Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 22, 2022 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:31:26

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #354

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast The Low Suiters for the 22nd of March 2022.
	I'm joined by Carl.
	Laughing at jokes that we can't air.
	And today we're talking about Russell Brands doing the Lord's work, Facebook being declared an extremist organisation.
	Very much applaud that.
	And also don't let politics tear your family apart, because we haven't had dadism in a long time.
	No, but it's something that's come up, so we may as well talk about it.
	Firstly, we should mention the new stuff on the website, of course.
	So the first thing being here, Russo's Discourses on Inequality, which was a very painful book club to do with you.
	For you, I really enjoyed it.
	I was expecting better, as in, not from you, but from Rousseau.
	I don't know why, I just expected there was something redeeming in the slightest.
	I could kind of see why he thought this.
	Rousseau is basically the foundation of all modern leftism, so I don't know why you were expecting anything good.
	But it is important to know, and I think this is one of those book clubs that's genuinely like, if you want a really good grasp of what's happening, it's this, and then the next one we'll do is The Social Contract.
	Which we'll do later this week or next week.
	And this helps really explain why we are living in Rousseau's world right now.
	And he's the one who's calling the shots, unfortunately.
	Also going to give everyone who watches it, including me, a big think about the Enlightenment as well.
	Well, that's a bit of a concern, isn't it?
	Hang on, hang on.
	I've got to say, there are two branches.
	The sort of English and French version, and we're living in the French version when we want to be living in the English version.
	Not all bad.
	I hope so.
	Let's go to the next one.
	So the other stuff that's new on the website, the first thing being here, Media Lies Explained by John Wheatley.
	And, of course, this is looking into, well, how the media lies and what it is.
	There's also a silver and gold tier track, of course, for people who want to listen.
	Yeah, I listened to this earlier on the audio track.
	It was really good.
	Just going through the mechanisms of how the lies work.
	It's useful.
	So we go to the next one.
	We also have a republish here, The Framing Effect.
	So this is Josh's article.
	It's not been republished with AudioTrack for Silver and Gold Tier members as well, of course.
	So go ahead and enjoy that.
	And the last thing to mention being the Premium Hangouts.
	So we did one recently.
	I don't know if you can close the chat on that.
	This is What is British.
	We did the first part there.
	It went on too long.
	It was too angering.
	So we're going to do another one.
	Yep.
	So tomorrow at 3 something.
	3.30pm.
	Yeah, just finishing off the Britishness hangouts that we were doing.
	I didn't realise that the first one would take so long, but in the first one we were talking about the origin of...
	Essentially, Tony Blair got the Running Me Trust to do a woke critique of Britain, and they were like, yeah, so that's racist.
	And what we'll be talking about now, after this, is from about 2010 onwards, what that critique did to the British identity and what it's become now.
	I just can't get over the fact that they redefined racism to include culture groups.
	And religions.
	Yeah, but it's so wrong on so many levels.
	I'm racist against furries.
	Anyway.
	I'm proud.
	Come at me, I just don't care.
	Anyway...
	So, here's some words I thought I'd never say.
	Russell Brand is doing the Lord's work when it comes to critiquing the great and powerful and complaining and being concerned about the direction in which our societies are heading.
	And I just never thought I would say that, because I've never been a fan of Russell Brand.
	At all.
	He's a comedian, but I never particularly found him funny.
	And he's got a long history of basically being a bit of an edgelord.
	You can just go to his Wikipedia page and see all the scandals he's been embroiled in.
	He began as a comedian, became an MTV presenter, then jumped onto other presentations of other shows, and then in 2007, 2013, he appeared in various Hollywood movies, and then he went back to doing stand-up, and then he became basically a full-time political activist.
	Is that okay?
	But what are the politics that he's promoting?
	Well, basically communism.
	So it was like, right, okay, I'm not a fan.
	But, I mean, he's had many scandals, like calling Nigel Farage a pound shop, Enoch Powell, and stuff like that.
	But he got in a lot of trouble in 2008 with Saxgate.
	You probably don't remember this.
	No.
	No, him and Jonathan Ross decided to phone up Andrew Sachs, who played Manuel in Fawlty Towers, and left the message because Russell Brand had dated his granddaughter or something, and just saying, like, F'd his daughter and stuff like that.
	Oh, granddaughter.
	It's like, okay, that's gross.
	You know, Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand, I think got fired from the BBC, and Jonathan Ross got suspended.
	But anyway, it was pure old nonsense, and this was the kind of thing you had during the noughties.
	But then in about 2013, he became a commie activist.
	He did some guest editing for New Statesman, and then was appeared on Newsnight, where he was grilled by Jeremy Paxman.
	And Jeremy Paxman, because he was calling for a revolution, Always good, isn't it?
	Multi-millionaire, famous celebrity.
	I want a revolution, okay?
	Let's appropriate some property.
	Yours first.
	I think that's a quote.
	A socialist egalitarian system based off the massive redistribution of wealth.
	Yeah.
	Yay, okay.
	Yeah.
	We'll start with your mansions, Russell.
	No, but this is, Paxton was like, okay, what will the revolution look like?
	And he basically was like, well, communism.
	Okay, thanks.
	Thanks, Russell.
	But then in 2014, he began, he's been on YouTube for longer than this, but he began this YouTube series called The Trues, which I was never impressed with.
	I watch a few of these episodes and I was just like, yeah, it's just communist talking points.
	And so I wasn't particularly interested.
	He had guests such as Alan de Botton, Alistair Campbell and George Monbiot.
	And you pointed out that he had one interview with Ed Miliband.
	Yeah, so he said to everyone, don't vote.
	That was part of the revolution on the page as well.
	And then he invited Ed Miliband around, and Ed Miliband spent like an hour with him.
	And then afterwards he was like, guys, all those papers you ripped up, put them back together and go and vote for Ed Miliband.
	And it was not well received.
	Ed Miliband.
	I mean, A, he's got Corbyn's communist politics, so why Ed Miliband?
	But it was at the time, it was before Corbyn.
	Yeah, I suppose, yeah.
	He probably endorsed Corbyn.
	I haven't actually found him talking about Corbyn, actually.
	But the thing is, and so with this all laid out, Russell Brand is not normally the kind of person I'm like, yeah, so he's doing a good job.
	But then he started getting kind of based.
	And we can just, let's go through just some of the videos he's been putting out.
	And I'm actually quite impressed.
	We won't bother with any clips or anything.
	But in this one, he's just like, look, basically the people at the top view you as the enemy of the state.
	Like, view the regular person as the enemy of the state.
	It's like, yeah, we've got lots of evidence of that.
	But this was back in November 2021.
	So it's like, okay.
	Fair enough.
	And the next one is cheering CNN just being called out to its face.
	So the mainstream media, bad, yeah.
	Okay, agree.
	I mean, Russell Brand, he's had bad coverage from the mainstream media, but he's never really had bad coverage from the mainstream media, right?
	He's never been called a Nazi and this and that and the other.
	You know, it's always been like, ooh, isn't Russell Brand, like, so kooky?
	You know, because he's always been very left-wing and so they want to protect their own.
	But now that's changing, in fact.
	But anyway, cheering on the reputational destruction of CNN, good stuff.
	Opposing the censoring of the Let's Go Brandon mean?
	Good.
	He found it funny, apparently.
	Yeah, it's good to me.
	Yeah, it is.
	Admitting that Trump did not collude with Russia.
	And this, of course, got him labelled as being pro-Trump.
	Whereas now, I think these days he calls himself an anarchist and says that he thinks that Trump and Biden are basically two wings of the same bird.
	You know, the sort of, I'm not interested in politics position.
	But he was misrepresented by the media.
	Turns out Trump was right about Russia, and he made a video telling everyone about it.
	Nearly a million views on it.
	It's good stuff.
	He was opposing facial recognition software.
	Good for him.
	Calling out Australian tyranny.
	Again, another good...
	I'm just imagining you just hitting like on all of these.
	If I bothered liking YouTube videos, I would.
	I'd just watch them then.
	Okay, but all good stuff.
	But yeah, no, like, all things I totally, 100% agree with.
	How the media is dying and is paid to lie.
	Yep, that's correct.
	Well done, Russell.
	The fact that we're being led by total morons, which is true.
	Our leaders are actually deeply unimpressive people on an individual level.
	And that is worth noting.
	He's opposed vaccine mandates.
	How is, like, he's not, like, in the left-wing narrative anymore.
	No, I'm not finding anything to disagree with.
	No, not at all.
	And the thing is, in the last, say, five months, all of his videos, almost all of them have been this sort of consistent, almost the David Icke position, frankly.
	Like, you know, oh, all the power structures are bad and all the people in them corrupt and everything they want to do is bad.
	It's like, yeah, well done.
	That's true.
	That's absolutely correct.
	He opposes social media censorship by Silicon Valley.
	Regular people being silenced.
	He was defending the Canadian truckers.
	He's even been complaining about the sort of financial tyranny that we're finding ourselves under, as in Trudeau's forever emergency of there is always going to be a problem and we're going to freeze your bank accounts as and when we want.
	I'm wondering if this is the point at which people in the left started to turn on him.
	No, he's very popular.
	And of course, he's been calling out the Great Reset.
	It's not a conspiracy theory.
	And the next one is him just calling out the World Economic Forum directly using James Lindsay's hand-drawn meme of Klaus Schwab, which is nice.
	And so I was just like, wow, okay.
	Like, all of his videos are just basically like this now.
	And I was like, okay, great.
	Great.
	Russell Brand is doing the Lord's work.
	He's actually doing something really useful.
	And honestly, I don't disagree with any of these opinions in the last few months.
	They're all correct, frankly.
	And again, I never thought I'd say that.
	And so what do you think the response to Russell Brand being correct was?
	Well, that's why I say the Trudeau thing seems to be a turning point because everyone who criticized Trudeau was a Nazi and needs to be called a Nazi.
	So I'm imagining that's what the response was.
	Well, Russell Brand, you saw the graphic going around on Twitter where it's like, look at all these right-wing people Joe Rogan's had on them.
	Russell Brand's one of them.
	One of the right-wingers.
	I want a socialist egalitarian society with a redistribution of wealth.
	That's right-wing, alright?
	That's right, I'm a conservative, says Russell Brand.
	And so there have been a slew of these articles.
	Basically, passive-aggressive articles, and weirdly they're all being written by women.
	I don't know why.
	They're all really, really passive-aggressive, and they're all being written by women.
	And very few of them are really talking about, like, the actual controversial things he's done in his history, right?
	They never do.
	No, they're just basically saying, oh, he's become right-wing, a conspiracy theorist.
	And it's like, okay, not much of a charge.
	So what you're saying, he's basically Nostradamus.
	Like me, this institution in a newspaper.
	He's saying things against our institutions and saying we're bad.
	Yeah, but calling someone a conspiracy theorist is literally saying, okay, well, they're just ahead of the curve.
	Well, no, because if you're in the institution of, say, a national newspaper or whatever, yeah, you're part of the conspiracy.
	You literally all meet each other for drinks and have WhatsApp chats.
