Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 6, 2023 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:30:48

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #691

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast of Lotus Eaters, episode 6.
	I'm your host Harry, joined today by Carl.
	Hello!
	And today we're going to be talking about unstoppable immigration, how Labour is going to destroy Britain, and finally we're going to be talking about, what is your final segment regarding?
	Bill Gates is going to save the world with mosquitoes.
	Yes, I think that's why it didn't stick in my mind, because that's such an absurd scenario to me that it seems so confusing.
	You'll be praising the mosquito by the end of this.
	We'll see, I guess we'll see.
	Off to Africa with all of us, it seems.
	Before we get into the news though, for those of you who will be able to attend and watch live, we do have a Rumble livestream going out later today at 3.30 UK time, where yourself and Connor will be talking about the COVID vaccine and whether it is in fact the mark of the beast.
	Yeah, I don't actually know much about this, because this is Connor's Hangout, so he's going to be taking me through all of this stuff.
	It seems very biblical.
	From what I spoke to him about earlier on today, there's going to be a lot of references to Revelations and such in it.
	I'm sure there will.
	I'm sure you'll have a grand old time.
	I'm sure it'll be entertaining.
	So, yes, if you can tune into that live, please feel free.
	We always love to speak to our audience live and listen into your Super Chats and get your support there.
	So, thank you very much, and with that, let's get into the news.
	So I have come to the position that I don't think the rise of the far right can actually be stopped at this point.
	I think the rise of the far right is kind of inevitable and I think the left have come to the same conclusion.
	Can we be clear what we mean when we say the far right?
	The rise of the not left is coming and this is something that is of course making the left shake in their boots because they have dominated the 20th century and into the 21st century and so modernity has been essentially a left-wing project.
	And we're seeing how it's basically falling apart now, and this is unsustainable, it can't carry on.
	And if you would like to know more about modernity, go and check out Thomas and Stelios' symposium about modernity itself, because Thomas has come to a reasonably similar position as me, and Stelios is defending modernity, and I mean, as you can see by the thumbnail, Thomas looks like he's pretty intent on this.
	Thomas looks like he's got a closed fist just off screen.
	Obviously it's a really great discussion and I thoroughly recommend it.
	But anyway, let's go to the actual events now.
	So you can see that even places like the New Statesman are like, well hang on a second, this immigration issue is kind of getting out of hand and Rishi Sunak should take on the immigration fantasists.
	I have noticed the new statesmen, along with Labour, and we'll get into more of this in the next segment, have started to change the nature of some of their rhetoric recently.
	In this, they're still pro-immigration.
	Of course they are.
	But what they're saying is, Rishi Sunak and the rest of the Conservatives should stop promising to lower immigration, because obviously it means they're just breaking their promises every single time, year after year.
	Oh, this isn't even an article saying, like, okay, we still love immigration and all the enrichment, but a million a year, maybe not.
	No, no, they're toast.
	I'm fine with a million a year!
	The problem is that they say it's... The problem is that once you set out specific details, rather than speaking about reducing immigration in the abstract, it becomes very difficult or unwise to achieve radical reductions in immigration.
	So they're like, no, no, the country will collapse if we don't have millions of foreigners coming in every year.
	Well that's my experience.
	Okay, bring on the collapse then.
	We need to end the cycle of unrealistic promises followed by cries of betrayal and further unrealistic promises.
	Immigration policy is complex.
	It involves trade-offs.
	Aggressively lowering net migration involves costs that sensible governments do not want to pay.
	Rather than indulging in fantasies, our political leaders need to confront them.
	So what they're saying is that it's a fantasy to think that a million people a year won't come into the country.
	It's a total fancy and our leaders just need to come out and just be like, yeah, no, you're getting a million people a year.
	Get used to it.
	I love the way that they always use these abstract notions like the aggressively lowering net migration involves costs.
	It involves costs that sensible governments, because the sensible governments wouldn't pay any money.
	Sensible governments would pay who knows how much to house these people and give them benefits.
	Who knows how much to every service they use and whatnot.
	Anyway, right.
	So that was the far left position from the New Statesman.
	Let's go to the centre left position from the Telegraph.
	Immigration is out of control.
	The Conservatives can't control immigration.
	They don't want to.
	They've never tried.
	They don't do anything.
	And all they do is rubber-stamp visas, like probably frantically rubber-stamping these fucking visas.
	I shouldn't swear.
	To get as many people as they can.
	These are your own rules.
	I know, I know.
	Because these are the people who they think make the line go up.
	It's not true.
	It's the total opposite of reality.
	We are not experiencing any economic growth.
	We are experiencing record, unprecedented migration of 1.2 million people in last year, and yet the Conservatives are still committed to the idea that this makes a line go up.
	Well, even if it did, I don't care.
	But it doesn't.
	If the line that is important is the migration line, yes, that one is continually going up.
	That has very much gone up, yes, very good.
	But the thing is, they know that this is all coming to an end, right?
	They say just in this, like, the Tories are set to be booted out ultimately because they have betrayed the country on immigration.
	Totally true.
	The Conservatives know in their bones that it's over.
	But in the Westminster bubble, one hears all too often the fatalistic argument that the problem of the Channel Crossings and mass migration were always too intractable to solve.
	Too intractable to solve.
	But the problem is that those same problems didn't exist about 30 to 40 years ago.
	Yes.
	So how was it that we were in a period before these problems existed if you can't solve them?
	Well, for literally centuries we didn't have these problems and then for the last 25 years we have these problems and the Tories are like, oh it just can't be solved.
	The thing is, they know.
	In fact, they know even in the centre-left telegraph.
	They say, well look, with the right attitude, the Tories could have fixed both.
	That's right, the right attitude.
	It was to address, in nothing short, the civilizational challenge in the West.
	The implosion of an entire economic model and political governance.
	But yes, things have to change.
	End of story.
	And this, the one major problem, we've spoken about the systemic problems of immigration, but then you get the sort of personal problems of immigration that individuals have to deal with.
	Like this is an article I found today, if you go to the next one.
	This channel migrant, again, you don't know who he is, he doesn't have a passport, you don't know where he's come from, you don't know what his background is, you don't know what his criminal record's like.
	International criminal.
	Yeah, exactly, and he's here for 40 days and then rapes someone.
	Allegedly.
	They must have been holding back quite hard.
	Yeah, and it's just awful, obviously.
	Just a 33 year old man breaks into our country, finds a woman, drags her into the bushes and rapes her.
	Speaks to the court via an interpreter, obviously.
	These were not problems that we once suffered from.
	No.
	No, and the last time we did suffer from them, Alfred the Great destroyed the people who were doing it with actual armies.
	I don't see Suella leading any armies any time soon.
	But this is the problem.
	When you invite millions of people from around the world to come and live in your country, you actually don't tend to get the best and brightest from the countries that you are Trying to recruit from.
	You get the people who are chances.
	You get the people who are like, well, I'm not doing very well in my own country.
	Maybe I'll go to this country and try there, right?
	Because the people who are already doing well in that country are like, well, I'm not going to give up everything that I've got.
	I've made a life.
	I've got a business.
	I've got all these connections.
	I've got a family.
	I've got, I've been building what I want to have.
	And so it's not those people who are coming.
	And so you get like this article from the Spectator, which is just fantastic.
	Absolutely fantastic.
	By Jonathan Miller here.
	And in here, he just lays out some statistics, right?
	Police in Sweden have identified 31,000 people who have connections to gangs.
	31,000.
	That's a town.
	An entire town of people connected to gangs.
	We have never faced such ruthless criminality, says Anders Thornberg, the National Police Chief, in a recent interview.
	The model of organisation for the entire Swedish justice system is not rigged to face such extensive criminality.
	We're police officers, we can't deal with this level of crime.
	That's literally the demolition man phrase that he's using.
	In the most recent waves of immigration, Sweden has let in more refugees and people claiming to be refugees, which I think is the important distinction, as a share of population than any other European country.
	It is coping with the consequences.
	Last year, Norway had four fatal shootings, compared to 63 in Sweden.
	And if you say, well, Norway's got half the population, okay, well that's still nearly ten times the amount per capita, right?
	In Botkira, southwest of Stockholm, a generation has been lost to gangs, says Paulina Nuding, a journalist who has written a book on Sweden's dissent.
	Many of Boktira's children are disproportionately from immigrant backgrounds and easy pickings for Sweden alone.
	But it's not Sweden.
	Easy pickings for gangs, sorry.
	But it's not Sweden alone.
	In Brussels last week, police and angry immigrants crashed.
	Crashed?
	What is with my reading today?
	Clashed.
	Belgian police said they arrested 64 people.
	Perhaps more surprising is the experience of Switzerland, a country not associated with the rioting.
	In Lucerne, there were clashes between police and youths.
	Young people threw paving stones at at least one molotov cocktail officers.
	Swiss police detained Portuguese, Somali, Bosnian, Swiss, Georgian and Serbian citizens.
	Portuguese?
	What are you doing in Switzerland?
	Why are you rioting?
	A lot of this also comes out at the exact same time as the riots that began in France, which, as I was covering last week, seems to be breaking out into different countries because what has happened as well is across Europe, it's not just France and England that have imported these foreign populations, it's these places as well, and they seem to always be just waiting on the edge.
	Waiting at the edges for the right moment to erupt into chaos.
	Yeah, they're waiting for weakness so they can start doing these things.
	They carry on.
	In Germany, where Angela Merkel opened the doors to refugees from the Middle East, the number of criminal offences across that country's 16 federal states has skyrocketed, up by 12% last year, with some authorities recording 5.6 million crimes, most of which will go uninvestigated.
	Incidents of rapes, sexual offences and fatal assaults all rose by more than 20% last year.
	Robberies jumped to 27%.
	Why are the Germans becoming such criminals?
	I wonder.
	Well, are they the Germans?
	Exactly.
	They're not the Germans.
	That's exactly the point.
	And so this has led to right-wing commentators online making fun of this, such as Mullet Matthew here, debunking right-wing myths.
	No, refugees do not commit a majority of crime.
	They're only 2% of the population and commit 9% of all the crime.
	Racist.
	And it's a great way of framing it.
	Still vastly over-represented.
	Well, yes, exactly.
	You would think in theory they would commit 2% of the crime.
	Well, that's the thing.
	When the Spectator article that we looked at just a moment ago, when it says that the police in Sweden say that they don't have the means to be able to deal with these sorts of things, I don't believe them.
	They don't have the will.
