Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

June 21, 2022 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:31:09

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #419

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Eaters for the 21st of June 2022.
	I'm joined by Harry.
	Hello.
	And today we're going to be talking about Martin Dubly.
	I'm going to ruin your name, mate, every time.
	Dubly-boobly?
	Dubly-boobly.
	He calls a spade a spade.
	The Libertarian Party takeover and is America okay, frankly?
	No.
	I thought we'd just check it and be like, you doing okay, buddy?
	You winning, son?
	And he's just like, my pronouns are off of fuck.
	Anyway, let's get into Dubly-boobly.
	So...
	There's been a bit of a scandal in the UK that has now come back up, of course, the grooming scandal that never ends, because, of course, you can't get off Mr.
	Bones' wild ride when living here.
	And, well, a new report has come out showing that some horrible stuff has been taking place, and I thought we'd go through it.
	But the most interesting thing being the public debate around it, and as we'll see later on, please do stay tuned for it, we'll see Martin...
	Is this a rare time where I'm going to have a relative white pill segment and you've got the black pill segment on about noncing?
	I don't know about that.
	We'll see how it goes.
	Anyway, but he debates some leftists on GB News and I thought we'd take a look at it because it's amazing.
	But firstly, of course, just to mention, on the website we have some new content, this being the Hangout, the conversion, sorry, the conversion with Google's conversation with Google's sentient AI being at 3.30 today, so go and check that out if this is live on YouTube.
	It should be Around by that time, go and check it out after the video as well, of course.
	So, I... No.
	Do you know what this is about?
	I know, John, that's why I said if you're on YouTube, it should be live on our website.
	Anyway...
	Anyway, if you're watching this segment by the time it's on YouTube, you might still have a chance to tune in.
	That was my point.
	Anyway, let's go to the next link here, because we can see the fact that, of course, the old meme from Naz Shah, being that the victim should shut up for the sake of diversity, being a thing that I'm never going to let go, frankly, because she's still an MP, somehow.
	It is hilarious.
	As you can see, David noting down here that, well, her being just a rock's throw from Oldham as well is not.
	A million miles away.
	It came from an Owen Jones parody account, and her excuse was my finger slipped, if I remember correctly.
	Yeah, and this has, of course, been a bit of a joke for a long time, but it turns out that this is more of a serious position than we originally thought.
	Because if we go to the next link here, we can see the report I was talking about.
	So, Rochdale grooming gang boss, known as Daddy, worked as welfare officer at Oldham Council.
	Damning report reveals how police failed to flag his arrest to his employers, leaving other children exposed to tragic abuse.
	Imagine my shock.
	I mean, didn't even bother to tell his employers it.
	By the way, guy nonce.
	So, there you have it.
	The notorious ringleader of a grooming gang portrayed in the BBC's Three Girls series was employed as a welfare rights officer by Oldham Council, a major report has revealed.
	And just going to do it as a side note real quick.
	About Three Goals.
	You ever watched Three Goals?
	Documentary series?
	No, I have not.
	Very good.
	I'd recommend it, but it's a bit hard to get these days.
	I'll be honest.
	I have BBC deplatformed it.
	Off their own platform.
	Because if you go to the next one here, you can see this is just a screenshot.
	You can see two images of the actor playing the individual here.
	I presume it's the same guy, because he's the main character from what I saw.
	And there you have it.
	So what we're talking about is the real-life guy he was portraying is, or the actual actor?
	The guy he's portraying, obviously.
	It's a documentary about what happened in Oldham.
	And they've got some retellings of what happened as well, I assume.
	But this is a series that went up, and if you go to the next one here, we have the fact that this actually is what inspired the Finsbury Park mosque attack.
	Oh, really?
	So, as you can see here, this is the BBC themselves saying what led Darren Osborne to kill.
	"Osborne began to exhibit other known warning signs.
	He developed an irrational grievance and a sense of injustice that drove him to take matters into his own hands." The BBC, right.
	"It appears to have begun when Osborne became fixated on Three Girls, a three-part BBC drama about the Rochtel scandal in which most of the victims were white and most of the perpetrators were Pakistani heritage men.
	His partner told police how he had become obsessed with the drama, which aired a month before the attack.
	Commander Dean Hayden, the head of counterterrorism at the Metropolitan Police, says that this drama was the Catholicist.
	There you have it.
	So the guy who drove his van into a group of Muslims at a mosque, not related obviously to what had taken place, he was motivated by the BBC's own documentary, or at least docudrama, about what had happened.
	Interesting.
	I also just find it amazing.
	So you can't blame this on Tucker Carlson, for instance.
	No, you can't blame the bad man.
	Robin Tomlinson.
	Or it can't be him.
	They don't actually mention him in here, and you may remember people maybe, you know, not informed that he was blamed for this at the time.
	They even mention it in here, that some newspaper articles are just like, well, it's his fault.
	The messages with him.
	I swear.
	Not true.
	Wait, they tried to blame it on the bad man.
	Yeah, they tried to say that he had messages with each other and it just wasn't true.
	Completely made up.
	It was the BBC that radicalised him.
	But then, of course, it's the BBC's showing of reality in Britain.
	You mean to tell me the BBC... Well, you mean to tell me the newspapers lied about something?
	Yeah.
	So the censorship around this issue of religious and religious sexual abuse created a boiling pot in which this guy then did what he did.
	They also don't mention in here the three months leading up to the attack in case foreigners might not remember this period which of course in the three months leading up you had the Westminster attack and if you go to the next one you also have the Manchester Arena bombing, which again, a bunch of kids getting killed by an Islamist.
	If you go to the next one here, we then have the London Bridge attack, which took place just a short while before as well.
	BBC failed to mention any of that context as to why he did what he did.
	But the reason I'm mentioning all that is to tie back into the fact that this is so relevant to the news that has come out.
	That there are such extreme responses to the revelations that the police were unbelievably awful.
	The fact that they just didn't deal with the situation.
	And the example here being, of course, also the fact that, as I mentioned, you can't find Three Girls on the BBC iPlayer anymore.
	Not available, so you're probably going to have to take to the Seven Seas, I'd imagine, to find a copy of it.
	Amazingly, it's behind a paywall on YouTube, which doesn't make sense, because it's a BBC property, so it should be available on iPlayer for free.
	Maybe they licensed it out so that they could have, I don't know, it attributed to other people or something.
	Yeah.
	I don't know.
	Or as you say, Dailymotion is the place for me.
	This is where you're going to find that one.
	In case you want to go give it a watch, I would recommend.
	Otherwise, we should go to the next one because we'll go back to the article itself.
	They say in here, Shabir Ahmed, who led the sexual abuse ring in Rochdale, was nicknamed Daddy.
	He was sentenced to the Oldham, he was seconded to the Oldham Pakistani Community Centre during his time at a local authority, meaning that he's a pillar of the Pakistani community locally.
	He was put in with the community centre to work with them.
	Ahmed, identified only as Offender A in the report, is now serving a 22-year jail sentence.
	He was a sex predator and a former taxi driver, and described as the ringleader of a nine-strong group found guilty of exploiting girls as young as 13 at Tasty Bites, and another takeaway in Henwood from 2007.
	Heywood.
	Heywood, sorry.
	Despite multiple concerns being raised about him and his arrest for the sexual assault of children, police failed to tell his employers.
	The report added that if they had told the council, quote, it may have potentially avoided the tragic abuse of other children.
	The report looked into the alleged grooming of children in council homes, shisha bars, and by taxi drivers in the town, and concluded there was no evidence of a cover-up or widespread child sex abuse in those settings.
	I was going on directly under our nose.
	We didn't do anything about it.
	No cover-up.
	No.
	They mention it happened in all of these settings, but not a widespread situation.
	Not a cover-up, they swear.
	Although, you have to wonder.
	Chisha Bosh.
	You go to shisha bars much?
	No, not personally.
	It's not a beautiful British pastime, going out and getting some shisha?
	I could go back over some of Shakespeare's plays, but I don't remember any mention from the 1500s or anything.
	It's almost as if it comes from a certain group and not the locals.
	I also find it interesting how they always use incidents like, I've already forgotten his name, the guy who ran over some Muslims at a mosque.
	Yeah, Osborne.
	They use those sorts of things as an excuse to continue to not look into these sorts of incidents when they do happen.
	It's like, well, we don't want to inspire more.
	So you ignore it.
	This creates tension within the communities.
	Then some nutter goes off and hurts innocent people.
	And then they use that as an excuse to continue to ignore the problem.
	I mean, it's an amazing logic, isn't it?
	Because they don't see the covering up of crime as the source of those kind of events.
	It is instead the revealing of the cover-up that is the problem.
	No, just do your job instead.
	Actually, arrest the guy instead of pissing him out.
	If we go to the next one here, we can see there's another link here saying Oldham council leader apologizes for failing to protect children from sexual exploitation and grooming gangs after a report exposes how one 12-year-old victim was sent away by the police, only to be reportedly raped by five men.
	Great.
	How's an apology?
	How does an apology help?
	Oh, I'm really...
	I'm so sorry.
	It's like South Park with BP. Oh, we're sorry.
	I'm so sorry.
	Eh, not good enough, really.
	I'm not moved by that.
	The authorities did fail some children, they say in here, notably citing the case of one girl identified only as Sophie, who was abused at age 12 after significant opportunities were missed to protect her.
	She went to Oldham Police Station to report being raped by an Asian man in October 2006.
	What do you think they would do?
	Well, in a reasonable world, what they would do is take this information down, get this girl into protective custody, for instance, and then start knocking on doors.
	They told her to come back when she was not drunk.
	So then, she was picked up by a man in a car, who then raped her in the vehicle, and then took her back to her house, and she was raped multiple times by five different men.
	Just awful.
	I mean, it's so simple.
	You think it would be the simplest policing work in the world.
	A lady comes to you and says she's been raped.
	You're like, oh my god, I have to take care of you.
	Instead, they're just, nah, sod off love.
	Or he's getting in this car with this lad.
	I'm sure he'll be fine.
	And this is before the confusion over whether she would have been a woman or not.
	Yeah.
	In the modern era.
	So, there's also, obviously, because this is Britain and we live in a normal country, so the people who write about horrific crimes have to, for some reason, pledge allegiance that they're not members of the far right, so you have to report themselves saying here, despite legitimate concerns of the police and the council in Oldham of the far right...
	Capitalising on the issue of grooming by predominantly Pakistani men, the authorities in the town, which suffered race riots in 2001, did not shy away from tackling the issue, the report said.
	I'm sure they didn't.
