, not xenophobic, including the historically low plus plummeted refugee clap, is flat out wrong.
	Keep your promise.
	I mean, sure, he did promise this, but he's right to stand on it and say no.
	Actually, there is a completely reasonable humanitarian stance to just say we're only going to accept 15,000, I mean, not a tiny number of people, instead of over 100,000 under Obama.
	And that's fine.
	And there's nothing wrong with that.
	Quezzi Cortez is just talking absolute ass.
	So the other progressives were, of course, annoyed with him about this.
	And the best example I found was Vox.com's article, Biden's America First Hangover, which actually just kind of gives you a little bit of a white pill about the fact that at least some of the good stuff Trump did is going to stick around.
	So in here, they're largely complaining, of course, about immigration.
	So they start with, on immigration and global COVID-19 response in particular, Biden seemed unwilling or unable to move past Donald Trump's worldview, giving America First a home in the Democratic White House.
	Yeah, because Trump was right on a lot of things.
	And, well, they're finding this out the hard way.
	So, in mid-April, the Biden administration announced it would maintain the Trump administration's 15,000 per person cap on refugee admittance.
	So, talked about that already.
	According to the New York Times, Secretary of State Anthony Blinken was in the Oval Office on March 3rd, quote, Why?
	I don't get what the argument is.
	It's 15,000.
	It's not like it's no more refugees screw people fleeing persecuted governments or anything like this.
	It's no, it's just this number is what we can take.
	We don't want to take 100,000.
	It seems purely ideologically motivated because, practically speaking, you probably don't want this kind of stress on your infrastructure, especially when everything's shut down and your economy is not exactly at its best.
	Yeah, I mean, well, refugees shouldn't really be an issue for, you know, like mass migration.
	I mean, the Americans take in what is like over a million people a year through legal migration, and then you've got the illegal migration, which is a lot more.
	But 100,000 people per year on refugee claims to the United States, it seems like a lot.
	It's a load.
	But anyway, apparently Biden responded to Anthony Blinken pleading for mass refugee immigration.
	So it says, Mr.
	Biden, already under intense political pressure because of this surge in migrant children at the border with Mexico children, was unmoved.
	The attitude of the president during the meeting, according to one person to whom the conversation was later described, was essentially, why are you bothering me with this?
	Based.
	I mean, he knows the problem with the border is caused by him, his party, and their messaging around migration, which is please come.
	All of you come.
	Like, there's no problem.
	We won't build the wall.
	We won't do anything.
	In fact, we want to welcome you in as many as possible, regardless of if you're a criminal or not.
	Unlike Trump, who's just like, nah, we'll come through the proper procedures.
	It's simple.
	Like, the sensible approach.
	But I just love the idea that he's just like, why are you bothering with this?
	Go away.
	But they did cuck on this, and we're going to talk about the cucking.
	So, after intense backlash from congressional Democrats and liberal pundits, AOC, so the far left here, were pushing him on this, the administration reversed itself, saying they would announce a plan to raise the cap by an unspecified number by May 15th.
	They've now done this, so we'll talk about that in a minute.
	Sorry, did you want to say something?
	Oh, no, no, it's fine.
	Okay, so they say that the story on global vaccination distribution is similar.
	Like, the vaccine distribution of the United States is America first, is it?
	Okay, so what's this argument going to be?
	For weeks after it became clear the United States would have enough vaccines to meet domestic demand, the Biden administration refused to export its excesses to poorer countries.
	That includes stockpiles of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine, which still has not been approved for use in the United States.
	It's like, right...
	So the United States said, we need a bunch of vaccines because we want to get rid of COVID. They ordered, you know, tons and tons of them, more than they would need, because, I mean, that's the sensible thing to do.
	So then if a bunch of them fail or some aren't approved, then you can still use the other ones.
	And the complaint here is you're not just exporting them en masse to foreign countries, even though they haven't been used in the United States.
	Yeah, and they haven't vaccinated.
	The whole population actually would like the vaccine yet, so it seems strange that they would be then giving it away to other countries that have the ability to get it themselves.
	This is something the American taxpayer paid for as well.
	Yeah, so if people are paying for it and they're not even getting vaccinated themselves if they so wish it, then surely that's completely backwards.
	There should be no obligation there.
	Yeah, absolutely not.
	I did see that Vox decided to make a whole video about this, so if you can get the video up, this is on their channel.
	It's like an eight-minute video, and I just hate the responses to this, like the absolute morons in the comments.
	I think it's got mass upvotes, and if you just check out the comments as well, people all agreeing with it, like, oh, so horrible.
	How dare the United States use its vaccines for their own population?
	Pathetic.
	We're all in this together is the greatest lie ever told.
	What do you mean?
	So the argument in here is that the vaccine companies, so a bunch of companies that make vaccines, decided we're going to make some vaccines.
	We need a bunch of money to start this up.
	So at the starting phase, a bunch of rich countries came in and were like, hey, we'll give you a bunch of money to develop a vaccine.
	They're like, sure, okay.
	And the deal is you get the first ones we make.
	Nothing wrong with that.
	So they divert the vaccine and the poorer countries don't have the money to invest on the early stages, so they don't.
	So they have to wait until it's done and looks good and then, you know, say we'll buy a million doses or whatever.
	But of course the rich countries have to get their vaccines first because they're the ones who paid for it.
	I mean, they're getting what they paid for.
	I mean, the American taxpayer paid ridiculous amounts of money at the early stages to make sure these things would exist.
	And then they get the fruits of that labor, which is an overabundance of vaccines that are still being checked.
	I mean, most of the American population is not vaccinated.
	It's not even near 50%.
	And the complaint here is that they just don't export them.
	Like, Vox's opinion is, just export the things you paid for, and their audience just laps it up.
	I can't get over it.
	She's like, yes, but in India, people are dying of COVID. It's like...
	Yeah, okay.
	That's bad.
	It's not like India doesn't have a really large pharmaceutical industry of their own.
	It's not like they can develop it.
	Superpower by 2020.
	I mean...
	Sorry, I love that meme.
	2021 and it's still nowhere near a superpower.
	But, you know, they've got money.
	They could buy vaccines if they want, but they didn't want to.
	They didn't stuff it up.
	And the Americans did.
	You know, the Japanese and whatnot did.
	And they're going to get the first doses.
	There's...
	It just makes perfect sense.
	But instead, Vox is like, nah, nah, just spread the vaccines everywhere.
	I think the actual proliferation of vaccines correlates quite highly with the kind of research expertise and having the research infrastructure in these areas like the UK, the US. The reason they have so many is because they have all the best researchers.
	It's not really a surprise that it's going to happen in these countries.
	Yeah, but I also love it, of course, it comes from the Vox position, the far-left position of just being like, nah, whatever's good for America, get rid of it.
	Just export it elsewhere.
	Why?
	We paid for this.
	Doesn't matter.
	Export it.
	It's not yours.
	It's basically spite at this point, just like...
	How dare rich countries get what they paid for?
	Well, they paid for it.
	Anyway, so they also go on, there's another couple of places in which the Biden administration, and I'm going to keep saying the Biden administration, not Biden himself, because God knows if he has any ideas.
	They say that there are other areas where Biden sounded off the America First tune.
	His administration plans to maintain Trump's tariffs on China indefinitely.
	I don't have any opinion on the tariffs.
	Tariffs generally seem like a bad idea, but I don't know.
	China's situation is complex.
	But okay, he's keeping that around.
	It has also continued Trump's policy of using Title 42, a health code, to kick asylum seekers out of the country.
	So asylum seekers break into the country, say, I want asylum.
	They're like, COVID, deport it.
	LAUGHTER So the Trump administration would just find illegals and they'd be like, oh, I want asylum.
	It's like, that's lovely, but there's a pandemic.
	Bye-bye, get out the door.
	So they could kick them out really easily instead of going through paperwork and all this nonsense, which is, I don't know, very useful.
	I mean, they have no right to be there.
	It's up to the discretion of the country you are breaking into to accept you or not.
	So we're just like, no, go to Mexico, it's fine, and then apply there.
	And the Biden administration has kept that policy, because presumably they're looking at the southern border crisis that they've created and thinking, oh, toss.
	Like, we still need a way to get rid of these people, keep using that.
	And of course, the guys at Vox are complaining about that.
	But then they fully cucked.
	So as I said, they were going to bring through the revised cap.
	And as you can see here, we saved this before it got changed.
	So this is the BBC reporting.
	Joe Biden raises refugee admissions cap after outcry.
	Outcry by AOC in the far left.
	The president raises the cap from 15,000 to 62,500 after critics said the lower figure was racist.
	I'm so bored of hearing the goddamn term.
	Like, refugees could come from anywhere on planet Earth.
	They're like, nah, it's racism.
	And just supposedly the arbitrary figure of 62,500 is not racist.
	No, that's not racist.
	That is the number that is not racist.
	But 15,000, that is apparently.
	If you lower it by one, then it's racist again.
	I think that's how that works.
	Okay, that seems perfectly reasonable.
	Nothing to see here.
	I mean, like I said, Barack Obama's administration, Joe Biden and Barack Obama, had over 100,000.
	So, I mean, that's the presumably less racist position.
	So, Joe Biden, he's only 60% less racist now.
	He's still 40% racist.
	Okay.
	Weird flex joke, but okay.
	So, we go to the story itself.
	So, they changed in which they didn't want to use the term racism in the description.
	So, that's why I captured that image.
	Because, okay, BBC. Like, they know that sounds stupid, so they changed it.
	So they say in here that the Joe Biden administration raises Trump refugee cap after outcry.
	The country's refugee program is distinct from the asylum system.
	Refugee status applies to those who seek protection while still overseas.
	Whilst asylum seekers do so from a port of entry inside the United States.
	So they're making the point here that that cap should apply to people who are applying outside the United States.
	Because that's the way you want it done.
	Because why would you invite people in and then process them?
