Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

June 8, 2022 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:31:10

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #410

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hi folks, welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Eaters for the 8th of June 2022.
	I'm I'm Carl and I have the pleasure of being joined by Maya Tusi.
	Maya, how are you?
	Good, good.
	Thanks for having me.
	Well, thanks so much for being able to come in.
	You know, I've been waiting to have you as a guest for ages.
	Yeah, no, it's actually my pleasure.
	It's lovely being here and you guys are doing so well.
	Oh, thank you.
	Right, so today we're going to be talking about how Keir Starmer is a centrist turf.
	I love this.
	I love this.
	I'm not letting it go.
	You know, we don't have to cover this because it's such a small thing, really.
	But it speaks to a massive division in British politics, which is incidentally what we're going to talk about in the second segment, which is the division of American politics, and then just having a laugh at the Washington Post having a public meltdown because they're not the media anymore, apparently.
	But before we begin, if you are interested in being a presenter for us, go to lotuses.com forward slash careers and go and check out the job opportunity that we have there because we are interested in hiring at least one but possibly two new presenters and you will have to, of course, do that.
	Video content, the podcast, premium content.
	But the overwhelming and the thing I have to nail into the ground, you will have to work from the office, because this is where all the stuff is.
	So don't ask if you can work somewhere else.
	Anyway, let's start.
	So, Keir Starmer is a centrist turf.
	Did you know this?
	Brand new information.
	Yeah.
	No, it's been hilarious and a long-running problem that Keir Starmer has, which is he's running into the question of what is a woman?
	I love how that's their priorities.
	We were saying this like over the last few days, actually over the last few months, Boris Johnson keeps going down.
	And instead of kicking him, Akia Starmer keeps missing open goals.
	Literally just went through a crisis of no confidence with Boris.
	And Starmer, 10 minutes later, opened his mouth to talk about penises again.
	But he can't get away from the question of penises, unfortunately, and whether women have them, because his party seems to be, it seems roughly 50-50, that half of his party are extreme progressives who believe that women can have penises, and the other half are normal people who think they can't.
	Well, what I don't understand is that he can't define what a woman is, but every single time, if you guys watch Prime Minister's Questions, he has all the female shadow ministers behind him, so clearly he can identify the women so that he puts them right behind him.
	Well, I mean, maybe when Angela Rayner was crossing her legs, Boris could see a penis.
	I mean, I don't want to prove anything, Angela.
	I just don't know what a woman is.
	But the thing is, this is relevant to a recent premium article Thomas did for us on Notices.com called The Black Hole of British Politics.
	And in this, he's just talking about, look, British politics, I mean, a black hole is a great way to describe it.
	It's just pouring wasted energy into something that's going nowhere.
	And it's, I mean, at least in America, it feels like change is happening.
	It feels like something political can happen.
	But in this country, we're stuck in this unbelievably...
	Just torpid position, where nothing seems to change, and the Conservatives don't know what they're doing, and the Labour Party are just continually beating them, while collapsing on their own accord.
	So anyway, if you want to support us, go sign up on lucid.com, you can listen to that and all the other great premium content we have.
	So, this began a couple of, well, nearly a year ago now.
	This controversy has been dragging on for ages.
	So in September 2021, Kirstam was forced to say that it's not right that only women have a cervix.
	How do you feel about that, Maya?
	How do I feel about cervixes?
	Is it right to say that women have a cervix?
	Well, to be fair, it's coming from a guy who doesn't have balls.
	He should actually be a leader, so I'm not really sure.
	Maybe he's right.
	This is, of course, Rosie Duffield got bullied within her own party for saying, look, only women have a cervix.
	The trans rights activists in the Labour Party flipped out about that because this is essentially heresy.
	And Keir Starmer was sat on the horns of a dilemma where he's like, "Well, I don't want to alienate the radicals in my party who essentially I have to agree with or I'm not a progressive, but I also want to be tethered to the reality of voting in the United Kingdom and, you know, being a human being." And so he tried to plead propriety.
	He said, "Well, it's not right to say." But it is true.
	Yeah.
	It is true.
	Is that not good enough, Keir?
	No, no, no.
	It's improper.
	And it is amazing.
	We need to have a mature, respectful debate about trans rights.
	We need to bear in mind that the trans community are among the most marginalized and abused communities.
	Whatever we've got to on the law, we need to go further.
	But what does going further mean?
	Yeah.
	Going further means accepting that some women have penises.
	Some men have cervixes.
	Yeah, it's funny.
	They think that they are...
	With these old cultural issues, they think they are fighting against some invisible right-wing people.
	Like the BLM movement, same thing.
	But in reality, they're fighting among themselves.
	It's an internal battle on the left.
	You're not actually fighting some invisible...
	When it comes to BLM or cervixes, you're still fighting against yourselves.
	Again, Duffield is a good example.
	You're fighting against her, not some sort of Hitler.
	And all she's doing, really, is trying to claim fidelity to reality.
	So they're fighting, essentially, against the tyranny of reality as being presented by feminist activists in Labour.
	It's like, You know, we, the white women, just sat outside going, okay, fight, fight, fight, throwing the money in.
	But anyway, so then Stella Creasy decided, and gotta love Stella Creasy.
	She's the most mask-off feminist.
	No, J.K. Rowling's wrong.
	Women can have a penis, as we've previously covered, which, do you stand by that?
	It's funny, because we always say that the left always end up eating themselves.
	They are destroying third-wave feminism.
	We didn't have to do anything.
	They're actually destroying feminism themselves.
	That's right, and they're going to a place that I would consider to be electoral suicide.
	Yeah.
	If literally the progressive wing of the Labour Party is going to be on the doors going, so, does your daughter have a penis?
	You're going to be like, get out, freak.
	But yeah, the best bit about this was Stella Creasy saying, quote, I am somebody who would say that a trans woman is an adult human female.
	Just think about that for a minute.
	That's the most thunderously stupid statement, right?
	A trans woman is a male who wants to become a woman, so a trans woman cannot be an adult human female by definition.
	And she's like, a trans woman is an adult human female.
	It's like, no.
	No.
	That would be a trans man.
	An adult human female who becomes trans is a trans man.
	You idiot.
	But if a man or a woman didn't exist as words, clearly, then what is a trans woman and was a trans man?
	It makes no sense.
	What are you trying to be?
	Yeah, literally.
	Exactly.
	What's the point?
	But that's the biggest issue with the whole gender identity and the whole trans debate.
	Obviously, you've got the actual trans lobby, the political activists.
	And you actually have some...
	I've got my own issues.
	I'm not going to shout in your face.
	Just leave me alone.
	But the reality is, a lot of the experts came out and said, in terms of the gender dysphoria and all these issues, it's basically a lot of people who The primary thing is they don't feel comfortable in what they are.
	So they know what they don't want to be.
	But the political side of this trans lobby, they move towards what they should be rather than what they don't want to be.
	So because you don't want to be something, we're going to tell you what you should be.
	And that's the problem.
	And kids as well.
	That's the problem.
	But also, what they're doing there as well, that's a great way of distinguishing as well.
	They're saying, I don't want to be a man.
	That's the primary, yeah.
	And, you know, that's your personal issue.
	I'm not going to make a judgment about that.
	You know, it sounds like an unfortunate place to be, and I am sympathetic.
	But the, like you said, the trans activist solution is to try and explode the category of what they're trying to become.
	So it's like, no, you can't even be a woman now, because there is no such thing as a woman.
	Women are formless, limitless.
	And it's like, what are you talking about?
	Why, you know, So these poor trans people would say, I just wanted to be a woman.
	It's like, well, that doesn't exist anymore.
	Good luck.
	You're on your own.
	And so anyway, he's been on Nick Ferrari's show a bunch of times talking about this.
	And I've got to give it to Nick.
	He's just presenting the question.
	This was from March this year, where Keir was asked, and let's watch the clip because it's really funny.
	So a woman can have a penis?
	Nick, I'm not...
	I don't think we can conduct this debate with, you know...
	Sorry, have I offended you or something?
	No, no, no, it's just...
	No, no, no, I just...
	A woman can have a penis.
	I don't think that discussing this issue in this way helps anyone in the long run.
	What I want to see is a reform of the law as it is, but I also am an advocate of safe spaces for women.
	And I want to have a discussion that is...
	Anybody who genuinely wants to find a way through this, I want to discuss that with.
	I do find that...
	Too many people, in my view, retreat or hold a position which is intolerant of others.
	And that's not picking on any individual at all.
	But I don't like intolerance.
	I like open discussion.
	What do you make of that?
	He talked a lot, but he didn't say anything.
	It was brilliant.
	He's got a great skill set to actually talk for like, what was it, like a minute, but he didn't actually say anything that wasn't, I'm against intolerance.
	But firstly, it's just one of those like, I like to be kind, like, well, that's just normal.
	I hate racism.
	We're like, okay.
	I like being nice to people.
	I like being tolerant.
	That's brilliant.
	Also, imagine like 20 years ago, in politics, not even like just American politics, in this country, if you had a show where a presenter, a journalist, asking a politician, can people have penises?
	20 years ago, or even 15 years ago, people would have been like, that's a topic?
	Yeah, why are you discussing...
	But like you said, look at him struggle.
	Look at him absolutely struggle.
	For a minute, he's just blathering nonsense.
	Like, well, I mean, we need women in space.
	Okay, what's a woman, Kier?
	Does a woman have a penis?
	That's the question.
	Are penises allowed in the women's space?
	That's the question, Kier?
	And he's just got no answer at all.
	And this hasn't gone away.
	This is, for some reason, eating up the Labour Party.
	And so he went back on Nick Ferrari last week, and Nick Ferrari brought up again.
	And you've got...
	Again, you've got to love it.
	But you can tell that Keir Starmer's like, oh, God, I'm going to have to come to an answer for this.
	Let's watch this next clip.
	Look, Nick, let me take this head on, because you challenged me on this last time.
	And let me be clear, for the vast majority of women, this is all about biology.
	And of course they don't have a penis.
	We all know that.
	And, of course, they need safe spaces, and we all support that.
	I've been supporting that for many years.
	And, of course, we want more equality for women.
	Again, the Labour Party's been fighting that cause for a very, very, very long time.
	So for the vast majority of women, biology is what matters, and it's very clear they don't have a penis.
	Right.
	He just laughed at the end.
	Even he realised how ridiculous it was.
	But that's fine.
