Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

June 20, 2022 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:31:15

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #418

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Easters for the 20th of June 2022.
	I am joined by John.
	Hello!
	And today we are talking about the Turf's endless PR victories, the school's bill is coming for your children, and Taylor LeRae's, Lorenz, cries about getting caught.
	Which I thought was enjoyable, if nothing else.
	So I thought we'd check that out.
	But without further ado, I suppose we shall get into the TERFs.
	I need to figure out what I'm saying before I say it.
	Alright, so...
	The TERFs are on an endless PR victory campaign, it seems.
	At least from what I can see.
	And I thought we'd go through some of it.
	Because, well, the Americans, certainly grappling with this problem, need to pick up on what the UK TERFs are doing.
	If they want to win that war of what is a woman, presumably.
	If we go to the link here, you can see the first thing to mention being that we have a premium video on the review of What is a Woman by Matt Walsh as well from Carl and Harry there, which seems to have had a huge amount of cultural impact and it seems that right-wingers can still do an amazing job of having a huge dent in that intersectional worldview.
	Yeah, this is a really good creative project, I think, this documentary.
	Yeah, so go and check that out.
	And also, it is great work that Matt Walsh has done.
	But back to Blighty for a minute, for what the TERFs have also been able to do in this regard.
	We'll start off with Posey Parker, who has been going around here.
	As you can see, she's celebrating.
	She's, well, dealing with the racial pride flag there by putting her stickers on it.
	She's been like, no.
	What is that?
	Is that Waitrose or something?
	And she's just like, to hell with you.
	And this is endemic, so good work for her there.
	I hope at least some of the employees see it.
	it and knows what the hell they're doing but if we go to the next one here we can see the fact that there was a demonstration again in Bristol this time around.
	Okay.
	He was gonna go and say that women exist and that proposition ruffled a few feathers so Antifa turned up to you know look like the tolerant and peaceful chaps that they always Okay.
	Let's play this first clip You're gonna die You're going to die out.
	You are ancient history.
	You are fucking.
	You are dinosaur.
	You are failed.
	I failed, but I can't defend.
	Get to the sea.
	Wonderful, wonderful individuals.
	So, local woman turns up to say that women exist, and that's the response she got from the locals there, because Bristol, for people who don't know, seems to be a leftist Antifa asshole.
	You may remember it was a place where the riots took place.
	Yes, absolutely, where the Edward Colston statue was toppled as well.
	Yeah, and then they set fire to police cars in the evening, because, you know, movement of peace.
	And the man there, screaming that you're going to die out like dinosaurs, which, I mean, there is the obvious rhetoric from the test, which is that women are being erased, they're trying to replace authentic women with trans women, and then this individual turns up screaming that, yes, you women are going to die out, and your time has come.
	The age of women is no more, which is interesting rhetoric, to say the least.
	There's also the point that the irony trans have no children either, so where does that future lie?
	However, moving to the next link here, we can see, of course, Andy Noe picking that up.
	But then there's more of this as well.
	And he says, Antifa members from the Anarchist Federation and other far-left extremists gathered to try and shut down a women's rights gathering.
	Again, the feminists were accused of being transphobic fascists and required police protection.
	Let's play this club, in which they continue to be perfectly nice.
	You have to literally just attack our kids.
	Go, JSC!
	Die out!
	Dinosaurs!
	Dinosaurs!
	Fussles!
	You're gonna die out!
	You're going to die out.
	You're a fossil.
	You're a dinosaur.
	You have failed.
	You have failed.
	Your ideas have failed.
	Get in the sea.
	Get in the sea of culture.
	Go home.
	Get in the sea.
	Look after your kids.
	I must have missed that episode of Jurassic Park.
	I mean, I love something about those masks, you know, it goes back into them else.
	It just makes me think they're puppets.
	Yeah, it does.
	It looks so strange.
	It's surreal to look at, but then the ending off there, go home and look after your kids.
	Okay.
	Unlike you, I suppose.
	But then also, it's just like, women, you belong back at home.
	Interesting.
	Make me a sandwich while you're at it.
	Yeah.
	From the left-wingers there, of course, and screaming, you are ancient history, at the women, the authentic women, saying that you're, you know, no longer part of the new women.
	I mean, it's the Ricky Gervais joke.
	Come true, yet again.
	Someone's like, not the old women, the ancient history women.
	Used to, you know, have vaginas and things.
	Whereas the new women, lovely.
	Much better, of course, from this individual as they rip up their signs as well.
	And this is what I mean by the endless PR victories.
	What do the TERFs have to do?
	Nothing.
	Literally bugger all.
	We're going to go to Bristol.
	What are we going to do?
	Say that women exist.
	And what's going to happen?
	We're going to get a PR win.
	Why?
	Because Antifa will turn up and do this.
	And just become the living memes that they are.
	Again, with the puppet thing.
	I mean, it's not just me, right?
	Yeah.
	I was thinking that earlier.
	It looks so strange.
	It's almost like a fake beard as well, the way it hangs down below his chin like that.
	Yeah, and you got both of them there, and then the rest of them with the masks on, of course.
	Always the mask.
	No one else in Britain wears masks.
	It's almost like that's a pair of Speedos he's wearing around his face rather than an actual mask.
	Furiously breathing in and out.
	Not the best idea.
	Moving on to the next one here.
	There was more of this puppet as well, screaming that you were going to die because you're dinosaurs.
	But then this one here, I love how Andy worded this.
	Hashtag Andy Adifar groups organize the Bristol direct action against Posey Parker there.
	Feminist rally on Twitter and Mastodon.
	They conspire to hide their identities and threaten to throw the women into the harbor.
	At least one militant had a visible Adifar tattoo circled next to the erection.
	Which, if you click on that fourth image there, we're gonna...
	There you are.
	Presumably one of these chaps getting rather excited by his day out as he screams at women that they belong back in the kitchen and looking after the kiddos.
	Rightio!
	If you go back through the images, we can see some more of these individuals.
	You can see with their flags.
	Well, masks, a lot of them as well.
	It's just cringe.
	Cringe, if nothing else.
	But there you are.
	That's the Antifa chaps who turned up and decided to give Posey Parker another win on a platter, which is...
	I mean, I had this argument with Carlo ages ago.
	Where we were debating about, well, who's going to win this?
	It's actually a feminist debate.
	Right, yeah.
	Is it going to be the trans activists or Posey Parker types?
	And I was pretty sure that, yeah, the Posey Parker types are definitely going to win.
	And frankly, I don't know how they could lose.
	I mean, I don't know what they'd have to do wrong for the public to think they're the bad guys in a situation like that.
	I mean, they're literally just standing there and the opposition has decided to make themselves laughable.
	That's true.
	I mean, it's the simplest thing in the world.
	There's also the obvious point that, well, only one side has the racial pride flag as well.
	They even have the most updated one, as you can see there, with its little circle, which I believe stands for intersex or something.
	Who knows?
	Why not just add every other colour as well?
	I mean, everyone's seen the memes.
	Let's not go over it again.
	But using the Ukrainian flag edition.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Well, that's the one I was looking for.
	They haven't got that one on there yet.
	No, but there was a meme made up by the right-wingers, and then I did see a couple of groups in America started using it, unironically, thinking it was the new one.
	Well, that's just the level of the world we live in, the sort of Surkovian, post-modernist hellscape where no one can tell what's sincere and what's not.
	No, but also, like, the...
	Because there's a level of the sincere leftists who believe that stuff, right?
	But then the kind of people who would take a joke flag and use it as the authentic one.
	I mean, part of your wonders, are they just NPCs looking for the update?
	I mean, genuinely.
	Like, they don't really believe it.
	They just go along with it.
	And then they've seen a new one and thought, yeah, fine.
	Maybe.
	Maybe not.
	Maybe they really are that deluded.
	But if we go to the next one here, we also have the fact that they're not exactly the smartest group as well.
	We have an individual here with a sign that says, Turfs can suck my D. Is that the guy with the erection from earlier?
	Maybe.
	Maybe indeed.
	Tell what he's here for.
	I don't know if he's a trans man or a trans woman either, in which case we'd also have to riddle your way out of that one as well, which is not really going to happen, but there we are.
	Again, lovely people, lovely individuals turning out to be very much welcomed by the public after the public get a look at them.
	And then I thought I'd end this off, just if we go to the next one here, we can see the fact that I did laugh at this.
	Just Posey promoting her merch in the middle of all this.
	And just a side note, it just made me laugh, frankly.
	For people listening, it's a black cab with black writing that says woman on it.
	Barely legible.
	Yeah, well, you know, the erasure of women right there, in real time.
	So if you've got a friend who's in Bristol and loves wearing black block and walking around with his erections, you can give him a little black cab to wear as well that just says woman on it.
	Please be patient, I have autism.
	Go along with the black shirts and the black armbar.
	Black erections.
	Anyway, so that's the rally they had, which they just turned up and just laughed at the leftists.
	And then the women were like, let's go to the pub, because we're British.
	What else are we going to do?
	And the leftists, of course, followed and harassed them all the way there as well.
	And you can see Posey updating us here.
	They followed us to the pub.
	The pub is being closed by the police because of the children outside.
	Very unruly.
	Hashtag let women speak.
	Hashtag let women drink.
	We go to the next one as well with the fact that the police had to stick around.
	Some other individual who's really there for this saying that women and GC men have been blockaded by gender critical men.
	I don't know why they make that distinction though.
	They are feminists.
	Yeah, but you think they are, you know, at least get the message there are women and men and then there's lunatics, which, you know, that's the phraseology I would have used.
	Have been blockaded at a Bristol pub by trans activists who won't let women speak.
	The police have closed the pub's gates.
	So there you have it.
	I mean, again, what's the imagery here?
	I mean, this is why I think that the TERFs are just going to win.
	I mean, why else?
	If you go to the next one as well, we also have the fact that apparently there's this many police that need to be there just to protect you from these, well, raging men, as the women here would put it, because they're feminists, of course.
	That's how they phrase this stuff.
	They also say that they come out and scream to us on the megaphone.
	If we go to the next one as well, there's also just some media picked up on this, of course.
	As you can see, the Daily Mail picked up on it, and there's just a little more information here, which is a mob clad in black as Bristol anarchists tell feminists they are next after Coulson's statue was toppled into the river.
