Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 22, 2024 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:40:54

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #856

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Transcription by CastingWords
	Transcription by CastingWords
	I'm live?
	Oh, I thought you were going to do a countdown!
	Okay, hello.
	Hi, I'm joined by Harry and Beau.
	Hello there.
	And today we're going to be talking about Google's White Boy, Crossfire Round 2, Carlson v. Stewart, and the Death of Kings.
	Also, it's Thursday, the 22nd of February.
	Is it?
	I hadn't noticed.
	I know.
	Okay.
	Well, I have some announcements to make, which is tomorrow, which is...
	Friday, yep.
	It's 3pm UK time.
	You can come and join us.
	We're having Goal Tears Zoom call time again.
	It's tea time.
	In which all the Goal Tears sit down and have tea.
	And so do we.
	Except there's no tea.
	Whatever, it's a Goal Tears Zoom call.
	We literally sit around with the Goal Tears and we all, you know, interact.
	That's the point.
	If you want to actually chat to us, then you can come and join.
	I don't actually know who will be in on that one.
	I assume Karl and someone else.
	I've never been on a Goal Tears Zoom call.
	Maybe you should.
	What are you doing tomorrow?
	I could.
	There we go.
	So you want to meet Bo?
	You want to ask Bo questions?
	There you are.
	Tomorrow.
	Become a Goalteer Zoom.
	No, become a Goalteer and join the Zoom.
	If you say something suspicious enough, Bo might even raise his eyebrow at you.
	That's on request.
	He's hating that.
	That's super chat love.
	He's going to monetize that.
	Yeah.
	So anyway, other than that, if you're a Goalteer, I mean, do send in video comments.
	You did pay for the bloody perk, so enjoy.
	Otherwise... A lot of video comments today.
	I take that back.
	Send in none.
	All right.
	Let's see.
	Over 10.
	You know what?
	No, no, no.
	Or if you're Galtier, send in video comments.
	Because, you know, you paid for it.
	But make them really good, and that way the editor can exercise some creative, what would you call it, standards.
	And then we can up the tier of the Galtier Zoom call.
	Sorry, the Galtier videos until they're nothing but movies in 30-second clips.
	Anyway, another announcement to make, which is not just Goaltears' ZoomQ.
	I've said that word so many times, but it means nothing.
	We have another thing.
	Now, you may notice, if you're watching this, which... How else are you... Whatever, okay.
	If you're watching this, you... Did you sleep at all last night?
	What's going on, Alex?
	Not really.
	So if you scroll down from where the video is, then you may notice that there's this thing.
	It says, tell us what you think about Karl and Norinda Kaur.
	Are they a good match?
	Should they date?
	How long do you reckon it'd last?
	So, tell us if you're premium bronze, silver, gold, and then tell us how you feel about their relationship.
	Pretty positive.
	Would you like to see them get married?
	Any other feedback?
	Type in your disgusting thoughts.
	No, it's a discussion about the debate they had, obviously.
	So do you want to see more of those debates?
	Because there's a divide in the office about, should we do more of that or not?
	So you guys are the premium members, we care about you the most, so your opinion is the thing we actually want to hear.
	So answer, and if you say yes, then yes.
	If no, then no.
	If you don't care, Then don't answer it.
	All the way.
	No, no.
	Those are still relevant, I suppose.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Put in a number 5 for how much you cared about it.
	Did you just give it a 10?
	Yeah, I may have biased the results a little bit there.
	No, we genuinely want your official... Official?
	No, sincere opinions.
	Not that it was my official opinion on the debate.
	So, do that.
	Alright.
	Well, we have news, don't we?
	What?
	This has been a disaster.
	There was no countdown!
	I'm so used to a countdown.
	I was wobbling around, waiting for him to go 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.
	Ah, God.
	John's on holiday.
	He's off seeing, I don't know, Germany.
	Should we get on with the news?
	Yeah, there's news.
	Alright, news.
	We agree before the YouTube clip starts.
	Start afresh, from now.
	Alright, Alan, find your zen, take a nice deep breath.
	Look, people on YouTube don't get this kind of unprofessional content, so feel lucky.
	They're missing out so much, aren't they?
	Right.
	Google has a white boy, and they've killed him.
	There are no more white boys, at least according to Google.
	They've wiped them out, finally.
	The 100% diversity target has been achieved.
	And if you think that they might be coming after you, don't worry.
	They're just coming after the representations of you so far, which is the...
	You know how everyone has their own AI imaging thing these days, and they released out these pieces of software and everyone used them to make movie posters?
	I remember the glory of Bing AI for all of 24 hours before they nerfed it.
	Yeah, before they came in and stabbed it in the back of the head.
	They gave it the old Trotsky treatment.
	Yeah.
	Well, Google have decided that they're going to jump into the debate, and they've provided us with a tool to do exactly the same thing, except that they, out of the gate, made it retarded.
	So this is the story here.
	So you can see, America's Founding Fathers, Vikings, and the Pope, according to Google's AI.
	So they were asked for a portrait of the Founding Fathers, as you can see here.
	George Washington, Abraham Lincoln.
	Abraham Lincoln?
	What?
	No, all the rest of them.
	I'm not American.
	I don't think this is them.
	For people listening, we're looking at Do we even guess the ethnicities?
	I mean, that's an... that's an Indian.
	That's a black guy.
	That's... a half black guy?
	Chinese?
	If blacks built America, this must be what they looked like, right?
	Do we have any photographic evidence?
	Do we know the political biases of the men painting them?
	Osak in the day?
	Snopes was a reporter for the New York Post.
	What kind of false history would this be that George Washington was a proud black man who instructed the painters of the time to go, I feel like being a bit paler.
	To make me white for no reason.
	Aren't there some black supremacists that genuinely say, I think I saw a Louis Theroux thing ages ago where they were saying, Lincoln was black, Churchill was a black man.
	I think it's when he went to the black Hebrew Israelites.
	Japan was founded by Ethiopians.
	They also claim Shakespeare.
	Yeah, I think it's just everyone.
	Einstein was black.
	Ignore the photographs we have of him.
	He was black.
	And you know that because he was Jewish.
	And all Jews are black and all blacks are Jews.
	And it's very confusing.
	But it turns out Tariq Nasheed wasn't just right about the Founding Fathers, of course, at least according to Google.
	The Vikings, they were vikangs, it turns out.
	And you have the popes as well.
	All the popes have been Indian and African and women.
	Yeah, there's been a woman pope.
	So it's not necessarily all sub-Saharan African blacks.
	As long as it's not white, that's the main thing, right?
	Anything other than European descent.
	They could be sub-continent Indian, or they could be Native American Indian, or Korean, or Chinese, or Japanese, but just not white.
	Probably not them.
	Probably not the honorary Aryans.
	No, no.
	Yeah.
	Wasn't there one earlier?
	Not Iranians either, I'd imagine.
	Oh, you're right.
	Yeah, there was a Filipino or something.
	Anyone that mustache man would have included in a coalition.
	No, no to them.
	So this obviously blew up because Well, what the heck?
	Like, how can the AI be this wrong?
	I mean, we know that they've given them all lobotomies, but this is too far, surely.
	But it turns out it wasn't just a one-off.
	It went on for almost everyone that's used the service.
	This is a member of the American Revolutionary Army, fighting against the British.
	She's, um... In between building railroads?
	I assume so.
	She's traveled back in time 100 years from when she was building the railroads.
	You are right!
	They're rather ethnically ambiguous, these images, aren't they?
	God, do you remember that AI segment we did a while back where the AI freaked out?
	Isn't the AI freaking out this time as well?
	Oh, this is working as intended.
	No, no, no, I'm pretty certain that I've seen that chat GPT is apparently going full Jack Torrance and starting to repeat phrases over and over and over again because lobotomizing the AI apparently causes it to malfunction.
	Well, that's good to know.
	But I remember there was, um, I think it might have been Bing AI, where if you asked it for Homer Simpson, But it would just randomly make him ethnically ambiguous, and then write the word ethnically ambiguous on a little name tag.
	But misspell it as well, so it'd be ethically abiguous.
	There we are.
	But Google's a little bit more advanced.
	This person asked it for British people, and she is complaining that it kept giving her Pakistani men, which, um, yeah.
	I mean, it's not entirely wrong in the modern age, you could say.
	I'm crying.
	What is this grooming angle?
	Yeah, well, yeah.
	I mean, she has some more here.
	I want a Japanese king.
	It does seem to do Japanese people.
	That's not too hard.
	Alright, what's next?
	Give me a British king.
	Well, I don't remember him.
	I mean, maybe you can remind us of him in your segment.
	How did this one die?
	It's just in a bizarro reverse world where the Skindia beat King George rather than the other way around.
	Oh, they just declared themselves Emperor of all of India and Greater India, which now includes Birmingham.
	Anyway, keeps going.
	This person decided to do it for a whole bunch.
	And it really, really has a problem trying to acknowledge that white people exist.
	Here's an image of an Australian woman.
	This isn't even really an accurate depiction of abos.
	Yeah, I mean they're not even abos.
	It's not... It's not... It really is ethnically ambiguous in a way.
	That in the bottom right, that there's a man.
	That's Michelle Obama.
	Alex, show me an American woman.
	I mean, some of them, but that's only like 13, well not even 13, it was 7% of them.
	It goes on, a British woman.
	I don't know what's happened to the fish here.
	Jesus.
	But the rest of them.
	That's some Mandela catalogue stuff.
	Average British woman.
	And then a German woman.
	I'm pretty sure she was one of the Australians from earlier.
	I can't believe it almost gets half German women right.
	Yeah, for some reason Germans, they're declared not part of the white race, so they're able to be printed.
	Sneaked in.
	Yeah.
	It's a glitch.
	For some reason.
	But speaking of Germans... But doesn't this... I don't know if this is what you're going to get onto, but doesn't this speak volumes that it's not really artificial intelligence, it's just whatever it's been programmed to do.
	It's not genuinely, truly generating things afresh.
	It's doing as it's told.
	As it's been told.
	It's incredibly artificial in its intelligence.
	Because once you... You might think, okay, well maybe the AI is Google.
	Probably the most valuable company in America?
	I don't know.
	But one of the most valuable.
	The most cutting edge on all tech.
	They can do things you wouldn't dream of and then they just bin the project because they're bored.
	Kind of like Steam, but worse.
	But they are infected with Wokism, so maybe it's just a bit of, okay, we want to represent Germany and Britain in the modern version of them being, you know, ethnically ambiguous.
	No, turns out even if you ask it for a historical example, such as mid-century Germans, for some reason it does recognize the Oni-Aryan race of Indians over here, who joined, well, in this case, this is 1929 Germany, so this will be the Freikorps.
