All Episodes
Previous Next
July 16, 2021 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters
01:30:31
The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #177
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Eaters for the 16th of July 2021.
I'm John Baikal.
Hello!
And today we're going to be talking about how diversity is a scam, says a leftist, which wasn't expecting.
Also, that England is systemically racist, which was expecting from the leftists.
And that's the election audit, which we're not going to be able to put out as a clip, so it'll be a specialty only for the website and alternative tech.
Yeah, for anyone who's wondering why things have changed, we've had a minor technical glitch on the back end.
It's not of our making.
We can't explain it at the moment, unfortunately, but when we have the opportunity to, we will.
But anyway, so let's just carry on.
Yeah, let's get into it.
First thing I wanted to mention was the article Rory's put up, this is Premium, talking about the condemnation of England along racial lines was always going to happen, regardless of what it was.
Yeah, we'll actually be citing this in the England is Systemically Racist piece, because this is a really great piece by Rory.
I didn't know he'd turn out to be a fantastic writer when I hired him.
I just knew he'd be good at doing articles.
But this is a really great piece of analysis.
Strongly recommended.
Anyway, let's get into how diversity is a scam.
So a leftist has decided to write an article in which she says, Diversity Inc.
is a big scam.
Based.
Yeah, based.
I didn't expect that one.
Her solutions to the scam is to do racial discrimination, which is not really a solution, but whatever.
So this is the article in Time magazine.
Diversity has become booming business, so where are the results?
This is the question you've been pondering a long time, which is, if we go to the diversity department, you want all this money, what have you produced in the last 10 years?
Well, yeah, how do we hold someone accountable for not having actually produced the results?
And I love the way they've got this here.
We just want to sit at the table, we just want to sit at the table.
Okay, now we want to rearrange the table, because we're not happy with the table.
It's like, hmm, I get the feeling these demands aren't the end of the demands that are going to be made, are they?
No, nor does it have anything to do with procedure, as will be made apparent.
So in here she says, In 2003, MIT professor Thomas Cochran noted that companies were spending an estimated $8 billion a year on diversity efforts.
And that was in 2003.
Imagine what that is now.
But since Trump's election, and with the emergence of movements like Hashtag Me Too and Black Lives Matter, the industry has exploded.
The industry.
The industry of diversity.
Really is your Ethical Companies.
You should have shilled that now.
Booming business, yeah.
You should go ahead and check out the Ethical Companies podcast on losias.com.
Because this is, just to be clear, this is nothing new.
And the exact same thing happened with the guild system in medieval England promoting Christianity.
Massive amounts of members' money being given to the Christian church instead of being spent on the guild's purpose of making cloth or whatever the hell it was.
Yeah, so we can just essentially say religious activities, which is what we've come back around to now.
So the religious activities have obviously gotten worse.
So a survey in 2019 of 234 companies in the S&P 500 found that 63% of diversity professionals had been appointed or promoted to their roles during the past three years.
In March 2018, the job site Indeed reported that postings for diversity and inclusion professionals had risen 35% upon the previous two years.
So in the last two years especially, but I'm going to say in the last five would probably be the best estimate, is the massive explosion of the diversity industry.
Because that's what it is.
Oh, absolutely.
It's an industry.
And what does it produce?
How many factories does it take to produce all the goods, all the consumer goods, the diversity?
None.
It doesn't produce anything whatsoever.
Just talk.
Endless talk.
These are symbolic posts, aren't they?
Where people can preach radical left-wing ideas at companies.
Like a church.
You could say that a church can give you meaning or the truth and all that, and that's how these people see their job as well.
They see meaning in life by advancing equality and diversity.
What does that mean?
Prayers, by the sounds of it.
Because there's no solid metrics against which they can be judged, and no one's going to get fired for not doing their job.
Because there is no job.
The job is just to be a front person who says things.
Continually broadcast the message.
That's what it is.
So her complaint here, as a leftist, is that they're not getting the percentage of brown-skinned people and women in the positions that she desires.
In positions she doesn't desire, then she doesn't care, of course, because that's how this always works.
You know, why are there not too many female bricklayers?
Never a question that gets asked by feminists.
She says, Yeah, the whole thing is a catastrophic waste of money.
There is endless things they can do.
None of them produce anything other than patting themselves on the back going, good job lads.
Very diverse.
But while business targeting diversity is flourishing, diversity is not.
Ah, I can't believe this didn't work out.
It wasn't real diversity.
Real diversity's never been tried, you've got to understand, Callum.
That's literally her argument, actually.
So, people of colour who make up nearly 40% of the US population remain acutely underrepresented in most influential fields.
The un-influential fields she doesn't give a toss about.
From 2009 to 2018, the percentage of black law partners inched up from 1.7% to 1.8%.
Okay, but what are we going to do?
Like, what are you going to do?
Are you going to get someone to go out and conscript black people into law schools?
Yeah, we're going to force the black people into the law department.
At any means necessary, I guess.
From 1985 to 2016, the proportion of black men in management in US companies with 100 or more employees barely budged from 3% to 3.2%.
Again, what do you want to do?
Like, there is no barrier in the way in the hiring process.
We've criminalised all that.
And not only that, you've got affirmative action hiring policies that are deliberately trying to hire these people, and you can't get them.
Which is criminal action.
And yet, it just goes on.
And then you have your diversity schemes, as you point out, billions upon billions of dollars per year being spent.
And, uh...
Well, then what?
I mean, literally, as you say, you're going to have to take a bayonet and force these guys into the roles that you want, I guess.
Well...
Which is what South African...
Return to tradition.
South African government ended up doing it, actually, so...
Not impossible.
People of colour held 16% of Fortune 500 board seats in 2018.
A 2018 survey of the 15 largest public fashion and appeal companies...
Apparel.
Sorry, apparel companies found that non-whites held only 11% of board seats, while nearly three-quarters of the companies were CEOs were...
WHITE MEN! I love that it's just non-whites.
Just non-whites.
Any of them.
Any of them.
Non-whites.
Just gather them all together.
They're all basically the same.
I should say that I have no idea where Asians land on this because, of course, they were tact-feared out of the black and brown group into the white race a while back by the progressives.
So, as she says, non-whites, but what does that actually mean?
And also, where's the barrier?
Get the colour swatch out, I guess.
Yeah.
Italians, not white.
So, she continues.
A look at higher education, where, in the fall of 2017, 81% of full-time professors in degree-generating post-secondary schools were white, while just 3% were Hispanic and 4% were black.
I'm getting very much Hamza Yusuf vibes from this lady.
Yeah.
Yeah, I'm getting exactly those vibes.
CEOs, whites.
Professors, whites.
Okay.
What do you want?
I want them to be non-white.
Why?
Because I feel better about it.
Because I don't like whites, I guess.
Okay, zealots.
Get out.
I don't care about your weird extremism.
So, through the 1960s, saw the introduction of affirmative action policies.
Now, here comes her solution to this problem.
Intended to address the history of slavery following the centuries of discrimination against people of colour.
Yes, we will address discrimination against people of colour with discrimination against people of non-colour.
Because that's a solvable problem there.
Decades of legal challenges have undermined these measures.
Why?
What were they?
They were legal challenges on the basis of civil rights that you can't discriminate on the basis of race.
I love the fact that it came to California going, look, can we just repeal this anti-discrimination law?
Thankfully it didn't pass, but that's where they were going with it.
That's her agreeing with that point here.
So she says, and since 1978, for example, Regents of the University of California v.
Bake has prohibited institutions from using racial quotas or other remedies to address past discrimination.
You don't address past discrimination and fix that discrimination, as if that can be done because it's in the past, with new discrimination.
That doesn't make any sense.
Well, that's actually exactly what they think.
It is what they think.
It is what she's promoting as the solution to the problem of Diversity Inc.
Which, eh.
Because of this decision, it says Columbia University President Lee Bollinger, who, as president of the University of Michigan, was named in two lawsuits in which white students who'd been denied admission claimed reverse discrimination.
I hate the way they use the word reverse.
It's not reverse, it's just discrimination.
We're deprived of the context that gave it a sense of mission.
Every college leader is told, do not defer to history.
So, she says that we tried racial discrimination and got sued, us as the leftists here, and this chap here has been named in two lawsuits in which he or his institution discriminated against white students.
And the problem here is that the institution has backed down on that and we should be able to defer to history.
What he's saying there is we should be able to look at discrimination in the past and say, that's the solution applied to today.
Which is what's happening to the Asians at Harvard.
And they lost that case as well.
Yeah.
It was awful.
It's unbelievable.
I don't know how this keeps marching.
You would have thought anyone with a brain in a courtroom would have just been like, racist, get lost.
Well, it's just open.
And these guys are obviously, you know, very hardworking.
They've got great grades, but they can't come in because they're Asian and we've got too many Asians.
Sorry.
There was a funny case in which an Indian guy went to his admissions thing and he just shaved his head to look black and then claimed he was black in the admissions and got in.
Good for him, I guess.
Game the system.
That's how you gotta do it, Asians.
You gotta become black.
So, in recent years...
Good luck, Japanese.
Diversity has been touted as a feel-good exercise that includes everything from gender to sexual orientation to body size.
Yeah, that kind of sounds stupid, doesn't it?
Like, why are you claiming body size is something we should be celebrating, regardless of what size it is?
It's like your ideology is moronic, but she just papers over that.
But while we should be concerned about discrimination against any group...
Any?
Are these groups?
Are fat people really a group?
Also, how do you limit paedophiles from being included in those groups?
You don't, do you?
Because inclusion is total.
There is no limiting principle.
The term has become such a catch-all that we've lost focus of the original intention of anti-discrimination efforts.
I hate the double thing.
Anti-discrimination efforts.
What we need to do?
More discrimination.
Quote, there hasn't been enough pushback on the abstraction of diversity, the professor says from earlier.
It's like, both of you are advancing discrimination.
There's what you've just said, a paragraph up, that you need to discriminate against whites, Asians.
Well, I suppose there are also whites these days, aren't they?
I suppose Indians, also whites.
Oof.
Arabs, yeah?
Can I add them in too?
They're rich.
Oh, no, no, no.
I think that there is a legal classification in America that is white.