	And I agree.
	The vast majority of women don't have penises.
	Good to know.
	Good to know.
	I mean, I think it's all women don't have penises.
	And they need safe spaces away from penises, which he agrees with.
	And I agree.
	It seems a very conservative position here.
	But that means that Labour can't be a pro-trans party.
	Yeah.
	No.
	Yeah.
	Also, that means that what you said, that means they should be in favour of women-only toilets.
	If you want safe spaces.
	Or vagina-only toilets, if that's how you have to define it.
	Check before you go in.
	But what I love is, you know, it's clear that women don't have penises.
	It's like, why is your party on the brink of civil war over whether women can have a penis if it's clear and it's, you know?
	Why are you even talking about that?
	But then the question is, what's your definition of a woman?
	Is it subjective to each woman?
	Because that's what he's saying.
	For the majority of women, it's biological, but that's subjective to the majority of women.
	But, if we can play in the next clip...
	But let's not leave out of account that there is a small minority of individuals who were born in a gender they don't now identify with.
	Some go through a process, others don't.
	And that is very traumatic for them.
	And I, for one, I'm going to respect and support them.
	And I think that's...
	Actually, when most people step back from this, they think, well, that's a fair assessment, Keir.
	You know, 99.9% probably of women.
	It's all biology.
	We must support them.
	Safe spaces.
	More women's equality.
	But let's not pretend or disparage or fail to support a small group of people who actually struggle with their gender identity.
	And I think that we can resolve this if we all approach it in that spirit.
	What's the resolution then?
	What is the resolution?
	So you're saying a small minority of men have a mental illness called gender dysphoria.
	This is the medical term for it.
	And he's going to respect and support them by allowing the penis owners into the anti-penis safe spaces.
	Yeah, that's the problem.
	In fact, it's that side that claim that they're doing all this because they care about these individuals.
	In reality, they're the ones who are damaging them even more, people who have these conditions.
	But the way the political left of pushing this agenda...
	They said that we're doing this because before there was a suicide raid in this community, but now that you've been doing this, suicide still exists and in some places it's actually gone higher.
	So you haven't solved that problem.
	You're actually making it even more confused and more ill in terms of the mental health issues because there's too many categories and there's a big menu of some sort of weird buffet.
	What should I be?
	Should I be a penguin?
	Should I be a cactus?
	You're just making me more confused.
	And the political...
	They think that it's because of the cultural conservative side that are being intolerant that they're killing themselves.
	It's not even that you're killing them.
	So it's actually...
	They're the reason that they're being damaged, the individuals.
	And moreover, you're actually...
	I mean, there is definitely...
	I mean, there's a prisoner called Karen White...
	Who is a male to female trans person who is in jail for rape and paedophilia and who sexually assaulted other prisoners and guards.
	It's like, well, that's quite an extreme example, but there is no denying that allowing penis owners into spaces that should be vagina exclusive, and again, not the language I would normally use for this, but what am I supposed to do?
	This has ramifications for the vagina owners.
	I don't understand why this is a thing.
	Prisons, things like prisons have always been categorized.
	Different type of prisoners are in place in certain places because of either their type of crimes or connections or threats or physical stuff.
	So why is it that...
	We're basically putting women and men in women's prisons in a very blanket policy way.
	That makes no sense.
	You've got pedophiles separate to a white-coloured crime person.
	Terrorists as well.
	But you put women in all those categories.
	Well, it's to be progressive, isn't it?
	That's the thing.
	It's to be progressive because progressive ideology believes that it's merely about one's belief in the adherence to the category.
	And the biological reality doesn't matter at all.
	And that's obvious nonsense.
	Keir Starmer admits that's obvious nonsense.
	Everyone can see that for the majority of women, it's biological.
	But for some small percentage of men with a mental disorder, it's not biological.
	It's like, okay, but that doesn't matter.
	You know, I'm sorry, and they should get the treatment they deserve.
	Yeah.
	And I'm not even saying that they can't act like a woman.
	I'm not saying you can't be transgender or anything like that.
	Go and live the life that you want to live.
	We're not banning the existence.
	I'm even so progressive, I'm going to use she when I talk to them.
	If someone has made a conscious effort to appear as a woman, I'll use she.
	That's fine.
	I'm not going to be rude at the very least.
	But you can't expect women to give up their women's only spaces and for that person to be treated as a woman.
	Yeah.
	But also, it allows the sun to just totally batter Keir.
	Let's have a look at this headline.
	Look at this.
	You walk right into this, Keir.
	Todger Dodger.
	Some women do have penises, Sir Keir Starmer claims, as he reignites Labour's civil war over biology.
	You earned that absolutely ridiculous headline here.
	Yeah.
	You did this to yourself, man.
	It's because of him.
	Boris Johnson and his party and his government, despite all the chaos and not being conservative, are still in power because Boris Johnson has no urgency in his party to make any changes because they can still probably just about win the next election anyway.
	I mean, what are you going to do?
	Vote for this?
	Yeah.
	Well, he says the vast majority of girls do not, but a small minority do.
	It's just absolutely wrong.
	But the great thing about this is Keir is trapped between two masters that he's trying to serve.
	The majority of women who are normal and not progressive lunatics, and a very tiny fringe of radical progressive activists who will call him mean names on Twitter.
	Yeah.
	Because that's the threat.
	Yeah, it's that fear.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Loud minority.
	Yeah, but it is literally social media, Twitter specifically.
	And The Guardian, maybe, as if anyone cares about that.
	But the thing about it, for Keir Starmer to say, look, women don't have penises.
	I don't know why I'm bringing this up.
	Let's talk about social inequality or housing problem, whatever.
	That would be a very easy thing for him to do.
	And what would it lose him the support of?
	A small percentage of people on Twitter.
	No votes are going to change because he thinks women don't have penises.
	Yeah, it's because they don't hear the other side.
	The actual majority, like normal people, who are basically by nature, that means they are socially conserved.
	It's just normal.
	Not even socially conserved.
	They just live in the real world.
	But they don't express their opinions.
	They don't send complaints to Ofcom.
	So they only see the other side, even if it's like 10 of them.
	So they just assume, well, let's just not make them angry.
	And Twitter allows the concentration of these radical activists, and internationally as well.
	So they get access to a much larger pool of radical activists who represent literally less than 1% of the voting base in this country.
	So it's just like, what are you doing?
	Anyway, speaking of these radical activists, it turns out that the left are not proud Americans.
	Well, they're just not American in terms of the mentality.
	That's right.
	What created America.
	Yes.
	And I go further and say that what is destroying America is the 20th century wave of Europeans who went to America.
	They left this continent and these places because they didn't want to be European and they created Americanism.
	And then the 20th century versions of them, the new waves, and from all places, they are actually Europeanizing America and that is ruining America.
	From the whole social security concepts to FDR and everything else and cultural issues.
	I think that's a really, really succinct summary of the problem, actually.
	You can tell that it's a constant, as I said, Europeanization, the idea that the state has a responsibility to essentially control your life and prevent you from making mistakes.
	And help you, yeah.
	In the name of...
	Support and help, which was a European thing.
	If you wanted that, why did you leave Europe?
	Yeah, why did you leave Europe?
	But I don't understand why they wanted to go to America.
	It's because America, well, the successful Americans created this kind of land of opportunity.
	And then with the idiots who went there, they went there because it was more stable than the early 20th century Europe, especially after the war.
	But then they didn't understand personal responsibility.
	They didn't understand that it's 100 games.
	You go there, you succeed or you die.
	It's your choice.
	No one's forcing you to go to America.
	But when you get there, you've got to work hard.
	But working hard is the key to success.
	Anyway, before we go on, I'd just like to promote an excellent, and this is definitely my favourite epochs that we've done in a long time on LotusEase.com.
	If you'd like to support us, go to LotusEase.com.
	Sign up, it's just the price of a super chat a month, and you get access to all of our great premium content, such as this Life of Pompey the Great that I did with Beau.
	This has been part of the sort of series, just analysing really interesting great figures from history.
	Because Pompey gets totally overshadowed by Caesar.
	Because Caesar was obviously Julius Caesar, right?
	He defeated Pompey.
	But Pompeii was a great man and great general in and of itself, and I am proud to have founded the Pompeii the Great Fan Club.
	Sign up to us on that.
	But the point is, there are massive differences in the way that things are going.
	So let's have a look at something called HiddenTribes.us.
	So Hidden Tribes is the result of a massive survey that they did.
	I actually have a number here.
	They collected the views of 8,000 people On a group of US citizens statistically representative of the population based on census data, and they conducted six hour long focus groups and 30 one-on-one interviews of at least one hour's duration with people across seven population segments.
	Survey participants answered hundreds of questions about many of today's most important issues and topics, their hopes, fears, and concerns for the future.
	So this is a really great, really large and representative study.
	And one of the first things, if you can go back up a bit, John, just because of the way it's organized, The first thing is that most Americans actually aren't polarised.
	So the representation that we get is primarily from social media and the media.
	So, for example, only 23% of Americans think that the differences between the two wings of politics are so great that they can't work together anymore, whereas 77% of course think that the differences are not so great that they can work together.
	What do you think of that?
	Yeah, but that's always supposed to be America.
	You had all the different tribes and different mentalities yet under one umbrella because the whole concept of the whole nation and the states and cultures is supposed to be a libertarian protectionist kind of country.
	We ruined America by putting the burden on them to become the world police after the Second World War because we couldn't do it at the British Empire when it fell.
	America was never supposed to be exposed to the world.
	People were supposed to go to America.
	And because of that, and access to information, the last few decades, the different states and different tribes and cultures are now exposed to each other more.
	That's why it seems that they're more polarized.
	They were always like they had basic differences.
	But as long as you just leave each other alone, but you're more similar than different.
	That's a great point.
	Increased contact between, like, you know, Iowa and California.
	Yeah, they're different tribes.
	Before, just leave it below.
	Each one had a, like, wall around each other.
	A state border.
	Yeah, literally, yeah.
	But no, that's a great point.
	That's a great way of looking at it.
	And I do think that social media has been a massive radical.
	It was probably always destined to be that way, but nobody really thought of it like that.
	Nobody thought that we'd silo and self-associate into political cults on the internet.
	So welcome to our political cult, by the way.
	But this is a real problem.
	So let's go into the actual hidden tribes, right?
	And so this is a really great breakdown.
	So they've got the little hidden tribes bit.