	It's so ridiculous you have to go, you know, I care about women being raped.
	Oh, I'm not a white nationalist, I'm not a white supremacist or anything, but I do care about women being raped and think it's a bad thing.
	Do you not think it's really bad optically to try and associate being morally appalled by rape to being a far-right attribute?
	If you care about rape, well, the only people who care about rape, according to that report's writer, surely, are the white nationalists.
	And that's how they think about the world.
	Why are you advertising the white nationalists in such a way?
	Weirdest statement, but there we go.
	I just keep that in mind as we go forward.
	There was no evidence of any such concerns that race or religious aspects had anything to do with this.
	Weird statement.
	A lot of the blue.
	Just having to mention it.
	Why?
	If we go to the next one, we have the Manchester News, more local people here, noting that now there is reasons to believe that that is what took place.
	They say here just some things that are even worse, or at least, you know, it gets worse in regards to that 12-year-old and everyone else.
	Girls being drugged and violently raped were said by social workers to be putting themselves at risk.
	Fantastic.
	Again, council doing amazing work by being like, eh, well, they deserve it.
	I thought you don't blame the victim.
	Shut up for the sake of diversity.
	Seems to be, again, coming true.
	Alden Council gave taxi driver licences to men convicted of sexual or serious sexual offences involving women and children.
	Good.
	Fantastic.
	I can't see anything going wrong with that.
	I mean, just every single time, it is the worst possible outcome seems to come out of every one of these reports.
	But in the cover-up section of this particular article is the most revealing part.
	You may remember, I just said, in the Daily Mail, the report writers were like, well, we don't want to help the far right.
	Okay?
	So that's why we investigated the race.
	There was nothing to do with race or religion.
	Any of this in the cover-up.
	I was like, yeah, right.
	That's not what they always say in their own report, though, once you actually scroll down.
	They quote here saying, Right,
	okay, so there was ideological blindness.
	You've just said there is.
	In your own report.
	You wouldn't have to keep addressing this if there wasn't obviously a problem going on.
	And the fact that they keep having to deny it means that there are probably members of these communities who have recognised this, because everyone can recognise this, and they're just trying to gaslight them into telling them, just don't believe what you can obviously see with your own two eyes.
	But, like, they've just said it.
	I mean, they literally just said Greater Manchester Police, Oldham officers, and Labour politicians had a religious bigotry that Pakistanis could not be engaged in this to the extent they were.
	And it must be a myth of the far right.
	Because they didn't want to look into the shisha bars as a source of this.
	Well, okay, then you just admitted that surely you are ideologically blind to that.
	You didn't want to look into areas associated with Islamic culture.
	As far as I'm concerned, by covering up this sort of stuff, these people are complicit in all of this stuff.
	These people should be charged as well.
	I mean, it's the fact that their opinion, as they say, is based on racial bigotry, that Islam is a brownsman religion as well, which is not.
	An aracial religion, funnily enough.
	However, that's not how the abusers see it, of course.
	Which is something to keep in mind.
	If we go to the next one, this is the facts of the case.
	And that's, you know, one thing.
	That's the news in, you know, the sending of, well, another horrible thing that continues to go on in the UK. However, the public debate about this is probably the most amazing aspect.
	And I saw it this morning in this clip here from GB News, which they had Martin...
	Sorry, mate.
	I just can't do it.
	I will say it.
	Martin Daubney.
	Daubney.
	And him debating some woman.
	And Dobny makes fair points, which is just that, you know, this bad.
	And she takes rather exception to that, because it's not very PC. Oh dear.
	He was, for 18 years, a council safeguarding officer, the precise person who should have been taking care...
	of children went on to rape 30 children.
	It's an absolute heartbreaking tale echoed in previous reports in Rotherham, Oxford and Rochdale and it once again shows a Labour authority too afraid to investigate for claims of being racist because these are ostensibly Pakistani men preying on white working-class girls.
	That's a fact.
	That's not racist, that's just the truth.
	And they're so scared of the blame culture that comes out of that, they would rather turn a blind eye and seriously, seriously fail these communities.
	And in many ways, this is representative, I think, of how liberal politics has completely failed the working classes.
	They just can't say the truth for being called racist.
	I'm going to Rotherham at the weekend.
	It's an area where the Reclaim Party are very well liked.
	And this sort of scandal has to be dealt with because it's still going on.
	This isn't historic.
	It still goes on.
	The problems persist.
	And it's an absolute betrayal of Britain.
	The area where I start to really struggle with you, Martin, is that I think the focus on race here is a complete distraction from what we see as a general abuse of power.
	The perpetrators are Pakistani men and the victims are white working class.
	In this instance...
	...is the reason why these reports are needed, because everyone's too afraid to speak the truth.
	That's the point.
	I think the point here is that wherever you have people in positions of power, they are all too often able to exploit the vulnerable.
	That's what we've seen here, and victims are not believed.
	It doesn't matter whether the perpetrator is black, white, whatever.
	It's just power imbalance, bro.
	Just don't worry about it.
	It's just people in power do that.
	Yeah, there is some truth to that, but we're talking about some very specific...
	Do you think if he had just said, it's men raping women, and left all the rest out of it, do you think she would go like, in this instance, we need to stop talking about how it's men raping women...
	No.
	But you need to stop putting the blame on men, you know?
	Obviously ridiculous.
	Like, we're talking about race-based child sexual exploitation.
	Well, race has nothing to do with that.
	I mean, we've seen...
	It's race-based.
	How can race not have anything to do with it?
	We've seen the text messages that these sorts of people send to one another where they're talking about how I want a white so-and-so, you know, nasty words, shall we say.
	They specifically prey on these people because they don't like them for their race.
	Yeah.
	It's awful.
	I mean, the endless statements from the victim saying this, endless statements from the perpetrators saying that's why they did it.
	Endless statements when they get caught guilty, just shouting Allahu Akbar, in some examples.
	There was some Kurds who did that, kind of which city that is, because there's so goddamn many, isn't there?
	But then just the head-banging moment of her being like, it's not very politically correct, Martin.
	Like...
	No S! Who cares?
	That's the point, you Muppet!
	Honestly, who cares?
	But, like, the political correctness was the reason that these kinds of scandals take place, and it's the reason that all kinds of scandals essentially end up taking place, cover-ups, or, you know, not slugging into a matter or not doing your job.
	And he's like, okay, well, we need to smash through the political correctness.
	She's like...
	I don't know if I want to stop the practice, though.
	If we give up the political correctness, you know, this might end.
	How will I virtue signal if I'm not allowed to be politically correct?
	Or if people just laugh at me for trying to be politically correct?
	Let's stop trying to be politically correct and just start trying to be correct again.
	Actually.
	Yes.
	Instead.
	Although this is the clip that GB News uploaded to their Twitter page that I saw, and people might not have seen the full thing, but the next bit that she said is somehow even more extreme, and of course gets into talking about the whites.
	Because, of course, It's not racial until she needs it to be.
	Let's play.
	Where else is it going on at that scale in the country?
	I mean, I apologise because examples are too prevalent, right?
	We saw it with the BBC, we've seen it with the church, we've seen it through the Met Police.
	All of those are far predominantly white institutions.
	If only the abuse of women was something that was limited to one racial group, that is absolutely not what we see.
	What we see is that people in positions of Power are able to exploit the vulnerable and that is what needs to be addressed.
	I also think there's a massive need to hugely increase investment in social care services because far too many people are left vulnerable and exposed.
	Let's move on to something a little bit less controversial, the benefits of Brexit.
	I mean, then they just move on.
	But just, what a weird intersectional argument.
	Like, the police, the church, and so forth are white institutions.
	Therefore, just as bad as any other kind of race-based CSE, except what race-based CSE was taking place by the church?
	Well, I mean, if she wants...
	God, if I know...
	It's not real.
	I mean, that's the point I'm getting at, which is like...
	Obviously.
	I mean, she's pointing out, yes, we know the BBC covered some stuff up, we know the police have covered stuff up, but I don't think people are making excuses for them in the same way that she's making excuses for these groomers.
	That's true, but also, just getting back to the point, she's like, no, no, no, race has nothing to do with this.
	That's the argument, the debate about the racial aspect here.
	And the fact that you've got racial-based child abuse, you know, from the groomers in such cases as the grooming gangs...
	And she's like, well, what about Jimmy Savile?
	I was like, I don't think Jimmy Savile was picking his targets based on race.
	Nor do I think that people were like, well, of course, TV presenters from, I don't know, whichever decade he was in, were notoriously looking for a racial war.
	Yeah, like the 70s and 80s before mass immigration.
	As if Jimmy Savile was engaging in a race war against ethnic minorities and therefore he only raped ethnic minority kids.
	What, like British kids?
	None of that makes any freaking sense.
	The church, again, against an erased war against...
	Well, if she wants to...
	Wait, what are you talking about?
	Well, here's one.
	If she wants to extend it out into these white institutions, well, let's take it into the lords, and what's a recent high-profile case of a lord doing something...
	Oh, it's Lord Ahmed.
	Yeah, and...
	Oops.
	I'm getting back to the aspect of the racial lines, because that's where her argument lies.
	And you'll notice that when it's about a minority group, she has to say, well, look, only in this case.
	There's no real racial aspect to it.
	But when, of course, she then wants to make it one, the only way she will accept it is if we're blaming white institutions.
	I don't even know what the hell that even means.
	It means English institutions is what it is.
	I know it's intersectional speak for this institution's English, therefore it's evil.
	But the idea that the police is a white institution...
	What?
	Like, okay, the majority of the British public are white, therefore the police are a white institution, therefore any rape that goes on within the police service is race-based CSC. Well, Callum, obviously what you're ignoring is that only white civilisations would create an institution to uphold law and protect the public, and that's a completely race-neutral statement that has no damning implications for any other races across the world, you know?
	Sure, but it's just that it's so transparent that this individual here is just evil, frankly.
	I mean, who on earth would talk like that in a non-obviously evil context?
	Why would you deny it in the case of where we actually have an example of people who preyed on people because of their race and religion, but yet when it comes to something like Jimmy Savile or the police or whatnot, you for some reason suddenly decide that race is important again, and now it's the white man who must be brought up on his racism.
	For white-on-white violence?
	Yes.
	The white-on-white violence, you could even name it, is...
	No.
	None of that makes any goddamn logical sense.
	It is just her trying to obfuscate crime when it's about ethnic minorities, because it's race-based, and when it isn't race-based, but there's white people involved, just how do I blame the white man?
	That's all that is.
	That's all that defense is.
	And it's pathetic.
