Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Jan. 17, 2023 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:30:03

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #569

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast The Lotus Eaters for today, Tuesday the 17th of January I am joined by Dan.
	Hello Connor.
	And we're going to be discussing how digital ID has finally arrived in the UK, how the world is being redistricted into the Hunger Games, and how grooming is just a conspiracy theory.
	Before we start, I wanted to draw your attention to, at 3 o'clock today, Brokonomics episode 4, which obviously you are chairing.
	Thank you very much.
	Which has had a hell of a lot of acclaim from the audience, so always wonderful to see new content getting the attention it deserves.
	Today it's on debt and deficit, so explaining why our economy is due to go off a cliff, because we're all living on borrowed time and quite literally borrowed money.
	And if I do say it myself, that is actually quite a good episode, that one.
	Fantastic.
	Well, sign up if you haven't already.
	Go on, freeloaders.
	We're giving you a lot.
	Anyway, on with the news and how today Digital ID is finally being brought to the UK. Yep, we're in the timeline for technocratic policies from it's not happening to it's a good thing.
	Remember how all of the pandemic conspiracy theorists said there's going to be vaccine passports and vaccine verification for everything you do, from travelling abroad to accessing domestic venues and even buying food eventually.
	I think it was in Lithuania where they had grocery speakeasies.
	Well, spoiler alert, something like that's coming here.
	Don't worry, it's not synced up with health yet, though Harry did already cover how the World Health Organization wants to do that, but we'll go through the consultation, and the reason we're going to do this, we had a few viewers request it, is because, first of all, I want to arm you with exactly how the government are laying out this information.
	Digital roadmap to intrude on many aspects of our private lives, and also point you to your ability to fight back here.
	Now, I'm not saying you filling out the consultation will actually do anything, because as you remember with the ULEZ zone, Sadiq Khan pushed through.
	All the taxicab drivers said no.
	Plenty of people said no.
	The London Assembly voted it down.
	Sadiq Khan put it through any way to advance the climate agenda.
	But it's something we can do to at least build a counter-consensus to the people who are professional paid agitators, who are paid to sit behind desks and, like the cycling lobby, any time a road consultation comes up, fill this out disproportionately and create a policy that goes against what the average working person wants.
	So there is a link in here.
	Please do go for it.
	There is one thing to say about this consultation up front, which is it's not as bad as it could have been.
	So this is actually a theme.
	That's always helpful.
	So this is a theme I'm picking up in my Brokernomics talk that I'll be filming later today with Central Bank Digital Currencies.
	There are sort of three versions of the future that we're walking into, and I describe them as the good, bad, and the ugly.
	The good version is that government gets out of identity and money and the whole digital realm entirely, and it's basically left up to the private sector, and you get that divorce of state from certain powers, including money.
	The bad version is that they sit down and they design all of these things from scratch to be as totalitarian as possible.
	And then there's the ugly, which I think is what we are going to get, where they basically outsource it to the private sector and you end up bouncing around somewhere between those two parameters.
	And I think that's the route that they've gone down.
	And the alarming thing about that is I'm pretty sure I know how it's going to go because it's going to go how everything else has gone over the last 20 years.
	The next 20 years will be this whole game where they pitch it at a level where they think they can get it through.
	And then they gradually walk it more and more towards the more totalitarian side.
	But yeah, I mean, you're covering it when we get into it.
	It's not starting from quite as bad as it could have been, but that's my praise for it.
	But eventually it will be merged for your convenience.
	And they do market this as an all-in-one access app for government services and also eventually for merging the private sector and the government in together.
	Now, I think I do want to start off by steel manning, as you said.
	There is a utility for a digital identity apparatus in the present day.
	You've got to, for example, if you're buying anything to do with firearms in America online, or if you're buying alcohol or cigarettes or...
	As we said in the past, if you want to age verify for pornography websites, you just put your passport in or something like that.
	You've already got some form of age verification for certain items which should not be bought by children.
	That just seems a sensible step.
	And in a prudent society, it would stop there.
	But I don't think we're living in a very prudent society at the moment, as proven by the overreach of things like lockdown, COVID, and vaccine passports.
	So in the wrong hands, which it definitely seems like pretty much every government signed up to the UN's 2030 agenda is, this is going to be something to use to control us for the sake of the planet or achieving racial equity.
	So the sort of outcome I'd like to see on something like digital identity is that you can basically choose your own.
	So you can have an anonymous identity that you use for gaming and dating apps, for example.
	You can have another one that you use for your professional life and you keep that separate from your private life.
	And you can have another identity which is maybe a government identity and you use it when you're doing your MOT or paying your taxes or something like that.
	And that's not a million miles away from where this is starting from.
	But of course, they are building in the tools that anytime they want to, any future successive government can just come along and say, well, we want to achieve this outcome.
	And look, we've got this tool here.
	So why don't we add one more requirement on top of it?
	We already had the precedent in this country for basically a social credit system.
	We had one for a period of several months.
	It was the vaccine pass mode.
	Now, it was a social credit system that only had one flag on it, vaccinated or unvaccinated.
	But, you know, it has happened.
	We're now getting a framework for a more sophisticated version of that that presumably everybody will have if you want to pay taxes or get an MOT or interact with the state in any way.
	And then what's to stop some future government from saying, OK, right, we're going to toggle this on?
	Well, nothing at all.
	Exactly.
	So we're going to go through the consultation.
	It'll be a bit dry, but we're going to unpack some of the implications.
	So this consultation runs from the 4th of January 2023 to the 1st of March 2023.
	So get your responses in using the link while you can.
	You can also send your response by the 1st of March to the data sharing legislation team at dea-data-sharing at digital.cabinet-office.gov.uk.
	Bit of a long-winded one there.
	So a response to this consultation exercise is due to be published by the 24th of May 2023 on gov.uk, where presumably they'll tell us they were going to do what they were always going to do anyway and just pass it through, but we can still complain, right?
	Proposed by Alex Burghardt MP, who is the Parliamentary Secretary for the Cabinet Office, who is the former Director of Policy at the Centre for Social Justice and part of Prime Minister Theresa May's Cabinet team.
	So a typical party-line toady who's trying to sell this as a good thing.
	According to They Work For You, who aggregates all of their voting records, Burkhart has rarely ever rebelled against the party government.
	So he's just a henchman.
	Great.
	The proposed legislation will also unlock the full benefits of a new government identity verification system, known as gov.uk1login.
	One World.
	Oh, lovely.
	As part of the Cabinet Office, the Government Digital Service, GDS, is developing Dov...
	Gov.uk1 login through close collaboration with other government departments.
	Inclusion is at the heart of gov.uk1 login.
	The proposed data sharing legislation will ensure that more people than ever will be able to prove their identity online and access government services, so that anybody who wants to use online services is able to.
	This is obviously to fight off accusations that Joe Biden had about black people can't use the internet.
	Can they not?
	I didn't know more.
	No, no, no, no, no.
	Apparently, also, if you don't vote for him, you aren't black.
	So, apparently, don't vote for Joe Biden, and you'll be able to use the internet.
	Topsy-turvy world we live in.
	Of course, they always want to do this kind of thing under the guise of, it's going to be more inclusive, it's going to be renewably powered, so it's going to have no carbon emissions.
	There'll be no downsides to this.
	Of course, you will be excluded if you say the wrong thing under the social credit system that could be spawned from this, but pay no attention to your civil rights citizen.
	So the introduction says, The Public Service Delivery, PSD Power, Chapter 1 of Part 5 of the Digital Economy Act of 2017, allows specified public authorities to share personal information for objectives which are set out in regulations.
	This information-sharing power is aimed at improving or targeting public services to individuals or households in order to improve their well-being.
	Improve your well-being.
	Now that's just carte blanche for the government to say, we're going to use this data for whatever we like according to the definition of what we think is in your best interest.
	Yeah, it sounds to me like we know best, essentially that sentence.
	Yeah.
	We're going to buy you from a pub or bar to stop the spread, citizen.
	Don't worry, you won't get sick.
	We'll save the NHS. So this consultation paper sets out a proposed objective to support identity verification and services And the draft Digital Government Disclosure of Information Identity Verification Services Regulations 2023, which would enact it.
	A proposal for four new public authorities to be added to the schedule of authorities able to use the objectives under the public service delivery data sharing powers, so four new government departments who get access to your data.
	A proposal for those four specified public authorities to be able to use the new objective to support identity verification services specifically.
	This consultation is aimed at the general public, UK public authorities and other government departments, arm's length bodies, non-departmental governmental bodies or other organisations who may consider they could be affected by the draft regulations.
	It may also be relevant to other bodies that have an interest in identity verification services.
	So, we have the opportunity here as UK citizens to respond overwhelmingly negatively.
	And even if they suppress our responses, we can, as I will show you towards the end of this segment, do what I have done and aggregate all of your responses as screenshots and just post them under possibly one unified hashtag or something like that.
	Or when the government puts out the consultation tweet in the future, we can just show the evidence that we all didn't want this, but you wanted to push it through anyway.
	Something that happened before, which does show the need sometimes to reply to these consultations.
	Do you remember when they changed the highway code to make it so that, in the UK, cyclists and pedestrians have a right of way?
	That was fairly recently.
	Right, no, I missed that one.
	So what happens is, obviously, cyclists usually have to ride in the gutters, and they were complaining that the gutters are usually dirty, or there's dips.
	Oh yes, that thing.
	So what ends up happening now is cyclists can ride multiple abreast or just straight in the middle of the road holding up traffic, and if any pedestrian steps out in front of traffic, you have to stop.
	Now, you should stop anyway so you don't run over anyone.
	Extreme position, I know.
	But they are not at fault if they step out in traffic.
	You are, even if it's really unexpected.
	So it's just a way to inconvenience drivers off the road.
	And the reason I say that is because when the cycling lobby were pressed on this, on GB News, Talk Radio, and the like...
	They said, what is the common sense safety reason for this happening?
	Because you can still be knocked off a car by an open door if you're driving out in the middle of the street.
	And they said, well, it's good for the economy and the environment.
	Completely circumventing a practical reason as to why the policy would change.
	Instead, they want to incrementally nudge you off the road to achieve their climate goals and their economic modelling, which just so happens to justify immiserating you out of privately owned jobs.
	That's essentially how government works on a whole range of different things at the moment.
	I call it increasing friction between you and the thing that you're trying to do, just to make you say, I'll solve this, I'll go and do something else.
	Yeah, it's the same thing that we said before when the NHS wasn't running properly.
	Adds so much bureaucratic red tape that it deters you from ever using the service.
	So it gets the waiting list down by letting people just die.
	Yep.
