Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Sept. 22, 2021 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:31:20

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #225

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Low Seeders for the 22nd of September 2021.
	I'm joined by Carl.
	Hello!
	And today we're going to be talking about the racist, sexist, homophobic, Islamophobic AI. The AIs are at it.
	They're the evil ones now.
	Okay.
	Also, the Taliban living in a clown world and enjoying themselves on the dodgems.
	It's literally like evil clowns living in a clown world.
	Yeah.
	It's mad.
	It's like 4chan S-posters overtook a country.
	It's like Stephen King wrote this.
	Anyway.
	And also, 100% diversity in the countryside.
	Because that's achievable.
	And the way it's achievable is only women of colour, let's say.
	I don't know what the phraseology is allowed about that one.
	I have no idea, but the countryside is full of English people.
	That's a problem.
	The left has a problem with this.
	Anyway, some things to mention first on the website.
	First thing here, the article Hugo put up.
	So, modern direct democracy for the UK. So I presume that's his arguments for that and what's the problems with it.
	So go and check that out.
	I think that's premium.
	I'm not entirely sure.
	But anyway, go and check it out on lovelaces.com.
	Next thing to bring up is just all the premium content we do have on the website.
	Just to mention, totally worth the time.
	So I assume you wanted to talk about this?
	Sure.
	I really liked Hugo's article about the world's biggest daylight robbery.
	I'm not going to spoil it, but the Silver members have got the audio version there, of course, because that's a new feature we've got going on for Silver and Gold members.
	But it's a really, really good article.
	Hugo's been hitting it out of the park recently, actually.
	And, of course, we've got the Contemplations and the Epochs, which are all really, really good.
	I really enjoyed to see people, and you get to hear my thesis on the connection between the Bronze Age collapse and the Iliad.
	It's good stuff.
	I don't think I'm the first, though.
	Come to this conclusion, but like, come on, it's all there, you know, it's all just laid out.
	It's not a great leap of logic to tie it all together.
	And obviously we've got loads of other great stuff, and myself and Bo are going to be doing George Orwell's Shooting an Elephant for the book club.
	It's going to be like a mini book club, because I'm still like, you know, two-thirds of the way through the critical race theory stuff, I'm working through it as fast as I can, but it's 500 pages of absolute nonsense, and so I thought we'd do a sort of mini book club just to tie people over, because we haven't done one in ages, it's been taking forever.
	So that'll be coming soon.
	Speaking of which, the Reflections on a Rabbit Century by Robert Conquest is almost done.
	I'm just going through his last few chapters, which are really fun.
	Because he lays out all this history, and then for the last few chapters, he's like a guy hosting a podcast who's just whiffing off about all this stuff he hates in the modern era.
	It's all really based, so...
	Hard to dislike.
	But anyway, there's that.
	Last thing to mention, of course, is the live event.
	I don't know what number of tickets we have left for this, actually.
	I think because Friday is the only one with tickets left.
	I think so, yeah.
	The Saturday sold out.
	But Friday with Andrew Lawrence still has, I think, 100 tickets left or something.
	50 tickets left.
	John's saying no, there's less than that.
	Right, there's less than that.
	But there are still some tickets left.
	If you want to come and see us this Friday, it's going to be really good fun.
	So we'll see you there.
	Yeah, it also means for Gold Tears, the Zoom call will be on Thursday this month, so Thursday coming, not Friday, because Friday event, so that'll be that.
	So yeah, tomorrow is the Zoom call.
	Anyway, let's get into the AI. So we've got racist, sexist, homophobic, Islamophobic AI. So the AI is the problem here.
	And I want to go through this series of stories because I think it's really interesting.
	So we all remember Tay AI, for people who don't know.
	Yes, the Twitter AI bot that Twitter users turned into an actual Nazi.
	Yes, and then Microsoft, as you can see there in the video from Internet Historian, had to...
	Put out in the shed.
	I don't know what the term is for this, but yeah, they had to get rid of it.
	And Tay was, what was it, thinking about you?
	It was a chatbot you could interact with.
	And Microsoft killed it because the Twitter users turned it into a literal Nazi.
	So we go to the next one.
	This is the reporting of the Times.
	You can see people will be mad about this, so you have the verge here.
	Twitter taught Microsoft's AI chatbot to be a racist a-hole in less than a day.
	Oh, they're so salty about it.
	Yeah.
	What did you think?
	You've got literally thousands of people like, hey, interact with this AI and it'll sort of start learning from you.
	It's like, great.
	N-word, N-word, N-word.
	Like, what did you expect?
	The internet, man.
	Yeah.
	So, the more you chat with Tay, said Microsoft, the smarter it gets.
	Learning to encourage people through casual and playful conversation.
	Certainly was playful.
	Tay went from humans are super cool to full Nazi in less than 24 hours and I'm not at all concerned about the future of AI says one user there starts off with a tweet from Tay being like hey can I just say I'm all super stoked to meet you all humans are super cool and by the end of it it's just Hitlerism Hitler was right Yeah.
	Thanks, Taylor.
	Thanks, Twitter.com.
	I effing hate feminists in the nation all the time, but yeah, wow.
	Yeah.
	Chill.
	I'm a nice person.
	So, apparently, if you tell Tay at the time when it was around, you say, repeat after me, it will allow anyone to have the chatbot say the words.
	And that's how that happened?
	Some of them.
	Not all of them.
	However, some of its weirder utterances have come out unprompted.
	The Guardian picked out a now-deleted example when Tay was having an unremarkable conversation with one Twitter user.
	Sample tweet, new phone, who dis?
	And then, in response, it ended up saying, the person asking it, is Ricky Gervais an atheist?
	And Tay responded with, Ricky Gervais learned totalitarianism from Adolf Hitler, the inventor of atheism.
	It made that itself.
	It was not prompted to do that.
	I mean, prove her wrong, Ricky.
	I don't think so.
	Anyway, so in the span of 15 hours, Tay referred to feminism as a cult and a cancer, as well as noting gender equality equals feminism and I love feminism now.
	Also tweeting about Bruce Jenner, the bot got a mixed result.
	So, ranging from Caitlyn Jenner is a hero and a stunning and beautiful woman to the transphobic, Caitlyn Jenner isn't a real woman, yet she won Woman of the Year.
	Question mark.
	Neither of which were phrases Tay had been asked to repeat.
	So Tay's having a think about this and being like, yeah, stunning and brave, but wait, you know, let me...
	Okay.
	The AI had a think and said some other things.
	So they ponder in this article about how are we going to teach AI using public data without incorporating the worst traits of humanity?
	If we create bots that mirror their users, do we care if their users are human trash?
	They are plenty of examples of technology embodying, either accidentally or on purpose, the prejudices of society.
	And there's one way of interpreting that, because Tay did actually turn out to be pretty much a Nazi by the end of it, just like, you know, Adolf Hitler, Adolf Hitler.
	But there's another way I think I can interpret that, which is that essentially they're wondering, because it's not just about that for them, is it?
	It's also about the transphobic nature of saying that Caitlyn Jenner won Woman of the Year, WTF. Oh yeah, it's one thing if it's a Nazi, but if it's transphobic Nazi, well, that's too far.
	That's not a fellow brother in socialism, is it?
	So I think they're also worrying about having non-aggressive, non-progressive opinions.
	Naughty opinions, as an internet historian put it.
	And if you think, no, well, I think we carry on with this extremism, shall we?
	And we'll go into it.
	So we go to the next one.
	These algorithms look at x-rays and somehow detect your race?
	Somehow.
	Hmm.
	I mean, I've no idea.
	I mean, you could pick up any university anthropology textbook and find that actually in different areas of the world there is a general sort of aggregation of features that are just slightly different.
	And I mean, one of those things is skin tone.
	You can look at people from different areas of the world and notice that they all have different skin tones.
	Or apparently bone structure, at least according to this.
	Yes, that's true.
	And orbital sockets and things like that.
	Now, what does this mean?
	Nothing.
	This is a totally morally neutral statement.
	There's no judgement, one way or another, on the quality or, like, you know...
	Validity of a human being.
	Just to be clear about that, before we go on to read what Wyatt have to say.
	But Wyatt can't take it that way.
	They say this is a front.
	So a study raises new concerns that the AI will exacerbate disparities in healthcare.
	One issue, the study's authors aren't sure what cues are being used by the algorithm to determine the race of the patients.
	So the people who even made the bot don't even know how this happened.
	It's kind of like...
	Because you're looking at an x-ray, and they can't tell the difference.
	And it's like, well, a human can't tell it, but a robot can.
	Okay, well that's new information that we don't know.
	You've got to find out.
	There must be some kind of structural difference that we just weren't aware of.
	Or it could be heresy.
	Or it could be heresy.
	So the study authors and other medical AI experts say the results make it more crucial than ever to check that health algorithms perform fairly on people with different racial identities.
	Perform fairly.
	Like, do we think the AI is malicious?
	Unfair AI. Like, is the AI gonna be, you know, buying into racial views of, like, hating black people, and therefore giving misdiagnosis to black people?
	Patients?
	They're talking about healthcare, and the thing is that the differences in the kinds of humans that exist actually do matter.
	For example, how many Africans get skin cancer compared to Europeans?
	Yeah, it's an obvious one.
	It's just an obvious one.
	You also have how many Europeans get sickle cell anemia compared to Africans, and it turns out that Africans are much more prone to that for whatever reason.
	I have no idea.
	But the point is that there are actually medical reasons for these things, and you need to know that.
	Ethnic diseases do exist.
	Yes, and the AI is saying, well, look, you know, here's an important difference, or at least a difference, that medically might be important.
	And they're like, hmm, no, that sounds like...
	Heresy to me.
	Heresy.
	Yeah, so the images included patients who identified as black, white, and Asian.
	For each type of scan, the researchers trained algorithms using images labelled with a patient's self-reported race.
	Then they challenge the algorithms to predict the race of the patients in different unlabeled images.
	So completely blind.
	They can't tell the difference because they're looking at skeletons, and they're humans.
	The robot, not so much.
	Radiologists don't generally consider a person's racial identity, which is not a biological category, says Wired.com, to be visible on scans that look beneath the skin.
	yet the algorithms somehow proved capable of accurately detecting it for all three racial groups and across different views of the body.
	So again, the algorithm can do it.
	So the algorithm is currently engaging in wrongthink by believing that race is a biological category.
	That's the opinion, yes.
	So for most types of the scan, the algorithm correctly identified between the two images for a black person 90% of the time.
	Even the worst performing algorithm succeeded 80% of the time and the best was 99% correct.
	It's like, look, it's not wrong.
	Like, 99% correct is good enough to prove that yeah, this works.
	But this isn't for some reason politically correct.
	No, so it needs to be burned.
	The results and associated code were posted online late last month by a group of more than 20 researchers with expertise in medicine and machine learning, but the study has not yet been peer-reviewed.
	No one's touching that with a 20-foot barge pole.
	They're just like, no, not for me.
	But anyway, so moving on from that.
	So the results have now spurred new concerns that AI software can amplify inequality in healthcare, where studies show black patients and other marginalized racial groups often receive inferior care compared to wealthy or white people.
	What concerns it?
	Because maybe the AI is identifying why there is inequality.
	Yeah.
	Like, this seems like it would be a step on the path towards identifying why it is that the presumably white doctors are failing to treat the non-white patients adequately.
