All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 12, 2022 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters
01:31:11
The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #478
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Good afternoon, folks.
Welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Eaters for the 12th of September 2022.
I'm joined by Chris Williamson once again.
Hi there.
Good time you're back.
Thanks.
Shame the world's collapsing, isn't it?
I've picked a great day to be here.
Uplifting, feeling jovial today.
Yeah, because you're very much a positive person.
Fortunately.
You put positive content out on the internet, and it's like, yeah, okay, but things are going badly.
Good luck doing that today.
Yeah.
Well, it's not your fault or anything, if that helps.
Thanks for that.
I'm not blaming you or anything.
It's not because you've come around that I'm like, okay, well...
I've got some bad news, but shall we begin?
How did you feel about the death of Queen Elizabeth?
So, I'm in America at the moment, which meant I was a little bit separated from the feelings of full-on patriotism that people had in the UK, and then I flew back here.
And it's pretty sombre, man.
Frankly, it's just sad.
It's sad in a beautiful way.
You know, she is someone that has spent so much time through so many very formative periods for this country doing something that has helped to bind people together.
And regardless of what you think about the monarchy, that woman put a shift in for this country.
And I didn't realise about how the line of succession had changed because one of the previous kings rescinded the throne.
Edward.
Yes.
She wasn't even supposed to be part of that lineage and she was ten and it goes, oh, you thought you were going to be some second cousin that wasn't even going to be working.
Hang on a second, you're going to be the longest reigning monarch in history ever.
No, Louis XIV was longer, actually.
Really?
Because he came to the throne at like ten or something.
But she's the second longest and the longest British monarch.
That's what I meant, yeah.
Sad, man.
Sad.
And the one thing that it's done, the main thing that I've taken away, is that having a type of establishment within a country that causes people to come together like this is one of the strongest justifications for having a monarchy that I could think about.
Yeah, exactly right.
Because this is something I've tried to explain to foreigners, basically.
I've never cared about the monarchy, really.
I'm not for or against.
I've never really given it much thought.
It's just been one of those institutions that's just there.
But it shows you that we're not a social contract society.
We're not a society that's based on a document that some people signed 250 years ago, and now we don't have to care about each other.
It shows you that there's bonds of sentiment that tie everything together.
And you are right, there's definitely a somber atmosphere that's over the country.
Even like...
Just generally.
It's just very strange, and it's not happened before, right?
Because she was 96.
She was literally older than almost everyone in the country, and so no one knew of a time before her, and everyone just kind of thought that she was going to go on forever, right?
That's the weird thing.
It's like, everyone's like, okay, she's 96.
We probably should have seen this coming, but nobody saw this coming.
It's weird, isn't it?
It's very, very strange.
One of my friends from America messaged me and said something along the lines, it was on the day that she passed away, said something like, a power grab in Westminster, a power grab in the palace must be going on at the moment.
I was like, oh, you think that this is one of those vacated Senate positions or something and everyone's sort of squirreling behind the scenes?
No, no, no, no, no.
This is dynasty stuff.
This is lineage stuff.
I mean, everyone's been saying it for decades about how Charles has had to wait forever.
He's in his 73.
He's almost as old as an American president.
I doubt there's any power grabbing going on behind the scenes because everyone knows exactly what's going to be.
It's been set in stone for decades.
I watched yesterday on BBC News, I think it was in Otley in West Yorkshire, near Leeds, and the town caller was out.
And apparently the way that the country used to be alerted when there was a mnemonic, because there was no email or post or anything like that, is that they would send messengers out to each town centre, and then the town square, the town caller would come and he would...
Hear ye, hear ye, we haven't blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
And the guy's got this big hat on and there's feathers coming out of it and he's dressed in this sort of kind of ridiculous way.
But to me, that reminds us just how esteemed and how steeped in history this country is.
It's not something which has had to be created.
Almost the fact it's so archaic and kind of silly is important because you go, look, this isn't something that we just created because it was efficient.
This is something which has been grandfathered in over centuries and centuries and centuries.
And watching that, I felt it wouldn't be too much for me to say this is close to the most patriotic I think I've ever felt toward this country.
No, no, I think that's exactly the way people are genuinely feeling about it.
I wasn't expecting the sort of depth of feeling that I saw from people, frankly, towards socialists who would come out and be like, yeah, but I'm a Republican.
It's like, look...
You know, shut up.
Now is just not the time.
You know, you can be an asshole on your own time.
And that is, in fact, what we're going to talk about now.
Because they've come out and, like, there's Jeremy Clarkson, actually.
We'll get into it in a second.
But, like, you really hit them with, like, look, you're just disgusting people.
And this went, you know, ultra-viral.
And they were really upset about this.
It's like, well, sorry, you are being disgusting, people.
Like, this isn't about, like, oh, I want a republic, blah, blah, blah.
This is not about this.
This is about, like, like you were saying, there's a historic continuity that's going on here, and we are suddenly feeling our place on that continuity, you know?
Because up until this point, we'd just, it'd been kind of this unresolved thing in the background.
You'd say, oh, well, that's just silly British things that happen, right?
Yep.
But now it's like, no, the town crier comes out, announces, now we're on our place on the continuum.
This is like an important step, right?
It's an opportunity for modern culture to clash up against with traditional history.
And you're starting to see some of the friction, I think, between those two things.
But the emotion that underpins the tradition is very powerful, actually.
You know, which I didn't really expect.
I kind of expected just people who don't care.
But actually, you know, a lot of people seem to be quite bothered by it.
Yes, and globally as well.
Yeah, yeah.
I mean, Australia, same thing.
Yeah, yeah.
And like, yeah, didn't like Bolsonaro put like three days in mourning or something?
It's like, you were never even part of the Commonwealth.
Like, why is Brazil in mourning?
She's a legend.
Before we go on, if you want to support us, let's go to Loses.com and check out this journalist's rhetorical tricks.
Because the journalists are, of course, basically all socialists as well.
And that's what we've been seeing, this sort of disgusting rhetorical trick.
I don't know how else to describe it as like an assault on the continuity of Britain, right?
That's what's been going on.
And I've been really hating it.
And honestly, I can feel a lot of people, their sentiments hardening against this kind of stuff, whether, you know, they're like, Republic Society, look, just shut up.
Oh, I'm Irish.
I'm black.
I'm this.
I don't care.
Not now.
Yeah, exactly.
I just don't care.
This little victim narrative is just not on.
But anyway, I want to play a couple of clips.
So the first one is from the Navarro media stream, right?
Now look at Michael Walker's smug little face here, right?
Who's this guy?
I'm not familiar with him.
So he's the host of a communist podcast.
Navarra Media, they've got Ash Sarkar, Aaron Bastani, and often have Owen Jones on, right?
So it's the kind of...
Real big hitters, then.
Yeah, actually.
No, no, they are like the London...
In that circle.
Yeah, the London left-wing commentariat, who are always going on the BBC, always going on Good Morning Britain or wherever, and being like, I'm a communist, here's the communist perspective.
And so, what I found interesting about this is the way that Michael could barely contain his mirth at the death of the Queen.
Let's watch.
I mean, it's difficult to know how to approach things like this.
I mean, I'm a Republican, and I assume most of our audience are probably most likely Republicans.
What the BBC tend to say, sort of, in this kind of situation is, look, whether you're a Republican or not, what you can recognise is this woman has worked incredibly hard and been incredibly honourable her whole life.
And for me, that's kind of irrelevant.
Like, I don't have very strong feelings about Queen Elizabeth for her life.
What's kind of relevant to me is lots of people do.
And I know I said at the introduction to this show that I don't want to appear like I'm taking this lightly because I know that lots of people care about this.
Lots of people will be moved by the passing of the Queen and lots of good people will be.
So I don't...
Want to take this lightly, but hearing Liz Truss say, God save the King, at the end of that quite banal speech, did, I mean, it did strike me as a little bit ridiculous.
Ash, what did you make of Liz Truss's statement there?
I mean, big moment for her.
She's only been Prime Minister for two days.
Well, in some ways this would be the ideal opportunity for a Conservative Prime Minister to emphasise their closeness to the institutions of tradition and hierarchy.
So, Ash then goes on and gives, you know, actually not a bad analysis of the situation.
But the thing I want to talk about there is just notice the difference in tone, right?
When he's trying to explain his position, he can barely stop himself from laughing.
Like, to him, this is just absurd.
How could you all be bothered by this?
You know, as he says, you know, saying God save the king is ridiculous.
Like, well, not in the United Kingdom, it's not.
That's actually totally what we should be doing.
And you'll notice how Ash Sarkar actually has the somber tone.
I watched the whole stream and she's actually quite dignified about these things.
Okay, that's remarkable for her.
So that's like the British communist perspective, which was awful, frankly.
But at least he was paying lip service.
Well, a lot of people are upset by this, even though I can't.
Even though it's not me, even though I don't particularly care.
Well, I don't know, man.
It really does...
He didn't say anything to incriminating there particularly.
Something tells me it's around the things that he's not saying than the things that he is saying.
And that's coming out in the smirk.
Correct.
And I also think that...
No matter how tone-deaf you are or how much you see this as a political football opportunity, you know that if you say something that's too egregious right now, it's going to be so inflammatory because of how recent her passing's been that you're going to end up being destroyed.
So what I think people should keep their eyes out for is the sort of rhetoric that you see in two weeks' time, in four weeks' time.
Or the sort of rhetoric an American communist will give us.
Let's go to Hasan Piker's take on this, shall we?
And watch the people around him as well.
What's he wearing?
Oh, God only knows.
It's something camp.
But let's play this next clip.
Oh my God!
She did die!
No, she didn't!
The royal family's official Twitter account said the Queen died peacefully at Balmoral this afternoon.
The King and Queen concert will remain at Balmoral this evening and will return to London tomorrow.
Woo!
