Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 22, 2021 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:31:20

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #181

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast of Lotus Eaters for the 22nd of July 2021.
	I'm joined by Carl.
	Hello!
	And today we're going to be talking about who is winning the culture war and the left's every opinion on the culture war they're holding at the moment.
	Apparently they're holding literally all of them like Dr.
	Fauci.
	And also women being oppressed by taking the knee.
	So you know it's our turn.
	Yeah.
	And also a dadist sermon, which apparently you're going to give fun.
	Ladies, you are going to want to pay attention to the cope you're about to hear later on in the podcast and make sure that you take the appropriate actions to make sure that's not your cope.
	That's all I'm saying.
	Yeah.
	So, first thing to mention is the premium content on the site.
	We're going to talk about some of the stuff we have planned.
	So, you have the reclaimed Lawrence Fox's party launched a document about free speech.
	Yeah.
	Lawrence Fox, I was at the launch of it.
	He's commissioned a few barristers to do a legal analysis about the state of free speech in the UK and what can be done to protect it.
	And I have a copy of the report, and so I'm going through it in detail, and we'll do what will be a premium podcast, but we'll make it free, Because we want everyone to be able to see this, because it's useful and important and provides really grounded proposals for the government.
	So basically, if we can get this to become something that is widely understood in the sort of free speech activist areas of culture, then that would be good for everyone and really help them put pressure on the government, which is something we've got to do.
	And also the upcoming Road to Wigan Pier book club in the middle of the book.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Next week's book club will be the Road to Wigan Pier and then afterwards we're going to do Mal's Great Famine, aren't we?
	Yeah, we talked about this just before we went on.
	I was like, you know what?
	We have Mal's Great Famine.
	We keep referencing the Eaton Kids story, for example.
	It might be useful just to take ten stories out of that.
	Not do a full review, but just here's ten stories from there and just go through them because it is unbelievable and when you hear them...
	Got a feeling we're all going to be anti-communist, folks, which is always good.
	One thing to mention on the video side of it, so the video comments, the editors asked me to say that don't speed up the footage and then send it in.
	He'll do that for you.
	It's his job.
	And also make sure that it's understandable.
	And just don't take the mickey with it as well.
	Do try to make sure that your comment or question is kept 30 seconds, just for the fairness for other people, because you're not the only person.
	And one comment per person per day, please, because our time's becoming limited.
	The mention I'm trying to get there is if it becomes so high-pitched that we can't really understand it, then it's kind of pointless for watching and for us.
	So, for anything else, let's get into who's winning the culture war.
	Yeah, well, the good question...
	Oh, sorry.
	Not even the good question.
	The question that the left is debating at the moment is, who is winning the culture war, and is it the right?
	Because they just don't know what they're doing.
	And that's literally what Nezrin Malik said in The Guardian recently.
	Now, this is not a purely British story, because this...
	And we will go on to the American side of the culture war as well, because really, it's not a national problem.
	It's an international problem.
	It has many different theatres, but it is one overarching war.
	So as Nazarene begins, the right is winning the culture war because the opponents don't know the rules.
	Well, you began the culture war.
	How is it you didn't know anything about it when you started it?
	But this is a very interesting piece.
	And so what they're trying to do in this is essentially wrest control of the narrative of England.
	From the patriots who like the country to the anti-patriots who hate the country and wish for it to change.
	So I find it very, very interesting here.
	So she says, Okay, well who are the invaders who are trying to mould a new narrative of England in their own image?
	Because the Patriots have got quite a firm and true narrative of England.
	The Anglo-Saxons resisted the Vikings and they resisted the Normans, but eventually had to come to an accommodation with the Normans in the form of constitutionalism.
	This developed into what we understand...
	Through to the English Bill of Rights to be the sort of modern stage set for constitutional democracies, and that of course evolved into the liberal democracies we have now, with the theoretical constitutional protections we're supposed to enjoy.
	This is a very strong moral narrative.
	So what's this foreign narrative that's come in?
	Well, the foreign narrative is like, oh, England is racist.
	Why?
	Because it's not communist, that's why.
	And it has an English character, if you can believe that.
	And so they're trying to play out this battle across our entire societies.
	And Nezrin is aware of this.
	She says, is it a man or a woman?
	It's a woman.
	Right, okay.
	I did get that right.
	Culture warriors of the right have their own story, crafted and solved by the government.
	As if it was the government who crafted the narrative of England, that the English believe about themselves.
	The right don't look to the state to tell them about why they are.
	Exactly, yeah.
	The right does not look to central government for its opinions, or at least it shouldn't do.
	In which England is a victim of those who unfairly cry racism at every opportunity?
	Yeah.
	The government didn't craft that narrative.
	We did.
	We, the people of England, crafted that narrative.
	The common mistake made by those who prefer Gareth Southgate's version of what England is, which is the progressive, international, European view, is...
	Well, it is.
	What's England?
	A European country.
	No, it's not.
	That is how they think.
	Yeah, but it's not.
	It's obviously not.
	No, it's a breakaway civilization, completely.
	But yeah, so the leftists, basically, the continentals, wish to believe that the culture war is confected.
	It is the belief that simply calling it a confection is some kind of victory.
	You started it.
	You know you started it.
	Confected by the left who invaded a country that existed long before they did.
	The narrative of England was well established long before socialism was created.
	It's not new.
	Anyway...
	She says, There we go.
	She agrees that the left has shifted the discourse to racism being something a person does to the state of affairs in this country that it is.
	And so, again, you're attacking the concept of England by declaring it racist, and so people are not wrong and say, well, look, we're being the victims of your belligerent activism.
	She's also devalued racism entirely.
	It all means nothing and everything.
	Well, yeah, it means literally just the state of affairs of the country at large, which means what's the point of calling any one person a racist if racism is institutional?
	I'm not an institution.
	Sorry, you can't call me a racist now.
	I know you speak highly of me, but...
	Yeah, I know I'm important and everything, but, you know.
	But anyway, she says, when it comes to these real debates about the real England, there's no debate about the real England.
	There are the foreigners who are trying to destroy England, and then there's the patriots.
	This lesson has gone unlearned.
	We argue about the country and its intentions as if it's a boorish uncle.
	Yes, you hate it.
	You're antipathetical to it.
	We are trapped, to borrow the words of an actual cultural fracas, between England is racist 100% from Stormzy and there is thought that this claim is 100% wrong from Sajid Javid.
	Can we ask an Englishman about that?
	Do we have to have people of immigrant descent tell us?
	Right.
	her background is i believe she's north sudanese and her family raised her and she wrote a guardian article about this i should find her at some point in which she says that they were raised to hate the south sudanese because they had darker skin than the north sudanese who are arabs right and then she moved to saudi arabia with her family and all the arabs looked down on her for being brown because she's obviously not arab yeah because sudanese people don't look like in arabia and she says like that's how she was raised and it's like right okay this might explain why you have such a racialized worldview oh absolutely
	i mean if if you are literally taught to view people of different skin tones as different Yeah, she thought, well, she was taught, she says, see, the South Sudanese is inferior because they're African, not Arab.
	And then when she went to Arabia, all the Arabs were like, you're not looking Arab to us.
	You're an African.
	And that's, I would have a guess as to why she's so obsessed with race.
	Yeah, but the question really is, why are we allowing them to force this conversation?
	I don't care about her concerns about racism.
	I just don't care.
	I don't even care if people have racist opinions.
	I care about their behaviour.
	How do they treat one another?
	And this is the kind of thing that's obviously being overlooked here.
	Anyway, on the heads of a few brave young men, as in the football team that lost, and their manager was placed at the hope of achieving the elusive liberal dream of progressive patriotism.
	You're not a liberal.
	Finally, we cheered.
	She doesn't even call herself a liberal.
	And she's never going to call herself a patriot, either.
	No.
	Finally, we cheered.
	Here was the real England.
	We knew that it was out there all along.
	This is the real England?
	Being a bunch of foreigners and continentals?
	This is real England, is it?
	No, it's not.
	It's obviously not.
	It's so transparently not.
	You can wear the skin suit all you want, but everyone knows that you're inauthentic.
	Anyway, set aside the years of deliberately cruel austerity and the resentful chaos of Brexit, that's the real England.
	Small state and independence, that's the real England.
	But of course she has to frame these as moral attacks on her.
	Sorry.
	Anyway, the bungled libertarian pandemic, disaster, Grenfell, Windrush, blah, blah, blah.
	The team was supposed to show us that another England was ready to be born.
	Literal subversion.
	The new England is here.
	I don't want new England.
	That's not how these things work.
	No.
	I love the old England.
	That's not an evolution, that's a replacement.
	Yes.
	She's not a patriot, of course, she thinks England's racist.
	And another England to be born means getting rid of the old England.
	I think the old England had some significantly good virtues.
	The speed with which this hope was daubed with racist graffiti and monkey emojis is not proof that England is racist.
	Just the outrage that followed does not prove the reverse.
	It is simply a reminder that we have not shed the mistaken idea that racism, like some stubborn relic from our past, the big hour there, is...
	Can be simply worn away by the slow accumulation of new realities, the passing of time, shifting of demographics, intermarriage and integration, as if that's happening.
	As if we're integrating all of these new immigrants.
	And because they're intermarrying.
	That's not happening.
	I would like it if it was happening.
	I think that would be a brilliant idea.
	It would be an excellent solution to the problems that people like Nezarin Malik feel that we face.
	But anyway, so they conclude by declaring, glass half full, that England has changed but not enough.
	Not the opinion of a patriot.
	A patriot doesn't look at their country and go, wow, this country sucks.
	This needs to change.
	And it's changed a bit, but not enough.
	That's not patriotic.
	A patriot could argue that there's this small amount that needs to change, but to have a revolution of the thing, destroy the old and bring in the new, as she lays out the new England, that doesn't make any sense.
	No.
	And that's, again, deliberate subversion, an attempt to destroy what was there before.
	As we wait passively for this new, inclusive England to arrive, you're not looking for England.
	What you're looking for is the European Union.
	That's what you're looking for.
	You're looking for the globalist, internationalist, progressive view of the world.
	And I hate to say it, but England is a specific, particular and parochial place.
	She's looking for a Merkel state.
	She is.
	But anyway, the Conservatives have successfully connected race to patriotism in the public mind.
	That's you.
	That's you thinking of race.
	There are lots of English people who are not white.
	No one cares, right?
	But also, has she ever seen any Conservative Party propaganda?
	Yeah, if they ever mentioned the word race, you know, is that their strong suit?
	The only time they ever do is in the sense of, you know, we accept all races.
	Yes.
	They're not the BNP. Yeah, but again, I hasten to add, I mean, I personally know lots of non-white people who are also English because of interracial marriages, which is a good thing.