	I mean, surely, to try and stretch the arguments a little bit, the fact that it's white people doing it to other white people in the examples that she would put forward makes it anti-racist rape, because they're not...
	Because they're not hurting people of ethnic minority status.
	This is like Hindi's argument on slavery.
	He was like, well, British slavery, only black people, pretty racist, Arab slavery, multicultural, who cares?
	Yeah, yeah.
	There you have it.
	But there you are.
	I suppose we'll move to the next one here, just to make the point as well.
	There's also the Labour MPs locally who have all failed to say sorry, as David notes here, which is, they give you a quote that this kind of thing, it is an uncomfortable and disturbing fact that abuse takes place in every city, town, and village.
	The smallest village.
	The Vicar of Dibley is engaged in such things.
	Or sorry, the Imam of Dibley, perhaps.
	But if you go to the next to me here, here's just a stock image of Exmouth.
	98% English.
	0% race-based CSE to my knowledge.
	Not something that takes place there.
	And probably something that doesn't take place in 90% of all other towns and villages.
	Again, the point, race-based CSE or religious-based CSE. Where I'm from, I'm not aware of any of this stuff that goes on, really.
	There might be some nasty stuff going on under the surface, but it's certainly nothing to do with people's race.
	And that's the thing that she wanted to obfuscate in the cases where it was prevalent and make up where it was white-on-white abuse, which, I mean, sorry, I just can't get over a person like that with seriously arguing in public.
	But there you have it.
	That's that.
	I mean, as much as we feel like we have to sometimes, let's just not take these people seriously at all.
	I just...
	I mean, she might as well have gone on in clown makeup, let's be perfectly honest here.
	Maybe that's the point.
	Maybe she's trying out for Joker 2, you know?
	She's trying out for Harley Quinn.
	There you go.
	Anyway, let's talk about something that's a little bit more positive, which is the Libertarian Party takeover in America.
	And I wanted to talk about this because, one, I think it's interesting and I think it's very positive, and two, I am kind of hoping that UK politics tends to be downstream from US politics.
	So if there are...
	Positive changes in US politics.
	I kind of hope that they'll just end up coming around over to here.
	Because as it stands, I find all of the UK parties, or at least the only viable ones, to be pretty much useless.
	I know you're a big libertarian fan too.
	Yes, I am.
	It does, and for those unaware, I know that libertarianism has kind of got probably a bad rep in mainstream circles.
	There are two main brands of libertarianism, which is the mainstream one that's been around for a while now, which is what I would refer to as left libertarianism.
	Where these people have taken the right to not be discriminated against as the ultimate right to be held up above all others, and then there's old-school libertarianism, which is more in line with the old right of America pre-World War II, which is anti-interventionist, anti-war, kind of isolationist, but mainly just leave-me-alone sort of style politics, which...
	Is my style of politics, to be perfectly honest.
	But before we go any further, I'll just talk about this, which is a recent deep think from Carl that you should all check out called How Elites Are Captured.
	And of course, this all relates to the idea that, you know, mainly the people pushing society forwards are a organized minority of elites that share ideological, an ideological belief system.
	And so with the Libertarian Party, for instance, what we're going to see is that there has been a change in that organized minority elite in the party that will be hopefully pushing for positive change there and make them a more viable party.
	They are already like the third biggest party in the US, but, you know, when you're up against the Democrats and the Republicans, which are like the entrenched parties, it's still kind of difficult.
	But hopefully they'll make some decent waves, so check out this article if you're interested in hearing Carl's take on how you can sort of switch critical race theory tactics around and capture elites for your own ideological purposes.
	Anyway, let's carry on.
	But before I go into the stuff regarding the Libertarian Party itself, I just wanted to draw some attention to some of the stuff that's going on with the two mainstream parties in the US on red flag laws regarding firearms.
	Are you aware of these?
	I've heard of them before.
	What exactly are they?
	Just to refresh my memory.
	Basically, it's if you think somebody is a danger to others, you can alert the authorities and they will be able to prevent them from being able to purchase new weapons or confiscate the weapons that they already have just in case.
	The idea being you get rid of mentally unstable people.
	Yes, but you can see immediately how that's going to be easily abused, because obviously Uvalde, is that how you pronounce it?
	Probably.
	The Uvalde school shooting went on recently, and this has restarted the whole discussion on gun control, which is...
	In my eyes, it should be reframed as the restriction of property rights, because, you know, guns are property just like everything else, and gun control is just an infringement on your property rights in the Second Amendment, the Second Amendment being the right that defends all the other ones, as you like to bring up.
	So, of course, this is being put through the Senate soon, and I just want to remind everybody that, sadly, as much as many of the more public-facing politicians in the Republican Party may bluster about it, They're still not really going to be there to defend your rights at the end of the day when it actually comes to this sort of stuff.
	So I'll just read a bit of this.
	The House of Representatives passed legislation that would allow US judges to seize firearms from someone deemed an imminent danger to themselves or others on Thursday.
	The Federal Extreme Risk Protection Order Act passed on a vote of 224 to 202, with five Republicans breaking ranks and voting in favour of the bill.
	The bill will also allow judges to prevent individuals from purchasing firearms under the same circumstances.
	It allows family members and police officers to ask judges to impose the restrictions so long as they provide proof of danger.
	Judges can enforce either 14-day or 180-day ban on the possession or purchase of firearms.
	So this I've covered before is basically a slippery slope to just taking away all of your rights for self-defense altogether.
	We had incremental things over in the UK that I've covered.
	Like the pistols bill and other such things, and all throughout the 20th century we had more and more regulations come in, until we've got it now where you're basically unable to defend yourself legally, except in very exceptional circumstances, and even then you're still probably going to go to prison for it.
	Sorry, I was laughing because I was just reading some of the chat that were like, this isn't going far enough, we need common sense bicycle control.
	I agree, I agree.
	I mean, who knows what danger bicycles could pose in the future.
	Old men breaking their arms.
	I know.
	Terrible, terrible thing.
	They carry on.
	The legislation is yet to pass through the Senate, and the five Republicans who voted in favour of this bill are Representative Fred Upton, Representative Adam Kinzinger, Anthony Gonzalez, Brian Fitzpatrick, and Chris Jacobs.
	So there are people within the Republican Party who are going to be more than happy to just...
	Let this sort of stuff pass and not protect your rights.
	And when it's going to the Senate, there's already 10 Senate Republicans who are happy to back this bipartisan bill, infringing your rights.
	So let's go to the next one.
	Bipartisan group of senators have announced a deal on framework legislation to address the recent surge in gun violence in the U.S. And I should have really put it in here, but I did recently look, I showed you earlier, a graph of mass shootings in the U.S., And they've really spiked up since maybe the early 2010s,
	and I looked also at the range of gun control legislation that's been put through in the US, and wouldn't you know, it's only since maybe the early 2000s that we've had this absolute space of gun control regulation come through in the US. So it really shows that gun control absolutely works.
	In every single time.
	It's not that, you know, having people armed maybe makes the bad guys with guns feel a little bit less secure about firing into a mass crowd because they know they'll get fired back at.
	No, it's take away the guns from all the good law-abiding people and then things will just get better.
	I suppose.
	Maybe.
	Just trust the state, bro.
	Yeah, just, I mean, I've got a sign on this school that says this is a no-gun zone.
	Any law-abiding criminal is going to see that and go, ooh, best not.
	Best not.
	The bipartisan group was made of 20 senators, including 10 GOP lawmakers, many of which are strong supporters of gun rights and political allies of the powerful National Rifle Association.
	And if you're going to say that these people are going to support bills like this, and say that they're strong supporters of gun rights, I'm just going to say X to doubt, mate.
	And with the support from these 10 GOP lawmakers, the legislation likely has the votes to overcome the 60-vote threshold to avoid a filibuster in the Senate.
	So this might actually pass.
	And of course you've got people like Mitt Romney supporting this sort of stuff, like the old-school milquetoast rhinos who don't have any real beliefs on anything except however they can progress their careers.
	Still makes me laugh that he could have been president.
	I would have...
	I mean, what would have happened?
	You remember him marching with BLM? Yeah.
	Do you remember as well that at the same time, like, Ron Paul was trying to become the nominee for presidential candidate for the Republican Party and they just went straight past him and they're like, no, Romney's our guy.
	You know, the incredibly popular Ron Paul who wanted to abolish income tax and all this sort of stuff and protect people's rights.
	No, we need Mitt Romney.
	It's laughable, looking back.
	It is terrible.
	And you've got people on Twitter trying to explain how red flag laws work with this handy-dandy, friendly little diagram.
	If you don't mind clicking on it, just because I want to read it out.
	So, this is Jane.
	Jane's social media contact, Randy, posts photos of guns and cryptic messages.
	This is an immediate warning sign in her head that he's about to go off and murder people for some reason.
	Jane calls the police to report the posts, to report thought crimes, essentially.
	The police petition in court to temporarily remove Randy's guns.
	They provide evidence that Randy's a danger to himself and others, and then the court agrees to temporarily remove Randy's weapons.
	And this is supposed to be telling you the benefits.
	Of red flag laws, because apparently this will somehow prevent mass shootings because Randy likes his guns and probably S posts on Twitter and Jane is like, oh my god, he's a terrorist!
	And people have responded to this with how red flag laws...
	This is Jane.
	She's a radical progressive.
	Jane works at the same company as Randy, who posts content of his scary guns and target shooting.
	She gets triggered and knows that he recently argued with his boss, so she calls the cops.
	The leftist-controlled police department is forced to ask courts to seize Randy's guns, and you know that they're all leftist-controlled for the most part.
	That's what we've got over here.
	That's what you've got over there.
	And then Randy is unable to defend himself in court or counter the evidence because how are you supposed to prove a negative of prove to me you're not a terrorist?
	Just do it.
	Just find the evidence somewhere in your pockets.
	I'm not a terrorist is exactly what a terrorist would say.
	Idiot.
	Yeah, obviously.
	Why would we believe that?
	That's just what all the other terrorists said before we took their guns away from them.
	And then an anti-Second Amendment judge infringes on Randy's Second Amendment rights, which...
	It all makes sense to me.
	Yeah.
	This looks exactly...
	I can imagine that happening many a time.
	Yes, and it has happened many a time already, I would imagine.
	And I just want to throw out here the Lysander Spooner gun argument in terms of rights.
	Lysander Spooner was an anarchist in the 18th century who actually argued against the Constitution for giving the federal government far too much wiggle room to be able to expand itself, and sadly it seems he was a...