	How humane.
	So who are the four new public authorities that get access to all of your data?
	The Cabinet Office.
	So that's the people making the policy at the highest echelons of government.
	The Department for Transport.
	So the people who want to, according to the 2030 you will own nothing and you'll be happy article, have a complete monopoly on all transport so you can only get a tram or a train or a bus or even a plane eventually if you say the right thing and use this sort of digital infrastructure, digital currency, digital ID in order to access their services.
	If you don't, you'll just be walking everywhere, I guess, forever.
	The Department for Food, Environment and Rural Affairs, so that's DEFRA, so that's the people who are at the heart of controlling land and agricultural policy, who have a heavy hand in our food industry, and who have a heavy hand in all of the climate policies being pushed at the moment.
	The Disclosure and Barring Service.
	Now that would be sensible, you'd think, right?
	So if you had to access any kind of employment, you pay your taxes, you have to disclose, particularly working with children or in prisons, your criminal history.
	That seems like a really sensible idea.
	But as Josh and I recently covered, they've updated the guidelines so that trans people don't have to give their former identities.
	So if you are a criminal, just say you're trans and change the name, and then you can go and work in a school without ever giving over your criminal history.
	And I'm sure there's no correlation between being trans and any sort of criminal activity of any sort.
	Absolutely not.
	That may or may not come up in the third section.
	And actually, regards to the second section, I'm just going to encourage viewers to bear that little list in mind, because my section coming up after this...
	If you were to take the conspiratorial angle on that as well, these four departments here would be incredibly useful for implementing that.
	So, yeah, this is really interesting, actually, once we get into the detail.
	Interesting, though.
	Health and adult social care bodies are not currently included in the scope of the Digital Economy Act 2017 for data sharing purposes.
	So, even though we have vaccine passports, you're not going to have your medical information integrated into the government digital ID under the existing framework until they obviously add the amendment to do that, which is really, really easy, and it's going to be superseded by the World Health Organization's global health passport proposed by the BNG20 in Indonesia last year anyway, which means that to travel to any country of which the UK is a co-signatory under the World Health Organization treaty, you have to show all your medical information upon arrival.
	Now, this feels to me exactly what we talked about at the beginning of the segment, which is they want to get it in under the radar at a level that avoids the biggest pushback.
	And for me, if the medical stuff was in there, that would have been my biggest pushback.
	And they've obviously recognised that and thought, OK, well, we're going to take that bit out for the time being so that that argument can't be used against us because they're going to say, well, it's not in there at the moment.
	This is just a thumb in the bum before they put the whole thing in.
	Anyway, here are the full list of bodies with access to the digital ID data.
	Because if you notice, they said four additional.
	So these are the ones that already would have access under the prior consultation, prior framework drafted.
	The Home Office, the Ministry of Justice, the Lord Chancellor, the Ministry of Defence, HM Revenue and Customs, Department for Leveling Up Housing and Communities, Department for Education, Department for Work and Pensions, Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, the same people doing the Online Harms Bill, funnily enough.
	HM Land Registry.
	An organisation which provides services to a specified public authority in connection with a specified objective.
	Well, that's just totally nebulous.
	That's anyone we subcontract to.
	A county district council in local England, a district council in local England, a London Borough Council, a combined authority established under Section 103 of the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act of 2009, the Common Council of the City of London, the Greater London Authority, and also the Welsh and Scottish ministers and local councils in the devolved authorities.
	My understanding of the British government is not sophisticated enough to know which one bit got left off that list.
	Apparently it's just the health department, which they're also drafting in legislation under the WHO to do anyway, and so they'll just meld it together for your convenience.
	The biggest spending department in Britain...
	The one where you can then come back with an argument, can't you?
	Because there'll be a big fuss about health tourism next.
	And they say, oh look, people are coming over here and they're getting free healthcare, so we need to bring it into this, unfortunately.
	So you can see that they can attack this from the right or the left at any future point.
	It's almost like they're manufacturing the excuse ahead of time to meld the things together for our own interest, particularly because that was the fuss that was kicked about last year when we had vaccine passports implemented.
	And they're going...
	Well, this is the thing they're going to be the most wary about, so we'll give it some time and then they'll adopt it for their own good.
	But it's just such a conspicuous, gaping hole in this list.
	So what data will be processed?
	We've got a full list of the things that are going to be kept on record.
	Public authorities will process the minimum number of data items.
	I'm sure you will known as attributes necessary for verifying the identity of an individual examples of attributes include the user's full name, date of birth, home address email address, photographic images which I'm sure no facial recognition cameras will pick up on various identifiers such as passport number or driving license number those are government documents, those seem sensible attributes held by government departments necessary for verifying the identity of an individual right Right.
	So, if that's the disclosure and barring service, couldn't that just be your DNA? Okay.
	The outcome of identity checks previously performed on a user, and transactional data, for example, income.
	Oh, right.
	So it ties in nicely with the CBDC, then.
	Yeah, it's literally the government spying on every single transaction you have coming in and out of your bank account.
	Okay.
	At this time, the service will not be aimed at children under the age of 13.
	So 13 and up, you get your own digital ID. The case studies in here also, when they're talking about why you need it, they include typical British names like Mikel and Bukayo.
	Wonderful.
	So why introduce the power now, which is a section on this?
	The Digital Identity Call for Evidence in 2020 demonstrated the UK public's strong desire for the government to use digital identities to enable citizens to access products and services with ease while maintaining privacy protections and safeguards to ensure citizens are protected from fraud.
	Right.
	So they're going to monitor every single transaction to only catch the criminals, guys.
	If you're not doing nothing wrong, you don't have anything to hide.
	Remember that old canard.
	Nothing wrong will probably expand to include things like supporting protesters that they don't like, or supporting rival political parties like Heritage and Reclaim and Heritage Party or whatever.
	Or buying more plane tickets than you're allowed on your carbon credits.
	Or red meat.
	So, the digital...
	Sorry, the timetable says the draft laying date for the statutory instrument is July 2023.
	The enactment of powers is October 2023, and the data sharing will be in place by December 2023.
	That's a very rapid timeline if they're genuinely asking if we want it or not, isn't it?
	Within a year, every government department will have access to all of your information, including your transactions and possible DNA.
	That is not enough time to even get a debate going in that time.
	No, but what we do know is that, thankfully, the experts, the elites, have been discussing this idea for a very long time, and they've got our best interests at heart, and they've been ironing all of this out since 2015.
	If we can go to the next document, please, John.
	A blueprint for digital identity, the World Economic Forum.
	Ah!
	Damn, it's those conspiracy theorists said it again.
	I'm sure the UK government have absolutely nothing to do with this.
	We can go to the next one, please, John.
	Oh, the Cabinet Office consulted on it in 2015.
	Right.
	Right.
	Along with every single bank, as well.
	And Reuters, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and the Australian Cabinet Office, which is really weird.
	It's almost like this has been in their minds for quite a while.
	Well, I remember the WEF made it the theme of their event for one year.
	I can't remember if it was 2015 or...
	It was either 2015 or one of the slightly later years, but the whole theme of the WEF that year was on digital IDs.
	And when they finished the event, they came out with something like an implementation guide that they were going to put out.
	And it was basically a list of homework assignments for the governments around the world to go off and implement this.
	And you can see, you can go to basically any Western country and you can type in a slight variation of the name of that WEF report.
	And you will see, and you get this in the UK as well, a version of that report that came out shortly after that WEF event in every Western country.
	And if you read those reports and compare them to the original WEF one, you can see they've basically just taken the headings from one and implemented it in their own.
	So they were given an instruction from the WEF, do this.
	And you can go and see it all in black and white on the websites.
	This is one of the clearest examples of how policy is set at the WEF and then implemented at the national government level.
	Well, the World Economic Forum are the direct listed partners for the UK's AI framework policy on the government website.
	So it's not like they aren't shaping policy.
	The Tony Blair Institute, for example, again, WEF partnered, and who had their own room at the Conservative Party conference to give panels, came out, it was one or two years ago now, with a document on how to implement digital ID, which Tony Blair, ID cards were a conversation way back, I believe, in 2009.
	Boris Johnson once said, I would rather eat an ID card for breakfast with a bowl of milk than adopt one, and then brought him back.
	So he's one of the very few things that Tony Blair got defeated on, and he's been obsessed with him ever since.
	And it seems that now our very Blairite, very international banker, unelected Prime Minister, is obsessed with it as well.
	Also in here, just before we move on, the WEF talk about not just their citizens' ID to access healthcare and voting, but an integrated corporate identity.
	What that means is that their corporate partners on ESG scores, who have been preferentially picked by governments, will be able to access a consumer's personal information, their medical information, their purchasing habits, and their integrated social media information.
	This will all be linked into one app for your convenience.
	And because the companies are ranked on ESG scores, Environmental Social Government scores, it's the new corporate social credit system which, if you get a high ranking, it allows you to get investment from hedge funds like BlackRock, State Street and Vanguard.
	If you, as a consumer, have a detrimental ESG score and the company...
	It takes into account its consumers and its ESG, because that's a new metric which allows them to go, we're really ethical consumer-based guys, see how our activism is working.
	If you're a detriment to their ESG score compared to their competitors, they can just stop you shopping there.
	It's like Nosedive in Black Mirror, where her stars go down, as rated by other people, and then she can't fly.
	And she can only use the trucks driven by people who are more disagreeable than the herd.
	This is the softest implementation of a social credit scheme.
	Get it under the radar.
	Once it's in, then of course you can start dialing it up.
	Scale it upwards.
	And I unfortunately did predict all of this last year in July.
	So go and subscribe to the website if you want to read this extensive article.
	I think it's about 6,000 words where I compared the ESG scores to the Mark of the Beast in Biblical Revelations.
	And I predicted how all of these factors would converge.
	You'll have the online harms bill, you have the European digital identity, you'll have vaccine passports, you'll have the WEF's blueprint for digital identity, and it will be rolled out as a digital infrastructure all around the same time, and eventually you'll get things like your smart meter in your home being synced up.
	As Shara Ali, the deputy leader of the Green Party, told me in a debate last year at Sussex University in February, just a little app on your phone that will calculate the amount of carbon you have every month, and if you hit that carbon limit, well, you can't trade them, and too bad.
	And, well, maybe we do need some punishments associated with going over it.
	Maybe it's for the good of the planet that you can't buy food or fly.
	Well, that's why I'm so keen on the whole idea.
	If we are going to have a future in which digital IDs are useful and we're spending more time online, so I can think of many scenarios in which it would be useful, I want them to be decentralized and as many of them as possible so that not everything has to relate back to one central point.
