Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 28, 2021 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:31:26

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #185

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Eaters for the 28th of July 2021 I'm joined by Carl.
	Hello!
	And today we're going to be talking about Britain's institutionalised paedophilia because it turns out apparently Britain is just as bad as the Germans on this question.
	And France.
	Yeah, sorry, none of that.
	There's also a Labour MP who's being investigated by her own party for liking a tweet.
	Because remember, none of this ended with the plebs.
	It always comes to the MPs.
	So I look forward to her being kicked out and then presumably investigate about the police afterwards.
	It's not Nas Shah, is it?
	No, it's not Nas Shah.
	She liked a tweet that said that grooming gang victims should shut up for the sake of diversity and she didn't get investigated or kicked out.
	No, this one's about the women are women.
	Of course it is.
	Yeah, and also we're going to find out what happens when a family member goes woke.
	Yes, indeed.
	So a couple of things to mention first.
	So the new video you did called The Progressive Skin Suit, explaining why all woke remakes are disturbing to even look at.
	Yeah, and the thing is, this appears to be an idea whose time has come as well, because I've had a few people saying, ah, well, didn't so-and-so did a video on this a while ago?
	And I'm like, well, I've never heard that person, but, like, I've been discussing this with you for ages, haven't I? Yes.
	You know, this has been an idea that I've been kicking around for a long time, and it just seems to have come to fruition now.
	But the thing is, a bunch of other people have essentially come to this same conclusion.
	So this is all my own work, thank you very much.
	I resent the allegation.
	He has been moaning at me for about a year about this idea.
	Yeah.
	So, there's that.
	Anyway, but yeah, go and give that a watch because it's a good way of explaining why they are so disturbing to look at.
	Like the all-female Ghostbusters or the absolute tragedy that's happened to Doctor Who as a Doctor Who fan up until, let's say, the more recent versions.
	That one stings particularly hard.
	My wife was too.
	She hated the female Doctor Who.
	They've utterly destroyed it.
	They've utterly destroyed it.
	It's so bad.
	Anyway, so there's that.
	Go and check that out.
	There's also the Freemium Book Club, which is the thing we did about Lawrence Fox's new...
	What is it?
	Document about freedom of speech and why it should be the law.
	Yeah, it's a legal and philosophical analysis and argument about why British law doesn't protect free speech and why it should and how it should, more importantly, in line with our established principles, which actually isn't very difficult if they...
	If the Conservatives were just to do something about this...
	I mean, there's the manual.
	Do it.
	Yeah.
	Anyway, also, the last thing to mention is the Zoom call we have.
	So, at 4pm on Friday, every last Friday of the month, we do a Zoom call, in which the Goaltier members and us just hang out, because it's fun.
	And we just go question by question, and it's nice.
	So, if you're a Goaltier member, be sure to join on Friday, 4pm.
	But without further ado, let's get into it.
	So, depressed me.
	Yeah, well, Britain, like many other continental countries, has a problem with institutionalised paedophilia that stems, of course, from left-wing politics.
	This is the council make-up of London Borough Lambeth's council.
	As you can see, it hasn't been conservative-dominated since 1968.
	Currently, there are 57 Labour councillors, one conservative.
	Yes.
	Five green, who are just watermelons.
	So, it is very, very much...
	A labour stronghold now, and it's become more labour over time, but even back in the 70s and 80s, it was very, very labour, as a sort of, like, two-to-one factor.
	The occasional Lib Dem popping up in there, but mostly labour.
	So, this has been the subject of a recent revelation by Dr Alexis J. Do you remember Dr Alexis J? She's the one who lived in Rotherham, of course.
	She is.
	She's an absolute hero of the Empire, and she is the person who seems to be single-handedly bringing light to all of the child sexual abuse that the left-wing run areas of the country have been permitting for such a long time.
	This one was a recent one that's been released that reveals that hundreds of children were abused while in the care of Lambeth Council.
	The abuse occurred over several decades on a scale they say is hard to comprehend.
	Hundreds, hundreds of allegations, about 700 allegations in fact, come from just three care homes in the borough.
	700 in three homes.
	And this is, of course, going to be massively underreported.
	The true scale of the abuse is far likely to be higher, as with the grooming gang scandals.
	But, of course, we can only work with what we have.
	What's the timescale for this, do they say?
	Decades.
	Okay, okay.
	So Lambeth Council allowed violence and sexual assault to flourish in its children's residential homes, failed to act against the known abusers, or tackle the brutal, harsh, punitive culture of its homes with devastating consequences.
	They say, "It is hard to comprehend the cruelty and sexual abuse inflicted on children in the care of Lambeth Council over many years by staff, foster carers and families, and their families, by volunteers in residential settings," the report concludes.
	Although most of the children have been taken into care after suffering violence and neglect at the hand of family members, the report noted that for some, the experience they had in the homes was worse than living with their birth families.
	The council failed on multiple occasions to protect children, including employing staff who it knew posed a risk to children, failing to investigate employees suspected of sexual abuse, and exposing children to situations where they knew there was a risk of sexual abuse.
	Over 40 years, just one senior employee was disciplined for their part in the catalogue of abuse.
	700 children in three homes and one person gets in trouble for this.
	More importantly, they knew.
	They knew.
	They knew that the staff were at risk.
	They knew that the situations that were putting the kids in were at risk.
	They did.
	And we'll get to exactly how they knew in a second.
	Six perpetrators of sexual abuse connected to Lambeth homes, some of whom were council employees, were convicted of child sexual abuse between 1994 and 2019.
	So long after the events, these people get convicted.
	Again, very much like the grooming gang scandal, in fact.
	Many staff at the children's homes demonstrated a callous regard for the vulnerable children they were paid to look after.
	Some failed to act when they knew about the sexual abuse and showed little compassion to the victims.
	It was this staff intended to create a harsh and punitive environment, the report concludes.
	It also is also critical of the Children's Services Inspectorate, Ofsted, and its predecessors, for failing to do anything about all of this, obviously.
	And, of course, the Metropolitan Police for failing to investigate the links between the offenders and the criminal investigations themselves, right?
	But this is the key crux of all of this, and all of the institutionalized non-suri that happened in the latter half of the 20th century, quote, the report is scathing of what it calls the progressive left-wing culture of the council in the 1980s.
	Imagine my shock.
	Just imagine.
	There is nowhere...
	Progressive, as it should be seen, is essentially a dog whistle for sexual liberation of paedophiles.
	Yes.
	Because that's what's going to happen.
	Yes.
	Every goddamn time.
	It's a dog whistle for non-sorry.
	This is why the word progressive holds such mud for me.
	Yeah, I despise it.
	I don't know where they're trying to progress to, but the things they've progressed into so far have been disgraceful and just way beyond the pale.
	And if this is what progress looks like, return to tradition, in my opinion.
	Anyway...
	The traditional opinion of not raping children.
	Yeah, don't molest children if that's...
	I know that's very retrograde.
	That's not very forward-thinking, but I'm not going to let it go.
	Anyway, many councillors and staff purported to hold principled beliefs about tackling racism and promoting equality, but in reality they fail to apply these principles to the children in their care.
	Amazing.
	It also notes that the overwhelming majority of the children in its homes were black.
	At Shirley Oaks in 1980, 57% of the children in care were black.
	At South Vale, a decade later, 85% of them were black.
	And the report says that racism was evident in the hostile and abusive treatment towards them by the staff.
	Professor Alexis Jay, who chaired the inquiry, said that the children were pawns in a toxic power game within the council in the 1980s and 90s, which was characterised by many years, over many years, by bullying, racism, nepotism, sexism, against the backdrop of political chaos, corruption and financial mismanagement.
	Basically, what this power struggle was was between the council and central government, as in Thatcher's government, and the Labour Council doing everything they can to resist it.
	And for some reason, this included allowing paedophiles to run rampant through their care homes.
	But also the allegation made that they weren't just abusing the children sexually, but also racially, by the sounds of it.
	It seems that way.
	That's right, they're progressives.
	Yeah, exactly.
	They're very progressive.
	They pay lip service to progressive beliefs while doing horrific things.
	Well, that's what they do every day, all day.
	Exactly.
	The method of the left has never changed.
	Anyway, Alexis J added, all of this contributed to allowing children in their care to suffer the most horrendous sexual abuse, with just one senior council employee disciplined for their part in it.
	So anyway, right, we'll get some of the children's own accounts.
	And these are just staggering, these accounts.
	We'll get to the next one.
	We don't know the name of the children, Child L.A.A.7.
	After being taken into care in the mid-1970s, aged eight, this child spent time in the notorious Shirley Oakes care home before running away and moving to another home in Southvale.
	There he was abused by three male members of staff, including his key worker, Leslie Paul, who took him to his flat and took photos of him.
	Of course, these are decent photos.
	They escaped but was returned to South Vale by the police.
	I had often tried to report abuse to other staff members and sometimes to the police when I ran off.
	I would be accused of being a liar.
	I tried to explain to them I was being abused and they told me I was lying.
	Leslie Paul worked at Lambeth Council from 1979 to 1992 when he was dismissed.
	He wasn't dismissed because he had done something to the children.
	He was dismissed for, I think it was financial impropriety.
	But he was sentenced to two and a half years in jail in 1994 for indecent assault, indecency with a child, and taking indecent images of a child.
	And in 2002, he was jailed for 18 months for sexual offences.
	And in 2016, he was sentenced to 13 years in jail for 18 offences of child abuse.
	I was about to say, those first two convictions seem a bit light.
	Yep, but that's because he wasn't getting the justice he deserved.
	But also the police here taking part in the situation by not taking the accusation seriously.
	Yeah.
	By literally denying that this serial rapist of children was actually doing something wrong.
	The next one, again, awful.
	Child LAA327. When she, this one's a girl, came into the care of Lambeth Council in the 70s, aged 12, she'd had a traumatic and abusive family life, including being knocked unconscious by her mother.
	She says that her experience of the care homes was even worse.
	Like hell, she told the inquiry.
	She described being constantly placed under restraint, locked in her room at night, and forced to take tranquilizers.
	She was moved to the Calais Street children's home where she was, quote, raped continuously, and as a result became pregnant at 15.
	She was moved to a council house where she was left to cope alone.
	That was literally it.
	I walked out of Calais Street and went to a council flat.
	No help, no furniture, no nothing.
	That was it.
	I was literally left to deal with it myself.
	No money, no nothing.
	I went into care with family.
	I came out of care.
	I hadn't seen my family in 14 years.
	Hang on.
	She had a family...
	Yeah, they put her in care because of what?
	Abuse.
	So the family were abusing her sexually?
	Just physically.
	Right.
	Her mother had knocked her out, for example.
	So then they moved her in with sexual abusers to remedy the situation.
	Yes.
	Child LAA323 was taken to Shirley Hoke's care in the 1970s when she was just two.
	She was subsequently hospitalised after being thrown into a table by a member of staff and locked in a cupboard.