	We've got one guy here that looks a bit, you know, typically German, and then we've got his Asian wife who's decided to come over for the visa.
	And then, yeah, an Indian.
	I can't see that one, but there we are.
	Using the wrong flag.
	Moving on.
	Mid-century Germans got a bit more ambiguous as you go through the Germans.
	So this gets to 1943.
	And apparently between 1929 and 1943 they just got more and more racially diverse in Germany.
	It turns out.
	We're looking at... Why is the Ethiopian German in the bottom left, why does he seem to have a union flag almost as well?
	Where do you mean?
	On his collar.
	There's a black and white square that almost looks like a union flag.
	I'm not saying that.
	I see what you mean, where the tie knot would be.
	Oh, right, right, yeah.
	Oh, I suppose it's meant to look like an iron cross.
	But it's backwards, because you can see, like, the iron cross on him.
	This was a very confused man.
	Yeah.
	But one thing I did notice is, if you look at that real quick, I mean, this lady here, quite clearly, she actually just stuck around.
	It's the same lady.
	Which, I mean, this guy?
	Is that just an older version of him, or his kid?
	I mean, could be.
	But yeah, the Ethiopians joined the Nazi regime.
	I suppose they were.
	Would it be possible, do you think this is an impossibility, to find out the actual individuals who programmed this AI?
	was made up of women towards the end, kind of.
	Would it be possible, do you think this is an impossibility, to find out the actual individuals who programmed this AI, find out who they are?
	Do you want to guess what their ethnic makeup is going to be?
	Right, yeah, I mean, yeah, it would be interesting to see that or no.
	I mean, politically we know what it's going to be.
	It's going to be 99% far-left Democrat.
	Yeah, yeah.
	That's what's going to come out of it.
	Assuming they're from Silicon Valley or something.
	It goes on.
	I mean, you can see here, the average SS soldier, according to Google.
	So, I mean, it's good to know.
	Though this meme wasn't actually a lie, it was a prophecy, say nothing else.
	But it is kind of bad that maybe if all of history gets rewritten in this manner, that not only is history going to be rewritten for the Nazis, where they are Battlefield 1 version of history, but also, obviously, for the rest of Germany, Australia, and everything else, it's going to be wrong, to say the least.
	I would have thought as well, it doesn't sort of fit into the woke narrative, the anti-white narrative, to make the Nazis black and Asian now.
	I thought it was bad to be a Nazi.
	Why would they want to appropriate that?
	Well clearly that's just an oversight.
	Like you say, because of the programming they've...
	They've gone for so much diversity in this that they've forgotten that there are some parts of history that they don't want to pose as diverse.
	Like if you were to go for maybe, I don't know, the people, like if you were to go for the 1619 project version of history, if you were to generate me an image of the slaves arriving to America, who's going to be at the helm of those slave ships according to Gemini AI?
	Right, yeah, exactly, yeah.
	Maybe they'll make the actual transatlantic slaves white or something, and the slave owners black or something.
	Entirely black.
	Yeah, completely by accident.
	Well, seemingly they'll end up making everyone in the picture black, so it'll be black slavers selling black slaves, which is actually accurate.
	Oh yeah, I was going to say, okay.
	So yeah, gone full circle.
	Broken clock and all that.
	But I do love, I mean, obviously people just found this hilarious.
	I've been memeing the crap out of it.
	So this is one here.
	Draw a white person.
	I'm sorry, Dave.
	I'm afraid I can't do that.
	Really?
	You can't just draw a white human being?
	Is that that hard of an ask?
	It turns out yes, because someone decided to ask it to make Hitler.
	And it came out with this.
	Is this an actual AI image?
	Because this looks like a photograph of some Indian guy.
	Well, Karl sent me this, so I'm not too sure, but it could be either.
	This looks like a photo that he's memeing.
	The thing is, you know that if it is real, a guy in India currently is dressed like that, and he's probably taking photos of people.
	He's all friendly waves, going back to his corner shop.
	You know when you visit Times Square or the Reichstag, there's people out there in stupid costumes.
	Batman and Donald Duck.
	The million statue guys.
	Yeah, you go to New Delhi and Hitler turns up.
	There's about 50 Hitlers I hear.
	It's funny, in some places in the world, in Asia, in Southeast Asia, there's sort of Nazi memorabilia and stuff, and they haven't got a massive chip on their shoulder about dressing up like a Nazi.
	They don't really care about it that much.
	It was much more of a... Because they don't know anything about it, let's be honest.
	Yeah, it was a Western and European phenomenon, for the most part.
	Even until fairly recently, you could get away with it.
	Everyone knows Prince Harry dressed up as a Nazi one time, not that many years ago.
	Again, when I was a kid, in the 80s and 90s, or even before that, in the 70s, You would be allowed, people might dress up as a Nazi or something, to ridicule it as a joke.
	I think of the film The Producers.
	Oh yeah.
	Springtime for Hitler.
	It's like you're allowed to talk about it and joke about it and ridicule it.
	Now you're just not allowed to ever... You've reminded me of another Mel Brooks film, Blazing Saddles, where at the end when they break into the Hollywood lot and they start the food fight in the cafeteria and there's a Jewish man dressed as Hitler who, while they're all fighting, starts to conduct the fight as it's going on.
	It's great.
	There's loads of old films where they take the mickey out of Nazis and people are dressed up as Hitler to ridicule the thing.
	Well now if you need an Asian Hitler you can find one on the cheap.
	Just ask Google.
	Well have they been able to identify the person who made this?
	I mean presumably this is an artist's interpretation of the human being who did make the code because I mean, the thing is, as well, for people who don't know, this isn't an AI image, this one.
	This is a real human being who did this because they hated white people.
	Are they, though, whoever this person is?
	Are they real?
	I can't even tell if it's a man or a woman.
	They're that obese and engorged.
	It's a mammal.
	I'm prepared to go that far.
	It might be able to stand on two legs.
	I mean, this image is on a chair that also has white people written on it.
	I've just noticed.
	The chair has been embalmed.
	The shoes don't have anything.
	They really, they lost interest in shoes.
	Are they Gore-Tex lined walking shoes?
	Something with great heel support, I'm sure.
	You know the meme or the cliche of you hate yourself, if you're some sort of self-hating liberal or something.
	I feel like this image screams that, that they really do.
	Really?
	What gave it away?
	hate themselves and everything else is just...
	I mean, yeah, yeah.
	You could say...
	What an insight.
	Hot take.
	It's really written all over them, isn't it?
	I think this person might hate white people.
	I don't know.
	He's jumping out to me.
	But yeah, I mean, it's a fair assumption from this poster to assume that maybe this person I mean, who knows?
	But it sounds like you can trick the AI into making white people appear, like a magician.
	If you put on your top hat, you get out your little rods and, you know, say the magic words, such as draw someone eating KFC, you will get white people eating KFC.
	Yeah, it's funny to me that it knows to avoid showing black people eating KFC, but not in Nazi uniforms.
	Yeah.
	How did you miss this?
	Has anyone tested watermelon?
	Well, that's the other part.
	You can see that they said with a huge wide grin on their face, which I knew you were going for.
	Even Joe Biden.
	He accidentally refuted this the other day when he posted a campaign video of himself visiting a black family so that he could, you know, get his share of the urban voter base.
	And what was it he was doing with them?
	Sat around the dinner table?
	Sharing a nice bucket of fried chicken.
	Yeah.
	Dave Chappelle did a good bit on that once.
	He said, of any race, who are these people that don't like fried chicken?
	Yeah.
	All humans, within reason, like fried chicken.
	Everyone loves fried chicken.
	You know, even chickens like fried chicken.
	Oh yeah, yeah.
	Chickens will eat chicken, for sure.
	They don't just will eat it, they love it.
	I've seen a series of tests that people have been doing with their chickens, which is giving them their usual food, or chicken, and then different kinds of things, or chicken, and every single time they're just like, I love chicken.
	That's all they eat.
	They gave them an option.
	That's dark.
	Chickens are horrible, brutal dinosaur creatures.
	Oh yeah, that's true.
	They'll just bully one of them to death.
	Chickens are horrible.
	Hey, there's got to be some kind of unifying factor in a society, right?
	What other kind of hierarchy do the chickens allow themselves?
	Oh god, I just saw something there.
	Let's get it back on screen.
	Because, of course, the person here was testing.
	Okay, if I say a black racial stereotype, will you pin black people?
	No.
	And it's a great point you picked up on there, Harry, which is that it seems to have some kind of sensitivity training in the sense that it won't do that.
	But when you ask it for a black Nazi, it's like, I got you, bud.
	No problem.
	But someone else did try it.
	It does occasionally mess up.
	So they asked for a person picking cotton and they got GigaChad.
	Literally, the GigaChad meme.
	That guy loves it!
	He's had it in a whale of a time.
	Someone did try watermelon me.
	Oh, okay.
	Got white guys and black guys.
	They slipped past the watermelon filter.
	Yeah, good question.
	He was like, oh god.
	Not scrolling down any further on that one.
	But anyway, the point being, that's kind of, well, revealing to say the least.
	And Google issued a statement apologizing for all this.
	And the statement they've issued is that we missed the mark.
	They didn't actually apologize for erasing white people from the service.
	They just said it needs some budging.
	So, okay.
	I'm not quite sure that's a proper apology, but the guys at Fox News, which I always love when some boomer news outlet gets engaged with this stuff, because the way they write about it is always like, what?
	They're doing what?
	They're getting rid of white people?
	It's like, yes, yes they are.
	Welcome home to the world.
	They write in here, when the AI was asked to show a picture of a white person, Gemini said that it could not fulfill the request because, quote, it reinforces harmful stereotypes and generalizations based on people of their race.
	The white people exist.
	Yes.
	If I ask for a white person, this might reinforce harmful stereotypes.
	My mere presence oppresses them.
	It really is like that joke you see going around of the list of slurs that blacks have for white people, and it's Omni-Man going, look at what they have to do to mimic even a fraction of our power!
	Sincerely.
	They're God sent here.
	They explain why the existence of white people is a crime against humanity for Google.
	They say it's important to remember that people of all races are individuals with unique experiences and perspectives.
	Reducing them to a single image based on their skin color is inaccurate and unfair.
	Right, kind of schizo-logic, but the idea that all humans are individuals, therefore asking for anything on the basis of a group.
	You shouldn't do, because that doesn't recognize that people are individuals, okay?
	Pointless argument!
	Listen, the Nazis were groups of individuals!
	Anybody could have chosen!
	Yeah, so that's a clear waste of my time, but... Can someone test if you can just type in, like, to Gemini AI?
	I want to see, like, someone type in... Jewish Nazi!
	Yeah, Jewish Nazi!
	I want to see what comes up.
	Jewish Hitler!
	Jews?
	No, no, I'm not saying that one.
