Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Nov. 24, 2021 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:30:48

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #270

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello, good afternoon, and welcome to episode 270 of the podcast of the Lotus Eaters.
	I am your host today, Harry, joined by my guest, John.
	Hello, Lotus Eaters.
	Hello there, and today we're going to be discussing the seemingly state-sanctioned looting of stores all across California, the controversy surrounding an Irish academic's criticism of Black Lives Matter, and also how Jeremy Corbyn is so bad at taking a joke, he will sue you over them.
	But before we get into that, we've got some announcements to make.
	So, first of all, we've got here a lovely new article from Carl talking about the heroism of women.
	I've not had a chance to read this one yet myself, but from what I can hear, from what he's been talking about it, and what I have seen of it, it's more discussing the fact that...
	What was he describing it as?
	That giving birth is the only thing that a woman can do independent of anybody else without any assistance or at least one of the duties, the only duty there.
	Well, there's a heroic narrative to giving birth, isn't there?
	And he goes very much into detail on that topic.
	Absolutely.
	And trying to re-inspire that heroic narrative within people nowadays.
	So good stuff there, Carl.
	If we move along, we've got a new article from Hugo, which I've been looking at, talking about the global movement against COVID tyranny, which is talking about...
	Mm-hmm.
	all across the world from the UK to Australia to everywhere in between, protesting against tyrannical COVID lockdown measures and coercive vaccine mandates.
	Basically just giving a big list of all the different countries where there have been tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of people taking part in these demonstrations.
	And when you see the images of the protests themselves, it is quite spectacular just how many people there are, and also quite spectacular how the media as a whole has been doing an excellent job of trying its best to ignore that any of that has been happening.
	So if you're interested in learning more about that, go check that article out.
	It's a very good one.
	If we move along, we've got a new premium video from John and Carl talking about the politics of Star Trek.
	Yeah, so I actually really enjoyed doing this video.
	It's our first foray into science fiction, which is replete with very important commentary and messages on life and the human condition as we know it.
	So I highly recommend giving that a watch if you're into Star Trek or things like that.
	And we've had some pretty good responses so far, so I look forward to joining the discussion.
	Do you come to an answer to the question of whether Star Trek truly is the socialist utopia?
	We definitely come to an answer to that.
	We also ask many more interesting questions, such as, is Picard a daddest icon?
	Ooh, interesting.
	So check that one out if you are a bronze tier member or above.
	And finally, for all of our gold tier members, just a reminder that this Friday coming up we have the gold tier call, where any gold tier members can call in on Zoom and join and have a chat with us.
	Carl will be involved.
	We don't know if it's going to be Me, John, Callum, who else is going to be joining Carl with that one?
	So tune in and you'll be able to find out and just have a nice natter with us.
	So, now all that's out of the way, let's get into the news and let's take a look at how all across California, primarily centred around San Francisco, there has been a massive uptick in the amount of looting that has been going on and how the state seems to be almost...
	Not necessarily encouraging it, but certainly sanctioning it.
	Not punishing it the way that they should.
	So we can see this article from The Independent here discussing the recent waves of looting that have been going on, pointing out that Nordstrom raided by 80 thieves in California amid a wave of smash and grabs across the states.
	So they carry on.
	A Nordstrom department store in Walnut Creek, California, was the target of looters on Saturday night amid a wave of smash and grab raids across the US.
	Eyewitnesses claim as many as 80 people in ski masks rushed into the store at approximately 8.45pm, with 25 cars blocking the street outside.
	Excuse me.
	Now, many leftists watching anything like this, as has become pretty typical of them over the past year and a half, two years, would probably look at these sorts of scenes and go, well, these people are obviously poor.
	They're trying to feed themselves.
	They're trying to feed themselves with fancy designer items.
	They're just trying to survive.
	Except stores like Nordstrom, many may be aware, sell designer clothes like Ralph Lauren.
	So I'm sure that...
	I don't know the nutritional value of a Ralph Lauren blazer, but I doubt it's going to keep you fed throughout the winter.
	I'll just put it like that way.
	Put it like that.
	And, yeah, so let's carry on.
	Videos taken by bystanders now show some of the thieves rushing from the store with merchandise and then driving off in the waiting vehicle.
	So as it said, they had about 25 cars blocking the street outside, and then as soon as they were done...
	They were able to use these cars as getaway vehicles.
	So this does seem to be a spate of looting, but it also seems to be highly organised.
	Yeah, I mean, 50 to 80 people, I can't get that many people together for a birthday party.
	I don't know if I know that many people anymore, to be perfectly honest.
	That's quite some organisation going on there.
	I know, it's very strange to see this sort of going down the way it is.
	And there were reports of a department store workers being punched and kicked, and one being pepper sprayed.
	Three people were treated for injuries.
	So, when you hear lots of people on the left talking about how...
	Theft from large corporations and department stores and all these sorts of places.
	Oh, they're insured.
	They don't need to worry about the money.
	It's just property.
	It's just property.
	You wouldn't hurt somebody over property.
	These are the real risks and costs of allowing this kind of lawlessness to happen in your city, your state, your town, wherever.
	Because the matter of fact is there are people on the front line in these situations Who are going to be the targets of people's ire, people's abuse.
	If people are in a state of mind where they are pumped full of adrenaline, they know that what they are doing is illegal and they don't want to get arrested for it, the likelihood is if you get in their way or if they think you are getting in their way, they are going to do whatever they need to to get you out of their way.
	And that will include hurting you, pepper spraying you, and potentially, if it comes to it, they might even shoot you.
	You never know.
	Which has happened in the past.
	Yes.
	Exactly.
	In these specific situations, it doesn't appear that it's come to anybody being shot as of yet, thankfully, but in the future, if this sort of behaviour is allowed to continue, who knows how it could escalate.
	The Walnut Creek Police say that three people were apprehended on Saturday, and a gun was recovered from one suspect.
	So, yeah, there you go right there.
	One of them actually had a gun.
	And therefore, if somebody had decided to make a particular nuisance of themselves, they might have ended up getting themselves killed.
	Sorry, where's the controller?
	Just there.
	Here it is.
	Apologies, everybody.
	Just need to do something.
	There we go.
	Yeah, so somebody could have ended up getting killed.
	And if they had, there is the question, how would the media have treated that?
	And these people were obviously poor, destitute, lonesome people.
	Desperate people.
	Desperate, trying to survive.
	They had to kill or else they would have starved without their designer shoes and jewellery.
	Basically what I'm asking, would they have treated them the same way that they treated Kyle Rittenhouse?
	That's a very good question.
	We have the footage showing himself desperately trying to survive and having to shoot people as a result of other people's actions in assaulting him.
	The verdict came out saying, oh, he was not guilty of all charges, as anybody with a functioning set of eyeballs could have told you, but the media is still pushing the narrative that it's an example of white supremacy.
	But when all of these people do this...
	They're not as condemning as they could be, I find.
	They tend to portray these sorts of people as a band of Robin Hoods, victims of the system, you know.
	And this all just happened, they continue, 24 hours after the Louis Vuitton store in downtown San Francisco's Union Square was raided along with several other businesses.
	So you can see the patterns here.
	Once again, these are not These people are hitting very high-end shops so that they can steal very high-end, high-valued products, presumably so that they can sell them off and make a big profit off of it.
	So this is not coming across like people struggling to survive.
	This is coming across very organised.
	And there is also the question, how coincidental is it that this is all happening around the time immediately after the verdict of Kyle Rittenhouse has come out?
	That is a question we also need to ask.
	I would say it's probably not coincidental at all, personally.
	But in July, a large group of thieves also made off with designer handbags and purses from the city's Nyman Marcus store in a coordinated raid that was captured on video by members of the public.
	The San Francisco mayor, London Breed, and police chief Bill Scott said at a press conference on Saturday that action will be taken to thwart repeated incidents.
	We will flood this area with police officers for the foreseeable future.
	As you walk around today, you will see police officers in the Union Square, but we're not going to stop at Union Square, Chief Scott said.
	So, I mean, given California's track record with dealing with crimes, I'm not entirely certain that they're going to do this.
	Tough on crime, are they?
	No, not exactly.
	I'm not particularly confident they're going to do that much to protect these businesses, shall we say, given the general population of California, within the metropolitan cities at least, and their views on property rights, shall we say.
	A Louis Vuitton store in suburban Chicago was also raided in broad daylight on Wednesday, with up to $100,000 in products taken.
	And in October, the Bottega Veneta store on the city's Magnificent Miles was also hit by 12 men who stole 35 handbags.
	And basically what this is all amounting to is that this is all becoming pretty routine, sadly.
	It's quite the five-finger discount, isn't it?
	$100,000 of Louis Vuitton products.
	Goodness me.
	Split between, I mean, obviously I don't know how many people there are, but even between 50 to 80 people, that's still a decent takeaway pay by the time you've sold everything.
	But let's take a look at what happened visually from this most recent Saturday, or Friday, when the Louis Vuitton was hit.
	So if you just want to play this clip so we can hear it, John...
	For those listening, rather than watching, there is a man with what appears to be a handful of designer clothes running away, wearing two masks on his face to conceal his identity.
	A man has just run into a car, and the police are battering the windows.
	What looks like a getaway car.
	Yes, what absolutely appears to be a getaway car.
	The man is trying to drive away, but the police have blocked him in.
	A nice car as well, convertible.
	I know, exactly.
	He must be really strapped for cash.
	And they've got him on the ground.
	And if you listen here, you can hear the...
