All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 5, 2022 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters
01:30:44
The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #300
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Load Seaters for the 5th of January 2022.
I'm joined by John.
Hello Lotus Eaters.
I just realized I think for the last four days I've been saying 2021.
Oh.
How long have we been doing it?
2022 guys.
2022.
Yeah god it's the current year don't you know.
And it's the 300th episode we've got today.
Which is pretty cool.
I'd have brought my Spartan gear if I'd known, but I didn't.
Today we're going to be talking about Jon Stewart accusing J.K. Rowling of anti-Semitism, Bill Gates owns your media, and nature just hates brown people.
Just does, apparently.
At least according to all the brown people setting up brown people hiking groups, or brown people bird-watching groups, or anything else.
And we'll go through all of them in due time.
But some things to mention first on the website.
The first one being here, an article from Bo that's just gone up.
So the best thing ever.
And looking at that, I haven't had time to read it, but I imagine it's about space.
It's about the James Webb Space Telescope.
I imagine, because you may remember Bo used to do White Pill Wednesday and all that.
So very interested in space stuff.
So go and read that.
Is that one free or premium as well?
I believe it's free.
I believe that's free.
Yeah, so that's free.
So you don't have to subscribe for that one.
Just go and check it out on lotuseaters.com.
Next thing to mention is Bill Gates from Saving the World to Worldwide Infamy, which is by Josh.
This is a republished audio track there for Silver and Gold TV members to go and listen to.
Yep, so if you'll like our second segment today and want to read more, that's where you need to go.
Yeah, you can also learn about how much of a scumbag he is from some of that I did read.
It's just like the business practices he used to engage in, like screwing over his own friends.
Okay, yeah, he's a bad guy.
Moving on, let's get into the...
Oh, sorry, there's one more thing to mention, of course, which is Getter.
So follow us on Getter as well.
LotusEase is underscore com, being the app there, and I can see it ticking up literally every day now.
We're over 40,000 there, which is nice.
And, of course, with Getter exploding as well.
Yeah, all good stuff.
If you don't like Getter, of course, you can go to any of the other social medias as well, I should mention.
But let's get into the news.
So, Jon Stewart has accused J.K. Rowling of antisemitism, or at least that is how it's been phrased.
Okay.
I thought we'd take a look at this story.
So for people who may have been living under a rock, I thought we'd just briefly mention, in case someone doesn't know, some Sudanese watcher, maybe, has seen that J.K. Rowling has been under fire repeatedly for daring to say that women are women.
And most recently, news on this, in the weeks leading up to the highlight of the anticipated program streaming New Year's Day on HBO Max, not a single teaser, trailer, or poster has featured Harry Potter's author, J.K. Rowling, for the reunion.
So just not interested in her being in any of the products anymore about her own creation, even though she holds all the rights to Harry Potter.
So I don't know how that works.
But if we go to the next link, you can see the mail article on this, which is sort of the front page of the day.
Here's how you know Jews are still where they are.
Jon Stewart accuses J.K. Rowling of anti-Semitism over her depiction of goblins in Harry Potter who run Gringotts' Wizarding Bank.
Great what?
A... A... Okay.
This very much, to me, does come off as like, well, we tried calling her a transphobe.
That didn't work.
No one's buying that.
People believe that women are women still.
Racist?
No.
Hang on, hang on, hang on.
Harry Potter, it's not like it just dropped yesterday.
It's been out for, what, 20 years?
25 years?
And he's only just...
Okay, fair enough.
But JK's Rowling views are very new, so...
Right, okay.
Interesting.
We'll get to the clip in a minute in which he ends up mentioning about the fact that he believes that he was in the theatre and looking around when he saw the bank and was like, how is no one else seeing what I'm seeing?
And everyone was just like, it's just goblins, mate.
It's not juice.
But, okay, John.
So the former host of The Daily Show raised the issue on the December 16th episode of his podcast, The Problem with Jon Stewart.
Stewart, who is Jewish, questioned why Rowling chose to throw Jews in there to run the effing underground bank in a fictional world where people can ride dragons and have pet owls.
And then if you scroll a bit, John, we can see the screenshot from the Harry Potter movie in which, you know, he goes to the bank and talks to the banker about his money.
And this is left here is like, ha ha, look, that's a Jew.
No!
It's a goblin, but okay.
John, this isn't owned that you think it is.
It very much reminds me of extra credits.
I mean, if that's what Jews look like to you, then I think you have problems.
Yeah, anyway, so, Stuart59 said, The Banker Goblin characters are based on caricatures of Jews from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, an infamous anti-Semitic text that purports to show a Jewish plan for world domination.
Now, my understanding is that these old anti-Semitic texts, they drew Jews to look like goblins, not the other way around.
I think so.
I mean, goblins are very, very old, as in they're part of folklore going back to God knows when, because it's folklore.
So you could try and make an argument, maybe, that the original folklore myth is based off Jews, but you've got no sources.
No, no way.
Because we have no sources for the folklore.
Well, the sources go back to the Viking sagas and that sort of thing.
That's what I mean.
You're going back so far that it's like, I don't think you'll be able to make this argument.
But if we scroll down, there should be an image in here in the article in which the Daily Mail have added a photo, there you are, of the Protocols of the Elder of Zion, and giving you an example of a Jewish caricature there on the left.
I mean, the only thing it has in common with the goblin, you could say, is, like, its nose is big.
Yeah, but notice they've also chosen a specific illustration that's drawn in the same style, just to try their hardest to make them look similar.
Sure, but it's also not.
The ears of the goblin in Harry Potter, for example, are very pointy, not just wide.
But you could use any two pictures of the same illustration style and you're conveying some kind of similarity, even if the actual content, like in this case, is radically different.
But this is the argument as laid out, which if we go to the next link, you can find there's a full podcast clip in which Jon Stewart did put this out, and you can go watch the full thing in your own time.
But I thought we'd play the quote, or at least what I find to be relevant to the quote here.
Let's play the clip.
The Jews have arrived.
What chapter of Harry Potter is that in?
That's when they get to Gringotts, right?
Can I tell you something about Harry Potter?
That is a wild thing.
Here's how you know, and this is the whole thing, and you don't have to use this, but this is true.
Here's how you know Jews are still where they are.
Talking to people, what I say is, have you ever seen a Harry Potter movie?
And people are all like, I love the Harry Potter movies.
Like, you ever...
See the scenes in Gringotts Bank?
And they're like, I love the scenes in Gringotts Bank.
He's like, do you know what those folks that run the bank are?
And they're like, what?
And they're like, Jews.
And then that person says, no, goblins.
And then you go, do you hear yourself?
Let me show you this from, it's the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
I just want to show you a caricature.
And they're like, oh, look at that.
That's from Harry Potter.
And you're like, no, that's a caricature of a Jew from an anti-Semitic piece of literature.
J.K. Rowling was like, Can we get these guys to run our bank?
And you're like, it's a wizarding world.
It's a world where it's like...
You can imagine anything.
The train station has a half a thing and no one can see it.
And we can ride dragons and you've got a pet owl.
And who runs the bank?
Who should run the bank?
Jews?
Not only that, I feel like she was like, why'd you make it so subtle?
Yeah, I mean, it's like, yeah, they look like Jews.
What if the teeth were sharper?
You're like, oh...
These people are insane, I'm just saying.
And I have never seen a single illustration from Harry Potter which depicts anything on top of a pile of skulls.
So I think that's your first giveaway.
Maybe there's a dragon or two, I don't know.
But the argument being put in there, which is that they run the banks, they're goblins, therefore they're Jews, and she's anti-Semitic?
That's how the logic runs there?
Which, I mean, not very convincing logic, I would say.
But, okay.
I mean, there's also the...
I wonder if we can open up this argument, though.
Because people will say, well, therefore we can apply to all other groups or nationalities and all the rest of it.
And I may have noticed, do you remember, what is it?
It was Seamus Finnegan.
Do you remember him?
I do, yes.
Do you remember his one gag throughout the whole series?
Was that he tried to do magic and everything would explode every time.
Oh, in the film series.
Oh, Seamus.
And then right at the end, the one wizarding power he has is he blows up the bridge.
Right.
You know, in the battle for Hogwarts.
Right, right.
Like, that's his job.
There's just Seamus over there.
What does he do?
He blows stuff up.
Chucky-ar-lar.
Oh, for goodness sake.
But what's funny about all this is, of course, that it also is very much reminiscent of when Extra Credits tried to say that orcs were black people, and everyone went...
What?
What?
Where'd you say that?
And for people who might not remember this, let's get this link up here.
Oh, look at that like-to-dislike ratio.
Goodness me.
This is why YouTube had to get rid of the dislikes.
Yeah.
Because, well, it showed people what they thought of things.
And this is extra credits in a segment here in which they're talking about evil racism being bad game design.
And they end up talking about the fact that they think, or at least they endorse this guy whose ideas are that black people are orcs.
I'm not kidding.
Let's play the clip.
60,000 dislikes.
Much of the recent conversation on Orcs points out that characterizing a whole species in your game as ugly, warlike, and malevolent might be harmful to real-world groups regularly mischaracterized as ugly, warlike, and malevolent.
However, this video isn't that.
Though if you want more on that discussion, Mendez breaks it down wonderfully over on his website, and we'll have a link to that in the description.
This is a long-running progressive argument that the orcs are minorities, specifically black people.
I don't know how you could be more wrong.
Even if you wanted to take this argument that the fantasy creatures of English folklore or Tolkien folklore are representative of real groups, well then, it's going to be of types of English people, not black Americans.
I mean, I think orcs are scouse personally, but don't at me.
Yeah.
There's the argument.
But the idea that the Americans ran onto that and they were like, yeah, sir, warlike, or at least extra credits ran across that.
And when warlike, malevolent, that describes black people, right?
What are you doing?
What are you doing extra credits?
But that's what it kind of reminds me of in the same vein with Jon Stewart there.
But I took that first clip in which I saw the headline from the Daily Mail.
I was like, okay.
And then I saw the clip and I'm like, eh, maybe he's just having a laugh.
Maybe he's just having a laugh.
