Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Oct. 15, 2021 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:30:35

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #242

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Eaters for the 15th of October 2021.
	I'm I'm joined by Thomas.
	Hello.
	And today we're going to be talking about the Cambridge offering fertility lessons to female students.
	Also Claudia Webb, guilty, very much enjoying myself, and also the Marxist-Leninist defense of academic freedom at Sussex University, is that correct?
	Yes.
	Right, so we're getting into that.
	So, one of the things to mention first is on the stuff on the website that's new, so the first thing being an article from Hugo here, Why You Are a Criminal.
	I believe this is premium, which means it comes with the audio track for silver and gold tier members to go and check out as well.
	Also, if we go to the next one, we have The New Normal Is Upon Us, again by Hugo here, in which there is also an audio track, which you can go and check out for silver and gold tiers in case you don't want to read, because reading's a pain in the ass, and I... And if we go to the next one here, we have The Ugliness of London.
	This is an article by Carl, in which he whines and whines and whines about why London is so unbelievably ugly.
	I was in with him during the live event, and he references this, where he's just sat at a pub just hating.
	And I do enjoy the memes some people have sent me of him in the corner of a party.
	You know, everyone's partying, and he's like, man, I hate London.
	Oh, my feet hurt.
	I want to go back to the shires.
	And it's like...
	Yeah, basically.
	But he does have some very good points because London is hideous.
	So that's true.
	Anyway, so if we go to the next one here, we also have the premium video he did.
	So this is between...
	Oh, no, sorry.
	This is the video you and him did together about critical theory.
	So I don't know if you want to talk about this.
	No, I very much enjoyed it.
	And I actually...
	We worked a lot on how the critical race theorists and the intersectionists have actually kind of...
	Made use of an offshoot of critical theory that can't actually be legitimately made with, well, I suppose, when you actually understand the main traditions.
	It's a very interesting discussion.
	I would recommend it to anyone who's interested in understanding the roots of the cultural wars.
	And yeah, it was a fun discussion that I had with Carl.
	So if anyone wants to get access to that stuff, sign up to lotuses.com to get access to all the premium comps there.
	I think the ugliness of London one's free, so give that a share around.
	Anyway, so moving on, let's get into the Cambridge fertility lessons.
	Yes.
	Just dadism.
	Well, this, for the reason I'm going to explain, is actually very interesting.
	But basically, the University of Cambridge are offering fertility lessons for female students.
	One of Cambridge University's last all-female colleges, Murray Edwards College, is set to introduce fertility seminars to teach women to start planning to have children by their mid-30s or risk forgetting to have a baby.
	Murray Edwards College will teach the classes alongside consent and sexual harassment classes this term.
	It comes after the latest data from the Office for National Statistics showed the total fertility rate in England and Wales has decreased from 1.58 children per woman.
	In 2020 to 1.53 in the first quarter of 2021.
	The ONS have said that there are relatively steep decreases in monthly fertility rates between December 2020 and January 2021.
	And Dorothy Byrne, who is the person we're going to be talking about, the new president of the college, said the new lessons would help empower female students to understand more about their fertility.
	It's worth noting that Byrne herself has only had her child through IVF, so clearly she feels compelled to ensure that other women who may want children don't end up in the position that she found herself in.
	I kind of love this, though, because it very much reminds me of Singapore.
	I don't know if you remember their program for trying to get women to have more kids.
	Yeah, I'm not familiar with it, sadly.
	So they massively emphasized they wanted educated women to have more kids because their leader believed in the idea that if they have kids, the kids will be smarter.
	He also tried to offer...
	Money in exchange for uneducated women getting made infertile, which is a whole other thing.
	But again, it kind of reminds me of that, where it's like, yeah, okay, also the women who are going to university, not having kids at a younger age.
	But also just, do you want more kids in the educated category?
	Probably yes.
	So it also makes sense there, presumably.
	Yeah.
	I'm going to have to read that.
	But if we move on to the Times article...
	Byrne is quoted explaining why she sees fertility lessons to be important.
	And we're asking a woman about...
	The future of humanity?
	Yeah, maybe.
	But she basically says we've swung too far one way.
	We rightly encourage girls to get themselves a great education, to have great careers, but it's come to be seen as old-fashioned and negative to say that, you know, To girls, the things an older generation used to say, like, are you courting or when are you going to have a baby?
	You know, these things seem to be perhaps not present enough.
	And she basically believes that women can't be truly empowered about knowing the facts about fertility.
	And to quote herself, young women tell me the minute they register with a GP, the doctor says, what form of contraception are you using?
	And parents and teachers just give out information about how not to get pregnant.
	There's an extreme bias on this front.
	So she says she wants to teach also about consent, about harassment, but also to just educate about the most important, basically just to inform them about the most important point if they want to have children.
	And needless to say, I mean, none of this strikes me as remotely controversial.
	No, I'm actually surprised that she's trying to put it in the language of empowering women in feminist-y packaging or something.
	No, just teaching people about fertility is something that's important and always has been.
	There's no need to dress it up.
	Yeah, exactly.
	There's a lot of pressure on not just women, but on people in general to prioritise careers.
	And not least because there's an economic incentive for it.
	But this is particularly bad for women because you've got, needless to say, pressure to accelerate or get more women into professionalised positions.
	And the idea that these women may be open to the idea of having children at some point has been a complete afterthought.
	And I suppose Byrne's concern is that they may realise this when it's too late.
	And doing this at the earliest stages of university, if anything, given that they are literally right at the beginning of adulthood, is surely the best time to be doing this.
	So it's quite hard to imagine how anyone can have any problem with this whatsoever.
	Of course, there is one group that we both have in mind here.
	But, yes.
	So how would you think this has been received?
	This is trying to turn women into slaves, I presume.
	You're not far off.
	Right.
	So, this is what Hannah Fern has said.
	Cambridge has got it wrong.
	It's not women who need lessons about their fertility, but men and employers.
	What do you want me to do about it?
	I'm not the one with the fertility graph that drops off so certainly.
	Well, she goes on to say that there are a myriad of endlessly complex reasons why women might not have children, but right at the very bottom of that list would be the utterly unfathomable idea that they forgot.
	As many women explained with Fury on social media yesterday, people do nothing but mention it from the minute you leave university.
	Whether you're in a relationship or not, you have experienced lost pregnancies or have no desire to become a parent at all, the questions just keep on coming, that is.
	Unless you're a man.
	I love how this is all in the language.
	I remember when 4chan did a raid and they convinced everyone you could microwave your iPhone and it would charge it.
	And people were like, oh, come on, no one's that stupid.
	No one's unaware that they need to have children and forget.
	Yeah, but the forums tell a different story.
	Or the Apple forums about, so say if I microwave my phone, what would I do?
	And all the blog posts of, so I'm 40 and I haven't had kids yet.
	But isn't it best, perhaps, to set the standard at those who are the most ignorant, and at least not to speculate that everyone will just happen to know the most basic things, on principle, I accept they should.
	Like, it's a vouchsafe, isn't it?
	But also the idea that she's just asserting that, oh, come on, everyone knows this.
	It's like, well, there's enough forum posts to suggest not.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	But this is utter cope, basically.
	And it's just that same old claim.
	This is the patriarchy telling women to have children.
	That's what's at the heart of this when you read Between the Lines.
	It isn't.
	This is actually a quite sincere effort from a woman who, from her own experience, having nearly missed out on having one of the most, I don't know, wholesome things a woman can enjoy, which is being a mother.
	But what's worse, and this is the part that I found actually particularly disturbing, is that this line is being peddled not only by classic feminists, but by the British Pregnancy Advisory Service.
	Which we will see now.
	Whatever her name is.
	This proposal is based on two notions that I disagree with.
	Firstly, it's based on the idea that women are ignorant about their fertility.
	At BPAS we often see women who underestimate their fertility and then experience an unplanned pregnancy in their late 30s because they thought that Their chance of conceiving was so low.
	And I think that these lessons are also based on the idea that if women were given this information, they would make different choices, when actually we know that there are lots of barriers to women having children at an earlier stage.
	Many women would love to start a family earlier in life, but unfortunately our society is just not set up to support those decisions.
	You know, women are acutely aware of the impact on their employment, for example, the cost of childcare, how difficult it is to afford a family home of your own.
	So these are the obstacles, not a lack of education.
	This is extraordinary.
	Because all she's saying is that women don't need to be told about their own fertility.
	And then speculates on the premises of why they are being told.
	Presumably referring to, well, it's the patriarchy telling women to get pregnant.
	And again, it's explicitly wrong.
	Burns doing this entirely out of concern for women who may want to get pregnant, may want to have children at some point.
	I mean, I do agree with her on one thing there.
	She's like, you know, there are structural issues that say financial or whatever.
	Yeah, that part of it's true.
	Fine, I'm all for bringing back marriage tax allowance or money for women to have babies and all the rest of it, in the same way Hungary has, for example.
	Nothing wrong with that.
	What's the problem?
	No, that part of it's perfectly fine.
	But I guess what strikes me is how have we got to the point where the British Pregnancy Advisory Service are arguing against pretty basic pregnancy education?
	Because they're feminists.
	Yeah, yeah.
	But yeah, clown world.
	Everything that Burnley's saying is backed up by Healthline, a health advisory site.
	And as you can see from the...
	If we focus on the ages 18 to 24 subsection, there is quite literally a point by which it's probably best to plan your future if you're a woman.
	And what it says clearly is that if you have, if you of course decide to, if you want to have children, then if you do something between 18 and 24, you cut the risk of birth defects, chromosomal problems, some facility issues.
	So, you know, the knowledge is out there.
	Yeah, it's a biological reality.
	It's a biological reality, but that's not to say that this is going to be accessible to absolutely everyone.
	There are, unfortunately, generations of young women who have probably been told a certain way of living their lives without understanding what the consequences of that might be.
	I mean, university especially is going to cut into those years.
	Yeah, yeah.
	And of course, it's particularly bad, given that, I mean, again, it's another awkward topic, but it's the correlation between attractiveness and reproductive success as well, isn't it?
