Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Sept. 27, 2022 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:30:35

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #489

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast of Lotus Eaters.
	This is episode 489.
	I'm your host, Harry, joined today by Carl.
	Hello!
	And we're going to be talking about the coping and the seething over the Italian election, how American packs and super packs are just massive grifts, and also the Tories having to lean right if they actually want to get anything done.
	And with that, let's get into it.
	Yeah, so there's been a great deal of coping and seething and possibly dilating over Maloney's victory in Italy.
	This came as, I don't know, is it a surprise?
	Europe seems to have been going rather right-wing recently.
	Well, we've had Sweden, supposedly Denmark is heading in that direction.
	Italy, I mean...
	Poland, Hungary.
	Yeah, they've been furious over Hungary and Poland for a long time, so I'm not that surprised.
	Le Pen nearly defeating Macron.
	I'm surprised that they think that just throwing the fascist term around constantly is going to achieve anything still, but you know...
	Yeah, and speaking of fascism, I did a book club a while ago on Zeef Sternhell's Neither Left Not Right.
	He was a liberal Jewish Israeli man, and he was fascinated with fascism, and so did a deep philosophical and historical dive into it.
	And if you want to know the conclusions he came to, well, go and check out our book club on it, because it's very illuminating, and there's a reason he calls it Neither Right Not Left, because fascism is a kind of centrist synthesis of authoritarian and totalitarianism.
	And it's essentially the final phase of socialism.
	It's what socialism realises it has to become after it gets filtered through the French and the Italians.
	Well, if it comes from France, then just...
	Which is why all the fascists were socialists first.
	It's a product of the left, in my opinion.
	But anyway, as you explained yesterday, the Brothers of Italy are not actually fascist.
	Shockingly enough.
	She's disavowed fascism many times.
	And what was the analogy you were just using before we started?
	Oh, well, the connection to Mussolini's fascist parties that everybody keeps drawing is basically like in Spaceballs when Lord Helmut goes, I'm your father's cousin's brother's roommate.
	Yeah, exactly.
	I watched the segment yesterday, and it was just like, right, okay, that's just six degrees of separation being ridiculous.
	Of course, if you're going to use that as your metric, then every party in Italy has ties to Mussolini.
	Well, yeah, exactly.
	And it seems kind of racist, doesn't it?
	Oh, Italian.
	Conservative.
	Nazi.
	You know, it's just she's a fascist.
	Why?
	Because she's an Italian.
	And not a communist.
	But this is surely a certified girl boss moment.
	I would imagine so.
	In 1992, a 15-year-old schoolgirl went to join her local branch of the far-right Youth Front in Rome.
	The all-male group of radicals met her with bemusement.
	30 years later, she's on course to become Italy's first female prime minister.
	I think there is...
	So empowering.
	I mean, there is something to this.
	It's kind of like when women enter male-dominated spaces and they want to make their mark, they kind of have to go above and beyond everybody else, so what she had to do was be even more radical.
	Yeah, yeah.
	But yeah, so you would think that would be the narrative, but it was only Politico Europe that posted something like that.
	Everyone else was, of course, having a meltdown.
	Like NBC News.
	Let's watch.
	Meloni's win is the latest in a string of election victories for the hard right across Europe.
	In Sweden, a far-right party is now the second largest in parliament.
	And in France, ultra-nationalists won 11 times as many seats as they did five years ago.
	Meloni has pledged to continue NATO's policy of supporting Ukraine.
	But some of her right-wing coalition partners, including former Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, have made comments sympathetic to Putin.
	A time of uncertainty in Europe, only deepening with the rise of a new far-right leader.
	Now, maybe a few weeks before Maloney actually takes power as Italy's prime minister, first she needs to negotiate with other parties and form a government.
	But she could be in place in time to meet President Biden and other world leaders at the G20 in November.
	Terrifying.
	Hard right.
	Far right.
	And I won't go over the clips and stuff that you played yesterday, but it was just conservative rhetoric.
	It really was.
	Family, faith, and country.
	Oh, God.
	Hard right.
	Terrifying.
	She was explicitly trying to appeal to people's sense of community and belonging.
	She didn't want her citizens to be mindless consumers in thrall of the globalist agenda.
	She wanted them to be able to have their family, you know, have lives that they can lead happily.
	Yeah.
	I'm actually doing a book club on Giovanni Gentili's The Origin and Doctrine of Fascism.
	That is not what he's concerned with.
	It's just leftist rhetoric about class consciousness.
	It's all within the state, nothing without the state.
	Yes, exactly.
	It's a radical revolutionary movement to politicize and homogenize.
	Not homogenize, but like...
	Concretize the entire state under the direction of one leader.
	Nothing like Maloney seems to have been saying.
	But anyway, yeah, so Italy is elected.
	It's first woman prime minister, and she's a Nazi, according to MSNBC's Joy Reid, which is hilarious.
	This week, neo-fascism won big in Italy, and she's poised to form Italy's most right-wing government since the Second World War, when they were leftists.
	But Reid added that Maloney's victory could be considered a threat to the rest of the world, including the United States.
	Ah, yes!
	Italy!
	Likely to march on the United States.
	Possibly a threat to the Ethiopians, if history's repeating itself.
	Only after a couple of attempts.
	Yeah, they couldn't even get the Ethiopians, though.
	The only colonial power to be defeated in Africa.
	Global threat.
	I mean, it's just ridiculous, isn't it?
	Like, oh, so Italy is now a threat to the United States.
	The election poses a danger not just to Italy, but to the rest of the world as well.
	At a time where here in America we debate so often and loudly about the creeping rise of a national security threat of fascism.
	Yes, you debate it a lot, but that doesn't mean it's happening, you absolute lunatics.
	Those same leaders are solidifying power in other parts of the world, where the march towards fascism is boldly, defiantly taking hold.
	Well, even if Italy gets its sort of irredentist tendencies back, it was crap at it.
	I don't think it's improved in the last hundred years.
	Yeah, and also, the problem I always find with this sort of stuff is, okay, right, even if they go all the way in with, you know, let's bring classical Italian fascism back, as long as they just go and will be isolationist and just leave everybody alone...
	Okay, I don't care.
	Let them do what they want, because Italy is not any kind of global superpower to be worried about.
	I mean, it's just preposterous and doesn't bear any relation to reality.
	Are they going to take the Walter White tactic?
	Are we going to throw pizzas on our roofs?
	Is that what's going to happen?
	The humanity of it all.
	Well, you know, the first program on the new fascist regime is to ban pineapple on pizza.
	I support this entirely.
	Yeah.
	Tag your telly in every pot.
	That's what she's promising.
	Anyway, moving on to NBC News.
	Now she's a white supremacist, which...
	I find unlikely, since Italians aren't white.
	Giorgio Maloney, a nationalist accused by political rivals and experts of spreading white supremacist ideas, is set to become Italy's first far-right leader since World War II. It's like, look, when you say white supremacist, right, in Europe, that doesn't really have any meaning.
	That's an American term for Americans to use in America.
	Well, yeah, I look at the French and I go, they're not the same as me.
	I look at anyone south of pretty much Paris and be like, well, they're not part of the white race.
	And you'd probably be right, actually.
	I probably would be right, but it doesn't even matter because that's not how we judge things in Europe.
	We judge things based on ethnicity, based on the national group that you come from, not the colour of your skin.
	But again, it's Americans being American and having an American one, obviously.
	But Maloney, who would be Italy's first female leader under the Brothers of Italy, advocate naval blockades stop unauthorised migration from Africa.
	I'm a bit sus about the Brothers of Italy electing a woman.
	Not very brotherly, is it?
	What's that on?
	Seems kind of woke.
	What happened to Bros Before Hoes?
	It's the woke remake of...
	This is woke fascism.
	But yeah, so she wants to stop illegal immigration from Africa.
	Yeah, who doesn't?
	Stop illegal immigration from Albania and everywhere else?
	I mean, I think the problem that people are having optically is the methods by which she's saying that she would do it, which is a complete naval blockade.
	And if you ask me...
	As if Italy's got the navy for that.
	Well, that's true, but also, okay, what else will it take then?
	I mean, if it's effective, that's what it's going to be.
	Yeah.
	I mean, I just don't see the problem.
	She has also bemoaned the chronically low birth rate in Italy, which we'll talk about in a minute because it's tragic, actually, and spoken of a left-wing government plot to finance the invasion and replace Italians with immigrants, a main tenet of the Great Replacement Conspiracy Theory that accuses shadowy global elites of wholesale importing of non-white migrants into white-majority countries.
	But we're also, like, one of the things they're also complaining about is Eastern European migrants, right?
	But also white.
	So you, again, Americans being like, oh, it's about race.
	No, it's about location.
	It's about where you come from.
	I mean, up north, where I'm from, we don't really have anywhere outside of the major cities.
	As much Eastern European and African migration.
	What we do have a lot of...
	Sorry, Middle Eastern.
	What we do have a lot of tends to be Eastern European Polish migrants coming over.
	We still complain about them.
	Oh yes, because they're foreigners.
	Because they're taking jobs.
	So anyway, the problem is of course that now a woman's in charge, women's rights are in danger.
	According to Vice.
	I thought this was just a joke news article.
	It is actually not a joke news article.
	Well, I mean, you could say...
	Well, I mean, it is a joke, but, like, unintentional.
	Yes.
	They say that Vice reported on Maloney's admiration for right-wing politician success in other regions, and she has been funding anti-abortion groups and grant them access to healthcare settings when they speak to patients directly.
	It's, oh, no.
	Trying to persuade people, you know what, you don't have to murder your baby, actually.
	Maloney has not said, she said in fact she doesn't want to repeal laws that permit abortions, but she has described the changes in Piedmont as a courageous choice where they've reduced abortion rights and abortion rights activists fear her victory could lead to similar laws and limits across the country.
	Oh well.
	Oh dear.
	Oh no, babies being born, Italians most affected.
	Her views have prompted concerns from several corners of the LGBT community, from gay parents worrying they'll no longer be able to adopt because she said she opposes it, as well as the use of surrogacy to trans and non-binary individuals fearing small milestones made this year in gender recognition may be reversed, as in, you won't be able to write the gender of your choice on your passport because your passport has your sex on it.
	Terrible.
	Oh well.
	The oppression.
	And this is why Australian media was like, gays, don't go to Italy!
	Oh no!
	The gay Australian tourism to Italy is over, lads!
	An expert in European politics has warned.
	What will Rome do?
	Yes, exactly.