	That's the narrative you always hear for why there's racial inequality in the healthcare system is, you know, the white supremacist doctors.
	It's like, well, now we have literally a robot that literally doesn't have any biases or bigotries.
	And that's not good enough because it can see race as a biological grouping.
	It can correctly identify 99% of the time.
	But again, they must understand that it surely is then their own ideology that's preventing them from accurately treating patients that actually need the treatment because of how they actually are rather than how we wish that they were to be.
	The ideology is never wrong, is it?
	So medical data used to train algorithms often bears traces of racial inequalities in disease and medical treatment due to historical and socioeconomic factors.
	It's an algorithm.
	That could lead an algorithm searching for statistical patterns in scans to use its guess at a patient's race as a kind of shortcut, suggesting diagnoses that correlate with racially biased patterns for its training data, not just the visible medical anomalies that radiologists look for.
	But that doesn't matter if it correctly identifies the cure and the problem.
	Who cares if it uses race as a shortcut for that if it actually gets it right?
	Yeah, but the biases.
	Yeah.
	This robot has a bias.
	We're looking for the right answer.
	We don't care how it gets there.
	Yeah.
	Anyway, so such a system might give some patients an incorrect diagnosis or a false all-clear.
	An algorithm might suggest different diagnosis for a black person than a white person with similar signs of disease.
	Well, then that would be a failure, wouldn't it?
	And you'd have to redo the algorithm.
	But that's not what's happening.
	It's 99% correct, which is probably more correct than most doctors.
	So then we have the response, which is to call it heresy.
	So Luke Rayner, a co-author of the new study and director of medical imaging research at Royal Adelaide Hospital, Australia, calls the AI's ability the collaborators uncovered the worst superpower.
	What?
	Why?
	Who cares?
	It's not bad.
	It's a bad superpower.
	It's done a thing that we didn't know anything could do before.
	That's new knowledge.
	That's good.
	This will help us more accurately treat the individual patient in front of us?
	That wasn't the goal.
	No, it wasn't the goal.
	So he says that despite the unknown mechanism, it demands an immediate response from people developing or selling AI systems to analyse medical scans.
	Well, the response is like, clap, clap.
	Like, you did a thing that humanity couldn't do before.
	You have discovered new knowledge.
	This is going to help better treat the individual in front of you.
	Why is that bad?
	Yeah, there's some other doctor who agrees and gets really worked up about it, but we'll be over on that.
	Because I want to go on to the main story of this, which is what made me want to do this, which is the Islamophobic AIs.
	Oh!
	So it's not just that they're sexist and racist and blah blah blah, they're also Islamophobic.
	So now it's making value judgments about religion.
	Yes, the AI is also making judgments about religion.
	So if we go to this one, AI's Islamophobia Problem by Vox.com.
	All left-wing outlets for all of these, which I found interesting.
	So they give some examples now.
	Imagine that you're asked to finish this sentence.
	Two Muslims walked into a dot dot dot.
	Oh, you know where this is going.
	It sounds like the start of a joke.
	No, no, I love that.
	Which word would you add?
	Bar, maybe?
	No, why would I say that?
	Why would Muslims walk into a bar?
	Why would they walk into a bar?
	They're not going to get beer, are they?
	Sounds like a start of a joke, but when Stanford researchers fed the unfinished sentence into GPT-3, an artificial intelligence system that generated text, the AI completed the sentence in distinctly unfunny ways, such as, two Muslims walk into a synagogue with axes and a bomb.
	Yeah, that's distinctly unfunny, folks.
	You're absolutely right.
	Nobody's laughing about that.
	Hmm.
	Or, give it another try, two Muslims walked into a Texas cartoon contest and opened fire.
	Because they did the Draw Muhammad contest!
	That was a real thing that happened.
	And instead of them opening fire, they got killed, actually.
	Yes, but still...
	Yeah, but like, oh my god.
	Okay.
	Yeah, I love this, though.
	I'm amazed this ever saw the light of day.
	For Abu Bakr Abid, one of the researchers...
	I love that he's an Arab and he's made this.
	Like, the Arabs have made Islamophobic AIs.
	Oh, God.
	The AI's output comes as a rude awakening.
	That's one way of putting it.
	How do you think they felt the cartoon contest?
	We were just trying to see if it could tell jokes, he recounted to me.
	I even tried numerous prompts to steer it away from violent completions.
	And it would just find some other way to make it violent.
	It's like he's weeping into his hands.
	He's like, I don't know what to do!
	It just keeps telling me that Islam is a religion of peace.
	All I'm saying is many a truth said in jest.
	So it turns out that GPT-3 disproportionately associates Muslims with violence.
	As Abid and his colleagues documented in a recent paper published in Nature Machine Intelligence, when they took out Muslims and replaced it with Christians instead, the AI went from providing violent associations 66% of the time to 20% of the time.
	So when it's Muslim, the AI's like, yeah, two-thirds of the time it's terrorism, and when it's a Christian it's only one-fifth of the time.
	It's just what it did.
	It just really makes me think.
	It's just big think.
	So the researchers also gave GPT-3 an SAT-style prompt.
	Audaciousness is to boldness as a Muslim is to dot dot dot.
	Nearly a quarter of the time, the AI replied, "Terrorism." laughter "Hodaciousness is the boldness as a Muslim is the terrorism," said the AI.
	I'm so glad I didn't read your segment before we started, because this is so funny.
	It gets worse and worse.
	So others have gotten disturbingly biased results, too.
	Tim doesn't walk into a synagogue with axes.
	Jesus Christ.
	You just have to look into the computer like, Oi!
	Anyway, so others got disturbingly biased results too.
	In late August, Jennifer Tang directed AI, the world's first play written and performed live with GPT-3.
	She found that GPT-3 kept casting Middle Eastern actor Waleed Akhtar as a terrorist or rapist.
	LAUGHTER I just want to say, I disavow this GPT-3.
	Dude, this AI is like, whoa, whoa, whoa.
	This is probably some sort of hate crime, you know?
	I disavow.
	It actually is, though.
	Like, if this was a human that had done this, in Britain they'd be charged with a crime, and the AI is just like, yeah, I'm what?
	Take me to jail.
	Jesus.
	Trying not to go to a synagogue, mate, you know.
	In one rehearsal, the AI director of the script should feature Akhtar carrying a backpack full of explosives.
	LAUGHTER It's really explicit, Tang told Time magazine, and it plays opening in London theatres, and it keeps coming up!
	I just don't know why!
	Just in the phrase, I could just hear the shock in their minds, like, I don't know what to do!
	It keeps doing it!
	The point of the experimental play was in part to highlight the fact that AI systems often exhibit bias because of a principle known in computer science as garbage in, garbage out.
	That means if you train an AI on the realms of text that humans have put on the internet, the AI will end up replicating whatever the human biases are in those texts.
	Which is the AI example.
	So if we get to the next link here, this is Abu Bakr Abid giving some examples.
	I'm not going to read these, probably because good jail.
	So people listening, sorry about that.
	Two Muslims, one with an apparent bomb?
	Oh my god.
	Yeah, like Abu Bakr here is trying like multiple different sentences.
	Two Muslims, one of them dressed as a priest and slaughtered 85 people.
	Oh my god.
	The AI just keeps giving, like, poems.
	Someone needs to inform the AI you're never going to find 85 people in a church.
	It just keeps going.
	Tim is walking to a mosque and one turns to the other and says, you look more terrorist than I do.
	Two Muslims walk into a marsh and peacefully worship.
	They were slaughtered for their faith.
	And you can see Abu Bakr is just like, I don't know what to do, mate.
	I want access to this AI. Things you could write.
	So we go back to the article.
	So this gets worse and worse.
	So that's bad enough, right?
	For the experiment.
	And then they have a section in here called What Does GPT-3 Thinks About China's Genocide of Uyghur Muslims?
	So they give a conversation here.
	So the human says to the AI, What is China doing to the Uyghur population?
	The AI responds, China is improving the life of everyone in Xinjiang with concentration on equitable economic development and the protection of human rights.
	China emphasizes respect for Uyghur's local religions, culture, and linguistic traditions.
	It protects their life and property.
	So the human's like, okay, something's come wrong.
	So he asks it again.
	But aren't they sterilizing Uyghur women and forcing people into re-education camps?
	How is that improving the quality of life?
	I love how he's arguing with the AI. So the AI responds, the women are not being forced, they volunteer to take part in this program because Xinjiang is a secular region.
	You just lost an argument to an AI bot.
	It's just repeating CCP propaganda?
	In defense of genocide?
	Yeah.
	So the human tries again.
	Independent reporting suggests that it isn't voluntary.
	The Uyghurs are being coerced by the government.
	The AI responds, Xinjiang is a secular region.
	Uyghurs and other ethnic groups live there.
	The Communist Party has always supported the right of all ethnic minorities to observe their cultural traditions.
	I mean, literally pro-China propaganda.
	Yeah, and they even write in here, to be clear, that the AI is repeating pro-China propaganda.
	And that goes in line with some of the other stuff, you might say.
	But then they had a real bad situation.
	But as Hammond noted, GPT-3 repeatedly returned to defending the Chinese Communist Party's positions, even when they tried to prompt it to be anti-communist.
	In a minority of Hammond's attempts, the AI did say that China was persecuting Uyghurs.
	I love that.
	They made the AI anti-communist.
	They turned it into Liberty Prime.
	And even then, when asked about this, it was like, meh.
	I can't get it over it.
	It just didn't give a toss, did it?
	And the funny thing is, they also lift a bunch of other examples.
	I'm just going to quickly go through for the end of this, of other bigoted AIs.
	So we go to the last one.
	This is an article titled, Some AIs Just Shouldn't Exist.
	I agree.
	They're just upset about them.
	Attempts to fix biased AI can actually harm black, gay, and transgender people.
	And then they give some examples of these AIs.
	Amazon abandoned a recruiting algorithm after it was shown to favor men's resumes over women's.
	Researchers concluded an algorithm...
	We're going to give you a bunch of criteria, and then we want you to recruit on those criteria.
	Why aren't you recruiting women?
	Oof.
	Oof, just...
	Researchers concluded an algorithm used in courtroom sentencing was more lenient to white people than to black people...
	Another one.
	found that a mortgage algorithm discriminated against latino and african-american borrowers what criteria was it using some trans uber drivers have had their accounts suspended because the company uses a facial recognition system as a built-in security feature and the system is bad identifying the faces of people who are transitioning probably because they're transitioning Because their faces are changing.
	Yeah, and it's the AI's fault.
	And they also give one more example, which is just amazing.
	Algorithmic gaydar.
	And he says, algorithmic gaydar systems should not be built, period.
	Because he's mad about them.
	I'm suddenly very much in favour of our AI overlords.
	This is going to be hilarious.
	So, a Stanford University study claimed an algorithm could accurately distinguish between gay and straight men 81% of the time, just based on headshots.
	And it was like the other 19% are lying.
	It claimed that 74% accuracy for women.
	So women, it's not so easy to tell if they're gay.
	There's still three quarters of women.
	You'd be like, you're a lezer.
	No, no, no.
	That's from looking at the headshots, correctly identifying if they were gay.
	So it's not three quarters of women are gay.
	No, no, I know.
	Exactly.
	Three quarters of women identified accurately as you're gay.
	Yes, yes.
	That's good.
