All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 27, 2023 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters
01:30:50
The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #750
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Heeders.
Today, it is Wednesday, the 27th of September of the year of our Lord, 2023, and it is episode 750.
Today, we are joined by Lewis Brackpoll.
Hello.
Nice to have you back, Lewis.
Thank you.
And we're going to talk about New York being defeated by buses.
Exactly what you've heard.
A very British non-crime and Ibram X. Kendi after the money?
Question mark.
Now, before we start, Lewis, you've been with us several times, but do you want to tell people where people can find you?
Of course, yeah.
Thank you once again for having me back.
I love being here, so it's great to be back.
You can find me on Twitter, that's Lewis underscore Brackpool.
You can find me there where I, of course, just Post whatever these days.
You can find me on Instagram under just Louis Brackpill.
And you can also find me on YouTube if you want to check out some of my video content, which I talk politics, culture and agendas, which is all very fun.
Great.
I must say that I really liked your segments on Lampedusa.
Oh, thank you.
And I'll check out more of that.
Nice one.
Thank you very much.
Great.
Now, before we begin, we have an announcement to make.
Tomorrow you should join us for Lads Hour number four.
On the Reddit question that Harry stages and he's going to be joined by Charlie, Nick, Connor, and Rory.
So check it out tomorrow, five o'clock UK time.
It's going to be live at 3 PM.
Sorry.
Okay.
I got a bit confused.
That's all right.
Right.
So we are going to talk about New York City being defeated by buses.
Have you ever heard the city being defeated by buses?
No, I haven't.
This is a first, being completely defeated by buses.
Sounds intriguing.
So I'm looking forward to this.
Yeah.
So we have, you know, Godzilla versus Kong, Mega Shark versus Giant Octopus.
And here we have New York City versus Republican buses.
Cool.
Republican buses won.
Now, when it comes to illegal migration, you could say that the southern border of the U.S.
is something like the Mediterranean in Europe.
This is the main area of migration flow.
So, for instance, the U.S.
from Mexico and other countries in, let's say, Latin America or a different one, they enter through the Southern border, and in Europe we mostly have areas through the Mediterranean.
We have Gibraltar, we have Lampedusa in Italy, we have Greece and the Greek Isles, and also we have the road from Bulgaria to the rest of Europe.
Now, for some time now, there has been a US-Southern border crisis, and the Democrats, or supporters of the Democrat Party, I should say, they have denied that there was such a crisis.
Of course.
For them, it's a good thing.
Yeah.
But now we will talk about Democrats Ranting against other Democrats as well, not just against other people who oppose these policies.
They are starting having something like civil strife.
Yeah.
Internal conflict among the ranks.
Yeah.
And it is really interesting and it shows the nature of the left as being basically structured against, around the effort and the ability to blame game.
To engage in blame game.
Everyone blames everyone else.
They never assume responsibility.
I would say that this is almost metaphysical.
This is how they view things to the core.
It's never an individual's responsibility for their own actions or their policies.
It's always someone else's or an institution, another person, a structure.
It's never their own responsibility.
So, um, Up so far, up till now, people who have talked about there being a US-Southern border crisis have either been ignored or labeled as, you know, extremists.
Of course.
But now, as we said, we have supporters of the Democrat Party realizing that there is a problem with numbers.
Now, before we begin, if you would like to support us, you can visit lotusseeders.com, our website, and consider subscribing.
You could subscribe for as little as £5 a month and gain access to all our premium content.
And you could watch videos such as Symposium 37.
It's the discussion Beau, Karl and I did on Machiavelli's Discourses on Levi Part II.
And we are talking more about Machiavelli's greatest hits.
You see him here dressed like a bat out of hell, singing songs like...
I would do anything for Firenze and I would definitely do that.
Bella Italia.
And also might as well face it, you're addicted to plots.
Now, let's go here and see what happens.
And talk about problems with buses.
Now, this is an article from Daily Mail, and it says, Tensions flare over migrants in New York City.
Staten Island protesters are arrested while trying to stop buses carrying asylum seekers to shelter.
As they yell, take them back.
Footage from the scene shows protesters banging on the bus windows as they try to prevent the migrants from entering the shelter in Midland Beach.
And let us just give you an idea of numbers.
It says, Over 110,000 asylum seekers have arrived since the spring of 2022, with over, currently, 10,000 arriving every month.
And we can scroll here a bit down.
It shows some of the footage.
Yeah, it was General A.M.
We have several trending weird articles there.
I see something about Virginia candidate support collapses after live online sex sessions.
It's the most viewed category.
So what happened here is that basically Democrats have started understanding that numbers pose a problem.
Because if you remember, The Democrat Party has been, let's say, in favor of migration and open borders.
They have very much hinted that anyone who would suggest otherwise is an extremist and someone who does not have a place in their society.
But it is interesting to see that right now, when they come across and when they encounter the consequences of their own policies, they don't like it.
How does this seem to you?
Well, I'll tell you what, it's an interesting development because, like you mentioned, Democrats are usually for open border policy.
So to see Democrats within their own party having that sort of tug of war with this subject, I think is a good thing.
Because it shows that actually there are some sane people within the Democrat Party that actually want to address the issue, forbear it's taken them this long to realise.
And of course it happens in a Democrat city.
So if it would have been in a Republican state, we probably would have seen a different answer.
But because New York being a very, very liberal state, we're going to of course see the conversation open up a little bit more on the Democrat side.
But that's just my view of it all.
I think that to a very large extent they are trying to give a different interpretation of the situation, because it's not like they started saying suddenly there's a problem with numbers, therefore Republicans were correct.
Yeah.
They blame the federal government for not giving a response to that because they're saying that these, let's say, issues need a response from the federal government and the federal government does not give such a response.
But they would not suddenly turn and claim that, well, we need closed borders now.
They would argue for something different, I think, that they would argue for a different distribution of the migrant influx across the states.
I've seen as well the blame being shifted to sanctions.
I believe AOC, I think, spoke about that briefly.
She did, yes.
And said that we should look to, I believe, lift sanctions.
I'm not sure if that's 100% correct.
But she says if we just stop sanctioning Mexico, for example, or Southern America.
Venezuela.
Venezuela and other places, then we wouldn't have this issue.
And it's like, it's not as easy as that.
Well, every socialist country like Venezuela, for instance, or a country that has a centrally planned economy, it's always one step away from utopia for people like AOC.
And the whole reason Why the utopia has not materialized is to be traced outside that country.
It's always something external because God forbid, who could ever say that... Oh, it's my policy that made this happen.
Yes.
So I am willing to consider that there are people who are, let's say, between the swing voters, who are in the swing voter category, who will wake up to it.
I am not I'm positive on that when it comes to the leadership of the Democrat Party.
But yeah, I mean, of course.
So let's see here.
Colin Ragg says, Justin, New York City is gearing up to pay over $1 billion on just hotels over the next three years to house illegal migrants.
Good.
That's what happens when you call yourself a sanctuary city.
But that's just the hotel costs.
New York City Mayor Eric Adams estimates the total cost of the migrant crisis will be about $12 billion over the next three years.
We're past our breaking point, he said.
With more than 557,300 individuals currently in our care on an average night, it amounts to $9.8 million a day.
Almost $300 million a month.
and nearly 3.6 billions a year.
Residents in New York City have had enough.
In the video below Staten Island, locals were arrested for blocking migrant buses.
So this is terrifying numbers.
Huge, hugely terrifying.
And, you know, you compare it with our situation here in the UK.
I mean, it's a pond to an ocean, really, if you compare the situations.
But the situations is the same issue, which is, well, I mean, it's unsurprising, put it that way.
Our overlords seem to be, well, for me...
I don't know what your take is on this but for me it seems to be almost by design at this point and it's just being allowed to happen but at least there is a conversation opening up.
I think there is one and it is allowed to continue for several reasons but I would say most of all is cheap labor.
Sure.
I think this is the main reason.
Yeah.