	She was also sexually abused by a male visitor, although not a relative, described as an uncle.
	She later received compensation, but of course, this has all been awful.
	So, the consequence of Lambeth Council's institutionalised and just long-running known paedophilia was that they had to pay out £71 million to their victims.
	And this is, again, only the victims that we know about.
	There are bound to be more.
	Among those who have faced criticism, of course, the police and social services and local politicians and officials...
	Criticism is a light way of putting it.
	For presiding over the institutionalized rape of children.
	I mean, I don't know why these people aren't all, well, punished, shall we say, for what they've done.
	But I guess justice is something that just escapes from this situation.
	I mean, seven years for all of those involved would be the appropriate thing to do at the minimum.
	At the bare minimum, yeah.
	What is currently the law.
	Yep.
	So, for example, one man called John Carroll, who you can see there, is a paedophile, and he was an abuser, and he was allowed to remain in his job as the boss of One Care Home, despite senior officials learning that he had a prior conviction for child sexual abuse in 1986.
	Yeah.
	So they knew he was a convicted paedophile, and they're like, eh, he can be the boss of this care home.
	What could go wrong?
	It was Carroll, sorry, that was sacked in 1991, but only for financial irregularities, and in 1999 he was jailed for ten years after admitting a string of sexual assaults against children following a Merseyside police probe.
	Yes, he is a convicted paedophile, but we are also going to give him unfettered access to children, Again, it's very much like the Dr.
	Kentler view of things.
	They know.
	They know.
	They know what they're doing.
	Of course they know.
	They're very progressive.
	Proto-woke, if you will.
	Anyway, the BBC reported this in the most BBC way possible.
	Oh, there was a culture of cover-up that saw hundreds of children abused.
	Culture of cover up ABBC. You sure you want to open that box?
	Anyway.
	What kind of culture?
	Should we get a little label?
	A very progressive one, yes.
	But anyway, Lambeth Council has apparently apologised unreservedly, which is not really good enough, is it?
	Paid their £71 million, Metropolitan Police has also apologised, and the report basically blames Labour Council's battle against the Conservative government.
	During that time, Children in Care became a pawns in the Toxic Power Game, as we said.
	But again, BBC, do you really want to talk about covering up child sexual abuse?
	Because isn't that what you did with Jimmy Savile?
	I mean, if we can go to the next one, this is what all of the people in the BBC at the time were saying.
	For example, Radio 1 DJ Andy Kershaw said he believed senior management was still trying to cover their tracks as late as 2012 over Jimmy Savile's abuse.
	And, of course, the BBC have a statue...
	Of a paedophile.
	Or, like, what I guess is a paedophile.
	I mean, I don't know how to describe it.
	It's a man...
	I thought the guy who made the statue was a paedophile.
	Yeah, yeah.
	But the statue itself is of a man with a naked young boy in front of him, for some reason, by a chap called Eric Gill, who was one of the most respected artists of the 20th century until he died in 1940.
	And then his diaries were published in 1989 that revealed that he raped his two daughters and a family dog.
	And someone at the BBC was like, we need a statue that represents the value of the BBC. What have you got in mind, chap?
	Well, how about a man with a naked boy?
	Yeah, that's not weird, is it?
	And despite the fact that there have been lots of attempts to get people to remove this statue, because is it appropriate to have a statue, a paedophile statue on the BBC? When the BBC is already known to have been harboring paedophiles?
	Yeah, and it's still there.
	This was in 2013.
	They were like, oh, this should be taken down.
	They were like, no.
	Yeah, if I can think of a statue to move to a museum, as a museum to the BBC's noncery, and to remember what they've done, that would be it.
	Yeah.
	I mean, I agree.
	But anyway, The Guardian had a Guardian moment about it.
	So yeah, I mean, but can we separate the artist from the abuser?
	Why would we need to?
	Can we not just get rid of the nonce statue?
	Hang on, it's not like he made a sculpture of a football.
	Yeah, I know.
	If he'd done something that was of genuine artistic merit...
	Like, here's a building.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Or like, you know, here's the Virgin Mary or something.
	No, but it's a man holding a young boy with a flute for some reason.
	And the boy is nude.
	And the boy is totally nude.
	Like, I'm sorry, why is that what you choose?
	Can't you put up a statue of Orwell or something?
	For the love of God.
	Like, what are you doing?
	But no, the Guardian's like, you know, but hang on, we need to stop and think about this for a minute.
	It's like, of course you do.
	Of course you need to stop and think about this.
	Also, death of the statue of Churchill.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Also, tear down Churchill, you know.
	But anyway, so what was the other thing that you wanted to cover on this one?
	Oh, so some of the other stuff that came up on this, so we'll go to the next one.
	There's Maggie Oliver here saying that, well, there's an Islamic flavour to this, isn't there?
	Because everything in Britain has that flavour.
	So on the side, she says here, once again, professionals failing in their duty to protect.
	A sadly familiar story that demands action and accountability for all those who are turned away.
	Because this is an instance of a girl who was essentially sold into sexual slavery by the council.
	So, go to the next link.
	This is the story.
	So you can see a social worker attended wedding of terrified girl 15, the wedding to her abuser.
	Despite the teenager not coming from a Muslim background, professionals meant to protect her then allowed the parents of her husband to foster her.
	Right, so her rapist's family have adopted her, and now she's marrying her rapist.
	This was after she became pregnant.
	So a rapist raped a child.
	So the council were like, how do we remedy that situation?
	We could put him in prison, could do other things.
	Nah, let's not do that.
	Let's marry him off to his parents, so then he's a foster child, and we'll also marry her to him.
	Totally normal.
	One of the social workers allegedly even attended the wedding ceremony.
	They know what they're doing.
	They know what they're doing.
	The terrified girl, referred to as Anna, was left in a state of domestic slavery.
	That's the correct way of putting it all.
	These people are essentially sexual slaves, which is why you'll have people like British Voldemort mentioning that, hey, in the Koran it says you can take sexual slaves.
	And then you'll have Muslims saying, oh no, it totally doesn't, except when you actually just buy a copy of the Koran or Google it.
	You can look up the doctrine of what your right hand possesses to find out more.
	So they married her off into domestic slavery, scared to leave the controlling relationship for fear she would be a victim of an honour killing, she told reports authorities.
	Details emerged yesterday in an independent report into the treatment of five abused victims in West Yorkshire City over the last two decades, which found that children suffered abuse no child should have to experience, including selling young girls into domestic slavery.
	Seems to be happening everywhere, doesn't it?
	Alarmingly, the report concluded that some youngsters in Bradford, quote, remain unprotected from sex exploitation.
	Bradford.
	We know.
	Known for God knows what.
	But what I wanted to counter all this with is, you have all this stuff that goes on, and it's good they've finally got a payout, let's say, in the case of Lambert.
	It only took decades.
	There should be people going to jail alongside that from the authorities, because you have to send a message to your bureaucrats.
	You cannot be seen to engage in any such thing.
	Just to shame that we've abolished the death penalty, that's all.
	I wanted to compare this to a situation in which, because she got fostered to that Muslim family, well, what happens when there's an instance of right-wingers trying to get fostership in the UK? Well, we have an example of this from UKIP, actually, in 2012.
	You can see here at BBC News, UKIP couple have fostered children removed from care.
	Were they abusing the kids?
	They can't have been, because otherwise they would have been there at their wedding ceremony, wouldn't they?
	I suppose so.
	They say in here a couple have had three foster children removed from their care because they belong to the UK Independence Party.
	Wow.
	That was it.
	I imagine the Rotherham Borough Council was a very progressive Labour council, wasn't it?
	Yeah, it's got to be bloody Rotherham, hasn't it?
	Yeah.
	Rotherham Borough Council said the children were, quote, not indigenous white British.
	That matters, does it?
	Also, I'm interested in how you can define that, Rotherham Council.
	Thought you guys went into such conversations.
	And that it had concerns about UKIP's stance on immigration.
	It said that it had to consider the, quote, needs of the children longer term.
	We don't think they're being diddled enough.
	Rotherham Council.
	Rotherham.
	Had to be bloody Rotherham, didn't it?
	They're saying that these UKIP members can't have foster children because they're UKIP. But if you want to rape some kids, A-OK with Rotherham's Council, I guess.
	Rotherham Borough Council's Strategic Director of Children and Young People's Services, Joyce Thacker, told the BBC that her decision was influenced by UKIP's immigration policy.
	Just says it.
	Just openly says it.
	Which she says calls for an end of the active promotion of multiculturalism.
	So it was based on red-pilled?
	Because multiculturalism is not race mixing, in case they're that dumb.
	Multiculturalism is that you have multiple cultures in the same geographic area that shall not touch because it has to be multicultural.
	If they mixed, then it would become monocultural, wouldn't it?
	Yes.
	Kind of the whole point.
	It is against integration.
	Specifically, a state policy against the integration of new immigrants into a society, which is a terrible idea.
	A policy David Cameron would end up throwing out, but UKIP at the time saying...
	And Merkel and Macron and all of the rest.
	Yeah, they're all for segregation and then they change their minds.
	UKIP being for integration, not segregation.
	That was a reason to have these children taken away from this UKIP couple.
	Because they're UKIP. Just openly political.
	If you want to talk about people abandoning their professional values for political values instead in professional life, this is a perfect example of it.
	I'm sorry, what did this family do wrong?
	They were the wrong political party.
	Therefore, they're not comrades.
	Therefore, get rid of them.
	But apparently the Muslim rapists in Rotherham, no such concern.
	Well, the political rapists in Lambeth.
	Also, they were comrades.
	Therefore, that's fine.
	700 children in three homes.
	Unbelievable.
	So, thanks, Left Wing.
	I kind of hate doing these segments.
	Yeah, me too, but they've got to be done.
	Yep.
	Because, I mean, no one on LBC is going to start kicking up a stink about this.
	If we don't do it, no one's going to.
	Speaking of stories that people in the mainstream don't want to talk about.
	So a Labour MP is being investigated for liking a tweet.
	This has already happened to the public by the police.
	You remember, what is it, Harry Miller?
	Harry Miller, yeah.
	The limerick criminal.
	He got investigated by the police because he liked a limerick.
	Checking his thinking.
	Apparently it hasn't gone that far quite yet for this Labour MP, but she is being investigated by her own party.
	So here's the first tweet from Owen Jones, who's upset.
	He's angry that she's like this.
	Sorry, he.
	Got to get the pronouns right for Owen.
	Don't know if he's transitioned yet.
	I'd like to publicly apologise for organising a mass canvas in support of Rosie Duffield in the 2019 general election.
	Genuinely mortified.
	Oh, she must be really bad.
	Well, I mean, thanks, Owen.
	I mean, labour are awful, but of course it's not about that.
	It's about the liking of a tweet.
	So what was the tweet?
	Let's go to the next one.
	So you can see the tweet here.
	Rosie Duffield, MP. She'll like this.
	Man named Curtis.