	They've probably got enough gays of their own.
	So anyway, the question is, what are the Brothers of Italy going to do?
	What's Maloney going to do?
	Well, I mean, it's going to be probably what she said.
	I'm going to be against immigration.
	I hope so.
	Going to be for families.
	If she just does what she said she was going to do, this would be a massive step in the right direction for Europe.
	Yes, it would.
	They expect that migration is going to be one of the areas that she can bring in the most sweeping change most easily.
	And she said, the smart approach is, you come to my house according to my rules.
	Oh, what a Nazi.
	What an absolute lunatic!
	You can do stuff relatively quickly on migration that is draconian, symbolic, and sends a message, says Andrew Geddes, the director of Migration Policy Centre at the European University Institute in Florence.
	So they found a leftist.
	They're like, excuse me, a European leftist.
	Can you call her a Nazi, please?
	Yeah, draconian!
	But there's trouble in store because the EU will be annoyed about this.
	Good.
	Excellent.
	I mean, Ursula von der Lin did say that they had tools to deal with this thing, but outright, other than outright declaring war on Italy...
	Ursula von der Lin has tools to deal with democracy in Italy...
	To save democracy in Europe.
	Yeah, why don't we just count up the number of votes that Maloney got and Ursula got, and we'll find that actually Ursula got like five votes from whatever the council in Europe, whatever, you know, elite body of bureaucrats elects her.
	Democracy in action right there.
	Yeah, exactly.
	I mean, those bureaucrats were just embodying the general will.
	No, that's exactly right.
	Because she phrased it, you know, if Italy votes the right way, it's like, what the hell is the right way?
	How do you know what the right way is in advance of the vote?
	I mean, that's just democracy being turned into a God.
	Democracy is whatever God says, and shockingly enough, God agrees with everything I think.
	But it's also, there's a right way, which is the progressive, open borders, internationalist, European Union way.
	The Whig history way.
	The Whig history way, and the wrong way, which is in your own self-interest.
	So, you know.
	Anyway, The Atlantic, not a parody site, apparently.
	Are we sure?
	The return of fascism in Italy.
	Oh, God, that sounds terrible.
	Maloney sounds in many ways like other modern national conservative politicians like Victor Orban and American MAGA Republicans, then Il Duce.
	It's like, well, why call her a fascist, then?
	Okay, so she doesn't sound like a fascist, but we're going to call her a fascist anyway.
	This is an alarming headline, isn't it?
	Maloney's list of enemies is familiar.
	LGBT lobbies that are out to harm women and the family by destroying gender identity.
	In quotes.
	It's like, yeah, that's true.
	Just because you put scare quotes around it doesn't make it not true.
	Exactly.
	I mean, that's just an open and explicit goal of Black Lives Matter.
	Destroy the West and prescribe nuclear family.
	It's like, sorry, what do you want?
	George Soros, an international speculator, unironically made millions after destroying the pound, shorting the pound, in the 90s, right?
	He actually is an international speculator who finances global migration, which is absolutely true.
	He's funding the caravans that's bringing migrants to the southern border of the United States.
	And he keeps funding scummy leftist human rights lawyers to stick up for them every single time.
	And judges in the United States who are giving them lenient sentences for committing these crimes.
	Like, this is not a conspiracy theory.
	This is just documented activities of billionaire George Soros.
	And the sad thing for me is that there is enough retards out there that will read an article like this, just unthinkingly just go along, oh, I guess that is a conspiracy.
	You put scare quotes around it, it must be a conspiracy.
	It's like, all of that's completely true.
	And so they compare her to Le Pen.
	Both are examples of what political scientists call gender-washing.
	When female politicians adopt a non-threatening image to blunt the force of their extremism.
	It works, it works.
	If that is the tactic, you know, even if that's true, okay.
	I love the presuppositions here.
	It's like, no, no, no, George Soros bringing all these migrants in and the LGBT guys perversing your children, that's not extreme.
	These extremists who want to protect your borders and look after the integrity of children's innocence...
	Look how extreme they are.
	They've got a woman up there doing it.
	That's because they're hiding the evil masculinity of protecting the country and family behind a woman now.
	So you are lunatics.
	I'm sure you know Oron McIntyre's Twitter feed.
	I'm sure you've seen him posting over and over again, don't make me tap the sign.
	It's not hard.
	They're just evil and wanted little kids.
	Which is actually correct, I think.
	But to uninformed foreigners, her ascent could look like female empowerment.
	You mean like Politico-EU? She poses as a defender of women, even as her party has rolled back women's rights.
	Yeah, what about a woman's right to be raped by a migrant, Harry?
	Have you thought about that?
	Well, I mean, in Sweden, Callum showed me that they were voting in favour of that, so the men had to instil the evil patriarchy to go, hey, don't get raped, women.
	Yes.
	Here's a little, what was it, rape armbands?
	Yeah, those armbands just saying, please don't rape me.
	And I think they were in Swedish at first, and then they realised, oh, the migrants don't speak Swedish, so they put them in foreign languages, and it still didn't work.
	Weird.
	What a shock.
	Anyway, so a few days later, The Atlantic actually published another article going, well, actually it's not a vote for fascism, because we're a parody website.
	Do they just have massive arguments in the writers' room?
	Maybe?
	But anyway, they say that part of the reason is that Maloney has distanced herself from her hit party's past.
	But her party was never a fascist party, like we covered earlier.
	She declared that fascism is history and suspended members who persisted in praising fascist leaders.
	She also demonstrates she would prove a reliable partner for Italy's European and North American allies.
	She has, for example, moderated parties' criticism of the European Union, emphasizing that she wants the country to stay in the Eurozone, And unlike many far-right leaders in Europe, she's been a vocal critic of Putin and a staunch supporter of Ukraine.
	That's just sensible politics at this point, I would say, more than anything else.
	But anyway, let's talk about some of the problems.
	Immigration into Italy, yeah, it's pretty high, from my perspective.
	Along with Greece, they're one of the first ports of call.
	They are.
	I mean, this is, as far as I'm aware, just the net number of immigrants who arrived by sea in Italy, which is 750,000 since 2014.
	Not as many as it could be, to be honest.
	But I don't think that's all immigration.
	No, of course not.
	These are just the ones arrived by sea.
	So that's, you know, the channel migrants is quite bad.
	I mean, we've got like 30,000 a year.
	Well, I mean, in seven years, they've had 100,000 a year, basically.
	So it's like, it's been pretty bad for the Italians.
	So she's right that that's a problem that needs to be fixed.
	What a Nazi.
	Italy also has real demographic problems, right?
	So in the 1960s, Italian women had 2.5 children per woman, which is above replacement birth rates.
	The Italian population would grow.
	Well, that's now 1.27.
	So it's literally halved.
	I think that's less than ours, isn't it?
	That is less than ours.
	I was about 1.6, I think.
	Yeah.
	So it's actually among the lowest birth rates in Europe, right?
	Italian women are finding it difficult to balance work and family life.
	Due to a lack of public childcare facilities, grandparents will have to step in as babysitters if her mother works, while household chores are mostly left to women.
	Tragic.
	But yes, this is like essentially the central problem.
	As this chap on Twitter points out, the path forwards for parties of the centre-left in Europe begins with an acknowledgement of the challenges of collapsed birth rates and migrant integration are the central challenges of the 21st century in Europe.
	Not far-right distractions that will vanish in some restored normalcy, right?
	Totally reasonable comment from the New York Times...
	I'm shocking that came from someone from the New York Times, to be honest.
	And then you get someone from NBC who replies to this going, so you're saying we need more of some people and fewer of other people?
	Would you like to be more explicit about the exact people you want more of and fewer of?
	It's like, yeah, okay.
	We want more Italians, fewer foreigners.
	What is wrong with you, Ben Collins?
	Oh, that's right.
	You're an American.
	That's your problem.
	Yeah, what they're doing, they're still doing that thing that they tried to accuse Tucker Carlson of, which is if you use just random pronouns like they to describe them being the deep state.
	A group of identifiable people.
	Yes, a group of identifiable people.
	They try and hone in on that and be like, oh, you're being vague.
	You're just like a fascist appealing to the vague them.
	It's them and us, isn't it?
	Well, it can be.
	Well, yeah, it is.
	Like, Biden's not on my side.
	But it's like, I love this.
	Would you be more explicit about the exact people you want more of and fewer of?
	It's like, yeah.
	Yeah.
	Oh, I'm glad you asked.
	Yeah, yeah.
	I've got a long list, actually.
	I'd like more law-abiding people and fewer criminals.
	I would like more people who like this country and fewer people who don't like this country.
	More patriots, less communists.
	You know, more native people around fewer immigrants.
	I've got a huge list.
	And I don't see any problem with laying that out.
	What were you aiming for, Ben?
	Oh, that's right.
	You can see what Ben was saying.
	You want more whites, don't you?
	No, not really.
	I want just fewer foreigners.
	Yeah.
	Ben Collins just wanted more people to scrub his toilet.
	Yeah, he needs those Mexicans, baby.
	Anyway, that's that.
	All right.
	Well...
	I'm enjoying the meltdown, to be honest.
	Because, again, nothing she's saying is unreasonable in any way, shape, or form.
	No, I can understand optically why they want to call her a fascist when there was that speech that she made in front of Vox in Spain, where she went full on, like, I'm yelling passionately, I'm wagging my finger.
	So I can understand why optically they want to do that, but I'm sorry the things that she was saying were perfectly reasonable.
	And the thing is, it's...
	It's amusing because she's got a perfectly reasonable position.
	And she's got the sort of Tony Blair sort of framing, where it's like she's framing these things as inevitable.
	It's inevitable that we win.
	I think she described herself as a right-wing Tony Blair.
	She did.
	And she obviously gets the framing is important.
	But she's delivering it with the kind of disappointed tone of an Italian mother as well, right?
	Because, I mean, I was listening to, you know, I can't understand Italian, but I can hear the tone of her voice as I'm reading the text.
	And she just, as if this is redundant.
	Why do I have to explain this, you know?
	You know, the tone of disappointment and inevitability.
	It's actually a really good combination.
	No, it is.
	If you've watched The Godfather, you understand it, because that happens a few times in that as well.
	But let's move on, shall we?
	So, American politics is a very strange place filled with what some people refer to as dark money.
	So you're going to say Americans?
	Yeah.
	Well, yes, it is also sadly filled with Americans, but there's not much we can do about that.
	Just teasing our American friends.
	Although less and less by the day, it seems.
	More Mexicans nowadays.