And, you know, maybe.
Maybe it's just, you know, some light banter.
Fair enough.
But then I checked up The Problem with Jon Stewart, the podcast in which he made this.
I just checked out some clips.
And it seems that he didn't really retire from saying political nonsense and actually did continue.
And, well, this series seems to be one because this is an interview with a guy who has arrested my Maduro in Venezuela.
Okay.
And he opens up the segment talking to this guy about the fact that, well, Venezuela's not real socialism, is it?
You think I'm joking.
Let's play the clip.
Francisco, you're coming from Venezuela.
Venezuela is, for the American right, you're the model of where we're going if we end up with like a national healthcare.
So you're the government that we point to to say, hey man, you don't want to be Venezuela.
It's not socialism, it's a dictatorship of Maduro.
It's not about the form of government they have, it's the way they're exercising it, yes?
I mean, they are self-professed socialists, but there's more to it than that.
There's Maduro, who just today came out a report on the UN saying that he committed crimes against humanity.
He's one of the few dictators who is currently under investigation in the International Criminal Court.
And just to explain, crimes against humanity only occurs when there's wide and systematic persecution.
And human rights violations.
So it's not just one person.
We're talking about thousands of people.
My case, I was in prison for four months, but I'm only one out of thousands.
And you were in prison for?
I helped organize a petition drive, just get signatures basically, to do a recall election on Maduro.
In the process of doing that, I was put in prison.
I mean, you couldn't be just more wrong, and John Stewart obviously looking uncomfortable there.
I mean, I can't believe he unironically actually started the conversation with, it's not socialism, it's just a dictatorship, it's just Maduro guy.
Well, it is a dictatorship, and there are problems with dictatorships, but it's also socialist, and there are problems with socialism at that level.
I mean, like, all the socialist countries are not becoming dictatorships.
Yeah, that's an interesting point, John.
Have a think about that on your podcast.
No, no, it's just dictatorships, bro.
He said that in all seriousness.
That's why I played the full of that clip.
He may honestly actually just be retarded.
I don't know what's happened to him.
He was a very funny guy back in the day.
Was he?
I didn't follow back then.
Unlike Extra Credits, who I remember before they were insufferable.
I actually used to like Extra Credits, some of their gaming design stuff.
And they went into history, and that was great too.
Yeah.
And then they went into progressivism.
That wasn't a bad decision, to say the least.
Oh, God.
But let's go back to the article, because it wasn't just Jon Stewart in here who's mentioned as coming out all of a sudden and trying to make an attack on J.K. Rowling as being some kind of anti-Semite.
Okay.
In here, it also says, in light of Stewart's criticism, Sarah Silverman weighed in on the controversy.
I don't know who's asking her, but okay.
Although she said she hadn't read the books...
Or seen the films.
Okay, so immediately we have no reason to listen to this person.
He's like, nobody, still nobody, Sarah Silverman.
Sarah Silverman, I've done no research, but here's my opinion.
Okay, right.
After watching The Below and then seeing the clip in the thread, I am just kind of stunned.
You know when you giggle, but it's really more fear than joy, she wrote on Twitter after seeing a single clip.
Never seen the movie.
I don't know who hasn't seen the Harry Potter movies at this point, to be honest.
But then she's arguing that she's giggling there out of fear instead of joy.
Does she really think Harry Potter fans are going to go around and burn down her house?
Jon Stewart.
Start throwing in bricks in synagogues and being like, you know, this is for Harry's pension fund or something.
No.
Nonsense.
But they also have a quote in here from the Harry Potter universe, which...
What?
They're saying here, This is the male, adding this in.
Yeah.
Yep.
It's almost like this is a joke.
And are adept metalsmiths, notable for their silver work, they even mint coins for wizarding currency, the description reads.
Due to their skills with money and finances, they control the wizarding economy to a large extent and run the Gringotts Wizarding Bank.
I'm just like, what the hell am I reading?
Why is this in a national newspaper?
Why is this the front page story?
Yeah, this is the front page!
Yeah, they're just like, what are we talking about?
Well, you know.
The goblins are anti-Semitic, at least according to the Harry Potter universe.
It took us 25 years to notice it was that obvious, but they're anti-Semitic.
There's also just the absurdity of, as we mentioned before, how do you even say, because they're goblins.
And if you just look up goblins on Wikipedia, you can find a long history of them.
Being interested in money and jewellery.
Because, well, it's folklore.
These things are there.
So it's not like she's just like, you know, I'll just pick Jews, but then I have to pick an ugly-looking folklore, I don't know, race, to represent them.
So I can, like, you know, stealth antisemitism into the movie.
Yeah, I don't think that's how it works.
Not happening.
But I thought I'd end this on...
So you have J.K. Rowling being accused of being an anti-Semite.
At the same time, apparently Emma Watson is also being accused of being an anti-Semite.
Okay.
Which...
Apparently, yes, okay, maybe starring in the movies does make you an anti-Semite, I don't know.
So this is a point here made by the Israeli government, or at least an ambassador or two of theirs.
So Emma Watson decided to put out this image on her Instagram, which is, you've got free Palestine stuff all around it, and then solidarity is a verb.
We're not getting into the Palestine-Israel debates, who cares?
And this guy from the, I think he's an Israeli ambassador, responded with, 10 points from Gryffindor for being an anti-Semite, at Emma Watson.
Yeah, I feel I do have to say that supporting free Palestine is not anti-Semitism.
So I'll give the argument from the Israeli right, which is essentially that they would argue that we've tried to give peace to the Arabs on multiple occasions, they reject any peace offer, therefore supporting them at all is just adhering to their version of events, which is that all the Jews should be killed.
Right, but that's a pretty extreme interpretation of the Free Palestine position.
I agree there is a lot of extreme stuff in the Free Palestine movement.
There are people in favour of violence and so on and so forth.
But to hold the position of Free Palestine does not make you an anti-Semite.
And I think actually it's really disingenuous of people like the Israeli ambassador to come out with that message because it lumps in people who are anti-Semitic with people who aren't.
But if we go to the next link, you can see the story blowing up as well.
I mean, this is The Guardian here trying to say that she's not.
And you can see, I just find it really funny that at the same time Emma Watson gets accused of anti-Semitism, JK Rowling gets accused of anti-Semitism, it's almost like you tried to hit it on the turf, and instead, okay, now everyone else is also getting accused of the same thing.
But I do see that in the vein, because Jon Stewart, you can argue he's just having a joke, yeah, maybe, but he clearly still seems to want to be involved in politics as a political actor.
Yes, of course.
By his, well, softening of his conversation there, he was like, it's not real socialism, it's just dictatorships.
But anyway, that's the story.
We'll leave that there.
All right.
Well, I'm going to talk about Bill Gates for a bit.
But before we get there, there's quite a lot of content that goes into this segment.
And this section sort of circles the more broad epistemic and social differences between alternative media and mainstream media.
So I saw this article this morning, and I thought this is fabulous.
So I thought I'd read that.
The Republican Party is succeeding because we are not a true democracy.
Presumably in a true democracy, we would have a one-party state.
The opposition doesn't exist.
Yeah, and he has a fairly bold argument here.
Did the CCP write this?
You have to wonder, don't you?
But no, this is written by a professor of constitutional law.
So that's a yes.
He says in this article, in a more democratic system, the Republican Party's extreme elements would have been sent packing long before they stormed the Capitol because they couldn't muster enough votes to win a national election.
Instead, they have perfected minority rule as a path to political success.
An anti-democratic system has bred an anti-democratic party.
The remedy is to democratize our so-called democracy.
So the comparison to minority rule there, I mean, comparing it to, for example, pre-majority rule Zimbabwe, I don't really see that analogy working for America very well.
So, Just a very strange argument.
What follows is a rant against the electoral college system.
He also claims that non-citizens should be given the vote in America, along with prisoners and so on.
Tourists?
Why not?
Yeah, tourists.
Sound like a good idea.
They're having to be in the country right now, therefore they should have a say in how to run.
Yeah, I mean, their fate is affected by the political destiny of America.
They're in the country.
Why not?
Why not foreigners who have trade relationships with the United States?
Absolutely.
I mean, America affects my life quite considerably with their media and their funding of foreign things.
Putin should have the vote.
I mean, he's got...
Anyway, I'm sorry.
It's a silly argument to be like, you're affected by the country's decision, therefore get the vote.
But in case we doubted the political position of a contributor to the New York Times, he wants non-citizens to vote.
Interesting.
Democracy, he claims, should be continuously updated to ensure that the Democrats win.
Reading between the lines.
And yeah, this is by Professor of Constitutional Law.
If we go to his profile, this is it.
Yeah, seems a very respectable academic in law.
And law professors are an integral part of the social networks of elite politico-corporate America, I think it's fair to say.
That network which some have called the cathedral.
US law also found itself in the crosshairs of the fortification of the US election, which I thought, as it's that time, as it's come around, we'd remind you of.
So we have this article from Time magazine.
Let's cast our minds back to what was said.
The secret history of the shadow campaign that saved the 2020 election.
A second odd thing happened amid Trump's attempts to reverse the election result, they say.
Corporate America turned on him.
Hundreds of major business leaders, many of whom had backed Trump's candidacy and supported his policies, called on him to concede.
To the president, something felt amiss.
It was all very, very strange, Trump said on December 2nd.
Within days after the election, we witnessed an orchestrated effort to anoint the winner even while many key states were still being counted, Time magazine says.
In a way, they continue, Trump was right.
There was a conspiracy unfolding behind the scenes, one that both curtailed the protests and coordinated the resistance from CEOs.
Both surprises were the result of an informal alliance between left-wing activists and business titans.
The pact was formalized in a terse, little-noticed joint statement of the US Chamber of Commerce and AFL-CIO published on Election Day.
Both sides would come to see it as a sort of implicit bargain, inspired by the summer's massive, sometimes destructive racial justice protests, in which the forces of Labour came together with the forces of capital to keep the peace and oppose Trump's assault on democracy.
Great fanfic.
Well, anyway, lest we forget the role of American lawyers in this process, they continue.
Their work touched every aspect of the election.
