Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 28, 2024 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:34:26

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #860

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast, The Lotus Eaters.
	This is episode 860 on Wednesday, the 27th of February 2024.
	That's right.
	Callum not hosting means you do get the day and the date to go along with it.
	Although, to be fair, somebody's noted this down wrong because it is the 28th of February.
	So that's fantastic.
	But was that... That was me!
	Were you taking some cues from Callum there?
	That was me, yeah.
	I think we can still blame Callum.
	I was just channeling Callum.
	There we go.
	We wanted to make sure that you still get your daily dose of Dara on here.
	And as you can see, I'm joined today by Bo and our very special guest, Mr. H. Also going by... Nate.
	Nate, as we'll call you today.
	How are you feeling today?
	Yeah, good.
	I had a fantastic sit down.
	So yeah, it was good.
	Yeah, so people can look forward to a conversation between you coming out on the website soon.
	Yeah, it won't come out for a good week or so, but yeah.
	We're going to collaborate at some point, start streaming four days a week.
	That's it.
	Nate Dogg and the G Child.
	I just made that up by the way.
	I think it sticks.
	I think it's got some, there's something iconic to that.
	The G Child.
	So, today we're going to be talking about the British skin and sin, I should say, and asking what is a British person?
	Unlike some, we actually have answers to questions like that.
	That's why you come here.
	We're going to be talking about Joe, because we need to talk about Joe.
	We need to have a few words about Joe.
	Sleepy Joe.
	And then I'm going to be exploring how satire is a completely meaningless word because the leftoids have got a hold of it and now they just don't understand how words work.
	Shockingly enough, when you get postmodern people who don't believe in definitions, words completely lose all definitions.
	So that's what we're going to be talking about today.
	Where can people find you as we start?
	Just Mr. H Reviews on YouTube and Twitter.
	Wonderful.
	Thank you very much.
	So we'll get on with it.
	So let's talk about the British sin.
	And the British sin is something that we hear a lot about.
	And if I could refine it to one aspect of Britishness, it's that we exist.
	So it's an original sin.
	It's a type of original sin.
	Yes, absolutely it is.
	And because of that, we must be erased and denied our very existence because do you know that our ancestors or at least some people's ancestors who share an ethnicity with us might have done bad things in the past?
	Sounds fair.
	It's funny how something that doesn't exist and has never existed also needs to be eradicated.
	Yes.
	That's weird.
	It's clearly rationalism is fueling this.
	Yes, it's rational thought that's fueling this.
	So for this segment, I'm going to go over a bit of a spat that went on over the weekend that I got involved in.
	Because this question of what is a British person, who are the British, is one that I would have thought would be settled by now.
	But it is still shocking to see how people with an immense amount of media influence, or even just a remote amount of media influence, are able to peddle this absolute filth, as far as I'm concerned.
	So I'm just deconstructing everything down to its most base components, and then saying, because I can do that, it means it doesn't exist in the first place.
	The analogy that I keep hearing to people who ask these questions is, well, if you get a cake and you get a load of different ingredients and you bake it into a cake, because it's made of different ingredients, it doesn't exist anymore.
	The cake can be denied because, well, once it was eggs, once it was flour, it might have had some sugar in there.
	So can you really say it's a cake?
	It's this absurd kind of thought, and it comes from people like Peter Dukes on here, who is the co-founder of the Byline Times, which is a lefty rag.
	And he was doing the sort of thing that everybody on the left does.
	Every time you hear anybody in the Conservative Party, or slightly to the right of centre, talk about the state of London and the state of migration coming into the country right now.
	Both legal and illegal.
	And they say, this is worse than Enoch Powell.
	Enoch Powell, who we have prescribed as being the worst human being to have ever lived, because he said, hey, have you thought that immigration might be a bit too high, and then made some references to classical literature, therefore is the most evil person who's ever existed.
	I think that's a fair assessment.
	It pretty much goes Trump, Hitler, Enoch Powell.
	There's some stiff competition.
	I'd say that's right, you know, definitely.
	In that order.
	And it's always only in the service of justifying the current thing.
	That's all it is.