	They can leave, like we've seen in the UK, when you bring them over in the boats.
	They just break out, or they'll leave, and then you can't track them.
	And there's no way of knowing if you got rid of them.
	I think it was like 80% of those rejected asylum applications we get from people who are chancing it across the English Channel.
	We just don't know where they are.
	There's no way of tracking them down because the Home Office sucks.
	It's a matter of logistics, really, in that even if you did want lots of migrants for some reason, you would still want to keep track of where they are, who they are, because if they're undocumented and just kind of wandering about, they're probably going to end up in a far worse position than otherwise.
	Yeah, but also they might be terrorists.
	I mean, the reason for the terror ban, which is what Joe Biden drafted and then Trump put into action, which was these countries are full of ISIS terrorists.
	I mean, Libya are in the middle of a civil war.
	Somalia, endlessly in war.
	So on and so forth.
	Therefore, these places, if we accept refugees, asylum applications, there's a significant chance that ISIS will try and use these vectors to get people in, as they have promised to do so.
	I mean, you remember during the migrant crisis, they promised to send terrorists with the columns of people coming to Europe, and then they successfully carried out that promise and committed terrorist attacks all over Europe.
	Fantastic.
	To play devil's advocate here a little bit, I mean, ISIS doesn't really exist that much anymore.
	I mean, they've kind of been bombed into oblivion, but at the same time...
	In 2017 they did, and I'm being a bit broad about, like, it could just, you know, ISIS, Al-Qaeda, all these different groups said they would use these as methods.
	It's still certainly something that people need to be cautious of, and I certainly agree that you need to be very wary of these countries where there's lots of Islamic extremism.
	Yeah, which I mean is why Obama and Joe Biden drafted that proposal, which was the right thing to do.
	They didn't do anything wrong about that.
	So anyway, so they also say here that, but the White House is known to be concerned about the optics of a record number of undocumented immigrants arriving at the southern border, with an influx expected to rise during the warmer weather.
	As I say, weather get warmer, a lot more people will be coming.
	But I love how they say that they are concerned about the optics, which means they know it's wrong.
	They know what they're doing is wrong.
	They know that the numbers have gone up by four times for people arriving on the southern border, and they're like, oh shit, this makes us look bad.
	Why does it make you look bad?
	I thought you wanted mass migration into the United States.
	I thought immigrants made the world stronger.
	I thought it was wonderful when millions of people turn up on your shores and you just can't document them at all.
	You have no idea where they're coming from.
	No.
	And they know this.
	I mean, they know that Trump's policy of build the wall, come through the port of entry, is the right policy.
	She can't get over it.
	Like, they're literally just admitting that that's the case.
	Pathetic.
	And also, the American public know that this is the case as well, so just the thing to end on here.
	Most Americans are critical of the government's handling of the situation at the US-Mexico border.
	And this is Pew polling, so, I mean, far-right outlet, clearly.
	It just hates foreigners.
	So they check in here, about two-thirds of US adults, 68%, say that the government is doing very, 33%, or somewhat, 35%, of a bad job in dealing with the increased number of people seeking asylum at the country's southern border.
	Two-thirds.
	Over two-thirds think they're doing bad or very bad.
	This is probably why they're trying to kind of drag their heels with it.
	I don't know why they would walk back on it because two-thirds, you know, they're clearly going to want to win people over here.
	But they're doing a terrible job of it because they're too focused on signaling to the left of the Democratic Party here.
	I think that they could have just ignored them and it would have been fine and everyone would have been happy about it in continuing Trump's policies.
	I mean, it's AOC. I mean, every single link I went to on this, all they quoted for the opposition to, sorry, the proposals for bringing up the numbers, the people proposing this, was people like AOC. And it's like, yeah, but who cares what she thinks?
	Why should you?
	They're fringe, and they get way too much press time just because they're always complaining about stuff.
	Exactly.
	But why, then, does the Biden administration cuck to them?
	It's the reason because, well, in reality, they may get loads of press time and whatnot, and they might be fringe, but that doesn't mean they don't have power.
	And they've got power within the Democratic Party to be able to force the president to do this kind of thing.
	It's pathetic.
	They give the last number here just saying that, well, fewer than half as many, 29% of the American public, say it is doing a somewhat or very good job.
	29% of the public think they're doing an okay job at the southern border, or a good or very good job.
	Whereas the two-thirds of the American public are like, nah, this administration sucks.
	That's quite a condemnation, 29% as well.
	I mean, you could poll pretty much anything that's partisan, you'll get 29%, and that would still look terrible.
	Yeah, I mean, even Democrats are being critical of it, clearly, if it's 29%.
	So they must be going wrong somewhere.
	Trying to please that remainder isn't going to do them any favours.
	But that's the thing, as I say, the Biden administration know they've done wrong here.
	They're worried about the optics.
	Why are they worried about the optics?
	Because they know the American public don't want this.
	And if they don't want it, why are you doing it?
	Yeah, it makes no sense to raise that cap.
	It's ridiculous.
	Because the far left demanded it.
	It's like, great, wonderful.
	That's how the country should work.
	Anyway, let's get into Caitlin for California.
	Okay, so as you may remember, back in 2003, there was a governor recall for Gray Davis, who was only about 11 months into his second term, which allowed Arnold Schwarzenegger to win the election.
	And I think everyone knows that Arnold is the governor of California.
	They're kind of synonymous now, but at the time, obviously, it was a bit of a shock that someone from Hollywood just came in.
	and of course there is reagan where he was you know movie star and came into politics but it was still relatively unprecedented and what i'm trying to set up for here is the fact that there was a petition to recall gavin newsom who is the current governor uh governor the governor of new york Sorry, California.
	Yeah, the current governor of California.
	And this petition has got 1.6 million signatures so far.
	And if I could just read why he's been recalled, it says, Over a decade of proven mismanagement of policies, public monies and resources and lack of leadership have led to the deterioration of Californian communities, poorer schools, crumbling infrastructure, outrageous rising costs from gas to utilities, mass housing crisis, frightening increase in homelessness, insurmountable mass housing crisis, frightening increase in homelessness, insurmountable debt, all caused by gross mismanagement.
	Massive increases in public safety risk by pushing forward laws and policies like Medicare for all and universal health care and laws protecting and helping illegal aliens, putting Californians in the United States, including our veterans, last.
	And this is what has got 1.6 million signatures.
	Is that a lot or a little?
	Well, the population of California is approaching 40 million, so that's a pretty significant amount of the population, and it's enough to trigger an election, I believe, which is set to happen sometime this year.
	I think people are predicting around November time.
	So we have recall petitions in the UK, you have to get 10% of the electorate in a constituency, so I assume there's some limit for this, and they've approached it, or have they got it?
	I think they've got it.
	I wasn't actually able to find any information, but I know that the recall election is going ahead, and the actual ballot paper that people are going to be given is going to have two questions where it says, should Gavin Newsom go, and if so, who should replace him?
	Okay.
	I'm not sure if that's verbatim, what it says on the ballot paper.
	But yeah, there's also, of course, the controversies recently with his dealing of the pandemic and the strict lockdowns, and then the fact that he was spotted at a dinner at a French restaurant, breaking his own rules, just to celebrate.
	Just like Nancy Pelosi and all the rest of them, you know?
	Yeah, the hypocrisy of it as well in that, you know, you've seen the kind of viral video of the woman who owns the restaurant crying next to some Hollywood tent that is allowed to go ahead but she can't open her restaurant even though, you know, they're both outdoor seating.
	Just the unfairness of it.
	And then he's seen in this fancy restaurant celebrating the birthday of a prominent lobbyist for the Democratic Party.
	And it's not even like it's got any purpose here.
	It's just someone's birthday.
	So it looks really, really bad on his part.
	And I think people are relatively fed up with him, especially with the hypocrisy.
	And, of course, all of the other stuff mentioned in the text of the petition.
	That's good.
	I mean, these people deserve to get what they deserve, which is to be kicked out of office.
	Yeah, but kind of annoyingly, some polls have suggested that only about 40% of Californians agree to recall him, which is just ridiculous, considering how much worse California seems to be getting and the fact that he's breaking his own rules.
	Like, how much worse can he get before people actually want to recall him?
	But...
	even if this doesn't go ahead, there's still an election in 2022.
	So the fact that lots of candidates are coming out for this 2021 election is probably going to carry over even if, you know, it's not going to get to a point where other candidates are going to be proposed.
	But nevertheless, um caitlin jenner has kind of thrown her hat into the ring um and the times here has reported that uh she has a real shot at taking california which i think is a little bit optimistic considering that the polling for the recall is relatively low it just depends on whether that translates into decent turnout
	But because I think there are about 15 candidates, the actual threshold for the number of votes might be as low as 15% of the votes may win you the governor's seat.
	So just the sheer amount of vote splitting there means that there's a lot of random chance here that any one of these candidates could go ahead.
	I think Newsom still has a reasonable advantage.
	But nevertheless, I mean, there's still an election in 2022.
	So even if he clings on to power for one more year, this campaign is still going to be kind of good going into the 2022 one.
	So it seems like it's going to be important regardless of how it goes.
	So, a little bit about her, I guess.
	Yeah, I think we're compelled by YouTube's editorial guidelines.
	We are indeed.
	To say that this has always been a woman.
	Well, so, Caitlyn Jenner was former Olympic decathlon champion and became...
	For the women's, surely?
	Well, I don't want to get us demonetised, but no...
	Also turned reality TV star, man turned woman, turned Republican politician now apparently.
	And she's also got links to pro-Trump figures and things like that.
	Supposedly, although this hasn't been confirmed, wants to And mobilise a similar campaign to Trump where you get national press coverage and just the prominence of the name in a race where there's 15 candidates and it's going to be a small share might be a significant advantage just because that's a name that everyone would recognise.
	And this may actually turn into something but it's difficult to tell at this point.
	So, we've also got reports that she's very much pro-constitution freedom and minimum government, and that's a direct quote.