	Proven right with time, as far as it goes, because as the Constitution stops the federal government from expanding itself into every aspect of your day-to-day lives, did George Bush think, oh, is this constitutional when he passed the Patriot Act?
	No.
	No!
	It got through anyway, so it's a useless piece of paper, basically, at the end of the day.
	Could you imagine that debate in the Oval Office?
	Is this constitutional?
	What?
	Constitutional?
	What?
	Why do we care about that?
	And his argument is very simple.
	To ban guns because of criminals who use them is to tell the law-abiding that their rights and liberties depend not on their own conduct, but on the conduct of the guilty and lawless.
	That's like saying, you can't have your own private property because other people steal stuff.
	I mean, that's the argument.
	And there are plenty of people within the GOP who are more than happy to go along with this sort of stuff.
	And even Trump himself, I looked into it, was not great with gun control.
	Under his administration, they banned bump stocks, which are those things that allow you to turn single-fire rounds into something that can turn more automatic.
	I'll be honest, because I'm pro-gun, but I never actually understood the reason for those existing, because they just seemed like- Why not?
	They seemed like they were useful in one aspect, which is to be really dumb at the range and shoot a lot, but then obviously useful in mass shootings, as in like, how do I make a gun shoot more into crowd?
	So it never seemed like a real benefit, because if you wanted to overthrow the government, I don't feel like you'd be being dumb with a bump stock.
	Yeah, but still, why not?
	Why ban it?
	Because the guns are for overthrowing the government, and I would have thought, that's not even going to help us.
	Well, being able to make yourself more dangerous to the government with something like a bump start- I don't think that's more dangerous, I think I was just retarded, because the accuracy is ruined.
	You can question the logic of it, but still- I don't think the government has the right to say you just can't have that altogether.
	And also, Trump actually expanded red flag laws and other such things.
	Once again, the logic of it may be questionable for bump stocks.
	I mean, I'm not an American, so I've never been to a gun range, sadly, so I don't know the actual benefits as an American might describe them to me.
	But at the same time, at the end of the day, that's your property.
	You can do what you want.
	If I decided to turn my house into a giant water slide, you might say to me, is that really a great idea?
	But at the same time, at the end of the day, it's my house.
	I can do what I want with it.
	Sure.
	You can do what you want with your house.
	Yeah.
	So, at the end of the day, this is a discussion of property rights, and property rights are the most fundamental rights governing everything else.
	You know, the Second Amendment is the right to have property, which is a firearm.
	So, there you go.
	But that's just what I wanted to talk about regarding the Republicans and gun rights and other such things right now.
	And let's move over to the Libertarian Party, which has been recently taken over at the end of May by the Mises Caucus, who are the ones who I would describe as the right-wing Libertarian types.
	Obviously, they're trying to be a bit more...
	Gentle with their messaging, but I know for a fact that these are the sorts of people who are much more the Rothbardian and Hopper-style libertarians who are full-on for property rights, they're full-on for freedom of association, and other such things.
	So I'll just talk about this.
	Reason have tried to sort of...
	Play up some of the more edgy aspects of them, because I believe reason are more in terms of, like, the left libertarian types, but they'd still give a decent enough overview, because the libertarian party, as it stood in America, was basically just another leftist organisation.
	You know, they put forward all of the BLM, oh, wait for Juneteenth, and all this sort of stuff, and they were putting forward, like, pride flag rights and other such things, whereas these guys are just like, no.
	Throw away all the leftist BS and let's just focus on a relatively radical position to try and inspire people.
	Because at the end of the day, if you're a party that's trying to be an alternative and you're basically just a middle ground party between the two parties that people are already attached to emotionally and in terms of their voting habits, what are you offering as an alternative?
	If the whole discussion is, Republicans want to take tax away by, want to reduce tax by 5%, Democrats want to reduce it by 2.5%, and you're like, hey, hey, hey guys, why not 6%?
	Who cares?
	Yeah.
	Who cares?
	The only way to really provide an alternative is to do a Ron Paul and say, like, well, let's just abolish income tax altogether.
	I want to get rid of the IRS and then replace it with nothing, as he said.
	I mean, I am sympathetic to all these economic aims of the libertarians, but I must admit that's not really the thing that burns me off from them, at least in the United States in the past.
	Of course, the BLM stuff and all that is.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Well, that's the thing.
	You've had cringe libertarians for a long time.
	Yeah, the cringe libertarian compilations are real, and, you know, they're for a reason.
	So is that being destroyed?
	By the looks of it, yes.
	So I'll go through some of this.
	So dominating the convention body by more than two-thirds, the Mises caucus claims to offer an edgier, more libertarian organization.
	Foes accuse it of right-wing deviationism and racism.
	Oh, dear.
	A four-year battle.
	Sounds like they've done nothing wrong.
	Yes, they are very based.
	Four-year battle for the control of the Libertarian Party ended Saturday in Reno with a victory for the Mises Caucus at the party's national convention.
	The faction's chosen candidate for the chair of the party's national committee, Angela McArdle, won on the first round of piloting with 692 votes, more than 69% of the voting delegates.
	McArdle's first tweet after winning was mocking the Libertarian Party's recent past, quote-tweeting a March 2020 post that mentioned social distancing.
	Very libertarian.
	Supporting lockdowns, exactly.
	And she told the convention on Friday she would not allow the party to humiliate ourselves and alienate everyone when faced with the next COVID-style crisis.
	While McArdle was the Mises caucus candidate, the behind-the-scenes mastermind of its victory was caucus founder and leader Michael Heise.
	His disapproval of William Weld, Gary Johnson's running mate in 2016, I think that was the libertarian candidate in 2016, was the initial inspiration for the caucus's launch.
	He found Weld painfully lacking in orthodoxy for the libertarians, especially when it came to issues such as war and gun regulations.
	Caucus's official platform is plumbline libertarian, but its foes say that too many Mises caucus members and fans downplay libertarian positions that might offend the right, are intentionally obnoxious in bullying, and are often racist.
	For example, the New Hampshire Libertarian Party, a powerful vector of Mises Caucus messaging, tweeted on Martin Luther King Day that America isn't in debt to black people.
	If anything, it's the other way around.
	And the tweet was later deleted.
	So you want to talk about a radical alternative to what the Republicans and Democrats are putting forward?
	Boom!
	Oh god, I've seen a meme version of that where it's like an Atlantic article talking about reparations like, well, when will black America be able to pay it back?
	That's very spicy.
	It is very spicy, but isn't it nice to see...
	Our once cooked party being pretty basic.
	Doing interesting things.
	Doing very interesting things.
	Got my attention.
	Yep.
	The sense that the caucus is soft on or actively encourages racism attracted the attention of the Southern Poverty Law Centre.
	This is just another point in these guys' favour.
	As far as I'm concerned.
	The Southern Poverty Law Centre doesn't like them.
	Very interesting.
	Just before the convention had began, which aired the concerns in a story reported with cooperation from many Libertarian Party members upset with the Mises Caucus.
	And I did see a little documentary that Reason put together from the actual day that this went down, and you had loads of...
	Members of the Libertarian Party who were like trans in support of gay rights, the little badges that said they them, they had little rainbow badges and such on, and they were going, I can't believe that this has happened.
	We've let the bigots enter the party.
	Oh, this isn't what libertarianism is supposed to stand for at all.
	It's like, right, get out.
	Get lost left.
	Yes.
	Get lost, leftist.
	I think the Democrats are more than happy to accept you.
	Heise believes that the current rumoured frontrunner for a Mises caucus-approved presidential nominee in 2024 could be the comedian and podcaster Dave Smith.
	I don't know if you're aware of him.
	He's pretty based.
	He said they're being relatively coy on immigration and abortion rights and such like that, but Dave Smith in the past has been interviewed and said that, you know, he doesn't think anybody has a right to intrude on property, and his idea for, like, an immigration scheme for America would be that you have to, like, vouch for someone, take them in, and financially vouch for them yourself.
	So basically all of those refugee welcome people, put your money where your mouth is, is what he's saying.
	Other than that, stay out.
	To be honest, I kind of like the Mafia-esque aspect to immigration there.
	You've got to vouch for him.
	Basically, you're just sort of like, well, I mean, if you're so eager to have them come in and take advantage of everything that we have over here that's great, well, put your money up.
	Otherwise, get out.
	You know, because they're not going to want to have income tax to be able to pay for all of these things.
	So it's like, well, okay, you've got to support him yourself.
	And if it turns out that, you know, you invite old Abdul in, and Abdul has his way with certain people in your family, well, maybe you should have thought of that.
	But they say he's so well connected to the Joe Rogan world that legacy, respectable mainstream media will be meaningless for the party messaging moving forward.
	Good.
	Just ignore the mainstream media.
	Don't start a war with them like Trump did.
	Just ignore them.
	Just ignore that they exist because they're worthless.
	Their numbers are terrible, especially when you compare it to people like Joe Rogan.
	And Varna and Chastain, who were former donors to the party, see a distinctly right-wing culture and policy bent from the Mises faction.
	The caucus, whose whipping of its team proved very effective at the convention, wants to eliminate from the Libertarian Party's platform a statement that we condemn bigotry is irrational.
	And Republican.
	Sorry.
	And repugnant.
	Which is good, because that's basically saying that we agree with the leftist agenda.
	They have actually taken that out now, and have basically just replaced it with something saying, we will protect the rights of everyone.
	We don't need to specify race.
	We don't need to condemn bigotry or anything like that.
	We just say, we'll protect your rights.
	We don't need leftist dog whistles.
	Yeah, we don't need this ideology ruining everything.
	I'm still going to go with that tweet that's fucking hilarious.
	I know.
	It's fantastic.
	I mean, well done to them.
	And once again, this party was formally run by what Rothbard would have called the Libertines, those who are like, oh, we need to protect people's rights to not be offended at anything, when he's like, no, that's not a right.
	That's not a natural right.
	That's not even a right in the Constitution.
	Who cares about that?
	I tried to go on their website for the Mises Caucus, but for whatever reason, I don't know if it's down or something.
	It just wouldn't let me get to it.
	I did get to this, though, which had some of the platform planks that they have here, where they talk about...
	Property rights is number one.
	Great.
	Fantastic.
	The third plank was money, which they don't want the government involved in money at all.
	They want to get back to a hard money standard, reduce inflation, get away from the government being able to control the monetary funds, which is especially important now that we're starting to see the introduction of the idea of central bank digital currencies, which is just going to lead to social credit scores in the West, as far as I'm concerned.
	Decentralization of power.
	Excellent.
	And they just want to, as well, Plank 7 was just reject identity politics.
	Excellent.
	All sounds good to me.