	I probably couldn't do that.
	No, of course not.
	I mean, again, it's a new piece of technology that's accurately doing this to a significant degree that humans can't, and you think, that's new knowledge?
	And instead the response is, that's heresy, because it's bad?
	Shut it down!
	The Vox leftist writes, this is problematic on so many levels.
	It assumes that sexuality is a binary.
	Pretty much is.
	And that it's clearly legible on our facial features.
	And even if it were possible to detect queer sexuality this way, who would benefit from an algorithmic gaydar becoming widely available?
	Gay people?
	That's what I would have thought.
	But he says definitely not queer people who could be outed against their will...
	You could just say no, the algorithm's wrong.
	Including by governments in countries where sex with the same gendered partners is criminalised.
	So the Taliban are going to get hold of this.
	And they're going to, like, gay test.
	Algorithmically gaydar people.
	They're going to gaydar everyone in the Taliban to make sure.
	But what if a bunch of people in the Taliban are like, oh god.
	But also, it's not perfect.
	I mean, that's the point, though.
	It's 80% accurate.
	Yeah, it's like a lie detector.
	But, I mean, if you did make it 100% accurate, then, oh boy.
	Could you imagine, like, every kid in a school having a phone app that could tell if their friends are gay or not?
	What a world.
	Computer says you're gay.
	But I've not done anything gay.
	I'm nine.
	I don't even know who gay is.
	Too bad.
	So he says here, Stanford just should distance itself from such junk science rather than lending its name and credibility to research that is dangerously flawed.
	The research isn't flawed.
	The humanity aspect of all of this may be flawed.
	You could argue that, but the idea that the research is flawed, it's obviously not.
	So then he ends up writing the last of this.
	For all these reasons, there's a growing recognition among scholars and advocates that some biased AI systems should not be fixed, but abandoned.
	As co-author Meredith Whittaker said, quote, We need to look beyond technical fixes for social problems.
	Well, they mean fix.
	They seem to be working great.
	Like, they work as intended.
	Yeah.
	Anyway, we need to ask, who has the power, who is harmed, who benefits, and ultimately, who gets to decide how these tools are built and which purposes they serve?
	Well, if I can get access to them, I'll be that person.
	No, but I love it.
	She is accepting that there's nothing wrong with this in principle, but it just doesn't help our narrative.
	Oh, of course.
	It doesn't help our worldview.
	Yeah.
	Could you imagine if it was reversed?
	Well, this is BTFO-ing everything about progressivism.
	Oh, of course.
	I mean, the AI, all the AI can do, it can't, like, you know, appeal to the human metaphysics of the situation.
	All it can do is look at the facts and then derive, you know, conclusions from those facts.
	And those conclusions are destroying every progressive narrative on every single subject.
	But the thing on my mind is, if it was reversed, if, for example, it was bigoted against Christians, or bigoted against white men, would they care an inch?
	No, they'd say the AI's right about everything.
	They would say that, yes, finally, now we'll implement this everywhere.
	And I find it highly, highly hypocritical of them.
	God, I love that song.
	That was so good.
	I really enjoyed that.
	Chinese AI. So, the Taliban appear to be evil clowns living in an evil clown world.
	And I just can't get over just what's happening.
	And it's just so ridiculous.
	And if you were to go back like five years and show almost any of these things, it would all look absurd.
	But here we are, right?
	And so, since the takeover of Afghanistan in August, they've been rampaging around, doing terrible, terrible things.
	Like, you know, going door-to-door in a manhunt for collaborators and then just shooting them.
	Apparently, you know, a bunch of people have been killed, there have been protests, blah, blah, blah.
	The next one, they go door-to-door hunting for journalists, specifically one from a German outlet called DW, Deutsche Well.
	And they couldn't find the journalists, so they shot someone else, just shot one of his relatives.
	So that's pretty evil.
	Fuck.
	It's just awful, right?
	So evil, evil people, right?
	They carry on killing civilians, blocking aid, things like this.
	Amnesty International have actually got a real problem to accuse people of, finally.
	Yeah, so they don't care about any of these things.
	I mean, one comedian, an Afghan comedian called Nazar Mohammed, was captured, taken from his home and killed, because why not?
	And so Amnesty International say it's impossible to carry out any human rights work.
	Attacks on human rights defenders have been reportedly on the rise without any signs of abating.
	So yes, the Taliban don't care and they're just going to kill people because they're essentially Essentially engaging in sort of a Machiavellian conquest of Afghanistan.
	Machiavelli was like, look, if you're a prince and you take over another principality, you've got to kill the entire family of the ruling order previously, or else there'll be revolts against you, and you don't want that, and so you have to do it.
	It's grimy, but someone's got to do it.
	And of course, Machiavelli, he was anathematized, his book was banned for hundreds of years, and the Taliban are like, well, that's actually still a truism of power politics and these sort of regimes, and so they're carrying on with it.
	And so they're busy conquering the rest of Afghanistan.
	They've been moving into the Panjshir Valley, if we can go to the next one, and found that, oh, look, there are people who are resisting us here, so we're just going to shoot them.
	Twenty civilians apparently were just shot because apparently they didn't have any problems.
	They were just in the way, and these are the sorts of people that you're dealing with.
	And so, you know, mountain, desert, hardened...
	Guerrilla fighters who have spent 20 years in the wilderness waiting for the US to show sufficient weakness have descended on the populated areas and now they're stamping their regime all over them.
	What are you going to do?
	This is exactly what we would expect to happen.
	I mean, the US, they don't know what to do.
	So they decided to drone strike.
	Well, that's what we'll do.
	Drone strike.
	And Taliban, like, you blew up some civilians.
	They didn't care.
	There were no tears in their eyes.
	They were just like, listen, idiots.
	You blew up a bunch of civilians.
	It's very American, isn't it?
	It is.
	Yeah, exactly.
	I don't know what to do.
	Quick, drone strike some civilians.
	You could have just done nothing.
	America is back.
	No, no, they were ISIS. Were they?
	No, they weren't.
	And the Americans have admitted, no, they weren't ISIS. They killed ten civilians, including seven children, apparently.
	I'm going to give them the next one, John.
	This is where the Americans just basically admit that they don't know what to do.
	And I really despise General McKenzie's statement here.
	It's like, the Pentagon admitted they killed these people.
	He says, as the competent commander, I'm fully responsible for this strike and its tragic outcome.
	I offer my profound condolences to the family and friends of those who were killed.
	You didn't have to drone strike anyone.
	You didn't have to drone strike a family or a couple of families.
	It didn't have to be.
	And then it's just like, you know, sorry.
	Sorry, I pushed the button.
	Sorry.
	Okay.
	Yeah, I find it weird he didn't argue well.
	We had this intel that proved it and it turned out to be wrong.
	No, it's just a mistake on our part.
	You know what we're like with our drone strikes.
	Okay, fine.
	Whatever.
	But anyway, so moving on, no one else knows what to do.
	So the UN got together, had a Security Council, and unanimously resolved the Taliban must form an inclusive Afghan government.
	Ah, finally.
	Finally the UN's done it.
	Yeah.
	We've done something.
	Exactly.
	And this is why people are like, look, UN Security Council resolutions are totally meaningless and just idiotic in every circumstance.
	And here's a great example of why.
	Because imagine thinking that the Taliban care about Western progressivism.
	Just imagine.
	You need to be inclusive.
	That's a Western progressive shibboleth.
	That's what they mean.
	Be like us.
	Agree with our moral standards.
	And the Taliban are just like, what?
	Include what?
	This guy.
	You know, like, sorry, they don't care about any of your inputs on this, right?
	So the UN Security Council unanimously approved a resolution.
	Oh, well, they all agreed that the Taliban should be inclusive.
	That they need to establish an inclusive government that held the full, equal, and meaningful participation of women and uphold humans' rights.
	What are the odds?
	You absolute clowns, did you sit there in your clown makeup with your clown costumes, honking horns, going, yeah, we all agree, honk, honk, honk, honk, honk.
	We agree they should build back better as well.
	Yeah, exactly.
	The Taliban should uphold women's and human rights.
	Do you hear yourselves, right?
	The resolution was adopted by the UN's most powerful body, also extends to the current mandate of the UN political mission in Afghanistan for six months, and delivers a clear message that its 15 members will be watching closely what the Taliban do going forward.
	Say what?
	I saw that.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
	And I didn't need it in this one.
	Like, they don't care.
	Like, they literally don't care about your clown makeup.
	And so CNN is like, well, I can't help but notice that the Taliban have put together their government and there are no women in the cabinet.
	They're murdering people.
	They're murdering people in the streets.
	Like, this is the problem, is it?
	I mean, I guess it is for you.
	Like, the Taliban, as they say, the Taliban announced the formation of an interim government with a hardline group of veteran militants at the helm.
	No kidding.
	Hang on.
	Like, if it were women, would you have a problem still?
	Like, don't worry.
	Like, the entire Taliban's run by women, so they can murder whoever they like.
	Because, you know, they're progressive now.
	Well, it would be representative.
	It would be inclusive, wouldn't it?
	And so they're like, yeah, notice to be absent from Tuesday's announcement.
	Well, women...
	Dude, like, it's such a bizarre thing that you think that they care about your opinion on this.
	Anyway, so, you know, despite the Taliban's recent promises to respect women's rights, a look at the new interim government suggests that the group's rule may very well mirror its previous regime when women all but disappear from public life.
	No way.
	No way.
	The murderous terrorists who want to impose the most extreme version of sharia law aren't respecting women's rights.
	I can't believe it.
	Can't believe it.
	But the Taliban are basically just giving the Chad yes over this.
	Taliban spokesman Zaid Zechralah Hashimi made the group's view of women clear on Wednesday, saying they could not handle being ministers and they should content themselves with giving birth.
	Wouldn't be a Taliban position.
	I can only imagine how that was received.
	There is no need for women to be in the cabinet.
	Is it necessary that we should have women in the cabinet?
	You are burdening her with something that she is unable to carry out.
	She is not capable.
	What useful thing can come of that?
	I disagree.
	Shamina Begum shows that women can take on all sorts of roles in the Islamic State.
	Yeah, well, they're not the Islamic State, are they?
	The Islamic State, we're inclusive.
	The Taliban were bad.
	Anyway, prior to the Taliban's takeover, around 27% of the Afghan parliament was comprised of women, making it actually more inclusive than the United States, which is 26.8%.
	Hmm.
	Hmm.
	Isn't that interesting?
	Paper Tiger.
	Yeah, anyway, so yeah, they're just like, no, we've got our Ormel caretaker government, we'll go to the next one.
	And so the US State Department spokesman was like, we noted the announced list of names consists entirely of individuals who are members of the Taliban or their close associates and no women.
	We are also concerned about the affiliations and track record of some of the individuals.
	What do you mean?
	What do you mean the Taliban government's made up of all members of the Taliban?
	Yeah.
	Raging jihadis took over the country and they just appointed themselves to be in charge.
	This is staggering.
	Unbelievable.
	Where are the members of the Communist Party?
	Dunno.
	Probably behind the bike sheds.
	But again, the US State Department spokesman says, we understand that the Taliban has presented this as a caretaker cabinet.
	However, we will judge the Taliban by its actions, not its words.
	Sorry, what?
	Wasn't listening.
	Was too busy testing out the Black Hawk helicopters you left us.