	We'll get to that, in fact.
	Right, so this is the first one by Clemence Michellon.
	Russell Brand is the new Joe Rogan.
	That's an endorsement, you dummy.
	Yeah, that's great.
	The search for Joe Rogan's British counterpart has ended, and Russell Brand is the lucky winner.
	I know, I'm disappointed too.
	Who are you?
	Why do I care?
	Boo-hoo!
	Disappointed in what?
	Yeah, disappointed that, what, it wasn't someone left-wing who's pro-NAS media?
	Why wasn't it Owen Jones?
	He doesn't have any support.
	No, no, that's the question.
	Why isn't it Owen Jones?
	Because Owen Jones is not speaking truth to power.
	Owen Jones spends his entire career defending power for some reason.
	But this is the age we live in.
	One minute a comedian is going about his life, building a career, and the next minute he's peddling conspiracy theories on YouTube and quoting Glenn Greenwald's newsletter at length.
	No, I don't like it.
	Yes, I'm exhausted.
	This isn't your blog.
	Like, what are you doing?
	I don't care how exhausted you are, but cry harder because that's my fetish.
	Left-wing opinion writers going, oh, I'm exhausted.
	Yeah.
	Yes.
	Maybe it's time to quit, eh?
	Have you thought about that?
	Brand's video titles can be sorted in three broad categories.
	First, the ones that are referred to an undefined they, an apparently powerful entity that the viewers have supposedly been blind to, at least until now, when Russell Brand has finally stepped up to tell us all about them.
	In his defence, he literally names the people he's talking about.
	It's not undefined if we give them the names that they have on their birth certificates.
	He's literally got on the thumbnail, Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum.
	Who's going to be?
	Who's going to be?
	We don't know.
	But there are going to be millions of people who don't know what the World Economic Forum is.
	And so, I mean, it is kind of something that people have been blind to until now.
	The videos themselves use the language of conspiracies.
	English.
	Because they all use English.
	Brand affectionately calls his viewers awakening wonders and occasionally welcomes them on a purported journey towards truth.
	But honestly, right, and I've watched probably a couple of dozen of Brand's videos in the last few months, he is telling the truth.
	He is genuinely telling, he's giving the other side of the story that the media is legitimately ignoring and deliberately omitting from their narratives.
	He actually is.
	I never thought I'd say it.
	Never thought I'd be in praise of Russell Brand, right?
	Where Joe Rogan leaned into the unjust asking questions angle, Brand has opted for the language of openness of non-judgmentalism.
	Oh no!
	Not a man being open and non-judgmental.
	He too is a guy asking questions.
	He doesn't like boundaries.
	He doesn't like dogma.
	He, much like any Twitter reply guy who's ever polluted your mentions, get off Twitter, lady, just wants to have a conversation.
	Oh no, how terrible.
	A conversation.
	A non-judgmental conversation.
	The lifeblood of democracy.
	This is all happening where you're not involved as well.
	That's the funny thing.
	Russell is off on his YouTube channel uploading stuff and having a conversation, right?
	And you're sat somewhere else and you're not even presumably logged into YouTube checking him out because if you are, then you're doing it to yourself.
	This is not Russell Brand invading your world.
	You're turning up to his channel and going, I can't stand it.
	He is invading her turf.
	The media, as Mika Brzezinski pointed out, they're the ones who program people's minds.
	They're the narrative setters, and that's how they think of themselves.
	And Russell Brand is getting like 50 million views a month.
	But again, it's not personal.
	It kind of is to them.
	I know, but in the sense of, like, it's not really about her, it's about the institution.
	Although she has tried to personalise it, as you saw in the title of this article.
	It's absolutely pathetic.
	She's just replaceable with any other stooge.
	Absolutely.
	But the point is, he's invading on their turf, and he's not dogmatic, and he's not judging people, and it's like, oh no.
	The right thing to do.
	Like, be nice.
	You know?
	Don't be...
	You know, have an open conversation.
	It alarms and depresses me that people are making money becoming conspiracy theorists, while at the same time painting themselves as the rare speakers of truth.
	It alarms me that the media makes the entire careers just spreading lies, to be honest, but then we're different people.
	Anyway, let's get to the next one.
	How did Brand go from stardom to conspiracy theories?
	This is the narrative now.
	From Luis here?
	Yep, from Louise.
	Yep.
	Honestly, it's all women.
	Like, so, who is this, Louis Chilton?
	Maybe this is a man, actually.
	It's just written as if it's by a woman.
	But, no, no, it's very, again, feminine and passive-aggressive.
	With his beard, long hair, and loose-fitting, wide-necked shirts, it's hard to shake the sense there's something cultish about Brown's whole presentation.
	All right, lady, which I assume you are.
	Otherwise, you're a very astute man.
	Yeah, very fashion-conscious man or a woman.
	And yet, despite all the Matrix-like, there's real truthing.
	Bran's videos are thoroughly beholden to his puerile sense of humor, with each new revelation incongruously seasoned with a splash of his insufferable shtick.
	Don't like it.
	He's not funny.
	He's making fun of me.
	Too bad.
	Now, it's true that the evils of Western foreign policy are often omitted from mainstream news reporting or largely downplayed.
	So Bran's right.
	And he says this repeatedly in this.
	Well, he is right about that, but I don't like him.
	But is this really because of some grand orchestrated effort to keep the public ill-informed?
	More likely it's just for brevity or relevancy's sake, or for legal reasons or due to vague and unspoken corporate pressures.
	What do you make of that, Callum?
	Corporate pressures.
	As if Brand is the one who's being controlled by big tobacco.
	Yep.
	Not the huge, powerful, mainstream corporate media.
	But is this really because of some grand orchestrated effort to keep the public informed?
	Yeah.
	Yeah, it absolutely is.
	There's direct pressure from people like Jeff Zucker and various other moguls down to the journalists who actively go out of their way to report mistruths.
	To deliberately warp the story.
	The fact-checkers will actually say, no, this thing that's fact-true, let's take the Hunter Biden laptop story, that's not real.
	And therefore, social media is just going to censor it.
	And it's like, no, it is genuinely an orchestrated effort to keep the public ill-informed.
	That's all it is.
	And this is why YouTube has an editorial policy.
	There are a bunch of things on YouTube that we're not allowed to say because otherwise this would counteract a bunch of their narratives.
	And so saying, oh, it's more likely just for brevity or relevancy's sake.
	How could that be?
	You know, relevancy's sake, the things that people want to talk about are relevant to the subject, and you're literally forbidding them?
	Don't give me this nonsense.
	But anyway, maybe he truly wants to awaken his followers to the world's ugly realities.
	Maybe he just likes the attention.
	It's probably both.
	Like, he doubtless likes the attention, but it seems that he thinks he's doing some good here, which is nice.
	And to show that this is a kind of Corporate class.
	You can see even the Telegraph getting in on this.
	Why?
	Why is he the Mad Hatter of conspiracy theories?
	But this is the narrative.
	This is the stigma we're going to try and attach to Russell Brand.
	If you were going to pick someone, I'd pick the guy who thinks the lizard people run the world.
	Not the guy who's like, yeah, Klaus Schwab is claiming that he controls your government because there's him on camera saying it.
	I mean, he did interview David Icke.
	Okay.
	So, speaking of lizard people.
	But the thing about this is, I don't think they understand that the public really likes conspiracy theories.
	They were really, really popular until YouTube censored them all.
	We should be allowed to as well.
	Yes.
	I love conspiracy theories.
	They're hilarious.
	Tell me more about Bigfoot.
	Well, occasionally you get a conspiracy theory that suggests that Bigfoot and UFO activity is connected.
	It's hilarious.
	I don't know why.
	It's never fully explained, obviously.
	But the point is, conspiracy theories are really popular with the public.
	So going, oh, look at that Russell Brand.
	He's got all these conspiracy theories.
	People are going, oh, brilliant.
	I can't have been able to get a good conspiracy theory for ages.
	So, no, good for Russell Brand.
	He's not just a conspiracy theory.
	He's actually doing some good work, which, frankly, shocked me because I've never been a fan.
	And a friend of mine, back in 2014, was like, oh man, I really like Russell Brand.
	Like, you know, send me his videos.
	I'm like, yeah, but he's a commie.
	He's like, I know, but he's just really nice.
	And the other day I was like, okay, Russell Brand is actually winning me over now, mate.
	You know, fair enough.
	You were right.
	I was wrong.
	Just took a while to see it.
	Anyway, that's Russell Brand.
	Never thought I'd praise him.
	I do love the point you made.
	It's just like, how can you say that relevancy is why we don't cover the Hunter Biden laptop story?
	It's like, the day it came out, you all banned it.
	Yeah, exactly.
	The day it was most relevant, you deleted the story from your front pages.
	Not interested.
	And there was a poll done of the American public, something like one in six Biden voters said that they wouldn't have voted for Biden if they'd known about this stuff.
	And it's like, well, there we go.
	It couldn't be more relevant since it actually, censoring that, won the election for Biden.
	Officially.
	Officially.
	Anyway, moving on.
	Let's go to another extremist organisation.
	So, Facebook has been declared an extremist organisation, or at least it has in the Russian Federation.
	And I thought we'd go through this because I find it funny, and quite frankly, even though illegal invasion bad, I end up kind of agreeing with the Russians on this one.
	At least their reasoning.
	Are we allowed to do that?
	We'll read the specific claims, and we'll agree with the specific claims that the Federation made in this one.
	As you can see, or at least I will, I'll try and argue it with you.
	So Ukrainian war, Russia labels Facebook and Instagram extremist platforms, but spares WhatsApp from the ban.
	Hang on a second.
	No, I agree that Facebook is an extremist platform, but I doubt for the same reasons that Russia does.
	Um...
	According to Facebook's own standards, it makes themselves an extremist platform.
	That's what I'm going to argue.
	I was going to argue that their standards were what made it an extremist platform.
	Yeah, so Facebook has a set of standards in which they prohibit activities, and if you engage in those activities, you are an extremist and are banned from Facebook.
	We know many a person who is completely unpersoned.
	I mean, Lord Voldemort, Rob Lynn Tomlinson, for example, he is banned for hate speech, officially.
	So if Facebook were to encourage or allow said hate speech, what would that make them?
	What, like with the Azov Battalion?
	Yes.
	So, a Bosco court...
	They're not allowed to use Facebook, but you can't praise them on Facebook!
	It's like, well, Facebook, you've just broken your own standards.
	You're now extremists themselves.
	And that is what the Russians have argued.
	A Bosco court exempted WhatsApp from the ban, however, saying it didn't have the same power to disseminate information to the public as its sister companies, which are all owned by Meta, which doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
	I think it's just because WhatsApp is used more by Russian oligarchs, and therefore...
	That doesn't make any sense at all, but Instagram escaped the ban as well, did you say?
	No, they did get banned.
	Oh, they did get banned, right.
	Instagram was shut down for allowing users to post messages calling for violence against Russian troops in Ukraine.
	Right.
	And Facebook was banned following the invasion because they immediately banned Russia Today and Sputnik from their platforms.