They got states to change voting systems and laws and helped secure hundreds of millions in public and private funding.
They fended off voter suppression lawsuits, recruited armies of poll workers, and got millions of people to vote by mail for the first time.
They successfully pressured social media companies to take a harder line against disinformation and use data-driven strategies to fight viral smears.
And then we have the immortal line.
That's why the participants want the secret history of the 2020 election told.
Even though it sounds like a paranoid fever dream, a well-funded cabal of powerful people ranging across industries and ideologies, working together behind the scenes to influence perceptions change rules and laws steer media coverage and control the flow of information they were not rigging the election they were fortifying it It's quite a bold statement, isn't it?
Now, there is some criticism of this article, which I thought I'd bring in, and it's particularly from the left.
They claim that it needlessly feeds the trolls by posing...
Sorry.
I know, right?
It needlessly feeds the trolls by posing things in a conspiratorial manner.
There's certainly a sense that this article was written to go viral, and probably more among Republican circles than Democrat ones.
But let's just take a quick look at their criticisms.
So we have this article here from National Review, Irresponsible Hype from Molly Ball and Time magazine.
And they list the things that she's done.
They say here, Molly Ball mixes and matches together into a single stew, the story of efforts to one strategize among Democrats to beat Trump to change voting rules to allow more mail in balloting three convinced voters to vote by mail for finance, protective equipment for polling places five win pre-election lawsuits for Democrats over Republicans six enlist big tech leaders, such as Jack Dorsey of Twitter and Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook to actively police disinformation on their platforms.
Seven spread public awareness of the challenges of vote counting in 2028 promote in-person and mail and turn up by black voters in particular nine control the timing of street protests on the left and 10 pressure or convince Republican election officials and state legislators to resist Trump's post-election schemes.
Ball presents this narrative as if it were a single, unified plan directed by the people that she interviewed.
We are given no evidence, however, of which people and groups were involved across multiple different tasks, or how coordinated these efforts really were.
That's a valid criticism.
We don't know, and we can't know quite how centralised this effort was, but they do agree that no less than ten major transformational efforts were made across the whole spectrum of American elite society in order to make the blue man win.
So it's not that effective a rebuttal, to be honest.
Yes, we did all work together, but you can't tell how much we worked together.
Right, exactly.
Even when you strip away the rhetoric and the conspiracy fodder, this looks like some Grade A fortification.
I think that's fair to say.
That's how they described it themselves.
Yeah.
Now, let's focus a bit more on the role of media in this whole debacle.
And in order to do that, let's cast our minds back to almost this time last year, January the 6th.
The coverage of January the 6th, everyone was using the word insurrection.
But there are many synonyms for insurrection, as Josh pointed out the other day.
There's coup, insurgency, mutiny, revolt, revolution, rebellion, riot, sedition, uprising.
Are we really to believe that mass media is too dumb to look up thesaurus.com?
Is that likely?
It might be true.
But why did the media universally choose one word to describe January the 6th?
Well, I think we know why.
It's because they're all from the same background, they're all in each other's DMs, and they cooperate on both what to cover and how to cover it.
Choosing which word to use seems to be part of this process.
You see, mainstream media is a fundamentally different business to alternative media.
I think we're good to go.
They make their money by collaborating to exert a monopolizing force on the information ecosystem.
When they do this effectively, they can whip people up into a war frenzy, as we saw in 1904 with yellow journalism, or create mass hysteria, as we've seen with more recent events, or even start a panic buying spree.
Do you remember the panic buying?
Loo roll, oil, runs on various things.
Entirely whipped up by mass media.
Clearly this is the sort of power that governments, corporations and billionaires would want to wield, and I suspect that mainstream media is only too happy to take their money.
In fact, I can prove it.
Smaller media outlets have been questioning Bill Gates' funding of the media since at least 2011.
We go to this article here.
Does Gates' funding of media taint objectivity?
What do you reckon, Callum?
I'm going to go with a hell yes.
Along with all the COVID funding as well that the government was handing out to certain papers.
Yes, exactly.
So any time you put millions and millions into media, you are exerting an effect on the narrative, I think it's fair to say.
It's the most direct form of effecting the narrative.
Yeah.
Told hard cash!
So here we have quite a long introduction, but it's very well written, and this is from the Seattle Times, which is not exactly a massive or corrupt media organisation as far as I'm concerned.
Did you catch ABC's recent special on an incubator to boost premier survival in Africa and a new machine to diagnose tuberculosis in the developing world?
Perhaps you saw Ray Suarez's three-part series on poverty and AIDS in Mozambique on a PBS NewsHour, or listened to Public Radio International's piece on the rationing of kidney dialysis in South Africa.
Beyond their subject matter, these reports have something else in common.
They were all bankrolled by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
Imagine my shock.
But direct funding of media organisations is only one way the world's most powerful foundation influences what the public reads, hears and watches.
The foundation's grants to media organisations such as ABC and The Guardian, one of Britain's leading newspapers, they like to think they are, raise obvious conflict of interest questions.
How can reporting be unbiased when a major player holds the pursed strings?
Yeah, how indeed?
It's almost like they can't be unbiased, isn't it?
It's almost as if this is like Journalism School 101.
If you're being paid to write a story, you're not objective.
But no, even the most basic lessons don't make it into The Guardian yet.
To garner attention for the issues it cares about, the Foundation has invested millions in training programs for journalists.
It funds research on the most effective ways to craft media messages.
Gates-backed think tanks turn out media fact sheets and newspaper opinion pieces.
Magazines and scientific journals get Gates' money to publish research and articles.
Experts coached in Gates-funded programs write columns that appear in media outlets from the New York Times to the Huffington Post, while digital portals blur the line between journalism and spin.
These efforts are part of what the Foundation calls advocacy and policy.
Over the past decade, Gates has devoted $1 billion to these programs, which now account for about a tenth of the giant philanthropy's $3 billion a year spending.
The Gates Foundation spends more on policy and advocacy than most big foundations, including Rockefeller and MacArthur, spend in total.
This is ten years ago this was written, over ten years ago, 2011, this was published.
The Seattle Times is by no means a partisan right-wing publication, and over ten years ago they were speaking out about the problems with Gates funding.
We have now at least 20 years of consistent influence on the reporting of stories and the training of journalists in evidence here.
And that's just one of the players among the roster of political interests and billionaires who have involved themselves with media subversion for narrative control.
And I think it's fair to say that control of the mass media is one step removed from control of the masses, formally speaking.
Shall we take a look at who's being payrolled?
Oh, dear.
Let's have a look.
Let me scroll down here.
Documents reveal that he's given at least $319 million to bankroll select media outlets and change the public narrative.
Look at that.
You ever wonder why The Guardian never dies?
Yeah.
$13 million from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation?
Yeah.
24 million to NPR. There's just some of them here.
Five and a half million to Der Spiegel, which is Germany's main newspaper.
Four million to NBC Universal Media.
They also have funded groups in Kenya, France, Le Monde, their biggest paper as far as I'm aware.
South Africa, Ethiopia, Nigeria, all across the world.
El País, Spain's biggest newspaper, four million there.
BBC, 3.7 million.
CNN... Because that's important.
Like, you take The Guardian, they're a public paper or whatever.
De Spiegel.
I mean, in my book, they've even fallen for Soviet disinformation quite often.
So that's funny.
But a lot of them, you know, they're public organizations.
They can be as grubby and as deceitful as they want.
The BBC is funded by the license pair.
It's a license on our televisions in the UK. If you want to watch TV, you want to watch live programs, you've got to pay it.
It's the TV tax.
And therefore, well, the idea is that they are going to be neutral because they're getting it from not commercial sources, instead from, well, the tax.
And yet they're still taking, what, just under $4 million there from Bill and Millie.
Now, I don't know whether this is or whether this includes the donations to BBC's international charity called Media Action, which does a lot of international charities, the name suggests, funds international development and that sort of thing.
Yeah, I'm sure there's no corruption there.
No.
But even if they were paying BBC media action rather than BBC directly, you're trying to tell me that they're completely separate.
Paying for one would not affect the other.
This is like when people donate to the Clinton Foundation, the charity organisation, totally not trying to buy favours.
But it's not just the BBC. The CNN, 3.6 million.
The Daily Telegraph, Britain's premier conservative newspaper, takes 3.5 million from Billingman Linda Gates.
Financial Times takes 2.3 million.
Texas Tribune, another 2.3 million.
Punch Nigeria, The Atlantic, 1.4 million.
Al Jazeera takes a million.
Then one thing which surprised me, Kurzgesagt, the YouTube channel, as far as I'm aware.
They take $570,000 from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
And that's a shame, because I actually quite like their stuff.
It's high production value, great music.
I know why now.
Yeah, they're evidently putting that $570,000 to good use.
They're not the only educational broadcasting company there, because also the Educational Broadcasting Corp is on there.
Classical 98.1 is there, which I believe is Classic FM, but I may be mistaken.
It might be a different one.
They've got half a million.
Medium.com, $400,000.
It just keeps going, doesn't it?
And Kaixin Media in China gets a quarter of a million.
Yeah, it goes on and on and on.
Gates continues to underwrite a wide network of investigative journalism centres as well, totalling just over 38 million, more than half of which has gone to the DC-based International Centre for Journalists to expand and develop African media.
Yeah, they give them $20 million.
See, this is a great way.
If you want to ensure you've got positive coverage, paying for the training of all of the journalists seems like a good way of doing it.
I mean, literally all of them.
I don't think I noticed a single mainstream name there that I can't find.
I looked up the International Centre for Journalists, and they've trained 70,000 journalists since 1984.
I don't know when Bill Gates started majorly funding them.
We know he's been active since at least 2001.
Would it be wrong to call them Gates-funded agents?
Yeah, Gates journalists now.
Fabulous.
The Premium Times Centre for Investigative Journalism in Nigeria gets four million, and you have to wonder, that must be all of the journalism training in Nigeria, because I can't imagine it's an enormous industry there.
And also the Bureau of Investigative Journalism.
It seems like if you didn't want to get investigated, pay for all of the investigative journalists.