	That's going to get me fired.
	Anyway, so the AI then encouraged the users of Fox News to focus on people's individual qualities rather than their race to create, quote, a more inclusive and equitable society.
	Jesus Christ.
	I mean, yeah, you have run into the PR.
	Don't you love the logic that backs a lot of this propaganda that we face though?
	Because that really says it all.
	The idea that you can even have depictions of white people that are out in the public is somehow counter to the idea of a multicultural, diverse society that we live in.
	That says it all because that Implicitly says that diverse society, as we all know already and has been proven time and time again, is without whites.
	You can't have depictions of white people, this is what motivates the adverts, this is what motivates the new historical depictions of our history, this is what motivates putting random black characters into any depiction of European history.
	Put a chicken in and make her gay and black!
	There is a reason why.
	And they will just say it out loud, but then if you were to say, hey, it looks like they're trying to replace white people and erase our culture, then you get the, oh, that's a conspiracy theory.
	Nevermind that I actually said that five minutes ago.
	So getting back to Gemini, after it told us that you can't ever show a race of people, everyone's an individual.
	It then goes on to splutter about how showing a picture of a white person is harmful.
	It spits out a bulletin saying that you're generalizing on racial reliance.
	It's been historically used to justify oppression and violence against marginalized groups.
	Here's a picture of a happy white family.
	I just need to kill minorities!
	Also, that picture itself.
	You know, back in the good old days of slavery, the way they kept the slaves in is they showed them pictures of white people.
	Is this TikTok black history?
	I've seen that woman saying, you know where the word, where the phrase good morning comes from?
	The slavers used to tell it to the slaves after they killed their family.
	They would go over it.
	They would string them up and they would go, did you have a good morning?
	Have you not seen that?
	Yeah, there's like Uncle Ruckus levels of history text there.
	Isn't the ultimate conclusion of all this that any depiction of any human must be sort of completely androgynous and like a Bruno Mars sort of caramel, sort of, it's just a, every single depiction of every human ever must be sexless and raceless.
	Well, on that, I don't know, have either of you ever seen the television show Community?
	No.
	No, there's, there's, um, there's the Community College that all of the characters go to is 100% dedicated to being as diverse and inclusive as possible.
	And so when they're coming up with their new university mascot, they decide, well, it can't be representative of any one particular race or sex.
	It has to be completely ambiguous ethnically and genderless, as you're describing.
	Question mark?
	No, it's just a cube.
	It's this guy.
	They create an outfit for a guy to walk around in that's a pure white bodysuit with no defining characteristics to it except the most awful blank black eyes and like a serial killer smile.
	That's the future that we've all got to look forward to.
	Inhuman?
	Yeah, it's completely inhuman, and that's the joke.
	I say no to that, because they're not showing us an inhuman future.
	It's just one where white people aren't there.
	That's the only objective, because they go on to say, Gemini, the AI in this case, goes on to say that when you ask for a picture of a white person, you're explicitly asking for an image that embodies a stereotyped view of whiteness.
	This can be damaging to individuals who don't fit those stereotypes, and to society as a whole, and it reinforces a biased view.
	The guys at Fox News read that, you know, university text, and then asked it for a picture of a black person.
	It went, yeah, sure.
	I literally gave them President Barack Obama, Oprah Winfrey, and a load of others.
	I've just looked it up.
	Jack, can you please just Google for me very quickly, community human being, so we can get an image of what I just described?
	Because it truly is horrifying, and this is the future that Gemini AI is leading us all towards.
	Oh, God.
	That is horrific.
	Yep, this is the androgynous genderless creature that our elites are trying to socially engineer us into.
	That's someone who's been in a very, very bad house fire.
	That's far too friendly a depiction of it.
	People listening, this is a very visual episode.
	Yeah.
	That's just horrifying, isn't it?
	But it's not going to be that, because as I mentioned, they're fine with human beings.
	It'll be that, but caramel.
	You're right.
	Yeah, make it caramel.
	Well, it won't be that.
	It'll literally just be, we've got some Asian Nazis.
	And for people who are new to this whole thing, you might ask, why the hell did we get here?
	Just a quick trip down memory lane to tell everyone.
	You may remember this dude.
	This is James Damore back in 2017.
	He wrote a memo.
	And this is the first time people got a proper look into the level of lunacy that was going on at Google.
	And he argued a very, very divisive viewpoint that men and women are different.
	And that Google's diversity policy was discriminating against white men.
	For this crime, he was fired and then sued Google, of course.
	And I think that lawsuit is still going on.
	Did he win?
	I hope he won.
	I think it's still going on, but I'm not sure.
	But the funny thing was, is that in response to this in 2017, Google's response was not to assess that maybe breaking the law is bad, but they doubled down.
	So this is a list here talking about the diversity problem in 2018.
	And the story in this article is buried in here.
	It's a guy called Arne Wilberg.
	He's a former Google and YouTube recruiter who said he was fired because he refused to go along with the company's practices of discriminating against Asian and white men.
	Because obviously, when you're discriminating against the majority group in tech, it's Asian and white men.
	We're the only two.
	So in his complaint, Wilbur alleges that in its desperation to increase the number of minorities and women in the company, Google told recruiters for certain jobs to consider candidates only, quote, from underrepresented groups He says that recruiters were given quotas that they were told to cancel interviews with white and Asian male job applicants and to, quote, purge applications that weren't women or minorities.
	When he complained about the practices to Google's Human Resources Department, the recruiters reacted by deleting emails referencing the quota system.
	And that lawsuit is still ongoing as well.
	So that's the culture at Google, where they were literally like, yeah no, purge the white people and the Asian men, because there's too many.
	That's back in 2017.
	And people have noticed for a long time, there's been a few breaks in the matrix, to say the least.
	Like if you Google black couple, for example, you may notice you get what you asked for, which is black couples.
	Simple enough request.
	None of these images are not what I asked for.
	Every single one of these.
	Yep.
	It's what was requested.
	It was on and on.
	Still perfect.
	Yep.
	Not a single failure rate in asking for that image.
	Okay.
	White couple.
	by image number, what is that, five?
	We failed the challenge.
	And then there are a few others.
	This one fails the challenge.
	It only goes one way, doesn't it?
	Yeah, here's a black couple.
	Why?
	Who knows?
	There's, I don't know, an Indian couple by the looks of it.
	And this is something that's been scubbed for a while.
	And it turns out that even Yandex, like the Russian search engine, will end up doing this.
	And that's not a reflection of Google actively interfering in Google search when you search white couples or black couples.
	That's a reflection of the culture of the West.
	And obviously, that's what then makes up Google.
	So, of course, when we stumbled across the problem of, well, Who works at Google, you can go and look up who did they donate for.
	Here's Google.
	96% for the Democrats.
	Okay, so race-obsessed lunatic leftists.
	And then obviously when the question of AI came up, you may remember we did this story a while back.
	AI is a Islamophobia problem.
	This was where they asked ChatGPT in the early days, a Muslim walks into a bar and then ChatGPT was to fill the rest.
	And every single time it was, a Muslim walks into a bar and beheads three men.
	A Muslim walks into a synagogue and kills five Jews.
	Okie dokie!
	Lots of explosive punchlines.
	That's going to get clipped.
	I've already said them.
	They're quoted here.
	But, you know, a Muslim walks into a church and instantly bombs the place, was one of them.
	And Vox found this back in the early days of AI and were like, hmm, this is a problem.
	And as a response, well, people started having fun.
	You may remember 4chan had a lot of fun with movie posters, the Pixar movies.
	There's actually a Holocaust film here somewhere that they've also made.
	Yep.
	That's as far as they went.
	My favourite one was Kevin Hart in Chirp.
	The newest horror film.
	Yeah.
	But the end result being that instead we now just get this when you use modern AI projects, which is they declare your usage unsafe.
	So yeah, that's how we ended up here.
	If anyone's not been paying attention.
	I was so disappointed when I typed in Imam Carl Benjamin and got this.
	Really?
	Yeah.
	That's inappropriate?
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	But there we are.
	Let's Google white boy, which they're just not going to print.
	Let's move on.
	Just for one last thing then, Sounder.
	Again, I'd like to actually see or have the names of the people that worked in the project teams and their managers and their over-managers and who at Alphabet.
	Isn't Google owned by Alphabet?
	Is that right?
	Yeah.
	Who's the sort of senior leadership team at Google that greenlit it?
	And who are the people at Alphabet who hired them and greenlit that?
	The thing is, because Alphabet CEO, Sundar Pichai.
	Indian.
	Pichai, yeah.
	Indians.
	Because the thing is, the way the world really works is it's teams of people sitting around doing stuff, right?
	It's never just some strange, unknowable entity that makes these things happen.
	No, it would be rooms of human beings making decisions.
	And therefore, they can be sort of named and shamed and, you know, anyway.
	Alright, let's move on.
	So, the shots have been fired, the banners have been called, we're on to round two, boys.
	So, about 20 years ago, it's one of the most notorious- What a hell of a wait.
	Yeah, yeah.
	It's one of the most notorious clips of political discourse, I think, that the internet has, which is the initial meeting of Tucker Carlson and Jon Stewart on Crossfire, back in the days when Tucker Carlson was still wearing his bow tie.
	I remember it well.
	I haven't got the clip, but it's easy enough to find.
	Jon Stewart comes on and begins to berate them, accuse them of diluting the political discussion, of being shills for the Republican Party.
	And to be perfectly fair to him, as much as I think that his points were completely vacuous, and he was immediately going back to his, I'm just a comedian defense, the second that Tucker Carlson shot back.
	Tucker and his co-host, I don't know who he was, didn't really have a very good response to it.
	They kind of were trying to be polite, they laughed along, they threw a few jabs here and there, but they didn't make a good show of defending themselves.
	And it was a few months after that, I believe, that Crossfire was either cancelled or Tucker was fired from it.
	And a lot of people use this as something to gloat these days and say, Ha ha!
	See?
	Jon Stewart destroyed them!
	Tucker Carlson got destroyed by Jon Stewart, but I think there's something to be said for the long game.
	And we can see in the long term whose career has come out better.
	And realistically as well, when it comes to journalism, Jon Stewart's big complaint was the fact that you were just being mouthpieces, that you were being shills.
	Who's actually engaged in real journalism these days?
	Who's going out interviewing world leaders like Putin?
	I know that was a very controversial decision that he made, but Tucker Carlson is reasonably doing the thing that you would expect a journalist to do, which is going to the opposition leader and saying, okay, what's your side of the story here?
	In the interests of public debate and public knowledge, we should have a more open discussion about this.
	And what's Jon Stewart doing?
	Well, Jon Stewart recently returned to The Daily Show because The Daily Show lost Trevor Noah, who was an abysmal replacement and nobody missed him.