	It's the same thing that led to incidences in England, like the Rotherham scandal.
	We did have the ability to be able to do something about it, just that the people that were in positions where they could didn't.
	Yes, that's completely true.
	Anyway, let's go to his next one.
	This is good.
	He's got us!
	months as an undercover sleeper agent in right-wing circles to expose their lies.
	In the UK, non-whites who are 13% of the population are only 27% of the prisoners.
	Far cry from the majority, he's got us, he's got us.
	Anyway, in Ireland you get a lot of this as well and people are just taking direct action.
	Now, of course, we do not endorse burning down refugee camps.
	This is merely something that has happened as a consequence of what is occurring here.
	A bunch of far-right anti-immigrant activists, as Euronews described them, have claimed responsibility for setting fire to a makeshift camp housing asylum in uh dublin it's like okay well what did you expect did you expect they would just be put upon forever as as always the question is well if you create the environment where this is likely to happen what did you expect to happen yeah there was there was always going to be some kind of pushback right and so let's go to france let's go to the bbc coverages
	uh bbc's coverage of france right france riots fueled by everyday discrimination i've seen some clips from the rioters themselves that would suggest otherwise yeah i mean me too but uh the bbc hasn't seen those because their fact checkers are willfully blind but they say in our series of letters from african journalists france-based maha mezzi writes about how racism and islamophobia lie behind the anger seen on the country streets in the past week
	France-based Mahar Mezi, I'm sure, a completely impartial voice in this scenario.
	Yeah.
	He says some left-leaning politicians have condemned the campaign to raise money for the police officer who was killed by the rioters.
	Ended up raising 1.4 million pounds, 1.6 million euros.
	No, it's not that he wasn't killed, it was the police officer who killed the 17-year-old that led to all of this.
	He's been put into custody.
	Oh no, sorry, you are right, I misread that.
	But yeah, so, you can see the public is like, we're not on the side of the writers.
	No, of course not.
	Once again, I don't want to harp on this or make it sound like this kid deserved to die, but he had been stopped by the police numerous times, at least ten times in the past, for driving-related incidences.
	He was a drug dealer, and in the situation that he was in, he already had a gun pointed at him, and they said, we will shoot you, and then decided that he was going to disobey the police anyway.
	Also, he was driving illegally.
	Yes.
	He wasn't allowed to drive.
	And he was about to hit a... well, he'd almost hit a cyclist and numerous people.
	But they say some left-leaning politicians condemn the campaign, but others on the right use it to symbolise their support for the police and it has become a highly divisive issue.
	Well, okay, it's divisive between the rampaging immigrant gangs or the police and general population of France.
	That's the division.
	And why are you choosing the foreign?
	I mean, I don't always support the police in every situation.
	They victimise us oftentimes, but if it's a police officer in a situation that's reasonable, can be explained, then of course I'm going to support it.
	But this journalist says, all of this fuels the feeling of many Muslims and North Africans living in France.
	They're not accepted by the state and society.
	Then why stay?
	Well, they're not accepted by the state, just handed out who knows how many benefits by them.
	Well, yeah, they're obviously on benefits.
	But this explains why many people reacted with such anger to the killing of Nahal.
	And so, as Politico Europe point out, well, Macron must fix a broken France.
	Good luck.
	Just best of luck to you.
	I mean, if anyone can do it, it's not Macron.
	Exactly, right?
	Macron has accumulated a difficult, painful crisis situation that has perplexed the outside world, says a politics researcher at the Sciences Po Institute.
	It's as if France is a pressure cooker.
	Each crisis reveals tensions, a conflict in society, tensions over the respect owed to our institutions.
	Our country is constantly invoking Republican values, but it appears entire segments of the population don't feel this matters to them.
	Yeah.
	So you brought loads of people in France, and they're like, we don't care about your Republican values, we don't like you, we don't like your police, we don't like your institutions, we don't respect any of it, and screw you, and they're like, right, Macron, fix this.
	What's he supposed to do?
	Like, what are his options?
	I have found some of the flailing amusing as well from many liberal and centrist commentators saying, Well, it's nothing to do with their ethnicity or the fact that they're foreigners.
	It's nothing to do with that.
	Some of these people are, you know, second generation, third generation.
	Yes, and they still don't feel French, they still don't identify as being French, and they still have no respect for the culture and history of the place that has taken them in.
	And this is exactly what the African journalist in France is saying.
	We feel like outsiders in France.
	Okay, well then, what can be done?
	You know?
	I mean, Macron's only solution is turning off social media, which...
	I mean, he is right that social media networks are a means of spreading this kind of idea of revolution and revolt, and therefore it will slow down the process.
	He's not wrong.
	I mean, this is what the Arab Spring was inspired by.
	This is what social media is allowed.
	But that's hardly the right thing to do, is it?
	Okay, we're going to turn off social media for a moment.
	Now everyone has to be punished because groups of immigrants are rioting in France.
	Brilliant.
	Anyway, what he's talking about here are the mechanisms of the problem, not the heart of the problem.
	The heart of the problem is that the liberal delusion that in fact we can just bring anyone from anywhere in the world and they will just be like us willingly was not true.
	That was not true.
	They can be here for generations at a time and they still won't feel any connection to their new homeland.
	Or at least what they're being sold as, as being their new homeland.
	Unless you just cede the country over to them entirely, and even then they need to burn it all down before it'll be theirs.
	Yeah, I posted about this on Twitter yesterday, because there's a video going around that wasn't said to have been from the riots, and I got community noted on this.
	Which is fine, because the video is 2019, and it's a bunch of Algerians in the centre of Paris, waving the Algerian flag.
	And all I was like is, look, people wave the flags of the things they endorse.
	They're not waving French flags for a reason.
	This tells us everything we need to know.
	They do not think of themselves as French.
	I think John's just sorting out some of the tabs.
	Yeah, don't worry, I didn't get it up, John.
	I'm not saying that they're bad people for feeling Algerian.
	It's totally fine.
	But what I'm saying is, if actually the liberal delusion that in fact we can bring all of these people, we can just transplant people into the new country, and then say, right, you are now French, that doesn't work.
	Because people are different.
	And there are people who are like, ah, well, what are you saying, this is race?
	And I'm like, no, it's not race, because North Africans genetically are basically the same as Southern Europeans.
	Because, of course, North Africa and the Mediterranean region has been a melting pot, dare you use the term, For the last 2,000, 3,000 years.
	All of these people have been in close contact with each other.
	There have been empires that have spanned the entire thing.
	There's been a great movement of population.
	So these people are racially very, very similar.
	You probably wouldn't be able to tell a North African from a Spaniard or an Italian by looking at them.
	Their skin tone is basically the same.
	But they come from different civilizations.
	They come from different traditions.
	They have different languages.
	They have different law systems.
	They have different ethos towards life.
	Well, they have a different history.
	They have a different history, exactly, and history is what makes you what you are in the present day.
	You are not just year zero self-made men who can be transplanted anywhere, and this will be relevant when we get to your Bill and Jay Starla.
	Once again, what you're saying is not that they are bad people for feeling Algerian, but what we can tell certainly is that they are not French, and they do not feel French.
	The fact that you can get community noted and they can say, well, it's not from these riots, congratulations.
	Yeah, that's not the point I'm making.
	In that case, it doesn't even take this kind of event for them to go out on the streets and wave their flags around.
	Exactly.
	I mean, they were protesting about democracy in Algeria.
	I'm like, why does the average Frenchman care about that?
	If you're in France, I thought you were going there to get away from all of that, unless of course you still feel some kind of connection to Algeria.
	Exactly.
	And so anyway, going back to the rise of the far right, there was a recent poll in the past couple of days that showed Le Pen at 51%.
	I wonder why.
	Yeah, I wonder why.
	Where's the Moore doing in all of this?
	I don't think he's running at the moment, unfortunately.
	He's just reading the headlines and nodding along, saying, I told you, I said.
	Yeah, he really is.
	But yeah, so anyway, Le Pen at 51%, so it's not looking good, basically, for Macron.
	Macron's at like 45%, so the time is just coming closer and closer and closer, and the liberal centrist consensus must be well aware that what it's doing just isn't working but anyway like i said we're not the only ones seeing this of course you've got radical left wingers who are seeing this we go to then owen jones must we across europe the far right is rising That it seems normal is all the more terrifying.
	Brilliant.
	It's normal.
	For whatever Owen Jones calls the far right to rise.
	I mean, if it seems abnormal to Owen Jones, I'm more than happy to accept it within my own life.
	No, no, no.
	It's totally normal.
	It's normal.
	Normalise the far right, says Owen Jones.
	The far right is normal, says Owen Jones.
	It's perfectly understandable that after our communist policies have basically failed, the far right rises up and we expected that.
	We saw it coming too.
	He sees it coming and it's totally normal.
	Whenever they say far-right, you can just be like, okay, well that's just the same as saying Labour then, isn't it?
	It's just the same as saying Liberal Democrat.
	It's just the same as saying Conservative.
	It's just a normal aspect of politics.
	Love it.
	Love the normalisation, right?
	Because this is normal.
	As he says, we thought from our darkest moments of history we'd learned, but unless the far-right is once again treated as beyond the pale, new horrors await.
	I don't think they do.
	I think the horror is already happening, actually, and I think what you're calling the far right, which we can just call conservative, really, is a series of movements that are trying to just maintain and re-establish the previous political order of our countries, which has been deliberately perverted in the last 30 years or so by a globalist ideology.
	And he complains in here, obviously, About the AFD on the rise in Germany.
	Obviously he does.
	Of course he does.
	We may as well go to the next one, right?
	So, recent surveys have put support for the AFD at a record 18-20%.
	Neck and neck with Scholz's Social Democrats and behind only the Conservative Democrats.
	So, AFD are on track to become the second largest political party in Germany, if trends continue.
	And they recently won a mayor's office, as you can see there.
	And various other local elections in Germany haven't been followed very closely.
	But it's good to see that they're doing really well, because they're not like a self-loathing party.
	Every other party across the West is just a self-loathing party, apart from what is called far-right, because far-right just means essentially patriotic at this point, and until they do something terrible that I'm like, no, I don't agree with that, I'm going to maintain that position.
	Until they prove otherwise, I'm going to treat them as normal conservative patriots.
	Oh good.
	I don't see why there's any reason not to.
	And it's only people on the radical left who say, oh, they're evil, they're evil.
	Well, show me the evil.
	I don't see any evil.
	What I see is people being normal.