Rule number one, Don't investigate us.
Anyway, that's just the direct funding from the Gates Foundation, reported by one journalist, Alan McLeod, and there may be many other ways of indirectly funding media and propaganda, and many other players involved in doing so.
I still can't get over how Kurtz Cazart are on there.
I know.
Yeah.
I know.
I don't think they've ever mentioned that in a video, or at least not on my watch.
I haven't noticed it.
Yeah.
But yeah, this is why you shouldn't trust mainstream media.
And it's true, Kurzgesagt are not exactly mainstream.
So it is possible that alternative media could be bought and paid for in the same way.
I've taken zero dollars from Bill and Melinda Gates.
Yeah, I would have a better shirt if I had.
I don't think they're going to be paying us anytime soon as well.
But even if this tour de force of financial influence and conflicting interests doesn't persuade you, then there is also political contagion here.
Let's hear from a man on the inside.
A Canadian journalist has recently quit CBC, which is their BBC, and posts his reasons here.
The corporation is woke.
Surprised?
No.
No.
Is anyone at this point?
So he speaks out here.
For months now, he says, I've been getting complaints about the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, where I've worked as a TV and radio producer and occasional on-air columnist for much of the past decade.
People want to know why, for example, non-binary Filipinos concerned about a lack of LGBT terms in Tagalog is an editorial priority for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.
They're not wrong, are they?
When local issues of broad concern go unreported.
I wonder what their coverage of the Canadian church burnings was.
Hmm.
Interesting.
Church burns down.
No reason.
But LGBT terms in Tagalog, guys!
That's what you care about.
Or why our pop culture radio show's coverage of the Dave Chappelle Netflix special failed to include any of the legions of fans or comics that did not find it offensive.
Interesting.
Or why, exactly, taxpayers should be funding articles that scold Canadians for using words such as brainstorm and lame.
Did we cover that earlier?
I remember we talked about it in the office.
I don't remember, but it's not an unworthy complaint, and it's exactly the same in the BBC over here.
I mean, the Crown Corporation over there, or whatever the hell it is, is just an outlet for progressivism.
It's an advocacy group at this point.
And everyone is forced to pay for it, no matter their political inclination.
So why should their money be taken and used to propagate political messages that are antithetical to their beliefs?
It's an injustice and it's outrageous.
It's very offensive, I think.
And that's why I don't have a TV and don't pay the licence fee.
Neither should you.
Everyone asks the same thing.
What is going on at the CBC? And he explains, Do you remember the best one for the BBC during lockdown?
It was a non-binary person, and the story from the BBC was, I worry that I'm going to be buried with the wrong gender.
That's a story.
They went out their way to produce that as a video story in which they went out and interviewed the person and all the rest of it.
Not just some crap that they wrote in five minutes.
That's the kind of money they're wasting.
Yeah, it's mental.
Those of us on the inside know just how swiftly and how dramatically the politics of the public broadcaster have shifted.
So, I'm suspecting here...
Our friend here, the writer here, he might be more of an old-school Marxist style of leftist.
I don't know.
He might be completely different, so this is my speculation.
Because Marxist leftists are actually very anti-woke.
Wokeism is not included in Marx's Das Kapital or anything like that.
It's...
It's all about class barriers, and as far as they're concerned, differences in race and that sort of thing are a distraction from the class struggle of socialism and Marxism.
So I can easily imagine how now that intersectional politics and wokeism has become the agenda of the day, old-school leftists are probably feeling the pinch.
Well, they've been left out to dry, haven't they?
To work at the CBC, he says, in the current climate, is to embrace cognitive dissonance and to abandon journalistic integrity.
To work at the CBC now is to accept the idea that race is the most significant thing about a person and that some races are more relevant to the public conversation than others.
It is in my newsroom to fill out racial profile forms for every guest you book to actively book more people of some races and less of others.
Yeah, that happens here as well.
That's the BBC all over.
To work at the CBC is to submit to job interviews that are not about qualifications or experience, but instead demand the parroting of orthodoxies, the demonstration of fealty to dogma.
It is to become less adversarial to government and corporations, and more hostile to ordinary people with ideas that Twitter doesn't like.
And that's basically why we're here, isn't it, in a sense?
I mean, I saw a meme, I think it was yesterday, or I think it was on Getter, which summarised that perfectly.
It's like, you know, journalists back in the day, and there's a crowd of people, and then the journalist is shouting at the politicians or something.
And journalists today, well, they're with the politicians shouting at the people.
Yeah, absolutely.
Because that's what they do.
They're like, they are the mouthpiece of the elite, and that's what I'm...
You've seen where all their funding comes from here.
You've seen the coverage that they do, the sort of things they choose to cover.
You've seen their open hostility to the working man.
Yeah, that's absolutely correct.
It is to endlessly document microaggressions but pay little attention to evictions, to spotlight companies' political platitudes but have little interest in wages or working conditions.
It is to allow sweeping societal changes like lockdowns, vaccine mandates and school closures to roll out with little debate.
Very little debate.
In fact, almost no debate because they were all being bankrolled by governments when these were happening, as I recall.
Our government, for example, bought out all of the front pages for the booster campaign not long ago, as we covered on this channel.
To see billionaires amass extraordinary wealth and bureaucrats amass enormous power with little scrutiny.
And to watch the most vulnerable among us die of drug overdoses with little comment.
It is to consent to the idea that a growing list of subjects are off the table, that dialogue itself can be harmful, that the big issues of our time are all already settled.
It is to capitulate to certainty, to shut down critical thinking, to stamp out curiosity, to keep one's mouth shut, to not ask questions, to not rock the boat.
This, while the world burns.
I find that a very eloquent capitulation of what's happened, to be honest.
I mean, it is very nice to have an admission from someone who's leaving the organisation.
Because so often, at least over here, people just disappear, or they're not part of the system anymore, or they get smeared as like, I don't know, they've gone nuts now.
I mean, there are so many journalists you find on, like, who go out with their phones now.
They used to be ITV or BBC, and now they're not accepted even as journalists by their own colleagues.
Yeah.
And no matter what airs they put on, it's clear that mainstream journalism has ceased to be a respectable profession.
I think we view them pretty much like...
What's that term?
Like oil barons from the...
Or cigarette tobacco companies, the way their messaging goes.
Anyone with integrity is jumping ship off of mainstream media, moving into podcasting or otherwise joining the world of alternative media, where it's about saying what we see and not controlling the narrative.
So if you've joined us here today...
Welcome aboard.
With that, I suppose we should move on, so...
Yeah.
Thank you, Bill and Melinda Gates, for sponsoring this episode of the podcast, The Lotus...
notice it no let's talk about why nature hates brown people or at least that is an argument being put across endlessly by multiple outlets on the basis that people are having to set up their own organization specifically for people with brown I'm not going to use their terms of BAME or whatnot, but I can help because that is dumb.
Yes.
It's always along the same lines, which is if your skin, there's also no limit as to what is white or what is brown in their minds, just the one drop rule, I assume.
And we'll go through a whole bunch of these, because we've done this before, but there's more and they just keep coming.
And so the first one here, the Muslim hiker inspiring his community to hit the hills.
That sounds nice.
Okay, yeah, sure.
I mean, it's a bit weird that you have to segregate Muslims.
But all of a sudden, his community, they mean Muslims, don't they?
They don't mean his neighbours and the people in his district.
No.
Okay, that's not so nice.
There's a quote from him in this.
On average, 11 times less access, so brown people, have 11 times less access to green space than their white counterparts, and that only 20% of BAME children who visit natural environments go to the countryside compared to 40% of white children.
Is that because they disproportionately live in the cities, by any chance?
Yeah.
Okay, problem solved.
Move on.
But you would have thought, like, also the way he phrases that, less access.
What do you mean less?
Are you saying that you just can't be able to get the train journey or buy a car?
I don't know why.
There's not some white guy stopping you.
You don't need a government permit to leave your city, believe it or not.
Not yet.
This isn't North Korea.
Anyway, but this organisation seems to have quite a lot of articles written about them, specifically.
We go to the BBC, there's another one from there, in which they say, Muslim hikers say abusive comments won't stop them.
Yeah, of course, the comments aren't going to stop you from hiking.
I don't know what to say about that.
They say it here.
But when they posted pictures of their big hike in the Peak District on Christmas Day on social media, they received abusive comments.
The barriers for getting outside, they list here.
The headline there.
Although people from all backgrounds are welcome to join the Muslim hikers, so I wonder why you called it Muslim hikers, but...
That's a good point.
Maroon set up to provide support for lonely people after lockdown.
That's a good thing.
Sounds great.
He says, not enough people from Muslim backgrounds enjoy outdoor recreation because of different lifestyle and cultural norms.
Well, there you are.
There's your, you know, barriers.
You said the limited access.
Lifestyle and cultural norms.
Just differences in choice.
Change your lifestyle and cultural norms, and this becomes open.
But they didn't mention in here about the comments, like where are they from?
They just mentioned they had some comments that were upsetting to them, abusive.
And sure, I can believe that those comments are real, but where from?
And they don't say.
And well, if you just check out this organization's sort of name and then Google it, you can find out in September, before this article was published, if we go to the next one, please, The National, who published an article saying, the hikers who stood against racists raise five-figure sums for charity.
And this is in response to Patriotic Alternative, apparently.
So, back in September, the fundraiser was already planned before far-right outlet Patriotic Alternative used the famous peak to film a publicity video unfurling a banner proclaiming White Lives Matter at the top.
I mean, okay. - Okay.
I don't know where they get involved in this.
But after that, Haru Mota, founder of Muslim Hikers, invited people of all backgrounds to join him to climb and stand with us against such groups promoting discriminatory views.
I don't think White Lives Matter is a discriminatory view, is it?
I mean, I know Patriot Alternative are white nationalists, so I get that.
But if you're going to say that phrase is a discriminatory view or shouldn't be allowed, then BLM also has to go.
Well, I feel like this paper could have done a much better job of representing that group.
What do they say they're called?
Patriotic Alternative.
Yeah, but I mean, this is...
Promoting what they actually think, because, fair enough.