	This is really ad hoc, post hoc rationalisation for the fact that, well, Labour opened the floodgates, literally went headhunting for migrants to go and put into the country so that we could rub the right's nose in diversity.
	And therefore, because that's already happened, you just have to accept it.
	And by the way, if you think you have any kind of shared identity, you don't.
	There you go, little right winger, let's rub your nose in that.
	That's the logic it is, but it is disgusting to me that people still behave in this way and still throw this kind of dialogue about.
	Because he posted this over the weekend.
	A lot of people got into a bit of a tizzy about it.
	He started arguing with all sorts of people who came out with, um, actually Enoch was right or at the very least had a point.
	And he just started going like, oh, I'm disgusted.
	I can't believe I don't see the Thames foaming with blood because that's exactly what he said, wasn't it?
	Stop stirring up trouble in my city.
	It's not your city, Peter.
	It's certainly not your city anymore.
	And eventually, of course, after you get into lots of arguments with people, it ends up with this.
	This is the linchpin of the whole argument, of their whole side of this, which is just the statement, you have no people, just a racist fiction in your head with no basis in science or history.
	Enjoy it.
	That's absurd.
	It's quite a shocking statement, isn't it?
	But also, it's so detrimental to yourself.
	I mean, he hates himself.
	It's absolutely absurd.
	This is what we've seen with media and politics in general is the degradation of any form of patriotism.
	And then that's it embodied right there, isn't it?
	You've got no people.
	That's just nonsense.
	Self-abnegation.
	No basis in science?
	What does that mean?
	Well, that is a good question, because a lot of people like Tom, Survive the Chive, who's appeared having an interview with you before on Lotus Eaters, Beau.
	You can find that on the website on the Battlefield History interview with Tom Rousel.
	He's a good chap.
	Yeah, he's great.
	Very nice chap.
	I didn't get to meet him, sadly, but he does lots of excellent work where he discusses the both literary history of the English people going back through ancient texts, reviewing those and seeing what were the people themselves saying about their own ancestry and history and culture.
	What stories were they telling themselves?
	And he also goes into lots of genetic history as well, looking at haplogroups.
	And he gave a quite nice breakdown here, which is pretty simple.
	Just a single paragraph.
	The British are the Welsh, Scots, and English.
	The Iron Age Celtic-speaking populations of the first millennium BC had more ancestry from the pre-Celtic inhabitants of the island than they did from the Celts.
	The Romans left no genetic legacy here.
	A lot of people think that they did, but I think there's like a fraction of a percentage in some regions of the country, but for the most part, they didn't really leave much here, beyond their buildings, of course.
	I thought the Romans brought millions of black legionaries here.
	Is that not firm history?
	I thought they were already here, weren't they?
	Stonehenge?
	Yeah, even the builders of Stonehenge.
	Well, after we changed the name to Britain from Greater Ethiopia, no, we just genocided them like we did with all other non-white people who had been here for millions of years, some would say, after Jacob created us.
	We are between 25 to 50 percent descended from Germanic tribes who arrived after the Romans, who, like the previous inhabitants, are indigenous to northwestern Europe.
	We are comprised of various Celtic and Germanic-speaking tribes, all native to this corner of Europe, and we have called ourselves English for almost 1300 years.
	That's a nice succinct breakdown right there.
	Obviously there's a lot more history to that, but if you want a nice quick explanation, there it is right there.
	And he followed it up by saying, well, you know, if you want to point out that, oh, you've mixed with different tribes, who can you say hasn't?
	In the past 2,000 years, and also there's the question of we've been established and have some of the most robust documentation of our own history going back for since, like you said, about 1,300 years.
	Not many other places in the world can say, can lay claim to that same thing.
	Most of the places didn't even really have a written tradition for thousands of years up until quite recently.
	Yeah, we've got the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.
	Doesn't really speak of...
	You know, Sub-Saharan Africans or Turks or Bangladeshis being here.
	Well, clearly somebody's been going back and changing the record.
	That's the only explanation.
	It's falsifying documents.
	What happened is Windrush arrived, which was a momentous occasion because it was the first time that blacks in any numbers had come into the country, but also were returning to the country.