Let's go!
Get fucked, Queen!
Pack watch!
Woo!
Smoking on the Queen pack!
Here, have some.
Have some.
You see, the people around was like, dude, this is hot.
Even for you, son.
Wow, that's low.
But notice how hollow it sounds as well.
Like, Queen Elizabeth has never wronged Hassan Piker.
What's she ever done to...
When has he ever mentioned her before?
Dude, that's so uncomfortable.
Yeah, and you can hear the people in the background going, oh my god, you know...
This isn't even internet drama, oh, he's from one view, I'm from another.
That's just...
It's an old lady that worked really hard and was nice for ages...
And you're laughing about it.
Oh my, come on.
And if it was in the reverse, this would be, and you had made some joke about someone that had recently passed that had done a ton of stuff that he agreed with, this would be the most egregious thing.
But it goes further though, doesn't it?
because like like queen elizabeth like we were talking about the sort of genuine totemic position she occupied in the british psyche like she 75 approval rating right like like only 25 of the country weren't like we like queen elizabeth and so it's like basically an entire country it's like yeah she's important to us and so like you can see the people around going oh my god this pushing a bit hard here hassan yeah this feels important and like hassan's just an idiot about oh yeah
and he had a problem with that dude that basically pretended to be a wwe star after he was boxing oh yeah yeah sam hyde yeah Yes.
Well, again, there's more reason for Sam Hyde to keep challenging Hassan.
Yes.
And so I just find this reaction amazing, right?
So the Labour Party, what do you think the Labour Party's response was?
Actually, it wasn't bad, right?
Actually, the Labour Party tweets out a picture of Charles.
God save the king!
What was the response to this like in the comments?
Yeah, yeah, exactly.
But it's not being ratioed, which is nice.
No, but that's the appropriate thing for the Labour Party of the United Kingdom to tweet out the accession of a new monarch.
Yes.
That's right.
The response was not great.
If you can go to the next one, just, why aren't you saying death to monarchy?
Leftists have never looked like that.
No, they've not.
But they did chant death to monarchy.
But this is the, notice they have a guillotine there.
What country are guillotines from?
It's not from our country, is it?
Make themselves look like a bunch of foreigners, don't they?
Like, sorry, do you think the British Labour Party was always like, yeah, we need to overthrow the Queen and execute her?
That's not what the British Labour Party was about.
They were about, can we have some money for poor people?
Some money would be nice, yes.
Anyway, going on, next one.
A party named Labour praising the monarchy.
It is a bottomless pit.
Oh dear.
Oh dear.
Do they not understand how popular the monarchy is with working class people?
Yep.
Look at the people that were out on the streets.
Yeah.
That they were being scornful towards.
Yes.
You know, oh, that's so pathetic.
You're sad because the Queen does.
Yeah.
West Yorkshire that I saw that video of yesterday is hardly the stronghold of the bourgeoisie.
And it's just people that are out there that want to pay respects to someone that they feel...
It's so strange to feel this modern culture that allows people to say and do things that previously would have been reprehensible.
Yeah.
This is...
Into the Tower with you stuff a couple of centuries ago.
Oh yeah.
But now it's like, well, if the Labour Party isn't here to chop off the Queen's head, and if you get to the next one, they literally are like, what's the purpose of the Labour Party now?
What are you talking about?
What's the purpose of the Labour Party?
Yeah, because the Labour Party was only here to be anti-monarchy for all of time.
Yeah, exactly.
It was nothing to do with anti-monarchy.
And this, again, very much French opinions that have snuck into the Labour Party at some point.
But yeah, unsurprisingly, Sir Keir Starmer isn't an anti-monarchist at this point.
Well, the guy that was knighted.
Yes.
Perhaps unsurprisingly.
You do know that that's who's leading.
Should he have rescinded his knighthood?
Exactly.
Should he have stood for the king to put the...
That would have been one.
Or the opposite of kneeling, whatever it would have been.
But if you're the Labour Party of the United Kingdom...
What are you trying to be the leaders of if you're like, we're anti-monarchy?
It's like, sorry, the UK is a monarchy.
The entire bedrock of the country is that it is a united kingdom.
There's not going to be a Republic of Britain Because there'd be nothing holding it together, you know?
At best, you could have, say, an English Republic, but do you really want an English Republic?
That's going to be bloody far right, isn't it?
You know?
Like, that's going to be incredible.
Imagine if the English suddenly get the option to vote for the person in charge.
They're going to vote for Tommy Robinson.
They're going to vote someone really far right, and so the socialists will be like, oh no, this isn't the republic we were looking for.
You idiots don't even understand what you're asking for when you ask for these things.
Just imagine the average bloody Labour voter in the heartlands, just what their opinions are, and then compare them to the metropolitan elite.
Yeah, there's a big disparity there.
Do you think there's a bigger disparity in America between the elites and the...
No, not at all.
The same?
I think it's smaller.
Because the American right are Republicans.
You know, they're the Republicans.
So they come from the sort of Enlightenment rationalist tradition.
Whereas we're not in Britain.
We come out of the feudal tradition...
And so the people who are asking for essentially the French Revolution are a million miles away from those people just in the working class areas.
Be careful what you ask for.
Exactly.
And I don't think there's people who want to get rid of the monarchy at all.
We like the monarchy.
It's part of our country.
It's cool.
I remember I graduated from Newcastle University and they come out and there's a mace bearer and everybody doths their caps to the vice chairman of whatever.
I remember watching and I was 22 and I just got back from Ibiza, so I was barely conscious.
But as I was watching it, I remember thinking, This is really cool.
It's really...
And it's the same as the town crier that I saw on the news.
There's something...
You can't make it up.
No, there's something that...
It steeps you in this country's very long and illustrious history.
And yes, there are parts of it that are embarrassing and rubbish.
We just did...
We were bad at being a country during some periods of that.
But it is awesome to be around in a country that's got trees that are older than America.
Yeah, I know.
It's brilliant, isn't it?
We've got pubs that are older than America.
Which are about to be shut down.
I watched the episode the other day with the boys that we're talking about.
It's not good, is it?
No.
Anyway, so let's see what CNN had to say.
Let's go to the colonies.
What did CNN have to say?
There is the generation of multicultural and diverse Britons who want this answered, who want to see their monarch finally talk about what it means and what, you know, potentially the idea of reparations, definitely justice, right?
Justice.
Where are you finding these clips from?
CNN? Oh my god.
What do you think?
Reparations for the British Empire now that Queen Elizabeth has died?
Do you mean the empire which was the most influential in stopping slavery?
The ones that began slavery to be ceased?
Yeah.
Need to pay some reparations.
These people...
They're talking about reparations to the king of Nigeria for stopping the slave trade.
Think how much money we deprive Nigeria of from all those slaves we didn't allow them to trade.
Just think how much.
We're terrible.
Oh my god.
How awful are we?
And that was purely ideological.
We were like, no, slavery's wrong.
And they were like, yeah, but this is how we make our money.
There is no news story which is beyond the pale for being used as a political football to be kicked around, is there?
The death of a queen who's served for 70 years is not something that is outside the Overton window of, let's use this to see if we can score some points on our side.
but that i'm glad you were up sides because i think what this has done is shown us who's on our side like the normal people side and who's a communist revolutionary frankly who you know the sort of person who'd be like look this institution goes back to alfred the great we need to get rid of it it's like look i don't trust you to get rid of it yes i don't think you've got the competence to replace this thing i learned i learned the other day about um rules that are set in street fights I'm going to bring this back, I promise.
So in a street fight, typically between two men, you won't see eye gouging, kicks to the groin, nipping and fish hooking and stuff like that.
And the reason is that what two men are doing when they fight is they're trying to judge who is the stronger person.
Now, if you start to cheat, It no longer becomes a reliable indicator of who is the stronger person.
So even in a balls-to-the-wall, all-out fight between two men, there are still rules of combat, right?
This should have rules of combat in it.
There are situations that occur.
It wouldn't surprise me if Joe Biden, perhaps, was to encounter some medical issues at some point during his time as president.
And if somebody from the right started gleefully shouting about it, I would say that's a biticky.
Yeah.
That's...
When he fell off his bike, do you remember he fell...
He's an old man.
Exactly.
Falling off a bicycle.
Exactly.
I didn't do a segment going, like, ha-ha, look at that, Joe Biden nearly broke his hip.
You know, because that's gross.
Yeah.
You know, that's really gross, you know, and this is exactly the same.
Just a quick film on the street fight.
I find this interesting.
I've been thinking about this.
Like, why is it that men fight to resolve issues?
Does that actually resolve an issue?
And I was thinking about this.
There is a way that it actually does, because what it says is that I'm going to go the distance from On this conviction.
Yes.
As in, you know, and the fact that you bring up the rules thing is very interesting.
It's like, look, it's not just that we're going to have a fight about it.
It's that I'm going to keep fighting until you accept the validity of my position.
The guy who backs down first is the guy who shows the least amount of conviction for his position.
Correct.
Right.
That's what it's about.
And on the other side of that, I mean, you'll remember this from school.
I'm sure that perhaps your young'uns have done this already.
You get into a fight with someone, and on the other side of that, there's this unbelievable bond.
You actually end up...
I remember in school, some of the people that got into fights together became best friends afterwards.
Didn't you hate each other?
Yeah, we're best friends now.
Because there is something that you bond together.
A test of character.
But had someone have pulled out the groin kick, right, or the eye gouge, that would have been game over.
That wouldn't have...
So, yes, there are rules of combat that people...
Even if they're unwritten, do you need to be taught that talking about stuff like this in a time when the Queen's body is still pretty warm is a bit uncouth?
Yeah.
Probably not.
And you're not even from the same...
Maybe you could say, oh, they don't understand British traditions and stuff.
All right, what happened when your grandma died?
Did everybody immediately start talking about who should divvy up the inheritance?