Why make that clear?
So instead, they say, at the time of the far...
Not promoting what they think, as in promoting it, but at least saying what they think.
The accuracy of reality.
You understand what I mean, I'm sure.
At the time of the far-right row, the organisation, named in honour of the Scots naturalist known as the father of the national parks, said it was deeply angered and condemned the mountain's use in abhorrent racist propaganda.
Like White Lives Matter.
Yeah, but also just the idea that the mountain's use makes this work.
It's a piece of hill.
I don't really think this is a huge deal, but okay.
These funds are directed towards humanitarian efforts in Palestine and to provision of clean water in Asia and Africa.
Hang on a minute.
How is it a far-right row?
One of the groups is...
Well, Patriot Alternative are white nationalists, so...
Right, but is anything they do, then, a far-right row?
If you define far-right as including white nationalists.
So if, for example, you had an argument between radical rightists and radical leftists, that always becomes a far-right route.
That's a fair point.
You see what I mean?
Anyway, sorry, please continue.
But that's the comments, presumably, because they don't actually mention them in there.
Although, again, I don't even have any evidence, because, well, in the BBC article, they don't provide any.
So, what can you do?
I really hate this from newspapers.
Like, if you're going to say that, you know, X horrible thing happened, show the thing.
Yes.
And you may remember, what was it, the Marcus Rashford mural?
Right.
They were like, racist graffiti, racist graffiti, and then someone went down and it was not racist.
And it was because no one had ever shown the journalist what the racist graffiti was.
Yeah, they just picked it up, oh, it was racist.
Copied and pasted it.
Let me move on.
There are more and more of these.
So we go to the next one.
We have The Guardian.
It's not just a white thing.
How flock together are creating a new generation of birdwatchers?
Oh, I think I've heard of these people.
You're allowed to go birdwatching people with brown skin.
No one's going to stop you.
I won't stop you.
The system won't stop you.
The man's not going to keep you down.
Go and watch as many birds as you want.
No one's going to care.
In June 2020, they brought 15 people to this very same spot for their first outing of their collective, Flock Together, a birdwatching club that organizes monthly walks for people of colour.
Just for people of colour.
It sounds like you're talking about dogs or something there.
Like, we're going for monthly walks, but...
We're taking the minorities for a walk.
I don't know why you have to do it with just people of colour, or brown people, as a human would say, instead of some kind of NPC progressive robot.
They set up Flock Together last summer to challenge the under-representation of people of colour in outdoor spaces.
What do you mean, challenge?
Do you think there's someone like...
Who are you challenging?
Do you think there's someone going out there saying, alright, white guys, we need to get out there, we need to be out there hiking, we need to be out there birdwatching, because we need to show our power.
We need to show the supremacy of the system.
That's how you do it, is by sitting in a cold, muggy fen, staring through a pair of old binoculars.
Come out birdwatching.
A curlew or something.
Yeah, I don't think so.
There's clan and skinhead guys being like, here, brother.
We're going to go birdwatching together.
That's what the black shirts did, isn't it, before they got into power.
Yeah, that's the early stages of fascism.
For both founders, Flock Together is a movement for racial and environmental justice as it is a nature collective.
And here's where you get into it.
Fabulous.
This is where all of these different organizations, I think, come down to.
They are promoting the diversity in the countryside, not on the basis that they have any concern because, of course, no one cares.
The BBC, The Guardian, they would not give a rat's behind about this if it weren't for the fact that this is diversity and inclusion.
But the people involved I'm also very suspicious of.
They don't care about the environment, you know.
The people involved I'm suspicious of because they say, as they said, it's much a movement for racial and environmental justice as it is a nature collective.
After our walk, Perrier headed to Glasgow to speak at a panel at COP26. I mean, that's an unconnected person.
That's someone who doesn't have political contacts.
Just goes on a, you know, I've got something else to do, then I'm going to Parliament.
I don't think they'd give me a panel.
I'm going to go to Parliament and lecture on the MPs in the afternoon.
Oh, wouldn't that be great if we turned up and lectured them at COP26? Next time, maybe.
Quote, We're past the point of no return, says Olopekun.
Black and brown communities are the most affected by climate change.
I love the fact that people can just state that now, as if it's not an immensely controversial statement on the facts of it.
It's just part of the speech.
Yeah, of course.
I don't even know...
Who do they even define as black and brown, for one?
How could you even prove this?
They're not talking about UK black and brown communities, either.
They're talking about the global umma of black and brown people, aren't they?
Brown race.
I think the people most affected by climate change, as the argument goes, is actually the Polynesians, because their islands disappeared.
But I suppose they're part of the black race now.
At least the politically black race.
Anyway, they're saying here, so they're most affected by climate change, of course, brown people most affected, and are entirely underrepresented in mainstream politics.
Just a blatant lie by just the data, but okay.
Onypik and Para see flock together as a way to effect change at a grassroots level.
That's probably why Bill Gates is funding this paper.
You know why most people get together and go birdwatching for grassroots political change?
No, they go to watch the birds.
You get your binoculars and you're there to watch the birds.
You enjoy and depreciate the outdoors.
That's why it's called bird watching.
Yeah.
Because bird, and you watch it, you don't go and do politics.
Yeah.
So that's why I'm so suspicious of these groups.
What's the best of these people when they go out camping and they're just sitting on their smartphones on Twitter the whole time?
Dunking on the rightists.
Hey look, there's a bird here.
I don't care.
Shh, I'm dunking on the rightists.
Yes, that's how I imagine it goes.
We go to the next leg.
We also have CNN who wrote an article similar to this.
Also funded by Bill and Melinda Gates.
Of course.
Outdoor recreation has historically excluded people of colour.
That's beginning to change.
I don't think the rocks are keeping you down, brother.
Dubbed the adventure gap, or nature gap, the lack of diversity in outdoor recreation has become a hot topic in white, demonated spaces.
In 2019, more than 50 CEOs of outdoor retailers signed a pledge to work towards diversity and inclusion in outdoors.
A bunch of people who sell outdoor merch all wrote a pledge together being like, we need to get more browns into the outdoors.
Buy our merch, presumably.
Because diversity...
It sounds comical.
I mean, it's like when all the companies got together to declare BLM was their most important movement and giving millions of dollars to this underrepresented organization as it is endorsed by all of corporate America and then given millions and millions and millions to buy house after house after house.
Hello.
But the truth behind the gap in outdoor recreation, like so much in the US, has its roots in systemic racism, says Kang J. Jerry Lee, an assistant professor at North Carolina State University, who studies race and outdoor leisure.
Imagine that being your job.
What do you study?
I do particle physics, I do nuclear physics, microbiology, engineering.
Fabulous.
I do race and outdoor leisure.
Yeah, I bet he feels awesome when he's sitting in the parlour chatting to the professors of real academic subjects.
I bet he feels like he just belongs there.
Well, he's the one who gets interviews on CNN. As for the scientists or the engineers, not so much.
Yeah, because no academics want to talk to them, presumably.
He says it here, Some white elites saw the urban environment as dirty, unhealthy, filled with lots of immigrants and people of colour, whereas green spaces were clean, quiet, and for white people, Lee said.
Lee, you may have noticed that the point about it being clean or the urban areas being dirty is universal.
As in, every race, every ethnic group came to the same conclusion that the urban areas of their countries are dirty and the countryside is clean.
If every race came to that conclusion, it's not white supremacy.
There's also the fact that you as a community are kind of responsible for how clean your own space is.
If you go to Japan, where people are fanatically clean about a lot of things, they sweep their stuff, they pick up litter, all of this, everywhere looks nice and clean.
But if you go to a place where people don't do that, where they don't pick up litter, where they don't look after the local environment, it's going to be dirty.
So if you're trying to link that with different races of people, I think you're saying something rather problematic there.
Mr.
Lee, what are you trying to say?
Hmm.
You know, it couldn't have to do with the pollution or noise.
No, it has to do with the brown skin, of course.
So if we go to the next one, we have more stories of this.
So this is another one.
BAME women making outdoors more inclusive.
Who's fun than this?
I would have thought, but now I know.
Bill and Melinda Gates.
Ethnic minorities often deterred from heading into the outdoors due to deep-rooted, complex barriers, they say.
Yeah, but not actual, real, tangible barriers.
They're deep-rooted.
They're complex.
They're invisible.
This is not like the end of the Soviet Union where there's a human chain of people trying to stop you from passing or something.
Yeah, there aren't, like, police snipers roaming the countryside looking for the darkies.
That's how these people think about it.
Recent Sport England researchers identified six barriers to participation in outdoor activities.
Police snipers, human...
No, no.
They said...
They said...
Language...
I don't think that...
Look, if you can't speak English...
Worry, you go to countryside, people speak like you're a fuzz, innit?
If you can't speak countryside, fair enough, who can blame you?
But saying that I can't speak English, therefore I can't go to the countryside, shut up, no-one's believing that.
Awareness...
Awareness of what?
The countryside exists?
How do you not know?
You've flown over it on the way to get here, presumably.
Safety.
Safest place in the country, literally.
Culture.
That's, again, your choice.
That's not a barrier.
That's your decision.
Or confidence and perception of middle-class stigma.
Again, that's your delusion.
This is all BS. It's complete fabrication.
They say in their own article there are complex barriers.
What are the complex barriers?
Just retarded nonsense.
They do things differently there.
Yeah, there's a complex barrier to my going to Japan because they have a different culture.
So I'm never going to go there because, oh, imagine.
Imagine having to do things a bit different.
And then I thought we'd end up with the last section here, which I think really gets to the obvious point, which is this is just a cult.
This is just a cult of me too.
Like, I want to be involved.
How can I make me special?
Don't you know I have brown skin?
And if you get up, John, the last one here.
First woman of colour complete solo expedition to South Pole.
Woman of colour.
There we go.
That's her achievement.
I mean, if you wanted to make her achievement nil on the aspect of going to the South Pole, that's how you do it.
Yeah.
She's gone to the South Pole.
Who cares about that?
Loads of people in the South Pole.
Don't you know she's got brown skin?