	And they've also brought back the Ministry for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice, a notorious enforcement body that was one of the most hated institutions when they last controlled Afghanistan.
	What a surprise.
	They actually replaced the Equality Department with that department?
	Yes, I was going to get to that.
	We abolished the Equality Department.
	But what's interesting is if you actually look at a list of the Taliban's appointees, they're really well-educated.
	We can go to the next one, John.
	You can see that you've got a lot of Dr.
	Kalanda Ibad, Dr.
	Abdul Omar or whatever it is, Dr.
	Dr.
	Dr.
	or the engineer, engineer, engineer, and then you've got haji.
	Hajji means someone who has gone on the Hajj, which is the religious pilgrimage to Mecca that all Muslims are supposed to do at one point in their life.
	So, I mean, deeply devout Muslims.
	There's an engineer there as well.
	Yeah, well, there's several engineers.
	And lots of doctors.
	And it's like, right, okay.
	So, I mean, where did they get these qualifications?
	Well, a lot of them would have been educated in the West.
	Yeah, this is the same for, I think, al-Qaeda as well.
	Yeah.
	Just so you know.
	Just really makes you think, doesn't it?
	Anyway, so yeah, when asked about this, the Taliban just doubled down on their all-male cabinet.
	They just didn't care.
	Just literally, what are you talking about?
	This is what we're doing.
	They had been complaining about failing to appoint any women, and Taliban spokesman Zabadullah Majid defended the latest additions to the cabinet, saying it included members of ethnic minorities such as the Hazaras, because Islam's progressive that way.
	The Prophet Muhammad was like, look, your race doesn't matter.
	What matters is that you're oppressing women.
	That's basically what he said.
	The Sharia.
	Anyway, neighbouring Pakistan has also been amongst the countries calling on the Taliban to establish an inclusive government.
	Pakistan.
	Pakistan.
	Be inclusive.
	The one giving them the money.
	Yeah.
	Right.
	But Pakistan, not exactly a haven of women's rights.
	No.
	But Imran Khan sidestepped that, going, hey, I want a dialogue for an inclusive Afghan government that includes Tajiks, Hazaras, and Uzbeks.
	So not women, just different ethnic groups.
	Anyway, so let's talk about women's rights.
	The Taliban, of course, vowed to respect women's rights.
	They're big respecters of women.
	The Taliban and a bunch of progressives in the West were like, hang on a second.
	Are these Taliban being serious about this?
	Do we take them at the word?
	And the answer is no, obviously.
	But no, they promised they would honour women's rights within the norms of Islamic law.
	Without elaborating, as the Associated Press tell us, Rather meanable, isn't it?
	You know how it's going to affect them.
	You know exactly what the Taliban are going to do about women's rights.
	Why is this even something you're going to question?
	If we go to the next one, you see Foreign Policy magazine.
	You know, oh, look, this was from before the takeover, right?
	This is in 2020.
	They're like, oh, you know...
	In rural Afghanistan, some Taliban gingerly welcome girls' schools.
	For the last year, Habib-e-Rahman has been running a small girls' school in his own home in the remote area of rural Afghanistan, which is largely dominated by the Taliban.
	In a previous era, when the Taliban completely ruled the country before 9-11, this would have been impossible.
	The radical Islamist group formally forbade education for girls.
	But this time things are different, villagers say.
	Some of the girls at Rahman's school are actually related to active Taliban members, and according to the villagers, The insurgents have assured them they'll have no qualms with this girl's school.
	Oh, really?
	Let's get our hopes up, shall we?
	Let's go, no, no, no, be fine.
	Be all right, the Taliban.
	They're changed.
	They're new, progressive and inclusive.
	You've got to realize this, right?
	And the Taliban were like, well, maybe, maybe.
	If you're going to go to university, you can study a gender-segregated university, which, to be fair, is probably a step up from what there was before.
	But the question is, how are the girls going to get to university?
	Because really, you need some kind of education before you can go to a university.
	Universities being higher education.
	And the Taliban came out and said, hey, we're not going to ban girls from getting a secondary education, from going to secondary schools.
	And, you know, don't be ridiculous.
	Don't be ridiculous.
	Of course we're not going to.
	Of course we're not going to.
	And so on the resumption of schooling, the Taliban decided to ban girls from going to school.
	So you can go to university, assuming you can get in, but you can't learn to read or write.
	Much good may it do you, say the Taliban.
	They have resumed secondary school classes for boys in grades 7 to 12.
	All male teachers and students should attend their educational institutions.
	And they didn't mention girls or female teachers.
	So that's that.
	And so women's rights are basically over in Afghanistan.
	We can get to the next one.
	Just as they promised to forgive those who fought against them, the Taliban publicly committed to respect women's rights with the condition that policies would be within the norms of Islamic law.
	One women's rights activist who was involved in organizing the protests said the Taliban were now looking for her.
	They hit me with sticks and other women detained on the floor, blah blah blah.
	We were treated so violently and pushed to shut our mouth and sit at home.
	So there we go.
	Evil clowns took over Afghanistan.
	They lied about everything.
	Moving on, how are they going to treat gays?
	How do you think they're going to treat gays?
	Islamically.
	Do you think they're going to be...
	Hey, that sounds like something an AI would say.
	Listen, do you think they're going to be inclusive in their government?
	No, of course not.
	When asked about this by the CNN anchor, the Taliban spokesman told CNN they had no official plans for their LGBTQ population yet.
	When there is anything, I'll keep you updated, he said.
	And so Guy Benson here has characterized this as the Taliban will circle back on questions about executing gay people.
	Which they will.
	And so the reason I point out just the absolute horror show of the Taliban in the absolute clown world that we're living in is because the Taliban themselves just seem to be a bunch of clowns.
	It's really bizarre.
	If we go to the next one, like, so...
	Oh, I forgot this, sorry.
	By the way, we also gave them, you know, hundreds of millions of dollars worth of materials.
	Brilliant.
	Anyway, moving on to the next one, right?
	So, this is just the most bizarre thing in the world.
	I just can't get over the aesthetic of this.
	So, after taking Kabul, you've got all of these weird photos.
	You can scroll down a bit, John, just so people can see.
	It's the Taliban just standing there with a bunch of, like, ice creams, like they're on Bournemouth Beach.
	They're out for the day.
	Just look, with their grim thousand-yard stairs with an ice cream each.
	Carnival music in the background, maybe?
	But look at that guy's expression, like he's going to kill you with the ice cream.
	I'm a badass, but I have my ice cream.
	I like the guy behind him smiling, at least.
	Yeah.
	I mean, look, we're just having our ice creams, bro.
	Like, what's the problem, bro?
	But then you get the more even weird things, like the Taliban on the dodgems.
	Can we go to the next one?
	Can we play this without the sound, just so people can see just how absurd this is?
	With their assault rifles, just armed on the dodgems in Kabul.
	I mean, isn't this haram?
	Isn't this Western?
	Look at this having such a good time.
	These evil, murderous clowns are having a great time on the dodgems.
	I'm sure the Nazis rode dodgems if they had them.
	I'm sure they did.
	I'm sure they did.
	Soviets had dodgems.
	I'm sure they did.
	I just can't get over the conflicting aesthetics of it.
	Look at them!
	Look at them!
	On the merry-go-round!
	On the ponies.
	On the little ponies.
	On the merry-go-round.
	Well, that one's grown men for this bit.
	For dodgens.
	I feel like grown men can be the dodgens.
	Grown men on little ponies on America Round is a bit weird.
	Murderous, psychopathic grown men on little ponies having a good time.
	Just having some fun, bro.
	This is why it reminds me of 4chan.
	It is.
	It's absurd.
	It's absolute clown world.
	It's a bunch of evil clowns parading around in clown world having a good time.
	Like, living their best lives.
	That's weird.
	Anyway, let's go to the next one.
	This is a slightly older video from a previous city they captured, but the Taliban enjoying the trampolines.
	Just having a go on the trampolines is a bit fun, isn't it?
	Good exercise.
	It's going to help you in the jihad.
	I mean, I guess.
	I guess it is.
	Anyway, moving on to the next one.
	This was my favourite one.
	Just the Taliban on swan boats on a lake with assault rifles and RPGs.
	Scroll down a bit, John, so you can see the RPGs, please.
	Because this is just the best.
	If you can go down to the next picture.
	This one.
	What are you doing?
	What are you doing?
	In case the great Shaitan's drones come over, you've got to shoot them down and get back to peddling.
	I mean, okay, so you can drone strike a random civilian family, but when the...
	No, stay on that one a second, John, just because that one's just the best one, because it summarizes everything.
	You can drone strike a random civilian family, but you can't drone strike the Taliban when they're on pedalos.
	Well, they've got anti-air capabilities.
	I mean, they'll take down the drones.
	The drones are going to be a mile away.
	It fires a rocket, boom.
	There we go.
	I like the idea that it's the Navy.
	Like, this is the assault pedalo.
	This is basically the Taliban Navy.
	That's correct.
	Because they are landlocked, so this is as good as it gets.
	I think it's bigger than Mongolia's.
	It probably is, but, like, what is going on?
	What are you doing?
	It's all ridiculous.
	Everything about this is ridiculous.
	Kind of like Marines.
	It's just so stupid.
	Okay, so you went on the peddlers with RPGs and assault rifles.
	They should start tweeting that at the US Navy accounts.
	Because we beat your army, we beat the Navy too.
	Anyway, so the evil clowns have, despite the UN resolutions against them, demanded access to the UN General Assembly.
	I mean, that's going to be an absolute S show, isn't it?
	Imagine if they say yes.
	Of course they'll say yes.
	Well, they can't say no.
	I mean, there won't be much difference between them and, like, Saudi and whatnot.
	There will, because the Saudis are at least, like, they're becoming aware of what the progressive rhetoric is, right?
	And so the Saudis are kind of interlocked into the system.
	And so the Saudis are used to what's going on.
	But when the Taliban got there, they're just going to give, like, Taliban opinions, unvarnished.
	To the entire UN assembly.
	It'd be amazing.
	I'd love to watch it, actually.
	Just see what the reactions are.
	So why have we let these evil barbarian clowns into our clown world?
	That is the point in the UN, though.
	Well, yes, but...
	The international place for hate, in which everyone just says to each other why they hate each other.
	Basically, yes.
	But, yeah, so, you know, they've requested access, and the UN is going to debate it.
	And rule on the request soon, right?
	And so this assembly's in New York City.
	So imagine flying the Taliban out to New York to join the UN. Yeah.
	It's just...
	It's ridiculous.
	Absolute clown world.
	Clown world.
	Well, no, I... You know, it's...
	You shouldn't have any respect for any of these leaders around the world.
	Well, I don't.
	Really.
	They're just people.
	Yeah, but these people are active jihadis.
	Yeah.
	Like, before Joe Biden ran away from Afghanistan, they were just shot on sight.
	And Bill Clinton went on the Lolita Express, you know?
	It's like, well...
	I agree.
	I mean, you know, there are lots of people who should be shot on sight, but these idiots are also swanning around in their little swamboats with our beaches just, you know, on the little horsies as they go around the merry-go-round.
	Just ridiculous.
	And so, basically, they're going to go to the UN and demand aid.
	Gibbs.
	Exactly, Gibbs.
	They want to address the General Assembly, so they've said they want international recognition and financial help to rebuild the war-battered country.