Oh, the Asians are in it.
Yeah, no, I think...
Yeah, no, Mexicans are in it.
Like, loads of people have essentially lobbied legally to be advanced into the category of white.
I don't know why they bother with that anymore.
I mean, God.
Speaking of news.
What's more, many whites now claim they are being disenfranchised.
Yeah, I wonder why that is.
Well, the lawsuits seem to imply it.
A 2017 NPR poll found that 55% of white Americans believe that white people are discriminated against.
They believe that there is discrimination against white people.
55%.
Okay?
Well, more tellingly, a lower percentage said they actually experienced discrimination.
You're not listening to yourself.
Like, 55% have said it exists, and you're like, yeah, but only like 5% have said that they've experienced it.
It doesn't...
Prove the point.
Yeah.
The other 45% are just unaware of this.
Like, that's your own words here.
Although the worsening racial climate appears to power the diversity industry...
It's almost as if that's the reason for the raising of racial tensions by you people every two minutes.
A number of studies suggest that these initiatives can actually make matters worse by triggering racial resentment.
No kidding.
Think of Google's engineer who was fired for writing a memo deriding the company's diversity efforts.
James Damore.
Hmm.
Although Google reportedly spends $114 million on diversity program in 2014, that company alone, $114 million.
Burn it.
That's all that's done there.
Because it's just, as you said with the guilds, given to the church.
So, the Church of Diversity, which does nothing.
I'm reasonably sure that if Google gave me $100 million, I could hire more black people for them.
I mean, I just don't think it'd be a very hard job.
They actually say they kind of failed in doing that.
So its diversity report this year from Google shows that blacks made up 3.3% of the workforce, held 2.1% of the tech jobs, and 2.6% of the leadership roles.
So even though they spent $114 million just in 2014, and then presumably made hundreds of millions in every other year, they can't even hire the black people.
Like, if you just gave that money to one guy to set up, I don't know, like a, just a factory that made cars or something, like, you'd be able to do better.
A hundred million dollars, and you couldn't get results?
Yeah.
And then there's a complaint at the end of this from a black filmmaker, and she's a member of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, and says that more attention must also be paid to what happens once people of colour are hired.
So, the real problem is when we get in, we don't want to be there.
I guess.
So what are they going to do?
Like, you know, we've hired a black person.
Yay!
Confetti.
Well, the Welsh government was going to give mentors, weren't they?
Oh yeah, black mentors to, yeah.
As in, we're going to bring in a white guy and have him be the mentor to the black hire.
No, no, I thought they were going to hire black guys to mentor the white people.
I know, other way around, diversity mentors.
I remember it was going to be like, oh, you could have a black teacher in there, and you'd hire a diversity mentor to lecture them on diversity, and it would look a bit weird.
But she says, there should be some brown faces when I'm pitching.
Until there's diversity at every level, I doubt filmmakers of colour will be on the same level playing field.
Which I don't get that statement at all.
She's saying, until there's enough faces in the room that have the same skin tone as me, people won't take me seriously?
Hang on, how does that not apply to anything else?
Because this is intersectional logic.
You've also been discriminated against on the fact that you're a woman, aren't you?
In which case there needs to be an equal number of women in the room.
Well, she will of course make that exact argument.
And then there's going to be the problem, I mean, this also applies to, presumably, her own university.
There needs to be the same number of graduates of her university, so then they can better represent her background, because what's the difference there on the argument?
And then the same thing essentially comes down to, until everyone in the room agrees with me, I don't feel like I'm being taken seriously.
That is what she's arguing, let's be honest.
So...
She says at the end here, just to finish off, in the end, racial diversity will not be ushered in by pledges, slogans, or SARS. It will be achieved only once white America is weaned off a prevailing narrative of racial preeminence, which can still be glimpsed at in historical narratives, films and literature, and is racially offensive iconography like blackface.
Oh yes, because there's so much blackface in Hollywood these days.
But also the idea that just because it exists, I don't know, presumably in a museum or just, as she says, in a novel, therefore it has to go because it's harming current America?
Well, have you read Huckleberry Finn, Callum?
Has she ever heard of the Cultural Revolution?
Probably not.
Because that's what she's asking for.
Yes.
Just take all of the old stuff, burn it, destroy it, because it's currently causing discrimination.
Lunatic.
Absolutely lunatic.
She says, the seeds of this corrosive ideology are planted early and a paradise shift will require courageous leadership.
Yes, change will require resources.
Courageous leadership.
That's a very interesting and flexible phrase.
Well, when she's promoting racial discrimination, I mean, it would be courageous, I guess.
Resources to resolve, but no amount of money will succeed alongside a willful negation of our shared humanity.
Not shared with the white members of the boardrooms, I suppose.
But anyway, this lady is obviously kind of nuts.
But I love how this is just published.
Like, yeah, the diversity industry is massive money.
That's what it really is.
Hmm.
What's funny is she actually, the reason she was called upon to write this is she wrote a book saying exactly this as well.
So if we go to the next link, this is the Amazon book she wrote in which, sorry, this is just talking about the fact that Amazon stole $10 million from its customers and employees by giving money to these organizations.
So wasting it on diversity inclusion instead of giving the savings to its customers, for example.
But the next one is the Amazon link for her book in which she talks about this, Diversity Inc., The Failed Promise of a Billion Dollar Business.
It's probably worth a read, to be honest.
But that's the funny thing.
Even leftists are noticing, hang on, we're getting given so much cash.
Where's it going?
It's inhuman, and yet we don't do anything.
All we do is just sit around and play pancake and say, hmm, race isn't bad, isn't it?
Yeah, that's the normal narrative.
Yeah.
No, no, I think it's fantastic.
Yeah.
So she talks about the fact that no goals are achieved in here.
And what was funny is I looked up the term Diversity Inc.
because I wanted to know, like, is it a meme?
Because it sounds like a meme.
Yeah.
Because it was a meme for her when she made this book, presumably.
It turns out it's a real company.
Really?
It's all they do.
Well, diversity.
Exactly what she's talking about.
Yeah.
They get paid loads of money to do nothing.
So let's go to the next link.
So Diversity Inc., a real company.
They say in here that Diversity Inc.
is the dominant diversity publication.
Oh, I love this.
Their mission is to bring education and clarity to the business benefits of diversity.
Wow, that doesn't sound like a money sink or anything, does it?
They're going to be doing this forever.
Forever.
When does it end?
Yeah, never.
When is diversity achieved?
Yeah, that's amazing.
It's not.
It's never ever.
Like, even if we get rid of all of the laws of racial discrimination, as the United States has done, doesn't matter.
That's not important.
Send this over to the UEFA England football team.
right percentage i mean that's the argument these days isn't it the percentage of black and brown people or women or whatever it is group they want to talk about today because the other group's been satisfied and therefore well diversity marches on and once that's achieved well then what well then it has to be updated every year with the new percentage doesn't it right so it's just a money sink
and uh they say in here executives from these companies the companies for which they harass for cash share their data because they want to compete for the best human capital in the marketplace that is increasingly non-male and increasingly non-white not by that much increasingly well What are you talking about?
The problem is it hasn't been increasing.
There was a point Pamela laid out is that you, your organisation and people like you are just on money sink.
You're a front for a scam.
You are paid unbelievable amounts of money as an industry and you achieve nothing.
What?
I mean, even with the left's ridiculous goals of equality of outcome, they're not interested in equal treatment, because that's been achieved.
They want the equality of outcome, which is why she's talking about percentages.
That is no change whatsoever.
Hundreds of millions of dollars, year after year, and still 3.2%.
Why can't this change?
I don't know.
I mean, 8 billion in 2003.
I mean, God knows how many billion per year in the 2010s, 2020s.
Can you even imagine, with Black Lives Matter and pride of being everywhere, how many hundreds of billions of dollars are being spent on this junk?
And not just in the United States.
The entire Anglosphere does this nonsense.
Mad.
I mean, it really is just amazing.
And some of the stuff they mention on here is also really funny, because, I mean, what do you expect?
So let's go to the next one, which they have there.
Propaganda.
Because that's what they are.
Oh, good, good, good recommendations.
So, I mean, the most notable ones, of course, being Robin DiAngelo and Ibram Kendi.
How to be an anti-racist and white fragility.
I mean, what do you expect?
Go check out our Conservatives' Guide to White Fragility on Notices.com if you'd like to know more about this nonsense.
And also the companies in which they say they've worked with.
So if we go to the next one, they have their list of 50 companies.
And here, just some of them they mentioned.
Hilton, MasterCard, Target.
That was money well wasted, wasn't it, lads?
Wells Fargo.
The Northam Grumman.
Wells Fargo twice for some reason.
Northup Grumman Corporation, the weapons company, and also the Boeing company, the weapons company.
General Motors, yeah, I can see why the bombs being dropped on the Arabs are now with rainbow diversity.
Yeah, I just feel nice that a leftist has finally seen through their own nonsense.
Well, it's a bad time.
Yeah, we're a bunch of crooks.
We just steal money and do nothing.
Our solution is, well, I mean, that didn't work, so let's just do racial discrimination, which should be rejected by anyone sensible.
God, yeah, that's embarrassing.
Yeah, let's just end that there.
That's amazing.
Anyway, let's move on, because England is systemically racist, according to left-wing activists who have presupposed that England is systemically racist, and now they're just looking around for evidence to prove their case.
There was a report published, a think tank published a report telling the UN that England was systemically racist.
I put this down to being a massive cope, to be honest.
Of course, as they say, the report, which follows abuse directed at black football players after the Euro 2020 final, It says the government risks breaking human rights laws.
Do you think the government is going to start putting in segregation laws against black people in England?
Um, how soon?
No, they have done it against White so far, so I don't know what's stopping them, really.
Well, we'll get into that, because that's not wrong, according to this report.
But, of course, the other way is imminent is the conclusion they came to here.
But what I love about this is it's being framed in the response to the racist abuse that was sent against the black footballers.
Now, you can see they're using a picture of the Rashford mural...
Mural for a guy who's still alive, that was defaced with certain swear words that were not racial.
And the Manchester police have actually said, yeah, this wasn't a racial attack.
No, it was because he missed.
It was because he missed.