Because the woman part isn't actually important at all, because loads of women have been to the South Pole, as they will list later in this article.
It's a great achievement for her.
I haven't been to the South Pole.
I'd be proud of it for life if I had.
Yeah, but you're not a woman of colour, so...
But yeah, it only becomes newsworthy according to the Times.
Let me just check if they were on the list.
I think they were.
I don't think they were on this list.
They might be on another.
Buried in there somewhere.
First woman of colour to journey solo to the bottom of the earth is Defying Expectations.
What expectations?
We already know humans can make it to the South Pole.
Let's take that off the list.
But what about brown humans?
What about women?
Well, we've done women.
Brown humans, brown humans, apparently, I don't know, presumably someone else who is brown has been to the South Pole?
So what expectations?
Name them.
None.
Literally just, can a brown woman make it to the South Pole?
That's the story.
Being brown isn't a disability, you idiot.
She said that she did not merely wish to break a glass ceiling, but to smash it into a million pieces.
So her herself believing this nonsense.
What glass ceiling?
Name the glass.
There isn't one.
Everyone has done this.
We discovered that women could make it to the South Pole and brown people, and you're like, yeah, but what about a brown woman?
Don't you know I'm more inferior than all those groups?
I could die.
Okay.
Your words.
Anyway, quote, There are only a few female adventurers that have completed the solo, unsupported trek on this continent.
It is time to add some more names, diversity, and to make history, she said.
Why?
I would have joked about the whole thing just being like the media doing this, but when the person themselves is also engaged in this...
Well, they live in the media environment, they've been swallowing this for years and years and years, and that's the messaging that permeates through to their utterances.
I mean, what an achievement as well, like going to the South Pole on your own, unsupported, and instead, how do I ruin it?
But, like, if you look at the coverage of these sorts of things from 20 years ago, you'll more and more see that it's about the individual, the story of the individual hero.
But here the individual is completely erased in favour of their collective characteristics.
Oh, she's a woman.
Oh, she's of colour.
These sorts of things.
But her actual story...
I bet if she's been to the South Pole, she's got an absolutely fascinating life story.
I bet that would make a great story, but they don't care, because it's not the diversity aspect of it.
If you were at a party with this person, having a drink, would you like to talk about the South Pole, the fact that she's got brown skin?
Which is going to be more interesting as an evening.
Yeah.
It's going to be the South Pole trip.
Yeah.
So then I have to eat my own leg or whatever the hell else.
Lay this off with, in 2019, the last year before the pandemic interrupted expeditions, there were nine successful solo trips to the South Pole from the coast, four of them by women.
Almost 50% of that being women.
So, again, the woman part here, utterly useless.
So the entire argument is, brown person makes it to South Pole.
That's the story.
If you decode what they're saying, that is what it is.
Did you know brown people can live at the South Pole?
They could visit, just like white people.
I am absolutely shook the times.
And I mentioned that this is a cult, and I think it's a cult identifier.
Well, I've played this before, but we'll play it again, because it fits the topic so perfectly.
If we go to the next link, you can see this here, which is the smallest crevices of intersectionality.
I think we have finally found it.
Oh yes, I remember this.
Let's play the clip.
My name is councillor Bashir Ibrahim and I am proud to have become a councillor in May this year in a by-election.
One of the first black male councillors in Islington in over three years.
This is the government who wants to whitewash a rapport to say that there is no institutional racism in the UK when comrades, we know that there is institutional racism.
We are in a situation where the Conservative Party have more black male MPs than the Labour Party.
That is a great shame for us.
We are the natural home for black communities and black communities must know that we will always have their back.
I'm putting aside all the party political racial nationalism there, but the Labour Party owns black people.
Rightio.
Thank you, Labour Party speaker number five.
There's the point that he makes that he is the first, or at least one of the first, as he says, not even the first, one of the first black male councillors in Islington in over three years.
Council elections being every four years.
That's the lowest crevice.
That is just, I'm part of the group, I swear.
That's the identity there.
The individualistic achievements worth nothing, as you say.
Let's hear less about groups and more about individual stories, I say.
That's a good thing to learn.
Let's go to video comments.
I'm curious as to whether or not you know much about Isaac Asimov's Foundation series and the science that is used to predict the future far ahead, Psychohistory.
Psychohistory is an intriguing concept that can only work in the universe of the novels.
The human events can be predicted far into the future by modelling mass behaviour, ignoring the specific, sounds similar to the equally attractive yet flawed idea of history repeats itself.
To me Asimov probably poo-pooed it as the two foundations in the books exist precisely to ensure the outcome of the predictions.
Interesting.
I have had that series recommended, but I haven't read it yet.
You?
No, I haven't, but I feel like we're being outdone by Alex as well.
I know.
It's really good.
He's got these 30-second book clubs where he's like, yeah, that's all you need to know.
Bye.
Done.
Now get out.
Yeah, very concise.
Thanks, man.
Let's go to the next one.
So to all of the guys who keep bringing up manga and anime, why do you keep going back to all of this shounen stuff?
This is like saying that Carl should get into books, but then you only talk about Harry Potter and other similar young adult novels and kids stuff and so on.
I mean, why not talk about Monster?
Or the Vinan Saga, or the ever-classic Jinro the Wolf Brigitte.
You know, something where there's just a slightest chance that Carl actually may enjoy it.
I like Shonen, but I understand it's not for everyone.
Already?
I mean, Carl's not here to answer for that.
That's a very good point.
There is a lot of diversity in that creative universe.
So many different art forms, lots of different stories.
Sorry.
Don't care about any of them.
I've made that point before.
Let's go to the next one.
I'm gonna make a prediction, and if I'm right, Carl, you are way too predictable.
Carl's gonna say in response to both me and Zen that anime is gay, therefore you're wrong, and I'm not going to watch it.
No, you don't have to watch it, but the thing that you keep saying, I wish this show existed so I could show it to my kids as a message of positive masculinity and dadism, that show does exist, and just recoil in pain and saying wee-bree-bad isn't the solution.
You don't have a solution.
And He-Man ain't coming back, and that message is going to have to come from the industry that literally declared war on wokeness until the West is no longer subverted.
I wouldn't say Anime has declared war on wokeness, but other than that, I think actually he's found a very persuasive way of talking about it.
But anyway.
Again, Carl's not here, and I've made my position clear.
Don't care.
Let's go to the next one.
Hey guys, so I saw your show.
You're talking about how overweight people are really suffering through COVID. And the fact is that today, there's so much bad health information out there that it's really hard for folks to even know what to do.
There's so much emphasis put on running.
And I gotta tell you, running is like the worst exercise you can do, okay?
You ever seen a runner that really looks good?
I haven't.
They look like shit.
They always look like they're about to die.
People are about to have a heart attack.
Stay away from running.
Get in the weight room.
Lift heavy weights.
Yeah, I think you also benefit from doing some cardio.
I personally like rowing on the ergs.
That's great fun.
It's a good full-bodied workout.
It also works your cardio, which weights don't necessarily.
But there's all sorts.
Harry and I were joking in the gym the other day that we found this ski ergometer.
What's that?
It's like a skiing machine.
Neither of us ski, but it just looks like the dumbest thing ever.
But if that's your kind of workout, then go for it.
More power to you.
I love his point about, have you ever seen a runner that looks good?
Yeah, actually, all the professional runners kind of look like, you know, running from a famine.
Even Usain Bolt, yeah.
Well, it depends.
The really long distance runners, they look malnourished because they burn off so much, so many calories doing the marathons.
But the short distance ones, like Usain Bolt is jacked, full of weight.
John's coming up saying, interval training is the best bang for your buck, even for cardio.
Did you really?
And he says, was it a full or half?
Damn.
Wow.
And he said he ran a marathon with no training.
So if you've got John Wong's uber jeans, then that seems like the workout method for you.
Other than that, let's go to the next one.
Good evening, gentlemen.
I haven't made a video comment in quite some time because I've been kind of busy and not really much to talk about.
Anyway, I've been rereading my favorite American fantasy book series, The Wheel of Time by Robert Jordan, and also watching the TV adaptation of it, which was god-awful in so many ways, and I kind of really want to complain about it to you for some reason, so let me know if you're at all interested.
I've read The Wheel of Time.
I haven't seen the series.
My brother reckons it's okay.
I have no idea.
So, I mean, yes, I guess.
The books themselves are very interesting.
Basically, there was one book which was really good, then the next few were also quite good, and then the pacing of the whole story just went to zero.
So, it just stalled out until, like, 12 volumes.
The author died, and then he got another author, Brandon Sanderson, to finish it off.
So, it's an interesting cultural phenomenon.
Again, something I haven't seen.
So, let's get to the next one.
So, apparently, Holland is the new Australian.
It's the only European country that's in full lockdown, over nothing.
And this is how it treats its citizens who peacefully disagree.
And this wasn't a mostly peaceful protest.
This was a fully peaceful protest.
I'm still in exile in Scotland, waiting out the madness.
Yeah, fair enough.
Jesus, yeah.
You can see that he doesn't mean to set the dog on it, or at least it doesn't look like that, that he's hitting the dog with his baton to try and get it off.
So, it's a failure on the canine officer rather than a malicious attack.
But still.
I can't believe, because I remember when seeing the news...
But why would they deploy canine officers to a place like that anyway?
Well, so you do it as a threat, usually in response to a riot.
So I don't know what the situation was on the ground.
Maybe someone started breaking something.
That's the best case scenario.
I haven't actually, in the UK, I've not seen canine officers at a protest.
He says it was a peaceful protest, so there's no need to.
I've been at ones when the people start destroying property or rioting.
There's a battering an unarmed lady right there too, says John.
I thought he was also hitting a dog.
I may have missed it.
Yeah.
But the protests I've been to where they deployed dogs, it's because it's got rowdy.
So that's usually the reason for it.
So if there was no violence, there was no reason to deploy dogs.
I mean, that's usually how these things go.
Because, I mean, it's there as a threat to essentially remind the people breaking stuff, oi, cut it out.
And if they're not breaking stuff, there's no need for them to be there.
Because, as you see, it comes with risks.
Yeah.
It's horrible to see.
