Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

June 30, 2021 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:30:18

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #165

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast The Lotus Eaters for the 30th of June 2021.
	I think this is the last day of Pride, actually, I just realised.
	And then afterwards, the companies aren't gay for another 11 months.
	Well, it's not even gay, they're not leftists.
	Well, they are leftists still, aren't they?
	Yeah, that doesn't change, at least.
	They're going to change their profile pictures back to BLM, presumably, then.
	Anyway, I'm joined by Beau, and today we're going to be covering the right-wing watch, not getting what it deserves.
	Also, George Galloway, and the man, the meme, the legend that he is.
	And for better or worse, we're going to go through his history and make your own decision.
	I know your opinion on this already.
	And also, Oxfam's anti-white crusade.
	They've decided to fully embrace critical race theory, which views whites as evil and brown people as inferior.
	Because that's what charities should do.
	It does stink of white guilt, though.
	So I suppose two and two do go together quite well there.
	Anyway, first thing to mention is that we have new content on the website, luddisees.com.
	First thing here being the free speech and tolerance rally in Batley.
	So Lawrence Fox and Reclaim set this up.
	Good guys doing all that.
	George Galloway came and gave a speech in which he was supportive of the teacher, saying that he should be able to do whatever the hell he wants.
	And also, it was weird.
	Apparently, there's an accusation that the image of Muhammad would never even shown.
	So then, what's that about then?
	Like, if nothing was shown, what's all this about?
	So, go give that a watch.
	I quite liked Galloway's speech, even though there's a few bits in there where you're like, I'm not sure I trust this guy.
	But anyway, we'll get into that in a minute.
	So go and check that out.
	That's up now.
	That went up yesterday.
	And all the other good stuff we have on there.
	That's also free as well, so don't worry about not being premium.
	Let's get right into it.
	So...
	Right Wing Watch is an organisation that did not get what it deserves.
	And we're going to go through this because it's just depressing to see the difference between how a leftist organisation is treated and someone who's not a leftist is treated in the same regard.
	So this is the first tweet here.
	This is Right Wing Watch, an organisation that is run by leftists who, in their words, would say we're here to observe the rights and put a spotlight on its more extreme aspects of white supremacy and so on and so forth.
	Big F to doubt there, because, I mean, sorry, X to doubt, because who's trusting them on this?
	They've been awful in the past, and we'll demonstrate that.
	So, this is their quote.
	Our efforts to expose the bigoted view and dangerous conspiracy theories spread by right-wing activists has resulted in YouTube banning our channel and removing thousands of our videos.
	We attempted to appeal this decision, and YouTube rejected it.
	So, they have all this content on there.
	They've been massively pushing that YouTube's role is to take responsibility of their platform and start banning people who publish this stuff, so they got banned.
	Funny, right?
	So, at this point in time, it looked like they'd kind of got their comeuppance or they'd been hoisted by their own petard or something at this moment in time.
	Yeah.
	Leftist.
	Pushes for censorship.
	Gets banned.
	Pikachu face.
	Like, what did you think was going to happen?
	And in typical YouTube fashion, they provide no explanation in the initial banning or in the counter notice, in which they're just like, community guidelines.
	Bye!
	Which ones?
	What?
	Nothing.
	No information.
	Just community guidelines.
	Get lost.
	Yeah, yeah.
	So, if you're wondering who is in charge of this, there's a guy called Jared Holt, who is just a huckster, and in here you can see an example of that and the pathetic nature of their organisation.
	So, this is an article from Salon.com, I left this organisation, praising him.
	Praising him for what?
	Meet Jared Holt, the guy who's getting Alex Jones kicked off the internet.
	Because that's a moral thing to do.
	I'd rather not.
	I'd rather not meet him, if that's okay.
	Well, we're going to have to meet him.
	So, introduction.
	Alex Jones is having a rough week.
	The Texas-based conspiracy theorist and head of disturbingly popular Infowars media empire has been banned in rapid succession from a variety of platforms, including Apple, YouTube, Facebook, and Spotify.
	You remember all of them at once, deciding that all of a sudden he broke all of their terms of service.
	We have had...
	Well, they claimed...
	We have terms of service, he has broken them, therefore he's gone, you know, everything prim and proper.
	We've had the leaks since, and we know from people like Ryan Hartwig, who is a great guy on this, who went to Project Veritas and showed, within, because he was a Facebook moderator, they just got sent an update.
	Update to the guidelines, new band group, InfoWars.
	So his breach of the community guidelines was...
	He didn't.
	Until they literally just released a new one saying, you're banned.
	That was the guideline they breached existing.
	That was it.
	Right.
	So there is no pretense.
	So craziness.
	And all four or five of the big players did it all on the same day, right?
	Yeah.
	All of a sudden.
	But they're definitely not a cartel.
	Definitely not.
	Definitely not talking to each other.
	So, Salon says...
	Created the momentum that led to this decision.
	This has been mentioned in passing in much of the coverage, but these folks deserve much more credit and recognition for their work they've been doing to try and fight right-wing disinformation campaigns.
	They're mad because they're not getting enough credit for the censorship.
	Sure, Alex Jones is getting kicked off, but I did this!
	I want the credit for doing that.
	At the same time, there is no attempt to censor right-wing voices or anything of the sort.
	There's no cancel culture, but also give us credit for doing it.
	We want the brownie points, the likes, the retweets for being the censorious monsters that they are.
	So just to be explicitly clear, I'm sure most people watching this already know, but it's just anyone that isn't progressive enough for them is just labelled as far right.
	So it's not just Alex Jones, right?
	It'll be anyone they sort of even mildly disagree with or not, because I must admit, to be completely honest, I hadn't even heard of these guys until a few days ago.
	Jared Hall gives a very specific example of his particular case.
	Of course, progressives, generally.
	I agree.
	So, the interviewer asks him, Why did you decide to target Spotify?
	Alex Jones is being distributed all over, as we've come to realise...
	Jared's response.
	I'm not sure it was really a calculated effort.
	I use Spotify to listen to music while I work.
	I noticed that they had a podcast section, so I was looking through that when I found Infowars.
	I was surprised, mostly because my own experience as someone who has a podcast, aside from my working with Right Wing Watch, I experienced a personal struggle to get Spotify to list my own podcast.
	So he's jealous that Jones was on Spotify and he wasn't?
	He finishes that statement.
	I guess I was a little bit offended that Alex Jones was able to get on the air and I wasn't.
	You guess, yeah, I mean, it's pretty obvious that's what it was.
	Not even politics.
	Not even going to say it's because he's far right and a conspiracy theorist and all the rest of it.
	It's because, well, I couldn't get a podcast on Spotify, so why should he have one?
	Like, let's just kick him because, you know, I'm S. I can't make a successful podcast.
	Alex can, therefore ban him, promote me.
	I don't know this Jared Coates, I've literally never heard of him until a few days ago, never seen his face until a few moments ago, but he's coming across as a petulant child.
	Well, they all are, aren't they?
	But this is his claim to fame, this is his big oomph.
	What did I do?
	I banned Alex Jones.
	Why'd you do that?
	Because I didn't have a podcast needed.
	That's it.
	That's all they need.
	That's all they need whatsoever.
	I mean, the politics stuff, of course, will influence his decision, but for him, personally, that was it.
	That was his answer.
	Just petty spitefulness, it seems like.
	Nothing beyond that, right?
	When they get banned from YouTube, I mean, what's the response?
	What's the correct response to such people?
	It's too bad, get lost.
	People who spend their time trying to destroy your rights and then get bitten by themselves.
	No sympathy whatsoever.
	Absolutely none.
	Even though, yeah, it's bad that censorship happens.
	No sympathy for the individual who was promoting censorship and then got censored.
	None.
	That's the correct thing.
	It's funny, isn't it?
	Yeah, no, you should just point and laugh.
	There is absolutely none here.
	I mean, if someone's been arguing for, no, no, no, you know, some left-winger who's, you know, Glenn Greenwald, let's say, has been arguing, no, we shouldn't censor people, and then he gets censored, yeah, all glory to him, all sympathy to him.
	Someone like Right Wing Watch, get stuffed.
	Get stuffed.
	That's a correct approach.
	Yeah.
	So we'll go through some of these, just enjoying it.
	So first one, Count Dankula.
	Well, they are a private company, and they can do what they want.
	You don't have a right to be on the platform, and eh.
	Get stuffed.
	So then there's the next one from Styx, who did a great response.
	You know, you could always use Odyssey, Bitshoot, and Rumble.
	Oh, yeah, wait.
	You alienated them all, calling them hateful.
	Lol.
	Guess opposing free expression isn't a great idea, is it?
	Hmm.
	Wouldn't want to go to those Nazi platforms now, would you?
	So, if we go to the next one, you can see Young America Foundation.
	Oh, no.
	Anyway.
	Get stuffed.
	There's also the next one here from Tim Cast, who said, I am very pro-free speech.
	I will no longer defend the anti-speech scumbags who set fire to the system for ideological gain when they get burned by their own arson.
	Correct.
	I'm in agreement with them on this.
	I know some people are being like, yeah, it is horrible that they got censored.
	Censorship is bad.
	Horrible that they got censored?
	I'm not sure I'd call it horrible.
	I'm sure I'd call it justice.
	You get what you deserve.
	And if you, that's the definition of justice, getting what you deserve, and if you as an individual spend all your time promoting censorship of people because they say things you don't like and then you get censored because of something you've uploaded, too bad.
	Too bad.
	Good stuff.
	Your fault.
	Absolutely your fault.
	Next one here from Glenn Greenwell.
	Congratulations once again to all the liberals and leftists, led by their journalists, who urge censorship of political speech by Silicon Valley monopolists based in the belief that they would only be used to silence your adversaries and enemies, but never your allies.
	Get what you deserve.
	And then...
	I was just going to say, real quick, don't you think it's a recurring thing where...
	Well, both sides of the aisle are guilty of it, but they think whatever they do that's expedient for themselves in the present...
	Will never happen to that.
	Yeah.
	And, I mean, it's just...
	Well...
	Yeah, so when it does happen...
	It's kind of obvious, isn't it?
	From the bottom one, I mean...
	Your problem.
	So we've got the next one.
	They've got the quartering as well.
	Enjoying this.
	The reason I'm going through all this is just because I get some joy out of it.
	So, I mean, why not?
	Oh, I like Jeremy.
	So, the quartering.
	You should build your own YouTube.
	Yeah, this is the only one that I'm a bit of a...