	Of course, being that that's the reference, we're going to throw you in the harbour.
	Yep.
	A mob dressed in all black were heard screaming, trans rights are human rights, whilst women's rights activists held a talk in honour of Father's Day at College Green.
	Wow.
	I didn't know that was the reason, which, hmm, interesting to see from the feminists, of course, celebrating Father's Day.
	You know, what has happened to make these radical feminists celebrate Father's Day?
	It is a beautiful synergy.
	That's what I love about these things, you know, make a synthesis of the whole situation.
	But then the fact, of course, that, well, the opposition probably clearly needs some fathers as well.
	Another man was seen writing on the ground after Colston.
	Turfs are next, being the reference to throwing them in the harbour.
	And if we go to the next one, the David Mail gives all the credit here to the Bristol Anarchist Federation.
	The Anarchist Federation don't want to take all the credit for that.
	They're much more humble.
	Don't worry, there's far more lunatics out there.
	Shout out to all the feminist groups, the unions, students, queer groups, trans groups, and many other who do not involve themselves in any group who made today possible.
	So there you have it.
	I mean, there's the list of leftists, which are very, very typical.
	Just, yeah, all the queer, trans and unions.
	Okay, yeah.
	Same people every goddamn time.
	Of course it is.
	We have leftists everywhere.
	Especially in Bristol as well.
	Like, Bristol is somewhat renowned for this.
	It's almost as bad as Brighton.
	I mean, it's a living meme of a city.
	I mean, it's not, you know, Portland levels of mad, but maybe...
	It's like Britain's Portland.
	It's just not that bad yet.
	2015 Portland, maybe?
	Maybe.
	Before it, you know, just as ended in actual anarchy.
	They did see a response here from Julia Harley Brewer saying, imagine if these mass-threatening men were shouting at an ethnic minority group instead of...
	Fair point.
	Do you think the police would have stood by and allowed them to intimidate and abuse them, or is this only okay if the intimidation is aimed at women standing up on their rights?
	I mean, yeah, fair point by Julia, but then again, it's sort of, I get the message, frankly, which is the police are the enemy in this regard.
	I mean, the British police.
	And it's not because of the Bobby on the street, it's because of the College of Policing, as we've documented many a time.
	I mean, the laws as they're written and then interpreted and carried out are institutionally biased in favour of the intersectionals against everyone else, including, of course, the TERFs, which is why they've ended up on, let's say, outside of the debate as well.
	But if we go to the next one here, we can also see the fact, as previously I mentioned, it's an endless list of PR victories.
	Because they had this as we previously went over in Manchester as well.
	I mean, it is weird to have Antifa not come to our events anymore, or to spend much time spending all their energy instead on the turf.
	Which is, you know, relaxing to some extent, to not have to deal with the tarred wrangling that takes place otherwise.
	But then again, it is interesting to see that they've not given up their, oh yeah, we're macho left-wingers, even though they all look like little boys.
	But then they turn up trying to fight the women, which again, just endless PR victories.
	I mean, you cannot think of a stupider thing a political movement can do than being like, yeah, we're going to go fight the suffragettes.
	Mm-hmm.
	Okay, good luck in looking good at all that.
	But then if we go to the next one as well, we can see we had the fact that this is also something that, well, is only being one of the public eye, sadly, to be toned down a second, which is just that in the Labour Party, of course, you can still be incredibly hostile, as this individual was.
	I don't know if you've seen this clip.
	Yeah.
	It's one who's like...
	We need to stamp out prejudice in the most masculine voice you've ever heard talking about the TERFs.
	They need to be stamped out from the party because, of course, in left-wing politics they don't care about anything to do with morals but instead power.
	But in the public eye, not so much.
	You're going to lose that every time.
	But this isn't the only leftist thing that took place over the weekend that I thought they'd just talk about because it's a series of L's for them.
	If we go to the next one here, we have the fact that Islamo-Labor joined for some big old march in London with trade unions, presumably asking for communism again.
	What else are they doing?
	You might think I'm being a little bit unfair, though, but if we go to the next one, we can see there was a video here of some individuals who went down because, of course, they will have the refugees welcome here placards.
	So I had to ask them about their opinions on taking in a refugee.
	I didn't add this.
	I wonder if we can play it in the Twitter video instead.
	Sorry about that, John.
	My fault.
	But if you can play this one, because it's just too glorious not to.
	I just noticed your placard saying refugees welcome here.
	I was just wondering if you'd like to go down on a list saying you're willing to take the refugees into your home.
	Of course not.
	My only problem is rent.
	You rent?
	Yeah.
	Maybe an issue?
	Yeah, because they've got, well...
	They've put nine bedrooms in a four bedroom house, so we're pretty much...
	So would you actually adopt a refugee and take them into your home?
	Well, if I had any space, I would.
	If you had any space.
	It wouldn't be a nice place to bring them, because it's a bit overcrowded.
	But yes, if I had the space, definitely.
	Thank you very much for that, love.
	One into your home?
	I live in a rental place, so I can't...
	Rental?
	Yeah, yeah.
	You can't do it.
	It's someone else's job.
	Yeah.
	No, I'm sorry, I can't.
	You can't take one?
	I don't have...
	I don't have...
	Don't have the space.
	Do you want to have a refugee stay at your house?
	Yeah, I don't mind.
	You'll go on the list?
	I don't mind.
	Yeah, I can't do it.
	Give me the other thing.
	Oh wait, I can't because my house is only a little small.
	Amazing.
	Would you be willing to have a refugee in your home?
	Yes, if I had room.
	If you had room.
	It's funny, that.
	To adopt a refugee?
	No, thank you.
	No, thank you.
	Any reason in particular?
	No, I don't.
	What sort of refugee are you talking about?
	Excuse me.
	Would you be willing to adopt a refugee into your home?
	No!
	Would you adopt a refugee into your home?
	No, thank you.
	No?
	Adopt a refugee?
	I would be willing, yeah, if I had the space.
	If you had the space?
	Yeah.
	So where should we put them then?
	Where should we put them?
	Yeah.
	There's plenty of people who have followed.
	Who are you, mate?
	My name's Jim, who are you?
	My name's Alistair.
	I'm already adopted a refugee, thanks.
	What does racism mean to you?
	It means not equality for those who don't belong here.
	For those that don't belong here?
	Yeah.
	Amazing.
	I mean, what is there to say?
	I mean, that's just gold, by the way, when the channel went over.
	For those that don't belong here, if they don't have equality, what statement?
	No, I mean...
	There were some very revealing responses there as well.
	I mean, there's a lot of people renting, obviously, and a lot of people saying, oh, I don't have the space.
	Now, obviously, you can read that one of two ways.
	You can read, oh, I don't have the space.
	I've only got 28 bedrooms.
	What am I going to do with it?
	But also, we do live in tiny houses.
	We have this huge, dense population.
	We have a relatively small living space compared to the rest of the Western world.
	We pay huge amounts in house prices and rent, and most people struggle to get on the property ladder.
	So, you know, that is a valid cross-section of society there.
	But yeah, it's just funny that they haven't made that cognitive step between, I don't have space, don't have anywhere to live, can't buy a house.
	Maybe we shouldn't have, like, millions more refugees.
	No, that'll make it better.
	That'll mean there's more houses to buy, presumably.
	My life and the government are two different things.
	No, it's all the same place.
	They just steal your money.
	And there's the obvious visual irony of all these people carrying literal placards saying refugees welcome saying, oh no, no, no.
	Yeah, I kind of want to get some stickers that just say not in my house and just put it on each one.
	Not here, though.
	Not in my house, of course.
	Don't have the room.
	Funny that, for all of them.
	Except the two, of course, that were just like, well, what kind of refugee?
	Not the rapey kind.
	Which one's the rapey kind, presumably?
	Those who don't belong here.
	That was brilliant.
	Left-wing North FC there.
	If you don't have equality, for those who don't belong here, how are they going to, you know, F off?
	That's just gold.
	Anyway.
	That was fantastic.
	But you have them.
	That's the front of the march with the Islamo-leftist MPs.
	And then you have the back of the march, which, you know, kept a little bit separate so they can, you know, play dumb about who else is there.
	And you can see the other clip here, which is a bunch of red flags, red bandanas, almost a uniform there, which is actually illegal in the UK. You can't do that.
	If you're a right-winger and you try and do the same thing, you will be arrested, but Metropolitan Police apparently more accommodating to, well, open Communists.
	It's not an exaggeration, you can see the Communist flags.
	and we'll play their chants.
	Stay at them.
	It is a bit embarrassing looking at them.
	I mean, they look like basement dwellers who check out our socialism every night.
	They're like, it's unfair.
	Why can't I just do nothing and get paid?
	But there you have it.
	Just screaming Ho Ho Ho Chi Minh, Che Guevara Stalin, because, you know, they'd all survive in the Soviet Union, of course.
	But there you have it.
	There's the communists at large.
	And if we go to the next one here, there's just also just to end this off, because that's, you know, the communists of the weekend having their fun.
	But to get back to the test for a minute, you see Matt Walsh saying here, What is a Woman has been easily one of the most talked about films of the year.
	It has exceeded every expectation.
	It has done all of this without any mainstream media attention at all.
	They blacklisted us and we succeeded without them.
	They have no power over us whatsoever.
	And I think that is a beautiful moment, just celebrating how little power the progs, the progressives, have over private discourse anymore.
	Yeah.
	Private discourse is just completely free to say that reality exists.
	Women exist.
	And just to end this off with one other link I had at the end, which is quite funny, I did see someone has remixed Posey Parker's speech a little bit here.
	There's a battle cry they started using, which is, your mum's a TERF. Which, yeah, true, as well.
	All of these people's mums, because remember, all of those communists there and the screamy puppets probably have mums, and their opinions probably aren't on the same side.
	They're probably like, no, I gave birth to you.
	That's where babies come from.
	Yeah.
	Your child.
	And there we have it.
	There's the Turf's endless PR victories, which I thought we'd just enjoy.
	But if there is one place where the progressives can still push their messaging across, largely unhindered from private society, it is schools.
	And with all the nonsense going on in American schools, you might be thinking that alternative educational arrangements might be a good idea for you or for your kids, like homeschooling, for example, or private tutors, or even just private school.
	Well, the government is moving in to clamp down on such things as freedom for your kids with its schools bill.