Yes.
And this is a bit frightening because think of not wanting this, of being against it for several reasons.
And also you cannot just say that numbers don't count.
Of course.
I mean, suddenly if, let's say, let's say if 10 billion people, that's of course hypothetical.
Sure.
Just try to make their living in Lampedusa.
Lampedusa would be stifled, it would not happen.
So numbers definitely count.
- Of course.
- Okay?
- Yeah. - And it's good to exaggerate sometimes when we're trying to get across to people who may consider themselves in the swing voter category, and they are constantly fed up with the idea that anyone who would suggest otherwise is someone who should not be, who has forfeited their rights to live, to breathe or whatever.
This is total nonsense, and we should resist it, I think.
Now, but imagine this, that suddenly there is a necessity, or a perceived necessity, it is communicated as a necessity, to pay billions of dollars.
Let's say 10 billion, 11 or 12.
Let's say 10 billion.
Where is this money going to come from?
And who is going to pay?
It is either going to come from a direct tax or from an indirect tax.
Again, printing more money by the Fed.
That's why a lot of people, including myself, are really starting to see that it could potentially be by design and that it's just being orchestrated and it's just being allowed to happen.
So it's understandable.
And let's see the next clip, please.
Yes, we have here, this is Eric Adams, Mayor of New York City.
Let's hear him.
We've turned this city around in 20 months.
And then what happened?
Started with a madman down in Texas decided he wanted to bus people up to New York City.
110,000 migrants.
We have to feed, close, house, educate the children, wash their laundry sheets, give them everything they need, healthcare, And this team here, we stated, let's do everything possible before we have to push it out into neighborhoods and communities.
Month after month, I stood up and I said, this is going to come to a neighborhood near you.
Well, we're here.
We're here.
We're getting no support on this national crisis.
And we're receiving no support.
And let me tell you something, New Yorkers.
Never in my life have I had a problem that I did not see an ending to.
I don't see an ending to this.
I don't see an ending to this.
This issue will destroy New York City.
Destroy New York City.
We're getting 10,000 migrants a month.
One time we were just getting Venezuela, now we're getting Ecuador, now we're getting Russian-speaking coming through Mexico, now we're getting Western Africa, now we're getting people from all over the globe have made their minds up that they're going to come through the southern part of the border and come into New York City.
And everyone is saying it's New York City's problem.
Every community in this city is going to be impacted.
We had a $12 billion deficit that we're going to have to cut.
Every service in this city is going to be impacted.
Woe is me is all I got from that really.
This is a Democrat mayor.
Yeah.
So this is fun because and it is interesting.
I mean, of course, it's not fun because it's a it's a major problem.
But what I want to say is a bit it shows some hypocrisy, I would say.
Of course, because.
The Democrats have been pushing open border policies for so long, and then as soon as it comes to their back door, suddenly it's, oh, it's going to destroy our city.
It's like, yeah, a lot of Republicans and a lot of people on the right have been saying this for years, but you call them extremists and conspiracy theorists.
I would say that this is This is a mess.
A complete mess.
Last time I checked, the governor of Texas is a Republican governor and he's not in favor of an open border.
Abbots, I think his name is.
It's interesting that he's talking about the madman down from Texas sending red Republican buses flooding New York City.
But why should the Republican governor allow his city to be destroyed by policies that he is not in favor of and Texans are not in favor of?
So Eric Adams can converge a signal without suffering the consequences of his policies.
Now he suffers the consequences of his policies and he's blaming the Texas governor.
Well, what's funny is I thought they were pro redistribution.
So there you go.
Yeah.
Smell the coffee.
Yeah.
So I would just say that what is interesting here is that he recognizes that there is an issue with numbers.
These numbers are created by the policies that he has been in favor of, but when he encounters the consequences of the policies that he has been advocating, he just blames someone else who was against these policies.
But that's a classic.
politician move though, right?
You should never, because as a politician, to be seen as weak or incompetent is like the worst thing you could do for PR or whatever.
So to have, so for him, if he was to turn around and say, yeah, well to be fair, our entire party is very pro open borders, so it's kind of what happens, but you know, he's obviously not gonna come out and say that, so they have to shift the blame anyway.
So it's just classic political talk.
Yes, but it's also blame game, but it happens on so many levels now, because I think that it is endemic in left-wing politics due to the aversion that leftists have in general when it comes to the concept of personal responsibility.
And I mean, he has been personally responsible for advocating such policies.
Of course.
When he encounters the consequences of these policies, he blames other people.
Well, I find this weird, but there is a blaming game that occurs in so many levels.
So, for instance, you have, we can check here, for instance, this By AOC.
She's talking about sanctions against Venezuela.
Yeah.
And she's talking about the southern border.
And she is basically saying that they have been authored by Marco Rubio and that shortly after those sanctions were enacted, you started seeing dramatic increases.
Another blame game, blaming another politician.
And she also quotes herself.
She tweets her tweet.
She says, to actually address the asylum crisis, we must start with a U.S.
foreign policy and global dynamics creating it.
The broad Trump-Rubio sanctions have played a major role in driving millions of people out of Venezuela.
Serious discussions about asylum seekers should address this.
So it's Trump and Rubio's fault that so many people are flooding into the US.
Interesting.
And you were remarkably prescient before because you talked about AOC and how she was talking about Venezuela.
It's obviously Venezuela is a socialist country.
It's correct by default in her mind.
I thought it was a lovely place for socialism.
I love socialism.
And the only reason for exiting socialist countries throughout the history of the 20th century and the 21st has been External sanctions.
It's nothing internal that could possibly make people exit.
It couldn't be to do with socialism or anything of the like.
So AOC is blaming US foreign policy.
Eric Adams is blaming the federal government.
The federal government does nothing in crises that require a federal response.
And what the federal government does is basically to accuse every person who would suggest and even hint that there could be such a crisis.
Now let's watch the next clip, please, the next video.
I think it's something to watch here, how New York handles this, how the federal government handles what New York is doing, whether or not they take leadership, and how the sentiment on migrants might be changing even among some progressives or people who maybe previously were sympathetic or apathetic toward migrants.
How bringing this number of migrants into American cities might change the way some people view what's happening at the border.
Which takes me to my next question.
Can I just comment on one thing about this really quickly?
I've seen real heroes in my life.
I fought in the Battle of Fallujah.
I was in the Iraq War.
Every single day, I could not be prouder of the work that the city has been doing over the past year.
It is absolutely remarkable.
Housing now, currently, 60,000 people, 20% of them children.
That's more people than you could fit in Yankee Stadium.
That's more kids than you could fit in Madison Square Garden.
This is a lot of people that we're caring for every single day.
And in emergency management, I just want to make this one point.
In Emergency Management 101, when the local jurisdiction is no longer able to handle an emergency, you're supposed to be able to turn to the state and the federal government for help.
That's written into federal law with the Stafford Act and into, you know, you can see the history of emergencies and the way that this is the way it's supposed to respond.
We have been turning around now for over a year, looking for help from the state, looking for help from the federal government, and they're just not there.
And there's a lot of finger-pointing, there's a lot of blame, as Julia just said, but what we really need is partnership, we need solutions, and we need real leadership coming from Washington.
Again, this is someone who supports the Democrat Party, but there are two interesting things here, or many.
Let me just ask you first, what did you find interesting?
I found interesting... I'm always dubious of anyone who says, we must look to the state, or we must look to the Federal Reserve, or we must look to the government for solutions and help.
I'm always dubious of that because my views on the government may be pretty clear that I want less and I want them to stop putting their finger in so many pies, right?
So it's interesting hearing that.
I also think it's interesting, like we've been touching on throughout this segment, that Democrats are starting to actually have this conversation.
That is interesting in of itself.
But once again, You're almost too late.
You're too late.
The policy is done.
You've been drumming the drum of open border policy for so long now, and now that it's coming back to hurt the city that you love, or to hurt the city that you represent, or whatever, it's now almost like a Okay, best we do actually tackle this situation now.
