Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Aug. 12, 2021 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:31:12

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #196

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Eaters for the 12th of August 2021 I'm joined by Josh.
	Hello.
	And today we're going to be talking about the Queer Inquisition.
	Arnold Schwarzenegger's going back to his roots and demanding that freedom's overrated.
	Deutschland, Deutschland über alles from Arnold Schwarzenegger there.
	Also, the new Jim Crow.
	I mean, literally the new Jim Crow, not the version of leftism, the new Jim Crow, where it's a book about black people going to prison because it's been found here in a court of law.
	No, people actually being segregated in schools.
	Anyway, first thing to mention is some of the new stuff we have on the website.
	So first thing is the...
	Did we make this premium or not?
	I can't actually remember.
	The book club, Mark Sidwell's.
	This one is Preyman, yeah.
	The Long March Through the Institutions, the left's culture-warring stuff.
	This was particularly good.
	I quite enjoyed it.
	It's a perfect book to give to normies to understand what culture wars are, what's been happening, what's taken place, why the conservatives suck at it.
	And he gives some great examples of that.
	And then the last three chapters, it turns into Goldstein's book from 1984, which is like, yeah, here's how the world really works, and here's how to solve it.
	Yeah.
	So, would recommend.
	Go and check that out.
	Also, the Personal is Political direct video that Carl's done will be up this afternoon, which is him explaining why the left is basically terrible, and why them being terrible to each other is a reflection of the left, because it's their ideology that believes that the personal is political.
	Also, last thing to mention is the AA conference we'll be going to.
	So, Academic Agent is organizing a conference of people to go and give speeches and whatnot.
	It's near Birmingham.
	They're giving the location out once you buy a ticket and they'll let you know.
	We've been invited to go there, so we will be.
	Go and check that out.
	Any questions, please forward them to them because we're not organizing it.
	But I thought I'd mention that.
	Should be the link in the link section of this podcast page.
	Also, last thing is because we'll be doing that, it means that on the last Friday of the month, this month, we won't be able to do the gold tier Zoom call on Friday, so instead we're moving it the day before to Thursday.
	So just letting people know in advance.
	4pm we usually do that.
	But anyway, let's get right into it.
	So the Queer Inquisition.
	Yeah, I'm curious what this is.
	Nobody expects the Queer Inquisition either.
	Anyway.
	I knew that was coming.
	Gotta make the references.
	So, first story here is Manchester Pride CEO faces calls for resignation after damning investigation into his finances.
	Huh.
	What's happening with the finances of Pride?
	I mean, these things make lots of money.
	What's he been doing with it?
	So, Manchester Pride CEO Mark Fletcher has refused to resign after a damning BBC investigation raised serious questions about the finances of a major LGBT plus event.
	You notice this is Pink News reporting on it, so I bet they were doing this for, like, grinded teeth.
	As Fletcher appeared on BBC Radio Manchester and Gaydio?
	I don't know what that is.
	I think they've made that up.
	They can't even say radio without having to bring sexuality into it.
	You know we're gay?
	It's evident, mate.
	Don't worry.
	You're running Pride.
	Okay.
	On Wednesday, 11th August, amid uproar over Manchester Prize cutting ties with two local charities, the LGBT Foundation and George House Trust, citing a loss in revenue due to COVID-19.
	So he's like, wow, rates are down, not making the money we have to, we can't sponsor these charities anymore.
	Yeah, it doesn't seem to be true.
	As business in the city's gay village came together to fill the funding gap, Manchester Pride was forced to account for a notable drop in charitable donations, both before and after the pandemic.
	According to BBC Radio Manchester, in 2018, the event donated nearly £150,000 to charity, around 6% of its revenue.
	That's a lot of money, yeah.
	Running into, just for running Pride, for Christ's sake.
	God, anyway.
	The following year, Manchester Pride made a record-breaking £3.94 million.
	Pride event.
	Pride event made £4 million.
	That's ridiculous.
	That's incredible.
	I didn't know how much money was in these things, but I need to get in on that.
	Yeah, its charitable contributions were halved to 3%, amounting to just £122,000.
	So they made more money, and yet they were like, we're going to cut the budget for the charitable side of this.
	That is very strange, yeah.
	To 3%.
	So 97% of the money that goes to Pride doesn't end up with charities, it ends up with the organisation to do with what they want.
	That year saw the festival headlined by pop star Ariana Grande, who reportedly had a performing fee of £350,000.
	So it's got more on just Ariana Grande than all of the charitable donations combined.
	It cost nearly three times more than the event's charitable contributions.
	Overall, the organization spent a total of £3.19 million that year, £1.6 million more than in 2018, with £1.5 million on event production.
	So they gave £100,000 to a charity, just over, but they're spending £1.5 million on just event production.
	I don't even know what event production means.
	Is that just the cost of holding the event itself?
	That's still a huge return if they're getting, what, like, on average around £4 million.
	How the hell does it cost that much, though?
	I know, yeah.
	These events aren't that luxurious, are they?
	And it is up in Manchester as well, so it's going to be cheaper than down south, I imagine.
	But for certain people, it's very lucrative, I guess.
	So the interviewer from BBC asked him, why did you spend nearly a million pounds on event production?
	And he responded with, it's very, very costly and expensive to deliver at a festival.
	Four mil?
	We are not wasteful with our money.
	We ask our audience, what do you want?
	Who are the performers you want to see and come and celebrate with LGB people's lives like you?
	We then approach these performers and we are able to operate in a flexible way because we've built strong relations with them in a way which other commercial festivals don't.
	What, because if they don't come, they're going to be called homophobes, I imagine.
	I'm...
	Not confident.
	Strong relationships under threat of coercion.
	The Inquisition has strong relationships with a lot of people.
	When quizzed on the drop in charitable donations, Fletcher strongly denied cutting ties with the two funds that he's been with for 25 years.
	This is where it gets interesting, because he says, it's not something we want to do, it's not something that's happening.
	In the idea that he's cutting these funds to the charities.
	And you might think, okay, some guy's not giving money to charity or whatever.
	What's important is that the charities, the reason they've been cut, is not because of the money drop.
	It's because they're helping non-gays.
	That was his complaint.
	So if we go to the next link here, this is the Twitter link, in which you can see BBC Northwest there.
	They say that the trust says it didn't receive any funding in 2019 because Pride had concerns about the trust helping everyone living with HIV, whatever their sexuality.
	How awful.
	So Pride and Manchester were donating money to this charity to help people with AIDS. HIV, sorry.
	And they were helping everyone with HIV, being very inclusive.
	And Pride were like, oh no you don't.
	That's only for gay people.
	That's so...
	It's just scumbag.
	What a scumbag thing to do.
	How dare you help straights with HIV? They're not important.
	I mean, never mind the fact that, you know, eliminating it altogether, obviously not something feasible in the near future, but is a goal.
	Surely it's in your interest to help straight people as well in that cause.
	I mean, it's not like it's just like, oh, you know what?
	We're only going to infect those homophobic straight people.
	But donations to healthcare, they have to go along the lines of whoever donates it, apparently.
	And the Pride movement's version of this is, none of our money shall ever go to straights.
	Shall only stay within the gay umma, or whatever.
	So, we have that, but then we also have the man himself, the CEO, so we go back.
	The broadcaster also grilled the CEO on his £20,000 pay rise in a single year.
	One Pride employee received in 2019 £20,000 pay rise, which brought their salary to £90,000 a year to run a charity.
	Fletcher was forced to admit that this employee was him.
	Even though he initially denied it.
	Wait, so he was just like, yeah, an employee of mine got a £20,000 pay rise.
	There was only one employee.
	It was me.
	It could be me.
	So he gave himself £20,000, even though he's like, yeah, donations are dropping, even though they weren't.
	Did he actually, like, put it in those terms where he's just like, yeah, an employee of the charity, like, trying to conceal it?
	You can see that I didn't receive a £20,000 pay rise, and then she goes on to be like, yeah, but you did.
	And he's like, well, yeah, I did.
	But that was part of my pay structure.
	It's like...
	That's still a pay rise, yeah.
	What is this deflection?
	Oh, boy.
	So, as the nations dropped, and then...
	No, they weren't dropping, were they?
	As pointed out, they were made up by the gay village.
	I don't know what that is.
	I haven't been to Manchester in a long time.
	Well, at least not that part of Manchester.
	And even though they were getting the money, he decided to give himself a pay rise and also cut off funding to charities that were daring to help straights.
	Because death to straights, I suppose.
	Imagine doing that the other way around.
	We're going to give money to people with a disease, but if they're gay, forget about it.
	No chance.
	Don't get healthcare.
	You saw the NHS trying to do this.
	If you're a racist, we won't help you.
	So liberal.
	Ugh.
	But yeah, this is just an organised festival.
	That's what it is.
	It is not about being gay or anything like that at this point, not gay tolerance.
	It is about politics, frankly, and putting on a show.
	Apparently making money as well.
	I mean, only 3% gets spent on stuff like charitable donations, and most of it gets spent on the production of the festival.
	Like a ridiculous amount, millions of pounds.
	It's like its own self-sustaining thing, isn't it?
	It's dependent on the festival to get most of its money.
	Also very unwholesome people running it by the sounds of the fact that he's just giving himself a pay rise for...
	Why not?
	It's money.
	Steal it.
	Anyway, so there's also the Inquisition part of this, which I wanted to get to, because you've got people skimming money out of all this.
	You've also got them banning books.
	So this is a situation in America.
	American Booksellers Association to screen for hate after anti-trans book sent to 750 stores.
	They're going to pre-screen the books to see if they're acceptable.
	Wow.
	Oh yeah, I've seen this before.
	The screening process comes after the ABA was forced to carry out an internal review following an inexcusable error that meant that several copies of this book were sent to members and it caused irreversible damage.
	Like, okay.
	So the book is called Irreversible Damage, the Transgender Cray Seducing Our Daughters, and that's the damage he thinks that has been done.
	But they also say here, it was also sent to them on the 14th of July, which is International Non-Binary People's Day.
	Oh no, not the holy day.
	The holy day of Ramadan.
	It's like international non-binary people's day.
	But if you're worrying about where we've seen this before, we start with the Pope, the Catholic Church, and the English Parliament, regrettably.
	But apparently we follow Rome, even when we're not meant to.
	So if we go to the next one here, I don't know how you say this in Latin.
	Impero?
	Impero?
	Imprimator?
	Basically just let it be printed.
	So this is a Catholic thing in which the Catholic Church, in its response to Protestant Reformation and whatnot, decided that the Inquisition would be in charge of who could print books to see if it was okay to be printed.