	Is that worth it?
	Commentary of the person presumably holding the camera.
	Yeah, just basically saying, is that worth it?
	Is that worth it?
	As if they have really any context as to why any of this is happening in the first place.
	The police do appear to be being pretty brutal with that car there.
	But at the end of the day...
	We lack the context necessary to really judge whether that was appropriate behaviour or not from the police in terms of how they were treating that, because we know for a fact that there were people in these sorts of raids from Saturday and Friday that were hurt, that were pepper sprayed, and that were assaulted.
	So, for all we know, that man could have either been involved with the people who had done that, or was one of the people who had been going out and assaulting people.
	So, the Commentary by the person holding the camera.
	Oh, is it worth it?
	Yes.
	Yes, it is absolutely worth it.
	And if you scroll down, John, just on this Twitter feed, you can see some of the absolutely inane and vacuous responses that some people are putting there.
	Won't somebody do something?
	That poor store has a family and a mortgage.
	No, this is not about the particular business that this is happening to.
	I'm not going to feel particularly sorry for Louis Vuitton or Nordstrom or any big retail store getting hit.
	No, but we have rule of law for a reason, don't we?
	We have the rule of law.
	These need to be applied evenly to any and all businesses.
	If you begin to make exceptions for one case, then it's only a matter of time until the exceptions begin to be applied more broadly.
	And also, once again, people are on the front lines in these situations.
	You can say, oh, the poor store has a family and a mortgage, and yes, you're very clever and insightful with your witty comments in saying so, but the fact of the matter is that store has people on the front lines who probably do have a family and a mortgage, and If a store ends up going out of business because it becomes too dangerous for the store to operate there anymore, or if they just end up getting hurt in the process of a robbery, then I'd say that that is worth enforcing the rule of law, as you say.
	And if we carry on, and go along to the next article, we can see how people, how the experts, shall we say, are treating this.
	Experts caution the use of looting in describing rash...
	What would we do without experts?
	I know, I know.
	Goodness me.
	From their ivory towers here to bestow their grand wisdom upon us.
	So, here's just a few quotes because this article is basically just a transcript of the video they play at the top.
	So, they basically point out that according to, I believe it's Californian law, looting is officially designed, sorry, defined as something that happens during a state of emergency and...
	There's no state of emergency in California.
	Oh, I love these big brain fact checks we get these days.
	I know, right?
	There's no state of emergency going on in California right now.
	So it can't be looting.
	Yeah, so it can't be looting, but in saying that there is no state of emergency, and also referring once again to the status of the high-end stores that are being burgled and robbed from, so you're basically saying there's no emergency.
	Therefore, there's no excuse for anybody to steal these things, because if they needed essential items, they are not in a state of emergency.
	They'd be able to just go down the store and presumably buy whatever it is that they need.
	So, these people are robbers, these people are thieves, but if we continue, as the Bay Area grapples with a wave of Seemingly organised smash-and-grab robberies this weekend, policing and journalism analysts are cautioning against the use of the term looting.
	The Louis Vuitton store was burglarised and looted.
	The Burberry in Westfield Mall was burglarised and looted, is what was said by the San Francisco Police Chief Bill Scott in a press conference to reporters on Saturday.
	And I don't know if we've got footage of them in the video up top, John, but...
	Bill Scott, this will become necessary to point out, Bill Scott, the police chief, is a black man, and he was using the term looting, and I would say he had every right to do so.
	Whether or not there is a specific legal definition for looting, we all know what you mean when you say looting.
	You mean a large group of people going to a place where they shouldn't be stealing things, and stealing things, often en masse.
	Yes, legal experts do not have a monopoly on the English language.
	Oh, well, they wish they did.
	They would certainly like to.
	If we carry on, we are talking about...
	No, no, just stay on that article.
	We're talking about two incidents.
	We're not going to call this looting.
	This is organised robbery.
	That's what it is, said Sergeant Christian Camarillo, Public Information Officer for San Jose Police.
	And to be fair...
	I think that it is accurate also to call it organized robbery, because once again there is such an amount of people, 50 to 80 people, doing these sorts of things.
	They have getaway vehicles prepared.
	This is organized robbery, and I think in different times when people were less treading on eggshells about discussing these kinds of things, we would have described this as organized crime in general, because we don't know the Background of the people doing this.
	But people are treading on eggshells here because they say the term looting is racially loaded?
	Yes, let's get into that.
	So, some person, presumably some kind of expert, said looting is a term, I think it was an ex-police sergeant in the area, said that looting is a term that we typically use when people of colour or urban dwellers are doing something.
	We tend to not use that term for other people when they do the exact same thing.
	So it's racist.
	Looting is racist.
	You heard it here first.
	Excuse me, but I'm pretty sure I've seen plenty of times white people being described as looters as well.
	Anybody involved in the BLM riots of last year, who is Antifa, who are an overwhelming I would describe as looters if they were doing exactly that.
	That being breaking into stores en masse and robbing stuff that they do not need for the purposes of just stealing stuff for money.
	But yes, you are correct.
	They are basically just trying to say if you use the term looting, there's a racial element to that term.
	I love the phraseology here.
	It's a term we typically use when people of colour are doing something.
	I don't think we use the word looting when people of colour are getting degrees or driving cars, things like that.
	We call it looting when it is looting.
	Yes, that is absolutely correct.
	And it is very strange that they are nitpicking semantic arguments to distance people from that term.
	It sounds almost like they want to make looting seem like a neutral action by implying it only happens in emergence And therefore it's justified.
	But it's classic media propaganda in the sense that the last resort of a completely failed argument is semantic quibbling.
	Oh, yes.
	They have no defence for this.
	And I don't know what the point of trying to be like, oh, don't call it looting, it's organised robbery.
	Well, yeah, it's both.
	Why don't we just use the terms interchangeably, to be perfectly honest.
	And if we move along, let's take a look at some of the other stuff that's been going on in California.
	So if you play this clip, you can see there's a...
	Large group of thieves empty out an entire store in Oakland, California.
	If you just play this, John, it's strangely amusing, this one, to be perfectly honest, sad as it is.
	Primarily because, for anybody not watching, they just don't end.
	They just keep coming.
	There's a clown car of Antifa sat outside this store.
	They just keep going.
	Just keep emerging through.
	It's almost like it's a movie set and they're running around the back and coming through again.
	There's just so many of them.
	Yeah, exactly.
	It's ridiculous.
	And then they knock the camera over and then we can't really see anything else.
	There's so many of these people robbing this one store that it seems that some of the people who initially entered don't even have time to...
	Well, some of the people who haven't entered yet don't have time to get in before the people who came in first are already leaving.
	Mm.
	It's that hectic, and there's that many people robbing this one store.
	And I looked into this, and there's a little bit of information here, which is that the store was called Prime in Oakland, California, and it's been hit twice in the same month, presumably by the same people, because they know it can be an easy target, and presumably also because they know about how lax certain laws about robbery and theft are in California, which we'll get into in a moment.
	So they just know it's an easy target.
	They can just go and do it again.
	And as you can imagine, that's really hurt their business.
	The people there are struggling.
	And if you are interested, they have set up a GoFundMe, if you just want to scoot along to that.
	Yeah, they're trying to raise $10,000 so that they can help support the business after these two break-in and lootings that have been going on.
	I know GoFundMe isn't the best organization at the moment after what they've been doing with...
	After what they did to anybody trying to raise money for Kyle Rittenhouse.
	So I do not support GoHuntFundMe as a result of that, but purely for the sake of saying that this business deserves your help.
	If this is the place that they've put up their crowdsourcing for money, then just go with it if you feel like helping them out.
	So if we move along again, what is California and San Francisco in particular doing to try to mitigate these issues that they are currently experiencing?
	Well, the San Francisco mayor's plan to combat flash mob looting will limit access to stores ahead of the holidays.
	Interesting tactic to take and run with, isn't it?
	So the San Francisco mayor, again London Breed, announced that the city will limit car access to the city's popular shopping district, Union Square, in response to the mobs of thieves that have ransacked high-end stores in recent days.
	We're going to be making some changes to Union Square and how cars are able to access it.
	Breed said at a press conference there will be limited access in terms of when you come to this area.
	So the way he's phrased that makes it sound like it's not just limited access to cars, but also limited access to when people can go into that area.
	Right.
	So I can understand that when there is increased crime, there's difficulty handling this sort of thing when it seems to be organised on the scale that it is.
	But this just seems to be a way to almost punish the businesses themselves by making it more difficult for people to access them.
	So how do we help businesses by punishing businesses?
	Yeah, no, it's not very sensible.
	I do like one thing about this, though, which is that limiting cars' direct access to the shopfronts will make it harder for getaway cars to operate.
	So there is one small glimmer of common sense in this policy.
	Yes, that is true.
	And the article makes note here that the city saw a staggering increase in car break-ins as well, with the central district alone reporting a 753% increase in such crimes from May of last year to 2021.
	All of this, to me, just seems to be pointing to one inevitable conclusion.
	That California is a lost cause.
	To be perfectly honest, I don't see how California can be salvaged at this point.
	You had the chance earlier on this year with the recall for Gavin Newsom, and they just chose to stick with the same old, same old.
	So things in California don't really seem to be improving at any rate.
	And then let's see why it is that things might have escalated so much in California to the way that they are now.
	So people may be aware, I've pointed it out in this, throughout June, throughout July, throughout most of this year there's been lots and lots of shoplifting going on in San Francisco.
	And there continues to be lots of shoplifting going on in San Francisco.