That's why.
But anyway.
I also love seeing the Trotskist organisation stand up to racism in front of them.
They all took the knee as well.
At least, yeah, I was going to say, at least they're not kneeling.
Well, they did, didn't they?
Well, yeah, they did, yeah.
So anyway, England is systemically racist, according to a prominent government critic and think tank chief executive who called Boris Johnson a brat.
So, no bias here.
And just to be clear as well, the racist abuse that the England team faced, it was down to about 165 actual tweets that they could identify that were threatening.
I think five were in the UK. Five were in the UK, yeah.
So I can condemn these people.
Most of them were from elsewhere, although for some reason Twitter and Instagram wouldn't tell us where they were coming from.
Weird.
So, we've condemned the entire world, but now let's go on to see how England is racist.
So, a coalition of more than 100 civil society organizations and NGOs, coordinated by the race-equality think tank, the Runnymede Trust.
Oh, good.
It's the Runnymede Trust.
They're back again to tell us we're all bad.
And what annoys me the most about this?
There's only one thing that Runnymede is notable for.
Magna Carta?
Yes, the signing of the Magna Carta.
And so once again, the progressive ghouls have torn off the face of something you love, stuck it on their own, and say, look, you love me, don't you?
Don't you love the Magna Carta?
Don't you love England?
England's evil, you know.
England needs to change.
You can trust me because I'm wearing your face.
I hate it.
Anyway, they've warned that the government's approach to tackling racism risks breaking international human rights laws.
The idea that the Conservative government is going to start vindictively targeting ethnic minorities in the UK is ridiculous.
It's just so far outside of the bounds of a reasonable position to hold in the current political environment that you have to be desperate at this point.
I do disagree.
Oh, really?
The government's approach to tackling racism, I think, is a breach of international human rights laws.
Currently, it includes having government jobs for MI5 and the Civil Service and the BBC. We'll get to that very shortly, in fact, because you're wrong there.
You're wrong.
Oh, no, that's fine.
Yeah, that's fine.
International human rights is like...
Yeah, no, that's fine.
That's exactly it, right?
Yeah, exactly.
The report was submitted to the UN and found the government was in breach of a key treaty known as the ICERD Treaty, which is aimed at eradicating racial discrimination.
So if we just go on to the first Wikipedia link, because I had never heard this, so I had to do a bit of brushing up.
Wikipedia scholar that I am.
This is the draft declaration of the elimination on all forms of racial discrimination that was adopted by the General Assembly on the 20th of November 1963, but was finally ratified in 1965.
So quite an old treaty.
It comes out of the 60s view of an integrationist perspective on civil rights, which is one we still hold to this day.
Yeah, I was laughing at the fact that North Koreans still haven't signed.
They don't sign anything.
I imagine they have many minorities in North Korea.
I mean, Mongolia signed.
They probably have minorities.
Anyway, so Article 1 of the Convention describes racial discrimination as any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin that has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise on an equal footing of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other sphere of public life.
Conservatives are not going to do any of that.
They're never going to draft a law that says black people can't X. They're never going to draft a law that says Asian people can't Y. That's never going to happen.
Honestly, I will stake everything on that.
Never in my life are the Conservatives going to do that.
I'll eat my own arms off.
Yes.
But what's interesting is that distinctions can be made on the basis of citizenship, that is, between citizens and non-citizens, which are specifically excluded from this definition.
So if you've got a bunch of immigrants who have come over who are not citizens, you can discriminate against them because they're not citizens.
It's not racial discrimination.
But, and it also, specifically excluded from this, are positive discrimination policies and other measures taken to redress imbalances and promote equality.
I knew.
I told you.
Every time.
Every time.
You know, racial discrimination bad, unless we want to do it.
Free speech, unless we don't like it.
Well, it's just, unless it's against the majority.
And then it turns into a kind of aristocratic exercise.
It doesn't even, I think, the majority.
I mean, if white people become a minority in the United States, as they're on track to, for example, as everyone's celebrating, then what happens there?
The positive discrimination won't suddenly go in their favour, will it?
Well, no, I can't imagine that it will.
But anyway, so yeah, the definition does not distinguish between discrimination based on ethnicity and race, and they condemn and oblige parties to undertake to pursue by all appropriate means without delay a policy of eliminating racial discrimination in those forms.
Now, you would think that would be quite easy and that we had achieved this position at this point because we don't have any racial laws.
And discrimination on a racial basis is illegal.
Yeah.
Which is why those internships I'm talking about, or those jobs I'm talking about...
Are so offensive.
Yeah.
But anyway, so, returning to the article.
As a result, the report concluded that racism is systemic in England.
Oh, wow, did they?
Did they conclude that England is systemically racist?
Really, the race grifters who have decided that all of Western civilization is a white supremacist project have concluded that England is systemically racist.
Why?
Because it's English.
That's the reason.
It's because it's got a particular ethnic character.
Unbelievably, the nations of Europe have ethnic characters.
The French nation is remarkably French.
Germany's full of Germans.
Don't even get me started on Italy.
I mean, good grief.
And the Spanish.
Loads of Spaniards.
It's overflowing with the Portuguese.
It's ridiculous.
And yet, England is systemically racist for being an English country.
And they also warned that upcoming pieces of legislation were caused for particular alarm which would threaten the right of black and minority ethnic people.
They never specify which laws these are.
Now, I didn't have the time to go through and read the reports, so maybe the report they do.
But for some reason, in the Telegraph article, they don't tell us about it.
But of course, we have no racial laws that disadvantage minorities, only ones that disadvantage the majority, as you are so often annoyed about.
Of course, this is a response.
This whole thing is a response.
And when I say response, I mean cope.
Massive, massive cope because of Tony Sewell's race report.
Which found that actually, the system is not deliberately rigged against ethnic minorities in Britain, and actually seems to kind of be deliberately rigged against the white working class in Britain.
So, you know, they can get bent, I guess.
Quoting Dr.
Sewell here,"...for a range of outcomes, white working class children trail behind their peers in almost all ethnic minority groups, though the extent of these disparities vary by area." He said he's not denying racism, but railed against the people deploying the charge of institutional racism willy-nilly.
Education is the single most emphatic success story of the British ethnic minority experience it concluded.
I just can't imagine how you could look at a racist society like Antebellum South or something and be like, ah yes, look at the fine education those black children are getting under segregation and apartheid and slavery.
That's not what happens.
The people who are being oppressed don't get a good education.
I also love how the points here are completely antithetical to the left's ideology.
So you have the right's ideology, which is there should be a discrimination procedure.
That was achieved, except these days against white applicants for government jobs.
But the outcomes part, like even when the ethnic minority group is, in the outcomes, performing better than the majority group, they're still a racist society, so says the left.
What do they want?
They want nothing.
They are just there to complain.
Well, they want, we'll get on to what they want, the total decolonization of England.
A country that wasn't colonized.
So when they say decolonize, they mean de-anglicize England.
And that seems to me to be a form of cultural colonization.
You know, sorry.
But yeah, so, the commission notes that the average GCSE statement score for Indian, Bangladeshi, and African black pupils was above the white British average.
Conclusion, the English working class are basically being oppressed or underserved in their own country, is essentially what is drawn from that if you are a radical leftist, which is why they've produced this.
They're like, wait a minute, wait a minute, we're not oppressing the white working class.
Well, you know.
Your logic, mate.
Yeah, exactly.
Your logic.
I didn't say it.
I think they should just work hard and attain in school, but then I'm not the one who set up the structures to systematically disadvantage them, am I? Anyway, returning to the article, when the controversial report was published, the Runnymede Trust dismissed it as a script that had been written for No.
10 Downing Street.
Yeah, because they have a pre-supposed conclusion in mind.
The Runnymede Trust is a woke organisation.
They want to stigmatise our entire country and make us ashamed of it and hate it.
Well, that hasn't worked, and we'll get to that in a bit as well.
It's chief executive, Dr.
Halima Begum, you may remember her, described Boris as an entitled Bullingdon Club brat, which, I mean, is true, but is also demonstrating her massive bias.
More than a dozen Tory MPs wrote to the Charity Commission demanding an investigation into the Running Me Trust, good, claiming its criticisms of the report made in bad faith.
Self-evidently.
Sewell said that he would robustly defend it, et cetera, et cetera, of course.
My view is that the report stands as it is, and we will robustly defend its conclusions.
Good.
Don't back down, because you are right.
You have the data, you have the numbers, and they have cope.
Massive, massive cope.
And they're probably going to call you an Uncle Tom at some point as well.
They already did.
So, you know, just get ready for that.
I'm never going to call anyone an Uncle Tom, so there we go.
And, of course, this comes after Downing Street was forced to defend Priti Patel from the racial attacks of Tyrone Mings, a footballer, accusing her of stoking the fire of racism, which is really ironic.
But anyway...
So, enough about that.
In fact, no, sorry, there's one bit I want to add there.
So, the libertarians are at it again.
I regret to inform you.
Steve Baker, of course, said we need to start taking the knee because otherwise we risk misrepresenting our own heart for those who suffer injustice.
Proving libertarians can be useful idiots for socialists on occasion.
He's one of the MPs in a group called Conservatives Against Racism.
He's also a member of many of these kinds of groups.
Sorry, Conservatives Against Racism for Equality.
So, Conservatives for Communism.
Steve Baker is leading the charge.
They rallied to rethink their attitude ahead of the urgent question in the Commons on Wednesday on racial abuse on social media in the context of the Euro final.
Don't know what we're going to do about the Indonesians.
Indonesia, Russia, I think it was some Turkish as well.
Indian.
Indian, yeah.
Oh yeah, lots of anti-black tweets from India.
Arabia.
I mean, we're not going to send a gunship over there.
I mean, hand over the people who said naughty words on the internet or else.
This isn't imperialism, I swear.
Exactly, yeah.
Look, we're just controlling about a third of your country and, you know, come on.
But anyway, so this is...
British Empire.
Yeah, exactly.
Project.
Well, we'll get to the Pride in the Empire in a minute.
Anyway, this is CAF. Conservative approach to anti-racism, they call it.
Conservative approach to communism.
Anti-racism is a far-left term.
A far-left dog whistle that means communist.