	You know, it's fine.
	It's integrate into the culture.
	And these people, and I suppose myself as among them, Are some of the most vociferous defenders of Englishness.
	Because it has a particular character.
	It is not simply this new inclusive England.
	You have to actually like the place if you want to be included in it.
	If you are an obvious enemy to the culture that already exists there, they're not going to be very accepting of you.
	Don't know why I have to say that.
	Anyway, the point is, she could try becoming English, right?
	There is an Englishness, an English character that she could try habituating herself to.
	If she wants to change the character of her habits, then I think she'd find herself very welcome.
	I mean, imagine if she went up to just some pub in the shires and just sat down, got a pint of beer, poured out a paper and was just like, alright guys, how's it going?
	You know, after ten minutes they start talking, after a few hours she'd be one of the group.
	No problem at all.
	But she doesn't do that.
	She is keeping herself apart from these people.
	Anyway, the government has invested a lot of time and uncharacteristic effort in making the allegation of racism an insult and bullying institutions and organisations that dare to interrogate it.
	You mean resisting your attacks.
	It's commissioned the report about the Tony Sewell report which complains and then complains that this is all a form of the government's racism.
	None of this is about the government's racism and in fact that's the point.
	The goal of this rhetoric has been achieved.
	Anyone who talks about racism is simply doing Britain down, smearing white people, forcing a woke agenda down our throats.
	Yes.
	It's weird how she's so able to accurately describe her own movement, and yet lives in a deluded land of what the opposition is, in which the Conservative Party is putting BNP propaganda out.
	Yeah.
	Which it's not.
	Times colonist Melanie Phillips, invited onto the BBC Wednesday to discuss the horrific abuse suffered by the three young black footballers, almost exclusively from overseas, simply explained that taking the knee was the racist gesture, and that Black Lives Matter was fundamentally anti-white, anti-West, and anti-Jew.
	Yes.
	I don't know if I should just leave full stop.
	Like, no, like, oh no, they're totally not anti-Juge.
	Brilliantly put.
	So I'm going to skip to the end here, right?
	The complaint here that the right has managed to mobilize sort of the questions of race and identity that are playing a central role.
	It's like, really?
	Really?
	The right brought up questions of race and identity, didn't it?
	But they paint an England that is under assault from uppity minorities and their woke backers who can only be kept at bay by the Conservatives.
	If only that was the case.
	Are the Conservatives doing a good job of keeping the woke at bay?
	Not a brilliant job.
	There's nothing wrong with being woke, leader of the Conservative Party.
	Yeah, could be doing a hell of a lot better.
	In our This Is England excitement about the football team, we don't seem to have learned that what is true of individuals is also true of England.
	England, like a person, can behave in idiosyncratic ways when it comes to race.
	No one's talking about race.
	No one's interested about race.
	No one cares.
	We're talking about values.
	We're talking about a way of doing things.
	And the way of doing things you want is the continental way, and we want it to be the English way.
	I think that's proper because we happen to be in England, if that's okay with you, Nezrin.
	But this is the point from this I find most interesting.
	The only certain truth about England is that it is a creation, not a reality, whose essence can be revealed or discovered.
	I disagree.
	I think that England does have an essence, a reality that can be discovered.
	This is not true, Nezrin.
	You are a liar.
	And the point, I think, is you're not taking the time or effort to try and figure it out.
	But anyway, after Nezrin going, well, well, you know, the culture war, we're losing, we don't understand what's going on.
	That could well be because, like in the Independent Publish, there is no culture war.
	Oh, okay, thanks.
	Left-wing commentator, if we can go to the next one.
	This was written by a French lady who, I mean, I guess just being white now just makes her as English as you and I, because she's white.
	Therefore, Marie Le Conte.
	Is well positioned to judge Englishness.
	I mean, to be honest with you, as a French woman, she is actually well positioned to judge Englishness by means of comparison and difference.
	But not from the inside.
	But not from the inside as a fellow white person.
	You know, like, sorry, no, you're not.
	Anyway.
	So, it's just what...
	I mean, don't get me wrong.
	There are French critiques of England and Englishness that are very informative.
	Anyway, basically, some Conservatives apparently think that Gareth Southgate is a tool of deep woke, as in the left-wing cathedral in Britain, basically, because his patriotism essay was suspiciously well written.
	And I agree.
	There's no way that Gareth Southgate was the author of those ideas, in my opinion.
	We know that he's not the author originator of the ideas, but I doubt he wrote himself.
	One Conservative MP, who's apparently not a hardline Tory, but she fails to name him, says that he was convinced that Rashford had been working with the Labour Party from the start and was effectively just a front for the opposition.
	Well, everyone can see it.
	Everyone can see the partisan nature of what the England football team was doing, which is why they provoked a partisan backlash.
	I actually quite like the term deep woke.
	I know a lot of people have been, a lot of leftists have been like, oh, how silly.
	But it's like, no, it's true.
	When an individual sacrifices their own personal, sorry, professional standards and instead replaces it with political values, that's an activist for an ideology and they're operating in a deep sense, like the deep state.
	Deep woke works.
	I mean, you could be a deep conservative, you could be a deep liberal.
	Well, that's where you're wrong, because these points of view are interesting because they're so obviously wrong.
	There is no deep woke.
	Just that there are no Labour Party cells giving secret instructions to footballers.
	Bull.
	Stupid idea.
	I think that's totally, totally wrong.
	I don't think that you think that, and I think that you know that we don't think that.
	How many professors in this country support the Conservatives versus the Labour Party?
	And do you think that has any impact on what they do?
	No, of course not.
	Apparently none.
	They're just totally professional.
	And the fact that it's only like 8% Conservative is not a concern whatsoever.
	In fact, Callum, there is no such thing as woke.
	Not really.
	Now we don't even have left-wing activism.
	Left-wing activism doesn't exist.
	Cleavage on social issues aren't new at all.
	In fact, there's nothing unique about our generation or the times we live in.
	Brilliant.
	No woke culture at all.
	There's no leftism, no Marxists, no nothing.
	I always love it when they go for this defence.
	Nothing's going on.
	Then what are you advocating for?
	Nothing.
	Then what culture war are you losing if you're not even a faction that's fighting in it?
	Why are you mad if we ban Critical Race Theory again?
	No reason it doesn't exist.
	Great, well we can continue banning mythological things if you like.
	I ban unicorns from school classrooms.
	No chimeras, no angels or devils, none of these things.
	I think that's a great idea.
	What do you think?
	Anyway, the conservatives seem to have forgotten.
	I love this as well, right?
	Some conservatives seem to have forgotten that social issues evolve in a way that economic ones do not.
	Being economically conservative 30 years ago meant, broadly speaking, to be fighting for a smaller state and lower taxes.
	It means the same today, right?
	Okay.
	But as if that's not a moral issue as well.
	That's just economic.
	On the other hand, being socially conservative 30 years ago meant approving of Section 28 and a higher age of consent for same-sex relationships.
	That's right.
	I'm a conservative meme.
	She's just hit on there.
	That's right.
	I'm a conservative.
	Of course I want a higher age of consent for same-sex relationships.
	Okay, well, 30 years later, yeah, I'm a conservative.
	Of course I'm for drag queen story hour.
	You know, I just don't think they should do it in the nude.
	You know, of course I'm for transgenderism.
	I'm just worried about the number of children who are seeing adult male penises.
	You know, and then in 30 years' time, well, you know, of course I'm for the paedophiles, but I'm not sure that we should be taxpayer funding them and stuff like that.
	It's the continual march that she is identifying here.
	I love the way that she's, oh, but nothing's going on.
	Everyone knows what's going on.
	Anyway, getting to her conclusion here, in a way the paranoia ends up coming off as slightly desperate.
	That's right.
	People are just paranoid about wokeness and cancel culture and the left debasing their children.
	They're just paranoid about it.
	It's just paranoia.
	Just put that on its other side as well.
	All the leftists are paranoid about there being right-wingers in existence.
	Racism everywhere and all this nonsense.
	Transphobia.
	The idea of an all-powerful woke cabal working from the shadows.
	No one said they were all-powerful, but there's definitely a woke cabal and they're not even working in the shadows.
	They are endorsed by trillion-dollar companies.
	They're not working in the shadows.
	Our dear French author.
	But there will always be more reassuring than the possibility that maybe times have changed and they have been left behind.
	Why have they changed?
	Who's pushing the change?
	There is no change.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Now there was no change, yeah.
	But we know this is a conscious effort from the left.
	It's not like we can't name the activists and groups and who's funding them.
	We know!
	Anyway, waging endless culture wars, the Conservatives can keep convincing themselves that all is still in play and they can win.
	Ah, so now we've got to the point of assuming the eternal, inevitable victory of the left, which they all do, even while they're continually losing.
	In Jeremy Corbyn's mind, he still won.
	It's wild.
	Perhaps the solution...
	Look at what Boris has done.
	Perhaps the solution then is not to take them entirely seriously.
	Okay, great.
	You don't take us seriously and we're going to keep fighting you.
	Anyway, so moving on, the Wall Street Journal.
	The culture is a leftist offensive.
	I'm glad we agree on that.
	It is, obviously.
	And so, you know, so the right's winning the culture war.
	There is no culture war.
	Oh, it's a left-wing offensive.
	It's a very interesting range of opinions you get, isn't it?
	So this comes because...
	These conversations are happening because of a Fabian Society report in the UK for the state of the culture war.
	And in this one, this is part of an ongoing conversation that the left is having because a chap...
	Whose name I didn't write down, wrote a piece called, If You Hate Culture Wars, Blame Liberals, and basically blaming the left for creating the insane culture war that's going on in the United States.
	Trying to replace everything from the liberal standard to being a socialist standard.
	Exactly.
	And so, what I love about this is, this Mr.
	Drum, who wrote this, basically is like, look, the whole woke movement in general has turned off many moderate voters, and so we, the left, are losing...
	Because you are insane radicals.
	Defund the police.
	Abolish capitalism.
	Discrimination against white people.
	All the United States is evil.
	1619 Project.
	All of this crap.
	If you're a minority and you disagree with us, you're also, in theory, insane.
	Yes, exactly.
	And these awful, awful opinions of the left promotes, creates and promotes.
	As you can see, it's the same culture war that's going on across all of the Western world.
	It's just different theatres of war.
	But I love the way he puts this, though.
	The white activist class won't like hearing this, he says, but moving to the left while galvanizing the progressive base risks outrunning the vast middle of the country which progressive activists seem to be completely uninterested in talking to.
	And he ends with, and for God's sake, please don't insult my intelligence by pretending that wokeness and cancel culture are just figments of the conservative imagination.
	My dear French author, maybe you should be listening to this chap.
	We know that it's real.
	Everyone knows that it's real.