	And you can see here this New York Post article, San Francisco cops say viral Walgreens shoplifting incident is par for the course.
	So this is just another incident where people have been filmed just stealing stuff from a shop and then running out immediately.
	No consequences.
	The worst that can happen is the shopkeeper will run up and say, please stop doing that or start shouting at them.
	But the shopkeeper, of course, has no recourse on which to protect their property.
	Because California.
	So San Francisco has become a shoplifter's paradise with thieves like this one caught on video looting a Walgreens emboldened by relaxed punishment for the crime as businesses shutter, cops say.
	The Walgreens heist, which happened right in front of a security guard, renewed the debate over a controversial city law called Proposition 47.
	What happened in that Walgreens has been going on in that city for quite a while.
	San Francisco Police Lieutenant Lieutenant Tracy McRae said, I'm used to it, McRae continued.
	I mean, we can have a greatest hits compilation of people just walking in and cleaning out the store shelves and security guards, the people who work there just standing by helplessly because they can't do anything.
	Cops and prosecutors are at odds over Proposition 47, a 2014 referendum that lowered the penalty for stealing goods worth less than $950 from a felony to a misdemeanor.
	McRae said that the law only emboldens criminals.
	I mean, that should be obvious.
	What were the people thinking when they introduced this proposition?
	Lax laws like this haven't stopped people from being unnecessarily imprisoned.
	They have only encouraged an escalated lawlessness in San Francisco and the rest of the state.
	And just to make a point of this as well, this is how you create areas with great poverty.
	Yes.
	People seem to have a misplaced assumption that crime is a result of poverty.
	I would make the opposite argument that poverty is a result of crime.
	When you get businesses and neighbourhoods that have businesses where the people are not punished for stealing from them, from committing violent crimes and other such things, you are increasing the business risk and cost of operating in those neighbourhoods, whether it be insurance or just increased risk of physical damage done to people and the property themselves.
	And what happens when that happens is businesses move out.
	They don't get replaced because people don't want to invest in that neighbourhood anymore because it's too dangerous or just costs too much.
	And therefore, all of a sudden, you suddenly have created a poverty-stricken neighbourhood where nobody wants to live there and crime is rife.
	Yeah, I think we can all get behind that proposition.
	Moving on to something related, we have the fact that a lot of the violence and lawlessness that we're seeing in America, particularly over the last year or two, has been related to racial justice activism.
	In particular, we have with your segment just now the declaration of various legal experts that looting is a bad word to use because it is racist.
	Now, you could argue that there is a particular organisation doing the rounds which holds more responsibility for this attitude than anything else, and that organisation is BLM. Well, one based Irishman, whose story we're about to get into in this segment, had quite a lot to say about BLM. He had a lot to say.
	And the Twitter users said that what he had to say was disgusting and horrendous.
	Twitter?
	Offended at something?
	I'll never.
	This is a statement from Dublin City University, which is the employer of the Irishman in question.
	And I'm just going to read it out quickly.
	Dublin City University is aware of recent posts to a personal blog belonging to a member of its staff.
	And it carries on.
	We understand and acknowledge that people will find parts of this blog offensive.
	DCU is deeply committed to promoting equality, diversity and inclusion.
	The university does not endorse any of the viewpoints expressed in this blog and they do not reflect the views of the university, its staff or student body.
	So this is a fairly standard statement from the university.
	You'll notice they haven't fired this man, who we are going to get into, but they have released this very sort of public relations statement saying, get off our back, we're on your side, we're diverse, we're equal, we're inclusive.
	Given how many of these statements get put out, they almost come from a script at this point.
	It's so standard.
	They always say, we're promoting equality, diversity, inclusion, or more accurately, as Gadsad would put it, diversity, inclusion, and equity.
	Or die.
	Die.
	D-I-E. They always feel the need to put that out there.
	We don't endorse any of the viewpoints.
	They don't reflect the views of the university, et cetera, et cetera.
	Just please, like you say, it's not our fault.
	We ain't done nothing.
	Exactly.
	So...
	As is usually the case with Twitter, the condemnation has made its way twice around the internet before the actual statements have got their boots on.
	So we move to the next article.
	DCU released a statement after massive backlash to Lecturer's disgusting BLM blog.
	The blog, belonging to Dr.
	Mark Humphreys from the University's School of Computing, contained comments such as, The whole Black Lives Matter movement in the US is nonsense built on sand, and Floyd was another useless criminal who dug his own grave.
	Pretty spicy, I think you'll agree.
	Can I also just point out in this article that Humphreys himself, when he released a statement, said, I've expressed my opinions on various political and religious topics online.
	I do so under my own name, unlike the legions of internet trolls who've targeted me over the years, so dunking them all for being cowards.
	It's very much the moat in his eye and the beam in theirs at this point, isn't it?
	So carrying on, as society is not really rational or secular at this point, because we have a civic religion, BLM may not be criticized and blasphemy will not be tolerated.
	This sort of statement by Dr.
	Humphreys is, while it's what a lot of people may be thinking, it's not something you're going to find on the BBC, and that's why it attracts this level of response.
	Another of his tweets claims that BLM may have caused 3,000 homicides and references the following article from which I will quote extensively because it is a good summary of a number of studies and statistical reports.
	If we can move to the next article, John, and scroll down to the first paragraph.
	So this article introduces itself.
	Many politically acceptable explanations have been advanced for this, with left-leaning publications like Vox preferring to focus on the undeniable economic devastation wrought by the COVID-19 pandemic.
	However, an alternative explanation fits the data far better.
	Crime increased because major police departments had their budgets slashed and reeled in their stops dramatically, and similar chaos has followed such woke policy moves nearly every time they have been implemented.
	What do you make of that, Harry?
	I mean, it's pretty on the nose, pretty accurate, I would say, to be perfectly honest.
	And they're calling out publications like Vox.
	I mean, I think the most famous example that we can take from what they're referring to here was, was it CNN or MSNBC did the, everyone knows about it, fiery but mostly peaceful protest.
	Yes.
	Organisations trying to downplay what it is that they've been doing and also try and shift the blame onto anything else that they possibly can.
	You know, the economic devastation wrought by the COVID-19 pandemic.
	Ignore that plenty of businesses were burnt down, the kind that Kyle Rittenhouse was trying to protect last year.
	Plenty of businesses were burnt down and, as far as I'm aware, burnt out shells where there once were businesses are not good for the economy.
	And bearing in mind that these slashes in police budgets did not come out of the ether but were a direct result of the George Floyd incident and also the BLM campaigns that, for example, all cops are bastards and defund the police.
	Yes.
	Do you not think there might be room here for objective criticism of BLM?
	I think they've already started to...
	Carl did a segment on it a few weeks ago, refund the police.
	They have, that's true.
	Because they realise what a terrible idea it was.
	Yes, but...
	But moving on to something which I think reinforces the segment you did previously.
	Alongside budget cuts and at least citywide declines in stops came perhaps the ultimate empirical validation of broken windows theory.
	BWT, the controversial if oft-validated criminological theory originally proposed by James Q. Wilson and George Kelling, argues that visible signs of crime, chaos and disorder create urban environments that serve as breeding grounds for further and more extreme misbehaviour.
	Yeah, and I agree with what they're talking about there.
	It's the generally recognised theory that if you're walking down a street wherein everything is destroyed, you know that this is a street wherein there are no consequences for destroying something.
	Whereas if you go down a street where everything is perfectly preserved, where they've got lovely clean hedgerows, as Rory would love to see, then you know that there will be very little tolerance for messing with how that place is.
	But it gets worse.
	where George Floyd died, rioters destroyed much of a famous and heavily minority business district, ironically, and set an active police station on fire with the cops initially inside.
	In Seattle, Black Block and Black Lives Matter activists set up a literal city-state known as CHAZ, or CHOP, within which six people were eventually shot, and I believe shot dead.
	Yes, I believe there were also a number of sexual assaults in CHAZ as well, which is ironic, given the, well, I suppose typical, given I'm sure there was a high concentration of male feminists within CHAZ. Yeah, that's true.
	In Portland, Oregon, the well-known cesspool of all leftist violence and direct action.
	I think they've got riots going on there, either at the moment or there were over the weekend as well.
	I'm not surprised.
	There are always riots in Portland.
	It's like the weather in Scotland.
	It's always riots.
	Or rain.
	But the well-known federal courthouse was attacked for roughly 100 days running, often with M-80 fireworks used as homemade mortars.
	Again, anything to criticise here?
	Are BLM still beyond criticism?
	It is no exaggeration to say that the huge majority of rioters were essentially given the unpunished room to destroy originally suggested by Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake during her city's 2015 riots.
	Empirical articles from sources such as Courthouse News and Pamplin Media Group have pointed out that roughly 91% of arrested Portland rioters were never prosecuted for anything, and these figures frankly seem similar across other major cities like Chicago, which is also seeing recent looting.
	It seems logically obvious that even crimes as serious as murder could occur with relative impunity in this environment.
	The majority of the attackers of the six people seriously or fatally shot inside Chaz are still at large.
	That's no surprise.
	Within CHAZ, I think all emergency services refused to even go in.
	Because it wasn't safe.
	It had armed barricades in it.
	Yes, and I think on the barricades they had stuff written like, USA ends here, or something along those lines.
	And just on this note, I would like to plug this excellent book by Andy Ngo called Unmasked.
	Or Antifa Unmasked.
	And this is a very good journalistic account by Andy of what went on in Portland, particularly with Antifa during last year.