	We celebrate it as a momentous occasion.
	We're just coming home.
	Rather confused reasons when you start to think about it for more than a second.
	But yeah, they came back here and then Clement Attlee, I must assume, decided, quick, we need to change all of the history books before they get too uppity.
	That must have been what happened.
	But it's important to know that this is how a lot of people feel because Peter Dukes, as I mentioned, he's a He's a co-founder of this place, the Byline Times, who, as I mentioned, is the kind of leftist rag.
	But if you notice here in the header here, they have this section, Identity Empire and the Culture War.
	And I decided to click through that and see this sort of thing that they were talking about.
	And in it, you can find stuff like this, where they're talking about, from Clive Lewis, MP, who I think is of mixed ancestry, talking... Clive Lewis is...
	Terrible.
	Have you ever seen him?
	Have you ever heard him in interviews?
	I've not heard him in interviews, no.
	Yeah, he's just, he's like a Peter Jukes type person.
	Anything and everything you can smear our heritage and history with, he'll say it.
	It's such a... With glee.
	It's such an American way of thinking though, isn't it?
	It's an imported thing, you know?
	Like, a lot of British people don't realise the amount of history that they do actually have.
	And it's something to be celebrated.
	It's something to be, you know, genuinely proud of.
	But it's an imported thing, I think.
	But for everything that you can criticize him on, Peter Hitchens is actually very good at discussing the change in schooling that went on from the 60s onwards, where the closer you get to the 21st century and the Blair years, the more you find the curriculum changing so that British history is being taught less as a complete narrative of a people's
	and more as a series of particular units where you're looking at, here's a bit on the Civil War, as I learned about, here's a bit on World War II, but then also let's just start throwing in stuff like the civil rights stuff from America, where you're mainly learning about Martin Luther King.
	And that's not British history.
	And that changes the way that people are able to conceptualize themselves.
	Because if you have, in your own mind, a distinct narrative of a distinct people, that really helps you to conceptualize your place in the world.
	I appreciate it.
	Yeah, you should appreciate it.
	And if you only have, like I did for a very long time, just these distinct units, you're basically just trying to peer through the curtains at history.
	You're not getting the broad picture of it.
	Just to say, from the age of about Henry III or Edward I, our roles, the royal roles, are massive.
	People can't read them.
	A lot of them still haven't been read because there's masses and masses of material.
	Go back, you know, we've got Magna Carta, not Magna Carta, it's a doomsday book.
	Incredible document, a thousand years old.
	Before that, I mentioned the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.
	We've got the Venerable Bede, the Monk of Jarrow.
	We've got the Agricola by Tacitus during the first century AD.
	There's the account, Caesar's account of invading England.
	There's plenty there.
	Is it Pythias the Greek?
	Pythias the Greek, yeah.
	He's supposed to have sailed around the British Isles, that's right, yeah.
	His book survives.
	But all of that dismissed.
	All of that dismissed because Peter Jukes amusingly decided to break out his own version of British history, which was that all of the native Brits before the Anglo-Saxons arrived were completely genocided.
	Or pushed into Wales.
	Because obviously, as you know, Wales is a word for foreigner.
	And that's how the Anglo-Saxons were describing the native Brits.
	Despite the fact that lots of recent genetic testing shows that English people are about, as Tom mentioned, about 25-50% native Brit in the first place.
	They have Celtic DNA.
	So, if we just genocided them all, That's not possible, really, is it?
	It would mean that they would have no genetic legacy here as well.
	People of this country, they always go on about Cheddar Man because we made a fraudulent statue of Cheddar Man where we painted him darker than he would have actually been, probably.
	They ignore the fact that they found his And, well, one of his relatives living still very nearby to the area where they found him 10,000 years later.
	That's been completely disproved, discounted, isn't it?
	The skin colour element of it, yeah.
	Because they were working with, what, 10,000 year old DNA.
	The technology that they were using to determine the pigmentation of the skin as well seemed to be a 50-50 coin flip on whether it was accurate or not.
	So the whole thing was a fraud to begin with.