	And he's like, well, maybe the Conservatives are overreacting to it, but it definitely exists.
	I don't think it's an overreaction.
	I think it's totally proportional.
	And so we come to the New York Times opinion.
	Why don't we just lean into the culture war that we started?
	So it doesn't exist.
	That doesn't exist.
	That the right's winning.
	I don't know who.
	Why?
	Why not?
	Anyway, I'll quickly go through this.
	So, this is in response to the piece referenced in the Wall Street Journal and the Wall Street Journal's response.
	It was Kevin Drum, sorry, who put this.
	And then there was another chap who wrote an article called The Myth of Asymmetric Polarization, as in the Republicans have become slightly more Republican and hardline in their beliefs, but the left has essentially taken on a different set of beliefs and become radicalized into those.
	Anyway, So, the chap who wrote the second article argued that progressives do not want to acknowledge that on certain issues wrapped up with the culture war, Democrats have moved further and faster to the left than Republicans have moved to the right, because to do so would require that they cede some of the moral high ground in their battles with conservatives, since it would undermine the preferred progressive narrative according to which the right is motivated entirely by bad faith and pure malice.
	Ooh.
	Who is motivated by bad faith and malice?
	I don't know, but let me show you some more pregnant men.
	Yeah, let me tell you about the culture war that we've begun, that you're winning, that doesn't exist anymore.
	This is not bad faith.
	And I'm certainly not doing this out of a hatred of your country.
	Definitely not doing it out of a hatred of America or England.
	Absolutely no malice under there.
	I mean, I know that I've just pathologised literally your entire civilisation and everyone in it as racist, but it's not malicious.
	It's definitely not malicious.
	But anyway, so the solution that the New York Times provides us with is that we should lean into the culture war, if the other left, and be careful with it because we're worried that we might put into the hands of our adversaries ever more powerful weapons.
	Please do.
	Please continue to continue loading the Conservatives' cannons for them, if you don't mind.
	That would be nice.
	Because, frankly, the things you're doing are just terrible and crazy.
	And you're making demands that literally will undermine our entire civilizations.
	But then you already knew that, didn't you?
	I love the fact that they admit that they're losing.
	It's like, yeah, the Wii Sparrow situation, for example.
	Not a win for the left.
	No.
	But I love it.
	We started a culture war.
	We're losing it now.
	There is no culture war.
	Also, why is the right winning?
	It's like...
	Talking about malicious and bad faith culture wars, let's go on to the women being oppressed by taking the knee.
	So this is the first article here, in which you have the news which, after the defeat of the England team, Wokism had to look for something else to poison, so they went to the Olympics, because why not?
	So, Olympics team, GB women's soccer team...
	Take the knee at the Tokyo game.
	So they're going to take the knee there.
	And I guess just why not?
	Just why not, ladies?
	Just try and try again every time Wokism is losing.
	Just keep poisoning everything until there's nothing left.
	I think that's wonderful.
	I really hope that they lost badly.
	Yeah, I don't know about the GB team, but the US team played a game, which got a lot of coverage recently.
	And if we go to the next image, we can see basically a summary of how this went.
	Look.
	They didn't play against the Swedish teenage boys team, did they?
	No, the US essentially kicked a ball into their own face and then quite about it.
	So if we go to the next one, as you can see, these are the results.
	I saw the kick!
	Yeah.
	I mean, don't get me wrong, that looks rough.
	I wouldn't have enjoyed that either.
	But it's a summary of how this went.
	So if we go to the next one, this is the results.
	As you can see, Poso posting this.
	US women's soccer team takes the knee, goes on to lose 3-0 in the Olympic event to Sweden.
	And you can see there an image of them where, let's say, 80% of the team are taking the knee, and they've all got written across their chest Which is just really gauche.
	I don't know how else to put it.
	Black Lives Matter with red and blue.
	Even from a left perspective, if you thought it was good, it just looks bad.
	And you've got three members standing up there.
	So just like the UK football team, the Black Lives Matter team lost.
	Yeah, but also the embarrassment.
	I mean, just the pure cringe out of all of this.
	There's also the captain of the team there, the one with the purple hair.
	So that's always a feeling, isn't it?
	So let's go to the next one, in which you have the Babylon Bee talking about this.
	I thought I'd just throw in some fake news because it sounds like real news at this point.
	So the Babylon Bee, a fake news outlet, wrote this.
	Thank you for your service.
	And they have some fake quotes in here in which the captain is saying, this isn't the time to score goals when America is still racist.
	Also, I demand a hefty raise.
	But how is that even a joke?
	That's probably literally what they're thinking.
	I know, right?
	But that's the thing.
	It's like, I read the Babylon Bee as, you know, for good fun, and half the time I just think, you know what, that actually sounds like you should probably sell it.
	And the funny thing is, of course, because the satyr comes from reality.
	The reality is, okay, so before all the Swedish watchers of this start going, and just being happy and whatnot, nah, both teams support Chauvinn.
	So let's go to the next link.
	Anyone who takes the knee is a sport of chauvin.
	I mean, I don't know what else you're doing it for.
	So you can see the Swedish and the US team taking the knee because...
	Cringe.
	I'm amazed that we are the ones...
	The Swedes weren't way ahead of us on this, to be honest.
	I love how it's also the women proletariat rising up.
	The other question here is, of course, that, wow, this is about...
	The wage gap.
	Oh, of course it is.
	Why not?
	Because remember, it's the American team.
	Remember the American team?
	So there's more comic mockery of this.
	We go to the next one.
	I love this comic.
	G-Prime, yeah.
	Her taking the knee, and then the Swedish team scoring, because why wouldn't you?
	And then she's like, I deserve more money.
	I love George's facial expressions.
	He captures the smugness perfectly.
	I mean, look at that smug face.
	I deserve more money.
	Yeah, that's exactly what they're like.
	It's not just the Anglos who are embarrassing themselves.
	Of course, you've got the Swedes there, but if you go to the next link, you can see them calling this, AP calling this, soccer players kneel to start a new era of Olympic activism, which sort of tells you that you shouldn't be doing it.
	Yeah.
	Because why?
	Yeah.
	Like, why do you have to poison everything you touch?
	But they say in here, the referee blew his whistle, talking about the British game.
	The British players glanced at one another as they dropped to their knees.
	Their Chilean counterparts responded in kind, all taking the knee.
	And I'm just wondering if the Chileans were looking at each other like, is Gusto Pinochet coming back or something?
	Like, we'd better just do it, otherwise I don't know what's going to happen.
	Because, like, the game starts and just, like, the entire opposition team kneels.
	Curiously looking around for a man in a cloak.
	What are the Anglos doing this time?
	So, an hour later, it was the American and Swedish players in Tokyo taking part in Wednesday in United Unprecedented Gestures Against Racism.
	Yes, shut up.
	I'm sick of people talking about BLM is just against racism.
	Also, we support Fidel Castro and his fight against the evil proletariat.
	Also, abolish the family and abolish the police.
	This is going to go great.
	Also, reparations.
	Also, we're going to burn down your town.
	Also, it just continues, doesn't it?
	Anyway, sorry, go on.
	This is all about fighting racism.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Sorry, what were we talking about now?
	Racism?
	We need a socialist dictatorship to fight racism.
	What's this got to do with racism?
	What are you talking about?
	Anyway, they continue.
	And also, the final women's soccer game of the day.
	Sure, Australia's players pose with an indigenous flag and link arms before kickoff while the New Zealand counterparts knelt.
	Just the Anglos.
	Every Anglo except the Canadians so far has embarrassed themselves.
	The Canadians will not be far behind.
	Justin Trudeau will turn up in blackface taking the knee for everyone.
	LAUGHTER It's just inevitable.
	Blackface against racism, the Canadian way.
	The Trudeau way.
	I love that he couldn't tell people how many times he'd done blackface as well.
	I don't know.
	Just loads.
	So they say the practice of activism at the Olympics was long restricted by the International Olympic Committee.
	Such protests were within limited parameters and now they've been allowed to take part.
	So if we go to the next one, this is the link in which the IOC changed their rules because...
	Well, I want to be on the right side of history, don't you?
	Which is socialism.
	Right, okay.
	So they say the latest guidance appears to let athletes also copy the iconic black power raised fist gesture.
	Oh, good.
	So racial nationalism at the Tokyo Olympics.
	Wonderful.
	Looking forward to it.
	That's what the Olympics is all about, folks.
	But there was some base stuff because, of course...
	It's literally a supremacist gesture.
	It's in Japan, and the Japanese don't stand for any of this nonsense, so the Japanese authorities have apparently banned the team from posting this stuff on social media in an effort to try and dampen the nonsense, because Japan still has standards, professional standards.
	They're not entirely political activists.
	They're not communists.
	Yeah, so there's that.
	But you remember I mentioned about the fact that this is also about the wage gap.
	This is definitely about the wage gap.
	Oh, yeah.
	Don't know what that's got to do with it, but here's the Enlightenment, which is, you remember they did a segment about this on The Daily Show ages ago, which Gavin McGuinness was edited deceitfully, and then he just put out the full footage and was like, you guys are a bunch of morons.
	Yeah.
	And they were arguing in there that the American team score more goals than the male American team.
	Therefore, we get more money, right?
	And it's like, not if no one watches, because it's the female team.
	And let's be frank, women weaker than men.
	And you don't get paid by the goal?
	Because, I mean, if you were, then the under-15 teams are going to be getting loads of money when they play against the women's teams.
	Sorry, it's true.
	It's true.
	Yeah, so there's also a more recent clip in 2019 in which they played against Thailand and also were very unsportsmanlike, and The Daily Show did more cope for this.
	Oh, the patriarchy was oppressing women by restricting the number of goals.
	She says in here, our women were not playing against Thailand, they were playing against the patriarchy.
	Let's play the clip.
	No, this has nothing to do with them.
	Our women weren't playing against Thailand.
	They were playing against the patriarchy.
	That's what this game was really about.
	Well, last time I checked, the patriarchy wasn't made up of 13 Thai women.
	No, no, no.
	No, I'm talking about this.
	28 players are suing their employer, the U.S. Soccer Federation, alleging institutionalized gender discrimination.
	According to their lawsuit, the women's team earns just 38% of a male player for the same kind of work.
	The women scored more goals in one match than the men's team has scored in every World Cup appearance since 2006 combined.
	You see that?
	The women's soccer team is doing so much more and getting paid so much less than the men's team It's like finding out that Tony Stark got paid less than Hawkeye One's a superhero, the other's a dad who's into archery And the women's team is Hawkeye That's what's going on there.
	Why would they make this argument?
	I don't know.
	It's so stupid.
	I don't know how much alcohol they give their audience either, because there's no way you'd fall for that unless you were drunk.