	Progressive activists make up 8% of the population.
	And they're deeply concerned with issues concerning equality, fairness, and America's direction today.
	They tend to be more secular, cosmopolitan, and highly engaged with social media.
	Yeah, you've met some, I don't doubt.
	You can scroll down just a little bit so you can see that graph that they've got there.
	You can see they're a very, very small percentage.
	And of course, on the other side, you've got the devoted conservatives, the really hardcore Christian evangelical conservatives of America, who are 6% of the population, so roughly the same.
	And they are, of course, deeply engaged in politics and hold strident, uncompromising views, much like the progressives.
	They feel that America is embattled and they perceive themselves as the last defenders of traditional values that are under threat by the progressives.
	Not incorrectly either, frankly.
	But anyway, so then on either side moving in, you've got the traditional liberals and the traditional conservatives.
	There are about twice as many traditional conservatives as traditional liberals.
	But they, again, they think differently.
	The conservatives are religious, patriotic, and moralistic.
	They believe deeply in personal responsibility and self-reliance.
	As in, as you were framing it, like the traditional libertarian attitude of the American, the classic America.
	And the traditional liberals, the more European types, who are cautious, rational, and idealistic.
	They value tolerance and compromise and place great faith in institutions.
	That's not American.
	That's the European.
	Yeah, the 8%, the purple one, is definitely the...
	They're the Frenchism and Germanism who weren't there.
	11% is still a bit kind of Irish-British, but still European.
	I would say that the place in great faith in institutions is a very European attitude.
	I lived in Germany for ages and they love their institutions.
	Yeah, not all of Europe, but yeah, places like the UK and Netherlands and Germany, for example.
	Yeah.
	But the Americans usually are a bit more skeptical of their institutions.
	Exactly.
	They're much more self-reliant.
	But then you have the, again, more larger, middling groups, the passive liberals and the moderates.
	So the passive liberals tend to feel a bit isolated from their communities.
	They're insecure in their beliefs and try to avoid political conversations.
	They have a fatalistic view of politics and feel that the circumstances of their lives are beyond their control.
	And the moderates are engaged in their communities, well informed and civic minded.
	Their faith is often an important part of their lives.
	They shy away from extremism of any sort.
	So the passive liberals and the moderates are probably the swing voters who voted for both Obama and Trump.
	Yeah, and in this country, the Tories.
	Yes.
	Not conservatives, Tories.
	Yeah, no, no, that's so exactly right.
	In this country, we would call them Tory voters.
	And then, of course, you have the politically disengaged at being the largest individual segment, 26%, who are untrusting, suspicious about external threats, conspiratorially minded, pessimistic about progress.
	They tend to be patriotic yet detached from politics.
	It's true Americans.
	Yeah, yeah.
	The Alex Jones fan base.
	I like him.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Yeah, my kind of people, frankly.
	We are the 26%.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Let me tell you about the World Economic Forum.
	So yeah, that's very interesting, I thought.
	So the extreme left and right make up the wings of politics.
	And they combine with the...
	Slightly more inward category.
	To make up 33% of the people in the groups they call the Wings.
	And these are just, again, just one third of the population, really.
	But they're very, very tribal.
	They distrust and fear the opposing side.
	And they totally dominate political conversation.
	But what I find really interesting about this, and the reason I bring this up, is because the Wings are the most internally unified, but they are also not equal in truth value.
	Interesting.
	Isn't that fascinating?
	So we've got a great thing here.
	So men and women have different roles.
	Devoted conservatives, 91%.
	So yes.
	Obviously.
	Oh yeah, makes sense.
	Devoted progressives, only 15%.
	Wow.
	Think that's true?
	So they think that, you know, men can give birth.
	Women have penises.
	Wow, that's interesting.
	Isn't that fascinating?
	So literally 85% of progressives think there's no difference between the social role of a man or a woman.
	Again, it's the 20th century education system in America that's completely messed up their mind.
	That's what living in California does.
	It's so weird.
	I mean, literally, if you go to any other country, in any other time period, anywhere else in the world, every single one of them would have agreed with the devoted conservative there.
	Of course men and women have different roles.
	Well, yeah.
	It's not supposed to be a radical or insulting thing to say.
	It's just common sense biology.
	It's just an observation of reality.
	Exactly.
	It's not radical.
	And then the next one is men start off with an advantage.
	What advantage?
	Right?
	18% of conservatives think no, whereas 91% of progressives think yes.
	But advantage in what?
	Yeah.
	You know, maybe an advantage in, I don't know, the world of business, perhaps, and becoming a CEO, but not an advantage when it comes to, say, claiming you're a victim of domestic abuse.
	Yeah, and not just even that, like, deeper, yeah, physical prowess, you know, if...
	If that's the standard you're using.
	But if you're going to use that, then the other side, the other gender, they also have their own strength.
	People don't really see the emotional intelligence of women as a strength.
	With that, we men are stupid when it comes to that category, generally, compared to women.
	So they are superior when it comes to emotional intelligence, but nobody gives them credit, including feminists.
	It's the nice thing.
	Feminists only measure women by the standards of men.
	Yeah, masculinity.
	And it's crazy, isn't it?
	Because so many times my wife has been like, you've got to send a card to this person.
	You've got to say thank you to this person or something like that.
	And I, being an autistic man, has just been like, oh yeah, I guess I should.
	That would be nice.
	But it's my wife who reminds me about this stuff because I just don't think about it.
	And so do I have an advantage there?
	Not really.
	I have a massive deficiency there.
	And also in other things, like the realms of social power, like the Amber Heard, Johnny Depp thing, I think that really revealed the hand that a lot of women actually leverage.
	And we try not to talk about it.
	That clip where she's like, tell the world that you're a victim of domestic abuse.
	You're a man.
	No one will believe you.
	It's like you've got the whip hand there.
	Yeah.
	You know.
	But also psychological influence.
	Historically, for those who are familiar, the Italian mafia, you've got the boss, but then behind the boss is the conciliary, who's basically like the right-hand man, everything, in terms of advisor.
	Historically, women have always had that kind of massive influence behind powerful men, from your, obviously, Alexander Graves, and a lot of wars started because of them, and even now, jokingly, you know, Carrie Johnson, for example.
	Wow.
	Well, I mean, just saying, it seems true.
	That is a power.
	That is a strength.
	So give them credit.
	So they have some advantage.
	They, you know, not complete proper masters, but especially if the man is weak, then yes, the woman is the proper master.
	But also, like, imagine if, you know, there's a woman on a train or something and the train carriage is filled with, you know, random people.
	And if a guy was getting up in her face, the other men would say, you would think the other men would be like, hang on a second, what are you doing?
	We see videos of it not happening in America, and that shows social breakdown.
	That's an advantage women have lost.
	And so there's tangible social benefits to being a woman.
	And it's, you know, like you say, say they've got no power or influence is just to only categorize them as if they're men.
	And so, again, I don't think that's true from the progressive actors.
	Hard work will always lead to success.
	Of course, 92% of devoted conservatives think, well, yes, if you work hard, you'll succeed because what else are you doing?
	But of course, 95% of progressives don't think that's the case.
	That is embarrassing.
	What are you supposed to do for success?
	You're supposed to fall into your lap.
	Wish for the best.
	Exactly.
	I didn't work hard, but I was expecting success.
	That's why they're dependent on establishment and state.
	Exactly.
	They expect to have it handed down from the powers that be.
	But how do the powers that be become the powers that be?
	The next one is, government should take more responsibility to ensure everyone is provided for.
	Well, I mean, that's a value judgment, so I can't say it's true or false, but look at that.
	I am proud of that 3%.
	That's why the 97% of the one...
	Actually, I'm slightly embarrassed that 3% of devoted conservatives...
	Yeah, exactly.
	I want to speak to them.
	We need to have words.
	And then, proud to be an American.
	Surprisingly, 45% of progressive activists...
	I was going to say in the previous graph that until yesterday at least, even the majority of normal Liberals and Democrats still fly the flag.
	In this country, it's abnormal for the Liberal Democrats or Labour side, those tribes to do it, or even soft Conservatives.
	So give them credit, the Americans.
	A normal general Liberal Democrat in America is still more patriotic than us.
	Yeah, that's true.
	More patriotic than your average Conservative.
	Yeah.
	And the final one on this one is, I'm not proud of my country's history.
	And again, I want to speak to that 5%.
	Who the hell are you?
	60% of course.
	I'm surprised it's not higher for progressives, actually.
	But you can see that they're just nuts.
	A lot of this is just factually inaccurate.
	But anyway, so they go on to talk about the moderates, which are, you know, people who are basically stuck in what they call the exhausted majority.
	Scroll down onto this one.
	There's a graph here that you can scroll down to the little graph that's on there just so we can see it.
	Don't worry about the text.
	Yeah, this one.
	So this is just, you know, no, sorry, the one above.
	So you can see here that the exhausted majority think that people I agree with politically need to be willing to listen to others and compromise.
	Yes, most of them think that we need to compromise.
	Yeah.
	A sensible position.
	Fair enough.
	Whereas almost half of the wings think no.
	We don't have a breakdown of those wings, but, um, hmm, very interesting.
	Wow.
	But, yeah, the point is the exhaustive majority are tired of politics because of the way, yeah, literally because of the way it's being done.
	And I have to say, I don't think it's because the Conservatives are refusing to compromise or listen to the left.
	Yeah.
	Well, yeah, they're making it more uncomfortable or just difficult to have any civility.
	It's just not American.
	Even when you had the Tea Party being created and the whole movement back in the day...
	Compared to now, you could see it as, oh, that's like some sort of radical polarisation.
	But no, that's actually, it was about unity from the whole tribe of Americanism compared to a threat, something that was basically threatening their existence.
	But now, it doesn't feel the same anyway.
	No, and it's really difficult to get left-wing people to have an honest dialogue about anything.
	Like, look at the response to Matt Walsh's What is a Woman documentary.
	Have you seen it?
	No, no, no.
	It's really good.
	But whenever he sat down talking to some leftist, as soon as he starts saying, well, what's truth?
	They're like, I'm getting up, I'm leading this conversation.
	It's like...
	Well, how can, you know, how can you be willing to listen to others and compromise if you're literally not going to sit there and have that conversation?
	So it's, you know, one of those things, like, I hate to sit there and point fingers at who the problem is, but let's be honest, there's a bunch of leftists who believe a bunch of nonsense, and they're not willing to talk about the fact that they believe a bunch of nonsense.