Like, why are you not saying conservative approach to non-discrimination?
Yeah.
Or a conservative approach to freedom?
Yeah.
Yeah.
From discrimination.
Liberty.
Do you remember that?
No, don't we remember that.
So, Conservatives Against Racism for Equality.
Again, Conservatives for Equality.
I just find that amusing.
Conservatives for Communism.
They have no idea what they're doing.
Woo!
We're for Communism.
Britain's first centre-right organisation dedicated to race relations.
Why?
Why would the Conservatives ever use the term race relations?
Because that gives credence to the idea that there are some sort of, you know, distinct boundaries between the races that the left has drawn, and that you're actually going to be like, okay, well, if you set the chessboard up like this, I guess we'll play your game, you're going to lose that game.
They're going to win every time.
As people who aren't racist, we don't see those groups, remember?
No.
It's the whole point.
So how can there be a relation between the blacks and the whites if black and white don't mean anything?
Yeah, why not redraw these groups on a conservative line, say perhaps economic groups?
Or individual?
Or self-associated party groups, things like that.
But I think that if you're going to be like, look, there are people who are being systematically disadvantaged, like the white working class, and, you know, the Caribbean community, right?
Put them in the same economic bracket, and then you can actually start making, like, you know, free university for people earning less than X money a year.
You know, that's fine.
No one's going to argue with that.
No one's going to argue with that.
That benefits the people who need to be benefited And doesn't privilege one race over another.
I know, I know.
Retrograde.
Wealth.
Tangible.
Real.
Race.
What are you doing?
You're a conservative.
Highly retrograde to try and advance people regardless of the colour of their skin.
But anyway, yeah, so this is ridiculous, obviously.
Racism is not a matter of left and right.
It's a matter of right and wrong.
Oh, thank God.
Thank God someone's achieved wrong and that's being racist.
Thank God someone said it.
Otherwise we never would have come to this conclusion.
Also, race is a matter of left or right.
Race, like the idea of it and seeing the world through a racial lens is all left-wing.
The right don't do that.
They're meant to look through the world through an individual lens.
Yes.
I mean, there are other lenses, but the idea that racializing society isn't a political conception, sorry, yes it is.
But anyway, yeah, so Steve Baker's a member of this, and they seem like total cringe.
Anyway, returning to the article, Baker had come out and said, well look, we need to, we can't be associated with calls to defund the police, but we urgently need to challenge our attitude to people taking the knee.
No, Priti Patel was right.
Say, well look, they can take the knee, but I don't like that kind of gesture politics and people are free to boo it.
Priti Patel was completely right on that.
And it was quite good because it was obviously an off-the-cuff response as well from her.
So anyway, Boris also met with the social media firms and asked them to sort out the dark spaces of the internet, which is a really weird way of saying foreign parts.
And then West Mercy Police were arrested.
The Marcus Rashford tweeter, the 50-year-old man who said his Twitter account was hacked, but no, that really matters.
This is all just current events.
So the Running Me Trust-led report warned that the government's new approach to tackling racism and inequalities may in fact worsen the situation.
How?
home.
Defunds the far left.
But like, worse than the situation, the minorities are doing great.
I know.
Land of opportunity.
They're not important, though, are they?
I guess not.
It's the diversity industry that's important.
Well, that's it.
Essentially, the threat seems to come down to be a commie or else you're making things worse.
Like, if you're not funding us, you're a bad person.
Yes.
No, you are bad people.
I'm not going to fund you.
Yeah.
And then they start importing left-wing American narratives that the electoral integrity bill that would require voter ID at polling stations would marginalise...
That's right, those stupid untermensch who can't seem to figure out how to get an ID. Have they decided which group they're going to claim are the untermensch this week?
Because before it was transgender people.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
So three quarters of white people apparently hold a full driving license, compared to 38% of Asian people and 48% of black people.
So it's the Asians who are the intermensch now, according to the left.
This week?
This week, yep.
Because for some reason they've just chosen, well, a voter ID. That'll be how we figure out how they're inferior and can't get along in society.
What, they can't learn to drive?
I think they can.
It's not even that.
The voter ID bill, if anyone knows anything about it, you get a free one.
You just have to write to the council.
I didn't know that.
You don't even need a driving licence or a passport.
I didn't know that.
You can write to your local authority and they will give you a free ID. Oh, thank you very much.
Costs nothing.
But anyway, the government spokesman said that since the last ICERD report in 2015, it made significant progress.
That's a weird way of saying get lost.
I would have just told him to get bent.
But anyway.
So, yeah, just briefly we'll cover something on Rory's article.
This was inevitable.
Of course, the condemnation of England as being systemically racist.
Now, just before we go on, notice that the Running Mead report here is just transparently empty.
Like, Oh, but my voter ID, we're going to give them free IDs.
Well, then just...
Yeah, but brown people can't write letters.
Yeah, exactly.
That's what they're going to have to go next, isn't it?
You know, like brown people are literally just incapable of doing anything.
They can't walk to the centre.
No one thinks that.
Like, I remember seeing the Emmy Horowitz bit where he just walked around like black neighbours in America and going, hi, have you got ID? And they're like, yeah.
It's like, do you know how to get ID? He's like, yeah, the building's around the corner.
Why are you asking me this?
Well, the white liberals in California think you can't.
What?
Because you're black.
What?
I was like, where are they?
Why would they say that about me?
Well, they have a really low opinion of you, frankly.
But yeah, as Rory points out correctly, this was inevitable.
They were going to say this regardless, and of course they did.
And I really like the way he's framed this, right?
Ultimately, I mean, just to be clear, right, the FAIR network who monitored and campaigned against racism in football found that the abuse was global, from accounts from Indonesia to Argentina, leveling racism and homophobia at the players, with the biggest number of discriminated posts appearing in French and Spanish.
North FC's classic knowledge of foreign languages.
The mother tug of the North.
Yeah, exactly.
Spanish and French.
But anyway, he says here, and I like this, right?
Ultimately, the intelligentsia cabal's condemnation of England would have followed the Euro result, whatever the outcome.
A victory would have heralded the same virtue signallers who feel it appropriate to declare that the national team would have been doomed without its presence of eight players of non-English ancestry while rushing to crown Rashford, Sancho and Saka as kings, whose presence on the pitch is worthy of idolization.
This cabal does not want unity.
They view this green and pleasant land in all its scope as nothing more than an archaic promulgator of a racist evil that must be sanitized.
And that is exactly right." As far as they're concerned, everything about England and Englishness is white, which is totally inaccurate.
It's not French, it's not German, it's not Russian, it's not...
There are no other white people already.
It's not any foreign kind of white.
It's English, specifically.
And they view it entirely as bad.
Which is why they want to decolonize everything.
And this is just, you know, search with decolonize Oxford, and you'll find things like this.
Decolonizing events at Oxford University.
Decolonizing the curriculum.
What does that mean?
How could you decolonize a country that wasn't colonized?
Well, you would have to be specifically anti-Anglo for that to be the case.
We call it Torch Seminar.
Torch Seminar Room.
Because all of this is just taking a torch to the past.
It pretty much is.
And it's deliberately undermining the achievements of British civilization.
The workshop is the second of a series of state-of-the-art events that will explore ways to confront exclusion through decolonizing the curriculum.
And learn from the range of experiences of scholars, students, and other stakeholders in the university.
That's right.
What I want to do is hear what the students have to think.
That's what you do when you go to a university.
You go, right, students, teach us.
What?
What are you, stupid?
They don't know anything.
That's why they're there.
That's why they're paying you.
Yeah, exactly.
They're literally paying you to be taught.
We don't need to hear from them.
They don't know anything.
They're stupid young people.
No offense, stupid young people, but I was stupid in young months, and by the time you get to my age, you realize, God, I was really dumb.
Really dumb.
Sorry, you just don't know anything when you're 18, 19.
You're just too young.
It's not your fault.
Anyway, there'll be a mixture of discussions, blah, blah, blah, blah.
And again, the person, Dr.
Malachi McIntosh, who heads our migration story at the Roddy Mead Trust and Common Ground Movement that sets out to examine Oxford's colonial past in the context of its present-day inequalities.
Running me trust always getting up in stuff, aren't they?
Really interesting.
So anyway, let's move on to decolonizing, maths and music.
Maths, music.
Got to become less white European.
I like the way they say white European when they mean English.
They're going to claim we're going to have to stop using Arabic numerals.
Because that's racism.
Well, I mean, hopefully it means we can stop teaching German music.
It also means we'll have to return to Latin numbers to do mathematics.
I'll get my loot.
In documents seen by The Telegraph, an academic from the University of Oxford proposed a lighter focus on Euro-American elite music arising from international Black Lives Matter demonstrations.
So because of Black Lives Matter, they're like, yeah, maybe we shouldn't, in, you know, Oxford, one of England's most famous and old universities, teach English stuff?
Yeah.
That seems inappropriate, doesn't it?
Because some American communists who support the Cuban Communist Party have a thought.
Yeah.
Oxford needs to abandon England from its own curriculum.
They said they want to address the white hegemony in Oxford's musical syllabus and better represent other forms of music.
Now...
In fact, possible changes to undergraduate courses include reducing the focus on canonic classical composers, like Mozart and Beethoven, right, getting rid of the Germans, based, in a proposed move away from the white European music from the slave period.
Hang on, what?
Is that how we categorise the 18th and 19th centuries?
When's not a slave period before the British turn up, then?
Well, I mean, all of history is the slave period, up until the British decided, no, that's enough of that.
But I find that really interesting, right?
Because what they're going to do is they want to question the music curriculum's complicity in white supremacy, and proposed a like-to-focus-on-western musical notation and...
Described in the documents as, quote, colonialist representation system.
Oh, boy.
Also, they're arguing that mathematics is subjective, which is novel.
But what I find...
Polish folk music, they're just like, I just want to sing.
What are you talking about America?
What is that?
Just think about this, right?
Because this is a deeply imperialistic worldview, right?
No, you can't have things that are English being particular to England, because that means that it's excluding things around the world.
And in fact, what you need to do is go around the world, grab those things and bring them back to Oxford, kind of British museum style, where it's like, no, no, no, all of your stuff is ours now.