	Because they already do, don't they, mate?
	They've already got another YouTube.
	Which is YouTube.
	YouTube's owned by leftists.
	Run by leftists.
	Four leftists.
	So, of course, YouTube reinstated their comrades.
	If we go to the next one here.
	This is YouTube saying...
	Even though it had already been through the review stage.
	It had already been through a team looking at it.
	They banned it.
	The review stage said, no, we're banning you.
	And then the policy team has confirmed that this was a mistake.
	Okay.
	By our reviewers and your channel has been reinstated.
	So sorry for the frustration this caused.
	With a massive volume of content reviewed every day, mistakes can happen.
	They only ever seem to get reviewed and then put out in a certain way, don't they?
	Sorry, what do you mean exactly?
	It'd be nice to unpack that just a little bit.
	So right-wing watch are back on YouTube.
	And YouTube are like, oh, mistakes happen.
	Yeah, that's wonderful, YouTube.
	But you hinted at that there's stuff going on in the background there.
	I don't know.
	Well, sometimes they correct their mistakes in a certain way.
	Other people come to them.
	I mean, if we went to them, if we got banned tomorrow, hey, this is a mistake.
	We're clearly just quoting a scientific source, as Carl's done in the past.
	Too bad.
	That mistake never gets fixed.
	It's not a mistake.
	It's only a mistake when it happens to leftists, I think.
	So, if we go to the next one here, this is just the channel itself, in case you're wondering what they upload.
	It's garbage.
	It's just people saying stupid stuff and it gets no views.
	But that's the point.
	A tiny channel with no audience, because they're just poor quality stuff here, in which they're just uploading clips and then being like, haha, this guy is bad.
	No one wants to watch that.
	Some of the time they're probably right as well.
	I mean, I can see the MyPillow guy there talking about free speech.
	I haven't watched the video, but I bet it's perfectly reasonable.
	That's it.
	They can still get in contact with YouTube and get their stuff reinstated, even though they've got 50,000 subscribers.
	It's not nothing, Berger, but it is a tiny channel in YouTube's sphere of things they can see, but that's how connected the left is, I think.
	Right, so that was the thing I maybe might want to hear a slight bit more about.
	how exactly is certain publications or certain individual peoples that work at really influential online magazines or something and they've got an inside track to specific individuals within YouTube or well the same way all of society works I mean how do certain companies get preferential treatment by Matt Hancock nepotism you just you just know the guy you have his email you have his phone they'll know people at YouTube because they share their political views It's just a natural order of things.
	I'm not saying it's some big conspiracy or something.
	It's just people know each other.
	That's how life works.
	And this is an instance of it in which we know YouTube's run by leftists.
	So they give preferential treatment to leftist creators.
	They'll correct the mistakes when they happen.
	Won't do that for right-wingers.
	Too bad.
	Get stuffed.
	That's usually the response.
	So we go to the next link here.
	This is, what does it say, NBC or whatever reporting on it.
	And they have a statement from Right Wing Watch who say, Their inability to differentiate between the people who are trying to advocate this stuff and those who are trying to document and counter it is at the heart of the problem here.
	They learnt nothing.
	They got censored.
	After they've been campaigning for censorship, they're like, yeah, the real problem here is they're not doing smart censorship, in which they just target our enemies.
	Instead, we get caught up in the net, and that's the bad point.
	Not the censorship in and of itself of ideas that are not criminal, they're not advocacy for terrorism, they're not, you know...
	I was about to say, like, leftist stuff, because it's, you know, pro-pedophilia advocacy.
	You know, none of that.
	It's just people who have opinions, and they're not illegal, and yet you want the banned because I don't like them.
	That's your argument.
	So I also just wanted to take a look at what YouTube throws its money at, because that's an indication of what YouTube thinks.
	I mean, we can all show the BLM endorsement, all the rest of it, but every company on the planet apparently did that.
	So what's the stuff that they take their money?
	I mean, a company that says they're struggling with money, that's why they need more ads on our videos than everyone else's, is what are they throwing at?
	Well, let's have a look at a compilation.
	There are no labels that define you.
	No pronouns that can bind you.
	No rainbow big enough to capture you.
	No heels high enough to trip you.
	Because you are not one thing or another.
	Not just an L, G, B, T or Q. You are everything.
	I'm DeRay McKesson, civil rights activist and one of the co-founders of Campaign Zero.
	The police kill 1,100 people a year, disproportionately killing people of color.
	Black people are three times more likely to be killed by police than white people.
	We are all leaders in every form that we assume to be a Black girl.
	Throughout February, we celebrate the luminaries of our community.
	How I'm going to tell my kids, Dad's not going to be here for Christmas.
	Dad's not going to be here for your birthday.
	In five days, I might be the poor.
	Immigration is about people.
	And right now, people are fighting for their lives.
	Which statement describes you?
	I strongly prefer white people to black people.
	I moderately prefer white people to black people.
	I slightly prefer white people to black.
	I want to have a job again.
	White privilege is the set of advantages that you are born into by being white.
	And that's not to say that every white person has the same kind of privilege, same level of privilege, but they all have some certain amount of privilege that people of other races, in this country at least, do not have.
	It feels weird to call a machine racist, but I really can't explain...
	I can't explain what just happened.
	You can have neutral intentions, you can have good intentions, and the outcomes can still be discriminatory.
	I get amazing.
	This is a compilation of just all the stuff I found that are YouTube originals, stuff YouTube has spent money to produce.
	And I love the last one there.
	Like, you can have neutral intentions, you can have good intentions, and still the outcome can be discriminatory.
	How?
	How the hell is the outcome discriminatory if there was no discrimination along the way?
	It's just leftist thinking in a nutshell.
	Do you know the feeling I get when I see stuff like that, people talk like that?
	Um...
	What I feel like is that they know just enough words to be divisive.
	They know just enough to parrot something that's really horrible.
	And that's it.
	If you scratch the surface, if you ask them more about it, they would have nothing.
	I also love the pride thing they did.
	You are everything.
	You're not just an LGBTQ after saying that you must be an LGBT or Q. I mean, you're the alphabet grade who continuously put people in these boxes.
	And then you're everything at the same time.
	I mean, I love the destruction of your own ideology, but...
	Yeah, all that postmodern stuff is just...
	It's just cancer, isn't it?
	It's just designed to make you...
	They've got their ideology, and then they're like, yeah, and also the opposite.
	Yeah.
	Anyway, so at the same time as all this going on, I mean, Right Wing Watch getting their stuff back, this tiny shell.
	Andy Ngo has been to platform from SoundCloud.
	I thought we'd talk about this, because you remember this Mumford& Sons piece.
	I thought we'd start off with this, which is The View discussing it.
	And I can't believe that the brony platform of choice, The View, I don't know who else is watching it, has taken such much of the call aid that they've come out and said that Andy Ngo is far right now.
	So let's go to the first clip here of them talking about it.
	The banjo player from the group Mumford & Sons, Winston Marshall, announced that he's leaving the band after getting blowback for praising a far right-wing pundit's book about Antifa.
	Yeah, I've been following this for a while when he first tweeted about Andy Ngo and even the way Andy Ngo is introduced like on this show that he's a right wing crazy person.
	I don't know where that came from.
	He's actually a very brave journalist that I believe is in the hospital right now and he has been reporting the only person that's been reporting about Antifa in Portland for the past two years and I You know, Antifa's so bad over there, the National Guard was sent in to try and help keep Portland under control.
	They had an autonomous zone where people were getting killed and raped, and it had to be disbanned.
	Like, he's just reporting, and it's very strange to me that he's been turned into someone that could make someone in Mumford& Sons leave the ban.
	But I will say this.
	The suggestion somehow that Andy Nyo is...
	You know, a tried and true, well-respected journalist and that this tweet was completely benign and innocuous is just really not true.
	I mean, Andy is known as being a very controversial figure.
	He is known as...
	Being right wing.
	He is known as being a Twitter troll.
	He has a lot of his claims have been debunked.
	His book has been reviewed many, many times by reputable organizations as being found disreputable.
	And so, you know, if you do tweet out support and he did do that, he said finally had the time to read your important You are a brave man.
	Well that must say something about his ideology.
	I mean, unbelievable.
	Even in Normie Normiesville, apparently they're having this discussion.
	And you can see the lady in the middle living in reality.
	And then the other two hosts living in non-reality.
	Because, I mean, neither of them have read Andy Knows' book, Unmasked.
	It is on the bookshelf.
	We've done a book club about it.
	Go and check that out.
	And we had Andy in the studio for that as well, which is fantastic.
	He just gives a journalistic documentation of what happened in Portland, Seattle, and so forth.
	In which socialist terrorists, known as Antifa, in one instance bombed and tried to shoot up an ICE facility.
	They also murdered another guy in the streets of Portland, overtook several buildings, bombed the federal courthouse in Portland, and just engaged in rioting for hundreds and hundreds of days over the last four years.
	Causing God knows how much property damage.
	And for him saying, that happened.
	That makes him a right wing.
	His claims have been debunked.
	I don't know what they're going to do.
	Are they going to bring the guys they've shot back to life or something?
	And then his claims are debunked.
	But just unbelievable.
	Also, I like the Ink Sock logo.
	The little Vue logo literally looks like Ink Sock.
	So I don't know what that's about.
	I've never watched the Vue, ever.
	But yeah, of course, it's just...
	Terrible, horrible thing to say.
	Like, just open lies.
	He's far right.
	Sod off.
	Anyway, so here's SoundCloud has been removed, presumably because SoundCloud are leftists now, I guess.
	So he says, SoundCloud has permanently banned me and my podcast, You Should Know.
	In its email, it says I violated its community guidelines without naming the alleged offending content.
	Guests include The Rubin Report, Douglas Murray, Jordan Peterson.
	It's like, it's the most mainstream of people.
	He hasn't uploaded in there in like a year, I think.
	And yet, banned.
	So we go to the next one.
	This is The Postmillennial.
	I think he's the editor of them running the story about this.
	So they say that SoundCloud's the platform's podcast on the grounds that it violated their rules.
	What rules?
	It doesn't say.
	None whatsoever.
	No indication.
	But the guidelines are against abusive, libelous, defamatory, pornographic, obscene, promotes violence, terrorism, illegal acts, so on and so forth, and none of them have Andy ever done.
	Ever.
	Are they accusing him of a specific one of those, or...?
	No, presumably because if they did, he'd be like, that's libel, and I'll sue you.