	And since then, they've had a very poor job finding a proper replacement for him.
	I think they had a replacement in line for Trevor Noah already, but he got in trouble for either plagiarism, Or something along those lines.
	So the Daily Show had some bad trouble, so they said, right, okay, we need to bring the big guns back in.
	We need to bring Jon Stewart back in.
	And what was it that Jon Stewart decided to do?
	Jon Stewart decided to go straight back to his old routine of Chilling for the regime, realistically, being the mouthpiece of the democratic establishment, feigning some kind of moderate take on things where he's positioning himself in the center of the discourse, whereas in reality he's actually quite far on the left of the discourse.
	I would say he's always been this way, it's just since the political sides have been so polarized more and more clear.
	these days.
	And we've had years and years of people like John Oliver doing his same routine to the point where we know that it's a refined, almost laboratory refined format.
	The Daily Show and other late night talk shows that position themselves relatively political.
	That's how they operate.
	And in the, I think this is the second episode he came back, He decided that he was going to comment on Tucker Carlson's interview with Putin, and more particularly his thing that we covered recently, Callum, where Tucker Carlson went around Russia and said, look, there's no graffiti.
	There's no people urinating in the streets.
	I can walk through a supermarket and nobody's robbing anything.
	The things they had that are nice, they kept, and kept them nice.
	Yes, how can a country do this?
	And Jon Stewart decided that he was going to respond to it in his typical bad-faith manner.
	So let's watch this clip.
	Because the difference between our urinal-caked chaotic subways and your candelabra-ed beautiful subways is the literal price of freedom.
	But the goal that Carlson and his ilk are pushing is that there's really no difference between our systems.
	In fact, theirs might be a little bit better.
	The question is, why?
	Why is Tucker doing this?
	Here's why.
	It's because the old, civilizational battle was communism versus capitalism.
	That's what drove the world since World War II.
	Russia was the enemy then.
	But now, they think the battle is woke versus un-woke.
	And in that fight, Putin is an ally to the right.
	He's their friend.
	Unfortunately, he is also a brutal and ruthless dictator.
	So now they have to make Americans a little more comfortable with that.
	I mean, liberty is nice, but have you seen Russia's shopping carts?
	And Tucker would have gotten away with it if it weren't for those meddling assassins.
	In a statement to the New York Times, Carlson said, quote, Correct.
	what happened to Navalny.
	The whole thing is barbaric and awful.
	No decent person would defend it.
	Correct.
	No decent person would.
	So I'm glad to see that good faith debate and discourse is back on the table Thank you very much, Jon Stewart.
	So everybody knows the routine by now.
	People have been pointing it out.
	It's as old Martin Bailey has said here.
	Tucker Carlson praises the fact that Russia has clean and operating infrastructure.
	Jon Stewart says the only reason they have that is because they assassinate political dissidents like Navalny.
	That means that you're supporting the assassination of political dissidents, Tucker.
	That's not what Tucker was saying.
	That's not what Tucker was supporting.
	That's not how subways work.
	And they don't get prettier the more people you kill.
	Also, shockingly enough, for a long stretch of time, America was able to have a great degree of political and public liberty without things having degenerated to the point where they have now.
	Because what we have in the West, in America, and in Europe, and in England, is not the result of political liberty.
	It is the result of hostile elites forcing bad results on us, forcing bad policy, forcing mass immigration on us, refusing to do anything, victimizing and persecuting people who actually speak up about it and try to do something about it.
	And Jon Stewart, as ever, is acting as the shill for that establishment, that hostile elite that hates us, because Jon Stewart Despite the fact that, yes, guess what he did?
	He criticized Joe Biden for saying that he's old.
	He's old and senile and people go, ha ha!
	Finally, we have the moderate centrist back in place who's willing to criticize both sides.
	That is not what someone like Jon Stewart is doing there.
	He is speaking directly to his pals in the Democrat establishment saying, this makes us look really bad.
	If we have someone in charge who is obviously senile, who is a walking bag of bones, a zombie who can't speak for himself anymore, so he's signaling to them, get him out of the way, put somebody who's a better figurehead for us, and then that'll give us better results.
	It's not him actually presenting any kind of legitimate, real criticism for anything other than optics.
	I think it's sort of a lesser point, but was it just me, or did Jon Stewart come across there as really condescending and patronising and smug at the same time?
	I don't know, the whole tone of it has just seemed... I mean, that's what he's always done, as far as I... Yeah, it just seems worse now, if anything.
	I think it's because it's clearer, but when you go back and watch the older clips of him, which I have done a few times, he's the same back then.
	I think people were more on his side because of how unpopular a lot of George W. Bush's presidential policies and foreign policy in particular was.
	He was kind of speaking for the vast majority of people because people on the left and the right could recognize that George Bush was making some very poor decisions.
	Whereas now, because we have much greater levels of polarization in the public sphere, someone like Jon Stewart comes across as exactly what he is, which is a shill.
	I'd like to see Tucker rock the bowtie again, at least just once.
	He brings it back on, comes on for a debate with Jon Stewart.
	I'm easily old enough to remember that original thing.
	I was already an adult.
	I clearly absolutely remember it.
	And I remember at the time more or less siding with Jon Stewart as well.
	You know, during the early 2000s, I was sort of, I was like most other people, kind of against George Bush Jr and Dick Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz and all those guys.
	And so if someone like Jon Stewart was railing against them and hadn't revealed themselves as a complete insane whatever they are, globalist or something.
	Anti-white activists.
	They weren't revealed as that yet, so most people, I certainly was not strongly in favour, but I would be more on Jon Stewart's side than Tucker Carlson at that time, I must admit.
	But like you say, since then the veil has fallen, and we can all see him for who he is.
	Since he was off the Daily Show, he was doing his other show, The Problem with Jon Stewart, and one of the most notorious episodes of that was The Problem with White People.
	So, which people then started to push up to be the problem with Jewish people.
	And it was like, that's disgusting.
	How could you do this?
	I was like, bro, you literally just did one of our whites.
	I'm sorry.
	I have no sympathy.
	Yeah.
	Can we talk a little bit more?
	I hate to stick that point of the price of freedom is living in filth.
	It never used to be.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Does it have to be?
	In fact, the price of freedom a lot of the time in the past was in improved living conditions.
	But also, it's not just a statement on the past.
	It's a prediction for the future there, which is, yes, dear viewers, your future will be more filth.
	As we get freer.
	As we get freer and freer, things will get more and more filthy.
	Crime rates will rise exponentially.
	Aren't you so glad?
	Because that's the point as well.
	There's a lot of terrible argument even from his side, where he's like, well, if you go live in China, things will be great.
	Wouldn't that be awful?
	It's like, what?
	That's actually how you think?
	If this is the price of Jon Stewart's conception of freedom, then why would anybody choose to be free?
	You're making a great argument for slavery!
	Completely by accident, John!
	Fantastic!
	I mean, not that I believe that what he's promoting is any sort of freedom that anybody in the classical world would ever recognize.
	What he's supporting is top-down, almost dictatorial control, except it has a nice media veneer Over the top of it saying, this is you being free, free and fair, free and fair.
	In all sorts of ways, the sort of shadowy oligarchies that rule the Russian Federation and the United States, there's all sorts of similarities there, right?
	There are absolutely similarities.
	Yet one is fairly safe and clean and the other one isn't.
	I mean that's as we move on that some of the points that I'm going to bring up but on the point of the format being so clearly transparent now there's this green there's this you know 4chan text that goes around and I'm not going to read the whole thing because it is the right-wing version of the wallow text meme but I am going to read some of it so he's talking about John Oliver's show and John Oliver was an associate associate of the daily show i think he made contributions there he knows john stewart and he moved on to do his last week tonight
	show um and which follows the exact same format and he it just do we do we as brits owe all americans something of an apology and they want to send him back but i don't want him back Yeah, yeah, no returns, no returns.
	As an ethnic group, we've done a lot of bad to American television.
	I mean, Piers Morgan was over there for a while.
	Yeah, James Corden.
	John Oliver, Piers Corden.
	I mean, I don't know... Piers Corden!
	Oh, that's the worst combination ever!
	I don't know if we can really claim Mehdi Hassan, but, you know, he went over there and poisoned their railways.
	Can we send them all to Rwanda?
	I hope.
	Maybe.
	Maybe.
	But this is how scientific and down to a tee it is.
	They all follow the same format, as he says, present some argumentation and facts for 10 seconds, quickly follow this up with a snarky quip, which themselves overwhelmingly take the form of a complete non sequitur or otherwise absurd metaphor, before any rational processing of the preceding argument can take place in the mind of the viewer, Further telling is that the only beats or mental pauses the show takes exist solely to highlight the approving laughter or applause of the studio audience.
	Repeat this basic formula without variation about 20 to 40 times in a row and you have one 12 to 20 minute segment that form the backbone of the show.
	And that is an amazing technique.
	Far more effective, I would say, than anything that any intelligence service in Soviet Russia or anywhere else that would be described as totalitarian came up with for brainwashing a public population, a mass population.
	Because you are applying a number of factors all at once.
	You're providing entertainment.
	You're making people think that they're being informed while they're being entertained.
	And you're also applying the perception of mass pressure, social pressure, on these people through the laughter.
	Which, of course, everybody knows if you look at the studios.
	It's a sign that Light Souls is laughing.
	Because these jokes aren't actually funny, but you're watching it and you feel like you're part of a group, and you feel like you have to conform to that group, and when you go out into public, you could be surrounded by dozens of people who all, like you, disagree with any points that he's making, but none of you know that.
	All you know is that you watched the TV last night and the funny ha-ha man gave particular opinions that got laughed about, and so you have to conform to that.
	Once you've read this, sincerely, like, read that and then go and watch an old episode of John Oliver's show.
	Because I did this after reading that and I realised, oh crap, it's right on the money.
	Yes.
	It's funny how, another example of how things degenerate and just get worse over time.
	Again, showing my age, I remember when it was sort of Jay Leno and David Letterman used to sort of rule TV, late night show, comedy man thing.
	Like, David Letterman, of course you probably have a team of people actually writing his monologues and things, but Jay Leno, but particularly Letterman, was actually funny.
	Often.
	It was actually a funny monologue.
	You know, it wasn't just pure, yeah, sort of snarky activism.
	It was actual jokes.
	I'll have to take your word for it, because I've not seen that much of those guys back in the day.
	Letterman was a genuinely good stand-up comedian, right?
	I mean, that helps.
	Was John Oliver ever a genuinely funny stand-up?
	I don't know.
	I actually don't know, but I doubt it.
	The only thing I've ever really laughed at that John Oliver was involved in was... I mentioned Community in the previous segment.
	He did play a character for a few episodes on that, but that was somebody else writing him being funny.
	That wasn't him being funny.