	And you've got people like the online content creator for YouTube, Eric July, who mainly focuses on media talking about this, but he's also an ANCAP and he's very happy, as you can see here through this tweet, saying that, you know, big shout out to them for getting the dysfunctional party back to you.
	Publicly emphasising actual libertarianism, because once again, the only thing that's going to convince people to move away from the two main parties is presenting a radical alternative.
	You can't just be a milquetoast middle ground party.
	If you want to get people's attention, you need to try and inspire people.
	And then all of a sudden, the Soy Libertines, just as a nice example of what the party was, interjects.
	Last time I checked, actual libertarianism isn't supporting groomers.
	Where does that come into it?
	I'm sorry, they don't support Democrats, sorry.
	And welcoming bigoted alt-right people in with open arms.
	Freedom of association, mate.
	I can associate with whoever I want, whether you like it or not, sorry.
	And this person also has pronouns and bio.
	And here's another example of what the party had turned into there.
	You can see the picture from the header image is a don't tread on me rainbow flag.
	Why?
	Why?
	Okay.
	Why?
	Because they wanted to present their allegiance to the leftist agenda, even though that's not what it's supposed to be.
	I'm not doing this to bully these people, as bullyable as they do appear to be, sad to say.
	I'm just pointing out these telltale signs, because this person also has, you know, tweets supporting Juneteenth reparations and other such things.
	Oh my goodness, this person...
	Actually has something against these gun right laws, but, I mean, that's basically the minimum that you can do for this sort of stuff, because I've seen this person tweeting in support of Juneteenth and all this sort of stuff, and, you know, there is a libertarian argument for reparations, for instance, but the people who you'd be arguing in support of getting those reparations are all dead, because it would be the actual slaves who were subjugated by state laws allowing them to be slaves.
	So...
	We can't just give it to their great-great-grandchildren, can we?
	Well, you could, but it wouldn't make any sense.
	It wouldn't make any sense, because these people, as the party may have hinted at with that tweet that I said about, are actually the beneficiaries of massive tax subsidies, massive amounts of affirmative action, and other such things, which have actually harmed their communities far more than anybody ever expected.
	But yeah, that's just what I wanted to talk about there.
	You know, if you're in America...
	And you are tired of the two main parties, maybe give these guys a look in and think about, you know, whether this is something that you want to get away from the main two-party system and see if you can get some actual radical change in your country.
	Fair enough.
	I know you've got a bit of a soft spot, especially for the Libertarians.
	It makes me happy.
	I've got a small one too, in the sense of I like to see them do okay and not do silly things.
	I like to see them not be cringe.
	Yes.
	Who doesn't enjoy that?
	I know, right?
	Anyway, I thought we'd end it off with...
	Just checking in on America.
	Just, okay, buddy.
	You're winning, son.
	And checking, are they alright?
	Which, apparently not, in a lot of regards of what I keep seeing online, at least.
	American culture, or at least culture around, let's say, race and all the rest of it.
	It's been ridiculous for quite some time.
	But it is now getting to a stage where I'm kind of a bit worried.
	But I thought we'd start this off just by mentioning, of course, there is now a premium video on lotuses.com.
	There's one around the politics of the death of Stalin, which, of course, is another place in which politics is mad, as well as the United States in regards to their culture here.
	But if we go to the next one here, we can see the fact that we've mentioned a million times, so I won't go on there.
	American schools are not schools.
	It's just indoctrination centers.
	Camps.
	Intersexual crap.
	If you go to the next one, you can see that the teachers are all cringe lunatics.
	This one being a middle school teacher with repeal the second amendment on there.
	Right?
	Nope.
	GTFO. Why are you taking that to a middle school?
	Even...
	Like all of those five-year-olds that are going to be...
	Well, ten-year-olds that are going to be coming in with their AR-15s and their little handguns.
	My rat.
	That would be pretty based.
	That would be pretty based.
	But if we go to the next one here, we can see the more extremist examples of things.
	I mean, extreme as all the other, you know, gender ideology in the schools is.
	This kind of stuff creeps me out.
	And as you can see here, this is a video of a Wisconsin first grade teacher leading her students in a pledge of allegiance to the Pan-African flag for Juneteenth.
	We have joked previously, obviously, about the point that it doesn't make any friggin' sense.
	Juneteenth, Pan-African flag.
	Who do you think sold you into slavery?
	The Africans!
	We bought the slaves.
	We didn't go out and get them.
	So, it's mad anyway.
	As much as Roots might have tried to tell you that, Roots was a television show, guys.
	It didn't actually happen that way.
	The Europeans would turn up and exchange money for slaves.
	The Africans did the slaving for us.
	Pretty easy.
	Anyway, but let's watch this clip of this historically illiterate person.
	And one.
	Fist up.
	On the count of three.
	One, two, three.
	I pledge allegiance to the flag of the Afro-American people.
	Under God, I will protect freedom, seek peace, honor our ancestors, and encourage and support the development and prosperity of people of African descent.
	You may be seated.
	Why did she film herself doing that?
	That looks so bad!
	Creepy cult-like behaviour.
	I can't get over the lyric.
	We must honour our ancestors.
	It's like, you literally got a Pan-African flag behind you, you moron.
	Your ancestors were sold in slavery by Africans.
	I'm just imagining the one kid, the one white kid who's got, like, I don't know, confederate ancestry sweating while he's saying that part.
	It's...
	It's worrying, to say the least.
	And if we go to the next set of links, we can also see some other worrying aspects about American culture being mad.
	You can see here.
	This was so embarrassing when I saw this earlier.
	This is unbelievably cringe.
	Also, how does a black...
	Person, not see this, and just feel like they're being treated like a literal baby.
	You're black, you like those afrocombs, don't you?
	It's ridiculous.
	I mean, at the same time in which people tear down statues of George Washington because he doesn't represent America, instead this...
	The afrocombe represents America.
	Big old comb with a BLM fist for black power represents America.
	Right, okay.
	This is hideous.
	It's just embarrassing, to say the least.
	And that looks like an embarrassing toy you'd find in your mum's room.
	Yeah.
	What's the fist for, Mum?
	Next thing here, we just check in with, well, what about the fact that, you know, of course, black people are so oppressed in the United States, they have a list of grievances that's ten miles long of serious and legitimate things.
	Being made the centre of attention, having the entire culture based around them, and trans people.
	Maybe it's that they have to share the limelight with the transes right now.
	Maybe that's what they're offended about.
	That is the complaint from these individuals, at least.
	Oh, no!
	Of course, very well-to-do TV hosts who are black women, and therefore, I don't know, just the worst of in all of human history.
	I only have three mansions.
	You hear about that, Patrice Cullors?
	Four mansions.
	Essentially.
	In this MSNBC special, Culture is Black Women, panelists complain about the racism of TV makeup stylists not treating, sorry, tending to their hair properly, insufficient makeup supplies, ooh lord, And also inadequate style prep before shooting a Time magazine cover.
	Oh my god.
	Oh, poor baby.
	Oh dear.
	Unbearable what these women have gone through.
	So let's listen and learn.
	How do we get our hair and makeup together?
	Back in the news business, your beautiful hair would not have been allowed even five years ago.
	Yeah.
	I went renegade last year and started wearing every kind of braid style.
	But for all of you, I mean, in every single one of our businesses, we've had to deal with our hair being fried, falling out of our hair.
	Somebody who didn't know how to do us.
	Couldn't sit in the thing.
	We couldn't have a black hair and makeup team.
	Foundations, two shades of fiber.
	And she's great.
	I go on TV and I'm like, I look a damn mess.
	Like, what?
	What's happening?
	And I'm supposed to have hair and the hair is like that and they done.
	I'm like, what?
	I'm just saying, man.
	I'm just saying.
	I'm going to tell you this.
	The first, the time cover, I've never told a story.
	They called me three days before and said, can you come in to do a photo shoot?
	They did not tell me it was the cover.
	They said, bring a yellow shirt and a blue shirt.
	Out of my closet.
	Wow.
	No wardrobe, no nothing.
	So I grabbed the yellow shirt.
	I grabbed the blue shirt.
	I came downtown.
	I came to the place, right?
	I'm just thinking it's going to be a little picture, like whatever.
	I get to the place.
	My braids wasn't fresh.
	Now, you know, come on.
	Come on.
	I had three days.
	I could have took my braids out of it.
	My braids wasn't fresh!
	My braids was always fresh!
	Oh, I would have fresh for myself.
	I get to the place.
	I get there.
	I just take the shoot like normal.
	They make this the cover of Frickin' Time Magazine.
	I feel like I've just listened to, like, the Seventh Circle of Hell or something.
	What fantasy land they live into!
	Oh, I'm being so aggrieved being put on the cover of Time magazine!
	Should we start to bring up our grievances with Kyle?
	Because I don't know about you, I had to bring this shirt in myself.
	Can you believe it?
	Unbearable that there was insufficient prep for my Time magazine cover.
	I mean, the most insufferable individuals on the planet.
	I just can't get over the imagery as well.
	Like, they sat around this fancy dinner table having these fancy meals with their champagne going, mm-hmm, mm-hmm, yeah, it's terrible, isn't it?
	You're all activists and weirdos.
	Do you see what the Libertarian Party meant from that tweet now?
	Do you see what they meant?
	These people owe us for putting us through that.
	It was the most painful experience.
	Jesus Christ.
	Also, is this what TV is now?
	I'm sorry, I haven't watched TV in friggin' ages.
	Me neither, because it's worthless.
	Why would you own one, especially if in the UK you got paid tax for it?
	So then, just, what the frick?
	Like, why is this what, you know, passes for entertainment?
	Just a quick life hack for anybody in the UK, you only have to pay the TV license if you watch BBC programming.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Just in case anybody didn't know.
	Or you could just not let them in.
	Anyway.
	Yeah, all that.
	But there's some people who are very aggrieved because, you know, it's terrible.
	They didn't get sufficient time for their Time magazine cover.
	And there's more of this stuff where you just kind of look at American culture and think, what the hell is going on?
	And, well, most worryingly for us foreigners, because, of course, our greatest relationship with the United States is that they keep us safe from the Chinese, frankly.
	And you can see here a video that is now being used to indoctrinate the US Navy, who are, you know, not an important institution.
	Oh no, not this.
	At all.
	Not keeping the Chinese in the ports, are they?
	So as you see, this is Navy training its members to create safe spaces by using proper gender pronouns.
	This is pain, so I'll give you a cringe warning, but, you know, we're used to it by now.
	My segment was supposed to be a white pill, and now you're just making me sad.
	Let's play the clip.