It's never future thinking.
It's always find the solution in the moment.
It's never, well, what could happen?
It's always, it's happening now.
I will deal with it now.
They never try to anticipate problems.
Yeah, there's no anticipation.
But what is interesting is that, first of all, the other lady is pointing out that there are swing voters for whom this is an issue.
Oh, yeah.
And I'm sure you've seen one.
It is a bit funny video.
There's a black community in Chicago who voted 97% for the Democrats and their neighborhood was essentially a host neighborhood.
For illegal migrants and they went out and they constantly started saying, our community is being destroyed.
We have lived here for so many generations.
So, I mean, of course there is a ton of hypocrisy there, but it is an issue for them.
So the issue is that when people actually encounter.
The effect of such policies that they may want to support for virtue signaling or for whatever other reasons, they actually do not like it.
No.
And they start complaining.
I'll tell you something.
This is going to sound quite incendiary, personally, and it sounds unfair for me to say, but in order for Democrats and the left, if we're going to use these paradigms, in order for them to wake up to bad policy, you almost have to Make sure that they feel the authoritative boot in that respect.
For example, free speech.
Take that as an example.
Take this for an example.
For them to understand that free speech is for all, not just for certain people, and people are being arrested for silly things, for people being arrested for protesting mass migration.
As soon as it starts happening to them, that's when they start to realize, OK, we must actually deal with this problem.
It sounds horrible.
I don't want it to happen to anyone on the left or on the right.
But when you have a case of bad policy, a taste of their own medicine is the only way really for them to really smell the coffee and wake up and realize actually we've made a mistake.
So I'm actually glad that they're having this conversation because it's a conversation that has fallen on deaf ears for such a long time.
So to finally see Democrats actually talking about it, It's actually really refreshing.
What is interesting here is that he said that they have been raising this, but the federal government does not listen to them for years.
Interesting.
That's one thing, but I don't know if you're way too optimistic on what you're saying.
Generally speaking, I am one of the office's optimists, but I don't know exactly how they are going to integrate This issue in their own thinking how they are going to start thinking about immigration because we have the next clip from this discussion Here's also, though, the dangerous line that I want to talk about because Julia was just talking about sentiment from a lot of people who are sympathetic to migrants or maybe were apathetic in the past.
We're at a place where so many of these people want to work, want to pay taxes, that if they don't get processed, well, we end up seeing a lot of these folks in the underground economy, which would be terrible for everyone.
So you're already seeing it.
So a lot of people who are currently working in the informal economy, and I will tell you, having spent a lot of time with the people in our care, all of them, number one thing they want to do is work.
They all have a loved one.
And we have jobs.
We have jobs.
We have 10,000 homemade jobs in this state alone.
We have 30,000 hospitality jobs, 5,000 agricultural jobs upstate.
There's a lot of jobs that can be filled in New York State alone, let alone across the country.
But the folks that I spend time with in our care, All of them have loved ones back home.
It could be an aging parent.
It could be a special needs child that they want to support.
And they will do anything they can to support those folks.
And so it is critically important that not only for them, but for ourselves, that we make these investments, get them to work, and do the right thing by the people in our care.
It will be good for our economy.
It will be good for society.
It will be good for culture.
What we need to do is find a comprehensive solution.
Gosh.
Do you want me to?
All right.
Okay.
So, a bit ambiguous to think that every single migrant will want to pay tax and want to work.
I mean, for a start, let's just be realistic.
That's not the case.
That's just not the case.
I'm sorry.
That's just a utopian thought.
I hate it.
I think that this is one of the manifestations of the rhetoric that ends with AOC's point with Alessandra Casi-Cortez, where she says basically something like, all those who will engage in criminal activity will do so because their applications are not already processed.
So again, this is an extra level of blame game where it's like saying, if you are, let's say in the U.S.
and you are against Open borders.
AOC is telling you that any kind of criminal activity that illegal immigrants may enter into, it is your fault.
And I will say that this is blackmailing.
And also, we should bear in mind that Trump's Title 42 has been repealed, which was an article that allowed for fast deportation during the COVID years.
And I think that this changes the picture completely because they are presenting the issue in such a manner that does suggest that numbers are a problem, but the solution is not to start talking about safeguarding community.
The solution has to be with a distribution of of the illegal immigrant population across the state.
And I would like to end with one thing here, because it seems to me that it is important to try to talk to people who may not even consider yet, who may not agree with, for instance, hardline border policies, that there are two There are two distinct arguments.
One is to say that people who want closed borders are not monsters.
Okay?
Obviously.
Okay?
But some people don't see it.
No.
And the other is that you should want closed borders.
Now, those who are in the swing voter category, and they may not, they may not, they, how should I put it?
They haven't made up their minds yet.
And sometimes they may not know what to think.
I think they should think of it this way.
Let us try to say that wanting close borders is not monstrous.
And I was thinking it this way, because I'm trying to communicate this point across to other people, because every Western country faces this issue.
And for instance, Greece faces this as well, just like the UK and the US and France and Spain.
So think of you and your family being in a block of flats.
And someone knocks on the door and gives you a very sad story, which may be true, and tells you, please let me spend the night and stay with you here.
What I want to say is that it is human to not want to open.
Why?
Because maybe you're afraid of your children.
Now, let's see the world as an extended block of flats, and each block of flat as a country.
That is what I want to say, that it is human to not want to open The door.
Even if the other person has a difficult story, it may be true or not.
There is such a thing and there is such a place for saying that I need to care for my own and sometimes I don't want to take some risks.
Yeah, I'll tell you what, great litmus test as well.
Ask someone how many illegal aliens are there in the UK or in the US and if they get upset by the use of the language or they turn around and say, well there's none, don't waste your time.
So that's with the first segment.
I was thinking that it shows brilliantly the nature of left-wing politics.
It's all centered on blame games.
The main population is targeted and blamed for everything like, you know, things like the extinction of the dinosaurs and stuff like that.
So it's good to show how this manifests in action.
Great.
Cool.
So, we've all heard of hate crimes, of course.
I'm sure many of the viewers at home have heard of a non-crime hate incident, and for those that haven't, I'm going to just read quickly from this FIRE website, which explains about the UK's police speech and how that all works.
It says, under the 2014 guidelines, police are required to log any non-crime hate instances brought to them by a member of the public.
No questions asked.
And the guidance states the victim does not have to justify or provide evidence of their belief.
And police officers or staff should not directly challenge this perception.
Evidence of the hostility is not required.
In other words, police have no obligation to investigate the veracity of the claims and in many incidences police do not even inform those accused of committing the non-crime hate instances of the complaint against them.
We were just talking off camera about how crimes or the police in the UK have just gone down this social revolutionary path and how things have changed.
I'm sure everyone is very aware of these types of crimes or non-crimes so I decided to compile a list for this segment for you to react to and the people at home A list of five of the most absurd non-crimes in Britain for the past, say, five years.
So it should be fun.
But before we get started, however...
In conjunction with this podcast you should become a premium member of the Lotus Eaters for more content and I wanted to promote a particular analysis that coincides with what we are talking about in a way and that's how the Home Office is hiding anti-white hate crimes and aiding the cover-up of grooming gangs which arguably is one of the most important topics Do such crimes exist?
that a majority of this country are actively avoiding to talk about, which is shameful in my view.
Do such crimes exist?
How do you mean?
Crimes against white people?
Well, according to many in government and on the left, no, that does not exist, and that you cannot be racist or hateful towards white people.
So that's kind of it.
But do check out this article published by Ella Hill.
It's absolutely fantastic and it's very well written and it touches on so many important points that we need to, of course, know as depressing as it is.
So are you ready?
I don't want to spoil.
I am, but I want to ask you something.
When people are talking about hate crime, is there any other kind of crime?
Is it love crime?
What is it?
Depressive crime.
Yeah, so hate crime is to do with either a prejudice against someone, apparently.