	So this is kind of...
	So that's why she is a Republican?
	Yeah, and we'll go on to see why that might be.
	For example, she said that trans girls that are born as boys should not compete in female sports, which is a pretty good opinion, really.
	I'm glad to see that that's...
	I mean, it's the biologically true opinion.
	I mean, it's not fair.
	As you say, I can read that there, it's just not fair.
	In what world would it be fair?
	Well, it's not fair, and I'll actually go into some of the research here into why it's not fair, and I've actually got hard numbers about the advantages it places.
	So, if you follow the science, this is going to be the...
	The side that you come down on.
	So, she actually said, it's not fair, we have to protect girls' sport in our schools, because most of the debate is focusing on schools, really.
	It doesn't seem to be really a problem outside of it, at least in terms of the press coverage of it.
	And this is coming in a time where states like West Virginia have passed a bill into law recently, which...
	Bans transgender women from competing in women's sport.
	And also, I know that in South Dakota, the governor, Kristi Noem, has been trying to force through executive orders trying to do exactly the same thing there.
	It seems to me that there's going to be a slew of states that are going to have to do this, particularly in the south and the centre of America.
	They seem to be having to take it upon themselves to do this, rather than it being a federal thing, because of course, Biden's not going to do that, is he?
	He's going to get chastised by his own party, and as we saw earlier, he's going to buckle to the far left's demands.
	So, some of the research seems to suggest that a biological advantage persists even after having hormone treatment for over a year, which amounts to about a 9% faster run speed, for example, which is not a small amount, especially in a sport 9%.
	That's pretty huge.
	And you've got the cases, which I've reported in some of my articles actually, which looked at transgender success in women's sport and there's a pretty sizable list that's ever expanding of records being broken and kind of being some of the most successful people in that sport because of the transgender advantage.
	And it supposedly...
	The uber-mensch women, as you might describe.
	I wouldn't quite use those terms, but...
	Well, I mean, if they're literally superior women on the...
	I was going to say battlefield, but on the Olympic field, I mean, what else are they meant to be?
	Because they're definitely women.
	Yeah, absolutely, YouTube.
	They certainly are.
	But supposedly they maintain an athletic advantage, especially if they don't start the hormone treatment of between 15 to 31%, which is absolutely massive.
	And if you actually want to keep it competitive and not ruin it for biological women, then you've kind of got to do this.
	And...
	Caitlin, coming from a sports background, I think might be very good in pushing this narrative, or not really a narrative, it's pushing the scientific evidence that this is absurd, it's not fair.
	Just rubbing the Democrats' face in reality and being like, look, look, they can't compete, it's not fair.
	Well, if they actually looked at the scientific research, they would know.
	It's all ideological.
	There's no scientific basis for these supposed balances in competition, and I think she's come out on the right side here.
	And also, interestingly, she doesn't seem to care about the use of pronouns either.
	So there was a case where Joy Behar, I don't know how to pronounce her name, but of the view, accidentally used the wrong pronouns after talking about Caitlin's run for California governor.
	And of course, she did the kind of So here's the thing in my mind, like, I don't really give a toss about Caitlyn Jenner.
	I mean, who does?
	No, me neither.
	They wants to be a woman?
	Okay, fine, whatever.
	You can do what you want.
	But one of the things I really find interesting, like you remember when Ben Shapiro responded to all this blowing up and he went on that TV show and there was some transgender person next to him who then threatened him with violence if he didn't start using the correct pronouns.
	A perfectly reasonable debating tactic.
	And then he became like the boogeyman for this.
	I'd really love to see him and Caitlyn Jenner sit down like a Republican meeting and discuss.
	Because I bet what would happen is he'd be like, look, I don't accept that you're a woman.
	And she'd be like, I don't care.
	And then that'll be the end of the conversation.
	Just, I don't care what you think.
	Think what you want.
	I bet they're completely tolerant of each other.
	Yeah, and it seems like there's a completely different attitude held by Caitlin and the rest of the supposed transgender lobby, and they've kind of renounced her, and they're kind of very fearful of the impact because they're saying that it's going to invite further transphobia, but I'll get onto that in a second.
	So if you move on to the Twitter reaction, John?
	But this is kind of emblematic of some of the reactions you can see around time where Caitlyn transitioned to a woman.
	George Takei.
	Yeah.
	Welcome to the party, Caitlyn Jenner.
	You're stunning inside and out.
	Stunning and brave.
	And you'll soon see that as time goes on, he says, this soldier said it all here.
	Caitlin is amazing.
	And then as he realises what she actually believes, I guess Caitlin Jenner needs to tell us next that America is not transphobic.
	You can see that the tide has turned a little bit when people actually realise that she's not an ally to the...
	She's not transgender now.
	Well...
	Well, that'll be their opinion.
	Like, you ain't black.
	If you've got the wrong thoughts, you're not black.
	It's the same vein, isn't it?
	And if we can move on to the next one as well.
	Caitlyn Jenner is no friend of the LGBTQ community.
	Don't call her an activist.
	She's a menace.
	Menace.
	Menace.
	Strong words.
	She disagrees with me.
	Therefore, she's not transgender.
	She's a menace.
	40,000 likes!
	I know.
	I think this is very representative of the change in tone.
	Everyone was just like, she's so stunning and brave, isn't she wonderful?
	And then all of a sudden, when she actually speaks about what she believes, they're like, actually, she kind of sounds like a Republican, therefore she is evil and a menace and needs to be stopped.
	Oh, man.
	Yeah, none of them are going to get banned for this either.
	Like, if you had said this about Caitlyn Jenner when she came out, like, no, Bruce Jenner was a menace or something like this.
	Instant ban.
	Instant ban.
	Like, these people, nothing will happen to them.
	And this is a great example of how the tone just changes and what would have been kind of forbidden only a few years ago is now the party line.
	And it's just amazing to see just explicitly...
	Can't wait for, like, she's debating Gavin Newsom on stage and he's just like, you're a man.
	Like, he's going to come out on the Ben Shapiro position.
	I'll respect your name and blah blah blah.
	Oh, man.
	But I think it'd be quite funny if just any criticism, she could just do what the left does and just like, no, you're being transphobic.
	Yeah.
	Just any criticism from the left.
	Let's talk about her ability to drive.
	Let's move on from that.
	Are we even allowed to talk about that?
	I don't even know.
	I'm not going to do it.
	I mean, I don't want to get into any legal trouble, but there are some...
	I'm sure she is a wonderful driver.
	Yeah.
	Let's just move on.
	I suppose I best.
	Yeah, you're going to make a joke.
	I know you.
	I'm very tempted, but essentially there was some kind of questions around a road accident where it seemed like she got away with it relatively scot-free, and it's one of those cases where you think, hmm...
	Caitlin is really tall, and then if she meets Ben, Ben is quite short, like a bit of a manlet, so the disparity would be great.
	Ben would sit on her lap.
	So, if you actually want to read the kind of...
	Full progressive view on this.
	I think this Vox article is probably the best port of call because it's just freaking out the prospect of someone who's a Republican and against really the use of pronouns and transgender women in sport.
	Trans people are dreading, dreading Caitlyn Jenner's run for governor.
	It's amazing how quickly the tone's changed.
	Like five years ago, this...
	Like she's going to come out and be like death to trans people or something.
	Yeah, and the fact that a trans person herself, you know, it's weird how all of a sudden they have just been thrown out and they're just like, no, no true trans person.
	Yeah, I mean, you're not trans anymore.
	I can't wait for it.
	They are going to be on the stage being like, no, you're just a white, privileged, straight male man or something.
	Because they can't accept the identity anymore because the identity is, you know, she's a, what would you call it, like a complete heretic to the left.
	Yeah, so I think my reason for talking about this is it's going to bring really interesting conversation to this democratic election and it's going to put this all on the national stage where it's going to really undermine the current narrative because probably the most prominent trans person is against these things that they're advocating for and it's going to make them look really bad and I think that is something that's going to be very good and although the chance of the kind of Governorship might
	be questionable.
	The media coverage is going to be hilarious, I think.
	God, I mean, the debates.
	I mean, just get them on stage, get them talking about it, because you'll see the Democrats just start squirming about the whole conversation.
	I love someone in the chat to point, you remember that, what was it, it was that professor from, I think it was Oxford or Cambridge, it was like, white lives don't matter as white lives.
	Like, you're going to see that with the Democrat response to her, it's like, trans lives don't matter as trans lives.
	What does that even mean as well?
	Isn't that the Cambridge professor that said that originally?
	I think it was Cambridge or Oxford, one of them.
	It was Cambridge, yeah.
	It's like Imperial Studies or something like that.
	Or Postcolonial Studies, that's what it was.
	So Grievance Study.
	Yeah, it's a non-subject.
	Anyway, I believe you wanted to talk about the state of the Labour Party.
	Yay!
	So the Corpse Labour Party, as I'm going to dub them, because, I mean, they are just a walking corpse at this point.
	I love, what is it, Peter Hitchens always had this where he's like, the two main parties, he describes it, the Tories and the Labour Party, were essentially like two corpses that had rigor mortis and were just keeping each other up with their own inadequacies.
	And eventually you just need one of them to collapse and then the whole system will collapse and you'll get a revolution in politics and you get to see some new stuff.
	And I mean, he's been kind of right.
	I mean, it was great to see up until the Brexit vote, you could see the alliance between these kinds of people.
	They all go to the same universities.
	They all know each other.
	They've got far more in common with each other than anyone else.
	And then with the Brexit vote, you saw some actual shifting.
	I mean, you saw that just laid out in front of you, both of them campaigning on the same issues with the same kinds of people.
	Anyway, but the late party themselves, since the Brexit vote, have been dwardling and wandering around aimlessly.
	And I thought under Keir Starmer they might reorganise and do some kind of Blairism or something and then be able to get back into power.
	But it seems that they're just going nowhere.