	But I wanted to highlight here, you know, you've got Clive Lewis writing articles for the Byline Times and Peter Dukes talking about Britain built on forgetting our imperial history.
	Here's Windrush, as you would expect, and he talks about here, he talks somewhere in here, yeah, paying reparations to the Caribbean islands of Granada and that's the Trevelyan family.
	I think part of the Trevelyan family at one point was administering the BBFC.
	And talking about ancestors.
	Ancestors parts in the enslavement of thousands of Africans.
	So what you find the disconnect, the divide is that you're not allowed to celebrate your ancestry, to celebrate your shared history, or to have ancestry and shared history if you are positive about it.
	If you think that, it's a good thing I come from a long line of people who have a very proud and storied and documented culture.
	But you are, If you're paying reparations for it.
	If we can single you out and get retribution for you.
	But it's such a reductive argument.
	And the thing about this is, it falls flat on its face when you start to apply it across the board.
	When this argument of reparations, for instance, you start applying that across the board, it all falls apart.
	The argument of doing it, it's gone.
	Because then who needs to do it?
	Do the Dahomey need to do it, for instance?
	Who needs to do it?
	Like, barbary slave trade?
	Do they need to start paying reparations?
	Do we need to go down to Norway?
	Get the Norwegians to do some reparations because of the Vikings?
	Where do we end it?
	At what point do we end it?
	I say we end... Is it Dublin that was a slave trading outpost for a long time where they traded British people?
	I say we end it there.
	We need to get our money back from Dublin.
	Who knows?
	I may have had ancestors who were maybe enslaved by the ancient Irish back in the day.
	I need my gifts.
	Yeah, exactly.
	How far do you go back with it?
	It's absurd, you know, that the modern day Iranians get reparations from the modern day Greeks or Macedonians, Greeks, for the campaigns of Alexander 300 years before Christ.
	What about that?
	For example, there were lots and lots of people abducted from Ireland and from the south coast and places like Cornwall ended up in a sultan's palace.
	in the Ottoman Empire.
	Do we get reparations from modern-day Turkey for that?
	I mean, no.
	And anyway, I seem to remember Britain and the British Empire leading the way in the abolitionist movement.
	I seem to remember that we... - People died, didn't they?
	- Sorry? - I think people died, didn't they?
	- Yeah, yeah, yeah, we start, We had wars over it, over abolitionism.
	Some of the shortest in history as well, with Madagascar, amusingly.
	We spent a vast amount of treasure on the Royal Navy to make that happen.
	I think we should get reparations from places like Granada for all the money we spent on the Royal Navy to abolish slavery.
	How about that, Clive?
	I don't know, you don't want to listen to that bit of it.
	Appropriately, I notice on the same page here that we have an advertisement for another article on the Byline Times from my old pal Andrew Scott, Otto English, talking about how Englishness evolves.
	And we can see a nice image here of a Pakistani mayor of London.
	Looking at a picture of an insane leftist, a footballer, I don't know.
	Bo, you could probably fill in the blank there.
	Who is that?
	That's Harry Tottenham, dude.
	I can't remember his name.
	He's one of the greatest goal scorers at the moment.
	I can't remember his name.
	Fair play.
	And then at the end we have the New British.
	So here we have a perfect encapsulation, really, of Britain at the moment.
	Certainly London, which is Two foreigners and two people who probably despise themselves all put out in a hideous street corner with some ugly painting with ugly graffiti on the wall.
	Fantastic.
	Looks like a fire station.
	It might do.
	It looks like a garage or a fire station of some kind.
	It's just completely performative.
	It's a lie and everybody knows it.
	And if you want to know some truth about England, as we've been talking a lot about it, you can actually go back through Bo's series of Epochs, which if you're a premium subscriber to the website, I'm sure you're all very familiar with because it's one of the longest running series on the channel.
	And it's very, very worth going through the archives.
	You can talk about Pythias's extraordinary voyage to Britain.
	Roman Britain.
	Alfred the Great, the Anglo-Saxons, Aethelstan.
	There's so much to go through.
	You've probably not even covered even a fraction of the total of British history at this point, have you?