To me, I'm a bit of a free speech absolutist.
I say a bit of, I am.
So I don't believe you should go to prison or the law should be involved with regards to hateful speech unless you are inciting violence.
You know, whatever idea it may be, the community should make up their minds on whether they deem that acceptable or not, and the law should not be involved.
That's my view on it.
I'm ready.
Are you ready for the first one?
Let's say it's crimes that have a hateful agenda behind them.
But these are so absurd that they're not even crimes, and they're not even logged as crimes.
So the first one, An Irishman was arrested in the UK, you may know this story, for causing anxiety by retweeting the Pride flag swastika meme.
Have you seen the Pride flag swastika meme?
Yeah, of course.
Yeah, that's quite a famous sort of meme.
This actually happened where police officers went to this guy's house, as you can see, to handcuff him for retweeting this meme on Twitter.
He's my delicate sentimentality.
Have you thought of me?
I mean, I think we, I think they might show it.
Let's read a bit more about the story.
Police in the UK have criticised themselves after a Dubliner was arrested for, quote, causing anxiety by retweeting a meme of a swastika made out of pride flags.
Darren Brady, 51, who was born and bred in the capital, slammed Hampshire police After he was handcuffed at his home in Aldershot on Friday, the British Army veteran served 30 years including tours of duty in Afghanistan, Iraq, Bosnia and Northern Ireland.
Footage shared on social media showed an officer who told Mr Brady he was being apprehended because his post had caused anxiety and reported to authorities.
I mean how absurd is that?
I mean what about drivers?
Drivers.
Yeah.
All of them you could say cause anxiety on other people.
True.
That's very true.
You're driving and you are cautious of what is going down.
The road and every rider should cause anxiety to you because every driver is presenting a threat, a possible threat.
It's true.
And what constitutes causing anxiety?
I mean, I get nervous sometimes if I have to go on a show or like a segment and I know that someone is going to of course either debate me or, you know, talk down against me.
Could I get someone arrested just for causing me anxiety?
I don't think so.
That's where the progressive agenda is going though.
Exactly.
It matters who is anxious.
Exactly.
Exactly.
You could say that not everyone's anxiety counts the same.
I mean, it's just absolutely absurd.
So it has made the list of the top five.
So that was number five.
Number four is next.
Keep males out of women only spaces.
A sticker picture investigated as a hate crime, not for sticking the sticker, But for taking a photo of the sticker and putting it online, I'm sure you guys have seen this, Pensioner has been questioned and given a long lecture by police for taking an image of a slogan over fears of causing harassment and alarm.
I mean, it's like progressive minority report.
It's what it is.
So they're preempting that someone may feel harassed or anxious.
What did she say there?
I'm curious to see the lady's response.
She could say, well, look at these bad people.
I'm taking a picture of it so I can go and report it.
Yeah, but even merely agreeing with.
The current thing or the message gets you into trouble.
Would you mind if we just scroll down just a little bit just so I can read the top part?
There we go.
Perfect.
Thank you.
A pensioner was questioned by police for a hateful incident after taking a picture of a sticker that said, keep males out of women only spaces.
The retired social worker was looking at a transgender flag-themed poster in Hebden Bridge, West Yorkshire, which carried the slogan, Stand By Your Trans.
Sorry, can I say something?
I've been to Hebden Bridge.
It's wonderful.
It's really beautiful.
I've never been.
It's really, really beautiful.
I think Yorkshire is beautiful in general, but Hebden Bridge is particularly good.
And it was fun because there was one lady there, really old lady.
It was all tourists.
There was one really old lady keeping it real with a free Palestine flag.
Oh yeah.
No one was paying attention.
Hebden Bridge wasn't particularly an urban center.
No.
No, keeping it real.
Keeping it real there.
A sticker had been placed on the top of a poster that said, keep males out of women-only spaces, referring to transgender women who were born male.
But the 73-year-old was left shocked when several days after she took a picture of the sticker, officers from West Yorkshire Police turned up at her home and recorded it as a non-crime hate incident.
She was shocked.
She was shocked.
She was anxious.
Ah!
There you go, loophole.
Yeah.
If only she'd have thought of that.
The women who did not want to be named out of fear of reprisal from activists told the Mail on Sunday, they gave me a long lecture about the sensitivity of the issue and how something like this could cause harassment and alarm to the community.
And the fact that the government have turned around over the previous years, even Suella Braverman has turned around and said, Police need to stop recording these non-crime hate instances.
But of course, the police in their progressive roles and their progressive hiring are continuing to record these.
So that was number four.
Let me just add to this.
I think there was a research published by Telegraph two years ago that said that around 53% of the victims of hate crime incidents are police officers.
Really?
Yes.
So the victims are the police officers?
Yes.
Interesting.
I have an incident in mind and I want to see if it's going to be one of your free ones.
We'll add it as a bonus.
Yes.
Okay, number three.
Next one.
So this is a new one, breaking the rise of the carrier bag police.
So Notts police or Nottingham police telephoned Kareen Aquina because she rejected a progressive pride flag carrier bag with the love is love motive, thereby causing the shopkeeper alarm, harassment and distress and threatening the shop's status as a trans-inclusive space.
So by saying, no thanks, I don't want your pride carrier flag, a carrier flag bag, that's caused alarm and distress to the shopkeeper who offered her that.
By the way, it's okay to shoplift, by the way.
Anxiety caused by shoplifting, it's okay, but anxiety caused by these non-crimes is not okay.
They should be tough on non-crimes.
I mean, they put themselves in such a loophole and pick all these progressive lot.
It says, in a 10-minute phone call, which we have heard, the police advised that the customer was now banned from the shop and warned that she must not hand out any form of literature in the shop's vicinity.
Yet again, the police are acting as TQI plus enforcers.
I mean, so the customer has now been banned from the shop.
And warned.
You must take pride flag carrier bags next time you shop.
If you refuse... That's one of the beauties of, let's say, freer economies.
If you think a shop has gone mental, you stop supporting it.
Exactly.
Now you're not even allowed to not support something.
So, unbelievable.
I believe the next one is number two.
And that's, if we scroll down just a little bit, Man Land's racial hatred police record for whistling the Bob the Builder theme at a neighbor.
Any thoughts on that?
Why is that?
I mean... I don't know the connection.
Okay, I can see.
It causes you anxiety.
Yeah.
Because if he's a grown-up man whistling Bob the Builder theme... I don't understand where the racial hatred theme is, to be honest.
I mean...
Bob the Builder?
I mean, what?
Let's read the story just a little bit before I make more of a judgment.
A Bedfordshire man has ended up with a police record for racial hatred after whistling the theme tune to Bob the Builder at his neighbor.
Police in Bedfordshire recorded the interaction as a non-crime hate incident, which will remain on their file for six years.
This was 2021, I believe.
The record could be disclosed to potential employers impacting the man's chances of getting a new job.
If a potential employer asks for a disclosure and barring service, i.e.
DBS check, the non-crime hate incident could show up.
So imagine you're applying for a job and they say, right, we're just going to run a DBS check on you just to make sure you're not a criminal.
I'm sure you're not a criminal.
And they go, yeah, obviously I'm not.
And then they say, oh, hang on a minute.
He's got a racial hatred.
I don't want him working for my progressive company.
Racial hatred.
They're not going to show that, oh, it's because he was whistling Bob the Builder to his neighbor.
They're not going to see that.
They're just going to see racial hatred flag up.
Oh, alarm bells.
We can't have him.
Unbelievable.
Look at the ridiculous phrase, non-crime hate incident.
It's just a non-crime I don't know if this is the phrase that the police used when they were announcing the incident, but when they are saying non-crime hate incident, they are saying basically that hate incidents are not necessarily crimes.
Yeah, they're saying that it could be crimes.
And that's the absurdity of it.
And that's why this was placed second, in my view, to the most absurd ones.
I just want to read that little bit just below the video actually.