	Well, it's just so ridiculous.
	Okay, but if a third of the people are watching your games, the money is made up of ticket sales?
	Why do I have to say that?
	Why would it be made up of goals?
	Yeah, why?
	What?
	Like, if you play North Korea and score ten goals, you need more money than if you're Spain playing, I don't know, France and being France.
	But if it's paid by the goal, then why wouldn't each team just go like, we're just gonna let them in.
	Yeah.
	We're all gonna come out of this loaded.
	It's like, oh god, we need to pay the team literally billions on either side.
	Well, I'm sorry, we just didn't take that much in ticket sales.
	Ticket sales?
	You know, what's that got to do with how much money we get?
	It's ridiculous.
	But when you put ball in net, money print.
	Yeah.
	Stupidest of stupid arguments.
	And they made it back when they interviewed Gavin, and it was really dumb then.
	And they just continued.
	Like, even though everyone's just like, are you guys actual morons?
	Like, no, they're still making segments in which they're like, they're fighting against the wage gap.
	Man, they're being disrespected by how much they're being paid as the women's soccer team that are trash anyway.
	Well, I mean...
	I mean, they lost to Sweden.
	They lost 3-0 as well, so not exactly a close loss.
	So they deserve to go home with no money, and Sweden deserves to go home with three bonuses each.
	I guess so, yeah.
	That's how that works.
	So the US women's soccer team's out of luck this time.
	Hand your salaries over to the Swedes, and well done.
	Have you tried hiring people who identify as women?
	For the women's soccer team.
	I'll leave that there.
	Anyway, I just wanted to show this picture in more detail.
	Just look at that.
	I can't get over this picture.
	These privileged children who are like, yeah, I'm going to stand up for racism.
	It's the most basic B kind of standard ever.
	I mean, remember Tanamongu in iDubbs?
	Do you remember that?
	Yeah.
	And Tanamongu's like, yeah, I want to spread the message of being against racism.
	That's it.
	These people are just Tanamongu level of stupid.
	Wow.
	Because they're just like, oh, I'm against racism if I'm a good person.
	What else are you against?
	I'm against eating feces.
	Oh, yeah.
	I mean, give them the Nobel Prize right now.
	Anyway, but if you want to talk about actual bigotry and tribalism, I decided to watch Winston's stream about South Africa, which was very enlightening, and I'd recommend everyone go and give it a watch.
	Winston, if people don't know, he was born in South Africa, moved to China, has a very unique perspective on racism, let's say, of dealing with those two places.
	And he gave a pretty good summation of why these people are trash.
	And I can't put it better than him, so I'm gonna let him say.
	My daughter's half Chinese.
	She is playing with kids over there.
	Mexican, black, Korean, Puerto Rican, white, and God knows what else.
	Everything you can think of.
	Like a big mix.
	And there's nothing, there's no hatred, there's no weirdness, there's no racism, there's no bullsh**.
	It's safe.
	This is America.
	Everyone in America is f***ing deluded.
	They think it's the most racist country in the world.
	You don't know what real racism is.
	If you grew up in South Africa, if you lived in China, any of these places that I've spent great times, great periods of my life in, you would know what real racism is.
	You can go on and on about your systemic racism.
	You can go on and on about things that you perceive as having hurt your feelings.
	But you know what?
	I'd rather have hurt feelings any day of the week and allow my daughter to grow up in a society where her f***ing race is not the most important thing about her.
	America and other developed countries have it right.
	And you f***ing spoiled, arrogant pricks who grew up in this kind of situation, in this kind of country, who go around trying to Tell me that America is racist?
	You guys can go f**k yourselves, okay?
	I'm sorry to be so blunt and, you know, I understand that there are issues that need to be addressed.
	You have to understand that it's nothing in comparison to real racism.
	In comparison to real bullshit that your average South African has to put up with.
	Anyone who's not Chinese who moves to China has to put up with.
	Racism sucks and it's bad in all forms, but you do not understand what it is unless you have actually experienced the real thing.
	And this kind of shit that first worlders complain about all the time really boils my blood because it's petty.
	Yeah, well put.
	I don't know if you know anything about Winston.
	I don't know if you watch his stuff.
	He's usually extremely calm, extremely measured.
	That was a very off-the-cuff moment for him.
	And that was the point where he's talking about people being killed in South Africa because of their skin tone or the wrong tribal group.
	And the riots being very tribal as well.
	I don't understand them fully, but he does and he's laid out.
	And it's like, right, there's that in which, you know, let's kill you because you're the wrong race or the wrong tribe.
	And then he goes over to China and you've got, you know, McDonald's saying no blacks in this McDonald's, for example.
	He checks on his phone.
	What's the West up to?
	Because he's had to leave China now.
	He goes to the West.
	Black lives matter.
	Why?
	Institutional racism I can't point to.
	The West is cancer, man.
	It's actual cancer if we decide to embrace this stuff and make it mainstream.
	Oh, I agree.
	I agree.
	And I think he makes a great point about the kids don't care.
	They don't.
	I mean, my son's got lots of friends he doesn't realise aren't European, obviously, because he doesn't really have that kind of conception yet.
	And, you know, so he's just talking about, like, all of his friends, and he, like, the last thing I want to have happen is to have them suddenly, you know, gain this, like, weird racial consciousness.
	Yeah, exactly, exactly.
	So his friends are then like, oh, no, you're oppressing me because you're white and we're not.
	That'd be awful.
	So at the moment, they're just a bunch of kids having fun with each other, and it's really wholesome, and so it's just like, yeah, no.
	I think it's a particularly valid point, though.
	I know people might feel a bit weird about using kids as an example, but it's like that meme where you have the little Japanese girl and be like, make her apologize for Pearl Harbor.
	Why?
	The hell does she have to do that?
	No, and then you take these little white kids and you're like, yeah, we need to give them race consciousness so they know that they're evil, and the brown kids in the room know that they're inferior.
	People are scum.
	Yeah, that is awful, isn't it?
	Anyway, we'll do a premium podcast about the effects of critical race theory at some point, because I'm about halfway through their Bible, and I can explain now why a lot of it appears as it does, what they're thinking, what the actual motives are.
	Anyway, moving on.
	Ladies, you're going to make mistakes in your life, and so you've got to choose which mistakes you make.
	Everyone makes mistakes, there's no question of it, but the mistakes you end up making are a consequence of the decisions that you made leading up to the point of the critical decision where you make the mistake or don't.
	And what you want to do is avoid the effect that Miss Kate Rose here has found herself in.
	This was a viral article that she had written, and it's from 2015, but...
	When you're coming to these sort of timeless relationship questions, it doesn't matter.
	They don't have to be contemporary.
	This had a million and a half views, and John found it and sent it over to me, so I thought, yeah, this is well worth talking about.
	And I like the way she's framing it, because she's framing it as if she's not responsible for the choices that she's making.
	Yes, you are.
	You're entirely responsible.
	Now, the main argument, I think, that would be fair from her perspective is if she would say, well, look, society didn't prepare me to have to make sensible decisions.
	I was told that I could be as hedonistic as I wanted, I could be as irresponsible as I wanted, and that somehow I would just land on my feet and find the man of my dreams and And I would be living happily ever after if I just settled down at 30 or something.
	That's not how it works.
	That's just not how it works.
	And that's why she's like a thank you letter to the men who didn't have the balls to claim me.
	Are you a piece of property?
	A piece of lost property?
	It's very Islamic of you.
	Yeah, very progressive.
	But as you can see, this whole thing is a cope.
	A massive cope.
	And I am genuinely sympathetic to these sorts of women who are now getting into their mid to late 30s who are like, well, hang on a second.
	Why aren't men interested in me anymore?
	It's like, well, because you were lied to.
	That's why.
	And we're going to continue hammering from the book of dadism on this until young women realise...
	They are not just unlimited, you know, free agents to do whatever they want with no consequences.
	There will be consequences.
	Anyway, so...
	Same for men.
	Oh, absolutely.
	But no one ever tells men there are no consequences to your actions.
	No one ever says that to men.
	Ever.
	Have you ever had anyone say that to you?
	Not that I can recall.
	No, and you'll have got the exact opposite, wouldn't you, from your dad.
	What the hell are you doing?
	Yeah, exactly.
	Exactly.
	It's just a one-sided issue because no one is ever telling men that they can be everything and have everything and everything will work out great.
	No, men get told to shut up and get to work.
	Rightfully so.
	Anyway, so I love the way that she begins this.
	Although I am a strong and independent woman, I have a secret cavern inside my heart that is open to be claimed but never owned.
	But no one does.
	And while I realise I still have so far to travel on this journey, I also feel immensely thankful for all those maybes and what-ifs.
	I'm thankful for all of those who are intimidated by my wild heart, because it taught me that I have two choices in life, either live within the boundaries of their comfort level, or say F it and be my own self wild and all.
	Big cope energy here.
	Because live within the boundaries of their comfort level, as in be considerate to your partner.
	Yeah, I was thinking, what the hell does that mean?
	That's what that means.
	I could be considerate to the person I'm dating, or, F it, I'm going to be wild.
	Which, hmm, hmm, what does that mean?
	We know what that means.
	Anyway, so, basically, she's failed form-lasting relationships because she's cheated on various boyfriends, and now no one wants her.
	Obviously.
	You'll see as we go along.
	I'm appreciative for those who I made uncomfortable with my truth.
	I hate that phrase.
	Yep.
	That's because it means nothing.
	You did something that hurt people, you won't consider it to them, and now you're calling it your truth.
	It was only through learning how much others didn't like the truth exposed, and to learn for myself how much I crave its very existence, as if truth were a drug would be my favourite high.
	I mean, this just sounds like a massive cope to me, but anyway...
	I'm gratified each and every time I felt I wasn't getting what I needed from a man because, in fact, I wasn't.
	It was only through looking at what I didn't have that made me realize what I do want.
	While I may travel along empty back roads by myself at times, I've also realized that it's okay to not accept less than what I deserve regardless of whether it makes sense to others or not.
	So, okay, but how often did that happen and do you think that that is consequence-free?
	Also, what kind of standard is she using here?
	Nothing less than I deserve.
	Well, a very high standard, that she probably doesn't live up to herself.
	But more importantly, you remember that you called this a thank you letter to the men who didn't have the balls to claim me.
	Like, you're on your own.
	Because you've acted in a way that was inappropriate, you didn't respect the people that you were with, and this led to you ruining every relationship you had until now, no one wants you.
	Because of this I'm wild, my wild side, that you decided to not, I don't know, habituate yourself to controlling, which you should, obviously.
	Does she expand what that means?
	We'll see.
	I can't remember off the top of my head.
	I'm thankful for the insecurities that your actions brought out in me, because if it hadn't, I wouldn't be the woman I am today.