	Yes, Andy has himself been on the front lines a number of times.
	More times than he should have, and more than any individual has a right to be.
	Yes, exactly.
	So he has great first-hand experience.
	But also, pointing out here that 91% of people arrested in Portland who were rioters, were never prosecuted for anything, even if they were arrested, you had people like Kamala Harris promoting and pushing these funds to help pay the bail of people who had been arrested.
	Because, don't you understand, they're just innocent people just fighting for racial justice.
	They don't deserve to be punished for burning down their own neighbourhoods.
	Yes, a cynical observation of this situation would propose that the Democrats and the rioters are on the same side and their enemy is civil society, which is you.
	But that would be a cynical observation, so I'm not going to make it.
	If we move on to the next segment, Dr.
	Humphrey's response, going back here, was quite interesting.
	He released a statement, as you mentioned previously, saying that for 20 years he'd expressed his opinions on various topics under his own name.
	He is willing to debate in public at the L&H, the NUIG, and in DCU debates.
	He has written op-eds under his own name, such as for the Sunday Times and RTE. This week, some students discovered my thoughts on the Black Lives Matter movement last year and got offended.
	I never showed these thoughts to any student.
	I do not discuss politics with students ever.
	Dr Humphreys says politics are completely absent from his lectures.
	I respect that immensely.
	I think that the classic saying is that teachers are there to teach you how to think, not what to think.
	And if you are inserting your politics into lectures, you are not doing your job right.
	Yes, and if we move to the front page of his blog...
	Dr.
	Humphreys appears to be doing exactly the right thing, according to a classical liberal democratic society.
	He's not using his position at university to indoctrinate malleable young minds into his politics, unlike some we could mention.
	And as he says on the front page of his blog here, I have three lives.
	Computing, history, politics.
	This site is for my third life only.
	It has nothing to do with my other two lives.
	If you try and drag my third life into my other two lives, I will block you, you are warned.
	So he seems pretty solid about where his boundaries lie.
	Clearly he's made the proper separation between his political views and his professional life, unlike many leftists who believe that everything is political and are temperamentally unable to separate the two.
	For a proper modern leftist, everything from breakfast to bubble bath is political.
	No wonder these people suffer from chronic anxiety, as we can see in the next one.
	There is a quote I pulled out from here.
	In 2016, nearly two-thirds of college students reported overwhelming anxiety, up from 50% just five years early.
	Two-thirds!
	That's quite incredible, isn't it, really?
	Yes.
	Now, if you haven't been following us closely or you're new to the channel, you might wonder, is it really fair to say that leftists believe that everything is political?
	Well, let's see what they have to say for themselves.
	We go to the next article.
	Few figures from the history of Marxism appear so frequently in the press and in public debate as Antonio Gramsci.
	For example, in December 2019, the New York Times used Gramsci's oft-quoted phrase, the old is dying and the new cannot be born, in an op-ed to characterise the state of affairs at the end of the decade.
	Similarly, the author Salman Rushdie, when asked by Prospect magazine for his favourite quotation, recalled Gramsci's use of the phrase, pessimism of the intellect and optimism of the will.
	On the British left, there is no shortage of allusions to Gramscian terms such as hegemony and common sense in political commentary.
	I will butt in here to say this article is wrong about common sense.
	It's been used since the 1530s.
	I was going to say I'd be very surprised if common sense was a Gramscian concept.
	But it is absolutely correct about hegemony, which is a product of Gramscian.
	Recently, the New Statesman even hailed Gramsci as the Marxist thinker for our times.
	And boy, is he!
	In the prison notebooks, the capacity of Marxism to create a new conception of the world is rooted in Gramsci's philosophy of praxis.
	Here, Gramsci redefines philosophy as an integral part of the realization of proletarian hegemony.
	Everything is political, even philosophy or philosophies, and the only philosophy is history in action, that is, life itself.
	So if the godfather of modern leftism says that everything is political, I think we should take him at his word.
	If you ask me, making everything political seems like the best possible way to create a miserable world.
	Yes.
	It must also be pointed out that Gramsci is especially impressive in the influence that he's had continuing on from his death, given that he...
	wasn't he the head of the Communist Party in Italy and then got imprisoned by the Fascist Party and then spent the rest of his life in prison until he died and most of the work that we have from him was taken from his...
	As I mentioned, the prison notebooks, where he came up with a lot of these ideas.
	And he is also the person, I believe, this is coming from Roger Shruton's Fools for Odds and Firebrands, who came up with the idea, not of just the praxis, but the praxis has to be implemented by a sort of elite class of intellectuals, which is why you see so many of these people in university positions.
	Yes, and it's worth pointing out that Gramsci is also directly cited as one of the main inspirations and intellectual forces behind critical theory and critical race theory in particular.
	Yes.
	So yes, Gramsci is a bad guy and it's worth getting acquainted with his ideas because they are enacting themselves in real life as we speak.
	Yeah, just because he was imprisoned by the fascists doesn't make him a good guy inherently.
	He was a communist.
	Communists and fascists are both bad.
	Yes, Scruton makes the argument that Gramsci and Mussolini were essentially trying to get to the same point with different colour flags.
	Yes.
	To paraphrase.
	So, just to conclude this segment, so we'll go to Mark's Twitter.
	Bravo to Dr Mark Humphries for having an opinion and having the guts to stick by it.
	I hope you're watching, British Conservatives.
	Go and follow the guy on Twitter if you want.
	Have a look through his blog or whatever you think is the best way to support someone who's standing up for classical liberal values.
	If there's a takeaway from this, I think it's that the power of social justice activism isn't nearly as absolute as it likes you to think.
	You can have your opinions, and you can talk about them, and the repercussions are merely unpleasant in most cases.
	In one sense, I would say you have a moral duty to voice your opinion.
	If you self-censor out of fear for what your friends or even random internet strangers might do to you, then you're handing modern leftism the stick with which to beat you.
	I think I'll end it there.
	Yes.
	Also, respect to Humphreys for having anti-jihad and anti-communist in his Twitter bio, just because of the fact that, sadly, those are not things that you see particularly regularly on Twitter.
	You're more likely to see a hammer and sickle in someone's Twitter handle than you are to see someone with anti-communist.
	Yes, or a collection of exotic pronouns.
	Oh, absolutely.
	You hoard your pronouns.
	Right, so let's move on.
	So for anybody who's not been paying attention somehow, last week there was, of course, the failed Liverpool bombing where a Christian terrorist put a big, big pair of quotation marks over that.
	Attempted to bomb, well, seemingly attempted to bomb a women's hospital in the city of Liverpool.
	He was fortunately foiled because of the fact, I believe, the taxi that he was in, the driver, sort of realised that something funky was going on, got out of the car and managed to lock the bomber in before he was able to get to his target, and therefore the car blew up with the terrorist inside of it, Happy ending for everybody, or at least the happiest ending that you can have when somebody's trying to blow up a hospital.
	But from that, we'll show the meme in a minute or two, but there have been...
	It's a good meme.
	Yes, it's a very good meme.
	There have been a number of things come out of the other side of that, including, as you would expect, politicians and news outlets embarrassing themselves, tripping up over themselves to give condolences, and not always to the right people.
	But there was a meme that we have just mentioned, that was put out by a councillor, a British councillor called Paul Nickerson, where he was showing the wreckage of this burnt-out car with Jeremy Corbyn, amusingly photoshopped in, approaching with a wreath in his hand, obviously to pay condolences to one of his favourite voters, I would imagine.
	I mean, I wouldn't be surprised if he was a Labour voter.
	I wonder why that was funny.
	Yes, exactly.
	We'll find out why exactly there's so much truth to the idea that comedy always has a little bit of truth in it, or in this case, a lot of truth.
	But first, Jeremy Corbyn was not best pleased with this meme, and in fact has decided to take legal action against Paul Nickerson himself for sharing it.
	So here you can see that we've got this thread up, Jeremy Corbyn's official Twitter page, Thread.
	Mm-hmm.
	to pay substantial damages and legal costs to Jeremy Corbyn regarding false defamatory statement.
	And he links to a Facebook post, which we'll see in a few minutes.
	But yeah, Jeremy Corbyn is so butthurt about a funny meme that somebody shared about him online that he is taking legal action.
	And you can be sure that if the leftists didn't have their wonderful cancel culture mobs to bully you off the internet for making a rude or jokey comment towards them, and instead had the backing of a legal team and lots of money with which to fund it, anybody making a joke about anything to do with left-wing movements or causes would probably be getting these sorts of cases thrown at them.
	Yes.
	Corbyn seems to have just taken particular offence to this one because it regards him personally.
	Yes, they call it lawfare, don't they, when they do this, when they have lots and lots of lawsuits, often frivolous ones, in order to further a political objective.
	Yes.
	But, let's just be honest here.
	Jeremy Corbyn, what an absolute joke of a man you are.
	Grow a set of balls, for God's sake.
	It was a joke.
	It was not a false defamatory statement.
	It was a joke.
	And even then, there's enough evidence to back up the reason for making that joke that makes it even funnier.
	And you do not help yourself in these situations.
	Everybody knows it was a joke.
	You know it was a joke.
	Get over yourself.
	It kind of sounds like the sort of primary school kid who would have run to the teacher over anything.
	This is cry-bullying.
	Yeah.
	Absolute cry-bullying.
	If we move along, we can see a little bit further down the thread.
	So this three out of five, Councillor Paul Nickerson's Photoshop Twitter post about me, failed to understand the seriousness of the threat and did a disservice to all those affected by the attack and their loved ones.