	So the Russians at the time just went, right, Facebook, you're banned for banning us.
	And then Instagram allowed hate speech against Russians.
	They were like, well, you're banned too.
	and then this has all gone to court.
	So, Moscow's Tudovsky District Court upheld the decision, enshrining the bans in law as it labelled the company's extremist organisations in the process.
	State prosecutors said that Meta, quote, deliberately allowed hate speech against Russians, which created an alternative reality in which many pro-Russian positions were suppressed and hatred was incited.
	I mean, that's not wrong!
	I've seen a lot of hate speech against Russians on social media.
	I mean, that's the point.
	I mean, that's the funny thing, because if Facebook has these rules, and we know people, and there are many others, who are on their, what do they call it, the extremist figure list or some nonsense like that.
	This was a few years ago where a bunch of feminists were whining that Facebook prevented them from saying, kill all men.
	Yes, I remember that.
	And now we've got to the point where Facebook's lying, yeah, but you can say kill all Russians.
	Only in Ukraine, though.
	If you're in Ukraine.
	And John makes a good point there.
	WhatsApp doesn't have a public facing, I assume this is why I'm exempted, because it's to private groups, isn't it, rather than public statements.
	Let's be frank, I don't think the Russian legal system really cares.
	It's not to do with the reality.
	I'm not saying it is, but that is a fair point.
	Yeah.
	So there's the argument, which is, according to Facebook's own laws, yes, they are in breach of them and therefore extremists, and the Russian court were like, hmm, we'll copy and paste that, and therefore banned.
	But they're not wrong.
	You can praise the Azov Battalion, you can cheer for the death of Russians.
	Okay, that does sound a bit bad, Facebook.
	I'm not in favour of Putin or Russia or the invasion either, but...
	And that's the funny thing, because Facebook said up until this situation, all of that was hate speech.
	All of that was incitement to violence.
	And now, because...
	Facebook's like, but you can do it.
	Only if you live in ex-Soviet countries.
	Oh, sure, great.
	Hate speech is allowed in certain circumstances.
	Yeah.
	Russia's state press agency said that Meta's lawyer had argued that the company was not an extremist organisation.
	Good try.
	And opposed hatred against Russians.
	See, I would have respected them if they'd come down and be like, damn right we are!
	Slavo-Ukraine or whatever it is.
	Slavo-Ukraine!
	But no, I love that they tried to claim that they opposed hatred against Russians, even though the court was obviously able to just pull up the law thing.
	I mean, they literally are in favour of it!
	Dude, you literally legalised it in ex-Soviet countries.
	So, yeah, that's a silly argument.
	So they lost.
	Not that they were going to win anyway.
	Are you sure that's a Russian court?
	Facebook and Instagram began blocking Russia Today and Spudnik for users in the UK following a request by the British government earlier this month.
	It followed a letter by Cultural Secretary Nadine Doris urging Meta, TikTok and Twitter to restrict access to the Russian state-owned organisations which she accused of spreading damaging propaganda in Britain.
	of course But there's the funny thing, because all of the claims by the Russian government that are actually verifiably true, which is that, well, you did allow hate speech against Russians, according to yourselves.
	So if you can load this up, as you can see here, Facebook and Instagram to temporarily allow calls for violence against Russians.
	I mean, that's just not on.
	Like, I... Just random...
	And this has had effects.
	Like, there's an Irish guy who rammed the Russian consulate in Ireland or something.
	There have been some of that.
	I mean, we'll try and give the devil his due.
	So Facebook said that their specifics for why hate speech was now allowed was because it was only allowed in ex-Soviet sphere nations.
	So Czechoslovakia, Poland, Ukraine, whatnot.
	Russia itself, which was funny.
	Russians calling for the death of all Russians.
	But it was only also for Russians in Ukraine you could call for the deaths of.
	But there's a large minority of Russians in Ukraine.
	Yeah, not Russians from the Federation, but Russian Ukrainians.
	So you are calling for the deaths of a minority ethnic group, and that's allowed because...
	And they have been persecuted by the Ukrainian government before the invasion.
	Before the war.
	I mean, this is what the whole dispute is about as well.
	I mean, shelling Donbass and Dutnesk saw it.
	Yeah, but before that you have the language dispute.
	Before we even get into the concept...
	But the Ukrainian government has been attacking these things.
	I'm not, you know...
	Yes.
	No good on either side, in my opinion.
	Before the war.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	This debate.
	But anyway, but it's the point of, well, okay, hate speech is allowed only when we say it is, and when it presumably agrees with American foreign policy seems to be the standard.
	In which case, I don't know, I mean, next time we attack a Middle Eastern nation, I assume Facebook will just allow us all to call for the deaths of whichever haji we're killing this time.
	Is that going to be how it's going to work?
	I can only imagine.
	I presume so.
	Although, no, it'll only have applied to other people, won't it?
	You could also call for the death of Putin, of course.
	I don't know why that's banned elsewhere, but whatever.
	So if we go to the next one, we can see the verifiable truth in that, which is, as well, Facebook and Instagram to block Russia today in Sputnik in the UK following government request.
	Yeah, the Zauer Iron Curtain.
	Literal government request.
	If we go to the next link, we can see the tweet itself in which they got the letter from Nadine Doris just saying, yeah, delete them.
	Don't allow them to be on your platforms.
	Why?
	Because the government said so.
	They accuse them of spreading misinformation, right?
	Yes.
	So do we have an example of that?
	They would say general support of the Russian Federation.
	How is that misinformation?
	That's partisanship.
	Yes.
	It's not misinformation.
	Misinformation is a verifiably untrue claim.
	Let's see it.
	But even if we could, let's say, because I imagine there are for Russia today, which you could say, this is completely wrong, or that is completely wrong, 1847 is the best weapon ever, no.
	No doubt.
	You know, you can say these things...
	Depends on your standards, I'd say, wouldn't it?
	But then we can obviously just point to the scandals within the BBC. I mean, like, the most funny one has to be when the BBC tried to run a story on Primark, saying that they ran slave labour sweatshops.
	You'd expect it to be true.
	So you'd think the BBC would go and get footage of it, and instead they'd just fake the footage, and then just moved on.
	It was just like, no.
	And Primark made them apologise for it.
	Good.
	They should have sued.
	Well, there you are.
	I mean, just verifiably false things.
	So can the Conservatives ban the BBC in Britain as well?
	For disinformation.
	Quote.
	That would improve the country.
	Quote from Nadine.
	I want to urge you to do everything you can to apply the approach you are taking across the EU to block both RT and Sputnik's online output.
	Again, just the government just comes down and says, ban it.
	I can't stand it.
	I never watch RT. I never read Sputnik.
	But also only for the Russians, not for Qatar-funded media, such as Alta Zera or AJ+. Consistent-ish, always.
	If you go to the next one, we could see Nadine celebrating all this as well, because that's her position on all this.
	I thank Meta in responding to my call to remove Russia today in Sputnik.
	Yeah, and then they got banned in Russia.
	Look at that social media traction that she gets.
	76 likes.
	Yes.
	Because the next one, we can also see that she used Ofcom to ban them from all the airwaves, so not just online.
	If you want to listen on TV, no.
	On the radio, no.
	I just hate the fact that we're just openly censoring.
	Why are we censoring ourselves?
	Yeah.
	Because that's the funny thing here.
	Like, you've made this point before, but if we're in a liberal democracy, we're able to listen to all forms of propaganda and then come to the truth.
	That's how this is meant to work.
	Whereas in a dictatorship or in an authoritarian system, you only get one line of propaganda.
	That's the problem.
	It's not that there's propaganda, it's that you don't have a plurality of propaganda to listen to.
	Go to the next one, we can also see the fact that she then organized with the French.
	So the French satellite, which broadcasts Russia today, was turned off.
	So, literally no way of listening to it as well.
	Yeah.
	And if we go to the next one, we can see the fact that we just look at Facebook again, back to the fact that they're an extremist organization.
	Eh, yeah.
	So this is political donations in 2016 by all the major tech companies.
	Yeah.
	I mean, it does say something, doesn't it?
	I mean, as partisan as RT. If nothing else, because you can see that.
	I mean, Facebook, 2.3 million to Dems, 160k to Republicans.
	That's in 2016.
	I'm genuinely amazed that Amazon managed to cheapskate their way out of this.
	Amazon, only 1.2 million in donations.
	If I were the Dems, I'd be like, hang on a second, hang on a second, come on.
	You guys get more money than all of these people.
	Yeah, you earn more money than God, okay?
	So come here.
	Like, 1.2 million, Google gave us six.
	You know, come on.
	But that was in 2016.
	If we go to 2020, we can see I've only got Facebook's figures here again.
	LAUGHTER It's just ridiculous!
	Like, it's not even, yeah, we lobby politicians because we want to win whoever gets in power.
	No, we lobby Democrats.
	We lobby Democrats, only Democrats.
	That's it.
	That's all we care for.
	And this is after the Summer of Love.
	Oh, yeah.
	After the engaging of terrorism by all of the Democrats' foot soldiers in BLM. Where you're allowed to praise them burning down the cities.
	And Facebook made sure you could praise that as well.
	But you can't praise Carl Rittenhouse for defending himself from the people burning down the cities.
	No.
	No, you can't.
	This is why.
	Because they're just unbelievably partisan.
	Yes.
	Unbelievably.
	For Russia today, oh, that's a partisan outlet for Russia.
	Yeah, yeah, it is.
	Yep.
	Funded by the government, by definition.
	That's what it's going to be.
	Everyone knows that as well.
	You're funding the government.
	It's fine.
	Totally different.
	But there's also the funny aspect in all this, that of course Facebook also allows the propaganda or partisanship that we have on our side, even though it's banned in other cases.
	And the most specific one would be the one not from a partisan organisation, but instead the state.
	Because the TikTokers, again, you remember this hoe?
	Oh yeah.
	So this is the lady who tried to claim that everything that was going wrong in America was Putin's fault.
	To be fair, Callum, I don't think we should impeach her moral character when it comes to whether she's promiscuous or not.
	We should just call her a government-sponsored liar, because she is.
	Well, that's why I'm calling her a hoe.
	Yeah, but that's got a specific sexual connotation.
	I don't think that's fair.
	I don't know.
	People have used this before for people who work for the Chinese Communist Party.
	People who go and sign up for the Chinese Communist Party and will make YouTube videos saying the Chinese Communist Party did nothing wrong.
	They routinely get called prostitutes for the state.
	Okay.
	And I think that is fine in this case as well.
	So a political hoe, then?
	Yeah, so a political prostitute.
	And we shall see this, because she wasn't paid, she says, but she did engage us.
	She did it for free!
	She did it for free.
	I lie on behalf of the Biden administration for free.
	Yeah, why not?
	Seems like a bad deal, love.
	I mean, I don't believe her, but carry on.
	So if we go to the next one, which is her response to the backlash in which people called her out, is to claim it's misogyny.
	She was a victim of misogyny.
	Ha!
	I claimed everything was Putin's fault, and people said no.