	Yeah.
	But in fact, we can go through more of their false beliefs.
	You can go down to the next one, John, where you've got the four categories.
	Immigration impact, sexual harassment, police brutality, and terrorism.
	So immigration impact, right?
	This is fascinating.
	So on the left, you've got immigration is good for America, helping sectors of our economy to be more successful and competitive.
	And on the other side, you've got immigration nowadays is bad for America, costing the welfare system and using resources that can be spent on Americans.
	Now you can see it's a roughly 50-50 split.
	And you can see how this goes through the tribes.
	Of course, almost every progressive activist thinks immigration, net good.
	You know, it's always good.
	And almost every conservative, diehard conservative, is like, rich man.
	The traditional conservatives are about where the traditional liberals are on the other side, and it's not like a mirror image.
	It's like, okay, well, you know, there's arguments to be had.
	But I find it interesting that politically disengaged, 63% say no, immigration is harming our country now.
	Yeah.
	So that, I think, is a definite indication that Americans are getting kind of tired of immigration.
	But again, the politically disengaged were the same tribe that they used to be.
	They were the original Americans in the 18th, 19th century.
	They were the ones who were not really political.
	They were political enough to fight for America as a system.
	But the question is kind of...
	Obviously, it's detailed, but it would have been better if you divide the question into...
	economic benefits versus the negative impact on culture and the whole kind of identity because generally speaking even in America migration still has a lot of economic benefits because by nature there's still more people when they come that will start jobs or businesses that generally speaking there's still more kind of in terms of GDP growth but That's not good enough because if there's going to be a negative impact on the culture and society,
	then long term it's going to affect the economics of that country anyway.
	Absolutely.
	It's just you're shooting yourself in the foot.
	But I mean, at least America has the advantage of being absolutely massive.
	Yeah.
	You know, one of the things that Britain doesn't have that advantage in is being absolutely massive.
	But if you can go to the sexual harassment tab, John, on this one, You can see that, again, it's roughly 50-50 split, with people on the left saying sexual harassment is commonplace nowadays.
	Is it?
	I think with these sort of things, especially now in 213, if it was, we would have seen it so visibly.
	Yeah.
	Because the world is so small, access to information, we would have seen it.
	It's the same with, like, the whole BLM claiming that racism is literally in every corner, every day.
	No, it's not.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, exactly.
	You would see.
	You would see people swearing.
	Every day, yeah.
	Exactly.
	And so the right side of this, though, is nowadays too many ordinary behaviours are labelled as sexual harassment.
	That, I think, look at, like, you can see, like, the politically disengaged moderates and stuff like that.
	Much, much higher sort of side on this one.
	For, you know, the liberals and the progressive activists who are like, no, no, no, no.
	And it's like, hmm, hmm.
	Yes, so true.
	Yeah.
	And statistically, it's just not true.
	Statistically, in police crimes, the actual record of these things is just a drop.
	So it's just like, right.
	So I think that factually, that's incorrect.
	If you can get to the police brutality one, again, this is just not really a true set of statements.
	The police are often more violent towards African-Americans than others, or the police are mostly fair towards people of every race.
	And of course, it's the split you'd expect.
	Yeah.
	But again, the statistics don't really bear this out.
	Because when polled, Americans, progressive Americans, think something like 10,000 black people are shot dead by police every year.
	No, no.
	It's less than 100.
	It's also a lot of the videos that come out with like extreme stop and search or like stopping the cars.
	So many of those videos are actually black police officers stopping a black driver.
	And that's also because same applies here in terms of it's not necessarily just the skin colors.
	Certain areas, certain kind of threats or kind of people who could be at risk apply to that area.
	For example, if you go to parts of Glasgow, it will be white people in hoodies that will be stopped.
	But if you go to South East London, there will be black people in here.
	It's not their skin colour.
	Each area is dependent on...
	It's a high crime area.
	But that's exactly right.
	And so the New York Times has been recording this.
	And it was 2019, I think, the last time they updated their database on this.
	There was like less than 100 black people in America were shot who were not armed.
	And that doesn't mean they weren't fighting with the police or anything like this.
	And yet the progressive activists think that literally more than 10,000 black people a year are murdered in the streets by police.
	So it's just you have got a completely disconnected view of reality.
	And then if we come on to terrorism, this is fascinating.
	This is absolutely fascinating.
	Because again, you couldn't get a more numerically confirmable statistic than this.
	So, they're extremists in every religion, or Islam is more violent than other religions.
	Whoa, look at that.
	Look at that.
	The progressives think there's just no difference between Buddhism and Islam.
	Really?
	That's interesting.
	Isn't that fascinating?
	That should be so obvious.
	But then they're so blind to the realities of the threat from Islam.
	Yeah.
	Like, it's not even comparable.
	Anyone, just take your time now, just Google, how many, you know, just terrorist attacks worldwide, and just see the massive column of Islamic ones, and then the small column of communist ones, and then the little thing of all other forms of terrorism.
	This should be more obvious than the penis debate.
	It's just a fact.
	But anyway, so let's quickly breeze through the rest of this.
	So this study is founded on Jonathan Haidt's moral foundations theory.
	Have you seen it?
	You can scroll down to the shifts in the moral bedrock one.
	If you can go down.
	Yeah, that's the one.
	So this is Jonathan Haidt's five different foundations of morality.
	So authority, care, fairness, loyalty, and purity.
	And one thing that you can notice is that progressive activists care very much about fairness and care.
	So they're very concerned.
	Five is how highly they rate these things and they consider them important.
	And the less than threes are very low rated.
	Authority, loyalty, and purity.
	That's funny, because if they care about fairness, they should actually care about authority, because authority gives you fairness, like, you know, the justice system and all that, but they're against it.
	They're police.
	They want to defund the police.
	Exactly.
	They see it as intrinsically unfair or uncaring to have justice for victims.
	Yeah.
	You know, and to have police that prevent crimes and things like this.
	Isn't that fascinating?
	Yeah.
	But look how radical that is compared to, say, like the moderates, the politically disengaged or the moderates in the center, who almost all of those care foundations are clustered along the same lines as the devoted conservatives.
	But the devoted conservatives are very, very much closer within like, you know, half a point of the moderates and politically disengaged than the progressive activists who are nearly two points away from them.
	Yeah, that shows the biggest delusional kind of flaw of the, let's just call it the actual, even intellectual left.
	They are genuinely, my belief is that, well, academic intelligence can actually make you very stupid actually.
	Yeah.
	Because they are against authority.
	But then their solution to all problems is big government, which is authority, but they genuinely don't see when they say big government, they don't even say big government, as authority.
	They genuinely have this abstract concept of it's society.
	I'm like, you do realize you're using the big machine, the whole actual establishment, but they don't see this.
	They genuinely think it's, no, no, no, we're doing what Jesus said, you know, help each other.
	We're like, That's not what he meant.
	Yeah, he didn't use the state to do it.
	You're not a Christian, so don't cite Jesus.
	But yeah, it's crazy, isn't it?
	You are absolutely right.
	They view the government as being the source of all wealth and power and success, and yet they claim to distrust authority and not see that as a political value.
	Yeah.
	Isn't it wild?
	You can see the detachment from the regular people.
	This is so revealing to me.
	They don't care.
	And this is where you get the drag queen story out.
	Do they care about purity?
	No.
	Do they care about loyalty?
	No.
	I'm more concerned about the lack of loyalty.
	That's very dangerous.
	They hate America, so they just don't care.
	And it's just like...
	I don't know what to tell you.
	You know, I don't see how...
	If the moderate Americans, if the politically disengaged and the moderates are like, well, we should all come together.
	It's like, I think we can see who the problem is.
	Yeah, my view is when they hate America, they actually hate themselves.
	They self-hate.
	And that, you know, they hate what they're born into, what they are, but that's why they're all confused.
	No, I think that's true.
	I think that's true.
	Anyway, let's go on to talk about the Washington Post, because...
	The Washington Post is having a very public meltdown at the moment, and I thought it'd be fun for us to just have a laugh at it, really, because it's really pathetic.
	But before we go on, this is part of a long-running problem that the legacy media has, that it essentially seems to have dementia because of the people who operate the institutions.
	And because the way that they think is very in the now and in the present, they tend to forget the things they've done.
	And so if you don't want to support us, go to lowseas.com and check out this premium video we've got, which is the Legacy Media Catches Dementia, in which they forget that they were complaining about Patriotic Alternative turning up at a Tommy Robinson rally.
	And they forgot that they were the ones who exposed Patriotic Alternative as Nazis and didn't use any of this in their exploration of this.
	There's a lot more to it than that, but that's a very brief summary.
	It's embarrassing for everyone, and it was great to watch.
	And it's just going to be like this segment, in fact.
	So, let's begin.
	There's a clown fight.
	A very public clown fight.
	What happened?
	The Washington Post.
	If we can get to the Breitbart article, in fact.
	But the point is, folks, get your popcorn, because it's going to be good.
	So the Washington Post has decided to suspend one of their senior reporters, or a reporter, for a reprehensible retweet.
	Have you ever retweeted anything reprehensible, Maya?
	Every day.
	So this is a reporter called Dave Weigel, who was suspended for a month without pay over a reprehensible tweet.
	As Breitbart tell us, he shared a tweet sent out by a YouTube host, Cam Harless, that joked, quote, Every girl is bi.
	You just have to figure out whether it's polar or sexual.
	It's just a joke.
	It's just an obvious joke.
	It's quite funny.
	It's clever.
	You know, it's fine.
	Go and make a joke about men if you're so offended about it.
	Well, they do.
	Exactly, yeah.
	It's fine.
	But anyway, so following this, I think it was Jessica Sonmez, another reporter at the Washington Post, decided to post a screenshot of this retweet with the caption, Fantastic to work at a news outlet where retweets like this are allowed.
	To be fair, the outlet didn't allow the retweet.
	Yeah, exactly.
	It's not like they didn't give a green light for the person to retweet it.
	Don't attack the actual outlet.
	There's still left brain.
	But that's the point, isn't it?
	Exactly.
	They're weaponizing it, aren't they?
	It's like, oh, okay, now I'm going to attack this man for tweeting something about women and I am a woman.
	But she's not even necessarily saying she's offended either.
	She's just saying, how dare you?
	Yeah.
	You know?
	It's so unnecessary.