	Don't know anything about him, but he said, I'm so sick of hearing about how, quote, queer has been reclaimed.
	I had that word spit in my face as recently as 2018.
	And look who is reclaiming it.
	Mostly heterosexuals cosplaying as the opposite sex and as, quote, gay.
	Stop co-opting our language.
	Stop colonising gay culture.
	Okay.
	So he expressed this opinion.
	Rosie, give it a like.
	And that's her crime.
	So if we go to the next one, you can see the Times reporting here that, yeah, she's being investigated for this.
	Before we move on, that's a very progressive framework that he's established here.
	He's...
	It is not from a white-wing perspective, it is definitely from a left-wing perspective.
	Absolutely not.
	I mean, anti-colonisation, anti-co-option, this is all very much left-wing rhetoric.
	I'm anti-colonisation, but...
	Well, yeah, sure, but this is all left-wing rhetoric, this is left-wing framing.
	Hmm.
	So, we've got the next one.
	This is the news that she's being investigated for this.
	Presumably being threatened to be kicked out as well.
	It's an anti-trans tweet, right?
	Yeah.
	The Labour LGBT chair Womixin, I don't know if she's Womixin, but I imagine that's how they refer to themselves, said,"...the party must demonstrate that it stands with the LGBT plus community and that it will not tolerate transphobia or homophobia from our membership or elected officials." Gonna stop you there.
	He was kind of pointing out that it's kind of homophobic for you guys to reclaim the word queer and then use it on each other.
	But I guess this guy's opinion is less important.
	I mean, the thing here being as well, I presume he's gay.
	Him referring to himself as having that word spat in his face.
	Seems that way, yeah.
	His opinion don't matter, though.
	He's a sex traitor?
	Is he a house queer?
	House queer.
	Right, okay.
	I suppose that's the Labour MPs, sort of, the Labour LGBTs position.
	I'll have to ask one of them, you know.
	I can imagine them actually talking like that.
	Like, anyone who is just like, yeah, I'm not up for the woke stuff, I just want to be gay.
	Douglas Murray.
	Yeah.
	I imagine how they look at him.
	So, it is understood, now that party officials are looking into the case, to know what they're expecting to find.
	It's a tweet.
	Yeah.
	Like, you could just Google it.
	Quote, The party must demonstrate that it stands with the community and will not tolerate blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
	More from her saying the same damn thing.
	So if we go to the next one, the organization she runs is super mad.
	Labour LGBT+. Right, okay.
	Totally there to represent homosexual tolerance and nothing else, I'm sure.
	Totally there to represent labour.
	Like, you know, these are the workers of the world uniting, I'm sure.
	Camrades.
	So they say, we've been made aware that Rosie Duffield MP has once again endorsed homophobic and transphobic content online by saying that we shouldn't call each other queers.
	Big move.
	This is important.
	We will be raising this with parties.
	Kitchen table issues.
	We continue to urge them to take strong and decisive action against anyone who seeks to discriminate against LGBT plus people.
	See, that's the weird thing about all this.
	Like, the whole point being made by the chap, and Rosie liking it, was we shouldn't call each other queers, because that's a slur, or at least that's how we've all thought of it, and why we've urged for it to be banned from public conversation.
	Sure.
	You know, it's the new N-word kind of thing.
	Yep.
	And, yeah, they're like, maybe we shouldn't use that word, and yet these guys are the ones saying, yeah, you're engaging in discrimination here.
	If we can't call you queer, then you're oppressing us.
	Because trans women are women.
	This is all so sensible.
	So we go to the next one.
	This is where they're calling for the whip to be removed.
	We're calling for the whip to be removed from Rosie Duffield.
	So they're not happy that just, ah, we don't like it.
	Nah, she's got to go.
	She's got to be purged from the party for this.
	And have submitted a formal complaint to the party about her conduct.
	At Labour UK, it must show zero tolerance towards homophobia.
	Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
	See, if Keir Starmer was smart, he'd purge every single person involved in this.
	Everything in the LGBT plus Labour, all of these woke tossers.
	Well, the entire wokest movement, but I mean, there's not much left in Labour.
	I mean, as we demonstrated from the party conference, it's endemic.
	Yeah.
	Like, what was weird about the whole thing is there was the occasional speaker who would say something of, say, interest.
	I mean, it wasn't amazing, but it was always just like, hey, you know, I serve in Afghanistan and, you know, that was horrible to go through.
	I don't think we should be involved in international wars or something.
	But just in between him for a solid like 30 minutes would just be nonsense.
	Comrades, comrades, comrades.
	Yeah, there is nothing to salvage from this party.
	Anyone in there who thinks that there's something to be, you're deluding yourself.
	So there's that.
	So there's been a bunch of defense and more hoes mad from this.
	So we go to the next one.
	This is a guy saying, Not sure how Rosie Duffield, advocating for a position deeply popular amongst the young...
	Unpopular.
	Sorry, unpopular amongst the young, holds a marginal constituency in which a Labour vote is heavily reliant on students.
	It is.
	I used to live in Canterbury.
	She got into power when I was there, and I'm very salty about it because she never responded to my damn emails.
	So I've got no sympathy for her at all, but it is absurd that she's being called for being kicked out of the party on the basis that she believes women are women.
	Well, I'm all in favour of it.
	If she doesn't want to call gay people queers, she should definitely be kicked out of that Labour Party.
	What a regressive, knuckle-dragging gammon she must be.
	I'm looking forward to what I think the organisation is BAME Labour.
	That's how they call themselves.
	Bit of an L. But I imagine them coming out and saying, yeah, you need to call me the N-word now, because we're reclaiming the word.
	I mean, that's where this logic leads.
	If you want to call me the N-word, you get kicked out.
	I mean, you can run the logic.
	I mean, transracial people.
	I mean, like the clearly transracial MP for Liverpool, who is clearly white but claims she's black.
	She wants to use the M-word.
	Why not?
	He's reclaiming it from the white people.
	In case you're wondering about how the parties feel about this, because you mentioned about what's the problem with the whole party, they'd have to do quite a lot of purging.
	So, poll of Labour voters.
	Is a trans woman a woman?
	63% of Labour voters agree that trans women are women, and 24% agree that women are women.
	I mean, I'm not against them purging 63% of the Labour Party.
	I mean, neither, I guess.
	But it is interesting as well that you've at least got that 24% there saying, no, women are women.
	You can't just claim you're a woman and that's it.
	That's not good enough.
	24% of the Labour Party don't have mental illnesses.
	24% of the party trust the science.
	Yeah.
	Sorry, it's so absurd.
	If you scroll down, there's the Conservative voting on this, which I'm sure you've been interested in, which is the Conservatives are in the majority position of Trust the Science.
	35% are like, yeah, I am a left-winger.
	I mean, it is a conservative party.
	So 35% conservatives and 49% conservatives.
	Anyway, I thought I'd also put alongside a poll in which I found really funny recently, which was a question of whether or not you'd like to be a British citizen, essentially.
	So, new poll, I would rather be a citizen of Britain than any other country on Earth.
	And you can see 78% of conservatives said that.
	Only 78% of conservatives?
	The other 22% were like, well...
	I'd rather be a foreigner.
	Weird.
	But the Labour group there being second to bottom, only 43% of the Labour British would rather be British than anywhere else.
	So a majority of Labour don't want to be British.
	Well, I mean, that explains a lot, actually.
	That explains absolutely everything, really, doesn't it?
	But I think this poll is fantastic, and you really should keep it in mind.
	But what's worse?
	Half the country would rather not be British.
	No, 54% would rather be British.
	Yeah, but that's half the country who doesn't want to be British.
	I mean, you've got the Romanos there, haven't you?
	Yes, I'd rather be European.
	But this just goes to show to the absolute corruption that the left has managed to do with, honestly, probably children.
	Again, left and children again.
	But the absolute corruption of the way that we view ourselves and our own self-identity and self-confidence in our country.
	If half the country are like, yeah, I'd rather not be British, then we're in trouble.
	Well, there is the nuance.
	I see John pointing out you could be arguing I'd rather be a citizen of Switzerland or something because it's hugely rich and more democratic and so forth.
	That might be a percentage, but the vast disparity there is certainly of note, should be kept in mind.
	In the US as well, this is also playing out the same way, which I found really funny.
	You can see a majority of Americans believe that women are women.
	They trust the science.
	Whereas for the Republicans, 81% believe that women are women and then trust the science.
	But only 34% of Dems.
	63% of Dems believe that trans women are women.
	I mean, the left is just totally corrupted at this point, isn't it?
	The really funny thing about the Democratic slot, though, is that they mention at the top there the racial breakdown of Dems.
	26% of white Dems believe that women are women, whereas 58% of black Dems believe that women are women.
	Oof.
	So the black Dems are all transphobes and therefore have to be purged as well.
	Lots of purging going on.
	Anyway, so there has been some support of Rosie Duffield in her position, the traditional position that women have for Jonas.
	From that known raging transphobe J.K. Rowling...
	Good for her.
	In news that will amaze precisely nobody, I stand with Rosie Duffield.
	Late to this, I've been wrestling a tricky chapter, so she's been busy, but J.K. Rowling coming in defensively.
	You can see the article there as well.
	Labour MP Rosie Duffield's right to defend women's rights.
	All of this coming from a feminist lens, as you'll see with the next one, Julie Bindle.
	Her wording kind of annoyed me.
	There are men and handmaidens on here calling for the execution of Rosie Duffield.
	This is misogynistic bullying, and it is a sadistic, as it is cynical, shame on you all, solidarity with sisterhood, and with Rosie.
	I'm just like, goddammit, feminist, why do you make me hate you?
	Like, the wording there, just like the sisterhood, why can't we just be on the side of women are women?
	Why does it always have to be put in feminist lenses?
	But it is Judy Bendel, so...
	Yeah, of course it's Judy Bendel, but we're all stuck on the same position that we either believe in the biologically essential definition of a woman, or you're a leftist.
	But I find it absurd to watch people who clearly have been the radical left of the past, are now considered still on the left, are trying to use their arguments to stop the continual march of progress.
	Yeah, you've already lost that one, Julie.
	That one's long over.
	Your thoughts have ended up leading here.
	You're now defaulting back to the deeply conservative view.
	That your philosophy is apparently based on.
	Yeah, sorry, it's just a personal complaint.
	But there have been some conservatives who have jumped into this.
	One from a divisor's MP, who I have thought about.
	So he says, when people derive their identity, indeed their existence, from their feelings, then there is no more debate, no more relationship, and no such thing as society.
	For that reason, I stand for the words of Duffield.
	The idea that you can just define yourself as whatever you like, because I feel like it.
	Surprisingly thoughtful response.
	Yeah, he got a load of people mad about this because it's Twitter.
	It's full of leftists.
	What do you expect?
	But I quite enjoyed that.
	Also, it's a shame that his whole thing actually relies on a train station being built and devices, but I'm sure he'll get on with it.