The Daily Mail reported few other details about the crime are known, but it's just one of the bizarre cases unearthed by an investigation into the controversial practice of recording hate instances, even if no law has been broken.
I just, I don't know when this will end.
I mean, like we were talking about earlier in the other segment, until the left, or quote-unquote the left, or progressives, feel the boot of this authoritarian madness, I don't think anything is going to run a conclusion.
It's horrible to say, I don't want anyone on the left to go to jail for something as ridiculous as that, but there's a part of me that says, well hang on a minute, you've built this framework, so you should feel what it's like Before passing judgment on something like this.
It is massive hypocrisy because they have built all this tradition and they have capitalized on all that, this tradition of civil disobedience.
And now people who are disobedient and they don't like the policies that the progressivists support, suddenly they don't have a right to breathe.
No, they don't.
Are you ready for number one?
Wait, do I need a kind of psychological preparation?
Is it PGA?
It's a very, very well-known story.
Okay.
Women arrested for silent prayer.
You heard of this?
So praying inside your head.
We've all heard of this story.
I put this as the number one most absurd non-crimes.
Vaughan Spruce, I think I've said her name right.
I probably haven't.
She's the director of March for Life UK and helps support women in crisis pregnancies.
She's regularly prayed near abortion clinics for over 20 years.
This sparked a huge debate when it came out where she was arrested for simply praying in our own head in what is called a buffer zone that we have in the UK which I never knew existed actually until this particular incident happened where I believe
A buffer zone is for abortion clinics to stop any protests or to stop any sort of, I think they class it as some kind of ASBO, which is like anti-social behavior, sort of laws against anyone trying to do that.
And standing outside of the abortion centers and just thinking about things or praying And I think there have been many such stories.
It's not the only one.
I mean, I want to get your thoughts immediately.
You know this story, right?
Yes.
And I think there have been many such stories.
It's not the only one.
I just think it's ridiculous.
I mean, what's more to say?
And that is one of the main issues with culture wars, because usually I like going to the meat of the issue.
There is no meat there.
It's just nonsense.
Yeah, absolutely.
But it is dangerous nonsense.
It is dangerous nonsense.
That's the problem.
The problem is that we can laugh with nonsense, but when it becomes dangerous, it's a problem then.
It's not so funny anymore.
And I would say that I don't see how it can end.
Because for me, progressivism and minority groups and pressure groups, they are basically a feature of divide and conquer by politicians.
Yes.
The politicians who think that they have lost touch with the will of the people and what the people of their own countries want, they do want to change the mix of the electoral system and of the population who votes, and they want the political support of more people.
That's why they want to change the mix.
And a way of Constantly playing one group against the other with obviously incompatible groups.
Yeah.
Is a way of ensuring chaos.
Yes.
But also in the population.
Yes.
Helping for extra domination.
Of course.
Because suddenly everyone is afraid to speak.
Suddenly anyone is afraid to criticize things.
Yes.
And what is unbelievably worrying is if we bear in mind the kind of anti-free speech laws that are being pushed forward in Ireland.
Right now yes if that could that could definitely happen here where they constantly say that it is not just the possession no it's not the dissemination of within quotation marks hateful content.
But it's also the possession of it that should be penalized.
Well, we already have the Communications Act of 2003, which can prosecute anyone for holding grossly offensive material on devices.
So if you have like a spicy meme, you can be fined.
I mean, that's how they got Count Dankula.
I think everyone knows Count Dankula on this show.
It's worrying.
It's worrying.
What we should have done in this country is repealed back Tony Blair legislation, and the Tory government has had 13 years to do so, but they have not done it.
They've done nothing.
So, I don't hold my breath that this is going to go away anytime soon.
As much as, you know, some of it is very comical because it's so absurd, this is the point of it, it's also a realisation of we're in some deep Yes, it's a problem and I would say that this is exactly why discussion and disagreement and debating is important.
So important.
And the people who want to talk about hate speech and constantly invent categories like hate crime and whatever, they have the presumption of infallibility.
They think they know everything and anyone who would dare question Their views should basically not be allowed to exist or have any rights.
Yeah.
Anyone should be placed in jail.
And I want to say that one thing that is unbelievably pernicious, and I will tie this back to the main point of your segment, is that the category of hate crime is an invention by the police, by a police that has been changed from within, bureaucratically.
Yeah.
And is not concerned with the public good as much as with virtue signaling.
And this creates a problem because lots of serious crime is on the rise.
Like murder, burglary, drugs, shoplifting.
All these are really important crimes.
And the police needs to show some data that they are doing something.
So they have invented this silly category, the hate crime, to look as if they're doing more than they're actually doing.
So they're saying we're tough on crime.
And when you ask them, what is crime?
What is exactly the type of crime?
Oh no, hate crimes.
Pulling people off Twitter, arresting people for saying mean things.
Arresting people for praying.
Arresting also, uh, 16 year old autistic, uh, drunk children for... Oh, yes.
For saying, you look like my nana lesbian and dragging them out of the house as if... I'm laughing.
I'm laughing.
It's not funny, but you know, it's just so absurd that we sometimes just have to laugh.
But, um, that's me.
Thank you very much.
No worries.
Now, Ibram Kendi after the money question mark.
Now, do you know Ibram Kendi?
I'll be honest, I've heard of this guy's name before, and I think I've seen him float around on Twitter and things like that for some of the most absurd things that he's said in the past, but I think this will be a little crash course for me on this segment.
Okay, so do you know who Henry Rogers is?
Henry Rogers, no.
Okay, Henry Rogers is Ibram Kendi.
Okay.
But he changed his name.
Oh right, okay!
Because...
I don't know.
It has been suggested that Henry Rogers doesn't sound very exotic.
Right.
Okay.
And he wanted to make several claims about the history of racism in America, in the U.S.
specifically, and he is known for the idea of anti-racism.
Okay.
Have you heard of that?
I have heard of anti-racism, the idea that you simply cannot, you have to be actively anti-racist to be anti-racist.
Yes.
So he has put it very succinctly when he says, the only remedy to racist discrimination is anti-racist discrimination.
The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination.
The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination.
Right, so you have to eradicate racism by getting rid of racism that hasn't even been racist yet.
Yes.
Okay.
Great logic.
Actually, I think it's just a way of saying, listen guys, I want to be relevant.
I constantly want to be relevant.
Give me a grant and I'll make something up.
I'll make something up.
I constantly want to be relevant.
Yeah, of course.
Things can never be solved on that front.
You constantly need someone, an expert on race, to talk about things.
So basically, he seems to be racist.
He seems to be saying that the only way to cure racism is by being anti-racism.
And anti-racism seems to be everything that racism is supposed to be.
It's just when people put the anti-clause in front of something, they frequently do the same thing.
So for instance, take the history of communism.
When people put anti in front of imperialism, or they were actually doing imperialism in the name of something different.
Yeah, it's just a change of definition.
Yes, and they could say that, well, I mean, we haven't reached Utopia yet.
We cannot act our ideals.
So we are in a capitalistic context.
We need to get our hands dirty in order to climb the ladder and throw it away once we climbed it and Utopia will just kick in.
And it all intertwines, all of this anti-racism stuff.
Yeah, so beware when people put the anti-clause in front of things, because usually it's more of the same.
Now, Ibram Kendi, a.k.a.
Henry Rogers, has written books like Stamped from the Beginning, How to Be an Anti-Racist, and How to Raise an Anti-Racist.
The quote, the main quote I have to mention before is from How to Be an Antiracist.
It's from 2019.
So basically, by 2020, he catapulted into fame, and he started the The Anti-Racist Research Center at Boston University.
He was involved, I think, in the American University, then in Florida University, where I got them mixed a bit.
And then they gave him a position at Boston University, and he leads, basically, the Anti-Racism Research Center.
You must be on a few, Bob, then.
Yes.
A lot of people say that he is one of the most virulent people who talk about racial animosity.
It's funny you mentioned, was it, you say he rose to fame in 2020?