	Yeah, it is.
	Exactly.
	It's obviously a power play.
	But that's the thing, as we said earlier, about any topic like this, they go after things, and then they don't know when to stop, and they run out of targets and enemies, and then they go after their own people.
	Right now, they're going after Gandhi's statues.
	I knew that was going to happen.
	Two years ago, when they went against...
	Oh, is he a racist?
	Yeah, they're going to bring down Gandhi's statues in the UK. Oh, are they?
	I knew that was going to happen.
	Okay.
	Yeah, you're right.
	As a proponent of the British Empire, Gandhi was wrong.
	But so this David Weigel apologized, of course, because what else is he going to do?
	And this carried on.
	This was not enough.
	He says, I just removed the retweet of an offensive joke.
	I apologized and didn't mean to cause any harm.
	Okay, let's move on.
	What harm?
	She's not accusing of any harm.
	It's assumed there's all this presupposed harm, but again, exactly.
	Let's move on then.
	Oh, no.
	No, no, no, no.
	We're not moving on.
	This is going to carry on, and this has been going on for days now, right?
	So the Washington Post chief spokesman, Chris Corati, told the press, I love that now I have to make a big press statement.
	The Washington Post has to make a big press statement about this.
	Okay, that's...
	This is unbelievable and pathetic, but editors have made it clear to the staff that the tweet was reprehensible, and demeaning language or actions like that will not be tolerated.
	That's fascinating.
	How dare you make a joke?
	They always demand apologies, but they don't actually want it, because the moment you apologise, then they kick you even further.
	Yes.
	They don't apologise.
	They don't actually want an apology.
	They never move on.
	Oh yes, that's exactly right.
	I mean, if he apologised, why would he be suspended for a month?
	The apology did nothing, so why apologize, right?
	And so this has caused a public rift between their own reporters.
	One reporter, Jose de Real, critiqued Somnés for publicly shaming their colleague.
	Felicia, we mess up all the time.
	Sorry, it's Felicia, not whatever I said.
	Engaging in repeated and targeted public harassment of a colleague is neither a good look nor is it particularly effective.
	It turns out the language of inclusivity into clout chasing.
	It turns the language of inclusivity into clout chasing and bullying.
	I don't think this is appropriate.
	Dave's retweet is terrible and unacceptable.
	It wasn't terrible and unacceptable.
	It was a joke.
	Get over it.
	You know, the fact that you've ceded all this ground means that she's not going to let this go now.
	Because she's still got the winning hand and you've just admitted it.
	He says, but rallying the internet to attack him for a mistake he made doesn't actually solve anything.
	We'll mess up, blah, blah, blah, blah.
	How do you think that went?
	Worse.
	It continues, right?
	Yeah.
	She doubled down on this, saying, no, Jose, Dave's retweet was indeed terrible and unacceptable.
	See, you left the door open for her.
	Yeah, it's terrible.
	You're giving them ammo.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Now you're on the chopping block.
	It was also public, but it wasn't an attack on a Washington Post reporter.
	No.
	It's just a joke about women, more generally.
	Get over it.
	Yeah.
	Well, it's not hate crime if it's not directly targeted.
	Yeah.
	But they do talk about, what's that thing, the microaggression nonsense?
	Which is what she'd probably...
	Yeah, so that's technically microaggression, but it's not like that kind of targeted hate crime, which should be targeting an individual, for example, or a group.
	That wasn't about anybody.
	No, exactly, exactly.
	That's exactly right.
	It wasn't about anybody.
	But anyway, this Jose guy had to deactivate his account because she was going at him so hard.
	It was terribly important stuff.
	But then this got the Washington Post executive editor, Sally Busby, to send an internal staff memo to all the reporters, but we'll get to that in a minute.
	Let's go to the next one a second.
	This is just hilarious.
	Because you can see they're just very publicly having this massive spat.
	It's like, look, you aren't meant to be professionals.
	You're in the same office.
	You're in the same office having this public spat being just childish about everything.
	Why not go across the room and talk to the person?
	You know, but that's the thing.
	This is about clout now, right?
	And so Glenn Greenwald, I'm not normally a massive fan of Glenn Greenwald, but he's been going on this for ages, because this went on for days.
	We'll go to the next one.
	As he points out, she's on her third straight day of publicly bashing her own colleagues.
	Three days later, she's still furious!
	Furious!
	And the thing is, he can probably just look over and see her at a desk, just furiously tweeting.
	Like, what are you doing?
	I would love it if it turns into a court case like Amber Heard, like publicly.
	It would be funny.
	So bad.
	It's mad, isn't it?
	So she's forced him to repeatedly apologize and is now attacking another Washington Post reporter.
	And he carries on in this thread.
	Post reporters are some of the planet's most privileged people because they are.
	They come from well-to-do backgrounds.
	They go to elite universities and then they get hired by places like the Washington Post and they think they're victims.
	Since victimhood is cultural gold in their twisted world, they never face real persecution they have to elevate mean tweets to a national scandal so they can always demand that your pity be lavished on them Yeah, but these are the people who keep talking about alliance and solidarity.
	They are the loneliest people because, like for example, a workplace who, generally speaking, overall in those places, they feel safe.
	It's a safe space because they generally have the same views.
	But they're always so on edge as individuals that if literally a team member sitting next to them says, you know, like retweet something funny like that, they're always on standby to start a fight.
	Like they always think that everyone's out there to get them.
	So they claim they keep talking about solidarity and we're all needs together, allies and all that, but they don't even trust each other.
	The moment someone crosses the line, or in a fake line, they're like, let's fight.
	But you can see it's like jostling for status, and it's very much clout chasing.
	But he says, a gigantic amount of time and energy of privilege employees at the large, the most powerful media corporations is devoted to concocting melodramatic, self-absorbed narratives where they cast themselves as marginalized victims while real journalists confront real persecutions.
	Yeah.
	I mean, you remember journalists in Russia?
	How is it being a journalist in Russia?
	Yeah.
	You tend to go missing every now and again?
	Yeah, just like every Tuesday.
	Yeah.
	Part of life.
	But this is worse.
	But anyway.
	And then, the thing is though, the Washington Post starts going into damage control mode.
	Because of course this starts looking bad.
	And they all start posting the same creepy statement.
	We're good for the next one.
	And again, you can see this has been a missive that's gone through the audience.
	We go to the next...
	In the office, sorry.
	We go to the next one.
	Just pull up, like, one of these quotes.
	I know the Washington Post...
	These are all reporters.
	I know the Washington Post is a remarkably collaborative newsroom filled with journalists and editors who may stumble at times, myself included, but always working towards better.
	I'm proud to work here.
	If you go to the next one and the next one, like, you can see they use the sort of same word.
	Proud to work here, yeah.
	Yeah, yeah, proud to work.
	And if you go to the next one, there's lots of them that have been using the term...
	They're all proud to work here.
	Yeah, I'm proud to work here.
	It's collegial, collaborative, and respectful.
	And if you go to the next one, you can see it's almost exactly the same, like, you know, collegial, collaborative, and fun humans.
	Fun humans?
	What is a fun human?
	I don't want to work there.
	Somebody who works at the Washington Post, I don't know.
	But it's like, right, so you've basically been sat down by the boss and said, right, you're all going to say that we're a fun, collegial, collaborative place to work and you're proud to work here, damn it.
	Why is collaborative being used as one of the bonuses?
	Any company should be collaborative.
	It's part of your job to be collaborative.
	I don't know.
	We breathe here.
	Yeah.
	But it's so weird, like, claiming, oh, we're collegial.
	It's like, that means, you know, respectful and decent.
	And it's like, look, we're watching the public Twitter spat.
	Everyone can see you being, like, little bitches.
	We're so united.
	Yeah, you've suspended one guy.
	Another guy's deactivated his account.
	You're like, oh, no, everything's great here.
	It's like, come on.
	It is, at the same time, giving them publicity there.
	You know, everyone's talking about watching their posts now.
	Sure.
	Is that good?
	I don't know.
	I wouldn't want people talking about us in this way.
	Yeah.
	But anyway, sorry, the Oliver Darcy tweet, yeah.
	So this is a great statement.
	This was leaked from within, and you can see where they got the language from.
	And basically, the takeaway from this is hilarious, because it's saying, well, we're against racist or sexist behavior, and we do not tolerate colleagues attacking other colleagues, either face-to-face or online.
	It's like, okay, so Dave Weigel did nothing wrong?
	He didn't attack anyone.
	No, that's true.
	Well, he didn't start the fight.
	No, exactly.
	If your priority is that you're among colleagues to attack each other, she started it, not him.
	Exactly.
	Felicia Somnes is the one in trouble, and yet he's the one who's been suspended.
	Yeah.
	So what are you doing?
	Like, it's just embarrassing.
	But the thing is, in response to this, you get people like this guy just posting, if you can go to the next one, John, no institution is perfect, including the post, but the place is filled with many terrific people who are smart and collegial.
	I'm proud to work in it.
	Like, who was supposed to be?
	It's just like...
	Listen, you NPCs, you know?
	Oh, my...
	You literally, yeah.
	It's just robots.
	It's just like you're having this public meltdown.
	You've punished a guy who didn't do anything wrong by the standards that your editor has set, and everyone of you is just posting this weird robot copypasta.
	It's like they've replicated Keir Starmer.
	There's so many Keir Starmer working there.
	They're repeating the same line.
	I want to be tolerant.
	It's wild, isn't it?
	But yeah, so I just thought we'd have a nice laugh at the Washington Post.
	The mask coming off and how they're just staffed by absolute...
	And the thing is, though, you can see the fear in the office place, right?
	This doesn't look like a healthy work environment.
	But if you're a normal person, do you really want to work there?
	I mean, no.
	I wouldn't want to work there.
	It's not political.
	You're not really right or left.
	You don't care.
	I would literally run away.
	If you're a journalist who wants to uncover the truth, that's not the place for you.
	No, that's her truth.
	Yeah, exactly.
	That's exactly it.
	It's her truth that he posted.
	I felt attacked because he made a joke about women.
	And I felt that represented me because I was definitely bipolar.
	Anyway, do we have video comments today, John?
	Okay, let's watch some video comments.
	Audio Africa also depicts that time in Kenya which Carl talks about where the white migrants have all their property confiscated by the Mau Mau supporters before they're shipped off back to Europe or South Africa.
	Not ethnic cleansing apparently.