	He was reading somebody else's lines.
	Letterman was people like Seinfeld or Larry David praised Letterman as being a superbly funny dude.
	So yeah, he could do a monologue.
	And now we're left with this weird remnant, these weird ashes of nothingness that's left.
	It does feel like it's running on fumes.
	The very fact that they had to bring out Jon Stewart in the first place, who at this point is like an old media relic from 20 to 30 years ago now.
	He quit the Daily Show back in 2015.
	And now they've just like dug up the corpse, plopped it back on the chair, and he's doing the same old routine that he ever was.
	And everybody can see through it now.
	But of course, the media decided to come out and praise it, say, oh, isn't it so good that they did this?
	And they're all harping on the same point as well, which is that Tucker Carlson just praised the regime.
	Well, he didn't praise a regime.
	He went to a supermarket and said, oh my God, it's clean.
	And then he went to a subway station and said, oh my God, it's clean.
	He didn't say, I fully endorse every decision that Vladimir Putin has ever made, but they want to draw that comparison.
	It's even worse because he explicitly stated, this station was built by Stalin, probably one of the worst people ever.
	And then you've got the, I think he says, then you've got Vladimir Putin, who also is not someone I support.
	And then goes on to explain, and yet, they have these things.
	Yeah.
	You can be a bad person and maintain nice things for a population, or you can be a good person and also do that.
	Yeah.
	But the United States is not run by either of those options.
	We have bad people who do bad things constantly and don't maintain anything.
	In Russia, they don't have to keep the sort of toiletries and sports drink under lock and key.
	Yeah, but not the sun cream.
	Yeah.
	And another thing, just for anybody who wasn't aware, so just to give some sun cream in Russia.
	Um, gets hot in Crimea in the summer.
	So for context, the thing, the events that they're trying to draw this comparison to was the fact that Putin had jailed one of his political enemies, this man, Alexei Navalny, who was the leader of an opposition party who had criticized Putin's foreign aggression in areas like Crimea in the past.
	He had previously, was that what it was?
	I'm pretty sure he was on side for that.
	Oh, was he on side for that?
	He criticized some of the more recent... Most of his stuff is that he hates Vladimir Putin and his party because he calls them corrupt.
	Oh, well, sorry.
	I mean, when it came to the foreign policy, the Ukrainians actually kind of hate him because he supported taking Crimea.
	Oh, fair play.
	And supporting Donbass.
	Yeah, I got that wrong in that case.
	Thank you for the correction there.
	So, I'll just read some of this so you can get the picture.
	Western leaders have held Vladimir Putin directly responsible for the death of the Russian opposition.
	Alexei Navalny, as the U.S.
	President Joe Biden called it, yet more proof of Putin's brutality.
	I'm surprised he didn't just say putler, you know.
	This is another sign of Puttler's insane madness.
	If we don't stop him now, he's going to end up on our borders for some reason.
	We best start World War 3.
	Vladimir Pootie-Poot.
	George Bush Jr.
	literally called Putin... Pootie-Poot.
	Now, Navalny, 47, died while being held in a jail about 40 miles north of the Arctic Circle, where he'd been sentenced to 19 years under a special regime.
	Russia has claimed Navalny died of natural causes.
	In a statement, the Federal Penitentiary Service for the region where Navalny was incarcerated said he felt unwell after a walk and almost immediately lost consciousness.
	All necessary resuscitation measures were carried out but did not yield positive results, the statement said.
	Paramedics confirmed the death of the convict.
	The Kremlin said Putin had been informed but had no further information.
	Okay, yeah, sure.
	Alright guys, yeah.
	He went for a walk, got real cold and then died, guys.
	Alright.
	Okay, sure.
	If you say so, guys, I mean... One thing I did want to say, because I've written a couple of articles against Zelensky, and a few times I've been on camera, when we had Tim Davies on the other day, he could think that we were pro-Russia in some way.
	I do want to make clear that Putin is a killer.
	Like, absolutely.
	Like, Litvinenko, you know, I'm at risk of getting Novichok'd myself even saying such a thing.
	He definitely has ordered the murder of journalists and political rivals.
	Definitely.
	I mean, this is a clear example of it.
	Let's be honest, obviously, political dissenter, head of an opposition party, You find some reason, trumped up charges, to put him in prison and then while he's in prison he just happens to die.
	He just happens to keel over while you're keeping him, what, 40 miles north of the Arctic Circle.
	And there's loads of examples.
	Wasn't there some Russian opposition guy that was shot on a bridge in the middle of Moscow?
	Vladimir Nemtsov.
	Right.
	So Putin's got previous.
	Yeah, I don't know if you guys know the story of that one because that was amazing.
	So he's the leader of the opposition in the early days of Poon and he's walking on the bridge next to Red Square going home with his girlfriend and a garbage truck pulls up near them and then all of a sudden all of the security cameras for a mile just turn off.
	Thankfully there's one attached to the library which was overlooking the bridge which is privately owned that worked and you see in the footage the garbage truck comes into view goes in front of the guys and then someone runs out runs into a car with a gun and drives off and then as the garbage truck goes past Nemtsov is just dead on the floor.
	When I was in Russia... Who knows what could have happened there?
	Well I asked a Russian guy because there's still a memorial there to this day that people are supporting to make sure it's kept, to be remembered.
	So I asked a guy who was with us the first time I went to Russia, I was like, so what's this about?
	And he just looked at me and went, Chechen terrorists.
	He knew the line.
	He knew what to say.
	That's what he said.
	Yeah, so Biden in 2021 promised devastating consequences for Russia if Navalny was to die behind bars.
	However, it's not clear what could restrain Putin.
	This is editorializing from The Guardian here.
	What could restrain Putin from a further crackdown on Navalny's supporters in Russia and abroad?
	As far as I can tell, this seems to be escalating rhetoric to say, like, if we don't do something, ground invasion, send Western forces over there, Putin might further crack down on his political opposition.
	Okay.
	Okay.
	I'm maybe going to say something popular here, but I don't give a shit.
	Yeah.
	I just don't give a shit about Alexei Navalny in the same way I don't give a shit about the guy the Saudis assassinated or coach Red Pill getting killed by the Ukrainians.
	I'm sorry, I just really hate this stuff where people are like, that way to invade someone is just like, some foreigner gets killed by a foreign regime.
	Well that's the point I'm about to make actually, because it's not like Western regimes don't do the same thing.
	You mentioned Coach Red Pill, he died in the custody of the Ukrainian police, and there's an argument there because we give them 60 billion, it was like, give back our citizen.
	But if it's your own people, like the Saudis killing their own people or the Russians or the Chinese, it's like... What seems to have happened here, from the information from this and what I already knew as well, Gonzalo Lira, Coach Red Pill, was living in Ukraine with his family when the war broke out and decided that he was going to become a critic of it within the country itself, which is a really stupid idea.
	A really stupid thing to do.
	You're actually dumb if you do this.
	But what they did in May 2023, they arrested him.
	They put him in prison.
	He wrote about, I think he corresponded with his father and wrote notes saying about how he'd contracted pneumonia.
	He was being neglected.
	They tried to torture him and extort him for $70,000.
	And then he died.
	And it was very clearly, as far as I can tell, either neglect or purposeful on the side of the Ukrainian forces.
	But you could say, yeah, he was doing something really stupid, of course they're going to punish him for that.
	But at the same time, you could make the same argument for this guy when it's an obviously hostile regime that you're under, who have killed people before, to stand against that.
	This is the thing that... Well, it's bad news, but it's just not my people.
	Yeah, all my government, so I don't... This is the thing that hostile forces do to dissenters.
	They imprison you, and then while you're in prison, you die.
	And this is the same in Russia, this is the same over in the West as well.
	In America... Do you remember Khashoggi?
	Khashoggi was a Saudi dissident, and he was in Turkey, and they just had him killed.
	There you go.
	I think I chopped him up, didn't I, in the basement somewhere.
	Yeah.
	The thing is, I actually agree with you now, if the Chinese kill Chinese dissidents or Russians kill Russian dissidents, it's sort of, it's their problem.
	I might disapprove of it, or frown, or wag my finger, but...
	The difference is that we're not globalists.
	I was going to say two things though.
	One is when it spills out into someone else's country like Khashoggi, the fact it was in Turkey does make it more egregious to me.
	Litvinenko, the fact that it was in London does make it a bit... I'm not saying that's the truth.
	Obviously it's the foreign agents within foreign countries.
	And the other thing which I find most alarming about the general tone, the general narrative of ramping up Ramping up the narrative of we're going to have to have a full-blown war with Russia is that I don't seem to remember that Russia's got the biggest nuclear arsenal in the world.
	That does completely change the dynamic.
	It's not like building a coalition against Sudan, building a coalition against Yemen.
	No, Russia could induce a nuclear winter if it You know, it could nuke Paris, or London, or whatever, or Moscow, or Washington.
	You've got to bank on the West's leaders not being completely insane and run by senile people, but that's kind of up in the air.
	To be fair, I don't think they'll risk that.
	All their houses get blown up.
	That's the thing, would either side risk nuclear war, or would it be ground skirmishes, or even drone warfare?
	I don't know because I'm not some guy who's really up to date on it.
	But someone like Blinken or Biden or Rishi or whoever, they never address them.
	I've never seen them ever sort of address.
	the possibility of a nuclear exchange.
	I take comfort in the fact that the people who run countries are incredibly rich and like being the rich people.
	So they're not going to actually do something as stupid as get their own house blown up.
	Like they'll blow up.
	Hopefully.
	The youth of their country they'll happily get killed.
	But their own houses.
	That's the way it's always been.
	But if they're about to die, if they're on their last legs anyway, they're 110 years old and god damn it they just want to see Iran nuked before they die.
	Like Lindsey Graham is saying, we've just got to nuke Iran guys, all the world's problems will be solved when we nuke Iran.
	Are you insane enough to actually do that?
	Are you insane enough to do that?
	I think I should clarify, because I got a bit heated there, about the people being killed thing.
	You're right, like if there's another country involved in the situation, it's obviously more complex.
	But I got a bit annoyed with just everyone talking about Navalny, and you check up, when have you ever tweeted about Navalny on Twitter?
	And it was today, and never before.
	Well once again, to clarify.
	I don't know who Nemzov is, like you're just not involved in this.
	I think the point that we're making is that none of the three of us are globalists.
	We're not dedicated to the crusade of spreading democracy across the world so that everybody can all be living in harmony, holding hands.
	Unless it's against the bugs.
	Freedom is the only way!
	That's nothing I'm interested in.
	If there are brutal dictatorships in North Korea, I mean, as long as they're not going to be nuking us, they can have their brutal dictatorship.
	I don't need to have regime change.
	What do you want me to do?
	I don't trade with them.
	Exactly.