	The British ended up, the English ended up doing this as well.
	So they say in here, the quote, their declarations that the book or pamphlet is free of doctrinal or moral error.
	That is exactly the same thing the American Book Association wants to do.
	They're going to check the books for doctrinal error.
	Are you engaging in hate speech?
	What's hate speech?
	Anything that points out that transitioning a child is not reversible?
	Stating objective facts.
	Hate speech.
	They also say that at the time, no implication is contained therein that those who have granted the section agree with the contents, which is kind of funny because it reminds me as well, they're going to be like, oh, I don't agree with the contents of Mein Kampf.
	But it doesn't have any doctrinal error against transgenderism, so we're selling it.
	Anyway, so we also did this in England with the 1662 Act, which was the act which Parliament passed to make sure that no books were published that offended Parliament.
	Because they just killed the king and made themselves sovereign, which is a totally normal thing to do.
	But anyway, so this isn't new, and it's the thing that John Milton argued against in Aria Pagatica.
	If we go back to it, because this is amazing, including the anti-trans book in its July promotional box, they said of it that it violated our commitment to equality and inclusion and caused harm.
	The book.
	The book.
	The book caused harm.
	How did the book cause harm?
	Threw it at someone?
	I don't know.
	It literally did nothing.
	It exists.
	But yeah, that's causing harm.
	So as a result, the books in next month's promotional box will be screened for hate speech before being sent out.
	Liberals.
	Liberal people here.
	On the topic of books, actually, did you see recently that the Orwell Prize, they employ people to be sensitivity readers.
	This came out very recently.
	This, I think, was in response to this situation as well.
	So, moreover, the chief executive, Alison Hill, wrote to members on the 5th of August saying the ABA was making a $5,000 donation to the Transgender Legal Defence and Education Fund.
	What?
	What?
	So some damaging book was circulating and you've suddenly got to pay a fine of five grand.
	Because that's what it is.
	It's an indulgence to be like, forgive me for my sins.
	How dare we have circulated this book?
	Because, of course, this donation is entirely voluntary.
	This whole thing has a weird religious setup, hasn't it?
	You've got to pay money to absolve yourself of sin if you read a book that is supposedly...
	It's got to be approved by the Gay Inquisition.
	The reason I'm calling it the Queer Inquisition is because it is.
	It is exactly the same thing the Catholic Church did, which is, if you want to publish a book, you need our approval.
	And this utterly failed because, I mean, what are you, an idiot?
	You can just print books elsewhere, but whatever.
	So they're going to try and do that, but also the indulgences there of, well, I've given five grand back to the transgender community.
	Yeah, okay.
	That's just a fine, isn't it?
	So they also say the policy to not review or screen titles submitted is in line with many members' preference to not have the ABA decide what books they have access to, preferring to review books themselves to determine what they shall read by, sell, and promote.
	Oh, glory.
	So you can technically buy the book still, but in any of the packages they're sending out, they're not going to send them.
	So you can get it, but only by going by other means than the normal means for them.
	So just making it more difficult, really.
	Yeah.
	So that's them saying you can, but it won't be easy.
	Which, again, I mean, happened with the Catholic Church.
	I mean, you could get some books, but weren't so easy, were they?
	Other planned changes include an audit of all internal ABA policies and process, quote, through a diversity, equality, and inclusion lens.
	So they're going to review everything for doctrinal errors, as the Catholic Church did.
	A new copy editor role responsible for reviewing the conscious language and awareness of equity and inclusion issues.
	So they're going to have someone looking up the language within these books to make sure they're, again, in line with doctrinal theory.
	They also said that Amazon previously acknowledged the book's offensive content when it suspended a paid-for advertising campaign last year from the author of the book, although it continues to sell the title.
	Yeah, and?
	Like, that's the thing.
	It's not good enough for them just to ban it, is it?
	Everyone else has to ban it, too.
	It can't be read by anyone because it disagrees with us.
	And we literally ban this sick filth.
	I mean, at what point does someone start banning books and think, well, actually, aren't we kind of becoming the people we're meant to be, like, fighting against?
	So they're the people they admire.
	Apparently so.
	But Amazon aren't exactly some bastion of free speech either.
	I mean, they did ban, what was it, Alex Jones' movies, talking about free speech.
	Rather ironic.
	And they also banned Robin Tomlinson's book about Islam, in which he just took the Koran and rearranged it in chronological order.
	That was it.
	Such blasphemy.
	MindCamp's not banned.
	If you want to buy MindCamp on Amazon, go ahead.
	It's produced in India and sold around the world through Amazon.
	It's actually produced in India.
	It's awfully fitting.
	The price on the back is in rupees.
	Oh boy.
	You mentioned the Orwell Prize, because this ties into this.
	You can see the free speech union retweeting the Orwell Prize.
	So the 2020 Orwell Prize winner is to be vetted by sensitivity readers.
	What?
	Yeah, that's not very fitting, is it, Orwell Prize?
	Ah, we need to vet our books.
	And if they don't like the book, what, they're going to put it in the memory hole?
	Put it in room 101, why not?
	It's going to be gone.
	Instead of defending free speech, the Orwell Prize now says it, quote, acknowledges the concerns and hurt the book caused.
	Another book down the memory hole.
	Totally right, from the Free Speech Union.
	This is why I like the Free Speech Union, guys.
	They're absolutely solid on issues like this.
	But also just the Orwell Prize of all people.
	The subversion there, where it's like the go-to books for, you know, advocacy of free speech, and then they're like, yeah, we're going to censor stuff now in Orwell's name.
	Like, I expect the Queer Inquisition to be...
	I just realised what I just said.
	So I expect the Queer Inquisition to be particularly censorious, but I did not expect, like, the people who venerate Orwell to buy into this as well.
	But I don't know what I'm thinking.
	The SELU always foul out of this stuff as well, so...
	Good God.
	But last thing I wanted to mention was a story that kind of made me wonder about Pride.
	Because we went to Pride Twinden and there was some degeneracy, not too bad compared to like San Francisco.
	San Francisco is San Francisco.
	Across the pond, across the channel in the Netherlands.
	Oh boy, this isn't good.
	So this is a picture that won an award in the Netherlands.
	Most aesthetic pride photo, images will...
	Sorry, images of what will hopefully stay taken for granted.
	Photo celebrating diversity.
	That's the name of the photo.
	And it's a photo of a bunch of men in, like, short leather shorts and, I don't know, what do you call that?
	Straps around themselves?
	And then a picture of a toddler with some swings in front of them.
	This is celebrating diversity, according to the author of this photo.
	That's what he called his photo.
	And they gave this an award.
	Little bit strange, just to say the least.
	I mean, why is this supposedly a good thing?
	I mean, it...
	Something to be celebrated and given awards as well.
	The caricature of the Pride movement gave me about the, let's say, 2000s and 90s was always that, well, they'll comfort your kids.
	Stop.
	What the hell is wrong with you people?
	Like, when you're venerating grown men in sexual outfits around children, do you think there's something wrong with you?
	Anyway, let's go to the article in which this is real, because I thought it was a joke at first.
	As they say, it's the most acidic Pride photo.
	It certainly goddamn is not.
	The photo competition of the Pride was won by Jan van Breder, a totally normal man who took this.
	Amongst others, more than 13,000 photos were submitted, but three of them ended up in the history books.
	The photographers all won a prize of €2,500 each.
	They had 13,000 photos, so it's not like they had three, and they were just like, well, I'll just pick one, because they're all like this.
	No, they went through 13,000.
	And thought this was the best one.
	That's the best one, according to these judges.
	Amsterdam Pride.
	Not good.
	The Pride organisation previously made an appeal to send in the most iconic, meaningful and aesthetic photos to celebrate 25 years of Pride Amsterdam.
	In the end, a selection of 50 photos was chosen for the outdoor exhibition Celebrating Diversity in the Vondel Park, I don't know where that is, from which three winners were chosen from a panel of experts.
	Experts.
	Experts in what?
	God knows.
	Such is the most aesthetic photo of Jan Verbreda.
	Quote, this photo in its composition.
	Child in the foreground, men preparing for Canal Pride in the background.
	Everyone's busy with their own activities and fascinations.
	Sublimely depicts what will hopefully remain self-evident that we, unhampered by prejudices and almost unsuspectingly, all may and can exist side by side.
	No, he can't, mate.
	No, no.
	What the hell is wrong with you?
	You cannot have children involved in your pride parade.
	I don't know what's wrong with you when you have a bunch of grown men in sexual outfits.
	That's not living side by side.
	That's sick.
	Ugh.
	If we go to the next link on here, you can see the event itself.
	If you could scroll down, eventually there's an image of...
	Yeah, stop there.
	So you can see the billboards they set up.
	So apparently they had all the images on billboards as well for the public to see.
	And still, no one was like, this looks like pedo stuff.
	What the hell is wrong with you?
	No, instead that went all the way to the top and they gave it the award.
	Which is just gross.
	Of course, also sponsored by Amazon and T-Mobile, this whole event.
	Every time.
	Of course it is.
	Every single time.
	It's always sponsored by corporate world, isn't it?
	Yeah.
	Anyway, kind of a sad thing to end on there for that story, but the Queer Inquisition.
	Apparently going to screen books, steal people's money from pride, and celebrate diversity, as they call it.
	Well, my section isn't much better.
	So, of course, everyone knows Arnold Schwarzenegger.
	I kind of grew up on watching lots of his films, obviously enjoyed lots of them, can quote them pretty much verbatim a lot of the time.
	And then he came out with this.
	So this video here is Arnold Schwarzenegger talks to Alexander Vindman, who is apparently a retired United States Army Lieutenant Colonel and former Director of European Affairs for the United States National Security Council.
	And he's basically having a chat with him.
	And the thing of note here in this 55 minute video, which is in the reading list on our website, if you want to find it, is him talking about COVID.
	So if we watch this first clip, you'll see what I mean.
	But I think people should know there is a virus here.
	It kills people.
	And the only way we prevent it is to get vaccinated, to wear masks, to do social distancing, washing your hands all the time, and not just to think about, well, my freedom is being kind of disturbed here.
	No.
	Screw your freedom.
	Because with freedom comes obligations and responsibilities.
	We cannot just say, I have the right to do X, Y, and Z. When you affect other people, that is when it gets serious.
	It's no different than a traffic light.
	We put a traffic light at an intersection so someone doesn't kill someone else by accident.
	So this is why we have a traffic light.