	And this has had relatively little media coverage and I think it's really important because there's a lot that goes on in here and I'm going to go through some of the main points as to why this is happening and why you should be concerned about it.
	So it's an outrageous infringement on the right of parents to home educate fundamentally.
	That's why we need to be worried.
	Even if your kids are going to school and you have no intention of making other arrangements, it's bad news and it will affect you, especially if you're privately educated.
	I'm going to break down why that is and why you should be concerned.
	So basically TLDR, the government believes now that it has the right to decide how your children are educated and the parents are at best an inconvenience.
	So that might sound a bit hyperbolic, right?
	Well, we'll get into it, so just hold on to that for a second.
	We have Calvin posting here.
	Which I think is reasonable.
	I agree with that.
	So let's jump down to Rhys Lavity here, and there's 18 points, so he received this forwarded message talking about the various parts of it, which is just a really good summary of what is included in this bill.
	So I'm going to read it so you can be informed.
	Under the bill, all schools must become academies.
	That's a certain type of school we have in Britain, I'll explain that later.
	New academies can only have state-provided sites preventing any new church schools from being set up.
	School governance is decided by the Department for Education who can remove and replace governors themselves.
	Worship and religious education arrangements can be changed or removed by Department for Education regulations.
	Trust schools lose the right to receive or buy extra land for the school.
	That's schools set up by trust.
	The Department for Education has the right to set the curriculum, not heads, not governors, not teachers.
	The Department for Education has the right to set school hours and term times.
	They have the right to set absence policies, removing the right of parents to obtain term time off from the head teacher for any reason.
	So just let that sink in.
	If you have to get time off for your kid, whether it's going on holiday, death in the family, whatever it might be, you can't go to the headteacher and say, oh, by the way, blah, blah, blah, I need to take little Timmy out for a day.
	No, you've got to get permission from the local authority.
	And that goes on the register and so on.
	And if you do that without the right permissions, you can be fined up to £120.
	Sorry, and that goes all the way back to Westminster, the Department of Education, approving whether or not you can take it all.
	You can, I believe, get it approved from the local authority, not Westminster, but still, that's the local council.
	And if you're fortunate enough never to have had any dealings with the local council, should we just say they are not the most reliable bureaucracy in the world?
	So also the Department for Education sets the fines for absence and as indicated they'll be used punitively to prevent parents from having the temerity to take their children out of school.
	Right.
	Bear in mind, we literally shut down schools for months and months during the pandemic lockdowns.
	And now the government's turning around and saying, well, actually, education at the time that a child spends in school is so important that even if you miss one day, we just have to fine you.
	It's a bit of a double standard there, I think.
	It's a punitively fine you as well.
	Yeah.
	We're going to try and absolutely ruin you because you took one day off.
	Right.
	The Department for Education has the right to set admissions procedures, not the school.
	Admissions procedures are a really curious thing because our governments, whether Labour or Conservative, for years and years, for decades, have been very anti-selective admissions.
	There's kind of this idea that every school should be a melting pot.
	That you shouldn't have, say, schools which select for people who are talented at the things that the school wants to cultivate, for example.
	And this is why schools in Britain have been described as engines of equality, because they just try to shove everyone together regardless of their ability and don't really care about whether that's good for the children or what comes out the other end, as long as all of their metrics are met.
	So the Department for Education also sets teacher salaries.
	It can ban teachers from teaching, not just in school, but also online and remotely.
	So if you've been banned from teaching, let's say you've had a political argument or fallen out with the board or so on and you've been banned from teaching, you can't even tutor.
	You can't even find alternative employment in the private sector to teach.
	No, the Department for Education can just ban you, that's it.
	You cannot do that job anymore in this country.
	Which is a little bit draconian, I think.
	The Department for Education also controls how the school spends money, completely removing autonomy from the proprietors of the school.
	So, there's your financial independence as the school gone as well.
	Ofsted can seize any material from the school that it wants.
	Not complying will be a criminal offence.
	They can literally come in and say, Gibbs, you have to give it to them.
	Now, obviously, this is understood in the framework of them investigating goings-on in schools, say, radicalism, extremism, etc., etc.
	But still, that's deeply concerning.
	But now we get to the real meat of why this is really bad.
	The bill introduces a register of children who are not in school.
	So, no matter who you are, your child needs to be on this register.
	So before, you had the right to educate your own children and you can send them to a school as you wish, which is what most people did because there are many efficiency arguments that gives you time off so that you're not spending your whole day teaching your children, etc., etc.
	And so most people go to school.
	There's an estimated, I think, 60,000 children homeschooling, last I heard.
	Now, every single one of those children needs to be on a register.
	This is a little bit creepy.
	If your child takes a day off for an appointment, you will have to register with your local authority.
	So if you take a day off school, you also need to be on a register.
	That goes back to not being able to get clearance from the head teacher.
	You have to go to the local authority.
	You will be under a duty to supply your local authority with any information that it demands of you under threat of fines or imprisonment if you fail to do so or even make a clerical error in doing so.
	So, okay, now the local authority is just empowered to make unreasonable demands and requests and intrusions into your privacy simply because you have a child or you're trying to home-educate.
	This is not in the social contract.
	This is not in the deal that we sign with the government, that we exist, we pay our taxes, you leave us alone.
	No, it doesn't end there.
	The government's coming for you.
	And, as I said before, fines are up to £120 for each day off school that hasn't been cleared by the local authority.
	It gets worse.
	If you use a tutor or out-of-school classes, the service provider will be under a duty to provide your child's details to the local authority.
	So your tutor has to dob your kid into the local authority so your kid gets on the register and blah blah blah and they harvest information about your child's education that way.
	Right.
	So again, tutor is just someone trying to do a job, teach some kids, get paid, you know, act as a normal economic actor.
	No, according to this schools bill, they are now an agent of the state and they are required to dob you in.
	That's just weird.
	Yeah.
	Why would you do that?
	Why indeed?
	We carry on.
	This is where it gets really mental, okay?
	If a family member educates your child with special needs or educates five children or more for some of the time they will have to register as a school and face Ofsted inspection and the duties that schools have to provide your information to the local authority.
	Right, let's just let that sink in, okay?
	So, you want to, say you have five children, right, and you want to home educate them, well you have to register as a school.
	You are now a school.
	And you have to be investigated as such.
	You have to file your paperwork like a school.
	You have to be investigated by Ofsted as a school.
	And you can fail that inspection as well.
	You know, so that is really creepy.
	But the main thing that this completely destroys is homeschooling communities.
	So if you have, say, a street and there are four families on there, say, each one has a child or two, And suppose they take it in turns to take one day off and do the teaching for the day.
	Whatever it is.
	Some arrangement like that.
	Well, under these rules, every single family on that street that's engaged in this project would have to register as a school.
	Every single household.
	So just to educate these five children from four different families, you need to register four schools.
	And each one of those households then has to submit paperwork as a school to do this.
	Like, can you see how absolutely mental this is?
	I mean, I imagine no one's been consulted about that aspect.
	I mean, I don't know.
	I mean, how big is homeschooling even in the UK? So last figure that I'm aware of is about 60,000 in 2019, but it's been going up strongly, you know, partly because of the sort of things we cover going on in schools.
	But 60,000 children is not actually a lot of children.
	And a lot of these homeschooled children are not going to be permanently homeschooled.
	They're going to be homeschooled for a year or two while they've got some kind of educational difficulties or whatever it may be.
	Then they'll go back into the school system maybe to get qualifications or whatever it may be.
	So it's not like we have an absolute chronic problem of homeschooling or even academic underachievement from homeschoolers, right?
	There is no problem here that they are fixing.
	They are just destroying the entire landscape, laying waste to the landscape of home education.
	Simply because, well, they're idiot bureaucrats and they want control.
	I mean, that's what this is always about.
	Mm-hmm.
	But it gets worse.
	Any setting which provides education to five children or more will have to register as a school with no exceptions made.
	Not for childminders, not for tutors.
	So tutors would have to register as a school.
	Not for after-school clubs, forest schools, or large families who home educate.
	So it's looking like after-school clubs will have to register as schools, which is just mental.
	If that is how this comes through, and there's a number of amendments being looked at, then that will be utterly Kafkaesque.
	And finally, the bill takes away your right to remove your child from a school without the oversight of your local authority, regardless of how that authority has already failed your child.
	So if you want to take your child out of school, the local authority basically has to clear it and say, yep, your paperwork's in order, your register's fine, we give our permission, etc., etc.
	So if your child's been abused at school by incompetent teachers, bullies, or is just depressed by the whole prison-like experience, You can't just say, you can't do anything unilaterally.
	You have to have the permission of the local authorities.
	And this is a huge change, because up until now, in this country, in Britain, we've always had the right to educate our own children.
	And now what this bill is doing is it's turning that presumption on its head.
	The presumption is you don't have the right unless you can provide paperwork satisfactorily and get all the right permissions and so on.
	It's the creeping invasion of bureaucracy into civic life.
	And they summarise that quite well here.
	The school bill places all education provisions under the control of the Department for Education and local authorities, with no exceptions.
	And one reason why this may not have been reported on quite so much is, if we go to the next one, that there's actually quite a lot to go into.
	If we scroll down through all of these policy statements, there's a lot to actually wrap your head around.
	There's pages and pages and pages and pages, and it's all split up into different bits and questions and so on.
	But you can find all of the information there.
	I'm leaving that in there, so if you do want to get to the heart of it, then it's all there for you.
	Moving on to the next one, a load of ex-ministers have lined up to criticise this.
	I'll quote from two in particular.
	Lord Baker, the Education Secretary between 1986 and 1989, warned that the bill increases the powers of the Secretary of State and the Department for Education in a way unprecedented since 1870.
	It's a real grab for power by the Department for Education, he warned.
	You must remember that the DfE, since 1870, has never run a school.
	Now they're going to take complete control over the education system, and so I think they should be watched.
	This is a really game-changing bill of a very significant nature, and I think it's totally unproved that the DfE actually knows very much about the improvement of schools.
	It's a very good point he puts there, isn't it?
	I didn't know they hadn't run a school since 1870.
	Well, yeah, they don't.
	The schools are run by governors and trustees and teachers and headteachers.
	But the Department for Education is more of an oversight board.
	It doesn't actually own any schools of its own, in the sense that it runs them themselves.