	It's 2022!
	Women don't even fucking exist!
	Like, go on, define woman, and then maybe I'll agree it's misogynistic.
	Shut up!
	Just shut up!
	No, come on!
	I thought you'd enjoy this stooge.
	This is in 2014, love.
	Misogyny is very much alive and well in the media, she said.
	Good!
	She claimed reporters harped on her despite the fact that she was not the only young woman deployed in the White House's plan.
	Deployed.
	Yeah, deployed.
	I mean, just wait till you see misogyny in women's sports.
	But also, that doesn't make any sense, lady.
	Like, you're claiming we're picking on you because you're a woman, right?
	Or at least the media was.
	Because we actually picked on the men and the women when we did the second one.
	Oh, yeah, just all of them.
	You're all political hoes.
	But okay, but the complaint is that, oh, I'm one of the several young women and they've all picked on me.
	It's like, well, yeah, then it's not misogyny, is it?
	Because otherwise we'd be picking on all the women because we hate all the women.
	No, the pick on you was because you made the dumbest video.
	And you were the best looking.
	Maybe.
	I didn't see all the other women.
	They were subpar.
	Okay.
	But it was also just the fact that you tried to claim that everything in America that's going wrong is because of Vladimir Putin.
	But look at this.
	She's 18 years old.
	Yeah.
	What are you doing?
	What is the White House doing here?
	This isn't her fault.
	Why wouldn't you have some scepticism about your own position in the world, right?
	She's 18.
	Yeah, but that's the point, right?
	If I was 18, and the government comes to me and goes, Carl, we need you to record a video putting out the message that the government has, I'd be like, me?
	You want 18-year-old me to do it?
	We want you to say how we should follow Leifang's good example.
	Sing the song.
	Exactly.
	I would be mildly sceptical of that, at the very least.
	I mean, come on, you're not.
	You're like, yo, you just hate women.
	Yeah, but like, it's also weird.
	The government's grooming you!
	Isn't that weird?
	I think that's weird.
	It is totally weird.
	Quote, What the hell are you talking about?
	The discrediting is your youth, not your womanhood.
	It is your naivety.
	It's ageism, not misogyny.
	Your dumbness, and your being a political ho.
	And you're being totally gullible to think they're telling you the truth.
	Oh my god, these people are professional liars.
	You're also being discredited for being a young woman interested in politics on social media.
	I'm just interested in politics.
	That's going to be her defence throughout all of this.
	I'm just interested in politics.
	Young women interested in politics.
	Discredit on social media.
	You know how you get interested in politics?
	What did you do?
	Yeah, I hated it.
	You'd watch some stuff, maybe some videos.
	Yeah, you'd read some books.
	Read a book.
	No, you didn't go and be a political prostitute for number 10 Downing Street?
	I don't think they...
	I think they would have been like, look, that would discredit us.
	Which is literally what the Biden administration should be thinking with her.
	That's what they should have done, yeah.
	The fact they're using an 18-year-old girl on TikTok discredits them.
	Yeah, they can't convince people with their words.
	They have to...
	Rational argument.
	No, we'll have lying children on the internet.
	Quote, In the last couple of days, I've gotten thousands of grown men and women shaming me for my body.
	I don't know why.
	Oh, now they're grown men and women.
	Right.
	Okay.
	Shaming me for my education.
	They're probably right on that one.
	Shaming me for wanting to be interested in politics.
	Again, no one's believing that you're just interested in politics.
	And shaming my parents for how they raised me.
	Considering you turned out to be a literal government schmuck...
	Yes!
	Your parents should have raised you better!
	For the worst government in living memory in America.
	If we go to the next one, I don't know if the link is working, but she decided to make a TikTok responding to all this, and I cut it down for the sake of time, but let's give it a lesson in which she tries to say that I'm just learning about politics, bro.
	Let's play.
	A video I put out earlier this week has inspired a lot of conversation and bashing in the media.
	I've been in and contacted by a lot of major news sources, and I've realized a few things.
	Misogyny is very much alive and well in the media.
	Out of all 30 creators, I'm the only one being body shamed and discredited for being a young woman interested in politics on social media.
	One reporter even asked me, why do you think that you're allowed to talk about politics when you post makeup and dance videos?
	Does that make me not allowed to be interested in politics and what's happening in the world?
	Why can't I be interested in fashion and care about politics?
	Grown men have posted pictures of me saying I must have done unspeakable things to get the opportunity to learn.
	With comments that I've been reading every day, such as, what do they call women who do anything for money?
	Yeah.
	You know.
	But also, men have been doing this.
	Did you see the name there?
	No.
	Bev Sue?
	Bev Sue.
	Bev Sue.
	Miss Bev.
	Oh, right.
	Was the one, actually, it wasn't a man.
	It was a woman just being like, you know what they call a woman who will do anything for money.
	Okay, just women on women violence.
	Which, yes.
	But I'm interested in politics, so I'm just going to rote-repeat the government's message.
	Yeah.
	For free.
	That's not an interest in politics.
	No, that's being a propagandist.
	Now again, I don't think it was for free.
	I think it just took money.
	Well, she claims it was an unpaid Zoom call.
	I don't know if she got paid for the video itself, because people online, at least propagandists, are slippery snakes, so it's hard to believe.
	At no point do you think, why is the government coming to beauty makeup bloggers and saying, can you say this one message for us, please?
	Just no scepticism at all.
	Total blind faith in the authorities.
	Mad.
	Absolutely mad.
	But I can't read a book.
	Can't do that.
	Presumably.
	Otherwise, why didn't you?
	Well, hang on.
	No, no.
	I didn't realise she was a beauty blogger.
	I mean, I should have guessed.
	But, like, I assumed she was a political TikToker.
	Yeah.
	And she talked about communism all day because she's an 18-year-old woman, right?
	Why would she be like, yeah, she's just interested.
	She's interested in politics.
	Yeah.
	She's interested in politics.
	Like, why would you not think, Christ, that is weird, isn't it?
	Yeah, but then, obviously it is weirder that she is a beauty vlogger that the White House went to.
	I don't know, particularly going to BMX TikTokers as well, just assuming they're all interested in politics as well.
	But then her weird defense, I just can't get over it, she's like, I'm just interested in politics, bro.
	A girl interested in politics?
	Why can't I be interested in politics?
	It's like, again, read a book!
	That will explain to you why girls can't be interested in politics.
	No, but read a book.
	Watch some political YouTube.
	I don't know, go on a march and say free the nipple or something.
	Don't become a propaganda mouthpiece for the White House.
	That's not what the rest of us do.
	The rest of us are like, you know, I'm concerned about the way things are going.
	I better go work for the central government as a propagandist.
	And you know what?
	If you are going to do that, at least get paid.
	Bad business.
	They've literally got all the money in the world.
	You're harming the wage gap.
	Stick your game up.
	But then we'll also get to the next one, because our own propaganda, of course, extends far beyond TikTokers.
	At least that's the Americans.
	That's what they're doing.
	In Britain, we still have ministers who are propagandists instead of hiring TikTokers.
	I don't know how long that's going to last.
	So this is the business secretary who decided to give a statement in which he said that the British people will have to suffer hardships in the months ahead.
	No, no, no, no, no.
	British people willing to suffer hardships.
	Not that they have to.
	We know we're going to have to.
	But willing?
	When were we consulted on this?
	There was no vote on it, but okay.
	In the months ahead, as the economy takes a hit from the Ukrainian crisis.
	Oh yeah, I'm sure so much of our economy was just so deeply tied to Ukraine.
	Everything.
	The value of the pound, the number of pounds in circulation.
	I mean, the fact that this was happening before the Ukraine crisis, as the money supermarket guy or whatever was...
	Exactly, that's my next link.
	You may believe this literal government propagandist because he's a government minister, but instead, let's go to a consumer advocate such as Martin Lewis.
	He just points out, that's bollocks.
	In much politer terms.
	He says, what has happened in Ukraine has exacerbated the situation, but the rises in energy, heating oil, water, council tax, broadband, mobiles, food and national insurance were all taking place before Ukraine.
	I love the idea you've got to claim council tax on Putin.
	Putin has raised your council tax, folks.
	No, he hasn't.
	He's raised my water costs.
	We were importing water from Russia, were we?
	En masse.
	It's very cheap to buy water from Russia, put it on a plane and fly over, rather than just ding it up from the ground.
	It falls from the sky all day, every day.
	Why would we need that?
	We have to set up a water pipeline through the sea.
	We import water.
	We import broadband from Russia, you see.
	If we don't get access to Russian broadband, no one gets on the internet.
	Again, obvious propaganda from the government.
	But at least we get it from ministers.
	At least we don't get it from 18-year-old beauty vloggers like Americans do.
	Is that better?
	But also, going forward, I mean, meanwhile, all this is taking place.
	I want to remind people, if we just go to the next one, you can see a graph.
	I don't know if you can scroll down to get the graph, John.
	It's just GDP per capita for the UK. It's just, yeah, Britons are still poorer than their compatriots in 2007.
	Ever since.
	Okay.
	Like, the government has failed completely to actually create any growth.
	This isn't true for the Americans.
	They've gotten richer since the financial crisis.
	Oh, good for them.
	Because they've been allowed to.
	The government stepped back, at least enough for them to grow.
	Whereas in the UK, new.
	Well, our bills are going up, Callum.
	I mean...
	Yeah, but also just for over a decade now.
	No, I know.
	Nothing's been better than in 2007.
	And our bills are going up.
	The height of British civilization in 2007.
	Well, I mean, that's giving Tony Blair way too much credit, isn't it?
	Well, then he led to the crash, of course.
	But if you go to the next one, we can also see the idea that national insurance is Putin's fault.
	Again, your taxes.
	How could it be?
	How could Putin keep taxing us, Carl?
	Putin keeps putting these taxes on you and me.
	I'm finally coming around to the taxationist theft argument.
	The money has to go to Putin.
	The national insurance rise, if you may remember, was to clear the NHS backlog from the two people who run the country, not Putin here.
	Also, who pledged in their manifesto that they wouldn't raise taxes.
	Of course.
	So immediately the NHS started hiring diversity hires.
	And we mocked this on the podcast because it was ridiculous.
	They're still doing it.
	This is from a couple of days ago.
	Hiring even more.
	I mean, if you scroll down, John, there's three more jobs have gone up.
	Honestly, I feel like...
	Heads of diversity and inclusion.
	I would rather if just the government would come around and be like, okay, we need your NHS money.
	I'd be like, here you go.
	Let's burn it in front of them.
	Although you're burning it in front of me.
	At least it would warm me.
	Yeah.
	At least they wouldn't be promoting communist propaganda.
	It would ever so slightly heat my house.
	Which would be better than communist propaganda.
	Let's scroll down a little bit and see how much of the head of equality and diversity is getting up to £60,000 a year.
	£63,000, £56,000, £60,000.
	That's three more.
	Just more money down the drain.
	I love the little line they have there as well.
	Job type permanent.
	Oh my god!
	An extra £117,000 to the NHS annual budget, well spent.