	Also, it depicts the liberation of Stanleyville by Mike Horr's mercenaries, which are a very interesting bunch of lads that you probably would have a fun time talking about, but definitely should shout them out to Count Dankula.
	So this is a documentary about the decolonization of Africa that was recommended to us.
	I haven't got around to watching it, but I mean, it looks pretty brutal.
	Oh god, that's still going on.
	How do they identify the different types of people apart from skin colour?
	Because everyone's so mixed in terms of ethnicity and also mentality.
	I always use the example of when Meghan Markle says, and her fans, she's black.
	She's as white as she's black.
	Why is she black?
	She's also 50% white.
	So why are you obsessed with her skin colour?
	But also, if you didn't tell me, I wouldn't have known.
	No one cares.
	But looking at her, does she look black?
	No.
	She looks like she's from the Mediterranean.
	When I watched her initially on TV, I used to think she was Latino or something.
	Well, not that you instantly think about that first, but if you were to ask me, I would probably tell you, oh, probably Latino or something.
	I'm not thinking racial prejudice.
	I'm thinking she just seems like a controlling bitch.
	Yeah.
	I have a problem with personality.
	Yes.
	I hate everyone equally.
	I don't care about you at all.
	You seem like a bitch.
	Yeah, I hate more white people than black people right now.
	They're all lefty.
	Oh god, don't even get me started.
	There's so many white people I hate.
	Let's get to the next one.
	This equation allows simple simulation of population over time through iteration.
	But what is the effect if we alter the rate parameter, r?
	Well, below 1, populations collapse to extinction.
	Above 1, they rise to a fixed value.
	Above around 3, the population alternates with each iteration between two values, a bifurcation.
	As r increases further, the bifurcations come faster and faster until chaos takes over.
	But from the chaos, suddenly, order forms.
	That's fascinating.
	I had no idea.
	Our subscribers are way smarter than we are.
	I know.
	It's just crazy how we...
	I'm like, right, okay, I don't understand that.
	It's quite good, actually.
	If you've got nothing to say for half an hour, just let them talk.
	Yeah, I mean, they do a better job than us, too.
	Let's get the next one.
	One of the commenters on yesterday's stream from June 7th maligned...
	Electroshock therapy, probably due to unfortunate depictions in the popular media.
	I highly recommend you look into it.
	It's a very powerful and valuable treatment for depression, among other things.
	Its current name is electroconvulsive therapy, and it's actually amazing how well it works.
	It sounds really scary, doesn't it?
	Yeah, I don't like anything that's new.
	Or something I haven't tried.
	Like seafood.
	Yeah.
	Right, let's go to the next one.
	Parks are terrible.
	They raise your space rent because you have to pay taxes to the county and you also have to pay space rent to them.
	Then they evict you and then they turn around and do a were-husband's lien and sell that personal property to store it on their physical property to the next person to rinse and repeat.
	Basically they just steal people's mobile homes continuously and sell them to new people.
	And the state just lets it happen.
	They don't even necessarily do it through the proper means.
	The things that the people most affected by it are usually people who That's terrible.
	I had no idea that was going on.
	Yeah, because we don't have these sort of things here in terms of like that concept.
	But that's again probably one of the reasons that Americanism is kind of changing those things.
	Like the lack of kind of foundation and stability.
	I mean, America being like the classical liberal state is built on property rights.
	Yeah, literally.
	If there's a way, a loophole of stealing someone's property like that, you're going to undermine the entire system.
	Exactly, yeah.
	Awful.
	And this looks like it's going to be a mean one.
	Go on then.
	I've been noticing that Carl is really depressed and black-filled of late, and I was wondering if he's been missing his confessions with the great Pastor Louis.
	Those always seem to lift the spirits in the past.
	And remember, having a positive vision is not only important for you and your family, but it also sets a good environment for your officers.
	That is true.
	I'm not terribly black-filled, it's just that...
	I mean, this country is a depressing place sometimes.
	Yeah, I'm trying to think about it.
	Otherwise it's just, yeah, it gets too dark.
	Because we're trapped with the Conservative Party because for some reason the public won't vote for anything else other than Labour or Conservatives.
	Maybe a bit of Lib Dems on the side, but it's like, Yeah, because there's no appetite for it.
	The political system has to kind of completely change.
	But who leads that change matters.
	Because even some of the people on our side, you know, the alternative radicals, the ones who have like smaller parties and all that.
	I don't really want them to lead it either.
	Because I don't want us to lead it.
	Because I think we might not have the best alternative system to offer.
	I mean, we have the right ideas, but I think you also need a bit of...
	Kind of elitist, kind of established mentality, to have the experience to be like, if I'm going to change it...
	It's about competence, isn't it?
	Competence, yeah.
	Because, I mean, the Conservatives have got it down to a T, where they can make themselves look confident, even though they're not.
	They've been incompetent for many, many years now, and yet they still persuade people that they can do the job.
	Yeah, that's a sad thing, yeah.
	But it's all about optics, right?
	You know, they're really good at the optics game, whereas, like, you know, everyone else, God bless them as well.
	You know, practically any right-wing alternative party at this point I'd support.
	You know, just anything other than...
	But idealism and competence, they should go hand-in-hand, and sometimes it doesn't.
	But it's the, you know, public portrayal of competence.
	Yes, yeah.
	Yeah.
	Let's get to the next one.
	That time of the year again, kids are setting up lemonade stands.
	And something that I've noticed from the two that have stopped at this past couple of weeks is that whereas kids used to be selling these, like I used to get a big old cup of lemonade, you know, topped off.
	Even how one kid put whipped cream on it.
	It was fantastic.
	That cost me a whole dollar.
	Now just a regular old thing of lemonade these kids are charging a full dollar for.
	Even the kids know that, oh wait, ignore that one.
	Even the kids know inflation is bad.
	I remember reading a story once about how a child got their lemonade stand shut down by the government.
	What, here or in America?
	In America.
	Oh, I was going to say here, I wasn't surprised, but in America, really?
	Yeah, I know, because of licensing and stuff like that.
	Stop ruining America.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Let them do it.
	Exactly.
	Stop being a busybody, a legal busybody.
	Do you have a license for that lemonade stand?
	Of course I bloody don't.
	It's a kid.
	What is that kid going to do?
	Some sort of agenda to kill people.
	Yeah, you didn't pay your taxes, did you?
	It's like, no, of course not.
	It's crazy.
	Tony D and Little Joan with another Legend of the Pines.
	From historiccamdencounty.com comes the story of Ancora, New Jersey.
	Ancora was built in 1866 by a man named George Haskell and his followers who were spiritualists.
	They believed in a utopian commune where the villagers would work in the village and the elites would be mediums and psychics who would Speak with the dead.
	Haskell died in 1876, but his followers continued on for a while until the village collapsed because communism doesn't work.
	Even mystical communing with the dead communism doesn't work.
	Wow, love America.
	Tony sends us one of those every day, like some crazy story.
	And they're so fantastic.
	Honestly, they're one of my favorite parts of the podcast.
	Let's go for the next one.
	The current prize money offered for winning a TT race stands at £18,000, so every racer has something else to keep them going through the rest of the year.
	To the racers, it's more about testing themselves, their bikes and their minds.
	Also, it's nice to be able to say, I'm the one with the biggest balls.
	The Ironman TT has been labelled as one of the pinnacles of motorsport racing at very few attempts.
	And it's not just me saying that, even Valentino Rossi is too chicken to race us.
	He's been sending us a few things about the Manx TT race.
	Right.
	And apparently it's really dangerous.
	Really?
	Yeah, I don't know much about it.
	Yeah, no, I don't either.
	I'm not down with the kids.
	No, I'm not.
	It's totally outside my wheelhouse.
	But, like, it looks really dangerous.
	Apparently loads of people have died doing it.
	What?
	Yeah.
	Brilliant.
	It sounds awesome.
	Anyway, we've got some written comments.
	So John says, Yay, Mr.
	Toosey!
	I was listening to him this morning and wondering when you'd get him on Boss Move.
	Ah, well, thank you so much.
	Yeah.
	So Oliver says, How can we turn UK politics back towards conservatism?
	Through an alternative party or from within the Conservative Party?
	Would be interesting getting Maia's perspective.
	Yeah, unfortunately, right now, it still has to be within the Conservative Party.
	But ironically, the way you do it is you use the external forces, like what UKIP did, to be able to get the referendum.
	You have to have the, whether you want to call it smaller parties or campaign groups, to push the Tories to the right.
	Because right now, they're only being pushed or pulled by the left.
	So technically, you have to basically use the Tory machine, the Tory party, to bring change.
	But you have to force them from the outside.
	Yeah, no, I think UKIP's a very instructive example in this.
	Or Brexit party, short-term project, get Brexit done.
	Yeah, but they provide an instructive example.
	It's like, okay, well, look, if the Conservatives feel that they will actually start losing their base to another party, they'll just change.
	Exactly.
	They're chameleons.
	They don't care.
	It's like, okay, well, then it's got to happen.
	Omar says, Kier, when kids are taught women have a penis, nothing.
	Kier, when I say if women have a penis, this is unproductive.
	It makes me uncomfortable.
	Can we change topic?
	Kevin says, as Maya said, the trans activists are a noisy minority, only to be expected.
	Empty barrels make the most noise.
	Free Will says, he is sitting on the fence because to get off it would enter the minefield of identity politics, and it could easily blow up in his face, damaging his electoral chances if he upsets any of the various competing factions by saying the wrong thing or having any contentious beliefs.
	You didn't clarify when it said Blobman's face, pun intended or not, but...
	I'm guessing not, but maybe.
	But this is the thing, isn't it?
	It just seems like such an obvious win, say, women don't have penises.
	Yeah.
	Like, okay, I've got the female vote now.
	Yeah.
	Why is it scary?
	I don't get it.
	Why does he care that a bunch of, like, extremely online, you know, at most, like, 8% of the country, online activists, are going to be like, I hate Keir Starman now.
	You hate him already, he's a white man.
	Yeah, I really want to ask them that question.
	And actually, I want to get a proper answer.
	They're not going to give you a proper answer, but I want to sit them down and actually ask them, what is your worry?
	What's your concern?
	What do you think will happen?
	That's a great point.
	What's your fear?
	What are you actually worried about happening?
	And Free Will again says, I'm not sure Boris could win the next election.
	He has betrayed the Red Wall and is dumping illegals in their villages.