	Because if you say, I've been promoting terrorism, that's a crime.
	In which case, if you're lying about that, I'm going to sue you for damaging my reputation.
	And as a public figure, as Andy knows, he should do.
	But he can't because they just didn't say it.
	They just said, guidelines get stuffed.
	So the Fox News reported on this as well, and there's some stuff in there.
	So they say that the email also explains that once an account violates these terms, all accounts, tracks, and followers are banned from returning to the site.
	it did not provide an exact insistence where andy violated these terms in his podcast when reach for comment no told fox news the long list of violations soundcloud accuses me of alleging violence including an incitement of violence how can a legitimate business accuse a client of such erroneous crimes without even pointing to the offending content or giving me an opportunity to ask for more information totally right by andy Like, they're accusing him of a crime if they're saying he encouraged terrorism or violence, so on and so forth.
	She's never done.
	She's never done.
	But he's still trying to ask for it to be put in the realms of just reality and what's reasonable, and they're not dealing in that realm, are they?
	It's just pure ideologies.
	I think Andy understands that.
	Yeah, I know he does.
	He's smart enough to know, but he's just like, come on, be reasonable, and then when they're not, you can expose them as the unreasonable characters that they are, as Jordan Peterson would advise.
	But they also say, in an email provided by No, SoundCloud also neglected a chance of appeal for the permanent ban, seemingly unassuring that Andy cannot challenge this appeal.
	So, just no appeal.
	Andy, no.
	Banned from SoundCloud.
	What for?
	Saying that socialist terrorism is bad?
	Right-wing watch.
	Reinstated.
	No problem, buddy.
	We got you.
	Even though God knows how you have that connection.
	And that's just the thing.
	It's like you just won't get what you deserve in certain instances, I guess.
	Andy does not deserve to be the platform from anywhere because he's done nothing.
	Right-wing watch.
	I don't know.
	But the fact that they've been advocating for censorship and then they get bit by it.
	No sympathy.
	No sympathy.
	Go to hell.
	Not wasting my time with those people.
	Hear, hear.
	Anyway, let's go to the Galloway stuff.
	So tell me about George Galloway, because I know some stuff about him, but I don't know his full story, so enlighten me.
	Old Georgie boy.
	Right, well, so people may know that Galloway is standing in the Batley and Spen by election, isn't he?
	Seem to have been parachuted in there, or some people say, what, carpet bagging?
	The idea of you just, you see a political opportunity and just go there and try and make the best of it, regardless of, you know, whether you've got any real connection to the area or anything like that.
	I mean, Galloway did that in 2005 in Tower Hamlets, where was it, around Bow in London.
	Yeah, just to exploit tensions there more or less, That's what people accused him of.
	I completely agree with that.
	The Labour MP had voted with Blair to go to war in Iraq, and of course one of Galloway's main things is not going to war with Arab states, regardless of anything.
	And so, yeah, he used that to go from nowhere, from the political wilderness, to have a seat again.
	And it was, I've got to give it to him.
	That's an amazing feat.
	Yeah, that's not easily done.
	There's not many people in the world that you would put money on them to do that.
	So I think he wants to, that was with the Respect Party, his party is now the Workers' Party of Britain or something, some nonsense he's made up.
	And he wants to try and recreate that in Batley and Spen, it seems.
	So yeah, maybe we could just talk a bit about Galloway.
	I mean, he's been around for a long time.
	One of the first things I would say is that I dislike him.
	I dislike his views.
	You're not a fan at all.
	No, but what I would say is I do like to dislike him.
	I think he is entertaining.
	I think he is funny sometimes.
	I think he's extremely clever, extremely quick, you know, very well read.
	You know, and I don't agree with his world view, but he is something interesting.
	He is something, an important figure in some ways.
	And so, yeah, I've said to other people before, I consider him a bit like...
	I agree with nearly everything Stefan Molyneux says, but I don't like him for whatever reason.
	Whenever I look at Stefan Molyneux for too long, I don't really like him.
	I feel the opposite about Galloway.
	I actually disagree with all his worldviews, but for whatever reason, which I can't really explain, I do like him.
	Does that make any sense?
	Some people are charismatic, even if you don't agree with them.
	And I heavily don't agree with him.
	I mean, I think he's kind of despicable in many ways.
	He's an apologist for all sorts of terrible, sadistic things that have gone on in the world.
	So tell me about them, I want to know.
	Oh, well, okay.
	Well, so, to begin with, he is just a committed radical leftist.
	I mean, openly, even in an interview with Owen Jones the other day, he said, you know, I'm a radical leftist.
	I'm a radical revolutionary.
	You won't find many people more radical than me.
	I mean, openly, happily say that is a massive part of his life, his politics, his identity.
	So, just straight off the bat, you know, it gives you an idea, you know...
	I don't agree with that.
	Most people here, probably most viewers, don't agree with that sort of thing.
	But that's where he is, you know, he's massively pro-Palestinian, pro-Islam, of course.
	But yeah, going back to his early days, I mean, he was always trying to get into the Labour Party.
	And, well, eventually did, of course, he was an MP for the Labour Party for many a year.
	But going back to sort of the early days of sort of like the 70s and the 80s, I mean, he was involved in Sort of the minor strike.
	I don't know a great deal about that.
	Sort of the Arthur Scargill stuff.
	So he was sort of on their side, sort of of course, I suppose.
	You know, there's pictures of him with Corbyn and Tony Benn.
	And Scargill and all that type of thing.
	But we actually got one, the first picture there.
	It's when Galloway sat down with Uday Hussain.
	And there's a picture there.
	People may know Uday Hussain from Count Dankula's Mad Lads on him.
	Yeah, Dankula did a Mad Lads, didn't he?
	Uday is a scumbag.
	And so there's Galloway with, there's George with Uday who, if anyone doesn't know, hasn't, you know, not old enough to remember or hasn't read into it or hasn't seen Dankula's video, that Uday Hussein, the son of Saddam, is an actual monster.
	Like, a serial rapist, a murderer, a torturer, yeah, just a massive sadist, one of the worst, among the worst people I've ever heard of.
	I mean, really.
	So the famous story about him is pulling up to weddings that he can see on the road, and then joining himself in the wedding, walking up, handling the groom, so his boys keep him to the side, and then raping his bride-to-be in front of him, and then just walking off and leaving.
	And there's nothing you can do because he's Saddam Hussein's son.
	Yep, yep, just cruising Baghdad to find a wedding party to do that to.
	Apparently loads of times, loads of times, dozens, maybe hundreds of times that happened.
	I mean, he shot up a room full of his own friends and family at one point with an AK just indiscriminately sweeping the room.
	Things like that.
	You know, he had all sorts of...
	Dark dungeons and prisons where people disappeared and dismembered and all sorts of stuff.
	So, yeah, a real, real psycho.
	No question.
	And there's George smiling away.
	Is it the second picture, John?
	Well, they're shaking hands.
	So what was this?
	Some meeting in which he visited Iraq?
	Yeah, exactly.
	Why is he with Uday, not Saddam, for example?
	Well, Uday was a massive player.
	So the thing is, George Galloway met Saddam Hussein twice, I believe.
	Once in 1994, which was between the two Iraq wars, and then another time just before the second Iraq war kicked off as some sort of diplomatic mission.
	So he met the big man a couple of times, but he met Tariq Aziz, the Iraqi prime minister, long term, like ten times.
	He'd meet with the regime, I wouldn't say semi-regularly, but multiple times.
	What was his purpose?
	Just to take a dump on the West's foreign policy.
	I mean, what was his purpose?
	What is his purpose?
	I'd like to ask you that.
	Why exactly did you go to Iraq and shake hands with Uday Hussain?
	What was the point of that exactly?
	So from my rough reading of his history, I imagine it's there.
	So he's like, you know, I want to meet with the regime because you can't meet with the opposition, let's say.
	They're the ones in power.
	And therefore I'm there to try and help the Iraqi people, even though the people in charge are awful.
	Yeah, I'm being a bit...
	I'm not being clear there.
	I do know the reason, or the reasons he gives...
	And it's just that Western foreign policy, imperialism, whatever you want to call it, is just wrong and evil.
	You know, the classic socialist, communist, Marxist thing, anything that we've done is just bad, by definition, and therefore any enemy, any of our enemies are his friends.
	Quite as simple as that.
	Regardless of their crimes, regardless of how disgusting the things they've said and done are, he'll happily travel across the world and shake their hands, sit down happily for a photo op.
	That's George Galloway.
	That's George Galloway for you.
	And he's slippery, though.
	He's a very slippery character.
	As I said, you know, anyone who knows him, anyone who's seen any interviews with him, people like Jeremy Paxman or John Humphreys or Andrew Neil, they'll struggle.
	They'll struggle to pin him down and get him, because he's good at what he does.
	He really is.
	You've got to give him some credit for that.
	As I say, I don't agree with the man, but he is very, very good at defending himself.
	Extremely good.
	There's a picture, obviously years after the actual minor strike.
	They're all much older than they were in the 80s there, but there's Scargill and Tony Benn.
	And, you know, the idea that...
	The idea that Thatcher trying to close down lots of coal mines, getting rid of lots of jobs, that was just a purely evil thing to do.
	You know, and there's lots more at play there.
	And Galloway was, you know, of course, of the opinion that anything and everything Tories ever do ever, regardless of any reason, should be fought against.
	You know, so Arthur Scargill there, just an actual, you know, full socialist.
	So, yeah, and later to be seen to be not on the level.
	But, you know, it's a very, very minor criminal as far as Galloway is concerned.
	But I mean, the list goes on.
	Like Corbyn, if it's the IRA... Oh, there's a picture of Galloway sitting with the big man himself, Saddam.
	And said glowing things about the man.
	You know, said that he admired his courage and his strength.
	Things like that.
	And...
	I too hate the Kurds.
	Right, yeah, yeah.
	I mean, yeah, he didn't really care too much about the Kurds at that point.
	I mean, he said in the first Gulf War, I don't know if you know about it in a great amount of detail, but where the aggression that Saddam displayed towards Kuwait in the first Gulf War in 1990 to 1991...
	It's very, very, very, very difficult to make any kind of argument that that's justified, what Saddam did.
	He tried to annex Kuwait, essentially, that bit of land where there's loads of more oil reserves.
	That's just part of Iraq now.
	Well, George Galloway agreed with him.
	He thought that was...
	I know the argument.