	Oh.
	Okay, so he's seemingly making a series of condolences here, and references to the fact that, oh, it's so terrible.
	But the fact of the matter is, this does not diminish any kind of threat.
	I'm sure it brings great attention to the amount of threat, because if it's something that you're supporting, Jeremy, then there must be something dangerous about it, let's be perfectly honest here.
	I mean, and once again, basically, this is the absolute...
	Imagine Jeremy Corbyn in charge of this country during World War II. He would have been putting people in prison for making jokes about the Blitz.
	Oh, God.
	With this logic.
	Let's take a look at the Facebook post, which has the full statement here.
	So, he makes mention here, the post included, this is in reference to Paul Nickerson's post, the post included a fake photograph of Mr Corbyn laying a poppy wreath at the side of a burning taxi outside the Liverpool Women's Hospital where a terror attack had taken place on Remembrance Sunday, killing a suicide bomber and injuring others.
	So, this is all stuff that we know.
	We'll show you, give you a little sneak peek.
	Of the meme in just a moment.
	But this post also includes a transcript of the apology that Paul Nickerson himself gave, which says, on 15th November 2021, a defamatory tweet for which I accept full responsibility was published on my Twitter account.
	The tweet targeted Jeremy Corbyn and included a fake photograph of him laying a poppy wreath at the side, blah, blah, blah.
	The false photograph, captioned by the word unsurprisingly, gave the completely untrue impression that Jeremy Corbyn supports terrorist violence, including suicide bombings, which without any hesitation, I wholly accept he does not.
	And I understand that for legal reasons, if someone's throwing a lawsuit in your direction, you're going to have to pay out legal damages for defaming somebody.
	It's probably a legal necessity that you throw out an apology like this.
	However...
	Why?
	It comes across so weak.
	It's the fact that he caved so quickly as well.
	That's just pathetic.
	It comes across so weak.
	He's cooked himself, basically, in doing this.
	Classic conservatives.
	Yeah, you're absolutely right there.
	Everybody knows it wasn't defamatory.
	It was a joke.
	You captioned it with unsurprisingly, because you knew it was a joke, which is actually quite a funny caption.
	But you had to cave.
	You absolutely had to cave, didn't you?
	But...
	Let's take a little bit of joy out of this.
	Let's take a look at the meme itself.
	I hope you're all watching that out there, because it is pretty funny.
	I think the tweet, as you'd imagine, has been taken down, so we can only preserve it through screenshots, and I'm glad that people took it.
	It's a pretty great photoshop, to be fair.
	It's an obvious photoshop, but it looks pretty convincing from far enough away, you could say.
	I don't know that there's something just hilarious about this meme, and the fact that it became illegal action makes it just all the funnier as far as I'm sitting.
	Yep.
	So if we move along, let's take a look into why this has a little bit more of a grain of truth...
	Oh no!
	Surely not!
	...more a block of truth than a grain of truth inside of it, given Corbyn's personal history.
	So, Jeremy Corbyn, I was present at wreath-laying, but I don't think I was involved.
	Headed with a nice big image of him, very involved...
	Inlaying a wreath.
	And this was at...
	What was this at?
	So Corbyn was speaking two days after the Daily Mail unearthed pictures of the Labour MP holding a wreath at the event near the graves of four Palestinian leaders believed to be collected to Black September, which carried out the terror attack on Israelis in the 1972 Olympics, in which 11 people died.
	Hmm.
	Very interesting.
	Well, surely this was just a simple slip-up.
	A one-off.
	Surely, yeah, one-off.
	There's no history that you could ever look into of Jeremy Corbyn performing similar feats of mind-numbing stupidity throughout his political career, is there?
	Oh, wait!
	If we move along, we've got this lovely article from Guido Fawkes.
	100 times Jeremy Corbyn sided with terrorists.
	Oh, dear.
	Because I'm sure there's probably more than 100, but they managed to compile at least 100.
	And let's read out a few of the highlights here.
	So it is a laundry list that you can go through.
	Invited two IRA members to Parliament two weeks after the Brighton bombing.
	Bad timing.
	A bit tasteless there, a bit soon, but okay.
	Attended Bloody Sunday commemoration with bomber Brendan McKenna.
	Little bit tasteless.
	attended meeting with provisional IRA member Raymond McCartney, hosted IRA-linked Mitchell McLaughlin in Parliament, so he brought him to home, spoke alongside IRA terrorist Martina Anderson, said that Hamas and Hezbollah are his friends, called for Hamas said that Hamas and Hezbollah are his friends, called for Hamas to be removed from the terror band list, called Hamas serious and Much like ISIS.
	Yep.
	Attended wreath-laying at grave of a Munich massacre terrorist, which I believe was probably that person.
	Yes.
	Attended a conference with Hamas and PFLP. And there's plenty more of these to go through, but it definitely points to a certain pattern of behaviour that Corbyn has...
	I can't remember.
	I don't know who said it.
	I think it was during one of the last elections.
	But there's a challenge to find a group of anti-British terrorists who Jeremy Corbyn hasn't sided with, sympathised with or carried water for.
	And if you can meet that challenge, we'd be very glad to hear from you at LotusEaters.com.
	Yes, if you can find just one, we might give you a shout-out.
	Probably not, but we might do.
	They have to be terrorists and they have to be anti-British, don't they?
	Yes.
	So, this is also a reminder that in the past, Corbyn, as they mention here, has invited Hamas to Parliament and said this specifically about them.
	And I've also invited, this is a quote now, I've also invited friends from Hamas to come and speak as well.
	Unfortunately, the Israelis would not allow them to travel here.
	The idea that Hamas should be labelled as a terrorist organisation by the British government is really a big, big historical mistake.
	End quote.
	So, a classic soft touch there from Comrade Corbyn, saying that the terrorist organisation should not be labelled as a terrorist organisation.
	Very interesting.
	I mean, they target civilians, as far as I'm aware, so...
	If you want to try and soften the blow on that to the civilians' families, you can go ahead.
	But sadly, Preeti Patel has decided that she's going to take some measures that might be a bit of a blow to Jeremy next time he invites his old pals over for dinner.
	So if we move along, you can see from the ITV, Preeti Patel has moved to make supporting Hamas illegal.
	So, those who express support or have membership for Palestinian militant group Hamas in the UK could soon face a maximum of up to 14 years in prison.
	Now, Corbyn's in his 70s, so that would be quite inconvenient and unfortunate for him.
	Yes, which I think Was this also his stance on the IRA, probably?
	Oh, almost certainly.
	The military arm of Hamas has been outlawed in the UK since 2001, but the organisation as a whole is not proscribed.
	A ban which must be approved in Parliament would make it illegal in Britain to be a member of Hamas or to express support for the group, with a maximum penalty of 14 years in prison.
	The government said it hoped that the banning order would be approved by Parliament within the week and take effect on November 26th.
	So, yeah, this will definitely hurt Corbyn's ability to go out and have a pint with his old friends.
	Well, not that they'd be indulging in the pint.
	They'll be very interested in British beers.
	Yeah, something tells me the same.
	Much like Jeremy Corbyn, I believe.
	I think, given that Hamas has, over the years, shown itself repeatedly to be a dangerous terrorist organisation...
	Yes, I think it's worth saying that, obviously, the Israeli-Palestine conflict is not the simplest and most straightforward It's very complex.
	And essentially, yes, I think this prescription of Hamas seems to be absolutely correct.
	So in my youth, in my misguided youth, I was involved in the Palestinian movement, and there is a difficulty there involved in being able to separate the idea of Palestinian self-determination from violent Islamist terrorism.
	And it is a contradiction within that movement that no one has managed to answer to this date, as far as I'm aware.
	So you've got first-hand experience of it then?
	No, I didn't blow anything up.
	I didn't meet any Hamas.
	Not saying that!
	Not saying that!
	But you've got first-hand experience of seeing the contradictions.
	Yes, it is quite difficult because there are plenty of people who we would accurately describe as peaceful Muslims who have to grapple with this contradiction.
	They feel there should be Palestinian self-determination, but there aren't any non-militant political forces with power in the region that they can get behind because of Hamas's local dominance.
	Yeah.
	Yes, exactly.
	Whether or not you support the Palestinian side of the conflict does not mean that automatically in doing so you have to support a terrorist organisation.
	Yes, there is a difference there, which is what I'd like to point out.
	And I would imagine that, given that we've got organisations like Prevent and other such things, I would imagine, not saying anything specifically, but this is just my viewing, that there would be a correlation between people supporting Hamas and the sorts of people trying to commit the Liverpool bombing from the other week.
	It doesn't seem like a wild leap of the imagination, does it?
	It doesn't, but Jeremy Corbyn is not the only person to have taken a pratfall in response to all of this.
	There have been a number of MPs who've made some very strange comments.
	So you can see here another one from Guido Fawkes talking about John Ashworth, a Labour MP, accidentally sending condolences to the family of the Liverpool taxi passengers.
	So if you just want to play this clip...
	I mean, absolutely shocking...
	That would happen anywhere, but particularly outside a women's maternity hospital.
	Obviously, we pay our respects and send our condolences to the family of the man who lost his life.
	I obviously want to thank the emergency services for the way in which they responded.
	Once again, this is not the first time, this is not the only Member of Parliament who has made some very strange comments.
	If we move along again, we can see that Oliver Dowden, a conservative MP, has expressed his deep sympathy for the person that's lost their life and claimed that he was joining the Prime Minister in doing so.