	Which has been, which is quite well supported.
	This very much unchallenged culture of promiscuous at university campuses is, as hard as it is to say, disproportionately going to affect women for this reason.
	And I think allowing these discussions to take, or at least I think Burn is very much aware of the fact that, I suppose, the early partying years of being an inseparable part of being an undergraduate Whilst this is something that can be enjoyed by some and doesn't come to the detriment of those who have no intention of having children at any point in their lives,
	it's going to negatively affect your chances of both finding a partner and having a child from the point that you graduate.
	A poor in uni isn't a good idea.
	You should probably try and find someone to settle down with if you can.
	No, quite, quite.
	But if we could get up the article by, what was it, Natalie?
	Yeah, I mean, this is the study that I was actually going to recommend that people read, ultimately, because it's one of the most notable ones out there.
	About the fact that you can't really separate physical interactiveness from reproductive success, reproductive success of which, of course, corresponds to fertility.
	So again, all of, you know, teaching these things and bringing the things to people's attention and what Byrne's trying to do shouldn't be seen as controversial.
	But yeah, if we could bring up the article by Natalie Morris of Bimetro, she's actually...
	You know, wrote a surprisingly based article with a very, very useful study.
	Of course, she says men, regardless of their age, will always be attracted to women in their early 20s.
	And the study that she actually references, the dataclasm study, if we go down a little bit more, That's the one, yeah.
	So as you can see, men are overwhelmingly, according to this study, fixated on women in their early 20s.
	And if you have a look at the...
	That's a man's age versus the age of the woman they're looking at.
	That looks best to him.
	Right.
	If you scroll down, I see it.
	20, 20, 21, 21, 21, 23, 21, 23.
	I mean, I guess there were 24 at max there.
	24 at max.
	At the 45 mark.
	So men at 45, averagely looking for a 24-year-old.
	But then around them, again, we have 20, 20, 21, 20.
	Just reality.
	It is, yeah.
	And if you actually have a look at the data beneath, which shows the women's age and the men whom they find attractive...
	So this is what John's been talking about, and everybody's been referencing this on occasion.
	So the women's one is fairly linear, let's say, in which as the woman gets older, she's looking for a man about the same age as her, roughly, just looking at this graph.
	I accept men, not so much.
	Men looking for 20 to 23, 4 max.
	They pretty much remain fixated on the same age group all the way up to 50.
	That's their ideal.
	Yes, and they probably change their mind in virtue of other variables, I imagine, as well.
	But what this essentially shows is what we already know, really, which is that women have a very, very narrow window to find the best people possible to spend the rest of their lives with and thus to have children with, whereas for men this can extend for, what, 30 years, between 20 and 50?
	Yeah, I mean, I'm looking there.
	I mean, women are still looking for men at, what, 39, 40 there?
	Exactly.
	So there's almost no consequence for men to do what they like in those early university years because they're going to have time to make up for it at some point.
	And if anything, women would probably find that the interest that they have, I imagine, is potentially a virtue that goes in their favour.
	So it's, needless to say, yeah.
	But even Maya Salam of the New York Times, if we could get that up, seems to agree.
	Online data, and this data was collected from okcupid.com.
	It shows that women peak at 18, while men peak at 50.
	Yeah, needless to say, it's...
	Sorry.
	Sorry.
	In it, it says, research has studied the desirability of male and female users based on how many messages nearly 200,000 users, all of whom were seeking opposite sets, partners got over one month on a popular free dating service.
	And if those sending the messages were desirable based on their same criteria.
	And what the research determined was that while men's sexual desirability peaks at 50, women start at 18 and falls off a cliff when you get to their mid-20s.
	So in short, I think it's fair to say that it's in women's interests for them to know.
	I don't see how...
	Why would keeping this information from women ever help them?
	It would only ever be a disservice to them.
	And it can only be for an ulterior motive, because you're just...
	It's an essential fact about, well...
	About what they are.
	It's a central fact about society.
	I mean, what men want from women.
	Yeah, quite.
	But I love the idea that if you keep this information from women, that's somehow a service to them.
	So the only way it could ever be a service is a service to an ideology that thinks that they shouldn't care about such things.
	But they obviously presumably will, because like everyone, we're interested in selling down and finding someone to live with.
	Yeah, exactly.
	So, in short, I suppose...
	Was it Dorothy Byrne?
	Perhaps her name wasn't it.
	I can't remember.
	Goodness me.
	We support you.
	We think this is actually a very, very positive thing that you are doing.
	And don't listen to the feminists.
	There.
	Yeah, I mean, absolutely right.
	I do love that it actually did turn out to be dadism in the end, because I called it to a dadism section on exactly this topic, which is that women, you know, there's a cap, essentially, in which you're no longer considered highly, what was it, attractive to men, as demonstrated by the age of what's an ideal woman to you, given your age, and all of the men along there were like, yeah, the ideal woman's at 20.
	I'm like, right, okay.
	So it's not that you can't get one at 30, 40, all the rest of it, but the chances diminish.
	Yeah.
	Anyway, let's move on.
	So, I'm going to have some fun.
	Oh, yes.
	I try not to spell too much.
	Claudia Webb has been found guilty of harassment.
	So, for people who may not know, Claudia Webb is an MP, a Labour elected, so if we get this up, this is GB News, getting the news that, yeah, she was found guilty.
	She was on trial after being mad for several months, and I have my own interactions with this crazy lady, but she had some worse interactions with someone who was an ex-lover of How lovely.
	What a fantastic diversity hire.
	And I don't say that without cause either, because she is a diversity hire.
	Yeah, quite.
	We'll get into that in a minute as well.
	I thought we'd just first go through the fact that she's a lunatic.
	Like, actual lunatic.
	I'm not just saying like, ah, you know, Labour MP, bit nuts.
	I mean, we saw the Labour conference, bit nuts.
	That's a bit of an understatement, really.
	But the Claudia Webb of the world is insane.
	Literally insane.
	So if we go to the next one here, we have her just tweeting out one day, it's 2021 and black people are still not free.
	What do you want me to do?
	You're an MP. You're a member of parliament, my lady.
	You're a member of parliament in a seat which is rotten, and you were appointed because diversity.
	I mean, you could not get any more privileged a person.
	And she's like, yeah, me and black people, not free.
	You'll notice the capital be there again as well, because she does not talk about black people as in people with brown skin.
	She's talking about politically black people, which excludes people with brown skin sometimes, such as Larry Elder, because he ain't black.
	She must hate BAME then, the concept of BAME. I don't know.
	They always flip-flop on this.
	Some days it's in, some days it's out.
	Because, I mean, Yukma Gamur, as the Guardian was using, didn't really take off.
	I don't know if you saw that.
	I didn't.
	It was UK MBE or whatever the hell it was.
	It was like UK Global Heritage Minority Ethnic.
	I was like, yeah, that's better.
	That's human.
	Yukma Gamur.
	Fantastic.
	Anyway, so let's continue on this, because she also does a lot of other mad things.
	So we get this one up.
	So this is Claudia Webb tweeting out, One day I will be free of police racism.
	This was in response to the fact that she was being charged by the police for harassment.
	So she was out harassing a woman, and has never felt guilty, so I can say for definite she was harassing a woman.
	And she's like, yeah, okay, this is me being under the oppression of police racism.
	Right.
	So she's quite literally collapsing, what, harassment into, what, black freedom?
	Yes.
	Blacks should be able to commit crime.
	Otherwise, racism, my friend.
	It's like, no, that's not how that works, you lunatic.
	Anyway, decided to make fun of her.
	So if we go to the next one, I made a tweet taking the piss out of her because she's a moron.
	And of course, it's the bike meme for people listening.
	So a guy riding the bike, sticks the stick in his own bike, falls over and then blames the police racism for the fact that she's being charged with harassment.
	And I thought that'd be the end of it.
	So we go to the next one.
	She got mad and decided to respond.
	Terrible how misinformation, racism and injustice works.
	Meanwhile, hate abuse and death threats and male violence against me continues.
	If we scroll up to show that this is in response to the tweet.
	Male violence against her.
	Death threats and abuse against her.
	As I mock her for threatening to throw acid in a woman's face.
	I mean, again, the self-awareness is not there.
	If we continue, she then broke, and this guy from Gita Fawkes has noticed, in which she just started responding to literally everyone ever, just, what is a meme?
	I'm not talking about a meme, what meme?
	You were just talking about a meme.
	I posted the meme.
	Whatever.
	Anyway, just clearly friggin' insane.
	So let's...
	I mean, turning into a literal NPC. But of course, you also got into that position by playing the labour trick of just whatever there's criticism about you.
	That's racist.
	Like, what?
	Ah, sexism as well.
	What?
	Why?
	I literally just said you were bad on a committee or something.
	I mean, you can see there are many examples of this, which is like, yeah, this is stop anti-black hate against me.
	Oh, dearie me.
	It's just saying you're a laughingstock.
	No one mentioned you were back then.
	I mean, this one here.
	Hey, hun, did you...
	Sorry, who did you want us to sue in Belarus?
	I'm not your hun.
	Take your sexism elsewhere and stop being so ignorant.
	Oh, good lord.
	Okay, totally normal individual.
	She also did some other things that are meme-worthy, and we'll go down to history as probably one of the meme-worthy MPs of all time.
	Her tweeting out an image of a map of Africa after colonization, and with the caption, This map has been hidden from you all your life.
	We can go back so I can read that.
	So just the idea that, sorry, hidden from your life, this is how they carved up Africa.
	And there's also some mistakes on this map, but I'm not going to go into it because this isn't map man.
	Good show, by the way.
	But also just the absurdity, this has been hidden from you.
	Did you know they colonized Africa?
	I was never told.
	I went through all of school, no idea.
	Used to me.
	Not a clue, woman.
	I'm lying, obviously.
	If anyone attended school, unlike Claudia, you probably would have seen it.
	If you kept your eyes closed all your life, maybe you wouldn't have.