	I mean, Thomas Kruger, the head of Federal Agency for Civic Education, warned this weekend that the party should not be dismissed as a mere protest movement.
	Oh, good.
	The voters want this party.
	The situation is serious.
	Excellent.
	Brilliant.
	Great news.
	Good news.
	The voters want this party.
	They're not just a protest movement.
	The situation is serious.
	Yeah, it's been serious for quite a while now.
	Did you see yesterday what Callum and I briefly mentioned regarding the AFD, where there were polls done where I think the question was, the AFD is a major threat to democracy, seeing if people agreed or not, and 10% of the AFD respondents said yes.
	Many a GigaChad meme was made.
	I've met various members of the AFD because I went out there and gave my conservative guide to white fragility out there and this was really good because they were like what's all this stuff and I was like well actually I kind of know a lot about this and so I went over and gave a talk saying look this is an Anglo-American invasive species of ideology that is coming to pollute your country.
	And so they invited me to the German parliament to explain this, which I did, and they all seemed very nice and normal.
	Like there was nothing insane or radical about them, they were just very concerned people.
	Maybe they were just waiting for you to leave the room.
	Maybe.
	Yeah, the banners fell.
	Yeah, exactly.
	That's all I can imagine.
	And, you know, I'm as sceptical of Germans as anyone.
	But yeah, no, you can go watch this on listleast.com because, A, I thought it did a really good job, and B, they were just normal, right?
	Anyway, go back to the Guardian now.
	The far-right is marching into the mainstream.
	Oh very choice photo of Maloney right there as well.
	She's waving at someone but... They did this to David Bowie in the 70s as well.
	But could that be a Heil Hitler salute?
	Could it be?
	It could be, couldn't it?
	Maybe.
	That's disgusting.
	She's just reconnecting with her Roman heritage car.
	I love the line.
	Whether in Italy, Spain, France or Finland, parties that were once outcasts are fast gaining respectability and power.
	It's just a Professor Farnsworth meme.
	Good news everyone!
	Across Western Europe, far-right parties are advancing, climbing steadily up the polls, shaping the policies of the mainstream right to reflect nativist and populist platforms and occupying select ministerial roles in coalition governments.
	If you look at that graph, the blue is the right wing and the red is the left wing.
	The happy colour is the right wing.
	The evil colour is the left wing.
	Actually, that's correct!
	The colour that represents order and stability and, you know, cool, calm, peace.
	The colour that represents fire and pain and damage and chaos is thankfully on the wane there.
	But I love the way they frame it.
	Oh, they reflect nativist and populist platforms.
	What, you mean Democratic platforms?
	Majoritarian platforms?
	I must have to point out, though, with this particular graph, it seems rather slanted in the way that it's tallying right-wing, given that the UK is one, majority right-wing, and two, on the darker shade of right-wing as well, which suggests that, as always, the Guardian is a little bit skewed in its perspective.
	I know.
	Like, really, take everything up until, like, the very furthest, darkest blue as being left-wing in some way, Yeah.
	But you can see the Guardian is like, well no, it should all be dark red everywhere.
	So at least they feel, they can feel the way the winds are shifting.
	The tide is turning.
	They can feel it.
	And then they go, so they go through a bunch of them, like in Spain you've got Vox, who have been storming in the poles apparently.
	In the Netherlands you've got the Farmers' Movement, which we, the Farmers' Citizen Movement, which we talked about previously, who have been doing, they're the second biggest party now or something, they've just come out of nowhere.
	And then they get to Britain, and it's like, well, how do we explain Britain's lack of far-right party?
	Which is a great question.
	This is true, because I'm hearing all of this, and it's sounding great from what you're saying to me, and I'm just thinking, why can't I have this?
	Yeah, exactly.
	Why can't we have what Italy has?
	Or what Germany has?
	No, you've got the worst of the far-right.
	You have the Tories!
	That's literally what they say!
	That's literally what they say!
	The most radically right-wing party in the UK's history.
	Significantly to the left of Clement Attlee.
	I know, I know.
	Listen to this, right.
	The far right may not be formally represented in Westminster, but analysts argue that populism, nativism and cultural conservatism have long dictated certain centre-right policies.
	They cite nationalistic sloganeering by government ministers and Conservative MPs before and since the Brexit referendum.
	And immigration policy and related rhetoric that are arguably tougher than those on any continental European government.
	Which is why we have such record immigration numbers.
	Delusional nonsense!
	Because they're saying, oh, all this rhetoric.
	Yeah, but what do they do, though?
	Yeah, nothing.
	That's the most important thing, is words aren't action.
	Action is action.
	Yes.
	And so they're like, yeah, and the Conservatives have declared war on woke.
	It's like, no they haven't.
	They've got LGBT Conservatives.
	They ARE woke.
	Yeah, they ARE the woke.
	You know, all of this has happened in the last 13 years of Conservative government.
	They're literally in the position of government that enforces woke laws.
	Yeah, they literally are enforcing the woke laws.
	And so, anyway, basically in Britain we have nothing because ultimately our electorate is just prepared to be... They're allowed to be lied to.
	They allow themselves to be lied to.
	And they're like, oh, I'm not happy with the Conservatives.
	I'm going to vote Labour.
	It's like, why?
	Why are you going to vote Labour?
	But anyway, so across Europe, the far right is rising, and that's a good thing.
	Alright, and speaking of voting Labour, don't do it!
	Don't vote Labour!
	They've been saying lots of things recently that has been throwing out the red meat to right-wingers, disaffected Tory voters, people who look at the country and go, well this is all going to hell.
	Let's not vote for the people that have been doing this for the past 13 years.
	And then they look over at Labour and see that Keir Starmer has been making some claims that he is now a Conservative.
	Fat chance.
	Unless he means conserving Blairism and the same paradigm we've been living in for the past 25 years.
	Yeah, Blairism is dying.
	I have to save it, says Keir Starmer.
	Yes, that's right, I'm a conservative.
	So, one thing, just to bear in mind, when your politicians start throwing out red meat, ask yourself why they force you onto a vegan diet every other day of the week.
	They won't do this.
	Why isn't the red meat your main party policy?
	If you throw that out when you know you want people to like you, why don't you do that every single day of the week and then people will just have every reason to like you, all the time, until it gets to the elections?
	Well, because it's sheer electioneering.
	Exactly, because they know what they're doing.
	And something important that has come out recently is an article from the Daily Skeptic.
	We're not going to go to it straight away, but an article from the Daily Skeptic examining a proposal by Labour called the New Britain Document, which lays out their plans... I hate new things!
	I know.
	I know, but it lays out their plans for the future of the country, if they are to get in power.
	And I tell you what, it's not looking good.
	It's really not looking good.
	I must say as well that this document's been out for about six months.
	Some people already knew what was on it.
	I'm sure we covered it previously.
	We might have.
	I know that Scrump did a stream on it, but nobody was really paying attention to it before this Daily Skeptic article came out.
	I think AA spoke about it last night as well, but we need to spread the word that Labour are evil, Blairism is evil, and just because they're saying the right rhetoric doesn't mean they actually are going to do anything with it.
	Well, they're just gonna ruin us.
	Like, it's all a front to just ruin us.
	Yes, and I think it's rather appropriate to direct people to the website where they can find your book club on Jean-Jacques Rousseau's social contracts, because essentially, as you pointed out while we were discussing this beforehand, what this is going to be is initiating the social contract society to an even greater degree than we already experience.
	Yeah, the Labour Party, Keir Starmer in particular, I've come to the conclusion they're just not very bright people and they don't understand what it is they're doing and so they've got this MPC political programming that is just taken from the French Revolution where they're like yeah we need to do all of those things and so they're enacting a slow-scale French Revolution in Britain at the moment.
	Perhaps.
	I don't know necessarily if I would say that they're unintelligent people.
	Oh, I would definitely say the Labour Party are unintelligent.
	I would say elements of them are.
	Keir Starmer seems to be trying to reorient them in a more intelligent direction, purely off the back of the rhetoric for electioneering.
	I don't think he's intelligent.
	I think it's just pragmatism.
	I don't think he understands what it is he's asking.
	He has Blair guiding him behind the scenes, and Blair I do think is intelligent, just evil.
	Let's be fair, he got what he wanted done, but what he wanted was evil.
	Yeah, but the reason he wants these things is because he's not very smart, I think.
	I don't think any of these people are very smart.
	Blair is definitely the best of them, but that's not saying a lot.
	But anyway, I'll let you carry on.
	Yeah, yes, and we also have another article, a deep think that you did on this as well, where you were talking about Rousseau's Savage, which is also available on the website.
	The reason that these are important is because I'm explaining the assumptions that go into all of these things, why they matter.
	Because essentially what Keir Starmer is trying to do is arrive at the year zero position that the French revolutionaries took up.
	And it's trying to create, like, this self-made man who is not a product of a time and a place, whereas we are all products of times and places.
	We all come from somewhere, in a certain place, in a certain time, from a certain people, with certain habits and customs and language, and there's the accumulated detritus of tradition that weighs on us, whether we like it or not.
	And Kirstein was like, yeah, but we need to get rid of that.
	It's like, you can't get rid of that.
	The French have been trying for 200 years, and they're still the French.
	You know, it's just... For now.
	For now.
	It is just the way that our civilisations are, and the very notion of a social contract is kind of evil, really, when you think about it, but I won't go on about it now.
	Yes, if you want to learn more about it, then you can watch the book club and you can read Carl's article, both of which are available for people who get a premium subscription to the website, which starts out at £5 per month.
	In fact, is the DeepThink free?
	Is it just the Silver members get the audio track, or is it... I can't remember, I found it.
	We can't remember offhand but either way you should get a subscription to the website because we have so much excellent work on there.
	Videos, articles that you can get access to for five pounds a month.
	So very good investment if you ask me.
	So moving on with this then.
	So I did cover in recent weeks the conservative turn that a lot of Labour's rhetoric has been taking.
	I've been sure to To asterisk all of this by saying, you know, they will say the right things but they will do everything that you expect Labour to do because they are still Labour.
	That's all you can expect from them.
	When they say Conservative, they mean David Cameron Conservative.
	Yes, they mean modern 21st century conservative which isn't fitting of the title but still if we carry on we can see what they're doing now and there was an announcement earlier today where they were talking about what they would do.
	Keir Starmer went up and gave a speech in front of people and this speech was he was talking about the class ceiling I was talking about this because of course being Labour you can talk all you want about conservatism but all of it is constantly about class divides, how we need to allow the working class to be able to get a leg up through the systems of education, we need to use education to mean that people, and he used this very phrase in the speech, can break the links from where they started to where they end up, which seems to me
	To just be... I want to break people's family relationships.