	Once again, just a reminder, the person who lost their life was the terrorist trying to blow up a hospital.
	Later, Labour MP Charlotte Nichols posted a tweet claiming that she was sending love to the family and friends of the person who was killed in the incident.
	The tweet has since been deleted, probably for the best...
	And to top it all off, the Mirror, that's right, the newspaper, then posted a Facebook status saying, Police have now named the man who sadly died.
	RIP with a little broken love heart.
	The statement was swiftly edited to remove the heartbreak, although it's still visible in their post history.
	So, this is not something that is specific to Labour.
	All of our MPs are, well, the vast majority of our MPs in the UK are jokes.
	Yes.
	Have no idea what they're talking about half the time.
	Well, it just goes to show as well that a lot of this emoting of sympathy and sadness over the deaths of people in these incidents is purely automatic optics gathering.
	Because without even knowing the details, having any information about this person, they were emoting as if he was some catch.
	Yes, they were tripping up over themselves to offer condolences.
	I'm sympathetic.
	Look at me.
	I'm sympathetic.
	Vote for me.
	This sort of mentality is animating these utterances.
	Yeah, so, whereas Jeremy Corbyn might be deciding to take legal action against those who decide to mock him, it's no problem because Labour, the Conservatives, and most of everybody else involved in the corporate media are making themselves look enough of a joke as it is anyway.
	And that's about all we've got there.
	Let's move on to the video comments.
	Hey guys, just to remind you, this month's Chad Tier Gold Chat review is starting at 12 o'clock on Friday in the Cheshire Cheese on the Strand.
	I think we've got a 9 pub crawl.
	Join us there, or if you need to catch up with us later, you can find our progress on the Sultans of Chaudelay Discord.
	Hope to see you there!
	Nice.
	Excellent.
	Fully in favour.
	Sounds really cool.
	Why do you always film in that gigantic monolithic structure behind you?
	Is that just the place you get the best internet or something?
	You just always seem to film there.
	It's quite a cool structure, to be fair.
	Am I going to pick up my cup?
	I don't know.
	Am I going to pick up my cup?
	I might.
	You know, I'm thinking about it.
	Am I going to pick up my cup?
	No, I'm going to stop my cup.
	Why do people choose to be mentally ill?
	A certain arrangement of atoms and molecules arrived at a particular configuration to force you to call you a horse.
	I love those kinds of edits.
	Good job.
	They remind me of the one of Jordan Peterson describing a rat.
	You're just a rat!
	And there's just various impressions of him being a rat.
	If, like me, you haven't read E.M. Forster's The Machine Stops, you may be able to find the BBC dramatic adaptation from their series, Out of the Unknown.
	It is a great introduction, albeit of its time, to the concept of a civilization dependent on an all-powerful technology that they don't understand, can't maintain, and that is failing around them.
	Above you, beneath you, around you is the machine.
	But deep down in the machine, you have your own darkness and your own light.
	I must admit, I read M. Forster's Room with a View for English literature, and I did not think he was the sort of author who would have the imagination to write interesting sci-fi.
	Oh, really?
	Yes, but maybe that just displays my literary experience.
	That's not a ringing endorsement, if I've ever heard one.
	No, I shall have to check that one out.
	That sounded very interesting, though.
	So just to clarify my fellow Dane from yesterday, what he showed was the regional results for him.
	These are the country results where the Social Democrats won with 28%.
	The left, which is our right-wing party, don't ask, with 21%.
	The Conservatives, also right-wing.
	Social Folks Party, left-wing.
	And at last, the Communist one in his list with 7.3%.
	That's a large percentage.
	Thank God, not as bad as 60%.
	Well, not really having the context of what the comment was yesterday, I can't comment too much, but at least the communists are coming up second to last.
	Yeah, but imagine if 7.3% of the people you met were communists.
	I mean, I went to university, I don't have to imagine.
	It was far more than 7.3%.
	Friends, Romans, lend me your ears.
	I come to tell you a story of Stone Toss.
	The Stone Toss decided one day that simply making political cartoons was not enough and that he wanted to be a millionaire.
	So, Stone Toss created something called an NFT. If you don't know what this is, please don't screenshot it.
	Simply put, Stone Toss sold many of these cute little cartoon characters down here.
	They were selling on the OpenSea platform until he got banned for having naughty opinions.
	Then we went over to Rarible, where we hosted for some time.
	Then we were banned.
	Then we hosted again, and then banned.
	Stone Toss is a millionaire, NFTs are great, flex forever, cope and see.
	Nice.
	Nice helmet.
	Also, I do really enjoy a Stone Toss comic here or there.
	He's got some very cutting comics.
	And you know what?
	Whether or not people end up screenshotting them or not, he's made all the money he's going to make out of him, so good on him.
	Absolutely.
	Oh, no, not David Hogg, no.
	The left.
	Just say no.
	Was that it?
	Alright!
	Short and sweet, I like it.
	I did that a while back, so glad to have taken your advice.
	He saved us from the Kenosha riots.
	He met Donald Trump, the great president, and together they saved us from the communists.
	And now, Kyle Rittenhouse needs your help.
	Kyle Rittenhouse 2040.
	Isn't it time to have a president that's even more based?
	Paid for by the political committee of Little Joe.
	Nice.
	I'd vote for him, to be fair.
	Well, he's demonstrated more personal credentials than most career politicians.
	Whether he can back that up by being an effective statesman is, well, he's got another, what, 18 years?
	Yeah, he seems to have plenty of integrity.
	I know people have been a little critical of him for making the statement of, you know, he supports Black Lives Matter.
	I'm critical of him for that, after my last segment.
	I'm critical of him as well for that, but given that he is 18 years old, I do have to give him the benefit of the doubt that he might just be taking the organisation on its face, like taking the organisation at face of It's not even face value for what they say they are.
	It's face value of what the media says they are, isn't it?
	Yes.
	I do forgive him a little bit for a bit of naivety, because I doubt that he's done that much looking into BLM. He probably sees the riots potentially as an outlier rather than...
	Systemic and deliberate.
	Well, yeah.
	The riots, let's be perfectly honest, were the intended outcome for what was going on.
	These people are grifters.
	Oh, okay.
	Yeah, so in response to my question of where that guy is always hanging out, it's a World War II Zeppelin hangar.
	Why wouldn't he hang out in it?
	World War II Zeppelin hangar.
	Apparently, that's what it says here in John's note.
	Oh, we got a text from him.
	I didn't realise they even had Zeppelins by World War II. I thought they got rid of them after the Hindenburg crash in the early 30s.
	Neither did I, but that's very cool.
	And if I was in that area, I would probably also be found in the World War II Zeppelin hangar quite a bit as well.
	That's a really cool little bit of history.
	Yeah, carrying on, they have been pushing and agitating for things like riots because it's a cycle.
	It's a cycle that BLM loves to perpetuate, I have noticed, which is you say that there is some kind of injustice going on related to race, you agitate enough for people to go out and commit violence or loot and do all the sorts of things that we saw last summer in the name of that movement, and then when people decide to Fight back, whether it be like Rittenhouse or whether it be just through...
	Try and destroy them.
	Yeah, disagree.
	Well, no, it's not even necessarily you try and destroy them.
	You then use that as evidence to propel the next round of everything's white supremacy, everything is designed to keep the black person down, you know?
	So when you get someone like Rittenhouse coming out and doing what he did to protect himself, that's just more evidence of white supremacy so the next time they can just keep making money.
	And once again, I don't expect Rittenhouse to have looked into that.
	I believe when I looked at the website from BLM earlier this year, they had raised about $86 million in the course of all of their fundraising and activism.
	That they had done last year, how much of that was legally obtained and not just fenced, shall we say, is probably up for debate.
	But looking through their website, I could only make up for about 86,000 of it having been invested back into, say, community projects in low-income neighbourhoods for school programmes and other such things.
	So you ask yourself, 4.6 million dollars worth of mansions, plural?
	So I don't expect Rittenhouse to have looked into any of that.
	I still respect him immensely.
	And I expect, as he starts to do press tours and talk about this sort of stuff and talks to people like, is it Nicholas Sandman, who was the...
	Yes, the Covington kid.
	Yeah, the Covington kid.
	He's probably going to get more and more red-pilled.
	Although, to be fair, there is one thing that I will say is a takeaway from having watched a lot of the trial and watching the court case unfold, which...
	Which is that the American justice system, as much as some would like to say, oh, it's subjective, oh, it tries to...
	I mean, we saw all this with Derek Chauvin earlier this year, and the fact that a BLM activist managed to get onto the jury, which is that you see the way that Binger, the prosecutor, treated Rittenhouse...
	And you think to yourself, okay, evidently, there is some corruption within the system.
	There are people who may be getting screwed over by people within the system.
	I'm not going to say the system, like systemic or anything like that, but people like Bingo exist within that.
	And they are going to try and screw people over.
	And if you aren't like Kyle, who had the crowdfunding to be able to afford a good defence attorney, the likelihood is you are probably going to get screwed over.
	Now, I'm not going to say that that is something that specifically happens to black people, like BLM would have you believe, especially given that Kyle Rittenhouse himself is not a black person.
	But remember, how much does that potentially go on behind the scenes when it's cases that we do not get public access to through filmings?
	Yeah, exactly.
	You could argue it's the tip of the iceberg.
	Shall we move on to the comments?
	It's unsurprising that they were a Democrat, I'll just say this.
	Yeah, we've got a comment from Carl himself.
	Hi Carl, if you're still watching, thank you for tuning in.
