All Episodes
Previous Next
July 20, 2021 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters
01:01:33
The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #179
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Studios for the 20th of July 2021.
I'm joined by Josh.
Hello.
And today we're going to be talking about the intersectional billionaires, also the tainted Freedom Day, which took us a sour turn in the afternoon, and also AOC's Capital Socialism, in which she is going to make good money to promote socialism through engaging in pure capitalism.
And none of this money is totally going to her.
This is all going through other causes, she swears.
Oh, of course.
Anyway, first thing to mention is the article you put up about explaining the chaos in South Africa and the situation there, which I haven't got time to read, but I really do actually want to.
It's very good.
It's premium as well.
I did write it.
Explain a little bit.
Don't have to listen to me.
Do a little advert there.
Okay, so basically what happened was that their former president was imprisoned for corruption charges, he probably was corrupt, and his supporters used the looting and chaos and destruction as like a bargaining chip to get him released.
So like, this will stop when you release him.
Yeah, it's pretty messed up.
Wow, that's barbarian.
Yeah.
Well, I don't want to spoil too much of it, but give it a read if you are interested.
Yeah, because there's a friend of ours from the AFD who knows people down there and kept sending me stuff, being like, dude, it's crazy.
I couldn't really understand it.
Have you seen some of the videos of it?
It's crazy.
It's full-esque.
There's a video that I saw of a woman driving past a queue for a shop where they're all queuing up to get bread, food, nappies for babies and stuff like that, and she's just driving for two and a half minutes.
Just following this cue.
And it's absolutely ridiculous.
She bursts into tears because it's so awful.
I'm surprised there was a cue.
I'm surprised people just burn the place down.
British culture.
Still there.
That's not British culture.
What, cueing?
Oh, the cueing is British culture.
Anyway, so go and check that out.
Also, for the video comments, for the people who sent hidden comments who are specifically for Carl, we've taken those out and we'll have them back tomorrow when he's back.
Schedule for him because it's a bit weird trying to answer comments.
I do feel a bit bad.
When you're asking questions for Carl and I'm here, Anyway, so let's get into the first thing here, the billionaire intersectionals.
So this is based on a leak which was sent to us from a guy who is in the United States who sent us the diversity stuff from J.P. Morgan, which I'm not going to say his name or anything, obviously, but thanks for this.
And it is pretty nuts, so I thought we'd go through it.
And it's at the highest levels, is the point.
So J.P. Morgan, you can see here the first article, is the CEO taking the knee because...
The billionaires of the world unite.
Black Lives Matter.
I mean, it's kind of weird to have the resistance being endorsed by the biggest private bank on the planet, but okay.
Yeah, it's a bit of a strange photo-op as well, just outside of a bank vault.
I don't know what the imagery is meant to be there.
It's almost like they're dabbing on you.
You're like, yeah, we're rich, good for it.
Anyway, so I looked up JP Morgan because I didn't know this, but they're not only the biggest bank in the world that isn't directly controlled by the CCP, but also they rate their total assets as $3.3 trillion, which is crazy.
Like, that's 14% of the US economy.
Wow.
They're not all entirely US-based, though, are they?
No, they're a global organisation, but there's a reference for how much of the...
I mean, just one bank?
Yeah, that's ridiculous.
Anyway, so they're also listed with full of controversies, because, of course, they're a global international bank, so they've been done for fraud, sanction-busting, discrimination situations, or giving $5 billion to the European Super League.
So, all that's not clean, shall we say?
I mean, it's to be expected of any bank...
But they'll take the knee.
They'll take the knee.
And, well, they'll do anything wrong, won't they?
Anyway, but what was interesting is moments after this, apparently the CEO went to a vote about doing a racial equity...
I think it was a survey of all of their stuff to make sure that their personnel, if they had a certain race, were being paid a certain amount, because that's totally normal.
So they didn't want a racial audit, and he voted against it.
So, of course, they were leftists complaining about this, being like, oh, he took the knee, but he doesn't want full communism.
So it's easy to write this off as just being, well, okay, it's the billionaires, they'll do the PR thing, and then they won't have anything on the backside.
But the leak we got showed that actually it's kind of crazy.
As in, they're actually buying into it.
Yeah, it's not just a meme for the front of house.
Like, they have internal documents in which they are propagandising their own employees.
So, they say in here, the racial audit, JPMorgan Chase& Co., Chief Executive Jamie Dimon, addressed inequality, racism, and corporate responsibility in his annual letter to shareholders on Wednesday morning.
Hours later, the JPMorgan board, which he chairs, urged shareholders to vote against the proposal for racial equity audit.
So he didn't want that.
And let's go to the next one here, because they also give quite a lot of money away for nonsense causes, I'm just going to call it, because there is no way this is going to where the idealized version of where it's going is.
So this is JPMorgan pledging $30 billion to help remedy racial wealth gap.
Racial wealth gap.
It doesn't matter what the situation is of how people got that gap.
What matters is that there is one.
Even if it's through all free choice, that doesn't matter.
Because, of course, all we care about is race.
So where do they actually donate this, then?
They didn't say, they just said they were donating it to different organizations that would help racial inequality, which is a thing.
But yeah, I know about this.
Don't worry.
So the next thing I wanted to mention was if you want to know more about this, go to the Ethical Companies podcast we did on this situation, because this guy, the guy who donated $30 billion or gave that order, he's a thief.
He's a thief to everyone involved in J.P. Morgan.
The customers, and the employees, and the shareholders.
Because he's stolen from all of them by taking that money that is not his to give away, and just giving it away on his own personal enjoyment, which is his charitable beings, let's say.
He could give his own money away, and probably he gets paid handsomely, so he could give his own salary away to help these organisations.
No, he's going to steal from the employees of J.P. Morgan.
£30 billion as well.
I imagine that would be a significant pay rise for every single one of them.
Yeah, or you could just spend 30 billion hiring black employees.
But no, it's just pissing away on organizations that are just going to race grift, I guess.
So let's play the first clip, which is some of the internal stuff that's been leaked to us.
You can see the first one here of them talking about the words they're going to ban within the organization.
However, even the vocabulary we use, some of these things, there has put a new sensitivity around the language we use.
Some of this terminology has been used in technology for a long time.
Whether we're talking about whitelist or blacklists, or master-slave, we're going to start stripping that out of our vocabulary, as well as things like manpower, looking at this broadly.
What can we do?
Because sometimes the unintention of how the words that we use can make people feel uncomfortable, and so there are lots of things that we can do.
Did you know someone said the words manpower?
Oh no!
So triggered.
This has touched me so deeply.
Also, the master and slave system, isn't that like computer programming language?
Or is that offensive to computers?
Yeah, you've offended the computers.
So, of course they've got this kind of nonsense.
I wanted to look this up, so I just Googled randomly to see if they had any, let's say, critical race theorists or nutjobs come and speak to them, like every organization.