	Break the relationship to the land that they're tied to.
	Joe Biden actually said something similar recently, but at least he actually said it in the traditional conservative way.
	He said, I want people to be able to achieve what they want, in the place that they come from.
	Right?
	And that's actually quite a conservative message.
	Well, that was at the heart of what Starmer was saying from an economic sense.
	He's just an idiot.
	When you start to use phrases like break the links of etc. etc., you can be sure that it's not just going to stay in the economic realm.
	I don't want them to end up where they started.
	It's like, but that's where my family is.
	That's where I want to be.
	That's where I grew up.
	That's where I feel most at home.
	I want to break the links with your home.
	He did say that he wanted people to not have to move from where they started.
	But at the same time, I don't think that any of this is going to end up that way.
	But that's my point.
	Keir Starmer is just not bright.
	He's just not very bright.
	All of the implication of what you've just said is obviously packaged in there.
	That any normal person would be like, okay, so you don't want me to leave where I come from, but you don't want me to end up where I came from.
	So what am I doing?
	Yes, there are some many contradictions in this, which does come from a lot of the issues that you're discussing there.
	So he unveiled a new goal of half a million more children reaching their learning targets by 2030, because constantly just going education, education, education works so well under Blair.
	Part of the plans include removing tax breaks for private schools, which he said would raise £1 billion, funds that he would use to employ 6,500 more teachers in areas with shortages.
	So what's going to happen is that the price of private schooling will go up, which means fewer children will go to private schools, which means he won't generate the revenue that he's trying to get because the private schools will shrink and they will give him less money, and also it'll increase the burden on public schools because more children will be taken from public schools to private schools.
	So what you're suggesting is that private schools might become even more exclusive, probably for the children of those like Keir Starmer, increasing class divides.
	And he will have reduced the overall quality of the education of children in this country, he will not have obtained the money he expected, and he will have just increased the tax burden on the taxpayer because he is an effing moron.
	And this is just basic logic as well, which is that just throwing more money at any situation and throwing more teachers into the school situation does not solve the problem what solves the problem is the quality of education that you are getting which does not just come from having multiple steep teachers standing around at any one time possibly doing things maybe
	and also when you're overloading the schools with immigrants and the children of immigrants that might also have something to do with the shortages that some are experiencing oh it absolutely does man yes he He also committed to ensuring that every child has a specialist teacher in his classroom and promised to modernize the National Curriculum.
	That's dangerous.
	You can say whatever you want.
	Well, I think modernize... I would not want the leftists in Labour to be modernizing the National Curriculum any more than it already is.
	They did that under Blair.
	The decline is just so palpable at this point.
	He also wants to end the academic and vocational divide.
	And there was, listening to it, there was a commitment to trying to get people into areas where they can actually have jobs.
	Which, I mean, fair, but why are we in this situation in the first place?
	Why are we in this situation in the first place?
	There was also this, which I saw you retweet and speak about, where he's going to set out plans in a major education to put speaking lessons at the heart of the national curriculum.
	Schools will teach children to speak.
	Well, there is precedent for this.
	You used to be able to get elocution lessons in schools.
	That was to help you lose your accent.
	That was, but it does also help you to formulate your speech and be able to communicate effectively.
	So I think there is some pragmatism to this and some value to it.
	Problem is, I imagine it's once again probably motivated more by the fact that we've got lots of foreigners who can barely speak English in the classrooms.
	I read this clip of the article and it doesn't say that in there.
	Keir's arguing that actually children are just dumb these days and can't properly articulate what it is they're trying to say.
	And this is true.
	All you need to do is look at any clip of Gen Z.
	Yeah, it's totally true.
	And it's Zed, American.
	Zed.
	But the thing is, if you go back and watch a clip of, like... You can find video clips of journalists interviewing children from the 1960s, and the children form fully... It is quite remarkable, looking back at those.
	They're as eloquent as Douglas Murray, and it's just like, okay...
	What happened?
	Why did this change?
	Why are we constantly on the decline?
	There was educational decline and it doesn't seem that any of these solutions that are being put forward have fixed them because there have been variations of all of these solutions done in the time between now and then and things just keep getting worse.
	What they need is some kind of trivium.
	Where you get taught logic, you get taught proper maths, and then you get taught rhetoric.
	Absolutely.
	That's what they need, the classical education, and that helps people to be able to form their own minds, understand the world around them, and then communicate it better to one another.
	That's clearly what needs to be done.
	I don't see any... I don't see Keir Starmer going out and saying, what we need is a revitalisation of the trivium, though.
	I don't see him saying that.
	No.
	I see him saying, let's just keep throwing money at this brick wall.
	His solution is the managerial solution.
	He can't speak to the quality and character of the children themselves.
	He can only speak to the results.
	And so he's like, well, we just need the line to go up.
	And there are other problems in the Labour Party as well.
	I mean, there's constant problems in the Labour Party, but there are other ones going on right now, including the ULEZ priorities that are being put forward, the ULEZ plans, especially around London.
	Sadiq Khan, for those unaware, ULEZ is Ultra Low Emission Zone, which if you drive into particular parts of London, you just have to pay a charge, or, like me, you find out that you get a £60 fine overnight.
	Because, right, I just want to harp on this for a quick moment, Because it really, really annoyed me.
	Last year, a little over a year ago, I went into Brixton.
	It was for a gig.
	I didn't want to go into Brixton.
	I was wearing a stab-proof vest.
	I was safe.
	Only a few people died.
	It's fine.
	And I paid the charges.
	All of the charges.
	I got into Brixton at what, like...
	5 o'clock, I'd paid all of the charges, managed to park up, go to the gig, gig finishes at half ten, get back to the car at eleven, start driving out of London.
	Not able to get out of London or the ultra-low emission zone before midnight, I thought that it would just pay for 24 hours.
	No, it resets at midnight.
	So, even though I'd already paid the charges, I still got fined, despite the fact that I thought I was following the rules.
	I hate London, it's a hellhole, it's an awful city.
	Yes, and they are planning to expand that because at the moment it's mainly parts within the centre of London.
	Now they're trying to expand it to the M25 and in this article some of the Labour MPs are rebelling against this because it's obviously a terrible idea, it's obviously going to cause them more trouble than it's worth because people will start complaining to them and filling up their offices with complaints and then people will just not vote for them if this goes ahead.
	If I were left-wing I'd point out that this is just a tax on poor people.
	That is actually the trick that they're going for here.
	They're saying this will affect poor people the most, which it absolutely does, because these constituencies that it's going to affect aren't just going to be Westminster.
	No.
	It's going to be people of varying backgrounds and varying wealth.
	But that's some of the stuff that's going on with Labour today.
	There was also another thing that I put in here.
	John, if you could just open the link that I had to... No, no, not this one.
	It's in the document here.
	Yeah, about the activists.
	Thank you very much.
	So, at the speech as well, that he was giving out, some activists, who were already on stage with him, who presumably had been vetted by Labour because why else would you have them next to their future Prime Minister, are standing on stage and then decide that what they're going to do is say, oh, you've done a U-turn on the Green commitments, we need you to go back, no more U-turns, Keir!
	And it's all very manufactured.
	It's all clearly staged because the whole world is a stage.
	We already looked into a few weeks ago how a lot of the UK government has specific channels set up to be able to manufacture consent and have all of these things done at the click of a finger.
	Notice this.
	Green New Deal.
	So the American ideal has a Green New Deal.
	Brilliant.
	Yes.
	I can't even use Jeremy Corbyn's Green Industrial Revolution.
	Exactly.
	Exactly that.
	And you just have the two most diverse members of the stage just happened to be the ones to do this.
	And Keir gets an opportunity to look as though he's standing strong, standing firm, waving the crazies off the stage like he will the rest of the country.
	I'm going to take firm control of the...
	Obviously staged, as far as I'm concerned.
	A clear opportunity, as far as he's concerned, to say, I'm strong, I'm stable, I'm not crazy, but I also still care about the environment.
	Absolute rubbish.
	But then let's get on to the Daily Skeptic article.
	So this is what people are talking about now, which is the New Britain Constitution ending parliamentary democracy.
	And what they say in here...
	...is that the proposals of Keir Starmer's A New Britain Constitution, written up by Gordon Brown, who I'm honestly surprised is still alive, let alone involved in UK politics, but he is, are designed to destroy Parliament forever.
	Don't say base, don't say base.
	Of course... Parliament is a historic institution, I want to continue.
	And by extension anything approaching popular sovereignty in Britain.
	These are the subordination of Parliament to the judiciary, universal English devolution and reorganisation of Britain as a multinational state and the enshrining of the current social order as a constitution.
	So he wants to turn us into a social contract society?
	He wants to turn us into the USA.
	Yeah.
	In miniature.
	Which is a social contract society.
	I mean that's literally what it is.
	Yes, and devolution, for those who aren't aware, UK politics operates primarily from Westminster and the Houses of Parliament, and Parliament itself, and then the House of Lords.
	There's the House of Commons, where all the MPs are, and then the House of Lords.
	And what this would do is separate all of this, so that they don't have power over the local constituencies.
	Now, in a different circumstance, I might say, great, more power to these local constituencies.
	But there is a lot wrapped up in all of this, and also it's being headed by Labour.
	Oh no, I'm actually kind of in favour of this.
	This is a threat.
	If you devolve England, I'm going to find the furthest right area of England and get elected to whatever you get.
	I'm going to do this.
	This is a threat, Keir Starmer.
	This is a campaign promise from your future king, Carl Benjamin.
	I'm not going to be king.
	Maybe of that particular area.
	I'm just going to be an elected politician they won't be able to get rid of.
	Because I'm just going to get to the farthest right place and I'm just going to get elected.
	Well, I mean, what a lot of people are concerned about.
	I don't care.
	And what we'll get into later on in this article is that a lot of what will happen is essentially it will be devolved, as happened with Wales and Scotland, and as happened with Wales and Scotland, the opportunity will be given for far-left lunatics to occupy every new position of bureaucracy that exists.
	Hang on, hang on.
	Let's be more optimistic about this.
	I will not.
	I refuse.
	Why can't they be far-right lunatics occupying every...
	Why can't we, why can't we... Because if it's done by Labour, they will turn around and arrest those far-right lunatics.
	Why can't we just galvanise the Brexiteers and say, hey guys, we could take over England this way?