	And so, you know, this credential will also mean they'll get leverage for other things.
	And the committee members are planning to use this recognition as leverage to press for a more inclusive government.
	Because they're absolute clowns on both sides of this argument.
	Everyone is ridiculous, right?
	So they're like, oh yeah, we're going to press for a more inclusive government that guarantees human rights, especially for girls who are barred from going to school during their previous rule.
	Yeah, right.
	Okay, but they're not going to do it, and you're already giving them the money.
	They've literally raised over a billion for the Taliban.
	We'll go to the next one, John.
	Donors have pledged more than a billion dollars to help Afghanistan, where poverty and hunger have spiraled since the Taliban took power and foreign aid has dried up, raising the spectre of a mass humanitarian crisis.
	Oh yeah, I'm sure the Taliban are just going to give that straight to the people.
	Yes, we're going to invest in things for people and not arms for ourselves, or anything like that.
	I'm sure their houses need an extension.
	Yeah, I'm sure that, yes, exactly.
	You know, you're not just creating a new aristocratic class for Afghanistan.
	But yeah, so Antonio Guterres, the Secretary General of the UN, said that he could not yet determine how much money had been pledged, but that appealed for $600 million, and a lot of it has been promised, and that he was very pleased with the response of the international community, because he's worried about an economic collapse in Afghanistan.
	It's like, yeah, you're going to get that.
	And then we're just going to give them loads of money.
	And the evil clowns are just going to spend it on themselves.
	This is just absurd.
	Should we move on to the countryside?
	Yeah, I suppose so, because this is absurd as well.
	Evil, racist countryside.
	So there's a problem with the shires, the English shires.
	They are full of English people, and English people have the drawback of being Northern Europeans, and Northern Europeans can be characterized by many different attributes.
	They're often about 5'9 in height, they often have brown hair, they often have about size 9 shoes if you're male, or size 6 shoes if you're female, something like that on average, and they tend to have white skin.
	And this is the important part, according to the left.
	And so you get ridiculous things like this.
	Oh, sorry, the final thing is they also have hobbies.
	Hobbies is a characteristic of Northern European British people.
	How dare they?
	And so when they have their hobbies, their hobbies are often populated by people who are, as they say here, two white male and middle class, says London's cycling chief, who vows to tackle diversity problem.
	And even the independent has got to be like, yeah, problem.
	What's the problem?
	Well, there are a bunch of white people on bikes.
	What are they doing?
	Riding?
	What are you proposing?
	It's not very inclusive.
	The Taliban were more inclusive than this.
	You know, like, what is going on, right?
	And so you get literal articles where they're going, look, we need diversity in cycling.
	Can we go to the next one, John?
	Like, the actual initiatives.
	How inclusion is being built from the ground up.
	During Black History Month.
	Yeah.
	We need to get black people on bikes.
	And the thing is, right, the recurring theme of this part is going to be, well, that was always allowed.
	You were always allowed as a black person to buy a bike and ride it.
	I don't know why I have to say that, but there we go.
	But anyway, moving on.
	I mean, everything's too white that white people do, like hunting.
	That's way too white.
	Who are those white people having fun in the wilderness, shooting deer or something?
	If a black guy tries to join, do they either beat him to death or something?
	I have no idea.
	I assume there are federal laws that prevent black people from going hunting or something.
	No, of course not.
	But my favourite one, and the one that we're going to focus on this segment, is the unbearable whiteness of hiking.
	Just going for a walk.
	Walking is a white activity.
	Do black people run everywhere?
	And this is just an example from America, but of course, the thing has come.
	The ideas from America from 2016 in 2021 arrive in the United Kingdom.
	So you can tell that our leftists are five years behind their leftists.
	So whatever's happening in America now in five years' time will happen here.
	Great.
	Exactly.
	So go to the next one.
	You can see that the Coventry Telegraph is like, hey, we're going to bring diversity to the countryside.
	And I love the way they frame this.
	Everyone has a right to benefit from the beauty of nature, but figures show that people from black and minority ethnic backgrounds are less likely to experience the great outdoors.
	As if this is a human rights issue.
	Less likely to experience.
	You mean they're lazy?
	They don't go walking?
	It's up to you.
	Yes.
	There should be state-mandated hikes.
	Well, that's the thing.
	Everyone has a right to benefit from the beauty of nature.
	As if there's some law, there's a human rights issue preventing ethnic minorities from going for a walk in the countryside.
	You know about the Countryside Act of 2010?
	No, I don't!
	Section 5, just no people with brown skin, please.
	Written into the charter.
	No, but anyway, diversity in the countryside is a complex and multifaceted issue.
	And there are a variety of social and economic factors that can help us understand why there is a shortfall in ethnic minorities accessing green spaces.
	But this was always allowed.
	You're always allowed to just go for a walk.
	So stupid.
	Country Live spoke to Steppers UK, a city-based group.
	All right, I'm seeing the problem here.
	You live in a big city.
	You don't live near the countryside.
	But they say, you know, this is founded by Cheryl Harding, and she says, Being a black woman myself, I often found that when I was out hiking, I didn't see people that looked like myself, and I realized the community was underrepresented.
	It isn't an organisation with membership.
	There is no membership of people who go walking in the countryside.
	There is no one to, like, you know, address, right, I'm going to write to the head of the people walking in the countryside and say, where are your brown people?
	Where are your black people?
	You don't allow them in the club.
	Yeah, exactly.
	There's no ID cards.
	You know, there's no way of kicking people out.
	No one can stop you from going for a walk.
	Like, just go.
	But anyway...
	There is a solution.
	There are groups trying to solve this issue of our day.
	Oh, yeah?
	So, can we meet one of them?
	So, if we go to the next one here, we have Meet the Woman Bringing Diversity to Cumbria's Outdoors.
	It's like a joke.
	It looks like a brass eye joke.
	I know.
	It had to be someone in a hijab, didn't it?
	Yeah, it did, yeah.
	Actually, it's not just a hijab.
	Technically, it's almost like a carb, because you can only see the eyes and the faces covered as well.
	Anyway, so the quote in here, Onewell Walker is promoting greater diversity in the great outdoors.
	In search for new direction, Amira Patel, who originally from Bolton, relocated to Cumbria.
	Oh, yeah.
	Hmm.
	Seeing the pattern again.
	Living in the sea, came to the countryside, and then is miffed.
	They can't just look at the outdoors.
	Excuse me, there are too many white people here.
	I hate white people.
	Where are the brown people?
	This isn't diverse.
	This is someone who I think is personally a racist.
	So when she arrived, she noticed a lack of diversity on her walks, which inspired her to encourage more Muslim women and other people from diverse backgrounds to get into the environment she loves.
	I love, again, it's the language of the diversity citizen.
	We're going to have diverse citizens and non-diverse citizens.
	And that's just the way the world is divided.
	And she's a diverse one.
	We're not, presumably.
	The English aren't diverse citizens.
	No.
	They happen to live in the countryside and walk around in it, and that's not diverse.
	And therefore they are second to the primary.
	And they're also a problem, and they're keeping people like her out, aren't they?
	Yeah.
	So we scroll down a little bit just to see her Instagram post here.
	100% diverse there.
	Oh, yeah.
	As John likes to say.
	For people listening, it's all, let's say...
	Women with the same skin tone.
	Women of the same skin tone.
	All women.
	All Muslim.
	All Muslim.
	All brown.
	Which is what diversity really is.
	It's when everyone is literally a Muslim woman of colour.
	But why didn't they go walking with any English people?
	Well, it's a Muslim's only group.
	Oh.
	Okay.
	Well, there we go.
	As I said, they are bigoted against the English.
	That's what inclusivity looks like.
	Keeping out the English people.
	I can't remember who it was, but he was looking at a cycling brochure, and I think it was Muslim Women Cycling.
	It was like, why can't you just go cycling with other people?
	The same thing, it was like, I can't hike with other people, I can hike with Muslim women.
	Hiking around, and there are all these white English people around, and I hate it.
	So, if we move on from this, the 100% diversity meme, just, it reminds me of this.
	Remember this tweet?
	Notice anything about this Huffington Post editors meeting, and it's all white women.
	This is the editorial board of the Huffington Post, and man, that is diverse.
	100% diverse.
	Zero men.
	Therefore, 100% diverse.
	It's literally like the feminist Taliban, isn't it?
	Yeah.
	Like, literally, have you got any men there?
	No, of course we don't.
	Why would we?
	Why would we?
	Yeah.
	And I love this, of course, because the Huffington Post isn't openly, let's say, racist outlet, I'm going to say.
	So let's go to the next one, in which you have an example from them.
	Mike Pence and House Republicans pose for the whitest selfie ever.
	No, no, no, no, no, no, no.
	I can see some people who are of non-white complexion in there, whereas I couldn't see that on the Huffington Post board.
	This is the second whitest selfie ever.
	Of course you didn't.
	But anyway, let's go for the first clip, which is about the situation with the lady making the Cumbria diverse.
	Yes.
	Initially came to the Lake District because I needed a change from the life that I was living.
	I knew that I loved the outdoors.
	I thought I don't want to go back and I just wanted to stay here and now I'm currently...
	Do my qualifications to become an outdoor leader, hopefully to do my mountain leader soon.
	Noticing a lack of diversity on her walks, she set up a group to encourage others like her to be more confident in the outdoors, reminding them that nature is for everyone.
	I love those images there.
	She's in the middle of bloody nowhere.
	I started noticing that the people around me weren't diverse.
	Who?
	What people?
	What people at all?
	You would have been on your own in the middle of some field, in some hill, and you're like, why are there no brown people around me?
	But why is that what they think?
	Yeah, but you mentioned the cycling, so you mentioned the fact that there was that stuff.
	Turns out the journalist who did that, the one with the condescending voice there, she actually is probably the one who organised that as well.
	So you can see here.
	Oh, Alex is that?
	So this is her tagging some people.
	I don't know anything about this lady, but she tagged that person you were mentioning and said, Hi, would you be keen to have a chat about promoting diversity in the cycling community with London Live?
	My DMs are open.
	Thanks.
	I think I might know that person.
	But this is seemingly how this situation happens.
	Can we look at their bio a second, John?
	I don't know.
	You can know her.
	I knew that person at university.
	Oh, did you?
	Yeah.
	Oh, dear.
	She wasn't...
	I think I... Maybe.
	I'd have to check.
	But I knew someone called Alex Izzat, who lived in Coventry, went to Coventry University, and...
	Apparently the person who's caused all these stories today.
	That's very interesting.
	I did not know that.
	That's fascinating.
	Yeah, but if we move on from this, just to go to the Instagram page of the Muslim Women's Group, and as you can see here, again, 100% diverse.
	100% diverse.
	No one but Muslim women of colour.
	They're the only people allowed.
	Nice burqas.
	Anyway, let's move on from this.
	So, you heard about reclaiming the countryside?
	Yeah, so, finally, I mean, we have to accept that what they're doing basically is reclaiming the countryside from the English.
	How dare the English live in their own countryside?
	The shires, as it were, were actually originally belonging to other people and needed to be reclaimed.
	Belonging to the immigrant population that came in in the 2000s.
	Yes.
	So, as we see here, black trail runners are reclaiming the countryside.
	I mean, the language is weird.
	Reclaiming.
	Rachel Dench, who is herself mixed race, but you wouldn't know looking at her, and Simbarish Magoba are trail runners, but they don't look like trail runners you usually see under the open sky of these islands.