And if you just Google JP Morgan, Robin DiAngelo, you get this, which is the JP Morgan Chase& Co.
Women on the Move Leadership Day 2020, in which they have them talking about the fact that they invited Robin DiAngelo.
They say in here, confirmed speakers include Dr.
Robin DiAngelo.
Oh, God.
And if you don't know anything about her, well, Carl's actually done a talk about this.
He runs to the German parliament, which people should check out.
The Conservatives' Guide to White Fragility.
Because our ideology, as she lays out in White Fragility, is indistinguishable from that of a white nationalist.
She believes that whiteness and white people are some kind of ubermensch who lord over the non-white people of the world through their sheer existence.
It's really weird, but go and check that out.
So, of course, they got that.
But there's also some other nonsense.
So there was a series of internal memos.
So this is the first one here, in which it's a message from the global lead for diversity and inclusion.
And what's he got to say?
So he says that they are collaborating with events to show unity while celebrating our diversity and intersectionality.
Great, great.
So it's explicit then.
They're using their terminology in their internal emails.
This was sent to everyone around the world in the company as well.
So it wasn't just the American branch.
But they continue.
The firm is making a $3 million philanthropic commitment to promote racial and social equality, because that's totally normal, Supporting national civil rights organizations that advocate for justice and inclusion.
Targeted local non-profits and communities disproportionately impacted from COVID-19 pandemic.
That's a lie, for one.
You're not interested in whoever's disproportionately impacted from COVID-19, people being locked down by the Democrats.
You're more interested in race, as implemented by the latest stuff here, because why else are you going on about race?
So, in fact, they're going to be giving that $3 million on the basis of race.
Which is a totally non-racist thing to do.
This is totally normal.
This is totally not racist, they swear.
This isn't even any concern of a bank.
It's got nothing to do with banking in any way either.
What does this have to do with the actual business?
Racial inequality.
How did that happen?
Like, if you can point to a man who has been discriminated against, such as a JP Morgan, which they got sued for, for discriminating against black customers, then yeah, you guys can be guilty of that, you can be fined for it, they were, and therefore that's the resolution.
But just, there's inequality in the world, that means nothing to a liberal or a conservative.
The only person who would care about such a thing is a socialist, because that is what they care about.
So they're kind of pandering to cover up for the fact that they were prosecuted for supposedly discriminating against black...
Well, I'd like to think it was just a joke, but I don't think it is.
I think they actually have, like most other companies in the Western world, brought into this garbage.
And I'm sure these people are getting paid handsomely for their contribution, shall we say.
But they continue.
Locally, we are taking steps to restore branches and communities directly impacted as a result of the riots...
What riots?
Those are peaceful protests.
They're mostly peaceful protests.
Why would you need to go in there and restore the branches with the communities?
Against the riots.
At least they called them riots.
There's some shred of something there.
Yeah, but no, I guess they're racist for pointing out the obvious, which is the George Floyd riots caused a lot of deaths and a lot of damage.
And they continue, we are matching employee contributions two to one, made to select organisations that have a long history of supporting justice and inclusion.
I want to thank our employees who have already shown their support by donating more than $373,000 as of Friday.
So they'll be donating $2 to one for whatever.
So not only are they donating, what, $30 billion, they're also getting their employees to donate...
And the three million they just threw out there.
Yeah, so not only did they take that money from their employees, they're also encouraging the employees to take it out of their own wage as well.
Yeah, give us back your wages so we can give it away as donations and then get a tax rebate, presumably.
It's just a scum thing to do.
Why are they doing this?
Because leftism, that's always the point.
There's racial inequality.
That means nothing.
Did the inequality arise through maltreatment?
And then you have an argument.
If you don't, then you're just a communist.
That's all it is.
Sorry.
No one calls the black guy to get less wages than the other guy.
If they made their job decisions, and one got paid more than the other, that's not discrimination.
That's a fact of life.
Anyway, same with the wage gap between men and women, of course.
So, the funniest thing in here is they wanted a moment of silence for Big Floyd.
Sure.
That's what we're calling him now.
I guess so.
Moment of silence.
We're inviting all employees to join a firm, wide moment of silence on Tuesday, June 9th at 8.46am Eastern Time.
Moment of silence, though.
The kind of thing we do for November the 11th for the Fallen in the Great Wars and every war since.
So I guess it's the Fallen of the Great Race War.
The day and time are significant, they say, as they represent the 8 minutes and 46 seconds that George Floyd was pinned to the ground.
We ask that you and your teams dictate at least one minute and pause meetings not to conduct business, transactions, and refrain from using emails or having calls.
Which sounds a bit cultish, but whatever.
This moment of silence represents our solidarity with the black community and commitment to stamp out racism wherever we can.
Why?
There's no racial aspect to George Floyd's killing.
There is none.
There was none alleged in the courtroom.
There was none alleged by the fence or the prosecution.
What there was alleged is by BLM, a Marxist organisation that endorses the Cuban communist regime.
I don't know how this lie has travelled so far that even in a company of billionaires...
I know.
Whenever George Floyd is mentioned, we have to always repeat that the court case had no racial element whatsoever.
Not even alleged?
No.
I mean, it would have damaged their case, wouldn't it?
Because there's no proof.
You can't prove what's in someone's head in a courtroom.
That's 1984 territory.
It's just the BLM position of, well, cop was white, man who died was black, therefore racism.
It's the only answer.
If we switch it around, cop is black, man on the floor who dies is white, is this now still racism?
Of course not.
Well then, you don't care about racism, there is no racial aspect, you're a liar, you're a grifter.
That's all it was for BLM. I'm eternally surprised by how no one's figured this out.
This lie just carries on and on.
They also rattle on about how they have a duty to propagandize their employees because they're managers.
No, you can propagandize your employees if you want, but you don't have a duty to unless you're a member of a comrade in some kind of war.
So if you're a liberal, then you want to promote liberalism, then you'd have a duty to propagate liberal values throughout the company.
But that's not what's going on here.
You're propagating socialist values, because you're talking about racial equality, for example.
Not equal treatment, but instead the wage gap between black and white people, which is a hell of a thing to talk about.
In which case, you think of yourself as a comrade in the race war, presumably.
Because I don't know what else they could be talking about here.
So let's go for the diversity course that they set out, which is also really funny.
So this is the first image in which they have their confidentiality statement, and you have to ask why.
Why are they so concerned?
This material may not be copied, shared, or distributed to anyone other than an employee.
Any unauthorized use or distribution may result in disciplinary action for employees up to and including termination.
Funny that they've included that.
It's almost like they've seen what has happened to other workplaces and seen their employees releasing the diversity stuff, which has been really bad PR for a lot of those companies.
And now they're saying anyone who does this is going to be disciplined.
Coca-Cola.
Be less white.
I mean, yeah, it's a big PR disaster to see this extreme leftist nonsense promoted by mainstream companies.