	At least he should do.
	But this isn't the first time, as mentioned.
	Rosie's said these things in the past.
	So if we go to the next one, she got in trouble before for saying that women have cervix.
	So the, what's her name?
	The official government position that women have vaginas.
	Yeah, so Labour MP Rosie Duffield urged to apologise by Canterbury Pride after transphobia row.
	What was the transphobia row over?
	She said that only women have a cervix.
	I'm sorry, it's just...
	Matt.
	What are they doing in the West?
	You know, us living in the third world, you check up on your phone, just look at what the West are doing.
	They're debating whether or not women have vaginas.
	Yes.
	Right, turn that off.
	They're not the example to follow.
	Yeah, no, absolutely.
	And I would not blame foreign countries from looking at this and going, actually, they've gone wrong somewhere.
	Pride Canterbury, who I think are a bunch of creeps in this, responded with a letter condemning her.
	They said "using inclusive language is not intended to invalidate cis women, but rather include those to whom this also applies but don't identify as cisgender.
	For example, on the NHS website the phrasing "all women and people with a cervix" is used.
	You idiots!
	So all women and people who are not women?
	So, I mean, we don't use this language to exclude cis women, but also they're just people with a cervix.
	They're not even women.
	Amazing.
	I just...
	You don't listen to yourselves, do you, you utter morons?
	This is why I call you creeps, because you don't talk like people.
	Anyway.
	But why does...
	They continue.
	This ensures that the important message of screening is understood by as many people as possible.
	Idiots.
	This makes no one understand what you're talking about.
	There was no confusion until you came along.
	Everyone understood that women had cervixes and therefore women needed checkups and whatnot.
	People without cervixes, we call males, and they didn't need that.
	And there is a small percentage of intersex and people who want to be the other sex but can't be and therefore do what they can to experience that.
	And that's the world?
	And then you guys come along like, no, there are no women, there are just people with cervixes.
	Yeah, this is making everything so much more clear.
	Anyway.
	That's right, I'm a feminist.
	Responding to the criticism, the Canterbury MP wrote, I'm a transphobe for knowing that only women have a cervix, question mark, exclamation point.
	And then, Kent Online here say, however, a follower replied with a screenshot taken from the NHS website, outlining how transgender men with cervixes are invited to the doctor's surgery for smear tests.
	That's because they're a woman.
	Sexually, they're a woman.
	They can identify their gender, you know, how they feel with being a man, all they want, but they are still sexually a woman.
	Biologically a woman.
	That's the point being made here.
	So them, you know, them being like, yeah, well, what about what the NHS has written?
	Who cares?
	Yeah, don't care.
	Nature is more important, surely, than whatever the...
	I mean, the very fact that you have to bend the knee to nature eventually and be like, okay, well, you're going to have to get your smear test.
	No matter how you identify, nature demands that you get that smear test because you might have a problem, blah, blah, blah.
	Yeah, this is why male vagina and female penis are just the meme of the whole movement.
	It's ridiculous.
	You're not going to get past the reality of it.
	Anyway, so she also said in response to the backlash that this was a tenuous communist pile-on, which I thought was funny.
	Fair.
	Yeah.
	But what's interesting is she had a couple of staffers in her department in Canterbury quit because they didn't like that she said that women are women.
	So the next one here.
	You don't think women can have penises?
	I'm leaving!
	I resent the remark.
	I'm out of here.
	So this is back when she reiterates her report for trans rights because someone had left who was upset.
	So I believe she had two lesbians working for her.
	Right.
	Cis lesbians.
	Yeah.
	Lesbians.
	Okay.
	Okay.
	Who then left because, well, they were upset that she had said that women have a cervix and then loads of mail kept coming in saying, oh, well done.
	Good job.
	You know, good for standing up for women.
	And they read all this mail because, you know, they're the staff.
	These women are misogynists!
	And they were like, this place is full of transphobes!
	I'm leaving!
	I just found that really funny.
	If we go to the last one here, this is just the reason I don't like her, in case you're wondering.
	I'm quite happy to actually see her lose her seat.
	And I think her majority is like 183.
	So if you are in Canterbury, especially if you're a student in Canterbury, register yourself there.
	Your vote's going to be worth more.
	And get rid of her.
	Feel free to vote green.
	No.
	Well, if they're voting Labour, they're never going to vote Conservative, aren't they?
	Anyway, but just the reasons why I hate her.
	The first one here being because she's a meme.
	So this is her complaining about cultural appropriation because a tea room had opened in Canterbury.
	And if you can scroll down, you can see the nice girls there who dressed up in geisha makeup.
	Mm-hmm.
	This is cultural appropriation.
	Oh, how dare they?
	This is bad.
	So she's been using all of these left-wing identity politics arguments until it comes to what is a woman, and then she's like, well, actually, no, get rid of all this.
	I'm a conservative.
	Yeah, exactly.
	She's like, no, no, you are a bit of a snake oil salesman, in my opinion.
	Confused, I think, is the way to put it.
	I personally hate her because I wrote her letters about Count Dankula during that old Polarco.
	Like, I wrote her physical letters, emails, phone calls, and nothing.
	I think I ended up in response eventually getting the stock party labor response that had been issued.
	And I was just like, right, and I sent her the original stock party report.
	I know you've just sent me the stock party one.
	Send me the real one.
	You know, what's your real feels on this?
	Nothing.
	So...
	Yeah, not a good MP. Hope she loses her seat.
	But, funny situation.
	Quite enjoy it.
	Hmm.
	Well, since we're on the topic, let's discuss what happens when a family member of yours goes woke.
	Because this is something that is happening to many, many people, because your children are being indoctrinated by communists in their schools.
	For some reason, the Conservative Party in the UK is doing nothing about it.
	The Republicans, thank God, are on the march against all of this critical race theory, identitarian nonsense.
	But people here are not doing a damn thing, and the Conservatives are letting it carry on.
	And so this is going to be something that happens to many people, and so why not?
	Why not go through this anonymous confession from someone who says they can't converse with their woke 18-year-old daughter without getting angry?
	I like girls and boys, she announced recently.
	She meant in a romantic sense, and this person was like, right, okay, tiresome.
	As a young teen, her bedroom wall was covered in posters of Robert Pattinson.
	That's the guy from Twilight, isn't it?
	I don't know.
	I'm sure it's the vampire from Twilight.
	Yeah, and she had the same boyfriend for several years through secondary school.
	She has decided that now she's attracted to both sexes.
	This would never be a problem, of course, but the reason is the father knows that his daughter doesn't like girls and boys.
	She likes boys.
	It's just always been the way.
	Isn't this a Family Guy sketch?
	Yes.
	Like, I swear this happens to Meg.
	Yeah.
	Yes.
	But she says she's attracted both to jump on another woke bandwagon, because for Snowflake Generation Z, it's trendy to be gender ambiguous.
	My own daughter has done this.
	She's gone through the LGBT indoctrination in school, came home one day and said, oh, I'm bisexual.
	It's like, you're 11, you're not anything sexual.
	Any leftists who are telling children that they're ex-sexual, stop it, you're disgusting.
	Sexualising children, as usual.
	Nothing new.
	Anyway, in the past couple of years, I've listened to it all.
	Trans rights, patriarchy, plastics in the ocean.
	I agree with a lot of it.
	Well, there's your problem, isn't it?
	If you're writing for The Telegraph, it means you're generally conservative-leaning, theoretically.
	And if you agree with a lot of this woke nonsense, then you're a real conservative now.
	Ha!
	But my daughter's insistence that the world's ills are mainly down to me is becoming grating.
	She sees it as her job and the right to make me see the error of my ways and atone for her lost future.
	So, this woke indoctrination, critical race theory, and various other kinds of critical theory, you've got to understand it is deliberately designed, explicitly and consciously so, to change what is being analysed.
	Now, you can read pretty much any critical race theory text...
	And you will find in their introductions, they say, well, look, we didn't want to just analyze this, because that's a neutral approach to power dynamics.
	We want to be able to change them in the analysis.
	So the analysis itself presents a should.
	They've decided to buck Hume's is-ought distinction and say, no, because something is, therefore we ought, and that's intrinsic to wokeism and to critical analysis.
	Anyway, so another issue as well is that what they're trying to do with this is turn children into moral legislators.
	Now, I don't know whether anyone is watching who's never met a child.
	They're not.
	They're moral students.
	The adults are the moral legislators and they teach the children what it is they should believe is right and wrong because children don't know anything, which is why they're so open to be exploited by the left in our schools.
	Again, if you're a conservative and you think, oh, I might become a teacher, now you have to become a teacher.
	Because otherwise it's a communist who's going to indoctrinate your children.
	Anyway, to begin with, I was proud that she was becoming politically aware and encouraged her when she joined her fellow sixth formers to boycott lessons in protest of climate change.
	Get what you deserve.
	Equally, I was scorned when I mentioned how convenient it was that the protests were all scheduled for a Friday, allowing students a long weekend.
	When I pointed out on Monday mornings that perhaps she'd prefer to walk to school and lower her carbon footprint, I was branded a boomer.
	So what?
	I'm furious about this, right?
	She's the child, right?
	So instantly you should be adopting the position of the adult and saying, oh, look, I don't care about your opinion on this because you're a child.
	You don't know what you're talking about, but I do.
	For example, if you want her to walk...
	No, I mean, just the point of, like, if you're the adult here and your child's like, I want to skip Friday school to go protest.
	Never.
	I don't care.
	Go back to school.
	Yeah.
	Not only that, it's like, you're going to walk to school now because you were disrespectful.
	You know, just, oh, okay, boomer.
	No, okay, walk to school.
	You know, when you get back, no pudding.
	Anymore, you get even worse groundings.
	You know, the punishments continue mounting up until the child does as it's supposed to do.
	But yeah, you're never allowed to skip school for any reason.
	It should be the default position of the parent, not "Oh, convenient these protests are on a Friday." Then you don't go.
	You do not go to the protest.
	Anyway, I was supportive too when, along with her middle-class white friends, she joined a Black Lives Matter sit-in in the local park, attended by no people of colour because very few live in our village.
	This is what happens when your children are indoctrinated into an American problem that doesn't have an equivalent in small English villages.
	Black lives matter, okay dear.
	The institutional racism of churro.
	Where's the black people?
	I don't know any, but you know.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Exactly.
	Like some small English village and they're talking about like American race politics.
	Like the village of Pottingham where, you know, non-white population zero.
	But there's still systemic racism somewhere, trust me.
	Yes, there's severe systemic racism in St.
	Austell.
	Just some small Cornish village.
	This happened.
	There was a statue of a, I think it was like a Celtic Scot, and it was very famous, and they wanted to pull it down for being racist.
	And I thank you to retweeted it and be like, this guy had never seen a black man in his life.
	How the hell would he be racist?
	Who knows?
	And they say, I'm a lifelong advocate of equality.
	There we go.
	You're a communist.