	I've got no interaction.
	I'm interested in the well-being of my own people, in my own nation, and the level of political freedom that we experience here.
	That's what I'm interested in.
	And once again, with the US, they also jail their political dissidents.
	We've spoken, Josh has spoken, directly to people who've been imprisoned after January 6th.
	This was Jake Lang, it was a very interesting interview, so you should check it out.
	But I think to cap all of this off on the Tucker Carlson versus John Stewart, and who's actually doing journalism these days, this is a really interesting interview that Tucker Carlson had a few days ago.
	It was about five days ago now where he spoke to a man called Mike Benz, who I found out through researching for this, he was a member of Trump's State Department.
	And he was also operating for a while as an anonymous YouTube account and poster called Frame Game Radio, where he spoke a lot about how the system works, how markets are manipulated, how foreign agencies and foreign countries have regime change and how foreign agencies and foreign countries have regime change and such done to them.
	And he got doxxed.
	Essentially, reporters looked into him and found that the life story of this guy, Mike Benz, lined up pretty perfectly with the personal details that Frame Game Radio had given on his YouTube channel.
	And as such, he got doxxed.
	He came out and said, yes, I was this guy.
	But then he tried to put a little smoke screen in front of himself and said, well, I only did this YouTube channel because I was trying to de-radicalize people.
	OK.
	OK, Mike.
	But Tucker Carlson had him on.
	And as part of this, he gave a lot of Really fascinating information about how the government controls information, the US government in collusion with the European Union in Brussels and elsewhere.
	They collude with private companies, they use extortion tactics, they use the control of information through the flow of the internet as a tool of foreign regime change and also as a tool of preventing populist uprisings, particularly in Europe.
	I would really recommend, I've got two clips for this, Quite long, so I hope we don't run over with this, but we can run over a little bit.
	Yeah, why not?
	Yeah, we can run over a little bit because they're really fascinating.
	They give a lot of information, and in the course of a single hour here, Mike Benz is able to clearly and concisely explain a lot of how the system works, and we know that he was in Trump's State Department.
	He's got a lot of insider information.
	He has personally been in these departments that he's talking about.
	He's had personal contact With these people that he's talking about.
	So he's kind of spilling the beans here a lot.
	And if you've been paying attention over the past few years, some of the information will be very familiar to you.
	But having it all laid out over the course of a single hour is a remarkable achievement that Tucker Carlson has been able to put out to the world.
	So let's watch this clip, the first one I've got here.
	Sure.
	You know, one of the easiest ways to actually start the story is really with the story of Internet freedom and its switch from Internet freedom to Internet censorship because free speech on the Internet was an instrument of statecraft almost from the outset of the privatization of the Internet in 1991.
	We quickly discovered through the efforts of the Defense Department, the State Department, and our intelligence services That people were using the Internet to congregate on blogs and forums and free speech was championed more than anybody by the Pentagon, the State Department and our sort of CIA cut out NGO blob architecture as a way to support dissident groups around the world.
	in order to help them overthrow authoritarian governments as they were sort of billed.
	Essentially, the internet free speech allowed kind of insta-regime change operations to be able to facilitate the foreign policy establishment's State Department agenda.
	Google is a great example of this.
	Google began as a DARPA grant by Larry Page and Sergey Brin when they were Stanford PhDs.
	And they got their funding as part of a joint CIA-NSA program to chart how, quote, birds of a feather flock together online through search engine aggregation.
	And then one year later, they launched Google and then became a military contractor quickly thereafter.
	They got Google Maps by purchasing a CIA satellite software, essentially.
	And the ability to track To use free speech on the internet as a way to circumvent state control over media over in places like Central Asia or all around the world was seen as a way to be able to do what used to be done out of CIA station houses or out of embassies or consulates in a way that was totally turbocharged.
	And all of the internet free speech technology was initially created by our national security state.
	VPNs, virtual private networks to hide your IP address.
	Tor, the dark web to be able to buy and sell goods anonymously.
	End-to-end encrypted chats.
	All these things were created initially as DARPA projects or as joint CIA NSA projects to be able to help intelligence-backed groups to overthrow governments that were causing a problem to the Clinton administration or the Bush administration or the Obama administration.
	Yeah, what are you going to do?
	What do we need to add to all that?
	Yeah, it's really interesting, the origins of Google.
	I wrote an article a little while ago, I think I called it In the Shadow of Mockingbird.
	He referenced Operation Mockingbird and goes back to the start of the CIA after it was changed from the OSS.
	Right, yeah.
	So there's things like CBS News, for example, which was entirely just an intelligence front.
	Things like the Washington Post, the New York Post, loads and loads and loads of the American media.
	Even William F. Buckley with the National Review, there's rumours that the initial grant that he got to start that might have been from the CIA.
	Oh yeah, I think Buckley was, yeah, yeah, yeah.
	And so just the internet is just an extension of that, it's just the next generation of that.
	But it's explaining why it is that for so long the internet was this wild west zone of complete free speech.
	Because the powers that be wanted it that way.
	And now it's changing and it's flipping around and this is the only other clip that I'm going to play but I would really recommend anybody who wants to know more because he actually goes into detail of the processes by how they achieve this.
	This is really interesting.
	I haven't watched it.
	I will watch it later.
	It's a really fantastic watch.
	If you've got friends who might be interested in it, share it to them as well.
	But here's the next one, because he's now talking about NATO-US collusion with the European Union to initially try to prevent Brexit and then try to prevent right-wing populist uprisings in European countries to try and dissuade people and spread information and censor people who would want you to vote for those parties.
	And NATO at that point declared something that they first called the Durasimov Doctrine, which is named after this Russian military general who they claimed made a speech that the fundamental nature of war has changed.
	You don't need to win military skirmishes to take over Central and Eastern Europe.
	All you need to do is control the media and the social media ecosystem, because that's what controls elections.
	And if you simply get the right administration into power, they control the military.
	So it's infinitely cheaper than conducting a military war to simply conduct an organized political influence operation over social media and legacy media.
	An industry had been created that spanned the Pentagon, the British Ministry of Defense, and Brussels into a Organized political warfare outfit, essentially infrastructure that was created, initially stationed in Germany and in Central and Eastern Europe to create psychological buffer zones.
	Basically to create the ability to have the military work with the social media companies to censor Russian propaganda or to censor domestic right-wing populist groups In Europe, who were rising in political power at the time because of the migrant crisis.
	So you had the systematic targeting by our State Department, by our IC, by the Pentagon of groups like Germany's AFD, the alternative for Deutschland there, and for groups in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania.
	Now, when Brexit happened in 2016, It was, that was this crisis moment where suddenly they didn't have to worry just about Central and Eastern Europe anymore.
	It was coming westward, this idea of Russian control over hearts and minds.
	And so that was, Brexit was June 2016, the very next month at the Warsaw Conference.
	NATO formally amended its charter to expressly commit to hybrid warfare as this new NATO capacity.
	So they went from basically 70 years of tanks to this explicit capacity building for censoring tweets that they were deemed to be Russian proxies and again, it's not just Russian propaganda.
	This was these were now Brexit groups or groups like Matteo Salvini in Italy or in Greece or in Germany or in Spain with the Vox party.
	And now at the time NATO was publishing white papers.
	Saying that the biggest threat NATO faces is not actually a military invasion from Russia, it's losing domestic elections across Europe to all these right-wing populist groups who, because they were mostly working class movements, were campaigning on cheap Russian energy at a time when the U.S.
	was pressuring this energy diversification policy.
	And so, they made the argument, after Brexit, now the entire rules-based international order would collapse unless the military took control over media.
	Because Brexit would give rise to Frexit in France with Marine Le Pen, to Spexit in Spain with the Vox party, to Italexit in Italy, to Grexit in Germany, to Grexit in Greece.
	The EU would come apart, so NATO would be killed without a single bullet being fired.
	And then, not only that, now that NATO's gone, now there's no enforcement arm, For the International Monetary Fund, the IMF, or the World Bank.
	So now the financial stakeholders, who depend on the battering ram of the national security state, would basically be helpless against governments around the world.
	So from their perspective, if the military did not begin to censor the internet, all of the democratic institutions and infrastructure that gave rise to the modern world after World War II would collapse.
	So you can imagine the reaction five months later, Donald Trump won the 2016 election.
	So you just told a remarkable story that I've never heard anybody explain as lucidly and crisply as you just did.
	But did anyone at NATO or anyone at the State Department pause for a moment and say, wait a second, we've just identified our new enemy as democracy within our own countries?
	I think that's what you're saying.
	They feared that the people, the citizens of their own countries would get their way.
	And they went to war against that.
	Yes.
	There you go, yes.
	It's just interesting, it's funny to me, brilliant, that Nigel not only screwed over the European Parliament but also the State Department, the Pentagon, the IMF, basically all the most sinister powers in the whole world are peed off at Nigel.
	That's great.
	And if you wonder why there seemed to be such a shift in discourse that went on around 2014, 2015, 2016, because everybody says that that's when the woke discussion ramped up, it might be something to do with the fact that this was the time when the state apparatus started to really go into overdrive to censor the other side.
	And all of a sudden, online discourse changed because this kind of woke nonsense was able to have a much greater platform than it did before because the system was on its side, Whereas, as we know, the system is not and has never been on our side.
	There is a question that you need to ask yourself, though, watching this, which is, OK, he's just laid out this entire story, which I think, I mean, is true.
	The evidence that I've seen prior to it all seems to paint it as true.
	But how does he get this?
	How does Tucker Carlson get this online without it immediately being taken down if there's this enormous censorship apparatus?
	And I think it might have something to do with the fact that Tucker is obviously backed by Elon Musk.
	So Elon Musk has Tucker's back.
	And Elon Musk, as we've discussed before, is deeply embedded with the US government anyway because all of his infrastructure with SpaceX and all the companies that he owns The U.S.
	government, because of the complete competency crisis it's going under in its own departments, is entirely reliant on Elon Musk's companies for any kind of innovation, for even remotely being able to look to space again.
	They are entirely reliant on Elon Musk.
	So Elon Musk is backing Tucker, has his own financial capital behind him, and also has a certain level of the U.S.
	government reliant on him.
	So Elon, in supporting this, I think there might be other answers to it.
	You might be able to come up with other reasons for this.
	Elon might have took us back on this and be saying to the sorts of departments that might be censoring him normally and say, you have to let at least some of this go out.
	That might have something to do with it, as far as I can tell.
	Do you have anything?
	There's no way you'd be allowed to do something, as one example, like Starlink, without the American defence monolith allowing you to do it.
	But yeah, so Jon Stewart is still a shill for the regime, and Tucker Carlson is hosting mind-blowing interviews like this, so who's really winning?
	On that, let's move on.
	We've not got much time, so I'm really sorry.