Or did you let everyone mourn a little bit first?
Yeah.
I mean, when 9-11 happened, we were like, only 3,000 people.
Is that it?
I mean, we've taken way worse casualties.
No, we didn't say that.
Yes.
You know, of course not.
Now isn't the time.
September 11th, that was supposed to run very timely.
Exactly, yeah.
And so I think this really highlights, like, who is on our side and who's not.
Because this is a clip from Tucker Carlson's segment, and it's the night and day, night and day, as to who is, in my opinion, a decent human being and who isn't.
Let's watch this.
The very least you can say about the English is that they took their colonial responsibilities seriously.
They didn't just take things, they added.
When the US government withdrew from Afghanistan after 20 years, we left behind airstrips, shipping containers, and guns.
When the British pulled out of India, they left behind an entire civilization, a language, a legal system, schools, churches and public buildings, all of which are still in use today.
Here's the train station the English built in Bombay, for example.
There's nothing like that in Washington, D.C. right now, much less in Kabul or Baghdad.
Today, India is far more powerful than the UK, the nation that once ruled it.
And yet, after 75 years of independence, has that country produced a single building as beautiful as the Bombay train station that the British colonialists built?
No, sadly it has not.
Not one.
So despite what they may be claiming on Twitter tonight, the British Empire was more than just genocide.
In fact, the British did not commit genocide, except arguably against the Dutch during the Boer War.
The British did give the world the Magna Carta and habeas corpus and free speech.
They helped end the transatlantic slave trade, as well as the ritual murder of widows in India.
The British Empire spread Protestant Christianity to the entire world.
It published some of the greatest literature ever written and produced the finest manufactured goods ever made anywhere at any time, including now.
It was an impressive place run by impressive people.
Nine day, isn't it?
Thank you, Tucker.
Yeah.
Well, what do you think is the difference fundamentally, philosophically, between those two videos that we've just watched?
Why is it that Tucker is speaking?
He's not invested in the UK in any particular way any more than somebody from CNN should be.
What is it philosophically that is the difference that's driving the changes in messaging?
I think it's something that Edmund Burke described as something the French revolutionaries did, which is to create a pedigree of crimes, right?
So what Burke was saying is that the French revolutionaries had ransacked through the histories of former ages.
And find anything that they considered to be a moral wrong, and then kind of add them together in this narrative.
It's a one-sided narrative of, oh, this bad thing happened, the king did this, going back hundreds of years, as we are now.
And, uh, and this is used as a justification to demonize and overthrow the thing that they're talking about.
Whereas Tucker hasn't done that.
He has given you a positive narrative, but he did say, well, you know, there's, you know, uh, possibly a genocide against the Boaz, you know, but the, you know, this one thing and then there's other things.
And so it's not just all one way, you know?
And so essentially Tucker is providing you a positive, but not totalizing narrative.
Whereas the ransacking through the history of former eras is a totalizing narrative.
There's only one series of bad events, and therefore you can come away with the impression, well, that thing must be all bad.
And this is what Edmund Burke was saying about the French nobility.
It's like, well, they're nicer to the peasants than the English nobility in his experience, and he'd been over there.
So he was like, if you guys are bad, then we must be worse.
So that's what I think underpins it, basically.
It just feels like reverence.
It feels like a nice respectable response from someone.
And that's really all I'm bothered about.
I don't care if you agree.
I don't care if you like the monarchy or not.
Just have a little bit of respect.
That's it.
Yeah.
And that's exactly it.
It's about respect, isn't it?
And it's about the way that you treat people.
So let's go to David Starkey, right?
He was on GB News and he was making obviously amazing points because if anyone, you know, the guy to talk about the passing of Queen Elizabeth is definitely David Starkey.
So you can go watch those in your own time.
And so he starts trending on Twitter because people are like, oh, he did a brilliant job here, didn't he?
And so what was the socialist response?
We can go to the next one.
Saw the racist and bigoted David Starkey was trending.
Sadly, my hopes were dashed.
He's still alive and a racist bigot.
I think it's a different one.
But this is one of, you know, one of the many things, right?
And so Jeremy Clarkson tweeted out, it's just awful, isn't it?
Right?
This is the one I was talking about, yeah.
And it's just like, look, that's just awful to say about anyone, for any reason.
Purely ideological.
Completely ideological.
And so Jeremy Clarkson just tweeted out, Twitter is a handy and constant reminder that socialists are disgusting people.
145,000 likes because it's true.
Wow.
Well, this is the litmus test, right?
It's been the canary in the coal mine for whether or not you can put aside the political football opportunities in place of just being a normal human.
And this is one of the things where, especially on Twitter, when I see people that morally grandstand, that tweet these sorts of things, to me, from the outside, as someone who doesn't know the person that tweeted it or their private life or anything else, it's usually an identifier that I don't think that person is a very good person.
I don't think that they're very nice.
And I don't think that they're all that happy.
I have never been motivated to tweet the sort of things that we've gone through today about even my worst enemy.
I'm going to be gleeful about someone's death.
Why not say something really nice to Jeremy Clarkson to prove him wrong?
So this one I found hilarious.
Some guy from Harry Potter replied to him saying, shut the F up, you rancid old thug.
Right, okay.
Jeremy Clarkson says, socialists are disgusting people, and you replied by being a disgusting person.
Well, you showed him.
Sean Biggestaff.
How dare you?
Never even heard of him.
Apparently he's a no-name from Harry Potter.
I think, based on that first photo, that he was the captain of the Quidditch team in the first ever Harry Potter.
That's me showing my nerdiness.
But yeah, just dunk on Jeremy Clarkson, Quidditch player.
Yes.
Shut the F up, you rancid old thug.
Again, your class is showing.
It's really peeking out from underneath your skirt there.
Anyway, so this kept going.
And you've got people, like, complaining that, like, at some point Charles with his sausage fingers, if you can scroll down a bit.
He needed something moving, didn't he?
Yeah, and so, like, I don't know what the service is.
Is there audio for this?
Sorry.
I don't know, actually.
Is there audio?
No, it doesn't seem to be.
But there is.
You can hear him moving the stuff, so he's not said anything.
Listen.
Hear that?
Oh yeah, very briefly, yeah.
So had he have said, get this, because without sound on, that sounds like he's going, get this, what is this rubbish, get it out of the way.
But he's not, he's just saying, would we be able to move this?
He is under, could you say that this could- I mean, what a day for him.
Yeah, it's a little bit of pressure.
Have you ever been under pressure and then there's something that's not quite right and you go, God.
And your mum's just died.
But also this might be about protocol or something.
It may be that he's not allowed to touch it.
I don't know.
From some rule from 1527 where the monarch isn't allowed to touch the ink well or something.
As the man with the embroidered sleeves comes in, perhaps there could be something in there.
And everyone's like, oh, look, he's a terrible guy.
And so Not My King started trending from this.
And it's like, oh, shut up, right?
But then you've got takes like this.
And I thought this was amazing, right?
In the space of three days, we have a Prime Minister that 99.3% of the population never voted for, and a King and a Prince that 100% of the population never voted for.
The UK has many things, but a democracy isn't one of them.
It's like, okay.
And so the next one you get, like, Jedward going, abolish the monarchy.
This is who I go to.
This is who I go to for my political hot takes.
I want to hear from the two tallest fringes in British TV 15 years ago.
And they're Irish.
So I don't take an Irishman's opinion on the British monarchy, ever.
Next one, right?
So people in denial about...
Oh, sorry, no.
Don't write.
Yeah, so this one, right?
This, I think, is fascinating, right?
Look at the statement here.
I am a lifelong Republican, and he is not my king.
I want to live in a normal country with a written constitution, clear separation of powers, proportional electoral system, an elected second chamber, and an enshrined set of rights and absolutely no kings, queens, or princes.
Where is that normal?
Is there a country that this is in now?
America doesn't have a proportional electoral system, so that country doesn't exist anywhere.
I want an imagined country.
A normal country that's entirely hypothetical.
Well, just go somewhere else.
Well, where can he go?
Where can he go to find that?
Anywhere.
He can't go anywhere to find that.
Yes, but anywhere that's not here would be nice for me.
Yeah, yeah, no, I agree.
I would enjoy it.
Sent from Brighton.
You're not far from the coast.
Yeah, exactly.
But this is the opinion in Brighton.
It's like, look, that's not normal.
It's actually normal to have constitutional monarchies in Europe.
Like, most European countries are actually still constitutional monarchies.
Do you know where else in the world still has a constitutional monarchy?
Oh, probably like Taiwan or...
But not many places.
Thailand, sorry.
A few places.
Yeah.
Well, a lot of places would have had monarchies had the Europeans not gone and conquered them.
Right, yes.
I'm not terribly sympathetic.
But in Europe, it's very normal to have constitutional monarchies.
And then he's like, okay, well, I want, like, what is essentially, I think he's asking for in the United States here, because, I mean, God forbid we have kings, queens, or princes, because, I mean, you get inequality, wouldn't you, like in Britain?
Is the system working yet?
Well, okay, let's go over to the most, the closest place I could find that represented his normality was California.
Let's have a look at how things are going.
California!
Oh yeah, right, that's it.
12% of the country's population, but 30% of the homeless population.
California is a state that shows what American politicians can do with an unlimited budget.
It's incredible, isn't it?
Which is to say completely annihilated.
But it's also the most unequal place on Earth, because the most billionaires in all of the world live in California.
So the Gini coefficient of inequality will be at its highest, more than South Africa.
Yes, more than the United Kingdom, with our monarchy.
It's more unequal.
If you go to the next one, you see that they're the fifth largest economy in the world, and they have, of course, the most billionaires...
At all.
And it's just unbelievable.
And California is the closest that he would find to his quote-unquote normal country.
So it's all a lie.
It's all false.
And of course, California is collapsing because they keep shutting down energy plants and things like this.