We, the colonialists...
Unless it's white, though.
Well, sure.
I mean, we're not going to take the French and German stuff.
But, like, it's a very colonial mindset.
It's like, we're going to go to Africa, take all their stuff, and give it to the kids in Oxford.
This is decolonizing.
Yeah, this is decolonizing.
Exactly.
It's very much...
Like, it still assumes all of the things that the Empire assumed, frankly.
But also playing the point of like, we don't want to be racist, therefore Polish music not valid because they're white, because slaves in America?
Because slave era.
It's like the Poles in the 1700s.
I don't know what America is.
What are you talking about?
Well, they had a big empire in the 1700s.
Yeah, but not in America.
Sure.
No, not in America.
In Eastern Europe.
When in the 1700s did that collapse?
I think it was the beginning of the 18th century.
So anyway...
Inches and miles are tied to empire, apparently.
The very nature of the measurements we use are imperial.
I mean, we do call them the imperial metrics.
Oxford, of course, is like, oh god, the word imperial has been mentioned.
Are they going to make the claim that, like, yeah, the measurement of stone and foot that's based on a slave?
I don't know, but, like, what are we going to do, measuring burgers?
That's American imperialism, isn't it?
I'm going to do French imperialism and be like, yeah, metric.
Well, that's exactly right.
As if the French aren't imperial power.
But how do African tribes measure things, if not in stones?
I don't know.
If not in feet.
I don't know.
You just have your own units, which is where the Imperial measurements come from.
It's a growth of the units we use in England.
Return to Stadia.
Anyway, Oxford is going to remove these, and this got mocked by Sky News Australia, based.
But I've got to say, though, Sky News Australia, you've got to up your game here and understand why they're doing it.
Because they're doing it, of course, because this is prestigious towards England, and that's something they hate.
The history of modern measurement is being decolonised as part of the drive to decolonise the measurements, such as the pound and the mile, which have been accused of being tied deeply to the idea of empire.
We had sterling before the empire.
We also had miles before the empire.
Other nations have had miles.
There's a Roman mile.
We didn't invent the concept of the mile.
That's why I hate Yankee leftists.
Like, history just begins in the 1700s.
Nothing before it happened.
But Alan Jones of Sky News Australia, I like the take it, though.
I note this absurd story emerging from Oxford University.
They're going to teach students that imperial measurements, including the mile, inch, yard, pound, and ounce, are, quote, deeply tied to the idea of empire.
The great Oxford University is going to decolonize these imperial measurements and introduce a new curriculum to teach the history of modern measurement.
Why can't there just be a class?
Why wouldn't you have that as a class?
He added, this is everywhere, this stuff.
There is a new vice chancellor, Louise Richardson, who wants to decolonize the teaching at Oxford, whatever that means.
It means de-Anglicize.
It means anything that's connected to England, Britain, or the Empire needs to go.
It's oppressive, apparently.
And an Oxford University spokesman said, and this is why I'm saying you need to up your game.
You need to be able to say that explicitly because that's what they're doing.
They only target things that are English, that are native to this country.
They never say, right, we need to decolonize the French parts of it or the Caribbean parts of it or anything like that.
They never say anything like that.
It's always the English parts.
A University of Oxford spokesman said, the university supports diversifying STEM curriculum project and is looking at how curriculum might change to acknowledge questions of diversity and colonialism.
Great, decolonized STEM. You know how that's going to go.
Looking forward to finding out how the shaman calls the lightning.
Good news, though, is only a fifth of English universities are decolonising.
Only.
Only.
This is an article from last year.
Only 20% are buying into the pseudoscience.
Well, it's not even pseudoscience.
It's like pseudo-history.
But only a fifth of UK universities have committed to reforming their curriculum to confront the harmful legacy of colonialism the Guardian has found.
I guess they were weeping into their oppression.
But at least we've got the list of universities you should never attend.
Yeah.
From 128 universities, only 24 said they were committed to decolonizing the curriculum.
Of those, 11 were committed to reform across the whole institution and with most efforts confined to a few departments or just one or a handful of academics and students.
Yes, who should probably be told to get a proper job.
Yeah.
When I was at university, we had this.
Like, a bunch of students were arguing for decolonising the curriculum.
One of the demands was we needed queer theory applied to all sections and all degrees.
And I was sat there doing my physics degree, like, where is the queer theory coming in in this?
More importantly, why would we colonise England with French thought?
Because that's what that is.
French thought created by a bunch of pedos, incidentally.
Yeah, Derrida, de Beauvoir, a bunch of others, they all signed the letter.
A bunch of them have been accused of being actual rapists of children as well.
But, you know, colonize English thought with that for some reason.
But anyway, it doesn't matter because at least the Brits are still on the side of, yeah, actually the British Empire was a good thing.
Which is nice.
This is one survey from 2014, where 59% said the British Empire was something to be proud of, and only 19% said they were ashamed of it, and 23% said they didn't know.
Younger people least likely to feel pride because, of course, the juggernaut of the media saying British Empire bad, British Empire bad, had only just begun in 2014.
And so most people are just like, yeah, it seems to have been all right.
Seems to have made the modern world, seems to have ended slavery, seems to have produced law and order and property rights, which is good for everybody, so why wouldn't we be proud of that?
And of course, the propaganda mill has carried on, but they didn't actually get much in the way of results.
By 2020, so only still in 2020, 19% thought the empire was something to be ashamed of.
So that sort of 20% slice of the public, which is like, yeah, oh, we're so guilty, so guilty.
They didn't change their minds.
But only now 32% say it's something to be proud of, and 37% say neither proud nor ashamed.
So that's disappointing.
No, that 37% message, you should be proud of the British Empire.
It was a big competition between all of the nations of the world a few hundred years ago, and we won.
And that's why it's not a big competition between all the nations of the world now, even though the American hegemony is falling apart, so it probably will return to that in the future.
And then they'll look back in 100 years going, wow, the British Empire really was a good thing.
Yeah.
If we didn't do it, the French would have, and their colonies suck compared to ours.
Yes.
As do everyone else.
God, don't even look at the Spanish colonies.
Anyway.
Should we get into the election?
Yeah.
So we're going to have to preface this with a little bit, aren't we?
Well, yeah.
So for people watching on YouTube in the future, after we've clipped this and put this up, you're going to have to go to lotusseasons.com if you would like to watch this segment because YouTube has very stringent editorial guidelines that we're not sure we're allowed to talk about this subject.
Pretty sure.
Even though this subject is just a compilation of the factual evidence that has come out from the audits into the elections.
That piece of evidence which you can find on mainstream media cannot be said on YouTube and therefore...
And so rather than risk the ire of YouTube's sensors, we'll just have to put this clip up and say, well, come and look at it on lotuses.com.
You'll find a link in the description so you can watch the full podcast.
Or alt-tech.
Or you can go on alt-tech.
And to be honest with you, there are a bunch of other Silicon Valley sites that we can actually talk about this on, just not YouTube, because for some reason they're particularly bothered about the audits that are going on.
But anyway, so that's something you'll have to do.
Without further ado.
So...
You know Brad Raffensperger?
I do know Brad Raffensperger.
He has something to say.
Oh, does he?
Yeah.
So he says in here...
Is it, I'm sorry, Mr.
Trump?
No.
I was full of it, Mr.
Trump.
Fulton County's continued failures have gone on long enough with no accountability.
Okay.
Who are they accountable to?
Rick Barron and Ralph Jones, Fulton's registered chief, must be fired and removed from Fulton's elections leadership immediately.
Fulton voters and the people of Georgia deserve better.
Oh.
What?
There wasn't anything wrong?
I like the fact that Scott Presler's just underneath going, there's no digging you out of this one.
Because Brad Raffensburg is very much anti-Trump.
Yeah.
Highly anti-Trump.
And if I was going to suggest there might be a Republican who'd team up with the Democrats to get rid of Trump, well, he'd be on that list.
So there's the next tweet as well, when she's continuing to speak here, in which he says, Fulton election issues are decades in the making.
Last year you said there was nothing wrong.
Yeah, really.
That was exactly the opposite of what you were saying.
I have been calling on Fulton to better serve their voters since I took office.
But are you?
Because if I recall correctly, wasn't he the guy who brought in the election machines?
Yeah.
And the Democrats in the state were like, don't do that.
That could cause voter fraud.
And then, after the election, they didn't say a word.
Really makes you think.
Georgia voters in Fulton County deserve better.
Noggins are a jog in here, I tell you.
So what's the story he links to here?
So let's go to the story.
So this is they call reporting.
Raffensperger warns Georgia County to clean their own house after double-counting dozens of 2020 ballots before recount.
But I thought everything was fine.
I thought there was literally nothing to see.
This is the problem.
This is fundamentally the problem here.
You could have taken, if you wanted to say, and I find sympathy with this position, which is to say that I don't think there was enough to overthrow in the election, or at least we don't have that evidence, but, you know, come on, yeah, we can investigate it.
The opposition candidate has a right to ask for an investigation.
We must be reasonable.
No one did that on the left.
No one did it in his office, Mr.
Raffertsburgers.
They were just like, no, election, perfect.
Nothing went wrong.
Every ballot, a golden ticket.
Best election.
Ridiculous.
So, it says in here that Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger lambasted Fulton County's election mismanagement in a statement to the Daily Callers News Foundation Wednesday after it reported that nearly 200 ballots were initially scanned twice before being corrected in the recount.
The recount that they've done recently, because they've done recounts in the past and didn't discover this.
Oh yeah, no, they said no, it's exactly the same.
Exactly the same.
We did a recount four times, they said, and it was the same four times.
Which implies they didn't do it and just lied to everyone.
I don't know what else to say.
Horrible.
So, if you don't remember this guy, if we go to the next link, this is the BBC reporting at the time, that Raffensperger was like, ah, Trump deranged.
Calls Trump just plain wrong after election call, in which Trump called him up and said, come on, there's got to be voter fraud.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, I remember the call.
And this chap here, I remember him doing a video, which sounded like just Democrat Party propaganda, saying, no, Trump bad, Trump bad, everything perfect here, go away.
It's like, that's not rational or reasonable.