	If you're a civil servant in the Department for Education, I suspect that the probability you've ever taught a class of children is going to be quite low.
	You'll be a career civil servant.
	God help us.
	The government has set a target for all schools to be in academy trusts or in the process of moving into them by 2030.
	There's a load of ex-ministers who complained.
	A lot of them from a very Labour perspective where they're saying, it doesn't go far enough.
	Government needs more power.
	Why?
	Doesn't matter, they just need more power.
	Power for power, sir.
	Be all socialism.
	Lord Knight also spoke out against this.
	Now, he served as schools minister in the Blair and Brown Labour governments, so we can't exactly expect to have died in the walled Tory here.
	But he said the government had identified the right problem with academy agreements and a multitude of contracts between the education secretary and academies.
	So, the system is quite complicated at the moment.
	Michael Gove set up a load of free schools and academies starting from 2010-2011.
	And now, it is true, it's a very Byzantine system of what's a school, what's an academy, what type of school is it, compared to before.
	So that is perhaps overcomplicated, but this is a real blunt instrument if that's the problem to solve.
	And that's what he says.
	But the solution is draw-jobbing.
	Draw-jobbing, goodness me.
	My earpiece is catastrophically malfunctioning.
	It's putting off my reading, so I'm going to take that out.
	The solution is jaw-dropping, making the Secretary of State effectively the Chief Education Officer for 25,000 schools.
	They're not going to be in office forever.
	Do they really want to give future Secretaries of State the power to do what on earth they like to schools in this country?
	Because that's what this bill allows them to do.
	I mean, I don't really care if they want to give that power or not.
	I don't want to give them that power.
	I think the voters are the ones from whom the power is being taken.
	It's the voters over whom the power is being wielded.
	We're the ones who should be involved in this.
	And just a quick bit on academies so I can explain them.
	So this is one of the reasons they give in the next article.
	Why is becoming an academy so important?
	We have a decade of evidence that academy trusts can transform under performing schools.
	We want all schools to be part of a strong academy trust so they can benefit from the trust's support in everything from teacher training, curriculum, financial planning, and inclusivity towards children with additional needs to excellent behaviour and attendance cultures.
	So, again, inclusivity is just rearing its ugly head in the background there.
	Now, there are a couple of petitions I want to draw your attention to.
	So one of them is on change.org.
	This already has 85,000 signatures now, and that clearly shows there's a significant popular interest in this issue, despite the fact that no one is really reporting on it.
	No one is telling you that this is a massive power grab of your rights.
	You know, BBC, ITV, Guardian, Telegraph, a few articles here and there, but nothing really getting at the case.
	on petition.parliament.uk, this one only has 5,000 signatures.
	This is the important one, because if you get enough signatures on this, they will actually debate this in Parliament.
	Or give you a government response, which may be laughable at times, but at least gives you something to laugh at and an insight into how incompetent some of the government ministers are.
	Yeah, so it's all well and good having a, and this sadly only addresses a small part of the of the bill rather than the whole thing.
	However, the change.org petitions, they're okay as a barometer for all people are concerned about this, but they're functionally useless.
	If you really want a proper petition, you want to do it through Parliament so there can be an actual parliamentary debate about it, and then you can say, right, we've properly brought this to the attention of the government, whether or not they respond to it.
	But that can be useful for lawmakers like Lord Knight, who are trying to push back on aspects of this bill.
	And yes, I did have a little explainer lined up on the British school system.
	This just illustrates just how complicated it is.
	So there are community schools, which are also local authority-maintained schools, which are state schools.
	There are foundation schools and voluntary schools, which are funded by the local authority.
	There are academies and free schools which are run by not-for-profit academy trusts, are independent from the local authority and allegedly have more freedom to run how they run their education and follow the curriculum.
	And then there are grammar schools which can also be run by a local authority, a foundation body or an academy trust which have an academic selection principle.
	So there's quite a lot.
	Thank you, Sanfrey.
	I just remember it being, well, basically it's state schools and then there's grammar schools and state comp, comprehensive.
	And I'm not saying that was a good system, but at least it was an easy to understand system.
	And there are also special schools for people with special educational needs.
	So let's look at academies in particular, because that's the one they're trying to make all schools this type of school.
	Academies receive funding directly from the government and are run by an academy trust.
	They have more control over how they do things than community schools.
	Community schools, by the way, are not actually run by the community.
	They're run by the local authority, the council.
	So it's a bit of a misnomer.
	Academies have more freedom and more autonomy.
	They do not charge fees.
	They are inspected by Ofsted and have to follow the same rules on admissions, special educational needs and exclusions as other state schools, and students sit the same exams.
	Academies have more control over how they do things.
	For example, they do not have to follow the national curriculum, hurrah, and can set their own turn times.
	Also interesting.
	And that's useful for, say, religious schools or slightly internationally focused schools that want to adhere to a certain calendar.
	Some schools choose to become academies.
	If a school funded by the local authority is judged as inadequate by Ofsted, then it must become an academy.
	Now, academies are a really curious experiment.
	So it's not all that academy's bad.
	Academies were actually set up by Gove during his time as education secretary, and they're an experiment in a free market vision of schooling.
	So the idea is that you have lots of different types of education, all these different academies.
	Each one of them has more autonomy to be a different type of school.
	And the idea is that gives more choice to parents to choose to send their children to a school that will benefit their child's education.
	And it gives more autonomy to teachers to plan out the type of education that they think will be good for the world and for the children under their care.
	So that actually is a really interesting idea.
	However, they call them free schools, and I think that's a misnomer.
	It's a bit like a free prison, if you ask me.
	For me, a free school would be a school in which children can direct their own learning, rather than be subject to a curriculum.
	So like a Montessori school, or something like that, or even homeschool.
	However, neither academies nor free schools are allowed to have selective admissions processes, i.e.
	having to pass an academic test to get in.
	So they're not meritocratic in that way.
	There's one small exception, which is academies that converted to academies having previously been grammar schools or had some kind of selective admissions policy.
	And I actually do think you need selective admissions policies if you want schools that are going to produce excellence in any direction.
	Of course, the mission of our schools is not to produce excellence, it's to produce equality.
	And I've written on this at the Lotus Eaters as well.
	You can find this, the meaning of an education, where I talk about what's actually important when we talk about education.
	And the second one is about how schools can be bad from an institutional angle rather than just education.
	In terms of bad teachers or bad implementation.
	And that's what I wanted to talk about today.
	I mean, fair enough.
	I suppose I can see people asking for a link in the chat.
	I'm sure Vicky will be able to sort that out for you.
	Yep.
	But otherwise, I suppose we should move on to Taylor Lorraine's.
	I don't know why I just found that last name just weird.
	Well, it's like a Lorentz transform, isn't it?
	Yeah, anyway.
	Alright, so Taylor Lorentz is crying about being caught.
	At least one thing has finally come to her, which is that Washington Post has apparently decided that she's no longer a staff member, which is interesting enough.
	So we'll start off in case you have no idea who the hell this smear merchant is.
	As you can see, Imels Chung here saying, Taylor Lorentz would definitely stalk lives of TikTok at the supermarket as she cries because, well, there's a lot of media focused on her.
	She's like, isn't it terrible?
	They probably stalk me in the supermarket.
	I was like...
	Yeah, but if you click on that second image, this is you who lives at TikTok's house because she dare try to show, well, did show the left in their own words.
	I mean, you were so upset that you decided to turn up in your N95 mask, of course, to a home stalking random individuals as well.
	So there you have it.
	The idea that she's some kind of victim in here is mad for people who don't know it.
	But if we go to the next one, this is where she became an absolute living meme.
	As you can see, my dentist wants to charge me $1,300 for a single plastic retainer?
	Oh no.
	Maybe you should publish your dentist's name and private information while stalking their family, responds Greg, which...
	Yeah, why not?
	It's what you do to everyone else who has the slightest inconvenience in your life, so what would stop you as well, morally?
	If we go to the next one, we then have the fact that this is the news.
	Washington Post moves Taylor Renz to technology team.
	She's no longer a staffer there.
	Instead, she's on the tech team.
	It seems that that's been quite a downgrade.
	And it's because while she keeps making stuff up, as in just openly lying, I do hate it when they choose a photo that's like mid-talking like that and they use that as the cover.
	It's a bit scummy, but yeah, I get the point.
	The reason for this as well, it is a bit scummy, but it's purposely done so, I think.
	I don't know if the Daily Caller did it purposely done so, but this image from this interview gets put up a lot because she's in there crying about how she's, you know, 30s, totally not, you know, late 40s.
	And she's received so much abuse, and then she tried to get the clip taken down, because she looks like a moron, crying.
	Oh god, how can I be harassed?
	I was like, you're a professional harasser.
	What were you doing at Liberty TikTok's house?
	Oh, you don't know, it could be a Russian agent or something.
	Doesn't make any sense.
	Moron.
	Anyway, after a recent incident regarding an incorrect attributation, the Washington Post removed her from the feature staff team and has requested that the paper's senior managing editor, Cameron Barr, review all of her articles before publication, the New York Times reported.
	Don't you review all articles before publication anyway?
	You would have thought.
	I think they had people reviewing them, and there's been, well, obviously corruption.
	So then they've decided to get someone else who isn't just in her orbital circle of corruption, not just looking at it and going, that's fine, but actually checking that, did you do any work?
	Or did you just make it up?
	Like the lady from USA Today.
	And, well, made it up seems to be at least some of the things she's done.
	The Washington Post issued two correction on Lorenz's June 3rd article.
	Quote, Just made up.
	Just like, yeah, I contacted them and they didn't respond.
	I was like, you didn't.
	I mean, if we go to the next one, we can see the Umbrella guy as just one example.
	I just, I really, I don't know this chap, but I checked out his channel.
	Seems like an alright guy.
	And as you can see, he just mentions the fact that this is just an open lie.
	He noted this on Twitter at 8.31pm.
	And then at 9.44pm, he decides to get a, well, Lorenz decides to contact him directly after he noted it publicly.
	And if you click on that first one there, I remember this became a meme soon as she did it as well because she's become an international joke.
	Hi there, I'm a reporter with the Washington Post.
	Delete.
	Just don't read the rest.
	Who cares what this weirdo has to say?
	So, that would be the right thing to do.
	And he also notes in here, as you can see, she's like, oh, you made 80 grand last month from Social Blade reporting on your YouTube channel.