	But that's her problem, not mine.
	So she's also well known for then going, as mentioned, about Belarus.
	So if it goes to the Gita Fawkes article on this, she went on some committee and demanded that we sue someone in Belarus.
	I'm not very pronouncing that.
	She did.
	She asked Beowus.
	In Beowus, who are we suing?
	She couldn't pronounce Belarus.
	Oh, goodness.
	And then the foreign secretary obviously just responded with, Do you mean Belarus?
	Yeah, yeah.
	Okay.
	Also, who do you want us to sue?
	It's a dictatorship.
	You want us to sue the dictator?
	How do you think that's going to work?
	Just a nonsensical stupid-ass question.
	There was also another one after Afghanistan in which she asked, what are we doing to help LGBT folks in Afghanistan?
	Oh, good.
	We left.
	Yeah.
	We're not there.
	We quite literally let the fearcrats take it.
	Do you want us to go back in and shoot everyone until the LGBTs are free again?
	It's not our problem anymore, but, you know, a literal brain-dead individual doing no work in Parliament.
	But anyway, this is her being found guilty.
	So this is the article on bloodlesses.com, which I'd go and recommend using for the source, because we tried to get as much information here as possible.
	Labour MP Claudia Webb made acid attack threats.
	So, again, a fighter for social justice, threatening women with acid for...
	Fighting the good fight.
	She's just doing Labour things.
	Hashtag Labour things.
	So, quote from here.
	So, Claudia Webb's boyfriend had been in a relationship with some woman before, and they got in contact, Claudia Webb's boyfriend had been in a relationship with some woman before, Don't know why.
	Bit weird, but whatever.
	And then Claudia Webb made 16 phone calls to his ex, threatening her in God knows how many of them, but again, I think harassment in this country, it's multiple instances of unwanted contact, so it could be two.
	That's all it would take, legally.
	But they got 16, so got that.
	In one phone call recorded on April 25th and presented to the court by the prosecution, Webb was heard calling Merritt a slag.
	Alright.
	Alright.
	Before yelling, get out of my relationship, eleven times, a second call exhibited a more sinister tone on the part of the MP, who threatened Merritt with an acid attack and the distribution of her naked pictures and videos to her daughter's.
	Perfectly sane.
	Sane individual.
	My boyfriend is going and talking to some random ex.
	I mean, you would have thought you'd been able to stop that or demand that, no, you stop this or we're breaking up.
	That'd be the sensible thing to do.
	You'd think so, yeah.
	Or you could threaten the ex-girlfriend with an acid attack.
	As an MP. Or you think no one's going to notice.
	Or that this is an acceptable thing to do.
	But okay.
	This is what you do when you're mad, don't you?
	So Webb proceeded to argue that her actions have been taken out of context by the prosecution.
	Ah, the context matter.
	Well, what was the context?
	So quote, she said, we were in a national lockdown.
	And so I asked her not to break lockdown with Lester.
	She was committing a crime.
	I was pointing this out.
	I'm the victim.
	Dear God.
	If you had said to her, maybe stop having sex with my boyfriend.
	If you had said to her, maybe don't break lockdown.
	Don't you know there's a lockdown?
	No, you threatened her with acid.
	It's pretty impossible to find a good context to cast acid, isn't it?
	Well, of course I threatened him with acid.
	There was a national lockdown.
	You know, holy bee to the NHS. That makes it perfectly permissible.
	I know, but the idea that, like, you know, we all take the lockdown so seriously.
	I mean, we'll kill people if they break it.
	I mean, why not just grab a gun, kill them?
	No, lady.
	Let's just all collapse this into an endorsement of a policy that their party didn't actually make because they weren't in government.
	But also the idea that just, if there's a law and someone breaks it, you should be able to kill them.
	That's Labour policy.
	Right, okay.
	And if someone calls you out, you'll evict him.
	So despite arriving at court hand-in-hand with Thomas...
	Why?
	The whole court case is talking about the fact that he's cheating on you, or hanging out with this girl when he shouldn't be, and you're super mad about that, and you're like, yes, we're very much in love, I swear.
	No, you're not.
	You're obviously not.
	Anyway, so she arrived in court hand-in-hand with Thomas over the course of the trial.
	Webb proceeded to accuse him of abusing her.
	What?
	So, she turns up in court, holding hands with this guy, who's really cheating on her, but also then claims that, yeah, he beats me.
	Also, we're very much in love.
	Ugh.
	Right.
	So he accused him of abusing her, while the prosecution exhibited a neighbour's call to the police over the sound of screaming from her Islington home.
	However, the defendant, who confirmed in the court that she and Thomas were to be married, I don't know what this guy's doing with his life, said that she did not report her partner to the police because she, quote,"...did not trust them, the police, to keep black men alive and to treat domestic abuse seriously." Right.
	So she says she was being beaten up by this guy, but wasn't gonna call the police because the police would just kill him.
	Because the police in this country just hate black people, and just go around killing them like death squads or something.
	Yeah, I mean, at that point I'd be getting them in the white coats.
	Yeah, I mean, if there wasn't enough evidence here already that she's mad.
	Yeah.
	It always gets worse.
	Anyway, so also the idea that they don't treat the domestic abuse seriously, that's why they're going to kill your husband.
	It doesn't really follow anyway, but whatever.
	She continues, I was being goaded and gaslit by Thomas.
	Again, you were turned up to the court holding hands.
	I don't understand this relationship.
	Anyway, this is all about domestic abuse and coercive control.
	I'm not mad, I'm a member of parliament.
	That line is going down in the ages.
	I can't be mad I'm a member of parliament.
	No, very much the opposite, my friend.
	I mean, we've all seen the conference.
	A close ally and former Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn.
	So, Jeremy Corbyn turns up to give Webb a character redness.
	Hmm.
	Because this person, who's clearly mad, okay, we need someone who's clearly not mad to make the point that she's very much a good standing person in the community.
	Let's call it the guy who's nationally accused of being an anti-Semite.
	Right, that's going to help the case, isn't it?
	Anyway, so Webb's testimony was supplemented by glowing character references from the former Shadow Chancellor John MacDonald, Jeremy Corbyn, as mentioned, and the former Shadow Home Secretary Diane Abbott.
	You really had to pick the worst people on the planet, didn't they?
	Yeah.
	I mean, the moron who doesn't know that she doesn't have two left feet, you know, wearing multiple shoes, thinks Mal did more good than harm.
	The Marxist McDonald, who wants to reform the entire economy on socialist lines instead of capitalism.
	And then Jeremy Corbyn.
	And you think the judge is going to listen to any of this?
	She's literally chosen the worst people imaginable to give her a character reference.
	Like, even if you agreed with the Labour Party, all the rest of it, let's say the judge is a Labour supporter, I can't think of a just legally worse strategy than to bring these people in to give character witnesses.
	No.
	I mean, it's not like she had much of a case anyway.
	No, that's true.
	Obviously a bloody lunatic, but anyway.
	So Diane Abbott said of the defendant that she was very honest and also very committed to working to support women, as she was accused of threatening to throw acid in a woman's face.
	Diane Abbott's like, yes, she is very committed to supporting women.
	Supporting them how?
	With acid, presumably.
	In a written statement that read in court, Corbyn said that Webb was warm-hearted, decent, and a dedicated person.
	Dedicated to what?
	I mean, riddle me that.
	You're on trial for harassing and threatening a woman with acid.
	Jesus Christ.
	And Jeremy Corman's like, no.
	Jumps in the way.
	Good person, I swear.
	Okay.
	See if your wife likes it.
	So she said she was a very delicate person who is very committed to ensuring the administration of justice is done whilst being prepared to state uncomfortable truths when it matters.
	Sorry, what was the uncomfortable truth in this case?
	What, the fact that she chucked acid at someone she suspected was cheating with her husband?
	And therefore, the woman who's doing that and is being threatened with the acid is in the wrong, because there's an uncomfortable truth there that people who cheat should have acid thrown in their face.
	Jeremy Corbyn 2021.
	Look, of all the complaints we have about Boris, I'm glad that this guy didn't get in.
	I mean, Jesus Christ.
	The judge wasn't having any of this, so the judge responded, I find Mrs.
	Webb to be vague, incoherent, and at times illogical.
	He also went on to say that she seemed to just make stuff up on the spot endlessly, which fits in with her online activity and parliamentary activity.
	Goldberg released Webb on unconditional bail with the possibility of a prison sentence on account of the MP's threat to, quote, throw acid at somebody and send intimate photographs to family members crossing the custody threshold.
	Again, that being made illegal as well.
	So, if we go to the next one, this Sky News had a little bit on this that I wanted to quote as well, because there's the context, of course, that Claudia Webb took over from Keith Vaz.
	So the MP entered the Commons in December 2019, winning the seat formally held by Keith Vaz, the married Labour veteran who decided not to stand for re-election after being suspended from the Parliament for, quote, expressing willingness to buy cocaine for male prostitutes.
	This is what the people of Leicester East have to deal with.
	They had that guy.
	And now they've got...
	And then they've got this lady.
	I really hope they flip.
	I don't care who to.
	The monster-raving loony pie, for all I care.
	They deserve better.
	Just a bit.
	I feel so bad for the people who live there.
	But then again, at the same time, this is a constituency where one in eight residents is a modern-day slave as well.
	So, yeah, labour-thiefdoms.
	Just labour things.
	So the court heard one phone call that's mentioned from the prosecution saying that she was mad, and the prosecutor, Susan Evans, suggesting that the comment was made, because you had gone mad, but Webb said, I'm not mad, I'm a Member of Parliament.
	Again, just the line that has to go down in history from all of this.
	Justin MP, you're clearly mad, I'm a Member of Parliament.
	Right.
	Anyway.
	But I thought we'd just illustrate this also with the fact that she's totally not mad and have a little bit of a Twitter conversation to prove it.
	So this is in response to the Beowus incident, as you can see.
	Some guy wrote to her saying, Already been rolled out in Beowus, next level.