	For some reason, these heroes didn't get a mention in Savage Java's radical NHS reform speech earlier this week.
	Why are the Conservatives doing this, though?
	It'd be such an easy win to say, well, look, we've got all of these diversity hires, and it's costing you literally hundreds of millions of pounds a year, probably a day, millions of pounds a day, hundreds of millions a year, winning a bullshit, and then reduce the amount you have to pay for the NHS. Aren't you happy with that?
	Yeah.
	And also, we'll move on from this.
	Such an easy win.
	There's another point I saw on Guido, which is the government's hiring a new nuclear threat reduction manager for the obvious reason.
	And that person's getting paid 40 grand, whereas the guy in charge of diversity and inclusion is getting paid 108 grand.
	Just look at our priorities.
	I love the image.
	It's just the guy sweating.
	He deals with, oh, what if we all get nuked?
	And then there's the guy checking out your genitals and your skin tone.
	I just don't understand why the Conservatives are doing this.
	If we were living under a Labour government, I'd be like, wow, yeah, that's what they do.
	But...
	But instead we have this from the quote-unquote right-wing party.
	If we get to the last one here, I'll end this off with this one, which is just, I wanted to check out the Russian response to the extremist stuff as well.
	So just that, no, the last one, please, John, which is the Russian one.
	So as you can see, this is Pravda again, which I've used because it's the main outlet in Russia.
	And I just felt this funny.
	So as you can see, they leveled them extremists.
	And then they have some bullet points about what you should do.
	So number three, what happens if I post on Facebook or Instagram?
	If these are cats or any other entities that do not populise extremist or fake information, this will not be regarded as a violation.
	So, Russians can still use them as long as they post cat videos.
	Sorry, that's that.
	Number four, is it possible to do business on these social networks?
	It is strictly forbidden to make payments on social networks.
	Even a ruble to their account will be regarded as financing of terrorism.
	Sorry, extremism.
	Criminal liability will be 100%.
	I just find it funny.
	That's the life of a Russian here now, which is if you ever do Facebook Marketplace, you're funding terrorism or extremists.
	That's the law as it is in the Federation.
	There's also some advice, which is to untag yourself completely, because then you can't be accused of being involved in provocation.
	Yeah, that's it.
	That's Facebook being labelled extremists.
	Well, all the arguments in court were actually factually true.
	One thing I hate about this is that we've adopted the Russian position on censorship as our own.
	I can't stand it.
	I don't know why.
	Instead, we should have the Western values one, the thing we're all fighting for, which is, well, we allow all points of view, no matter how stupid or propagandist, because, well, then we can listen to them all and find the truth.
	The free and liberal West is like, yeah, but except for that.
	Anyway...
	So, you shouldn't let politics tear apart your family, and I'm doing this in response to one ethicist, a question an ethicist at the New York Times was asked.
	May I disinherit my right-wing daughters?
	The answer is no.
	The fact that you even want to ask this is your problem, right?
	So this is a question from someone whose name is withheld.
	They say, I'm 18 and very good health.
	I have two grown daughters, both in their 50s.
	Sorry.
	I'm in good health, but I'm trying to disown my kids.
	I want to do it before I die.
	And a lovely granddaughter in her teens.
	So she's got two daughters with one granddaughter.
	It's concerning, isn't it?
	Anyway, a few years ago, I made my will for my estate to be divided equally between those three survivors.
	Even though my daughters grew up in a very progressive household, they have embraced the opposite political side from me.
	Based.
	What?
	What?
	They all grew up in a progressive household and then they hated leftism.
	Really makes you think, doesn't it?
	My granddaughter hears all the talk in her family and I'm sure she believes she's hearing the truth.
	One of my daughters also does not believe in the vaccine and did not have my granddaughter vaccinated.
	Not allowed to say anything about that.
	I do not discuss politics with them any longer.
	They get all of their information from the internet and don't read the mainstream press.
	Oh no.
	These daughters sounded based.
	The worst thing of all to me is that they believe the election was stolen, which of course it wasn't because we're putting this on YouTube.
	I'm distraught by this and have considered changing my will and leaving it all to a good Name withheld.
	So the boomer truther can't accept there are facts outside of her narrative.
	Progress is the only thing that matters.
	Get your vaccine.
	Watch the mainstream media.
	Do as you're told, says the person who has...
	I love, what is it, Michael Malice's word on this.
	The mainstream media should be regarded as tobacco salesmen.
	Yes.
	And be trusted as much.
	So when she's saying, oh my god, they don't listen to what the tobacco salesman has to say.
	They don't even smoke.
	Yeah.
	That's how I'm saying this.
	Yeah, same.
	It's like, well, you know, why would I expect them to?
	But there is, in fact, a great deal of information outside of the mainstream narrative that is literally prohibited from social media, right?
	And this is why we have to do premium podcasts on the website, because we just can't put this on any Silicon Valley platform.
	Talking about why sportsmen, for example, are just dropping dead on the football pitch.
	Dozens and dozens of them.
	It's really weird.
	Actually, what the anti-vaxxers got right, maybe for YouTube's terms of services, we have to say nothing.
	I end up having to clip this whole section, I'll be honest.
	You better not!
	And then, we had to do two parts of that, because there were so many things to talk about, right?
	And then, of course, talking about the dishonest narrative about the horse paste that Joe Rogan took, because it did nothing for him, obviously.
	To show that there is genuinely a set of narratives that don't include all of the evidence and all of the truth.
	So going back to the article, right?
	What a claim, though.
	Like, there's a narrative out there that has all of the truth.
	I mean, what insanity!
	Well, that's what they say.
	Yeah.
	She doesn't watch the media and therefore she believes nothing but lies, whereas I believe all things that are true.
	And that's literally what she's saying.
	So, go to the article.
	She's like, back in the 1960s, when the generation gap gained currency, many families were divided over political questions involving the Vietnam War, And this, you can see, it begins a new kind of society.
	This is the year zero.
	This is the adoption of Rousseau's frame of rejecting tradition and reinventing themselves every generation.
	And this is, we'll do the book club on the social contract soon, in fact, because you'll see exactly this is precisely what Rue is advocating for.
	And so now each generation feels the need to reinvent themselves.
	And look where we are!
	Like, oh, we're going to do something different.
	We're going to do something different.
	I say, okay, but there are necessary human constants.
	And so when we did a segment on this the other day, progressives discovering Atlantis, because what they'd essentially done is reasoned themselves back into, oh, hang on a second.
	Maybe abstinence does have an effect.
	Maybe traditional families are a good thing, and maybe mass immigration does have a consequence for the country.
	And the progressives all reason themselves back into this.
	Like, yeah, but if you just looked at the traditions, you would have got all of those answers without having to go through the long convoluted road that also comes with a great deal of burdens.
	Like, there are loads of people who have been essentially tossed by the wayside in the progressive mission for liberation, whatever that's supposed to mean, who are now ruined.
	For people who are, you know, the OnlyFans girls who can't get dates.
	People like that.
	People whose lives have actually been ruined in the hard road of learning, again, relearning things that your grandmothers knew.
	Your great grandmothers would have said, don't ever do this.
	You'll come to a bad end.
	Why?
	Because of the long march of tradition, learning this hard lesson.
	And so we've come back to this.
	I know you've got the Zoomer TikTokers who are all on their own going, God, I wish I had a community.
	I wish someone liked me.
	I wish I had friends.
	Don't worry, the White House does.
	Yeah, exactly.
	But I wish, you know, and so there's no point suffering in ignoring this inherited wisdom of the past.
	And that's, I just thought that was interesting.
	Right, so going back to the article, one oddity about the present day is that many families appear to be divided over factual rather than moral issues.
	Is that an oddity?
	Is that by design?
	Did Joe Biden win the last presidential election?
	Are the FDA-authorized COVID vaccines safe and effective?
	At the same time, people tend to regard those who disagree with them on these factual matters as not simply wrong but wicked.
	That's an interesting point.
	Again, I think it really does come back to the Rousseauian rationalistic perspective, where if everything has to be rationally understood, then those people who essentially refuse to agree with your rational schemata...
	Are not just wrong, they are bad people.
	So this is a feature of left-wing politics.
	It's not a bug.
	But also, it's because there are a lot of lies going around.
	Lies by mission, specifically.
	We discussed these in another premium podcast.
	In fact, this...
	Did you do this one with me or was this with Harry?
	I can't remember.
	But this was with Harry.
	This was talking about the German public broadcaster.
	This chap, he had posted an article...
	I'm going to have to resign from the German public broadcaster because there are things about the COVID narrative that we actively suppress and we just won't tell the public about.
	And so going back to the old woman, they don't watch any of the mainstream media.
	It's like, well, if you only watch the mainstream media and you've got people within it saying, well, we are literally suppressing parts information that you would otherwise want to know.
	Well, yeah.
	You're going to have a misinformed worldview.
	And this is an entirely political worldview.
	It's being done with intent.
	It's not random.
	The things that are being omitted from the narrative, these are all political talking points in order to maintain essentially the fancy world that the left are currently living in.
	Anyway, going back to the article, the natural explanation is that these beliefs are badges of identity, the regalia of our tribes or teams, and come together with other beliefs and values.
	Proponents of the big steel and benefits of ivermectin in treating COVID are inclined to think their opponents are enemies of freedom who, among other things, want to flood the country with burdensome immigrants.
	So, no questions about the election.
	Ivermectin doesn't work, treating COVID, and the Democrats are not pro-open borders.
	Because these are right-wing talking points.
	It's not that, you know, there might be some...
	Video evidence?
	Yeah.
	People talking at their party conference about such matters?
	Active legislation to make it easier to, I mean, allow illegals to vote in elections and things like this.
	I mean, the law has changed in Wales and Scotland.
	And in America, in California.
	Migrants can vote in Wales and Scotland for the elected assembly.
	I'm pretty sure legal immigrants can vote in California now as well.
	Oh, fantastic.
	Fact check me on that, but I'm sure I saw something going on.
	But the point is, they're doing nothing to secure the border.
	They're not interested in this.
	And the Republicans are like, well, why are you concerned about Ukraine's borders and not ours?
	Valid question.
	Why is the military not on the Mexican border?
	But notice how it's only one tribe that literally won't accept true things.
	What are the Republicans saying isn't true when the Democrats are saying it is true?
	What are the Republicans denying?
	Do you think of anything?
	Not off the top of my head.
	Right?
	Isn't that weird?
	And so, I know I sat there and had a thing about it.
	It's like, no, it really seems the Republicans just advancing things that the Democrats and the right advancing things that the left just is consistently denying.
	Like, their entire worldview, their entire political narrative, it's based on asserting a series of things that are true.
	And some of them are true, obviously.
	But then it's based on invalidating all of the right-wing claims.
	And that's how they essentially radicalize themselves.
	Say, well, look, there's no truth on the right.
	They're just evil liars.
	And we have all the truth.
	Don't look at any of their propaganda.
	It's all false.
	And so this is the narrative difference that's been staked out here.
	Whereas the right usually think that the left are just stupid.