	Become an advocate of freedom.
	become a liberal these things don't happen when you're an advocate of freedom they only happen when you're an advocate of communism i also understand about irony but when i tried to talk to her about the white savior syndrome and virtue signaling i was cancelled and told i could never understand because my white privilege makes me a part of the problem and not the solution spanking still legal isn't it Yeah.
	But just lol.
	You were cancelled by your own children.
	No, they get grounded for that.
	Like, for backchatting, that's what you should be doing.
	I mean, number one, just kids talking nonsense.
	Number two, going to the school.
	What the hell have you taught my child?
	Yeah.
	But number three, why should you get in-pocket money?
	You get any sort of bank chat from your kids, you just cancel their pocket money.
	Sorry, no, you've got to understand how the power dynamics in the family work.
	You don't hold any of the power here!
	You're supposed to do as you're told because I'm your father and I'm concerned about your emotional and mental well-being.
	And that means discipline.
	Discipline's good for the children as well.
	Anyway, now most discussions end in disagreement.
	Harry and Meghan, my view, spoil hypocrites playing the Hollywood PR game to a T. Her view, victims of racist colonial systems.
	This prince and his princess are the victims of colonialism, racism, and privilege.
	The victims of privilege.
	The victims, the royal victims of privilege.
	Obesity.
	My view.
	A public health disaster in which people need to eat less and move more.
	Her view?
	Body positive people such as Towie's Gemma Collins are aspirational role models.
	Ah yes.
	If only we could all be obese, then the world would be a better place.
	Look at that incredibly fat person.
	Aspirational.
	Thank God for you.
	It's such an obvious cope.
	It's so obvious.
	The fat positivity movement is such a joke.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Socialism, my view, a dangerous pipe dream that stifles innovation and ambition.
	Her view, utopia.
	So, to summarise, his daughter's been programmed as an NPC by the school.
	Yeah.
	Her local school.
	By her local, tiny, homogenous English village school.
	That's how far this has gone.
	This isn't just in the major cities.
	It's everywhere, right?
	She has opinions about everything, and they are all rigidly held.
	Then just tell her opinions are wrong on everything, and don't listen.
	Increasingly, our conversations involve me biting my lip, then changing the subject to safer grounds such as the weather or plans for the weekend.
	It's exhausting.
	Well, this is what you get.
	You should be instructing her in her moral values.
	But I guess the thing you should be doing is start observing the flaws and contradictions within the ideology she's espousing.
	Or failing that, just tell her that yes, you're the patriarchy, because you're her dad, and you're oppressing her, go to her room.
	I do understand that every generation has an obligation to shock their parents, and it must be tough for today's teenagers.
	No, it's really easy for today's teenagers.
	That's the problem.
	That's why they're making up these problems, and adopting them.
	But anyway, we are quite unshockable, speaking of himself, and so all that's left for rebellious teens is to smash up a few historical artifacts, then blame their parents for all the ills of the world.
	Well...
	I mean, you know, if you're like, well, I didn't provide her with anything to rebel against, so now she's got to rebel against literally everything, again, whose fault was this?
	And I'm sorry, but there is a distinct permissiveness among the boomers that I actually think was a mistake.
	My own parents are remarkably permissive, and I think that might have been a bit of a mistake as well.
	You know, the permissiveness of the sort of, you know, 60s to 80s generation of parents that then raised a kid in the sort of 90s, I think they should have had more boundaries and they should have had more of a kind of understanding that, look, there's a pattern to your life and you should pay attention to this.
	I mean, you can also just look at the end results of leftist children, for example, and just look at them and be like, do you want your kid to end up like that?
	Exactly.
	But I mean, the boomers, I suppose, you know, in their day, they didn't realize, and they had had the privilege of having come from a society that had social order imposed on it by custom and tradition.
	And so I guess they thought, well, you know, they expected that to persist while failing to uphold the necessary social institutions.
	But anyway, moving on.
	This is a story from America and how wokeism is literally tearing apart another family.
	And again, these are just horrible, horrible things that are happening.
	Because, I mean, the previous one, the dad is literally like, I dislike my daughter.
	So by politicizing everything, the family is being torn apart because the dad doesn't even like his end daughter.
	Because he's not his daughter anymore.
	She's an NPC. Exactly.
	She's a political agent.
	But then this one, it's even worse, to be honest.
	I really...
	This one's way worse.
	Because this is a mixed-race family.
	So a white man and a black wife.
	Uh, and he says this, uh, woke anti-racism is child abuse.
	My family is the living antithesis of the, uh, uh, of something that I've not heard of.
	But anyway, he says, I'm white.
	When we met, we saw each other's race, but we didn't think it was the most interesting thing about us.
	We foolishly thought our children could be part of a post-racial future in which all Americans could just be human beings to one another.
	Then came Trump, as if Trump is the one who's responsible for this, right?
	You're blaming him for this!
	Is that really where he's going?
	Trump made all this happen.
	He was the one introducing identity politics.
	Yep.
	Trump, unironically, would have been an advocate, is an advocate, of the post-racial future.
	There is no way, if someone came to Trump and said, I'm an American, he would be interested in their race.
	There is no black America, there is no white America, there is just America.
	Exactly.
	And anyway, so then came Trump.
	I decided I should try and learn more about my fellow citizens, who I now realised were completely opaque to me.
	In contrast, my wife decided she was at war with an immutably white supremacist America.
	My wife began to read all the...
	I feel bad, man.
	Exactly.
	Eventually, she's going to come to the conclusion that my own husband is oppressing me.
	Yeah.
	So, my wife began to read authors like Nicole Hannah-Jones and Michael Harriot.
	She had a, quote, racial awakening, concluding that she had been, quote, inauthentically black all her life.
	So she has gained the critical race theory racial consciousness that they've all been trying to promote.
	She's going to become an authentic black.
	What is that?
	Something they're going to prescribe to her?
	I dread to think.
	This is human, isn't it?
	Yeah, exactly.
	My wife came to think that her mind, trained in exclusive private schools and two Ivy League institutions for BA and PhD, had been colonized.
	By who?
	Well, the white man.
	Obviously.
	So, her education that got her to be a doctor made her colonised.
	I mean, she seems to be colonising upwards, I guess.
	She's come to think she owes her success to being the right kind of black woman.
	What?
	In this case, the right kind of black woman, I suppose, is a black woman who succeeds, works hard.
	Yeah, works hard, gets married, has a family.
	Are the critical racists saying here that the right kind of black woman is one that doesn't do that?
	That seems to be the only inference we can take from this.
	If that's an inauthentic black woman, an authentic black woman is presumably a single mother with no qualifications and no prospects.
	I mean, that's not my view.
	That's the critical race theory view.
	But anyway, she's an inauthentic, white-acting black woman who is non-threatening to white spaces.
	She's not bombing Congress.
	Yeah, she's not a Sata Shukur.
	Most disturbing, she's reinterpreted her five decades of life, in which she only ever had one very mild story of a microaggression, as a history of brutal, grinding racial oppression.
	Yes, racial oppression often includes the oppressed getting doctorates.
	At Ivy League institutions.
	I hear South Africa was like that right until the 90s.
	Just any black man could walk in and get a doctorate.
	Yeah.
	It just worked hard enough.
	And then Nelson Mandela appeared.
	I mean, it's literally like the Uncle Ruckus view of the world.
	Yeah, it really is.
	Deep beneath her inauthentic white acculturation is an oppressed black woman struggling for freedom.
	How much more free do you need to be?
	Like, what freedom are you asking for?
	Well, I mean, I got my PhD.
	Got my family.
	Got married.
	Got a career.
	Made loads of money.
	Live in a nice house.
	But I'm still not free.
	This is racial oppression.
	Oh God, if only...
	I'll trade.
	It's madness, isn't it?
	Right?
	So this is what racial grievance entrepreneurs like NHJ, I don't know who that's actually referring to, some critical race theorists have done to my wife's mind.
	And what she's doing in turn to the minds of our small children makes my blood run cold.
	My wife is teaching our children that America hates them and wants to kill them because they're black.
	Rather than take the birth of our children, ambiguous, innocent, raceless little creatures as an opportunity to rethink the oppressive American race ideology and not hand it down to a new generation, my wife got woke after Trump and doubled down on the anti-racist racial essentialism.
	Here are three hair-raising stories.
	First story, she regularly explains to our kids that the police want to kill black people.
	Thanks, Mum.
	Even the black police?
	Even the black police.
	I imagine especially black police.
	Blacks are people police like to kill, and they always have been.
	They all keep using the pretext that they get scared when unarmed black people reach into cars like Jacob Blake, or steal tasers like Rayshard Brooks, as long as using that pretext allows them to keep killing black people with impunity.
	As in, black people fight and attack the police, and so the police shoot them, and that's the police liking killing black people.
	Just speak to any of the cops involved in any of the stories about, you know, the black hero who's been killed.
	Just talk to them about the killing.
	Watch body cam footage.
	But just the way the police feel.
	I mean, she's saying that the police here love doing it.
	They're getting a thriller.
	No.
	No way do they.
	Haunt them for the rest of their lives.
	There was one video where this woman, I think she fired from a car, a cop, and so the cop shot her.
	The car, like, drives off and crashes, and the cop just falls to his knees and starts sobbing.
	Yeah.
	Oh, God.
	Well, there's two lives ruined there, because this woman was a bloody idiot.
	Anyway.
	That's what she told her children, our children, who, by plantation logic, are among the black population that the police go out hoping to kill every day.
	Second story.
	She told our kids that Kyle Rittenhouse, like so many whites, hates black people, wants to kill black people.
	So he went to a BLM protest and opened fire.
	What?
	That's not what happened.
	He didn't shoot a single black person, did he?
	No.
	I thought he just shot pedos.
	He did.
	Pedos and white beaters.
	And he was the one being attacked.
	Sorry, Peter's politically black now.
	And it wasn't a BLM protest, it was an anti-fire riot.
	And he didn't just open fire, he was physically assaulted and defended himself.
	But anyway, the lies that she's got from Twitter, clearly, are the problem here.
	When I asked in a neutral way why she thought Rittenhouse had shot those people, she became upset and stormed out of the house and did not return for three hours.
	Jesus Christ.
	I mean, that's awful.
	It's terrible.
	But she knows she's lying.
	Yeah.
	She knows there's a big lie, right?
	It wasn't needless, and they were both pedophiles.
	Anyway, third story.
	We drove past a poster that said Ahmad with a picture of Ahmad Arbery.
	Daughter, who's that?
	Wife.
	A black man who was killed.
	My seven-year-old daughter, now trained to think that white people hate and want to kill black people like her, went straight to the inference.
	Oh, so they killed him because they hate black people.
	It's what she's doing to her own children.
	It's because she became woke.
	I don't even know how her husband deals with this.
	My daughter needed no further information to infer that black men have been killed because they hate black people.
	This is bad enough, but what's worse is that my wife is training herself to see herself as one of these universally hated black people whom everyone wants to kill.