But we'll leave that one there because this leads us on nicely to...
The next segment I want to talk about and how the future isn't looking very good, is it?
It's uplifting today.
We're really bringing that lively energy after the Queen has passed.
Now let's talk about how terrible the future might be.
Yes.
Yes.
So, before we begin, if you want to support us, go over to LotusEast.com and check out my speech that I gave at the Witan conference called The Word and the Shire.
This is what I think people on the right need to be doing, and my analysis of the circumstance.
And one of the things I was really proud about with this is being able to tie everything that we're doing onto the historical continuity of England, basically.
It's, you know...
One of those things that we don't think about, but we maybe should, because you'll notice that everyone's like, well, I'm black and I find that offensive.
I'm Irish and I find that offensive.
Okay, well, in the wake of the way that the socialists, I was going to swear, have reacted in the death of Queen Elizabeth, I'm English and I find that offensive, right?
Is that not a valid way of approaching this?
If this is your paradigm...
Shut up, basically.
It's how I feel about it, you know?
And so am I allowed to articulate this perspective?
And so that's essentially a sort of, like, look at postmodern Englishness.
But I think it's important.
Anyway, so this is much more your wheelhouse, I think, Chris.
Things are getting bad, aren't they, socially?
There are more single working women than ever, and that's changing the US economy.
An article on CNN here.
Yep.
Because this is from 2019, but we'll build on it.
45% of women are expected to be single by 2030.
That's Reuters, is it not?
Or maybe Morgan Stanley.
Morgan Stanley, yes.
Yeah, well, I mean, the more worker drones that they have, the better.
You know, if they can continue to make women believe that they need to buy bags and shoes to impress people that they hate at a job that they don't enjoy...
The more that they're going to be able to rinse money out of them.
Now, I put a clip out about this on my channel.
I know, I saw it.
That's what inspired this.
Which got people really, really riled up.
It ventured into areas of Twitter that I'm not usually exposed to and people got very upset.
I think the biggest...
The main point I wanted to make with this, apart from the fact that this is a very nefarious capitalist viewpoint from certain companies in order to maximise their labour force and squeeze as much out of them as possible, is that it causes people to view mothers as second-class citizens.
That, for me, is the thing which is most uncomfortable about it.
My mum stopped working for...
We were a very working-class household, so it was three people living on three-quarters of a person's wage, right?
It wasn't as if I came from some lavish background.
And I really, really appreciate all of the effort that my mum did.
And for someone to say that she was conned, rubed into being some willful tool of the patriarchy, this heteronormative patriarchal superstructure which is misogynistically keeping all women down, that Makes me feel very, very uncomfortable.
I don't like that at all.
By what standard?
Like, by the standard of working in an office?
Like, that's the question.
So, I mean, like, the way they frame everything about this, right?
One of the biggest barriers that remains to female workers is access to childcare.
It's like, great, yeah, your children should be in a daycare, and you should be in the office.
And it's because of the lack of being able to put the children in the daycare that you're not in the office.
But who wants to be in the bloody office?
I don't know why.
I asked Will Costello this, who's the guy that was on the show with me that day, and I said, what is it about this male default which is being pushed as the thing which is aspirational for everybody to go toward?
Why is it the case that people should see attainment in work and being disagreeable and being hyper-industrious within the workplace as the thing that everybody is supposed to aim for?
Now, Would it be good...
Feminism takes men as a default.
Yes.
Would it be good for everybody to have a degree of financial independence?
Yes, absolutely.
Especially given the fact that a single person's working wage is now kind of difficult to sustain a household on.
And no matter how much you try and date up and across, there are not going to be an unlimited number of men that can sustain an entire household.
So yeah, women need to be able to contribute in that way.
But it should not be the case that a woman that is...
20 years old and maybe finishes a university degree and thinks, I really can't wait to be a mum, considers herself a second-class citizen.
That, to me, is actively disincentivising us creating the generation which is going to look after all of us when we get old.
Yeah.
But, I mean, it's just...
Like, who does it benefit?
Because, I mean...
If I asked you to estimate do women respect men who earn more than them or less than them, you know the answer.
Every man knows the answer.
There is basically double to three times the increased likelihood of a marriage ending in divorce when the woman earns more than the man.
There is a statistically significant increase in the use of erectile dysfunction medication.
Women fake more orgasms with men that don't earn as much as them.
I think it's a lot more about...
It's unsympathetic.
...an inherent power imbalance.
And the bottom line is that most men don't care about what the woman does for a job.
Most women do care about what the man does for a job.
Would you date a man that is unemployed, was asked of most women, and more than three-quarters of women said no, that they wouldn't.
I... But if men were asked, would you date a woman who's unemployed?
It'd be preferable, actually, yeah.
In some ways, yeah.
Here's the other thing as well.
Almost all women, when surveyed, said that getting to the stage where they can stay at home if they want to is an aspirational life goal for them.
My grandmother's life is an aspirational life goal.
Chop would carry water, man.
Yeah, no, I totally agree.
But the thing is, I mean, like, if women weren't being encouraged en masse, well, you've all got to get degrees and get jobs working in the corporate bigwig headquarters in London, then maybe this would be easier.
Well, you're going to have two women for every one man completing a four-year US college by 2030.
Women aged 21 to 29 are out-earning men by £1,111 per year on average.
All of these things, fantastic.
Like, women for a good while...
Aren't they fantastic, are they?
Women for a good while weren't able to earn their fair share.
They didn't have the equality of access that they did in the workplace, and that required a pendulum swing.
I fear that it is swinging back and downstream from this.
This is the topic of Louise Perry's work, of Mary Harrington's work, of Will Costello's work, of David Buss.
This is part of the broader mating crisis, which is that a proliferation of high-performing women and a reduction in the number of men that are above and across from them means that it is very difficult for them to find someone they're fundamentally attracted to.
Women are fundamentally attracted to men who have more status, more education, and more resources than they do.
If you do not have that, women are going to have to date down.
They're going to have to reduce the hypergamy.
They don't like dating down.
They don't.
However, they're starting to.
There's a little bit of evidence that suggests that women are beginning to date down.
However, this is going up in line perfectly.
It is correlated exactly with increases in extramarital affairs for women only.
So women are prepared to date down, but they're also going to Because presumably they're struggling to remain as attracted to the guy.
And for the people that haven't been introduced to evolutionary psychology and these precepts before, it can sound like a very sort of transactional, sterile way of looking at relationships.
And this is on average.
This is not for me to say that you are not able to get into a relationship with a man who doesn't earn as much as you and have a fantastic marriage.
That is absolutely true.
However, on average, this is not the way that this seems to work.
And the statistics bear this out.
Women are...
Women want men they can look up to.
That's what it is.
They genuinely do.
And why that would be a bad thing, I'm not sure.
Well, if you're a feminist, then what you're establishing there is that women actually want a superior man.
That's not equality.
That's horrendous from the feminist perspective.
But it turns out that the feminist perspective isn't really representative of what women actually want.
I saw a meme a little while ago that said...
Feminists a couple of decades ago have got us to the stage where men are able to smoke weed and stay on the couch playing Xbox all day and consider that an equitable relationship.
Yeah, that's a win.
How's that good for women?
Well played.
The main thing for me is the celebration of motherhood.
I think that really should be front and centre.
Well, let's talk about the celebration of motherhood.
How many children do you think people are having these days?
Not enough.
It's going to be more women are without children than with children by the age of 30 than ever.
That's the first time in history, 50.1%.
Yes.
And when asked, this was in 2021, 44% of non-parents between 18 and 49 say it's unlikely they'll have children someday, which is an increase of 7% from the 2018 survey.
So in three years, people are even more unlikely to have children.
74% of younger adults, sorry, adults younger than 50, who are already parents, of course, say they're unlikely to have more kids.
And a majority of non-parents, 56%, younger than 50, say that it's unlikely they'll have children some days.
They just don't want kids.
It's like, oh, okay.
It really blows my mind that something which has been baked into our evolutionary precepts for so long has been undone by a few decades of culture.
I think it shows just how mediated our normal desires are.
Survival and reproduction, two things, right?
That's it.
And we've abandoned the reproduction bit.
It's really, it's almost impressive.
It really does blow my mind and I keep on speaking to these guys that are at the forefront of the research on this.
David Buss, the grandfather of evolutionary psychology.
Jeffrey Miller, who's probably one of the fathers of it as well.
How is it that culture is able to mediate and negate and dissolve so many of these I think what it is, is because it's the difference between pleasure and satisfaction, right?
So it takes a long time and a lot of work to be satisfied with something.
But there's a kind of sublime feeling about it that you can't really replicate.
However, what you can do is obscure that by triggering dopamine receptors.
Take this drug, have the sex.
The modern devil is cheap dopamine.
Exactly right.
That's exactly right.
And so when you get someone addicted to that kind of cheap dopamine hit, why would they want to give that up?
Even though it's making them depressed and miserable, and it's ruining their life incrementally, because the more years you do this, the more The less of a payback you get for that dopamine increase.
Whereas the longer you find yourself in a sort of life frame of being satisfied, the longer that goes on for, the more satisfied you are and the happier you become.
Have you seen the graphs that are predicting the growth of Mormons in America?
I have, yeah.
Yeah, it's the only, I think it's Mormons in some other religious group.
Probably the Amish or something.
Yes, I think it might be.
Everybody in America is going to be Mormon or Amish within the next 300 years or something like that.
I mean, that's because we are looking literally at a population collapse.
And this is the thing.
It's like, okay, well, you, for now, can say, well, I don't need to, and it's not my problem.
But actually, if you, going back to the sort of, you know, thousand-year traditional inheritance that Britain has, well, there is a form of labor that underpins that, that everyone actually does owe to the civilization itself, which is to reproduce and have kids.
Right.
This was your point.