	So the argument is essentially that the British turned up and took Kuwait, and it should be part of Iraq as the 9th province or whatever it is, because it's imperialism that took Kuwait away from Iraq, therefore it belongs to them.
	But yeah, not a great argument for just invading, and then what happened in Kuwait City, let's say.
	So that's a terrible argument on the surface of it, and then thrown to it the army, the tank divisions, or whatever, that Saddam rolled into Kuwait City, and there was some terrible things done by them.
	Theft, murder, rape.
	Gang raping them and then shooting them in the head while you're raping them, is some of the stories I've heard.
	But apparently the whole thing was the fault of perfidious Albion, according to Galloway.
	It's just our fault for having been involved in geopolitics for the last couple of hundred years before that.
	Because it's actually very complicated, isn't it?
	Like the last shah and when and, you know, all sorts of things.
	People always bring up the science Pico agreement, blah, blah, blah.
	But nevertheless, what Saddam did in 1990 was a terrible thing.
	I mean, quite clearly, just a humanitarian thing.
	But George Galloway defended him on that.
	So that's just one more example.
	And it goes on and on and on.
	It's his entire career, really.
	It's everything you can do.
	Like Jeremy Corbyn.
	Any angle that can sort of dunk on England or Britain or the West, you'll find him there.
	Almost.
	Almost.
	Because he's a socialist.
	So, I mean, 10,000 people get killed in Katya.
	How do we blame this on the US? That's essentially the thinking.
	Well, he said when the Soviet Union collapsed at the very end of the 80s, that it was like one of the biggest catastrophes of his life.
	Or something like that.
	I might not have the quote perfect there.
	But it was something like that where he said, you know, he's basically heartbroken that the Soviet bloc fell apart.
	That tells you a lot about the man, I think.
	The whole angle I'm trying to make here is don't trust Galloway.
	I don't trust him.
	I don't trust him as far as I can throw him.
	No way.
	He may be making the right noises at the moment in Batley and Spen, saying the things that he thinks the electorate will want to hear about freedom of speech.
	I don't buy it at all.
	I don't buy it at all.
	He's a snake in the grass.
	He'll say or do whatever he thinks he needs to to get a seat in Parliament again, I believe.
	That's just my opinion.
	He's quite a litigious fellow, so we won't go too far with what we say.
	But I just simply don't believe his shtick, his angle.
	Because we've got decades of what he's done.
	Do you take someone on the last speech they made, or on the decades of actions they took?
	Because I just think it's a little bit, it would be a bit gullible of people in Batlin Spen to just take him on the last speech he made and just say, oh, he's saying the things I like right now, so I'll give him my vote.
	I mean, they haven't got any great options in battling in Spain, to be quite fair.
	But don't vote for someone like that.
	I mean, it's...
	Well, he had a famous debate with Christopher Hitchens, the late, great Christopher Hitchens, there's a picture of it there, in America.
	And they were talking about foreign policy and the Iraq war.
	It was in about 2005, so just a couple of years after that second Iraq war.
	And I actually re-watched it recently.
	I've watched it two or three times now.
	It's a really good one.
	It's a really, really good one.
	And I did think, until I re-watched it recently, that Galloway acquitted himself very well.
	And there's not many people that go head to head with Christopher Hitchens and come out not completely destroyed.
	Which is what he does.
	Hitchens actually didn't annihilate him.
	And, you know, not many people can boast that, to be quite honest.
	However, re-watching it recently, I do think that Hitchens came out on top.
	And I actually don't agree with Hitchens.
	I agree with Galloway.
	I think the second Gulf War was...
	Unjust, trumped up, and all sorts of other things.
	So, well, that's one of the other things I would say about George Galloway, is that he is interesting.
	He is better than most of the people on the left, someone like Owen Jones, for example, where he will come out with something that's a bit off the main beam, that isn't purely in the canon of the accepted things the left should say.
	And that's becoming more and more rarer and rarer, isn't it?
	For example, he was sort of pro-Brexit.
	Galloway was kind of pro-Brexit.
	Sorry, I'm a little bit out of sync here.
	Let's talk about the Senate hearing.
	Again, back in about 2005 it was.
	Galloway was called before a Senate committee On Homeland Security, and asked about whether he'd ever received money from the Iraqi regime, basically, oil for money, there he is on C-SPAN, and he absolutely smashed them.
	It's great.
	You know, again, I'm not on his side, but it's great to watch him just smash that Senate committee.
	If anyone wants to look that up, I advise they do, because it is really good stuff.
	I'm running out of time a little bit here.
	Well, another thing in his past, he was on Big Brother.
	The most cringy.
	People use the word cringe very freely these days, don't they?
	It's almost like a go-to word, go-to term.
	This is among the most cringy things.
	There's the late, not great Pete Burns with him.
	It's so cringy.
	It's like the worst.
	There's a couple of things.
	There's this bit and there's another bit where he's role-playing as a cat and there's some weird sexual undertones with the woman.
	It's like I can't watch.
	In fact, I tried to watch the clip earlier this morning and I got about 50 seconds in and I just couldn't do it.
	I just couldn't do it.
	It's one of the worst things ever.
	But it's so embarrassing.
	It feels like an ad hominem thing to bring it up.
	But nevertheless, that's where it is.
	Oh no, my point was going to be that...
	It's not an ad hominem to bring up his past.
	Well, yeah, not ad hominem.
	That's the wrong phrase.
	But the point I was going to try and make with it is that...
	He's shameless.
	He's a shameless self-publicist, will do or say almost anything for attention or to keep his career alive.
	So he might come across as a very sincere man, a very, very serious cerebral man, and he is on many levels, but also cretinous, as that picture testifies.
	He's a fan of Assad.
	There you go, sitting with Assad.
	So is he an Arab nationalist, though?
	Well, he's pro anyone that is our...
	Yeah, he said he loved the Barthist party.
	Okay.
	Yeah.
	So, again, if Kat at the time, I think probably Cameron and people like that, wanted to get rid of Assad, so he'll go over there then and be his friend, shake his hand, have a photo opportunity.
	It doesn't really matter about the killings, the murders.
	It doesn't really matter about that.
	It's more important than...
	George can have a photo up with someone.
	But no, that's also pretty socialist behaviour.
	It's just anti-American.
	The Assad regime is not pro-American, therefore I support them.
	Oh yeah, that'll be his justification for it, for sure.
	And then we'll get on to the Brexit thing.
	So it's surprising that sometimes you'll find him saying something, you'd be like, oh, I didn't think an arch-socialist would go there.
	But he did, I think...
	Nigel's face there says it all, I think.
	I can't quite believe it's comical that Galloway would join.
	But to be fair, actually, there is an argument from the left why we shouldn't be in Europe, which Galloway has held for a long, long time.
	People like Tony Benn held it.
	They want to collectivise your children and things like that and get rid of a freedom of press, and they don't want to be answered to anyone in Strasbourg or Brussels.
	That's what it is.
	That's why Galloway is not a fan.
	I mean, he'll say it's to do with democracy.
	I don't believe it.
	I just don't believe it.
	It's not to do with that, in my opinion.
	But anyways, we are running out of time.
	He's just...
	Well, let's go back to Batley and Spen real quick.
	And we put up...
	Lotus, he just put up a video of his 10-minute-odd speech the other day, didn't we?
	And he was talking about the good things like freedom of speech and the...
	Talking about freedom of speech and how the teacher had been hard done by her and all that sort of thing and how the Joe Cox murder is a terrible thing, etc, etc, etc.
	All the things you would expect the normal electorate of West Yorkshire constituency to want to hear.
	I would suggest it's all disingenuous.
	I would suggest the man's a Marxist.
	He doesn't really care about freedom of speech.
	He didn't care when the Saddam crime family, the Hussein crime family, there's no freedom of speech there.
	I don't remember him bringing it up.
	There wasn't a point.
	I don't believe...
	He asked Assad about the levels of freedom of the press in Syria.
	I don't think he really cares about it.
	I think it's what he's calculated correctly, that there's a chink in Labour's armour there, and it might lead to him getting a seat back.
	He cares about council culture once they came for him.
	Once it wasn't in his interest, you know, once they accuse him of being far right, which is of course absurd, but yeah, that's beyond the pale, and he needs to speak up and say something about it at that point.
	It's just, he accused Hitchens once of being a slug who left a trad of slime behind him.
	I think that's ironic.
	I think that's exactly what Galloway himself is.
	So that's why you don't think he's legit in Ballyons Bend.
	There's no reason to support him.
	No, he's been parachuted in there, or he's parachuted himself in there to try and stick it to Labour, because obviously Labour got rid of him back in the Blair years when he spoke out against Gulf War II, you know, telling our soldiers to disobey orders and that sort of thing, and that the death squads were justified in some way.
	way it was normal to have sectarian bombings every day or whatever just crazy nonsense just whatever he needs to say to justify the weirdo boomer position he's got he's a throwback I don't buy it.
	Don't buy it.
	Okay.
	Well, we're going to move on to the Oxford.
	Sorry, too much time.
	Sorry.
	The White Crusade.
	Okay.
	Not Oxford, Oxfam.
	So, Oxfam.
	People might know Oxfam.
	So, Oxfam being a charity that's meant to help people in parts of the world which are not doing too well.
	And you go down and you buy some stuff in their shop that's secondhand and they're selling for a price that's up and then they use the profits to help people.
	That's the theory, but of course that's not the reality.
	Particularly in this case, now that we know.
	So here's a new article that Rory put up this morning, because we found out that Oxfam is adopting Robert D'Angelo's inspired version of whiteness, and sent a staff survey to all of their staff, educating them on the new doctrine, let's say.
	So in here he says, Oxfam's staff were left up in arms after a divisive racial justice survey to find whiteness as the overarching preservation of power and domination for the benefit of white people.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	Oxfam, a charity focused on the alleviation of global poverty, has 1,800 staff in the UK. Quick fact, about 80% of them are white, so that's the other thing to keep in mind.
	And they sent this survey to them.
	In the survey, the charity declared that white privilege is a byproduct of a racist system and affirmed that its bureaucracy did not recognise reverse racism.
	It's because there is no reverse racism.
	It's just racism.
	If you hate white people, that's just racism.
	We don't need a special term for it.
	The discrimination or prejudice against a race or ethnic majority.
	So you can only be racist towards majorities.
	Well, then they have to explain the whites need not apply jobs that we've covered.
	You liars.
	Like, the idea there is no racism against whites, there's plenty of it.
	Do we know the names of the people that are sort of the top brass at Oxfam?