	You're complaining about the woman that you are today.
	Anyway, in looking at what emotions that the behaviors of the others were triggering me, I had the ability to look at myself and make a choice on how I wanted to feel.
	Then why didn't you make that choice about how you wanted to feel when you were sat there looking around going, oh, there's all this stuff over there, there's these other men that I want and blah, blah, blah.
	If you can choose how you want to feel, why don't you choose not to ruin your relationships by chasing after whatever you think is the better prospect?
	If you get to choose how you feel like that.
	It was only through this experience that I learned that no one can make me feel a certain way unless I give them permission to do so.
	Okay, then why did you ruin all of your relationships leading up to this point?
	Why couldn't you have learnt that lesson before you ruined everything?
	And I like the way that she's basically stumbled into stoicism here, quoting Hamlet.
	There's nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.
	Anyway, even though at the time it is never easy, I'm simply so grateful that you never loved me enough.
	That's a big cope.
	That's a big cope.
	You don't actually want to be writing articles saying, I'm grateful you didn't love me enough.
	And she's the one who left the men?
	She's the one who ruined the relationships with the men.
	She admits it was her insecurity that led her to essentially be promiscuous and cheat on her boyfriends, and this means that they didn't love her enough.
	It's someone else's fault, is what she's saying, even though she could control her feelings.
	She didn't control her feelings while she was with them and went on and cheated.
	Weird.
	Again, massive cope.
	And the fundamental core of all of this is that she's not taking responsibility for her own goddamn actions and her own goddamn feelings.
	Ladies, don't be like this.
	You are responsible for the way you feel and the way you act.
	And you are the only person responsible.
	Anyway.
	We never loved the same way twice, and while I know in your own way you did love me, it wasn't the kind that could keep me warm on a blustery winter's eve.
	So just change your feelings.
	I don't know.
	Thank you for showing me that I don't want someone to be only half in love with me or to merely appreciate me, but to leave me breathless.
	Now this is a really interesting point, right?
	Because what she's trying to do is say, look, I deserve the magic of a full-throated romantic relationship.
	I deserve to be treated like someone's princess, like the object of someone's soul desire.
	But you can't capture that kind of magic with your 15th boyfriend.
	That doesn't work.
	That's not how things are.
	And I'm sorry to say it, I don't want to be the bearer of bad news, but what she's looking for, this kind of deep romantic relationship, you get these maybe once or twice in your entire life, if you're lucky.
	Some people don't get them at all.
	And so you have to make do, and you have to be aware of that in advance.
	So basically, if you feel that you are actually in this deep romantic relationship, you have this kind of love, don't ruin it.
	Don't just be casting your eye around to see if there's anything better.
	There isn't anything better.
	And you end up like this woman, going, well, look, I'm glad that you taught me stuff, blah, blah, blah.
	Don't be like this.
	I'm so appreciative for you having tried to make me the woman behind the man, because it was there in the shadows that I learned I meant to be a partner and nothing else.
	Well, do you want to be a wife or not?
	What are you aiming for?
	Anyway, I can create a lot more trouble in the world next to a man who appreciates the burn of originality.
	So you're looking for some kind of life partner rather than a husband.
	But this means that you didn't get what you want.
	And now you're writing bitter articles about it.
	But anyway, I looked at some of the comments on this, because obviously this is very entertaining.
	And I thought it was amusing that there were lots of women patrolling this woman.
	I love it when women patrol themselves at each other even.
	Cindy says, Based Cindy.
	And then there's another one from Clara.
	Hi, Kate.
	I really wanted to love this piece.
	I really did.
	As a woman who has deeply felt the full weight of grief in the aftermath of several broken long-term relationships, currently happily married in the late 30s, I understand your need to express your relationship experiences and learnings about yourself.
	Sadly, the public nature of this makes every sentence in the article scream the opposite to strong and independent woman.
	It screams self-absorbance, self-centeredness, and a lack of understanding or readiness for a mature two-way respectful relationship.
	Smoked.
	Absolutely just one-shot it there.
	This, all alongside a disturbing disrespect for those men that you once chose to be close to.
	You take zero personal responsibility, apart from, by the way, I'm no angel.
	Wink.
	Did you provide these men with their perfect needs as much as you say they did not fulfil yours?
	Surely a basic respect for the men should be equal to the amount of respect you expect for yourself and other women.
	Imagine a headline, a thank you to the women who didn't have the right tits to clank.
	I'm sure you wouldn't quite appreciate reading that.
	You have diminished those who have helped you on your journey to display your own magnificent, bright, wild light.
	I only hope that your new, courageous, better self starts thinking and writing more about the growth feelings and endless mysteries behind others' eyes as much as you do writing about your own.
	Journey on, I wish you all the best.
	Brutal.
	Absolutely brutal assessments from her sisters there.
	That's a very good point there about it being public, though.
	Like, there is something very weird about writing publicly in a website about your relationships and how you're so good for being signal and not having someone.
	Well, it's an obvious cope, and what she's obviously doing is looking for other people who share an experience like that, who don't want to take responsibility for the decisions they made.
	And we'll get into the follow-up article she wrote about this, showing that actually, yes, it was her.
	She admits, I did this.
	I ruined these relationships.
	It was all me.
	But yeah, exactly, John.
	She's looking for validation from the public.
	And she's doing it because she wants to pretend that she did nothing wrong and doesn't have to change.
	That's why she's doing this.
	And ladies, you do have to change.
	You're not perfect.
	You need to improve.
	Same with men, obviously, but no one ever says that men don't have to improve.
	Anyway, she followed this up with, to the men who didn't have the balls to claim me, I'm no angel either.
	No, you seem to be the person responsible for the problems.
	This article is written in response to the many comments left of my original article.
	I never said I was an angel.
	My hands are dirty with the mistakes of my past that my niece scraped from the struggle to find what will make my heart sore in this life.
	Cheating.
	You mean cheating on people.
	That's what this was.
	Instead, I only have good intentions like the rest of us, I suppose.
	I have lied to others and unfortunately to myself.
	I have made choices that I knew were wrong and I chose to make them anyway simply because I wanted to.
	Well, I thought you said you could control your feelings.
	I thought you said you'd learn to control your feelings.
	Why did you sit there making terrible choices that you knew were going to hurt people?
	And how is that you acting in good intentions?
	You're not acting in good intentions if you're making selfish decisions that you know will hurt people, especially if you're just following your base desires and rationalizing why it was okay after the fact.
	It's not acceptable.
	I've caused tidal waves in this life with the mistakes I've made.
	I've hurt others, sometimes accidentally, sometimes on purpose.
	Why would you do that?
	Good intentions.
	Again, the double thing, the lie, the lie that she's telling herself is I don't always bite my tongue and choose peace.
	I will often say the very things I know shouldn't be said just because I delight in saying what so many choose not to.
	Admittedly, I take delight in being difficult at times.
	So, you cheated on people and destroyed your relationships, you refused to exercise control over this kind of destructive nature, and you're not actually taking responsibility for that now.
	Okay.
	Most of the times I've caused hurt and made mistakes have come from fear, from either striking out against another first so I wouldn't take the first blow, or because I was protecting myself from the seductive lure of possibility by self-sabotage.
	So, I mean, I agree with Frank Herbert that fear is the mind-killer, but what she's saying is she was involved in these long-term relationships, and then she started getting paranoid.
	She was like, oh my god, you know, maybe this isn't good enough for me, or I'm good enough for him, or whatever, and then she's cheated, is what she's saying.
	And, okay, well, then that will destroy your relationships and cause men to go, well, I don't have the balls to have you, then.
	Bye.
	You know?
	Well, the cancer balls in their head that's making them not think?
	Well, no, apparently all of these men were quite sensible and left.
	I know that I will continue to make mistakes, and I know I undoubtedly hurt those I love, but I can try my best not to let that happen.
	Trying my best here is a euphemism for make excuses the next time I show no self-control.
	That's what it is.
	You've got to control your fears, you have to control your passions, if you want to maintain the sort of magical, even be able to form, frankly, the sort of magical relationship that you're looking for and you know you're looking for that.
	Anyway.
	To speak the truth does not always mean it will be pleasant, but if we teach ourselves to address other people and situations in a way that is authentic for each of us, then we will set the expectations for others in our lives.
	Okay, so why didn't you do that?
	Why does it take all of this for you to get to essentially the point that every child should be able to articulate?
	This means being honest in our feelings, whether it's love, anger, fear, or pain.
	It means not making excuses when we don't feel like doing something, or making false promises when we don't want to let someone down.
	This type of truth is letting our lovers know that if we're feeling attracted to someone else, here we go.
	Or if we are falling out of love with them, it's valuing honesty above all else.
	So there we go.
	She's failed to commit.
	Like, emotionally commits to one guy.
	And then another guy.
	And then another guy.
	And another guy.
	And she's constantly looking around for other guys.
	Oh, he's attractive.
	Oh, maybe I can find that magical love that I'm looking for with him.
	No.
	That's not how it works.
	It doesn't work that way.
	She wasn't discerning in her choice of partner.
	Now has a high body count.
	And is making excuses for it.
	That's what this is.
	I'm sorry, ladies.
	I'm not going to sugarcoat this, right?
	You only get one chance at creating this kind of magical relationship that you're looking for.
	You can't jump from relationship to relationship and expect to find it.
	So either lower your expectations or improve your behavior.
	And do this from a young age.
	You can make a lot of mistakes that will ruin your ability to be able to achieve the end goal that you're looking for.
	From literally the age of 18 onwards.
	And I'm sorry that the culture around you doesn't incentivize you to think in these terms.
	But it is your future and it is your life and it is going to be taken away from you by your own actions.
	I really mean this.
	Anyway.
	She says, I never said I was an angel.
	I am merely a beautifully flawed woman doing the best with what I can.
	I am a wife.
	She's just the victim here.
	I'm laughing at the chat as well saying that World War II had a lower body count.
	That's just mean.
	I mean, I don't think she's had that kind of boy count.
	But anyway, I am a woman who tries to extend love and kindness to those who need it most.
	And someone who believes that in the end, truth and love not only prevail, but they're the very qualities that make your life worth living.
	It seems like you're not doing your best and you're just fulfilling your animal desires, to be honest.
	With my broken wings and my dirty bare feet, I make the choice not to be an angel, but to be real instead.
	I don't claim that my heart and soul is divine perfection manifested, but I do guarantee it's unlike any other.
	But you're not.
	This is not a unique story.
	There's women who jump from relationship to relationship, cheating, and then going into the next one, blah, blah, blah, blah, until they realize that they're in the 30s, and they've got literally like 20 guys that have dated and had sex with, and no one wants them.
	It's like, sorry, this is not unique.