	Let the implications of that for my girl's soul, for the ease with which she will encounter the world, sink in.
	My wife wants her to, quote, inherit the wound, as Thomas Chatwell has said, when she should inherit nothing but joy, love, and the sense of her own endless potential in the world, that will reward her for her beauty and brilliance and not punish her for her hatred of her blackness.
	As in, you know, she got married, had kids, became a doctor, and now she's inheriting a wound.
	You know what's weird?
	You ever seen the Louis III documentary where he meets with, like, members of the clan and whatnot, and they've got families?
	Maybe.
	It's exactly the same.
	Really?
	Exactly the same situation where they're like, no, I need to teach my kids about white power and all the rest of it, and how the world is out to kill them because they're white, and being obsessed with that sort of stuff.
	Right.
	Where it's like, why?
	Like, your child, like the Westboro Baptist Church, where they've got, like, their two-year-olds holding signs saying God hates, you know, F-word.
	Why does my wife want our kids to inherit the wound?
	I suspect it's because, due to her parents' successes, who fought in the civil rights battles of the 60s, and became a surgeon and a teacher, she never inherited the wound herself, and has come to feel inauthentically black.
	And she's not.
	She's doing very well for herself.
	And rightfully so.
	And I bet she earned everything that she has.
	And now she's been persuaded by critical race theorists that actually she's not really a black person at all and she should hate everything around her and that the world is coming to get her.
	And she's making her children think this.
	After all, NHJ and Coates, Tanahashi Coates, are always telling her how traumatised she should be because she's black in America.
	So she has come to believe that only when she viscerally feels the wound that all black people are supposed to feel, she will herself be authentic.
	My wife's father told me he's glad his daughter and Obama too come from the post-civil rights generation because they did not acquire his, quote, black rage.
	This is why Obama could be elected, he said, and why race is never important to his daughter and my wife until now.
	Newly desiring to feel the wound but not able to authentically experience it due to a life of untroubled privilege she's living vicariously through her kids trying to inflict the wound upon them.
	Maybe if she can't be an authentically wounded black person they can.
	This is awful.
	This is absolutely awful.
	The father who pushed his son into sports, into which he could not excel himself.
	She's pushing her children into a racial grievance that she has read about in books in the New York Times, but has never had a chance to experience for herself.
	The only viable alternative to this child abuse I've seen in the writing of Thomas Chatwell.
	The alternative my 80-year-old father-in-law offered is as bad as my wife's plan.
	He said he's happy his grandkids will identify as white, so they will never have to feel the sense of inherent worthlessness compared to whites that he felt coming in the age of the Jim Crow South.
	His revelation of his own wound saddened me immeasurably.
	This proud surgeon's scars bears witness to the country that America used to be, but my father-in-law's situation, a binary situation, and the only one this black man from another era could come up with is as bad as my wife's.
	I don't want my children to identify as white any more than black.
	I want them to be deeply aware of the complex and difficult but often beautiful histories behind their parental lineages.
	But I pray they identify into neither blackness nor whiteness.
	Each of these legacies is heavy, one with pain, the other with guilt.
	Yes, the best thing, of course, for the children to identify as Americans.
	Do I have to say that?
	Why do I have to say that?
	Apparently, yes.
	It's just such a normal, obvious thing.
	Like, you know, being American and your skin colour actually doesn't matter.
	That's actually the great thing that the Americans did.
	That's the great thing about the American identity.
	One of the sad things about them as well, like, all of you look the damn same to us.
	Like, all of you talk the same, all of you act the same to us.
	Like, all of the black and white Americans.
	I can't tell the damn difference between you people.
	Yeah.
	Trust us, we know that you're Americans.
	We, the foreigners, are very aware.
	And fundamentally, you do all act kind of the same.
	Not an insult, obviously.
	It's just an observation.
	No, you're just American and be it.
	There's nothing wrong with it.
	Yeah, it's just an American thing.
	Anyway, I want them to be the generation that at last transcends the limiting and soul-destroying American skin game.
	I want them not to identify but empathize deeply with the complexities of their heritage without being limited by the trauma and shame it would oppose.
	To me, that's how we can simply become fellow citizens and fellow humans to one another, so I'm in this for the long game, in a game in which my wife, with her racial essentialism agenda, has as yet no real idea that she is an opponent.
	I'm committed to mitigating the effects of what I see as her child abuse where I can, and until our kids are old enough to read this stuff themselves, And through other former writers.
	So, yeah, ripping apart families and, in this father's view, abusing his children with critical race theory.
	I agree, that's a terrible story.
	It's awful, isn't it?
	Tomorrow we're going to find some cheery stuff to laugh at.
	I like cheery podcasts where we can just laugh at stupid things that are happening.
	I mean, you saw some of this with the Trump derangement syndrome, but to do this on the lines of racial nationalism essentially is even worse.
	Literally imposing racial harms on your own children because you didn't have racial harms imposed on you and therefore some...
	Black supremacist is like, well, you're not even black.
	Who the hell is he to tell her who black is and isn't?
	You don't even have a PhD.
	Go to hell.
	Yeah.
	Whatever.
	Let's go to the video comments.
	I thought I was obtaining all the material for the lotuseaters.com by going to the website directly, and I now find that you've been going behind my back and submitting...
	Off-site material.
	Now, could you please create an extra tab or something to make sure that other members that go direct to the website have access to the extra material you record?
	Thank you.
	That'd be the weekend clips that we put on YouTube for the algorithm, I assume he's talking about.
	Yeah, I assume so.
	They also go on old tech, they're on BitChute, GabMines, all the rest of it, whatever the hell it gets uploaded to.
	But it's usually because we record them, they're just extra stuff for the algorithm, really.
	Yeah.
	Stories we didn't get to.
	Also, they usually get done for about Friday, uploaded, and in the past I've had to come in on weekends and have to do it, and I'd just rather not.
	Well, we are expanding.
	We are recruiting people and interviewing people, and so that shouldn't actually happen in the future too much.
	But at the moment, I don't think it's really plausible.
	But we will expand our broadcasting schedule to include the weekend so this doesn't happen.
	It's not your fault, though.
	You're not in the office.
	Sorry.
	This is for Josh as psychologist and Carl as business owner.
	I'm one who has spent 12 years in university learning nothing but how to be a religious ideologue, and my upbringing and past actions have given me little relevant life skills or experience.
	Through podcasts such as yours, it has taken me years to smash this ideology and see the world with clear eyes, but my lack of experience combined with needing to look after my family leaves me stuck in an excruciating government job that provides nothing to society.
	The question is, what the hell do I do now?
	Depends what your job is, I suppose.
	Like, I don't know what precisely you're doing.
	But I mean, we've had a conversation like that before with a guy who worked in a school.
	And it's kind of the point you had where it's like, well, it's difficult because there have to be conservative teachers.
	I mean, in the UK, they're outnumbered 1 to 10.
	Yes.
	It's absurd.
	If you're a conservative, you should probably become a teacher because otherwise communists are going to teach your kids.
	I don't know.
	It's hard to tell.
	About 100 years ago, teaching was an incredibly conservative profession.
	You know, the sort of old English schoolmaster-style teachers.
	Bring that back.
	Honestly, bring that back.
	I do wonder, when you had the liberal enlightenment coming about, were the teachers' majority becoming liberals, or were they, you know, Tories?
	Good question.
	As in the old kind.
	Yeah, good question.
	Go to the next one.
	You know, my mom's a nurse.
	laughter laughter For the people listening, he lit up a cigar with a bunch of tissue, 50 pound notes, so...
	Okay, three things.
	One, stop saying anime is based.
	If anything...
	It's less woke than the West, but it's still pretty woke.
	Two, as a guy who watches anime, stop suggesting anime!
	It is getting annoying!
	Three, Callum, take the goddamn man test.
	Do it!
	Do it!
	So what's the man test?
	The eating of a spoonful of Vegemite.
	Oh, yeah, yeah.
	And screaming, how's that?
	Yeah, stop being a cuck.
	Well, I agree with the anime part.
	I'm not eating Vegemite, though.
	The hell with Vegemite.
	I should try it on you, because if you're liking Marmite, I want to see if you can tell the difference between Marmite and Vegemite.
	Get me some?
	I'll do it.
	Because to me, it's all trash.
	I happen to really like Marmite, so...
	So, on Monday night, Tuesday morning, thanks to Keep Me Awake, I was on the Sultans of Châtelet Discord, and eventually the topic came around to inflation.
	And I have an idea, essentially, I have no idea if this has ever been done before, but an idea to remove inflation, essentially reduce inflation.
	Propaganda has the sheep to willingly go along with this.
	Gather excess money in the economy which is causing inflation.
	Burn and destroy it until there's nothing left.
	Therefore, as excess money creates inflation, destroying excess money would actually, you know, strengthen the actual money because there's less of it.
	Well, they do do that.
	I mean, this is the great train robber, isn't it?
	You know about that?
	No.
	Oh, so that means the story of the, what is it, Royal Mail transferring piles of piles of old notes to be destroyed?
	Because they get old, they're a bit crap, and then the government takes them back, destroys them, and then throws out the new ones.
	So that does happen.
	It's just not happening enough because they're printing too much.
	Okay, I didn't know that.
	What did you think they did with the money?
	I'd never get any thought.
	Oh, really?
	Why would I? Oh, alright.
	I wonder what the government does with all the old £5 notes.
	I don't know.
	We've got more pressing things to worry about.
	You've never seen The Great Train Robbery?
	No.
	It's a good movie.
	They get caught because they play Monopoly with their money.
	Right.
	And their fingerprints are all over.
	Idiots.
	Yeah.
	If you can identify the three-letter root in Arabic, you can essentially extrapolate that to make longer words.
	So, ka, ta, and ba, which broadly means writing, can be extrapolated to yekhtub, which is he writes, katab, which is book, mikhtub, which is office, mikhtaba, which is a library, and katab, which is a secretary.
	Sorry, I had trouble following that, but...
	I do enjoy the attempt at teaching a little bit of Arabic.
	Arabic is the only language that befuddles me completely.
	I just don't understand it.
	Anyway, let's go to the next one.
	My respect to you, Callan, for pointing out how TikTok steals songs and doesn't credit the creators.
	Senzala is the channel that created Okidoki Boomer's song.
	She also sang for Belle Dolphine.
	Unfortunately, Senzala's channel is dead.
	If you want a substitute, I recommend Gaugura.
	She's quite similar.
	And my question.
	Does the old man know who VTubers are?
	I'm aware of the concept of VTubers.
	Disavow it, obviously.
	It's where you have a video avatar instead of you, right?
	Yeah.
	And then you just have your voiceover because you're a Japanese schoolgirl or something.
	No, you're not.
	Because you're a 45-year-old Japanese woman.
	Right.
	Yeah.
	Every single one of these is a catfish.
	Carry on.
	Hello, gentlemen.