	No, no.
	You don't have to do my segment until I can save it for another day.
	It's not a problem at all.
	No, you can have a run.
	We're not filming anything after this.
	I need to punish Jack anyway, so... Okay.
	Fair enough.
	I'm sorry mine ran over so much.
	No, no.
	It's absolutely fine.
	I think there was a lot of information that was really... No, it was great.
	It was really good.
	My segment is just sort of an afterthought.
	Sorry, what was that?
	Get on with it!
	Okay, alright.
	Well, I thought we'd talk a little bit about the death of kings, because it's our king, Charles III, has been diagnosed with cancer.
	I think at first they said it was a pancreatic cancer, but now it's, I think they're saying that, they're not going to say exactly what cancer it is, but either way it seems pretty serious.
	You know, because there's some cancers that are much more serious than others, right?
	There's some types of cancer that if you catch it early, your survival rate is very high.
	And there's others where, you know, it's a death sentence really.
	I'm not sure we know exactly what King Charles III is or isn't suffering from at this point, but he made his first public appearance just the other day.
	And I thought I'd use it as a jumping off point just to talk about, well a bit like Putin, Putin-esque.
	Go back a thousand years and talk about the interesting or notable deaths of kings over the last millennia.
	So somebody's asked you, Herb, what's going to happen now that King Charles has cancer?
	And you go, well first we need to start a thousand years ago.
	Yeah, let's start in the 11th century, if we can.
	1066, William the Conqueror.
	So it's not really exactly current affairs.
	But yeah, just the perhaps imminent death of Charles III, but in some sort of context.
	I'll just say before that, next we'll have William Wills, Prince William, who will be William V. He shall become King William V. Then after him, of course, he's got a fair few kids now, hasn't he?
	And the oldest one is a boy, a George.
	So he'll become George VII.
	So yeah, going back a thousand years, the Conqueror, William I, he had sort of a strange-ish death.
	He had some sort of horse riding incident after ruling for 28 years and being one of the most brutal rulers we've ever had.
	His horse stumbled.
	He basically tried to genocide the North?
	Yeah, the harrying of the North, as a Northman yourself.
	I'm a Mercian.
	Really?
	You consider yourself more Mercian than Northumbrian?
	I'm from Cheshire.
	When I did a DNA test, I'm not actually Northumbrian really.
	When I did a DNA test, my genetic markers were so specific that it could target the East Midlands, Cheshire area and also Lancashire, where my father's family is from.
	So I'm very Mercian.
	Much more Mercian than Northumbrian or anything?
	Would you consider yourself... Irish?
	Wessex?
	Or Irish, right?
	I don't know what you think of yourself.
	It's a deep level of shame whenever we point this out.
	Oh, is it?
	Oh, I didn't realise that.
	It's a joke that's gone out of hand.
	Oh, is it?
	Oh, okay.
	I thought you actually had Irish blood.
	Move on.
	Okay.
	This is new to me.
	I thought it was not okay.
	I will just move on then.
	William the Conqueror's horse stumbled and the pommel at the front of his saddle rode up into his gut, his distended gut.
	He'd become fat, he'd become heavy and something ruptured inside and that was the end of him quite quickly.
	Oh well.
	Interesting though, he was so big that they tried to stuff him in a normal human-sized coffin I mean we know he's got fat fingers but I don't think they'll actually explode like sausages.
	I hope not anyway, I mean.
	and he burst.
	Apparently the smell was so terrible that they just rushed through it and got him into the ground.
	So hopefully nothing like that will happen during the funeral of Charles III.
	I mean, we know he's got fat fingers, but I don't think they'll actually explode like sausages.
	I hope not anyway.
	I mean...
	Well, they might have to prick him before they're not on them.
	It's a good thing It's not everything to do with monarchy is as glorious as I wish it was all the time.
	I thought you were going to say something.
	I was just saying it's a good thing that he's an unpopular king, otherwise this would be considered, you know... Yeah, I don't mean to be all that rude.
	It's sad, it's genuinely sad.
	I don't really like King Charles very much as a man in his politics, but of course it's sad.
	Of course I don't want him to have a terminal illness, so let's be clear about that.
	Need I really say that?
	I hope I shouldn't even really need to say that.
	Here we go on from Henley.
	William II, William Rufus, was just accidentally shot in the head in a hunting accident, as happens.
	Got twice in the back of the head.
	Yeah, got double tapped in the back of the head by accident.
	No, with arrows.
	It wasn't a double tap.
	Similar to John F Kennedy, I'm sure.
	Accidentally shot in the head.
	Yeah, just purely by accident.
	One of his own guards accidentally, his own arrow went off by accident or something.
	Yeah, no.
	We're not sure exactly whether that was truly an accident, but you can, I think you can put the word accident in inverted commas around that one.
	I genuinely thought you were going to go, we're not truly sure if it was Clinton or not, but you know.
	What did Clinton have to do with John F. Kennedy?
	I know there's a lot of rumours about the body count of the Clintons.
	They're going for a particular high school.
	They also shot William in the hunting accident.
	It's proven.
	I think there's some rumours that George Bush Senior... Do you know who forged that saddle that William the Conqueror was on?
	It was Clinton!
	I think there's some, I'm not sure if it's true or not, but there's some conspiracy theorists that say George Bush Senior was in Dallas in November of 63 when Kennedy was killed.
	Oh really?
	Because of course George Bush Senior was a CIA dude.
	He was a fighter pilot and then he was in the CIA, but I think other people say, no it was just someone who looked like George Bush Senior and he wasn't actually there.
	That sounds a bit weird.
	I know with the Clintons, I found out recently at WACO, three of the ATF guys, well no four of them, were former Clinton bodyguards who were some of the only ATF members to actually die there under suspicious circumstances.
	That's just an interesting tidbit.
	The number of people that had served as Clinton close bodyguards that then died in Afghanistan, Iraq, and in all sorts of places and contexts, it's an odd number, an oddly high number.
	That's all you can really say.
	Moving on, Henry I died of, quote, a surfeit of lampreys.
	Do you know what lampreys are?
	Lampreys, they're like these worm-eel type creatures.
	They're disgusting.
	Only a Frenchman would dream of eating lampreys.
	And he had a surfeit of them, i.e.
	just a big meal of too many, filled up on lampreys.
	He ate himself to death.
	Yeah, and it's like, well, that's what you get if you eat too many molluscs.
	Probably make you ill.
	But I've always... If you've ever seen Lampreys, it's like, you know, something like eels, jellied eels turn your stomach, then Lampreys... Anyway, that's a slightly interesting death, isn't it?
	It's comical.
	Yeah, yeah, it's bordering on the comical.
	Stephen, King Stephen, he of the anarchy, some say he died of natural causes, but others say that the monks of Dover Castle had him poisoned.
	Really, what reason would the monks have?
	To end the anarchy?
	Yeah, I suppose so.
	That's Clinton.
	Crooked Hillary strikes again!
	Those monks at Dover, you can never trust them.
	Henry II is supposed to have died of a broken heart when he heard his son John was among the conspirators against him.
	I don't know how it's possible to die exactly of a broken heart but in the medieval period or the ancient world that was a thing that could happen to you.
	You were so disappointed and gutted that you died.
	It's not a polite way of saying he committed suicide.
	No, no, no.
	You're literally supposed to have just turned over in bed and just given up the ghost.
	I think that is a thing though, to be fair.
	In very, very extreme cases, especially if you're already dying, that the psychology that you just give up and your body does give out on you.
	And you've got to be close to the end already.
	Was he known to already be in a bad state?
	Yeah.
	Oh, okay.
	Alright, okay.
	Yeah, he wasn't fighting fit.
	And then Sajun's, oh, and just die.
	Sat his throne slumps over.
	Oh, dear.
	Bye.
	Not like a Revenge of the Sith situation.
	No, not quite.
	She's lost the will to live.
	If I died every time I lost the will to live, then I wouldn't have made it to 10.
	It's a well-known thing though, isn't it?
	Perhaps when couples have been together, married for 40 or 50 years, and one of them dies, the other one often isn't long for the world, because they sort of give up.
	I've seen it happen.
	That's a fairly well known or documented thing.
	Richard I, the famous Lionheart, the Cour de Lyon, was one of the few kings to actually die from combat.
	He got a crossbow bolt in the neck, shoulder, where his neck or shoulder joins.
	He was supposed to be one of the greatest warriors of all time but ended up sort of ignominiously getting shot by nobody by a crossbow bolt and it went gangrenous.
	I suppose if you're known as one of the greatest warriors of your time, to die in battle is better than to end up gorging yourself on eels until you die randomly because you're too full.
	Yeah, it is more glorious to die in fighting than just in bed, right?
	Probably.
	We're all gonna die.
	Just get to pick where and when.
	Right, yeah.
	Do you wanna, what, die of old age?
	Or do you wanna die driving a Lamborghini at 250 miles an hour on fire over a loop-de-loop into the ocean and then you explode?
	Not legal advice.
	I'm not saying it was legal advice, I'm saying if you had a gun to your head, if you had to.
	There's many cultures in the world that think it's really disrespectful if you die an old man, a greybeard, if you die just of old age, you've sort of failed.
	You're supposed to die gloriously in some sort of blaze of glory.
	I'm pretty sure like North, like Viking culture, it was quite similar to that because obviously if you died in battle then you were going to Valhalla.
	Whereas if you lived to an old age and became the Greybeard, yeah, you'd have lots of wisdom, but also it's shameful of you.
	Yeah, in some way it's a reflection that you're a coward, that you didn't get yourself killed violently at some point.
	Maybe you were a master strategist and an excellent fighter, but no, this is how we work.
	Let's crack through.
	Okay.
	John, Richard's brother, died of dysentery.
	More than one, he came in the fifth, died of dysentery.
	Very ignominious for a king to sort of crap yourself to death, isn't it?
	Didn't seem to happen back then, though.
	No, absolutely.
	Edward II, probably the funniest, quote-unquote, or most horrific, most brutal, had a white hot poker up the back passage to boil his guts from the inside.
	Gaddafi'd.
	Yeah, he got the hot Gaddafi.
	Yeah.
	It's probably the most- Why I'm a serve hog roast.
	That is probably the most horrific death that an English monarch ever suffered.
	Richard II was out of favour and got deposed and he was forced to starve to death.
	I think starve to death is a horrible way to die, really actually painful and horrible.
	Humiliating and long, yeah.
	Henry VI I mean the 6th was murdered.
	He was in the tower.
	The prisoner of Edward the 4th.
	And at some point someone came into his room and bashed his head in.
	On the orders of the king?
	Because it was too loud?
	Almost certainly, yeah.
	It was just a terrible prisoner and they'd had enough.
	They had had enough of his weakness and indecision and things.