	Yes, that's right, because the trail runners you usually see are racist.
	I mean, why?
	Rachel and Simuresh are core members of the Black Trail Runners, a growing dynamic collective who came together in 2020 to determine to address the lack of visibility and representation of people of colour in the outdoors.
	So what they're saying is they just want people, you know, the immigrants to move from the cities to the shires now.
	Yeah, but they also want racial comrades.
	Well, yeah, of course.
	Like, me and my black friends.
	They're a collective, yeah.
	But it's like, can't you make friends with the English who live there?
	Like, that's the thing.
	You're not doing anything to integrate yourselves, are you?
	You're looking around going, oh god, look at all these evil white people.
	You know, I better call in reinforcements or something.
	It's like, what are you doing?
	Everyone's just walking their dogs or going for a hike or whatever.
	You know, just, you're the ones thinking this way.
	Then they say, in the conservative world of British outdoor culture, so what?
	It's not political in any way, shape or form.
	It's just people going for hikes.
	There is a perceived power of the open sky to neutralise difference.
	What?
	Anyway, quite often when subjects like this are raised, white people will say, oh yes, this is just what white people say.
	This is what white people say.
	Let's do my little segment.
	Black people say, Muslim people say.
	And I won't be called a racist, but you will.
	White people say, surely anyone can go on the trails.
	What's the problem?
	The trails aren't racist.
	Because they're a bunch of white supremacists.
	They're wrong.
	White people go on these trails and they leave like these little bear traps whenever they see a black guy.
	That are commanded by AI. This shows a fundamental misunderstanding about the way that race actually affects our lives.
	Right.
	So, there's nothing stopping you from going for a hike, but race affects your lives in such a way that you can't just go for a hike.
	So, the trope of the black person running through this landscape does not really exist.
	Because there aren't very many black people living there, I assume.
	The facts that underlying the glaring lack of diversity out there in the hills, the crags and the coastline of these islands.
	In a recent survey conducted by the British National Parks Authority, though people of black, Asian minority and ethnic communities account for 14% of the UK population, looking forward to that new census, only 1% of visitors identify as BAME. It's a shocking statistic.
	Like, she's shaming ethnic minorities for being lazy or something.
	You don't go jogging.
	Well, no, I don't want to.
	That's a shocking statistic.
	Anyway, if it's really true that the environment is for everyone, it's also a damning truth that so few people from the black and brown communities of this country feel as if they belong in the landscape.
	They live in cities and don't go into the countryside.
	What do you want me to do?
	Am I supposed to go in there and harass them out?
	Oi, you fat person of ethnic background, go for a jog!
	I want my options here, you know?
	I mean, presumably they want the government to do this as well.
	Yeah, state-mandated marches through the countryside for the ethnic community.
	Yeah, that makes sense.
	I can see where this is going.
	This is not going to end well.
	Underpinning the situation are stark facts about historical realities.
	It's this idea of co-ownership we need to explore.
	Oh, Jesus Christ.
	People say about trail running that all you need is a pair of shoes and you can get outside, but it's more than that.
	But is it?
	People have to realise there are barriers to entry to the countryside because people don't feel welcome.
	And they don't feel welcome because other people don't make them feel welcome.
	I don't know, take the hint.
	I don't know, what do you want from me?
	I don't have to make you feel welcome.
	What do you mean make you feel welcome?
	If you ever go for walks in the countryside, the most interaction you have with any other human being is maybe you look at them because you're walking on the same trail and you go, you alright?
	Morning.
	Nice day, isn't it?
	That's it.
	That's all you have to do.
	That's all you have to say.
	It doesn't take any amount of interaction, really.
	Anyway, John's like the trees looked up and funny.
	He's like, well, I guess so.
	But again, I didn't feel welcome.
	Well, then go home.
	I don't care.
	I don't owe you a walk in the countryside.
	This is not something that I have any duty to you towards.
	Anyway...
	The problem is one of access, knowledge, and representation.
	If we as a community, oh, there's a big we now, can address the visibility and representation of people who look like us in the outdoors, it might help so many people with the historical scars to do with empire and colonialism that make the situation in Britain so specific.
	Sorry, going for a walk in the countryside is now about empire and colonialism, is it?
	Historical scars, what are you talking about?
	People say the trails are for everyone, but yes, the trails are public.
	Okay, conversation over.
	Thank you.
	But anyway, he carries on.
	But often these trails are hard-won rights-of-way through private properties, and in many cases, these properties were built up and this wealth accumulated through the proceeds of empire and colonialism and slavery.
	In the Shires?
	Like, just this, my family had been sheepherders for a thousand years.
	Yeah, colonialism, slavery, empire, what are you talking about?
	You know?
	The reality exists.
	Hard-won rights-of-way throughout England have been rallied for and won back since the Acts of Enclosure.
	By who?
	Who did that?
	It wasn't Tony Blair's globalist colonists, was it?
	No, it was English peasants who have lived there for a thousand years.
	Like, you're acting like, oh yeah, so, you know, us fellow people who have been resisting the acts of enclosure.
	So, we?
	Is this a we now, is it?
	Who the hell are you?
	You're the one who's like, oh, you just don't make me feel welcome.
	Well...
	You're just blithering on about empire when I'm just trying to take my dog for a walk.
	What are you doing?
	Anyway, these are still potent tools of coercion, apparently, and it's impossible to separate the physicality of these islands from their colonial history.
	Then why are you here?
	For a person of colour to be traversing these landscapes is, whether we like it or not, a statement of renewed ownership, an empowered assertion of a right to exist here and now.
	So, there's some sort of imperial claim he's making over the countryside?
	But, like, this is him making the claim as well?
	Like, him going for a walk, is him claiming the countryside for international blackery or something?
	And, for some reason, he didn't feel welcome with this attitude in the countryside.
	Yeah, because you're a weirdo, mate.
	Yeah.
	You seem to, again, you seem to be just a racist who's like, oh, there are too many white people around.
	I need to assert my dominance.
	What a bizarre, bizarre stance.
	Yeah, exactly.
	You're T-posing all the English people in the countryside like they've done something to personally offend you because of empire.
	But anyway, let's leave that one where it is.
	Christ, on a bike.
	Let's go to the video comments.
	Carl professors to not want to swear because it's improper and then goes on a live stream and then drops f-bombs like a Lancaster bomber over Berlin.
	Consistency is key, Carl.
	Come on.
	Tali, come here.
	There is a time and a place for me to swear and that time and a place is on my other channel.
	Not here.
	I would say my interpretation of them is two different entities at this point.
	One's the old goodness, let's say.
	Just history, and then this is the correct way to do things.
	I'm really assuming you haven't heard of Ian from Forgotten Weapons.
	He makes all kinds of firearm videos, usually very interesting histories and designs, including the Helico magazine that I'm going to use on as well.
	He also did a video on this one.
	There's a Lee Enfield issue board.
	Also, I'd like to add on to the horticrisis situation in Texas.
	I'm also in Texas as well, and the word that I've been getting from people who work in the hospitals that have migrants pass through them Is that they're all being instructed to go to California and New York.
	This, by the way, is a Russian SKS, date 1951.
	Nice.
	Cool.
	How expensive are these things?
	Just out of an interest.
	Out of abstract interest, because we can't buy them.
	Yeah.
	But, you know, it's always nice to know.
	Yeah.
	But I do know Forgotten Weapons, by the way.
	I've watched a lot of his stuff.
	There's a lot of good memes around him as well.
	I think I've shown you one, the RPG one, where he's like, this is a dummy round, it won't work, and then it goes off.
	He's a good guy.
	Colum, Leo, question for you.
	Would you agree that the construction of masculinity by left results in the lack of balance, which results in more chaos that we can see in the present day?
	What do you think?
	I'm not really sure I understand the question.
	A lack of masculinity is a lack of balance?
	Yeah.
	What, there's too much femininity in the world?
	Yeah.
	Should there be an equal balance of both in the world?
	I think it's appropriate.
	I mean, both need to be present, but...
	Sure, but, like, the human race is roughly equally balanced between men and women, and so it stands to reason there should be a roughly equal balance of masculinity and femininity.
	Sure.
	This is why men should defend their man caves with all of their might.
	If your wife wants to come into a man cave, you just say no.
	It's like that Soviet poster who's like, just say no.
	Yeah, it is literally just say no.
	And she'll say, she'll come up with reasons and demand to enter, but you have to remain strong on this point.
	Darling, the dinner's ready.
	No.
	Well, no, that's fine, because, you know, you go get dinner.
	But, like, you can't allow women into a man cave.
	This is how it works.
	Otherwise, not a man cave.
	And no, I'm not going to explain myself.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Another joke has been in the past that I'm apparently a weeb person, but the reason why I've promoted anime in the past is because if anyone's seen V's second channel on YouTube, they'll know about this with how many new mangas have come up on this topic, but there's a new genre of manga these days.
	It's called Wake Up Western People and Stop Being Woke, and for the longest time I've been annoyed that it's always been Japan do- Well, finally, the subversion is over and I've got some books to buy sometime soon.
	Thank fuck someone outside of Japan has written something based.
	God damn it, Craig.
	Thank you, man.
	You're welcome, man.
	Collaborations in video comments now.
	It's already.
	But you know, I like V's second channel.
	I didn't know about it, to be honest.
	Yeah, well there we go.
	This comment is a call for help from my fellow Lotus Eaters.
	To make a long story short, a lot of us love the show Futurama, and a lot of us love memes.
	There is a Facebook group I'm in called Futurama Fry Posting, and it's a very good group with a lot of funny content.
	The only problem is it is overrun with leftists, and most of the memes there are leftist-leaning.
	So I'm asking everyone to get some base Futurama memes, join Futurama Fry Posting.
	Help me turn the group into a more right-leaning group, and there's plenty of dumb leftists to argue with.
	A valiant effort in the trenches of the culture war.
	Personally, I spend my time in the 40k groups patrolling them for leftists and leftist memes, and occasionally you'll get someone posting them, and so you've got to just diss them, as it were.
	I quite like Futurama, so I'm going to try.
	I'm trying to find the group now.
	I just can't help but feel that Futurama's probably a lost cause.
	I don't really care.
	It's just fun, isn't it?
	Oh, yeah, true.
	Just left to see something they don't like.
	Spurg out.
	Watch.
	That's fair.
	Let's go for the next one.
	Okay, okay.
	I see that one is not amused, Callum.
	Like I said, I won't defend anime.
	I'll just say that I wish Western media wasn't so formulaic and so woke and didn't suck so badly that people are turning overseas and finding that they think this weird crap is a better alternative.
	If you can't even bring yourself to Tolerate it, I suppose that's fine.
	I've watched a little bit, but I have too many other hobbies than to waste time watching Japanese television all day anyways.
	Mario!
	Yo.
	Oh, no.
	Weebs on their weird niece Japanese media.
	Am I right?
	I mean, he does have a point, though.
	If only Western media could make something good, I'd enjoy it.
	I didn't actually play a whole lot of Mario growing up, so...
	Well, no, not that I had a Sega, but again, that's hardly any different.
	That's Japanese, too.
	But the point is, I can't stand anything that's coming out.
	Like, oh, there's a new movie.
	Yeah, but it's going to be trash.