	You cannot say, no one is going to tell me that I'm going to stop here, that I have to stop at this traffic light here.
	I'm going to go right through it.
	Then you kill someone else, and then it is you doing.
	So this is the same thing with the virus.
	You cannot go and not put a mask on, because when you breathe, you can infect someone else, and you can infect someone that then gets sick and may die.
	So this is why I think...
	So what do you make of that, yeah?
	Ah, God.
	I mean, just screw your freedoms is going to be the line, isn't it?
	Yeah.
	That old German comes out of him.
	I can't believe that he said that after talking about freedom in America when he was being elected to the governor of California, how much he loved America.
	And then he's...
	Governor of California.
	Yeah, I know.
	Of course.
	But at least he was a Republican, I suppose.
	That's a small redeeming feature.
	But not with opinions like that.
	Screw your freedom.
	Team Red, Team Blue isn't that important when the guy on Team Red just looks like Team Blue.
	No.
	That's why I said it with a certain amount of contempt.
	Just like, well, he wasn't completely awful.
	Yeah.
	But it's not really a redeeming thing.
	So yeah, obviously he says social distancing, washing your hands works, which, I mean, is true.
	However, he does come out with some questionable stuff.
	No one's opposing the idea that you should wash your hands.
	There's no big lobby of like, nah, screw you, I'm never going to wash my hands.
	That's not happening.
	See someone with black hands.
	I've never washed these hands and I'm proud.
	Make me Arnold!
	That's not happening.
	There is no movement for, I ban hand washing.
	There is a movement for ban the government forcing you to wear masks or forcing you to get jabbed.
	Because that's not right.
	That's inhumane.
	It is the wrong thing to do to give the government that kind of power.
	They can just say, yeah, we'll just inject you whatever we want, nothing you can do about it.
	And if you don't, we're going to ruin your life.
	Exactly.
	And I think that's a perfectly valid thing.
	And he seems to really not understand that for someone who seems to like America.
	And he does say that with freedom comes obligations, which is true.
	Of course, you know, these obligations shouldn't be enforced by the state.
	They should be social obligations there, right?
	So you have things like you respect other people's space.
	You don't go up to them and kind of freak them out.
	obviously it's not illegal to kind of stand right next to you.
	And if I was like getting right up in your face, I mean, I'm not really doing anything, but it's just weird and you wouldn't do it, right? - It's great.
	- Yeah.
	And being loud at night when people are trying to sleep, like I'm sure it's illegal.
	And I'm personally a little bit bitter about this. - You've been sleeping well, huh? - No, not really.
	But yeah, it's an obligation.
	That's something that you've got to live up to, It's not necessarily legally enforced, but you have responsibility.
	Freedom doesn't mean just doing exactly what you want.
	That's a fair point.
	However, he's not interpreting it in the right way.
	Those obligations shouldn't be enforced by the state because society enforces them in a better way, I think.
	And, you know, of course, Arnold as well, talking about obligations and freedom, the guy who, you know, slept with a maid in his wife's bed, You know, he's used his freedom in a way which is irresponsible.
	Do you see Michael Malice's tweet about this?
	Because you saw his example there.
	He was like, well, there's a red light, you know, just drive through because my freedom.
	He's like, yeah, Arnold.
	And if there's a maid in your hotel room, you know, just have sex with her and not tell your wife because my freedom.
	It's a fair point.
	There's your obligations, Arnold.
	Don't have sex with the maid.
	And it seems a little bit rich coming from him talking about obligations and freedom when he's basically betrayed someone who is obviously very close to him, his wife.
	Yeah.
	But also, every time a German starts talking about freedom, it's being bad.
	Yeah.
	The apple hasn't fallen far from the tree, but I will get onto that in a second.
	Don't worry.
	I'm not going to let him off the hook quite yet.
	For being German.
	You're Austrian, actually.
	Don't give me that Austrian.
	No, no, just proto-Germans.
	So yeah, something that I saw commented on the original video, which is a quote that I was reminded of and like quite a lot, is a quote from Benjamin Franklin.
	Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
	Those are the values of America, not screw your freedom.
	This is what he should be saying.
	Benjamin Franklin, screw your freedom.
	It wasn't going to happen.
	Yeah.
	What an insult to the people of America.
	He pretends to actually care about them to get into elected office.
	And then he's just like, you know what?
	One of your founding principles, you know what?
	It's not important.
	You've got to listen to the government, which is apparently him importing some Austrian values.
	But I won't go into that quite yet.
	So, also, the analogy he uses...
	I should make a correction.
	They're not proto-Germans.
	They're mountain Germans.
	The Austrians.
	Well, just like the Netherlands, it's full of swamp Germans.
	You know how this is before?
	I have, but it's just silly.
	It just doesn't make any sense.
	Yeah, it does.
	Just add some kind of prefix to a word.
	Swiss Germans.
	Because we are descended from Saxons, we're island Germans now, are we?
	Nah, we're too mixed to be Germans.
	Okay.
	I'm glad we're safe with that anyway.
	The German virus.
	But anyway, this traffic light analogy he uses where you don't drive through the traffic light, that doesn't make sense because you're not forced to drive on the road.
	You could use public transport.
	You're technically not driving there.
	You could choose not to travel at all.
	Whereas with the vaccines and stuff going towards it being mandated, you're not really given a choice.
	You're having...
	Things taken away from you.
	You can't go to large events like in the UK. Music festivals are going to be off limits to people who aren't vaccinated.
	Yeah, you could be even worse and be French, just in general.
	Sorry.
	But you have the police coming round and checking your papers, please.
	You're having a coffee outdoors and the police will come over to you and they'll be asking for your vaccine papers.
	And if you don't have them, I don't know what exactly they do, but it's either a fine or, I don't know, prison.
	Prison if you don't pay it.
	Yeah, I imagine so.
	Because that's the thing as well.
	I think it was iDubbbz made a video joking about the people who are worried about coercion from the government on this stuff.
	And in America, it's at the stage of free hamburgers, free money and whatnot.
	The people talking are not talking about stopping there.
	Yeah, exactly.
	They're happy to keep going.
	That's what I kind of gathered from Arnold there, in that...
	It seemed like he was alluding to, you know, these things have to be mandated.
	You've got to get people to do this.
	I mean, Joe Biden's looking at that right now, I believe.
	I think he's having in talks with the executive about doing a federal mask mandate, as in trying to enforce it across all the states, and everyone has told him that's unconstitutional.
	We're not doing that.
	And the biggest thing, which we also touched on yesterday, that Fauci mentioned as well, is that getting vaccinated...
	Doesn't really reduce your chance of passing on COVID. It might do a little bit.
	I've seen studies that have suggested it does it a lot, but it's very variable at the minute.
	There's no exact definition of, you know, this is how much it prevents it.
	It's only at the very least a small amount, but you can still pass it on.
	You can still get it.
	The main effect of the vaccines is...
	That it reduces the severity of the symptoms, right?
	So we can look at a study here from Israel, which I've deliberately gone to CNBC as well, just to make sure, you know, even the left wing.
	They're saying, look, the vaccine is about 39% effective in Israel, the most vaccinated country in the world.
	And, you know, the main thing it prevents is severe illness.
	And they say that the main benefit is that about 88% of effectiveness against hospitalisation and 91% effectiveness against severe illness.
	But, as we've seen with the kind of ongoing debate at the minute, for young people who have no chance of serious illness or hospitalisation...
	Is this really worth it?
	And as we looked at yesterday, of course, there isn't actually any evidence for this yet.
	Like, if your risk of death is 0.02%, getting rid of 91% of that, it's not that important.
	It seems very disproportionate to then be like, you can do these things, but not these things, based on something that is not lethal to that element of the population.
	It's bad either.
	Obviously, it's good for people of high risk.
	Yeah, exactly.
	I'm not saying you shouldn't get the vaccine if you're vulnerable.
	Obviously that's a good thing to do, but if you're young or healthy, you know, it's your decision to make, but it's not the same as the people who are vulnerable.
	Unless the German gets its way.
	Well, old habits die hard, don't they?
	So, I want to move on to another thing about the ongoing COVID debates from Arnold, and I'm just going to read the whole thing here.
	He says, I said this to someone in the comments, but I think a lot of you need to hear this.
	I always say you should know your strengths and listen to experts.
	If you want to learn about building biceps, listen to me, because I've spent my life studying how to get the perfect peak, and I've been called the greatest bodybuilder of all time.
	We all have different specialities.
	I like how he kind of sets up the best rebuttal against him as well.
	He's saying you should listen to the experts.
	Now here's me talking about virology.
	Here's why you shouldn't listen to me.
	Now!
	So he says, Dr.
	Fauci and all of the virologists and epidemiologists and doctors have studied diseases and vaccines for their entire lives, so I listen to them and I urge you to do the same.
	None of us are going to learn more than them by watching a few hours of videos.
	It's simple.
	If your house is on fire, you don't go on YouTube.
	You call the damn fire department.
	If you have a heart attack, you don't check your Facebook group, you call an ambulance.
	If nine doctors tell you you have cancer and need to treat it or die, and one doctor says the cancer will disappear, you should always side with the nine.
	In this case, virtually all of the real experts around the world are telling you the vaccine is safe, and some people on Facebook say it isn't.
	In general, I think The circle of people you trust gets smaller and smaller and you find yourself more and more isolated.
	It should be a warning sign that you're going down a rabbit hole of misinformation.
	Some people say it is weak to listen to experts.
	That's bogus.
	It takes strength to admit that you don't know everything.
	Weakness is thinking you don't need expert advice and only listen to sources that confirm what you want to believe.
	He didn't address his point at all.
	The point was about freedom.
	Should people have the right to say no, thank you?
	This isn't like a subsequent post rationalising the video.
	The video only just went up, but this is something else that he's commenting on, but there's a lot to dissect here that I think is interesting.
	So...
	You know, of course, Dr Fauci, we know, as we touched on yesterday, his advice has changed.
	He's said, you know, you don't have to wear masks and masks should be mandated.
	He's kind of flipped between the two.
	His position always changes.
	And of course, we now know...
	Here's a good article from The Telegraph that says, cloth face masks are comfort blankets that do not curb COVID spread, scientists warns.
	And this is a, I think he's a physicist because he's talking about the actual particle.
	Particulates, yeah.
	Yeah, yeah.
	So, getting through the material.
	I went to the WHO, they had a study on particulates on different face mask coverings.
	And their data was that if you wore an N95 mask, that worked perfectly.
	That was what you wanted to wear.
	I think it was like 99%, 95% didn't get through for COVID particulates.