And they're taking note of that, I assume, and being like, yeah, don't tell anyone.
And in case you're wondering why they're saying don't tell anyone, if we go to the next image, this is one of the slides in which the head of diversity and inclusion is explaining himself.
And in here he says...
We'll be exploring key terms like diversity, inclusion, privilege, microaggressions and unconscious bias.
It's important that we understand these terms so we can, quote, speak the same language and establish a solid foundation upon which we can communicate.
Right, so they're dog whistles.
That's what they are.
They're leftist dog whistles.
Because you never hear rightists talk like this.
You only ever hear leftists talk like this.
Microaggressions.
I mean, the nonsense of college campuses.
Yeah, and unconscious bias as well.
Because we did a podcast about that, didn't we?
Where we were talking about all of the science that is against it and how it doesn't work because you can't consciously change your unconscious because you're conscious and unconscious are two different things.
And yeah, it doesn't make sense.
So trust the science.
Unconscious bias training is a load of rubbish.
But my opinion in here is he's laying out his position, which is, um, this is the reason they didn't want it to go public, is, like with Coca-Cola, when it does go public, they get embarrassed by the fact that you're promoting far-left ideology, in which case, why are you promoting it?
Yeah, just don't do it in the first place.
If you're so embarrassed, why do you do it?
You know it's bad.
That's why.
So, indoctrinating your employees into leftist terminology so they can have a language of their own in which they can communicate with each other on the basis, hey, fellow leftist.
Yeah, that's a bad thing to do.
Anyway, we've got the next image.
There's all the microaggressions.
I thought you could read some of these and just have a laugh because I need a drink.
Commenting that a person speaks excellent English.
Isn't that a compliment?
I mean...
It's a microaggression, mate.
If I say to Hugo you speak excellent English, surely that's a compliment that he's diligent in his learning of a second language.
No, you're fired.
How dare you be this insulting?
There's other stuff here, so interrupting a co-worker to say what you are trying to say is.
Okay, well, Cathy Newman's fired then.
Calling a female co-worker sweetheart.
Calling transgender employee no one...
Sorry, saying to a transgender employee no one can tell you are trans.
Everyone can tell is fine.
That's okay, but saying no one can tell, that's a microaggression there.
Everyone knows you're a man.
You can't hide it.
Apparently that's fine.
Telling a co-worker that they're too sensitive.
In a banking environment as well, surely that's important, where there's lots of money at stake.
Saying you're too sensitive to criticism is a valid thing to say to someone.
I love the idea as well.
Like, you think of bankers.
I mean, what do you think of?
Stockbrokers and all that financial world.
You think of Wall of Wall Street.
And you think of them all taking coke and doing drugs.
Carrying around big piles of cash everywhere.
Yeah, parking until 4am with clients to get them to sign some stupid deal that's going to make them take all their money.
And you think, like, imagine being that guy who's taking drugs and doing all that partying and coming to work and then having to learn about critical race theory.
You're just like, right, I did not work this hard to do this.
Anyway, you mentioned about the unconscious bias training nonsense, which is, as I think you wrote this article, I can't remember if we go to the next one, they banned this, the UK government banned this for being nonsense, rightfully.
I did write this, yeah.
Yeah, because it's pseudoscience.
It doesn't work, even for the thing it's trying to obtain, which is...
Yeah.
It doesn't even...
Not only does it not work, practically speaking, like a philosophical level and a theoretical level, it doesn't work either, because the whole reason the unconscious is unconscious is because it's beyond our control.
So if it's beyond our control, what are you going to do about it?
Nothing, pretty much.
I also love it.
This is just a billionaire company.
Trillion dollar company, actually.
Trillion dollar bank that's buying into this stuff.
It really does go to the highest levels, doesn't it?
Anyway, so I thought we'd just go on to the next one here, which is just an example of why it's so nonsensical, which I found recently.
Harvard University decided to do a study of implicit bias between different countries about how they associated the term dark skin, and they rated it with more negative thoughts to more positive thoughts.
Do you know who's the least racist country according to this logic?
We are?
Serbia.
Okay, that was not what I expected.
Well, that's interesting.
For any non-Europeans, Serbia, most well known for genocide in the last few decades, in which they just started killing all their neighbours because, well, they wanted independence and therefore are different and therefore need to die because of the wrong ethnic group.
They're the least racist people in the country according to implicit biotests from Harvard University.
Apparently they thought highly of them though.
Yeah, that doesn't tell you anything about the racism of each country.
That just tells you that Harvard University believes in bunk.
If they're actually publishing this and being like, hey, we found that Serbia is the least racist country.
Whilst they're all singing, nevo limte alia, santos osi...
No, I'm not going to finish that one.
Anyway, some people will get that joke.
I have no idea what it was about.
So let's end this with just a dump on the BBC, because why not?
Because you put this in the chat a while back, which is the BBC Bitesize, putting the Equality and Social Justice article out, in which we're trying to propagandise kids that are believing in equality and social justice.
They define equality as when each person is seen as equal in the eyes of the law.
No, that's equality under the law, not equality in and of itself.
Social justice is when a person can exercise their rights within a society.
What?
No, it's not.
Social justice is now just liberalism.
Okay.
Yeah, because you have equality before the law, okay?
Because you've got equality, equality on its own is just the same.
Quality before the law, same treatment before the law.
Equality on its own is everyone must be the same.
So they're getting that wrong.
But also, that's required because equality before the law performs justice, produces justice.
And that is antithetical to social justice, ergo the part of social in front.
Because social justice requires that you look at the percentage of people in prison and then determine whether or not this person is going to prison.
You look at the percentage of, say, black murderers and then decide whether or not this person should go to jail because is that social justice?
They're disproportionately represented in the prison system, therefore they're guilty or not guilty.
It doesn't make any sense.
Yeah, which is why it's garbage, but BBC wants to indoctrinate our kids into this.
But whatever, it's a kid's article, so they could just be overly simplifying.
I imagine not many kids read the BBC stuff anyway.
No.
I know I certainly didn't when I was younger.
It's just for leftists to indoctrinate their kids.
But anyway, the discrimination section here as well, I found funny.
The problem is when we discriminate against people too often, people are discriminated against because of who they are.
They may suffer from unemployment, lower wages, abuse, or violence because of their gender, race, religion, or sexuality.
Coming from the BBC, the organisation that discriminates on the basis of race for the application of jobs.
If we go to the next one, you can see here, this is something we noted before.
BBC, this opportunity is only open to people from underrepresented backgrounds.
So, it's the second image here for the BBC. Yeah.
This opportunity is only open to black, Asian, and ethnically diverse candidates.
This was for a research job.
It's not on-screen talent.
You're not playing Anne Boleyn, so you don't have to be black.
Don't worry about it.
This is just for behind the scenes.
The BBC openly discriminates against white people at the same time as like, hey, racism is bad.
It's clearly just to bump up their numbers and to look good in the eyes of the progressives, right?