	But, no, one of the biggest confusing parts of American politics to any...
	Outside observers is the existence of PACs and super PACs, which I was looking into this morning because Callum, I have to give credit for, sent me some information.
	He sent me some tweets that pointed to some of these PACs, in particular Occupy Democrats, our old buddies over there, not exactly being...
	Let's say honourable with where their donations were going.
	For sure.
	And it doesn't seem that any of these organisations tend to be, whether on the left or right, it just seems like a gigantic money laundering scheme to me.
	One of the only sort of comparable organisations I could probably say that we have in the UK are Quangos, but even then they aren't really the same.
	No, they're funded by the government.
	Yeah, they're funded by the government, whereas these are supposed to directly create funds for them.
	So just to explain to anybody who doesn't know what a PAC or Super PAC is, a PAC stands for a Political Action Committee.
	Super PAC is just a bigger version of that.
	And they say they're controlled, administered by firms, labour unions, corporations that invest money in elections.
	PACs can directly donate funds to their chosen candidate, but they can't exceed donations of $5,000 per election.
	In addition, they donate $15,000 a year to any national party committee and an additional $5,000 to any other PAC. At the same time, they can accept a maximum of $5,000 annually from any individual firm, corporation, national party, or PAC. And how much can a person donate to a PAC? Is there a limit?
	This doesn't actually say if there's any individual limits on donations.
	So I'm guessing that there's not.
	So this seems like a way for George Soros to basically bankroll the candidates of his choice.
	Shockingly enough, it might be.
	And super PACs seem even more ripe for such corruption.
	As they say, there are more recent creation compared to traditional political action committees.
	They first appeared in 2010 following the decision of the Supreme Court and Citizens United vs.
	FEC case.
	Super PACs cannot directly donate money to parties or candidates, but can raise unlimited amounts of money from donors, unions and corporations without having to reject the $5,000 cap.
	The funds raised can be used to advocate for or advertise against political candidates or parties.
	So, no cap.
	This is just money laundering.
	So this is how George Soros pours billions into advertisements for Democrats.
	Absolutely is, and we'll even cover some of the people that we've mentioned before as being obvious paid Democrat operatives that have been uncovered as well.
	But the first thing was that Occupy Democrats, this man Hamish Mitchell, found that, just looking into it, because it's very easy to find all this information, because all you need to do is go on opensecrets.org, And they've got a full rundown because all of these companies, all of these organizations have to declare all of the money they take, where it's going.
	And he says they, run by Omar Rivero, raised $797,000 between 2021 and 2022, contributed $0 of that to federal candidates, and yet at the same time, shockingly enough, spent $577,000 on fundraising consultants.
	This is clever.
	We should be doing this.
	We should be doing this.
	I could be a fundraising consultant.
	Yeah, but we're not, because...
	For half a million.
	It's probably something similar to how BLM, for instance, were funneling money to one of the Leaders Brothers consultancy organisations, and all the consultancy will be is coming in for an hour's lunch, maybe once a month, and just probably laughing over their champagne, swilling it, massive cigars.
	Yeah, I mean, the thing is...
	There's going to be no accountability.
	There'll be no accountability for any of that sort of stuff.
	There's no way of declaring that that wasn't the case.
	If they met for lunch, okay, well, that was them doing it.
	Well, what more do you need?
	Well, there we go.
	Done.
	There you go.
	I mean, we're raising money.
	We're helping for these campaigns in some way.
	And he just goes on further to point out as well, you know, he searched through the Open Secrets and he just specifically went for, you know, any money put towards any candidates whatsoever, and I'm pretty sure that Occupy Democrats are a pack rather than a super pack, so they can give money directly to candidates.
	I mean, that's Probably what you'd hope to do if you want to influence elections, as well as do all the viral stuff and whatnot.
	And scroll down, we can just see here.
	John, thank you.
	No.
	No one.
	We've not given money to anybody, but there's $577,000.
	I mean, we really, really needed to consult.
	And I'll get back to that in a moment, because Omar Rivero...
	Had a quite spectacular response to this that he has since deleted, but I'll get to that in a moment.
	Because you can find all of this information, as I said, yourself if you check on the links in the website.
	You can go to opensecrets.org.
	For instance, I looked through it all myself this morning, and you can see if you scroll down, they've got spending by election cycle.
	Here's Total raised, total spent.
	They're spending quite a lot of money, and you can see that.
	And then one of the things I noticed as well when I was going through here was that they got, I think, a $20,000 donation from some random other PAC called the Fair and Balanced Pack.
	And if we go to the next one...
	Yeah, here it is.
	Fair and balanced package.
	Contributions from other ones.
	Just random 20 grand, you know, here you go, take it, you know.
	And then go to the next one for me.
	Okay, what do they do?
	Oh, they do nothing.
	All they do is receive money from another organization called Communications Workers of America, who gave them $50,000.
	So they've retained $30,000 of that.
	That's what it seems like.
	And these guys, the Communication Workers of America, they did actually contribute about 50% of their total income that they raised to contributions to political parties and candidates that they were supporting.
	But then there's another 50% of their money which seems to just go...
	I mean, most of it's going to expenditures.
	They spent almost $350,000 going to expenditures to committees, which will mean other political action committees.
	Nearly half a million on salaries.
	Yeah, this is an absolute grift.
	And it's shocking to me that American politics allows this.
	Because this is one of the things that you often hear the left complaining about in American politics, all the dark money going around the place.
	And whether or not they realise that it benefits their preferred political candidates or not...
	I think they do actually have a point that this is shady as all hell.
	But the thing is, you'd be appealing to the people who are directly benefiting from this money to stop this.
	Well, yeah, of course.
	So how are you going to get them to do it?
	Because they're never going to do it.
	I suppose I would have to be appealing to a leftist's sense of integrity.
	LAUGHTER Good luck there, am I right?
	A politician's sense of integrity, you know, let's not be partisan about this.
	Yeah, that's true.
	And one of the funny things was that Shu shared a post about this and pointed out, oh, here's his deleted response that he sent to Hamish Mitchell, Omar Rivero.
	If you understood the time and effort that goes into making viral memes and the impact they have, you might respect our work more.
	Bro, you think this is our first day on the internet?
	Do you understand how expensive 4chan is?
	Yes, I do.
	Do you understand?
	Meme science is a delicate issue.
	We need to send a lot of money into it.
	I've just got an image.
	I'm sure you've seen the picture of Walter White with his test tubes where it's like...
	Leftists making the worst meme you've ever seen in your life.
	That's what I'm imagining he's funding right now.
	And if you want to see the kinds of viral memes, I mean we've gone over the Occupy Democrats and all this garbage that they put out before.
	This is just what they do on a day-to-day basis.
	Every single hour they'll put out some I follow Occupy Democrats on Facebook.
	And every day, they put out what I would just call lies.
	Just extremist lies.
	Oh, yeah.
	Designed to totally inflame their followers into thinking that the opposition is just evil.
	And so, if that's the case, and you get an endorsement from them, well, then I think you're on the wrong side.
	Yeah, you might want to question whether you're evil or not.
	Yeah.
	And Sticks and Hammer, actually, top comment there.
	Go back for a second.
	Retweet to thank Dick Cheney's daughter for being a warmongering pig.
	Basically.
	Fair play.
	And it really is the level of just overt, clear political propaganda.
	And I just wanted to relate this to something I saw yesterday.
	This is not good for the Republic either.
	No, it's not good for unity.
	Characterising your opponents as just evil, always doing evil, and being paid to do so.
	Well, I think that's having a fairly negative effect on the political fabric of your country.
	But what do I know?
	Yeah, but it's so transparent, so blatant.
	I just wanted to draw comparisons, because I saw this yesterday, and I wanted to fit it in somewhere, somehow.
	So I just saw this, and it just reminded me of this kind of level of political propaganda from the Palmer Report, who unironically...
	Got 10,000 likes for stating that history has accurately recorded that liberals of every era were morally ahead of their time, and that the conservatives of every era were the villains.
	History just doesn't identify them as liberals and conservatives, so as not to hurt the feelings of today's conservatives.
	10,000 likes, probably if you go into his account, I don't know if he's got, like, donations or something, you could probably donate money to this guy.
	I mean, it's absolutely ridiculous.
	It carries on down here.
	Not only are today's liberals on the correct side of every issue, you know, Drag Queen Story Hour, that's just the correct side of the issue.
	Decriminalising, giving people AIDS in California, right side of every issue.
	Right side of history, Carl.
	I just don't think that we've gotten over the fact that we're on the wrong side of history, obviously.
	And they don't even stop there.
	This person says, not only are they on the correct side of every issue, history will ultimately conclude that today's liberals weren't nearly liberal enough.
	Yeah.
	Just as history already shows that every previous generation's liberals weren't liberal.
	What else is there?
	We're releasing violent criminals from prison.
	I mean, isn't that the right side of history?
	Is this not as liberal as it can get?
	What do you need to do?
	When we talk about the Whig's view of history, this is like identifying that there must be some kind of pinpoint where there is the end of history, where people can just be free to remove body parts at will, beat each other to death and rape at will.
	I want my state-mandated heroin injection.
	I want it.
	So what is the point of history in this person's view?
	Where do they think they're trying to get to?
	I guess we'll figure it out when we get there.
	That seems to be the prevailing idea.
	We'll just figure it out when we get there.
	When everybody is progressive enough, we'll all just innately know.
	I love the back-patting of this.
	Like, yeah, we're so brilliant.
	We've always been brilliant, and we've never done anything wrong.
	And you're the villains, and you always have been.
	Like, okay, calm down.
	Why was it Margaret Sanger tried to push for abortion again?
	Because she was a conservative.
	Must have been.
	Must have been.
	Not a liberal progressive or anything, no.
	And there's another one.
	All of...
	There are so many terrible things.
	Like, all the, you know, like, lobotomies and all the sort of, you know, medical experiments and stuff like that.
	Fascism, all the stuff.
	The Soviets, these are progressive and forward-thinking.
	Even just domestic to the USA, prohibition?
	Yeah.
	That was a progressive idea.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	That was a liberal idea.
	It was terrible.
	It didn't work.
	Incredible.
	Chicago became Chicago as a result of that.
	And there was this other beautiful piece of propaganda that I saw that I know that you saw as well.
	I'm thinking about covering this on the weekend, actually, but carry on.
	I'll briefly mention it.
	This How Fascism Works, The Politics of Us and Them from Jason Stanley.
	Oh, thank God.
	We can finally draw a distinction between us and them.