	If you use the dentist-looking one that most people have, it was 30% lock.
	So 70% still got through.
	And if you use those biker things people sometimes wear...
	Like a bandana.
	Yeah, that increased the number of particulates to 103%.
	How does that work?
	The larger ones went through and then got cut up at the smaller ones, apparently.
	So, yeah, I mean, just putting a piece of cloth there doesn't work.
	According to the WHO, you've got to wear something useful.
	That's more or less what this Dr.
	Colin acts on suggests, that some cloth masks have gaps which are invisible to the naked eye, but are 5,000 times the size of a viral COVID particle.
	So he uses the analogy of the small sizes are not easily understood, but an imperfect analogy would be to imagine marbles fired at builders' scaffolding.
	Some might hit a pole and rebound, but obviously most will fly through.
	So he's saying that they're not particularly useful.
	Sure, they might do something.
	There is an argument in Counter, which is that the reason you want that anyway is because you're trying to lower the percentage of dose you get.
	So if you have a lower amount of particulates being ejected to you through coughing or whatever, and therefore if it stops 30%, then it still has a role to play.
	That's the counter-argument.
	I'm not saying that they're completely useless, but I think...
	The bandana one apparently was.
	Yeah, well...
	So even the blue surgical mask, apparently a COVID viral particle is around 100 nanometres and the material gaps in these blue masks are a thousand times that size.
	So, you know, it's imperfect.
	But I imagine if you had, you know, holes that were absolutely tiny that actually stopped them, you probably just wouldn't be able to breathe.
	Well, no, that's the difference between N95 and the dentist-looking one.
	The N95 one stopped them all, apparently, and the dentist one stopped 30%.
	So I don't really understand why, if we had masks in shops and stuff like that where it was legally enforced...
	Why was it not the ones that are the most effective?
	Is that because of...
	I imagine it's material shortages.
	The price of them skyrocketed in the early stages as well because I was on Amazon looking at them.
	So there's that.
	That's probably why.
	Yeah.
	So, I mean, fair enough.
	I do want to mention about Arnold Schwarzenegger's post, though, going back for a second.
	You know how he said, if someone's having a heart attack, you wouldn't go on a Facebook group?
	There is, like, a funny meme of people, like, someone had a heart attack, so they look up how to do CPR on YouTube, and, like, YouTube runs a 30-second advert.
	It's like, thanks, YouTube!
	I think everyone should know CPR. That's going to be...
	My one takeaway from this is if you want to actually do something useful, learn CPR, because it will always come in handy.
	But never mind.
	That's completely irrelevant to what we're talking about.
	Tangent.
	Let's go back.
	So back to the actual Arnold post again.
	He says, just to repeat the quote, in general I think if the circle of people you trust gets smaller and smaller, you find yourself more and more isolated, it should be a warning sign you're going through a rabbit hole of misinformation.
	So this is where I wanted to look at Arnold's father, because this ties in quite nicely.
	That face.
	Can you trust the experts?
	Well, so here is an article from the LA Times which says, Austrian archives reveal Nazi military role of actor's father.
	I like how they deliberately didn't mention which actor this was.
	Which German actor could it be?
	They do mention down below.
	So...
	Supposedly, his father voluntarily joined the Nazi Party in 1938, and joined the Brownshirts in 1939, which was after Kristallnacht, so he must have known what it was about.
	Oh, everyone knew.
	What was I, sorry?
	No one didn't know what the Nazi Party was about.
	Well, yeah.
	I think it's difficult to be naive of that.
	So, he was also a master sergeant in the military police, who both suppressed citizen dissent and fought on the front lines.
	Um...
	Of course, his father's name was Gustav, being Austrian, and reportedly fought in the thick of some battles as he was reported as being in infirmaries with battle injuries.
	So he was pretty much committed to this, right?
	So he wasn't just a conscript either?
	No, he joined voluntarily, yeah.
	So, of course, at the time, in Germany and Austria, the majority were supportive of the Nazi party.
	So, in this scenario, what is the right thing to do, Arnold?
	Is it to trust the majority of people?
	Is it...
	Trust the experts.
	You trust the experts, the people in authority...
	There is something to be said.
	Do you know about the referendum in Austria for the Anschluss?
	They did a referendum afterwards, after the army had come in.
	And you should look up the ballot if you're at home.
	Just Austrian referendum ballot.
	And you'll get...
	It's a big circle in the middle.
	It says Ja.
	There's a tiny circle over here that says Nein.
	Do you want to join with Germany?
	It's like...
	It's ridiculous.
	Yes, or I want to be shot.
	But yeah, the point I'm trying to make here is that minorities throughout history have been right about things.
	And I know that sounds uncharacteristic of someone who's been recently very critical of the LGBT stuff.
	Obviously, not all minorities are right inherently, but the people who were fighting against the Nazis within Germany...
	You can't say that they're wrong just because they're a minority.
	They didn't respect the authority.
	People in authority can be wrong.
	And just because you live in the modern day and you think everything's rosy and great doesn't mean that human beings are any different.
	It doesn't mean you need to trust what people say at face value.
	You should always be sceptical and come to your own opinion because people don't always have your interests at heart.
	John makes a great point there with saying that science is not a democracy.
	No, it's not.
	I know for a while about that.
	Yeah.
	Like, anyone with a science background would not fall for the argument of, like, well, most people agree.
	It's like, yeah, I don't care.
	Well, there's, of course, using the science analogy, there were lots of opinions only, I don't know, 20, 30 years ago where they were commonplace both amongst the population and amongst the majority of scientists that are now completely defunct but still carry on in the popular consciousness and stuff like that.
	Yeah.
	Nevertheless, I think my opinion of Arnold has gone down significantly after him saying that, and I think if you're American in particular, the disrespect he showed for your country's values should be infuriating, yeah.
	Exactly.
	But anyway, you wanted to talk about the new Jim Crow.
	Yeah.
	I like this topic.
	You like Jim Crow?
	No.
	I like the ridiculous of it.
	So the new Jim Crow is a book that was published a while back and it's this lady who's a critical race theorist who argues that black men who are found guilty in a court of law by their peers and then sent to jail but if it happens en masse because they find a lot of black men who have engaged in criminal activity and then sent to court sent to prison after going to court that's Jim Crow Okay, so...
	So for a lot of black men are found guilty with evidence in a court of law when they go to prison.
	That's Jim Crow.
	So you have legal safety in numbers, so as long as you're in a large enough group of people, you can basically do what you want, because that's racist.
	Yeah, otherwise it's racial discrimination, which is obviously nonsense.
	The lady who wrote this, being a far-left critical race theorist type, is of course going to say stuff like this.
	What's interesting, though, is we can point to the effects of these people's ideology, and it is the new Jim Crow.
	And when I say Jim Crow, I mean segregation in schools.
	Because we've spoken about this before, but you can see it in black and...
	Well, not black and white, in colour these days.
	Of the next clip here.
	So if we go to the next link, you can see this is a guy posting.
	Critical race theory in action.
	Black parents outraged after discovering their children are being segregated by race.
	Parents told there are white classrooms and there are black classrooms.
	And the students must not mix.
	Separate but equal.
	And you'll notice a black principal made that decision.
	Yeah, I don't understand that impulse.
	Surely he must understand, having been in school himself, I imagine.
	This is where you've got to read more critical race theory, that desegregation was a bad idea because it helps the white community continue their racial power.
	Doesn't make any sense, I don't know, but let's go for the first clip in which you can see this lady making her allegations.
	Yes, the school district here has looked into these allegations and says it has taken action still.
	Parent Kyla Posey says she can't believe a principal thought separating students according to race was a good idea.
	We've lost sleep trying to figure out, like, why would a person do this?
	Kyla Posey says she was stunned when she learned about classes segregated by race at Maryland Elementary last year, a practice she says was put in place and condoned by Principal Sharon Briscoe.
	First, it was just disbelief that I was having this conversation in 2020 with a person that looks just like me, a black woman.
	It's segregating classrooms.
	You cannot segregate classrooms.
	You can't do it.
	Posey says she found out the school was putting black students in two separate classes with two separate teachers.
	The white kids were placed in six classes with six different teachers.
	The parent says she found this out when she let Briscoe know she wanted her child placed in the classroom of a teacher she thought would be a good fit.
	Posey says the principal said that wouldn't work.
	She said that that's not one of the black classes and I immediately said, what does that mean?
	I was confused.
	I asked for more clarification.
	I was like, we have those in the school?
	And she proceeded to say that, yes, I have decided that I'm going to place all of the black students in two classes.
	Posey says she insisted her child be placed in a class with white students.
	She says Briscoe explained her child would be isolated.
	And I explained to her she shouldn't be isolated or punished because I'm unwilling to go along with your illegal and unethical practice.
	Can you imagine that conversation?
	I know.
	Just being the parent there, talking to the principal, I was like, well, he's going to the Blair Clash Room.
	In my mind, they've all got southern accents, all the critical race socials.
	Good for that mother, though, that she actually went that far and insisted.
	What the hell is wrong with you?
	This is illegal.
	But also just the idea of she's being like, yeah, we've got the black classroom down here.
	Your son is going to.
	And also, you can use this black bony bathroom that we've also segregated off.
	And also, the water fountain over there, that's just for you.
	Don't use any of the others.
	Not around these parts.
	The fact that the principal of the school seemed to just mention it in passing like it was perfectly normal as well.
	Very weird.
	Kind of betrays how far down the rabbit hole they must be.
	They're just like, yeah, well...
	They're in the black classroom.
	They're in the white classroom.
	That's just how it is, you know?
	We're just segregating them off.
	I mean, it's 2021.
	Don't you want to be a bigot?
	Jesus Christ.
	The level this has gotten to where they're just brazen about it, as you say.
	I mean, mentioning passing.
	Yeah, we segregate the kids by race.
	What of it?
	Also, I don't know how this is going to work because, I mean, at this point, there's probably been enough race mixing that you actually do need to get the family guy colour chart out.
	Like, where's the line, lady?
	Like, where's non-white and white?
	At which point does that happen?
	Why do I think that this principle probably operates under the one-drop rule?
	What, one-drop black or one-drop white?
	It doesn't matter.
	Okay, so one of the other things I thought of here is that the thing is obviously because she's a black principle.
	She's not Uncle Ruckus.
	Like, she's not like, wow, the glorious white man needs his own spit, and that's not happening.
	No, this is clearly along the lines of critical race theorists who argue that you need to re-segregate the schools, or that segregation was bad.
	I mean, the opening essay in the critical race theory textbook Carl has is this guy called Derek Bell arguing that Brown v.