	From the first segment, just saying that California is literally an asshole that permits gangs of drug-addled youths to steal and terrorise law-abiding citizens.
	Heinlein was right.
	I would just like to say, it's funny that we don't swear on the podcast and he leaves a comment like that, isn't it, Harry?
	Yeah, of course, he's testing us.
	He's definitely testing us.
	Seeing if we're on our toes.
	Carl, I agree with you there, man.
	California, they do a fantastic job of making it look nice in all of the tourism advertisement and marketing, but I would not like to go there because I've seen what it's really like in all of the videos of people defecating on the streets in San Francisco, for instance.
	I'm not aware of Heinlein, though.
	Sorry, Carl.
	You might need to educate me on that.
	S.H. Silver says, So they're getting store control in California in response to robbery of stores.
	Like gun control, it only punishes the law-abiding citizens for the actions of criminals.
	I'm sure the robbery is going to find ways around your controls, but the grandma who needs to buy their medication is now going to have to go through the hoops to the city setting up.
	So what they're essentially doing, right, is they're creating borders?
	Okay, they may not be physical borders.
	Maybe they are.
	They're checkpoints for not letting cars in.
	But they're creating borders which make life difficult within the city.
	Now, I can think of a way that you could not have to make these borders within the city, making grandma's life difficult.
	And that would be to have the borders outside the city, maybe even outside the country, on the borders of the country.
	No, no.
	You see, state lines and other such borders, they're absolutely necessary.
	Paramount, aren't they?
	But stop any potential malignant factors getting into the country itself.
	That's racism, my friend.
	That's horrible.
	How could you suggest that?
	But yeah, I agree.
	Stuart Holland says, Question, do you think that the current left-wing tsunami of media bias, disinformation and lies is organic or perhaps an establishment move to get the right on board with limiting speech, particularly given how collectively it amounts to incitement, but each individual instance does not?
	Well, couldn't it be both?
	Would be my response to that.
	Yeah, I would need to think long and hard about that personally, so I can't give a specific answer right now.
	So I would say that there's definitely an organic component because this is the whole idea of praxis, which is that if you have a political objective, particularly coming from the left...
	Then you can only understand that idea, really, if you use it as praxis.
	So you're perpetually doing activism in everything that you do.
	So that means that it can be organic without having...
	So people can all be acting in concert and getting the same result without specifically colluding and being in each other's DMs and creating a grand conspiracy.
	So that's why I say it could be both.
	Because there could be, and almost certainly are, elements of people talking to each other and planning things together.
	But also, that doesn't have to be the case.
	This could happen organically.
	Absolutely.
	I still wouldn't abandon my principles of freedom of speech and such things, but I think it probably would not be as much of a problem if elements of left-wing media were not already in charge of the largest platforms available for which people can communicate.
	To be honest, nothing that you see on these segments should make you change your principles, really, I would say.
	Yeah.
	Like, do not let leftist activism change your principles either one way or the other.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Let's carry on.
	Base Ape says, I love Base Ape's takes.
	Yeah.
	I've not read it yet, but this is basically an example of what John McWater would refer to in his latest book as woke racism.
	Because, realistically speaking, if you take these statements on the face for what they're saying, it is basically, yeah, racism.
	Alright, so Benjamin Charles says, organised burglary.
	Okay, I propose that we now prosecute those people under RICO, which means that each person in the group is now criminally liable for every crime committed.
	Sending a few of these people to federal prison on 25-year sentences will serve as a disincentive to prospective organised burglars.
	That is true.
	I mean, I think we have an equivalent in the UK where if a number of people are involved in a crime, then they can essentially be...
	Yes, no, there is this.
	I'm not going to get into it because I'm going to sound like a legal idiot, but I think you understand.
	I mean, yeah, I mean, this is basically organised crime at this point, so as far as I'm concerned, everybody involved in the particular act of crime that is committed is liable for it.
	So everyone should be an accessory, shall we?
	Yes.
	Chad Kowala, when there is no law and order in an area, businesses can't operate and will leave.
	Without business, no tax revenue.
	Just how does California plan on funding their generous social programs after the long bitten hands that fed them for so long leave?
	That's a good point.
	They're going to struggle to get heroin in the hands of those heroin addicts in the streets now, aren't they?
	Well, California is fundamentally...
	A little bit parasitic, I think, in the sense that it's adopted so much left-wing ideology that doesn't support itself, it has to rely on other paradigms such as taxing big tech companies in order to survive.
	Yeah, and sadly I don't see much chance of big companies like Google, Twitter, and then obviously you've got the Hollywood film industry there as well.
	I don't see much chance of them moving out of California anytime soon.
	So they're probably still going to be able to just take the tax revenue that they need.
	Free Will 2112.
	Hollywood celebrities, the media, and rich corporations have encouraged these people.
	And now the chickens are coming home to roost.
	I don't suppose looters discriminate between woke and non-woke businesses when stealing the latest designer goods.
	No, they absolutely do not.
	There is a number of photos, which you can find online quite amusingly, of businesses with big signs out front saying, We support you, BLM.
	and they're just as empty.
	They're on fire.
	Yep, they're just as empty and just as on fire as every other business.
	Baron Von Warhawk.
	Most of the looting is only happening in Democrat cities like Portland and Baltimore.
	So it's not big of a deal, really.
	If the Liberals want to destroy their land, then let them burn as much as they want.
	These store owners and victims will just vote Democrat again next season and support big daddy government's tyranny.
	So as long as I'm concerned, they get what they deserve.
	I don't blame the looter who is simply taking advantage in order to get free stuff, but I do blame the store owner for not standing up to protect what they have.
	I blame both.
	You can blame the store owner for supporting policies that do not benefit them.
	They're victims, really, of a media disinformation bubble in which they live.
	And so that's why they vote Democrat, and if they get burgled or looted, the idea that you make the inference that that is a result of Democrat policies is to them anathema, and it's you being mean.
	Yeah, you don't want to be mean.
	And there's also the fact of the matter that it is, on a certain level, your problem as well, because you live in the same country as them, and if they realise how effed their state is, they're going to yours.
	They're coming to yours, and guess what?
	They're still going to vote blue.
	I'll tell you that.
	Yeah, let's carry on.
	Student of history.
	The assaults on people in this actively organised raid against the Storm makes sense.
	How to get a majority of randoms to fall in line, coming fast and hard, show that A, you're able to commit severe violence against the employees, B, you're willing to commit severe acts of violence against the employees.
	In doing that, you scare and confuse people.
	That makes them less likely to back-chatter you, and the boys get to go to work without a fight.
	Absolutely, this is why on no level, whether it's a big business or a small mom-and-pop business, you should not support these people.
	Yeah, it sounds a lot like organised crime at this point.
	Yeah, it really does.
	It sounds like just going in and being like, oh, wouldn't it be a shame if all of your shows exploded?
	Omar Awad, if I recall correctly, this crime wave began when they stopped prosecuting thefts under $1,000 or something.
	Yep, that's what we brought up.
	I wonder if any outlets have ever considered using loopholes like Raising Prices 1000% That's a brilliant idea.
	Member discounts of 999% at the tilt.
	That's actually not a bad idea.
	That's a brilliant idea.
	I love it.
	We've got another comment from Carl.
	Glad to see he was paying attention.
	Ah, looting is racial.
	White people have never looted, and thus the British Museum was saved.
	That's an excellent argument, Carl.
	Thank you for that one.
	Almost On Point says, wouldn't be surprised if it's not that long.
	Kevin Fox, why would we associate the word looting with BAME people?
	Well, let's think back to last summer.
	Now, looking at the video you showed, the guy running past the camera with armfuls of goods was a POC. So is it okay to call him a looter?
	I mean, judging by these people's standards that they've established themselves for some reason, yes.
	Well, really, the argument they're making, if you were to get semantic about it, is not that the word is incorrect, but just that it's problematic.
	I'm fine with being problematic, personally.
	At least better than being wrong.
	Oh yeah, it might not actually be Karl as well.
	Oh no, it's an imposter.
	That's a good point.
	It might not be Karl himself.
	Oh, we've been fooled.
	No.
	Free Will 2112, this is all part of the Marxist plan to wreck America and then replace it with a society of their own making.
	The politicians pushing this agenda are at best fools at worst fellow travellers.
	I would agree that they are all useful idiots.
	Robert Millis has mostly peaceful legalised looting, another symptom of the slow death by suicide of a nation and especially these deranged democratic states.
	Yes, just a couple of comments on our Irishman.
	From Captain Charlie the Beagle, regarding the based Irish professor...
	Oh, we just got confirmation that it was Carl sending those comments in.
	So, glad to see that you're enjoying the show, Carl.
	Fabulous.
	Good stuff.
	funnily enough on the irish national news when the blm protests were first marching in dublin during the lockdown the media and political response was to the effect of i understand why you're doing it but you should stay at home followed by weeks of the broadcasters telling us how racist we are an irish singer imelda may posted a video of her saying a poem she wrote about you don't need you don't to get to you don't get to be irish and racist okay yeah that's
	When the anti-lockdown protests happened, the guards cracked down on them with an iron fist, and they received universal condemnation by the media.
	Both of these events happened within months of each other.
	Yeah, and this has been repeated the world over.
	It's not just in Ireland.
	In fact, I believe in America, a lot of the media were saying, oh, let them off.
	It's okay.
	It won't spread COVID. Like, don't worry about it.
	They have to be out there for racial justice.
	And there were similar sentiments in Britain and in...