I think in 2019.
2019?
2020 especially.
Okay, I was going to say, it's 2020 of course, we saw the rioting from Black Lives Matter all over America.
So, pretty well timed.
Yes.
Indeed.
And they were saying that he wants to be one of the major faces in that movement.
And one of the only rivals is Nicole Hannah-Jones of the 1619 Project.
And basically, the idea is that any kind of racial Disparity, any kind of disparity between races is to be blamed on white people, on racial discrimination.
Okay.
Yes.
So anything, anything that you find to be different, any kind of disparity between different races is an outcome of racist policies.
Okay.
So white supremacy.
And this is the, this is the axiom.
Okay.
That's the axiom.
My brain's going to be mush by the end of this.
So basically, do you have a good grasp of what racism is or what anti-racism is?
I'd like to think so, yeah, in the context of what it means.
Yeah, but I see you're white.
Ah.
And you have this whiteness and you need to atone for it.
Ah, I see.
So I can't talk about racism because of my skin color.
Yes.
Right.
So basically you need to listen to Ibram X Kendi defining racism.
This is an oldie but goodie.
I want to hear this.
Unless I missed it, which is possible.
I didn't hear your personal definition.
Is there one that you would offer us?
Like, how do you define racism?
Sure.
So racism, I would define it as a collection of racist policies that lead to racial inequity that are substantiated by racist ideas.
No, no.
No.
Sure.
A collection of Racist policies that lead to racial inequity that are substantiated by racist ideas.
And anti-racism is pretty simple using the same terms.
Anti-racism is a collection of anti-racist policies leading to racial, anybody want to take a guess?
Equity that are substantiated by anti-racist ideas.
What?
Just look.
Awkwardly laughing.
Um, thank you for this.
It's the most comprehensive talk I've seen on racism in my whole life.
I really appreciate you.
No.
How dare you question it?
This is a hate crime.
Yeah, this is a hate crime.
Yeah, this is a hate crime.
To be honest, like, it's unsurprising.
It's unsurprising.
To try and stay relevant, you have to just start adding in jargon in order to make yourself sound intelligent, and you're already trying to put a front on.
There's an extra thing though.
First of all, he doesn't seem to be given a definition.
He says racism is racist policies, racist people who have racist ideas and they put forth.
So at no place did he define racism.
No.
And I think that's an example of putting progressives on the spot.
Yes.
It's a good example of someone calling someone out and saying, what does this mean?
And then you realize, hang on a minute, no, I don't know what it means.
So I'm just going to make it up and we need to do more of that.
But I want to add something that very few people have added.
In fact, I mean, I haven't heard anyone talk about it, but I'm just saying it because there may have been people talking about it.
He doesn't give a definition and maybe, you know, he doesn't have one.
But what he says is actually showing something weird, because this is a circular definition.
It's when the term you define appears in the statement that you use to define the term.
This can happen in some cases, like for instance, when you talk about what is power.
Sure.
Some people say power, to have the power to do something is to have the ability, to have the ability is to use the skill, to have the skill is to have the capability.
And asking what is to have a capability?
Well, it is to have the power.
That's a circular account of what happens.
And it usually happens when we are taking something as a fundamental element of the universe.
So this sounded a bit weird and I'm not on something, don't worry.
On the one hand, it can be seen as profoundly stupid because he didn't give a definition.
On the other hand, it may show that he thinks that racism is an integral and essential part of the universe.
This is actually what his type of thinking conveys.
Racism is just, it's everywhere around us.
It's a basic, it's a force like, you know, the forces of good and evil.
Racism is just essential for the universe.
I've noticed the conversation with progressives.
Say you have a road or a motorway that you want to go from A to B, and they just start chucking up cones and hurdles and everything for you to somehow get out your car, jump over, move it around.
It's just, it's catching, they're going to just catch themselves out with this nonsense.
So going back to what I said about calling this stuff out and asking for definitive definitions, there's one thing that I noticed that I need to address as well from that video.
I've noticed people doing this, okay?
What is your definition of something?
What is your definition?
That's got to stop.
It's the definition, not your definition.
It shouldn't be an idea of subjectiveness.
It should be objective.
This is the definition we all agree.
It shouldn't be, what's your definition of racism?
No, it's the definition.
I'm sick and tired of hearing it.
Excuse me, it actually really annoys me because we've seen this language change time and time again for the last couple of decades and it just gets so annoying and this segment is going to really annoy me by the end of this.
So I must say on this that I don't think this can happen because language is very fluid and people use terms all the time in different ways.
Sure.
But I do think that what is important is to constantly try and confront people with their use of terminology and tell them in what way do you use this term.
So when you want to talk about racism, what do you mean by racism?
When you want to talk about liberty, community, what do you mean?
Because that should be a rigid answer.
What is racism?
You should be able to just say, yeah, not saying racist policies and yeah.
It should be just rigid.
It means prejudice against someone for their skin color.
Done.
So let's say that he's not an idiot.
Let's grant that assumption.
And he actually thinks that racism is built into the universe.
It's a fundamental element and dimension of the universe, like time or space, for instance.
Okay.
What if such a person came and told you, give me grants to conduct research on how to win racism?
Wouldn't make sense, would it?
How to win racism.
Yeah.
If he thinks that it's a fundamental... Yeah, you can't... It's like, if by his logic, it's the same as trying to... Right, well let's beat time.
That's the logic he's going with.
So, impossible.
So, he is behind this Center for Anti-Racist Research.
Right.
It says, it has here the statement, be anti-racist.
Yeah.
And he was here, this is the anti-racist and systemic racism.
Right.
Anti-racist research.
Right.
What are they researching exactly?
This is exactly the major question.
This is what makes it very funny.
Okay.
And you found out what they're researching?
No, I don't know.
Because there is no research.
I mean, but that is the issue.
That's the absurdity of it.
There is no research.
I mean, when you research things, you need to have an open mind.
You are searching for things.
You are searching for answers that you don't think you have.
But this person obviously has all the answers in his mind.
He has already decided that every racial disparity is sourced, is to be traced back at racial policies.
Right.
He has already figured out in his mind that anyone who disagrees with him is a racist and he should be an anti-racist.
So what's there to research?
Does he mean everyone is racist?
Like every race is racist?
Or is it a particular race that is always racist?
I think that is the idea.
The latter.
The latter is definitely an essential feature of the rhetoric.
I would say that the former could come in handy.
Let's say you have some colleagues and you're researching with them things that you already think you know the answer to.
Okay.
Telling them that they are against the cause, that they are against the right side of history could come in handy, especially when you're running and administrating a center.
Now, speaking of that, you could visit a website.
Speaking of, you could say, sorry, Stelios versus technology.
You could visit the website lottoceders.com and you could subscribe to our website for just five pounds a month and watch all our premium content.
And you could have, you could have access to brilliant discussions such as the one on cults part one that Josh, Bo and myself did on cargo cults.
That's cool.
It's a very interesting conversation.
That's cool.
Yeah.
So they worship Western goods, airplanes and boats that sprung up in response to contact with European civilization.
Interesting.
I won't say more.
Check it out.
Nice.
Right.
So let's see here.
Before we talk a bit about this, let me just say, isn't this the exact person you think is cut out to administrate a research center?
I mean, if there's any person in the world who should conduct research, it should be this guy.
I mean, he gives such great definitions, so I'm sure his research will be simply accurate and cannot be fact-checked.
And he has an open mind.
He doesn't have all the answers yet, so you bet that he'll be objective.
So we have here a tweet by Christopher Rufo that says, Ibram Kendi's anti-racism center is collapsing.
He hired a bunch of left-wing academics that produce almost no research, but complained that he was exploitative and forced them to work too hard.
Now he's laid off nearly half of the employees and they're trashing him publicly.
Interesting.
Okay.
Now, this is weird, but I want to say that I read an article here by the Daily Free Press.
There is tons of articles, but all of them go back to this one, and it's just lovely.