Happy 300!
So I wanted to talk to you guys about something pretty serious that I need to discuss, and that is...
toilet paper!
The Australian toilet paper.
As you can see, it's got words on it because the Australians do love to, uh, live...
I'm sorry, I can't do this.
I don't know where this toilet paper argument came from, but it's just ridiculous.
Hope you guys have a nice day.
Sorry, apparently the Canadian or American toilet paper isn't particularly awful, which I never thought about.
You know, I'm actually thinking...
There are lots of different types of toilet paper.
Yeah, but they have apparently, like, you can buy this really crap stuff that's basically like grease paper, which is awful.
But I always had a question in my mind, because you've lived in Japan and South Korea.
You know they've got all squat toilets and whatnot.
Yeah.
What's happening with the toilet paper situation?
Yeah, they also have toilet paper.
Right, alright.
I don't know.
Never been.
But those toilets in South Korea and Japan are actually quite rare.
Most of them are converted to the super modern ones with all sorts of functionalities.
So I imagine it's still like a thing in China or whatever.
Yeah.
Just wondering.
You will still find them in Japan and South Korea, in the more rural areas.
Do people use them, or is it just seems like that's an old person?
Yeah, people use them, but they'd rather use a property.
Yeah, alright.
Let's go to the next one.
BD and Little Joan with another legend of the pines, Russell Hardwick.
Russell was my neighbour across the street, and he passed on last week.
He was 88, he was a landscaper, and he was a legend in my neighbourhood.
He would always help people out with their edging, with their leaves, with any kind of landscaping.
He was really good at it.
He was suffering from dementia towards the end, but that didn't slow him down.
Every day he was out there doing something to his lawn or the church lawn or the lawn of the historical site.
Russell Hardwick, a true legend.
Thank you.
Yeah, cool.
So one thing I fear is eventually getting dementia.
Because you see, when people sort of get to that age where it's not even necessarily dementia, but when your brain starts going, I just get worried about that.
Because it happens to all of us.
Are you the same person?
I read media headlines these days, and the truth seems to change so often that I wonder if it's already happening.
But there we go.
Yeah, maybe.
Let's go to cscooper.com.au Real quick announcement.
I'm going to be at the Sydney Royal Easter Show this April.
This is a huge event in Sydney where there are markets and last year over half a million people went through these markets and I think it's going to be even bigger this year.
If there are any Australian authors or artists who would also like to be there, I'm happy to share my stall if you want to share the financial costs.
So please reach out to me, cscooper.com.au.
Let me know.
Awesome.
All right.
Sure.
Yeah.
Good luck.
Hope the fair is successful for you.
Like this, I gave my notice and so my last day of work is Friday after next and then I'm hoping to move to New Hampshire by at least the middle of next month because I'm going to move out with my boyfriend and stuff.
I could possibly try to go back to school and get a bachelor's in computer science and stuff.
It's kind of exciting.
It's really making me anxious, the whole driving across the country and moving and such, but wish me luck.
Yeah, movies always.
She's also going to be part of the statistics on the refugees now.
She lives in California, so...
Right.
You'll be part of the next 500,000 who leave this year.
So, there's also that.
Yeah, great news.
I hope you're well.
I hope it all goes good.
First time, Goldmember.
Showing off my Warhammer stuff.
These two are my son and daughters.
These two are mine.
I 3D printed this night and hand-sculpted the parts.
Jesus.
And that's really all I wanted to show for now.
I'll figure out something more insightful to ask.
But the next time I send in a video question, that's all I could really think of.
Anyway, thank you all for all the work you do.
I enjoyed watching the podcast while I'm working.
I love it when people show in their projects and things like that.
I do wish you'd say which 3D printer you use, though, because I'm trying to build up an idea of what setups people have got.
Don't put yourself down, though.
We like video comments like this.
No, absolutely.
Also, I do have to wonder, is the night a Nurgle night or something?
Because I know it's like all the creepy sort of...
What do you call it?
You know when you're doing food rots?
What's that called on top?
Mould.
Mould, yeah.
It's like the mould stuff on the top there.
Have you ever seen a Nurgle spacecraft, or at least a drawing of it?
Correct.
Yeah, yeah.
It's all made out of mould.
It just looks like the worst thing in the world.
Can you imagine a whole spaceship?
You just put your foot in it.
But anyway...
Well, I'm just guessing.
I can see he's got one of each there as well.
Yeah, that's awesome.
Although I never feel like I can fully trust a Chaos player.
Something about it.
I mean, not to be rude, but everyone knows what you mean, right?
It's just like, why'd you pick Chaos?
What's that about?
I know.
My brother was into Chaos as well, and no, I wouldn't trust him either.
Let's go to the written comments.
Okay.
So, Shaker Silver says, D&D had a recent push.
Sorry, who's D&D? Did he talk about Dungeons& Dragons?
Dungeons& Dragons.
I can't wait to solve all problems in D&D where the love and the villains are just misunderstood.
Roll to poor tea.
Yes, I think Arch actually covered this on his channel not long ago, but it is a curious thing.
The D&D is grappling with a moral problem which Tolkien was grappling with when he wrote his Orcs, and this is in the sort of Christian theology mindset.
Can you be born evil?
And Tolkien thought that, no, you couldn't.
You would always have to have some kind of path to redemption.
But there's a contradiction that's raised in D&D, because these races have entire cultures which do evil stuff from start to finish.
But then it's like, oh, but they're not evil.
And I like the idea of some of them having potential for redemption, but the way that they're doing it is just very primitive, very clumsy.
It feels like you've given something super precious to, like a, what's the expression Douglas Murray uses?
It's like giving a Sèvres vase to a dancing chimpanzee.
Like, they don't understand what they've got or the value of it or the depth of nuance in that world that they're in charge of, so they're just going to wreck it.
I don't know anything at all about D&D. Have you ever been tempted?
I always wanted to play a game because it sounds like fun, but I just never got around to it.
Fair enough.
Although, I'm thinking to, like, Warhammer 40k.
There's always this argument, it's like, oh, don't you know the evil races exist?
And she's like, which ones are the evil races?
They're all bastards.
But I mean, when you get down to it, though, and you look at it, there's some races where they're obviously not evil, because you can't really characterise them like that.
Like the orcs.
The orcs aren't evil.
Like, they're savage.
They're brutal.
But evil?
I think that's just because you associate yourself with them too much, Callum.
No, but I mean, from an Orc perspective, are they really doing anything wrong?
They're just doing their nature.
In the same way with the Tyranids.
I mean, are the Tyranids evil?
Yes.
I mean, okay, Inquisitor.
Purge the heretics.
It's literally just in their nature to eat, and then they go off and eat.
It's not really evil in the same way, like the Dark Eldar evil.
Right.
I know the Dark Eldar have got their justifications, like, oh, I don't want to go to Solesh and get raped for all eternity.
What, so you're just going to tear people limb from limb and rape them for all eternity?
Yeah, that's moral guidance.
You know, you can point to them and say they're definitely evil, but with the Orcs and the Tyrians, for example, I don't think you can.
The problem is, you see, they're all Xeno scum.
Well, that too.
So Ian says, J.K.R. wrote the books before the films.
I don't remember J.K.R. describing the goblins with Semitic features.
How much input did J.K.R. have in the depiction of goblins in the films?
She did have quite a lot of creative direction of the films, to be fair, like casting especially.
The goblins question, who knows?
I don't know enough of the specifics to be able to say anything on that.
So, Dave Carter says, JK didn't make the movies.
The characterization of the goblins in the movies is a Hollywood studio.
Essentially the same point.
Charlie Beagle says, A funny thing about the premise of the books is that one of the main themes is about how we shouldn't segregate based on the purity of their heritage, mudbloods and purebloods.
In short, it's modeled on the persecution of Jews and undesirables by the Nazis.
That's why it made such an impact on Yeah, although I have to say that I do think the way this particular aspect of the story of Harry Potter was carried out was very badly done.
I feel like that was what it was trying to be, and that perception was so strong in the general cultural zeitgeist that everyone accepted it as that.
But her actual execution of it was bad.
But I don't want to go into a rant about Harry Potter without another name.
I remember it being a theme, but I don't remember...
It was.
She tried to make it a really strong theme.
It just didn't really work for a lot of reasons.
I don't know.
In the movies, it never really stood out enough that I cared.
Or at least that's my recollection.
The problem really was magic not being necessarily a heritable characteristic.
So Harry T says, This looks like our stereotypical stereotype of Jews, so it must be how she thinks too.
That is what it is.
That's essentially the argument.
Student of History, well, that's a very negative opinion that Mr.
Stewart holds of the Jews.
Yeah, Mr.
Stewart.
I believe, I remember, was it Bill O'Reilly went on his show?
It was just like, why'd you get rid of your Jewish name?
And I don't think Stewart ever answered it.
I don't know what the reason was.
He didn't give one.
So, Arthur Lyon says, these people are seriously not aware of their own thought process, are they?
No.
Anyway, let's move on to Bill Gates.
Okay, what have we got?
Christopher says, I have been plastering the Time article all over since the day it was written.
Multiple Tim pulled episodes, Twitter, every damned argument in YouTube videos, etc.
Especially during each one relating to the support of Antifa by the left and the part where it brags about the mobilization of their activists.
Glad it's finally getting the traction it deserves.
This demonstrates that this attack on our systems is not ideological but financial.
I think it's probably both.
There is a union between the unelected of our executive branch, the unaccountable ABC agencies, and the revolving door with global business, and multinationals all using anything they can to keep America and Western nations on a collision course with coerced globalism for fun and profit.
Yeah, union, I don't know about that.
I like the term cathedral again, which is why I put it in there, because you can never tell how much direct collusion there is and how much it's just like...
What's the word?
Collective behavior motivated by the same ideology.
So that's why I talk about ideology, because I feel like the people who are the stakeholders and the movers and shakers in all of these different organizations, they have one thing in common, which is they adhere to the same general ideology.
And that's why their actions end up working in harmony with each other to create what seems like the actions of a vast conspiracy.
What do you reckon?
I think some of that's true.
It also helps explain.