	I think the left of the party has gone too far to the point where he can't really do a Blair anymore.
	It seems like he's trying and he can't really please anyone.
	A lot of the left and the Labour Party just call him Blue Labour.
	Sure, but that's the activist base, which is a huge problem, absolutely.
	But also among the public, he's not really able to do anything.
	And it might be because of the activists.
	Yeah, and there's also the fact that he's riding in from the coattails of Jeremy Corbyn, who was defeated pretty resoundingly and was an avowed socialist.
	And people don't really like socialists, especially in England, although...
	Would you like to give up all of your rights?
	No.
	Next question.
	Anyway, so the thing I wanted to mention first is just the 2021 London mayoral elections.
	This is the, let's say, biggest election coming up for the UK because we have local elections of a whole different kind.
	So we've got, like, you know, councillors, a couple of big mayors.
	So, as I said, Greater Manchester, London, big, powerful places.
	And then we've also got a by-election I'll get into.
	But the London one being the main one that most people look to, especially in the South.
	And just by the polling, if you can scroll down so you can get the polling, just so we can see that...
	It's right.
	It's right down at the bottom.
	You can see Sadiq Khan, the current mayor, the awful one who spends more time campaigning on trans traffic lights than getting actual policies to try and stop people stabbing each other.
	If you can keep going, there should be a graph.
	So the graph shows, you know, like him.
	And you can see that.
	So right at the top, Khan.
	And it seems to be a no-brainer.
	The Conservatives have utterly failed in London to present any kind of significant opposition.
	So Khan is going to win.
	He's going to be back in.
	Wow.
	Wonderful.
	More stabbings.
	Fantastic.
	It's not even close either.
	No, I don't know what's wrong with London.
	I don't know how you can live there, observe him and be like, yes, more of this please.
	More stabbings.
	I just love the stabbings.
	Vote carnage.
	Yeah, as a friend of mine used to say.
	Carnage.
	Yeah, yeah.
	So there's also some funny stuff that's been going on.
	So the things the Labour Party could do if they actually want to be the opposition, as the pub landlord pointed out, was you could be the opposition to lockdowns.
	You could be the opposition on COVID passports and all the rest of it.
	And they have been.
	I mean, they have been on opposition to COVID passports, Keir Starmer, saying it's un-British.
	I've got to commend him on that.
	I mean, I don't agree with him on much, but on this case...
	This is after pushing lockdowns week after week after week.
	And then he gets the COVID passport, he's like, no, that's not British.
	You've gone too far.
	At least you can say it.
	I mean, Boris Johnson wasn't even able to say it.
	Pathetic.
	So let's go to the next link here, which is someone...
	I saw Lawrence Fox posted this.
	Apparently this is Keir Starmer during all of this, deciding to have a little bit of a party at his, I presume, Labour office.
	You can see no one there wearing a mask, because why would you?
	They all know this is stupid.
	They all know the mask mandates and all this is a waste of everyone's time.
	So they're just hanging out, drinking beers.
	And this is the thing, they could be the based opposition!
	I mean, I know it's the Labour Party, but they could do that thing at least.
	Because if they're able to oppose vaccine passports...
	They could have been the ones opposing lockdowns and blah blah blah, and then actually been the opposition, as the pub landlord pointed out.
	But no, they're not.
	They could have actually won votes that way as well.
	Exactly, it would have been a popular position.
	The reason they're polling so badly is because they're just not accommodating anyone.
	That's exactly it.
	They're not able to accommodate the Brexit debate under Jeremy Corbyn.
	They still haven't really solved that at all.
	I mean, are Labour pro- or anti-Brexit?
	Who even knows?
	Such a mess.
	I mean, are they pro- or anti-lockdowns?
	I mean, look at it.
	Look at it.
	Is this a man who really believes that the lockdowns work?
	Does he really believe in the lockdown policy?
	No, of course not.
	Anyway, so let's just check in with the leftists, see what they're arguing about.
	So there's the great Twitter account to follow for this kind of thing, stats for leftists.
	On whether or not Corbyn should or should not be let back into the Labour Party, 28% said he should, 50% said he's not, he shouldn't.
	It's just like, really?
	Still arguing about this?
	They kicked Corbyn out.
	Is this genuinely still an issue?
	Oh yeah, it's the 1st of May as well.
	It's only a few days ago.
	God, man.
	I mean, Corbyn, it's weird.
	I know it's been not a huge amount of time, but he seems like something from another era already.
	His leadership is just something I don't even think about at all, if I can help it.
	Because it's just, like, who cares?
	I mean, it was from another era.
	It was old-school socialism.
	Yeah, that's definitely true.
	But they're still arguing about that.
	I mean, that's what they're still infighting about.
	And it's just like, oh, okay.
	Well, how's that?
	How's that going?
	Because if you're not able to campaign on anything, Keir Starmer's group, and if the rest of you are just infighting about Corbyn still, well, how's the polling doing?
	So if we go to the next one, this is polling from the Red Wall.
	So you can see here, Conservatives on 37%, Labour on 38%.
	So the Conservatives up 13% from 2016.
	In the Red Wall.
	The Red Wall...
	The Red Bull?
	So this is meant to be the area of strong Labour voters.
	The heartland in which they could get solid Labour constituencies.
	And they're just like neck and neck with the Conservatives now.
	This could lead to some interesting results, actually, because it could be a case of lifelong Labour seats are going to flip, and we might see what's happened in past elections, where once they flip, they don't really go back to voting Labour again, even though it was close the first time.
	The Tories only make their gains further, and we've had this in many seats, particularly up in the North, where they've voted Labour for almost like 100 years, and then all of a sudden they switch to Tory.
	Yeah, and it was on the Brexit issue, mostly.
	I mean, most of the seats in 2019 that flipped from the Red Wall were hard Brexit seats, and of course the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn being the party of rejoining.
	I mean, Keir Starmer, arch rejoiner, most of his cabinet arch rejoiners, why would they stick around?
	What's the point?
	So if you can scroll up, just so we can see the local election predictions.
	So if you scroll up to the top, there's them predicting that the Conservatives are going to gain 90 seats here.
	Labour losing 59.
	Lib Dems down 13.
	Great.
	I mean, we'll get into the Tories in a minute, but I mean, just I love seeing the Labour Party die.
	There is nothing better.
	I mean, the Tories have a whole host of problems of their own, but the Labour Party does not deserve to exist.
	It should be the Tories versus something else, like the actual opposition, not this skin suit of communism.
	Anyway, so if we go to the next link, there's the Red Wall councils as well.
	So if you can scroll down just so you can see the numbers here.
	So you've got the prediction of conservatives getting 37%.
	You can see like four councils just flip.
	Sorry, two councils flip from Labour to Conservative with a bunch of others, you know, going from solid Labour to likely Labour.
	Again, this is the red wall.
	I mean, you can see the numbers.
	It's meant to be solid red.
	And instead, it's just buckling and buckling further.
	It's great.
	I love it.
	Keep it going.
	So we can go to the next link as well.
	There's some other polling I saw.
	Westminster voting intention.
	This is the worst one I saw.
	44% Conservative, Labour 33.
	That's quite significant as well.
	11 point difference.
	I mean, you remember, they were getting eston for Corbyn's terrible leadership and how he took the party into the grave.
	And yeah, he sure did.
	But there's no getting out of that grave, it seems.
	It's just the 30% of the country that will always vote Labour is still that.
	That's it.
	That's all we've got left.
	And it seems like the Greens and the Lib Dems have picked up a reasonable amount of that vote, and because their votes are normally split between the country, that might not actually amount to very many seats.
	So that might actually mean that if this is accurate, which I'm very skeptical of, as with many of the polls, then the Conservatives would clearly have a pretty significant number of seats over any other party.
	I mean, it's one of the nice, well, it's nice and bad.
	So, I mean, the Lib Dems and the Greens, they're just, you know, progressives and socialists wearing different clothing.
	There's nothing really unique about them that makes them a proper opposition in my mind.
	And so, okay, they suck up a bunch of votes from Labour and stop them getting huge majorities.
	But the Conservatives don't have really anyone to the...
	Side of them that can challenge them and bring them towards traditionalism.
	And I accept maybe Brexit party and Reform UK and UKIP, but they're all really gone now, let's say.
	I mean, they're still around, and in the London elections, I certainly vote for them over the Tory candidate.
	I mean, what a mess.
	But apart from that, I mean, it is a shame to say they're not on 10%.
	They're not on 15% in being able to strike away at the Tories and then force them to become traditionalists.
	I think the problem largely is that in seats where it's close between Labour and the Conservatives, people are more inclined to vote tactically.
	So they're more willing to say, OK, well, I'll vote for the Tories even though I'm not happy with them because at least it's not Labour.
	And I think that happens more on a scale on the right than it does the left.
	Certainly the Labour Party needs to die.
	I agree with Peter Hitchens.
	That's how you will get things to change.
	But it gets even worse.
	We go to the next link.
	This is working class polling.
	Working class voters polled them 48% Conservative, 29% Labour.
	That's really resounding.
	Almost 50% voting Conservative in the working class, 29% Labour.
	Where are Labour even going to get their votes from?
	Votes.
	That's literally their campaign strategy.
	It's like, let's just import voters.
	Because you can't even rely on the working class at all anymore, because the working class have seen your BS for what it is.
	It's BS. And then they're turning against you, which I just love to see.
	And again, I mean, I know people are going to be like, yeah, but the Tories.
	And I'm like, yeah, okay, the Tories.
	But if we just kill the Labour Party, and then we can have the Tories as them, and then we can have an actual opposition...
	In my worldview, I know a lot of people are unionists, but Carl's kind of winning me around to the anti-unionist side here, which is if Scotland goes independent, for example.
	I mean, it gets worse if Wales goes.
	But you look at the country, look at the constituencies, there is no way the left can ever get back in power in Britain if Scotland leaves.
	And the Labour Party know this as well.