	Board of Education was wrong and instead we should have kept the black segregated schools separate but equal because that was the right thing to do according to the critical race theories and you can see it being reenacted and this isn't the only example as we've mentioned with Governor DeSantis when he banned critical race theory being taught in schools some of the examples he gave were situations in Florida I mean this is in Maryland but in Florida they had a school that also segregated kids by their race this is not coincidence
	This is like when, what is it, there's Islamic terrorist attacks and everyone's like, well, that's got nothing to do with Islam.
	Islamic terrorist attack.
	That's ridiculous.
	The fact that you've got multiple schools all operating along the same ideology, segregating kids by race, there's a reason for that.
	There's a reason they're not doing it along eye colour or hair colour, like they're doing it along racial lines.
	Anyway, let's go to the next one here in which she says that she's suing the school.
	Proposies recorded a call with an assistant principal where they complained about the segregated classes.
	The administrator confirmed it was the principal's decision and seemed to offer an explanation why the classes were set up this way.
	Some of them are in a class because of the services that they need.
	Kyla Posey has filed this discrimination complaint with the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights.
	Her attorney, Sharice Shields, says what's going on at Maryland is a violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
	Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 says that you cannot treat one group of people differently based upon race, and that is what is going on at Maryland.
	Could you imagine being in the Civil Rights Office and getting that as a complaint?
	You wouldn't be able to believe it, would you?
	For the last 50 years, we've never had a complaint like this, and then all of a sudden they started reintroducing segregation, and we're going to have to go down and desegregate the schools with the National Guard again, on Little Rock style, which is like the critical race there is, chanting, being like, no, you can't do this.
	It's amazing, really, that these principles and these people in the modern day think that they know better than the people who actually wanted to end this stuff, that actually lived through it.
	They were the ones that pushed this through, and they're like, well, no.
	Despite them actually living through it and thinking it's terrible, we're going to impose it again.
	The arrogance on the people.
	These scumbags are, I'm on the right side of history.
	Go to hell.
	These people are goddamn evil.
	But also, I didn't really get the quote in there.
	They called the school and taken a quote that might reveal the reason they've done this.
	I wish we had more black kids too, and then some of them are in a class because of the services that they need.
	What?
	Yeah, I didn't really get what that meant.
	I assume because it's the argument of like, well, black kids shouldn't learn from white teachers because they don't understand them.
	Crap like that.
	Presumably it's that kind of thing where they're like, well, they need black teachers to teach them, otherwise they won't understand things.
	As if black people are, I don't know, like a different species or something.
	They just can't interact with white people ever.
	I mean, this is their ideology.
	Anyway, so I thought I'd mention as well on this, because I got a bit mad when I watched the Charlie Kirk-Vosch debate, particularly with the section in which they spoke about critical race theories in schools.
	I don't know if you saw any of this.
	No, I didn't get around to watching it.
	So, Tim Paul, I think, brings up the issue, and he gives some examples of egregious stuff.
	And Vosch is like, yeah, that's bad, the egregious stuff, because, I mean, who's going to support that in public?
	but then he says that um he there's a he thinks there's an academic version which is not being used in schools because it would be very difficult or impossible to teach kids the academic version and therefore there's not really a problem there and i'm like no no that's that's not the situation and i'm sure he's aware which is that you don't need to sit down with the kid in the textbook and run through the textbook that's not how that's going to work what's going to work is going to be stuff like that where they segregate the kids into different classrooms
	so he's saying that you can explain the segregationist approach academically or it's it would work in an academic setting but in like higher education when you're an adult Is that what he's trying to say?
	No.
	He was saying that it's an academic field of law, which is a thing.
	I don't think you'd call it crazy, but obviously it's crazy.
	And then that's not being applied in the schools, but it obviously is.
	Like, we can see the real-world examples.
	I mean, that's a perfect example of how you don't need to teach the topic directly if you could just get the ideas into the children's heads by other means.
	I mean, segregating the kids off, or just bombarding them with stuff about white privilege, as another example that you could do.
	And it's also a great example about why this stuff is illegal, and rightfully considered so, because it is evil.
	But, whatever.
	So I just wanted to mention, I wish I had the textbook with me, but I left it over there, but the...
	The opening essay on Critical Race Theory, as we've mentioned, is Derek Bell arguing against Brown v.
	Board of Education because he thinks that desegregating the schools was an act of white power.
	How does that work?
	Anyway, so they also define themselves in the opening section of the book, their textbook that's opposed to MLK and his dream, because that would be integrationist, and they recognize that their worldview to the average American looks like the Black Panthers or the Black Nationalists, It looks like they're the mirror version of the clan.
	I mean, they're not wrong there.
	Yeah, but they say it themselves in the opening section and then decide that, yeah, that's why we've academicised everything, so that it doesn't easily come off to the public.
	It kind of sanitises it a bit behind a wall of jargon that you can't really realise what they're saying.
	I've noticed that a lot, that the critical race theorists hide behind a lot of jargon, that if you're actually academically trained, you can just see through it immediately.
	It's like, well, that doesn't actually mean anything.
	There's no meaning behind those words.
	You're just using them as placeholders, regurgitating stuff.
	To give an example of why they're obviously just black nationalists, they speak about black genocide.
	What normal people do.
	Just spouting off about white and black genocide all day.
	Anyway, so I wish I had the book.
	If you want to read it along, it's the Critical Race Theory, the teachings that founded the movement, or whatever, by Kimberley Cremshaw, and it's page 269.
	So the quote from here is,"...the colourblind assimilationist ideal seeks homogeneity in a society rather than diversity." Yes.
	Such an ideal neglects the positive aspects of race, particularly the cultural components that distinguish us from one another.
	She doesn't mention what they are, but put a pin in that.
	It may not be a desirable result for those cultural components to be subsumed into a society that recognizes commonalities.
	We don't want integration.
	That's what she's saying in that statement.
	We don't want integration.
	We're not interested in the colorblind assimilationist position.
	The assimilationist colourblind ignores and thereby devalues culture race.
	One word.
	Culture race?
	So that there's a cultural aspect to your race, so blackness, for example, or whiteness.
	That's a huge sleight of hand by turning that into a compound word, because they're trying to suggest that they're inseparable from one another, that if you're of one race...
	Black, you have to be of blackness?
	Yeah, you have to have the culture, when obviously culture and race are two separate things.
	This is why they call black guys who don't agree with far less policies like race traitors, because they're like, you abandoned the culture race, you've left the culture of the race, and it's like, no, that's not how that works.
	You absolute morons.
	it doesn't have you anyway the successful abolition of black as a meaningful concept would require abolishing the distinctiveness that we attribute to the black community culture and consciousness the abolition of a people's culture is by definition cultural genocide in short assimilation as a societal goal has grave political consequences for black and other non-whites what's the consequence
	It's going to get rid of blackness and instead assimilate minority communities into being Americans.
	That's their complaint.
	That's not really a bad impulse, is it?
	We want you to be part of our culture.
	It's not a negative thing.
	But that's also why they segregate the classrooms.
	Why does she do that?
	Because she wants to preserve the culture race of the black students as being separate.
	Apparently equal, I presume.
	Also, if you apply that principle that, you know, if...
	Culture being undermined is cultural genocide.
	Was that the term she used?
	Yeah, cultural genocide.
	So, what?
	Immigration to the UK? Yes.
	Any kind of highly populated minority area?
	Colonies.
	Yeah, apparently...
	There's also cultural genocide.
	Genocide of white people.
	If I said that, I'd be probably locked away somewhere.
	But she can say it about other stuff.
	But the argument there, she wants the...
	So the leftists are segregating off non-whites as something separate from America.
	It's blackness, or she says non-whites, or like Latinxness, or whatever the hell it is.
	And she's arguing that to assimilate those groups into being American, that's not what we should do.
	We should instead keep them separate but equal.
	How are they not American, though?
	It's not like they're still African.
	If they went to Africa, they would have way, way less in common than other Americans.
	They're not American, they're black.
	That's how they view this.
	So weird.
	Yeah, but the point there being that if we allow them to assimilate, well, therefore they won't identify themselves on racial lines.
	And therefore, what happens to our race politics?
	I mean, God forbid as well, they might identify on personal lines, you know, on individual lines, and therefore think of themselves as a person instead of part of the black race.
	So, I mean, the greatest example of this is the next one, which is the, what is it, this is called I'm Not Black, I'm Kanye, is the title of this article if you can scroll down.
	Because Kanye went to the White House and said that.
	Yeah, he's not part of the black homogeneity of blackness.
	He's Kanye.
	He's himself.
	He's an individual.
	I love how the race grifter titles this as well.
	Kanye West wants freedom.
	White freedom.
	Yeah, white freedom.
	Liberal freedom.
	To be yourself.
	To be an individual.
	That's what that is.
	I mean, it's like a member of the CCP talking about liberalism.
	It's like, you really don't get it, do you?
	Jesus Christ.
	Anyway, so let's go to Ben Shapiro talking about this as well because this ties in quite well.
	Ben Shapiro went on Bill Maher's show to talk about critical race theory and utterly destroyed him about this.
	So let's play the first clip in which Ben Shapiro defines critical race theory.
	What is critical race theory?
	I will admit that I read a lot of critical race theory in law school.
	So, you know, the work of Derrick Bell or Gene Stefancic and Richard Delgado.
	This is the stuff no one knows but you and six other people.
	Right.
	But what matters is what is it practically it's being taught in schools or some form of Yes, there's a certain sort of crystallized version of it that is a lot less complex than what critical race theory actually is.
	But critical race theory essentially argues that racism is baked into all the systems of American society and that any sort of neutral system is in fact a guise for racial power.
	And so the argument is made by Derrick Bell, for example, that Brown versus Board of Education, this is an argument he made in 1991, that Brown versus Board of Education was actually a way for the white community to leverage its own power.
	It wasn't an attempt to end segregation in public schools.
	Even things that are purportedly good in terms of race, so long as they uphold these broader systems, things like capitalism or things like the meritocracy, these things are actually just guises for power.
	And so what that boils down to in sort of practical terms is all disparity equals discrimination.
	If you can see any stat where black people are underperforming white people, this means the system was set up for the benefit of white people and that white people have a duty to tear down these systems in order to alleviate the racism that's implicit in those systems.
	When it comes to Schools, what this tends to boil down to is kids who are white have experienced privilege because the system was built for white people and we have to change the standards.
	Right.
	Right.
	Pretty good job by Ben, but obviously insane.