Yeah, this isn't the first time either.
If we go to the next one, there's the trainee situation they had before as well.
So this was a, I think it was a radio, BBC radio, you wanted to go and get a traineeship with them.
They also banned white applicants.
I emailed them about this when it happened, and they just wrote back to me being like, we stand by it.
People have no shame.
Don't expect them to double down when you're asking them about it.
Yeah, do you endorse racism?
Yes, says the BBC. Aha, okay.
So, there's also not this, but the last thing I wanted to end on was something, I didn't know where to put it, but I just have to mention it because it's really weird, is the ITV. So, after someone said the N-word online, presumably Indonesians and Indians, about the football, the ITV, Good Morning Britain show, decided to read out a message from a nine-year-old saying racism bad.
Oh no, we're not going to watch it, are we?
Yeah, we are.
And then they break down crying about the whole thing because it's so touching.
There's a nine-year-old saying racism bad, which is a stunning and brave thing to say.
They also say here about privilege.
Your privilege if you don't have to think about it.
Let's play.
There is a letter online from a nine-year-old called Dexter.
And Marcus tweeted it along with his statement.
And it says, Dear Marcus Rashford, I hope you won't be sad for long because you are such a good person.
Last year, you inspired me to help those less fortunate.
I hope Marcus feels everything that's coming through from this letter and from all the messages of support.
Then last night you inspired me again to always be brave.
I'm proud of you.
You'll always be a hero.
It's hideous.
That's England.
That's England, isn't it?
That's, isn't it?
Dexter's England, right?
Yeah.
And Marcus Rashford.
And Tyrone Mings and Jadon Sancho and Bukayo Saka and every single member of that squad.
Now look, you've got to read the news, so dry your eyes.
No, I mean, the thing is, it goes to the heart of what we want for our children.
My son going to school, he's talked about racism that he's faced.
He's going to be nine.
But you think about it all the time.
And you're privileged if you don't have to think about it.
And the only time you think about it is when one of your heroes is suffering.
That's the definition of privilege.
Yeah, that's privilege when you don't have to think about it.
It's weird how two grown presenters have broken down crying after reading a nine-year-old saying race is bad.
But the ITV, you don't have to think about your race unless you've got brown skin, and therefore that's evidence of white privilege.
Except ITV, as shown earlier, are also an organization that discriminates against white people applying for jobs.
I just can't get over the utter hypocrisy of the thing being like, we're going to do a big segment on racism bad and also at the same time F white people who apply for jobs in our organisation.
Crocodile tears.
That's why I wanted to show you this.
Not because it's particularly special but just the utter patheticness of crying about racism bad on the show and at the same time saying to applicants who apply for your jobs we will discriminate on the basis of race.
Truly progressive.
Obviously it's going to make things worse.
All of this discrimination isn't going to make people happy about all of this so-called diversity.
People are going to say, oh wait, no jobs want to hire me because I'm white.
That's not going to make someone think, actually, you know what, I was wrong.
It's not going to win anyone over if their opportunities are infringed.
Do you want to tell us about the situation?
Of course.
Freedom Day.
So, Freedom Day was pretty much spoiled by the news that there are going to have to be domestic vaccine passports.
So, before I get into that, I'll just go over the, I suppose, good news.
I mean, we're getting some of our liberties returned back to us that shouldn't have been taken away in the first place.
But, face masks in our voluntary in England, Scotland and Wales are to keep mandatory...
masks because they have their own devolved parliaments.
They have their own petty tyrants.
Indeed they do.
Northern Ireland is also yet to announce but it's still a legal requirement for now.
So only England is allowed to take off our masks while the rest of the UK for some reason cannot.
I don't really understand the logic in that.
They've also got their own rules of sex and all the other ridiculous restrictions where we don't anymore.
Some more bad stuff from devolution.
Well done, Tony Blair.
So all businesses are allowed to open with no limits on their capacity, so no more rule of six, and they're allowed to have as many people without masks as they like.
And they no longer require people to enter with a QR code being scanned or taking details, so you don't need to have the test and trace app and having to scan the We're good to go.
And I think it is probably likely that they are going to use them anyway.
And from the 16th of August, those who are double jabbed and still exposed to COVID are not required to self-isolate anymore, even though it doesn't make you immune.
It just makes the symptoms less bad.
So I don't really understand that either.
And if you're not vaccinated, you're still required to isolate.
There are limits on the number of people who go into care homes still, and you have to have a negative test to get in.
So that makes more sense to me, because if you have the vaccine, you can still carry the virus, right?
But the negative test is the important thing, but it's not going by the negative test, it's always by whether you're doubly vaccinated.
So it seems like the government is just trying to incentivise people to get the vaccine, because it'll make their life easier, even if they have questions about it in the first place.
So the requirements for working from home are also dropped and the school bubble system has been scrapped and UK residents who are fully vaccinated after 14 days they no longer have to isolate when returning to England from a green or amber list country.
So it makes foreign travel easier I suppose.
So, I mean, it's nice that we've got some freedoms back.
I mean, not having to wear a mask, going out and about, and being able to go into shops with groups of people is nice, although lots of people are still wearing masks.
You're pretty much in a minority if you're not wearing a mask in a shop, which is quite amazing, really, isn't it?
At least round here.
Yeah, at least from what I've seen so far.
But it kind of goes to show that the fear campaign that the government has put on people has had such a huge impact on how people think about things, because the government's saying you don't need masks anymore, and people are still wearing them relatively overwhelmingly from what I've seen so far, which is...
Kind of counterintuitive, I expected.
Once the government mandate was dropped, most people would be like, well, that's just a hassle.
Stop.
It's kind of annoying to have it on my face.
I don't want to wear it anymore, but that's not the case.
So, Keir Starmer, Labour leader, of course, commented saying that lifting all restrictions at once is reckless.
Of course, we need an eternal lockdown.
Like, no one's dying.
We need more restrictions.
Labour.
I mean, there's also the fact that how are we going to pay for this?
We can't just close off our economy for two years.
We're not going to do anything.
We're just going to sit in our homes and do nothing and rack up a huge debt.
Our national debt is already close to our entire GDP anyway.
So the damage is already done, but even more of it is just ridiculous.
So I want to briefly go on to how the actual COVID passports will work.
So COVID passports are compulsory for high-risk events, such as going into nightclubs from the end of September.
So you've got to prove that you've been double-jabbed for things like nightclubs and probably music festivals.
So this is the news that basically spoiled the day?
Yeah.
Because you've got all the restrictions being drawn, like we're getting rid of this, getting rid of that, getting rid of that.
Also, by the way, if you want to go into a nightclub or have a life as a young person, let's say, because that's what this is based on.
It's not the pensioners going nightclubbing who are at risk of dying.
It's the young people who are going nightclubbing who aren't at risk of dying.
And they're like, no, you need to be vaccinated, even if you have a negative test.