Okay.
So, it's a long article.
I will share some of the main key points, but let's see here this.
So, Boston University hired Ibram X. Kendi to lead its new Center for Antiracist Research in 2020.
Three years later, after at least $43 million in grants and gifts, and what sources say has been an underwhelming output of research, the Center for Anti-Racist Research laid off almost all of its staff last week.
Do you know what I think happened?
What?
They sort of went, hang on a minute, this is a load of nonsense we're researching.
Well, we've got to give them something.
So they've just delayed that for so long.
I don't think they brought themselves to that conclusion.
I must say, honestly, just think of people who would give 43 million people for research to someone who already knows all the answers.
And then they have the nerve.
Honestly, I don't know if sentimentally I want him to get away with it.
I don't know what he has done.
There are plenty of allegations.
I'm not making any statement.
Obviously, that's why we have the question.
I just want to know what their research... I don't want to know what their day-to-day is.
Yeah, what would you expect?
You know, like, people make, like, day-in-the-life of whatever.
I want to know, like, a day-in-the-life of a anti-racist researcher.
Today, we looked on Google.
Like, you know, I want to see that.
I want to see what they're doing.
Multiple former staff members allege that the mismanagement of funds, high turnover rate, and general disorganization have plagued the center since its inception.
Oh.
Okay.
High turnover rate here is the funniest thing.
Yeah.
Because allegedly you have this idea of let's fight meritocracy because meritocracy bad.
Yeah.
But he has a very high turnover rate.
Oh yeah.
It's always the ones that shout the loudest that can't seem to get it in order in that respect.
They feel they have the need to take the attention and divert the attention away from their... Of course, their incompetence.
The $43 million, according to 2021 budget records obtained by the Daily Free Press, includes general support, such as the $10 million from Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey, as well as donations for specific projects.
Interesting.
So someone from Twitter, a co-founder, literally gave Kendi $10 million for research, for conducting a research That basically, the answer there is already.
These people have already decided that all racial disparities are caused by racial discrimination.
And that they have already built a framework with anti-racism and how to be.
So there is nothing to research, honestly.
Those of you who gave him money.
Just this level of stupidity should be illegal.
I've got nothing to say.
I'm lost for words.
We have more donors here.
The document, which is not an all-inclusive list of donors, also lists TJ Maxx's foundation, Stop and Shop, and Peloton as donating over a million dollars.
Wow.
So here he says things like, my hope is that it becomes a premier research center for researchers and for practitioners to really solve these intractable racial problems over time.
Well, the best person to do this is either a person who can define racism or a person who thinks that basically racism is inherent in the universe and cannot be solved.
Again, congratulations for giving this person money for research.
And we have other stuff here.
So there are multiple allegations.
People who are laid off, they are blaming the culture of mismanagement, mismanaging funds.
They're saying things like, um, Kendi wasn't good, wasn't cut out to be the best administration, administrator.
And let us say here, go here on the layoffs and funding somewhere.
It says here, let me find it somewhere.
He got to leave.
Got a leave of absence.
I can't find it here.
It doesn't matter.
Just read the article.
It's just brilliant.
Oh, I see.
Sentence was postponed until Kendi, who was on leave as of July 31st.
Yeah.
I mean, he had to take a break from research when you're researching things.
Researching nothing.
Yeah.
You have to take a break as well.
OK, so there are multiple allegations about mismanagement of funds, about bad treatment of people.
Maybe they weren't on the right side of history.
Doesn't sound good.
Okay, Tim Crowley here.
Tweet.
Dr. Ibram X. Kendi was an academic rock star after all.
When you hear an academic being called a rock star, Judith Butler is another often described this way, it's pretty much a red flag.
Yep.
Never heard of such a thing, an academic rock star.
Well, it's about treating them like.
Oh, I see.
I think that, for instance, if you think how people treat rock stars in a completely sentimental way, there are people who completely shut their minds, completely shut the reason when they listen to people, because reason is a bad thing, apparently.
It's a colonialist residue or something.
You shouldn't.
Just let your emotions take over.
Let your emotions conquer you.
We have here, Boston University is investigating Ibram Kendi's anti-racism center following allegations that he mismanaged grant funding, failed to deliver key projects, and unleashed employment violence on staff.
Employment violence?
Well, this is, I mean, this is, again, allegations, and I am willing to say that when you are So much into this idea of psychological harm.
I really don't know what to make of that.
I mean, literally anything could count like violence when you are so woke.
That is quite the allegation.
That's very serious.
The mismanaging grant funding is also funny here because the allegations are saying that the research output of that center is really poor.
Which I think was kind to be expected.
So I kind of want him to get away with it because it's a kind of Darwin's revenge.
Right.
Got you.
Okay.
Next one.
Here we have Philip Copeland is one of the major collaborators.
He was saying that Boston University needs to explain how one of its premier centers ended up in this situation and how mass layoffs are anti-racist.
Oh, really?
So mass layoffs are anti-racist?
So this is a sort of anti-racist civil war here?
Oh, I'm just...
But that is the issue.
And this is something that literally people in academic departments should take into account.
When you are employing people who have such an agenda, which is bollocks, you are also preventing other good people and people who have actually done research from getting positions, and you're destroying universities.
And then these This kind of rhetoric that you are allowing to grow will come and bite you.
So, I would laugh, but as we said before, there is such a thing as dangerous nonsense.
Now, let's go.
Next one.
We have more from the same allegations about how this was really bad practice.
Not looking good for him.
And so we have here Coleman Hughes, who I think is a really brilliant voice.
He has really interesting stuff to say.
He says, so Kendi received tens of millions in 2020, did nothing with it and alienated and mismanaged his entire stuff.
I for one, I'm shocked.
Shocked.
Yeah.
So how does all this strike you?
Again, I won't say these are allegations, but don't just see the point.
Yeah, I mean, allegations, some serious allegations in there that definitely need to be investigated.
And you know, if true, I mean, I'm not sure what the punishment is for all of that, but it's not looking good.
We need some common sense.
We do.
When you give grants for research to someone who basically tells you between the lines, just read between the lines, okay?
Read between the lines.
He tells you there is nothing to be researched here.
All there is, all that is left is for me to sell books by just constantly describing everything as being an outcome of racism.
Oh, it's interesting.
Stories of Black Lives Matter as well.
A very well-known anti-racist organization, quote unquote, that there has been, I think in the UK, it's just come out about a fraud, misuse of money.
Oh, right!
Oh, wow.
I didn't even look.
Yeah, this was just to end with this.
Oh, brilliant.
Okay.
Black Lives Matter protester admits fraud over missing donations.
Of course.
I believe it's Zahra Saleem, co-founder of the group that toppled the statue of Edward Coulson.
Right.
And she's talking here, she admitted It says here, I'm just reading from the Times, a woman who helped organize the Black Lives Matter protests that toppled the statue of the slave trader, Edward Colston, has admitted fraud after £30,000 donated by the public went missing.
This is just to... Just went missing.
Thin air.
Interesting.
Yeah.
Well, they just disappeared.
They will manifest somewhere.
Gosh.
They will manifest somewhere.
It would just, yeah, you just think of it and it would just arrive.
Yeah.
Well, there you have it.
I've got nothing else to say about that other than that story just popped into my mind.
And what do you know?
It's in the segment.
I hope you don't feel brain fried after this.
I am a little, but it's all good.
Great.
Let's go to the comments.
I love that Dan's taken a page out of my advertising book.
challenge accepted sargon sargon sargon sargon sargon sargon sargon sargon sargon I love that Dan's taking a page out of my advertising book by the way on the topic of pizza homemade stuck crust oh that looks nice yeah
I will say I want to have I want to win the pizza challenge.
For me, Friday night is pizza night.
I will cook my pizzas and they're better than any pizza that Carl advertised and other people have advertised and Phil Labonte from TeamCast is talking about.
I'll create the best pizza.
Just take my word for it.
There you go.
Right.