	And she responded, It is so easy for you to ridicule me because you believe that I could not pronounce Belarus because I am black or because I look foreign.
	Right.
	What?
	What?
	No one mentioned you were black.
	No one mentioned you look foreign.
	Also, you did mispronounce Belarus.
	Yeah.
	Twice.
	On camera.
	In Parliament.
	Okay.
	So someone responds with, who mentioned that you were black or foreign?
	And she responds, you?
	So someone else responds, no, I didn't.
	And she responds, exactly.
	Is this person mad?
	I think it's evidence that she's not compass mentis.
	Beyond a reasonable doubt, let's say.
	I wish Josh was here to give the specific diagnosis of what psychological problems she has, but Mad will do it for now.
	If she's giving herself a pat on the back for a slam dunk here...
	You know, my interaction with her was just one thing.
	Apparently there's this endless list of stupid stuff she's doing that makes no sense.
	You ridicule me because I can't pronounce Belarus because I'm black.
	No one said that.
	No one on Earth.
	No.
	You said this.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	Anyway, moving on.
	So they have, of course, the irony of her talking about violence against women as well.
	So if we can get up this image here, they've got some tweet from her a little while back in which she's trying to stand on the grave of Sarah Everard and be like, yes, women, women, women.
	So she tweets out, violence against women in our homes, in our streets, by the state.
	All unacceptable.
	Also, I'm gonna throw acid in this woman's face.
	Ha ha!
	Yes, violence against women.
	Like, yeah, you're part of it, lady.
	End violence against women.
	She finishes that one off.
	We're gonna.
	By putting you in jail.
	One way of doing with it.
	So let's move on.
	So we also have the point being made by Dan Hodges here.
	Under Jeremy Corbyn, Claudia Webb was responsible for handling the anti-Semitism and other disputes within the Labour Party.
	Ah, okay.
	That might explain a thing or two as well.
	Yeah.
	Like, we put the clinically insane person in charge of the anti-Semitism procedures, and then we got accused of anti-Semitism in the late...
	It does actually make you wonder whether Jeremy Corbyn himself would have been a better alternative, given what you've shown me in this segment.
	Oh, God.
	But again, I just want to read her emails of her interacting with people accusing the party of anti-Semitism.
	Like, is she just responding, is that because I'm black?
	God knows.
	I mean, that's what her activity on Twitter's like, so I bet there's a goldmine.
	Anyway, so if we move on from this, the Labour Party have at least done the decent thing of saying maybe our MPs who threaten to throw acid in women's faces should resign.
	Low, low bar.
	It's a starting point, isn't it?
	We've got that level of the quorum still, okay?
	So the Labour Party strongly condemns Claudia Webb's actions, and she should now resign.
	Now?
	Now.
	Right.
	I mean, she's been an actual embarrassment to the party and to the country, frankly, because these stories have also gotten international for quite some time.
	But now she's throwing acid in women's faces or saying she's going to.
	That's the thing that makes her need to resign from being an MP. I really thought there should be a higher bar for these sort of things, but I'm not mad.
	I'm an MP. Yeah.
	Low bars.
	So let's carry on.
	So Jeremy Corbyn, also in the past, has called for much support of Claudia Webb.
	It wasn't just that he went down and gave a character witness saying that she can solve the difficult questions of the day with her pots of bleach.
	Instead, he actually, back in the day when she was first being accused of harassment, decided to go out and give some speech in favour of her.
	She was under attack by the Tory establishment.
	And it's really weird.
	And let's just play and enjoy.
	And I want to say thank you to a lot of people, but one person who has only been mentioned once tonight, but I think we should, because you've probably noticed that members of the Socialist Campaign Group disproportionately go through hell, high water and beyond at the hands of the media, the briefing machines and everything else.
	We've talked about Nadia, you've talked about Apsana, You've talked about the way Diane has been treated.
	Can we just have a thought tonight in absolute solidarity with our great friend Claudia Webb for what she's going through?
	Brilliant comrade, brilliant anti-racist campaigner and fighter all of her life.
	That's what anti-racism looks like, folks.
	Yep.
	Throwing acid in women's faces.
	Taliban.
	Anti-racist.
	Brilliant comrade, brilliant anti-racist, brilliant prisoner to be.
	I also love the fact that he's like, yeah, all these useless diversity hires we had, they're all getting attacked.
	Also, this other useless diversity hire we have is also being attacked.
	Maybe we should stop doing diversity hires.
	Maybe we should just hire people for competence.
	I guess that thought hasn't got through.
	I mentioned the prison sentence because she's also going to be at sentencing and I presume we'll get one.
	Deserves one.
	That's for sure.
	Anyways, we have ElectionMapsUK here tweeting out Claudia Webb MP, independent because Labour kicked her out of the party when she was under investigation and if she was found not guilty, they were going to let her back in because, I don't know, they don't mind the madness only the acid.
	For Leicester East, has been found guilty of one count of harassment.
	Any prison sentence will result in an automatic recall petition.
	A sentence of 12 months or more will result in an automatic by-election.
	I don't know why the people of Leicester East or any of the Conservative Party are waiting.
	Just get out there and do the petition already because I think it's like 10% of the electorate if they sign a petition, the MP has to do a by-election.
	And yeah, she's not going to win.
	That's for sure.
	No.
	Put it that way.
	So I don't bother waiting for that unless the judge just gives her 12 months and then he doesn't have to bother with it, I guess.
	But get started early.
	Don't wait for it.
	If he gives her 11 months, you're going to be very sore about that.
	Anyway, so let's just move on on this, which is to nail down the colours that, yes, Claudia Webb is a diversity hire.
	I'm not just being flippant when I mention this.
	So this is a Calvin Robinson article.
	I think he wrote for Spike.com.
	I can't quite remember.
	Anyway, so he says in this, in a quote, Webb was originally placed on an all-women, all-BAME shortlist to replace Heidi Alexander in Lewisham East.
	Even on this rigged shortlist, she did not make the final cut.
	So, there was a position she tried for before, in which she was promoted because of her race and sex over other people, because they had inferior races and sexes for the position.
	That's all you can get from that argument.
	And she didn't even make that.
	So then, in Leicester East, there was an election, and they just installed her from Labour HQ, like she was parachuted in.
	People in Leicester East, even in that constituency, didn't get a choice.
	That's your Labour candidate.
	Enjoy.
	So...
	Couldn't win on a rigged election, so instead had no election and won that way for the position.
	Oh, God.
	And I thought we'd just also compare this to Kemi Baden-Ock as a point of comparison, as I mentioned in the Political Parties Explained video.
	Kemi, being on a panel here with Kimberley Crenshaw, I'm sure you recognize creative intersectionality.
	I just love, we're not going to play the speech, but it's basically just Kemi lying out that, yeah, in my constituency, I turned up and fought the other people, the other candidates locally, and everyone sided with me because they liked me.
	That's how you get a good MP. You get the local members to elect someone based on their competence, not on their diversity characteristics, or just parachute it in.
	Yeah.
	I also love the way she comes off in all this, which is essentially like, I'm not a diversity hire like you losers, as I've written there, because that's the energy she gives off.
	Also, Diane Abbott was there, and she sculled off as soon as Kemi started talking.
	Of course she would.
	Yeah, she had somewhere to be, apparently.
	That's convenient, isn't it?
	Very convenient, isn't it?
	Yeah.
	So anyway, that's the comparison between a diversity hire and a non-diversity hire.
	Someone who's competent, and someone who threatens women with acid in their spare time.
	I hope she gets a 12-year prison sentence at the minimum.
	As do I. As do I. A good world for the Labour Party, for the country, and, well, I suppose, for wider society in general, wouldn't it?
	For that woman and her fiancé as well.
	Yes.
	Quite.
	Right.
	So, I thought we should move on to what is ultimately my bread and butter, and that is the Marxist-Leninist defence of academic freedom, which would probably be quite surprising for a lot of people.
	I'm also incredibly suspicious of.
	Incredibly suspicious, and you are right to be suspicious of it, to a point.
	But for those unaware, philosophy lecturer Kathleen Stock has been under unrelenting attack by the LGBZ lobby, not just in the University of Sussex, but everywhere.
	The lobby in Sussex has been calling for her to be dismissed because of her view, and on their view, that she's a transphobe.
	For essentially believing that sexual orientation as a concept makes second to no sense without reference to biological sex.
	Of course, there's a much more sophisticated argument behind that, but that's the crux of her position.
	In the lobby's own words, what Stok advocates is not philosophy to transphobia.
	And the University of Sussex rightly defended Stok on the principle of academic freedom.
	But they weren't the only ones to do so.
	The Communist Party of Britain, Marxist-Leninist, that must be distinguished from the Communist Party of Britain, defended Kathleen Stok.
	I forgot left, it's just a splinter, don't I?
	Yeah.
	But they defended Stok on the grounds of academic freedom, but actually went further to say that the university had not gone far enough.
	And they said this.
	Rather than support her, they issued a bizarre statement in support of trans and non-binary communities at Sussex, which criticises the Vice Chancellor's statement and calls for investigation into institutional transphobia.
	The statement contains the puzzling assertion that appeals to both employment rights and academic freedom and are often instrumentalised, a curious thing for an organisation self-identifying as a trade union to say.
	Sussex, UCU's officers, completely failed to support stock herself.
	UCU nationally has sided with its local branch committee.
	And they basically go on to say the introduction of undergraduate tuition fees in 1998 by the Blair government has encouraged some students to claim paying for tuition allows them to dictate the views that can be exposed to and, it would seem, demand the stacking of those they disagree with.
	This is actually pretty amazing, because what's happening here is that you've got Marxist-Leninists saying that the Blair government has enabled a mob of middle-class, self-entitled obnoxious brats with strange ideas to take over the universities and lecture everyone about their entirely abstract claims to oppression.
	For years, that is precisely, precisely what the left has constantly claimed to be the narrative of the far right, and the Marxist-Leninists have come round to saying almost exactly the same thing.