	Suddenly it's not sounding so bad, is it?
	No, no, no.
	See, that sounds good, but it won't happen.
	I don't know.
	I think we can make it happen if we want to.
	Maybe, maybe.
	I'm joking, I'm joking.
	It's not going to happen.
	It's going to turn into the Welsh Parliament and the Scottish Assembly.
	That's what happens with these things.
	From experience, right-wingers just don't get to have much of a say in these events.
	I do think a lot of that is down to right-wingers not organising them.
	Oh yeah.
	The right wing has sadly been quite complacent for a long time.
	The thing is, if each area of England has its own devolved parliament, well that's money.
	Because one of the problems that right wingers have is financing.
	They can't get their organisations financed.
	But of course, if it's elected to a parliamentary body, well those people do get paid.
	And they get staffers and assistants and what not.
	Once again there's a lot more wrapped into all of this which we'll cover in just a moment that seems to be explicitly designed to prevent people with different opinions from the entrenched bureaucracy from getting into any positions of power.
	For instance that on this Labour's very nice and slick renewing our democracy and rebuilding our economy Look at the picture.
	Look at the picture.
	It is literally a vertex diagram of Britain.
	It's not a photo, it's not an artistic representation.
	It has stripped away Britain to merely a series of lines in the rough shape of Britain.
	This is how their minds operate.
	They could have had a beautiful, aesthetically pleasing picture of Britain that was really nice to look at.
	No, they've stripped away everything that makes Britain what it is, like the greenery, the countryside, and they've reduced it to merely lines and heat blobs.
	Yes, a tech intern drafted this up for them, and that's just the mindset that inspires.
	This is what the manager sees when he thinks of Britain.
	Yes, he doesn't see a real place.
	No.
	He sees a series of plotted graphs through which he can manipulate to get desired results.
	Exactly.
	He doesn't see people.
	But this, as you would imagine, includes the same sorts of headlines that you would expect.
	A country of potential.
	Sorry, we were already a great country.
	Yeah.
	And we have the potential to be a great country again, but not with Labour.
	Not with Tories either, to be honest, but either way.
	The scourge, the scourge of inequality.
	Everybody's favourite talking point that they love to harp on constantly.
	And there's more in here.
	I'm literally going to run on a platform that's the opposite of this.
	I'm pro-inequality.
	I can make an argument for inequality.
	The glory of inequality.
	No, no, that's exactly what it is.
	The glory of having passed on an inheritance to your children.
	That's how I'll frame it.
	The glory of living in a place where not everybody is some amorphous blob expected to be the exact same as one another.
	Imagine that your children get to inherit the good things that you built up during your lifetime.
	Vote for me if you want that to continue.
	There you go, there's another campaign promise.
	So in this page they say, firstly, we propose a New Britain of shared purpose, the purpose of a...
	It's just so alien and so French, frankly.
	It's just like, why don't we have a New France?
	We live in England, we live in Britain.
	This is a very old country and we like it being an old country.
	I don't want to just get rid of it.
	I don't want to scrap it all.
	I like living in my old, comfortable shoes.
	They're a bit crusty around the edge, aren't they?
	Don't you want some sketches instead?
	I was very happy with the old country that we have.
	Wouldn't you prefer some Nikes?
	I've got a graph here that says they're very efficient.
	Are they Yeezys?
	We won't get into that now, will we?
	I was very happy with what I had, thank you very much.
	And I just don't think that Keir Starmer is the man to create a brilliant New Britain.
	No.
	No he certainly is not.
	Nor is Tony Blair for any Iranian rug merchants who might be watching this right now.
	The purpose of the New Britain should be grounded in the shared values and aspirations that unite people across our country and to make that possible we need to build new constitutional foundations.
	We don't have a constitution.
	We have an unwritten constitution.
	They're going to try and formalise something.
	The constitutional foundations of Britain are over a thousand years old and are inherited.
	They are traditional.
	They are literally inscribed on the hearts of the people.
	Keir Starmer wants to turn us into a piece of paper.
	Just literally, here's the social contract, sign here.
	Now it's about our values.
	Well, we don't share values, Keir.
	We don't share values here.
	I mean, as the French Revolution was still going on, de Maistre was writing about how if you actually, if you can't come up with a constitution a priori, it has to be based on the experience of the people within a particular nation who've been there for a certain amount of time.
	And if you write it down, that automatically destroys any legitimacy that the Constitution may have had Because, and he was a lawyer, so he was thinking it in legalistic terms as well as religious terms, but it was essentially, well once you've got a rule written down on a piece of paper, you will get all manner of technicians and managers looking for ways in which they can legitimately break that rule.
	That's a fair point.
	And even, I mean, and that's probably what's going to happen.
	But a best case scenario, the best you can really do in that situation is just explain to people what they already think.
	You know, it's like, oh you do all these things, well I'll write it down.
	It's like, okay great, we don't need it written down.
	Well, this isn't going to be what people already think.
	This is going to be what Labour dictates from on high.
	Of course.
	It's just going to be, again, it's just going to be French Revolution 2.0.
	Yeah, so they also say they're going to propose a root-and-branch reform of our centre of government.
	They're going to put forward detailed proposals for abolishing the current undemocratic House of Lords.
	Not the undemocratic Supreme Court.
	No, that's fine.
	That's fine because that was done by Blair.
	Yeah, the American import that is the Supreme Court.
	And Keir's like, yeah, we don't have enough Americanism in this country.
	Yeah, I suppose as far as I'm aware as well, the Supreme Court don't do anything to block legislation every so often like the House of Lords occasionally do.
	Yeah, I mean the House of Lords are meant to be a check through the wise men and women of the country who don't have to have the democratic pressure of getting elected every five years.
	But this is the thing, isn't it?
	I'm going to restructure all of this because the thousand years of history just didn't produce the communist revolution I was expecting.
	It's like, good?
	And they want to make sure as well that there's no going back.
	Because they say here, we also believe that as part of our new constitutional settlement, there must be a safeguard to ensure that change is permanent, as well as profound.
	We are going to tear apart your country, reform it in the way that we want, and then we're going to staple it together with superglue, and we're going to concrete it together, to make sure that you can't do anything about it in the future.
	We're going to have a thousand year Starmer Reich.
	Yes, that's literally what he's asking for.
	But I love it, as if future generations are now going to be bound by the social contract that Keir Starmer writes.
	It's totally immoral.
	It's very arrogant.
	Scruton puts out this essentially like treaty-making, where it's going to be a dead hand on future generations, like no, you've been bounded by Keir Starmer's midwit interpretation of French Republican politics.
	It's like, why?
	One of the great things about traditions is that they change.
	They're flexible.
	You do what seems to be in line with what came previously, that is also fit within the current environment which you are in.
	It's organic, in a way.
	Exactly, they're organic.
	They change, they grow, they mould.
	Things that aren't useful get forgotten, and things that are useful get remembered.
	And this makes them holistic, wholesome, decent, organic, as you said.
	This is literally, as Scruton says, the dead hand of a treatise.
	500 years ago, Keir Starmer wrote this down and you have to live by it now, forever.
	I hate it.
	In fact, I've forgotten his name, but there was an American anarchist in the 1800s who was making the argument like that against the Constitution of the United States, saying, well I didn't sign it, and nobody alive signed it, so why am I having to stick to it?
	Man, like, go and read We're So Savage.
	I am so against the idea of a social contract.
	And people are like, what's the alternative?
	Well, we are a sentimental traditional society.
	Our civilization was built up by bonds of sentiment, where we actually liked where we were, we liked the people around us, and we thought well of them, and therefore our interests were theirs, because we were essentially going back to Aristotle's very original conception of what a civic polity was, is a city based on Friendship.
	And relationships.
	Exactly, it was all about relationships.
	It starts from the family, and then expands out by their association of families, and the head patriarch of those families, they all get together and figure out what's going on.
	And it was just, you don't have to be quite so strict about patriarch and collab, but like, the regions are bound together because of a shared love of the place and a shared history together.
	And sharing the same problems because they live in the same country.
	And that's what it was based on.
	It was all based on bonds of sentiment.
	Relationships, as you say.
	It wasn't a document that now anyone can say I've signed and lay claim to all of this.
	You know, this was particular to a time and a place.
	Sorry, I'm going to go on on this.
	No, no, it's alright.
	There's a lot to talk about.
	I can tell it's incensed you.
	Oh, I just hate this so much.
	There is, as you can imagine, with any proposals like this, there is an absurdly long document to go with all of it, which is 155 pages long.
	I will not go through the whole thing.
	I will instead just draw your attention to a few diagrams, including this one where they're talking about Britishness, and they have...
	Happily, and very organically, quantified people's sense of identity into a handy-dandy graph for every one of us.
	How do you feel?
	I'm gonna write down a number.
	Yes, where it says that we've got a tridentity, not an identity, not a sense of being British, but a tridentity, where Britishness is felt alongside national and local senses of belonging.
	Okay, this is fair, whatever.
	We do have it so, you know, I'm British, but I'm also English.
	I'm also from a particular part of England that are all important to me.
	But what's this?
	World Citizen.
	Being used as the control as well.
	Turns out that most people have a really strong sense of being a world citizen.
	Well, they don't actually.
	Which is why it's even more strange that it's being used as the control.
	That is weird, isn't it?
	Very, very strange.
	And once again, this is just a quantification of people's feelings.
	Very silly thing to do.
	And there was also this one.
	If you don't mind zooming in a bit on this as well.
	This is the thing.
	This is the one that's been going around social media.
	But what this is, is the genuine total destruction of the traditional Britain that we lived in prior to New Labour.
	This is the culmination of the destruction of this country under the New Labour government.
	Literally, here's a list of things that are old Britain, which is you're British, it comes from your parents and your birth.
	Oh, it's a centralised state, so they're trying to appeal to all of the libertarian Labour voters.
	You don't want a centralised state, do you?
	Well, actually I do, because I can see what's happening in the devolved parliaments and it's a total waste of money.
	Agnostic on the role of geography and family wealth in determining life chances, New Britain proactively equalising opportunity.
	No, it's an ethical state.
	No, what this means is communism.
	Yes.
	That's communism.
	Power and wealth of the centre trickles down to the periphery, or the wealth of the nation invested to create wealth everywhere.
	Invested by who?
	So the state proactively equalises, and then the state proactively invests to create wealth everywhere.
	This is communism.
	Power and wealth trickle down from the States.