	I mean, they're freaking out about it, which is that if Scotland leaves, they can't get the seats.
	It just can't happen.
	like England being the Tories versus, I don't know, like a UKIP type party.
	And then that will be the two party system.
	And that's where it needs to be, because that's the only place in which you can have sensible debate.
	And all of this is looking great, sure.
	And it's all on a national scale.
	And there's the local elections and whatnot.
	But one of the interesting things is there's Boris has been campaigning in Hartlepool constituency.
	And Hartlepool constituency is an MP constituency because there's a by-election going on.
	So if you can get the next one, you can just see him campaigning there.
	People have been saying that he's coming around, so in two days there's a by-election there.
	Boris Johnson and Hartlepool doubt he would be here if the Tories didn't think they had a real chance of winning here.
	On the freezing wet seafront, people are flocking to him for selfies and elbow bumps.
	And I mean, yeah, okay, we can have a million conversations about his handling of coronavirus and lockdowns and all the rest of it.
	But Realpolitik, for a minute, they're winning.
	Like, they're winning these positions.
	And if they can take them from Labour, eh.
	I'm not going to complain.
	Screw them.
	And if you just check the local polling for the area of Hartlepool, so this is them trying to win another MP. Favorability rating.
	Johnson's favorability rating in Hartlepool, net plus 23.
	Keir Starmer, net minus 18.
	Red wall.
	How's that red wall looking?
	Not looking very red, is it?
	Yeah, good.
	I love it.
	And some people have been pointing out, I mean, like Toby Young points out, how did this happen?
	How could this have happened?
	Yeah, I mean, come on, guess.
	Guess.
	I mean, you've got Keir Starmer in charge here, and he just doubled down on a lot of the woke nonsense that lost them votes on Jeremy Corbyn to begin with.
	I mean, like, taking the need for BLM. It has no history here as well, and I think it actually aggravates a lot of people because they know it's just an American influence in our culture, and I think that that winds people up because they're like, well, what are you doing this for?
	Like, we're fine.
	There's no problem here.
	Why are you acting as if it's one and the same thing?
	And I think just regular people can see that that aren't really following politics, and the fact that they're continually virtue-signaling is only going to alienate people more.
	Yeah, I mean, we looked at the working class numbers there earlier.
	I mean, how do the working class feel about the nuclear family?
	How do they feel about Britain existing?
	How do they feel about England existing?
	Do they think that England's a good place?
	Do they think it's a racist hellhole and it's to be destroyed?
	And then you look at the BLM guys.
	These two groups can't mesh.
	They don't coexist, do they?
	They're two separate entities.
	I mean, as Helen Dale pointed out, what is it?
	Fund the NHS, hang the nonces?
	I mean, that's how she characterized working class editing predictions, and then you compare that to the woke types, and it's just like, nah, nah, they're never going to agree.
	I mean, we should have no standards versus, nah, hang the nonces, standard, standard, standards.
	No, not going to happen.
	I mean, just like on Brexit, it's just there's too many groups that just can't mesh, and then it just becomes the cluster F that is the Labour Party, and they're getting what they deserve by the looks of it, which is dismal polling.
	So if we go to the Hartlepool polling here, so this is the constituency that's up for a by-election for an MP, so you can see here, Conservatives 50% versus Labour 33%.
	Red wall.
	This is the red wall.
	It's a blue wall now.
	Look at me, it is blue now!
	God, it's so good.
	Okay, good.
	Finally.
	Finally, we can just accept that the Labour Party, everything about them is garbage.
	They don't deserve to be in politics.
	They don't deserve to be in polite politics at all.
	There should be a fringe party selling pencils.
	There should be nothing else.
	I just wanted to mention as well, this seat here has been Labour since 1945.
	Wow.
	1945.
	So it was only in World War II that they ever voted Conservative, and I imagine that would be Churchill, right?
	And now it's 50% Conservative again.
	This is...
	It's amazing.
	I mean, we are seeing something real, real shift going on here.
	And that's why I wanted to cover it.
	I didn't just want to have a laugh at the Labour Party.
	Although I'll happily do that because they suck and they deserve everything they get.
	But it's just great to see.
	And again, I mean, Hartlepool being a special condition here, but an example of the wider problem across the country.
	I mean, if you just look at the Leave vote, the Leave Brexit vote.
	So if you scroll down, just so we can get the graph up in which it shows how many people voted Leave and how many voted Remain.
	You can see here of the Leave vote, 69.5% voted Leave.
	That's a pretty resounding Leave vote, isn't it?
	Yeah.
	Just Britain goods, EU bad.
	Good, good.
	Except, you know, where's the Labour Party on this?
	Yeah, they're nowhere to be seen.
	They're still debating it.
	They're kind of going along with it, like, we respect the vote, and they're just dragging their heels along, and people can kind of see that.
	They know that they're not very enthusiastic about it, because they never talk about it, except the problems it causes.
	And it's ridiculous, really, because if they were just thinking about it from a tactical political perspective, they should be saying, well, we respect this vote.
	We're going to do the best for the country.
	And they're not doing that.
	They're saying we need to move closer to the EU. And they're almost putting the EU's interests above our own.
	And it's ridiculous.
	Who wants that other than the metropolitan elite?
	It's fantastic.
	I saw, like, what was it, the Twitter leftists.
	I saw, like, Ash Sharker and all the rest of them complaining.
	It was like, yeah, but okay, in this constituency, we won in 2017 and 2019, so why should we lose it now?
	And it's like, you know why you should lose it.
	You absolutely know why you should lose it, because you guys suck.
	You guys hate Britain.
	You hate everyone, and you hate the fucking voters who voted for these.
	Sorry, I'm going to get mad.
	Let's go to the next one.
	So this is just the by-election here.
	So if you can scroll down, so we can see 2019's vote.
	So just below this box, you can see another box that has the data in it.
	So in here, they have the...
	Sorry, keep going.
	Yeah, so you can see this vote here.
	Late party 2019, 37% voted for Labour, 28% for Conservative, 25% for Richard Tice, Brexit party, now leader of Reform Ukraine, the new name for the Brexit party.
	And where are these people going to go?
	Do you trust Labour with keeping us out of the EU and not rejoining?
	Do you trust them to care about Britain at all?
	Well, Keir Starmer, Arch Remainer.
	We did the statistics on his cabinet, like Emily Thornberry, Jess Phillips, all the rest of them.
	It was like 90% of them were hard Remainers.
	Not even just, we need to remain in the EU in 2016, but campaigned against democracy throughout the treasonous period in which they tried to overturn the vote.
	And are they still against our decision to leave?
	Would they rejoin, do you reckon?
	Well, I mean, they publicly say, oh no, the debate's over, we're not going to talk about this anymore.
	You get in power, you're going to run another referendum, you're going to try and take us back in.
	There is no way you're going to respect this in the long term.
	Plastic face.
	I would imagine that they would just say, oh, there's this kind of insignificant consequence.
	Oh, it's really bad.
	And then this is the rationale for another referendum.
	We need to have another decision because the situation has changed.
	Yeah, they'll claim that, I don't know, lockdowns destroyed the economy, therefore we must join the EU. And it's like, huh, okay.
	Like, we got rid of all property rights in the UK, and this means we must get rid of our nation-state's independence.
	Convincing argument.
	Anyway, so let's go to the next link, which is just the constituency itself.
	If we can scroll down to 2017, because there's the argument, as I said, from Ash Sarkar and whatnot, trying to claim that, oh, okay, but we won in 2017 and 2019.
	So if you go to 2017, you can see, keep going down.
	So I want to see the graph.
	See here?
	Up a little bit.
	So, there we go.
	2017, Labour Party 52%, Conservatives 34%.
	And as you can see, that's them mopping up the UKIP vote there.
	See, UKIP down 16% in that area.
	And it's just them mopping that up.
	But, okay, 2017-2019, you had Jeremy Corbyn.
	They're like, this shows that Jeremy Corbyn was the way.
	Morons.
	Morons.
	Absolutely morons.
	Because you can go up to the graph, and if you can see the graph, you can just see it's an endless curve down.
	And it's, as I say, and as you've pointed out, it's these contradictions within the party itself.
	You know, these groups cannot align with each other on fundamental things.
	And this is why this party literally cannot last.
	I don't see it lasting into the next few decades.
	Yeah, and Brexit is still a key issue, even though it's over and done with, more or less.
	It still gets mentioned in the news all the time.
	And although there was the kind of horrendous BBC reporting of despite Brexit, such and such, it's still something that's relevant in the political consciousness a lot of the time.
	Because it exposed the problems.
	I mean, it exposed how these people think about Britain, it exposed how they think about...
	The working class.
	I mean, endlessly calling them racist S-word, W-word, as one Labour MP called Brexiteers.
	That's how they think about these things.
	In which case, these people can never be trusted with power.
	It's not, oh no, now we've changed.
	Now you haven't changed.
	Exactly the same people.
	They've got worse, if anything.
	Yeah.
	I mean, they've not given up on any of the identity politics stuff.
	I mean, one of the weird things I saw, was it Tony Blair gave a speech like last month warning Labour against identity politics?
	Yeah, I watched the whole thing and on a lot of it he was actually right.
	And I mean, I hate to say that I agreed with Tony Blair, but he was right about the Labour Party.
	Tony Blair is right, the Labour Party's cancer.
	But anyway, we'll end that there.
	Let's go to the video comments.
	Carl, how do you square your...
	Atheism with your belief in the fundamental rights of man because it seems to me to be a contradiction.
	You cannot both be atheist and believe that the fundamental rights of man come from a higher power and are not granted by government and then therefore can be taken away by government.
	Just American looking at you with a side eye.
	So I'm not Carl, but I know what Carl would say to this.
	So, you know, the Americans say we're endowed with these rights from our Creator.
	And of course, they're Christians, so they would say the Creator is God.