	I mean, it's interesting, but as you mentioned, the far right, like, I'm incredibly suspicious of it in the same way of, like, a neo-Nazi was telling me, yeah, but, you know, free speech in this instance, all the rest of it.
	It's like, yeah.
	Like, the complaint there being that Blair made it a situation in which the students have turned into customers, as a chap at the Festival of Ideas mentioned, and therefore they're able to, like, dictate what should be allowed on campus is this new idea that's come into being.
	But at the same time, like, coming from Marxist-Leninists, like...
	Why is that complaint?
	It's like, yeah, we should be in charge instead of these people paying the money is presumably where the position would end up being, as historically it has been.
	There is, I believe, a very, very, I suppose, profound reason why they're taking this line, and particularly why they're using this particular case of Kathleen Stock to make this point in favour of academic freedom.
	But they proceed to argue for the importance of free speech in trade unions, which itself does actually make sense.
	And they basically say that the importance of free speech in trade unions is simple.
	Debates in a union branch needs every member's point of view, every perspective, before a decision is reached.
	And with that being done, members know they can rely on everyone to carry us out to whatever position they took in the discussion.
	And importantly, and we'll refer to this later, in scientific and academic discussion too, the alternative to free debate is enforced adherence to dogma and the suppression of new thinking.
	They did this standing behind a sign that's saying Marxist-Leninist.
	Yes.
	Was the irony not lost?
	You could make that argument, yes.
	That's how I'm viewing all of this.
	What's interesting, though, is that this was of such importance that they actually had a Zoom meeting entirely about the role that free speech has to play in a Marxist-Landinist course, and we can see that on their own website.
	There isn't actually any content to this.
	But it does make you wonder, what exactly are they discussing?
	What is the potential role of free speech in the furtherance, or furthering, sorry, I almost made up a word there, of Marxist-Leninism?
	And actually, because of course this wouldn't happen with the socialist worker, you can be sure of that.
	Okay, I'll tell you what I think it is.
	You're going to have to tell me the difference there.
	All I know is the socialist work is the Trotskyist, so...
	Well, yeah.
	But I think it signifies an awakening to a very obvious fact.
	That those making such strong claims to Marxist cause, namely the critical race theorists and the intersectionalists, who shall we say are the most...
	Profound Marxist, and I say that in inverted commas, around at the moment, are actually part of the problem.
	They see them as part of the capitalist class trying to reconfigure what Marxism or progressivism actually is.
	So this is far from a random act of endorsement.
	So what orthodox Marxists are basically hinting to is that intersectionalists and critical race theorists are trying to do away with the important variable of the division of labour, which is inseparable from how Marxist-Leninists have naturally identified which is inseparable from how Marxist-Leninists have naturally identified the systemic problems of capitalism.
	Like, I mean, given the division of labour between men and women, and that it corresponds to their reproductive capacities, right, it's capitalism is rigged against women from the very start in the sense that they're naturally not more productive it's capitalism is rigged against women from the very start If, for example, you have two people doing exactly the same job, happily married, whatever, want to raise a child, that overwhelmingly goes in favour of the man, because he doesn't have to carry that child.
	So the argument basically has, from the Marxist-Lenin side, has more force with reference to biological sex, which the intersectionalists are trying to undermine constantly.
	Right.
	So I imagine what's happening here is that they've identified that freedom of speech, potentially...
	Can be used as a means of reinforcing this so as to restabilise Marxism on the more orthodox framework or on the more orthodox trajectory.
	Are you with me?
	Yeah, I just find it really funny.
	It is funny.
	Like, the idea of being like, no, no, no, we need to restabilise Marxism into a sense that's more coherent, and it's like, right, okay.
	Yeah, but it would be more coherent, would it not?
	Because it would make more sense in and of itself, as contrived as a political sense as it may be.
	No, I feel like intersectionality and wokeism as an ideology are essentially taking those principles and applying it on more basis.
	Yeah, but it's very easy to change the goalposts with Marxism, isn't it?
	Because as Jordan Peterson actually says quite rightly, it ultimately breaks down into the oppressors versus the oppressed.
	Anyone can make that claim and can make a straw man about something that doesn't really exist.
	And the intersections have done exactly that with Marxism.
	But there is, of course, a very, very particular way of looking at things from the Marxist-Leninist framework, which is strictly materialistic.
	And if you're going to start negating matter, then Marxism loses its force.
	So I think that may be why, and I am speculating to a considerable point here, why they have chosen to support stock.
	Does that make sense?
	I get the argument, but it just makes Marxism sound even, like, childish-er than the intersectionals in my mind.
	Yeah.
	Well, how about this?
	If you're a Marxist, you should hate wokeness.
	Shouldn't you?
	I mean, of course, it's quite hard to find a definition for wokeness.
	But if you look at what the end of wokeness ultimately is, that is, well, diversity.
	Is diversifying, for example, an entire corporation, as is currently being kind of furthered, actually, does that actually equate to any systemic change?
	Well, I wouldn't argue that's the end goal of wokeness.
	So, Ash Darker argued this quite succinctly, surprisingly for her, which is that she defined woke culture, and Carl's featured it in his video, as on a political level, the redistribution of land, power, and wealth along race, gender, and class lines.
	So, you can also expand that onto...
	sounds as stupid as it would begin with, but that's an end goal that's not the same as just more diversity.
	She quite literally believes that when you actually have that new management class, if you like, comprised of people of those backgrounds that she's just described, you would then have a more equal society and structural change would come about by those means.
	That's not what the Marxist-Leninists believe at all.
	They literally believe that those who are ultimately on the receiving end, economically speaking, of the class system are those that actually are in the epistemic position to transition or, shall we say, bring about the revolution.
	Well, isn't that not the same thing happening with the Rainbow Coalition, as has been dubbed?
	I mean, the trans, homosexual, black nationalists, combine it all together, I mean, you've seen the...
	Yeah, only the Lindy Intersection, in this case, it's a far more abstract claims of class, in the case of the wokists.
	Sure, but I mean, I'm not a Marxist, so both of those sound stupid to me, inherently.
	It's just, this one's a more funny version, and I can't believe it's actually the majority position of modern left-wing politics.
	But nonetheless, it's interesting.
	And I'm interested to see if, because of course there is no strong Communist Party in Britain, not least because we have...
	I suppose a political tradition of slow gradual change, which has been a very, very good antidote to revolutions.
	And there are too many communist parties in Britain, really, for communism itself to be a coherent force.
	Well, thankfully...
	But I am interested to see how the rest of the fringes, or the communist fringes, actually react to this, and what lines they take.
	Where's Claire Fox these days stand on this kind of stuff?
	Because I know she joined the Brexit party a lot.
	To be honest, it's very, very hard to tell.
	I think, in principle, she still looks at things in a fundamentally Marxist way.
	But quite clearly, she's not a revolutionary anymore.
	I can't see how she can be.
	Being in the House of Lords will do that to you.
	What a revolution!
	That is exactly what the Marxists would say.
	But also, I just find it interesting that she was at the Battle of Deus event, for example.
	Kathleen Stock was meant to go to that, to give a speech, and then Kathleen couldn't because of the threats made against her, so she was just like, ah, scrap, she's got to stay home and eat bread.
	I think that Claire Fox's attendance at the LGB event would indicate that she's on board with this.
	Again, it just comes off as like, you know the two retards fighting meme?
	You know that one?
	Where it's like two fat guys who are just fighting and it's like a YouTube thumbnail.
	Anyway, that's what it comes off to me like, because you go, you've got the communists or like the Claire Fox radical communists who's now doing God knows what, I don't know, it's weird.
	But you go like that, and they're like, yeah, so Wokeness is bad, why?
	Because it undermines class revolution?
	I was like, Yeah, I really don't care about that.
	Like, if that undermines that, okay.
	Couldn't give a toss.
	It's sort of like a Suni or a Shia coming to me and being like, yeah, so it undermines the Ummah ruling the world or something.
	I was like...
	Is that a bad thing?
	But...
	Anyway, that'll be my perspective on it, because I'm not sympathetic to any other.
	No, that's fair.
	I guess I'm just more curious to see where this goes.
	Yeah, it's interesting to see where it's going.
	Yeah, and...
	It's like the joke meme of...
	You remember in Birmingham, there were those Muslims who were protesting that their children were being given reading materials that were promoting homosexuality, as they said, or paedophilia, their arguments.
	And then there was the idea of getting Tommy Robinson of the world, and...
	The Muslims of the world all holding hands around the school to block it off.
	I mean, it's a weird coalition, but, you know, it could happen.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	But it's a coalition entirely...
	Weird thing you're saying with the anti-woke coalition.
	Yeah, but it's a coalition that doesn't make sense in and of itself, given that, as I would say, the women part of it, and the trans part of it, given that the trans bit's been collapsed into the LGBTs annexation of it.
	It means that it can't be a coalition that ultimately lasts, whereas, at least with the Marxist-Leninist, this idea of the dictatorship of the proletariat, at least in principle, has some consistency, even though there are, of course, flaws within the concept of the proletariat in that tradition, very deep flaws.
	But as a science, it makes sense, whereas it doesn't make sense as a science in the intersectionalist's case, I would say.
	I don't agree either.
	Either are scientific in my view.
	They're both pseudosciences.
	The interesting thing about the intersectional one is we did a premium podcast recently, so people should go check that out when it's out, in which Carl just went through Kimberley Crenshaw's essay on intersectionality.
	And one of the weird things, she makes an argument in there, that essentially the...
	The black parts of the Rainbow Coalition politics, so the BLM types, let's say, are a direct contradiction with the...
	I think it was the women's liberation part, so the feminists, on the basis that black women, as she saw it, make up a matriarchy of their community, and therefore things should be kept that way, and if we give liberation to women to do this, that, and the other, then it's going to undermine black women.
	I can't...
	I'm not...
	Making this very clear.
	Go watch Premium Podcast, it makes it much more clear.
	But she's noticing that there are contradictions even within the known framework, as you see with LGB Alliance versus the T-part.