	So if I start a business and we start doing really well because loads of you chaps subscribe, then the States are going to be like, well, that's trickled down somehow.
	So we're going to have to redistribute this to somewhere in Bradford where, you know, Mr Mohammed whatever has not done the same.
	Why?
	Thomas Sowell constantly points out that trickle-down economics is not real and has never actually been the name for any economic theory that anybody has ever put forward, not even Reaganomics.
	So trickle-down is determined, is a bit of rhetoric used entirely by communists.
	And they get to decide what trickle-down is and what it essentially means is not communism.
	But this thing where it's like, Britishness is defined how we're born, parentage and birth, is because that's literally what the old world is.
	We don't have the right of the soil, we have the right of the blood.
	It's just sully and just sanguine or something.
	Sanguineous, something like that.
	Oh, well now it's defined by citizenship.
	I've got the passport!
	No, but that's the point.
	Now it's the right of the soil rather than the right of the blood.
	And that's new world.
	That's the new world social contract view of doing these things.
	What it seems to me is... Because in the old world, in literally all of the old world, your identity and ethnicity is inherited from your parentage.
	That's how it works.
	That's how heredity works.
	And what they're doing is saying, no, we're breaking that chain and now it's anyone, anywhere, it's step one all the time.
	That's certainly a part of it, but what it seems to me to mean is that citizenship, well who determines citizenship?
	The state.
	So the state decides whether what you have done is worthy of citizenship or not.
	It has nothing connected, once again it's breaking that link to your heritage, what you came from before, and only what you have done right now.
	What have you done for me right now?
	There is also, I won't find the pages but I've got some quotes here, worrying talk of social rights.
	included in this.
	Wow, okay.
	We therefore propose that the rights created and protected should be those that form the foundation of the UK welfare state.
	Oh, good.
	So these are the new rights that are sacred to us, are the rights of the welfare state.
	Our economic development...
	Milton Friedman is crying somewhere.
	I'm crying.
	Our economic development proposals are intended to address the root of the problem of idleness, and we therefore propose four new social rights relating to health, schooling, poverty, and housing.
	Housing rights...
	How is this going to get around idleness?
	I You're being idle, why don't we give you some free stuff?
	This will help the problem.
	Yeah, this will make you less idle, won't it?
	This will motivate you if we just give you free things.
	Good arguments can be made for extending social rights further.
	To include, say, rights in relation to health, not simply healthcare.
	So not simply healthcare, we get to determine what the optimum level of health is for you.
	Oh, right, okay, so this is transphobic.
	Got it.
	It's sounding a bit based in that.
	Or to post-school education, or to guarantees about housing provision.
	There you go again.
	Similarly, rights can be extended into the economics sphere, on fair conditions of work, or on culture and the environment.
	and you'll like it.
	Yep.
	They can be extended into the economic sphere on fair conditions of work or on culture and the environment.
	Climate lockdown.
	Climate lockdown.
	The Equality and Human Rights Commission should report at least annually on how effectively key social rights are being delivered across the UK and on the guaranteed levels of social provision across England.
	Everything's going to be managed.
	I've already spoken about why the Equality and Human Rights Commission needs to be abolished along with the Equalities Act, both of them, that allow them to exist in the first place.
	But yeah, you're right, that's just a bunch of bureaucrats infecting every aspect of life, determining whether it's equal enough.
	This is Seuss Lewis's tyranny of the people who think they're doing the right thing.
	They persecute you without end because they do so with the permission of their own conscience.
	Yes.
	There is more in this particular Daily Skeptic article but we've been going on for a little while now about this and you can read the article yourself because I think we've already painted enough of a dystopian picture.
	To be honest, maybe we should do a deep dive.
	Yeah, maybe.
	Maybe we should, because there is a lot in here.
	So possibly keep a look out for that in the future.
	And until then, remember that Labour might be saying nice things, but they mean bad things.
	Don't vote for them, and don't even want to say vote for the Tories, because I hate the Tories as well.
	Don't vote for either of them.
	Vote for Reform or Reclaim.
	There you go.
	People who we know and like, you know?
	Don't... Oh, God.
	We are going into a dark age.
	Can the mosquitoes save us?
	So, Bill Gates is planning to release 500 million mosquitoes to save the human race.
	To eat us all?
	To kill us all?
	I mean, part of it will be eating us.
	Oh, okay.
	Well, that's what mosquitoes do.
	Well, yeah, I know.
	Are they trying to kill us all?
	Will that save the human race?
	Ending the human race?
	No, he thinks that releasing hundreds of millions of virus-carrying mosquitoes will save us.
	It'll prevent deaths, apparently.
	I mean, I'm mildly sceptical.
	I feel like Africa is a case study for this.
	It doesn't seem to work.
	We'll get into it shortly.
	But before we do, go and enjoy one of Dan's latest Broconomics episodes, which is an investment series he's been doing with a guy called Peter Lowry.
	Now, Peter Lowry was a former Jupiter Fund manager, and the Jupiter Fund manages $50 billion worth of assets.
	And he was a former manager of it, right?
	So if you're interested in investing, then he's going to know one or two things about it, and Dan got to pick his brains extensively on this.
	Very interesting conversation.
	You might think, well, how's that relevant?
	Well, we know a few other billionaire fund managers who are interested in Spreading mosquitoes everywhere to save the world, right?
	Don't compare this man to Bill Gates.
	Well, yeah.
	I mean, he's... Phil, that's an unfair comparison.
	Yeah, Peter isn't, um... He's not a Saturday morning cartoon villain.
	No, he's not.
	He's a very nice chap.
	I went to dinner with him.
	He was a really nice guy.
	There you go.
	So anyway, in 2016, the FDA approved, the risk assessment approved, this company's attempt to save the world by flooding it with mosquitoes.
	No wonder you're stumbling over that sentence!
	I don't understand it!
	I couldn't think of a good way of framing it that didn't make it sound like the plan of a villain, right?
	This is all very G.I.
	Joe so far.
	Yeah, the firm is called Oxitec.
	It's based in Abingdon, UK, and it's funded not just by Bill Gates, but it is partially, of course, funded by Bill Gates.
	There are other members of the Legion of Doom involved in this.
	I can tell you who they are if you like.
	Oh, alright.
	The initial 11 investors included the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, JPMorgan Chase, The World Bank, Merck, Pfizer, and GlaxoSmithKline.
	Doesn't that just put your mind at ease?
	Trustworthy factors.
	Doesn't that just make you think, oh thank god, they're releasing 500 million malaria-infested mosquitoes.
	If it was someone else, I'd be concerned.
	I'm not even joking!
	So this is from this paper, right?
	In this paper, he's asking, well, why are they doing this exactly?
	So the plan is they were asking to field test biotechnology to try and reduce mosquito-borne diseases.
	And he points out, well, the US does not have a high incidence of mosquito-borne diseases.
	Why do we need to do this in Florida?
	That's an excellent question.
	That is an excellent question, isn't it?
	So, they approved Oxitz, or whatever they're called, genetically modified Aedes aegypti mosquito as a public health tool.
	And he's like, yeah, so they want to solve public health problems of the global south by means of their patented products.
	Some powerful non-state actors committed to capitalism or neoliberalism believe they can do better than democratic state.
	Therefore, they have chosen to take on some roles of the state, motivated by the conviction they can be just as just, efficient and effective.
	And so, of course, Bill and Melinda Gates, JPMorgan Chase, and all the rest have invested in this.
	I mean, the Gates Foundation put $75 million into this, right?
	So it's not small fry.
	It's not just pocket change, although it probably is to Bill Gates.
	But they aim to use these genetically engineered mosquitoes to wipe out malaria in regions of sub-Saharan Africa.
	Why release them into Florida, then?
	What are you doing?
	A 2016 MIT Technology Review article notes that Gates Foundation said it no longer believes that malaria can be wiped out without a genetically engineered mosquito gene drive.
	So if you're in Sub-Saharan Africa and you're constantly at risk of malaria from mosquitoes coming around and possibly biting and transferring it to you, how are you supposed to tell the difference between the ones that cure your malaria or just give you malaria?
	It is slightly more clever than that because these are supervillains.
	Sorry, I forgot about that.
	So, they have genetically engineered the adedes, or however it's pronounced, aegypti mosquitoes to include a heritable synthetic genetic sequence that makes them dependent on a chemical called tetracycline, which, and it's so is expected, that if they don't get this, then the mosquitoes, when they mate with their wild female counterparts, 95% of the resulting progeny will inherit the
	tetracycline dependency trait and so they're not expected to survive into adulthood in environments that do not have sufficient amounts of that chemical this is literally the plot of Jurassic Park and this is all wild expectations as well Well, we expect that they go out and this will happen.
	Yeah.
	But this is exactly what Henry Wu does in Jurassic Park with the velociraptors and the other creatures.
	They're like, well, it's... I can't remember the name of the amino acid they're lacking.
	But they're like, so yeah, we have to give them the amino acid or they'll die.
	It's like, oh, they can get it from their environment.
	Which again, happens in Jurassic Park.
	So...
	Anyway, it's entirely possible these mosquitoes simply won't die if they can find it in their environment.
	And so, in this article, the author says, well, I'm interested in... Why?
	Like, why this?
	Yeah, why?
	He gets the proposal, but why?
	Yeah, exactly.
	By evaluating the FDA's assessment of a proposed uncaged field trial in Keyhaven, Florida, and by identifying the low incidence of mosquito-borne diseases in states in the US, this paper has raised the question of why the sponsors of biotechnology seek to conduct uncaged field trials in the US.
	Again, okay, why not do it in the Congo, where they actually have mosquito-bearing, uh, malaria-bearing mosquitoes?
	Why wouldn't you do it there?
	Why would you do it in Florida?
	Well, we don't want to risk our precious Africans being hurt in the trials.
	Floridians, though!
	Well, actually, it's argued that proponents of biotechnologies may be interested in using the fact that the US has a regulatory agency that has authorized uncaged field trials of genetically engineered mosquitoes to urge other countries to permit uncaged field trials and commercial use of patented biotechnologies.
	So they're like, well, look, they're doing it in America.
	Don't you want that too?
	Here's some money.
	Anyway, so in 2021, Bill Gates released 150,000 mosquitoes in Florida.
	There you go.
	Good luck.
	Oxitec are like, yeah, we've got 150,000 mosquitoes ready to go.
	Okay, this sounds crazy, but what are you gonna do, right?
	But the UK has apparently already tested these mosquitoes in Brazil, Malaysia, Panama, and the Cayman Islands.