	Because if everything ends up relating back to basically one cluster of centralized digital IDs… And you have to link everything to it, your smart fridge, your smart meter and all that kind of things.
	It makes it very easy to build a complete picture of a person and start turning on and off aspects of their life that you decide that they shouldn't be doing, like, I don't know, driving or eating red meat or whatever it is.
	Or even those who think that this might be a good idea, the technocrats, the neoliberals out there, imagine if you start critiquing a very right-wing government about having more immigration for GDP and suddenly they turn off your social credit system.
	So you wouldn't be too keen on that either, would you?
	Now, I did mention in here, as I said, the online harms bill being the legislative crowbar by which they will sync up your social media ID and your state-mandered digital ID, and so you'll need the ID to access social media in order to protect children from harmful but legal content, that nebulous standard.
	If we go over to the next article, please, this will be, I think, the first frontier on this, because recently the Conservative Party withdrew the legal but harmful standard under Sinax government, Now the incumbent Labour Party, and I will say that because they're set to win the next election by a landslide because the British public just vote red or blue like it's a bloody halo match, they've said it's too weak and that actually the shadow culture secretary Lucy Powell said to The Independent that Mr.
	Sunak had failed to read the room by threatening only fines rather than criminal liability for social media bosses if they fail to protect children from damaging content.
	Now, they define damaging content, I'm assuming the Labour Party, as promoting against gender-affirming care because if you remember...
	Keir Starmer at the Pink News Awards said he would criminalise misgendering.
	And Nadine Dorries, who was the former Culture Secretary under Boris Johnson, said that Jimmy Carr's rather edgy Holocaust joke about gypsies would lead to actual prosecution because it was distributed by Netflix on an online platform and a criminal penalty under the online harms bill.
	Well, it's only a matter of time before the Lotus Eaters gets added to legal but harmful.
	Oh, genuinely, if this comes through, and then the successive Labour government takes over and makes it even worse than the so-called Conservative government now, we won't have a business and we're going to have to move elsewhere.
	That is an actual reality that we are staring down.
	So, if anyone has a spare room going in Florida, I'll be a lodger.
	Thank you very much.
	So here's where to take the survey for everyone here.
	And at this point, even if you just clip this bit, even if you just clip an earlier bit in the segment, or if you sell the full thing via Facebook, Rumble, YouTube, whatever, to your relatives, please make them aware of this.
	This is the link that you can use, and it is linked in the description on our website, but it's also up there at surveys.domains.gov.uk slash s slash capital C zero Z D eight one.
	You can find this and you can give your responses to the digital ID consultation and tell them exactly why you don't want it.
	But my advice is not just to do that, but every step of the way, as we can go next, and this isn't just me plugging my own Twitter account, but this is a good idea.
	If you just scroll down slightly, please, John.
	What I did was I made sure to include all of my responses as screenshots In this tweet thread.
	And so if we can get some sort of unified hashtag going or just respond to any government tweets relating to the digital ID consultation with our responses to show there is a counter consensus out there that did make their voices heard even if they're going to push it through anyway.
	That is a very important thing to do to push back against the narrative that will remiserate us all.
	I don't want a social credit system even for the people I politically disagree with.
	This could be the back door for it.
	So it's very important we all jump on this consultation and shout back against the government overstepping their boundaries.
	Great.
	Right.
	So good news, fellow plebs.
	Following the roaring success of winners such as Freedom of Movement and Mass Immigration, our betters have come to the conclusion that the cities are in fact a bit crowded.
	So they've got a new one for us, which is going to be Freedom From Movement.
	Specifically, they're introducing 15-minute cities.
	Now, you've probably heard about this in the news because it's that traffic management thing that Oxford is doing.
	It's not particularly worrisome, is it?
	I mean, after all, who could be against a couple of filters that just do a little bit of traffic management?
	Sounds entirely sensible.
	And after all, who wouldn't like the idea of a 15-minute city?
	Because, you know, if you can have everything that you need, you can have all of your leisure and work, and it's all 15 minutes from your home.
	I mean...
	what's not to like.
	Now, as Davos is getting going, I believe on the first day of the main event today, when they start getting into the talks and the stuff like that, it's worth looking at their plans on this one, even though the 15-minute city is something that they don't feel they even need to talk about this time because we've moved into the implementation phase. even though the 15-minute city is something that they don't Before I get into that, let's just show one of our premium things, which is the politics of the Hunger Game, which I think is gonna be quite relevant to this segment.
	So, 15-minute cities, where did that idea come from?
	Well, the idea is apparently one of Carlos Moreno's, who is a Chilean-born city planner, and he really introduced this idea to the COP21 event in Paris in 2015, where we get the Paris Accords from these days.
	And he introduced four key characteristics that a 15-minute city must have, and these are, one, proximity, obviously, diversity, again, obviously, because you can never have enough diversity, and three, density, got to pack people in, and ubiquity.
	If you don't know what that means, basically it means it's for poor people.
	Now, the story goes that this type of thinking was just utopian dreaming until the pandemic came along, where government types noticed that people were choosing to stay quite close to their home.
	They were sticking to sort of 15 minutes of their home.
	Well, because we were prosecuted if you went on the walk for longer than an hour.
	Well, yes, that's a good point, because we were sort of propagandised and coerced.
	And in this country, in the UK, police were literally harassing people and asking to see where they started their journey from.
	They didn't have the powers to do that, but they didn't understand that.
	They just thought that they should do that.
	If you took an extra lap around the prison yard, you don't get shower privileges, I suppose.
	Now, enter WEF member and Paris Mayor Anne Hedigo.
	Now, she made the 15-minute city a key part of her re-election campaign recently, and apparently she was working on this well before the pandemic, because her election was in early 2020.
	So I think that it came from that aforementioned Paris Accords event.
	So this was the United Nations Framework on Climate Change, or the UNFCCC, something like that.
	And it featured heavily contributions from C40. What is C40? Well, C40 is a collaboration of the world's 40 largest cities.
	What started that way is now almost 100 cities are in that list.
	And it emerged from the Clinton Foundation, so you know that it comes from good stock.
	That explains the inclusive and equitable climate action concern that's chief listed among that banner there.
	Now, in July 2020, the C40, they published something they called an implementation guide.
	I think we can throw that up on the screen.
	Yeah, implementation guide, July 2020, how to build back better with a 15-minute city.
	I thought just everyone saying that phrase all at once was a conspiracy theory.
	It may well be.
	The conspiracy theory is to say that a load of cities around the world didn't read this and instantly sign up for it.
	It wasn't a backroom deal of that COP event, definitely not, no.
	Apparently, within a few weeks of reading this, cities such as Barcelona, Bogota, Buenos Aires, Melbourne, Milan, Paris and Portland, they all signed up for this programme, but they were going to convert themselves into 15-minute cities.
	But you don't really want to convert a megacity like those into a 15-minute city without being sure that you know what you're doing.
	Now, this is where it starts to get a bit spicy, you see, because enter the investment firm, Enrep, who apparently is a Nordic investment company with nothing but billions of dollars at their disposal, and they did a tie-in with the C40 where they said that they were going to go off and find smaller cities to trial it, to make it work.
	And so they set out to find at least five cities, five second-tier cities that they could put it into.
	Now, personally, I have absolutely no idea how a firm with connections to the sort of murky world that UN types and Clinton operatives swim in, with nothing at their disposal other than billions of dollars, could possibly go about achieving something like this.
	So, anyway, slight break in the segment.
	I'm now going to pick up a completely different theme.
	Councillors in Oxford and Canterbury suddenly woke up one morning and decided that they wanted to implement a 15-minute city.
	I'm sure they had that idea all by themselves.
	Maybe it came to them in a dream or something like that.
	Oxford went first.
	They started off with a public consultation on this wonderful new idea.
	The public consultation recorded 93% of people against it, so they took this as affirmation that they should immediately proceed at full speed.
	Now, the really weird thing for me about this whole 15 Minute City thing is, why can I not find anyone talking about this?
	I mean, Oxford people are talking about it.
	A couple of people on our side, you know, GB News types, they're speaking about it.
	There's local residents in Canterbury that aren't too happy that they can't drive from their house to the supermarket anymore.
	There's people in Bath that have seen similar measures coming.
	Ask any Addison Lee or Uber driver that drove me to the GB News studio over the last couple of years from my place in Kent, London all the way to central London and they will say Sadiq Khan is ruining this city by putting flower boxes everywhere.
	Why is he shutting roads?
	I can't understand it.
	They're not too delighted.
	But one question I had to ask you, Connor, because I don't watch any BBC anymore, I don't watch any mainstream media, is you actually still watch BBC Question Time, don't you?
	Yes.
	I asked you, had this come up?
	No.
	No.
	Odd.
	Why is nobody talking about this idea?
	Their entire packed-out NHS audience, which is definitely not astroturf at all, must just not drive all that much.
	But it should be the sort of thing that we're talking about, because we're actually...
	This isn't a new idea.
	We are rehashing an old Soviet-era idea.
	So check this out.
	This is a...
	This is one example of the sort of thing that I'm talking about.
	It was the ideal communist city published in 1968 out of Moscow University.
	This is just one of many examples, by the way, of this type of thinking that was going on during the Soviet era about how can we segregate people, how can we put them in districts.
	I'll make sure this is in the reading links so you can go and have a look at it yourself, but there's a whole book there on the reasons you want to do it.
	I have had a bit of a skin read myself.
	Funnily enough, there's quite a lot of overlap between this and the implementation guide that I mentioned earlier.
	I would say, yeah, the implementation guide had the subheading food there.
	And I wonder if the Soviets had a particular need to redistrict things in order to ensure that the bread lines weren't too long when rations started coming in.
	So I might suspect, you know, in the 2030 predictions that said meat will only be a treat, you will eat less of it.
	That if meat is no longer on the menu and we're all having to eat cricket protein and that, if there were some sort of calamity that restricted the food supply, then you do have to keep a tight control of the population so that if they're all living in these giant megacities in their pods, they don't just start rioting and devouring each other.
	So you do need a breadline within a 15-minute walk of absolutely everyone.
	Look, and I'm not alleging anything, but if a globalist organisation We have strong links to the Clinton Foundation, the UN and the WEF, is trying to implement a Soviet-era ideal of segregating cities into this country I cannot imagine why this would not be of interest to national politicians and why I was unable to find any quotes on this subject as if it's just,
	you know, that's just something that's happening, you know, get over it, it's just a traffic management, you don't need to concern yourself with it at all, we don't even need to comment on it.
	This is a weird thing that again is being sort of sneaked under the radar.
	Let's pause for a moment and consider what is actually being delivered in these cities that are putting them in, because it's full of promises.