	I'm so glad.
	If only we'd been able to do that for all of human history, but no, it was only until the 20th century when fascism was invented that we were able to distinguish between us and them.
	Tribal distinctions.
	It's so stupid.
	It's so ridiculous.
	I'm pretty sure Julius Evler came up with the idea of groups, so it must be a fascist idea.
	There's just some of the ideas he's putting in here.
	Facts are debased without common understanding.
	The idea that we come from a mythic past.
	I'm going to talk about this more, but can you imagine some leftist coming up to me and going, yeah, the Nazis are debasing facts.
	It's like, define woman.
	Just define woman.
	Now we'll have a conversation.
	Oh, we can't.
	Right, okay.
	There we go.
	That must have been the fascists that redefined woman.
	I know.
	Unbelievable liars.
	Oh, victimhood?
	Any gains for minorities?
	Them or a loss for us?
	The left has never been the victim of anything.
	No.
	Unbelievable.
	No leftist has ever embraced victimhood.
	Yeah, I mean, like Occupy Democrats, like everything else, this kind of propaganda isn't meant to convince anybody.
	It's not meant to bring anybody over to the side of my head.
	Wait, sexual anxiety?
	Sorry, if you don't want to sleep with me, you're a fascist.
	Yeah, literally.
	If you don't want to sleep with trans people, you're a fascist.
	Suck the dick bigger.
	Oh my god.
	They are deviant and threatening, says the people who are about to go off to Drag Queen Story Hour.
	Sodom and Gomorrah.
	We come from the rural heartland, the backbone of the nation.
	They live in the cities.
	I mean, Maoist China wants to have a word with you about what they did to the countryside.
	The industrial workers of the world...
	Yeah, what the city folk did to the Chinese countryside, not particularly nice.
	The same as the Soviet Union.
	Yeah, I mean, they're not good people.
	But it's the same with these political memes.
	They just want to have their own opinions projected back in them.
	The things that you believe mean that you're the good guy, everybody else is the bad guy.
	Fascism doesn't mean fascism, at least not in the way that it meant in the early 20th century.
	Fascism just means not left enough.
	Fascism just means unacceptable, right?
	Yeah, basically.
	We disagree.
	Deplorable.
	Yeah, deplorable, yeah.
	That's what it's come to mean.
	But going back to it as well, we've seen many people accepting this kind of dark money like Brooklyn Dad Defiant, who was a bit of a meme last year but seems to have dropped off the radar just a little bit because he was accepting up to almost $60,000, $57,088 in 13 payments from the really American.
	I feel like that's just trying to convince themselves, yeah, we're really American guys.
	Yeah, he's literally just a paid shill on Twitter.
	$60,000 a year just to tweet.
	It seems that it's not quite as lucrative as once it was, because they got this information from opensecrets.org, and if you go to the next link, it seems that it's not paying out as well.
	He's gone from $60,000 over 13 payments.
	He's only got $12,750 over three payments this year.
	At least he's got some good experience on his CV. Yeah, at least he can know that he was fighting...
	Paying propagandists for the Democrats.
	Yeah, he was fighting the good fight.
	And Occupy Democrats, they show the hypocrisy of it as well.
	They even point out when other organizations do this, Lincoln Project filing shows millions of dollar donations funneled to personal companies.
	Isn't that the nonce project?
	Yes.
	Right.
	The nonce project's just like, yeah, we love Lincoln, which is why you should vote Democrat.
	It's like, hmm.
	They were probably also funneling it to, like, Nambler or something.
	Let's be honest.
	I'm just imagining the guy writing this article for Occupy Democrats, learning about how they were funneling all the money, going, hmm.
	Hmm, I think we can use this ourselves.
	And just to reinforce it as well, like I say, this is not anything new or even particularly partisan to American politics.
	This goes over both lines, because there was a Politico article from 2015 talking about the rise of scam packs, where they just say a political action committee called the Conservative Action Fund blasted an email to thousands of recipients, urging them to help us stop Jeb Bush today.
	Bush could be persuaded to stay out of the race, they said, if hundreds of thousands of conservative grassroots activists signed petitions by December to be hand-delivered to Jeb Bush in a very public way that would presumably shame him out of the race, and after you sign the petition, please make sure to donate $5, $15, and after you sign the petition, please make sure to donate $5, $15, $25, or even more to The email concluded in underlined bold text embedded with a hyperlink that took readers to a petition landing page that asked for their cash.
	So years ago, a bunch of people who troll me decided to sign up one of my email accounts.
	Oh, did they?
	All of these things.
	And so every single day, I get exactly those kind of emails, and I'm just looking and thinking, who the hell is persuaded by this?
	Well, it's a scam.
	It must work, though.
	Well, that's the thing.
	There must be, like, you know, American boomers who are like, yeah, I'm going to defeat the Republicans, or yeah, I'm going to defeat the Democrats, by giving whoever these people are, like, $20.
	It must be.
	Otherwise we wouldn't do it.
	The Nigerian Prince scam must have worked on at least one person over the years for it to be so prevalent.
	So, yeah, this has to work.
	And then they just carry on.
	The PAC's treasurer told us that the email got an extremely positive response in petition signatures and contributions.
	More than one month later, the Conservative Action Fund had yet to deliver any signed petitions to Jeb Bush.
	What a shock.
	It did, however, send out another email this month urging recipients to sign a petition to tell Mitt Romney to sit 2016 out and then to make a contribution of at least $17.76 today.
	Cringe.
	Yeah.
	Cringe.
	But...
	Probably worked.
	Somebody was fooled by it.
	And then they just go on to give a report of a bunch of the different PACs and found that over a bunch of them, they all raised about $43 million.
	And most of it went on ads and self-campaigning and probably along the lines of Occupy Democrats fundraising consultancy, all that sort of stuff.
	And they only sent...
	They didn't really send very much to the campaigns that they were trying to support, shockingly enough.
	So, American politics, still ridiculous.
	Be ashamed of yourselves, and maybe you should stop these PACs existing?
	I don't know.
	They're never going to, though.
	They're not going to.
	There's way too much money goes through it.
	But yeah, you are right.
	This is a terrible way to operate politically.
	But anyway.
	Anyway, let's move on to what the Conservatives need to do to win.
	Now, we've looked at Europe, and we've realised that, oh, look, right-wing wins, right-wing wins, right-wing wins, right-wing very close to winning, right-wing very close to winning.
	The pendulum is swinging to the right, and so the British Conservatives are like, hmm...
	What if we do Blairism again?
	So, yeah, no.
	This is why you're absolutely getting tanked, but we'll talk about that in a minute.
	And even Blair's there at the side going, no guys, don't do it!
	Well, that's interesting.
	If you want to support us, right, go over to lowseas.com and watch this latest hangout that I do with Callum about, is Tony Blair based?
	Because people are wrongly telling others that I am saying that Tony Blair is based, and I am not saying Tony Blair is Tony Blair is...
	The reason he looks based is because he is no longer a Blairite, ironically, because Tony Blair came into power in the late 90s, did a bunch of stuff that was terrible, and anyone with any common sense could have told you it was terrible at the time, and the conservatives at the time, in fact, did say it was terrible, and then within about 10 years' time, he'd seen the consequences of his actions and gone, oh, that was bad, I shouldn't have done that, and so now he's going around telling everyone, yeah, don't be a Blairite because I've made a lot of mistakes.
	I mean, he's kind of the real-life version of the Reflections on Revolution in France meme of the, I want things to change, destroys everything.
	Oh, no.
	Yes, that's exactly what Tony Blair is.
	And so it's not that Tony Blair is based.
	What it is, is he wants the Labour Party to succeed, and he's trying to advise the Labour Party not to be a Blairite party.
	And this is why he's looking based, because he's essentially leaning to the right and saying, look, if you do all these things, people won't vote for you.
	So you've got to lean right, because, of course, the public is actually quite far right, just generally.
	And so that's why Tony Blair seems based, but he's not at all.
	But anyway, so let's begin with what Liz Truss is doing.
	Tax cuts.
	Okay.
	I mean, I like tax cuts.
	I suppose that's leaning right?
	Something?
	The funny thing is, nobody ever complains about tax cuts.
	Well, at least when it's tax cuts that you benefit from.
	Well, the left complains.
	Well, yeah, but the left complains about literally everything.
	Yes, they do.
	Tax cuts are one of the most universally popular policy positions you can ever take.
	It's an easy win.
	Yes, it is an easy win, right?
	Because at the moment, basically, they're abolishing the 45% tax income of earnings over $150,000, and so the highest tax bracket will be 40%.
	It's like, oh, that's still 40%.
	The Americans fought a revolution of a 3% tax.
	This is just the paradigm that we live in right now.
	Because of the fact that you can identify the tax being spent as being spent on behalf of the people, the people go, well, I want more money spent on me, don't I? It's completely stupid.
	And they're reducing the residual rates by 1% as well.
	So basically, if you earn over £30,000, it'll be £33 a month that you save.
	Which is something.
	I'd rather it go down slightly than up slightly.
	£33, that'll get me, what, an extra half, well, maybe an extra half a litre of petrol nowadays?
	Get me an extra loaf of bread, by the way that inflation's going.
	So it's not much, but it's something.
	And of course, the left have been whining about this in The Guardian.
	Liz Truss plans to radically reshape the UK economy with even more tax cuts and fewer regulations, her chancellor has said.
	Great.
	Brilliant.
	You know, if the Guardian are whining about what you're doing, you're doing the right thing.
	If they're not whining about you, then you're doing the wrong thing.
	That's the barometer you need to be using, according to Tony Blair.
	So they are complaining about this because, of course, they're like, well, it's £45 billion of tax cuts mainly for the rich.
	But that's because the rich are paying most of the tax, isn't it?
	Yeah.
	And this is the Elon Musk argument, where they go, oh, Elon Musk doesn't pay his fair share, Elon Musk paying $11 billion in tax.
	Yeah.
	Is that not?
	Okay.
	But that's the complaint.
	It's just that the rich, they will always load it in this way, say, well, the tax cuts are mostly for the rich, and that's because they pay most of the tax.
	But they're still for people who don't pay as much tax.
	Well, interestingly, Kwasi Kwarteng, actually, I listened to a bit of his speech when he was giving the mini-budget, seemed like he was channeling Thomas Sowell quite a bit when talking about it, because he specifically said the reason they wanted to do this was to attract greater investment, to allow businessmen and entrepreneurs to be a bit more risky with their money, and also recognize that, hey, if we keep taxing them too much, they will just find loopholes or pull out of the country altogether.