	Like, they've believed false things and, okay, we'll keep some of the right things.
	They do believe false things.
	The right tends to think the left's interpretation is wrong, not the thing that the left is pointing to.
	Like, they've fallen into a falsehood or something.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Or they've read themselves down a path of believing something and then another thing and another thing.
	But they're not denying the existence of gender roles and the controversy around them.
	They just have an interpretation.
	They believe the left-wing interpretation is wrong, and therefore it's not that they're evil, it's that they're stupid.
	But the left believes that the right just lives in a delusional fantasy world.
	But in fact, the left has led itself into the delusional fantasy world by denying aspects of reality, like true things.
	This is why I was so annoyed about Kellyanne Conway failing to actually nail the narrative on alternative facts.
	There are alternative facts.
	There are facts that you just don't know.
	These are not like not facts.
	They're just lies that you're leaving out.
	But anyway...
	So, they carry on.
	We can acknowledge that we're all prone to tribalism, and we all have false beliefs, without lazily supposing that different positions are epistemically and morally equivalent.
	I'm on your side, and when it comes to the particulars you mentioned, so is the evidence.
	But there's also evidence in the other way, but they don't see any of it.
	But basically, this is just her pledging her allegiance to the tribe, and she says, but there's more to the story.
	The whole media apparatus aims to persuade people like your daughters to adopt mistaken views.
	The whole media apparatus is right-wing propaganda against vaccines in favour of ivermectin and against conspiracy theories about the election.
	I mean, how misled do you have to be to believe that?
	I mean, oh, the irony.
	But maybe it has to do with where they live or what church they go to.
	A 2013 study that sifted through British and US voting data, going back to the 1960s, concluded paradoxically that people who were especially politically engaged were more likely to have adult children who switched to the opposing camp.
	The study conjectures that by facilitating political discussions at home, they make the offspring more attentive to the political messages of their times.
	And that may well be true.
	And it could be that also maybe there's a lack of explicit coherence.
	Because the thing is, the only reason you need to, like, promote political propaganda to your own children is if you felt that it wasn't really true.
	I never sit down and talk to my kids about pronouns or anything like that.
	It's talking about family things.
	And when they bring up politics, I basically try and change the subject.
	I don't want my kids being politicized.
	It's kind of gross.
	And also, it's probably going to make them be like, yeah, screw you, mum and dad.
	I'm going to become a conservative.
	I'm not going to take drugs and be a whore on the streets.
	I'm not moving to California.
	I don't want my kids being like, yeah, screw you, dad.
	I'm going to become a leftist.
	Anyway, what's clear is that your errant offspring have acquired the views that accompany certain identities or group allegiances, and that by trusting unreliable sources, they have been led into error.
	Error from the perfect left-wing narrative.
	That makes them wrong-headed.
	It doesn't make them wicked.
	Now, this is the part on which I agree, right?
	So even if you are the big brain progressive, you've watched all the CNN documentaries, you've constantly...
	All the CNN. All the CNN. You're constantly plugged into Rachel Maddow, where she's telling you nothing but the unvarnished, accurate truth...
	Because Rachel Maddow's never been monumentally wrong about anything.
	Russia.
	Right.
	And many other things.
	But anyway, even if that's the case, they're not evil.
	They're just misguided.
	They've finally arrived at the Republican side of politics.
	What's more, our close relationships have many facets.
	A woman I know in your situation does what you should do.
	She avoids talking politics with her far-right progeny.
	That's what my sister does with me.
	That's why I brought this up, because my sister's the same.
	She doesn't ever want to talk to me about politics, because she's a Jeremy Corbyn supporter.
	Well, it's going to go well, isn't it?
	Yeah.
	Especially as I'm right.
	But this is finally a good piece of advice, right?
	Because human bonds transcend political politics, right?
	Human bonds are pre-political.
	You have them from the very first moment of your birth with your family.
	And then you make them with your friends.
	And this mother's focus on only the political has led her to think that somehow these are less important.
	But the thing is, your family bonds don't change.
	Your father never stops being your father, even if you disown them.
	They're still your father.
	Whether you like it or not.
	Your politics can change.
	Most people's politics does change.
	They start left-wing when they're young and stupid and when they're old and wise they become conservative.
	So it's not something you should prioritize over your family connections because your family connections are the guarantee where you are in the world, your place in the world.
	This is where you belong in your family.
	You don't have a good relationship with your children Then they're the people, and your parents, they're the people who are closest to you and who you can most rely on.
	And if you can't rely on them, you're probably never going to find a relational bond that is as strong.
	And so when you're in a time of crisis, if you phone up your mother or your kids, and you're like, look, I really need your help, there's no one else who's going to be more willing or ready to help you.
	And so atomizing yourself over politics is bad.
	But she carries on a bit, but I think that's the major point that I wanted to get to on this one.
	Because even this ethicist is like, well, yes, I'm a left-winger, but...
	It's like, yeah, but...
	Yeah, exactly.
	Exactly.
	It's not everything.
	So stop acting like it's everything.
	You know, there is something actually more important.
	And it's nice that, essentially, the mask has to drop and be like, yeah, this is left-wing politics.
	I know it's your entire life, you can't stop thinking about it, and there it's evil right-wingers, but it's not quite as simple as that.
	So...
	Just a thought.
	I agree.
	Let's go to the video comments.
	Hey Carl, you mentioned wanting to get a wooden sword to play sword fights with your son.
	I would recommend for actual sword fighting these foam LARPing swords.
	It's got a fiberglass core, nice and strong, and it's made of a nice durable foam.
	You can get them from Calamacil or Epic Armory.
	High quality products would really recommend them.
	Oh, thank you.
	I've asked the Spartan Larkurgus guy to make me a couple of just light wooden swords, see how they are.
	If they break, I'll definitely take that as a good piece of advice.
	Thank you.
	Well, so anyone else needs them, that they are.
	Oh, yeah.
	For the next one.
	So the reason Owen Jones thinks that LGB is inseparable from T is because he's an outdated 37-year-old man who's still living in his teenage years from the 1990s when the Judeo-Christian Reagan right was a dominant cultural force.
	Men wear pants and date women.
	Women wear dresses and bear men's children.
	So a man who wears a dress and a man who dates a man are essentially the same category of misfit, which is just not how cultural forces view the issue at all today.
	Hmm.
	Interesting point.
	He does seem to be living in the past in a lot of those respects.
	Yeah, he doesn't seem to have grown up at all, does he?
	No.
	Weird.
	Well, it's also physically he hasn't grown up, but that's also...
	Yeah, but that's probably due to him being, he's probably a vegan.
	I mean, he looks like a vegan.
	Look at that insult.
	Absolutely.
	I've really come around to the eat animal products way of thinking.
	I mean, keto will do that.
	Make you strong and healthy.
	But no, but seriously, like, you know, I feel really great.
	I feel really, really good.
	I wish I'd done this 20 years ago.
	Go to the next one.
	So when I first came across this so-called optical illusion, I unironically thought J.K. Rowling was making a meme.
	You will never be a fish, you ask.
	And then I found The Sun reporting on it unironically.
	Did I say The Sun?
	I mean clearly The Ministry of Truth, because this is gaslighting if I've ever seen it.
	And of course, the source is TikTok.
	In what universe is that, a mermaid?
	Not mine.
	The interesting thing about these illusions is that they're obviously, I mean, you can look at it and then you can see a seal in it as well.
	I was about to say, that's exactly what I was looking at.
	Yeah, but it does look like a donkey as well.
	So it's all about illusion.
	I've actually been reading stuff about illusions.
	We'll do a podcast about it.
	It's interesting.
	They're not my favourite subject, I'll be honest.
	Well, it's more interesting than you think.
	And especially this is all kind of up in the air.
	No one really knows.
	But, like, if you were to put a few extra, you know, I don't know, another feature of a donkey on that thing, it would look expressly like a donkey.
	It wouldn't look...
	And it's the ambiguity of it.
	Catches people.
	Anyway.
	Go to the next one.
	So my triple vaccinated mother has unfortunately caught COVID, flu-like symptoms, bed-bound, feeling very rough.
	And while that's a tragedy, it does seem strange that she thought I'd be the one to give her COVID because I'm reluctant to get a third jab and my job requires me to interact with a whole heap of people.
	And in addition, I frequently go to the pub because, you know, British.
	But the thing is, I've done a COVID test and I'm COVID free.
	Where did it come from, I wonder?
	Big think time.
	Well, I hope she's okay, even if she's blaming you and you're not to blame.
	I just love the idea that he was like, the Anglo-Saxon genes keep me strong.
	Yeah.
	Otherwise, thank you.
	Let's go to the next one.
	DaVinci for video editing And Pro Tools for audio editing.
	What kind of software and gear do you guys use?
	Sorry, but I have to have a bit of a rant here.
	It doesn't matter what sort of setup you have if you don't pay attention to how your creation will be consumed.
	Note the position of the presenters in the podcast and don't line up text behind them.
	Think about the colors and shades and try to make your images and text as clear as possible.
	Mr.
	Chi produces some pleasingly trippy stuff, but this is unreadable.
	Oof.
	He's got you there.
	Yeah, I think that's all astute criticism.
	It's definitely been true as well, something I've learned over time.
	Fair enough.
	Let's go to the next one.
	So, good news and bad news.
	Bad news is, earlier this week, dog died.
	So, it's been a pretty awful few days.
	The good news on the other side of this is the satire news website I've been working on.
	It's pretty much almost done, ready to be launched.
	It's technically live now, but it only has about three articles on it, so I'm still working on getting more content before I really want to share it with everyone.
	But if you want to see an early preview of it, go for The Winsorian on Getter or Truth Social if you want a little preview.
	The only thing, when he said his dog died, I was reminded, so I'm reading the Cultural Revolution at the moment, and there's a chapter in there when, so dogs have already all really been eaten because of the Great Relief Forward.
	Yeah.
	So all the dogs have turned into food, but people still had cats, and at one point, Mao just declares that cats are bourgeois.
	So then, I don't know, he was having a bad day, a cat scratched him or something.
	Yeah.
	So then all the red guards go around herding up the cats and killing them, and then there's this one lady, because it's part of the family, she has it hidden in her, what do women call it, handbag, and she's walking outside, she's trying to pretend, and the bag starts moving, so then the red guards pull out the cat and just beat it in front of her, and she's just like in tears, and her brother's holding her back and whatnot, and she's like, She's lucky she didn't get shot for harbouring a bourgeois cat.
	Yeah.
	Maybe, but it's just awful, isn't it?
	Horrible.
	Yeah, so I can imagine the pain you're in at the moment with the dog.
	Yeah, sorry to hear it.
	Hello!
	Have you been keeping up with this Section 127 debacle?
	Got an email through from the petitions lot the other day with an explanation, I think it was, and it sounds as if they're not fully repealing it.
	They're actually going to replace it with a few other bits.
	It could be fun when I get to read that one, but I want to know if you lot know anything about it first.
	You might see me reading it.
	Have you read into that?
	So I haven't had an email from the petitions guys, but I've been in contact with the Free Speech Union who have been part of the lobbying to change this.