	She's like, nope, nope, just not true.
	But if you go back on this one, John, you see the fact that he says, the fact that, well, Social Blade says that he made between $5,000 and $79,000.
	If you scroll down on this one, Which, okay, that's SocialBlade reporting on the whole situation, but that's not how that works.
	I mean, SocialBlade isn't always representative of the whole thing.
	And he goes on to say that, well, they added to the highest estimate reporting for dramatic effects.
	I mean, he made 80 grand.
	No, even SocialBlade said he only made 79.
	They rounded up to the nearest 10 from the top estimate.
	Pretty scummy.
	Yeah, very, very simple scummy actions there, but then also just, we contacted you and you didn't respond.
	No, you didn't.
	Again, just made up stuff.
	I mean, it's nice to see reporters from leftist outlets just being found to have been making stuff up repeatedly.
	We covered the USA Today fact checkers getting fact checked.
	The fact that they made up like 20-odd articles out of thin air, but they weren't the only ones.
	If we go back to the article here from the Daily Caller, then we can read more here.
	Saying, Lawrence blamed her editor, whose sources identified to be David Millitz, for adding the incorrect information and had asked that it be removed after publication.
	Quote, Last Thursday, an incorrect line was added to the story of mine before publishing due to a miscommunication with the editor.
	I did not write the line and was not aware it was inserted.
	I asked for it to be removed as soon as the story went live.
	I am not a liar.
	I would not make stuff up like that I contacted people when I hadn't.
	Except that her own outlet said, well, that's not true.
	So the tweets were discussed and agreed upon between Lorentz and three other editors before posting them, the New York Times reported.
	It's just made up again.
	I mean, that's the thing.
	We all know these people are just open smear merchants, but it's nice to see the internals of how much of a smear merchant these people are, which is they will just add fake news to their own articles.
	And then when someone calls them out, like the umbrella guy, I was like, well, those bollocks.
	You never called me.
	You never tagged me.
	They just go back and say, no, no, no, no.
	This was someone else's mistake.
	No, it wasn't.
	And then you find out, no.
	You all just had your little room.
	Should we add this?
	Well, it makes the story sound better, so we'll just add it.
	Can't text him.
	Didn't respond.
	What a bellend.
	Not true.
	Again, just the smallest things they will make up because they can't be bothered to do any job whatsoever.
	The piece originally claims Depp's attorney said he, quote, slid into big influencers' DMs to provide evidence that his client was innocent, which was also just not there.
	Just made up.
	Previous version of the story also inaccurately attributed a quote to Adam Waldman, a lawyer for Johnny Depp.
	The editor's note said the quote described how he contacted some internet influencers and it has been removed.
	Because it's not there.
	It's not real.
	There you go.
	I mean, we've had two now in the space of like a week, which I'm quite pleased about.
	Just these smear merchants just getting caught up in their own lies, in the public at least, for everyone to see.
	I mean, you can't even quote right, apparently.
	But there's also the fact that Taylor Lorenz It's an unlikable C-word.
	I mean, just unbearably.
	I don't know how much you follow what she's been up to, but this is the thing.
	It's not really about her.
	It's about the fact that she's such a villain and she's so unlikable.
	And you can see this in a perfect example here, as Ian and Oda here.
	Just some random interaction.
	Who would care, right?
	But this guy says, FYI, all future typos are due to long COVID. Haha.
	Very basic joke on Twitter.com from some guy.
	Taylor very personally hurt by all that.
	She responds, I'm glad it's a joke for you, Matt, and you're lucky enough not to get access to great care.
	Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
	It's not funny.
	I was like, What?
	How does it matter with you?
	What kind of lunatic are you?
	Well, this is the kind of people who work at corporate media.
	I mean, these tobacco salesmen.
	Who are they?
	Literal mad people.
	And then someone responds going, Hi Taylor, can I joke about it?
	This is me with COVID. All the information about the fact that, you know, he had a bad time of it, to say the least.
	And she responds with, There's a big difference between joking about your own condition and others.
	I encourage you to learn about lateral ableism.
	What?
	This nice chap, who you can see has been through hell, and you're just like, yeah, whatever, ableist.
	That response.
	And then the response from the Midwest Gundam, just being, Dear God, I am a half-crippled, fat, balding, internet shitposter, and I'm still more likable than you.
	You and the internet for today, sir.
	I mean, 100% true.
	I mean, Gundad over there is a bold, fat internet shitposter, and he is unbelievably more likable than this, well, literal C-word, frankly.
	I mean, this is what I'm getting at.
	It's not really about Taylor Morant and the fact that she's, you know, an obvious liar and a piece of ass.
	I mean, that's all obviously true when she doxed a TikTok because her fifis were her.
	But the fact that she's the kind of person that's just an open villain, again.
	I mean, like Amber Heard.
	I mean, it's a weird intersect that her story blowing her up again was an Amber Heard story.
	But I do wonder, she hasn't actually made a public statement about Amber Heard, so I'm wondering if she's an Amber Heard stan.
	My fellow abusers, we all stan together.
	I abuse people by doxing them.
	You abuse people by beating them.
	We are like.
	Anyway, here you have it.
	She decides to take all of this, not in the obvious direction that every other sane person did, which is that unlikable C-word is being an unlikable C-word again.
	I mean, obvious villain is the worst person on the planet.
	No, she decided to go with, you know, someone says here, the way they jump on her for every little thing is so chilling.
	It's not chilling.
	It's obvious.
	The public figure is unlikable.
	I mean, just horrible.
	Therefore, that's the story.
	She goes, it's been two years straight on this merry-go-round every single time I post.
	I'm like, no.
	People aren't obsessed with you because they care about you.
	I mean, in the slightest.
	I mean, the only thing that makes Taylor Lawrence of any note in the public sphere is the Libs of TikTok story.
	The thing that blew up because Libs of TikTok had done nothing wrong and then had to flee her house because this, well, C-word, decided to dox her instead.
	I mean, people are obsessed with villains.
	Yeah.
	And this is why everyone was obsessed with the Amber Heard Johnny Depp trial.
	It wasn't because, you know, I care deeply about Johnny Depp's personal finances and his relationships.
	No, it's about the fact that someone...
	Oh, I thought you were a sucker for celebrity gossip, Callum.
	Unfortunately not.
	The fact is that Amber Heard could be so publicly an open liar, absolute villain in every single regard, still stand up with her after in court she's already lost, and just carry on.
	I mean, it is just a train wreck.
	I mean, when you watch a train slowly derail and the coal goes everywhere, you can't help but stare.
	Well, it sets itself off as a brilliant story, doesn't it?
	Because with that trial, I feel like the weight of evidence that was coming out, everyone knew what was going to happen.
	Like you said, like a train wreck.
	You're watching it, you're like, it's going to go off the end of that cliff, and you're just watching it hurtle towards it.
	Is it going to happen?
	Is it going to be now?
	Is it going to be now?
	Oh, there it goes.
	And it's just a beautiful cathartic experience to watch.
	Not the train, I'm just saying.
	Like, you know, innocent people.
	As long as someone dies on the train wreck.
	Watching journos destroy themselves is also a beautiful experience to watch.
	It's, you know, glorious.
	Let's just be like, why does everyone hate me?
	It's sort of that thing, like, one of the classic story tropes is if you have a boring conversation between two people, but then you introduce it by saying there's a bomb under the table that's fizzing, then it actually makes it really interesting to watch.
	And that's the same sort of thing happening with the Depp Heard trial.
	It's like, You know it's going to be explosive at the end and it just keeps you hooked.
	But there's also the aspect of it, I mean, less so with Hurd.
	It's for no reason either.
	Amber Hurd didn't have to accuse Johnny Depp of hitting her.
	She had a career.
	She had millions of dollars.
	Wasting it on rent, apparently, which I still can't get over, frankly.
	But, you know, nothing going wrong in her life.
	Let me ruin it.
	For no reason.
	I mean, that's the even more brilliant bit.
	Because it's not just someone who's been caught being a villain.
	It's the fact that they made themselves a villain for no goddamn reason.
	I mean, Ted Lorenz could have been a journo for the left-wing media outlets.
	I mean, your left-wings are a bit of a...
	Yeah.
	But okay, but she, you know, she would get along doing her thing, doing her job, her daily grind, writing those, you know, clickbait pieces.
	But instead, she decided, oh, how about I just be an unlikable C-word constantly?
	Hey, how dare you joke about these things?
	Aren't you an ableist?
	And if we go to the next one, the left-wing response, because that's the right-wing sphere, as she mentions.
	It's just the right-wing are just kind of looking at her as an individual of, well, left-wing corporate media and being horrible.
	Like, hey, get a load of this.
	Yeah.
	But if you look over the left wing, what's their response to all this?
	Conspiracy.
	Oh.
	Don't you know the writers are all working together trying to destroy innocent, wholesome Taylor Lorenz?
	So, you have an individual here who's like, in meta Facebook, the results show there is an effort to discredit Taylor Lorenz.
	There's not...
	The effort comes from Taylor herself.
	But Callum, left wing, has said it, so it must be true.
	Of course.
	How does he prove it?
	There are ads on Facebook.
	This is where it gets deep.
	Okay.
	That are from people like Ben Shapiro, Dan Borgino, or however you say his last name, and others who are putting up adverts saying, hey, look, dumb liberal.
	This is a campaign to try and destroy pure, innocent, wholesome Taylor, who has done nothing but expose the Russian bots that run libs of TikTok.
	I mean, I have an alternative theory.
	Which may be...
	Maybe they're just paying for, like, commercial advertising of their business and the content they happen to be producing is about Taylor Lawrence because she's big in the news at the moment.
	Yeah, but being a retard.
	I mean, if you click on this job, we can see some of the posts.
	I mean, they're all very stock standard.
	I mean, Ben Shapiro, I mean, I imagine he doesn't host his own, you know, write his own stuff, as you can see, because a lot of them are, like, one words.
	There's just been, like, you know, Dan Borgino in there being, libs fail again, you know, pointing emojis.
	That's a coordinated campaign by some very serious political organizers who are like, right, the right-wing is dead unless we get rid of Taylor, because what's Taylor doing?
	She's being retarded.
	So, gotta stop that.
	No, she's just retarded, and it's funny, if nothing else, to see someone ruin their own lives, their own reputation, and become an evil individual for no discernible reason other than, well, they're bored, and it's a Tuesday, I suppose.