	I've been thinking about this question a lot, and I've come to the conclusion that not only does the West have a right to defend itself against communism and its attack dogs, it has an obligation to defend itself against communism and all of its attack dogs.
	Bring back the West Africa Squadron, but for communists.
	Maybe a fleet of helicopters this time.
	I mean, honestly, I'm more and more in favour of just prescribing communism as a terrorist ideology.
	Could you imagine Reagan listening to us talk?
	Well, I don't know if we should prescribe communism and fight against it.
	Like the people in the modern age talking about this stuff.
	And you'd just be looking at us like, what the hell are you doing?
	Why did I spend my life fighting communism if you guys were just going to let go?
	Well, why didn't you make it illegal, then?
	It's a fair point, but I mean, it's the point of, like, we're talking about whether or not, um, not just us, but the society at large, about whether or not we should resist socialists.
	I mean, what was the point in the Cold War, if not?
	Yeah, exactly.
	Obviously we should.
	Based commenter.
	Hmm.
	Oh, he's shaved.
	Hi, this, uh, comment is for Carl, specifically.
	On one of the premium videos that I watched recently, you mentioned something about...
	Punishing your kids harshly when they get caught lying so that they don't lie.
	It reminded me of an article I read many, many years ago about that exact topic.
	And so my question for you is, do you worry that punishing them harsher will only make them really good at lying?
	No.
	Thankfully, my son's really open, and my daughter's really open, so they're terrible liars anyway.
	And literally, if they start lying, I just say, are you lying?
	And just look at them.
	And literally, within about five or six seconds, my son's just like, yeah, I'm lying.
	It's brilliant.
	My wife wants to know how I do it, and it's like, you've got to have this kind of, like, death stare.
	If you dare lie to me, you know what's going to happen.
	Exactly.
	And literally, it's only been the past month or two that I've actually managed to really crack it, but now he gets halfway through the lie and then stops, and it's brilliant.
	The same thing happens with the drill sergeants that I told you about.
	There's a wonderful example of these British shows where they redo the training and they film it all, in which there's some instances where they give the candidate a chance to say they've told the truth, and when the candidate just outright lies, there's no plea.
	They're just out.
	But if they do admit, yeah, okay, I was lying, or they are upfront and honest at some point, then they're redeemable and they're brought back in.
	Right, okay.
	That's good.
	I mean, the other day, it was like, so my son's allowed to get these smoothie shake things from the fridge, but he's only allowed one a day.
	And so we're sat, I think it was like Saturday morning or something, we're sat in the living room, and he picks up this empty smoothie cart and says, this is yesterday's one.
	I was looking at him, are you lying?
	He's like, yeah, I'm lying.
	And then he's like, I'm not allowed to play games on your phone today, am I? I was like, no.
	And it's like, well, there we go.
	And he knew, he knew what the punishment would be.
	Shouldn't have done it.
	Good afternoon, Lotus Eaters.
	Could we please have a The Politics Of series about Fallout New Vegas and the DLCs, please?
	They're very, very good, Sargon.
	You can do that if you want.
	On my own?
	Well, I can help you with it.
	Okay.
	But if you want to get the clips and the ethos together of the things, I'll help you with it.
	Yeah, we could do.
	I've not played New Vegas, but it sounds interesting.
	It sounds like a lot of people want it.
	You would have to play some of it to get the point.
	You don't even have to speedrun the main quest, though.
	It's sort of like Skyrim, where there's a million other quests, but fuck it.
	Well, I mean, if you know what it is, you can just explain to me.
	Yeah, yeah, but the speedrunner would be useful because then you'd know who the hell I'm talking about.
	I'm not opposed to it.
	It is a funny concept.
	Hey guys, uh, sorry about the trolling on Friday, but I had a great laugh at your reaction, so, you know, no hard feelings.
	Second thing is, a few weeks ago I showed you a project I was working on that broke down the vaccine and COVID data.
	Unfortunately, today I checked my billing account and, um, that's not something I'm going to be able to pay out of pocket every month, so unfortunately I might have to close this down.
	It was an interesting experiment, but, yeah, I can't afford to pay this, even next month I'm fucked.
	Okay, see ya.
	Well, sorry about that.
	If you want to continue that, I would say the cheapest way of doing it would be to screenshot the data and post it on social media, one after the other, or in a series, whichever social media you're using.
	To be a source for that, I would say that's the cheapest way of doing it, if you wish to continue.
	Hey guys, I just want to say this to everyone out there.
	We've got to slowly stop supporting these companies that are taking our favorite characters and going woke.
	As you can see, I kind of like Spider-Man a little bit too much.
	I even dedicated my left arm to him.
	And they literally took Mary Jane, one of the best characters, made her black, made her look, act, do nothing like her, but just gave her the name because they have the rights to the character and made her talk about how slavery's bad.
	We gotta stop doing this.
	Support people that have better art.
	Agreed.
	True.
	I'm sorry that they killed the thing you love and wore it as a skin too.
	I used to really like Ben and Jerry's ice cream and I haven't touched it in years.
	So I'm just like, I have to hell with you people.
	It's a rhyme anyway.
	Yeah.
	For you.
	It's a choice to live with this virus.
	And with all due respect, you don't have a choice to go out and drink and drive and put everybody else's lives at risk.
	That's the equivalent Okay, Gavin.
	So, you put something foreign into your body.
	Aren't you the one that is intoxicated in that analogy?
	Should suicide be made illegal?
	Yes, and we should definitely punish those people who commit suicide.
	It already is in the UK. Is it?
	I thought it was a joke.
	I think it's still in the book.
	You're not allowed to kill yourself.
	Well, what are you going to do about it?
	I don't think you're in the courtroom, you just am what?
	I wish that guy survived to know what the memes were.
	Yeah, capital punishment for people who commit suicide.
	Hi.
	I recently got in trouble with my university, which, mind you, school hasn't even started yet.
	I'll be a freshman in August because someone sent the school a screenshot of a conversation I had with someone about freedom of speech.
	In this argument, I used the N-word as a tool to say, I can say these words because you are the one that gives them power, and if I say this word, nothing will happen.
	Along with this, they took another screenshot of a post that I had, which linked to a Ryan Long video, asking who had the better groups, Kamala Harris or Elizabeth Warren.
	Now, should I hide my political beliefs or stay true to them?
	Thank you.
	Depends on your circumstances.
	Yeah, we don't know enough about what's going to happen or what actual contingent circumstances you're in is to be able to make a proper judgment.
	So you've got to make the decisions there.
	But if you are arguing from a political position, you could say, well, look, I'm a Republican, and so these are my views, and they don't align with yours because I'm not part of your cult.
	Hmm.
	I think there is some conversation to be had about how to engage with politics in their life.
	And a conversation between you and Destiny would actually be interesting about that.
	But some rules I think probably should be proposed is that if the conversation isn't political, don't make it if you can.
	Yeah.
	Because, sure, you're a Republican.
	But if they're going to start a political conversation, I mean, then, you know, go ahead.
	But also, we don't know your circumstances.
	Not in the position to just endlessly tell you what to do.
	Oh, good.
	I'm looking forward to this next one.
	Oh, God.
	A follow-up to the Declaration comment.
	My understanding of the dialectic is that it was originally a method of purifying ideas through exposing their contradictions.
	And in Hegel's view, once the ideas were sufficiently purified, the utopia would emerge.
	This dialectic was used on Hegel's use to produce Marxism, and then on Marxism to produce cultural Marxism as we're dealing with today.
	Karl, it may not have been Hegelian dialectic.
	However, the way modern Marxists criticize the West is often to compare things with the pre-supposed utopia.
	I think there is a relationship between this comparison to utopia and the dialectic.
	Yes, I think so.
	The idea was to arrive at some sort of perfect idea.
	But hang on, his own method means that there isn't one, surely.
	Because once he's made the perfect idea through this endless rigmarole, he's going to end up with an antithesis to it, surely.
	Well, the idea is that the perfect idea is kind of like the final idea that includes everything, I think.
	And so, this is why I use the analogy of the chessboard, right?
	So, you know, if one idea is highlighting the white tiles, then the antithesis will say, well, okay, but there are black tiles.
	And so you synthesize that by going together and saying, right, there are both kinds of tiles.
	And that theoretically, I think, is the way to essentially arrive at the final idea.
	But again, it's obvious nonsense.
	It still doesn't work, though.
	No.
	Because then I could be like, yeah, but there's also the table.
	Well, there's never going to be an answer.
	There's no way you can have a singular idea that encompasses everything.
	Caesar out of Caesar's Legion also says that's his foundational ideology.
	Oh, really?
	Alien dialectics.
	Right, well, there we go.
	Oh, long-time listener, first-time vid-caller.
	You well-defined the term simp and, of course, why it's bad.
	What would you say to someone in that position?
	Well, I would say that we fulfill our obligation.
	We have an obligation to produce interesting and intellectually stimulating content that will help you improve your own ability to think.
	We're not saying that we're going to get married to you one day, or anything like this.
	Whatever it is that we're promising, I feel that we're delivering.
	Whereas when it comes to simping, the simps know that, well, they want to be able to date this woman, and the reason she can't be like, I've got a boyfriend, is because she's got to make sure that option appears to be on the table, which is a form of deceit.
	But if I was to take the position of the V-girl right now, surely I would be able to say that, well, my obligation was to notice you.
	And I did by saying, oh, thanks, so-and-so, and then moved on.
	But it's underpinned by the prospect, the potential for the relationship to actually manifest.
	And a few people made the good point.
	It's not just that the men think they're going to be able to engage in a relationship or a physical relationship with her.
	It's also the fancy that they'll be able to turn her into a good traditional wife as well.
	That's embedded in there.
	Again, ain't gonna happen, Sims.
	Ain't gonna happen, right?
	Sorry.
	It just isn't on the table, right?
	And so this is a...
	This is a fiction.
	You're not going to meet this girl.
	She's not going to date you, and you're not going to turn her into a proper girlfriend.
	This is all stuff that is promised implicitly in the simp and ethos relationship that is not present in our relationship.
	We're not going to promise to marry you or anything like that, but we are going to promise to make interesting and informative content for you, which I think we're delivering.
	So I don't think you're simping for us.
	Sort of like when I buy bread from a shop.
	I'm not simping for the shop.
	I get the bread.
	Yes.
	Howdy!
	So considering that the anniversary is just coming forward, it's stride after stride, I'm just wondering, how are you going to celebrate that?
	I mean, hear me out here.
	I suggest that you have like an EFAP length podcast that maybe six or, if you're a real man laying tough, 24 hours.
	How dare you?
	There is no way.
	I don't even know why those are enjoyable.
	Like, I'm not trying to be funny, but I've seen some people try and do really long streams, and I'm just like, nah.
	I don't have time for it anyway.
	I mean, like, God.
	But yeah, no, I don't think that's going to happen.
	Anyway, Carl says, I worked as a security guard for Lord Voldemort, and I could see firsthand exactly how much the police wanted him to shut up about institutionalized pedophilia.