	But it hadn't received regulatory approval for the US, but it has now.
	According to the study, these carry a gene that kills the female progeny in the early larval stages.
	So fingers crossed that that does happen, and life doesn't find a way Right?
	And so, yes, they've released all these batches, and the researchers will make use of capture devices to trap mosquitoes for study.
	Because, of course, how would you know that this is working?
	So they just plan to just trap as many mosquitoes.
	And they've added a fluorescent marker gene, and so under a particular kind of light, they fluoresce.
	I don't think I've watched it.
	Isn't there an episode of Black Mirror where they have genetically modified or robot bees that get unleashed and start killing people?
	Um, it's actually also the plot of Jurassic Park Dominion.
	I've not watched that one.
	And they've got genetically engineered locusts.
	I've only ever watched the first one.
	Well, yeah, and I don't blame you, it was terrible.
	But, you know, my new Jurassic Park film comes out and my son's like, oh, can we watch that?
	I was like, yeah, okay, why not?
	It'll at least be CGI dinosaurs.
	And, like, half the film is taken up with this plot about genetically engineered locusts that have escaped from the biolab and are gonna ravage the food supplies of the Earth.
	It's really boring.
	There wasn't a strange man in glasses and a sweater vest sat on the row behind you taking notes, was there?
	I mean, I didn't see one, but I went to the Swindon cinema.
	So maybe if it was in LA or something.
	But yeah, anyway.
	It's again the same plot of a Jurassic Park movie, somehow.
	But Snopes stepped in and were like, hang on a second.
	You're not spreading conspiracy theories, are you?
	Here's the whole story.
	Well, if you want to scroll down to the fact check on that, John.
	It's kind of true.
	Look at the line.
	Bill Gates himself is not releasing the mosquitoes into the wild.
	However, he is funding the people who are.
	Yes.
	Bill Gates himself isn't opening the box with the mosquitoes.
	The only way they can ever fact check this is just by taking the sentence Bill Gates is doing this literally like he's hand-releasing them.
	Yes.
	That is exactly what the Snopes fact check is.
	He personally is not doing it.
	But of course, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is providing the funding to genetically modify and release mosquitoes in various locations, including Florida.
	Yes, we know.
	Remarkable.
	But also, hang on a second, we've got even more of a fact check on this.
	Because Oxitec is being funded by multiple different partners, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation did give that company grants, but it was to do other things, and not just that thing.
	What other things would those other things be?
	No idea.
	We've also got another fact check.
	This isn't the next pandemic, you know.
	I mean, I've got an idea for what else other things you could do.
	You know, maybe hounds with insulin-tipped fangs released into areas of diabetes.
	There you go.
	Insulin-delivering pit bulls.
	Yeah, there you go.
	Yeah, well, entirely possible, frankly.
	But again, another fact check.
	It's not the next pandemic.
	What are you talking about?
	The virus has no correlation with the West Nile virus, which was reported in Florida.
	The virus has got no correlation to the release of mosquitoes, and no governments have mentioned they caused harm.
	Was there a spike at the time, when all of this was done, in cases in Florida?
	Well, that was only in 2022.
	But Bill Gates wrote a blog post about this.
	Oh, alright.
	I mean, he literally has a blog called Gates Notes.
	I think I've looked at this before for things.
	Until I fell down this rabbit hole, I had no idea Bill Gates had a blog.
	Did you not?
	No.
	I'm sure I've shown you things of it before, but anyway.
	Possibly, I just don't remember it.
	But he says this, and this is just brilliant, right?
	Inside a two-story brick building in Medellin, Colombia, scientists work long hours in muggy labs breeding millions and millions of mosquitoes.
	And they're the good guys.
	They tend to the insects every need, as they grow from larvae to pupae to adults, keeping the temperature just right and feeding them generous helpings of fish meal, sugar, and of course, blood.
	It's got a large supply of blood on hand, do you, Bill?
	Bill Gates approaches you in a bar.
	You got any blood, mate?
	Yeah.
	I need some blood.
	I'll pay you for the blood.
	I mean, it's not like he's gonna skimp out on that.
	Well, yeah, that's true.
	Hang all over the blood with Bill Gates.
	I was the richest man in the world.
	I can afford your blood.
	But then, they release them across the country to breed with wild mosquitoes that can carry denning and other viruses, threatening to sicken and kill the population of Colombia.
	That might sound like the beginnings of a Hollywood writer's film horror plot, but it's not.
	This factory is real.
	Yeah, it does.
	Even he himself is like, okay, I sound like Dr. Frankenstein.
	I sound like an evil villain.
	This sounds like the beginning of Resident Evil.
	I know this sounds evil, but trust me, bro.
	It's like, of all the people I don't trust, bro, it's someone who went to Epstein's Island and was like, well, his lifestyle isn't for me.
	It's like, no, I don't trust you.
	I bet, I just bet Bill Gates is testing out, like, rage-inducing drugs on chimpanzees right now in a lab underneath London.
	We know what's gonna happen.
	And everyone's like, why is the Umbrella Corporation just so evil?
	And it's like, yeah, it's a great question.
	It's because they think they're good, right?
	He says, the mosquitoes aren't being released to terrorise the local population.
	Far from it.
	They're actually helping to save and improve millions of lives.
	Well, I feel reassured.
	Bill Gates is just releasing hundreds of millions of malaria-carrying mosquitoes, guys.
	Trust us, it's going to save the world.
	It's for your own good.
	He says, well, a randomly controlled trial conducted in Indonesia.
	Why did you need to conduct it in Indonesia, Bill?
	Found that Wolbachia-carrying mosquitoes reduced the number of dengue cases by 77% and hospitalizations by 86%.
	See, isn't this just great?
	Nothing more to worry about.
	Mosquitoes to the rescue for a disease I've never even heard of, right?
	The demand for these life-saving mosquitoes continues to grow.
	Popular demand for life-saving mosquitoes, mate.
	Don't question it.
	You're a conspiracy theorist.
	Maybe these diseases, like you say, I've never heard of some of these diseases.
	Dengue or dengue, whatever it's called.
	You know, maybe it is epidemic in those countries.
	We are, at the end of the day, Little Englanders.
	It's not epidemic in Florida.
	Yeah, it's not epidemic in Florida, but it's very, very strange method of, generally speaking, in the past we have had... Maybe this is because people were hesitant with the vaccines and he's gone, right.
	Okay, you're not willing to take them.
	Well, I'll get a bug to literally bite it into you then.
	Which, don't give them ideas, that isn't the plan.
	Remember, the plan is for the males with the faulty genes to mate with wild females to produce infertile or dead offspring.
	Offspring that are dying in youth.
	So the plan is to reduce just the number of mosquitoes.
	You will receive mosquito vaccines in the future, though.
	This is what this is leading to.
	It probably is, yeah.
	It probably is.
	I would not be shocked, right?
	But as I said, the demand for these life-saving mosquitoes is just through the roof.
	Everyone's like, God, I just need more mosquitoes.
	And the factory is producing more than 30 million mosquitoes per week.
	Really?
	Industrially produced mosquitoes.
	This is such a glorious new future.
	This is a much better plot than anything in the most recent series of Black Mirror though, to be fair.
	Yeah, I'm only producing hundreds of millions of mosquitoes.
	Trust me, I'm the good guy, bro.
	I'm not a weird freak.
	The demand for these mosquitoes is through the roof.
	These amazing mosquitoes are taking flight and saving lives.
	So we'll bang our pots and pans for the mosquitoes like we do the NHS.
	And yeah, if we go to the next one, there's going to be 500 million of these produced.
	500 million mosquitoes that are definitely going to solve all the problems.
	They say the mosquito release in Florida was fiercely opposed by a significant portion of the local community, as well as outside experts and experts.
	Although, many say that with better controls and more advanced research, they'd be more open to the trial in their community.
	But for now, critics say there are scientific flaws with Arctic Tech's plan for the Florida release and insufficient safety testing.
	No.
	What could be the flaw with releasing hundreds of millions of mosquitoes into Florida?
	What could be the flaw?
	You tell me.
	We'll get to that in a second, in fact.
	Many in the community say they feel that the experiment is being forced upon them, with no way to opt out other than packing up and leaving the area.
	I find this criminal.
	We are being bullied into this experiment, said one resident at a recent town council meeting.
	I find it criminal that we are being subjected to this terrorism by our own Florida Keys Mosquito Control Board.
	So the people charged with controlling the mosquito population are like, yeah, we're going to release hundreds of millions of mosquitoes, which seems a bit counterintuitive, but theoretically they're going to reduce the mosquito population.
	It's like, right, and when that doesn't happen, what then?
	Spend money to make money.
	Release mosquitoes to reduce mosquitoes.
	And this, remember, you will recall, was all with the aid of reducing malaria.
	The noble humanitarian goal of reducing malaria.
	Would it surprise you to learn, for the first time in 20 years, malaria has been found in Florida?
	I was hoping that that wouldn't be the horrifying shock twist of this story, but... We just released loads of African mosquitoes into Florida to help reduce malaria, and now there's malaria, if you go to the next one, in Florida.
	Which is just amazing.
	Like, who could have predicted this?
	Five new cases of malaria, one in Texas and four in Florida, are alarming officials because they were locally acquired, meaning a mosquito in the U.S.
	was carrying the parasite.
	What a crazy coincidence.
	Who could have seen that one coming, yeah?
	Just a coincidence, bro.
	Right?
	This hasn't happened since 2003, and almost all cases of malaria announced in the US are from people who travelled outside of the country where they caught malaria from somewhere in Africa.
	But these five new cases, seen in people who hadn't travelled abroad, raise fears that local mosquitoes could be spreading the disease to other people.
	Well, where did these come from?
	Who could have predicted this?
	Sure, it's nothing to worry about.
	The real problem is that it's climate change.
	Climate change is definitely playing a role in vector-borne disease throughout the US, said one expert.
	We know in general that climate can be one of the many factors that can impact vector-borne diseases, said a CDC spokesman.
	Today global travel and trade allow vector-borne diseases to be moved around the world and transmitted by local mosquitoes or ticks.
	So there we go.
	It's climate change that has done this.
	It's not Bill Gates releasing 500 million mosquitoes into Florida that's giving people malaria from mosquitoes.
	It's climate change.
	I knew it.
	You're just a conspiracy theorist.
	Alright, and with that let's get on to some of the video comments.
	Oh yes, Sophie is showing what appears to be a little play figure that she has made.