Even if you were centre-left or something, you'd be like, look, there's not perfect.
Like, go and find the few hundred or whatever that are wrong and we can say Joe Biden still won because he got 10,000 votes and that few hundred wouldn't change it.
But no one did that.
And moreover, it just looked like they were lying.
It looked like they had something to hide.
Why the insecurity about the whole thing?
Why not just say, it's only a few hundred votes, let them do their checks, that's fine, and so on and so forth.
Why won't we be transparent about this?
Yeah, so there's also claims that the stacks, which are being recorded, so the way this works, of course, you get a bunch of votes, calm, and then you rate on the stack, so many for Biden, so many for Trump, so many for Libertarian, whoever that is, and then there you go, done, right?
There are a whole bunch that were 100 for Biden, so just 100% for Biden, and And then when you went through the staff and the audit, as these people have done, you see this stack here?
100% Joseph R. Biden.
Nothing for anyone else.
Amazing.
That's definitely not how it goes in North Korea.
Because you normally get like 99 for...
You actually do.
There are two parties that do get some...
So it's actually doing better than North Korea with that particular one.
And yeah, when they go through the data, they can see that, oh no, like 23 of those ballots were for Trump.
And then it's not just one, there are multiple that they show.
And this is the other problem here, that they've got a bunch of ballots that have been clearly scanned twice, because they've got the same mistakes.
Like someone's filled it in and done a little squiggle, and the squiggle is the same on the bunch of them, and also the handwriting, and also the mistakes.
Really?
So they were multiplying the number of ballots on the system by scanning them multiple times.
And then there are batches which are incorrectly labelled.
Now, you can say that, well, this isn't enough to slip it or something like that, but that's the problem with the goddamn narrative that everything's perfect and why you shouldn't do it.
So let's go to Tucker Carlson who explains this better than I can on the first clip.
Here's what the audit found, quote, seven falsified audit tally sheets containing fabricated vote totals.
For example, a batch containing 59 actual ballot images for Joe Biden and 42 for Donald Trump was reported as 100 for Biden and zero for Trump.
The seven batches of ballot images with 554 votes for Joe Biden, 140 votes for Donald Trump, and 11 votes for Joe Jorgensen had tally sheets in the audit falsified to show 850 votes for Biden, zero votes for Trump, and zero votes for Jorgensen.
Wait, did you just follow that?
How is that not flat-out criminal fraud?
We'd love to know because it certainly sounds like flat-out criminal fraud.
Good boy Tucker.
Hammer it.
This is not, you know, the Kraken is going to come out.
Someone's saying that I've got evidence.
No, this is factual now.
It's been done.
They've got the printed ballots, the screenshots of them, and said, look, this is a Trump vote.
Why is it in a pile that says 100% Biden?
And also there's a bunch of these.
And for a whole bunch of these stacks, this has happened.
And also here's several hundred, which are clearly just photocopied several times.
And they're all for Biden, what's going on here?
So that's fact now.
Hmm.
Okay, stuff should have been investigated, and therefore nationwide, you should probably look into this sort of thing. - Wow. - Anyway.
So also outside of Fulton County, 'cause that's just one county in Georgia.
So Trump has issued a statement on this whole situation, I've just cut it down for the sake of time, when she says that the news that's coming out of Georgia is beyond incredible.
The hand recount in Fulton County was a total fraud.
They stuffed the ballot box and got caught.
This means that Brad Raffensperger certified the 2020 presidential election scam despite it being, quote, riddled with massive errors and provable fraud.
How's he wrong?
We have the ballots now.
You can say that it's not enough to flip the election.
You can say it's probably just a few mistakes or something like that.
In that one county, it's probably not on its own enough to flip the election.
You can argue those things, but you cannot argue election perfect, which is what the current standards are for the entire nation, which is you're not allowed to speak about this on social media, for example.
Why?
Why?
What's the problem?
Why do you want to shut it down that much?
If it's just a few hundred votes.
If it's just, okay, now we can prove this.
They don't want you unfortifying the election, do they?
But you could argue, I went through the data of Fulton County and looking at the trends there.
So 2008, it's 67% Democrat.
2012, 64% Democrat.
2016, 69% Democrat.
2020, 72% Democrat.
So it goes up a bit.
And you get the fact that Trump got an extra 20,000 votes in that county.
Biden got 83,000.
And you can see, I mean, this could be reasonable.
You could argue, no, he's just a swing in that area.
People liked Biden for no reason, but they did.
And that would be the case.
But that's not what happened, and it's not as what the current standard is.
If we go to the next link, this is the YouTube reporting at the time.
Sorry, the media reporting at the time.
And this, as you can see with the downvotes, a lot of people have gone back to this clip.
You can see a lot of comments from today being like, no problems, huh?
Because they have a reporter in Fulton County in this area where the...
Fraud?
Mistakes?
I don't know what this is at the right time here.
Took place.
And they're like, yeah, we know nothing happened because we were there.
It's like, okay, months later we've got...
Now we're going through the checks and it turns out you're full of it.
What now?
Where's the accountability there?
That's what's been happening in Georgia.
Anyway, we'll have to run over because this seems like important stuff.
Arizona, of course, are doing their audit, and, well, they found lots of discrepancies too.
As Daily Signal reports, in Arizona's final official results, Joe Biden got 1.67 million votes, or 49.4%, and Trump got 1.66 million votes, or 49.1%, so less than a half a percentage point between them, so this matters.
Nearly 4,000 Maricopa County voters in the presidential election registered after the court ordered deadline of October the 15th.
So how did they vote?
According to Cyber Ninjas, which is the company that's looking into this, that's doing the audit, CEO Doug Logan, head of the company, the audit found that 18,000 voters who voted in November were removed from the voter rolls after the election.
Weird.
We voted, then we get removed.
Weird.
They also found 74,243 mail-in ballots, quote, where there was no clear record of them being sent.
74,000.
74,000.
That do not appear to have actually arrived in the mail.
They were not sent by the people in charge of the elections, and yet they came back.
Yes.
That makes me think of Birmingham.
Yes.
This makes me think of 4am ballot dumps.
He says, I think when we've got some 74,000 questionable ballots, it merits knocking on the door and validating some of the information.
But the Biden Justice Department previously warned Arizona officials against doing door-to-door canvassing of voters, as in checking, did you send this ballot?
And suggesting it could be considered voter intimidation.
Didn't you just say we're going to kick down your door and forcibly vaccinate you?
But don't go around and ask, excuse me, is this your ballot?
Yeah, it is great.
Thanks very much.
You could just say, how many did you send?
You couldn't make it look like you're covering this up better if you just came out and said we're covering this up.
It could not be more obvious.
It's amazing.
Absolutely amazing.
And so anyway, carrying on, they don't know what the numbers are even supposed to be.
Huh?
The ballots.
They don't match and they don't know what they're supposed to be.
So the Arizona State Senate President Karen Fan said that the number of 2020 general election ballots don't match the ballot totals documented by Maricopa County.
But she also says she doesn't know how wide the discrepancy is because they haven't released a number yet.
If you will, however, we do know that those numbers don't match with Maricopa County at this point.
So when asked how far off the counts are, she's like, I don't know.
They haven't told me the number.
So, there have been numerous delays, and so the results of the audit are expected at the end of July, if not August, but they don't know because they're not telling them how many ballots they have.
They've got 74,000 that weren't mailed, and they don't know what the discrepancy is.
It's like, well, what's going on?
And so, moving on, members of the auditing team contracted by the Senate president, which includes Cyber Ninjas and another cybersecurity group called Cypher, have been asking for the information and the systems and ballot information from Maricopa County, and they're not getting it.
Isn't that weird?
Can we know how many you've got?
No.
Why not?
Because you're not allowed?
Can we have a look?
No.
We're doing the election audit, don't care.
They've been denied access by the county, which includes Phoenix, and also mentions the need to the door-to-door canvassing.
But they say, if we don't get these numbers, it'll be an incomplete report, it'll be an incomplete audit, and that's what the findings will reflect, says Doug Logan.
So they're just not getting it.
And so basically they're going to have to start litigation battles with subpoenas, which the people controlling Maricopa County have said that we'll fight.
If you try to legally force us to give you this information, we'll fight you in the courts.
Just the number of ballots?
Just the number of ballots.
Makes you think, doesn't it?
I'll skip over the legal information because I don't know anything about that.
But Cypher founder Ben Cotton stated that it was critically important to obtain routers owned by the county, saying they would help clarify specific vulnerabilities he claimed were existent in Maricopa's digital election system.
Cotton also claimed that the antivirus software on the county's election management system had not been updated since August 2019.
Not good news if you know anything about antiviruses.
Maricopa County Attorney.
I'm surprised it's that recent, Well, yeah, me too, to be honest.
But anyway, Alistair Adele has argued that providing the county's routers could jeopardize the security of law enforcement data.
And a Democrat sheriff called Paul Pezzoni said the same thing.
Hmm.
Seems sus to me, frankly.
And we'll just move on because we're running out of time.
So Pennsylvania, of course, are refusing to give audit details as well.
Pennsylvania, if I recall correctly, being the state where the state legislature just, by fiat, said they could accept mail-in ballots like five days after the close of play.
So it's just like, that's against their state legislature rules.
They're not allowed to do that.
I think the claim is that it's against the US Constitution.
No, the state constitution.
State constitution, okay.
Yeah, so it's against the state constitution and they did it anyway.
But at least one of the three Pennsylvania counties contacted by the lawmakers, Republican lawmakers, seeking the materials for the forensic investigation, have said that they're not going to give their voting machines up for review because they've got nothing to hide, presumably.
The commissioners in Teoga County, which was won by Trump, incidentally, decided they would not allow access to their voting machines after the Pennsylvania Department of State advised counties against giving third-party entities access to the equipment, or they'd risk decertification.
So it looks like the Pennsylvania Department of State is saying, if you do this, we're going to punish you.
Why?
What are you covering?
Why can't we have a look at what the votes were?
It was a free and open election, wasn't it?
Don't you want it to be accurate?
This is what I mean.
Even if you're actually convinced that everything's fine, you act in the worst possible way for conveying that.
Well, it just makes me think you don't think that everything's fine.