	Which is precisely what Trust told Jake Tapper the other day when he decided he was going to confront her on this.
	She said that they were incentivizing businesses to invest and helping ordinary people get on with their lives, with their taxes.
	Which, I mean, it's pretty basic libertarian economics, isn't it?
	Well, it doesn't even necessarily mean to be libertarian.
	It can be conservative, because shockingly enough, you want a country to succeed, and policies that prevent that are bad.
	Yeah, so now, I'm no economist, so I have no idea why the pound sank to its lowest level against the dollar, why the market's flipped out over this, and I don't even know what the implications are.
	I know that there are benefits and drawbacks to having a strong and weak currency.
	Well, it can make your currency a bit more viable on the international market.
	Yes, it makes your exports increase, but it makes imports difficult, blah, blah, blah.
	I don't know.
	I'm not an economist, so I'm just going to skip over.
	But these basically became controversial within her own party, where people are like, oh my god, we're going to hit the nuclear button if the pound continues to fall.
	It's like, right.
	So there are elements within the Conservative Party who are like, how dare you cut taxes?
	Very conservative.
	Yeah.
	That's just ultra Blairite policy, right?
	One Tory MP, unnamed, told the paper, my biggest anxiety is I'm going to wake up on Monday and it's going to be Black Monday.
	Okay, maybe, but I mean, I spoke to Dan Tubbs about this and he was just like, look, this is coming, whether we like it or not.
	You know, how long we can stave off these problems is the question.
	But anyway, so they are, just to summarize this, Briefly.
	They're very concerned about the market and the pound's value, and there's probably going to be some sort of backbench revolt in the Conservative Party.
	I don't know what the future is going to hold here.
	If I were to make a guess about why that's happened to the pound, it would probably be international trust in the UK markets has probably sunk a little bit.
	That, I think, is probably accurate because Bloomberg put out an article about this saying, well, look, the international traders are more worried by Liz Truss than Maloney in Italy, which is surprising because, like, Liz Truss has said nothing about international traders, but Maloney's like, we're going to beat these guys.
	She's got an active vendetta against them.
	So what's amusing about this, though, is that, yeah, exactly, she's got an active vendetta against them, but that's not as scary as Liz Truss's incompetence.
	LAUGHTER They're more worried about Liz Truss not knowing what she's doing.
	I mean, put that way, I can kind of get it.
	I'm surprised.
	I mean, I'm sure she had to be directed for this photo shoot, Where the Helmet Goes.
	Probably, yes.
	But anyway, the point being that the voting public is not objecting to tax cuts, because as you said, no one's going to object to tax cuts, apart from Guardian Reader's.
	So leaning right is good here, even if international markets are freaking out and the Conservatives can't hold their nerve in the face of doing the right thing, blah, blah, blah, right?
	But the thing is, I'm not going to vote for the Tories unless they tell me that they are far right on practically every other issue.
	Unless they are publicly proclaiming, yes, we're a far right party when it comes to the family, when it comes to border security, when it comes to immigration.
	Crime and punishment.
	Exactly.
	Crime and punishment.
	Like, you know, education.
	Just all of these things.
	I want them to explicitly say we are a far-right party on these things.
	We are like Maloney.
	We are like Le Pen.
	We are like the Swedish Democrats or whatever it was.
	You know, we are a patriotic party, which is the far-right position.
	That's what I want to hear from them, right?
	I don't want to hear that they're going to loosen immigration to make line go up.
	That is just not what I want to hear.
	Guardian's like, oh, here's a puff piece.
	Have a nice, positive article.
	We're not going to call you a Nazi.
	Yeah, we know what our readers want.
	Exactly.
	The Guardian's praising you.
	You're doing something wrong, right?
	So she's expected to loosen immigration rules, which is remarkable because the Conservatives let in a million people, 1.16 million a year.
	How much looser can they get?
	I didn't realise we had restrictions.
	I thought the only restriction was just literally the number of spaces in the ports and on the planes as they came down.
	On the beaches.
	Yeah, exactly.
	So she's doing this to expand the government's shortage occupation list to help businesses fill vacancies by recruiting overseas workers with less bureaucracy.
	It's brilliant.
	This is a full return to Blairism.
	She's going to do the Mandelson thing and send out search parties to bring them in.
	I mean, she might.
	No, but seriously, the Blair government did that.
	They sent search parties out to foreign countries to get them to come here.
	I'm sorry, I'm just imagining...
	It's in the podcast.
	I'm just imagining a remix of Churchill's speech, where instead of, we'll fight them on the beaches, we'll take them at the ports, we'll take them at the airports, we'll take them on the beaches.
	We will never surrender until our island is literally packed wall-to-wall with foreigners.
	Um...
	But this is because there are industry demands saying, oh, look, we just want extra workers.
	And it's like, or, and this sucks for you, but it stops being a buyer's market for labor and it becomes a seller's market for labor.
	Because who does that benefit?
	That benefits the worker.
	It doesn't benefit the CEO. You would think the Guardian of all publications would be in support of this?
	Not the Guardian, but I would think the Conservatives of all people would be in support of this.
	Like, look, cut the taxes and just stop the immigration and then an equilibrium will find itself.
	But anyway, the cap is expected to be lifted and a six-month time limit extended according to the Sun.
	No, no, no.
	This is any goodwill that you've built up through tax cuts, you obliterate through saying, yeah, so now we're going to open the borders even more.
	What do you mean even more?
	We're going to get two million a year now.
	We're going to have to build even more houses!
	That lovely field behind your house, wave goodbye!
	Yeah, exactly!
	Welcome to literally megacity Britain.
	But then you get, like, idiots like this on Twitter being like, in two weeks, Liz Truss has become the best Prime Minister of my lifetime.
	Are you serious, Miss Raheem Ibrahim?
	In what way?
	She has reversed the national insurance rise.
	Wow, brilliant.
	She's cancelled the 6% rise in corporation tax.
	Good idea.
	She's abolished the top rate of tax, and she's prepared to increase immigration to boost growth.
	The line is going up, boys!
	You had me going for a little bit.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Not gonna lie.
	Had me in the first half, like, but, like, and then, it's just like, right, and then we're gonna get more Leicester, more Birmingham.
	You know those machete riots in London?
	Yeah, more of that.
	Please more of that, because that's the consequence of immigration.
	I mean, the Leicester needs reinforcements.
	Which is how I guess they're viewing it.
	The Hindus have clearly won this battle.
	We need to muster a new argument.
	It's just economic growth.
	It's just warm bodies on an island, on my spreadsheet.
	That's all it is.
	There's no other concerns.
	It's mental, right?
	And so this is producing another cabinet revolt for Liz Truss.
	Not another one, please!
	Apparently it's not archived, for whatever reason.
	Oh, bloody hell.
	But this is a Daily Mail article where Liz Truss is facing another cabinet revolt because of her immigration plans.
	Sweller Braverman, Jacob Rees-Mogg, and there was someone else, Kemi Badenock, who were objecting to this.
	Because, I mean, it was in your manifesto that you were going to reduce immigration...
	I do love that it's always the conservatives in the cabinet from foreign descent who are like, close the bloody borders!
	Yeah, well, they're right to do so, you know.
	But at least they're consistent on these things, right?
	You know, Sweller Braveman and Kenny Bainock have been consistent about immigration.
	So, okay, good.
	You know, at least there's a couple of people.
	The trust is threatening to lift the cap.
	Apparently there's a numbers cap of 30,000-40,000 people.
	No, there isn't.
	Yeah, imagine.
	And abolish the requirement for them to be able to speak English.
	Wait, there is a requirement?
	I walk around Swindon and I hear people speaking just all sorts of languages, like Spanish and Italian and French and, like, you know, Asian languages.
	I'm just like, what are you talking about?
	I can see the results of your immigration policy.
	Like, this is just mental.
	And, of course, we've got the Channel Crossings adding to all of this, add to the million, we've got 30,000 illegals, and it just makes you wonder why they come illegally.
	I mean, not that anything happens to them, but why would you come illegally if the UK is just letting in a million people a year?
	Just apply on the website.
	You don't have to go through all of this, unfortunately.
	Is it easier somehow?
	I don't understand.
	More people have come this year than the whole of last year.
	30,000 compared to the 28,000 last year.
	I guess we got Brexit done, lads.
	Yeah, exactly.
	We got Brexit done.
	And so it's not like they're being sent back anyway.
	You don't know what's happening in the Rwanda plan.
	That paused things for like a week, and then they were like, they sent no one to Rwanda.
	Okay, well, great.
	We're not even going to send Albanian asylum seekers back?
	And when we say asylum seekers, we mean human traffickers.
	And drug dealers.
	And drug dealers, yes.
	The government's rapid returns to deal with Albanians has been thrown into doubt as, after it emerged, those who claim asylum will be exempt.
	So if you say, I'd like to claim asylum, please, they're going to be like, okay, well, then he's staying forever, which means that literally, like, 90% of them will not be removed.
	Okay.
	Because all you have to do is claim asylum.
	Every single one of them could claim asylum.
	Not that there's a war in Albania or anything, but who cares?
	Doesn't matter.
	And so this is, of course, because of the lefty human rights lawyers that, in fact, it was Boris Johnson who said we're going to remove the Human Rights Act of...
	I can't remember the year of the Human Rights Act now.
	Was it 98?
	Yeah.
	I think it was the 1998 Human Rights Act.
	Again, another Blair initiative.
	We're going to repeal it and replace it with something that the lefty human rights lawyers can't use to make sure that they get around all this.
	Yeah, it was 1998.
	Thank you, John.
	And Braverman, again, was the person being like, yeah, get out of the European Court of Human Rights, get rid of this thing, that's the only solution to the immigration problem, because currently the left are using the law, as it's written by Tony Blair, to ensure that we can't fix this.
	It's like, okay, who's got dominating control of Parliament?
	Not me!
	Not Labour.
	Keir Starmer.
	It's not the Liberal Democrats.
	It's not the SNP. It is the Conservative Party of which you guys are a part.
	And you could literally do this tomorrow.
	It is infuriating that they keep saying, we're definitely going to do this.
	We will do this.
	They keep saying that they will.
	And then, when?
	Don't tell me you're going to do it.
	Just do it.
	Give me a date.
	Give me the date.
	And so, yeah, it's just insufferable.
	And so this, I think, it's this...
	The constant failure to address the actual problems that people are genuinely concerned about that has given Labour their historic lead.
	Now, this is incredible, actually.