	Yeah, so many of my greatest hits there.
	I wasn't prepared for this.
	Great, thank you for that.
	Yeah, I've done loads of it and still not really scratched the surface.
	Going through it sort of fairly chronologically and still only up to Edward III.
	But yeah, always, always you're only ever going to scratch the surface.
	If you're doing a podcast that's an hour and a half, two hours or something.
	Yeah, there's so much there to say we haven't got, that we're not a people or an indigenous native people.
	It's just, as you say, absurd is the right word.
	I mean, I actually replied to Dukes at one point and I said, I paraphrased, I can't remember exactly my words, but I said something like, this is genocidal.
	Hopefully in generations to come, people like Dukes will be remembered In the same vein as someone like Pol Pot or Tamerlane, as just one of the most malevolent Evil people history has ever thrown up.
	Not necessarily a pulp op, but I could see them kind of being remembered alongside a Walter Durante.
	The kind of shit-heel media journalists who were following along the side of genocidal maniacs and making excuses for them and saying, oh it's not happening.
	It is not happening, but it doesn't matter anyway because you don't exist.
	I feel like someone like Peter Jukes, if they were given sort of complete executive absolute power, probably I wouldn't put it past him to do something along the lines of the Kamehameha.
	Just get rid of them.
	Just get rid of them.
	I mean, it's on that level for me, it's sickening, truly sickening.
	I was just going to say, we've been told time and time again, right, like, you know, don't be patriotic, don't like your country, don't like this stuff, you're a bigot, you're this, you're that, we live in a racist country, all this kind of nonsense.
	And yet in the same vein, the same people that say all of this are like, yep, we're hugely diverse, so don't you pick your poison.
	You know, you can't be hugely diverse and then also live in a racist country.
	It's not how it works.
	And they can't also advocate for mass migration and demographic change while at the same time pointing to the Anglo-Saxons and claiming that they genocided all of the native Britons.
	So it's like, okay, so you're bringing historical examples, completely misremembered inaccurate historical examples, and then saying actually they genocided the natives.
	How does that bolster your argument in any way?
	The contradiction that diversity built Britain, that diverse peoples built all of it, did all of it, but also at the same time it was massively racist and evil at the same time.
	So which one is it?
	Yeah, once again, Windrush, in this fantasy, is just a celebration of the return of the indigenous people.
	But it's not.
	They don't even really try and make it make sense.
	They're not trying to make it all fit together and have logic.
	But that's why they, whenever questioned, they resort to very very nonsensical replies because they don't have, they don't have a leg to stand on and it's just all part of demoralizing everyone.
	Like there's nothing positive about those statements.
	They don't do anything positive for anyone in anything that they do.
	Like that website said something about the crisis of British journalism.
	It's like well apparently you said Britain doesn't exist so that's It's a hypocritical statement, but also like, you know, where's the positivity?
	Where are you putting out anything to lift people up?
	You're just trying to demoralize people over and over and over and over again.
	Lift people up.
	Be proud of where you come from.
	Be proud of the country.
	We've done a lot of good for the world.
	Yeah, absolutely.
	If you think that British journalism is so terrible, do some good journalism for Britain.
	Also, once again, I hate to deconstruct the logic even further, but if you're saying that Britain isn't a real thing, then you can't say there's British journalism, because there are simply individual journalists who are all performing journalism which has to be assessed at its own quality on an individual basis.
	So if you're trying to take any kind of grouping of peoples together while denying that groups exist, You can't do it.
	It's completely nonsensical.
	Your brain can't wrap itself around that because it's not the way that human beings operate.
	Obviously, we make generalizations and categories of groups of individual things.
	It's just how we get through our day.
	And mentioning Otto English, as I did, I got into a spat with him as well, where he was talking about the same thing.
	He started to try and attack me after I commented on the whole thing.
	And I pointed out, you know, you're actually supporting the Tory line.
	If you hate the Tories so much, well, it's the Tories who've helped to shift the demographics so much.
	They're the diversity-built Britain party.
	And also, why is it that I can't afford houses?
	Why is it that everything is so expensive since the late 90s?