Who's going to look after you when you get older?
Yeah, exactly.
Because my kids will look after me.
They're not going to look after some stranger because my kids love me, you know, and so they'll want to, hopefully.
You know, everything goes well.
Keep playing your cards right with them.
I'm doing my best.
But the point is, like, there is no civilization if we don't continue it on.
And so this will be like, well, I just don't want children.
It's like, look, I don't really think that's your choice, actually.
I've actually got to the point where I'm like, no, no, if you don't, you will be miscarrying something that was handed to you.
So you think that it's the duty of people to have children?
Yes.
That is a...
A forward-thinking point.
That's one that I haven't come across yet.
Well, it's because it's become so evident that, like, this is one of the things that Edmund Burke always says.
Look, the good thing about traditions is they allow us to build up a stock of good things, right?
So laws, you know, resources, all of these things can be built up and preserved over time, and these are passed down from generation to generation.
But we've arrived at the generation that's like, actually, that's not my problem.
I don't care.
I'm just going to be the beneficiaries of all of these things I've inherited.
Without contributing to it.
Exactly.
And not even without contributing.
It's one thing to not contribute, but it's another thing to destroy it.
And when you say, I'm not having children, what you're saying is, I'm literally just going to obliterate this continuity that's been going on for this time.
That ends with me.
And it's like, that's really goddamn arrogant.
And if that's the case, why should you be the beneficiary of any of it?
That's the question.
What right do you have to say, I'm going to destroy this continuity?
Well, perhaps that explains a little bit around why the boss bitch, lean-in, disagreeable career path is becoming celebrated, because you know that there isn't going to be anybody that's genetically there to look after you.
But if you earn...
300 grand a year, perhaps you can just get yourself into a private care home when you're 75, and then you'll be looked after.
So you are surrogating children, you're surrogating money for children, basically.
And that, I don't know, man.
But think about it, like, state pensions and stuff like this, right?
Like, who do you think is paying for that?
Like, someone's going to have to come after you and pay for you to be in a care home, and if you would turn around and say, well, look, I'm just not going to have children because I feel like not doing it, it's like, okay, but you are now expecting something without having put in the work.
There's a certain kind of labor that is raising a family that you are relying on some other people to do for you, you selfish parasite.
I can't remember the country.
I want to say it's some Scandi, Netherlandsy place that offers women a 25% reduction in their income tax for the first child.
I suspect it's Denmark.
25% for the second and then 100% for the third.
Oh, wow.
So if you have three children, you pay no income tax.
Hungary, I think, was doing the same thing.
Very well might be.
That, I mean...
That's a great incentive.
Unbelievable incentive.
I would love it if the government would, like, take my tax away.
That's for your wife, not for you.
Well, my money can go through my wife.
I mean, most of it goes to her anyway.
Look, the HMRC are listening, so let's try and...
No, no, no.
You can always figure these things out.
Creative accountant.
Oh, yeah.
My point being, that to me sounds so...
Look, you now have both sides of what it is that you want to do.
The amount of work that you do contribute as a woman is maximised because you're not going to have any of it taken away by the state and you're incentivised to have children.
But this is still in the Morgan Stanley paradigm, right?
If we can go to the next one...
This is exactly my problem, right?
Because the Morgan Stanley paradigm, this is the article I think this all comes from.
Yes, it is.
The rise of the she-economy, right?
Listen to the framing, right?
In the past, educational, lower-paying occupational choices largely drove the pay gap, says one chief U.S. economist.
Today, motherhood is by far the largest contributor to the wage gap, since women who become mothers often choose to stop working or work fewer hours.
It's like, okay, but we need people.
We need people in the future.
Demography is destiny.
Yes, this is an obligation that only women can fulfill.
And so it's like, you actually have a duty here.
And so men have the obligation on a civilizational timeline to provide the resources to women to be able to raise the generations of the future in order to pass down those things that we ourselves right now consider to be good that we have inherited.
But you want a welfare state, you want, you know, like, property rights, you want habeas corpus, you want any of the good things that you think we have, well, they were passed to you from history.
So you have an obligation to pass that along, and you need to produce people to do that.
So actually, I do think we end up realizing, actually, we have an obligation here.
Well, you need to incentivize it.
You're not going to go around enforcing...
I mean, I don't know how you would...
Jordan Peterson would disagree.
Enforced monogamy, that wasn't what he meant.
You know that's not what he meant, Carl.
He meant culturally reinforced monogamy.
I agree with that, though.
Yes.
I agree.
I think that celebrating couples, I think that Louise Perry's book, I know that you guys are going to maybe do some stuff on that soon, which is amazing, by the way.
People should check that out.
Case Against the Sexual Revolution.
Loveless sex is not empowering.
No.
Right?
You decoupled sex from making babies with a pill.
That's a piece of toothpaste that's not going back in the bottle, I think.
But...
Decoupling love and connection from having sex, that was something which is very, very dangerous.
And somehow women are being told that this is something that they're supposed to put on a pedestal.
You should be able to out-shag men.
And there's articles from Cosmopolitan and Elle and these girl magazines that are, how to sleep with a one-night stand without catching feels.
There's a similar part of- How gross is that?
Dude, it's awful.
It's awful.
How to disembody yourself from the person that you're literally allowing inside of you.
And look, this can sound like old fuddy-duddy stuff.
And I come from a background in the nightlife industry, right?
So I've observed this firsthand.
But I genuinely believe that it is the best way to treat yourself and the relationships that you have as if they mean something.
Does this mean that casual sex has to go out of the window?
No, it doesn't.
But it doesn't mean that you should throw yourself away for no reason at all.
And here's the other thing as well.
The adversarial relationship between men and women grows bigger and bigger if every time that a man has sex with a woman, it's seen like she loses and it's seen like a man wins.
Men have been working with women for all of time.
Intrasexual competition, which is competition within the sex as opposed to between the sexes, is significantly higher than intersexual competition.
Women compete amongst themselves for mates, for resources to make sure that their allo parenting, shared parenting is done effectively.
And men compete amongst themselves for status, for resources to make sure that they get access to the best mates.
Men and women are not enemies.
Every single time that something like this comes out, it suggests that they are.
Every woman's gain is a man's loss and vice versa.
Therefore, the zero-sum mentality means that we should continue doing this.
And it's kind of mad as well, because it's like, okay, here's how you can out-shag a man.
It's like, any woman, anywhere, in any time period, could out-shag a man.
Because that's not how it works.
Well, she could do it, but it's going to hurt a lot more.
Sure, but the point is, the access to sex is much easier for a woman, because women are the gatekeepers of access to sex, because it has negative consequences, if done in inappropriate ways, obviously, you know.
Get pregnant, have to bear a child.
And so it's like the very Cosmo-like framing.
It's like, here's how Shagamag.
It's like, that's like saying here's how Zuby can outlift a woman.
Yes.
It's like, of course.
You know, this is ridiculous.
Why would you buy a magazine like that?
But for some...
But how to do it and not catch feels is just...
So Louise says in her book, she talks about this diary of a prostitute or an escort.
And she's talking about one of the first skills that you need to develop as a prostitute is how not to throw up when you're having sex with a client.
Because what is happening to you emotionally and what is happening to you physically are things that are very difficult to separate.
When you think, okay, that doesn't seem like it's the sort of world that we should be pushing people toward.
It doesn't, does it?
No, man.
And then, you know, the final point, this article that I found from Business Week that was talking about this lady that was celebrating a single life and was happy with the no child and no family and stuff.
And for some women, that is the case.
There are women out there for whom this is correct.
However, saying that there are costs to being childless, single women pay more in taxes.
It's also significantly more difficult to get a mortgage given the fact that interest rates are on the rise.
Am I... You cannot write an article about this extolling the virtues of being a boss bitch and say that the only costs are the increases in your taxes and the difficulty in getting a single-person mortgage.
But honestly, that is exactly the only framing from Morgan Stanley.
They've literally been like, well, we're doing a great job to end the gender pay gap.
That's totally ideological.
Nobody in the real world cares about the gender pay gap.
It's totally abstract.
But anyway, there were a couple of other things I wanted to talk about on this one.
Apparently, it's not growing older that makes you more conservative.
It's having children that makes you more conservative.
And so this, as they say, indicates that actually the people who are like absconding their duty to have children to pass on the civilization to the next generation, is it any wonder that our civilization is becoming more left-wing?
That's very interesting.
I hadn't seen that.
Isn't it?
Yes.
So they say that researchers have found that people who do not have children tend to be more socially liberal than parents, which is counter to the idea that people just become naturally more conservative as they age.
Actually, no.
As they say, there's this idea that you get older and you become conservative from experience and being bitten by the real world.
That doesn't seem to be the case.
If you look at people who are not parents, you do not see an age difference.
And I tell you what, I think I have seen this from my own life, because what it comes down to, right, is about taking responsibility for something else.
And that's what all of this is about.
Like, if you go back to the Morgan Stanley one, sorry, the CNN one, don't worry about going back to it, but in there they say, oh, well, these women are, the apparel and footwear, personal care, food and luxury sectors of the economy are going to get a boost with women being single.
So, right, so they're going to be self-indulgent.
They're going to be selfish and lazy and our civilization is going to burn up all of the good things we've inherited that we've failed to pass down because a bunch of selfish single women are going to burn it up in their own pleasure, basically.
That's what they're saying.
And the people who are conservative are like, I need to think about setting the rules going forward for after I'm dead.
That's what they're thinking about.
There's this Donald Kingsbury quote that I always come back to that says, "Tradition is a set of solutions for which we have forgotten the problems." Take the solution away and often the problem comes back just as big as it ever was.
And it's baby and bathwater continues to go out.
And the kernel of truth that's at the center of a lot of these discussions, the fact that it was right for us to be able to give women equal access, to be able to go to university, to be able to go and get a job.