Let's go to the comments.
OK, excellent episode today by Ross Diggle.
Always enjoy it when you have Lewis and the Lotus Seattle's own academic rock star Stelios on.
Hey, thank you.
Thank you.
What I said before, you can make an exception with me.
Michael Maguire, off topic, whoever suggested the SS Nazi be honored in Canada is the greatest troll of all time.
They made every elected official look like a colossal fool and ass.
Yeah, it's very funny.
Did you watch the video?
Yeah, I did.
Yeah, it's outrageous.
But it's almost, it's just a meme that wrote itself.
Yeah.
So funny, just seeing liberals do something so stupid.
But it's also funny because these people are constantly talking about censoring stuff.
Oh, of course.
Yeah.
They know better.
And they had literally someone with that kind of past.
Yeah.
And they didn't even have him as a guest.
They were clapping also.
Maybe they gave him a standing ovation or something.
Conservatives were in there as well, so I shouldn't just aim at liberals with steel.
Right.
New York City defeated by buses.
Okay.
Transportation wombat.
As someone from Texas.
Good.
I'm loving seeing them contort themselves into mental pretzels because I have spent years bashing and belittling my state for saying it was a problem.
The insult of being a sanctuary city yet not previously getting the immigrant population was taking the piss by design.
Yeah.
These fools have gotten what they voted for.
I don't want to give away everything we have built over 200 years.
Our forefathers built this land and because of idiots at the top it's going to get looted and destroyed.
I understand.
I definitely understand their sentiment.
And I want to say that this, this is an issue with politicians in Washington, for instance, who they may not encounter on their day to day lives, the actual consequences of their policies.
When you don't look on the street you're walking and the street you're driving and you don't see It's filled by, you know, masses of people, mass flows of people.
It's easy to make all these, let's say, calculations of political gain and stuff.
Okay.
Ethelstan95, AOC repeating the sanctions line is not the first time I have heard that argument from a communist.
Real socialism has not been tried, has been replaced with socialism would have worked if it was not for those maddening kids and their dumb capitalism.
That's funny.
And if AOC was in Stalin's position, the world right now would be a classless society.
Of course.
Ben Cronin.
So Adam says immigration will destroy New York, but it won't destroy the USA.
He's super mega ultra nimby man.
He surely can't be that deluded.
Well, it's political cost calculation.
He understands that some people within the swing voter category who were going to vote Democrats now are beginning to rethinking of the situation.
That's where the whole game is played, is the swing voters.
Theodore Brewer.
The Democrats are the masters of nimbyism.
Vengeance is a dish best served cold.
Yeah, best served cold, definitely.
Sophie Liv.
Always funny how these people love blue politics until the exact moment the consequences hit them.
Omar Awad.
The most hypocritical, disgusting, The infuriating thing about pro-legal stances is that they'll never extend a fraction of that level of charity to our own homeless, dispossessed and struggling population.
It's literally ecophobic genocide.
I think this is spot on, and there's a reason why this happens.
It's just, when you have progressive politics and minority groups that governments want to appeal to, and they know that these groups are not compatible, for instance, you have people who are in favor of trans rights, people who are in favor of women rights, and also people who are, let's say, Very stipped into the Sharia law.
All these three groups are completely incompatible.
Of course.
The only way to put them together and convince them to unite under a common banner, the banner of progressivism, is by inventing a common enemy, which is always, invariably, the native people.
Colin Peay, you vote for these policies, you get what you voted for.
Damn straight.
Derek Power, so Eric Adams thinks he can insult most of the country and still expect to get support.
He and his predecessors have made the bet.
Go lion it.
Arizona desert, right.
Has AOC actually spent time talking to the people fleeing Venezuela?
Whenever Venezuelans are interviewed by journalists, they say they're running from the socialist regime.
She hasn't, but she thinks that it's a way of virtue signaling.
Of course.
She'll never criticize her own ideologue.
Thomas Howell, cut the Democrat mayor some slack.
New York is a powerhouse in innovation.
Look at how tiny his violin was.
And Nicholas Valentine, maybe people like Eric Adams should not have written checks for others that they themselves were not willing to pay.
I always thought New York welcomes migrants and classed itself as a sanctuary city.
They should be thanking places like Texas and Florida for allowing them to prove that.
Okay, do you want to read some of these comments?
Yeah, so Ross Diggle.
Oh gosh.
Ambivalent?
Ambivalent.
Sorry.
Apologies.
Crime would probably be my favourite crime if I had any feelings towards it.
Colin P. So, if I report Chris Packham for a hate crime in inciting violence because people don't agree with him about the crime, I think people should mass report him just for a laugh.
Not everyone's anxiety counts the same.
Yeah.
We're all anxious beings, but some people's anxiety counts for more.
Omar Awad says, now that we're part of the United Kingdom of North Korea, how long before the first family of three generations gets gulags for not rescuing the nonce flag from a burning building?
I'm sort of glad all this nonsense is so well documented.
If there's ever a regime change, there's going to be hell to pay.
Colin P says, am I allowed to hate the very idea of hate crimes?
No, you're not.
Bigot.
Henry Ashman says, did the shopkeeper say whether the rainbow carrier bags cost more than normal ones?
I can see a scam coming.
That's actually a good point.
I didn't even think of that.
Whether it would cost like 30p more, which is probably something they would do.
Derek Power, to be fair, if a company doesn't want to hire me for any non-crime hate incidents, I may have I don't want to work for them anyway Yeah, I don't blame you.
I don't blame you.
Take your business someplace else, basically.
Colin P., once again, no thanks.
I brought my own bag to help the environment.
Yes, that's the way to get around it. 100%.
Right.
Sophie Liv.
There are only two academics I will acknowledge as rock stars.
Thomas Sowell and Jordan Peterson.
Good choices.
Good choices.
And I want to add one if you haven't checked already.
Victor Davis Hanson is a brilliant voice.
He has really sophisticated analyses of situations.
Arizona, there's a rat.
I'm kind of worrying if the center is getting shut down because they're having a hard time finding examples of systemic racism that have data to support their claims.
That's what I thought.
areas where it was felt that the research output has been poor.
But on the other hand, again, there's no research because these are frequently normative claims that could just say, "Okay, I felt there was racism." Anyway, Sophie Liv, "I agree with Stelios, those who put anti in front of anything, they're probably the ones doing that thing." So anyway, Ross Diggle, Ibram X. Kendi, get rid of racism.
You have to continue it.
It's just the new kind of logic.
It just operates in a weird way.
Don't try to rationalize things.
It's racist.
Colin Peay, so a self-defining loop then.
Yep. Yep. Colin P, anti-racism is just reverse racism.
Exactly.
Lorna Ereva, I for one am shocked to see a self-professed anti-racist breaking all sorts of laws and perpetually failing upwards.
Shocked.
I'm so shocked.
Yeah.
And honorable mentions George Happ, the carrier bag incident shows that the alphabet mob don't want tolerance, but acceptance and fear.
It's also a reminder that the police are nothing more than the teeth of the state willing to enforce any garbage law.
Yes, exactly.
Couldn't have said it better.
I think fear is leading to domination and the future we're looking at, if the current trend of progressivist policies continues, is basically a state of fear of differentiating yourself by the main official narrative.
Fear is a very valuable currency for the politician because they can enact whatever they want.
OK, so before we finish, do you want to tell us again when people... Sure!
Because I really enjoyed our conversation.
Yes, same.
I think it was brilliant.
I hope you enjoyed it as well.
And let's hear where people can find more from you.
So you can find me on Twitter, where I just post any old nonsense.
That's Lewis underscore Brackpool.
And you can find me on Instagram.
Which I post any old nonsense on there as well, on Lewis Brackpool.
And of course I'm on YouTube, making my own sort of content, which I post nonsense on there too.
You just find my name, Lewis Brackpool.
Pretty easy.
Excellent.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
I hope you enjoyed our podcast and see you tomorrow.
▲
Export Selection