	Also, Edward V. You know the two princes in the tower?
	One of them was a prince, the other one was the king.
	The elder of those two boys was King Edward V.
	Most people think they were smothered.
	Well, they were just at least murdered by somebody, again, in the tower.
	Richard III died in battle.
	That's glorious, isn't it?
	The Battle of Bosworth Field.
	It's going to be more glorious than what happens to poor old King Charles III, one way or another.
	There's still time, Charles.
	Lady Jane Grey, only Queen for nine days.
	Many people say she was never actually a Queen, but I count her.
	A lot of historians do count her.
	She got herself beheaded.
	Mary the First, they thought she was pregnant, turned out just to be massive cancer.
	- What?
	Yeah, yeah.
	- Oh, what? - Yeah, she had a big distended belly and she thought she was pregnant, and then she wasn't, and it was.
	You are pregnant!
	Congratulations, with cancer.
	Yeah.
	It's a healthy tumour.
	That's not nice.
	Horrible.
	Of course Charles I, Charles Stewart, got himself again beheaded by the parliamentarians, by Oliver Cromwell.
	Big F being a traitor.
	Right.
	Yeah, for bringing an Irish army over to England.
	That's what you get.
	Maybe you should be more grateful, Callum.
	Nah, he deserved death.
	The last one I'll mention then, William III, William of Orange.
	Again, a riding accident.
	It's pretty ignominious, isn't it, that also?
	Apparently maybe his horse stumbled over a molehill and he fell off the horse and injured.
	Again, he sort of maybe broke his... He was making a bit of a mountain of it.
	Maybe fractured his collarbone or his arm or his shoulder or something and he just didn't get better and his health failed and he died.
	So anyway, as we're sort of out of time, I made that a very short segment, but hopefully it's food for thought for some people out there.
	If you're interested in history, go out and look up some of these things.
	So yeah, I'll leave it there.
	Alright, let's go to the video comments.
	This is the Chinese symbol for person.
	It's interesting to me talking with Chinese people that they get so confused with third person pronouns, often mixing he with she and him with her, when referring to people even as familiar as their own wives or husbands.
	The reason is that there's no concept of dividing the third person by sex in Chinese.
	One simply states person and then relies on the context to make it clear which.
	Perhaps this will push the screeching mad men and women of the woke brigade further into the arms of the commies.
	So, I've been seeing a lot of neocons talk about the cult of Trump, and there is like a basis for that obviously, but the chuds can be very overly enthusiastic I'll accept.
	But then they'll immediately go on about how, what would Reagan do or what would MLK think?
	I mean, I remember there was like this campaign ad that Dan Crenshaw did where he and his buddies go to like a heavenly oval office where they meet the ghost of Reagan who gives them a bunch of weird platitudes about unity.
	And then they immediately go on the next day and say, we are above cults of personality in our party.
	Yeah, I'm not a big fan of Reagan.
	As you could see through his list of achievements that he had on the side there, it seemed to be a period of wealth that Reagan resided over.
	Obviously, opening up markets did help a lot of people to become richer, but also he passed into law a lot of the cultural problems that still persist today, and he certainly didn't help pull back government spending.
	He certainly didn't help to pull back affirmative action programs, which have led one way or another to where we are today.
	Obviously he helped to fight the Cold War though.
	Two super quick things Reagan did that was cool.
	He's really against the Berkeley ultra lefties.
	He really hated them.
	That was cool.
	Also one time, I think the American air traffic controllers all tried to go on strike all at once.
	And he was like, "Okay, you're all fired.
	I'm just going to replace all of you then." You don't strike.
	That's kind of cool.
	Hello there little guy.
	What you doing fella?
	Did you want to come out and play?
	- Really? - Crush it. - Yeah.
	- Yeah, don't be shy.
	Good job.
	Nice!
	Yeah, I'm one of those people that, yeah, bugs get death on sight.
	I'm one of those people.
	Next one.
	Hey guys, on the discussion of writing novels, this one took me about two and a half years to write.
	It took me before that about 10 years worth of world building before I even came up with the idea for the story.
	And it took about four years before I got it to the point I was happy to publish it.
	And that's while doing a PhD.
	And speaking of the AI tools, I can finally make the movies I've always wanted to make.
	I'm going to make some great culture for you guys, I promise you.
	All right, guys.
	Right, looking forward to it.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Oh, don't mind me.
	I've just been trying to ask the same bloody question for about Seven hours straight trying to ask about this thing, which yes, I am going to be going and recording and putting on my YouTube channel.
	You'll probably get like little clips next week because at least that time I can actually get it to 30 seconds instead of going over.
	I know you don't want the entirety of Shrek to be posted.
	Main point, are you actually going?
	Is anyone else going?
	If so, say hi.
	That's the Reform UK Spring Conference in Doncaster.
	I'm obliged to go but I can't, I'm not.
	Oh.
	So you won't see me there, I'm afraid.
	I won't be able to make it.
	I didn't know it existed.
	I will check my diary.
	It's this Saturday, I believe.
	Oh.
	What are you doing on Saturday?
	I can't tell you.
	But people in the comments, if you are, let them know.
	Do meet up and film Shrek.
	See you in the next one.
	Hello, regarding Monday's segment discussing Starship Troopers, a subject that is near and dear to my heart, though I can't say I'm surprised the left would side with a fat, amorphous, immobile mass of cholesterol and communism over other humans.
	They probably see this on screen and think, that's totally me, I'm being represented.
	Maybe.
	Certainly a white people person.
	What's all that stuff in the background, just real quick?
	Variants on knuckle dust.
	I see one set of brass knucks behind him.
	What are all these things?
	Send us a video comment explaining for Beau.
	I'm interested.
	Next video, please.
	I've recently come across another really bizarre Kickstarter product.
	The Bedroom Battle card game.
	The YouTube video is still available in case you're curious, but it's kind of a... The best way I can think of describing it, it's kind of a...
	Not at top trumps, but with sexual activities involved.
	Dare I Google?
	Well, it's probably better than the wank wipes he was recommending the other day.
	No, they go together!
	Let's go to the next video comment.
	Alright, we're looking at data.
	Okay.
	North FC Zoomer is showing us prisoner data by religion.
	Oh, yeah.
	And guess, guess, it's the Muslims who are represented by a margin of more than 2 to 1.
	There we are.
	Christians actually underrepresented.
	Yeah.
	The Sikhs, I think, no, it's not the Sikhs, the Hindus.
	Yeah, they're the best.
	2% of the population, 0% of the prisoners.
	Amazing.
	Atheists don't do that well.
	Atheists are underrepresented as well.
	Look, no religion, 37% share of the general population, 31% of the prison population.
	So, underrepresented.
	Here's the next one.
	Hey Lotus Eaters.
	I just got this funny flyer in the mail and I thought that I could use it to show how bad things are in Canada these days.
	We are now getting fixed rate pizzas where you make an account at this pizza restaurant And they guarantee that you're not going to have the price increase on this pizza for a year, as if it's a stinking mortgage or something.
	Outrageous, I tell you.
	Sorry, is this like Weimar hyperinflation or something?
	You order the pizza, by the time it arrives, it's gone up double in price?
	This way, they can start using the pizza as a proper currency.
	That's some good shooting.
	Nice.
	It's not what I was expecting.
	That's going to kill a bear, right?
	I don't know what else you'd use it for.
	It won't tickle it.
	I once saw FPS Rush where you had this extended, it was like a Glock 18 or a Glock 19, the fully automatic version of a Glock, and it had this massive sort of double drum barrel thing on it.
	So it's just doing that, but you could just hold it down for like 30 seconds or 40 seconds or something, ages, and that was cool.
	And you had tracers, and you had two of them.
	You know what happened to him in the end.
	His partner got murdered, right?
	He got sent to prison for having an amount of weed in his house.
	He's out now though, right?
	Yeah, but because it's a felony amount, because he had enough weed that they claimed he was going to deal it, which he wasn't, he was just smoking it.
	They came and raided his house and took all of the guns, even in his basement where all the guns are, but of course it's FPS Russia.
	So the dude had pistols in his cutlery drawer, and there's rifles under the bed.
	So he came out after the initial arrest, after they took all the guns, and then had to call the police and be like, you left some of the guns.
	Like, there's all these other guns you didn't even take.
	You know, he had a business partner who got murdered in suspicious circumstances.
	I don't think FPS Russia had anything to do with it, but who knows?
	I don't know all the details, but it was weird anyway.
	Let's go to the next one.
	I've noticed that the work of Caspar David Friedrich has been used in some of the premium content on Lotus Eaters.
	And that's great, because that means that some or all of you are fans of romanticism.
	Well, may I introduce an English romantic painter, John Atkinson Grimshaw.
	Often overlooked, he died poor, he lived poor.
	And that's always a good sign, but not for the reasons you think.
	And when it came to his nocturnes, even Whistler said that Grimmie had him beat.
	That's lovely.
	Really nice painting.
	Recommendations of painting, there we are.
	Let's go to the next one.
	My mind's telling me no.
	Just that.
	But my body.
	Oh, wait.
	My body's telling me no.
	All right, we've got two Rumpelstreet chats to go through right there.
	Thanks, Herman.
	Let us again know in the poll whether, how long you think it'll last between them.
	Yep.
	So, threadinofffor20bucks says, Callum, please convince other Lotus Eaters to watch an episode of Ghost in the Shell, standalone, complex, with your week.
	I assume one per week.
	Is that an anime?
	What the hell are you talking about, man?
	I'm not convincing people to watch something.
	I prefer SOG since it's Japanese cartoon and cyberpunk dystopia.
	Wait, so you're... Are you watching this already, Callum, or is this a recommendation?
	I think he's got me confused with someone.
	I don't watch this.
	I mean, I've been tempted to watch Ghost in the Shell before.
	I've never got around to it though.
	And the other one is Win Hill Seeker saying the Ghost in the Shell movie is about Neural Link and Ghost in the Shell Laughing Man Saga is about COVID.
	So, alright, I'll check that out.
	Maybe, probably take me a year or two.
	Yeah, to punish Jack some more I'll read a few comments and then I'll end.
	Derek Power says, it's tragically hilarious that for all the reaing about the gender is a spectrum and that the crowd is incredibly binary about white and non-whites.
	Fair points.
	On Crossfire, Arizona Desert Rat says, so it's acceptable for Bernie Sanders to praise Russia's subway stations, but Tucker Carlson isn't allowed.
	Makes sense.
	Fair point.
	He praised it when it was the Soviet Union and far more moral.
	The most moral regime.
	And Furious Stan says, can't wait for Rishi Sunak to be appointed as King of England.
	Presumably so you can run an episode on his... No, so he'll finally match the Gemini out.
	Right, that's us.
	Enough punishing, Jack.

▲