	And in Australia, probably many other countries too.
	And yet, in the same countries when later on there were genuine protests about the vaccine mandates or COVID restrictions, we saw a rather different side of the media and the security forces, didn't we?
	Yeah, double standards.
	One from Callum.
	This Irish dude is something.
	Sounds like he's from a time before today when the left and right talked cordially on talk shows.
	Yes, the world created by classical liberal values, you might say.
	Corbin the Crybaby.
	Nice little title there, John.
	These are the comments for that.
	Hairdoctor says, That would be an unbreakable love.
	Baron Von Warhawk says, What this?
	A communist like Corbyn censoring others because even one simple joke is enough to severely damage his political position because his beliefs are so weak, shallow, and indefensible that a single breeze could completely destroy it?
	Imagine my shock.
	I'm speechless.
	As am I, Baron.
	As am I. Duffy B says, joke over terrorist made Corbyn most affected.
	Pete's the one who put the Corbyn the Crybaby title, so thank you very much, Pete.
	Baron Von Warhawk again, Osama Bin Laden, Oswald Mosley, George Blake and Guy Fawkes ain't got S on Corbyn when it comes to treason and terrorism.
	That's a hot take there.
	Ross Diggle says, Jeremy Corbyn was against the Jewish terrorists fighting against the British-Palestinian mandate in the 1940s.
	Hmm.
	Interesting.
	And Robert Miller says, regarding...
	Ooh, that might be a candidate for the Jeremy Corbyn terrorist challenge.
	That's a good point.
	That's true.
	Maybe the Jews rank more importantly in Jeremy Corbyn's hierarchy of who to oppose than the British.
	Oh, we'll have to test that, yeah.
	Good shout, Ross.
	Well, it would be historically consistent.
	It would be, wouldn't it?
	Yes.
	Robert Miller.
	Regarding old Jeremy, he isn't the only politician who cozied up to the IRA. In an attempt to keep bombs out of London, the British establishment handed over a corner of the UK to them, and now they govern over 1.8 million UK citizens.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	Honourable mentions.
	Do you want to go through some of these?
	If you could go to start with?
	I can't read out praise to myself.
	It just sounds ridiculous.
	Oh, that's fair.
	I was hoping that you would.
	Simon Bird says, John, like an onion, many layers.
	Look forward to lots of podcasts ahead.
	P.S. More John 1.
	Come on.
	That's this John, right?
	No, I assume that that was just a mistyping.
	It was supposed to be an exclamation point.
	So more John.
	Come on.
	Okay.
	Well, thank you very much.
	Thank you for the kind comments.
	There we go.
	Do you want to go through some of these?
	Alexander says, everything is political is also the definitional way to be a fascist with corporations and politicians colluding.
	Everything in the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.
	You're absolutely correct, I think.
	Yes, absolutely correct.
	Sounds a lot like what a lot of governments are trying to do at the moment.
	We've had Pelosi and the majority of any Build Back Better initiative across the West seems to be to bring corporations and private business and the government and the public into the same realm.
	Anthony says, new name for looting, supermarket sweep.
	It will be great when they've redefined colonialism so that it no longer exists.
	Yeah, I think that's fair.
	Kevin says, that university tweet will be a template on Microsoft Word in Windows 11, I guess.
	Well, because it's so standard.
	Yes, exactly.
	That's a good one.
	Then we have some Star Trek comments, so let's have a look at this.
	We have a comment from Callum saying, I must say, despite your analysis being correct upon this being the ultimate liberal society, that many Trekkies descend that view into their perfect society, not for all, but for their proletariat.
	They believe that this is the endpoint of the society the proletariat would establish and that bourgeois thought gets dispelled as unworthy and prejudicial.
	A starstruck, despite not being revolutionary itself beyond the liberal mindset, is not inherently so in the minds of revolutionaries, and in fact, as described, is prescribed as what the proletariat left of the aisle would create if the irrelevant or worse reactionary thoughts of the right were dispelled.
	I think that's a charitable interpretation of, like, the old-school communist proletariat, which is something of a fiction, really, because at least in this country, it never really existed.
	Of course, nowadays, the constituency of Marxist revolution has moved on from the proletariat, and it's in fact very close to the former definitions of the bourgeoisie.
	But yes, I see what you're saying.
	Yes, I mean, generally speaking, the proletariat and the class consciousness have always been ideas maintained and pushed by people who are members of an elite intellectual class, such as the type that Gramsci was advocating for, to the point where I wouldn't even necessarily say that what he was advocating for was a new idea.
	He had just found a way to refine it and put it into words.
	Yep.
	And also, I agree, there's so many cringey communists who think that if they get their way, everything will just turn into the perfect Star Trek utopian society.
	Did you see, I think Callum did the supercut of the Communist Party, the Labour Party conference, from I think it was either last year or this year, where they had like...
	I think they did both of them.
	Probably.
	They had, like, weedy little dudes coming up and saying, we need a socialist future.
	It'll be just like Star Trek, it will.
	Did these people not realise that there is property ownership within Star Trek?
	Josh says, good to get an interpretation of Star Trek as opposed to Woketrek.
	Yes, it'd be interesting to see Stargate, SG-1 specifically, maybe Atlantis if there's thirst for more, given some analysis.
	But perhaps as a comparison of a modern liberal democracy versus a feudal society in terms of how they interact and integrate.
	Given the many seasons, there's bound to be many other scenarios worth commenting on.
	Short answer, more sci-fi, please.
	Well, I would certainly like to do more sci-fi, so if we do end up doing more sci-fi, then you will be the first to know.
	That would be interesting.
	Have you watched Stargate or anything like that?
	I wasn't into Stargate as much as I was into Star Trek, but I have seen some episodes.
	I've probably seen more of Atlantis than SQ1. That's fair.
	I'm not familiar with them.
	I'm not really that familiar with Star Trek.
	I was more into sci-fi literature than sci-fi TV. Oh, fair play.
	Any particular recommendations for sci-fi literature?
	Oh, goodness me, there's so much.
	You put me on the spot there, I must say.
	Well, I've got one book that I need to actually get round to reading, which is Isaac Asimov's Foundation.
	Yeah, Foundation.
	I've got The Complete Robot, which is like a compilation.
	I need to give that a read.
	I also need to give a bit of a read to George Martin's more sci-fi stuff, like The Dying of the Light, you know, the guy who wrote Song of Ice and Fire.
	Prior to being a fantasy author, he was more of a sci-fi inclined guy.
	I think he had a Thousand World Series, which was made up of a number of short stories.
	Mm-hmm.
	So more sci-fi.
	Sci-fi is a really fertile ground for exploring interesting topics.
	I mean, I have quite enjoyed some of China Mieville's works, such as Embassy Town, but he is a raging leftist.
	I think he is a self-declared communist.
	So I think a lot of sci-fi authors tend to be more left on the political spectrum, as far as that I've seen.
	Well, I would suspect it correlates more strongly with trait openness, which is, as I'm aware, and Josh will correct us, is associated with leftism.
	Get some pure height in there, yes.
	Simon says, As a teen, Star Trek was a talking point between friends.
	A feel-good with a moral delivered at the end.
	Not a soap, and as John pointed out, a strong cohesion of the crew.
	It is like Carl mentioned, somewhat of a daydream.
	There are many things people need to overcome to reach that point, and myself being not left, it is an aspiration, something to aim for in a rational way.
	Yeah, I think that's very true.
	I quite like that.
	There's some compliments to you further on in that comment that I can see that you're avoiding, so I'll just read them out.
	I do like the dynamic of Carl and John.
	John is very calm and focused.
	Interesting guy.
	Do a podcast of him drunk, lol.
	I think we'll skip that one.
	That would be very interesting.
	Speaking of the cooperative element, correct me if I'm wrong on this, I'm aware that for the first two series of The Next Generation, Gene Roddenberry had...
	Ordered a mandate to the writing staff that there was not allowed to be any interpersonal conflict between crew members.
	Is that correct?
	Because that would kind of be sort of a bit lofty, idealistic...
	I don't actually know off the top of my head, so I'll have to look with that.
	But regardless of whether there was a directive from Gene, that was certainly the result of it.
	It was very much a cohesive and together kind of show, which is rare because most often, especially with shows today, the...
	The manufactured division, conflict, and disunity within the main team is emblematic of the disunity and conflict within our own societies, I think.
	I would also say, from a pure writing in-universe perspective, one of the easiest ways to gin up some kind of drama for an episode is purely through just, like, get all of your characters to start shouting at what other through any manufactured means that you're talking about.
	Yes, but I I think it's been used so much.
	It's such an overdone trope that I certainly roll my eyes very heavily when I see it in movies.
	And you can see it with modern Trek very obviously.
	There's a great example of, I think it's from Into Darkness, which is the worst of the modern Trek characters.
	Yeah, Into Darkness was trash.
	Yes.
	But there's one moment where they're on a mission, a serious mission involving elite experts like Kirk and Spock and so on, doing very serious things to save lives.
	And yet, what are they doing?
	They're bickering about the relationship status of Heron and Spock in the middle of it.
	It's like the word professionalism does not exist in these writers' vocabulary.
	Well, it's from Hollywood, so...
	Exactly.
	But I think that's about all we have time for.
	Thank you very, very much for tuning in and joining us for this episode of the podcast of Lotus Eaters.
	If you'd like more, check out the website.
	And if you want to tune in to us live again, you can do so tomorrow at 1 o'clock UK time.
	Thank you once again so much for tuning in.

▲