	And of course, their position is just scrap it.
	Free Speech Union, what do you expect?
	They're upset.
	So there's been reorganization on the front that it should be changed into if the post...
	I'm going to butcher the wording because it's just been a while.
	Where it has to cause psychological harm, and psychological harm is actually definable in law in a much stricter way than gross offence, because that means nothing.
	So there's that, which is an improvement, but the Free Speech Union obviously is still annoyed because this is going to get abused yet again.
	Like, he called me gay, that's psychological harm, and that's what it's going to end up turning into, probably in the courts.
	I mean, just social media surely is going to be considered to be something that causes psychological harm at the root of it.
	Yeah, so it is stricter.
	I mean, the best interpretation, I don't know if they have it, which is the...
	I don't know if they're using it, but you could have it, which is the kind of psychological harm you can measure for compensation in a case.
	So people argue for psychological damage, right?
	And there are different layers.
	And the highest layer is like, you know, someone kidnapped my kid and killed him and then sent me pictures of his fingers being cut off or something, right?
	So there are different layers, but I don't know what they're going with.
	Well, we will see, I suppose.
	But I know the Free Speech Union is doing great work on that, and they're in the halls of power being able to lobby as well.
	We'll give the petition response a read in a while as well.
	Thank you.
	Good day, Lotus Eaters!
	I'm on my way home from military through the ages.
	Normally at this event, the reenactment groups who are doing the presentations will actually get formally judged and ranked.
	This year, coming back from COVID, they wanted to be a little more lax.
	So instead of doing that, they just did kind of an exit poll for visitors as they were leaving, which groups were your favorite.
	And apparently our Hoplake group was rated number one in the entire event by audience choice.
	So I will be uploading pictures and videos of what we presented for the rest of the week.
	Well done.
	That's awesome.
	I'm happy for the photos as well.
	Yeah.
	That's great.
	Yeah, see the shields?
	Yeah, absolutely.
	Let's go back to them.
	A lot of men are being sort of driven to the right, so to speak, the sexual right, hating women and thinking that they all plan to cut their things off.
	I would like to argue, anyway, that women would be the losers if the chaperone came back.
	It was considered It's kind of babyish to want to go to the dean the entire time and complain about your feelings.
	To have more complaints procedures, to have more therapy and more litigation.
	And I would say, for heaven's sake, it's a regression to infantilism that's going on.
	And I think it's a real shame.
	That's the next thing that's going to happen.
	The infantilizing I was talking about.
	It's going to happen.
	Men will say, well, I'm going to start complaining too.
	Everyone's going to start being a victim.
	Men will want a share in the victimhood business.
	It will be unstoppable and completely negative.
	He's not wrong.
	He's not wrong.
	Do you want to put that in the share drive?
	John, I'll put that on Getter afterwards.
	Same.
	I mean, for all of Christopher Hitchens' faults with socialism, his cultural commentary is fantastic every time.
	Go to the next one.
	Gonna start converting the power armor's paneling from the wimpy aluminum flashing to 22 gauge steel plate.
	That's gonna be heavier though.
	Using pop rivets until I can get an extension cord for my welder.
	So you're probably wondering what part this is specifically.
	Well...
	I think I can counteract the black-pilled gloomies by hitting my power armor in the dong.
	Aluminium's way lighter than steel, so...
	Yeah, but it's protecting his dong.
	I mean, good point.
	Oh, it's just a steel bit on the dong.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Tony D and Little Joan with another Legend of the Pines from...
	Camden County College Times comes the story of Jefferson Hall.
	Jefferson Hall was originally built as a Catholic seminary before the college took over and legend has it that a monk hung himself on the third floor and that his ghost haunts the hall.
	Some of the students report seeing doors opening and closing, lights flickering, strange noises.
	Some have even seen the ghost and several students will not take a class in Jefferson Hall.
	Want to?
	Hello.
	It's not, though.
	You don't know that?
	This is my problem with ghost stories, because every time it's like, yeah, it's spooky, but not really, though.
	It's good to see you and Joan as well, but I'm very skeptical.
	I like things.
	No, I do enjoy the stories, but I just, I don't like, like I mentioned to you, I went to, what was it, Oxford's castle, and the tour guide was telling us all these historical facts that were super interesting about the Civil War, the people who were there, and then they had to barricade themselves in, sneak out to get out, and then he told us, oh, and also there are ghosts, ooh, and I just went, Can you tell us about that thing again?
	Alright, let's go to the next one.
	Hello there.
	I thought I'd make a video about Australian political parties since I've recently joined one.
	So I compared all the parties of Australia to, well, the main parties to the British parties in the UK. You would notice that the Australian Labour Party, I've compared it to the Liberal Democrat Party of the UK. And that's because they ain't nearly as woke as the Labour Party of the UK. The most woke party is the Australian Dream Party.
	I can believe it.
	I always love these little, like, comparisons as well.
	I love how you labelled them as like, here's the gun nuts and whatnot.
	Which is good.
	I'm gonna have a look at that afterwards.
	Thank you.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Callum, I know you've said you don't want to paint warmer miniatures because you think you'll be bad at it, but trust me, that's not the point.
	These are the eight, a collection of Tau Rebels, who I just like to give the paint schemes of various Power Rangers.
	The paint jobs themselves are pretty bad, especially put a torch star here, and I've barely got any detailing done on them, but trust me, it's about the creativity you put into them, and you get to really relax when you sit down on an evening with your brush.
	Take it from me, someone who sucks at painting, even bad painting can be fun.
	Is therapeutic?
	Yeah, but I've got a tremor, and I want to do something very specific, which is going to require a steady hand, so that's why I'm not keen on doing that bit.
	I could probably do the painting black and white and the basic parts, but...
	Well, I mean, one way to get over it is literally to brace yourself and then move just the end of your finger, right?
	Yeah, but for the lettering, that's going to be...
	Spaghetti is hard to write.
	No, you just get a transfer for that.
	Can you order one for that?
	You could order a custom transfer.
	Might look a bit strange if it's literally a custom ISIS transfer.
	Anyway, alright.
	It's not terrible advice.
	I don't unappreciate your concern.
	It's just something I'm worried about.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Apparently, to plaster over the fuel duty hole that we have in the budget due to moving from fossil fuel cars to electric cars, they're going to introduce toll roads.
	And this is a new implementation coming from Downing Street as well.
	So rather than reduce the scope of government and the size of government, they're going to be just plastering the hole with some other new tax.
	The poor plebs are going to have to receive, right?
	That's a great point.
	And, like, A, the Conservative Party is obviously totally captured by...
	Blairism.
	Yeah, it's not just Blairism, though.
	Like, the green internationalist agenda, right?
	Yes.
	It's totally captured by this.
	And one thing that you don't ever hear about, say, electric cars, is they have real drawbacks, like they take an hour to charge, right?
	So charging stations, if ever...
	John's saying they're also talking about paying pay-per-mile tax because electric cars have no road tax.
	Yep, good point.
	But the charging stations, you're going to need literally hundreds and hundreds of them, a petrol...
	well, a charging station...
	Because, you know, when you're putting petrol in a car, it takes like two minutes, and then you go.
	But if it takes an hour to charge each car, that's a nightmare.
	You know, and then there are loads of videos of these catching fire as well, which isn't good.
	Like, all the cars basically catching fire, so I've got it.
	Then all the resource demands.
	Like, I think even Elon Musk spoke about this.
	He was like, yeah, if we dig up all the resources, we actually won't have enough resources.
	Like, precious metals to revive the cars we need.
	I can't remember what the name of the metal is, but it's really rare.
	Well, there's a few.
	I mean, they're literally called rare earth metals.
	Yeah, so there's those problems.
	Yeah.
	I don't...
	I don't get it.
	Because I know that it's specifically Boris for a lot of this.
	It's obsessed.
	Whenever I've spoken to MPs, they always tell me, well, it's a vote winner.
	As in, like, they've seen polling on it, and focus groups.
	And that's about as far as the evidence seems to go.
	So I just go along with it for that reason, but...
	It's strange.
	I think increasingly they'll start to realise, or at least they'll get complaints, filter through with their door knocking, and start to realise that actually this is a bit of a pain.
	Making everyone poorer doesn't make them happy.
	Weird.
	It upsets them quite a bit.
	Yeah, strange.
	Not that we're even doing well.
	I mean, by that graph, it's just like, when we obsess over this to get rid of 1% of the Earth's emissions that we are, and yet we're not even as rich as we were in 2007, and we're stunting ourselves on purpose.
	And what annoyed me, I sent you the Pretty Patel tweet, didn't I? Where she's like, oh, I want Ukrainians to come and thrive in the UK. No one's thriving in the UK. Everything sucks at the moment.
	Like, since before the financial crisis, we haven't been thriving economically.
	I mean, just the graph.
	Everything's getting worse.
	Line not go up.
	We should get, unless we're talking about your bills, and then line go really high!
	But it's the argument of the neoliberalist, it's like, we'll have infinite immigration because line go up, world more good.
	It's like, well, we've got the immigration, line's still not going up.
	Well, not more good.
	In fact, well, not good.
	The wrong lines are going up, like inflation, like the price of your bills.
	It's just mad, isn't it?
	And so it's just like, you know, disconnected from reality.
	I can't stand it.
	Anyway, Bald Eagle says, I watch Russell Brand on YouTube and his turn towards baseness has been fun to watch.
	Yeah, hasn't it?
	He's been one of the few major personalities on the internet.
	It's fostering discussion between all camps.
	He hates the establishment and wants things to return simpler times when we could all give each other crap without triggering half the world.
	Yeah, sing it.
	Good job.
	Yeah.
	I also keep up the good work.
	Glad I'm able to subscribe now that I've got an 18k pay rise to going into a new job.
	Congratulations.
	You're going to need it.
	George says, I wouldn't be too trusting of Russell Brand.
	Well, I don't trust Russell Brand.
	I'm not going to...
	I wouldn't trust him in money or something, you know.
	Christ.
	He's part of the elite and has called for the formation of a global government in the past.
	Yes, but I think he's going into a sort of anarchist phase.
	So he's generally against government now.
	So, good.
	He's most likely controlled opposition, much like Joe Rogan, given that anyone else talking about these subjects would be destroyed in the YouTube algorithm and not have a growing channel.
	Well, Russell Brand's already famous, and so people already know him, and so the general chatter about him on social media I think is driving a lot of his audience growth, which is good.
	But, I mean, he probably will be, frankly.
	He's being very sceptical of media narratives at the moment.
	He's probably eventually going to find himself being deplatformed.
	Omar says, I'm going to be honest.
	I fully expected Russell Brown to cuck out like most other people were in favor with the left and raging it like, like raging his machine.
	I'm not one to consume his type of content, but seeing him stick to his principles, regardless of how he presents himself has been a welcome surprise.
	Yeah.
	Again, like with all the list of the subjects he's covering and in the right way, I was just like, Oh, okay.
	Russell Brand went from a degenerate heroin addict to having a successful career all through his own agency.