	And I don't want to be cruel about it, but it's not that you...
	You didn't just not make the choice to be an angel.
	You weren't even trying to keep fidelity to these people.
	That's the thing.
	You were the one who was saying it as well.
	But anyway, this all seems like a big cope to me to prevent the inevitable, crushing, soul-destroying realisation that is cathood that she has got coming.
	Break out the wine, though.
	And the thing is, this is something I've talked about in a video before.
	I did a video on Lotuses.com, our other channel, called Your Scars, because this is something that, ladies, I do think you should think about from a young age, because men can recover from a lot of the mistakes they make as a youth.
	Which is not fair, I agree.
	It's not a fair thing.
	But you don't get away from the scars that you accrue, these sort of emotional scars that have caused her to write these pieces.
	She can't escape these scars.
	And it would have been better, I think, in her mind and for her if she hadn't accrued them at all.
	And it's by her choices that this happened.
	And it's because the culture around us is lying to the women.
	It's just openly lying at this point.
	And so if you want a more comprehensive, sort of, well, direct, sort of scripted view of it that I actually had time to think of properly and articulate properly, then you can check that out.
	But yeah, be careful, ladies.
	That's all I'm saying.
	Let's go to video comments.
	Here we have some legislation from the UK. It mandates vaccinations for care workers with only a temporary authorisation required.
	Round 3 Parliament last week House of Lords did at least note the lack of impact assessment and the weak evidence, but then passed it anyway.
	And that's my girlfriend out of a job.
	Yeah.
	That's our system.
	It's not just got some problems, it's very broken, let's be honest.
	Yeah.
	When there's certain things, they just don't even try.
	I should mention probably two things I was thinking about.
	Now I've forgotten, I can remember the first one, at least, are declaring war on Serbia.
	I love the Serbians in the chat who are upset about me joking about Serbia, but too bad.
	History is history.
	I can't remember the other thing now, but I've forgotten now.
	Oh well, let's go to the next one.
	Hey, Lotus Eaters.
	The dictum, you can't serve two masters.
	You'll either end up loving one and loathing the other.
	I can't remember the last of the verse, but it comes from Jesus.
	He says that you cannot serve both God and Manon, which is often translated money, but it can mean any worldly thing.
	Yeah, I saw a lot of people in the comments correcting me, like, that's from the Bible, idiot!
	And I was like, well, it's been a long time since I've read the Bible.
	You know, I didn't know.
	I never bothered with the Bible.
	It's interesting enough.
	Honestly, the Old Testament's a rip-roaring read, if you look at it as, like, a fiction.
	Like, because, you know, I don't know what God's intent with the Israelites is, but he's a lunatic, frankly, the way he treats them.
	And this was mean.
	Like, he wipes out an entire generation of them crossing the Sinai Desert because...
	reasons?
	It's like, these are your chosen people, are they?
	Yeah, I'm just going to kill them all.
	Some of them will arrive in the Promised Land.
	Is he Mal?
	Well...
	We'll kill half the world, but at least half will be socialist by the end of it.
	Well, yeah, basically.
	Half of them will at least worship me by the end of it.
	God's not a very forgiving God in the first half of the Bible.
	Jesus makes some good moral arguments, so it's not worth your time.
	I'll stop fighting it and just watch Attack on Titan.
	It is hilarious to watch you struggle.
	Here's the thing, you've got to give the author credit because of the confidence and they've gone on records to essentially say they planned everything out from the start and with how the big reveal changes everything and the fact there were hints from the beginning, I believe them, it deliberately starts off seemingly not political to suck a normies and SJWs in and then forces them to think about the ethics of judging people for their ancestors.
	Well, I'm glad that that's the case.
	I'm just not watching 12 hours of weebery in order to get to that conclusion.
	Let's go to the next one.
	First off, Callum, I reject the term Yankee.
	That's what we call New Yorkers who move down here and refuse to assimilate.
	I will never be and have never been a Yank.
	Moving on.
	So I live in a purple state with a spineless Democrat governor.
	And the cities went full Democrat and hard lockdown, whereas all the rural areas just did whatever the heck they wanted.
	They did not follow COVID restrictions at all.
	I was wondering if there's anything like that in the UK.
	No, we have national, so...
	So they tried the regional thing and then they just gave up on it and locked down the whole country except they all are white.
	Yeah, but, I mean, she's not wrong that in, like, the more rural areas, I mean, lockdown is a very flexible term.
	There's the culture.
	Yeah.
	I got a message from my parents the other day who live in a more rural area than Swindon, and they said, even though there's people wearing masks here still, in the rural areas, people are just, pfft, hell with this then.
	Yeah.
	Because even just looking at the death statistics, like the southwest, it was...
	Doesn't justify anything.
	Minus, uh, minus, not minus.
	It was very, very low, even though the population is very old.
	Yeah.
	Which...
	But John's right to point out that Scotland and Wales have different measures because devolve Parliament.
	I'm very disappointed you guys didn't recognize this.
	This is none other than Mr.
	Zodiac himself doing some impressions.
	Almost as good as Dylan, or as we call him, Second Plague.
	Yes.
	But before I go, I want to show you something.
	I know you had that recommended before, but I'll recommend it again, and I'll recommend it until you do it.
	Abolition of Man.
	Very good book.
	You should do a book club on it.
	I will.
	I know.
	I've been told a lot that I should read C.S. Lewis and...
	I clearly should.
	I'm more likely to do that than watch Attack on Titan.
	Let's go for the next one.
	So here's a document that talks about the flag of America.
	It doesn't actually talk about the person or the nation.
	It's mostly about whatever virtues or values that we have.
	You're not representing the American flag.
	You're representing what you care about.
	Is there a meaning behind the English and British flags?
	Um, I don't know if it's official.
	I know from geography now that there's, it's a very modern concept to say, like, this colour stands for this and whatnot.
	The St.
	George's Cross, it's just sort of mythical, you know, like it stands for St.
	George.
	We still look through Genoese.
	That's what I mean, though.
	So for modern flags, what they'll do is they'll usually be like this colour stands for the land of the country that's beautiful and the red stands for the heroes who fought for its independence.
	And we don't really have that because we're not our new country.
	No, we're a very old country.
	No, it's an amalgamation of the Scottish and English flags, basically, to placate the Scots because they, for some reason, weren't happy with us across St.
	George, which is weird.
	Should have been.
	I don't mean to keep banging the drum about this born that way thing.
	It's just we've got a law that's almost ascended here in Canada that will put parents in prison for five years for refusing to cut their kid's dick off.
	So I'm just a little bit perturbed about it because it's going to directly affect me and my family.
	So I'm just seeing what other people think.
	No, I fully appreciate that it's directly affecting everyone's families everywhere, practically, these days.
	But I just haven't looked into whether being gay is a biological trait or something you're habituated into.
	But either way, I don't think it's a choice.
	I didn't get to choose to be straight.
	I don't know whether it's biological or whether it's just the way I was raised, but I don't think that gay people get to choose if they're gay either.
	So I don't agree with the left's new conception that everything is a choice at all times.
	Sorry, I think that some things are essential, whether they're from our genes or from our habit.
	Have y'all considered using the EFAP solution to the comments problems?
	And much more importantly, when are y'all releasing the Callum body pillow?
	If the eFap solution is just doing a stream going through comments, honestly, it's about time, really.
	We've got a lot of studio time that's booked up.
	When we're off also doing other things.
	I've got a website that's given us the ancient traditions of each of the colours, and then there's a modern version of it.
	I don't know who they're saying is official on this, determining these things.
	I quite like the change between the ancient and the modern version.
	It's ancient.
	White stands for purity.
	Red symbolizes military strength.
	Blue symbolizes loyalty.
	And then the modern version is white symbolizes peace.
	Red symbolizes bravery and blue vigilance.
	Why do you need to be brave in peace?
	I don't know.
	It's a bit weird.
	Anyway.
	I don't know how official that is, though.
	I prefer the ancient one.
	Yeah.
	You're right, so I think the government are using the same technique a python would when trying to get these vaccine passports out, and that's waiting for an individual to breathe, or in this case, for people to get vaccinated.
	Then they'll constrict harder on the remaining people.
	More people will get vaccinated.
	They'll constrict harder until this minority gets smaller and smaller and smaller, and they're easier to oppress.
	So if you're feeling pressured, now is the easiest time to not get it.
	So if you don't want it, and you're feeling pressured to get it, don't back down.
	You'll make it harder for everyone else.
	Maybe, but there is a, I think, a large-scale movement of people who have been vaccinated or are supportive of the vaccine who are still like, no, come on.
	Like, there is no way we're having the unvaccinated become serfs or second-class citizens.
	This is just un-British.
	It's not fair to do that to these people.
	But, I mean, I completely agree with the way that he's framed that, though.
	I do agree that this is the same method as the python, so eventually you don't have enough space to breathe at all and you eventually die.
	Sure.
	I don't think he's wrong with that at all.
	But you are right.
	Because we've got, what is it, 87% of the population has had at least the first dose.
	Yeah, some of that.
	And still, there is a mass movement of people who are pro-vaccine or not, or taking it or not, who are still like, no, come on, this is not the right thing to do.
	Everyone knows it.
	I know that they're having a vote on it soon, and they might actually have a defeat on this.
	Yeah, I saw a headline this morning that the Conservatives are facing defeat because of the revolt from within their own party, Labour being no good at all on this, or the Liberal Democrats, the SNP. Did you see Labour, they announced that they would oppose it, and then an hour later the press was like, actually no, we're going to look at it.
	It was like, oh, that opposition lasted long, didn't it?
	The opposition existed in the UK for an hour.
	Insufferable.
	I'm certain this is all coming down to SAGE, the communist riddled body that's basically dictating to the government, worm-tongue style, what they have to do, but anyway.
	Why are we even arguing about semantics here?
	You were doing game of function research.
	No, technically it wasn't game of function.
	Who cares?
	Who cares?
	Were you or were you not creating coronavirus bioweapons knowing that this was a likely outcome?
	Yes.
	Okay, go to forever, Jill.
	What they were doing was so incredibly irresponsible and now we're all paying the price for it.
	What are you waiting for in America?
	Go arrest this son of a- As I understand it, Rand Paul has moved to get Fauci charged for lying at Congress as well.
	Good.
	I haven't, again, I've only seen the headlines going past, but it's like, excellent.
	So, you know, big respect for Rand Paul.
	I'll cover it next week, see if anything comes of it or whatever.
	But yeah, I mean, I can't see how Fauci could possibly defend himself as having not lied to the Congress.
	And if lying to Congress is a federal crime that gets five years in jail, Then he deserves all five.
	Absolutely.
	Hello, Lotus Eaters.
	I don't know if you guys ever heard of a show called Dexter.