	Hi, my name is Johnny, and I use he-him pronouns.
	Hi, and I'm Conchi, and I use she-her pronouns.
	And we're here to talk about pronouns.
	What is a pronoun?
	A pronoun is how we identify ourselves apart from our name and it's also how people refer to us in conversations.
	Using the right pronouns is a really simple way to affirm someone's identity.
	It is a signal of acceptance and respect.
	If it's a signal of acceptance and respect, how do we go about creating a safe space for everybody?
	That's a good question.
	A really good way to do that is to use inclusive language.
	Instead of saying something like, hey, guys, you can say, hey, everyone, or hey, team.
	Yeah, and now that you say that, another way that we could show that we're allies and that we accept everybody is to maybe include our pronouns in our emails or, like we just did, introduce ourselves using our pronouns.
	But what would I do if I misgender someone?
	I think the first thing to recognize is that it's not the end of the world.
	You correct yourself and move on, or you accept the correction and move on.
	The most important thing I can tell you is do not put the burden of making you feel good about your mistake on the person that you just misgendered.
	Oh, thank you for telling me that.
	That goes on for like three odd minutes.
	I tweeted this out and was like, okay, I know this is already stupid enough, but did they have to get two people to talk about this who sound like literal dribbling retards?
	The way they're talking, it's like they're talking to a baby.
	If I misgender somebody, what do I do?
	Yes, I think that is literal, because, again, it's party indoctrination.
	It's made for the stupidest person in the room, because even the stupidest person has to say, hail the party.
	Yeah, but even the smartest person in the room who doesn't want to have to do this knows that they have to go along with this babying BS anyway, or else they might get kicked out of the room.
	Well, that's the thing.
	I mean, this is something that surprised me when we had Zuby in, and I asked him, because he has lived much of his life in Saudi Arabia studying there, So I asked, okay, you know, you've got all this kind of indoctrination that takes place in schools and elsewhere, of course, in the Navy now.
	What was it like living in Saudi?
	I mean, how much indoctrination do you have to deal with from the Islamic side?
	And he said none.
	I couldn't really believe him.
	I asked him again and he was like, no, none.
	Like, there just isn't any.
	They don't care.
	Like, if you're a Muslim or not, that's how simple it is.
	That's so shocking to me.
	Yeah, in the West, you believe or not, that doesn't matter.
	You're gonna believe.
	You're gonna believe in putting your pronouns in your emails, damn it.
	Yeah, because you've got the gun to your head.
	Yeah, and the funniest part of this three-minute odd clip, though, I just wanted to demonstrate some of that for the level of cringe and embarrassment that this is.
	But the best part is when this pronouner on the right there, she runs into someone who isn't mentally ill, and it goes about as well as you'd expect.
	Let's play.
	The argument was, if you look like a female, then it's she, her, because that's what's normal.
	And if you make me call you something else, then you're infringing on my rights.
	Yes.
	And I was really taken aback by the comment, and I really wasn't sure...
	How to respond and the only thing I could really think quickly to say was it's not about you at all and it's mostly and ultimately about respect.
	I mean, if you wanted to look like an NPC, I don't think she could have done a better job.
	Yeah, literally, you went off of her programming.
	Her dialogue tree didn't extend that far.
	It's like, someone who isn't mentally ill says to you, well, no, if you're a woman, it's she, her, because that's how language works.
	Anyway, but also, I have a civil right to do as I please to my language.
	That's what the First Amendment is.
	Muppet.
	And her, as you say, her dialogue tree just failed.
	She didn't know what to do, and she went, but it's about respect.
	It's not about respect.
	So just go to hell.
	You're full of it.
	Also, I don't know if it's Michael who pointed this out.
	It's like, since when do people who are joining the Navy have to worry about safe spaces?
	You're literally going to fight in battlefields.
	Too bad.
	But there we have that.
	I also love the idea that civil rights die when more respect begins.
	So therefore all insults are just illegal.
	I mean, everyone knows that respect is just something that's handed to you, right?
	You don't have to do anything for it.
	And if we go to this link here, we also see the fact that there's Matt Walsh releasing that a woman whose husband is on active duty in the Navy also decided to send this in.
	His command held a diversity hike, or diversity march, perhaps, in honour of Pride Month.
	Attendance was mandatory.
	They hiked waving the rainbow flag of not the American flag.
	I just love the idea.
	It's like, we're going on a march for progress and diversity.
	You will come.
	You will come and enjoy so much.
	I mean, it is literally the- Have you seen the diversity camp?
	What is it?
	The tolerance camp from South Park?
	Where they make all the boys go to tolerance camp.
	Where intolerance will not be tolerated.
	They will make macaroni paintings of families holding hands of all different races and crates.
	This isn't normal.
	This is really weird.
	Once again, this is just a cult.
	Yeah, and I thought, I know this was some good news in that regard, so if we go to the next one here, we just have the fact that apparently Elon Musk decided to fire a whole bunch of his employees because he doesn't have the belief in the economy, so he said we have to get rid of 10%, and in that he got rid of the LGBTQI diversity highs.
	Why did he have them in the first place?
	I don't know.
	That's really weird that he had them in the first place.
	He's a bit of an oversight.
	To be fair, actually, I think Tesla recently got taken off of ESG, so he might have had them purely to accommodate for ESG, but still, I would have just said no.
	Well, you hire diversity hires, but he did get rid of one.
	But I suppose I'm going to end on a quote.
	I didn't know if I was going to do it.
	Oh, yeah, yeah.
	Go for it.
	Douglas Murray's new book.
	Because it really is, in my mind, just I'm sort of saying, like, America, how are you winning, buddy?
	And a lot of it is a big no.
	And one of the quotes in here makes me really laugh.
	This is Douglas' new book.
	And he writes in here about moral panic.
	So I just wanted to read it to you.
	I think it's funny as hell.
	He just gives us a list of the Klan.
	Because, you know, with all the complaints about racism in the United States, the endemic of structural racism, you'd think the Klan are just wandering about left, right, and center.
	And that's what it sounds like.
	Apparently so.
	So, in April 2016, an extraordinary panic kicked off at the University of Indiana.
	It was around 9 o'clock in the evening when somebody reported that a member of the Ku Klux Klan had been spotted on campus.
	The suspect turned out the member was not a member of the Klan, but in fact a Dominican monk.
	It's just a guy wearing monk robes.
	Happened again.
	One morning in 2013, there was a sighting of a person in a Klansman outfit at Oberlin College in Ohio.
	The panic at this liberal arts college led to the cancellation of all classes for the rest of the day.
	Well, kind of a clan member on campus.
	Like someone just burst through the door.
	CLAN! But also the clan are like, I'm bored today, better go for a walk on a college campus.
	That's a welcoming zone.
	It transpires that the sighting was most likely caused by either a homeless pedestrian wrapped in a blanket or a woman who was seen the same morning carrying a blanket on campus.
	Could you imagine some homeless dude just walking through the campus, wrapped in his blanket because he's cold, and a mob of college students just start beating him?
	Clearly trying to lynch black people.
	We know your game.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Spare some change?
	You want it for a noose?
	That's one.
	You wanna lynch, we lynch you first.
	This happened again.
	In November 2015, a queer black activist who was also a former student body president caused a virtual stampede at the University of Missouri when he claimed that the Klan had been spotted on campus.
	I'm sorry, do they have their own Jussie Smollett right there?
	Yeah.
	He said he was working with the police.
	He wasn't.
	He said he was working with campus security.
	He wasn't.
	He eventually ended up apologising for just making that up.
	Well, yeah, they do like to throw hoaxes out there, don't they?
	But there's the thing, which is just, I can't get over how the United States, and Douglas is demonstrating much more examples than just those, of course, and some of them here.
	The whole society seems to act, I mean, if you were taking this as legitimate, you know, the intersectionals, as if it is apartheid South Africa, as if black people are just killed for existing, presumably.
	Well, yeah, they've constructed this fantasy land which has no bearing in reality whatsoever, but everybody has to tiptoe around it like it is reality.
	Yeah.
	Like, there really are just clan members turning up on campus, and that's really what I wanted to talk about, which is just like, what the fuck?
	When you step back for a minute, I mean, remember when we read, what was it, Mao's Great Cultural Revolution, and you think, okay, crazy thing for no reason, crazy thing for no reason.
	Yep, everyone's nuts every single day, constantly.
	Looking at the United States, the number of stories we cover in this regard really do feed into that vein.
	It really does feel like, from an outsider looking at the United States, being like, why do they keep doing this crazy thing every day that just gets worse and worse for no reason?
	I mean, as we are outsiders and there's crazy stuff going on there, but I mean, from what we covered in the first segment, there's crazy stuff going on over here as well.
	Yeah, it's just the United States is the most weird example, because, you know, richest country on earth.
	And the United States is where the ideology that's pushing all of this originated from, and we just happen to have it imported over here for some stupid reason.
	Anyway, I thought that's where I probably should leave this off, but I thought I'd just check in and be like, hey, buddy, you alright?
	And for the rest of us who are not Americans, we are looking in and being like, hey, buddy, you still alive?
	Black power, please don't say that, buddy.
	America dribbling and wetting itself, except then in the process of wetting itself, we get some on us as well, and it just descends.
	That certainly seems to be taking place.
	But otherwise, let's move to the video comments.
	It's a disgrace.
	I'll skip this one.
	Sorry, I don't have time for it.
	I think Freedom Toons already did this, but we really need to start calling Kyle Rittenhouse The Boy Who Lived.
	That way we can hopefully make the leftists stop making Harry Potter analogies.
	Also, you guys need to start coming up with good book titles for Harry Potter related to Kyle Rittenhouse or other fun topics.
	It's not a bad idea.
	I quite like that.
	I will say, I mean, J.K. Rowling being Turf Queen, so to speak, didn't stop them from using Harry Potter analogies, so just equating it with Kyle Rittenhouse won't do anything.
	I mean, I have seen a slow down take since that, and you don't see it so much at protests anymore.
	A protest, but it's still all over online.
	Sure, sure.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Callum, yesterday on your Juneteenth little blurb, You talked about how the slave trade was ongoing in 1860s when the Civil War was fought in America.
	Well, guess what?
	It's still going on right now.
	So they kind of haven't stopped at all, which makes the use of the Pan-African colors that much more insulting.
	Yeah, in Libya it became a real thing again.
	Funny thing I read this morning, apparently in Arabic, the word for slave is like a lib or something, and they still use it to refer to all black people in Saudi Arabia.
	Like, they just call black people slave.
	Like, that's the word for it.