	No, I didn't jot it down.
	Not necessarily you, but it's known, it's knowledge.
	I imagine it will be, but the people behind the survey, I don't know.
	So Oxfam affirmed in the survey that many of its members outside the UK are not racialized as white, although racism is deeply embedded in society and, quote, exists to serve whiteness.
	Yeah.
	They're just buying the Kool-Aid.
	They full-on buy the Kool-Aid of just, like, whiteness is everywhere, we live in a white supremacist capitalist patriarchy and all the rest of it, and this charity of a thousand odd people is now drumming into their own staff, if they need to believe it.
	I mean, just a re-education of nice people who go and work in a charity because they want to help something or something like that.
	They're not radical people who work in Oxfam from what I've met.
	Usually they're just kind of old folks who've got, you know, they're retired, so why not?
	Yeah, I mean, I've been in an Oxfam maybe five or six times in my life, and usually to get the sort of second-hand paperback that I've seen, I guess I'll just have to get my second-hand Bernard Cornwalls from somewhere else.
	Yeah, so the next thing here is GB News taking note, which I like.
	So this is another reason why I quite like GB News as a construct, because they're the only ones retweeting this, the only ones writing an article about it.
	Where's, you know, BBC, Sky News, any of it?
	No, no, no.
	Instead, GB News is taking off the slack there, so glory to them for that.
	However, the Times, because there are some right-wing papers out there.
	So if we go to the next link, the Times reported a screenshot of this.
	So Peter Whittle here saying, as reported in the Times as an extract from the survey distributed to staff at Oxfam.
	Has anti-white racism been so explicit as here?
	This charity seems to be entirely captured by insidious critical race theory.
	Stop giving them money now.
	And I have to agree.
	I'm not going to shop Oxfam anymore.
	That's true.
	So they say in here, At OxfamGB, racism is about much more than the behaviour of individual people.
	Racism is a power construct created by white nations.
	What's a white nation?
	I mean, what?
	Like, just a nation that has a majority of white people, that's a white nation now.
	Like, you and Richard Spencer holding hands there.
	Like, this is a white country.
	If you ain't white, you're not involved.
	For the benefit of white people, this power construct has been based on viewing white people as superior and underpinned by a parallel power structure, the byproduct, white privilege, of which gives us a unique privilege solely based on the colour of your skin.
	The pensioners working at Oxfam, volunteering their time, helping out.
	The white pensioners, yeah.
	They've got white privilege and they need to atone for their role in a white nation that's keeping non-white people down.
	It's insanity, isn't it?
	I mean, is this sort of thing cut and paste directly from the Robin DiAngelo book?
	Pretty much, in the language.
	It'll be people who are educated in critical race theory and then just repurposing it against their own stuff.
	I say against on purpose.
	We understand whiteness as an overarching preservation of power and domination for the benefit of white people, and ultimately that white supremacy serves to protect.
	At Oxfam GB, the work on racism is even more important with regards to progressing our wider work on decolonization.
	Oxfam needs to decolonize, the charity that sends money abroad.
	Yeah.
	Although I don't know what they're doing with too much of that money, but we'll get into that in a minute.
	So if we have some quotes from the staff from the Times article in which they're saying their response to this, and all of them are correct, the document says that white privilege is a byproduct of a racist system and adds that Oxfam does not recognize reverse racism.
	One of the questions in the results, the staff said that they had to describe themselves as non-racist, anti-racist, or none-either.
	So, either you're not a racist, you're an anti-racist, so neo-racism, or you're a racist.
	Who's ticking the racism box?
	Yeah.
	Who's like, yeah, I'm Adolf Hitler all the way.
	What do you think is going to happen to your job?
	So, they have quotes from the employees.
	One employee says, why are they presuming their workers who are working for a humanitarian charity, racists and bigots?
	Because that's how they view you.
	You have white skin, therefore you're a racist.
	Little old white women that are altruistic.
	If you volunteer to go and work in Oxfam, that's, to my mind, that's approaching, if not actual altruism.
	And so we're going to dunk on them.
	We're going to victimise those people, are we?
	Oxfam history may make a change of mind on that.
	But the idea that the charity that helps foreign nations abroad and not only white nations...
	I mean, if you're a white supremacist, surely you'd set up a charity to help white nations, not nations that have non-white people.
	I hadn't thought about that exactly, but yeah.
	Doesn't make any sense to say that these employees would be racist.
	They'd go and start their own white charity then, wouldn't they?
	So they say, surely the time and money should be better spent on finding real findings that some men they employ are sexual predators.
	Hmm.
	Because they've been involved.
	Oh yeah, wasn't there loads of sex crime allegations about Oxfam?
	A lot.
	I've forgotten that.
	So they also mentioned that the proportion of ethnic minority employees at Oxfam fell from 16% in 2019 to 11% in 2020.
	So also at the same time, they're getting rid of their non-white employees.
	I mean, it's white fragility for you.
	It's a white supremacist book.
	It'll make you do these things.
	The survey document says, however, many of the workers employed in the 27 countries where Oxfam operates are not racialized as white.
	So only some people are white, other people are not white, even if they both have the same skin tone, presumably.
	I don't really know what on earth they're trying to get at there other than that.
	It states that racism is deeply emphasized in society, with all echelon's power, to some degree serving whiteness, whether by legacy, the persistence of neocolonialism or cultural imperialism.
	Yeah, I know the Marxists are in the office.
	They start waving off about imperialism in the 2000s.
	Like, what on earth do you think you're living in?
	Anti-black racism, it says, is, quote, the most harmful and insidious form of racism.
	It's the worst one, isn't it?
	It's definitely the worst one.
	And, quote, the theoretical underpinnings wherein every group is coaxed in proximity with whiteness.
	So, black racism is the worst kind.
	Racism against white people doesn't exist.
	Also, if you are not a racist, therefore you're part of this imperialist structure, it's painful to listen to.
	So, some of the other respondents saying in here, some of them said they were annoyed that they had to identify as white, black, indigenous, person of colour, BIPOC, Asian, black...
	Or minority ethnic, and they were just like, I don't even know what the hell you're even asking me.
	You could also self-identify as being several genders, obviously, women, men, including trans men and trans women, non-binary, or preferred to identify as a preferred gender.
	So you could put attack helicopter.
	I was going to say, can you be an attack helicopter?
	Needs to be on there.
	One woman employee said, I felt like I was being signposted into a category that I did not wish to be labeled in.
	I don't want to be a subcategory as either white supremacist or full-on racist, and I don't want to have to apologize for being a white woman.
	Good, good.
	I like it when people stand up.
	That's someone pointing out the obvious point there.
	Like, you're giving me this survey telling me I'm evil for being white.
	Off.
	Like, I'm not messing my time with you people.
	It's the right thing to do.
	Another woman employed at Oxfam's charity shop division said that she felt under attack for being a white English and leave voting person.
	Hmm.
	I didn't know there was much about voting leave, but, you know, it's all under the same rubric, isn't it?
	Mm-hmm.
	Pauline Latman, MP, Conservative Party member and Commons International Development Committee, said, And Oxfam have defended themselves, even though, I mean, all of this looks awful.
	I mean, you would not want this in the front page of your organisation.
	Oxfam said...
	Oxfam is working hard to become an anti-racist organisation, and this survey is an important part of ensuring that we live up to our values.
	Our values of being Marxist critical race theorists.
	Whenever I say anti-racist...
	I'm going to take a quote from the Critical Race Theory textbook on this to demonstrate exactly that point, that the anti-racist is garbage.
	So they say, the Critical Race Theory, in their own goddamn textbook, with its explicit embrace of racial consciousness, Critical Race Theory aims to re-examine the terms by which race and racism have been negotiated in American consciousness.
	And to recover and revitalize the racial tradition of race consciousness among African Americans and other peoples of color.
	They want to bring race consciousness back to brown-skinned people.
	A tradition that was discarded when integration, assimilation, and the idea of colourblindness became the official norms of the racial enlightenment.
	So, Martin Luther King, judge me on the content of my character, not my race.
	They're like, that's become the norm, and yet we can't promote race consciousness around brown people now?
	This is where this all comes from.
	They're happy to endorse black nationalism.
	That's their rubric.
	Don't ever get past anti-racist, you're black nationalists.
	That's what you goddamn are.
	Yeah, black separatists.
	The idea that what Martin Luther King said that day in Washington is wrong-headed.
	To be colourblind is wrong.
	I mean, what on earth?
	That's their position, don't they?
	That's their position, yeah.
	Tucker is right when he says, just call it racism.
	He's correct.
	You know, all these terms, they are important because it is what they label themselves.
	It's important to read the document and find out what they actually believe, so on and so forth.
	But it's just racism.
	It is just racism.
	So, Ho's mad, because of course Ho's mad, so you can see some of the Ho's mad accounts here.
	People are like, what's the drama with Oxfam defining white supremacy?
	You're like, yeah, that's what racism is.
	It's a systemic power structure stemming back centuries.
	Hashtag critical race theory.
	Yep, so you are being endorsed by the critical race theorists here, and that's why you're awful.
	So if we go to the next one, you'll also have someone moaning.
	You do realise that the majority of the executives are white, so please just F off.
	It doesn't matter.
	Most of the critical race theorists are white.
	Most of the critical legal studies are white.
	Which is why I got criticized by the non-white ones saying, hang on, this critical race theory stuff is pretty white.
	And there's no defense away from that.
	They all just kind of like shoot each other because they don't know what to do.
	But if we go to the next one here, there's also Oxfam engaging in some vice signaling.
	So you can see them celebrating Pride Month here with a little Pride logo.
	Happy Pride Month.
	Oxfam shops are celebrating the wonderful Windows displays with many featured books by LGBTQIA plus writers.
	I mean, add another letter, why not?
	So, you can see them engaging in this stuff.
	I also love that they have the hashtag, love is love, the pedo phrase.
	Oh, is it?
	Well, that's what they say.
	I mean, love is love.
	The pedos will be like, yeah, I have love for this child, and it's just love, so you have to accept it.
	In the same way that the people engaging in, what is it called, when you have sex within family lineage?
	Incest?
	Yeah, incest.
	They'll be like, yeah, I love my brother, and love is love.
	Yeah, not a good argument.
	Not a good argument, that's all.
	That's why I hate when companies use this phrase.
	Love is love.
	It's funny, isn't it?
	When I grew up, Oxfam was just a place, a charity shop, you could go in, buy some old tat, and hopefully some of the money would go to Africa or India and help a starving village or something, help build a well or something.