	Like, he lays it out and he's like, right, this is obviously mad.
	Because, I mean, just go through some of the things he said there.
	So, a neutral system is a guise for racial power.
	A neutral system.
	A system that is neutral on race is a guise for racial power.
	You hear them talking about that when they talk about colour blindness, how it's implicitly racist.
	Because it's probably one.
	Treating everyone equal, yeah.
	Yeah, I mean, they say in the book, for example, MRK's dream of colourblindness, well, that helps whiteness.
	What is whiteness?
	It's being American, English, you know, liberal philosophy, instead of, well, blank nationalist Marxist philosophy, essentially.
	But also that desegregation was the white community leveraging its power.
	To do what?
	Yeah, what would they get out of that, really?
	I don't get this.
	Like, the white community are all a bunch of racists, so they want the black kids in the classroom with their kids.
	To do what?
	That's probably the opposite of what a racist would do.
	It's mad, but also then he says that capitalism and meritocracy are levers for racial power.
	Ben says that, which is obviously, again, mad, and it's a great definition of what they believe, why they hate capitalism, why they hate meritocracy.
	Not to flatten everything.
	But also that all disparity is discrimination.
	I've seen this a million times, you can mention any article, but they're like, oh, there's a disparity in the GB News.
	And team.
	Therefore, there's racism.
	It's obviously garbage, and it's just demonstrable.
	And also that white children are privileged.
	I mean, you teach them that they're privileged.
	Children.
	Children that have just been born.
	Why?
	Because the school is desegregated, presumably.
	That's their privilege.
	That's not even...
	Objectively true either, because you go to the UK, most of the poor people who are underperforming are working class white.
	That's explicitly stated.
	The situation I'm trying to get at is that Ben lays this all out quite well, and it is obviously a mad ideology.
	It sounds incredibly stupid and insane to believe such things.
	So what's the response from his guest?
	Let's play the next clip.
	Okay, so Malcolm, you tell me your definition.
	Oh, I agree with everything he just said.
	Oh, great.
	He...
	You can see on Bill's face, he's just like, oh my king audience, why do they clap everything?
	It's like, right, this guy is clearly mad if he believes what Ben just laid out to be critical race theory, which is also true, but then he does believe it.
	Okay, so that guy's a goddamn lunatic.
	And you can see on Bill's face, he's just like, why is my audience clapping this?
	You could tell by his body language, he kind of moved back a bit in disgust, just like, I don't even believe that close.
	He's sat across the table, yeah.
	Rumours this guy.
	If you want to watch the full debate, go for it.
	That's the only real interesting part.
	The rest of it is Malcolm making an ass of himself because he's just unbelievably aggressive to Ben for no reason.
	If we can go to Malcolm's tweet about this, you can see an example of this.
	Him afterwards being clearly butthurt and acting like a scum human being.
	He says, Why don't debate a flyweight fascist?
	Ben.
	Ben Shapiro.
	Ben Shapiro's a fascist.
	Okay.
	Because he's a dishonourable, unworthy troll pretending to be a thinking human.
	Right.
	Dehumanising language.
	That's good.
	Dishonorable, right.
	So you admit you were a prick the entire time throughout all of this, and you refused to engage with anything Ben said, and he's the dishonorable one.
	He's also an unworthy troll, unlike you, who's just sitting there flowing S into the air because you've got nothing, and it looks embarrassing.
	And also, he's the unthinking human, the guy trying to engage in a debate about critical race theory, who is able to explain critical race theory, and you even agree with it.
	You know, that guy is unthinking.
	He's never thought about anything.
	I like how he uses the word fascist and then refers to a Jewish person as unthinking human within like a sentence of each other.
	Oy vey.
	The lack of self-awareness.
	But I thought we'd just end this on because this has been fun.
	It's just some kind of white pill because I think it's just really funny.
	So you know Tucker Carlson's been against critical race theory.
	Of course.
	He's fighting against the left very effectively.
	He's a very good orator and makes very good shows.
	So some people are really mad about him, and they've gone down to the Fox News headquarters to burn an American flag and pictures of Tucker?
	Like, the Iranian parliament or something?
	Like, in my head, they're all just chanting, death to America, while they do this, outside Fox News' headquarters.
	I like how it's not even that many people, either.
	It's just like a...
	What a bunch of losers.
	Black Lives Matter on that flag there.
	Oh boy.
	Death to Tucker Carlson.
	Why?
	Well, he pointed out the worst people on the planet.
	Pretty sure it had liar written over his face as well there.
	Over Tucker Carlson.
	Oh boy.
	That sure showed him.
	Look at this guy with the flag he comes in in a minute.
	I'm pretty sure it's a Black Lives Matter on the back, isn't it?
	It's difficult to tell.
	It's hard to tell.
	Anyway, but yeah, that's some good cringe I thought we'd end on.
	But otherwise...
	Yeah, segregationists, man.
	Literal segregationists.
	Don't always say that there's just nothing going on in the schools or whatnot.
	They're segregating kids.
	These are the most evil people in modern politics.
	Let's go to the video comments.
	So what of your literature should I study?
	Looks like getting in the university is going well.
	Got the engineering courses...
	I also gave the rationale that we freaked out over the common cold, and I'm taking a British literature course.
	I'll probably give a list when I have the syllabus.
	So, in one semester, what should I be studying?
	Also, Shakespeare is its own course.
	And I'm not sure what the argument is, but Yes.
	Don't worry, I got you back in the last video comments.
	I don't have any English lit recommendations.
	I don't know if he can hear me and he can recommend one, but the one thing I would probably say is the Robin Hood poems, because he seems to have gotten a massive amount out of that.
	I don't know if that's part of the syllabus.
	Tolkien?
	I don't know.
	Yeah.
	What's wrong with American universities, though?
	Because did you see...
	You remember the lady we covered that said rule Britannia?
	And then she got investigated by the university for it?
	She recently applied to go to university for one year, I presume, because, you know, exchange years and whatnot.
	And she got sent back from the university, concerned about her, that she was a member of the far right because she had said rule Britannia.
	She's like, how bad are American unis?
	There's...
	I mean, it was ridiculous here, but I kind of expect it from idiot British academia because it's an s-hole.
	But American universities, I don't know why I expected it.
	I expected a little bit more decorum.
	It's the other way around, really.
	I think American universities are a bit more nuts than UK ones, because my experience at university was red-pilling more than anything.
	All of my psychology lecturers were just based, pretty much.
	They were just biological essentialists, just like, yeah, by the way, gender dysphoria, mental illness.
	Yeah, the Marxists haven't got to our syllabus yet.
	Oh yeah, they are scientists, they pride themselves on looking at objective fact and not politics.
	Yeah, I feel bad for her because it's just like, imagine getting a letter and being like, yeah, well you said rule Britannia, you're a fascist.
	From a university in America, it's like, what?
	But they probably are worse because they're the ground zero for critical race theory and all that crap anyway.
	So, yeah, let's go to the next one.
	My non-anime recommendation for a series is going to be Babylon 5.
	Very political.
	Deals a lot with bureaucracy and the nonsense of it.
	Also...
	It wrestles with the Petersonian concepts of chaos and order and how humans need to have a foot in both in order to eject both those extremes.
	Check it out.
	Alright, yeah.
	I have like a little...
	Well, I mostly just DM Carl whenever we get recommendations so it's in the chat and then we can see it later.
	But I heard a lot of good about Babylon 5.
	Have you ever watched it?
	No, I haven't.
	I'll put it on my list.
	But I wanted to make a quick point about the Petersonian order chaos thing because...
	I'm just going to throw this out there.
	I don't actually believe it.
	It's controversial.
	I like Peterson.
	I've read all of his books.
	But I think that everything is chaos and you've just got to make sense of it.
	There is no natural order of things.
	There is no inherent order in anything.
	But it's the fact that you make sense of chaos and you learn how to deal with it rather than there being an order.
	They're not diametrically opposed things as a concept.
	I haven't read his book on this topic, but is the argument not about, like, here's the two different positions you can have?
	Because I know he talks about the left and the right in these terms.
	He may mean it more in a...
	It's difficult to know, because he may mean it more in an abstract sense than a literal sense, and I'm probably interpreting it like the kind of cognitive psychologist that I am, that, you know, very practical.
	There is no natural order of things, like...
	An ecosystem doesn't default to a point of equilibrium.
	It's always in flux.
	That sort of thing.
	I've never read any Peterson.
	I know, John, you have, but I always just watch him.
	You guys yesterday were stupid.
	I have a limited number of weeks to build up to fitness beyond that of what I had pre-lockdown.
	I wonder if I'll be wearing clothes that are typically worn for exercise.
	I wonder.
	Well, good news is, I've built up to the point where I can do my pre-lockdown warm-up, but it's more tiring than it used to be.
	Wish me luck.
	Good to hear.
	Good for you, yeah.
	Getting fit.
	You need to share some moves.
	I need to start going to the gym as well.
	Got too complacent.
	Hey Lotus Eaters, Tony D and Little Joan here with the story of Indian Curse Road.
	It's a road in South Jersey, Route 55, the extension coming off of Route 42 down south towards the Deptford Mall.
	It was built in 1983 and through an Indian burial mound and there was a lot of protest and a lot of accidents as they were building the road.
	They say the road is cursed.
	Stay off of Route 55.
	This is great.
	Getting a little bit of East Coast folklore every day.
	I'm staring at the dog.
	I don't know where any of those places are, so it's going over my head.
	I'm pretty sure I might have been to Jersey, but I was so young, as in the place in the States, not the island.
	I've been to both.
	I've never been to America.
	Yeah, I'd like to go again, actually.
	Are you an adult or just a child?
	Child, yeah.
	Quite young.
	Fear, I understand your concern, but they're just gun stocks from broken, out-of-commissioned guns that are actually from World War II. We have Springfield 1903 as well that we use.
	We didn't actually break anything.
	Fair enough.
	That's pretty awesome.
	You've got loads there as well.
	Nice and wholesome as well.
	It's nice, actually, to reuse old stuff like that, because otherwise, what would you really be able to do with it?
	And then having something that is a bit of a keepsake, a ring or something, it lives on, and that's something good, I think.
	Sorry.
	No, no, you carry on.
	I was just going to say, it's one of the things I actually quite liked about hearing the Catholic Church do throughout the years.
	Not a fan of the Catholic Church, atheists, all the rest of it.
	But the idea, of course, I don't believe it either, but the idea that they've got bits of the cross in places is just really cute.
	That wouldn't be the word I would think of.
	Well, whatever.