	If we go to the next one here, we can see the fact that she's also been a member of the...
	Amber Heard fan club, as you can see there, which is, as the individual states here, I love that when Taylor Lorenz gets called out for her toxic BS, the standard accompanying photo is this ugly cry from the MSNBC interview that she demanded be scrubbed from the internet.
	I mean, it is beautiful.
	And that's why I wonder, I mean, I do wonder if, you know, all the abusers of the world do have a little, like, fan club, and they're just, you know, rainbows holding hands being like, boy, I love being a piece of S, frankly.
	Well, I think it's quite common that people who are abusers have a self-image of themselves being abused, which sort of justifies and negates the entire question of whether they are themselves acting evilly and it removes the entire need for introspection.
	I mean, you get that definitely with Amber Heard, you know, don't I know I'm the victim?
	What about my free speech to call a man an abuser and ruin his life?
	It's not free speech.
	And then you have Taylor over here crying because she's been harassed online and it's terrible.
	But anyway, do you want to know the names of all of my enemies and where they live?
	Right.
	Yeah.
	The psychopathic behavior, as you're saying, of the abusers is in common.
	Anyway, I thought it ends off.
	A completely unrelated note.
	But, it is a holy day.
	Is it?
	I don't know if you're aware.
	It's Juneteenth, of course.
	It's what now?
	It's some holiday in America.
	So, as you can see here, voila!
	Google celebrating Juneteenth for all our American black viewers, of course.
	In google.co.uk, the British version.
	I'll be you've Googled it.
	As you see, celebrate freedom.
	But that flag there, that American flag.
	No, it's the Pan-African colours.
	And, um, I never thought about this, but the more I thought about it, the more I think this is, the more retarded as it gets.
	Because if you go to the next one here, someone made the point.
	What the hell is this?
	Because Juneteenth is a celebration of the Emancipation Proclamation being pronounced in Texas, and then, you know, spreading over, you know, black Americans who descended slaves being freed.
	So what flag would you use for that?
	The American one?
	Maybe?
	I don't know.
	America enslaved us originally.
	Okay, you could see that argument, maybe.
	But that doesn't really make sense, because then, you know, fought the Civil War to end that.
	And the American flag was used by those fighting for freedom.
	So, no.
	But even then, maybe you'd use the British flag or just anything.
	But the Pan-African colours...
	I mean, as you can see here, so the American holiday that recognises the end of slavery and the end of the Civil War is represented by the Pan-African flag, where the slave trade was conducted, and not the American flag where it was ended, in the United States.
	So the point you're making there is that the slaves were enslaved in Africa.
	Yeah, by Africans.
	By Africans.
	Who then sold them to the Europeans, who took them, some of them, to America.
	And eventually in America they were emancipated.
	That's a very good point, actually.
	I'm pretty sure by the time that emancipation had been taking place in the United States, the Africans were still selling slaves as well.
	So they're still selling, I don't know what is it meant to be, your ancestral brothers, as Tariq Lashid might put it.
	But yeah, we're going to use their colours to celebrate the end of slavery, which I just wanted to mention because I didn't want to get this holy day to go by without mentioning, what the hell?
	Because the more I think about that, the more insane that is.
	That's true.
	Pan-African colours for God knows what reason.
	But if we go to the next one as well, we also just have someone mentioning that, you know, today is for not people of colour, but for black people, specifically descendants of slaves, not the black Africans.
	Well, which is it?
	Is it about the descendants of slaves or is it about black people?
	Because those are not the same thing.
	No, because then you have black slavers in Africa with their pan-African colours, and then there are the slaves in America who are flying their flag for some reason, presumably one that they don't know.
	But, I mean, don't feel too bad, anyone who doesn't know about Juneteenth's Holy Day and anything it stands for, apparently.
	The black American community certainly doesn't use that flag, because Joe Biden doesn't know either.
	If we go to the next one here, this is him talking about the flag, so I'm not going to play the clip, but he just goes in here and says that, yeah, we remember Juneteenth for the Tulsa Massacre, right?
	No.
	No, we don't.
	Even those who do, we don't.
	Okay, look.
	I can be excused for not knowing what this is, because I am not the president of the country where it's celebrated, okay?
	But Joe Biden, goodness me.
	Not an American.
	Not the president.
	Not the one who made this a national holiday.
	But the guy who did doesn't even know what it's for.
	But there we have it.
	I just saw a bit of a sidetrack, I know, from Taylor, but there we have, which is also just Juneteenth, which made me laugh at nothing else.
	But other than that, where goes the video comments?
	In fact, I don't know why I completely hate the city of Minneapolis, but not only is where all the riots happen, because, you know, St.
	George Floyd, you know, died from the gutters, but also I'm just going to contact the city of Minneapolis to redo some of the properties of this town, and houses make them, you know, the lawn make them look nice, right?
	Well, everything about it sucks, their land is awful, it's all clay, there are rocks everywhere for no good reason.
	Everything about it is awful, and everywhere else looks like it's garbage, and it's going to look like garbage again in the next five years.
	So, I hate Minneapolis.
	I don't really know what the point in that video was.
	He was saying why he hates Minneapolis, but I think we lost a lot of that in the sound.
	Couldn't make out any of that, so in future, if you send that kind of video, we're probably just going to not play it, because what's the point?
	I can't stand what you said.
	Sorry about that, but let's go to the next one.
	I saw that Callum was interested in the Waterworld Abomination, and if you wanted to see some excerpts of it, he can find them on the Pat Stares at Japan video part 1 on YouTube.
	Just check the final parts of it and you'll see a whole bunch of the key scenes.
	It's something to behold.
	And he is just so upset at watching what he's seeing.
	Alright, well, certainly will.
	Yeah.
	Sorry about that, though.
	The controls are here.
	Right, okay.
	They were left in that position.
	I see.
	Let's go to the next one.
	In my bedroom at the time, and I'm building a wardrobe.
	Well, chest of drawers, actually.
	I lied that bit.
	Chest of drawers.
	And I've got the Lotus Eaters podcast on.
	Yep.
	Right?
	I hope Az's Lotus Eater shout-out on the Friday Night Tights livestream a couple of weeks ago boosted your numbers.
	It would be interesting if Az could interview Tony D after reading Hollywoke, which delightfully captures an executive at a media company not too dissimilar from a certain Murine company struggling to save what he sees as his family legacy against a tide of clueless, incompetent, and selfishly motivated characters.
	I mean, maybe.
	I guess I'll have to check the numbers as well for seeing how that went.
	Excellent.
	Very thank you.
	Yeah, cheers for the shout out.
	Go to the next one.
	Hey, Lotus Eaters.
	It's me, the Canadian Sparky, again.
	So, my parents' chickens have been moved out to the chicken tractor.
	Or at least that's what we call this mobile pen that we move around fresh patches of grass with a dolly.
	That way the chickens can be given fresh grass and they don't turn their yard into a mud pit.
	And they also get to fertilize our lawn and that keeps it nice and green and luscious.
	That's very smart.
	I have chased quite a few chickens who have escaped from their fencing when I was younger.
	So I think that's definitely a good idea, the chicken pen, the mobile one.
	Is that ever worthwhile, actually getting your own little chicken pen in a house?
	Does it actually pay for itself, or is it more of a little project for fun?
	I mean, I haven't done the numbers on the economics, but having access to your own eggs all the time from your chickens is really cool.
	It's just great to have this constant little supply.
	And we used to sell them out the front of the house as well, the spares, so...
	Yeah, it's good.
	I've always wanted to do it, because it does just look like wholesome fun, even if it didn't make money, but...
	Yeah, I think that's mainly it.
	But it's also the fact...
	It's not just about fun and making money.
	It's about that you're getting...
	It's about getting good quality organic ingredients on your doorstop.
	That's the main thing.
	Straight there.
	didn't even say I'm going to get cscuba.com.au.
	Okay, that's my favourite meme.
	Yeah.
	You have heard it here first.
	That was really good.
	That's some really creative guerrilla advertising.
	I like it.
	Yeah.
	I love how he's just sitting on his empire of meme.
	Great job.
	Yeah, really like that guy in the Mechanicus suit there.
	It was really impressive.
	Although it was then weird to hear the Space Marine with his, you know, normal voice.
	Yeah, he needs some kind of synthesizer, doesn't he?
	Sound really deep.
	Gotta be deep, doesn't it?
	Yeah.
	I mean, then again, it would be funny if you actually went to 40k and all the Space Marines are just really high-pitched.
	It should go one way or the other.
	If he wants it really high, he could also use the synthesizer and turn it the other way.
	All the genetic modifications messed with me!
	Die, Xenos!
	That's Captain Sikarius, actually.
	He's actually a character.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Greetings to the Lotus Eaters.
	On this, my first visual and financial contribution to the works of the man whose progress I have followed and been influenced by since that fateful year 2016.
	I just bought a manor house.
	Bit of a fixer-upper.
	It certainly looks like it.
	You know, that house reminds me of, I've just finished reading a book, The Angels Game, by Carlos Ruiz Zafon, who's a Catalan-Gothic writer, Gothic magical realism writer, and it really reminded me of that, just the first few visuals of the way it was going around.
	I mean, I'm looking forward to him doing it up.
	I want to see the end of it, where it all looks nice and wonderful as well.
	I was watching some YouTube over the weekend.
	There's a channel who is just some kid.
	He must be like 20 or something.
	But he lives in Scotland and he brought this really crappy stone house.
	It didn't even have like plasterboard or anything.
	It was just stone and then nothing.
	So windy, drafty, complete wreck.
	You spend £170,000 doing it up, and then by the end of it, it's beautiful.
	It's cobblestone.
	Now it looks like a historic building that you'd want to preserve, but it's all livable.
	It's amazing what a man can achieve when government leaves him alone for five minutes and he can get on with things he actually enjoys, right?
	Yeah, actually improving the land on which we stand.
	Yes.
	It's the most...
	But the GDP, Callum, the GDP. But there's a real heartwarming thing about seeing something be restored that you don't get from something being built.
	Yeah.
	Well, I knew a state being put up is nowhere near as interesting as restoring an estate to some kind of glory that it never...
	Very good point, yeah.
	Maybe never even had, but...
	The next one.