	It's coming back on air after eight years because of the terrible ending.
	But it's based off of a book series about a blood splatter analyst in Miami, and he kills only serial killers.
	That's mostly in the show, but in the book, he actually goes out and murders a couple of Nambla members who are taking pictures of little boys.
	Can you say base Florida man and the wood chipper?
	I have no one's texter.
	You know about the guy who killed the pedo who touched his son?
	Yeah.
	And then the town was just like, community service.
	Yeah.
	He got like 150 hours cutie service for murder.
	And a statue.
	Yeah.
	I didn't know that.
	I didn't know about the guy.
	I didn't know what he got for it though.
	I love the idea that that is...
	It's one of the things I like about the jury system is the jury could just go, nah, nah, justified.
	Yeah.
	This is a public service announcement.
	All of you watching anime, cease doing so immediately.
	What the hell is wrong with all of you?
	Stop your cartoonish-like simping for the Far East.
	If you're going to watch something from the Asians, I'd recommend historical dramas.
	Something like Empress Kai, in particular, is an exceptional piece of storytelling.
	Paste.
	All right.
	My first instinct whenever someone does something immoral is get on the wall.
	However, I do know it is best to give a second chance.
	That is why we have the justice system.
	To figure things out, figure out what happened, and rehabilitate you.
	Yep.
	Yeah.
	Two things.
	Spencer Clavin has a channel called Young Heretics.
	Talks about cluster and western literature, and it's pretty good.
	He deserves more subs than he has, and is also on Locals.
	Karl Callum, what do you think of the Brandy Love vs Turning Point USA thing?
	More broadly, are you concerned that the modern conservative movement in the US will become too puritanical, or that it will abandon its principles in the pursuit of a Big Ten coalition?
	What did you think of the Brandy Love vs Turning Point USA thing, Callum?
	So I happened to, I think it was like a Louis Theroux documentary or one of them, where he was hanging out with porn stars.
	I can't remember who it was, but it was one about Brandy Love.
	And history is that she had been a stay-at-home man, she'd raised the kids with her husband, and then they'd grown up, they'd moved on, and then she was just at home alone.
	And then they were like, I'm bored, do you want to try having sex with other people?
	And they did that.
	And then she became a porn star, and he sometimes acts with her, sometimes directs the thing.
	Very weird.
	And how old was she when she decided to become a porn star?
	After the kids had left the place.
	In her 40s.
	Yeah, like old.
	So it wasn't like her kids are going to be bullied for, you know, I've got your mum or something.
	They're grown-ups now.
	So it was quite weird because there's that aspect that I don't see people talking about at all because it's kind of like, well, she's done the right thing, at least.
	Like, she's not like the immoral only fan.
	Well, not even that.
	She's done her duty and she's secured her life and relationships, right?
	So...
	So the negative I see from people is like, well, she engages in porn, porn is degenerate, you know, it's degenerating the country, therefore she can't be involved in the conservative movement.
	I'm not sure I agree.
	I feel like it's a weird thing.
	You can say that, yeah, she's bad for doing this.
	You can be moralistic around it and say, yeah, bad.
	And I could find agreements with some of those statements.
	But to say that she should be banished from the movement is, I think, not good.
	In fact, it's one of the embarrassing things about her response to that.
	She's like, wow, you guys are all moralistic.
	You should be banned from the movement.
	It's like, yeah, that's pathetic.
	Both of these groups can exist within the conservative movement.
	movement the constitutionalists who like to engage in hedonism and then the the moralist types both of those groups should be in there together and trying to ban one of them seems strange to me i mean her saying that the moralist should be banned and also some moralist saying she should be banned for it but otherwise i just think it's really funny because i i've never seen this before and i wonder what's going to happen with the future of it i know ramvia's very uh predicting that mind geek's going to become more and more conservative mm-hmm And there's also the point of, like, he raised, which is, you've got all these alternatives to YouTube who are doing a good job, you know, all the rest of it.
	But if there was one who could offer an alternative platform and everything would work and is in a position to do that, it is actually Pornhub.
	Like, Pornhub have the capacity to be a conservative YouTube, well, to make a new site that's a conservative YouTube, essentially, or a liberal one that doesn't ban you for not being a leftist.
	But the question is, like, still unresolved, though, is...
	Is what she's doing wrong?
	Yeah, and I think the answer depends how you define wrong, doesn't it?
	Yeah, I'm just talking about the practical stuff.
	No, no, no, of course.
	But you could say it's unconservative that she's doing this, and that's true.
	But the fact that she has all of the sort of traditional credentials already under her belt...
	Is a question that opens the door to the problem.
	And I think the Conservatives would have to default back to the, well, it's inherently immoral, because it's pornography, and as I say, it's inherently degenerative, and you're corrupting the youth elsewhere, which puts you firmly on the anti-Socrates side of things, which I'm not sure is that wise.
	Or, and not only that, if she's a constitutional Republican and she's adhering to the constitutional principles of the United States, this is a conflict of sort of English classical liberalism versus traditionalist conservatism.
	And it's a fault line within the Republican Party that has to be analysed.
	I mean, you get this quite a lot, and this is why Tucker Carlson is constantly being attacked by the left, because they're calling him a white supremacist because he is a conservative.
	And, of course, his conservative values also align with the Republican values.
	But I would like to know his opinion on this, right?
	Like, where would he fall?
	Because I think he would have to essentially place himself on the, well, I'm not interested in infringing civil liberties, but in my personal social opinion...
	What she's doing is probably wrong.
	But I don't think that's deserving of banishment.
	Yeah.
	It seems really stringent.
	Like, I'm very much...
	My mindset is very much more in the practical sense of the things, usually.
	So when I look at that, it's like, yeah, banishment.
	Stupid idea.
	Like, the rightists of the Anglosphere, because it's all the same struggle, let's be honest.
	It's all the same goddamn problems in Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and US, UK. And this person, like...
	I don't know, like, what is the right?
	What is the right in the Anglosphere at the moment?
	And all it is is just anti-leftism, which is a thing, and she fits into that, if that's what the right is.
	There is no real opposition to leftists that isn't that, from what I can see.
	Which is a problem, you can have a whine about it and say that's wrong, we should have some firm conservative principles that we say this is conservatism and outside of it is not, so brandy love, you're out, or something.
	And sure, you can have that opinion, but on a practical sense, that's just how I see the theatre.
	Well, no, I think that's an exactly correct analysis as well.
	And the question is, okay, is the right in a position to be able to start discarding allies?
	And I don't think that they are.
	I can think of worst allies in the rightist movement.
	Oh, yeah.
	But the point is, like, the question is not, is pornography acceptable?
	The left has already dominated this argument.
	Yeah, of course porn is.
	Everyone uses porn.
	It's all over the place.
	It's free all over the internet.
	I don't think they're going to get rid of it.
	Yeah, there's no real controlling it either.
	No, exactly.
	The conservative government in the UK, I know the US doesn't really do this, have continuously tried to control pornography, and every time it ends in failure, because they have to come down to the solution of, well, we're going to have wanking licenses that you can buy in the news agency.
	And it's like, right, we're not doing that, so what else have you got?
	And they've got nothing.
	But not only that, what I'm saying is it's a different paradigm that they would be arguing about.
	Because at the moment, the argument is, is America worthy of existence or not?
	Which is the left-wing position, no.
	And the right-wing position, again, the broad anti-left position is, yes.
	And she obviously fits on that.
	And so the question is one of sort of moral and cultural purity, which obviously the moralistic conservators are like, yes, of course, everyone has to agree with us, but every moraliser ever has always said exactly that, which is why you guys can't find any concord with the left.
	And so I would say that it's probably wrong to kick her out, even if the most strict conservatives find what she's doing immoral.
	Well, sure.
	But then she could argue from a strict constitutionalist position that censoring people and deplatforming them, exiling them, is also wrong.
	So you could make a moralist argument from either way.
	I have to wonder, I feel like this has caused more of a spark than it usually would, because you've got the other questions going on about just the other people in the rightist movement of the US. So, for example, Caitlyn Jenner turning up and becoming a Republican candidate.
	And I've seen loads of conservatives going, yeah, see, this is real conservatism.
	Transgender women.
	And they are, again, very hardline about it.
	And from their paradigm, they're not wrong, from that sort of hardline conservative position, sure, you can't accept porn stars and transgenders.
	Sure, you can't accept them.
	You can't accept transgenderism as being true.
	You could accept a transgender person, but the idea that Caitlyn Jennings is a woman is...
	Yeah, yeah.
	But the point is, are you in a position to win any battles with that mindset?
	And the answer is probably no.
	You know, if the Republican coalition splits up, then the left is going to have easier victories in future.
	You actually need a united front on this, and so choose a principle upon which you can agree.
	And I would suggest that the constitutional nature of the United States is probably that principle.
	At the end of the day, I don't think that you're going to...
	Is it going to corrupt conservative communities if Brandy Love is doing her thing somewhere else and they don't?
	What do you mean?
	I mean, is it going to ruin conservatism?
	Brandy Love, Ben Shapiro Alliance.
	Yeah, that's essentially it, isn't it?
	Basically.
	Yeah.
	I just think that we're not...
	I think it's funny.
	I wonder what happens.
	I mean, there's the obvious point.
	What if it's not just Brandy Love?
	What if you're bringing...
	Well, not Mia Khalifa, she's an anti-Semite, but...
	Sure.
	All the other porn stars are like, right, fair enough.
	Because that's the interesting thing as well.
	The porn community, if we use leftist language, is very much anti-censorship.
	You can see this in the documentary with Louis Theroux, where he goes and meets a bunch of people who were sent to jail by the government for indecency.
	And some of the stuff they made then is now just everywhere on the internet.
	But the point is, this is like part of a conservative culture war, right?
	And if you both agree on the point of anti-censorship, then they get to behave in the way that they want to behave, but the conservatives also get to put the social pressure on these people that they want to put on.
	They want to say, look, that's immoral, that's degenerate.
	And as long as you both agree that anti-censorship good, as in First Amendment good, then you can both do those things, and the question will be resolved naturally, sort of homogeneously.
	Holistically, sorry.
	It'll just come out of the solutions.
	Did this serve people or not?
	Was it good for them?
	Was it in their interests?
	And people will realise.
	People will discover.
	Which is why it's a bit cringe of her saying, get rid of the moralists.
	Yeah.
	What do you stand on?
	Yeah, exactly.
	And so I actually don't think that they should be kicked out.
	Because A, we're not in a position to.
	But B, I do think it would go rather against the kind of First Amendment principles that the Conservative Party does seem to broadly hold.
	And you want the freedom to be able to tell them they're degenerates, don't you?
	So they have to have the freedom to be able to be degenerates for you to criticize them.