	Well, these are sexualities, these are gender identities, so they're not the same.
	Also, they have contradictory goals, so the coalition's never going to work.
	Yeah, it would just result in infighting.
	Yeah, and there is infighting within critical race theory as well, as I'm sure you know.
	Yeah.
	I find it interesting that even at the primary document where she's writing, she's like, yeah, so none of this makes any sense, and we're going to be infighting all the time.
	She's writing that in 89, and then it's like 2021, and it's starting to happen with LGB Alliance versus LGBT. Yeah.
	But no, just, I suppose...
	The position was leave it aside for now and let's just march towards this end of history that we haven't as of yet defined for ourselves.
	Oh well.
	Just kill people until there's nothing left.
	That does seem to be where it ends up.
	Yeah.
	Anyway, should we go to the video comments?
	Let's do it.
	Let's go to the video comments.
	Welcome to my studio!
	So I'm trying to learn how to make backing tracks on Cubase.
	I have no idea what I'm doing, but it's okay.
	It's okay.
	I got YouTube.
	This I stole from my dad.
	This is from the flea market.
	And as for yesterday, ask Callum.
	I did it for the meme.
	I really enjoy her videos.
	They're always kind of funny.
	Well, I look forward to the musical renditions.
	I don't have any recommendations, but I'm sure you'll make good stuff.
	So, I look forward to it.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Get COVID. It's pretty great.
	Well, I'm sorry to hear that, man.
	It's one way of boosting your profile.
	Slightly scary.
	I don't think there's too much disagreement.
	No, I doubt there is much.
	You've done something wrong.
	That may be true.
	I don't know enough.
	But when you get older and you start to think a bit more deeply about these things, you do realise that I think I'm a victim of it, personally.
	And if you don't, you'll find yourself in a place of suffering.
	Almost certainly.
	But we definitely should just...
	Get COVID. And we'll see you tomorrow.
	I disavow that message.
	I heard it all else to say.
	Yeah, well, unless you're a fan of herd immunity.
	Yeah, I mean, I still wouldn't say get it.
	Like, don't purposely start not washing your hands or anything.
	No.
	But anyway, I always loved the cuts.
	I don't know if that was Minister for Base or the other chap, so I'll just say thanks either way.
	It's a good next one.
	Ended the lockdown hair, and here I am.
	Yeah, when I have kids...
	I will get them baptised because culturally I'm a Catholic even though I don't really believe in God I would get them baptised and I would take them to church because it's going to immunise their minds against certain mind viruses that are far deadlier than anything that comes out of Wuhan.
	I just regret that I can't convince my friends who are married and have kids of the same thing.
	That's a question.
	Are you Christian, by the way?
	I'm...
	I'm not.
	But I have a lot of...
	Were you baptized?
	No.
	Right.
	Because there's a thing in my mind where I'm like, I'm not Christian.
	It's not part of my identity at all.
	But I was baptized, and I feel like if I did have a kid, I'd probably get baptized because it's a cultural thing.
	But I don't believe in any of that, so it's a bit weird.
	But...
	No, and being baptised ultimately, I mean, I know this is a strictly secularist view, doesn't really do much for earning your way into heaven from a Christian perspective anyway.
	At least that's a strictly Protestant claim, of which I'm not.
	But...
	No, I'm not sure where I was going with that, but it sounds like he's trying to line up a wholesome way for his kids to grow up.
	So I've got nothing to dispute about.
	I see John's writing there that Minister of Base is going to be annoyed again, apparently going wrong.
	But also, apparently John is also baptised.
	Are you going to baptise your kids John or not?
	Probably, he says.
	Yeah, it's weird, isn't it?
	Don't believe it in that mumbo-jumbo.
	Sky Daddy.
	No, but Christianity is inseparable from the things that make the country, so you still have to kind of owe to it.
	God save the Queen.
	Yeah.
	I'm currently writing a script for another video about monarchy and the crown, and it's making me very, very monarchist, as I've mentioned beforehand, which is just...
	Also, the Christian stuff is so true.
	The fact that the monarch is meant to be the ideal for which people can strive for in their wretched lives, and on the family and on Christian basis, because she's the supreme commander of the Church of England.
	And therefore, that's why there were big problems with Edward VIII marrying a divorcee.
	He was a Yankee.
	Sorry, but a Yankee shouldn't be allowed in the royal family.
	And I think it was a sister or something couldn't marry Captain Townsend because he was divorced as well.
	And now they seem to have just given up on that.
	Charles hangs around with his woman and Harry destroys his own life and all the rest.
	It's embarrassing to see.
	I mean, she's kept it up.
	Her Majesty.
	No, she has.
	William's also the only one who's kept it up so far.
	Yeah.
	I don't know how you guys were talking about indigenous people the other day.
	My boyfriend and I had already discussed this before, but basically like I am very indigenous to the Americas.
	It's like how long does my family have to be residing in America before I'm considered indigenous because I can trace my genealogy back to like the early 1600s.
	So 400 years is that enough to be considered indigenous?
	So we have like a homeowner's association and my mom does like road work for it.
	The other day this guy just made salsa and came and gave her some salsa while she was out working on the roads.
	It's just like friendly little neighborhood stuff, you know?
	It's all right.
	It's wholesome.
	As to the first question, I don't think there is ever going to be a fixed answer to that question.
	But of course, 400 years, yes.
	Because it's a question, as I tried to make clear, was it's the difference between being from a place and of the place.
	So if you're of the place, then you're of nowhere else, by definition.
	If you're of Britain, then you cannot be of China.
	It doesn't make sense.
	Yeah.
	Therefore, to say you're indigenous to China doesn't make any sense, but indigenous Britain would.
	Yeah.
	Even if you were born in China and then, you know, moved back or some shit.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	I agree with that.
	But I think if you're going to appeal to indigenousness, if that's a word, in the way that those who criticize America for its colonial past do, about how they wiped out the indigenous Americans, you're actually at a regress of, well, where did humanity start?
	We end up all being Africans, ultimately.
	Yeah, if you're going to run that kind of thing.
	Exactly.
	So I think your version of it is far better.
	And so I would say, yes, you have earned your right as an American.
	It's not perfect either.
	There's going to be some problems.
	But I just hate this narrative.
	It's like, well, there are the indigenous Americans and then the Americans.
	It's like, no, both of them are indigenous.
	You've got the Indians, as we should call them.
	As I've referenced before, CGP Grey's video is great on this.
	I don't know if you've seen it.
	I haven't yet.
	Okay, so he argues in there that basically he was writing a video about Indians and he was just like, okay, the closer I get to an Indian tribe and hang out with them and talk about these issues, the more likely they are to use the word Indian.
	Whereas if you get to the coastal elites or Americans who don't live anywhere near tribal reserves, none of them use that term and they all say Native American.
	And he made that distinction and was like, right, okay, so this is stupid.
	This is the thing white people who feel guilty about being white are doing.
	And it also is incredibly useful for the Indians to use the term Indian.
	You know, like the American Indian Reservation System or the rest of it, in all of law, they're referred to as Indians.
	And it's a banner they can all get together under, even though they have nothing in common with each other, other than the fact that they lost.
	Yeah, that's interesting.
	I never knew that.
	But anyway, that's why I call them Indians.
	It's not just because, you know, funny.
	But it's because, no, they use that term.
	And it's right that we use that term because it recognizes the branching aspect of it.
	And also that, yeah, Native American's not a thing.
	It's just a white guilt thing, which also sounds weird.
	Because, again, the other Americans are also Native.
	A screenwriter would never tell a cinematographer where to put the lights, and a comics writer would never tell the anchor how thick the lines should be around Superman, and a TV writer would never tell the director where the cameras should be set up.
	And yet, everybody tells the writer scenes and lines and ideas for the show as if they got a hand in my job.
	The problem long before the woke has been an absolute lack of respect for the craft of writing.
	Yeah, that's probably true, but I think that's also an aspect of creative disciplines in general.
	Everyone's got an idea.
	I mean, everyone's a gateway of this.
	We've all got ideas about something we don't do that could be done better, we swear.
	But we have no idea how it's made, so why would we know how to make it better?
	Yeah, well, exactly.
	You can't do so without reference to something that's already been done.
	I see John's writing a thing, so now everyone tells the cameraman how to use the camera.
	Same in every industry, cooking, etc.
	So the same point being that everyone gets told how to do their job, and it's really irritating for everyone, isn't it?
	Writers and industries do get a very, very bad deal compared to...
	Well, at least in the music industry, they get a very bad deal.
	Yeah.
	I assume writers is also a thing where people are like, oh, just rewrite it this way.
	It's like, yeah, but that loses the meaning.
	I was trying to make 10 pages back.
	You haven't noticed.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, I sympathize with you, mate, but, you know, we've all got it.
	Yeah.
	So when I see the news and I see all the stuff that's going on in my country, I get pretty angry, but...
	I've got a 60-hour work week, a house, relationships, and stuff like that to take care of, so I'm able to, for the most part, keep it out of my head.
	But this is your job.
	You have to be constantly thinking about this.
	You have to be constantly working with this, and you're just surrounded by this all the time.
	I'm assuming you get angry, and so I guess I'm just wondering, what do you do to deal with this anger?
	It gets burned out of you after a little while.
	Especially when you're dealing with the rape gangs and whatnot.
	I'm just some guy in the countryside.
	What am I going to do about it at this point?
	I suppose doing this allows us to get a lot off of our chest and to communicate that with others who reciprocate that feeling.
	We're extremely lucky to do something that enables us to actually attack these things.
	But Before I had this chance, it did kind of...
	Before I got into politics proper, I used to write about it in music.
	But of course, it only has so much reach, doesn't it, when you're as bad as I was as a musician.
	I would recommend...
	I've got some advice for...
	So after work, I try and just tune off, because you've got to be realistic about these things as well.
	applied jobs that are currently in place in the UK we've talked about this I don't know if you know but the civil service the GCHQ MI5 BBC multiple times now yeah have done this and you can only just be realistic about what can be changed and what can't and even though that you know if I think about it it's going to pee me off to no end like yeah I've done my I sent the letters.