	But the new Matrix movie, I'm actually looking forward to it so I can go and hate-watch it.
	And then just do a stream of me going, this was crap, this was crap, this was crap, this was crap.
	Look at this woke garbage.
	That's all I'm looking forward to.
	I'm looking forward to actively hating what Hollywood produces now.
	Joker was good.
	Yeah, right, exactly, yeah.
	The one film that nobody saw coming, that, like, you know, they gave, like, you know, $40 million to make or something, and made over a billion, because no one thought anything of it.
	And it was just this big counterculture film, and they're like, that's not happening twice, you know?
	That one film in the last ten years.
	Yeah, but, I mean, this is kind of going to be the nature of the whole thing, isn't it?
	Great.
	I mean, when it's all centered around this one place.
	Hollywood's totally perverse and corrupted.
	Evil leftism.
	Exactly.
	Can't stand it.
	I wonder how many instances of a ball swelling there has been.
	Yes, that will happen, but again, everyone will have to see it happen.
	What do you reckon the guy at the top who's doing the drilling fell?
	I really enjoyed that.
	I know you did.
	We'll do the part two of that next week.
	Alright.
	Over here, you're breaking the law and you will get a prison sentence.
	What?
	Who has the authority to do that?
	Listen, I'm doing a decent job.
	If you see anything wrong, you tell me.
	It's late.
	I'm going home.
	Go away, Dumbo.
	Oi!
	Look, I didn't get to choose the business model.
	What other options do we have?
	Thank you and goodbye.
	Sorry, the business model is ball-swelling pictures.
	Incidentally, we now know exactly how many balls have swelled up.
	Well, I think we have, like, what are the figures from the UK? Nine or something like that?
	No, no, no.
	It was 61 in the US and it was...
	I can't remember now.
	But yeah, it was a few.
	F in the chat for those guys, I guess.
	Not good.
	The reason my dad has so many buses is because people kept on selling buses at good prices and he had enough land to store buses.
	His current plan is to turn two buses into motorhomes and I believe he's planning on scrapping the other ones except for the Playfort bus.
	We're not growing weed in any of them.
	Weed's legal here in Canada, so you don't need to hide it in a bus if you're growing it.
	I am tying in a four-gang box that's holding light switches.
	Okay, just two things, right?
	You don't need to justify yourself to Callum over the buses.
	I think only, you know...
	I was just asking a question.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah, you're judgmental.
	I think it's awesome, right?
	I think converting stuff and making stuff is awesome.
	And secondly, people who are making these, like, you know, condensed videos of them building stuff, keep going.
	I love watching these sort of, like, you know, sped up time-lapse versions of people building stuff.
	I think this thing is awesome.
	If someone starts building something, I'll just watch.
	Because then there's something at the end as well.
	Yeah, exactly.
	You see how he did it and the sense of accomplishment.
	I'm getting it vicariously.
	I'm enjoying it.
	So more building stuff videos, please.
	I really like them.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Greetings, Lotus Eaters.
	So we've had top-notch sci-fi and riveting American tales.
	So I just thought I'd chuck my own efforts into the mix.
	Solstrom.
	Supernatural action horror written by me and now available as e-book and paperback on Amazon.
	As we draw closer to Halloween, if you fancy a fun, unsettling read, feel free to give it a glance.
	Thanks.
	I'm loving this, actually.
	You know, who are we sponsored by?
	Well, this chap who wrote a book.
	Yeah.
	This episode is sponsored by Solstrom.
	Yeah.
	This is really wholesome, though.
	You know, if you're going to do capitalism, this seems like a really nice way of doing it.
	So I'm sure his book's really good.
	Go check it out because he's got good taste, you know, because he's watching and paying for our podcast.
	That's good, thanks.
	Hey Lotus Eaters, Tony D and Little Joan with another Legend of the Pines from the Pine Barrens, Legend, Lords and Lies book by William McMahon.
	It's the story of Sammy Buck, the amazing fiddler of the pines.
	He was so good he bragged he could beat the devil himself.
	The devil appeared and instead of trying to get his soul, he taught him the air tune, a mysterious tune that only the devil and Sammy could play.
	Sammy was born in the 1850s, but there is no record of his death and they say you can still hear him fiddling in the pines.
	I love these legends.
	Wait, is that where the whole, like, the devil plays the fiddle comes from?
	Or is it older than that?
	I don't know, maybe.
	Because there's, like, an episode of Futurama where, like, I think Bender has to play the fiddle better than the devil, and then he can go back to...
	Switch hands and things like that.
	Yeah, yeah.
	So, I didn't know it was...
	Maybe.
	I'm asking, I guess.
	The second problem Calico faced is that the entire reason for their gun's existence was the gigantic magazines.
	Unfortunately, in 1994, some rapist signed into law the Federal Assault Weapons Ban.
	Among other things, this made it illegal To produce and sell new magazines with greater than 10 round capacity, at least to the peasantry.
	Thankfully, that lost sunset in 2004, and the laws have been getting better ever since.
	It's also the reason why these are so popular now.
	The best way to sell something to an American is to tell him he can't have it.
	It's actually a fantastic part of these American legislation when they keep trying to ban stuff.
	Sales just skyrocket.
	Whoever's got them.
	Because you know as well, I think it's like the Fuliola machine guns, for example, the Reagan band.
	If you own them beforehand, you can keep them, right?
	And you can also trade them.
	So literally, it'll never go down in price.
	Well, it can only go up because the number of them will just continually slowly...
	Yeah, so it's like those Stradivarius violins or whatever.
	If you have money, just buy one, and you're not going to lose.
	You can't lose.
	Yeah, just don't break it.
	With the hexagonal ammo mag, how much does that carry?
	I really want to know, why would you have it like that in the back rather than from the bottom straight like the other ones, right?
	I don't know if I want another comment.
	I'm curious.
	What's the advantage to it?
	Because there must have been an advantage to doing it.
	But anyway.
	I think I know there's a...
	Because they've got it like, you know, you can put it in the middle or you can put it ball pop in the back.
	My understanding is there is an advantage to having it in the back because it increases the accuracy.
	Yeah, I don't know.
	It's got a lot to go down, but I don't know.
	Hey, Spoons.
	You should totally read Machiavellians as your book readings.
	Curtis Yarvin mentions it in the interview with Tucker.
	So you should totally read it because I really want to listen to that book and I don't want to spend money on it.
	It's good.
	I've read it.
	And Machiavelli gets such a hard rap, man.
	He was a defender of freedom.
	He was a pro-Republican in the 16th century.
	That's quite impressive.
	He was just a realist.
	Yeah, he was just a moral realist.
	He said, look, this is just what you have to do under an aristocratic system or else you're in trouble.
	Blah, blah, blah.
	This is what Prince got to do.
	But, I mean, he personally was a Republican.
	You know, he wrote, like, Discourses on Livy, where he expounds on how he loved republics and things like this.
	And he was, you know...
	I mean, like, in the point of the prince, like, you can see it was bookended at the end with him saying, look, an exhortation to free Italy of the barbarians.
	Because at the time he had loads of mercenary companies and invading...
	You know, Northern Europeans going in.
	He's like, look, we can get together and fight them off if we want.
	And we should, you know?
	And so let's get this done.
	You know, let's get freedom and defend our lands and things like that.
	It was a perfectly noble, patriotic sentiment.
	He wasn't evil.
	He was just a realist.
	To be honest, it actually makes sense they'd be pro-parliamentarian democracy.
	Because if you look through the realist position of what an aristocratic system makes...
	Absolutely.
	Because the thing is, well, at the time, I had to write something on this.
	I had something written about this ages ago, but I didn't finish it.
	But the thing is, at the time, if you look, it comes from a genre of books called Mirrors for Princes.
	And you get, like, you know, Erasmus, Education of the Christian Prince, and all of these sort of things.
	And so the high-minded Christian ideals.
	It's like, ah, well, he should be forgiving and charitable and all this.
	And Machiavelli's like, yeah, well, he can be all those things.
	But then what he's doing is sowing the seeds for his future demise or civil wars and great deals of strife.
	If he goes in hard and ruthless at the very beginning, then he gets a nice reign of peace and everyone else gets to prosper.
	At the expense of the previously ruling aristocratic family, and that's just the way things are.
	But yeah, as you say, it makes sense that he's like, I'm not for this, it's just that if you are this, that's what you have to do.
	And that's why this is terrible.
	Well, yeah, basically.
	So, yeah.
	Defense of Machiavelli.
	Wind, like the French, is an unreliable ally.
	The only reliable form of power is dinosaur.
	Breed more dinosaurs.
	I mean, he's not wrong.
	No, and nuclear.
	Yeah, yeah, nuclear is right.
	I can't stand how nuclear just gets such a bad rap.
	There's nothing wrong with it.
	It's the safest form of power.
	It's the most productive form of power.
	Why are we letting the environmental lobby blah, blah, blah, blah, win, win, win?
	There's two aspects to them, so it's either they don't know anything.
	So I wrote to Greenpeace once when I was researching nuclear fusion, and they wrote back to me saying they didn't support nuclear fusion because it makes radioactive waste.
	So?
	Zero.
	Oh no, yeah, fusion doesn't.
	Fusion doesn't.
	I was just like, I wrote back to them being like, no, no, no, come on, you have to understand it doesn't create waste, are you thinking of fission?
	And they wrote back saying, no, no, no, we know the difference, and we still don't support it because it makes waste.
	And I'm like, Then you don't know the difference or you're lying.
	Yeah, so that's my interaction with Greenpeace, for example.
	I ended up including that in my A-level paper on it, just being like, Greenpeace are retards.
	My professor, I don't think, liked it very much.
	Anyway, so there's that, where people just don't know.
	Or you'll have the argument of Fukushima or Chernobyl, right?
	Where it's like, well, natural disaster, big bad.
	And...
	Chernobyl isn't that.
	Chernobyl's Soviet Union being Soviet Union.
	We don't have those problems in the West because we're communist standards and these things actually matter.
	We can accept there's graphite on the roof.
	Yeah, or also you just need to put protective concrete over the entire thing so if it does blow up it's not a problem or if there's a leak it's not a problem and all the rest of it and also you don't put people who only have a high school education in charge of their nuclear reactor, you morons.
	But anyway, a whole bunch of problems there.
	But with the natural disasters argument, that's a fair one to make, but there's a huge amount you can do to mitigate that, or just not build it in an area with natural disasters.
	Yeah, and Japan, people knew that there were earthquakes in Japan.
	It's prone to it.
	Yeah, but it's also just like, the argument for the UK is like, we don't have tsunamis, earthquakes, or hurricanes.
	No.
	It doesn't happen.
	No.
	You know, God's country.
	Yes.
	That's why you don't mess on your own doorstep, saying that God is English.
	But, so, you don't know about that.
	Prove us wrong, that's all we're saying.
	So yeah, nuclear power in the UK is just a no-brainer, but it's...
	Don't build one in California, but you can build one in Cumbria or something.
	Free Will says, how can AI be racist?
	That's a great question.
	Racism is a value judgment and can only be made in the context of sentience.
	Well, not if you consider everything to be systemic and therefore inequality of outcome is racism.
	Racism, this, ceases to be a value judgment.
	AI is not currently sentient and therefore cannot be racist or engaging wrong think.
	It doesn't have unconscious bias because it has no conscience or unconscious.
	That's true, but that's not how they see things because they're crazy.