	Ah, what did you make of that?
	Well, yeah, but at the same time, they have nowhere to go in a sense that...
	The system we have in this country, the electoral system, is not perfect, but when it comes to general elections, it gets the mood in the moment right.
	So like 2010, they didn't want Brown, but they weren't convinced by Cameron...
	He was still kind of baby-faced and a bit wishy-washy, so they gave him a minority and a kind of coalition.
	2015, again, every election was basically the right result, and Theresa May and Corbyn.
	So, if it stands the way it is now, the situation, they would give him a...
	Good minority Tory government.
	So he might lose his majority, but it doesn't mean that just because the Tories lose that Labour, by default, will be in power.
	It's not like an American system where, you know, Republican losers and Democrats will be in power.
	Yeah, it's not win-and-take-all.
	Yeah, so the way I see it now, unless things change, he's got some time, he's got a couple of years, is that they might get a good enough minority so they could get the DUP to kind of support them on...
	It's interesting as well.
	You were making the point before we started that often people saying I'm going to vote Labour isn't necessarily Conservative saying I now support Socialism or something like that.
	It's actually I'm protesting against the way the Conservatives are going.
	Exactly.
	People in this country, this is a small city Conservative country.
	So when people are leaning towards Labour, yeah, they don't want Socialism or want to be told what to do by a state.
	They don't suddenly think women have penises.
	Yeah, they just want Tories to be Conservative.
	And they don't even...
	I mean that, because this subconscious is hard work.
	They're not even political, the majority of them.
	But by nature, they lean into it.
	That's how Blair won.
	Blair in 97 was basically mostly conservative.
	He brought enough modernization liberalism, like in a forward, like in a bright future.
	So good enough for the millennial, the new millennial.
	But at the same time, it was still conservatism.
	Pro-business, I'll leave you alone, law and order.
	Obviously messed it up.
	But his platform was...
	It's mostly conservatism.
	Yeah, I mean, he didn't run on the radical agenda that he enacted.
	No, no, no.
	At all.
	Smartly, don't get me wrong.
	I'm not saying that Blair isn't a brilliant and Machiavellian politician, because unfortunately he is.
	Yeah, I know.
	But no, I think that's a great point.
	Do you think the conservatives understand that this is a way of objecting to them not being conservative enough?
	No.
	No, they don't.
	Because I know some of them are the MPs and ministers and...
	And I'm just fascinated by why they don't.
	I do know.
	When we say politicians are out of touch, there's a very specific type of being out of touch when you're MP, especially Tory MPs.
	They are not exposed to the real world, even if they came from normal life.
	But the moment they get into a western bubble, They think that by getting involved with the constituents, you know, a few angry, loud minority constituents come and see them every Friday or on Twitter, they think they are now in touch with society.
	They have the pulse, but they don't.
	They actually, in fact, they are forgetting about normal life.
	You know, as I say, even if they came from normal life.
	Thatcher was like, you know, saying the whole price of milk and all this stuff that became overused as a kind of question.
	But she was right.
	Even her ministers didn't know Price and Mill.
	That's a metaphor for everything else.
	They genuinely don't know that people are rejecting soft socialism that Tories are doing.
	No, I hadn't even looked at it that way, because I was just thinking...
	Honestly, I was like the Conservatives.
	I was like, what is wrong with these people?
	What is wrong with this country?
	It didn't occur to me that essentially this is a protest about the lack of conservatism in the Conservatives.
	We'll threaten to vote for your enemies if you don't do what we want, is what the message...
	And I think that's probably a good way of looking at it.
	Probably accurate, too.
	Anyway, Paul says, the problem for the Conservatives is they all graduated from the same indoctrination mills as the Liberals.
	It's wearing conservative skin suits.
	It is no surprise that they have no real ability to make change despite having the legal power to do so.
	Yeah, I mean, also to add to that, different to American conservatism or the rest of the world, British conservatives are scared of British conservatism because they think British conservatism is like Hungarian conservatism or Polish conservatism.
	British conservatism, the world we know, is what we were.
	Old English liberals, the classical liberals.
	So conservatism, until basically post-Thatcher, or when she went, British conservatism was conserving the values of classical liberalism.
	So it's not some sort of scary fascist thing.
	It's still very progressive, ironically.
	But they are so fearful, the Tories, to be conservative, because they think conservative sounds like very backwards.
	And it's not even backwards, for God's sake.
	And they call themselves conservatives.
	Like, they literally have it on their party.
	It's like Nicola Sturgeon when she's like, oh, you know, I wouldn't have called the SNP the Scottish National Party.
	It's like, then why are you leading it?
	Well, they get offended if you say Scottish Nationalist Party.
	They say, oh, no, we're Scottish National Party.
	We're like, what's the difference?
	He's still got national in it.
	Yeah, exactly.
	What is the...
	Exactly.
	But you are right, Paul.
	You know, they have all the legal power in the world.
	Like, Boris has literally got godlike power at this point.
	You know, the Parliament is overwhelmingly Conservative.
	He could have done anything.
	Yeah.
	Could have done anything.
	Yeah.
	And this is what the Civil War basically, the question that left up in the air is, what are the limits on the power of Parliament?
	And the answer is none.
	No, exactly, yeah.
	You know, there are no limits.
	So it's like, right, okay, why aren't you doing anything?
	Anyway, Robert says, if it's not right to say only women have a cervix, the follow-up question should be, what kinds of women don't have a cervix?
	Oh, yeah.
	That's a great question.
	Make it detailed.
	Yeah, confuse them more.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	And kids were like the ones with penises?
	Taffy Duck says, the surgical butchering of mentally ill people and desperate pandering MPs towards this tiny group is the greatest damage the Soviet Union ever did to the West.
	You know, I wish we could blame this on the Soviets.
	I wish we could blame them.
	It's not.
	This is something that's homegrown from American communists.
	They didn't come from the Soviet Union.
	They came from France.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	French liberalism turned into communism, yeah.
	French liberalism, yeah, exactly.
	Goes to America and a bunch of communists.
	Literally.
	It's mad.
	But anyway, other than communists at the end of the long march to the institutions, who is championing this destructive issue now?
	Doctors, because they get paid.
	Oh, that's true, actually, yeah.
	Paul again says trans ideology seems to promote the sexual binary in direct conflict with the idea that there are 57 genders or spectrum of sex.
	I wonder how they intend to resolve this.
	Why does the list keep changing?
	57, 97.
	I'm guessing the nerdy ones, the really weird ones, activist ones, they memorize them?
	How do you memorize them?
	And also, the list keeps changing.
	But you'll notice that the transitioners, they never transition into some other gender.
	It's always male to female, female to male.
	Yeah, that list updates more than my iPhone updates.
	Really makes you think, though, doesn't it?
	Anyway, Lord Nerevar says, Welcome to the Uniparty conglomerate.
	It's not unbeatable, though.
	We just have to work for it.
	That'd be nice.
	Radnor says, Kira's a snake, Boris is a traitor.
	And we're going to be bouncing between these two extremes of incompetence in British politics for the foreseeable future.
	Every new PM results in us looking at the last PM who we hated and reminiscing about how much better they were than what we have now.
	Yeah.
	That's kind of true.
	That's a sad thing.
	Yeah, it's really sad, isn't it?
	It's so true.
	Really sad.
	Right, sorry.
	General Hai Ping says, the left are not proud to be anything.
	They've mired themselves into generacy and hedonistic pursuits as a way of coping with one thing that they truly hate more than the societies that they admonish and actively try to comfort and contort and manipulate, which is, as you said, themselves.
	Now, honestly, I think this is just so, like, just look at them.
	Yeah.
	Look at them.
	They're not proud to be the people that they are.
	They don't look at themselves.
	And see in the mirror, there was an article about the Zoom calls and it was written by a trans person who was complaining that it was a form of abuse to make them look at their own faces on Zoom.
	That's brutal.
	That's the thing.
	I mean, it goes further that the left are now, in the West, they're more anti-things.
	They're not pro-anything.
	And being anti is not enough.
	You have to be pro-things.
	In the past, the liberals and the left in the West, even in France back then, they were pro-something.
	They wanted something.
	But now, these guys, it's in their names.
	Antifa is anti-fa.
	It's not anti-fa.
	It's not pro-tolerance, it's always anti-something, and it's like everything is negative, and that's not enough.
	You can't build a good world by simply tearing everything down.
	Yeah, but you need to have a solution.
	Yeah, I think that's absolutely true.
	Omar says, progressives love mocking trickle-down economics, but experience no cognitive dissonance while simultaneously believing in trickle-down success.
	That's a Omar is by far one of the most incisive commentators.
	You think giving more power to the government will result in you, the useful idiot, getting better outcomes?
	You don't even need to look back at history.
	Thousands of Americans are suffering from the Bidenomics-induced inflation, while politicians drive by in their EV cars commenting on all the money they don't need to spend on petrol.
	This is the Pete Buttigieg Like, you know, stop complaining about the gas prices and buy an electric car.
	It's so interesting.
	With permission, I'm going to steal this line.
	It's a very good philosophical kind of thought to actually have.
	Yeah, they actually, yeah.
	Trickle-down success is a great coin, Omar.
	Yeah, we're going to steal that.
	Thank you.
	But no, that's a great point.
	Yep.
	And this is what I've been saying to people.
	You can't give people prosperity.
	You can't hand it out.
	No.
	It has to be taken.
	And it can only be taken by hard work.
	And so, get to work.
	Stop whining.
	And experience and failure.
	Yeah.
	You have to experience things, yeah.
	Yeah, exactly.
	All of these things end up, you know, build yourself up.
	Yeah.
	Exactly.
	And when you fail, you want to blame somebody.
	It's a classic, we all have it to an extent, but as humans, going back to Freud, but on an extreme level, the whole tribe of left, all type of them, they have mommy-dad issues, basically.
	That's why they, on a bad level, they want the support and the safety net and dependency on But when they fail, when they fall as a baby, then they want to basically blame somebody.
	They're not going to say, oh, it was actually my fault that I stepped on something.
	Yeah.
	I mean, I don't know about you, but my dad would just never let me get away with that at all.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Yeah.
	When something went wrong, it was my fault.
	And it's like, yeah, well, I mean, that is true, but I don't like it.
	I would say, quotes, that's not fair.
	And my dad would say, life isn't fair.
	Who told you life was fair?
	And he was right.
	It's totally right.
	And you are right.