	It's full of, you know, everything that you need is on hand.
	You can have a perfect work-life balance, loads of leisure activity and work opportunities close to your home.
	Have they actually implemented any of those things?
	No, they've just talked about them.
	What have they actually implemented?
	Barriers and cameras.
	That's the thing that is actually being delivered.
	The rest of it is all fluff.
	So I want to make a couple of quick obvious points here.
	Obvious point number one.
	At the moment, Oxford is saying that you can leave your district 100 days a year in your car.
	Well, that will obviously be reduced over time.
	You can walk out of your district.
	Presumably, that's not going to change any time soon until the next hysteria or lockdown or whatever it is that changes that.
	But that 100 days is going to come down.
	Obvious point number two, more cities are going to be included on this.
	I mean, we've got Oxford and Canterbury at the moment, and I think you mentioned Bath.
	Is that official?
	That has been reported.
	Really?
	Okay.
	And obvious point number three, that the fines will go up for leaving the districts and the barriers will get bigger and there'll be more cameras.
	So we know that's happening.
	We know that we're getting cameras and barriers.
	And you can't even make the argument that it's really about what they say it is.
	Because another attack that they put across this is for the climate.
	It's to reduce CO2. But how can that possibly be true?
	Because if you want to...
	Let's say you live in the centre of Oxford.
	And, you know, you could have a situation where somebody lives in the centre of Oxford, and at the moment they have a short journey where they go from their home to kids' school number one, kids' school number two, and then on to work.
	And that might take you four districts.
	And at the moment it's a relatively short trip and they get it done.
	Under this scheme, all of those could be in different districts.
	So you'd have to drive from your home all the way out to the ring road, go round, all the way in, out, round, all the way, and just keep repeating that process.
	So it drastically increases journey times.
	It drastically increases the amount of CO2 you're committing.
	So...
	It doesn't even hold up on its own merits.
	Well, it does though, because if you do the 2030 prediction and run it out to its logical end point, you won't actually need to travel anywhere not on foot or on public transport at all, remember, because you get everything you ever need delivered to you to be rented by a drone, which are obviously renewably powered, so you won't need to go on shopping trips for your family.
	Your pod school will be within 15 minutes.
	Your gym will be built into your high-rise complex.
	Your apartment will only be small.
	And if everything's incredibly homogenous, why would you need to leave your city if all of the mini-districts look practically identical?
	I can speak to two more things, by the way.
	As you said about the cameras, there's a reason why it's being brought in at the same time as the concept of smart cities, where they're actively trying to build in things like 5G along the Belt and Road that China's stretching into Africa.
	we may have purchased them as well, I need to be fact-checked on that, but Canada definitely has facial recognition cameras to be implemented along major city streets from the Chinese Communist Party.
	Linking that up with the digital ID being rolled out in the prior segment, which looks at your photographs and any other information they need to identify you for all government departments to do with the Disclosure and Borrowing Service, which gives out criminal fines, that's obviously going to be a way of grading you for jaywalking on the social The last one is as well, I lived in Oxford for about three or four months last summer while I was teaching at the uni.
	What happened was, when I drove in to move my stuff in and out, only in actually...
	We encountered all of their EULES zones, because they've implemented lots of EULES zones in, God, Edinburgh, Bath, Oxford, loads of cities.
	I covered this in my first ever segment for Lotus Ears.
	And the zones are, as you described before, that sort of intentional bureaucratic impediment to inconvenience you out of a behaviour and nudge you towards another one.
	They're It's deliberately obtuse as to where you don't know where the start and finish point is, because the signs say it starts in 100 metres, but it doesn't say a deliberate sign that says Euler zone here.
	You actually have to pull up a map ahead of time on your phone to look at the roads, but they don't even name the roads on the map.
	It's just a zoomed out thing of...
	Okay, well this is blue and interconnected and the rest of it is...
	The soft entrapment process, yeah.
	So all you do is, okay, if I don't know which roads are the ring roads that I won't be penalised in and out of my zone for, I guess I'll just take the bus.
	Oh, and I have to use my social credit system to do that.
	And I best not tweet it so that I'm not inconvenienced and I can't use that system anymore.
	It's that thing that we keep on talking about, adding friction to it so that you give up and you do what they want you to do.
	Okay, so there are obviously two big agendas here, and I think one of them is possibly a bit of a red herring.
	So one of the agendas is just the pure anti-car stuff.
	This probably resonates more with the sort of, you know, yoghurt-weaving eco-twats in sandals that populate Oxford Council, or I don't know, I've never met any of these people, maybe they're lovely people.
	The Stop Killing Cyclist Group Lobby.
	I think they are mostly useful idiots.
	They're just pushing the standard eco-mentalist thinking of, you know, we've got to do this green stuff even if it does increase CO2 massively because, you know, these people can't really think.
	They're foot soldiers in the streets to manufacture concern.
	Yeah, and I think they're the useful idiots in this.
	I think there's a much bigger agenda at work going on here.
	And this is actually one of the big themes of the WEF. Now, I want to turn your attention to a WEF article which went up and this was sort of required reading for people attending the WEF this year.
	And let's have a quick look at the picture.
	Global risks when the turbulent 20s.
	So, you know, what are their risks?
	And what's that picture?
	Well, that is a picture of people protesting in the street, presumably against their government or something like that.
	Let's go and have a look at the actual list of things that they think are major risks.
	So if we go down a little bit, there is going to be a section with some nice charts, bar charts.
	Maybe a little bit further.
	Just keep scrolling, John.
	There we go.
	There we go.
	The nice coloured chart.
	So this is their top ten risks.
	Oh my God.
	This is what Sadiq Khan tweeted out the other day.
	I responded to it and I literally asked him, Oh, Sadiq, you signed up to their 2030 predictions of owning nothing and being happy.
	He took this screenshot and tweeted it out.
	I will get up the link as you're talking.
	Now this is interesting if you look at these top ten risks.
	So these are the things that the people who attend the WEF are most concerned about.
	You look at two years, okay, cost of living, well that's something that they basically gave us and there's nothing that the people at the WEF are going to do about it because they've engineered the situation where we get the cost of living.
	Natural disasters, extreme weather, well yeah, fluff, that's out of their hands, they can't control the weather.
	Geo-economic confrontation.
	So they're thinking of the Ukraine war, aren't they?
	But again, that is not something that they're going to get involved in.
	Failure to mitigate climate change.
	Again, fluff.
	So what is the first real concern on that list?
	Erosion of social cohesion and society polarisation.
	Now, what do they mean by erosion of social cohesion?
	Do they mean stuff like, you know, women being hostile to men pushed by a feminist agenda?
	No, they don't mean that.
	Do they mean things like different racial groups at loggerheads?
	No, they absolutely love that stuff.
	Do they want intergenerational conflicts or conflicts between...
	Cis and trans.
	No, again, they love all of those conflicts.
	So what do they mean by a lack of social cohesion?
	What they mean is people pushing back against their government.
	Kicking back against the global homogenisation of their culture because they don't want to erase the parochiality of where they grew up and where they inherited.
	That's their top concern.
	And you look at 10 years as well.
	Start removing the fluff from the 10 years.
	Climate change fluff.
	Climate change, yeah, fluff, fluff, biofluff, yep.
	Large-scale involuntary migration.
	They're pushing that, so that's obviously not a concern for them.
	Fluff, again, the top concern on the 10-year list that is something that they're actually doing anything about, it's subtly disguised on this, but the top concern...
	Is erosion of social cohesion and societal polarisation.
	Klaus Schwab literally said we're going to see a very angry world very soon.
	The exact point I was about to make.
	And this is not new for this event.
	If you go back to previous events, and I've watched a whole bunch of these events for years now...
	They are always banging on about this.
	Klaus is always saying that there is an angrier world coming.
	They're always showing imagery of people protesting and being violent and pushing back and basically getting upset with the state.
	So I'll put it like this.
	The top concern of globalist organisations and people who attend those organisations, the top concern is people pushing back against the government.
	These very same people are also implementing 15-minute cities throughout the world, and these 15-minute cities sell themselves on stuff like a vision of convenience and how you have everything close at hand while actually delivering cameras and barriers.
	That lock you into a section.
	Why would an organisation whose biggest concern is social unrest and people pushing back against their government want to see every city around the world put up barriers and cameras that basically lock people into their particular zone?
	To scare you into compliance?
	Well, and also, I mean, how would you do something like the Canadian truckers protest if there's barriers everywhere?
	Because they could have stopped that before it started by, you know, the trucks coming in from all sides, barriers up.
	Problem solved.
	You know, you try and organise against the government on any meaningful way until they get their central bank digital currencies, of course, when they just stop your money from working if you protest against them.
	So, yeah, again, it's coming in under the radar.
	It is this soft...
	Oh, it's just a traffic management scheme in Oxford.
	It's nothing to worry about.
	You know, you just go along with it.
	It's not going to be too bad.
	We get it through the public consultation.
	We will deem it a success, even if 93% of people push back against it, as they did with the...
	Yeah, the Eula Zone, which Sadiq Khan did, which I've sent you the link to, John, if you don't mind pulling up in a second.
	They've established some soft barriers, and then over time those barriers will become more and more established.
	Let's have a look at the Sadiq Khan thing that you found.
	Yes, I responded to this the other day.
	Look, it's the exact list.
	In the next decade, failures to tackle climate emergency will have devastating consequences for the world's economy, from more extreme weather to force mass migration.
	You know, like the London Bridge that flooded only because you put up the barriers to stop people driving.
	I'm taking action now to make our city and its economy greener, fairer and more sustainable.
	He's citing the WEF. He is taking action.
	So that means that all of the traffic management schemes, the EULA zone which penalises you for driving into the city, that is just to try to prevent you from entering London outside the districts that he wants to segment the city up into.
	And, you know, you try to organise anything like the trucker protest after this has been implemented.
	I kind of want to give the last word to Frank Zappa.
	Take a look at this.
	The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it is profitable to continue the illusion.
	At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery.
	They will pull back the curtains and move the tables and chairs out of the way, and you will see the brick wall at the back of a theatre.
	Now, I am not saying we are there now.
	What I am saying is that people who run the world envisage that we are going to get to this point.
	It has been their top concern that they've been talking about for years.
	They have been warning about people rising up against their government.
	They envisage a world where, for whatever reason that they foresee, we are going to be really angry at our governments and we're going to be really unhappy and we're going to want to push back.
	And what they are doing is they are implementing programs.
	Not just here, this is one example of it, but on a whole range of different things that give them the tools that when this day comes, they're not caught with their pants down.
	Thank you.
	Thank you.