	And he points out, well, it's because they don't build enough.
	So I said, yeah, but why would you need, why do you need to build so many houses when the population is either stagnant or falling because of low birth rates?
	It's absolutely ridiculous and he goes on he asks the same question to find the British people.
	For those who don't know Otto English is an author called Andrew Scott who is quite appropriately the author of a book called Fake History and he's got a new one called Fake Heroes out in 25th of May and if we take a look you can see a little bit of that cover there is basically just saying Anyone who might be remotely aspirational from the past was actually an evil racist, so therefore you're not allowed to like him.
	That's kind of the path he takes.
	So not a historian, an anti-historian?
	Yes.
	A bizarro historian, the opposite.
	You could say you're a revisionist historian, but I think that's an insult to revisionist historians, some of whom have done some really good work examining things like the Spanish Inquisition, for instance, and trying to figure out what's truth and what's lies, because you can say, yeah, I'd call him a court historian, because he's towing the exact line that the establishment wants him to.
	I've seen him floating around Twitter.
	It's exactly the sort of person I block.
	I'm just not interested in any sort of advice from them, or any sort of dialogue with them.
	But he seems to me, you know, just the classic example of abandoning reason or logic, or anything at all, and just saying whatever is the most disgusting, divisive thing in any given context.
	Yeah, well he has a whole...
	A whole crew, a whole gaggle of retards he brings with him wherever he goes because he's a terrible reply guy on Twitter and whenever he shows up because he's got over 100,000 followers there's you're sure to get a motley crew of dysgenics in your replies.
	One of whom I'm almost certain was a bot who kept calling me a racist coward and I kept responding to him saying because he would ask questions and end them with racist coward and I would give an answer to his question and he would go Ah, deflecting again, are you, racist coward?
	Either you're not a real person, or you're the equivalent of not a real person.
	I was going to say, they're basically the same at this point, aren't they?
	Because again, they don't have any critical thought.
	Yeah, because they're perfect examples of the NPC meme, because they have one dialogue track that they can stick by.
	They have the dialogue tree, and it's only programmed like a Bethesda game where they only have one choice that they can go down and you decide to rewrite the code and pretend like, oh, maybe this is Fallout New Vegas instead.
	And they completely, they go haywire and they don't know how to respond.
	The thing is doing that on Twitter or even in real life where you're in an argument with someone and you just keep resulting to just being rude, just saying you're a racist coward.
	Whatever they say back, you just go back with your racist coward.
	That sort of thing is playground level stuff, you know, like a seven year old, a 10 year old can do that easily, endlessly.
	So that's why I block loads of people on Twitter all the time.
	I'm just not interested in that, in having that back and forth with anyone.
	Well, I respect it.
	That's one approach.
	But also I needed an opportunity to, I was bored over the weekend.
	I was making myself a fry up.
	I'd thrown one little tweet out there and then all of a sudden I had a maelstrom descend on me.
	I thought, you know what?
	Let's run with it.
	Let's just run with it.
	It's boring, you know, the missus is still in bed.
	I've got nothing better to do.
	Sometimes it's fun.
	Yeah, sometimes it can be fun.
	There's no way to really counter the fact that you can send in a DNA sample to something like Ancestry and 23andMe and get a detailed breakdown of your ethnicity if it didn't exist and wasn't based in science.
	You wouldn't be able to do that.
	Of course, he ended up resorting to, uh, imagine why you should care.
	Imagine why you should care, which is the last refuge of the coward who's lost the argument.
	You just turn around and go, well, you may have a few points, but why do you care, bro?
	Why do you care?
	All I'm trying to do is justify demographic change and destroy your identity in history.
	Why do you care?
	But also, isn't it so funny that they they reveal themselves as, well, quite literally just hardcore racists?
	You know, he's talking about colour.
	No, I'm not talking about colour.
	You're saying that Britain doesn't exist.
	You're starting to bring colour into it as opposed to, you know, like it's cultural, right?
	It's far and above just colour of your skin.
	Yeah, of course.
	You know, but the reductive argument is always colour.
	No.
	No one's talking about stuff like that.