	He is antithetical to modern progressive values, says Jimbo.
	Taffy says, Brand is about as right-wing as I am vegan.
	Yeah, he's not a right-winger.
	However, he is telling the truth, which is a revolutionary act today.
	True news is okay-ish.
	I subbed to it back in the day.
	It was all Corbynista talking points.
	Couldn't take it.
	It was always like the banks are controlling Britain and we need to go and crush the city of London because of it.
	It's just Yeah, but then it was racism, blah, blah, blah.
	Chris says, I was introduced to British comedy through the Big Fat Quiz.
	It's nice to see some people like Russell Brown, Jimmy Crow, and Russell Howard being able to see through some of the nonsense.
	Howard?
	Really?
	Is Russell Howard based?
	Last I saw of Russell Howard's Good News, he's always been a bit cringe.
	I even watched him growing up thinking Robin Tomlinson was a far-right racist because of Russell Howard.
	And then when I started watching his stuff on Facebook, I was like, oh, Russell Howard lied to me.
	Yes.
	Russell Howard, as far as I'm aware, is a cringe leftist.
	Maybe he's changed.
	I don't know.
	Yeah, I'm not saying he's not.
	I haven't been following him.
	It's more difficult to watch more recent quizzes, especially when they have guests like Nish Kumar.
	The bread roll man.
	Yes.
	He's coming to Reading.
	Some of my friends are apparently going to go see him.
	make sure you bring your bread rolls.
	Lee says, Russell Brown's ideas have changed because amongst his previous left-wing views, one thing that remained for him was free speech, and obviously not so much for the rest of the left, and the importance of dialogue.
	He has had loads of people he disagrees with on his shows for this reason.
	He's always open to hearing new ideas, even if he doesn't fully agree with them, and he has learned a lot of things, unlike the cowards in the media who willfully censor and ignore forbidden topics for fear of reprisal.
	Yeah, and that's what's getting him in trouble.
	That's why he's the Mad Hatter of conspiracy theories.
	Mike says, one of YouTube's biggest mistakes was the banning and censoring of conspiracy theories.
	Some people made their career out of mocking them, and I loved that content back in the day.
	There were some comedic geniuses in that sphere, but of course YouTube must take away all of our fun in the name of sanitizing thought.
	Yeah, I used to like that as well.
	The flat-earth conspiracy theories.
	Like, what was the channel?
	Cool Hard Logic.
	Man, his videos against flat-earthers were just the funniest things in the world.
	Because this guy's obviously, you know, some sort of professor of physics or something.
	And so when they're talking about the Flat Earth, he's just like, that can't work.
	You fucking retard.
	Because look, these are the basic calculations that you have no idea about.
	And he just lays out the physics of it.
	And it's just like, so go on then, Cletus, explain to us how the Earth's flat.
	It was genuinely hilarious.
	Genuinely hilarious.
	Because, I mean, it's obvious nonsense.
	Yeah.
	But I like the conspiracy theories as well.
	Chet says, on his podcast, Russell Brand did an interview with Dr.
	John Campbell.
	He's definitely worth a watch and listen if you want to hear John not self-censor.
	The two of them are remarkable.
	That's interesting.
	Lady Sarcastro says, it would be interesting to find out how much these companies donate to our political parties.
	Well, you showed it.
	She must have put that comment before we saw Facebook and Google's donations to the Dems.
	For the Dems, the Republicans, I think it's publicly available.
	As in the UK, I'm not sure.
	I don't know.
	Hmm.
	We might be able to find out.
	I mean, we know...
	I think we can find out.
	Okay.
	We probably can look.
	We should look, really.
	It's quite obvious how politicians no longer work for us, the public, so who are they working for?
	Klaus Schwab.
	Just so you know.
	Spartan Larkurgus again says, Honestly, I'm willing to believe that she didn't take money for the video.
	The government called her to do her civic duty and do the right thing, and being a naive, uninformed young woman, she stepped up to the task.
	Let's be charitable.
	She's not a political prostitute.
	She's a useful idiot.
	I thought you were being a bit harsh.
	No, I still stand by it.
	Even if she did it for absolutely free, you're still being a political prostitute.
	Because if I literally went to number 10, because I'm interested in politics, and was like, yes, I'll make videos...
	Callum the beauty blogger.
	Yeah, give me a script, Boris, and I'll just read it verbatim, and then move on with my life.
	Remember, she didn't go to them, they came to her.
	You could argue that, but even then, the agency is still on you.
	You could have said no.
	You could have not gone.
	You could have received the script and gone and laughed at it.
	You could have Googled it.
	Well, no, okay.
	You could have looked on Yandex or something.
	Not Yandex.
	I thought you were going to be like, yes, you could have looked up your beauty vloggers who's on this.
	No, no, no.
	Just any information on this.
	But uncritically reciting a government script.
	Surely you'd be looking at it.
	Do I need to read a book about anything?
	Or do I just accept what the government says verbatim?
	Because that's the thing, I used to have friends who engaged in beauty vlogging YouTube as well, and even they had more, I don't know, wisdom than to be as stupid as to just be like, well, the government said so, and move on with your life.
	And then someone's like, you're an idiot, Putin didn't raise the tax, and then she's like, well, this is misogynist.
	We don't get a broadband from Russia, Cheryl.
	Whatever, Bev, you're being a misogynist.
	What's going on?
	This is pathetic.
	I still stand by it.
	I think it is accurate, even if you don't get paid, to be called a political prostitute.
	If you literally just uncritically take a government script and just say it and then move on with your life.
	What are you doing?
	You're literally 18 years old and the government comes knocking on your door.
	Hey, we need you to spread our message.
	Oh my god.
	Me?
	Yeah.
	Can I get to the White House?
	Can you imagine being the handler who had to deal with these people, frankly, actually?
	Like, being the dem who had to email all the TikTokers.
	It must be embarrassing.
	Shotgun in the mouth at the end of the evening.
	Callum says, I only use Facebook to check announcements for his local Warhammer store, otherwise I don't have a Facebook account and don't need to see the things people publicly post on the platform.
	Um, well, I mean, you know, it's up to you.
	Free Will says, she is totally allowed to have views on politics, correct, and people are allowed to criticise that view.
	However, discussion online can frequently degenerate into mindless vitriol.
	That is why it's often not a healthy environment for discussion.
	That's why you want to stay out of politics, kids.
	That's also, when I come back to the Beauty Vlogger, that's why they've gone to Beauty Vlogger's model, right?
	Because they know their audience, and them, are not ever really engaged in a debate in any such capacity.
	It's NPC talking points.
	No, no, no, no, hang on.
	They are engaged in a debate, just in a particular sphere of life, right?
	So they're debating over which one is the best foundation and eyeliner.
	Okay, yes.
	They engage in lots of debate about subjects like that.
	When it comes to politics, these people, at least when you meet them at university and whatnot...
	Yeah, they're not politically informed.
	It's so talking point in the sense of, Trump's the racist guy, right?
	Yeah, exactly.
	They don't know anything about it.
	You just want to claw your eyes out.
	Yeah, exactly.
	It's embarrassing.
	Which is, again, why she should have been like, me?
	They don't want to talk to me about my hair.
	Ross says...
	They want me to talk about Ukraine.
	I'll come and talk about Ukraine, but you have to talk about my hair.
	It's better than yours.
	It's better than your feet.
	Better than Jen Psaki's feet, yeah.
	I can't believe they put out feet pictures.
	Yeah, for people who don't know, the White House, they have an account on Flickr where they put out images for the public to use.
	And the photographer for the White House, for some reason, took a really disgusting photo of her feet.
	They looked like chicken feet?
	Yeah.
	And thought, I don't know, foot fetishes would enjoy this?
	Because no one else used it.
	Oh god, that's awful.
	Ross says, every time I criticize Facebook or Biden in Facebook, they go through my memes and pick one, usually from five years previous, and delete it and give me a temporary ban.
	Yeah, I know, right?
	Literally, I had this the other day.
	I was off for 30 days.
	This is something I posted eight years ago.
	I was like, I don't even remember posting that.
	And it certainly was fine back then.
	Literally, you didn't have any bloody terms and conditions.
	Yeah, Jeremy Corbyn's in charge somehow.
	Everything's getting more expensive, so the government's raising your taxes.
	Luke says...
	Excellent move.
	Young women in your area interested in politics?
	With the list advert?
	Actually, someone make that.
	I want to see that.
	With that woman.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Some sort of Tinder for politics is going to be.
	That's a good marketing idea.
	Student of History says, well...
	I'm not going to start something.
	My wife will go, why?
	For money, honey.
	Untapped market, darling.
	Why else?
	Well, when you look, when you okay the targeting of a specific ethnic group, not just soldiers, not just politicians, specifically noted for civilians as well, yeah, you're an extremist organization.
	Not okay for the Jews, not okay for the Bosnians and the Armenians or the Uyghurs or the goddamn Russians.
	It's not a hard standard.
	As you would say.
	Yeah, but it's true.
	I mean, you see this actual demonization of Russians and then the corporations being like, yeah, so you're not allowed to eat at our restaurants, buy our products.
	Trade money on our apps is like...
	The people in Russia?
	Like, they're not, like, all Putin drones?
	Psychos?
	Anyway, James says, Between Brexit, Scotland, independence, and vaccines, I have several differences of opinion with both my brother and my best friend.
	We're all capable of having grown-up discussions on each subject.
	None of us had to raise our voices or fall out.
	If you can't act like a grown-up when someone disagrees with you, don't vote.
	See, the problem, though, is that the narrative that excludes loads of information...
	When someone gets angry, that is an admission that they're running out of information.
	They do not know enough about the subject and they can't call upon a more detailed critique in order to address your arguments.
	That's why they get angry.
	And of course they can't because they've been deliberately misinformed by the media actually leaving information out.
	So no wonder.
	Joseph says, Good point.
	Harry says, My family are almost insufferable when they try and talk about politics.
	I was waiting for a comment like this.
	They all have the correct opinions as their takes.
	Ill-informed NPC-tier trash.
	I have to bite my tongue so much I barely have one left.
	Honestly, this is just the state of being essentially based online.
	You actually get to see things, and you're like, oh god, no one knows about any of this.
	It's not right or wrong.
	It's just that you were...
	I bet that, like, if I went to any family member of mine who buys into the general left-wing narrative about, say, the US election, they have no idea who Hunter Biden is, or that he has a laptop, or that that is germane to the topic.
	They just don't know, you know?
	And that's the problem with you actually being informed, is that you do know.
	And so I feel you.
	Just thinking about that Facebook thing, because you know that we're banned for not adhering to their own standards.
	But I wonder if you could just ban them for having those standards in the UK? Or is opposition to free speech?
	Maybe.
	Honestly, that's what I'd do.
	If our government had any stones.
	Anyway, otherwise, we are out of time.
	So if you want more from us, of course, go over to theloseears.com to get access to all the premium content we mentioned.
	Please do subscribe, because it also helps fund the show.
	And to everyone who is, thank you very much.
	Otherwise, we'll be back tomorrow at 1 o'clock.

▲