	To do it with real things, like weapons from World War II or whatnot, is awesome.
	The more relics, the better.
	Yeah, it does play into our kind of mythological mind, almost, where the object is imbued with some kind of intrinsic properties.
	But it is our perception, but it doesn't mean that the feeling we get from it is any less valid.
	Obviously it's not an objective property of the object.
	Just because it's just your feels doesn't mean it's not reals.
	Is that an actual phrase?
	No, I didn't make that up.
	No, I think we did it on the thick concepts talking about this and about Alexander's sword and armor and all that crap.
	Where it was like, well, if everyone just believes in the thing and the thing is the original thing, it's got meaning and feelings don't care about your facts sometimes.
	And that's a valid thing to say about things that only feel.
	The subjective and objective don't necessarily need to be in opposition.
	You can have subjective feelings towards something that may be separate from the objective, but it's still a property.
	It's still part of the material world, isn't it?
	Yeah.
	I mean, why when the Cultural Revolution happened and they melted down the first cannon that fired at the British in China and turned it into pig iron, if they just took some random pig iron and put it back together in a perfect way, it wouldn't be the same.
	Everyone knows it.
	It has symbolic meaning, doesn't it?
	It's like, I don't know, I can't think of a good example off the top of my head.
	Like, I don't know, if you took a British uniform that was at the battle of, I don't know, in the Boer War and you gave it to someone in South America, it wouldn't have the same significance as someone who might have been involved on either side.
	But anyway, that's a...
	Sorry, I'm going on a tangent now.
	...a pigged version of the conversation Carl had with me in which we talked about thick concepts and the ship of Theseus and all that stuff.
	So go and check out those premium cod pass if you haven't.
	Good morning, Lotus users.
	I wanted to give a quick introduction for myself by showing off my new apartment.
	I'm an extremely independent person, and so I've been waiting for this since I was 10 years old.
	Now that I've finished up my bachelor's, have one more requirement for my master's, and will be working on my dissertation for my PhD in computer science soon, I figured now would be a good time to finally move out and get my own place, and it's just something so fulfilling and liberating to being the man of my own home, and I'm so much happier for it.
	That's absolutely awesome.
	I'm glad to hear it.
	I got my first apartment where I wasn't living in a shared house.
	Getting this job, actually.
	I got so sick of living in a shared house.
	Sure, it's good for saving money, but just having to share with people that you don't necessarily choose, even if you get along with them well, is still a bit weird and strange.
	You can never really get used to it, even though I did it for four or five years.
	I hate living with other people, and it makes me horrible to live with as well, so I'm happy to be the master of my own place, but that's why I buy my own apartment.
	No, I haven't bought one.
	I'm renting it, but you know what I mean.
	Really, Callum?
	At first, you don't understand my magic trick.
	Second, you don't understand my Mao joke.
	But what I was trying to say was that red, white, and gray, if I remember correctly, red was for the best workers, gray was for the okay workers, and white was designated for the worst workers.
	You would have those flags for those people.
	You probably didn't understand that because you're white.
	It's from the Great Famine.
	In the communes, I think you would get different flags put next to your name, and you get a red flag because, you know, communism for being good, grey for so-and-so for the white ones.
	Sorry, didn't recognise.
	I like how a red flag is like the positive one in...
	Communism, just like, yeah.
	Everywhere else in the world it means mines.
	In North Korea and China it means good job.
	You know they take them to building sites?
	They'll come to building sites and put red flags around them.
	As if that's meant to make me work harder.
	What, just the presence of a flag?
	Yeah.
	But a red flag.
	Not even the country flag, just a red flag.
	Yeah.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Hey, Lotus Eaters.
	Please don't ever play one of those god-awful TikTok videos again.
	I puked blood for almost an hour.
	So these are the people kids adore and aspire to be these days?
	Well, I guess the dreams Bill Hicks spoke of are now long gone, and this is the future.
	I'm officially an influencer now with this lightning.
	Just kidding.
	No.
	Yuck.
	I do agree.
	I make no promises.
	People were very cringy when I was still young, and I think a certain portion grows out of it.
	Some of them never engage in it, and if you're like me, you actively made fun of them to their face.
	Like you should.
	We've all done some cringe things, but looking back at the cringe from olden days before Wokism, in the dark times, there was people pretending to do stuff like that.
	What do you call it?
	Like from Dragon Ball Z. I've seen clips of people doing that from my old footage, and it's just like, yeah, that's cringe.
	But then it has nothing on TikTok.
	The TikTok Tumblr writes talking about gender and identity.
	There's a certain neurotic desperation to just, like, look at me, I want to be popular, I want to be famous, that exudes from everything they do.
	I mean, young people generally have a problem with identity and finding themselves, because, you know, of course.
	But the latching on to, well, I'll just cut my dick off, is not a healthy way of dealing with that.
	I can't really say much to that, of course.
	Yeah.
	Callum, you should listen to Carl's advice about getting girls.
	He knows what he's talking about.
	And more advice is girls love it when you do chores.
	Am I right?
	Who are you talking to?
	Yes, I'm right.
	Good video, but I still disagree.
	So you all know that Pride is one giant fetish bridge where everybody bounces about just yelling what they like to do with their genitals.
	Hmm.
	And Josh and Callum was there, claiming that they were investigating.
	Does that mean that the U2 get off an investigation?
	A lot of questions there.
	Also...
	Purge the furries.
	They are hedonist abominations.
	In Minecraft, of course.
	Based.
	But, no, the way that actually happened is we agreed...
	No, we weren't drinking the night before.
	Got drunk.
	And they were like, we'll meet up tomorrow, and we'll go for, I don't know, food.
	And we went to this cafe...
	We were sat around eating, and we just kept seeing loads of people with, like, rainbows on their face and, like, flags and stuff.
	I remember seeing some girl with a pink wig and, like, elf ears, and I was just like, that's not...
	Like, this doesn't happen every day in Swindon.
	What's going on?
	And then, I think Michael looked it up and was finding out there's a Pride event going on.
	We were like, right, we're going to that.
	We're going to go have a look at what's going on.
	I had my suspicions just by the sheer number of degenerates I was surrounded by.
	Not normal people, but people who you raise eyebrows at and think, well, I... I just realised that basically calling all of them degenerates, that's probably not fair.
	It's the difference between queer and gay, isn't it, as Douglas Murray makes out?
	It's the difference between people who their entire identity is, let's say, pride, and then there's people who just are gay and lesbian and bisexual, and that's it.
	But I do disavow my own comment there.
	Thousands of dollars worth of product ordered.
	Hundreds of dollars for convention fees.
	For one fucking case!
	What?
	I didn't understand that at all.
	So I think he was going to a convention, he bought loads of stuff to go there.
	I imagine his books, right?
	And because he's Australian, they have like one case and they lock down and cancel the event.
	Oh, I feel bad for you, Cooper.
	Sorry.
	That sucks.
	I have another request for recommendations.
	40k novels, particularly ones heavily involving the warp, chaos gods, or other warp-related entities.
	Anyone who has good recommendations, including commenters, let me know.
	Thanks.
	That's all you.
	I've never read the books.
	I really love listening to Warhammer lore, though.
	I've mentioned the Adeptus Ridiculous before, who are fantastic, because they have one guy who doesn't know anything and then one guy who knows stuff, and he's explaining to him the memes, so it's good as well.
	There's also Luton, who does a great job.
	Arch Warhammer, I know Carl very much likes his stuff as well, which is just the...
	So those are the people who do the reading, and then I'll just listen to them talk about it, because I don't want to read stuff like that, because I'd rather just listen to it.
	Jon's saying I have entire audiobook collections if...
	I didn't get the end of that.
	If you want them, I think.
	If you want them.
	I will listen to any.
	Maybe?
	I'm not a huge fan of audiobooks either, but it's not a bad idea.
	Are you a fan of anything?
	Let's go to the next video, Colin!
	So I am an in-home health nurse, and I mostly work with the elderly, so I got my job to protect them.
	Now I have three or four co-workers that are now unemployed because they don't work with the elderly so they didn't want to get the jab.
	I just find it funny how last year nurses were considered heroes and this year were considered disposable.
	The whole hero rhetoric was just for political capital, wasn't it?
	I'm sure ordinary people do think that.
	They're very grateful for what you do.
	Certainly not ungrateful that people were willing to get ill to help other people.
	That's obviously a good thing to do.
	But, of course, empty promises are never a surprise in politics.
	I'm very weirded out by the mandated vaccination stuff.
	Yes.
	I get the argument when it comes to healthcare workers or people near the elderly.
	But I mean, at this point, surely all the elderly are vaccinated anyway.
	So...
	Well, I think it makes some difference, like a small difference, and therefore it's enough in their mind to make it compulsory.
	I don't agree, but I can kind of understand.
	Go to the next one.
	GME wasn't originally about sticking it to Wall Street.
	Deep f***ing value originally opened his position because he saw it as value investing, picking a stock that is trading for less than it's actually worth.
	This means ignoring the ticker, what people say it's worth, And looking at the fundamentals, the details of a business like revenue, debt, cash on hand, executive team, market share, etc.
	He saw a very real chance that GameStop could reinvent itself and explode in value.
	Even if it didn't, it was still worth more than $4 a share and would give him some return without going to the moon.
	He just thought that the bears, people betting against the stock, were mistaken.
	We found out about the illegal hedge fund f***ery later.
	That is correct.
	That is the correct summation.
	But once people found out about the bear hedge fund effery, then it was about killing some people, as in the firms.
	And Melvin Capital, where's your capital?
	Because they lost half of it.
	So, call yourself Melvin Capital, yet you have no capital.
	Interesting.
	Melvin and Povnish.
	Yeah, Melvin's doing very well, actually.
	Do you want to read the comment?
	Of course.
	So, Steve Stevens.
	Apparently two people have been cured of the HIV disease, Josh, so it could be a possibility soon.
	Well, that's really good.
	Some actual good news.
	Yeah, cure AIDS. HIV. I don't really understand the difference between the two, to be honest.
	I think...
	AIDS isn't like, isn't it just like the activated version or whatever, like the late stage version?
	Yeah, I think so.
	Alpha of the betas, hate speech is just another way of saying blasphemy.
	Correct.
	Absolutely.
	Omar Awad, so let me get this straight, pun intended.
	If we can help only gays, then we won't help any gays just to make sure we don't help any straights.
	Yes.
	Yes, that's right.
	That's Manchester Pride's position, which is death to the straights.
	Like, we'd rather help no gays whatsoever if it means helping one straight.
	Right.