	That's not what it is.
	Somebody's character doesn't change if the second they get a deep tan.
	But diversity to these people is quite literally, well, what colour are they?
	But that's racism.
	That's the racist element.
	That's the funny thing as well.
	I see lots of people recognise it, which is when you get these leftists into a corner and you get them to admit, OK, yeah, maybe some cultures are different.
	They always resort to, oh, well, what are we going to do then?
	Genocide?
	Yeah, bit full on, mate.
	Who said that, mate?
	What are you on about?
	Because that's the only way that they conceptualize it, and I think it is because, to a certain degree, the leftist mindset is one of a supremacist, and they see themselves as a kind of an intellectual supremacist.
	They put themselves above the plebs like you or I.
	And they say, well, your life is worth less because of that.
	Your history, your people are worth less because of that.
	So, of course, they're going to start applying it to everything else.
	They've got a hammer, so everything becomes a nail.
	That is why I mentioned Pol Pot or someone like Timur, because again, they go there very, very quickly.
	Yeah, I suppose you are right there, actually.
	It's like, maybe we should reduce mass immigration or start a policy of re-migration.
	Oh, you mean to kill every person of colour, do you?
	Should we start firing up the gas chambers?
	No!
	Yeah, it's interesting, that's where your mind went immediately with it.
	That's so incredibly violent.
	These people are incredibly violent and it's that mass hysteria that's gripped them and that's what they resort to at all times.
	You can't engage them in a normal conversation because they will just resort to violence as well.
	It's just awful.
	Peter Dukes ended up with a similar line here.
	Baiting ignorant racists is actually quite fun.
	I do recommend it.
	They have nothing in their heads but ahistorical You told everybody the Anglo-Saxons genocide the Brits, so you don't know what you're talking about.
	Unscientific Nazi nonsense.
	So this is a classic example of what I would like to describe as wetting yourself in public and declaring yourself the victor.
	Haha, finally!
	Everybody's pointing and laughing at me.
	I must have done something right.
	Thank you very much.
	Straightens tie.
	Joke's on you.
	I've got 9,000 views.
	Oh, wow.
	Impressive, Peter.
	Yeah, and I think the logic can really be condensed down to, because Connor got into it as well, and started responding, and the English came from Germany.
	Well, that's not true though, is it?
	Some of the tribes migrated over from Jutland, Yeah, the Anglos, the Saxons, the Jutes, all from that part of the world.
	Yeah.
	They're not the same thing as the English, certainly not the modern English.
	It's just not, like you say, the analogy of a cake, the ingredients and then a final cake.
	Confusing the two.
	Yeah.
	He got a nice reader's community note on that, but I just simplified it down to, well, when you think about it, everything's just made up of individual atoms, so nothing really exists, does it?
	I know it's quite tired to point it out, but post-modernism is just a purely destructive mindset when you're only deconstructing, and that's the problem with it, which is that they never have They don't have any prescriptions for anything.
	They only have a completely destructive description of reality.
	And even then, a very poorly understood reality in the first place.
	So when people like Peter Jukes and Otto English, who sadly do seem to have a certain level of media influence within the establishment, because they are towing the party line, they're court historians, court journalists, whatever you want to call them.
	Um, ignore them.
	As much as I'm saying about how, you know, it was fun for me to spend some time, the actual content of their argument is completely void because it's only a post hoc rationalization for why the powers that be are able and allowed to do what they're already doing.
	And you should stand against it and you should recognize that you do have a history, you do have a culture, and it's not evil to be proud of that.
	Shall we go on about Joe?
	OK, yeah, do I need... does this mouse work?
	Yeah, do you need... you've got the thing, haven't you?
	John, shall we move on to the next segment?
	Yeah, I'll let John do it.
	Yeah, there we go.
	OK, so I thought we need to talk about Joe.
	Sleepy Joe Biden.
	A conversation needs to be had.
	And actually the point of this segment is that it is beginning to be had.
	Yeah, look at this.
	PrimetimeAlex999 did a tweet where, just look at Joe's physicality and the expression on his face.
	I mean, it's sad.