	And I don't really take YouGov very seriously, but it's not just YouGov.
	I saw a few other polls before it was live, and I just didn't have time to put them in.
	There are a couple of other polls that show literally like a 15 to 17 point lead that Labour have over the Conservatives at the moment.
	Jesus.
	The Labour Party are an absolute joke.
	At the moment, the Labour Party conference is going on, and it's just a clown show.
	I've seen some clips that Callum's shown me.
	Callum's going to do a montage, yeah, a supercut.
	Because it's just this standard clown show from the Labour Party.
	It's genuinely hilarious.
	And all Keir Starmer just has to do now is just be quiet.
	It's just like, okay, and then Keir Starmer wins!
	And it's like, unbelievable.
	And so it's like, right, okay, the conservatives, why, why, though?
	Why, why are people not supporting, why are the conservatives on 28%?
	28%.
	Like, you're less well-favored than Joe Biden, and he has actively destroyed his own country.
	When you put it like that, that's bad.
	That's really bad.
	I already knew it was bad.
	I mean, obviously conservatives for basically the past two years have been having a repeated series of public meltdowns and scandals, so it's not that surprising.
	But fallen lower than Labour as well.
	Only three years ago, Boris was winning supermajorities.
	Massive sweeps.
	Converting the North, you know?
	Because he had something.
	I know, John, implying they're not actively doing it.
	I don't think it's active.
	I think they're just incompetent.
	I just think they don't know what to do.
	Sorry, what were you going to say?
	Oh, I was just going to say, I knew people up North who were like, well, I've never voted Conservative before, but Labour suck.
	Well, they do.
	But this is the thing, right?
	So the percentages are actually slightly misleading, right?
	So there's Matthew Goodwin, an academic, has looked into this, and he has found that actually the problem is that conservatives are not holding on to their existing voters.
	If you can go to the next graph, you can see, here we go.
	So you can see who voted in 2015, 2017, and 2019.
	We've got massive number of Conservatives.
	However, if you look at the bottom on 2019, half of those voters have just disappeared.
	It's not that they've gone over to Labour.
	Only about 10% have gone over to Labour.
	But the rest of them are just like, I'm just not voting.
	I'm not voting for this Conservative Party.
	I get it.
	Exactly.
	I completely get it.
	There is a massive, floating, unattached block of potential Conservative voters who are just refusing to vote for the pro-immigration campaign.
	Basically LGBTQ plus conservatives.
	They are not voting for that.
	So what the Conservative Party needs to do is lean to the right as hard as possible, just like in Europe at the moment, because these are the genuine problems that are facing these countries, and they're not going away.
	We can see the change in the streets of our own towns and cities.
	We can see it.
	What's it like going through Swindon?
	It's not like being in England, I'll tell you that.
	That's it, exactly.
	Once again, it was just a massive, even though it's only like 100 miles away, culture shock just coming down here from where I was living, where everyone is English except for maybe four or five people who, because they're in such a minority, have just integrated and are just normal with everybody else, to coming here, where you walk down the street and you've got asylum seekers everywhere.
	You've got people talking foreign languages constantly.
	You walk around and you feel...
	Outside of England.
	I feel like I've gone on holiday somewhere.
	Somewhere horrible.
	Yeah, somewhere horrible, yeah.
	Where the economy's collapsing.
	But this is the point.
	It's not that the Conservative voters wouldn't vote Conservative.
	It's not that the Conservatives can't activate these voters again.
	It's that there's nothing coming out of the mouths of the Conservatives themselves that will bring them back and say, okay, well, you know, actually vote for us.
	Because why would you?
	Why would you vote for a party?
	It's like, yeah, so we're going to do more of that immigration you loved so much.
	It's like, get bent.
	I will not vote for this.
	And so basically what I'm saying is the Conservatives need to start declaring themselves actively as far-right.
	You need to be like, no, we are a far-right party, and we're going to do far-right things, just like the family, faith, and God, and country.
	Like, you know, just come out with that.
	That's our agenda.
	The majoritarian agenda is the foreign agenda.
	It's not like, you know, evil.
	It's actually good to do that.
	If you need evidence that would work beyond just pointing to foreign countries as well, just look at last week with the response to the Queen's funeral.
	Yes!
	Yeah, yes, exactly.
	Precisely the point.
	That is the real Britain that is existing.
	When we're not being constantly bombarded by minoritarian propaganda, That's what you're appealing to, conservatives.
	Literally millions of people all got out on the street to go and see this.
	That's your voter base.
	Engage them.
	Actually play to their concerns.
	Do what they want.
	And if the Guardian is not complaining about you, then you are not doing the job right.
	They should be screeching and shouting, oh God, you're far right, you're far right, and you should just turn around and go, yeah.
	If you somehow even manage to pull the Guardian right somehow, what you need to do in response is go even further, right?
	Yes, exactly.
	So anyway, that's just the only way I think the Conservatives can win, because they're bleeding their traditional demographics, because they're trying to be a Blairite party, and even Tony Blair is like, no, that's a bad idea, as you can see in the podcast.
	Anyway, with that, let's go on to the video comments.
	I took notes.
	I'm responding to your piece about the true red pill.
	You said that the true red pill is realizing that there is no one in charge and we are essentially at the whim of chaos.
	While I agree that a giant cabal of evil masterminds is probably not responsible for all the problems in the world, I think that shocking the problems we are seeing up to chaotic chance is a dangerous premise.
	It gives people an easy out.
	If it's all chance, why fight?
	I don't think you actually believe this, especially since you run a podcast devoting to dragging what is wrong into the light.
	And I didn't say that either.
	I didn't say that there weren't conspiracies.
	I didn't say that there weren't powerful and influential actors.
	What I was warning about is the tendency to see these people as being all-powerful.
	And this is a very easy thing to do because these are very powerful people.
	They command a lot of money.
	They command entire countries or international businesses.
	And so it's very easy to see them as being Machiavellian masterminds who are just giant, omnipresent...
	Presences.
	But they're not.
	And again, the old meme, if there was no hope, their propaganda would be unnecessary.
	That's, I think, what I... But obviously I didn't communicate.
	So what you're appealing to is the incompetency of the grand conspirators, or the potential.
	It's the limits of them.
	They're just human.
	And so they...
	Whenever these conspiracies are exposed, you actually find people who are just...
	They're kind of desperate to get the pieces to fall into place, and it's not easy to do this.
	And so their control is limited.
	That's what we need to remember.
	The practical reality of the world means that any action that you take is going to have unforeseen consequences, that you're never going to be able to account for every single one of them.
	Things can't just go off like you're Gus Fring in Breaking Bad and everything just falls into place because you're that much of a mega-genius.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, no, that's exactly right.
	And so a lot of, you know, the planning of the G7 and stuff like that is them trying not to lose what they have rather than actively advancing a particular agenda.
	And now they are.
	There are lots of people who are actively advancing.
	And of course, things like the WEF are a terrible idea.
	But they're not omnipotent gods.
	You know, they can be foiled.
	They will hopefully be foiled.
	And so it was a way of actually saying, don't be disheartened by the scope of the power structures that we're against.
	Not that they're not massive and important, and not that I haven't warned about that anyway.
	But there is a through way here, I think.
	All right, let's move on to the next one.
	Something that what Carl was talking about on Friday was how, I guess, maybe not fame, but just this whole glamour lifestyle.
	And it made me think of Tom Petty's music video for Into the Great Wide Open, which is sort of the same story, although it's not about porn.
	It's about some kid who gets into the music industry and then gets basically swallowed up by it.
	I'd suggest you guys check it out.
	That's a very good point.
	I've not heard of that music video either, although I do quite like Tom Petty.
	I watched your segment about the porn stars on Friday, and it's a horribly depressing industry to get into, unsurprisingly.
	But what you were saying there about some people get sucked into the industry, I can say from experience that yes, people absolutely do.
	For instance, I've You got sucked into the porn industry, did you?
	There's Harry porn out there, isn't there?
	Your trans fans online will be thrilled.
	No, having lived in Manchester, I have met a few people of that.
	No, I mean music industry.
	Sorry, I should have specified.
	Because, you know, I've been abandoned by friends who just three years ago now, we would have considered ourselves brothers in arms no matter what differing opinions that we would have had, but then all of a sudden you get sucked into it and it becomes expedient for your career or whatever success you're trying to attain, and then I get thrown at the wayside, so it is sad that it does happen.
	Anyway.
	Set in the England of King Stephen, Derek Jacoby plays Brother Cadphile, a monk in the Shrewsbury area during the much-overlooked Civil War with the Empress Matilda.
	For Lotus Eaters who enjoy the Epochs podcasts, and also a good murder mystery, the Cadphile programs are a delight.
	Carl and Beau should really look at that Civil War.
	It's a shame they skipped past it.
	I thought that was after William the Conqueror.
	It was Stephen's, like, Civil War.
	We haven't got to it yet.
	It's not that we skipped past it.
	We're still doing William at the moment.
	I tried watching that CAD fail program a while ago, but for some reason, I can't remember exactly why, but I couldn't get into it.
	Is it BBC? I can't remember.
	Probably.
	It looked a bit BBC, and sometimes I can have issues just getting past the production values, to be honest.
	It looks cheap a lot of the time.
	I did try to watch it, but I just couldn't get into it.
	Fair play.
	Anyway, let's carry on.
	So, yesterday it was brought up the story about frogs jumping out of the water, and there's an interesting part to that story that's usually ignored or just forgotten about.
	You see, there were actually two groups of frogs that were put in the slowly warming water, and one of the groups jumped out, the other didn't.
	Which kind of raises some questions because why would one do it and one didn't?
	And it turns out that there was a small change between the two groups of frogs.
	One of them was lobotomized, which kind of changes the entire meaning of that story, doesn't it?
	What was that?
	Very interesting.
	I didn't know that.
	You know the old saying, like a frog in boiling water?
	Yeah.
	The idea that if you just get somebody complacent enough that they'll just go along with it if they don't realise.
	What I think he's saying there was the actual experiment had two frogs.
	One just jumped out of the water, the other one didn't, and I assume the one that didn't had been lobotomised.
	Right, right.
	Which explains it, really.
	That would, yeah.
	I think that's all the video comments we've got, so...
	Do you want to read them?
	Oh, it's your comments first.
	Spadroon says, This does make me wish for an actual Conservative PM in the UK. Anecdote.
	When Kemi was shafted by both the media and the Conservative Party, many of the younger party members I know debated leaving the party.
	I myself am certainly exploring options.