	And if you guys are right, which honestly, I think maybe you probably are on the question of porn, then you don't need to act censoriously or enact, you know...
	The vice is evident.
	Exactly.
	You don't need to use the reins of power, even if you have access to them, to prove this point.
	And if you don't need to do that, you probably shouldn't do that.
	So I wouldn't kick her out personally.
	I would leave her in there.
	It'll be funny if she becomes a moralist, like she returns to where she was and becomes like a trad wife again.
	It would, yeah.
	It'd be an interesting result.
	Yeah, I'm just seeing what happens, I guess.
	I mean, there is no real thing like that in the UK from where I can see.
	Whatever.
	At least not that gets any airtime.
	There was a spike.
	There was a candidate for UKIP who was a porn star.
	And Nigel Farage was asked about this.
	Some leftists for some reason and got all very puritanical about it.
	It was like, he's a disgusting man.
	And Nigel Farage was just like, live and live, buv.
	Based.
	Hi, guys.
	Seeing as everyone's recommending anime, I'm also going to recommend an anime.
	It's Naruto, at the very least the Zabuza and Haku arc, which argues the reality of existence and the purpose of people's existence.
	And the lack of meaning when you have no purpose.
	A very strong message indeed.
	Hmm.
	I'm not gonna watch it because it's anime.
	Sorry.
	Yeah.
	I apologise in advance, but I don't care.
	I must admit as well, these video comments are making me hate anime irrationally even more, just because I'm being told to do the thing.
	It's like when the government keeps telling you to do the thing, I'm just letting you know.
	Yeah, well, that's the thing.
	I'm actually not particularly worried about the vaccine.
	I don't think it's going to be particularly dangerous, but, like, I'm just not doing it.
	Why?
	Because you're trying to make me, that's why.
	Anyway, Mr.
	Flipple says, in what world is the right-winging the culture war when people are losing their jobs for ancient tweets and companies and mandating benign words that may not be used?
	Ah, see now, this is you failing to understand the hubris and scope of the left, right?
	So from the left-wing position, they have established the perfect world.
	And if they are prevented from enacting the regime, the perfect utopia that they're trying to achieve...
	And any resistance to this is counted as a catastrophic defeat.
	So whereas you or I might be like, right, okay, if we were Alexander the Great and we're invading Persia, and we managed to take half the Persian Empire, we might be like, oh, we're winning this war.
	But from the left's position, because we didn't take the entire empire, we didn't win the war on the right.
	The Persians are winning the war.
	Even if we're crushing them at every battle, this is how the left views it.
	They expect to have everything.
	All in one go.
	And so that's why they think that the right is winning, because they have failed to yet destroy parts of the right.
	That's their problem.
	PirateSkeleton says, Modern leftist, I'm going to tell you what your motivations are.
	Unfortunately, all I know how to do is projection.
	Everything they accuse you of is just a dark reflection of themselves.
	Well, Nesrine's a perfect example of that.
	Remember, she's the clip in which she said, what do we do about free speech if we're the real party of free speech, says Owen Jones.
	What was Nesrine's response?
	Death to free speech.
	Yeah, we're not for free speech.
	Literally the Richard Spencer response.
	Because they are bedfellows.
	Literally two sides of the same coin.
	Matthew says, I've given up trying to explain woke to my boomer parents when they ask.
	I'll just say it's communism.
	Yeah, honestly, that's a perfectly reasonable way of framing it as well.
	It is.
	Your video, What is Woke Culture, I would recommend if you haven't tried that for them.
	Where they literally state, I want redistribution on the lines of race, gender, and class.
	Land, wealth, and power along race, gender, and class lines.
	Right, so there's race, gender, and class communism.
	Yeah.
	Anthony said, Hi all, love your podcast.
	Yesterday I reported an obviously racist user comment on the BBC website stating gammons are as thick as mints.
	The moderator said this is not against the House rules, so I had to make a general BBC complaint threatening to report that my MPs and police is a hate crime.
	The comment was soon removed.
	Small victories, yes!
	Hold them to their own standards.
	We have it from the BBC.
	Gammon is a hate crime.
	Malicious compliance.
	That's what you need to do.
	When someone makes a statement that you can interpret so you perceive is the standard as being a racial attack on someone, it's a racial attack on someone.
	You damn well report it.
	Northamptonian Knight says, I guess the leftists have told so many lies that they are no longer themselves even aware of the truths they are trying to subvert.
	Probably, yeah.
	Also by Ades Nuts says, I wish all the race rhetoric would just die already.
	Race is one of the least interesting things about you.
	It isn't a personality.
	It doesn't make a point.
	You aren't special for being a member of a certain race.
	It is what you do that determines your worth as a person.
	Well, from, you know, your mouth to God's ears or whatever it is.
	That's exactly true.
	I don't know why I have to say it.
	I don't know why I have to say it.
	Well, I do know, but you know.
	It doesn't help the race war, does it?
	No.
	Yeah, that's exactly it.
	The left can't win a race war if you're not being a racist.
	So, sorry.
	Omar says, your opinions are politics.
	My opinions are human rights.
	Everything is political.
	Our youth changes legislation based on race isn't politics.
	Being based is a human right.
	Yeah.
	Oh, you know, we can adopt that.
	That would be funny.
	Just everything you argue is a human right.
	That is what the left does.
	He's right.
	No, no, that is literally it.
	You know, everyone deserves healthcare.
	Well, whose opinion is that?
	You know, really?
	Does Adolf Hitler deserve healthcare, does he?
	He's just been shot.
	If I had to get a doctor in here quick, send the left.
	His human rights are being violent.
	Oh, shut up.
	We didn't change the rules.
	We changed the words that define them.
	We're not segregating minorities.
	We're giving them the safe space away from the whites.
	We're not white supremacists.
	We just think brown people can never succeed because they'll never surpass white people, even though literally the data doesn't show that.
	We don't hate white people.
	We just hate racists, and all white people are racist.
	Exactly.
	Henry says, for additional context on the women's US team versus the men's, the Women's World Cup was expanded from 16 teams to 24, so they decked a Mickey Mouse amateur team, whereas the men actually had to play top-quality opposition.
	I was extra happy for the US loss to Sweden the last time the US goalie got banned for calling Sweden a bunch of cowards for defending well and beating them on penalties rather than attacking and letting the USA team win.
	They're a bunch of entitled pink-haired arse weasels, so seeing them lose is glorious.
	Yeah.
	Couldn't have happened to a more deserving people.
	No.
	I'm going to go past the next one.
	So, women as...
	Right, okay, so Sophie has got an opinion on the woman question.
	A great issue with these kinds of women is that their body has matured, but their mind has not.
	That's a great way of framing it.
	I read through a Reddit thread directed towards men asking what they were looking for in a woman, and nobody talked about looks, which is eye-opening.
	What they wanted was support, maturity, partnership, and someone who makes them feel worthwhile as a man.
	Okay, if it helps, I'll say looks.
	I'm happy to say that.
	I'm joking.
	If you are a warm, mature, and honest woman, you should have no problem finding a man.
	As long as your standard is not too high, that's another issue with these women.
	Their standards are far too high.
	Do you remember the OKCupid survey from 2014?
	Yeah.
	Where it turned out that 80% of women thought that 80% of men were below average.
	So you have ridiculous standards.
	According to women on OKCupid, the average man is an AR-10.
	How does that work?
	It literally doesn't work.
	I mean, by the very definition of what an average is.
	That also implies that they think of themselves as being way more important and way more attractive than they are as well.
	Anyway, funny how this woman wants the man to make her feel like a queen, but she is not prepared to make him feel like a king.
	As I have often said, the way to a man's heart is easy.
	Cook him good food, serve him a glass of wine, allow him to watch the game and hand him a beer without being a bee about it, and let him be assured that you are his.
	And that, I think, is the most important part, to be honest.
	He will have pride in protecting and loving you.
	Men want to feel loved and appreciated too.
	So it's so little that you have to give as a woman and he will protect you forever.
	He will be proud and happy to do it too.
	Yes, I'm a woman myself and unlike all of these feminist types, I have no issue with men.
	I've always been very well liked.
	As you were saying to all these feminist types, it's not because you're a woman, it's because you're a It's a good point she noted on there, that if you aren't confident that the woman is yours, why would you defend and provide?
	Yes.
	That's precisely why women should be thinking about fidelity as young as possible as well.
	The younger you are, the more firm the bond becomes and the more secure the man becomes with you.
	You know, and the more that you will get out of your relationship.
	Reverse is also true.
	Of course.
	If you don't defend and provide, then why would they be?
	Of course.
	And, you know, we'll do one of these for young men.
	But, I mean, I think the young men watching what we're saying here, they already know what my opinion on all of this is.
	You know, so, you know.
	But anyway.
	And he says, I was like that woman when I was a teenager, a feminist by default.
	It's toxic and dangerous for young women.
	I made my worst decisions and then blamed the world around me for them, picked up some scars like you said.
	Thank God I got red-pilled when my kids are so young.
	I'm teaching my daughter every day that she's responsible for her own actions the same as her brother.
	Yes.
	And protect the sanctity of her own person is, I think, an important thing there as well.
	And it's not taught to young women that, look, you are born with a kind of innocence and...
	This is something you will carry into adulthood.
	And if you allow the feminist narrative on what it is to be a woman to take hold, then you'll defile that very quickly, and it can't be recovered.
	Like, this sort of magical romance that you're looking for is only possible from that position of relative innocence.
	One or two mistakes a man can overlook, blah, blah.
	But, like, when you've got a woman with, like, 30 bodies under her belt, that ain't happening.
	You are not finding the man of your dreams.
	It just isn't happening.
	Deal with it.
	Anyway, Adam says one key mistake ladies should avoid is not listening to feminists.
	They really should make decisions about what they feel is best for them.
	Feminists arguing that women don't want X is really their way of subverting women into being miserable.
	True.
	Alexander, the cheating woman, blames everyone but herself.
	What's new with the progressives these days?
	Good point.
	Anyway, morning gents.
	The woman who wrote that article reminds me of women who say, all the women I meet are terrible slash crazy.
	That's why I don't have female friends.
	The logic applies, and the response is still, well, maybe the problem is with you.
	So I just want to brag for a bit.
	I've been with my wife for 10 years, happily married for three years of this month, and we managed that before 30.
	Congratulations.
	That's the sort of thing that I'm talking about.
	If you want that, and I think a lot of women do want that, you know, to have been together for 10 years and, you know, this magical special relationship, you've got to make sure that you, like, nail your colours to that mask as soon as you can.
	It doesn't get easy with age.
	That's all I'm saying.
	We out of time?
	We are.
	Anyway, if you want more from us, go to notices.com.
	Otherwise, we'll be back tomorrow at 1 o'clock.

▲