	And she's painting a face?
	Yes, she's painting a face.
	Appears to be of... A sad looking man with a big nose.
	Yes.
	But he's apparently some Danish chap.
	She did tell us in a video comment the other day, I just can't remember who it was.
	I might not have been on podcast for that one.
	Today we'll discuss the Deep South.
	This region was settled by many people, but ruled by the second sons of European nobility.
	With no land to call their own, these disinherited created their own kingdom in the south.
	Many southern gents see themselves as descendants of royal blood or Norman conquerors.
	Either way, higher and apart from the common people.
	These neo-elites have weathered 400 years of English liberal waves upon their shores.
	Unlike their cousins in France, they have learned that the people's anger cannot be ignored, but instead harnessed.
	Over the centuries, the Southern gents have learned to trick their constituents into fighting their wars, keeping their peace, and forgiving their sins.
	The culmination of this 400-year masterclass on subverting English liberalism is the cynical Real Politique of the Southern Democrats.
	Great fashion sense, though.
	Very interesting.
	And yes.
	Let's get on to some of the written comments now.
	Would you like to go through some more?
	No, because I didn't do as much as you did.
	Oh, that's alright.
	Okay.
	The Wigan survivalist says Far Right just equals non-uniparty.
	And that's exactly what it is.
	Yes.
	And it's, well, far right, yeah, it has all of the connotations.
	So if you just attach it to anything you don't like, yeah, people just go, ooh, evil.
	California Refugee says, I hope the kinks continue to get worked out.
	Loving the new studio still.
	Thank you very much.
	Hope I'll have some new video comments next week beside my Flower Friday video.
	I'll be awake for this one today.
	Cheers, lads.
	Well, thank you very much for tuning in.
	It must be late in California, I'd imagine.
	That'll be early in California.
	Or early, whichever one.
	But we didn't have any kinks today.
	Yeah, it's been alright.
	We've done well today.
	Well, I imagine it's just... You're messing me up.
	...that we know of.
	Yeah, that I'm aware of.
	I mean, John might have just been keeping it from us, but no, everything's gone alright today.
	Yeah.
	On to It Can't Be Stopped Now.
	Ethelstan95 says, The immigration issue is so ridiculous given the amount of manifesto commitments at every election.
	At some point there needs to be legal consequences akin to breach of contract if you fail to fulfil promises in a commercial tender.
	If you fail within a certain period of your term to implement snap election and a ban from rerunning for a time period.
	There definitely needs to be something, because I'm so tired of the Conservatives every single time being like, we're going to reduce immigration.
	It's like, uh... Flogging?
	I'd be up for people being flogged, yeah.
	Lord Nerevar says, the left has miscalculated.
	They assumed that they could import millions of immigrants and then allow them to vote.
	They would never lose power, but in importing the immigrants, they've alienated the native population that still forms a considerable majority of the nation.
	Give it 10 years, assume fortification becomes impossible, and the left will be out of meaningful power to a century.
	For a central because of this you get what you deserve.
	I hope that's a god fingers crossed That's a that's what I would consider quite an optimistic take on this given that the EU is actively funding Proposals like the becoming a minority in your own country idea because they don't want us to be like you say there We do still form a majority of the nations that we find ourselves in so the idea is okay Well, we don't want you to be the absolute minority But we don't want you to be the majority So if they do that, then they take away some of the power that is still left.
	"Shaker Silver, the labels of left and right have grown to be too low resolution for describing current events." I absolutely agree.
	"On the main point of immigration, the right-wing establishment wants replaceable workers to benefit their big business buddies, while the left-wing establishment pushes it to make the underclasses equally miserable in equity." In truth, it's not the far-right, as in conservatives, they are afraid of, it's that these elitists are afraid of populists who don't want to benefit the current ruling class, Sticking to the left-right labels is allowing them to set the terms.
	I agree with some of that.
	I think people who are in charge right now are just evil, as far as I'm concerned.
	Incompetent and evil.
	Or competent at being evil, perhaps.
	It is something like that.
	It's hard to say exactly because I mean, there are lots of people involved and lots of them are stupid.
	Very few of the people we see, at least at the forefront, are the brightest bulbs in the bunch.
	That's true.
	I'm more than happy to attribute malice to it, though.
	Yeah, I think malice is really the issue.
	But it's malice that is evil.
	The reason we perceive it as malice is because what they're doing is evil.
	But they perceive what they're doing as sort of heroic goodwill, because they think what they're doing is good, because they're stupid.
	Yeah, many evil people thought they were doing good things.
	Yeah, yeah, absolutely.
	Bill Gates releasing hundreds of millions of mosquitoes.
	For some reason, yeah.
	American Connor.
	Nice to meet you, American Connor.
	I always suggest the thought experiment, without 50 plus million immigrants in the US, would wages be higher or lower as a whole?
	Would housing costs be higher or lower?
	If you're not capable of understanding supply and demand on that level, please stop voting.
	The amount of people I would just strip the suffrage away from.
	I would say net taxpayers.
	You have to be a net taxpayer for five years, then you get to vote.
	That makes sense to me.
	Which I think is totally fair.
	Open to anyone who just pays taxes net.
	Yeah.
	So that's going to reduce the tax-paying population of Britain to about... probably about 3 million straight white men in the South West.
	Excellent.
	And a few in the North, I would hope.
	Probably.
	My family members.
	Possibly.
	Nah, I'm joking, obviously.
	Twisted Frenzy says traditions are solutions to problems we've long since forgotten that we had.
	Yes.
	Well, across parts of Europe, yes.
	Yeah, across parts of Europe we're winning.
	Well, across parts of Europe, yes.
	Yeah, across parts of Europe we're winning.
	In Britain, we're not.
	Yeah.
	Richard Monik...
	Monik...
	Monikendom...
	Sorry if that is your surname.
	I was trying to pronounce it my best.
	Mononychidim.
	I think that's how you say it.
	Okay.
	It says, Labour are scum.
	Very nicely and succinctly put.
	I could have shortened the entire segment down to that, but I wanted to just explain why.
	Lord Nerevar, the Labour thing follows on from what I said about the far-right.
	Labour can see their whole platform is threatened by the disgraceful policies in regards to immigration and wokery.
	They need to concoct a new image which embraces patriotism And disavows their previous leader in order to regain the voter base they lost by being traitors.
	But it doesn't mean they're going to simply give up on the treason they want to commit.
	They are a dangerous force and not to be taken lightly.
	Can I just read this comment?
	Sorry, you're absolutely right.
	Omar's got a great comment here.
	Here's the problem, Carl.
	Their hands are tied.
	How do you depress wages, fracture community bonds, and expand money laundering and maintain a housing bubble without unfettered immigration?
	Infinite waves of foreigners are part and parcel of increasing my stock portfolio.
	Rishi, probably.
	Exactly.
	I mean, they know what they're doing.
	They must know what they're doing.
	Well that's why I put it down to malice, because from their own perspectives it's self-interest, but from the perspective of everybody else who doesn't share their self-interest, it's completely malicious.
	Yeah.
	But they do think they're doing good.
	They do think that.
	They're just really stupid.
	They think they're doing good for someone.
	Yeah, that's true.
	They think they're doing good for someone.
	That's a great frame.
	ShakerSilver.
	Looking at Starmer from the low-resolution left-right view is what is confusing you about his motives.
	Instead of taking on the elitist populist lens will make you better understand why his managerial positions aren't bringing Labour further right.
	It's returning it's true to the more elite form of Labour under Blair rather than Corbynism.
	Well I am already aware of that, that's why it's Blairism.
	Yeah.
	It's not Corbynism.
	He's totally right though, that's exactly what's happening.
	Yes, Angel Brain.
	That devolved England idea means we'll almost instantly get a bunch of little Caliphates across England.
	Great idea.
	That's true, but we could also get a bunch of little far-right Caliphates.
	The Calum-fate will rise.
	Yeah, exactly!
	I mean, you know, it'll be better than not having it, I suppose.
	Derek Power says, if the last decade or way more has demonstrated it is possible to both be stupid and evil.
	That's fair.
	Yes.
	I agree.
	On to the mosquitoes.
	What do people think about the mosquitoes?
	I'll read some of these.
	These are great.
	Oh yeah, of course.
	George Happ says, now when I'm killing mosquitoes I'll be fighting the globalists.
	Thanks, Bill Gates.
	And Ron Swansea says, I'm sick of Bill Gates putting mosquitoes in the swamps that are turning the frickin' Floridans malarious.
	Which is, yeah, exactly.
	I'm just so, so tired.
	Yep.
	Of everything.
	Yep.
	Should I go through a few more?
	Yeah, yeah, go through a few more because my things only load up a couple of times.
	Baron from Warhawk says, "Soon Bill Gates will reveal that releasing swarms of malaria-carrying pests is part of his plot to take over the world and rename himself Mosquito Man.
	Only Mark the Lizard Zuckerberg can save us by eating all of Bill's minions." Mosquito Lord to you, actually.
	Oh yes, apologies, apologies.
	Robert Longshore, imagine not wanting your children to suck from the tit of the government for their whole lives.
	I think that was more in relation to my segment, but very true.
	LaFrenchIndependenceFromTheUS says if you release them in Africa, they will quickly reach Europe, especially as the climate of Europe gets warmer.
	Probably.
	Maybe.
	Maybe.
	Kobe Comstock says, The anti-immigration fantasy is the idea that the Royal Navy, the police, and the Home Office would do the job and immediately arrest and deport the invaders back to France where they came from.
	It is a fantasy.
	God, I do fantasize about it every single day.
	It is a fantasy because no one in these institutions has an incentive to do that and no one will be punished for not doing it.
	Totally true.
	Possibly.
	I think that comes from the unions and also from the people at the heads of these institutions.
	I think most of them are mainly just there to try and do what they think is best and try and help the country.
	Why else would you become a police officer if you don't have some feeling that you want to help people, right?
	I assume that's why they do it.
	And so if you put the people in power, if you strip out all of the wokeists and put in people in power who will motivate them to do the right thing, I think they will do the right thing.
	Fingers crossed.
	Fingers crossed.
	Yes.
	And with that, that's all we've got time for.
	So thank you very much for watching.
	Once again, if you can make it in about an hour's time at 3.30 UK time, we have the Rumble live stream where Connor and Carl will be talking about whether the COVID vaccine is the mark of the beast.
	Should be fun.
	Yes.
	Stick around for that.
	Until then, we'll see you tomorrow back at one o'clock.

▲