So, not about the virus then, is it?
Because if you've got a negative test, that shows that you're not infected.
It's just ridiculous, isn't it?
I mean, if I wanted to go to, say, a music festival, I would need to be doubly vaccinated, even if I stood, like, right at the back, away from everyone else if I wanted to, which I probably wouldn't, but it just doesn't make any sense, especially if you're outdoors as well.
Like, supposedly it makes the transmission far more difficult.
Like, you could prove I don't have the virus, also I'm in my 20s, so I can look at the statistics and the chance of death is incredibly low.
Yeah.
That's not good enough.
It's also the negative test, which I think is the better marker of having it, because, of course, you can still carry it once you've been vaccinated and pass it on to other people, which is the main concern here, right?
For young people.
Well, apparently that's the main concern, but...
Well, yeah, it just doesn't make sense, even from the...
It's clear to me that even if you take their logic, it still doesn't make sense, because of course the negative tests would be the key thing in most cases, right?
But no, apparently not.
So the rationale behind the end of September goal for the COVID passports is to give over-18s the opportunity to get vaccinated, so they've at least been vaccinated.
Charitable enough to postpone it a little while so you have a little taste of freedom before it gets taken away, if you don't get vaccinated, that is.
And of course the Covid passport avoids any need for self-isolation if you visit an Ambalist country, which is, you know, the kind of second tier of risk.
So making unvaccinated people second-class citizens.
Everyone else has this right, except for you.
That's more or less what it's doing, and of course, it is ridiculous.
And the nightclub industry has been understandably very angry about this plan, especially considering the government didn't They said we're not going to have them, and then here they are, magically, on the Freedom Day.
It's almost like they timed it so that people would be less angry because at least they've got, you know, some restrictions removed.
So it seems very tactical on their part to say, okay, you're all free to do what you want, but also we've got some new restrictions from the end of September.
And I just can't understand why they would do this.
So I'm going to read a quote here from a BBC article from Sasha Lord, who is a nighttime economy advisor for Greater Manchester.
He says, I'm not a scientist or a doctor, but I'm deeply concerned by the discriminatory nature of those who either can't have the vaccine for medical reasons or age, or who do not want to.
Surely these answers should have been given at the same time as this announcement.
Where does this leave festivals or live music events catering specifically for teenagers or children who haven't been vaccinated?
Does this now mean that young people who have already suffered hugely during this pandemic now won't be able to experience the thrill of seeing their favourite artists on stage?
And he goes on to say...
With this one move, the government appears to have wiped out live gigs for a whole generation, and they definitely have, and it is awful.
Just, okay, you're a young person, because of course under-18s can't get the vaccine, and younger people as well are most likely to go to these sorts of events, and I think it's 35% of all young people haven't had a vaccine yet, so it's a reasonable proportion of them.
Say five.
Yeah.
So that means that the opposing percentage have had the vaccine.
Mm-hmm.
So that's the thing.
It's not even like, oh, 90% of them haven't had the vaccine.
Yeah.
No, you've got more than the majority have.
Two-thirds, yeah.
And they're still putting in these restrictions, which is...
So the science doesn't support it.
It's a completely nonsensical argument to be like, yeah, well, the science this time round, let's say, although all the other time rounds, let's also be frank, true.
But also the point of it's discriminatory, it's illiberal to do this sort of thing, because you're just like, you haven't had the vaccine, therefore you're a second-class citizen.
Yeah, I really just can't emphasise how annoyed I am about it, because they're imposing things on a country where the deaths are lower than the flu, aren't they, at the minute?
Where COVID deaths, you know, they're tiny compared to what they once were.
It's not even comparable.
And the fact that these new restrictions are being imposed on a largely vaccinated population just doesn't make any sense to me.
So I wanted to move on to something that Twitter did as like a bit of a tangent, just Twitter being ridiculous.
So the London protests, the demonstrations against the domestic COVID passports, that was trending on Twitter.
And the Twitter kind of Editorialising.
Yeah, the editorialising here, where they're explaining the trend, says, Demonstrators gather at Parliament Square to protest COVID-19 vaccinations and vaccine passports, despite the fact that various vaccination identifiers and vaccination requirements for travel have been in existence for over a century.
No one's talking about that, Twitter.
You are to moron yanks.
We're talking about the domestic passport situation which the government is imposing for bars, events, lockdowns, sorry, not lockdowns, for events and so on and so forth.
And yet the Yangs are like, oh, I've got an opinion on this, that's right about this.
So not only is it, you know, American imperialism, I hate to use that term.
Yeah, but it is Silicon Valley.
Yeah, it's Silicon Valley imposing their values on a situation which they clearly don't understand because they're talking about foreign travel when it's a domestic issue.
So yeah, just thought it'd be nice to highlight that they are getting it wrong because they are a source of much suffering in the world.
And something else which I think...
These are the guys who want to control what misinformation is.
Yeah.
A party that thinks men can get pregnant.
And related to COVID, something else that was very interesting is that former government advisor to the Prime Minister Boris Johnson has done a recent interview where he's saying Boris Johnson resisted autumn lockdowns as only over 80s dying.
So I wanted to...
Go into this a little bit.
So why is a former advisor, if you haven't been following, having a go at his former employer?
Well, he was kind of fired under dubious circumstances, supposedly.
The rumour was that Boris Johnson's wife, or now wife, I don't think she was his wife at the time, Carrie Simmons, didn't like Dominic Cummings, and mysteriously, he lost his job, for no fault of his own, supposedly.
So I think he's relatively bitter and he's been going against tirades against the government.
He's been calling Matt Hancock incompetent and stuff like that, which at least we agree on that.
But he's been saying that Boris Johnson was reluctant to tighten COVID restrictions as cases rose last autumn because he thought people that were dying from it were essentially all over 80.
And he's saying this to try and smear Johnson.
But this is exactly what we were saying, really, wasn't it?
Just like...
Well, it's what the NHS says.
Here's the average death age for someone with COVID, and here's the average death age if you live in the UK. And if you get COVID, your average death age is higher than the average age of expectancy.
And that's actually what Boris says.
He says, hardly anyone under 60 goes into hospital, and of those, virtually all survive.
And I no longer buy all of this NHS overwhelm stuff, folks.
I think we may need to recalibrate...
There are a max 3 million in this country aged over 80.
Of course, he's saying here that it just was a mistake.
We're protecting people who are already above the average age of dying in the UK, and we're keeping everyone else in their homes.
And this is what we were saying.
I want to believe that he is agreeing with the numbers released from the NHS, but I feel like Dominic Cummings, you actually mentioned this earlier as a joke, which is that he's playing 4D underwater backgammon.
And when she's like, yeah, I'll go out and smear you, bro.
And then I'll release that you said some sensible things to smear you.
To be honest, I believe that more than Boris Johnson saying something sensible.