	Alright then.
	Much needed pause.
	Comfy?
	Comfy.
	Good man.
	Let's talk about how grooming is just a conspiracy theory.
	We've been right all along.
	There's been no grooming conspiracies throughout history.
	I mean, we heard before, for example, that there were grooming gangs in Rochdale, Rotherham, Telford, which all turned out to be real, of course.
	Unfortunately, very little justice has been seen.
	We heard that the priests in the Catholic and Anglican churches were abusing children and nuns, which also turned out to be true, and has seemingly irreparably damaged the reputations of those institutions for at least a generation.
	We heard that Jimmy Savile and Jeffrey Epstein and other paedophiles, or the ones that Ghislaine Maxwell was trafficking them to, oh that was absolutely no one, you're right, were a cabal, which turned out to be operating on literal islands and within the BBC, sometimes in plain sight or in mortuaries.
	But now, our lying eyes have finally deceived us.
	Because Wikipedia is here to tell us that nobody, absolutely nobody, in the LGBTQ +, LMNP, Jumanji community is grooming a single child.
	Thank you for setting us straight.
	We've been fact-checked.
	For a sincere and insightful voice on this topic, actually, you can go over to LotusCities.com and watch this free interview with the Wonderful and compelling Richie Heron, a man who I am very glad to have known, who went through the gender transition surgery, which he calls, of course, cosmetic mutilation, and you can listen to his story because he tells it far better than I can, and he actually elaborates on how lots of very vulnerable people who were raised in less than supportive homes seek validation online.
	Sometimes they send compromising Materials which allow them to get blackmailed by older men who are autogynophiles, and they exploit that subordinate position to convince them to become a beautiful girl, to become trans, because you'll look so lovely.
	I missed that one.
	That sounds really interesting.
	I'm going to go and watch that one.
	It is free for everyone to watch.
	Is it quite harrowing?
	Yes.
	I do have to...
	Trigger warning.
	We don't actually issue any trigger warnings on this channel, but there is an explicit language and content warning for this one.
	Some people tried to watch it in the office yesterday, got about 20 minutes in and just got too sad.
	But they did finish it and it is very meaningful, so I cannot oversell it enough.
	Unfortunately, unlike Richie, Wikipedia don't want to tell the truth.
	So there's a new Wikipedia article called The LGBT Grooming Conspiracy Theory.
	Since the early 2020s, conservatives and members of the far-right, mostly in the United States, have falsely accused LGBT people, as well as their allies and progressives in general, of systematically using LGBT-positive education and campaigns for LGBT rights as a method of child grooming.
	To be fair, it's not the LGB bit, is it?
	Well, there was the gay men's choir in San Francisco who sang, we're coming for your children.
	Okay, yeah, a bit of that, but it's mostly back-ended, the concern on this one.
	Poor choice of words.
	It seems that some people are using their sexuality as a Trojan horse, and rather than advancing the cause of, born this way, just be tolerant, let me do whatever is in the privacy of my own bedroom...
	All of those tired and repeated platitudes to, instead of liking men and women, they like kids, and so they want to normalise that, just like their allies and progressive leftists did in the 1970s when a bunch of French intellectuals signed a letter saying we need to abolish the age of consent.
	Lovely stuff.
	Didn't happen.
	Just misinformation, I'm sure.
	These accusations and conspiracy theories are characterised by experts as baseless, homophobic and transphobic and examples of moral panic.
	Experts.
	They cite Vox in here, by the way, as an expert.
	The term groomer is derived from the practice of child grooming, but conservatives are using it to imply that the LGBTQ community, their allies and liberals, are more generally are paedophiles or paedophile enablers.
	As described by Vox, research has shown that LGBT people do not molest children at a higher rate than non-LGBT people.
	I don't think that was necessarily the contention.
	The contention was more that people are using the ideology to get close to children under the guise of inclusive and sex education training and without supervision of the parents you are exploiting them because some people do not like men and women, they like kids.
	The term OK Groomer originated in 2020 as a play on the OK Boomer meme.
	In the United Kingdom, the conspiracy theory began to be popularised in the gender-critical movement around 2020.
	In the United States, see, we started it first.
	History repeats itself.
	The popularisation of the term has been linked to Christopher Rufo, who tweeted about winning the language war, as if leftists haven't been trying to do that since the 1960s, or even earlier with Adorno and Horkheimer, utterly demolishing culture, language, and the critical reinterpretation of every text...
	And by winning the language of war, we mean sort of basically legislating to criminalise people who don't talk the way they want them to talk.
	Yeah, but Christopher Rufo said that, which means that basically he's on the defensive.
	Rather than allowing the progressives to dictate the terms of the argument, he just means, no, no, no, we're not going to give up, we're not going to acquiesce the language to you so you can redefine it as you see fit and normalise your fetishes.
	No, we're going to reframe the argument so that it exposes you for what you are.
	You're not a minor attractive person, you're a nonce.
	James Lindsay in August 2021 also jumped on this.
	Following the WeSpa controversy in July 2021, Julia Serrano noted a rise in false accusations of grooming directed towards transgender people, saying that it appeared as if there was a movement to, quote, lay the foundation for just smearing all trans people as child sexual predators.
	Why don't we check out Wikipedia's own page on WeSpa, shall we?
	Because was WeSpa a false instance of LGBT grooming?
	Was that the one where this biological male was struttling up and down the women's changing women in front of little girls with his tackle out?
	Yeah, well, that biological male, sorry, that brave trans woman, we misspoke YouTube, don't ban us.
	On August 30th 2021, an individual commonly reported to be a transgender woman was charged with indecent exposure relating to the alleged incident after four women and one minor girl filed police reports in July.
	The suspect had been previously convicted of indecent exposure in 2002 and 2003, being obliged to register as a sex offender since 2006, and convicted for failing to register in 2008.
	The suspect is awaiting trial on seven counts of indecent exposure, according to court documents from 2019.
	The suspect has denied guilt, claiming harassment over being trans.
	And the funny thing is, you're getting this conspiracy theory that Wikipedia tells us doesn't exist off of Wikipedia.
	From Wikipedia.
	Yeah.
	Thank you.
	Hence why I pulled out that source.
	It reminds me of, there's a family guy bit, because there always is for everything, of where there's an obvious, stunning and brave woman sitting at the end of the bar watching pornography on their phone, and the barman goes, you can't do that here, and he goes, it's okay, I'm trans, and he goes, oh, never mind, carry on.
	Back to Wikipedia, shall we?
	The original article.
	The conspiracy theory then moved into the American conservative mainstream with a number of high-profile cases of its use in spring 2022, including its use by members of the Republican Party.
	On February 24th, the right-wing Heritage Foundation issued a tweet stating the Florida Don't Say Gay bill protects young children from sexual grooming.
	Again, notice the dishonest framing.
	Don't trust Wikipedia for anything.
	It was not named the Don't Say Gay Bill.
	It was named the Parental Rights in Education Bill.
	Something that only a groomer would object to, as Florento Santos already said.
	Because the bill actually doesn't stop gay people talking about anything.
	There's nowhere in that bill that doesn't stop it.
	It just stops you talking about sex and sex ed from kindergartners to third grade.
	Now that is a remarkably lenient cut-off.
	Third grade, still way too young.
	What age is third grade?
	Is that like 16 or something?
	No, that's 1st, 2nd, 3rd grade.
	That's like 8, isn't it?
	Oh, okay.
	So basically, the map of the United States is now Florida.
	You can't groom kids until they're 8.
	And the rest is just carte blanche.
	The rest is literally Weimar Germany.
	Brilliant.
	In April 2022, Marjorie Taylor Greene referred to the Democratic Party as the party of killing babies, grooming and transitioning children, and pro-pedophile politics.
	Have to disavow.
	Disney has been the focus of several other uses of the conspiracy, because lots of their employees at the parks and the executives keep being found out to be actual paedophiles and stings, but I suppose it's just a conspiracy.
	All those convictions, just a conspiracy theory.
	All those people that want to work really close to kids in costumes.
	Just a conspiracy theory.
	Jim Banks and 19 other members of the Republican Study Committee published a letter to Disney accusing the corporation of, quote, purposefully influencing small children with political and sexual agenda.
	You mean the same Disney who did a streamed Zoom call hosted by a woman who has two transgender children with a woman who is a lead in content who boasted about her quote not-so-secret gay agenda where she was quote adding queerness everywhere I could and nobody stopped me.
	And she had two transgender children?
	The Disney executive had two transgender children.
	The woman who then started speaking, also an executive, was the one who said she has a not-so-secret gay agenda.
	Okay, since trans people are supposed to be some tiny percentage, the chances of having two transgender children is...
	I don't know.
	I kind of want to work out what the number is, but it's going to be infinitesimally small.
	Isn't she just so lucky to have liberated their authentic selves from such a young age?
	I'm sure there's going to be no health complications.
	She really hit the lottery there by happening to have children who precisely met her political wishes.
	And who won't have any children of their own.
	Since then, numerous right-wing pundits have described the behaviour of parents and teachers who support minors in their transgender identities as grooming, and the term groomer has widely been used by conservative media and politicians who want to denounce the LGBTQ community and its allies by implying that they are paedophiles or paedophile enablers.
	Well, they certainly can't write or spell because there's no punctuation in this.
	In April 2022, the left-leaning media watchdog Media Matters, ah, dirty, dirty smear merchants, published a study stating that within a three-week period spanning from March 17th to April 6th, Fox News ran 170 segments on trans people, throughout which the network repeatedly invoked the long-debunked myth that trans people pose a threat to minors and seek to groom them.
	Well, you certainly gave them a lot of cannon fodder for the segments, didn't you?
	Hmm.
	Anyway, since 2019, protesters have targeted drag queen story hour events at public facilities and private venues.
	Appearing on Fox News, Chris Ruffo characterised child-friendly drag, oxymoron we'll get into in a bit, as an attempt to, quote, sexualise children, quote, subvert the middle-class family, hang on to that part, and, quote, eliminate what they call the sexual hierarchy in favour of creating a sexual connection between adult and child.
	Now, I wonder where he got that idea from.
	Could it possibly, possibly be, the best-selling author of The Hips on the Drag Queen Go Swish Swish Swish, which is mandatory reading in some New York schools, and the creator of Drag Queen Story Hour, Little Miss Hot Mess?
	Who wrote this paper here in an education journal, by the way.
	If we go on to that, Drag Pedagogy, The Playful Practice of Queer Imagination in Early Childhood.
	I've read this out on the podcast before, but I haven't subjected you, a father, to it, Dan.
	Would you like to be sickened by exactly how family-friendly these drag events are?
	Not really.