	That's it.
	So it's odd now to find that it hates the West and straight people, or it's just really, really pro-gayness.
	Well, it's not gayness.
	It's this idea that there's LGBTQIA +, so-and-so-forth.
	Because Douglas Murray makes this distinction.
	Fair enough.
	Fair enough.
	Douglas Murray, the way he puts it, is gays versus queers.
	And Douglas Murray's a gay man.
	You can't really accuse him of homophobia in this instance.
	And he's like, yes, I am a gay man.
	I have my husband.
	We go out and we have drinks and we love each other and so-and-so-forth.
	We're perfectly normal people.
	And then there are the queers.
	And he just writes like three pages of just like, these people who have no personality other than their sexuality.
	I hate them.
	I can't stand them.
	It's really funny to read.
	It's just the idea that there's poverty in the world and we're going to try and get little kids some shoes or something.
	What that's got to do with sex at all, on any level.
	But there's the thing, the ideology is more important than reality.
	So funding, critical race theory...
	It's just disgusting to me.
	But again, I mean, this is the point people saying, well, why should we care about it in the UK? Because why wouldn't you?
	All the Yankee nonsense ends up coming here and taking over everything we have.
	So, something to think about.
	So, they also have the black and browns as separate in their flag, because of course they do.
	So if you go to the Oxfam America, you can see there.
	Black and brown queers, as they say, are separate from the rest of the flag.
	Separate but equal, I'm sure.
	I'm sure that's how that works.
	And then we have the next link here, which is, as you mentioned...
	Oxfam is not some cutie organisation that's never had a scandal.
	They've had some pretty awful scandals.
	So in this one, you can see them being accused.
	This isn't the only one either.
	If we go to the next one...
	Oxfam failed to act on reports its workers were raping girls as young as 12, damning report concludes by The Independent.
	Was this in Haiti as well?
	This was in the Democratic Republic of Congo, I believe.
	Oh, right, just a completely different sex crime operation run by Oxfam then.
	But that's the thing, with all this vice signalling, because that's what it is, it's a vice when they do all this stuff, there's a reason for it, as Douglas Murray points out.
	They've got skeletons in their closet and they're covering up.
	Or at least trying to atone in some way.
	Yeah, here's a bunch of woke nonsense.
	We believe in colloquial race theory, also don't mind that we're raping kids.
	I mean, why is it that all the woke organisations end up turning to be male feminists?
	That's a euphemism I'm going to use from now on.
	So if we go to the next one here, we do have some good news at least, which is because of the sex abuse claims, the UK government has halted all funding to Oxfam back in April.
	But they should never get it back.
	Even if all of that sex scandal stuff is proven to be not true, doubt it, but let's say it's proven to be not true, then they should not get it back for the promotion of white supremacy, because that's what they are doing when they encourage such things.
	I mean, in the Critical Race Theory book, they're explicitly saying, we want racial consciousness only for brown-skinned people, and for the white-skinned people, we want their consciousness to be entirely negative, but black-skinned people, they should be entirely positive, and therefore we want to destroy Martin Luther King's dream.
	That's them.
	That's them what they're saying.
	And Oxfam's like, yeah, we'll sign off on that.
	Then no government money.
	You deserve nothing.
	And I'm glad that, so far, it has seemed to have taken off.
	You know, you've got that conservative MP in there on the International Committee saying, get stuffed.
	We want nothing to do with the organization.
	Providing critical race theory.
	Great.
	Great on her.
	And I hope that whoever's in charge of the International Committee says, yeah, even if you are found not guilty in all this sex abuse stuff, you're getting nothing.
	And I won't be shopping at Oxfam, but I don't know about you guys, but...
	I never really have, but yeah, certainly won't now.
	It does just seem funny that the subversion that's gone on there, as I say, in my childhood Oxfam was just a good thing, surely it was a good thing to just try and alleviate some poverty in the third world to some degree, and now it's like, what, a force for sex crime and racism.
	Yeah, laundering money so you can engage in sex crime and critical race.
	Could it have been perverted and subverted anymore?
	I don't think so.
	Well, one way leads to the other, doesn't it?
	Coming a leftist, no standards.
	Let's go to the video comments.
	So as someone doesn't want to get through the long world building to get to the politics of this series, I've decided, similar to how Carl has broken down certain movie politics before, I'm going to try and break down the politics of every episode of Attack on Titan.
	This is a massive project and it's going to take time and energy for me to do this, including a lot of reading through political books.
	Wish me luck, but if anyone's interested, here's my YouTube channel and playlist.
	Odd YouTube channel name, but just go of it.
	It was made a while back.
	Please, just don't...
	Long story, just go of it.
	Yeah, so Harry...
	In round two of the Ragnarok tournament, we have Zeus, the father of the gods, and Adam, the father of humanity, as our champion to fight for us.
	Now, one of these two people is a better father than the other, certainly more compassionate, and behold it.
	The quote that ends all wars and unites all humanity for a single moment in one idea as they all pray for our father's victory, Adam.
	This is the most daddest quote and I will fight anyone who disagrees.
	Tell me this is not a daddest quote.
	So Harry was recommending that Carl did a politics review of Attack on Titan, and me and Carl being not weebs.
	Don't care about anime at all, sorry.
	I know a lot of some people do, and that's, you know, unto you, your religion, unto me, mine.
	I had Akira on VHS in the 90s, and that's about as far as it went, I'm afraid.
	But if you are a fan of Attack on Titan, go and check out Harry's channel, I guess, and enjoy the review of the politics.
	Otherwise, let's go to the next comment.
	So a couple of questions today.
	Question number one, what video editing software do you guys use?
	Question number two, I have recently written a poem that I think you guys might enjoy.
	Is it okay if I can send it in?
	And if it is, what email address should I use?
	And finally, do you guys think that Star Trek from 1960s up until 2005 had the correct and morally right way of viewing people and the world around them?
	I didn't quite catch the second question.
	What did he send?
	What email would he send his poem to?
	I didn't quite get it all either, but Vicky?
	Poems, I'm not sure.
	Don't worry about it.
	Probably tips at logishears.com is the best thing for stories.
	So Star Trek, though, I can say something on that.
	I've not, I didn't really ever watch, I watched a fair bit, but not much of The Next Generation, and then didn't watch anything like Voyager with Janeway and the Deep Space Nine, but I have watched loads of the original stuff with Spock.
	And Captain Kirk.
	I've watched loads of it.
	And, yeah, it's a bit dated.
	Like, he'll slap a woman about because she's being hysterical and stuff like that.
	But, yeah, it's just sort of the old-school morality.
	Seems fine to me.
	For the question on editing, I've used Sunny Vegas in Laplace.
	John always used Adobe stuff, so we started using that together when we joined with Carl.
	And we've since.
	I've used Camtasia as well because of its screen recording software, which is not bad, but...
	I'm not sure what I want to recommend any of them.
	Just find which one works for you if you're looking for video editing software.
	I use Premiere Pro.
	As for the Star Trek question, what's interesting, working next to Carl, he's at times spoken about the politics of Star Trek, and I've got like half an episode, let's say, of if he did an episode on it.
	And one of the things is it's so obviously a liberal utopia, not a communist utopia.
	We talk about the original Star Trek with William Shatner and stuff.
	I don't know which one.
	I think that's what he was talking about.
	I've seen Carl talk about Star Trek.
	I'm not a huge Star Trek fan, so don't take me on that.
	But the thing he'll say is, like, you know, this character owned a farm, this character owned a bar.
	You know, private property was commonplace, therefore it's obviously not socialist, because socialists wouldn't want that.
	And then he has the point where he's like, well, if you want socialism, it would have to be the Borg.
	Property-less, classless, monomite.
	That's what you're looking for.
	Whereas all the people who own property in the rest of the Federation with defined borders and a structural government with a hierarchy is not going to be socialism.
	I have heard that about the next generation, that it's some sort of utopian...
	Subtext going on there, but I don't know.
	Like I say, I haven't really watched much.
	But the original stuff with old Bill Shatner and stuff, that's good TV, I think.
	There's also the quote from one of the creators who's like, we've got our toes in the mud and our head in the clouds, not one or the other, because Karl defines fascism as having your toes in the mud entirely.
	Wait, no.
	Communism is having your toes in the mud entirely because you're materialist.
	Head in the clouds entirely would be the fascists because they're entire idealists.
	And humans aren't that.
	Liberals aren't that.
	We're both.
	So anyway, let's go for the next video.
	Yeah.
	Hello, fellow Lotus Eaters.
	So, you may be wondering why I'm currently sat on a deck chair looking at some soil and that's because we've just bought our first house.
	Nice.
	Congratulations.
	Tyler mentioned at the end of the Monday's podcast that he wishes he did a leaser back in 2015.
	Well, that's exactly what we've done about three or four years ago now and we managed to save up and buy our first house.
	So, I just wanted to...
	Put the word out there.
	Lisa's great.
	Get the Lisa.
	And also...
	Good for you, bro.
	...in response to Callum the other week about getting fed up with the keto memes.
	What's that?
	Well, you don't choose the memes, Callum.
	The memes choose you.
	I love that.
	Great for you getting the house.
	Great for you using the ELISA. I'd recommend that to anyone in the UK who's 8th and above.
	Get ELISA, put some money in it and you get a 25% return from the government.
	Totally worth it.
	Getting on the property ladder.
	Genuinely good for you.
	So, do that.
	Also, the memes.
	Yeah, I suppose you're right.
	I suppose you're right.
	Let's go for the next one.
	And in case you were wondering what this is, this graph is the last 20 videos published on YouTube by both the Lotus Eaters in orange and Navara Media in blue.
	If you look really carefully, you might see that all of the orange lines are bigger.
	Mmm!
	I'm just going to leave that in the air.
	Let's go for the next one.
	If ejaculation is murder, then so is menstruation.
	Okay.
	For people who don't know what that is, yesterday...
	I still don't know my opinion on this, I'll be honest.
	When is a...
	What do you call them?
	The cells that become a baby.
	The sperm and the egg.
	At what point is that a human?
	Is it when they've got it?
	The embryo, the fetus.
	What is it?
	And then it was like, well, if the sperm on its own is life, then therefore ejaculation is genocide.
	But...
	There's a Monty Python thing isn't it?
	Every sperm is sacred.
	That's what Catholics would think.
	Well then every egg is surely as well.
	Women are murderers.