The official government response was that the Prime Minister took necessary actions to protect their lives and livelihoods guided by the best scientific advice, even though not all of the scientists agreed.
And the government had prevented the NHS from being overwhelmed through free national lockdowns.
But it was the vaccines that worked, wasn't it?
It wasn't really the lockdowns.
But never mind.
UK Chief Scientific Advisor Sir Patrick Valence and England's Chief Medical Officer Professor Chris Whitty both pushed for tighter restrictions in mid-September of 2020.
Apparently Boris resisted, saying, no, no, no.
I'm not doing it.
But then he actually went and had restrictions, you know, a few days later.
I'm not going to do it, and then did it.
Yeah, exactly.
So, I'm including this to reinforce the point that Boris Johnson is the one with the power.
Like, he's acting as...
Like, reading this, you'd think, okay, it's out of his hands.
But he's the Prime Minister.
He's the one who has the choice here.
And it seems like from these kind of quotes, if they're to be trusted...
That he's almost taking a back seat and it's just like, well, I don't want to do this, but my scientists are telling me to.
And, I mean, we kind of all suspected that this was going on, but it's now clearly explicit.
So...
The Prime Minister had parts of the media and the Tory party screaming not to increase restrictions and always referred to the Daily Telegraph for which he had previously written a column as my real boss.
So I think this is really important and this is kind of overshadowed in the BBC article that Cummings is saying that basically Boris Johnson viewed himself as accountable to the media more than anything, particularly the Daily Telegraph.
And I think that says it all, right?
Yeah, all Tory MPs think this.
And it's just not true.
You can circumvent the media.
Look at Trump, for example.
Sure, he had lots of negative press, but he was still wildly popular.
You don't need the press on your side.
And also, it's a bad strategy.
Why would you want to be held accountable by the corporate press?
These are the worst people in the country.
Yeah, they're not doing you any good.
I know we've got a vested interest in saying so, but even so...
But no, I mean, they've just been caught a million times openly lying, making up things, smearing people who have done nothing wrong.
Like, these people are not trustworthy or to be respected in any sense, which is why whenever you do a poll in the Western Hemisphere about how do people feel about the press, I think it's the British who always, like, hate them.
Just hate them.
Rightly so.
I don't think there's any other industry where just the large portion of people are so contemptible.
I mean, John Cleese has talked about this.
They're the least trusted within all of Europe.
Like, poll after poll after poll every single year.
Rightly so.
At least people realise it.
That's something.
So, how do you think the Labour Party reacted to these revelations that Boris Johnson was actually, you know, listening to the numbers?
Well, the Labour shadow Health Minister Justine Justin Madders said, NHS workers, patients and the relatives of COVID victims would find Mr Cummings' interview shocking and difficult to hear.
The revelations are further evidence that the Prime Minister has made the wrong cause time and time again at the expense of public health.
Boris Johnson is reckless, unfit to govern and a public inquiry cannot be delayed.
White noise at this point.
I don't know.
Just whenever labors speak.
He did exactly what the scientists told him to.
So I don't know what they're saying here.
It's exactly what you told them to as well.
Yeah.
You were the guy banging the table and then he bended the knee to you and you were like, oh, his policies are bad.
I was like, you're the one who wrote them.
So yeah, not only is he listening to his advisers and the Labour Party for policy advice, they're also criticising him for it, so they apparently want their cake and eat it as well.
More positive news, there's a petition to outlaw discrimination against those who do not agree with the COVID-19 vaccinations.
Surf them?
Yeah.
It's not about the vaccine, it's not about pro or anti, it's just should unvaccinated people be surfs?
And no.
And this is doing really well, and I encourage everyone in the UK to sign this petition.
Like this morning, I think it was about 90,000, about, I don't know, 8 o'clock this morning.
And it's already up to 117,000, so it's doing really well.
I mean, it's over that 100,000 barrier where they've got to acknowledge it.
So keep on signing it, let people know that you oppose this, and let people know that it's unpopular.
Because of course you had the other thing of, what was it, 650,000 people signing a petition to end online anonymity because a few sports people received some mean tweets.
So, in comparison to that, we can surely do a bit better with curtailing of people's freedom rather than hurt feelings.
So, I think I should probably skip over the rest because I'm running out of time here, but...
You wanted to talk about AOC's...
Socialist capitalism, yeah.
Exactly.
I kind of like AOC. Because you're just so stupid, it's a meme.
Oh, right.
We've spoken before about how there's a bunch of Labour MPs who I love because they're the worst, and therefore it's just like watching a car crash.
I mean, what can you do?
AOC is another one of these people, and Reuters have decided to join her campaigning staff.
I'm not joking.
This is the Royer's tweet in which they tweeted out.
What is this here?
T-shirt emoji.
AUC is now selling merchandise.
Okay, Reuters.
Alexandra Acacia-Cortez has become one of America's most prominent progressive Democrats with her calls to tax the wealthy and spend heavily to fight climate change.
Is that the main policy, is it?
I didn't realise that.
With some gif of her talking about fight for the future, tax the rich.
Don't Reuters pride themselves on supposedly being neutral as well?
Well, they've joined her campaigning team, and this isn't just one tweet.
If you scroll down, there are a whole bunch of these.
So the next one is with a loudspeaker emoji, tax the rich, not a loudspeaker emoji, fight for our future.
I really hate people who write with emojis.
Sorry.
Just a personal pet peeve.
Now she is investing heavily in her online store, selling merchandise with her name, initials, and slogans as fundraising efforts for profile-building exercise.
And then there's another one in which they continue to simp.
Moneybag emoji?
Okay, don't want to usually use that around AFC if you were binging her up, but okay.
Her campaign paid a political merchandise firm more than $1.4 million in the first six months of 2021.
She paid them $1.4 million, presumably to provide the merch and then the profit.
God knows.
I just looked up, by the way, that Reuters is worth $20 billion, so they want to tax the rich.
Billionaires and millionaires combined for socialism.
Yeah.
According to the campaign disclosures of the Federal Election Commission, that's her spending the $1.4 billion, that's more than many lawmakers spend on their entire re-election efforts during the same period.
And she's just paying that just to pay for the, what would you call it, the wholesale cost or whatever it is for the merch, the profit that she's making off of that.
Who knows, but it's going to be millions of dollars, isn't it?
Millions and millions.
For someone who hates capitalism, she's sure pretty good at it.
I love it.
Every time there's a socialist, just every single time they become a millionaire.
I absolutely love that capitalism does that.
The free market world in which we live makes socialist millionaires.
And we'd all look at them and be like, how's it feel?
I'm a libertarian now.
Yeah, of course you are.
It's a proof that capitalism has failed because it makes socialists rich.
It's not bad criticism.
So there's the next we're hearing, which she says, while she has no formal party leadership role, AOC has star power rarely seen in Congress.
Again, this is Reuters.
Not IOC's campaign.
This is Reuters writing this.
They've got a phone emoji.