	So, in discussing the work of Drag Queen Story Hour within our social circles, we have occasionally encountered critiques that Drag Queen Story Hour is sanitising the risque nature of drag in order to make it, quote, family-friendly.
	We do not share this pessimistic view.
	Queer world-making, including political organising, has long been a project driven by desire.
	It is, in fact, enacted through art forms like fashion, theatre, and drag.
	We believe Drag Queen Story Hour offers an invitation towards deeper public engagement with queer cultural production, particularly for young children and their families.
	It may be that Drag Queen Story Hour is family-friendly in the sense that it is accessible and inviting to families with children, but it is less than a sanitising force than it is a preparatory introduction to alternative modes of kinship.
	and So Drag Queen Story Hour is a way to prepare you to move away from your family into queer ways of living.
	Based on desire.
	They really, very nearly said the quiet part out loud.
	I mean, they're sort of...
	Oh, they did.
	No, no, they do.
	Here, Drag Queen Story Hour is family-friendly in the sense of a family as an old-school queer code to identify and connect with other queers on the street.
	Right.
	Literally the quiet part I love.
	We're going to take you away from your family into this adopted family.
	This Dragtime story, it is so goddamn weird.
	I mean, I know you're getting into the details, but I just kind of just pulled back and said the whole thing is so screwed up.
	There was one I wanted to cover, actually, on Libs of TikTok's page, which we can't show, because there is a man walking around with an exposed buttocks, bare breasts in a box, simulating sodomy with another man on stage in front of children.
	And we actually can't show the video.
	We can't properly report on it.
	It's on Twitter.
	Go and look at it in your own time.
	I bet Chinese TV showed it.
	If I was Chinese state media, I would be broadcasting every one of those and say, look what's going on in the West.
	Yeah, you can't own a house because you spoke out about the Uyghurs, but at least you don't live in Florida.
	In addition to teaching the public, drag performers have well-established ways of learning from each other and their audiences.
	Many performers study their craft in an adoptive drag family, wherein drag mothers or fathers, sisters and aunties guide their children in anything from how to glue down one's eyebrows to delivering a flawless lip sync.
	So we want you to experience new ways of kinship with your adoptive drag family.
	And from the earlier part there was actually a part where they said we want to bring new ways of queer ways of knowing and queer ways of being into early childhood education.
	And so it ends with this last quotation.
	We're reading books while we read each other's looks and we're leaving a trail of glitter in the carpet that won't ever come out.
	That's a threat.
	How is that not irreversibly shaping a child's mind?
	That is the head of Drag Queen Story Hour, ladies and gentlemen.
	If you haven't heard that before, you're welcome to clip that and share that around.
	Link is in the description on our website.
	Anyway, let's check the cope in the comments for this article, shall we?
	Because we've established it's definitely not happening.
	There's nothing untoward going on here.
	So, they talk about potentially moving the title of the page, because they realise it doesn't look very good to dismiss obvious evidence as a conspiracy theory.
	The moderator who retained the title, despite challenges, is Isabel Bellato.
	Who has...
	If you scroll down, John, you might be able to see...
	Oh, there it is, yeah.
	The pride flag is right next to Isabelle's name.
	Obviously signalling ideological fealty.
	Most of the disputes in this seem to be related to the title of the page.
	This is what one of the comments says.
	We should settle this through a discussion on which title to use.
	There are five options.
	Keep the current title.
	Change it to LGBT grooming rhetoric, LGBT grooming allegations, LGBT grooming moral panic, or another title.
	Very not inclusive of them to include the Q plus there.
	I'm sure that needs updating probably tomorrow when they invent another pronoun.
	I think rhetoric is the best descriptor for this.
	Says, I am really good at checkers.
	And then another person responds to that because they're fighting back and forth.
	Rhetoric can encompass honest claims and arguments made in mistaken good faith.
	That is not what this is.
	And there is no genuine controversy about that, says Daniel Regal.
	So they've kept the title because it's an obvious smear against their opponents that...
	Midwits can pull up and just say, see?
	Sore-cited.
	You're a conspiracy theorist.
	It is genuinely amazing to me that we live in the type of modern world where these people, instead of doing something productive, get to spend all day arguing about this stuff.
	It's very productive, because it enforces the ideological hegemon, because people that don't realise that Wikipedia is just crowdsourced ideologues inputting their preferred articles in and calling it truth will cite this.
	Like, there are actual academics now, many of whom aren't that credible, I know, but turn around and say, don't cite Wikipedia in your university essays.
	So, I mean, sometimes when I do my brokonomic stuff, I think to myself, you know, am I worried too much?
	You know, my general contention that Western economies are going to collapse in from the weight of the rot that they've ingested over the years.
	And then I look at this and I just think, how the hell are we still standing?
	This is the Wile E. Coyote analogy I did in my recent video.
	Who do you think pushes over that cliff?
	These people, who have no investment in the future, by the way, and who are just utterly narcissistic.
	Speaking of who these people are, here's one person who upheld the name.
	This is one user who was pretty dominant in the thread.
	And just scroll down.
	It's just a list of people who they claim to have been unjustly killed by police violence.
	And if you just go to the bottom, John, of that.
	Making racist mad on Wikipedia since 2016.
	2016.
	I wonder if that was the Trump election.
	Right, when everyone lost their mind.
	Brilliant.
	Thanks very much.
	Back to the comments section, the actual cesspit it is.
	It discusses gays against groomers, which is quite inconvenient for them, because these are gay people who acknowledge the problem and say, I like men and women, but I don't like kids.
	One of their founders was recently on Timcast, actually.
	It is mostly the TV, isn't it?
	It's a TQ+. I suppose I can't say that again, because I nearly got arrested last time, but then when folks like Gail Rubin want to, quote, normalise boy love...
	And that is the foundational text for queer theory.
	That's thinking sex, by the way.
	Bit suspicious.
	There's at least one group which promotes the groomer panic, but whose members claim to be gay themselves, says one user.
	That should be worth noting as well, especially since this group was kicked off PayPal and responded by accusing the platform of something called woke homophobia.
	No concern trolls are not a new phenomenon on the far right, and Wikipedia should not give undue clout to them, says another person.
	So we're not going to address our principled opposition.
	Instead, we're just going to call you concern trolls and go away.
	They're far right radicals, right?
	How far right are these people?
	Well, they've adopted the conservative pride flag, if we go to the next one.
	Reject modernity, embrace tradition.
	And on the left is the trans dad's army arrow pride flag of intersex.
	Do you know what the black and brown stripes are, by the way?
	Just a quick question.
	Go on.
	They're for AIDS. And black and brown bodies.
	That's the sort of thing I'd put in for a joke.
	There's a new one as well that has a big red umbrella in the middle and it looks like a pocket anus.
	And it's for sex workers.
	Because they want to make whores a marginalised identity that you can't critique.
	But we actually have got to the hilarious point that Callum said how many, God, it must have been nearly two years ago now, that we have the Conservative Pride flag, which is the traditional one of just the rainbow.
	We're actually being given slop and expected to support this.
	But I don't want to speak badly of gays against groomers.
	I'm sure they're nice people, but they're hardly far right.
	Nobody in their right mind agrees with this.
	And that's why they've omitted them practically from the article, because they realise their narrative falls apart if they actually acknowledge their existence.
	Right, let's go back to it then.
	Seriously, they put AIDS in the...
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	So the last of the comments I wanted to address was, it says, it's an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory.
	Now, it says, are there any reliable sources covering the blatantly anti-Semitic undertones?
	Are there even undertones at this point of this conspiracy theory?
	Nobody mentioned the Jews.
	How fascinating.
	Now, this page then received protection, which locked it from edits by critics, unless you've been already ordained on the right side.
	So, I just thought we'd go to evidence, since this has come out, that it definitely isn't happening, but it is also a good thing, of course.
	So we have here from the Postmillennial, Penn State professor tells straight students to watch gay or lesbian porn.
	Why could that possibly be?
	Penn State professor Sam Richards aired the challenge to students during a lecture for his entry-level sociology class in December, and was of course remet with silence in response.
	If you're straight, watch gay or lesbian porn and see how quickly you feel aroused, and how you can't control that, Richards reportedly asked in the clip, which was viewed by Fox News.
	Singling out his male students, especially men, the professor said in the clip, Richards explained you'll realise that, oh damn, I could be sexualised by people who are like me.
	The school, meanwhile, is standing by its staffer's statements, telling the Daily Mail that academic freedom for faculty is necessary to achieve critical thinking and discussion within its student body.
	He said that out loud?
	Yeah.
	He's a tenured academic.
	It's literally a weird sex cult where they want to normalise their fetishes by gaslighting you.
	He told his students a lot more about him than he was trying to tell his students about anything else.
	Because he's trying to sleep with his students.
	Yeah, especially the men ones, from the sound of it.
	Well, yeah, because otherwise he wouldn't be in the LGBT acronym, would he?
	Unless he's just ticking by and hoping they don't check on the diversity form or something, which does work, fellas.
	I don't endorse lying, but anyway, so next we can go on to this, this very disturbing thing.
	There's a PhD student broken by Colin Boryshenko in a Zoom call telling autistic children how to masturbate.
	Definitely not grooming.
	I will happily talk about masturbation with your autistic child, he says.
	I've done it many times with many autistic children.
	It brings me lots of joy.
	God, are you trying to get the parents in on this?
	No, he said his parents are his least favourite people.
	He says, I absolutely love masturbation.
	It's my favourite topic.
	Any of my friends will tell you so.
	He also said porn literacy is important.
	In general, it means teaching students about ethical porn consumption and where to find ethical porn.
	What's ethical porn?
	Is that when you don't choke them?
	Must be boring kind, isn't it?
	Self-diagnosis is super valid autism experience, he also said.
	So he's literally defined himself as marginalized category, right?
	In order to get himself a job to talk about other autistic children who are easily manipulatable, especially if they're feeling social pressure and don't know they're autistic, about how to rub one out.
	And he's also telling them they all might be trans.
	All of them.
	We have a clip here.
	John, brace yourself for this creature's voice.
	Okay, this is my favorite statistic of all time ever, which is that 70% of autistics are LGBTQ +, with 50% of that population being trans.
	70% and 50% both round up to 100.
	Awesome, that's a huge number.
	What does that mean?
	This means that all autistic individuals need to be talked to and informed about queer and trans identities and how those folks have sex.
	This also means that if you are teaching sex ed to your autistic students, you need to be comfortable and competent in the subject of queer and trans issues, which a lot of people are not.
	Jesus Christ.
	I mean, if low testosterone was a sine wave, it would be his voice.