However, when the pendulum swings way too far the other way, you go, oh, hang on a second.
How much baby has been thrown out?
Because that's bath and everything.
The sink's gone out with it.
Well, the concept of women having a responsibility to something that isn't themselves, that's the problem.
Because that's what all of this is about.
It's like, no, you can be a girl boss and have all of the luxuries in the world.
It's like, okay, but what do you owe to someone else?
Oh, women don't know anything to anyone.
Yeah, you do.
You owe it to your mother, to your grandmother, to your grandfather, to the previous generations.
And you owe something to those people who are expected to come after you, which is producing people who will come after you.
I'd be very interested to hear a critique and a breakdown of that because the demography is destiny thing and the shape that you get of your population graph, which at the moment...
It's around about like that, I think, in the US and in the UK. It's like this in China, which is why they're completely wrecked, and it's like this in a lot of the African countries.
You need more young people than old people.
They're the ones that generate GDP. They're the ones that do consumer spending.
They're the ones that do innovation and continue to drive so forward.
And physically, they're the ones that look after the old people.
They keep the lights on.
If it's the other way round, it's a very bad situation.
But then this leads across into the, well, you know, there's far too many people on the planet anyway, and the overpopulation and the climate change and stuff.
So you have this very strange sort of crossing of the streams of all of these different intersecting ideologies.
I just want to grab these people and go, listen, right?
Without people in the future, there is no civilisation.
You know, this collapses, the lights go off, everyone goes hungry, and it goes really bad.
Well, good.
Humans are a scourge on the earth anyway.
We'll stop hurting and scorching the ground, and we'll stop killing the fish, and the coral reefs will come back.
And so, is that not some sort of insurrectionist perspective against our own existence?
Human racism, Alex Epstein calls it.
Yeah, I'm definitely prejudiced in favour of humanity.
Unfortunately, so am I. I'm not very progressive in that way.
But anyway, let's move on to the real red pill.
So in the wake of the anniversary of 9-11, it's now 21, you can vote.
No, you can drink, sorry, in America.
In the wake of this, you get people talking about the 9-11 attacks.
It's like, okay...
I'm not saying there are no conspiracies, but I think it's actually worse because I think actually conspiracy theory thinking is a kind of crutch.
Because actually, it's way worse than there being a conspiracy.
The concept of conspiracy implies that there is a personal group of people out there who have sufficient agency to manage events.
And I don't think there is.
I think it's way worse.
In fact, this ties into a series I do now called Our Cyberpunk Dystopia.
I'm going to be doing the third episode installment of this this week, I think.
Because basically...
Because of the way that technology works and that political progress has been working, every time something dystopian in Cyberpunk comes across my timeline, I just save it in a document.
And after literally a few weeks, I've just got dozens of these things.
I'm like, oh my God, what are we creating here?
And that's the point.
There's no one at the head of this that's creating this evil dystopia we're moving into very visibly.
It's just the confluence of natural forces that everyone's dragged along by.
Yeah, it's emergent.
That's exactly right.
And I think that we can see the lack of control that the leaders of the world have in the political events that we see.
Like, you saw Biden's blood-red speech, if we can just get that picture up.
Like, it just...
That's just the worst optics when effectively declaring war on the Republicans in America, which is bizarre because this isn't the image of control and strength and security and someone who knows that everything will be alright.
Palpatine looking well there.
Yes.
But this comes out of fear.
And that's why it looks so scary, probably.
But this is not a man who's in control.
This is a man who is worried that things are going to get very out of control very quickly, which is why he goes on about the MAGA Republicans being a violent threat to democracy.
So, okay, but that's you showing your hand and how insecure your own position is.
And this we see in the persecution of the MAGA Republicans, Bannon and various others.
If you can go to the next one...
Bannon's like, look, they're coming for all of us.
So why?
How is Steve Bannon, like a bunch of Trump allies who are no longer in power and have no access to the levers of power or anything like that, how are they a threat to the republic?
Well, that's a good question.
And apparently, he claimed that 35 Trump allies were recently raided.
Again, this is the sort of thing that fearful banana republics do, because they're worried that there's going to be some sort of revolution.
But okay, well, that shows that you're not really in control of anything.
Do we know if this is, has this been fact-checked, this 35 MAGA allies thing?
Well, the claim is from Steve Bannon, and I've seen it reported in places like Newsweek and stuff like that.
So I assume that there's some legitimacy to it.
No one's telling him they didn't.
And the thing is, they did just raid Trump at Mar-a-Lago.
So, I mean, it does sound plausible.
And Biden did just declare war on the Republicans.
So it does sound plausible, frankly.
And then you've got...
Look at just the other people in charge.
You've got people like Liz Truss.
Who's Liz Truss?
She seems to be lost.
Completely adrift, as they say.
What are your thoughts on Liz Truss?
Who would you have had?
I don't really like any of them.
Right, but you have to choose some.
Whoever was going to be the most relentless...
Is she relentless?
She's doing okay, actually, so far.
I mean, she's only been in a few days.
But she has actually done a few.
Suspending the green levy on energy bills is a good start.
That should be abolished.
But, I mean, there's so much more.
If I was given just a year in charge, things would be very good.
You had a crack at that.
No, I didn't.
When I do, things will be very different.
When I get my 380 seat majority, you'll see things.
But the point is, she's been all over the place.
She's been a very left-wing, anti-monarchist Remainer, and now she's there meeting the new king as a hardline Brexiteer and, quote-unquote, is going to govern as a conservative.
Do you trust her?
Do you believe that she...
No, I don't trust her.
Oh, so you think that it's a grift?
Well...
It's hard to say...
Like, you know, is it a griff when you're the Prime Minister?
Well, my point being that do you think she believes the things that she's saying that she believes?
Because I think that Boris believed the things that he was saying that he believed.
It was, like, bumbling and...
It's possible.
It's possible.
But who knows?
But the point is...
The inconsistency of what's going on shows that these people are just not in control.
They're not in command.
And they are, again, somewhat adrift on the currents of events, right?
And so none of them have the kind of Not even just, like, manual power, but the kind of expertise required to actually be able to control the world in the way that it's very easy to fall into this view of, oh, well, you know, they've got all the power and the money, and therefore they control everything.
It's like, they're not that smart, frankly.
So how does this link in with the conspiracy theory stuff?
Well, this is the thing about all conspiracy theories, is that, if you can get to the next one, because I saw people in newspapers talking about this, oh, conspiracy theories everywhere.
It's like, yeah, and the conspiracy theories themselves...
It would be nice if there was someone in charge, if there was someone controlling world events, because they might be evil, but it implies that if we could just get them to listen...
Some coordination.
Yeah.
Or we could get our own good person in charge.
You know, to control world events.
That would be wonderful, right?
But no such thing exists.
And I saw this.
This was inspired by this thread by Dave Reboy, because this is a really great summation of it.
If we go to the next one, he says this.
I used to get angry when hearing 9-11 conspiracy theories, but now I understand them.
As the country grows more contemptuous of its people, and people correctly see their own country as the gravest threat to their lives and liberty, it's not that hard to imagine your enemy doing every horrible thing you can imagine.
For example, libs, even subject matter experts, who should know better, think this way of Putin, Trump, and of all of us.
It's a common enough analytical trap, but a trap nonetheless.
The other engine driving 9-11 conspiracy theories, but very closely aligned with the first, is the assumption is that your enemy is 12 feet tall, that he is hyper-competent, and can accomplish everything he sets out to do.
While this sounds scary, it's actually a security blanket.
it you are firm in the belief that someone is in charge replacing that competent person in charge even if they're evil with someone who's competent and good becomes a fantasy this is what q anon etc are the real red pill is that they hate you they suck at what they do nobody is in charge and nobody is coming to save you *sniff* Did you watch Don't Look Up, that movie that was on Netflix?
Okay, so it was about an asteroid coming toward Earth, and they're talking about how these scientists are desperately trying to tell the world what's going on, and no one's listening.
And one of the characters, who's this doctor, has got this amazing quote in there, and she says...
The truth is way more depressing.
They're not even smart enough to be as evil as you think.
Yes.
Yes.
And that's honestly what I think the final red pill is.
Like, all of this, like, ooh, you know, the WEF taking over and stuff like that.
It's like, I mean, they're going to try.
You wish they were as competent, you know, because at least you get a predictable result.
One of the things, there is a little bit of cognitive dissonance going on here because a lot of people will, when it's convenient, on both sides, point at the people in power and say, look at how bumbling and useless they are.
And yet, when it's convenient, say, look at how cabali and conspiratorial they are.
They've obviously orchestrated this.
And you go, hang on a second, look, they're either completely useless and can't get anything right, or they're the masters of the world.
You don't get to have it both ways.
There was a, you know, the Bilderberg group, the Bilderberg meetings, right?
So I posted this on Getter, if we can just get this up.
What?
It's unavailable.
You've been deleted.
On Getter?
Come on.
So if you can get that picture up, please.
This is from a book called The Wrong Way Home, which is a book written by a Californian psychologist called Arthur Diekmann in the 70s, I think it was.
Oh, no, sorry, it was in the 90s, but he was a psychologist in the 70s living in California.
And he wrote this book about cults.
And I found this to be a fascinating thing, because this is in the section called The Dear Leader, and how the reliance on the leader is one of the key aspects for cults.
But he talks about a journalist who broke into the Bilderberg group, and snuck into their secret meetings.
And he says this, Hmm.
As in, they're not in charge.
And he carries on.
He says, It is not inherently sinister to convene an assembly of wise men, led by those whom the wise believe to be the wisest.
But one feels a certain queasiness when, like Dorothy's little dog Toto, one pulls aside the curtain and discovers that the wizards haven't the slightest idea what to do.
To insinuate oneself in such company and to return them to the realm of roller disco and headphone radios is like slipping up on the spiral stairway of a trans-oceanic 747 and into the cockpit only to discover that one is alone there or Or there's no one there.