	Yeah, this is what I mean.
	The Conservatives are just like, yeah, no, actually we're a far-right party and the Blairites can go.
	That's how to win.
	As soon as the Conservatives talk about bringing back public hangings, then I might be back on side.
	Yeah, I might consider voting for them.
	Charlie says, the funny thing about Maloney is that if she were a communist, she'd be seen as a darling.
	The daughter of a single mother from a working-class background standing up against von der Leyen, a member of two aristocratic houses in Germany.
	But no, God forbid, the world accepts that the working class is inherently conservative and rejects all the left-wing nonsense.
	Yeah, that's exactly right.
	And that's the point that she was making, wasn't it?
	It's like...
	How inspiring.
	This is not a narrative they're going to spin just because she has non-left-wing politics.
	It is funny the working class is inherently conservative because it's just true.
	The working class families that I know, I've spoken to them because I'm friends with some of them, and there'll be one girl in them because there'll always be massive families of five or six brothers and a sister or two.
	And the sister will always be like, Well, you know, we could always respect the pronouns.
	We could do this or that.
	And all of the boys are just like, nah, it's not a woman, that's a bloke.
	But the thing is, as well, I've been thinking about this.
	I think the reason the working class is so conservative is because they are the ones who are closest to the negative impacts of these decisions.
	There's no safety net for these people.
	You've got to stay within these prescribed boundaries or else you get really negative outcomes.
	If you're like Carlos Maza and your parents live in a mansion, maybe that's not such a bad thing for you.
	You can just go live in the mansion and be a miserable commie online.
	You don't have to pay attention to any consequences of your bad decisions.
	Exactly.
	But if you're, you know, in a household that gets £20,000 a year income, no, you've got to make sure you stay within the boundaries to make sure you don't get these really negative adverse consequences.
	And, like, so, like...
	You're like, okay, so for my future I need to be able to find a wife, you know, have children, you know, get a secure family structure.
	That's success in my life.
	Well, you need to do certain things and you don't get to just, you know, chop off your penis.
	Yeah, I think because the working class doesn't have that extra room to just obsess over things and intellectualize.
	They're having to live day by day.
	They just focus on the important stuff.
	What do I want?
	I want to be financially secure and I want to be happy.
	How do I do that?
	Get a good job, get a wife, have kids.
	Yeah.
	Simple as.
	It literally is simple as.
	And, like, this is ironically to their benefit in the current era.
	Every single time.
	Ironically, this is completely to their benefit.
	They all seem much happier as long as their jobs are secure.
	Yeah, exactly.
	George says, what would it take for normally to see that conservatives aren't really conservative, the Tories aren't really conservative, and vote for an alternative?
	If the last 12 years weren't a hint, I don't know what is.
	Well, that's the thing.
	That's what I was showing in the last segment.
	Like, the conservatives have lost half of their voters, Purely because they're not conservative.
	So the normies can see that I'm not voting for the pro-immigration conservatives.
	That's not conservative.
	I'm not voting for it.
	Normies can see that.
	But the problem is exactly what you say.
	They will not vote for an alternative.
	It's really insufferable.
	Like, why can't normal people like, right, I'm going to vote conservative or UKIP, you know?
	I think a lot of people, just because of the fact that you're...
	Well, just because it's kind of ingrained in this country from a very young age.
	There's Conservative, there's Labour, and then maybe if you're feeling a bit quirky, there's Lib Dems.
	And that's about all people ever consider.
	So I imagine most of the people, if you even told them reform or any of these other parties are an actual viable alternative, they might be shocked.
	And sadly, online, you do get a lot of that.
	Because there was still like 34% of people still voting for them.
	And I imagine those are the insufferable Tory boys.
	Maybe.
	But it does seem that a lot of Conservative voters are essentially using the Labour Party as a form of punishment for the Conservatives.
	Look at what you made me do!
	Yeah, we're not going to vote for you and you're going to get Labour and you deserve it if you don't go far right, basically, is what the Conservative voter is saying.
	And it's like, we'll use this as a punishment.
	We will punish you with being out of office, being out of government.
	If you don't do what we say.
	And the Conservatives really should have learned this lesson by now.
	You're 200 years old.
	You'd think they'd know this?
	But anyway, Alfredo Beta says the media is hyperventilating that Italy has elected the new Mussolini.
	Not one mention of the glass ceiling or first woman PM. Yeah, I know.
	I love it.
	In every other thing, it's just the first woman this, the first black that, but not this.
	Oh no, she's evil.
	The media have no idea what fascism is, and since when is fascism less government control and more individual freedom?
	If anything, Maloney sounds like Steve Bannon, which is enough to put a target on her back.
	She's clearly anti-globalist.
	Make Italy great again.
	Well, yeah.
	Yeah.
	Sounds good to me.
	Hammurabi says, Conservatives, keep winning across Europe.
	Samir merchants, we'll call them fascists for the thousandth time.
	Maybe that'll stop them.
	Yeah, and it's getting to the point where, look, if you call fascism God, family, and country, then fascism will simply be redeemed as a political position.
	Congratulations.
	I mean, if there's one...
	At least it won't have anything to do with fascism.
	Yeah, if there's one good thing you might be able to say about this is the fact that fascists have been overused as a term so much has made people go, actually, what was fascism?
	And actually go back and look into it so more people know what they're on about.
	I mean, maybe that will happen, you know?
	Like, it's just misrepresenting things that are not fascist as fascist is not going to make those things bad.
	It'll just make fascism less bad.
	Malicious Compliance says, Question.
	Given that Marxist and communist ideology is fundamentally about subverting and destroying society, making things as bad as they can be in order to facilitate revolution, is it unreasonable to say that these people should be prohibited from holding any role of importance which would allow them to have a meaningful impact?
	No.
	No, it wouldn't.
	I mean, you wouldn't allow Nazis to be in the civil service, would you?
	No, I mean, for one, Italy banned any fascist parties, and as a result, Maloney went out last year and was like, actually, we should ban all communists in that case as well, because they're basically the same thing for what she said.
	The thing is, right, okay, so in Europe, that's one thing, because we're not propositional nations, right?
	But in America, I can't understand why they tolerate other propositions.
	We're a propositional nation.
	We are the nation of liberalism, basically.
	Classical Enlightenment liberalism.
	Then why would you tolerate fascists or communists?
	Well, they would probably argue free speech, but then all I need to do is point at John Locke saying actually non-Christians should be banned.
	Yeah, exactly.
	And you go, well, free speech has always had limits, even in the people who developed the ideas that support it.
	And it's like, well, we're a propositional nation.
	Well, okay, part of being a propositional nation must therefore be a rival proposition, and adherence to a rival proposition is a form of treason.
	Well, what you're doing is just openly inviting in enemies, which is, in any circumstance, idiotic.
	But the entire nation is predicated on the commitment to the Constitution, which is an ideological proposition that comes from classical English liberalism.
	And so, if everyone in the country has to agree to that, anyone who doesn't agree to that is somehow a traitor.
	I mean, personally, I don't understand why even the Founding Fathers, well, the Federalists, when they wrote up the Constitution, I don't understand why they allowed any amendments to be made to it after the 10th one, after that initial Bill of Rights that they made.
	Because since then, for one, whichever the amendment, was it the 19th Amendment that gave women the right to vote?
	That's a mistake.
	Joking.
	But there was the 14th Amendment, which was the one that's been used time and time again by courts to basically support illegal immigrants.
	Wait, was it?
	No, I thought it was the 13th Amendment.
	One of those amendments immediately after has been used time and time again just to facilitate letting illegal migrants just stay in the country.
	So it just comes across nonsense to me.
	Yeah.
	S.H. Silver says these neoliberals should count their blessings at right-wing parties that are actually winning are primarily reformist and things haven't been pushed towards actual revolutionary fascists.
	Yeah, they should.
	This is the thing.
	And as Ross says, they are doing their best to make fascism sound reasonable, which it is not.
	I'll do a book club on fascism at some point.
	I recently read The Origin and Doctrine of Fascism, re-read, by Gentilly.
	And it is lunatic leftist nonsense.
	But I'll let you go on to yours soon.
	Oh yeah, of course.
	Alright, so, looking at the comments for my segment.
	So, Zachary Straubel says, As an American, I must say I am utterly shocked to find that there is corruption within my country's political landscape.
	I'm sorry to drop that bombshell on you for all of our American listeners out there.
	I'm sorry that I had to do that to you.
	But you need to know, man.
	It is obviously...
	Of course it is.
	The fact that you can just, like, have any rando donate an unlimited amount of money to an unaccountable organisation.
	Mental.
	You're asking for trouble.
	Mental.
	Tax Fraud, appropriately, says: Well, I mean, the Wolf of Wall Street was three the Wolf of Wall Street was three hours, Wolf of Washington would have to be days long at this point.
	I mean, I'd be entertained by it, though.
	Don't politicians spend something like 70% of their time lobbying for funds as well?
	It's actually a really high number.
	And that's what most of the campaign trails are, really, aren't they?
	They're just going, you're lobbying for votes and you're lobbying for more money.
	And you'll often, that's why they end up in bed with businessmen, because businessmen have the most money.
	You do what the businessman asks you to, whether that be, you know, put up restrictive regulations on their competitors or anything else that they do, and then you're rolling in it, basically.
	Yeah.
	Kobe Constox says, That's partially true, but obviously if you want to get your voice and reach out there as much That's partially true, but obviously if you want to get your voice and reach out there as much as possible, you Yeah, so this is interesting because obviously the Mike Bloomberg campaign is the most obvious example of that.
	And I think what's actually happening here is it's a bit more subtle.
	I think the money in politics is a kind of weighting factor.
	It weights one side against the other.
	There are other forces that can make essentially the amount of money you pour into a campaign kind of redundant.
	For example, you could be Mike Bloomberg and everyone could hate you.
	If you've got no charisma whatsoever, people might not vote.
	Or you could be Donald Trump, who is hitting on issues that have been suppressed.
	And so, you know, the propaganda being like, immigrant's good, you know, Democrat's good.
	If Donald Trump's like, no, immigrant's bad, Democrat's bad, then it could be that a massive section of the electorate swings to that because it's reflective of the real life.
	But to say, you know, I... To have massive amounts of propaganda all the time blaring your name and your positive message is a very advantageous thing to have.
	It's just the message has to be vaguely in line with what the majority of the population wants.
	So it's not that money is not important.
	It's massively important.
	But he is right that it can't be the only thing that your campaign has.
	Well, of course.