	I sent the messages to the minister responsible.
	No more I can do.
	So just try and live your life.
	Yeah.
	I don't have any better advice.
	No, that sounds sound to me.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Hey guys, today I wanted to speak about mediocrity.
	It seems like mediocrity follows leftism everywhere.
	Peterson and Bezmenov used to talk about it quite a lot, how we got mediocre thinking of mediocre people putting mediocre efforts, and a lot of it, I think, has to stand from the educational system being completely pacified.
	Part of the reason why we have mediocre movies, mediocre, honestly, just plain bad, because mediocrity leads to degradation of standards by default.
	And a lot of it also, I think, has to do with corporatism.
	What do you think?
	I'm not really sure I understood the point.
	Was it arguing that just a lot of stuff is mediocre now?
	I think the argument is.
	Sorry.
	I think mediocrity towards, I suppose, things in general in terms of...
	That could extend to life's meat.
	I think he's talking about the meaning of life in particular.
	He mentioned Peterson, didn't he?
	And how the academic institutions seem to be pervading a sense of, or at least equipping people to be alienated from the things that ultimately would otherwise give them meaning.
	I would trace, if that's the point that's being made, then I think it would certainly help if we stop teaching people to hate the nations from which They're from, uncompromisingly.
	That's the same thing that comes to mind for me, anyway.
	Yeah, I still don't understand it.
	Sorry, mate.
	No, it's all right.
	I'm sorry if I misanswered your question.
	Anyway, go to the next one.
	Guys, I wanted to show you around this house.
	I work for a non-profit that fixes hurricane-damaged houses.
	We had to get this one to the studs because there was black mold on everything.
	Just wanted to make Carl jealous by having a satisfying job.
	Unfortunately, I'll remind him.
	I have a question for you, though, because if you're working on fixing up where hurricanes have gone through, do you have a fix on flooding issues as well?
	Because I've mentioned before, and it was in a John Stossel video I watched, in which the Obama administration passed a new law that guaranteed insurance for properties that were...
	basically 100% chance they were going to end up flooded.
	So there were loads of properties that are right there, rivers or right on the cliff edge of, of, you know, the, the rocks being eroded and people were buying them.
	And you think terrible investment, it's going to fall into the rocks.
	It's going to get destroyed.
	Right.
	But the insurance would always pay out.
	So you'd buy a house right next to a piece of land that's being eroding into the sea.
	And as soon as it falls in paycheck, You'd make loads of money out of it, because you just claim it's worth $200,000.
	Fantastic.
	Clearly wasn't, but that's what John Stossel made a video about anyway.
	I wonder if you've ever had to deal with that as well, particularly the one flooding in areas where it's 100% going to flood, and yet they're still insured by the government.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Oh, that's it.
	Right, okay.
	We'll go to the written comments.
	Need to...
	Oh god, what's all that?
	Rightio.
	So, let's start with the fertility lessons.
	So, no questions for you.
	George Happ says, The outrage towards the fertility lessons is rooted in women's aversion to responsibility for their own decisions.
	How can you claim you live in The Handmaid's Tale when you have full control over your reproductive choices and even the life of your child?
	Child.
	Yeah, I think that's essentially right.
	The only thing I would add is that I think that women are being coerced to look or at least look at themselves as if they're not morally responsible agents.
	And I think that there's a particular political reason behind that.
	I think the majority of women would otherwise have recognised that.
	But I think that has something to do with why certain...
	forces are doubling down on the um the effort to um for women to abdicate abdicate that to um avoid accepting that responsibility if that makes sense i've always found the complaints about herdman's tale always really crap though as well because i haven't watched the full thing but as i understand it like what happens is a group of religious extremists just overthrow the u.s government and then change the constitution and no one just kills them they just carry on running the country and that's how the dystopia is made
	and i'm just like it's such a child's argument of how this is going to happen i can't take it seriously whereas like 1984 you're already starting with big brother and then yeah you can take the world seriously but But it's just, yeah, the Christians are going to overthrow the government.
	Nah, it's America.
	Everyone has guns.
	So Doc Holliday...
	Oh, he's saying it's Afghanistan, John.
	Is this it?
	Okay, yeah, fair enough.
	Happened in Afghanistan.
	I still don't think it's going to happen in the US, though.
	Doc Holliday says fertility lessons are a good idea and should be taught.
	My wife, 35, and I never talked seriously about having children as we never thought age was a big deal and we had all the time in the world.
	We focused instead on our own careers and traveling and enjoying ourselves.
	Since we decided to try for a baby, my wife has had two miscarriages and is now pregnant again and is due to give birth in February.
	It has been a tough journey and we strongly suspect age has been a significant factor in it.
	This pregnancy has lasted longer than the other ones, so we are both hopeful for it.
	It will be the third time lucky.
	My advice would be to find someone you love and someone who loves you back and do not wait to start a family.
	Bye.
	Sound advice, and well, needless to say, congratulations.
	Yeah, I wish you all the best.
	It's such a thing to BTFO, the abortion argument, that no point is a baby.
	Why are we sad about miscarriages then?
	Yeah.
	makes no sense.
	Base Tape said, women are constantly told to spend all their most fertile years working on their career.
	Then later in life, they leave that career to have kids when the clock is almost out and there are all kinds of complications.
	It's a terrible thing feminism has put on women.
	It's totally backwards.
	Ideally, people should study and have children in their early 20s, then focus on getting parents into the workforce later once their children reach the school age.
	If we are subjected to the feminist mantra, this is why men and women were given different roles so they could do both at the same time.
	I'm assuming it's in previous eras.
	Yeah, that's absolutely right.
	I don't know why that hasn't got through to the level of government.
	I mean, like, take Sweden, for example.
	I mean, their extensive welfare state, the vast amount of thinking they do on this.
	But they took the feminist perspective instead of just, okay, we'll just retrain people after they've had the kids to, you know, subsidize that lifestyle.
	Yeah.
	So Dan Arthur says, teaching basic biology at Cambridge as an elective course seems a damning indictment of both the culture and the school system.
	These things should be an obvious part of life.
	Yes, absolutely.
	You'd think it wouldn't need to be repeated, but quite clearly there's a moral argument for it to be so repeated.
	Yeah.
	On the issue of Claudia Webb, which I'm not smirking about, a student of history says, and for my final character witness, I'm going to summon Jimmy Savile.
	Could you imagine?
	What else could she have pulled out of her ass?
	I mean, what would that be worse?
	Here's a literal communist Ash Sharker to say I'm a good person.
	I mean, again, the evidence is so overwhelming.
	You would have thought Diane Abbott and Corbyn would have been like, I can't be bothered.
	I mean, here's Claudia Webb.
	Some random MP who got selected for some C. It's clearly insane.
	Oh, she's on trial for throwing her acid in a woman's face, threatening to.
	Do you want to give a character witness, Mr.
	Corbyn?
	You know, if I miss PA, and I'm like, yeah, so that's the situation, and I'd be like, yeah, don't do it.
	It's not worth your time.
	If nothing else, the hell's the matter with you?
	Guy never learns.
	Guy never learns.
	Rogel Dorn says, if a Conservative was in Claudia Webb's position, not only would that MP be crucified and hounded by all the corners of the mainstream media, but also the opposition party, Labour, would be calling for a full dismantle of the Conservative Party.
	That is a great point.
	100%.
	The hysteria around Sarah Everard's murder, where it's not just taken as what it is, but instead, to 11, this is the time to push for film and stuff.
	Yes, and to present the cisgendered white man as the hegemon from which all of the world's problems exist.
	Yeah, I mean, that's the response to a cop killing a woman.
	It's like, right, okay, if this was a conservative MP, you're absolutely right, it would go away.
	But instead, Labour are going, please don't remember this.
	This wasn't our fault.
	We weren't breeding a culture of hate and violence towards anybody.
	That we don't agree with our ideology.
	Comrades, please.
	Yeah, you were.
	There'll be more.
	We'll get more of this.
	I mean, this is what diversity hires do to you.
	You end up surrounded by incompetence.
	Because you're not hiring on competence.
	Exactly, yeah.
	Incompetence and criminality, actually.
	Student of History says $20, she will get a fine, nothing happens.
	I was going to say I'm going to eat my own hat if that happens, but I own one.
	I don't know, I'm going to have to do some sort of forfeit.
	We'll have to think about that.
	I shouldn't have said anything.
	Free Will says, there is very little consistency in the views of the hard left wokest.
	For instance, they reject biological reality, except when it says white people are born racists.
	Is it any wonder Claudia Webb can turn into a domestic dispute into a case on the endemic police racism?
	The only constant is that any idea that can be used to attack what they hate can and will be used even if those ideas contradict themselves.
	Straight out of the pages of 1984.
	Yeah, that is exactly right.
	They literally adjust the goalposts whenever they have to.
	And given that, well...
	I mean, the very foundation of GB News wasn't precisely of this point.
	The media has turned into a woke kleptocracy and they will all back each other up and they're in the perpetuation of these ideas.
	So, yeah, I mean, no consistency is not a problem for wokeism if, again, you have that absolute power.
	I also love, I should have mentioned that, but just the fact she's like, yes, my honour, I should take the beating because the police are racist.
	See, her husband beats you.
	She doesn't want to send her husband to prison because police are racist.
	So instead, her solution is that black women should just get hit in the face.
	Just get hit in the face.
	That's the way to live.
	Don't call the police.
	They're racist.
	And that's the way, in turn, that's the way to improve the lives of other black women.
	When this happens to you, do not call the police because you will be a traitor.
	You're a race traitor.
	Just say it was a doorknob you fell into.
	Yeah.
	If that's the future, I... These people...
	It sounds like letting the patriarchy through the back door, to me.
	Yeah, you'd think.
	If you're going to run with that concept of the patriarchy.
	Ah, there it is.
	That's the thing from the intersectionality document.
	Kimberly Crenshaw was arguing that institutional racism is basically worse than the patriarchy.