The night is dark.
The howling storm lies ahead.
You descend into the main cabin and dinner service has been concluded.
A number of passengers are noisily airing their complaints.
The lights are dim.
The movie is about to begin.
And so the secret, the hideous, grisly secret of Bilderberg is revealed.
There's nobody at the controls, folks.
We're flying blind.
Let's hope there's foam on the runway, friends and neighbours, because we're coming in on a wing and a prayer.
And that is genuinely, I think, the kind of existential dread of the whole thing.
This is why it would be better to believe that if you look at the WEF stuff, like the World Economic Forum, if you can go to the next one, they put out this there, and this is what really crystallized it.
It's like really the Somali woman's newsroom.
Oh, look, we've got this.
All women's newsroom, they just talk about the gender pay gap in Somalia.
And you can see, these are not people who know what's coming next.
These are people who are just, well, what do we do?
Well, we talk about the gender pay gap.
That's all we talk about.
Well, put out something about the gender pay gap in Somalia.
Oh, yeah.
This is good, isn't it?
This is impressive.
I mean, they put up this article the other day on the website.
Again, like, they don't know what's happening.
And they actually do admit it.
They say, the current global outlook can feel bleak and confusing, with war and inflation throwing the future into uncertainty.
And so here's a series of books you might want to read, because we've read them.
And it's like...
But you don't know.
You know you don't know.
You know we are flying blind into the storm and let's just hope it goes alright.
Because there's no one at the helm.
Perhaps that's more comforting for people to believe.
I think it genuinely is more comforting for people to...
Hope that the world is the malign plan of some evil overlord because somehow that's more comforting than the fact that it's random chance.
Oh, it's totally more comforting because you could win against the evil overlord.
You know, you could be Frodo throwing the ring into Mordor and destroying Sauron.
You know, there's a heroic story there where a victory can be attained.
You can't have a victory against nothing.
Yes.
You know, just chaos.
We were talking about the fact that conspiracy theories...
A lot of the time seem to lay a lot at the feet of the people who are significantly less competent than it seems.
And what you see from the leaders in those times when they start to lose control are more grasping and power grabbing.
And I think that that's definitely a mechanism that people should look out for.
For almost all of human history, norms and laws were enforced bottom-up.
They were emergent.
Cultural habits.
What do you think jealousy or anger is?
What is that sense of indignation that you feel?
That is a genetic predisposition toward unfairness.
Now, because not everyone agrees on what that means, you have to then legislate it.
Then, in order to be able to legislate it, you need to have somebody that can enforce it.
Which means it needs to be written down, which means you need a wing that can go and do it, which is the police or the HMRC or whoever.
But as the top-down and the bottom-up begin to diverge, the only way that the top-down can continue to keep hold of control is to grab harder.
And that's what you see with Biden.
You can see his position is becoming shakier and shakier.
And every day, something stupid comes out.
But anyway, that's basically my view on the real red pill.
There's no one coming to save us.
Let me finish off with this.
So this was a topic called compensatory control.
This is Matthew Syed in The Times.
This was at the beginning of COVID a couple of years ago.
Psychologists have conducted experiments to shed light on why people lose or at least suspend rationality.
One experiment asked people to imagine going to a doctor to hear an uncertain medical diagnosis.
Such people were significantly more likely to express the belief that God was in control of their lives.
Another asked participants to imagine a time of deep uncertainty.
When they feared for their jobs or the health of their children, they were far more likely to see a pattern in meaningless static or to infer that two random events were connected.
This is such a common finding that psychologists have given it a name, compensatory control.
When we feel uncertain, when randomness intrudes upon our lives, we respond by reintroducing order in some other way.
Superstitions and conspiracy theories speak to this need.
It is not easy to accept that important events are shaped by random forces.
This is why, for some, it makes more sense to believe That we are threatened by the grand plans of malign scientists than some chance mutation of a silly little microbe.
And that really does hammer the point home, doesn't it?
But I just want to be clear.
This is not to say that there are no conspiracies.
This is not to say there are no nefarious people working behind the scenes.
I think there are, actually.
But the important thing, I think, is to remember that they are limited in a way that you would be limited.
Imagine yourself.
You would be just as limited.
Okay, so Klaus Schwab has got loads of money.
He's got, say, analysts who are researching constantly.
Okay, but...
What do they actually know?
They're actually taken away from the world.
They're not living in the actual world, so they can't see the forces as they're moving.
Whereas a regular person can see the forces.
They are in the forces.
And so it's not saying there aren't conspiracies, and they're not trying to do this.
But it's to remember that they are also limited in their power.
And there's a great meme that goes around that every time I see it, I think, yeah, that is actually very heartening.
If the situation was hopeless, then their propaganda would not be necessary.
I think that's brilliant.
Yeah, because the only reason that they continue to push is that they think that there's a way out of it.
Exactly.
Yes, exactly.
And you wouldn't need to...
I don't propagandize...
If I trapped a mouse in a box or something, I wouldn't propagandize the mouse saying, you can't get out of here.
So I know it can't get out.
I don't care.
And that puts it in perspective that the great effort to propagandize us is because actually this is all very fragile.
And actually it could come tumbling down quite quickly.
Only a couple of missed meals and things change, you know.
So anyway, let's go to the video comments.
I think something that's flown under everyone's radar is the change in Andrew Lawrence's style of videos.
He used to do humorous skits in which he would adopt one of a wide range of personas to conduct satirical and comedic social commentaries about recent events, but now he just talks into the camera with 100% seriousness.
He started doing a jokey version of himself, but even that has now given way to absolute sincerity.
Look back at his earlier videos and compare that to today, and you'll see what looks like the decline of a comedian.
I know it's par for the course now for comedians to become political figures, but this looks like a man who's just been fired from his job has dropped all pretense, which I suppose isn't too far from the truth.
I think the problem is it's not a laughing matter anymore.
Who is this guy?
Andrew Lawrence.
Yeah.
Oh, he's a comedian.
He's really good.
He was on, like, Live at the Apollo and stuff like that.
And then he was like, yeah, but I'm not a progressive.
I'm a right-winger.
And he was fired, basically.
He was dropped from it.
And so he went through this, like, period of, like, two years of depression where you could see this was really getting to him because all of his friends had basically disavowed him.
And he did, like, this small comedy tour, like, in small venues because he used to be, you know...
10,000 people watching him now.
It's like 300 people.
But the thing is, he came to Swindon twice on this call.
And my wife's a massive fan of his comedy.
I really like him as well.
And so we turned up in his little Swindon things.
And you could see, like, the first one, he was very down.
But the second one, he was starting to pick himself back up, you know, and it's like, okay, come on, man.
You know, I want you to do quite well.
And he started doing, like, political comedy sketches.
But as the person who sent that comment pointed out, he said, look, the comedy's just dropping away because this isn't funny, actually.
Things are getting really serious.
Well, I don't know, man.
Laughing through the apocalypse is really one of the only ways I think that you can get through it.
And it is difficult to keep your spirits up.
When we came in this morning, we were speaking about today.
It's kind of the end of the world and kind of the death of the queen.
And you go, well, God, yeah, it is a one-two punch.
But you think that's off the back of a massive recession and inflation.
That's off the back of two years of being locked in your own home and COVID. It's a, I mean, it's not a fantastic time at the moment, but this is a reason I think that everybody should focus on sovereignty, being as high agency as they can, making themselves as independent as possible, doing their own research, reading things, educating themselves, because that is the best defense, right, for this sort of stuff.
I don't see what else there is.
No, that's all.
That's all that you've got.
You know, when you can no longer rely on the people in power, it's you that's left to keep things moving forward.
That's absolutely right.
I don't know about you, but I've seen much less cash around since Covid as people eschew it for payment by card.
Lotus Eaters of course will know about the Chinese social credit system and that certain western powers are keen on emulating it, but may not be seeing the insidious tendrils of its arrival.
A bar near me recently upgraded its payment machines.
Note the user-facing camera above the display.
If you think this machine does not also feature an accelerometer and gyroscope to detect movement, and also microphones, then you don't know technology.
There is even a camera on the rear of the device.
We are moving into the cyberpunk dystopia.
The Panopticon continues.
And it's not like we don't know they won't shut down your bank account like the Canadian truckers.
I went into a shop yesterday, a local corner shop in Newcastle, that only accepts cash.
Oh, really?
Fantastic.
That's how far that Newcastle is from...
Good northern working people holding it down.
Absolutely.
Let's go to the next one.
Hi there, Lotus Eaters.
Just wanted to uplift people a little bit here in these black-pilled times.
Overall, I just want to let everyone know that you should continue to try to build yourselves up.
That's the best way to change the world.
Start with yourself.
I had the worst year of my life, and I'm still moving forward.
I'm going to be planting a garden this year again, and I'm going to start a side business.
So, keep doing all that good stuff for yourselves.
I hope you all have a wonderful day.
Keep strong.
Exactly your point.
That's inspiring, man.
One thing I think gets lost in the message of, like, improve yourself, is the socialists will always say, yeah, but, like, I want to improve society.
It's like, okay, look, there's no disconnection from improving yourself personally and improving society.
Society is a composite of all of the people in it.
And so if the people in it are, as Tucker Carlson said, serious people, then you get a better society out of that.
If you've got a bunch of frivolous 45-year-old women buying shoes and makeup and wasting their time, then you get a society that reflects that.
Incompetent individuals are not going to combine to make a competent society.
No, exactly.
Yeah.
Exactly.
And it's just one of those things where it's like, I feel the messaging could be done better in some way, right?
Just like, oh, but I want to improve society.
It's like, well, there's only one way of doing that.
Start with yourself.
That's the only way, you know, and then after enough time has passed, people will realise actually you've done some good and maybe they'll start and, you know, it'll be an upward thing.