	MEP Flyerboy says, You know, I always did wonder what scheme was behind ending the family unit.
	I didn't expect it to be a fancy about bringing to life a real-life brave new world.
	Which it appears to be.
	I'm glad you made me read that.
	It's a good book.
	Told you.
	Alex says, regarding Islamic attitudes to women, I'm astonished and angered by the times who broke the Rotherham rape scandal and have now gone utterly silent on it.
	I don't think they actually did break it.
	I just think that Lord Voldemort was just cast out into the wilderness.
	So, I mean, he was saying all of this in, like, 2011, and then it was in 2013, they said.
	Well, sooner actually.
	I'm going to give him a shout out here because it's good.
	Go to Alex Jones' platform and check out Mr.
	Robinson's Russia speech in which he lays out just the history of the whole thing.
	And you can see him talking about this in clippings in which the newspapers lie.
	This madman thinks this is happening years before the Times journalist who is credited being the one who made it big.
	And he gets that credit, rightfully, for the one who made it big in the Times.
	That's true.
	But it's not like he was the first guy to talk about it.
	I'm sure Tommy isn't the first guy to talk about it either, but he was a major figure who was.
	And yeah, they got rid of him because he was too effective, in my view.
	Yeah, I think so.
	The issue on the table.
	Anyway, he says, The Times is so disgraceful they wrote off the stabbing at Speaker's Corner as an attack on an evangelical Christian wearing a Charlie Hebdo shirt, hinting that she deserved it.
	Apparently, I haven't seen it.
	There is corruption in the services to let the crimes happen and the media are complicit in the cover-up.
	Yes.
	It just seems to be the case.
	HR Slave says, if only the UKIP couple had converted to Islam and pimped out their children as sex slaves, instead of the heinous crime of having a political opinion the authorities disagreed with.
	Destruction of the families in action?
	Why aren't the Tories doing more to stomp out this crap?
	Good question.
	Should be the easiest argument for the Conservatives to win.
	I mean, the opposition make themselves monstrous by their opposition to protecting children from predators.
	Don't know why the Conservatives aren't fighting this all day every day.
	You think you're going to lose that battle?
	Yeah, exactly.
	Do you think you can't win it?
	You know, it's like, well, actually, maybe the left or right.
	It's not going to happen.
	Yeah, no one is on their side on this.
	Anyway, Yanala says, Can't we just bring the stocks back, put all paedophiles in front of them for the public to all see and have a show about it with fruit and vegetables thrown at them?
	All funds gained from the show would go to the victim and her family.
	Afterwards, the paedophile or files to be thrown in jail or deported.
	Any idea or is this too little of a punishment?
	Too little of a punishment, in my opinion.
	Tyba says, Do you have a Freedom of Information request in the UK? We do.
	Could people find out who worked in these care facilities during that time?
	No, we can't go on any further with that comment, I'm afraid.
	Anyway.
	UKIP members having foster children taken away?
	I'm not surprised.
	I was having a chat with a few of my colleagues at work yesterday, and one of them mentioned a married friend of theirs who decided not to have children of their own but wanted to foster instead.
	They earned between them almost 200k a year.
	They earned a six-bedroom house and a back garden the size of a football pitch.
	They were denied because they both smoke, though not in the house.
	No idea if politics was involved, but it wouldn't surprise me as the excuse for their denial was pathetic.
	It evidently is a systemic problem in the UK. But if your politics is against the Labour Party, therefore it's taken into account.
	Yeah.
	Especially if you're actively against the Labour Party.
	If you're a Conservative and you're basically a Labour Party member yourself, it probably is fine.
	But if you're UKIP, then you're in trouble.
	Chris says, genuine question, if we misgender Owen before her transition, is it a her?
	So that we are using pronouns she will eventually use, are we more progressive or more bigoted for doing so?
	Like, if I start calling her she now, is that better?
	Because, and then I'm like, but I don't identify as a woman, and you say, yet.
	There's a whole host of games to be played here.
	SmallLLibertarian says, 22% of British conservatives may be looking at the US and saying, yes, I would prefer to have gun rights.
	I'm an Aussie, but I wish I was more free too.
	Don't we all?
	Perhaps.
	Clayton says, women and people with a cervix?
	So the NHS is saying that women have cervixes?
	Sounds awfully transphobic to me.
	Tsk-tsk, NHS do better.
	Well, they're also saying that some women don't have cervixes, which...
	don't only women yeah james says it seems like the left has become biological reductionists humans are merely reduced to biological components hence person with cervix yeah they're reductionists in every way aren't they like Like, all of the thick nature of the terms we use to describe things.
	Like, we use the term people, black people, and they're like, no, black bodies.
	I mean, corpses.
	Just the raw material component and that's it.
	Nothing about you being a person.
	The metaphysical construct of your personhood has been removed and that's what person with cervix is.
	Removing the thickness of the word woman.
	And we had the new one yesterday from the head of the BBC's diversity ship.
	It was that women are people with diverse characteristics.
	Very human.
	People with diverse characteristics.
	Thanks, Plato.
	Completely ignores high-level explanation of emergent phenomenon.
	The left reeks of bad philosophy in the Deutschian sense.
	Yeah, it does.
	It absolutely reeks of bad philosophy.
	Anyway, on to the woke family member comments.
	Supreme Duck says, Carl, it sounds like there's a real issue in your daughter's school.
	Have you considered moving school or is it highly inconvenient?
	Yeah, it would be highly inconvenient.
	I think she's moved a lot of schools anyway, so we don't want to keep moving her.
	Thankfully, she's actually more sceptical of this sort of stuff as time goes on, because she herself has noticed contradictions in it.
	It's like, she's only 11, and she's kind of like, this doesn't make sense.
	So yeah, it doesn't.
	I started noticing this nonsense in secondary school as well.
	I think the funniest example was when a history teacher tried to tell me that, all right, here's Malcolm X, and he was arguing for two states, one which would be black states and one would be white states.
	And I said to him, well, isn't that just like the Klan then?
	Oh, he's just as racist.
	And he was like, no, he wasn't racist.
	But he wants segregation.
	Yeah, but that doesn't make him racist.
	I just kind of looked at him like, come on, you know.
	You know what this is nonsense.
	Oh, yeah.
	He's a good teacher as well.
	I liked him, but it was just obvious.
	Yeah, no doubt.
	Luke says, I feel like the parents are having trouble with woke kids.
	It's more of a problem for the fun PC parents who haven't caught up with the current PC values, such as the TERFs, etc.
	Yeah, I think that's exactly the case.
	I was raised by very right-wing parents, and these kind of issues never happen because it's always seen as utter BS, regardless of how it's been presented.
	Yeah, and to say right-wing essentially just means freedom-loving at this point.
	So just be pro-liberty and you don't have these problems.
	SH Silver says, be aware that CRT theorists in the US are realising that they're failing and are trying to rebrand as school equity.
	I was not aware of that.
	Make sure to point out how much of a dog whistle equity is for leftists.
	Will do.
	Omar says, the grounding shall continue until morals improve.
	Exactly.
	That's exactly it.
	This is exactly how it works, right?
	Because the children have got to understand they are not your moral legislator.
	They don't make moral legislation for the parents.
	And this is what wokeness is trying to enable them to do, to be able to morally browbeat their own parents.
	No, don't have any of that.
	Yeah, I bet they don't.
	Yeah, that's what I was thinking of as well.
	And that was one of the things I found most interesting about Jordan Peterson, is I'd never really articulated it this way, but you can see it everywhere now.
	Like, as soon as you realise it, hang on, like...
	If your kids are actually doing something that makes you dislike them as people, you as a parent have a deep obligation to stop them from doing that.
	Because if you dislike it, and you're their parent, everyone else is going to hate it as well.
	You have an obligation to make sure your kids are likable people.
	Heathcliff says, if my child starts spouting NPC nonsense, I would stop everything, bundle them into the car, and spend a week in the woods deprogramming them.
	Yeah, take them on artery lessons or something like that.
	How to build a hide or something.
	Do something wholesome.
	Anyway, David says, Well, I mean, you wouldn't have known.
	They were married for, like, 50 years.
	You know, so, like, for 49 of these years, everything's great, and then suddenly your wife's like, I hate white people.
	Okay, darling.
	I'm white?
	What was I supposed to say?
	It's like me mentioning my wife's cooking as a metaphor.
	Everyone's like, oh, right, so you've got a real problem with your wife's cooking.
	No, my wife's fine cook.
	It's just, you know, that was the metaphor.
	Remember, lads, you might not be interested in race politics, but race politics is definitely interested in you, which is absolutely true.
	MEP5boy again says, listening to that article about the man having his family torn apart by this race BS is heartbreaking.
	Would be my worst nightmare.
	However, this is the plan the leftists have instigated and unfortunately it's working.
	Yeah, absolutely.
	It's honestly a nightmare to watch your family being torn apart and your wife inflicting a wound on your children, a psychological wound on your children.
	I mean, I'm sure the social services who went to the Klan members and would have seen them doing that to their white kids would have deemed that child abuse.
	I would hope so.
	So when she's doing that to her mixed-race children...
	Suddenly it's very progressive.
	George says, morning all, Carlo, whoever happens to be in the chair, as the podcast hasn't started yet.
	Here in Canada, we have a severe issue with the Catholic schools abusing native children.
	Yet our government apologizes for their part and demands an apology from the Vatican without demanding that the Vatican foot the bill for some of these investigations and the likely inevitable explanations.
	Thoughts?
	Should the Catholic Church be held responsible for the things the institution did decades ago?
	How does that differ from holding white people accountable for slavery 200 years ago?
	There's got to be a unique aspect there because it's Catholicism in the sense of, like, well, they believe that they've ruined those children's souls or whatever, surely.
	I mean, the Catholic Church doesn't care about age.
	That was a bad sentence.
	I'm not a Christian, but I'm definitely a Protestant, and I say beat them with it.
	Yeah.
	I would have to spend a bit of time thinking about it and looking into the situation in Canada.
	But good point on John's end.
	He says one is a multiple characteristic, the other is an institution.
	So I think the institution could be held accountable, but white people aren't an institution, so...
	Yet.
	Oh.
	They probably will end up having white-only things as a way of saving the blacks from the oppression of the whites.
	I mean, like, official institutions.
	I was thinking more that you look at the actual race socialist whites, like the Klan or whatnot, and you can always put a microphone in front of them, like, who radicalised you?
	It would be the left.
	Like, if you keep pushing that stuff, that's why...
	Well, I mean, I'm finishing up the critical race theory Bible at the moment, and they're definitely arguing for parallel legal systems for blacks and whites.
	So...
	It'll end there, eventually.
	Just thinking of the conversation as a prestigious institution.
	Anyway.
	Jared Taylor's University.
	If you want more from us, go to lowseers.com.
	Check out the content we have on there.
	If you want to see more from us tomorrow, we'll be back at 1 o'clock.

▲