	Therefore, we need to prioritise that.
	And she was saying that black women who are beaten by black husbands...
	She said that black husbands are doing this because they're historically slaves and therefore not real men, which is...
	God.
	Anyway, so...
	She argues that, and therefore the black women should just take the beating instead of calling the cops.
	And Claudia Webb's doing exactly the same thing.
	Yeah.
	Where she's like, well, of course I didn't call the cops.
	I should just take the beating.
	Don't you know I'm black?
	I was like, what?
	What the fuck are you talking about?
	It's like...
	This is where leftism leaves you.
	Alpha of the Beta says, Claudia Webb is another example of the mentally ill, emotionally unstable, and politically ignorant are drawn to the Labour Party like dead stars circling a black hole.
	All of that, yeah.
	Free Will says she is just one of the many top-quality MPs in Parliament.
	She has certainly served her purpose as someone who creates internet content.
	That's about it, really.
	She's funny to look at and think, good God.
	But if her purpose is to be the embodiment of how bad diversity hiring is, then yes, I suppose she's a top-quality MP if that's her purpose of being an MP. But that's the only positive argument you can make in her favour.
	Just like that Maggie Oliver.
	Not Maggie Oliver.
	Maggie character in Wales who was on the all-women shortlist.
	The first candidate they ran for the all-women shortlist.
	She lost 40% of the vote for Labour because the people of that constituency were like, we're not just voting for you because you're a woman.
	It's not happening.
	She got Hillary Clinton.
	Deserved.
	They certainly are.
	Long may they reign.
	I kind of want to win at this point.
	Could you imagine them in government?
	I don't want to.
	I hate to live here, but you'd have a big smile on your face every day because it's just like, this is so absurd.
	What are we going to do?
	So on the Marxist-Leninist question, Matthew Hammond says, do Marxists only defend academic freedom as long as they are out of power, only to take it away once they get into power?
	Well, I suppose from the Marxist position, once you've eliminated that distinction between, I suppose, the means of production and the people, you already have academic freedom straight away.
	So they're in a position effectively to say that everything that could possibly be said under our establishment is free speech.
	So you don't need free speech because there's there's no oppressive structure in the first place.
	Yeah.
	So Shaker Silver says, I can see why traditional, in quotes Marxists, would not like the woke, because they're clinging onto a socialism that's outdated and hasn't progressed past realising the proletariat aren't going to create a revolution.
	The woke and other vanguardists realise that the top-down approach is far more successful in getting their aims.
	I don't think that's particularly accurate because as I envision the woke, they're supplementing the working class as the proletariat and replacing them with the oppressed peoples of the world along all the intersections possible.
	The blacks versus the non-blacks.
	I should say peoples of colour.
	Yeah, I mean...
	It's not the same cause.
	Queers, all the rest of it.
	No, that's the proletariat.
	Yeah, that's the proletariat.
	So these people are the subject order of history.
	So in effect, it's a different dialectic that they're working to.
	So it isn't a matter of Marxists reconfiguring their goals.
	It's just another group using Marxism politically in a different way.
	Also, I would view the vanguardists as traditional Marxists as well.
	The vanguardist part of it, yes, it is.
	But I suppose the content of that vanguardism differs.
	But otherwise, yeah, interesting.
	So Joe says, communism works for five people.
	In a house of five people, it works.
	In a nation of tens of millions, communism works for five people.
	The leaders.
	Stalin.
	Sweating.
	Typer Fett says, the Nazi goose-stepped around saying they were the superior people, so deserve to rule.
	Now you have the BAME LGBT alliance marching around saying they are the inferior people.
	We deserve to rule.
	Oh my, how history repeats.
	There is very much a Christian narrative of, what would you call it, inferiority in some of this stuff.
	I know the Christians are going to be mad about that, but you know the sense of like, oh, we're being oppressed by the Romans, therefore we're virtuous?
	In the same way the woke are like, yeah, we're being oppressed, therefore virtue.
	Yeah.
	It doesn't make any sense.
	No, it's a non-sequitur, isn't it?
	Maybe the Marxist-Leninists know that with the morally weak institutions and managers in place, now they have to strike to achieve their aims now.
	If they let the intersectionalists take over, they will merely supplant the current power structure, but it will maintain its same hierarchy, and they won't be able to shift the intersectionalists once they have power.
	So the idea that the intersectionalists are going to win, and if they do, then the traditional Marxists are kind of buggered, because there's no way of them supplementing intersectionalists.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, but I thought that happened years ago.
	I think I'll steamroll along with the rest of them.
	Mm-hmm.
	Student of History says, so the Vanguardist Party, not to be confused with the Tankist Party, comes out as pro-academic freedom against the Neo-Trotskyists.
	In this instance, I am agreeing with Vanguardists, and I agree with Callum.
	I do not like or trust this.
	I'm always very suspicious of that sort of thing.
	Bigger Hero says, Thomas, what are your views on the Dark Lord, Mr.
	Blair?
	Awful man.
	Quite simply awful person.
	And, well...
	Quite simply the articulation of everything that is about how capitalism shouldn't be done.
	I can't get over how he just struts about thinking that he's done good still sometimes.
	I have mentioned before there's the base Blair meme that I had, and some people misconstrued that as me actually promoting him, like, are you nuts?
	But the occasional moments in which the lights turn on, especially on cultural issues.
	So, you know, he used to be very much that, oh, Islam's a religion of peace.
	It's just like Catholicism, just a bit different.
	And then he became envoy for peace in the Middle East after his premiership, and then came back after that and was like, oh, God.
	Yeah.
	It's not a shame at all.
	There is no way of fixing this.
	Yeah, everyone tried to tell you, but you didn't listen.
	Rims says, The UK Parliament, you don't have to be mad to work here, but it helps.
	It certainly does.
	Free will, problems with Marxism, imperfect humans, trying to create a perfect society, which is impossible.
	What is utopia?
	Everyone has their own views on what they would like to live, so who has the right to impose their view on everyone else?
	This is why we have democracy, imperfect as it is, because it is a compromise between competing viewpoints.
	If you have a one-party state or a dictatorship, or a dictatorship of the proletariat, where is the scrutiny of the power?
	If power is not scrutinized and challenged, it becomes corrupt, leading to corruption and a cult of personality.
	And finally, gulags.
	Frank Zappa said, Communism doesn't work.
	People like stuff.
	Basically correct.
	One for you, I imagine.
	Yes.
	Imperfect human is trying to create a perfect society, which is impossible.
	Yeah, I think that's precisely why a communist political system will never work and has never worked.
	A fixed economy doesn't work because you can't predict human behaviour.
	It's as simple as that, or at least in the way that Marx is supposed.
	And that kingdom of ends that they appeal to is, I don't think, is...
	It completely negates the concept of the particular will.
	That is, the fact that we all have some freedom from, shall we say, the greater good, but nonetheless...
	No, sorry, I've completely lost that.
	But in short, I agree with most of that.
	But I would be careful to not collapse Marxism entirely into communism as a political end, because you can make a Marxist argument, believe it or not, for why communism is a bad idea.
	I know that might sound extraordinary, but you can do it, trust me.
	The only thing I was going to say is it weirdly actually fits in with the stuff I'm writing about monarchy at the moment, which is that, of course, the family are made up of people, therefore they're imperfect, and they're also meant to be the ideal for Christian morals and all the rest of it, so it's silly.
	But the monarch themselves is practically a demigod, so the standards are even higher.
	Spoilers.
	So Simon says, quote, Yeah, that's a fair point.
	I mentioned it before.
	You can't really feel too bad for Keir Starmer.
	Sorry, feel that Keir Starmer's got the best people to deal with.
	I mean, you know, he picks some cabinet members and they're all idiots.
	It's like, yeah, but 90% of the people he could have picked from were idiots.
	So maybe he's just dealing with the eggs he's got.
	Although it's another question, which is with conservatives, you can see who's going to take over.
	There's a litany of names of people, whether you think they're stupid or not, could take over the party and could run it competently along their viewpoint.
	But with Labour, I don't see it.
	I can see Angela Rayner making a little bit of a charge for that claim.
	She will try.
	And she is trying, clearly.
	I don't see her being competent or being able to take them to victory.
	No, she's definitely not going to win back the red wall that was crushed in the last election.
	So CatastrophicRegressionThreshold says, Yeah, true.
	They'd probably be less mad as well if they did a little bit of competence hiring.
	So SoupCanHarry, Claudia Webb is the best diversity hire ever.
	Certainly is in my books.
	As I said, my favourite MP. DuffyB says, Yeah, I love that.
	You're harming women by telling women that women exist.
	Yeah.
	And biological things go along with that.
	Okay.
	Null Null says, Clown World is real.
	The memes are proven beyond imagination.
	Student of History says, I suppose every court needs a jester, so why not elect them en masse?
	So why does Labour elect them en masse?
	Yeah.
	I mean, that's why I focus on them so much.
	Of course, they're at 30% in the polls and whatnot, and they're a British party, not American, so it doesn't get as many clicks, you might think.
	But they're just so mad.
	I mean, it's like watching the Monster Raving Loony Party, but they're dead serious that they're going to get elected, which makes it even funnier.
	Yeah.
	Because the Monster Raving Ludipide are just like, yeah, it's a joke, isn't it?
	It's almost got to the point where something like this couldn't be on the thick of it, because they're so complete as a caricature of themselves.
	Yeah.
	For women rights, acid.
	Yeah.
	It's like, what are you doing?
	Student of History says, If I can't threaten to throw acid at a woman's face, am I even human?
	This dumb hoe.
	Yeah.
	And Dick Cheesehead says...
	The only thing a government should give for free are helicopter rides, in my opinion.
	I can certainly endorse some free helicopter rides around London.
	Anyway, probably on that note, probably time to end.
	So if you want more from us, go to lotuses.com and please sign up to Premium to get access to all the Premium content, as we mentioned, and it also keeps the show running, so we can pay for everything.
	But other than that, we will be back on Monday.

▲