	You wonder how much of it is down to single parenting, right?
	Because it's single mothers.
	Yeah, but also, generally speaking, I go back to my deep, drunk chat, philosophical chat.
	It's a generational thing.
	Generation X was the border.
	Generation X and the ones before the younger boomers, they were the ones, again, not all of you guys, not everybody, but as a whole...
	Because they had the good parenting and then by that point the world and the West was stable and good jobs and houses and everything else.
	Then subconsciously, unintentionally, some of them intentionally became lazy parents and didn't raise millennials and now generations dead the right way.
	So partly single parenthood, so a lot of divorces.
	And partly even if they stayed together...
	Especially because a lot of the mothers became Korea people, so they were never even at home, and the dads as well.
	So kids are messed up now.
	And general slackening of standards.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Lack of discipline.
	It is hard not to point to the boomers and say, well, you did this.
	Generation X as well.
	My generation is also culpable.
	But yeah, no, I think...
	I think that's right.
	And you can see it in, like, the 60s and 70s.
	Yeah.
	Well, you know, like, we want to, you know, just, like, Woodstock is always, you know, that sort of generational, like, it's considered to be some sort of cultural highlight.
	And it's like, well, what were you doing?
	You're sitting around in a field getting drunk and taking drugs.
	What were you doing?
	And having sex.
	Yeah, listen.
	That's not an accomplishment.
	No.
	Growing your hair.
	Yeah, exactly.
	That's not an accomplishment.
	You didn't do something magnificent there.
	You know, you just pigged out for a weekend and ruined the place, apparently.
	Yeah.
	You know, you didn't build something.
	Jeremy Corbyn.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Yeah, Bernie Sanders, these guys, yeah.
	What did you accomplish?
	You took drugs in a field.
	Oh, bravo!
	You know, who didn't do that?
	Anyway, S.H. still says...
	I greatly appreciate the point of the Europeanization of America.
	However, I think the biggest contributing factor for the division is the growing globalization of urban areas.
	Cities in the West at large have become more detached from the country they purportedly serve, while truly serving the wealthy businessmen and cultural moguls that bounce between them.
	The anywheres that ascribe to the ideology of neoliberal globalism, he doesn't say, but obviously compared to Scruton's somewheres who live in that place.
	What do you reckon?
	But yeah, it's so true because there was always a divide between the rural and urban areas, especially in countries like Britain and America.
	But the difference is, since the era we talk about Europeanization in the 20th century and globalization, the urban areas...
	The pace was a lot faster.
	So they become more internationalized and basically more progressive.
	And the rural areas are still, well, they're not staying the same or going backwards.
	They're still growing.
	They're still being exposed to new things and Uber, Netflix and all this.
	I mean, they still have, you know, phones?
	Yeah, exactly.
	So they're not like Amish.
	They are progressing, but the divide is more obvious because it's that kind of thing that the left always talk about, the inequality in terms of race.
	It's also the sort of concern, isn't it?
	Like the local farmer, the local community.
	I mean, we're in Wiltshire, you know, so you drive, you know, I'm personally not part of all these local communities.
	I live in the outskirts of Swindon.
	But like you drive through loads of like small farm villages and you know, these people have known each other for years.
	They go to the local shop and they, you know, they spend their time with each other.
	Whereas the Anywheres don't.
	But that's the most human thing, because we are tribal, but we also prefer smaller tribes to feel safer, and we're not used to big.
	I would say...
	In life and politics, size matters, and big is bad.
	Like, big business, big government, it makes things more complicated and also you can't really have that sense of community or understanding each other, priorities.
	And also with America, for example, back in the day, an American farmer was prioritized, was respected, you know, you're an important person in our society.
	It's the corporate kind of people, your kind of white collar, your banker, is seen more important than an American farmer.
	American farmer is like, oh, you don't matter anymore.
	You're just a pleb.
	It's mad.
	It's like, sorry, he makes the food.
	I'm hungry.
	Why is he in a bit?
	But it's also...
	There's a kind of lack of noblesse oblige in this whole thing, right?
	Because you would think that the people at the top of a society...
	And also, I think this is why the British aristocracy kept their heads during the French Revolution.
	It's like, look, we actually do have a bit of an obligation to look after all these plebs.
	And maybe we should give a little in order so they don't get really angry and kill.
	Yeah, don't just do complete greed like other monarchies and...
	Yeah, exactly.
	Callum says, this Hidden Tribe survey is very interesting.
	I'd like something like that to be done in the UK. Yeah, it would be great, wouldn't it?
	If anyone's got anything like that, send it across, because I'd really love to see it.
	Anyway, Taffy says, women of power behind men.
	Boris, carry anyone?
	Yeah, you can call her.
	The main force behind getting rid of Dominic Cummings, the PM's wife, which went well for the government.
	Have you been following Dominic Cummings' Twitter?
	Yeah.
	It takes 10 minutes to read one tweet.
	I know.
	I don't know why he writes it like that.
	I've no idea.
	I know it's autistic, but come on.
	You can tell that this is just, he's having a big brain dump.
	Yeah.
	In a series of tweets, it's like, okay, now you've got to try and pass through it.
	But he makes some good points, doesn't he?
	Well, he's got a big brain.
	He makes very good points, but he doesn't kind of communicate in the right way.
	And that's kind of the problem.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	It's not just about those kind of types of geniuses who don't have the social skills, they piss people off, and it's not just that.
	It's also just they're not salespeople.
	You need to be able to sell your ideas.
	Otherwise, no one's going to take it seriously, and that's the problem.
	I mean, he's very clearly an expert strategist.
	Yeah.
	He clearly knows what's going on.
	Anyway, Brandon says, you've got to love how the journalists at the Washington Post work together and dine together, but are so quick to backstab each other if it benefits them.
	Working for the New York Times at the Washington Post is like being a noble in Westeros.
	That's right!
	That's amazing!
	That's exactly the analogy that I was looking for.
	That's exactly right!
	They're all in the same office, and someone gets a knife in the back.
	That's so mad, isn't it?
	Yeah.
	Christian says, Bezos' Washington Post doesn't get enough clicks as a newspaper to have to create their own in-group drama.
	I would agree, but, like, that's not...
	Like, this Twitter drama doesn't create clicks for them, right?
	No, no, there are other dramas they could create, you know.
	Yeah.
	Well, Alec Baldwin.
	Like, it's not a...
	Exactly.
	That creates clicks.
	Obviously, yeah.
	But the point is, they clearly can't resist and stop this from overflowing into the public domain.
	And it just makes them look terrible.
	You see the sorts of people who are running this thing.
	It's like, well, there we go.
	And Bezos must just be like, I spent billions on this.
	Maureen says, fun times when an individual employee of a cognitive institution starts to air dirty laundry.
	Just show the world that they support the correct ideology and their sacred belief system.
	Rick says, when leftists are clambering for an apology, all I hear is, give us a stick to beat you with.
	That's exactly it.
	There was no good came from Daniel Weigel's apology.
	He got suspended, and yet the editor had to come out and say he did nothing wrong.
	Yeah.
	They're going to hit you anyway.
	It's like when they say Britain should give money to India and Africa and all these places.
	First they say apologize, and we already apologized like decades ago.
	And then they say give money.
	If we start giving them money, there's no limit.
	And then they're going to get us to do more.
	They're going to be like, expand the NHS to cover the healthcare in all those countries.
	They're not going to stop.
	They're going to keep asking for more.
	And the thing is, as well, there's an old English tradition of accepting an apology.
	Once you accept an apology, you don't bring it up again.
	Exactly.
	Because otherwise you're being a cruel, bullying person by doing that.
	And if you don't accept the apology, then don't give someone an apology if they're not going to accept it.
	Edward says, fun, collaborative, and collegial, and full of lizard people.
	I mean, humans.
	Fun humans.
	Fun lizards.
	Yeah, fun lizards, yeah.
	Yeah.
	Paul says, does anyone at the Washington Post know what a woman is?
	I mean, that's a great point!
	That's true, yeah.
	This is offensive to women.
	Okay, we'll define women and we'll go from there.
	Jonathan Crowe says, I personally have found that the Lotus Caesars is filled with many terrific people who are smart, collegial, and fun humans.
	Wow, we're not perfect like Washington Post.
	we've got problems um Tappy says the Watch the Post NPC update Always a bad sign.
	Just smacks of the CNN MSNPC speech about online disinformation is harmful to our democracy.
	It does, doesn't it?
	That's actually it.
	Yeah.
	Lord Nerevar says, The Washington Post having a meltdown about their own brilliance.
	What else is there?
	They deserve all the clowning we can bring on them.
	Yeah, I thought so too.
	Yeah, they deserve it.
	Excuse me.
	Stephen says, following book club number 30, I was wondering if you'd consider doing an analysis of the continental corruption of British culture and institutions, particularly with regards to the process versus outcome.
	Yes, but it'd take a long time.
	But it's the sort of thing that, like, slowly but surely, I think we can put together.
	And Risto says, refer to all legacy media as content creators from this point onwards.
	That's good.
	Well, yeah, also, who said it the other day?
	I think it was Michael Knowles saying, why did we say legacy media?
	It sounds nice, but give him credit.
	Yeah, it does.
	Don't give him legacy.
	Yeah, the content creators of the Washington Post.
	Influences.
	Like, how are they different?
	What do they do?
	Do they go on the ground and investigate the facts and then report?
	No, they don't.
	They sit there on Twitter like everyone else.
	It's just mad, isn't it?
	You know, this is great.
	I might do that.
	I'm actually going to try and...
	Omar says, must be a special kind of hell when your ideology demands that you hold all your friends to account for any little transgression until all you have left is allies who are doing the same to you.
	No wonder those efforts are always so miserable.
	And honestly, I can't even imagine being in a place like that.
	It's just sad.
	It must be hell to be inside their heads.
	Anyway, I think we've run out of time there.
	So, Maya, where can people find you?
	Well, on YouTube.com.
	Yeah, just go on YouTube, slash my full name, Maya TC, and then you will find me.
	I think the moment you type M-A-H, I'm the only one.
	It should be easy to find.
	But yeah, we've got the most watched daily UK news show in the country.
	We get more views than the mainstream media.
	Apart from BBC, no one can beat BBC. This is part of the institution, isn't it?
	Yeah.
	But anyway, thanks so much for coming on.
	This has been really good.
	Hope you've had fun, folks.

▲