	Well, I think they are trans, so they may be a trans man.
	Obviously, very high testosterone, we won't question at YouTube.
	Now, look, we try and present these segments fairly impartially, occasionally with a bit of joke.
	And then listening back to that, it's just infuriating.
	Yeah, what a mess.
	All children who are autistic and easily manipulatable and feel at odds with the world and don't really understand their identity, and many girls, particularly, feel alienated from their body as it's changing, they may be between 50% and 70% trans.
	So we all have to tell them this could be a possibility.
	And while we're telling them how to pleasure themselves in our presence, Fitting into this marginalised category which just so happens to push you down the route of making yourself into my fetish doll.
	Millstones, immediately.
	So, what's the result of this?
	Now, we're not going to homogenise here.
	This is still a burgeoning report, so we don't know the breakdown by sexuality.
	But the result is, by overlooking what you call a conspiracy theory, we get instances like this.
	If we go to the last link, please, John.
	Hundreds of Chicago teachers raped, sexually assaulted and groomed students in 2022.
	So, according to a report released by Chicago Public Schools' Office of the Inspector General, the 2021-2022 school year saw 772 investigations into teachers for allegedly raping, sexually assaulting or grooming students.
	Now, whether straight or gay, it is abhorrent.
	They're all paedophiles, obviously.
	But do not run interference from an ideology which allows...
	Groomers, to gain proximity to children without parent supervision, who think parents are their least favourite people, who just really want to talk about sex with kids.
	If you do not have adequate safeguarding concerns, and you dismiss this as a conspiracy theory, You are going to result in many children's lives being irreparably damaged.
	And so there are two camps here, right?
	This is what I'm going to finish on.
	Two camps.
	There are people who will cite this Wikipedia entry because they want to protect who they think are the LGBTQ community from undue criticism, right?
	That is what that's going to produce if you just genuflect to ideologues who are controlling the narrative.
	And then there are people who are using this acronym as a Trojan horse to get proximity to kids.
	I will not be gaslit by your attempts to pretend it isn't happening.
	It's not difficult.
	Stop trying to have sex with children.
	I want to slip one more thing in there.
	Please do.
	And that is, I saw some really interesting stats after the pandemic, which was basically a number of kids reporting as trans, and it was a line going up like that.
	Richie Herron told me it's an 8,000% increase in referrals.
	And...
	The only time that line went down was during lockdown, when teachers did not have access to kids, and then it started going the other way.
	It has gone up after lockdown because of access to things like TikTok.
	As LibSub TikTok has exposed, there are plenty of teachers with an interest in your children.
	And I would just like to raise the concern that the Biden administration's education head said that parents are not the primary stakeholders in their children's education.
	Oh, Jesus.
	Let's make sure that these monsters aren't instead.
	Onto the comments then.
	Hey boys, meet Pete.
	Also, any person who believes in the labor theory of value should have to be a piece rate production worker where you only get paid for each successful piece you produce.
	It'll show you that you can labor a lot or you can do it right and that's how you get paid.
	Well, the easiest reputation to labor theory of value I like to use is a little thought experiment I mentioned to Harry when we were talking about Robert Nozick's Anarchy, State, and Utopia.
	And that is, what's more valuable in a desert island, an iPhone or a shovel?
	It's way more difficult to put together an iPhone, all the hours of innovation, but if you can't charge it, it can get sun damage, it can get water damage, well, it's far more useful to have a stick with a bit of metal on the end of it to dig a hole, or to help whittle down trees, or strike a flint for a fire.
	So, value is always conditional.
	It's conditional to the circumstances that you're currently in, so there is no objective theory of value.
	And if you pull out that particular Jenga block at the base of Marxism, the entire tower comes crumbling down.
	On with the next one!
	One of the most pleasant men with whom I have worked was a very large black American.
	He once described a former job where there was a spate of break-ins to cars outside his office.
	One day, he caught the miscreant breaking into his own car.
	Grabbing the villain by the collar, he hauled him off to security.
	On the way, a sudden attack of conscience caused my friend to stop and say to the thief, you know what, this isn't your lucky day.
	Knowing security would go light on the wastrel, my friend punched him so hard that he came out of his shoes.
	I miss my former colleague.
	I mean, you are going to get to the point where if the police will enforce the law and don't investigate any burglaries, you are just going to get vigilante justice.
	Yeah, people are going to feel forced to do it.
	Cannot condone.
	It's not like ever in human history that Vigilante Justice has been the biggest selling box office and entertainment franchise.
	Definitely not.
	Batman doesn't resonate with anyone.
	Anyway, on to the comments.
	You're probably inevitably going to mention it, slash have mentioned it already, Connor, but I must say that I really enjoyed your interview with Richie Heron.
	Actually hearing, instead of just reading, a first-hand account of what can happen and the physical, emotional, financial consequences of it was really eye-opening and sickening.
	Yeah, Richie's a genuinely lovely bloke.
	The thing that got me at the end...
	I think I might have been the first person to ever tear up on a Lotuses podcast.
	I'll wear that badge of shame.
	But he was talking about the fact that as it got to the end of it, I asked him, hopefully...
	He doesn't like the term detransitional because he feels like you live perpetually in someone else's trauma being projected onto you, defining you forever.
	You don't want to be someone's fetish, you don't want to be someone's statistic, and so you just want to move on with your life, even though it's very difficult if you've had the surgery to ever be normal again.
	He's a permanent patient.
	And I said to him, well, how is that going?
	Do you have friends around you?
	Can you strike up a relationship?
	He went, oh, look, I've got a wonderful group of friends.
	I've met plenty of people through this political process.
	The main problem is, obviously, where you have no gonads, you produce no sort of desire.
	You have no sexuality, no drive, no ability to be intimate with anyone ever again.
	And so he just wants companionship, but he feels very lonely.
	And it's just incredibly sad to see someone who's genuinely really lovely on and off air.
	I've chatted to him since, before and after, and And to have someone like that, who's a genuine, kind-hearted and intelligent person, have their ability to make someone very happy lifelong stripped away from them.
	And our rotten society is gearing up to do this to kids on an industrial level.
	Utterly sickening.
	Yeah.
	Anyway, on with the digital ID comments.
	Speaking of things our society is going to inflict on us.
	Ah, but you see, if we declare a climate emergency...
	And then we sync up your systems ID, your purchase history, and your smart meter, which the government is also rolling out, and penalising certain energy companies for not rolling out fast enough.
	And we combine it with Grant Schapp's legislation and the experiments run by Octopus Energy and the National Grid, which siphon energy back out of electric cars and appliances, At generation drop times, then what we have there is an emergency because we need to get off fossil fuels, which is really reliable, to fight the climate crisis.
	But renewables just aren't there yet, even though we adopt them by 2030 under Starmer's framework.
	So if the renewables fail us, well, we can't fire the coal power plants because we'll burn the world down, right?
	And I think fundamentally, JJ's making a good point there.
	This is the type of thinking that meant that Blair couldn't get his identity cards through back in 2001 because there was a public discussion about it.
	All of these points were talked about.
	This time there is no public discussion.
	It's just an order of business for the government to do in the background.
	No discussion is required.
	We'll just let you know when it's finished.
	Oh, there might be a public consultation, but it's not really going to get talked about, apart from a few channels like ours.
	It's certainly not going to make it onto the mainstream media, so it will just be done for your own good.
	And that's where we've moved to a lot of this stuff now.
	There isn't even any discussion over it.
	No.
	First segment, that one will be up at 3 on YouTube and on Facebook, so please share the hell out of that if you want your friends and colleagues to go and fill out the consultation and start pushing back.
	They're going to adopt it anyway, but we've got to do something, right?
	Even just to ease our own consciences.
	Rick Archer.
	This system needs to be met with a resounding public outcry.
	A mere mild opposition means nothing.
	Unless politicians start to think their own personal safety might be in question, by the very angry world, of course, they will not care about what the public has to say.
	Look how Trudeau ran away when the trucker started honking too close to home.
	I should mention, I'm not advocating violence towards anyone.
	I'm merely saying politicians, like any criminals, are a cowardly and superstitious lot.
	Good reference.
	And they know what they're doing is wrong.
	Yes, make them afraid of electoral consequences.
	Colin P. Strong desire.
	Let me guess.
	71%.
	I don't know what that's referencing.
	71%?
	Does anyone know what that is?
	Did the consultation mention strong desire for digital IDs?
	Oh, I know what that is.
	That's the YouGov numbers.
	It's always 71%.
	Because Nadeem Zahari was a vaccine minister when it turns out that every single YouGov consultation resulted in them wanting more lockdown restrictions.
	So it's interesting that Nadeem Zahari had very favourable numbers come out of YouGov.
	I actually met Nadeem Zahari once when I was doing VC, when he was one of the founders of YouGov.
	He came into office and tried to pitch for it, and he explained the process of how it works.
	And I think one of the questions I asked at the time was, oh, so basically you can sort of tweak this to get the answers you want.
	And they were like, yeah.
	He was still on the board while he was an MP. Right.
	Interesting.
	Coby Koshtonk.
	Is there an N in there?
	No.
	Koshtonk.
	That one.
	Yep, like that one.
	It would be interesting to see voting records, wouldn't it?
	I mean, we already know all the sage with communists.
	Lord Nerevar.
	Yeah, another conspiracy theory come true.
	Shocker.
	Digital ID is probably going to be one of the great battlegrounds of the 21st century.
	If we don't beat this now, we're going to be under the boot heel for a generation, especially if they use the framework of digital ID to institute CBDCs.
	You'll be covering that in Brokeconomics very soon.
	Yes.
	When they say the public wants it, 3-1-1-2, no, 2-1-1-2, what they mean is they want it.
	Yeah.
	Caffeinated Sentry Gnome.
	That's a hell of a name.
	First comes a digital ID, then they will change the global currency to energy credits in the guise of saving the climate.
	Don't use too much energy or you'll run out of energy credits.
	Then you won't be able to buy food or travel.
	Literally what the Green Party deputy leader told me.
	Yeah.
	On to your stuff.
	Right.
	Global Hunger Games.
	Rue the Day says, 15-minute cities.
	What a novel and delightful idea.
	Now explain to me how it isn't a literal ghetto with a fancy cafe on every corner.
	Yeah, so they said it through the fluff, but what they don't tell you is you just can't leave.
	Omar Award says a 15-minute city shows the arrogance of top-down planning as it assumes the need can be calculated and fully accounted for.
	Yeah, totally agree.
	Central planners always go down this route.
	Only need to look as far back as the lockdowns to see how little people in power understand what is necessary to people in general.
	Okay, fine, yeah.