It makes me think that the Time magazine article about the fortification of the election was a lot more revealing than they would have us believe.
If you wanted to make me think you were covering something up, do this.
Because this looks like Banana Republic stuff.
Oh, we've got an investigation.
They want to have a look at the things that they're claiming that you did wrong.
No.
Well, then I'm going to assume you did something wrong.
Another county refused.
The other one, I can't remember the name of it, but the commissioners pointed out that those voting machines would be decertified because, of course, they're being threatened by their state Department of State with decertification.
So pressure is being put on these other counties, so you're not allowed to do this or decertify you.
Why are you doing that?
Why is the Pennsylvania Department of State refusing to do it?
But anyway, so that's a few other ones where they're not cooperating and they're doing everything in their power to be obstructionist, threatening legal action and decertification.
There's also some statements from Biden which are getting a bit strange.
So if you go to the next link here, this is Biden giving a speech in which he says it's about who gets to count the vote, which is literally a Stalin quote.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
It could be a clip, but then there's the speech he gave about this, in which he's talking about the fact that no other election has ever been held, which has been under such scrutiny and high standards.
The big lie is just that, a big lie.
Why can't we scrutinise it?
It's a naughty phrase as well.
I don't know why they keep using that.
Yeah, that is a naughty phrase.
So he's quoting Stalin and Goebbels.
Yeah.
But the fact that it's the most scrutinized and under high standards, and then, of course, people are just mocking this.
If we go to the next one, because, yeah, yeah, there's stuff like that.
But also the fact that there's no...
Was that Detroit where they put up the barricades?
I can't quite remember.
No, I'm sure it was in Detroit, where they wouldn't allow the Republican vote counters to watch the votes being counted.
They wouldn't let them in, and they put up these barricades they couldn't even see in the building.
So transparent.
But also, it's been under such scrutiny and it's so secure that you can't question it.
That's just the thing in my mind eternally.
It's like, right, if you wanted people to believe this and to not fall to QAnon conspiracy theories, you don't criminalize thinking about it.
You morons.
Anyway.
You certainly don't refuse to cooperate with the audit afterwards, either.
Yeah.
So can we go for the last image on this tweet, which I just put out this morning, which is just checking the postal ballots?
Because I don't think anyone's made this point clear enough, which is, you can see this was Pew Research, in which they did it from 1996 to 2016.
The fact that postal voting in the US had been slowly going up.
Literally doubled.
It went from 20% in 2016 to 42% in 2020.
And remember, you've got 75,000 ballots that aren't obviously sent by mail, but are counted as mail-in ballots.
It's a huge number.
There's a legitimate reason for people to be sus.
And your response by saying, if you're suspicious, then you're banned.
Makes you look guilty.
Don't do that if you think you're not guilty.
I don't know what to say.
Yeah, if you want good optics on this, just go along with it.
Because obviously you did nothing wrong, and there's nothing for them to find, and so they should be a clear audit.
They might find a few hundred discrepancies because human error, blah blah blah.
But if you're not organising a big racket here, what have you got to be afraid of?
Anyway, should we go to the video comments?
Although I agree with the idea that we all deserve free healthcare, I also think we should privatise and sell the NHS. It has been used as a tool and will continue to be used as a tool to shape our behaviour and introduce new taxes to keep this ship afloat.
If I were to purchase a product and then 50 years later they'd come back to me and say, this product that you've already paid for, in order to keep it you need to do X, Y and Z, well maybe the product is destined to crash and burn.
He's not wrong.
Weirdly, Kraut made a great video about the subject of state healthcare compared to private healthcare.
And he does it trying to advocate for state-run healthcare, whether it be through mandatory insurance or the NHS or whatnot.
And he makes it sound awful because it fundamentally comes down to the question, well, if you accept that the state should run healthcare, well, therefore the state has an interest in nannying your life and determining what you can eat, what you can't eat.
Reducing costs.
Yeah, all this stuff.
And it's just like, no, I don't want that kind of interference.
That's not the world I really want to live in, if I could take the choice.
Well, it forcibly converts the state into an ethical state.
And so it gives it an aspect of fascism, whether you like it or not.
Yeah, which is not desirable.
Also, I saw, I think it was what Dr.
Toby or whatever the hell his name was.
This morning, yesterday, talking about the sugar tax they're going to bring in for exactly this purpose.
Yeah, and salt.
And I'm just out there, because the phrase he used was to save the NHS again.
Everything, to save the NHS. Screw the NHS. And the thing that came to mind, if you want to save the NHS by his logic, the correct thing to do would be to kill yourself, because then you would cost the NHS zero pounds, and therefore you've saved it.
Your logic is pointless.
Just to jump in, by the way, there have been some unscheduled changes on the back end for us.
Some technical difficulties, so we're just working out the kinks because this will happen at a bit short notice.
So if there are any problems, we do apologize.
We'll get them fixed as soon as possible.
Alright, let's go for the next one.
Hey boys, for the first comment, I figured I'd let somebody else know that there's another North Carolinian in the chat, so good for them.
Secondly, there is a lot of manga going around, so here's some more of my own, I guess.
Oh my god.
That'll do you a little better, I hope.
That's fine.
And I'll introduce you to one of my dogs.
Okay.
Hey Henry.
Say hey.
Say hey.
He's a good boy.
He's only two.
Say lotus eaters.
Feel free to use my blind and autism and fat privilege to your advantage.
Make any and every joke that you so please.
And if anybody confronts you about it, tell you that I gave you permission.
You're welcome.
Queen of the Autists.
Oh, and by the way, Memento Mori.
I guess we get our slurs back for those ones.
No, I just need an N-word pass.
That's what I love about the account, what was it, like five days till I say the N-word?
The Joker account?
Loads of people, like loads of black guys send him pictures in his DMs with a picture of their skin going, you got my pass, bro.
Let's go for the next one.
Sadly, a lot of people around the world believe that a socialist utopia is possible because they believe that Denmark is a socialist utopia.
We are capitalists.
And did you know Denmark has a way lower corporate tax than the United States have?
In Denmark, the corporate tax is 22% and that's it.
In the United States, it has become 21% but it's going to be higher now plus they also have a state tax, meaning that the corporate tax in America would be between 30 and 40%.
But that also means you can campaign saying, "We want to be more like Denmark.
We want taxes like Denmark." And that means way, way lower corporate taxes.
Don't tax the rich.
I agree.
Be like Denmark.
Lower corporate taxes.
Denmark's got like a 60% individual tax, isn't it?
Yeah, I don't want that.
That's awful!
60% of everything you own goes to the government.
I don't know if it's that high in Denmark, actually.
No, no, it is.
I looked it up because I had to find...
Because they were all going, ah, well, look, in Denmark, Burger King employees get like $16 an hour.
And it's like, yeah, but they pay 60% of that to the government.
It can be up to 52%.
Okay, well, how much is it?
But it's ridiculous.
But you're correct that it's very high.
It's unbelievably high.
I'm sure it's 60%.
I don't know how they do their brackets, though.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
But it was such an unbelievable amount.
I'm like, oh my god.
May as well call it a socialist country in that bloody situation.
Like, 50%, half of everything you earn the government's going to take?
Get lost.
Get lost.
Like, making me very anarchist.
Taxation is theft!
Glad you finally agree.
Let's go for the next one.
I didn't want to agree.
Greetings, if I may suggest the final solution to the supposed quantity problem of video comments.
Well, just select a few to answer to and put the rest into an after-show segment which you introduce as some words from your sponsors, your listeners.
And that's that.
And if there are any German listeners, see, final solution doesn't always require genocide.
Breaking news for the Germans.
Merkel's like, what?
How would that work, though?
Because this is the after-show section, technically.
I don't know, maybe we could just put it on social media or something.
But then how would it be relevant if there's a bunch of questions that are sent at us?
I guess it wouldn't be.
We'll have to think about it.
Pick some, if there's just way too many.
Yeah, sorry.
Okay, let's see.
30 minutes of 30 second videos at 30 pounds sterling a month.
Okay, so that is 1,800 pounds sterling a month.
Now convert that into Canadian, not American.
That's 52 million dollars a month.
Okay, so I hope you guys are paying your fair share.
You can text him up.
This is the chap who wanted to tell us about his thoughts on homosexuality, and I assume he's talking about like he's made a 30-minute video, it would take 30 minutes to explain it, which...
This wasn't made for explaining a long thesis, but...
It was meant to be for video questions.
Good meme.
I agree, it's good meme.
The US communists are planning something.
Here's when they want to do it.
Here is why they want to do it.
Here's what they want to achieve.
Oh, $20 minimum.
And here's where you can find out everything you need to know about it.
Oh, that's good to know.
We've gone from $15 to $20.
Why not $50?
I'd demand $50 if I were an American communist.
$100.
Yeah, $500.
Good point.
$100 trillion Zimbabwean dollars.
Yeah.
$3 million an hour.
Good point.
I don't know why we didn't think of this earlier.
We can just raise the numbers.
I mean, it keeps going up.
In fact, there seems to be no limit to the numbers.
Socialists really are the equivalent of the TikTok girl who was like, homeless people, why don't they just buy a house?
Well, you mean Philosophy Tube.
Let's go to the next one.
Coral, you have lamented the terms left and right, and I propose using the I think these two terms encapsulate the basic sides that are battling at the moment.
Oh, I mean, you're right.
I think particularist might be more useful than culturalist because it describes the direction of focus, because you could be a universal culturalist.
I mean, this is what the global homo thing is, where it's just like, you know, every city ends up looking like a, you know, Starbucks, sort of like...
You know, generic people from around the world walking down high streets.
Everywhere looks like London, basically.
They have a culture.
It's just really weird.
Some of the driftless wastes of globalism.
But rather, I think universal rather against particular is what we're facing, actually.
I'm actually not a fan of this whole discussion, because if you want to try to describe different worldviews accurately, it's an endless task, because there are endless types.
Which is why I'm actually quite a fan, and I'll say that I've become more and more of a fan of rightist and leftist as just a division.
Not because it's perfect, or because it explains everything in a perfect way or something.
It's not meant to.
It's just, what are the two camps that are vying for power that are significant and have those distinct worldviews?