	I think Michael told us the insult for straights is meant to be breeders, so keep that in mind, I guess.
	Sounds dystopian, doesn't it?
	Yeah.
	You breeder.
	It is funny, I'll give them that.
	It's a good insult.
	If leftism had a favourite fizzy drink, it would be Spite.
	Gotta drop the hard R. What?
	I think it's more of a written pun.
	Sorry, I forgot what Sprite was.
	Tom, why?
	Well, it would appear that the Pride community does want to claim HIV as a gay virus after all, no straights allowed.
	It's exclusively the gay virus.
	Again, another one of these tropes from the olden times where it's like, they're just bringing it back in.
	Yeah, it's weird that the stuff that would have been offensive in the 90s is now like, yes, and we're proud.
	Yes, call us queers.
	Yes, we have children at Pride.
	Yes, segregate the schools.
	I don't know what's going on in the world.
	Kekistani Freedom Fighter.
	I love how people preaching about inclusivity are casually excluding straight people.
	It is always a one-way street for them.
	Yeah.
	When they say inclusivity, this is the point Carl's made, which is true.
	They don't mean including lots of people.
	They mean destroying standards and barriers.
	So any barriers or standards that need to be destroyed.
	That's what inclusivity means for them.
	That's why they can't help themselves in giving awards out to...
	Dutch photographers.
	Jun K. Callum, you need to come to terms with the fact that the Pride movement was always going to end up here.
	here i understand that you don't want to make a blanket judgment on non-straight and you are right to do so but you have to accept that the socio-political movement of pride always wanted to push the boundaries they are openly contemptuous of the fact that there are straight people around and will proudly discriminate against and get cheered on by most people uh doing so they'll gladly watch you die of hiv because you are straight while browbeating you into funding them to be honest
	i mostly agree with that position that pride was always going to end up in a weird place, but it's the...
	The thing in my mind is that there is an obvious need for a kind of movement that says homosexual tolerance, right?
	I mean, take countries that have it criminal by death or prison or fines or whatever.
	So a movement for that makes sense, and pride seems to be the one that's used universally.
	But it was always going to end up at this place, wasn't it?
	As soon as it was legal, tolerant, and then no discrimination in the law, that was never going to be enough.
	These people are always going to carry on.
	And even in the UK, 2021, you're like, yeah, we need to expand this.
	Why?
	It's even the word itself, pride, doesn't...
	It's not a good thing.
	There's no inherent value in being proud.
	Well, it's a Christian thing.
	Pride's a sin.
	Yeah.
	When's gluttony month?
	I agree with that Christian teaching, to be honest.
	I suppose it's Christmas, isn't it?
	Yeah, it is.
	December.
	So on to the Arnie stuff.
	George Happ, Schwarzenegger was always a nasty hypocrite.
	As governor, he introduced gun control legislation, and despite his huge car collection, he's listening to and promoting climate experts like Greta.
	She's not an expert, by the way.
	I really despise Greta.
	He's so reprehensible that he almost...
	Diminishes my enjoyment of the amazing movies he's styled in, but to quote Jack Slater from The Last Action Hero, when he addresses his actor Arnold, I don't like you.
	This is why Stallone won their rivalry.
	He never abandoned his craft to become a corrupt politician.
	Yeah, Stallone beats Schwarzenegger.
	I can't take Greta seriously.
	Like, not just her herself, because it's obviously just a child, but then the international hubbub about her is so obviously fake that it's just funny.
	It's just a child propagandist.
	It's like, oh yeah, wheeling out the kid when there are tens of thousands more people qualified than she is to talk about the topics.
	It's like, yeah, we're going to use a young looking girl.
	I mean, she still looks like she's about 12 years old, even though she's technically an adult.
	And I don't think that's a mistake.
	They're trying to kind of guilt you into it, like, you've got to listen to this little girl.
	Why would you not listen to her?
	You must be evil if you don't buy into everything she says.
	Yeah, but what happened to that YouTuber?
	I can't remember her name.
	Soph.
	There we are, Soph.
	Do you remember watching Soph?
	S-O-P-H? She's only on BitChute now, because she wrote one too many spicy scripts.
	And then BuzzFeed and whatnot went after her, being like, oh my god, this child is saying things that are politically incorrect.
	Yes, because it's the only fun thing to do.
	There was one where she dressed up in a burka to make jokes about stuff.
	I'll send you afterwards.
	It's really funny.
	JJHW, another Austrian with delusions of grandeur.
	All Arnie needs is a silly moustache to complete the transition, or transformation, sorry.
	I was accidentally adding different connotations there.
	That was the previous segment.
	Chet Chrisholm, Schwarzenegger, is incorrect.
	No medication is perfectly safe.
	They all have risks.
	Vaccines are mild to moderate risks depending on your medical history and conditions.
	Furthermore, they result in the production of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, which is part of the reason why people get so sick and why many continue to be sick after the virus has been eliminated from their body.
	Those with the long COVID are those who have the spike protein still within their system.
	This is why it is so important that people make an informed choice on getting this vaccine.
	Very true.
	Yes, I agree.
	The reason I was laughing is I just found Soph's channel on BitChute.
	John, I sent you an image.
	Can you get that on screen?
	Because it's just that...
	Like, she's always been very spicy, and I just always think it's really funny.
	Like, what the heck is this image?
	It's just an image of her dressed up as the Joker, with the title of the stream being Kill Bill Gates.
	Like, That's the thing, it's just so absurdist.
	That's why it's funny.
	But yeah, Greta Thunberg, he doesn't know her.
	Soph, not so much.
	Why?
	Seriously, what is the difference?
	Charles says so, if that's the argument.
	At least she's entertaining, from what I gather.
	Yeah, anyway.
	I'd like to see Greta Thunberg do this.
	Take on Bill Gates!
	Sorry.
	I'm going to skip to the next section.
	So, the Jim Crow stuff.
	Partially foreign.
	How the hell have we circled back to segregation now?
	America official failed state.
	I mean, they're not quite there yet.
	Critical racers.
	They literally argue that it's better for them to be separate but equal.
	I mean, it's the same black nationalists.
	I bet the black nationalists at the time were also talking about this being wrong.
	It's like Black Hammer trying to form their commune in the mountains.
	It's like, only blacks and Indians allowed.
	Who's black?
	I've got my colour swab.
	Brian Hack.
	So, segregating classes by black and white.
	Guess all the Asians.
	Amerindians.
	Some subcontinent Indians and Pacific Islanders sit outside the windows while only white and black students get an education.
	Yeah, I don't know what happens to everyone in between.
	Again, this is a very American worldview.
	In between?
	To define the world as just white and black people.
	Black and white, yeah.
	Yeah, it's...
	I mean, it literally is the meme of thinking in black and white terms.
	It is, yeah.
	There's no grey area.
	But, yeah.
	I mean, this is part of the reason everyone jokes about Yankees, because I'm sorry, but...
	I don't think they like it when you call them Yankees if they're from the South.
	Yeah.
	I am talking about the Yankee Yankees.
	So, like, the actual North.
	Well, I mean, they are the ones coming up with Critical Race Theory.
	I suppose so, yeah.
	It's not the Southerners.
	So, I mean, there is also the point, like, all of the schools that are most segregated as well, I think it was Vox did a video on this, are still in the North.
	Like, if you break down the communities and whatnot, all the segregation still exists in the North.
	And it's like, well...
	And they think that's a good thing.
	So...
	So...
	They vote for it, I guess.
	Anyway, David Shipton on The Racist Teacher.
	Do we think she would have been so open and honest with her parent if the parent wasn't a black woman?
	I don't know.
	It's difficult to say without knowing her character.
	Maybe, I suppose.
	It's a white woman.
	She's like, you white devils need to get out.
	Why's she got an African accent?
	She wouldn't be African.
	Africans are based.
	No.
	It depends what part of Africa.
	If you're Boko Haram, you're definitely not based.
	I'll make some good points.
	I mean, oh no, I'm not going to make that joke.
	All right, you're on the next one.
	Catastrophic regression threshold.
	Call me craze, but following the logic of white, can't understand black, would that eventually generate to no one can understand anyone because no one has the exact same experience and then everyone gets their little box to live in for the rest of their lives.
	Yes, and Christopher Hitchens warned about this.
	If you want to live in Lebanon, move to Lebanon.
	No one wants to live like this.
	We're not going to segregate them all off and let them have their own little special myths.
	He was talking about the religious groups of Jews will segregate them off and have their own little special myths, and education and society, and the same with Islam, and we'll segregate all the Muslims so they can have their own little special myths, the Catholics and the Protestants.
	It's not just that.
	Apparently in the United States we now have to do this along racial lines, and it is being exported around the world by them, and...
	No, it's not going well.
	It's going to end in goddamn Lebanon.
	It's not even just racial lines, is it?
	It's also, what, sexuality lines, class lines?
	They still come up every now and then.
	It's almost like class has been forgotten.
	I don't think they try that much anymore.
	Segregating along sexual lines, it doesn't work.
	Well, they also say sex doesn't exist these days, don't they?
	So, why are you segregating along?
	What we need to get them to agree on is that race doesn't exist.
	Push that more.
	Oh god, what a radical idea.
	I mean, it actually doesn't, but...
	Well, you can say there are racial groups and all the rest of it, it's not like it isn't in existence, but the main point is the toleration and acceptance that it's not the most important thing about a character, it's the individual, but that individualist mindset cannot exist in the same world as the collectivist mindset of the black race and the white race, and how they must be segregated and never the twain shall meet.
	My kind of non-race exists argument is that there's more differences within so-called racial groups than there are between them, and therefore to split them up into distinct groups is a bit weird.
	Is there?
	It's the same, like genetically speaking, yeah, but it's the same sort of argument.
	It's like comparing the list of genes to the list of genes.
	Mm-hmm.
	Right.
	And it's the same sort of thing for my objection with generational language, that by breaking up ages of people into generations, you're putting them into little compartments where, you know, you're acting as if there's no overlap when in reality, you know, these projected groups don't exist in reality.
	It's just your own mental projection.
	I have some disagreements with your first point there, but we're out of time, so we're going to have to end anyway.
	Okay.
	We'll continue this out afterwards.
	Anyway, if you want more from us, go to loaderseas.com.
	We've got loads of premium content, the book club, the long march, the institutions.
	Very good.
	Please go and have a look at that.
	Tell me what you think.
	I'm going to be reading the comments, see what people think about all that.
	And the personal is political thing will be on the website and YouTube channel.
	That should be free afterwards sometime today.
	Otherwise, thank you and goodbye.

▲