So, some journalists are incredibly lazy, which is why you end up with the same article published five times from five different outlets sometimes, because they're literally just copying and pasting, and they can't bother to do anything of their own work.
And some of that, I think, also comes from the fact, as you're pointing out there, that the ideological sympathies, and you think, oh, yeah, well, they're, you know, good guys, they wouldn't have written everything, and that would have been all the rest of the story, and therefore I don't have to do any work.
I'll just copy and paste it.
Well, that's not the case.
That's...
Best examples probably being the description of the Proud Boys as a white supremacist group.
And people just copy and pasting that.
Everywhere.
I think it's on Wikipedia now.
Their official Wikipedia page now becomes a smear against them.
Diver Dan says, Bill Gates just taking the same approach as the Marxists and fully subverting educational institutions, charities and governments.
I wonder at what point that behaviour is sedition.
I think it's slightly different.
So I've always thought that depending on who you are and what you do, if you want to affect politics and society, there are basically two ways of doing it.
One of them is you do it with your actions, your words, and the other is you do it with your money.
So a lot of people will get jobs which aren't political at all, like they might work in a bank or something like that, where they can make a lot of money, and then they can use their money to then donate to political causes to enact their view of the world on the world.
And Bill Gates is just like that up to 11 because he has so much money.
He has more money than many countries.
That's my interpretation of that.
I don't think it's actually necessarily the Marxist way.
He's training lots of people to think in a certain way that agree with his objectives.
But fundamentally, this is just one person with more money than anyone should probably have being able to use that to warp the world.
What do you reckon?
Yeah, I probably agree with that.
I mean, there is the funny thing of most Marxists always end up either being incredibly privileged or funded by someone incredibly privileged as well.
I mean, it is actually a tradition to be incredibly wealthy and still be a Marxist, or at least get funded by someone incredibly wealthy and still carry on with it.
Yeah.
No, exactly.
Alex Ogall says, In the spirit of Know Thine Enemy, I have my radio alarm clock set to CBC Radio 1 Kitchener-Waterloo every morning.
I can confirm that they have a set schedule where they interview activists, students with mental health concerns, and raise awareness of indigenous and fringe events.
Anything, rather than cover the actual events going on locally.
After all, reporting local events requires going out of the office to talk to people, whereas activists will come to you.
That's a very good point.
Yeah, they don't do that local coverage.
The students with mental health concerns.
They've got mental health problems otherwise.
CBC has become the propaganda machine of the incredibly unliberal Liberal Party of Canada.
Trudeau has his woke fascist tendrils wrapped all the way through it.
The CBC used to be a great source for news coverage, not anymore.
Sounds like Scottish media, doesn't it?
And then Ilavik L says, on the CBC I'm amazed that someone spoke out.
The CBC is an absolute joke.
They ignore important stories and frequently cover fluff nonsense like elementary school children writing letters to Olympic athletes.
That's not some small town newspaper, it's national television.
I would frequently play a little game when I would go out driving before my AM radio kicked the bucket, where I would listen to the CBC radio station and find something wrong with each story they cover.
It was frequently a matter of every sentence being something either idiotic or banal.
Wow, imagine being that bad at your job as a writer.
Here in Canada, you can tell who is a complete political illiterate by whether they like the CBC or not.
I think that's a good metric, and we do have that in the UK as well.
But I find Conservatives who are defending the BBC, and I sort of look at them funny, and I'm just like, why?
On what grounds could you possibly try to defend this?
And it's always like, oh, it could be good for Britain.
I'm like, eh.
The thing is, I think they see BBC as one of the last remnants of the British aesthetic, because it is.
It's just been completely subverted.
That's not worth the money.
No.
I mean, if nothing else, if nothing else about the endless attacks against you as a liberal or conservative or anything else that isn't a progressive, just ignore all of that from it.
It's just not worth the money.
Yeah, sure.
On to Nature's Racist.
Nature is racist.
I love the idea of just like the guys who were doing bird watching, staring at the bird and just being like, is it because I'm black?
Anyway, so Robert Longshore says...
That bird's white!
So what are the outdoor retailers going to do?
Brown Discount, where your discount is based on your darkness, by Color Swatch.
Don't give them ideas.
They will actually end up doing that.
I think we found it because people love sending in leaks and I always did enjoy them when we were doing them and leaking them.
There was one bike shop in the UK that was giving out discounts for bikes if you had brown skin during the BLM riots in the UK. Unironically.
I think it's on Carl's, the old Saga of a Cat Facebook page.
You want to go out and dig it if anyone's interested.
I think they ended up stopping and released it as well.
BasedApe says, well, I can't believe they've developed a brown people force field they've put around nature in the UK. Maybe we could deploy this technology in the English channel.
LAUGHTER Pretty Patel, I know you're looking for ideas.
Go and contact the National Trust.
That's a very good point.
There are so many complex barriers to the English countryside, but apparently the channel isn't one of them.
No.
Drew Doomhan says, I hate how every art, hobby or activity has to be political.
Everything is political.
Can I just go hiking for fresh air and to be one with nature?
Can I just play music or go to the movies and enjoy the arts?
No.
It's all apparently to own minorities and assert some kind of white supremacy.
You know what I mean?
It's like T-posing to assert dominance.
That's what I'm imagining now in my head.
It's just like the ballet's going on.
It's just Drew over here.
All his white friends T-posing over there like, yeah, minorities get owned.
Yeah.
I mean, this is what James Lindsay would call Wokecraft, and it's basically what started Carl's Channel as well.
It was because they were getting into games and they were messing all of that up.
Because they were saying, oh no, you can't just play games, it's political.
Also, you're sexist and homophobic and racist and all of this, and transphobic and blah blah blah.
But yeah, they just have to politicise everything, especially your hobbies.
You cannot do anything which is outside of their political crusade.
Because it's outside of the party, comrade.
Right.
Re, Nature Hates the Browns.
Notice that these groups require segregation on race or religion to exist.
Prediction on separation is not a feature of traditional groups.
If these people believed these groups were excluding them, there would be an uproar against those groups in the subverted media outlets.
The fact that they are not creating this uproar reveals their bigotry against the culture of actual communities that these groups were created to foster.
Simply put, they are the racists.
Yes, there is that as well.
As mentioned, I believe legally they can't do that.
But all of our advertising is just brown people.
What message does that give off?
If an organization is set up, this is the Whites Birdwatching Group, this is for white power and birdwatching, but anyone can join, we swear...
It's white birdwatchers, but anyone can join.
Yeah, that wouldn't last five minutes.
No.
Unless you pretended you only look at white birds, but anyway, that's getting off topic.
Was it just doves?
What else?
Owls.
That's bird mixing.
There could be different kinds of feathers in there, not just white feathers.
The plan goes birdwatching next week on BBC Radio 4.
Robert Longshaw says, no one ever asked these hobby organisations which white organisations didn't let them join.
Because they can't, it doesn't happen.
Actually, to be fair, I'm very tempted to personally go on a ramble with the Muslim hikers.
Next time they go on, I don't know, maybe grab someone from the office, turn up with our sticks.
Just feed them red pills?
I just have a good time.
Like they say, they're very welcoming and inclusive.
I like the idea of going for a walk, more people from the cities enjoying the beautiful bounty of the countryside.
There's a lot to love there.
I'm sure they'd love to have us.
I mean, I remember I was with the bad man once, and he told me a story about how he was waiting for the doctors or something.
And there's all these papers, you know, as there is for magazines or whatever else.
And he's looking at them, like, what is this crap?
And he picks up one, and it says, um, Muslim women's bike riding group.
Yeah.
And he just looked at it and went, they can't even bike ride with other people.
What the hell's going on?
Why do you need your own group to go bike riding?
Snowdog says, Normal people work hard, earn cash, and enjoy your life.
Leftists, all of these working people have nice stuff.
Let's scream and cry until we get everything for free.
There is only so much they can take until we win if we complain that they is racist, transphobic, or about white privilege.
Sadly, in a world where you have no delay to graphification, you never learn to take your time to achieve, and the leftist Karen army is born.
Yeah.
Let's move to the honourable mentions.
So Ash K says, Latacies.com, brought to you by Pfizer and...
I wish.
...and Bill and Melinda.
Yeah.
Haven't they divorced now, though, so they're not really Bill and Melinda?
Oh, they divorced.
Have they kept the name on the organisation, though?
Yes.
A bit weird.
Hammurabi VI says, 300 already?
Feels like only yesterday.
Sargon kept teasing his new website.
How time flies.
Yeah, it does feel a bit weird.
Paul Neubauer says, Orc Lives Matter...
No, we're not extra credits.
We don't believe that.
Robert Longshore says, I'm scared to be buried as the wrong gender.
I wonder how long till...
It'll be.
It'll be before we see pronouns on headstones.
Beep, bop, boop.
Being your pronouns there, I presume, Robert.
Oh, God.
Could you imagine walking through...
That would actually make cemeteries spooky for me on Halloween if you're wandering through.
All of the gravestones are like, Caesar...
There's a good horror movie there that a fist comes through the ground.
Yeah.
David Fisher says on the CBC, in a way it's worse than the BBC. It is not funded by license but is allocated money by the government directly through taxation.
This means you don't even have an option about not buying the license.
True.
I didn't know that.
That's terrible.
You're actually forced to pay for opinions and propaganda that you may not agree with, even if you don't have a TV. You may not watch the propaganda, but still end up ensuring that others receive the government brainwashing.
I mean, that's horrible.
And then last one here, Lord Nerevar says, I never noticed the woke invasion of my home county of Worcestershire until I walked through the town and saw our medieval cathedral was a vaccination centre in the week and home to a black safe space on Saturdays.
Thank you, Church of England, the world's most subverted moral institution.
God, if I wasn't such a monarchist, I'd just be like, yeah, just get rid of the whole thing, but...
Anyway, congratulations on the 300 episodes, lads and lasses.
Here's to many more.
And on that note, we are out of time.
So if you'd like more from us, go over to LettersEast.com, subscribe to get access to premium content, or check out the free content as mentioned.
Thank you and goodbye.
▲
Export Selection