She has more than 8 million Instagram followers.
Video camera emoji.
She shot a video for Vogue detailing her personal skincare routine.
What?
How's that got anything to do with politics?
Part of the resistance.
Totally not just a thought, essentially, for socialism.
Clean skin for socialism.
To be fair, a lot of socialists could benefit from that, but...
Well, it's American socialists, isn't it?
So they're just sitting there on their $2,000 computer and buying their $20 drink.
And you look at them and think, why?
It's not even for the workers.
Have you ever met one?
No, they're racist.
Yeah, okay.
So they finish off here.
Her online store capitalizes on her fame, experts say.
Anyone with eyes say, let's be honest.
Yeah, experts, right.
The last bit here, and she says her campaign has raised about $6.9 million since November's election.
Compare that to $10.8 million for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and $23 million for the Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer.
Millions and millions and millions.
Doesn't it feel good to be a millionaire, AOC? But wait, how much is she worth?
So I googled how much is she worth, because I was like, well, she's clearly making millions off her merch sales, but not by her campaign, aka Reuters here, because I don't know what else they're going to be their name at this point.
And there's a fact check from USA Today News, which is really funny.
So they're like, fact check, AOC is worth more than a million dollars.
Claiming that people are saying she's worth more than a million?
Well, she's making millions and millions in merch sales.
I think it's probably more than one million, but okay.
I would say so, yeah.
But they say at the bottom here, are ruling false?
Ocasio-Cortez reported between $2,003 and $31,000 in assets, compared with a student loan debt of $15,000 to $50,000.
So she's worth net loss of 20 grand.
B.S. Like, who believes that?
Like, who's reading that and believes that after her making millions in sales on merch?
Even just her wage from being in Congress is going to be better than that, surely.
Well, it's 180 grand a year.
She's been there for God knows how long now.
Yeah.
Not to mention all the other perks and speaking fees and all the other merch she'll be selling and gifts she'll be getting, I'm sure.
So, no one can be dumb enough to believe that, but apparently Reuters wouldn't...
Shut the F up about this.
And I'm not kidding, it wasn't just a one Twitter thread.
If we go to the next one, you can see the Reagan battalion here.
Listing just tweet after tweet after tweet from Reuters.
Being like, did you know AOC sells merch?
Check out AOC's merch right here.
Go to AOC's merch to buy merch.
News organisation.
Breaking news.
Leftist candidate has merch.
Except it's not even news.
Her merch has been around for ages.
And it's ridiculously expensive.
Yeah.
Isn't it like $60 for a t-shirt or something like that?
Not quite that much for a t-shirt, but the sweatshirt is.
So we go to the next one.
You can see some people taking the mickey out of her for this.
So Sean Spicer, using capitalism to push socialism.
So her being an arch-capitalist, making tons of money by stealing all that money away from socialists.
Because remember, if you're a socialist, this is theft.
You give someone a shirt and they give you their money.
No, no, no.
That's not a fair exchange in which both parties win.
No, no.
Theft.
Because that's the socialist line, all this.
But there's a thing.
Not bad for her.
Good for her.
Make millions of dollars selling merch, stealing it from leftists.
Based.
I mean, taking leftists' money and hoarding it, I mean, it's a good public service.
It's probably the best thing she's ever done as an elected representative.
Yeah, stealing millions of dollars from leftists.
Fair enough.
And again, it's not stealing to any liberal, it's only stealing to socialists, like herself.
She ain't happy about this, people calling her out for making millions of dollars.
She says, not sure if you knew this, Sean, but transactions aren't capitalism.
Uh, what?
What?
Capitalism is a system which is, well, it's a Marxist term for the system of natural human engagement in which we have a free market, that we exchange goods freely.
That's Marx describing what was going on in the natural state of the world, which is humans exchanging goods, and that's the free market.
So it is capitalism.
That's what that is.
The opposite of capitalism is when you get societal interference.
So she says, continuing, capitalism is a system that prioritizes profit at any and all human environmental cost.
So, is her t-shirt business a non-profit, then?
Is she raising money for charity?
Well, she goes on to argue, yes, but our shop is unionized, therefore it's not capitalism, doesn't operate for profit, and funds projects like free tutoring, food programs, and local organizing.
That doesn't stop it being a capitalistic enterprise, my love.
Because under socialism, what would happen there?
You wouldn't get to hand that money out as you please, would you?
You wouldn't get to decide where that money goes.
No, it all goes to the collective, and the collective decides where it's spent.
Whether they decide to spend it on, you know, the Red Army to invade some other country who's done nothing wrong, or to just send you to the gulag because you've made too much money this month, and therefore you're a dirty capitalist.
I mean, I'm sure if anyone did this in the Soviet Union and amassed this kind of wealth, they would just be shot...
No, you're clearly corrupt.
In the Soviet Union, if you said, oh, it's not capitalism, it's just transactions, you'd be instantly gulagged.
I love how she defines capitalism as a system that prioritizes profit at any and all cost.
No company does that.
BP. Yeah, tell that to JP Morgan.
But, like, take BP or EDF or any company.
Like, they all have regulations about what they do.
It's not like BP just goes around digging up oil out of the ground and is like, health and safety, that's for gays, and just throws out the clipboard or something.
Like, no, they've got set standards about what they can and can't do and things do go wrong sometimes.
Yeah.
So every company on planet Earth that isn't just Scrooge McDuck who wants to screw over everyone they've ever met.
Like, they're not capitalists.
They're all socialists now.
Just no idea.
Just throwing stuff out to be like, please don't point out that I'm making millions of dollars selling tax-the-rich shirts.
Also, I'm not rich.
And then dry to rise with the dollars.
So, also wanted to mention that, yeah, as I mentioned earlier, capitalism is a slur for the Marxists.
The free market system is what she's engaging in, which is why she gets called a capitalist.
So, if we go to the cope about all this, so the Socialist Party, I've mentioned this before, in which they're trying to cope for Cuba, because, of course, Cuba is a big embarrassment, big L for the left.
So they're like, no, that's not socialism, that's state capitalism.
Nonsense time.
State capitalism.
Yeah.
So, the state and society under a socialist worldview are the same thing.
Because when you have the collective that overtakes society, well, the state will disappear away, but who's going to run the place?
Well, it'll still be the collective, and who's the collective running the place?
That'll be the state, wouldn't it?
This is why all the socialist countries of the world, Russia, China, North Korea, all the rest of it, consider themselves socialists even though the state was running everything.
Because that's what socialism actually looks like.
Because there is no other way in which that works.
Famous capitalist Fidel Castro said no one ever.
Then why are you simping for him?
Socialist Party of Great Britain.
But none of this is news, as I mentioned.
Reuters tweeting all this out as if this is breaking news.
It's not.
So let's go to her store, because I just think it's funny.
So you can see she's selling posters about the Green New Deal.