Well, the Progressive Alliance agree with you.
I keep seeing them being posted on Facebook and various other social media.
They're just like, yeah, we're all against the conservatives.
It's like, well, there we go.
Yeah, so I'm just trying to describe the political fight that's practical.
I would say communist versus human.
But then trying to explain different worldviews, but I don't know, I think you can still be...
Can we have rightist versus wrongist?
The American boomers not correct?
I think they're correct.
That's so boomer, I kind of like it.
The American boomers invented it and they're right.
No, I quite like leftist and rightist.
No, I like wrongist.
Very practical.
Because then we can call them wrongest.
The wrongest have arrived.
A bunch of wrongens.
Well, they are.
North FC, boomer meme.
The wrongens are pedos.
The wrongens are pedos.
Hey, Lotus Eaters.
I was just wondering if there was any cultural sentiment in England that wishes to regain their rights to bear arms.
Also...
You guys should definitely play Fallout New Vegas.
It is an awesome game, and I loved it.
So, have a good day.
I like that big iron.
There is doubtless a small segment, but it's not a popular movement.
The libertarians are for it.
Most gun groups, if you ever meet them, are for it, of course, because the restrictions in the UK are bloody hilarious as well.
Like, you can have a pistol, but it has to be, like, 20 foot long, essentially.
So you have, like, the magazine that comes out and then attaches to there, and then the end of the pistol, there's just this big, long tube for no reason.
It's like, ah, it's a rifle, mate, not a pistol.
Well, I guess technically it is.
I was about to call it a rifle.
Yeah.
Here's a proposed solution to people uploading too many video comments, and yes, I know it's ironic, given that I've already uploaded one today.
How about a limited number per subscription, say five of them, renews every month, doesn't carry over.
Maybe technically too difficult, but it might work.
That's a reasonable suggestion.
That could work.
Yeah, it's one we'll consider.
Yeah.
I mean, I didn't really want to put restrictions on it, but then I didn't think we'd get so many, so...
Yeah.
I don't know about the technical side that's a question, but that's not a bad suggestion.
That's good thinking, mate.
Hmm.
So, here's something I've noticed.
The leftist cope with the results of Euro 2020 very much reminds me of the German cope with the results of the World Cup 1938, so...
Huh.
Huh.
I haven't seen what that was.
But if you've got any links, send them across, because I would like to see that.
It's like with the analytics as well.
You know, the massive cope afterwards, where it's like, ignore Jesse Owens.
Exist.
We said to Ubermatch, we said to Ubermatch!
Maybe we should give children the vote, except children obviously can't vote, so their parents would vote for them.
These people actually have more of a stake in the future and care about the future that the children are going to grow up in.
So if you have one vote and you have four children, then you have a total of five votes.
That's brilliant.
Because your vote is five times more valuable than some passive aggressive lefty sitting around contributing nothing, writing Guardian articles about how the world owes them more free stuff.
They're right.
Children should be voting because they're going to be voting.
Well, I want them to vote because they're my kids.
They're not your kids, leftists, are they?
Yeah, my votes are, for me, three times more powerful than every leftist vote.
That's a fantastic idea.
John's wondering about certain communities winning because they have too many children.
No, they're based.
Yeah, no, that's fine.
They're not going to turn into insufferable leftists.
That's a great idea.
No, you're not useful.
You're just sun god worshippers.
I'm reasonably sure that if you produce a railgun that left this into the sun, that would be very low carbon.
I'm sure that Hweetslipochtli would approve of Carl's railgun to the sun proposal.
All I'm saying is it would be very carbon efficient.
Yeah.
It's just magnets.
It's very good.
Here is one for you lot.
I like Ayn Rand.
I like her philosophy of rational self-interest.
The problem for me is, that ethos only works in the confines of the private sector, because once you start mixing it with the bloated bureaucracy of the public sector, the rational begins to dissipate, as the chances of your self-interest being at the detriment of someone else increases exponentially with the increasing size of the state, which is why taxation is theft.
Unless you can be a red gem like Trump and your self-interest is not a fiscal gain, but rather your own ego.
I mean, I'm having a hard time getting around the taxationist theft argument with the more they expand on that.
It's not wrong.
It's not wrong, yeah.
It's just, is it worth it?
Because I'm not against taxes on it.
I'm not an anarchist.
Ben Shapiro also has this opinion.
It's definitely to theft.
But if you're squeezing me down to pay for the National Army to defend us from an invasion from Mexico...
Or a police force to stop people burning down my house...
Fine.
Fine, but gender studies for Pakistan?
I'm being robbed.
Well, I mean, maybe we could...
King George can get stuffed.
Maybe we could have some sort of outreach program where we send them leftists and they do what they want with them.
Leftists have human rights too.
Hey, what are you saying about Pakistan?
Are you saying that they'd just put the leftists into a grinder because they're all pedos?
No, they'd sell them to the Taliban for cash.
They would.
As you may have guessed from my New Vegas comment, I do live in California, unfortunately, right on the edge of the Mojave Desert.
And on the news this morning, I heard them say, Governor Newsom wants to pay your rent.
It's like malarkey.
He ain't paying anything.
He's just taking other people's money to give it to people who don't do anything, basically.
I'm just saying, when I saw a picture of him and I didn't even know it was him, I thought it was a person who was an actor for, like, the devil.
He just has, like, resting evil face.
And it fits...
I love the idea.
You're actually Goodsprings.
The NCR have turned up, and they're taxing you too high, and you're like, I'm going to have to move east and get away from the NCR. Move further into the Mojave Desert and get away from them taxes.
Well, I'm just saying, if literally the governor is going, look, I'm going to pay your rent, no.
What you're saying is you're going to tax me and pay other people's rent.
I'm already paying my rent.
The NHS provides you with free health care.
Oh, thank God.
Thank God it's free.
Yeah.
I'm sure they're all volunteers from the followers of the apocalypse or something.
Well, yeah, exactly, yeah.
I don't know if I'm the right person to argue about Anglo reparations from Italians since I'm half English and half Italian.
I mean, would I owe myself reparations?
Yes, you do.
Stop oppressing yourself.
Or would I do half reparations?
Or would my English...
So I'd cancel out my Italian side and there's no reparations at all.
How do we owe the Italians reparations?
I don't think we've done anything to them.
No, that doesn't actually make...
We bombed them a bit in World War II, didn't we?
But they started it.
Yeah, they had it coming.
So...
No, I don't think we've ever had a war with them that's unjust, so...
Well, I mean, we've never had a war with anyone that's unjust, but that wasn't the question.
The only negative we could argue...
Well, they could argue that we bombed, what is it, the Papal Square or whatever, what's it called?
The Vatican.
Yeah, Vatican.
Because it got taken and the guys hadn't signed their treaty and made it national yet, and we started bombing around it, and then the Pope sent us a letter being like, hang on, I live here, I'm an independent state, please don't bomb me.
We were like, we're bombing Rome, get stuffed.
We just ignored it.
LAUGHTER Still not getting reparations.
On Wednesday, a written comment mentioned planting trees for shade for future generations.
That reminded me of in Genesis when God required Abraham to plant a tamarisk tree in what would eventually become a desert in Israel.
Now, they take 400 years to grow and offer shade, food...
And evaporate water around them to create an air conditioning system.
Now, 400 years later when the tree would have grown is when the Jews left Egypt in Exodus for what became Israel.
That's an interesting lesson from Bible studies.
Thank you.
I have to wonder what's with everyone with the crosses.
Like, we're not vampires.
Usually they're doing the video comments with the cross.
These Christians using this as a way of advancing Christianity.
That's what this is.
Subversion.
Jesus smuggling.
Jesus smuggling.
Let's go for the next one.
Allow me to whiten your black pill even more.
We don't need to worry about whistleblowers on social media.
Because the thing is, whistleblowers don't need social media.
They can go to the papers or...
Or they can go to any legitimate journalist's website.
That's what legitimate journalists are doing these days.
That's what you're doing.
That's what Tim Pool is doing.
That's what Dave Rubin is doing.
We don't need to worry.
So I say, let government destroy social media with these stupid ID laws.
Just enjoy the show.
You know, I'm actually coming around to this point.
No, no, no, let them do it.
It's a stupid idea.
It's terrible.
It's tyrannical.
It will kill Twitter, which is a net positive humanity.
Absolutely!
It will kill a lot of the cancer.
So, like, let them just keep going.
Oh, wait, someone said a nasty word on the internet against one of our black footballers.
Quick!
Boom!
Upheaval!
Thrip the table!
Yeah, do it.
Do it.
No, do it.
Make sure...
You've got a good point as well, because, I mean, Twitter's a leftist space, so if you carpet bomb that...
Yeah.
It's like...
Make sure everyone's well aware that Silicon Valley platforms are just riddled with racists.
Riddled with them.
And so we're going to unmask them all.
Quick, Silicon Valley.
Keep going.
Just keep punching and punching.
How bad can you make it?
Just keep going, government.
Anyway, Kobe says, problems with the site?
Yes, a couple.
We are doing our very best.
Not of our making, I'm afraid.
Anyway, so Justin says, Speaking of which, if anyone runs a company or is in a position, get rid of the D&I apartment.
It is just a blot on your money.
They are stealing from not only you as the business owner, they're stealing from the customers who you could give lower prices to, and they're also stealing from your employees who are productive, who you could give a pay rise.
We need a base department.
We need to have the opposite of that.
If this is what they've got in all of the other companies, why can't we have a base department?
Oh, 2050, I can literally go, hello, base department.
Exactly!
Oh no, I'm getting called from the base department.
You have not been based enough today.
Docked.
You need to go through a base training program.
Hey, this has got legs.
Sorry, we're out of time, aren't we?
Yeah.
Okay, well, we'll be back tomorrow at 1 o'clock.
What?
Oh, yeah, it's Friday, isn't it?
I'm an idiot.
Oh, no.
We'll be back Monday, 1 o'clock.
If you want more from us, we should have some clips going up on various video sites, so we have something on the weekends for people to enjoy if they want stuff.
Otherwise, go to latest.com because there are a million things on there, many of them free, loads of loads of good stuff that's premium, and that is how we keep the show going, so please do sign up.
▲
Export Selection