	But Carl, as an atheist, he would say, well, you're sort of given them by the universe or birth or your parents or whatever thing you want to use.
	It's more about the fact that when you're on a desert island, for example, you have the right to free speech.
	You can speak, clearly.
	You have the right to arm yourself and defend yourself.
	You can certainly do that.
	You might have to do it with twigs on a desert island, but you can certainly do these things.
	But you don't have a right to, say, water or property or, you know, healthcare.
	Like, you can't take those things from being alone on a desert island.
	Because you're not imbued with them.
	You have to take them from someone else.
	In which case, they're not rights.
	So I guess that's what he would say.
	But again, I'm not Carl.
	In case anyone's wondering, Carl's on holiday for the next, like, what is it, two weeks?
	I think so, yeah.
	I probably should have made that out in the start, just in case anyone's joined and is like, what the hell is going on?
	Yeah, I'm not Carl.
	No, Carl just lost a lot of weight.
	If you've just noticed.
	This keto diet...
	No, I'm not trying to ketoism.
	Anyway, let's go for the next one.
	Under flashy nights Now you know that Tony I I'm your biggest I'm trusting everything you told me.
	Doctor, Doctor Fauci.
	Told me there's no one of the super stories there for Andy.
	Nice Blade Runner 2044.
	Was it 2042?
	I've seen it twice.
	That was the first time I've actually seen it.
	I wasn't exposed to any of it.
	I avoided it successfully.
	Make you watch the segment afterwards.
	Just force me, tie me down to a chair and keep my eyes open like Clockwork Orange.
	Dr.
	Fauci!
	I told you to get stuck in my head.
	Anyway, let's go for the next video.
	With all of this race war propaganda, if there's a certain girl watching this who watches the Lotus Eaters, I don't want race war, and nice to know that you watch the Lotus Eaters, that would honestly be a surprise and a half to me if she was a fan of this.
	A race war would be a really bad idea because they self-admit to being the minorities in the countries they want to start race wars in, so how the hell do they think that's going to end?
	Well, it ends in them all being oppressed and learning to behave.
	I mean, race war bad?
	That's not a very controversial position there.
	Of course it's bad, yes.
	You'd think so, except ask BLM. Ask BLM and the KKK, and you'll find some agreement.
	I mean, the point about, I don't know, I think he was trying to make the point that if minorities in the United States started a race war, so the BLM types, they'd be in a minority, by definition.
	So it's at a disadvantage, inherently.
	Yeah.
	I don't know.
	I mean, they would probably argue that, you know, like, what is it?
	I can't remember the guy's name.
	Not MLK. Malcolm X. We would argue for a two-state solution back in his early days before he toned down, in which he'd argue that, you know, blacks need their own state and whites need their own states in the United States.
	He did renounce that later, wasn't he?
	He did renounce it, but I just...
	So even he didn't believe it, yeah.
	Of course, but I'm taking this position of, like, I mean, this is going to be the BLM types all over when you ask them, like, how are we going to live with white people?
	And they'll be like, no, no, we can't because they're white supremacists and so on and so forth.
	And you saw Jeremy Horowitz go down there and interview them.
	They're like, I don't know if we have to start killing white people, but...
	Anyway, but they probably argue that they separate peacefully or, you know, by force get their own states rather than have to fight for the whole country.
	I don't think it's ever going to come to that.
	There is a vocal minority.
	There's just, I think there's a lot of media attention on the people who are most radical because it makes good news.
	But I imagine there's probably a lot of normal people that are just interested in living their life.
	They don't want anything to do with this, which I think is very much the right attitude to have.
	That's certainly true, but terrorists are terrorists.
	Of course, yeah.
	I'm not excusing them, of course.
	I'm not saying you're excusing them, but they will do their thing regardless.
	So there's something to keep an eye on.
	Anyway, let's go for the next comment.
	Hey, guys.
	So as I prepare for my move from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to Houston, Texas, I can't help thinking about the historical factors that make each city so unique.
	In Philadelphia, you see a lot of imagery about Benjamin Franklin and And his famous key experiment with electricity.
	In Houston, the culture imagery is very much defined by the space program, and their baseball team is the Houston Astros for this very reason.
	In Philadelphia, when our team scores a home run, a Liberty Bell so large it can fit 128 and a half actual Liberty Bells inside it, lights up and swings from side to side.
	I think it's incredibly interesting how history infuses things like art and sports.
	Yeah, I agree.
	One of the things that just reminds me of is when you hear people talk about the fact that America has no culture.
	Sorry, you think they're ringing Liberty Bells in China, do you?
	Also, nice pillow, as John points out.
	I like those pillows.
	I didn't even notice.
	We need to get the merch store up when we can.
	We'll start selling things again.
	Yeah, that was cool.
	I didn't know about the Liberty Bell thing.
	Yeah, cool information.
	Yeah.
	The only way to spare more pain and more loss, the only way is...
	Excuse me.
	We have to do more than just build back better.
	We have to build back better.
	We began to celebrate our independence from the virus.
	If you if you hold near and dear to you that you like to be able I love it What is that?
	I think the name's Equilibrium, something like that.
	Oh, the original film?
	Yeah.
	I've never actually seen it.
	Unless I'm thinking of the wrong thing.
	But, like, where everyone has to take drugs to remain, like, neutrals.
	And there's a load of, like, I don't know what you call it, like, gun kung fu in the atmosphere.
	Like, everyone's trained with guns, and, like, the end showdown is him, like, running in with two machine guns, and he's just gunning people down and doing, like, you know, loads of kung fu with the guns.
	I'll have to show you afterwards.
	It is equilibrium, isn't it?
	I've never even heard of it, and I'm quite into films, so I'm surprised that I've not even seen it before.
	Yeah, it is equilibrium.
	At least if I'm thinking the right thing.
	When did that come out?
	2002.
	Oh, right.
	I'll show you the end scene afterwards.
	It's great.
	Everyone should go look it up on YouTube and watch the end scenes of that.
	Anyway, let's go back to Con.
	Hello, Callum.
	I'm just wondering, do you have a Twitter account with a Hunter x Hunter character as a profile picture?
	And if you do, have you been recently spammed in the last few days by several different pictures of, say, a frog and a spoon and shit like that?
	I'm just wondering.
	Just wondering for curiosity.
	No, and no.
	It's easy to answer at least, I guess.
	I don't really know what he's referencing there.
	Sorry, bud.
	Hello, Carl and Callum, new Gold Tier subscriber.
	I've tried to make this 30 times now, but I'm long-winded, so it's never worked.
	My point that I'd like to make is that it's not about winning or losing with the left.
	The left will never win.
	They'll always lose.
	Even if we give them a veritable paradise, they will ruin it within a decade if they even get that far.
	It's not about winning.
	It's about not allowing them to drag us down with them.
	Yes, and the liberal solution is to set up the socialist camps, which I've talked about at length.
	Just in case someone's clipping this, like, it was a half-joking idea I came up with, which is you give, like, the state of Montana, you make that a camp, and you're like, there you go, make your paradise, enjoy yourselves.
	And what are they going to say?
	Just like, no, I don't want to live in socialism.
	Oh, really?
	How interesting.
	And then the condition for leaving is you have to sign away your voting rights.
	I feel like that wouldn't catch on.
	The whole demarcated barrier, here you go, into this desolate wasteland.
	The thing on my mind, the only reason it's half-joking and not full-joking is I can't figure out a socialist argument against it yet.
	I mean, what are they going to say?
	I don't want to go live in the socialist paradise of Montana.
	I'm literally giving it to them for free.
	I would imagine that they probably want some degree of infrastructure before they...
	Sure, they can have Montana.
	We'll move everyone out.
	We'll pay a million dollars each.
	How many people are there?
	I don't know.
	Anyway.
	I mean, certainly it is a case of not letting them drag you down with them.
	I mean, it's something Carl talks about where he talks about the fact that they kind of want to fail.
	Well, you can see it in them that they want to be told no because they know what they're suggesting half the time is absolute nonsense.
	And they're expecting the state, I mean, particularly like the Republicans, the conservatives come in and just be like, no, no, you're a child, leave.
	Like, we should have open borders with the entire world.
	No, not happening.
	You know.
	And it's really irritating when you see the Conservatives and whatnot unable to just say no.
	Because you can see it's also irritating for them when they're like, oh, okay, yes, alright, we'll move on to the next thing.
	Let's go for the comments underneath the page.
	Sure.
	Do you want to read these out?
	Sure.
	So, Alexander, is that Fiat?
	It's kind of funny that the Biden admin replaced the Muslim ban with a Hindu ban.
	Stop Asian hate, especially the Indian part.
	LAUGHTER I haven't actually heard about this.
	I take it that they've banned travel from India because of the new strain, right?
	Yeah, and when Trump did this to China, it was xenophobic and racist and blah, blah, blah.
	When Biden does it to India, it's inclusive and progressive.
	He's just saving American lives.
	So, Clayton Ross, if the countries with strong infrastructure and medical research are the ones that get the vaccines first, that sounds quite like...
	Oh, sorry.
	That sounds like quite the incentive to improve your own medical research.
	Yeah.
	Yeah?
	I mean, it's just so stupid.
	Like, I couldn't go over all the comments.
	Like, they're just piles and piles of people who are like, how dare the rich countries get what they paid for?
	I was like, well, who do you think paid for the vaccine?
	Yeah.
	How do you think it was funded?
	Yeah.
	It's no mistake that the UK and the US are the ones that have the largest supplies of vaccine, more or less, because we've got some of the best research.
	Belgium as well.
	Belgium as well.
	But then they've got, isn't that, isn't Pfizer part Belgium or something?
	One of the vaccine companies is located.
	The history is really interesting.
	Like, they have historical roots, of course, to the Congo because of the Belgian Congo.
	And there was the group that ended up becoming that company, as I understand.
	Worked really well in the Congo trying to fight diseases, because the problem was most people were dying of these tropical diseases that most of the other African continent didn't have to deal with.