	Let's go for the next one.
	Job has been sending out extremely woke emails out to everyone and what they've been doing is they I haven't seen any wholesome content in a while, so what I want you to do is, Cara, I want you to focus on this card.
	I want you to think of any card you want.
	Got it?
	Alright, just take it.
	Carl, I thought you were a dadist.
	This is not dadism here.
	But yeah, my name is Cedric Purcell.
	You can find me on YouTube, Instagram, and other social medias like that.
	Instagram, Cedric Purcell.
	I didn't quite catch your name.
	Cedric Purcell or something, wasn't it?
	Announcing that a little bit?
	Sorry, that audio wasn't great.
	But that was fantastic.
	The question about the emails, tips at lodiceers.com, I would be interested, especially in the argument of critical race theory is popular, therefore we're doing it, even though it's racist.
	Because if they accept that, then what?
	Segregation is popular, therefore we're keeping it.
	I mean, what an argument.
	But also, I'd like to see a company accept that, yes, we are a bunch of racists.
	Oh, you can get the first bit of government, can't you?
	Let's go for the next one.
	Oh, the tree of blood needs to be watered with the liberty of citizens, which is what we're trying to do with the COVID-19 lockdowns.
	You know, my friend G.G. Ping, you know, we talk a lot about where the COVID came from.
	Oh, God, I'm getting tired.
	Need time.
	You know, people of the United States always ask me, what kind of stimulant do I do?
	Now, I know my son Hunter does cocaine, but I snort something very different.
	Oh, that's some good stuff.
	Come on, man.
	That was fantastic.
	I love his impressions.
	Let's go for the next one.
	A while back, I stumbled on the image on the right.
	Which prompts the question, have I discovered evidence of Carl's secret, career as a men's beard model, or have I perhaps found his evil twin?
	has Carl perhaps been replaced by his evil French twin you know I keep getting sent images like that Like, on Twitter and whatnot, someone just keeps tagging me in photos, being like, hey, this looks like Carl, is it him?
	I'm like, no, of course not.
	I think Carl looks a bit like King George V. I don't know what that looks like.
	Looks a bit like Carl.
	They've got a similar beard.
	So like the dad, mum, the woman who thinks she's a man who went to Leicester Hospital who was then characterised as a man giving birth.
	That person, I remember seeing the...
	So people started tagging me onto that and saying it looks like Carl.
	I must admit a little bit.
	Was it again just mainly the beard?
	Mainly the beard.
	Let's go to the next one.
	G'day guys.
	I just wanted to share an epiphany I just had.
	You were talking the other day about the guys trying to come across the English Channel in the dinghies.
	And remember a couple of weeks ago I said that I think the current state of Islam is the end point of feminism.
	Well, what if these guys coming across in dinghies is the end point of MGTOW? Because they're all single men.
	Going their own way.
	Because they're nearly all single men on their own, more or less.
	I think it's probably just the end of British civilisation.
	Yeah, it's the end of a few different things, I think.
	We have a ton of videos today, that's why we're trying to blast through them.
	Oh yeah, yeah.
	Breaking news.
	Matt Hancock forced to resign after scandalous photos show him cheating on his wife with his secretary.
	In other news, noted French politician Giuseppe Honhon Baguette III booted from his ministry job after more scandalous photos show him cheating on his mistress with his wife.
	More at 11.
	Yeah, don't, don't.
	I feel like he could have pulled the, like, well, I have French lineage, therefore this is cultural appropriation, so no goodness.
	Let's go for the next one.
	The transition of my gender and race has left me scarred and deformed.
	But I assure you, my resolve has never been stronger.
	That's why the LGBT plus lobby shall be reorganized into the first intersectional empire for safe and secure identity.
	That was fantastic.
	I love the impressions.
	I also love, yesterday we were thinking about the Imperial Pride flag, as we called it, and we couldn't decide whether it should be Hell's March or some other song playing in the background.
	If anyone's got any footage of cops at an LGBT parade in formation, marching, please send me that, because I'd love to put Hell's March over the back and post that.
	Let's go for the next one.
	So, I am an independent insurance broker by trade, And there's actually a carrier that's really getting on with this whole movement.
	It's an insurance company called Transamerica.
	And to the fine chap who called me out and said, no, keto is not going to cure MS. Well, it's true.
	So a month and a week ago, I went full carnivore and I've had nothing but beef, salt and water.
	And I do have a coffee in the morning.
	But for over a month, a month plus, and I have had no symptoms of my multiple sclerosis and I can walk in 118 degree heat.
	So eat that.
	Wow.
	I'm a bit suspicious of the whole, like, just eat meat and it'll do.
	I mean, if it's worked for him, fantastic.
	I mean, you remember, what is it, Jordan Peterson's daughter?
	I was just going to say Peterson, yeah.
	There's another example of someone who had something.
	I don't remember what it was.
	I do wonder if we are just meant to eat meat.
	Well, I suppose if we are just, like, a land mammal in the wild, so to speak, you know, before civilisation...
	You would have eaten mostly meat, I would have thought.
	Maybe not.
	People that know their prehistory would probably go mad at that statement.
	So John says you can almost eat any meat, almost all plants will kill you.
	It's not a bad observation.
	Let's go for the next video.
	I found some great tidbits.
	Twitter's updated hateful conduct policy is good, but including a ban on speciesist language and its rules against hate speech would make it great.
	Rather than calling somebody a chicken, we can say coward.
	Instead of pig, we can say glutton or repulsive.
	In the place of rat, we can say snitch.
	Guess what I found on their discourses months before?
	How long do you think until farmers are forced to segregate the black sheep from the white sheep to protect them from the trauma of anti-black sheep speciesism?
	That's amazing.
	Speciesism.
	God.
	I mean, this is where they're going to go.
	This is where we're going to go.
	I know on Facebook, for example, you're already banned from insulting at all.
	So if someone calls you even just an animal name, if they call you a pig, for example, on Facebook, that's a breach of the terms of service.
	And if you report them, that comment gets deleted because they're that much of a nanny state organization.
	Let's go for the next one.
	Hey guys!
	So I was finally able to catch up with the videos of the Lotus Eaters on the podcast.
	I have been all over the place and busy so I haven't been able to.
	And I have to say that I don't mind being this Thomas Fagan to you guys to Steven Crowder.
	This is in regards to Callum's comments in my last message.
	I haven't finished my degree yet, but I do a lot of research outside of the laboratory.
	After we do experiments and stuff, we do have to do a lot of research.
	So if you guys ever need any translations from Spanish to English or you need any more digging into Spanish-speaking countries news, I am here to help.
	I wouldn't mind helping you guys.
	I know how hard it is to try and dig those news when you guys don't know Spanish.
	If you guys need anything, I'm here to help.
	I've just decided I really need to do a deep dive on Franco.
	Yeah, I need to do that real quick.
	I remember someone messaged me on Twitter saying they'd like to translate Arabic for me.
	If they could message me again, that would actually be useful as well.
	For example, the last thing we did about Spain was the migrants coming over and there was an Arabic cartoon and I couldn't find a translation.
	So another message in case they're watching.
	Let's go for the next one.
	Hi guys.
	Just two really important things.
	Callum, go look at my playlist that I left for you on my channel.
	It's kind of important.
	And also, Red Hot Chili Peppers.
	The way you contact Project Veritas is veritastips at protonmail.com.
	I have a screenshot of it up here on the screen somewhere, probably the entire screen.
	So, hope that helps.
	Bye.
	Okay.
	Awesome.
	Peppers was saying she's got some stuff in the military that's ultra-woke and wants to get it out there.
	Oh, okay.
	Okay.
	I thought we were talking about the band, Reto at Chili Peppers.
	Hey, guys.
	I love the direction this self-identification process is going in.
	I think more Londoners should be encouraged to identify as Korean.
	I think probably the best way of dealing with the knife gangs is, you know, to take them out from the rooftops.
	Disavow.
	Reef Koreans.
	There's a new show on Channel 3 or something here, and it's called Sexy Beasts, and they've taken people who are on a date and they've dressed them up in really good prosthetics that look like dolphins or bears or something.
	And they're like, oh, and they're going to date and it's about personality.
	But at the same time the Korean self-identification came out, so in my head I'm just like, South Park's going to come true.
	Someone's going to go on there and be like, I already identify as a dolphin, thank you very much.
	And therefore I want dolphin mates.
	What are you going to do?
	Talk against them?
	No argument.
	Let's go for the next one.
	Callum, when are you going to move to the US and start your own gun collection?
	That was always a dream I had as a kid, actually.
	Because I loved guns.
	If I lived in America and had a little bit of money, I would have a small collection of guns, I think.
	Small?
	Why?
	Yeah, alright, yeah.
	Why not go full demolition route?
	Yeah.
	The closest you can get here is basically realistic BBs if you're making films, which is one thing, but it's not the same.
	It's not the same.
	If I ever did decide to leave the UK, it probably would be for the US, and I would buy a ton of guns, and it would be so much fun.
	Do you want to read the comments for the final section or do you want me to do it?
	No.
	Okay.
	So on Right Wing Watch, Student of History says, if someone advocates those people are bad and should be censored and gets censored, my response, you started that particular fire, now lay in there and burn.
	P.S. Jared Holt sounds like a woman who notices a better looking woman nearby.
	Yeah, I mean, do not call it a grave.
	It is the future you chose.
	Sit down.
	Sit down and enjoy your eternity.
	So, Bilbo Baggins says, Pro tip, set your VPN server to the UAE and you'll never get any of those cringe YouTube adverts.
	Hmm.
	You get what he's saying there.
	United Arab Emirates?
	Yeah.
	You could send it to any Arab country, I think, in fact.
	Get those adverts.
	The adverts about pride season.
	Northamptonian Knight says, so loony leftists are hypocritical crybabies.
	Who knew?
	Oh yeah, everyone else.
	Also, have you guys seen the Karen's movie trailer?
	It was an absolute train wreck of this leftist woken nonsense.
	I did, so I don't know if you've seen it.
	Yeah, I saw Jeremy at the quartering talking about it, I think.
	So one of the things on my mind is I watched it and I was like, you know what?
	You could change everything in there.
	So it was about her being a Democrat and it would still work.
	Because of the way she's paternally treating the black people in the movie.
	So if someone wants to re-edit that, I'm sure that would wind them up to no end.
	I just lost my place again.
	I'm doing a car.
	When Kyle comes in, he uses the thing.
	It always messes up.
	And now the boomerism has come to me.