	Alpha of the Betas says 15-minute city is the transition of the city into an open-air prison.
	Think a global Gaza Strip.
	Andrew Narog says the January 6th hysteria definitely serves to prime the public against any sort of pushback against government.
	Probably the main and perhaps only reason it was pushed as hard as it is.
	Do you know those barriers that went up around the capital?
	Yeah, are they still there?
	No, they got taken down very recently because of the Republican Congress flipping over.
	Ah, yeah, okay.
	It's interesting that almost the exact same thing happens in Brazil when Bolsonaro is away on holiday.
	Isn't that really weird?
	Yeah, there's a lot to be said about the Brazilian thing, but let's not get into it now because we could get seriously sidetracked on that one.
	Freeville2112 says, How many of us voted for an investment company to take control of our freedoms and movements of rights?
	I thought councillors were there to serve us and the democratic will.
	I guess democracy has been turned off.
	Yes, it does seem that way, doesn't it?
	He also says, in a separate comment, Totalitarians make your cage look attractive and then they slam the door shut.
	Yeah, so the remarkable thing for me about all of this stuff is that, you know, 70% of the population will just go along with it because it's convenient, and they say, oh, I can't leave my district more than 50 days a year.
	It's like, oh, well, I never go on holiday for that long anyway, so it's fine, and the TV says it's fine, and I can watch Netflix, and it's all fine.
	Yeah, it'll be the bread and circuses that distract you.
	It's literally bread and circuses.
	When my mum, first lockdown, was complaining that I was complaining about it, and I had the foresight to...
	Be against lockdown and the death jab.
	And she decided to say, well, it's good for me because I don't need to go into work.
	I can watch daytime TV and bake bread.
	I'm thinking, my mum is a very nice woman, but she is a normie.
	And then it took ages to go.
	It took to the third one for her to go, maybe these aren't really working.
	Well, yeah, no duh.
	Yeah, and I've got people of that in my family as well, and things now they're complaining about the inflation.
	They're complaining about the cost of living going through.
	But they loved when they sat at home and were paid to do so.
	Nathan Gunning says, the cameras on self-service checkout relates to this too, I think.
	You have exceeded your personal allowance of red meat this month, Computer says no.
	Especially they're all going card only.
	Yeah, and with a CBDC, that would be quite trivial to implement as well.
	Andrew Narog says, it really is amazing how many Soviet ideals are getting pushed forward in recent years, despite supposedly losing the Cold War 30 years ago.
	Everything's got a five-year plan, hasn't it?
	Yeah, I mean, we've got Davos going on this week, and I'm going to be following that quite closely to see what they're coming.
	But yeah, it's all Soviet-era ideas.
	It's all central planning the whole way through.
	The wonderful friend of the show, Calvin Robinson, is actually in Davos at the moment.
	Oh, right.
	He's covering it from the ground, so...
	He's not actually in the conferences, he's on the other side of the armed guards.
	I believe he's on the outskirts, though he did walk through the airport in the bit where it told, you know, all guests of the World Economic Forum, follow this part.
	So, he's with Rebel News, who is trying to get interviews with everyone.
	I believe Ezra Levant tried getting into the Blackrock area the other day, was thrown out.
	So, Calvin will be back on the show, probably February or March, and we'll get his insights, because...
	Reverend does good work.
	Grooming is just a conspiracy, of course.
	Free Will 2112.
	How many components of conspiracies have turned out to be true before it ceases to be a conspiracy and becomes reality?
	Well, the FBI literally did invent the word conspiracy theory.
	And look how that happened to JFK. How many of these virtuous people who are trying to save the world and who make people's lives harder in the process are really doing it for genuine reasons?
	How many just enjoy burning the world down or gaining power over other people?
	Yeah, I was talking with a friend about this this morning.
	There is a perverse incentive in a nihilistic culture that says, don't judge me, bro, for predators to create philosophies which are pseudo-post-hoc justifications for the things they want to do anyway.
	So lots of this queer theory and whatnot is just to get access to your kids and normalize their fetishes.
	And a lot of the time, these people are very psychologically damaged and have high rates of suicide because they have an internal gut sense that it is wrong.
	Like, it's not just arbitrary societal expectations that You shouldn't want to have sex with children.
	You're not only going to traumatise the child, but they literally can't reproduce your castrating yourself.
	It's a castrative desire.
	So they have a gut-level shame, not just inflected on them by society, but their own internal moral conscience screaming at them.
	And so what do you do?
	You either abandon the desire, or you normalise it and make it celebrated.
	Turn it into a virtue.
	And they gaslight you into thinking you're just a repressive, backwards moral bigot for judging them.
	them.
	But yeah, they're gaslighting themselves just as much.
	Yeah.
	Sophie Liv Peterson, we're not grooming your children.
	Also, we need drag queen story hour to normalise trans individuals to children.
	That's grooming.
	Yeah, it's funny as well how trans and drag has now been conflated.
	So I guess it's a costume after all, because they use female pronouns for drag acts.
	Anyway.
	Bald Eagle.
	Funny how the wiki article conveniently forgets to mention that even LGB members are standing against the tea lobby grooming children.
	Not to forget the LGB alliance.
	Oh wait, when you go against the current thing, you're immediately the sexist, homophobic, bigger, even though the LGB community knows how long it takes to become socially accepted and know that trying to groom children is not the way to go.
	Well, yeah, if you like men and women, you don't like kids.
	Shock.
	Rick Archer.
	Coming soon.
	Yes, we're grooming your children.
	And here's why.
	That's a good thing.
	Forget woodchippers.
	Take the combine harvesters.
	They're mobile.
	This is why I just say millstones, because it's the old Gospel of Matthew punishment.
	For those who lead the least and littlest among me astray, it is better to tie a millstone around your neck than try and enter the kingdom of heaven.
	And yes, media matters.
	That is saying we should drown convicted paedophiles.
	Hope you're watching.
	Binary surfer, friend of the show, good man.
	It's always, always, always projection with the left, particularly when they accuse the others of anti-Semitism.
	Scratch a leftist, find an anti-Semite.
	Every time.
	Oh yeah, I mean, I have on occasions heard anti-Semitic things said by people, and they're always leftists.
	I've never heard it from any of my right-wing friends, never.
	Well, you can't define Nazis at right wing because they're socialists.
	But when we put out that segment the other day about Louise Perry and it was titled Who Controls the Porn Industry, I did get quite a few comments.
	And I would just like to say that Shrug presents some evidence rather than just saying the Jews run the world on that.
	I'm yet to be convinced.
	Sure.
	AZ Desert Rat.
	Oh, AZ, because that's Arizona.
	Third grade is nine years old, turning ten.
	So, right, we were a year off.
	We were more progressive, turns out.
	Yeah, still bad, though.
	Yep.
	Well, of course, yeah.
	Don't talk about sex with ten-year-olds.
	Right, this is actually my main frustration, is that, and this is why the education system is a deliberate attempt to demolish the family, and why I'm never putting my kids in a state-funded school, but there you go.
	Have you noticed how we wouldn't actually need food tech, or DT, or fabrics, or sex ed, if people just parented their bloody kids?
	Like, if you had a dad in the home telling you how to cut wood, if your mum was telling you how to sew up your pair of jeans when you rip them or make some meals, and when the time came, you just say, okay, well, yep, if you do this with someone you love, then it makes a baby.
	I mean, cavemen didn't need inclusion classes to continue the species.
	This is just a deliberate canard to distance parents from their children and put them in the clutches of someone who never wants their own but does want yours.
	The only big problem with cavemen is they were under the misapplication there was only two genders, so, I mean, they did get some things wrong.
	Yeah.
	I identify as a mammoth, I suppose.
	I can't wait to be hit over the head and dragged back and be eaten in a cave.
	Colin P. These days when I hear groomer I tend to think of two things.
	One is obviously paedophilia.
	The other is persuading highly impressionable kids into the trans ideology as the only way they can actually spread it.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	A bit like leftism as a whole, generally.
	Yes.
	Yeah, well, you need a bad relationship for your parents to become a communist.
	I did...
	This is in the Richie Heron interview.
	I did speak to him about a revelation that I had listened to Tim Pool's show a little while ago, and that is that lots of these men online will groom young men into having bottom surgery, you know, mutilating themselves and inverting their penis and turning it into a fake vagina.
	The thing is, as Richie learned and has to now live with...
	you have no sensation down there it gets continually infected you can never have an orgasm ever again and so what is bottom surgery actually for?
	because it's not an authentic vagina what it is, is turning you into a fetish sleeve for someone else's gratification and we are doing this to children so you are living your life eternally as someone else's sex doll And we're the bad guys for trying to stop this stuff.
	Yeah, I know, yeah.
	Well, there you go.
	I think we'll be vindicated someday, but there you go.
	Andrew Narog.
	Among those French intellectuals calling for the abolition of the Age of Consent were a number of leftist sweethearts such as Foucault, Sartre and Derrida.
	Curious, isn't it?
	Yeah, Foucault, notorious boy rapist in Tunisia.
	Oh, he was a proper wrong in that one.
	Yeah, who did so much anal rape that he got AIDS and died.
	Also the most cited social scientist, I'm not going to use a scientist, crackpot by the entirety of academia.
	The most cited person.
	Well, at least he gets two entrances on that new pride flag.
	Yeah.
	Unless Philosopher's on there.
	Yeah, and the gating anus as well.
	Or French.
	Also, a little spoiler, Carl and I on Friday will be recording a two-hour, probably long, discussion on Simone de Beauvoir's Second Sex.
	Carl hasn't read it.
	I had the unfortunate thing of doing so, and thought we'd find out the evil origins of where feminism truly started.
	Last one, George Happ.
	The conservative pride flag is just as evil as the newer versions.
	It's still a symbol of a conquering nation.
	The alphabet people don't reproduce, so their method is indoctrination or the dreaded groomer word.
	I still can't believe they put AIDS on the pride flag.
	That has got to be somebody trolling from the inside.
	Yeah, but then it does add the fourth Chaos God to it, doesn't it?
	I mean, you've already got Slaanesh, with sexual gratification and breasts on weird animals with penises.
	You've got Zench, which is the forbidden knowledge and turning yourself into something utterly unrecognisable.
	You've got Korn, which is the rage of trans activists on HRT. And then now you've got Nurgle, which is disease.
	Right, makes sense.
	And on that note, at 3 o'clock, Dan's next episode of Brokonomics is coming out, so that's more nourishing than the depressing stuff we've had to cover today.
	Yeah, well, fun show as always, mate.
	Always enjoy my Tuesdays.
	We're back tomorrow at 1 o'clock.
	Thank you very much for watching, and goodbye.

▲