	So that's why they became sort of like a gold standard for pharmaceutical industries.
	I didn't know that.
	Got historical trading.
	Of course, it's sort of tied in with the whole king owning all of Congo and cutting off hands and whatnot, but deal with that all the time.
	Yeah, I'm going to cure your diseases, but you're not going to have hands.
	Seems like a bit of a bad trade-off.
	Oh boy, yeah, they're...
	So, Henry Ashman.
	I'm loving the Jenna reaction.
	I wonder how much of it is because she's running as a Republican or because she's anti-trans in women's sport.
	I can't think of anyone more qualified to make a judgement on that issue, to be honest, as an ex-Olympian who competed during an era of the Soviets pumping their female athletes full of testosterone.
	In East Germany it was the That's true.
	I was going to ask you, so you're saying there are scientific points, so the trans women can run 9% faster than women.
	I was wondering, how do you compare this and say that essentially this is the equivalent to this level of doping?
	I don't think it's been compared side by side, and I'm certainly no expert on it.
	It's the same as essentially doping, and to what degree?
	I think it's far more effective than that can ever be, because I think...
	I think doping only gives you like a few percent advantage.
	So even if you start doping women, they're not going to be able to...
	Compete, yeah.
	Oh, that's sad.
	I know what he means about the East German one, though.
	I can't remember the name.
	Someone's going to have to put it in chat.
	But there was this East German woman who the government started giving loads of testosterone.
	And I think she was like Discus or something, and she destroyed it.
	Well, she threw the discus to the point where it just shattered.
	She was destroying the record.
	She just started growing a massive beard, and then more of her face started changing, and now you look at her now, she's had to change her name and all the rest of it, because she just looks like a man.
	The German government poisoned her, to the extent that she just looks like a bold man now.
	I feel bad for laughing, but that was really awful.
	It was done to her, she didn't ask for this.
	Oh, now I feel really bad.
	Okay.
	Douglas Fraser.
	I'd say that the US should just eject California from the Union, but honestly, base states like Texas and Florida should leave Sleepy Joe's fascist America and form their own union, perhaps revive the Confederate States of America without slavery, I'm guessing that's meant to say.
	I don't think that's perhaps a good idea.
	I mean...
	Breaking up the Union.
	Hmm.
	I mean, I also think, like, you're looking at Joe, remember he gave that speech in which he said that no constitutional amendment is permanent?
	And he's like, okay, Confederate Joe's bringing back slavery.
	We'd love to see, like, the Confederate states break away and be like, no, we're anti-slavery.
	In the North, it's just like a role reversal.
	Redemption arc for the Confederates.
	They become the anti-slavery activists.
	So, Joseph Woodland.
	It's pretty funny how someone like Jenna can be a darling one moment and the second an utter apostate.
	What 60-something-year-old do you know that changes their opinions so frivolously?
	Her opinions have probably been the same for the past 20 years.
	I think she's 71, but it's just the cosmetic surgery.
	It's done its work.
	I don't know, I mean, I don't know much about her opinions on politics, but my guess is she's always been a Republican.
	Yeah, well, I tried to look them up, and supposedly, historically, she's kept it pretty close to the chest in that she's not really disclosed politics because it's not really good for...
	Yeah, if you live in California.
	Yeah, especially.
	Stalinist state, so...
	You don't really want to be outed as a Republican in California, do you?
	Yeah.
	Out it as a rightist force.
	So, Ruben Sanchez, the left cares about power, not trans people.
	That is factually correct.
	Fact check, true.
	Janels J. Mullak, can't wait for the memes of Ben sitting on Jenna's lap now.
	Yeah, I mean, if you folks have got Photoshop, I want to see that.
	Just spam that, please.
	Joseph Woodland honestly trying to explain to Labour voters that they are the reason that Conservatives can be corrupt might be one of the greatest lost causes.
	If Labour voters stop voting in nutcase communists and terrorist huggers there would at least be a viable threat that can hang over the Conservatives when they step out of line you know not doing Conservative things erasing Tony Blair from history would be a good start I see nothing wrong here I agree with that.
	But that's the thing.
	I'm not, like, cheering because, like, oh, yay, the Conservative Party is getting so and so forth.
	They are certainly better than Labour.
	That's certainly true.
	But the thing in my mind is just sort of like, well, if we want to see an actual debate in which we debate issues and real things that matter, then it has to be between the Conservatives and an actual opposition, not socialists who are just a dead ideology.
	Having an opposition that is actually a threat is better for everyone because then there's kind of the Hegelian dialogue of you actually arrive at a better point just through having a high-level discussion rather than just we're going to call you names and you're going to say no or not.
	I mean, in a sense, it's kind of like having the Conservative Party and then, like, Charles I's monarchist party in debate, where it's just like, this is so devoid of reality and so devoid of the modern world.
	I don't even know why they're still around.
	Like, when does the Labour Party exist?
	For what purpose?
	They need to go.
	It needs to be the case of conservatives versus some kind of liberal or traditionalist force instead of socialists.
	The funny thing is, the far left are also tearing them apart.
	So they're kind of being torn by two sides.
	They're trying to move more towards the centre to appeal to Conservative voters, but that's alienating them further from their far left voters, who are also tearing apart the party.
	So it's only going to get worse, I think.
	I just don't believe there are enough far left voters.
	I think there are enough far left activists.
	Yeah, but they're vocal enough.
	It's...
	Sure, but they should all be in the Socialist Workers' Party selling pencils.
	They shouldn't be in polite politics.
	They wouldn't be selling them, they'd be giving them away.
	No, they'd definitely be selling them.
	Socialism doesn't work.
	They'd be forcing them on people.
	We need to use our pencils.
	So, Alex Hill.
	The people voting Labour in London is the same mindset as big cities in the US always voting Democrat.
	Low information voting as well as restrictions on campaigning, so the elections are basically a foregone conclusion.
	Sure.
	I mean, there's the huge uniqueness of London, though, in the instance of, we don't know what the census is going to be this year after 10 years, but 10 years ago it became minority English.
	I mean, that was pointed out.
	I was like, okay, so a lot of these folks are going to be able to be in the position in which Labour can propagandize them on, you know, identity politics, for example, as you see with the Democrats in the United States.
	And there is, of course, the phenomenon of just immigrants to a country tend to vote more left-leaning.
	You don't get people emigrating to the UK and they're like, yeah, UKIP's great.
	I mean, there are probably a few, but...
	We should encourage more of them.
	So, Edward of Woodstock.
	The left not practising what they preach.
	What is this?
	A day ending in why?
	The grift is strong with this one.
	The issue with the whole Labour Party is that on the one side is you have one side of Labour willing to compromise their ideals to get into power and the other half stubbornly sticking to their commie guns and decrying any attempts to make themselves electable.
	This is a similar thing to what I was saying earlier, I think.
	Sadly, the Conservatives are the opposite, all too willing to compromise to keep in power.
	They need a hill to die on to prove that there ain't proved...
	I can't read for some reason.
	To prove to their own voters that they are, in fact, Conservatives, but they won't find it because they don't want to risk their position in government.
	Also, good point there, I'd like to see the end of the Union if it meant the death of the Labour Party.
	It'd be good to see the Whigs versus Tories again, Kingdom of England.
	Edward Woodstock seems correct.
	I mean, that's the thing.
	I mean, a lot of people...
	I mean, I'm still...
	You know, there's a romanticism in the Union and in Britain and all the rest of it, and I can't find myself fully agreeing to Carl's position of, you know, Kingdom of England.
	But if...
	There are certainly ups and downs to both sides, and the very good upside to at least the Kingdom of England emerging again is no Labour Party.
	What are they going to get?
	Where are they going to get their votes?
	Literally can't happen.
	They don't have the numbers.
	So...
	I'm just going to declare an independent state of London.
	Just Liverpool.
	Liverpool and London alliance, I guess.
	Alex Ogle, or Ogle, sorry if I mispronounced that.
	As much as Callum hates the Labour Party, I can make him hate them more.
	Callum, read Labour and the Gulags by Giles Udy, or Udy, U-D-Y. It documents the early years of the Labour Party, springing from the Communist Party of Great Britain, how in the 1920s and 30s they rallied against British values to excuse Soviet slave labour in the Gulag system.
	I used to hate the Labour Party, now I regard them as inutterable.
	Is that meant to be insufferable?
	I found this online as hardcover, £90.
	Okay, I'll get the Kindle edition or something.
	I'll spend £90 on it.
	90 pounds on a book, that's a bit steep.
	That's totally true, though.
	They should own this more.
	I don't know why.
	I mean, there should be a campaigning point for the Conservatives endlessly.
	It's like, you guys are the party of slavery.
	I mean, literally, you guys excused Soviet slavery.
	You're excusing Chinese slavery right now.
	I mean, that's what it is.
	That's what socialism is.
	We take away all of your rights.
	And all your money.
	And what do you call that person?
	That's a slave.
	Someone who has no rights and no property.
	It's just a slave.
	I'll look that up.
	Well, I've got it, so I'll get it.
	Henry Ashman, I'm waiting on Labour to rebrand to be the spoiled artsy slacker party, as let's be honest, it sounds like in a few years none of their voters will have done a day's Labour in their life.
	That's so true.
	I mean, you saw, like, what was it, Ash Sarker trying to redefine the working class, because the working class don't vote Labour?
	She was like, no, no, the real working class are, you know, millennials and foreigners.
	It's like...
	Okay, if that's what you want your party to be, go for it.
	Just young people and immigrants, the new working class.
	That was her redefinition of working class, essentially, was that right?
	Alright, fine.
	Enjoy your mediocrity, I guess.
	Okay, I'm going to struggle to pronounce this.
	Nitrocellulose doormat.
	Is the Labour Party falling because they are communists, or that you have some seriously lazy, no, crazy, oh, that was a bit of a Freudian slip there, probably true as well, or that they have some seriously crazy stupid MPs?