	I mean, that's how endemic the culture is to, you know, nothing like the West, where it's abhorrent.
	If they had a chance, they'd do it again.
	Let's go to the next one.
	One's roof is not supposed to have a valley in it.
	It is no wonder that rain is pouring into the house.
	I also regret to inform you that the ground is hard and distant.
	I'm kind of liking, but also kind of worried about where this is going.
	He's doing a renovation of this old house.
	The way he introduces it makes me feel like this is a murder mystery.
	We're going to find out something at the end.
	There's a guy in the basement or something.
	I guess we'll see.
	Every single video, is there an extra clue?
	In that one, we just didn't notice the recently disturbed soil that he was pointing the camera at.
	It's going to be Little Joan and Tony D turning up, being like, ooh, it's haunted the whole time!
	It is fun to trigger the closeted degenerates with my work.
	My goal is really nothing more than just a weebier Oscar the Robot, and learning how to control mech-grade motors with a computer.
	Imagine my giant robot Marduk controlled by voice or even a game controller.
	There would be a lot of backlash from creating a fully functional robo-waifu.
	Women tend to get mighty grumpy when they're rejected.
	I don't know.
	I think there's a bit of a backlash from us, too, in the sense of just being like, I'm scared.
	Nothing else.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Tony D and Little Joan with another legend of the Pines from Brigantine, New Jersey, comes the story of the Lady in White.
	She walks along 13th Street looking for her lost love.
	This is a very common ghost story in many cultures.
	Also, North Jersey has a version called Annie's Road.
	Annie was hit by a car and continues to wander it.
	Other states, other countries all over the world has this story, including there's a story in Northwest England in a place called Willow Park.
	Look for the White Lady.
	Okay, I don't know where the white lady is.
	Sounds like a mystery if you go to Rochdale.
	Look for the white lady.
	Oh, you can't find her!
	That's not fair.
	Anyway, let's go to the written comments.
	So, on Martin, Bleach Demon says that Hwemixin, who was responding to Martin...
	Has essentially acknowledged that a certain specific minority has more power than the white working class in England.
	That is perhaps the most damning and unintentional part of her rebuttal.
	That's a very, very good point.
	I can't believe I looked over that.
	But she was like, it's about positions of power.
	And it's like, what position of power does a takeaway worker have?
	Yeah, I mean, her whole argument was there are people in positions of power, but also, completely disconnected with that, we can't talk about this one particular demographic.
	That's a pretty good insight of where the position of power is.
	That's the point.
	The takeaway workers don't have any power.
	They're takeaway workers.
	I mean, it's not a desirable position.
	But the power that that individual has is his race and his religion.
	The ability that he won't be prosecuted for his crimes.
	That's the position of power she's talking about.
	I know, there's a certain power that takeaway workers have to make you feel good when they're like, yeah, boss man.
	Get called boss man by the local Indian takeaway guy.
	Keep me going all day.
	Reminds me of a green text.
	There's one that's like, yeah, called comrade by a drunk Russian.
	You get called sweetie by an old southern lady.
	Yep.
	It'll keep you going for the rest of the day.
	I think the top one was being called sir by a British aristocrat.
	I've not had that one personally.
	What do you call it?
	Not bachelor.
	What are they called?
	Rich people have them.
	You know, a rich Englishman who comes up and gives you tea and biscuits and steals your mail.
	Butler?
	Butler, there we go.
	Sorry.
	Completely escaped my memory.
	You mixed old butler with bachelor?
	Do I have copies?
	I can't speak English, you know this.
	Longshank1690 says, When this scandal first broke in the early 2010s, I was willing to believe the initial excuse that they were scared of being called racist.
	The accusation still had tremendous power back then without context.
	They still didn't want the Guardian crashing down on them for their jobs.
	But in retrospect, it's become clear they weren't actually concerned about being called racist.
	It was upsetting the narrative.
	They had been captured as an institution and didn't want anything to upset the narrative that immigrant communities were under constant attack from the racist society and that more than anything, it was a driving force behind the cover-up.
	There is no punishment too severe for these people.
	Um, I don't know if I agree with that statement, because it's sort of, I feel like you're complicating a relationship there that is more basic.
	I mean, the individual humans who did work there, who were saying, I was scared of being called racist, the civil servants, I mean, the multiple interviews with them, I think it is a true thing that they were scared of that.
	And it's the people who would be accusing them of being racist that are pushing the narrative.
	They're just reacting to it.
	Ross Stiggle says, the woman claims it's people of power.
	Okay, these Pakistani groomers are in a position of power through racial protected characteristics.
	Now continue, you daft bint.
	Yeah, I imagine if Martin said that, it might not end away.
	I think he should have, though.
	Yeah.
	Freewill2112, these hard left commentators have less free will than Pavlov's dog.
	They never deviate from their ideological programming.
	Yeah, I mean, we've seen a few examples of that now just in those last few segments, and it is painful.
	Every time you see an NPC in one of these clips or something, you just think, why are you doing this?
	Like, no one's forcing you to do this.
	You could just be a free individual instead.
	They chose that life.
	Free individual comes with having to think your own thoughts, take responsibility for your own actions, where it's much, much, much easier to just take on the thoughts of other people, because you can just assume that they've already thought everything through and it's bulletproof, and just follow the life path that they say that you should.
	Because then if you make mistakes, it's not your mistakes to make!
	Great!
	Wonderful!
	Sure, I just feel like it's a weird desire to take the path of least resistance in your entire life.
	What's the point?
	Well, sadly there is an overwhelming amount of people, I would say, who are weak-willed.
	Lord Kev Croft says, when it's whites on white, it's not about race.
	Just ask Wookiee Bulk.
	I was alluding to that a little bit.
	It's about man's inhumanity to man.
	Jimmy Savile was just man's inhumanity to man.
	Edward the Rabbit Mage says, this reminds me of that one Vosh clip where a woman is talking about no one believing her being raped, and he's said there, nodding along, saying, oh, this is terrible, and when it turns out that it's not a white man doing the raping, she immediately turns on the victim.
	I've not seen that clip, actually.
	That sounds awful!
	That sounds horrible!
	It's like a group session, like an interview, right?
	And they're all talking about their experiences, and just one goes like, yeah, no one believed me, I was raped by this guy multiple times.
	So is he watching a clip of someone...
	Yeah, and Vos reacts, and he's like, see?
	See how the system doesn't believe women?
	See how it's so terrible to women?
	And then all of a sudden, BAM! And then she says, yeah, because my groomer was Pakistani, they didn't take it seriously.
	And he pauses it and goes, BOOSH! The whole thing's...
	It's like...
	It's in the space of 10 seconds as well.
	Once again, it's like the NPC dialogue tree.
	You know the way in Fallout or something, if you pick certain dialogue options, the tone of the person you're talking to will change on a dime.
	That's what it is.
	It's unbelievable.
	It has to fit the narrative.
	If it doesn't, then the victim isn't a victim.
	Or pointing out a perpetrator is suddenly unhelpful.
	If your ideology doesn't allow you to address a tangible and ultimate terrible problem, your ideology is wrong.
	Sorry, I've just thought of it, actually.
	Did you ever play Oblivion?
	Elder Scrolls 4, Oblivion, the one before Skyrim.
	No, I never got around to it, actually.
	Oh, really?
	There's a stupid minigame in that, where you need to improve the disposition of a character to you.
	So you scroll through four options, and you have to choose the right options to, like, oh, tell a joke, give them a compliment, give them an insult, you know, to try and make them like you more.
	And whether they like it or not, their face goes from...
	What is that?
	That's Vosh.
	For people listening, Harry was smiling and frowning very rapidly.
	Lord Nerevar says, Following on from my last comment, it doesn't seem reasonable to me to trust any police or any other UK authorities to deal with this sort of sexual abuse, especially by Muslim rape gangs.
	Let's not forget that these are the same institutions that protected Jimmy Savile and covered up the grooming gangs under Bear and Brown.
	It's up to us now.
	You always start wondering, should we have a United Nations peacekeeping force to come in and do our policing in regards to this kind of crime?
	As far as I'm concerned, the majority of the police work in the UK is not up to snuff.
	I feel like the UN could, even with the UN's record on this, I feel like they couldn't do any worse.
	That's depressing.
	So Longshank says, Okay, I don't agree with her, but you guys are really straw-manging her argument here.
	Her argument isn't that the BBC and the church were committing race-based CSE. Her argument is that grooming gangs, the church, and the BBC were all unrelated to race.
	It was just examples of people in power abusing victims regardless of race, only mentioning the majority white institutions to show that there are more examples of victims being abused, not just minority perpetrators and white victims.
	I don't agree with her dumb arguments, but you guys really misunderstood what she was trying to make there.
	I get the point that she's bringing them up because of the power argument, but then why mention that they're the white institutions?
	Unless she's trying to, of course, as you say, that, oh, well, it's not about race, but then...
	The whole debate is about race.
	I mean, Martin didn't really get a chance to respond properly, but what he said was, it's just whataboutism.
	Which is exactly what it is.
	The whole conversation was about race-based CSD. I mean, that is what the subject is.
	She's sidestepping that whole argument.
	So when she brings up, you know, a white institution has done this, and therefore it's not valid, I find it very suspect.
	So, I may be wrong, but that's my interpretation.
	Jimbo G says, Working class eggs in a diversity omelette.
	I didn't want to read it, because that's just...
	It's true, though.
	It's true.
	I mean, that is the shut up for the sake of diversity position.
	Dominic Jones says, the BBC, guardians of the pedophiles.
	I mean, to be fair, have the Guardian ever explicitly said what they're guarding?
	No, but also the BBC are guardians of paedophiles.
	Yes.
	They still got that statue, don't they, as well?
	Yeah, yeah, that one Mr. Baseman tried to start just hammering away at a few months ago.
	General Hai Ping says, Mad respect for Martin for maintaining his composure when having to listen to just another NPC repeat the party line for the one and only time where they don't want to talk about bloody race.
	The conversation must be had.
	We, as a nation, cannot keep importing foreign labour that doesn't have any benefit when it comes with broken homes and shattered psyches.
	Yeah, I mean, I do love, I mentioned it before, Douglas Murray's line from The Strange Death of Europe, which he just lays out, it's like, well, some have argued that we have had mass migration.
	There have been many up this.
	You know, we've got cheap labour, many different kinds of curry, but now we have more kinds of rape and...
	Swings and roundabouts, really.
	I mean, really, it's a cost-benefit analysis.
	Have we run it through the spreadsheet?
	Have we found out whether killing all the poor will improve everything?
	Have you run the computer program?