Because otherwise it's just about reducing things to the lowest common denominator.
I spoke to Jocker Willink, professional hard man, on the show a couple of months ago, and I asked him about what people that don't fight believe wrongly about street fights and how they go ahead.
And he said, you know, some people believe that if everything kicks off, I'll just get wild, I'll just get mad, and that'll...
If the situation demands it, I will draw upon some extra sort of energy.
And it's kind of that same sort of belief here that, well, when we all combine together, despite the fact that I have no agency and I'm basically useless as a person, that when I'm with the right group of friends...
When I'm on the commune.
I'll be able to make things work.
We'll be able to create a good society out of individual pieces of rubbish.
Yeah.
And that's just not the case.
It's all done by good habit.
Yep.
You know, everything.
So begin the habit now.
You should have done it yesterday.
You should have done it 10 years ago.
But today is the right day.
Let's go to the next one.
Let's go to the next one.
Let's go to the next one.
What for?
This country.
Because one of the things that a lot of people have been saying is, look, Elizabeth is a link literally to the past.
I mean, Churchill was Prime Minister when she was inaugurated, when she was crowned.
So, like, that's the definitive, like, it's a world historical event.
be remembered in hundreds of years time as the new era that came after that yeah especially given that it was for so long as well so one thing that we probably should be relatively we should feel quite reassured by i think is that the amount of pressure which is being pushed by legacy media by political organizations by nefarious subcultures
all of that have been working incredibly hard to try and deconstruct things for a long time in any case.
The Queen may have contributed to slowing that down, but I think given the fact that we're still holding things together at least ever so slightly should give us hope moving forward.
I think the opportunity for people to be independent creators, to be able to find groups of people that they agree with on a belief, fundamental principle level on the internet is one of the most important things that you can have.
You may have been isolated previously as someone...
In the 1990s that lived in a town and you thought differently to all of those people or you live in a particular religious community or you live in a particular cultural community or whatever it is, you would have never been able to find someone that you can actually feel like you belong.
That has now changed with the advent of the internet.
So those are some of the things I think that we can hope that will actually help people, to give them an anchoring point because geographically you're no longer tethered to the place that you come from.
Moving forward, it's down to the individuals, man.
I really do think that that's the case.
And it's how much do people want it?
And I know that a lot of my friends are doing their utmost to try and be as agentic, have as much sovereignty as possible, to make themselves as uncancellable, as independent as whatever it can be.
I mean, you know, this entire business for you is that.
It is a real-world experiment in evading cancellation.
Well, I mean, we could still be cancelled, but I think that even if it all went...
I mean, they would have to go to some quite extreme length to get us off the internet.
So...
I mean, it's not that it can't be done.
There's a website called Kiwi Farms that recently got this treatment.
So it's not that it can't be done, but it is difficult to do.
And the more that people set examples like that, I think it's very important that you guys have done it in the UK. We were talking earlier on about the difference between the UK and the US, and that blue sky vision is something I really wish that we had more of in the UK. And the more that people do stuff like this, I think it's really, really impressive and important.
That being said, the UK is very insular, change takes, it's a leviathan, cultural norms in the UK, this big lumbering behemoth that we drag behind ourselves.
For all that mean you can say, it's great that they doth the cap and he has the feathers and the town crier comes out and stuff.
Yes, but that seeps into the culture in other ways because it means that we're not as agile, we don't change as quickly and we don't adapt as quickly.
That could end up being an advantage.
It could be an advantage or it could not.
What about you?
What do you think?
What's next?
I don't know.
I've been thinking about this a lot, obviously, because it's like, how do we view ourselves as a country?
And I think that actually, the death of Elizabeth has shown those people who view us as a country, and those who are, honestly, I can't see anything other than parasites, really.
You know, this, like, Gibbs, Gibbs, give me reparation.
How about I give you a one-way ticket back to wherever you came from?
How about that?
You're not on board with the country as a project.
I hate it.
I actually find myself genuinely hating it.
Every Irish nationalist could be deported back to Ireland as far as I'm concerned.
That rubbed me up the wrong way when I saw that the other day, their response there.
I think Sinn Féin didn't show up to the...
Well, that's fine.
I can understand Sinn Féin because they live in Ireland.
You've got loads of Irish people in England being like, Republican, okay, out.
Yeah, exactly.
So there is actually a kind of strength that I think has been generated from this, but it's not a very nice one.
No, I understand what you mean, that the resilience is being caused because you felt an imposition on you from people that you don't like.
Yeah, well...
I think I might have spoken about this the last time that I came on.
2012, before that, people were asked why they voted for the party that they did in the US. People voted for their own party more than they disliked the other party.
2012, this flipped, and you had basically a protest vote.
Why are you voting Democrat?
Because I am not a Republican.
And when you have people that are bound together over the mutual hatred of an out-group, not the mutual love of an in-group, that's inherently fragile.
This is where you get purity spirals from.
This is why people constantly circle the outside of an intersectional ideology, looking for the person that's not quite as oppressed so that they can continue to grandstand on the shoulders of people that weren't as victimized as they were.
That's how you bind things together.
That's something that is very easy to do.
Tribal...
Dynamics being pulled together over the mutual hatred of an out-group is so fragile, and yet it's very seductive, right?
I am not that.
Let's bind together over this.
Well, hang on a second.
If that's what's brought you together, you just need to find another pariah.
See, I don't think it's quite that, though.
What I think it is, is it's a kind of consciousness that is being raised in a way.
Like, the socialists are always going on about this sort of, you know, class consciousness, but this kind of British consciousness.
Actually, the death of Elizabeth is important, you know?
And if you feel that it's important, then you're on the same side as us, as Tucker Carlson, as all of the, you know, as Hassan Piker's friends, when they're like, oh my god, the Queen's died.
Okay, sorry, you're with us now.
Or you're going, you suck it, Lizzie.
You're on the socialist side, where that doesn't matter.
Okay, well, you know, it's not just our group bad.
It's actually, no, there was something important there.
And if you agree with that, then you're on that side.
And I think it's, like, divided these two things.
It's been a very good litmus test for who gets to stay in the caravan and who has to go outside.
Oh yeah.
Oh yeah.
Very much.
Let's get to the next one.
So I think part of the reason the Queen just felt eternal was because she aged so gracefully.
I mean, she basically looked the same in her 90s as she did at 70.
I'm 28 and her image has been basically the same my entire life.
So even if you kind of knew this was coming, it didn't feel like it was coming.
I mean, just picture King Charles now, and do you think 25 years from now his face is going to look basically the same?
But, uh, I'm sorry for your guys' loss.
As an American, we rebelled against your crown, but you're still our kin.
God save the king.
I had a bunch of messages from friends in America saying, okay, man, I hope everything's all right.
And I think the sentiment was amazing.
They don't quite understand how we're...
Everything is fine.
Yes, we're okay.
I promise.
But it was, I mean, pretty meaningful.
I had a pause on social media and stuff this weekend.
I'm like, look, I'm just going to stop doing things.
And the team that looks after that, I was like, look...
And all of them replied and said, dude, absolutely understood.
Like, sending my condolences.
Like, as if someone very close to us had died.
Yeah, that's not how it is.
It's...
It's hard to describe, isn't it?
But it is important, because it's kind of like a pillar of the earth.
You know?
This is what, like...
Again, the Hasan Piker video, I found fascinating.
His response to the friends of his response, because they were just like, oh my god, what's that mean?
And this is like...
There's a pillar of the 20th century that's just been pulled out.
An entire thing is...
And it's like, okay, well, does this stand?
Does everything collapse?
What happens now?
And so it's now, oh my god, something big...
One thing that I've just thought of there...
Given the fact that there are lots of changes that happen at the moment, everything's up in the air, everything is up for debate, we really need, if the current king decides to stick about or is able to stick about for 20, 25 years, that would be great.
But as we've said, he's not the youngest guy and what's the average age of men at the moment?
80?
81?
82?
It's not a long reign and I really, really hope that his diet and training and health regime, which I'm sure is well supported.
I know, you see his sausage fingers.
What do you mean?
Oh, John, can you get a picture of his sausage fingers up?
I wasn't expecting that today.
Pull that up, John.
But no, he might not be in the best health, because he's got, like, really bloated fingers.
Okay.
And it's just like, that can't be good.
Okay.
Yeah, I just, I really don't want to have this happen again.
Charles' fingers.
See the...
Yeah, those are some sausages, aren't they?
Yeah, but that's not healthy, like.
Those are some podgy boys.
Yeah, that indicates some sort of serious problem, right?
Like cardiovascular or something like that.
Doesn't look well.
No.
Does not look well.
So he might not last all that long, you know?
I just, I really don't, apart from the fact that More uproar and more change is not necessarily great.
I mean, there are many ways, right, that you can change the world.
A few of them will make it better, and lots of them will make it worse.
And we just need to be cautious, pump the brakes.
Anyway, I think we'll leave it there since we're out of time.
Thanks, everyone, for joining us.
Thanks, Chris, for coming back on, man.
Sorry it wasn't more jolly.
Absolutely fine.
I come here for the Doomer optimism.
I tell you what, next time, even if everything outside is burning, we'll do a funny one, dunking on SJWs.
Just make sure it's not a depressing and concerning state of affairs.
Where can people find you if they want to find more?
Chris Williamson on YouTube.
Check out some episodes I've done this year with Jordan Peterson, Jocko Willink, Andrew Huberman, if you're into the personal development and the biohacking stuff, and Modern Wisdom, Spotify, Apple Podcasts, etc., etc.
Dude, I always enjoy coming down here.
It's very inspiring to see what you guys are doing.
I really, really genuinely do take a lot of inspiration and resilience from the fact that you guys are continuing to make it work here.
I love seeing what you do.
Thanks, man.
We'll see you tomorrow, folks.
▲
Export Selection