	Why not both?
	Yeah, why not both?
	I mean, the MPs are also communists, so...
	Communism and crazy stupid?
	I mean, I don't see those as mutually exclusive.
	No.
	Shake us over.
	That's the one.
	Labour would never be the based opposition.
	The neoliberal snakes are even more pro-lockdown, even if they believe that the elite like them are exempt and the socialists don't believe you have rights at all.
	The Tories are just more conservative by virtue of the Overton window shifting so far into authoritarianism and leftism, with Labour's devolution and the Lib Dems increasing irrelevancy and replacing liberalism for what Being Labour-lite, or for being Labour-lite, should I say?
	The Tories need that proper Whig-Liberal opposition back in order for them to be effectively Conservative.
	Without it, the Tories' winning doesn't mean so much beyond the electoral football field.
	The field isn't Liberalism versus Conservatism anymore, it's Socialism versus Soft Liberals who roll over for Socialism.
	Everything there is completely true.
	Yep, I agree.
	And that's why I'm so ecstatic about the Labour Party dying.
	I mean, sure, I'll vote Conservative every day of the week if I have to, if it means that the Labour Party die, and then we can reform British politics into something that's actually worth listening to.
	Because, as Peter Hitchens points out, I mean, it's the major problem, these two rigor mortis parties that don't really know what they are, keeping each other up.
	But if at least one of them dies, the other one will collapse and then they will split.
	into where we can have the Whigs versus the Tories again.
	Something interesting.
	I mean, again, it's not even like going back to the Whigs versus the Tories, but just actual liberals versus traditionalist conservatives.
	Something that can actually clash and have something interesting to say while not just being slavers like the socialists.
	Yeah, and you can see that with some of the lockdown debates as well, where the Labour and the Tories are basically in agreement.
	I think some things they present as being too important for party politics, but I think that's a bit of a get-out-of-jail-for-free card in that If they both are seen as agreeing, they both can't be held accountable, and therefore they avoid any consequences.
	And I think in a large part, if both parties are seen as agreeing, they can't be held to account because they've both said the same thing.
	He's also right about the point that they really can't be the anti-authoritarian-based party opposing lockdowns and all the rest of it.
	Because if they've already agreed that lockdowns are fine, taking away everyone's rights is fine, shutting down your business is fine, but vaccine passports, that's on British.
	What's the rest of this, then?
	Is this traditional British governance?
	Is that what that is?
	Because the seal had already been broken there, really, hadn't it?
	And what was the vaccine passport to what has already been kind of treaded on...
	So, Joseph Woodland, as a working class British man, everyone I speak to has had enough of this new American culture trying to rut with ours, me included.
	I did like the way it only took eight hours for us to fill the gap left by the US and Saudi weapons deals, as did everyone else when I explained that money went straight into the welfare state and the NHS. Yippee.
	Well, he's totally right about the American thing.
	It's really weird.
	Like, thankfully, it's still absolute cringe when it happens.
	Like, when you see the leftists in London shouting, it is our duty to win.
	Duty.
	We have duty to win.
	It's like, no, that's not.
	We can see you're foreigners.
	And just to add a little caveat, I do like American things.
	I'm not anti-American.
	Sure, the American left, though.
	No, again, the woodchip.
	American politics, no.
	American leftist politics.
	Because, like, the Republicans, I mean, I don't agree with them on a lot of stuff, because some of the stuff they believe is strange to me.
	But there's nothing that makes me go, like, ew, like, that's absolutely horrible.
	Whereas with the Democrats, I mean, every other day there's something coming out of them.
	You're just like, oh, for God's sakes.
	Literally nothing they say I believe in.
	That's the thing.
	They're just so objectionable.
	They're like the antithesis to everything I believe.
	The American Democrats, anyway.
	Not the Republicans.
	I respect those, of course.
	So, David, fake last name.
	Great to see my favourite social scientist join the team while the keto fascist is away.
	Social scientists always get an unfair shake, but Josh does a great job.
	Social scientists, social scientists, social scientists, social scientists.
	I think someone might have watched the contemplations where I say that psychology is not a social science.
	It's the science of the individual, I'll have you know.
	Not wrong.
	Also social science, not a science.
	Well, you can have social psychology, and it's looking at society, but it's looking at it from the perspective of the individual.
	I'm sort of taking the very elitist physics position I've talked about before.
	The physics department is weird, where they're just like, biology?
	Not a science.
	Chemist?
	Maybe a science.
	I don't know.
	Basically, physics is the only science.
	A lot of physicists could benefit from knowing a bit about psychology.
	That's all I'm saying.
	Probably.
	That's a very charitable way of putting it.
	Not you, though.
	You're alright.
	You get the pass.
	Present company excluded.
	Lucas Kennedy.
	It was my birthday last Friday, but I was too busy to tune into the podcast.
	Please can Callum do an impression of an old lady calling the police because there are orcs at her door.
	Thanks, love the podcast, and have a nice day.
	Happy birthday for last Friday, by the way.
	Can you do an impression of an old lady calling the police because there are orcs at her door?
	God, I've got to have to think about that.
	Hang on.
	You want to read another comment and I'll think about that?
	Sure.
	Because I've got to think of the setup.
	MEP Flyerboy.
	It's refreshing to see a Boomer 3 podcast today.
	Don't tell Carl this, but it's just as enjoyable without him.
	Proof that the team can hold their own without Daddy.
	The Great Replacement coming.
	Thank you very much.
	You know, Keir Starman, the Great Replacement's real and it's us.
	I want to see, like, Boomer Pride marches now.
	I'm just like, you will not replace me.
	I've just seen a comment in here that says Josh is the most social scientist.
	I'm not sure if that's a compliment, as in to say I'm quite sociable, or that I am the prototypical social scientist.
	Oh, no.
	Socialists don't want Callum's socialist state solution because it doesn't have arse stuff in it for them to steal.
	Correct.
	There we go.
	That's their opposition.
	Make them say it.
	Offer it to them.
	Offer them all the land.
	It's all there.
	And then make them say, yeah, but there's nothing to steal.
	There's nobody to enslave.
	I'm reminded of a Margaret Thatcher quote where she says, the problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money.
	And if they don't have other people's money to take, they're not interested.
	Also just other people as well.
	I mean, they literally, it's totally right.
	I mean, they're just slavers.
	I'm sorry, but literally, what do they do?
	They take away all your rights, take away everything you own, and they're like, yes, and you work for me for free.
	Hmm.
	Like, what are you meant to call that other than a slave?
	Socialism is no fun unless there are people we're subjugating, didn't you know?
	Yeah, well, people even slaving.
	I'm going to have to start doing, like, Stalin impressions or something, where he's like a southern cotton plantation owner.
	I can't see that going down well, personally.
	How are they going to oppose it?
	He wasn't a slaver?
	Oh, really?
	What did they do with all the Poles?
	Shut up.
	So, Jobs McGee says physics accounts for chemistry, which accounts for biology.
	So biology is a very, very basic study of physics.
	Yeah, I'm not being serious, but the department loves to, at least when I was there, like everyone just loved to S on everyone.
	She'd be like, you're all idiots, all of you, except the mathematicians.
	I would point out that psychology comes out of biology as well.
	It's even lower on the ladder.
	Yeah, I'm bottom of the hierarchy.
	Basically drama at this point.
	Oh, steady on!
	Oliver Schofield, hello guys, been watching your stuff for a couple of years now and really happy to see everything come together in this podcast and the Lotus Eaters site in general.
	The quality and calibre of your setup, materials and professionalism has got off the charts.
	Recently subscribed a couple of weeks ago to show what little support I can.
	Your podcast has really helped add a light-hearted touch to these dark times we're in.
	Cheers for the sanity, Oli.
	Thank you very much.
	Thank you, Oli.
	Thanks for watching.
	It's wonderful.
	Chad Koala, how hard would it be to make a bread throne for the office like the iron throne but made of baguettes instead of swords?
	God, I mean the crumbs.
	I mean, that's the main problem there.
	I actually already sit on a bread throne.
	That's just what I do in my spare time.
	Didn't you know?
	Where's this going?
	I don't know.
	It's being stupid.
	Okay.
	Large Mammal.
	On other EU-related news, the EU is threatening its member states with reputation loss and political pressure if they do not accept the corona deal, according to the Finnish state broadcast.
	No one really wants to be in the union anymore.
	No.
	It's great to see, isn't it?
	It is good to see.
	I really love...
	See, my dream future for the European Union is, like, Marine Le Pen wins, and then she's just like, nah, we're out of here, France leaves.
	And she's like, well, there's no money left.
	And all of a sudden, all the other states that are net benefit is just like, well, why the hell are we here then?
	Bye-bye.
	And then it's just Germany and the surrounding countries.
	The EU is just going to be Germany on its own.
	It's just going to be greater Germany.
	That's all it'll end up being.
	There you go.
	And then we'll just see it for what it is, which is just it's Germany by other means, as Peter Hitchens says.
	Do you want to read these last two Odyssey ones?
	Sure.
	So, French name.
	For Callum's swear jar, yeah, yeah, we're going to really have to do something like that.
	And also, thank you for streaming with us from Thomas...
	Difficult name.
	What is that, Polish?
	Like, there's two Zs in there.
	Anyway, but thank you for sending us that on Odyssey.
	And thank you for letting us use Odyssey.
	I assume that's someone from Odyssey thanking us for that.
	But it's good to find another streaming service that we know is solid.
	But other than that, I suppose I should do the impressions.
	I'm trying to think, like, the orcs are at the door and what?
	She's, like, calling the cops and being like, hello?
	Save me from the cops!
	The cops are outside!
	Lovely boys!
	Pickle treats!
	Walk!
	Anyway, other than that, we've got to head off, so we'll be back tomorrow at 1 o'clock.
	As I say, go and check out the Sebastian Gorka interview.
	Thank you for watching.

▲