	Absolutely.
	Bleach Demon says, I think it's worth noting that American PACs were born out of the mid-2002 bipartisan push for campaign finance reform.
	Reform.
	The bipartisan push to fill our money with pockets of money.
	I mean, it was successful.
	Very successful.
	Congratulations.
	What a shock.
	against the citizen.
	McCain had the Midas touch of turning laws into crap in the eyes of most Americans.
	Yeah, that all makes sense now.
	Justin B says that PAC rule seems designed for abuse.
	If they can only donate $5,000 to their candidate, but can pass any amount of money to other PACs.
	Well, PAC A has reached its limit, so let's have someone set up another PAC and pass our remaining money to that ad infinitum.
	Yeah, going back to Bleach Demon's comment about it being obviously a grift.
	Yeah, I mean, as you can say, I even pointed it out there where there's just some random intermediary pack who's just like, well, we'll take 50 grand from you and pass 20 grand down the line somewhere else.
	And, you know, who knows exactly where all that money originally came from.
	We've got to spend half a million on salaries.
	It's like, okay.
	For all we know, when I say money laundry, they could literally be using it to just launder money from drug trafficking or human trafficking.
	Who knows?
	How would you know?
	Yeah, exactly.
	Especially on the Democrat side, why is it exactly that they might want those open borders?
	And it's keeping the sort of beltway parasitic class of political hangers-on employed around Washington as well.
	Yeah, and employed very nicely.
	So you get lots and lots of money so that you can attend parties, according to Bleach Demon.
	Why do any of these people exist?
	Good question.
	Josh Bibby says, Another point in the superpacks aren't going anywhere column.
	Many politicians use superpacks to enrich their family and pay off donors.
	Also, they are a way to launder actual government money to put it in your pocket.
	For instance, a government grant can be given to an educational institution who will then donate to the politician who included the fundings pack.
	The government spends so much money that it's literally impossible to follow it all, and if you know the system, you can line your pockets without breaking any laws.
	That's absolutely true.
	When you're spending in the trillions in your public deficit and such, who knows where all that money's going?
	Tomo de Tank, last one for this segment, says, That's a good point as well, actually.
	Yeah, it's a nice way of keeping track of who's donating towards which campaign.
	And then being able to just try and destroy them on the basis of that.
	Anyway, Baron Von Warhawk says, What the right wing needs to do to win?
	Stop taking marching orders from insane trans-communists on Twitter.
	Of course, that would require the right to have principles and balls, which is impossible.
	Well, yeah, exactly.
	But it's just so...
	Like, the data is in.
	The conservatives are not flipping to Labour.
	They are just not voting for you.
	Because you are not right wing.
	And that's what people want.
	It's just...
	Again, like, the Conservatives should know this as a party.
	They should know this.
	Because if they were like, look, immigration's just over, taxes are down, things might be a bit rough for a little while, but we'll get through it.
	It'll be okay, lads.
	Churchill spirit, you know.
	I think what they're deathly afraid of is that period that you're talking about where things will go a bit down for a little bit.
	Okay, if that's what we've got to do to fix the country...
	Just suffer it.
	Yeah.
	And like people would, like with COVID, people put up with it because they're like, well, you know, it's got to grin and bear through it, right?
	If you can sell it to the public, then...
	Yeah.
	Omar says, I bet if they didn't have vested interest in perpetuating the status quo, all the immigration issues would be solved in a week, and most of that would be turning out the home office of Quislings.
	Yeah, if it wasn't that 20% of the Conservatives' fundings came from property developers, then yeah, it probably would.
	And then the rest going from big business or whatever, probably would.
	It's absolutely insufferable.
	I just can't take it.
	Ignacio says, every Western right-wing party for the last two decades has just acted like a perpetual loyal opposition, even when in power, due to their obsession with wanting the 18-year-old communist revolutionaries not to call them fascists.
	Yeah, that's exactly right.
	Our only hope is that right-wingers with a spine like Brothers for Italy, Vox, AFD, etc.
	But let's pray their spine doesn't turn into a wet noodle to get into power.
	They want the millennial young communists to vote for them as well.
	It's not just about being called names.
	And it's really peculiar because these people basically don't vote.
	Yeah, it's the same with all the products they supposedly support and screech about needing to have more representation.
	They end up not watching them.
	Yeah, it's why Jeremy Corbyn got absolutely trashed in 2019.
	Ooh, the young vote's going to turn out for Corbyn.
	No, he didn't.
	Now what?
	Sad to say, the sorts of attitudes that Labour pushes makes people very lazy.
	Yeah, and young people are just not inclined to be engaged in politics, generally.
	Why would they be?
	What investment do they have?
	Which is why we need to raise the age of voting.
	Thomas says, we don't have a tax problem, we have a spending problem, and until we deal with that, there is only one direction all this goes.
	Yeah, that's true.
	That's absolutely true.
	Like, okay, we're reducing taxes.
	Okay, well, how much Gibbs are you reducing?
	What are you reducing there?
	Colin says...
	Sounds like Swindon High Street.
	Yes.
	Tax cuts don't give money to anyone, actually.
	They just don't take money off people.
	Tax cuts means the government is extorting less money from the rich.
	Inflation is theft.
	Taxation is robbery.
	Pretty based.
	That's a great way of framing it as well.
	Inflation is absolutely theft, and taxation is indeed a form of robbery.
	S.H. Silver says, Liz proving to be pure neoliberal.
	Yes, pure Blair.
	That's the thing.
	It's Blair, Blair, Blair.
	And even Tony Blair would have been like, yeah, no, don't do that.
	Well, Tony Blair, from what I've seen, amusingly, despite the fact that he was at the cutting edge in the late 90s of the neoliberal Blairite paradigm, as you say, he doesn't seem woke.
	No, he's not.
	He's not woke, which immediately...
	I can't believe I'm saying this...
	Immediately makes him an improvement from the current Tory leaders we've got.
	Well, the Conservative Party is, as Peter Hitchin says, a Blairite party.
	The Labour Party are essentially a communist party...
	With a sort of Blairite attachment to the Conservatives.
	They've got the Communists, who are about a third of the Labour Party are Communists.
	We know this from Keir Starmer's election, in fact.
	Keir Starmer got about two-thirds of the votes.
	Okay, so two-thirds Blairite in with the Conservatives.
	But about a third are Communists.
	Whereas if you look at the Conservatives, it's a very small fringe, really, that seemed to be actually based.
	And Tony Blair is actually saying, well, look, those guys actually represent the country.
	Yeah.
	Tony Blair isn't based.
	He doesn't do any of this out of principle.
	This is all about self-serving.
	It's about serving the Labour Party.
	How can we get back into power?
	That's what he's thinking.
	So Tony Blair goes to the Labour Party conference handing out red pills.
	Kind of, yeah.
	If only.
	Which is why he looks based, but he's not.
	He's an evil man.
	He's done evil things.
	But S.A. Silver's right.
	Liz is pure neoliberal.
	She did defund Stonewall, though, so that was one good thing she did.
	Colin said...
	I thought that...
	Was that her who did that?
	Yeah, it was her, yeah.
	Oh, okay.
	I can't remember what she was.
	Stop clock and all that, then?
	Yeah, yeah.
	I mean, you know, that's good.
	And I do like that she's sticking to the tax cuts things.
	Everyone's like, oh, you can't do that.
	It's like, no, we're going to do that.
	It's like, okay, great.
	Now, reduce immigration.
	Colin says, the BBC are complaining.
	Another sign you're doing something right.
	Anon says, if you think Swindon is bad, just try visiting Luton, Leicester.
	It feels like Pakistan.
	That's why I don't visit.
	Yeah, that is why I don't go there.
	But yeah, at least Swindon feels like some sort of Middle Eastern bazaar, where you've got foreigners from all over the world.
	It's not just a colony of Pakistan.
	I mean, diversity is our strength, it turns out.
	Yeah.
	Sophie says, I mean, Boris Johnson said he would curb immigration, but let even more in.
	Now Trust says she's going to make it even easier to immigrate.
	Maybe that would curb it.
	Maybe the incompetence will work out.
	Good point, actually.
	North Ant's Night says, Immigration is already looser than her cause morals.
	Maybe trust is thinking she can dig down further until she reaches the other side of the planet.
	Well, I just want them to put a number on it.
	Okay, so how many billions of people are you going to let into this country, Liz?
	Just round it off to the nearest billion.
	Are we just going to, like, cut off a part of the Middle East and just airdrop it into the sea next to us?
	Yeah, I mean, India has a billion people in it.
	We've been getting all into Britain.
	Then are we going to have a...
	Is the labour shortage over?
	And judging by the logic that they always use, that just means that we'd be a hive of industry and entrepreneurial shit.
	Yeah, just like India.
	Just like India is now.
	Okay, all right.
	Look at them.
	They're just – everything's going great.
	But this thing is that I just ran off to the nearest billion, Liz.
	And if that's a zero, then great.
	We'll have zero immigrants.
	That's all I'm saying.
	Omar says, I like Callum's suggestion from the other day where we use the reaction to the passing of the Queen as a litmus test for immigration.
	It would be truly ironic if the double-edged weapons of globalism were finally used to fight Western subversion.
	wouldn't it?
	But yeah.
	Ethan says, at least when Labour wins and finally turns Britain completely socialist, it becomes so crap the migrants will stop.
	Yeah, that's the only light at the end of the tunnel.
	Eventually the collapse will be so dramatic the immigrants are like, oh Christ, I'm going out of here.
	I'm going back to the third world hellhole.
	I fled.
	Well, if they went like...
	There's one benefit if they went like really old school, early 20th century trade unionist socialism, which would be they would just completely close off the borders to protect wages.
	Maybe I'd support that.
	Close the borders for a bit, let the socialists do their thing, and then we come back in.
	When the Labour Party take over and become full-fledged communists, at least we'll be out of the Blairite paradigm.
	Brilliant.
	That's the only way out, is to become communist, lads.
	God.
	Anyway, Ethan says, plus the commies will no longer need masses of immigrants in order to cause chaos and eventually revolution.
	Plus all the cringe, thin-wristed soy idiots will have outlived their usefulness.
	It may be hell, but at least you'll get the last laugh.
	Yeah, I'll convert to communism.
	Screw it.
	Alright.
	I think I've hit half past now.
	Oh, okay.
	Well, we're out of time.
	I think we're out of time.
	So, thank you very, very much for tuning in.
	We'll be back at 1 o'clock tomorrow afternoon.
	Have a great day.

▲