	My wife has been nagging me for years to actually document some of the projects I work on.
	So Carl's comments about watching other people make things has finally inspired me to actually go get a camera and try and record myself doing some of these things.
	So I'll be sharing some of my projects I do in the future with you guys.
	If people like it, maybe I'll put the longer format version of these videos on a YouTube channel.
	Oh, you should.
	Yeah, that's really cool.
	I mean, put some, what's it called?
	Watermarks, though, because otherwise everyone on Facebook is going to steal it.
	Yeah, that's true.
	So that was like a pulley for a boat by the looks of it.
	Yeah, it just looks wonderful.
	Good idea, and thanks for sending them in.
	I really hate Pride Month.
	It's an entire month dedicated to celebrating how certain people like to have sex.
	And I think that that is completely inappropriate, especially when it comes to, like, work celebration.
	I don't need to know that.
	Nobody needs to know that.
	Also, based off of what Leo said on Friday about how kids tend to like rainbows, now I'm starting to ponder if maybe that has something to do with why the gay community decided to adopt rainbows as their symbol.
	Fair point.
	I mean, the only thing that came to mind then was, you know how the Chinese calendar has like, you know, year of the dog, year of the rabbit or whatever.
	And then the fact that you were saying about it celebrates how people like to have sex.
	I was wondering if you could have it.
	So, you know, every year there'll be a new type of position or something like that.
	This is doggy style year and then rabbit style year or whatever.
	That's all that was going through my head, honestly.
	Fair enough.
	Speaking of that, actually, so I was hanging out with a guy from the Masons once, actually, and he was like 90, and he was telling me about his adventures where he traveled throughout the British Empire back in the day, and it was glorious.
	And he mentioned, oh, there's subcultural differences you have to get over there.
	Terrible, terrible.
	Oh, what was it?
	I got to China.
	Met this lady.
	Rabbit style.
	Don't know why they call it that.
	But anyway, I was just like, what?
	Apparently they call it rabbit over there.
	At least they did when he was there, which...
	I don't know why I told you that story, but there we go.
	This is why you tune into the light seat as well.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Carry.
	Greetings.
	This is the Mechonator's animated waifu. This is the Mechonator's animated waifu.
	Honestly, this just scared me.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	To be honest, the mechs kind of look like a thing.
	This just scares the hell out of me because it comes off like a doll.
	Yeah, I see what you mean.
	I don't know.
	It's uncanny valley levels because of the eyes and the stuff instead.
	I don't know how to improve that, but otherwise...
	Good bone structure.
	That's how you float.
	laughter music
	I... what?
	I think map mode is a minor attracted person in that context, and it's pointing out that the first thing he does after standing over is gravitate towards a small child.
	Oh, right, right.
	I was struggling to follow that one.
	Alright, let's go to the next one.
	Tony D and Little Joe with another legend of the Pines, the Greenfield House in Haddonfield, New Jersey, Built in 1728 originally as a log cabin, it was replaced a few times before John Gill IV built this house, which is now the Haddonfield Historical Society.
	It is inhabited by two ghosts, including John Gill IV's wife and two young girls who died of the flu in the 1850s who help other little children when they are sick.
	But why not John Gilt IV himself?
	Why is his wife there and him not him?
	Presumably he's haunting somewhere else.
	He doesn't want to be with her.
	Get your own haunt.
	It says till death do we part, okay?
	And then we're parted and I'm off.
	That's the deal, okay?
	I love how he holds little Joan and little Joan just sits there.
	Yeah.
	Just not bothered whatsoever.
	The chat is amazed that apparently Joan has legs as well.
	Indeed she does.
	On the written comments on the site, so General Highping says, Thanks again to John and Josh for their chats through the blurred lines of the death of Stalin.
	Always interesting to hear different perspectives, hoping to one day hear a discussion about the old BBC series Monkey Dust, as it's quite a window into our modern-day dilemmas in some respects.
	Did the execution scene make it into that in the end or not?
	I don't know how it went.
	I don't think we put the...
	Oh yeah, no, we put the execution scene at the end, yeah.
	Ah, okay.
	Well, there we go.
	For people who didn't check out the end, go and check out all the way to the end.
	It was one of our more theatrical podcasts.
	It was great fun, actually.
	Shot two?
	Well, no, I shot Josh twice, so that doesn't...
	We benefited extensively from Callum's library of ex-Soviet props.
	I'll get more.
	Jimbo G says, was anyone else pleasantly surprised by the appearance of the racial pride flag on their Windows home screen, complete with links to helping me become a better ally?
	For too long, I have been using my computer and not being politicized.
	Thankfully, those days are over.
	Yeah, what do you want to do on that?
	I believe it's you right-click, and then go to properties or something, and then just turn off the news, and then you will never get that crap again.
	Because...
	Regardless about their racial pride thing popping up.
	I know everyone's had this.
	Also, just whatever news...
	I don't need that.
	The hell do I care?
	I'm using this for searching.
	It's my computer.
	On the turf, so Jimbo G says, Angry anarchist goes to women's rights gathering and gets visibly aroused.
	I'm reminded of how many male feminists turn out to be rapey creeps.
	Beware the male commie.
	Yeah.
	Do you know about the great rape of Europe?
	That's a real thing.
	Okay.
	When the Soviets moved back in, there's just records of the fact that Soviet men were apparently terribly disciplined and just did as they pleased to everyone and everyone, including every other ethnicity between Russia and Berlin.
	You know that?
	Generally speaking, in wartime, these...
	I don't want to say these things do happen.
	Obviously, it's a terrible crime, especially being sanctioned from above the higher-ups.
	But there are arguments that similar things happened on smaller scales with the Allied army moving through Germany.
	Oh, of course.
	But if they found out, they'd kill you.
	And rightfully so.
	I mean, it did happen in small scale.
	But it's the fact that the entire structure was like, well, the Germans go do as you want.
	Who cares?
	But this is the thing, actually.
	In the World Wars...
	God, this is a whole academic topic, but basically, like, making sure that soldiers have access to sex is actually quite important, because you have these organizations which can consist of, like, hundreds of thousands of just, like, military-age men, and virtually no women.
	And basically, the way that that was usually done was by setting up official licensed military brothels.
	I thought that's what Shore Leave is for, but...
	Well, no, actually, I remember General Slim was talking about this extensively in Defeat into Victory, which is his memoirs of fighting the Burma campaign against the Japanese.
	And he pointed out that one of the main things he did to get the army ship shape was to set up these licensed brothels where the prostitutes were examined regularly by doctors to prevent essentially venereal disease spreading through the army, which reached alarming and, in fact, epidemic proportions, allegedly among the Americans at one point.
	So that's kind of funny.
	But then, of course, the Japanese solution to this was the comfort women thing.
	Yeah.
	Right.
	And the Soviet solution to this was the great rape of Europe.
	I don't think it was a solution to that.
	I think it was more a, you know, who cares in the Soviet case, at least from what I've read.
	But with the comfort women basically rape victims.
	Yeah.
	Oh, completely.
	The Japanese government set up.
	Yeah.
	There's a whole kettle of fish.
	Although I always thought they would just, you know, bring in women from the homeland who were just, you know, promiscuous or something.
	But then again, that's what the brothels are for, I suppose.
	Now, I'll point out that this conversation emerged out of two separate comments, one about the death of Stalin and the other about rapey commies.
	But I remember, I can't remember, I think it was Midway Island where they brought in loads of nurses and the pilots who were meant to be going over were not meant to stop.
	They kept Crash landing.
	Around Midway.
	Oh, you'd have to spend a month with the nurses, or 80 of them that were out there, just women.
	Oh, terrible, terrible shame.
	Kept happening.
	And then eventually, anyone who crashed basically just got imprisoned.
	Because I was just like, you need to stop.
	Can't have every plane that flies over the Pacific landing here for, you know, repairs.
	So Baron Von Warhawk says, OMG, Trump is a dictator.
	We need to get rid of him.
	Anyway, let's chant the names of the worst dictators in history to show we are commies and would support a one-party state if ever popped up.
	Yeah, that'll help the movement.
	So the leftist.
	Good point.
	Every time.
	Kevin Fox from, I believe in Thailand, aren't you?
	Says, great to see many NIMBYs in the left who spend all their time calling the right NIMBYs.
	Yeah, take a refugee, they never will.
	I wonder what the...
	So here's the question, I mean, him being in Thailand, I mean, it's just a small, compared to what I'm asking, but...
	I do wonder what's the rhetoric in, let's say, third world countries around refugees welcome.
	Because it does seem, of course, that the flow is in one direction to Europe and North America.
	I mean, do those conversations ever even come up?
	I mean, if you're not just, you know, Turkey bordering Syria.
	Well, I imagine they think it's just lunatic Western decadence.
	Yeah, no, I will not be called NIMBY in my own backyard.
	Thank you very much.
	Lord Nerevar says Ho Chi Minh, Che Guevara, Stalin say the upper middle class white kids who support gay rights and would have been killed in a heartbeat by all three of those men.
	It's beyond parody at this point.
	Longshanks 1690 says it's really hard to disagree with the feminist contention that the trans rights activist movement is just a way for men to be violent towards women without being publicly criticized for it when the video evidence seems to keep proving that accusation correct.
	Yes, it also seems to be a kink.
	Risto Ratteran says if they were proud of what they were doing, then Antifa wouldn't be wearing the masks.
	Good observation.
	I can't get over the uniform thing at that march, though.
	For people who don't know, Oswald Mosley and the Blackshirts did uniform marches, and the government, instead of debating them or anything, just banned uniforms to try and destroy any fascist movement.
	And the communists continue to do theirs, and the police just do nothing about it.
	I mean, I kind of want to do a parody leftist march, or something like that, just with uniforms, just to see if they'll stop us.
	How far can you take it?
	Yeah.
	Hello World says, if Antifa are blockading the pub, is that technically kidnapping?
	As far as I'm aware, if you block a person from leaving, you're essentially aiding in kidnapping.
	I'd be surprised.
	I'd be surprised about that one.
	I think it's more on a personal level than a premises.
	Risto Rattaran says, I finally found all those misogynists that the lefts keep yelling about.
	Yeah, I feel like in the first case, that would only be kidnap if you were literally blocking someone from leaving who was being kidnapped in that building.
	Presumably.
	Yeah.
	I mean, that's why I'm saying it's probably on a personal premises.