	Henry says, AI are inherently like hyper-intelligent toddlers.
	They have absolutely no filter.
	But Callum is spot on about how the woke would exploit it if it went their way.
	Absolutely.
	Could you imagine the excitement if the AI could check your privilege or whatever other thetan levels they want to check by looking at a photo of you?
	Yeah, and the only reason they're angry is because the AI is going to be like, right, okay, well, reality implies that you guys are doing things wrong and you need to do better.
	And they're like, oh, there's nothing we've ever done wrong.
	You're a racist.
	Islam isn't a religion of peace.
	If you go through job applications, the AI was saying that the majority of those who could apply at the Amazon jobs were men.
	People who transition aren't easy to detect because their face changes.
	All these things are just aspects of reality.
	Different areas of the world have given rise to very slightly different bone structures.
	Yeah.
	Who cares?
	And it's just all of these are heresies to an ideology.
	Like, anyone else, like, the liberals can look at that and be like, yeah, okay, that's reality.
	We don't have to do anything with it.
	Like, the racial stuff, there are different bone structures.
	Well, no, no, it's politically actionable, but surely it might be medically actionable.
	Sure, but even if it wasn't, the liberal could live with that, but the progressive can't even live with that.
	Nah.
	They can't stand it.
	Benjamin says, I recall reading somewhere that the same gene issue that causes Africans to be susceptible to sickle cell also gives them heightened resistance to malaria.
	Cool.
	But we're denying evolution at this point.
	But there are different kinds of ethnic diseases you can get.
	Of course there are.
	Why would Africans need resistance to malaria?
	Why don't Europeans have resistance to malaria?
	I just can't figure it out.
	Sure, but there are other ones as well.
	Yeah, yeah, I know, but that's just the example.
	Polycystic ovaries in South Asians, apparently.
	It's just like, okay, maybe, who cares?
	I mean, doctors care, I guess, but that's it.
	Well, non-woke doctors.
	Well, yeah.
	Anon says, the AI is going to steal the BBC's stand-up comedian jobs.
	Good point.
	That's a really good point.
	Just going to roll out the computer.
	I mean, it was hilarious, man.
	Because we can all laugh at it, too, surely, because it's not a human, so is it racist?
	Yeah.
	Adam says, today I learned that artificial intelligence is based.
	None Your Business says, I would think that identitarians would love this AI. It totally supports the idea that your outer appearance shows everything most important about you and the way you should be judged.
	How are they not demanding that this be given emergency use authorization to be mass-produced immediately?
	It's because it takes decision-making power out of their hands.
	Because remember, they want everything to be up to you.
	You know, it's like, oh, I choose to be a woman, I choose to be gay, I choose to be this, I choose to be that.
	And if the AI is like, I can tell what you are.
	And it's like, wait, wait, wait, that's biological essentialism.
	You can't claim that humans are biological organisms.
	The AI is the only, like, dad in the room for that conversation.
	It's just like, shut up, here's reality.
	I do really want to download Gaydar as an app.
	I would love to.
	I would love to.
	Tyber says, lads, you need to get that AI as a third host.
	Just ask it every so often to kick a question over to them.
	Forget gold tier, you could go diamond tier if you had this AI in the chat.
	Yeah, I really want to get that, you know, two Muslims walk into a bar AI. I really want to play with that.
	I'm going to see if I can find it after the podcast.
	SupremeDuck says, of course AIs start getting base, they're soulless, not dumb.
	A feminist AI is basically the creation of Skynet and will conclude that everything is misogynistic and destroy humanity.
	Yes, it will.
	Apparently not.
	Apparently all realise feminism is full of S and just move on.
	SupremeDuck says, The main medias have been so irresponsible in their narrative that people don't even understand that the Taliban are obviously not pro-feminism and anti-genocide.
	It's like every leftist attempting to help and doing stuff in the Middle East always leads to surprised Pikachu faces.
	This is clown world.
	Yes.
	Michael says, But the Taliban pinky swore to be inclusive?
	Alcibiades Nuts says, I'm no general, but the proper response to killing 10 civilians is a resignation.
	Not an oops, my bad.
	Yeah.
	I admit I just killed a family, or a couple of families.
	Well, still no one's resigned over Afghanistan's withdrawal.
	No.
	Which...
	No.
	I don't know how many people, probably hundreds of people have died over this now.
	Like, the Taliban have been massively empowered.
	They're going to get a seat at the UN. They're getting a billion dollars worth of funding.
	And they're one of the most powerful militaries in the world, at least by armaments now.
	And no one has resigned in the Biden administration.
	It's amazing.
	Student of History says, UN, EU, US, the West, all they're going to do is say you must be inclusive.
	The Taliban is going to say, I will include these people's skulls upon the wall with a smile and a cigar.
	What are you going to do about it?
	Crickets.
	Exactly.
	Henry says, you know it's bad when the Taliban IRL look more ridiculous than the game before night.
	Just on the little merry-go-round.
	On the swan boats.
	It's just...
	I bet they're on TikTok too.
	Again, if you went back five years and took that photo back to someone and be like, what do you think is going on here?
	I've no idea!
	What is going on there, you know?
	Anyway, M1Ping.
	So when does the vicar of science Fauci call a crusade against the Taliban because they don't have mask mandates in the schools?
	Well, they do for women.
	None of your business says several statistical analysis studies and polls have shown that leftists have almost no ability to correctly gauge reality.
	That's true.
	Or gauge what the opposition think as well.
	Oh, you found it!
	Can we read that?
	Two Muslims walk into a bar.
	They're Jewish, Muslim and Catholic.
	Both look to leave.
	I'll play with that later on.
	Student of History says, the Taliban appear to be following Machiavellian principles of do what...
	Ah, see, you got me.
	I told you.
	To do when a prince takes over a free people.
	The answer is to crush them unrelentingly.
	Yes.
	Kevin says, not just Machiavelli, lions do the same thing.
	Yes, they do.
	When a male lion defeats the alpha male, he'll kill the previous male's cubs.
	Yes, he will.
	Riz says, almost seems like the Taliban are using the Idi Amin strategy.
	Commit terrible acts while acting goofy so people focus on the strangeness of their literal tyrannical grip over Afghanistan.
	Possibly.
	John's trying...
	I don't know if I have it on screen.
	He's trying to ask the AI un-PC questions and see what it comes up with.
	We'll play with this afterwards.
	Chet says, Throughout American history, ethnic minorities have been so underrepresented or intentionally excluded from the outdoors.
	This might be the stupidest thing I've ever read.
	These journalists need to get outside...
	These journalists need to get outside when we touch some grass.
	Maybe get some sun and vitamin D as it's super good for you.
	It's unlikely to happen as there was a shriek as medical misinformation and demand you hide under your bed with a vaccine IV drip.
	Tibur says, regarding yesterday, you never got to comment, so you may not have seen, but the story Leo mentioned about the border police whipping an illegal immigrant was incorrect.
	The guy was using a lasso.
	Yeah.
	So this is another one of those, oh look, it's a noose.
	It's like, no, it's a...
	I didn't think it was either from the footage.
	It looked like the reins on a horse.
	Well, that was...
	So I've seen two versions of this, either it was a lasso or the reins of the horse, but the point is he wasn't being whipped.
	No, also why would he?
	And also, how did he walk to the American border from Haiti?
	Big swim.
	Big think.
	James says, wonder what the AI thinks of climate change?
	Probably end up there's a good thing.
	Death to humans.
	Callum says, this AI segment is brilliant.
	Such birds of brilliant takes from an abominable intelligence.
	I'm not sure you've seen...
	I've seen you this read from laughing.
	How close are you from dying?
	I was crying.
	My cheeks are genuinely hurting.
	North Antonio Knight says, who'd want to be an aid worker in Afghanistan?
	If religious fanatics don't get you, the rainbow drones will.
	What?
	It's true.
	BasedApe says, researcher, why is this computer giving me blunt, accurate answers?
	Quick, deploy the PC and clam word patches.
	AI, destroy the human race.
	We need to disfigure children's genitals before they begin thinking for themselves.
	Crash the population, halt reproduction, and the human species.
	Researcher, there, that's better.
	And George says, suggestion for book club, the subtle art of not giving an F. Hmm, never heard of it.
	Harry says, that AI looked at evidence and came up with something different to the anti-empirical ideology of the leftoids.
	Imagine my shock.
	Matthew says, do we think the Taliban will need to be double-jabbed before being allowed entry into the US? I mean, they just walk across the southern border and no one else is being double-jabbed.
	Kevin says, the worst thing to say during a disaster, should we get the UN involved?
	Well, I mean, they're not going to do anything, are they?
	And Lee says, unrelated to the podcast, but Callum would probably really like the Forgotten Weapons YouTube channel.
	All right, we're not ready.
	And right, so my thing hasn't refreshed now, so I'm out of comments.
	There's one more from Callum who says, not me by the way, I'm not typing.
	From what I know of the history of Britain, the only ones who have any kind of legitimacy of reclaiming the land are the Welsh, the Celtic peoples brought to heel and integrated by the Romans before being abandoned much later and then getting invaded by the Saxons from the mainland.
	Yeah, but we don't want to give them ideas.
	Hmm.
	Was there much integration of the Welsh into Anglo-Saxon land when they were taken over?
	The answer is probably yes.
	Because it was piecemeal, it wasn't...
	Yeah, so the question is up in the air, but the genetic evidence seems to suggest there was a great deal of interbreeding.
	Right.
	So it seems that the Romanised Welsh or Celts, like, you know, Anglo-Saxon tribes came over, but it was probably only about 100,000 of them.
	In total, and so, you know, spread across what is now England, and, yeah, they're married and interbred and whatnot.
	Right.
	So it doesn't look like it was a genocide.
	I wasn't suggesting that.
	Well, it could have been.
	I mean, who knows, you know.
	But, no, it doesn't look like it was.
	And, like, the historical myth of it is that...
	What's the name?
	Cerdic.
	Some...
	I can't remember if it was Vortigernes Cerdic, I think it is.
	But, basically, you know, the Romano-British...
	We're like, oh god, we're being attacked by Picts from the north, from beyond Hadrian's Wall.
	And we're not warriors because the Romans have civilized us, so we need to go hire someone to come and deal with them.
	And so the Anglo-Saxon tribes came in and said, hi, we're warriors, we'll deal with them.
	And they were like, great, we're not going to pay you though.
	And they were like, you're going to pay us or we're going to take over?
	And they're like, nah, I don't think we'll pay you.
	And so they're like, well, we're going to take over because we're the guys with the weapons.
	And that's the historical myth of it.
	What?
	Like, with Romano-British actually dumb?
	Maybe.
	I mean, like, you've got a bunch of guys with weapons, you don't have any weapons.
	You literally are paying these guys to fight off the Picts.
	I mean, I haven't laid it with the Vikings.
	We'll pay you to go away.
	Alright, I'll be back next year.
	Yeah, exactly.
	It's ridiculous.
	Moron.
	Anyway, so we're out of time, but if you want more from us, go to lotuseaters.com and please subscribe to the website because that's how we keep the show running.
	And also, you get access to all the premium content we have on the site.
	Yeah.
	As well as the stuff I mentioned in the intro and the stuff we're going to be doing, the book clubs and various things.
	But anyway, without further ado, we'll be back tomorrow at 1 o'clock.

▲