	Drew Doohand.
	Imagine hearing about murder and rape in Portland, and this one man reports on the people who committed this violence in Portland, and then they say, yeah, but he's a Twitter troll.
	Yeah.
	I mean, we're dealing with people who were killed.
	I mean, not to mention all the people who've been beaten up, had their property destroyed.
	IEDs thrown at the courthouse, for Christ's sake.
	Can I just say, I think Andy Ngo's got sort of balls of steel.
	I think he's like a real journalist, like an actual journalist with guts.
	I mean, you can read in his book, give it a purchase if you want to read it, in which he goes to Chaz, and he's just running into people that have given him death threats in the past, and they're armed.
	And they're in Chaz.
	So who's going to stop him?
	That's more balls than I've got, to be perfectly honest.
	I don't think I would do that.
	No, I wouldn't either.
	Well, I wouldn't do that.
	So, kudos to him.
	A student of history says Andy Noah's a fascist.
	No, he appears to be simply anti-socialist.
	As the Neither Left Nor Right podcast has explained that both fascism and socialism, that fascism is socialism, I say this claim has been debunked.
	Yeah, I agree.
	It's definitely been debunked.
	Andy Noah's not a leftist.
	He would never be a fascist.
	Yeah, that's how they view it.
	I mean, we've also seen them define free speech as their free speech to censor, so it makes perfect sense.
	I can't remember who it was, but I think it was Owen Jones?
	No, it was Nazarene Malik with Owen Jones, who is also a leftist advocate in the UK. And both of them agreed that, how do we show that the party, the left is the party of the free speech or the home of free speech?
	She was like, yeah, by censorship.
	Because it's our freedom to censor.
	De-platform people.
	Again, like I said earlier, knowing just enough words to say something divisive and perverse.
	No more than that.
	Just enough just to throw that out there.
	To be part of the division.
	Yeah.
	If the goal is just to shut down your enemies, just to shut them up, then yeah, just say whatever.
	It doesn't need to make sense.
	It doesn't need to map onto reality or anything.
	Just...
	So on the Galloway stuff, Alex Oogle says, Galloway is a prime example of why free speech is so necessary.
	His history, as Beau showed, denies his assertions.
	The only fortunate thing about him is that he's now committed to the Islamist cause for his voters that he'll act like a magnet for the iron-filling Muslim voters and split them off from the other parties.
	That might help defeat Labour.
	Yeah, but I must admit, I'm a little bit blackpilled on the Tory candidate.
	The fact that he said nothing about the teacher, and is just sitting there.
	I know it's the smart political thing to do, as he would argue.
	Is it the right thing to do, though?
	And he'll know it's not.
	He'll know that he should have said something.
	And even when he gets the seat, if he comes out and says something, that's nice.
	But you will have to live with the fact that you said nothing during the election for the rest of your life.
	It doesn't seem that there's many good options for the people in that constituency.
	Sort of the main three, it looks like the main three is Tory, Labour and Galloway.
	None of those options are good.
	None of those options will get your community out of the terrible messes.
	I don't know the Tory guy, what his views are, but that's part of the problem.
	Exactly.
	I've seen him going around and he's taking pictures with a biscuit company.
	And as if he's actually going to talk about the things that really matter.
	Like mass migration, demographic change, the nature of Islam.
	Of course, nothing like that will be dealt with by the Tory.
	So they've got no great options, really, have they?
	It's terrible.
	Angel Brain.
	Totally agree with Beau.
	I've always felt I could have a really fun pub lunch on a hazy Sunday with Galloway and never at any point agree with his stance on anything.
	I would love to have a conversation with him.
	I really would.
	Like, not a combative, trying to get one up, like even Owen Jones was doing that to him.
	Nearly everyone tries to Paxman him.
	I would love to have just a normal conversation in a pub.
	It's rare I recommend Owen Jones, but go to his channel and watch the interview between Galloway and him, because it's really interesting.
	You can see Galloway trying to explain a position, and he's even calling Jones out on the fact that he's a censorious socialist and the fact that he wanted Nigel Farage censored, for example.
	And Jones just comes off as like a commissar who doesn't understand Galloway, who's just like, yeah, but the party line!
	And Galloway's like, yes, but the party line is wrong, Owen.
	And Owen's like, yeah, but it's the party line!
	And it's like, for God's sakes.
	It's like talking to a brick wall.
	It's so clearly a man versus a boy, in my mind.
	There's just a full-grown adult who's got his own mind, wrong as it may be, versus, again, some sort of petulant child trying to score points against someone who's way out of his league with.
	I mean, that's the thing.
	I mean, it's why people, and I still have a soft spot for Galloway, because it's the interesting thing of, like, look, if the Labour front benches were made up of people like him, number one, they'd be an actual threat, because it's like, ah, we're competent people.
	And there's the other point of just, at least politics would be interesting.
	I mean, where are the good Labour MPs?
	Where are the up-and-coming ones?
	I mean, even with Keir Starmer potentially losing this election in battling Spain, which would then cause him to step down, the Corbynites have put a candidate up for who's to replace him.
	Can you guess who it is?
	Dawn Butler.
	The moron in chief.
	Like, there's just the absolute embarrassment.
	I mean, she's like, Diane Abbott number two.
	I mean, no one's going to reach Diane Abbott levels of incompetence.
	It's the thing of just like, you've got no one, and I have to feel for them, because it's just like, well, I feel for them on the basis that if I was in charge...
	You just want to pack it in, because there's no one good.
	It's people like Angela Rayner, isn't it?
	They're sort of there.
	It's people like that.
	It's a point, though.
	Again, there's like a zero gravitas there, isn't there?
	Yeah, George Galloway.
	I mean, as much of his views he may be to me, yeah, if he was Labour of the Labour Party, it'd be a much more interesting world.
	He's certainly a threat to Labour.
	Yeah.
	There's no doubt.
	So, Nitrocellulose Dormat says, an old housemate worked for Oxfam.
	Heard enough that I now see it as a big con job for people to get big salaries and be used as a big tax write-off.
	Apparently also to fund leftist nonsense such as critical race theory, which...
	I gotta be honest, I don't know why I wasn't expecting, but I wasn't expecting.
	Locust Eater said...
	If my company came out with anything about whiteness, I'd sue them so fast it'll break the sound barrier.
	You should.
	Alex Ogle says, A load of white women who are altruistic, said Bo, about the Oxfam staffers.
	Bo, those are the worst kind, especially if they don't have children and they see their role as mothering the world at large.
	Fair point, I suppose.
	I've never taken a survey of Oxfam's staff, so I'm not really on authority to say.
	But most of them just seem like, when I've gone in, I'm just pensioners.
	Probably the great generation, almost.
	Although most of them are probably dead at this point, because time's passed.
	Will the Impaler.
	I volunteered in an Oxfam bookshop for a bit when I was younger.
	I guess I am a confirmed racist now.
	Well, you've got to go for your re-education.
	The Ancient History Lawyer.
	Why do they want to take my white money?
	Yeah, take your money elsewhere.
	It's white money.
	You'd just be funding neocolonialism.
	I was going to say something along those lines.
	Nona to give.
	Wouldn't sending money to help overseas not be a form of white saviour complex?
	Yeah, I was speaking to Rory before, and he's like, well, to work at Oxfam, you've got to be a certain kind of racist anyway.
	And we burst out laughing, and even he said, like, I was taking the mickey.
	And then we started thinking about it.
	It's like, well...
	I mean, actually, any charity that's engaging in charity for a situation that's not an emergency...
	Kind of is, because take a famine or a natural disaster or something, right?
	Something you can go in and you can, you know, these people aren't going to help themselves, they need help now, and therefore it's the moral thing to do.
	But if you actually wanted to help a poor country that's just poor, that's just their problem, then you'd set up a business.
	You'd create opportunity.
	You'd increase the wealth of the nation.
	Charity isn't actually the thing to solve that there.
	So, I mean, technically not wrong, even if it was a meme.
	That's a fair point.
	Robbie Cooper said, oh sorry, I didn't finish that comment.
	Therefore, a form of white supremacy?
	Yes, it would appear that the only solution for Oxfam is to dissolve itself.
	Correct.
	Which is why, also with critical legal theory, the non-white critical legal studies people came along and said, hey, all the critical legal studies is too white.
	And the white critical legal theorists were like, ah, crap.
	Like, we don't have a comeback.
	Like, we're actually screwed.
	Therefore, it just dissolved and then the critical race theorists set up their own thing.
	So, a general...
	I don't know how to pronounce that, but...
	Yeah, the latter, I'm pretty sure.
	I'm pretty convinced.
	I mean, they got all the way up to Scotland.
	So, and Gaul, trans-Alpine Gaul, it's just strategically important.
	You need it if you want to go in to have Spanish campaigns, etc, etc.
	Yeah, I think if Caesar had lost that particular siege, it would have been a matter of time before they came back.
	I mean, you've got hundreds and hundreds of years of expansion beyond then.
	So, yeah, that's my opinion.
	Do you think it would have ended Julius Caesar's career as, you know, road to dictator?
	Quite possibly.
	I mean, the context of it is he had to keep imperium, he had to keep his generalship, because he was immune from prosecution whilst he was a general.
	So the second he had to go back to Rome as a civilian, he would have been prosecuted for corruption.
	That was one of the big reasons why he marched on Rome, or formed a triumvirate and things, is to prevent him from ever becoming a private citizen again, because he was going to be prosecuted almost certainly successfully for previous election fraud, election corruption in years gone by.
	So that's one of the reasons why he had to remain a general.
	So say he'd lost that battle but lived, I suppose that's the thing he's talking about, and had to go back to Rome with his tail between his legs and wouldn't have been able to continue to triumph or just be a dictator in his own right.
	That probably would have been the end of his career, I think, yeah.
	But who knows?
	But who knows?
	For people who don't know, Bo is the history guy.
	You know, he used to be History Bo on...
	I still am, History Bro.
	Check it out on YouTube.
	You do the Epochs with Carl, so that's the premium content on Lotacys.com.
	Yeah, I'm the resident history nerd.
	Yeah, so that's why I said it's a question for you.
	But otherwise, I think we're basically running out of time, so I'm going to end it here.
	But thank you for tuning in.
	Go and check out the content on Lotacys.com.
	We will be back tomorrow at 1 o'clock UK time.
	Carl will be back as well, in case you're wondering.
	And we'll see you then.
	Thank you and goodbye.
	Bye.

▲