A bill which, when put to the House, she refused to vote for, even though it was her bill, because it was an embarrassment.
Do you remember this?
I don't think so.
They finally, because it was after she brought out her paper about it, and it was like, yeah, we're gonna ban all planes, and you'll have to get a train to Hawaii.
And everyone's like, are you retarded?
Like, how do you, like, Hawaii's an island.
We're gonna invent flying trains.
We're gonna rebrand them.
They're gonna have wings.
they kind of go in the air you would have to ban all cows as well so presumably we just have a cow genocide which would kill all of them and then it was brought to the house by the republicans be like go on vote for that and she did like no one in the democratic party did not even herself even though it was her thing she was like i don't want to be associated with my own bill now do i so there's that there's also stuff like the the next thing here on our store which is uh drink water don't be racist what Stunning and brave.
How are those two things related in any way?
I just love how it's so non-interesting.
It's just, don't be racist.
Okay.
Yep.
That's, that's, that's...
It's not enough just to not be racist.
You have to be anti-racist.
I did laugh at the fact that she has a gender-neutral fit in there, so there we go.
That's for the non-binaries, I guess.
And then there's, as you mentioned, the $60 Tax the Rich sweatshirt, which is very famous.
Comes in XXL. Ha!
She knows her base.
But don't worry, you can actually go and buy stuff from the Trump store for less than this.
So this is $58 for that sweatshirt.
You can spend $50 on a doormat that says, don't blame this family, we voted for Trump.
Which is much better.
I'm not getting paid to say this, it's funny.
But also, if you go to Trump's store and look at the clothing, so like this t-shirt here, that only goes up to XXL. Doesn't go to XXXL, whereas Socialist merch does.
You're trying to imply something here.
I don't know, just people know their audience, don't they, I guess.
So also, the cringe about all of this isn't new, and I wanted to demonstrate this for people who might not know.
Remember the OK Boomer Girl?
Unfortunately, yeah.
Yeah, so click on the first image here, how it started.
She decided to buy this merch for 58 bucks and then dance around because that's all she does.
And then there's the next image, which is her apartment.
So, and she has a $2 million apartment.
And here's my apartment tour.
I love it.
Every socialist ends up as a millionaire in the West.
I might become a socialist just to make piles of cash.
But you just have to do it by stealing other socialists' money.
Because remember, according to them, that's theft.
It's a public service.
That's what it is.
It's not profit.
I worked for it.
That's what profit is.
Dunce.
Anyway, so I say, I mean, this isn't new, her merch, but Reuters becoming an AOC simping gang, that is.
I just thought it was funny.
Well, not that.
Let's go to the video comments.
Why is it always the middle class who seem to think that they know what's best for the working class?
Our lives are completely different.
You went off to uni, I got a real job.
It doesn't make sense.
Because they went off to uni.
Hey, it's not all of us.
We're not all bad.
No, I mean, we should specify it's not uni in general, it's specific courses in university.
Yeah, like I had a good experience going to university.
They made me more based, if anything.
Like, they taught me loads of stuff.
Damn, I just called psychology a science.
Yes!
But yeah, I mean, if you're actually learning something tangible or based on fact, then you'll become more based.
And if you learn nonsense, you'll become less based and become cringe.
Yeah.
Going to university made me realise how much biology rather than socialisation had an influence on people's psychology, which is kind of a prerequisite to most things that I now believe.
And I thought that's a weird formulation of Robert Conquest's law as well.
I can't remember which one it is, but it's the thing people know most about is the thing they're most conservative about.
So people are always conservative about things they know.
Even a hardcore Marxist, they're very conservative about their Marxism.
As in, they don't let anyone infringe on their...
Yeah, yeah.
Here's the strict version, and that works.
And all those nonsense ideas don't work.
But it's true of everything.
Like, if you know a subject really well, you are very conservative about it.
I can see that, yeah.
And if you don't know anything about it, because you took media studies instead of media production, you're cringe.
Which is how we know leftists don't know anything about economics.
I can make that joke as well, because Ranvi was telling me about some of that.
He was like, yeah, my course.
Very cringe.
Yeah.
I endorse Carl's message of we must defeat the universe.
However, on the off chance that Warhammer is the correct prediction of the future, for when we meet corn demons and orcs, I believe we should all start going to the gym and training in martial arts because it sends a certain message that this is our universe when we out-strength and out-martial arts skill corn demons and orcs.
Beat them at the thing they're best at.
I didn't understand, but cool t-shirt.
That wouldn't work though, because the orcs are ridiculously tall and muscular and the corn demons are crazy.
Even the Imperial Guard get beaten up by these guys.
It's just pure numbers that makes them win.
I've got to toe-to-toe with the Bloodthirster and see how that goes.
Jackie Chan versus Bloodthirster, Bloodthirster wins.
It's all over my head.
I have no idea what you're on about.
You need to learn about 40k.
I'll beat you up the head with it.
Let's go to the next one.
Hey, I want to thank everyone who checked out my comic.
I got a lot of new followers a short amount of time.
Also, I disagree that our modern world will inevitably lead to a nomadic lifestyle.
A lot of it is cultural.
We set the sights of our children very global very early on.
And things like how suburbs are structured and the way we've just left the idea of local communities to be a buzzword just kills it.
Yeah, I assume this is also kind of in reference, I believe it was his question about how do we stop people being so mobile because then they don't have any value to where they are.
Yeah, it's a definite thing.
If you remain in one place, you have more investment in making that place good.
I mean, it's not a very difficult thing to understand.
Even if it's just the street on where you live, like you don't want some guy just throwing trash everywhere.
Just you want to deal with it.
If you can hit the fire alarm, that's not planned, so if we burn to death, yeah, that's a good stream.
I think the electricity jumped a bit to the screen by the Blackboard second.
Lol.
Okay, let's go for the next one before we die.
You might remember that when Biden was elected, I said that every socialist regime has political concentration camps or death camps within 12 months.
It's now been, what, seven months?
How are we feeling about that prediction?
Five months left.
We'll find out.
If you're a rightist in the United States, you've got five months to enjoy your life.
Not a road trip, I guess.
Like, I've got a friend who's taken a road trip around the United States and looking at the beautiful sights, and it's totally worth it.
So, let's go to the next one.
Hey Callum, I've got a little story for you from my father-in-law who was Polish and lived in Poland under the USSR.
He had jobs that allowed him to go to Germany and back, and he would use that to smuggle in capitalist clothes to give to his wife, who became the enemy of the neighbours because she had leprechaun levies.
He managed to get these capitalist goods past the border guards by always keeping a bust of Lenin at the top of his suitcase.
So they would open his suitcase, see the statue of Lenin, know that he was a party man, and not check the rest of Lenin through.
That reminds me of the Jewish joke, you ever heard that one?
Are we dying or not?
Okay.
Well, thank you for tuning in.
This is the end of the podcast because apparently the building's on fire.
Great.
▲
Export Selection