	FreeWill2112 says, the anarchists seem very authoritarian and patriarchal, telling women to go home.
	Very based.
	BasedApe says, can we just start calling Antifa the Blackshirts and get that to catch on?
	I mean, I've been saying it for a year, at least.
	There's no reason not to, so...
	Longshank says, That is a Woman and Terror on the Prairie are some of the most...
	What is a Woman?
	Sorry, What is a Woman and Terror on the Prairie are some of the most streamed movies in the United States, despite not one mainstream review, even to crap on it.
	Very good point.
	I mean, it's been very successful.
	I mean, it is kind of nice to see that...
	Well, any power they did have is really just...
	It's in the government sphere.
	It's not in the private conversations anymore.
	Not in the slightest.
	And Freewell says, from the horse's mouth, these fascist bullies of Antifa tell us that they want what they want to happen.
	They want women to cease to exist, and by extension, men creating a new human race consisting of sexless drones worshipping at the Temple of Woke.
	On that note, on the schools, we have Dan Arthur commenting, I know this is an obvious point, but besides signing petitions, the best way you as an individual can help shoot down the schools bill is to email your MP about it, expressing as eloquently and forcefully as you can why they should vote against it.
	And yeah, that's a very good point.
	You can email your MP, it has to be your MP, but you will often get a response, as I've had on many an occasion.
	And, yeah, it is a good way to just make them aware of it.
	It's a salience factor.
	If the same topic keeps coming up again and again and again, it does get through to them.
	It's not futile.
	Maureen says, Naturally, I can understand why certain educational standards must be met.
	I'm sure some people are more knowledgeable about it than others.
	standardized education is easy to follow even by poor teachers and safe there's not much that can go wrong but to force this on all children is absurd there are clever children who do not fit the cookie cutter mold and will disengage from learning due to boredom and those who already know they want to work with their hands to make them undermine their own confidence just because they cannot pass e.g. literature is redundant and undermining the parents in this way is nauseating yeah absolutely And...
	Yeah, I do feel that there is a lot of sort of damage that we don't realize that schools are doing along these lines.
	So, for example, in America, the ridiculously large proportion of American boys on Ritalin or other ADHD medication because their view does not being able to behave in school.
	I did an interview with Warren Farrell where we touched on this issue briefly.
	And one of the arguments is, of course, fatherlessness.
	There isn't the discipline in the home that's required to make the boys behave and succeed and so on.
	But then there's also the fact that, yeah, but you want a load of boys to literally sit down in class and do nothing but what teacher tells them to for, like, all day for 10 years.
	Don't you think you're asking a bit much, is it any surprise that you're getting these bad behaviours coming out of that?
	Even if they were engaged in the learning process, I think that physically there's something deeply wrong about that.
	This probably brings...
	Because the difference is between the men and the girls, right?
	The fact that the boys are being treated like girls.
	I mean, it does make me think more and more that the boy-girl school separation probably is the right thing to do.
	There's just two different beasts, essentially.
	Well, sometimes yes and sometimes no, but I certainly think that everyone needs to have good role models of both sexes as growing up.
	And sometimes, I don't know, I feel like if anything we artificially dichotomize and cut up, cohortize, categorize children as they're growing up, even just by having everyone of the same age together within an arbitrary bracket of a year.
	I think actually natural social groups will form much better if you have more of a mix, not less.
	If you have Interaction with people on the same ability level rather than just the same age level.
	So, yeah, I don't know.
	I mean, it's what you get in private life.
	Especially, I've found, just going around making friends in politics, you end up making huge age gaps.
	Oh, yeah, yeah.
	It just doesn't matter, because you're on the same wavelength.
	Yeah, it's a great level.
	I know it's a very good point.
	Longshanks says, I can't believe I thought I'd ever miss Theresa May, but she did at least pay lip service to the importance of grammar schools and school choice, the only genuine way for poor children to uplift themselves.
	From what I'm reading, that is the extent of her attachment to grammar schools, i.e.
	lip service and no more, but I may be wrong.
	The fact that Alexander is allowing this to happen is nothing short of treachery, as if he needed any more reasons to be received as such and push conservative voters away from his party.
	Yeah, Alexander DePython Johnson, of course.
	UltraXYNZ says, at this point you should be making very good friends with religious communities to stir them up to help each other fight this.
	Yeah, one argument that I've heard is that these rules are being brought in this crackdown because it's anti-terrorism, because there are, say, Islamic communities which essentially home-educate their children in like a madrasa and then they don't actually learn any of the skills they need to succeed in life.
	But I really hate that argument because, one, it sort of implies that, oh yes, the entire population should just revert to East Germany because we have Muslims and they need to be guarded by the police.
	In the name of equality, the whole nation needs to be treated like the worst element.
	Right.
	You know, that's how you get a nightmare society.
	And so I really push back against that argument.
	I think it's a horrible argument.
	And then the other thing I find with that is that even if that is the case, I can guarantee you that even once they bring these regulations in, the only people it will be enforced on, generally speaking, are the ones who are quite docile when it comes to dealing with the police.
	So it's quite likely that you'll see a two-tier system emerging because the enforcement authorities simply find it too much of a headache to deal with minorities anyway.
	One of the aspects that, I mean, you've seen, I'm sure, the undercover, I mean, dispatches did it a million times.
	You just go into madrasas with a hidden camera, it's horrific, very Islamic.
	And this is illegal.
	And then this gets reported, and what do the police do?
	Well, nothing.
	So the idea that you give them more power, suddenly they'll do something about that specific problem.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Got the power now, then I'll do it.
	Journal-Lord says the schools bill is persuading me to leave the country so that my children, when I eventually have them, can actually be educated in a school, not a propaganda complex.
	Between this and Ofsted's marking down of a primary school for not teaching about gender identity, this is persuading me that if things don't change, there is no future for Britain.
	I've not heard of that story, but that sounds ridiculous.
	Yeah, I mean, there are some countries, like in Japan and Germany, homeschooling is just flat out banned.
	But then Japan and Germany have form when it comes to authoritarian societies.
	I'm just saying, they were the Axis powers.
	Justin B says, I'm someone who really wants kids and daily I'm feeling more that the school system is getting more toxic.
	Each line you read out made me feel more that it may be time to leave the UK before I have a child.
	And there's a lot of comments on this, and I will read them all, but unfortunately we don't have time to go through them all on the show, so we'll go through to the Taylor Lawrence section.
	Baron von Warhawk says, if you have to assign a particular person to review everything Taylor Lorenz writes, just to ensure she isn't harassing or lying about someone, it may be easier just to fire her.
	But what if she starts harassing and lying about you?
	I mean...
	The eternal abuser dilemma.
	She's got nothing else to do, so...
	I mean, that's really the rhetoric of it's better to have him in the tent pissing out, isn't it?
	Keep your enemies close.
	Yeah.
	Paul Newbar says Taylor Lorenz and Amber Heard seem to be cut from the same cloth.
	That's the point I was edging at, which it certainly seems so.
	She hasn't issued a statement publicly about if she stands with Amber all depth, though.
	I'm edging that she's probably with Amber.
	Lord Nerevar says Taylor Lorenz is an obvious grifter who physically needs this much attention to prop up her dying career.
	I'm not saying you guys should stop covering her, just pointing out that it probably helps her in the long run.
	I don't know.
	She doesn't seem that happy to be called out constantly, and I don't think the narcissist ever is happy to be called out as a liar.
	Well, it's the other thing that it's not really about Taylor herself, is it?
	It's about the fact that Taylor represents the archetype of the leftist smear merchant on Twitter, and we all know that type.
	We've run into them all these times, and she's just a really good exemplar for what they're like.
	I mean, just absolutely awful, but then still employed.
	I mean, as you say, I may turn around and harass them.
	And you start to ask, okay, how bad do you have to be to keep that job, to keep those social credits?
	Yeah, well, at CNN apparently you can still be...
	No, I won't make that, because I don't know if that's going to court yet.
	Oh, yeah.
	Longshag1690 says, Taylor is a deeply narcissistic person who is desperate for attention.
	I don't know whether or not she has daddy issues or ex-issues, or even empty carton issues.
	Probably all three.
	But I do not know...
	But I know it's not behaviour that comes out of a healthy, normal person.
	Kevin Fox says, all hail the right-leaning S posters.
	I love doing it.
	There's a group on Facebook which seems to be a mouthpiece for the left ideological intersectionists, and I just love going there when I'm feeling down.
	I'm just posting simple questions, and I know they can't answer without blowing themselves into bits.
	Oh, you're a wicked man, Kevin.
	That'd be fun.
	I love the idea that they could report Kevin and be like, I'll report you to the police for hate speech.
	She's like, good luck.
	I didn't insult the king.
	That's the question.
	Jimbo G says, seriously, this cry bully meets social media addicted journalist.
	Ark is beautiful.
	Long may the circular firing squad continue.
	Alexander Dake says, don't feel bad, John.
	No one in America knew what Juneteenth was up until a few years ago where it suddenly became a national holiday to own Trump.
	And Lee B says, May Day and Juneteenth mark the start of the Summer of Peaceful Protests.
	We'll see.
	And then to end this off, we have one from Elho World again.
	My friend has a chicken farm in his backyard and has told me that the chicken poo is possibly the worst smelling thing ever.
	Much worse than dog farts.
	Fake news.
	So, I don't know how true that is.
	I mean, I've mucked out chickens sheds before and it's bad, but it's not grim.
	It's not that grim.
	There's a question.
	I mean, how big does the chicken shed need to be for a number of chickens before you don't have to muck it out?
	I mean, if you give them a whole field, I can't imagine they'll ruin the whole field, surely.
	Yeah, but you prefer to keep chickens in density because they like to huddle up in the night time.
	They'll go into the shed where they're not going to be attacked by foxes.
	They like to group together for security.
	So they don't actually want, like, a penthouse shed.
	Even if you gave them the huge field, what they would probably do...
	They'd probably have to leave their hutch every few years.
	Yeah, they'd probably go around in a bit of a gaggle rather than just going off on their own to the four corners of the earth.
	Yes, I kind of want to run that as an experiment.
	Anyway, without further ado, though, we're out of time.
	So if you want more from us, loadyshears.com.
	Otherwise, we'll be back tomorrow at 1 o'clock.
	Thank you and goodbye.

▲