	Well, I just don't ever get over the argument.
	It's like, more kinds of curry.
	Where would we be without curry?
	Cookery book away, that's where.
	This might be a controversial opinion.
	All of the best curries were made for English people anyway.
	Well, the tikka masala in Manchester.
	Yeah, stuff like that.
	Yeah.
	The rest of them are a little bit too flavourless for me.
	Really?
	Yeah, I like the really...
	No, tikka masala is not my favourite.
	My favourite is stuff like madras and vindaloo, but as far as I'm aware, the spicier ones like those are made differently in England to account for English taste.
	So, those are my favourite ones, because you always hear, oh, over in India we don't actually eat those really spicy curries.
	Okay, great.
	I won't eat the curry from India then.
	I'll just have it here.
	I haven't been to India, but I know there is the regional aspect.
	I don't even say it.
	Pattaya?
	No, I don't think I have.
	That's my favourite.
	It's like sweet and sour.
	Oh, fair play.
	Yeah, but also the interesting thing is you don't...
	They don't tell you this.
	They don't tell you this.
	It's cool.
	You don't need to be Indian to cook Indian food.
	Yeah.
	Incredible.
	Incredible revelation.
	You can get the cookery book from the internet instead.
	I know.
	Amazing.
	Amazing.
	But let's go to the comments on the libertarian stuff.
	Yes, Kevin Fox says the red flag bill can only work properly if, number one, all claims delivered to the police are fully checked for personal grievance and ideological grievance before the action is taken, and two, before the guns are taken from someone, the individual is examined by a committee of psychiatrists to prevent one leftist psychologist from just signing off on an area case.
	Well, none of that's ever going to happen.
	And also, the claims in the first place are subjective.
	The decisions made by the police are going to be subjective.
	And at the end of the day, even if somebody is a little unusual, that shouldn't be a reason to...
	Unless they have explicitly aggressed on somebody else, that's still no reason to infringe on their rights.
	At the end of the day, unless you've done something or made it very clear that you are about to do something...
	It's already illegal as well.
	I'm going to go to the synagogue tomorrow and shoot people.
	That's a criminal statement.
	Yeah, and also, going out and shooting people is a criminal act, so it's like, all of these things are already covered under law.
	So, Alex L says, I would argue that the far-left libertarianism isn't a thing.
	They call themselves liberals, but are very authoritarian rather than libertarian.
	I think there is also a distinction to be made between classical libertarianism and neoliberalism.
	I mean, you can basically just call that classical neoliberalism as well, because classical liberalism of, like, the...
	Thomas Jefferson style is basically what modern day would consider libertarianism because the phrases have switched all over the place.
	Did you say classical neoliberalism?
	No, classical and neoliberalism.
	Sorry if I made that a bit more clear.
	That doesn't make sense.
	I don't know, maybe neoliberalism will morph in the future so we'll be looking back at the glorious days of the 80s and going, oh, if only we could return to classical neoliberalism.
	That's a JREG sketch right there.
	That really is.
	With the latter being more focused on laissez-faire markets rather than on fundamental individual rights.
	Yeah, but I mean, people like Rothbard have complained about this sort of stuff.
	I think I told you about it.
	I read an article he wrote in 96 about what he referred to as left libertarians, and he was just so angry when he was writing it, and he had a heart attack in 96.
	He was so angry I can only assume he had the heart attack while he was writing it.
	Managed to polish off the last few paragraphs and then died.
	Yeah.
	Because he was just complaining.
	Leftists?
	Yeah, pretty much.
	I mean, what happened was basically that there is a left libertarianism.
	And what it was was that in the 1970s, a coalition formed between the libertarians and the new left on the basis of we don't like the Vietnam War.
	The libertarians had a principled argument of, well, we see the draft and conscription as being basically a form of slavery forced by the state to go and fight in foreign wars that we have no real business in.
	And the new left had...
	You know, there's grievances with it because they're leftists and they just like to complain about everything like that.
	Well, they wanted to help their communist brother.
	Yeah, they wanted to help the communists.
	But that coalition actually led loads of leftists to joining the libertarian movement because they went, oh, you want freedom in every aspect?
	Great, I can just be free to be a degenerate 24-7 under your arguments, and free market economics will give me the prosperity to just do it 24-7.
	And so that's how you saw that, whereas the sort of like old-school libertarians were much more in line, like I say, with the old right of America from pre-World War II. So that's how that's happened, and it's nice to see the mainstream party in the US switch back around to how it really should have been to more orthodox politics.
	Ideas along the lines of Mises and Hayek and people like that.
	So that's what I'm happy to see.
	Pirate skeleton red flag laws are obviously rife for abuse.
	That being said, those gun owning revolutionary leftists might find themselves getting red flagged.
	Given their online behaviour, they're not afraid to make threats.
	Yeah, but they're leftists, so that's their shield for them.
	Heather Craig, the government, we must keep track of every child for safeguarding reasons and teach them exactly what we deem helpful.
	Also the government, safeguarding concerns?
	Oh no, that can't be right.
	They're not light enough on the Pantone scale.
	Diversity is our strength.
	Swallow, don't spit the narrative, pleb.
	Rape is bad, we're intelligent enough to spot patterns.
	If they cared about safeguarding, they would care.
	Yeah?
	I think that's probably more in reference to your segment, reading that through.
	That might be the wrong place.
	Yeah.
	Ultra X, Y, and Z. I get the libertarian argument, but they do not live in this world.
	Government is a fact for making life happen.
	The majority of the issues that we have coming out of government is that small government-minded people have completely ceded the ground to those who have far more cancerous ideology.
	The policy papers are written by those who have got the ear...
	For example, Sage, imagine that the stereotypical civil servant is closer to a Ron Swanson, not an overbearing busybody.
	I don't know necessarily about that, and the thing is, yeah, obviously we recognise, even the more extreme libertarians recognise that you can't just, you know, We're good to go.
	Getting rid of the Fed, for instance, and stuff like that.
	And the fact of the matter is that people were able to get along just fine throughout the 1800s and before without those things, like the Federal Reserve, without the income tax, which all got introduced in the beginning of the 20th century.
	In America, for instance, people can get on their way to doing these things, and the whole thing with taxes, it's coercive.
	If the government wants to offer these services, well, if they're worth paying for, people should be able to voluntarily choose to pay for them.
	Like, the police in England, for instance, if you were given the option, do you want to pay for the police as they stand right now for the service they're providing, would you?
	Or would you say, you're going to have to make some improvements first?
	I feel like this is a real stretch argument, though, because then it gets to the military as well.
	Like, why not?
	Well, why not?
	Because that's mad.
	Oh, well, there's other ways of national defense.
	I mean, I've not looked into that aspect of it.
	I've never been convinced by this aspect of, like, okay, on the national level, it will be a voluntary paid system.
	Well, I mean, Vietnam was able to hold back America pretty well, and it was basically just a bunch of militias.
	Sure.
	And guerrilla warfare.
	Sorry, hang on.
	The communists weren't engaging, and, you know, if you want to pay for the government, donations, please.
	Like, that's not how that works.
	Hmm.
	Well, still.
	Anyway, let's go on to the comments for yours.
	Alright.
	So, checking in on America, just seeing if the little buddy's okay.
	So, XSummer says, as if the Navy wasn't gay enough already.
	Yeah, I did have In the Navy playing in my head the whole time we were listening to that.
	Probably should have dubbed it in the back there.
	Someone should do that.
	I might do that afterwards.
	It'll be fun.
	Yeah, it's embarrassing.
	I also, I really hate the narrative told about it as well.
	Because there's, a lot of countries use the Pan-African colors based on the Ethiopian Empire, and the fact that, oh, they were never colonized, therefore they stood the test of time.
	Yeah, they were.
	Like, I hate this argument, it's just like, oh yeah, but they fought off the Italians in the 20s.
	And then in 36, what happened?
	Like, you got conquered.
	Like, you did.
	There's this whole thing like, oh, but there were guerrilla fighters still fighting against them, so.
	No, it's not good enough.
	Every African country did end up getting colonized.
	Sorry, it's just a pet peeve of mine about how the history is told.
	Anyway, Jimbo G says the pride flag and semen, a match made in heaven.
	It certainly is.
	Generico 101, America is not okay.
	The Anglo-American world is collapsing under the weight of its own hubris.
	This is absolutely like the fall of the Western Roman Empire.
	You know how they say history rhymes.
	This is like when Pitbull rhymes Kodak with Kodak.
	It's not even clever.
	We're making comparisons to Pitbull now to make a point.
	That's a good point.
	JD says, to answer your question, and no, America is not okay, please send some gas money.
	Hey, we're paying more for gas over here, comparatively, if you actually check the numbers properly, so...
	If you wanted to give us some freedom, some constitutional rights...
	Once again, yeah.
	North Sea Oil just happens to be there.
	Sophie Love Pitterson says, please make this cringe stop.
	Why do you guys keep doing this stuff?
	He did this to me as well.
	Yeah, you deserve it.
	Why do I deserve it?
	What did I do?
	I didn't do anything.
	We're alive.
	I feel like we deserve it.
	You've got to go through suffering.
	Jesus Christ, you've gone through the nihilist arc over here.
	Maybe.
	Carl was making this point once that to be good at anything, you need to go through suffering, and I feel that's kind of true to some extent.
	I mean, that's just the Jordan Peterson point, isn't it?
	Yeah, so look, we're self-improvement general by suffering through the cringe.
	I mean, there is truth to it, but I don't see self-improvement coming from that cringe.
	Well, at least if you show that cringe to your kids, hopefully they'll never fall for it, so...
	Yeah, we'll harden their hearts and strengthen their resolve.
	Anyway, Mr.
	Tucker says, I'm glad I left the Navy before they forced me to sit through that condescending claptrap.
	I don't want this S in my fighting force.
	Nobody gives an S about your pronouns when you're taking torpedo fire.
	Yeah, I imagine when the water's coming in and you're all about to drown, no one is like, well, misgendered me, so I don't want to fix the leak.
	Alright, no.
	Get that done.
	It is just a joke.
	Rose Gonella says, well, to address the last question first, no, no, America's not okay.
	We're so doomed.
	You certainly seem to.
	That's not the right spirit.
	Come on.
	Well, hopefully one of these days there'll be some white pills.
	Such as the Libertarian Party.
	I tried to provide a white pill and then you just smacked me down again.
	Otherwise, we're out of time.
	If you want more from us, lessees.com.
	Otherwise, they're going to be back at 3.30 for that live stream I was talking about.
	Otherwise, see you tomorrow.

▲