	He really doesn't know really where he is or what he's doing.
	That's tragic.
	The audio of it, someone's going, you're president, man, or something like that.
	Everyone can see at a glance.
	The thing is do you know what this reminds me of?
	Last year sadly my final remaining grandfather passed away and towards the end he was in hospital clearly suffering from Alzheimer's and you would go to visit him and when he was in that when he was in the bed mostly it would be a glazed over look in his eyes he wouldn't really know what's going on or where he's going but for a moment you get a hint of recognition and he would have that exact look on his face with just that momentary recognition and the surprise that comes with it and that's what i'm seeing there yeah yeah
	It's really sad.
	It really is sad.
	That was the other sort of angle I wanted to do with this take is that it's not funny.
	I'm not trying to ridicule the man.
	It's really not funny.
	You know, sometimes we've got a bit of a reputation for just like endless cackling and giggling on this podcast.
	Sometimes we're dealing with actually really serious things.
	I mean, that's elder abuse isn't it?
	Yeah, yeah.
	At this point you're wheeling someone out to... And he very clearly cannot function.
	He's not a functioning human at that point.
	And that's not, you know, it sounds really harsh, but it's the truth.
	If you left him in the street, what would happen to him?
	Genuinely, that's not a functioning person.
	That's awful.
	And he wields, allegedly, the most power in the world.
	Put his finger on the button and launched 10,000 nukes in the blink of an eye.
	Apparently.
	Can you scroll down, whoever's controlling the thing?
	This.
	Yeah.
	No, no, this job.
	Yeah, that.
	Okay.
	Scroll down a bit.
	Yeah.
	So it's been known since even before he became president in the first place that he had issues.
	It's just obviously got a lot worse, hasn't it?
	I mean, even in the last year or so, it seems to have got a lot worse.
	I wrote an article, the best part of three years ago now, and to quote myself, The illustrious history bro!
	Yeah, the brilliant BB Dade wrote, quote, Joe Biden is senile.
	I don't feel the need to qualify that any further.
	It's obvious to anyone with eyes and ears.
	Because that's the thing, that's sort of, that's the final command of the party, is to ignore the evidence of your own eyes and ears.
	We all know that it's the case.
	And that Sleepy Joe is suffering from relatively severe cognitive decline.
	You know, who knows exactly what it is?
	I think there's all different types of dementia.
	You know, brain tumour.
	Who knows what it is?
	But whatever it is, he's not okay.
	The man isn't okay, right?
	I said only the most rabid and partisan of Democrat shills would attempt to argue any different.
	But even they now, even now you are starting to see some people On the left, in the corporate mainstream media in America, start to say, oh, maybe Joe is getting a bit old.
	They obviously couch it in language not as strong as what I just said, just flatly calling him senile.
	Isn't he supposed to be stounding as well?
	He is, yeah.
	I think yesterday... Get some younger candidates.
	I think yesterday he won a primary.
	As the incumbent president, it's usually nearly always the case that it's more or less a given.
	Not exactly, but more or less a given.
	And yet there was, like 18 months ago, two years ago, discussion within the Democratic Party infrastructure.
	Should it be Joe?
	And they've obviously decided it will be.
	They are going for it.
	You're delegitimising your own party at that point.
	I'm questioning what the logic behind that is.
	Because he's easily controlled.
	I suppose so, but the question is, is he a surefire vote?
	Oh, well that's another question.
	Is he a surefire vote winner?
	Will it be fortified?
	Barring another dose of fortification.
	The logic that I see in a lot of these even leftist outlets recently coming out and starting to question him, as I pointed out when we spoke about Jon Stewart the other day pointing it out himself, is that it seems to be the Democrat apparatus turning around to the rest of the party and saying everybody can see how bad this looks.
	Everybody can see that he is senile.
	Everybody can see that we're basically weekend at Bernieing this campaign.
	I said it's not funny, but sometimes... So we need to get somebody who's younger, more dependable, who can actually deliver a speech without having mental blanks every five seconds.
	We need to get somebody who has some more charisma in there so that we can have a better campaign.
	But if they are just going to go ahead with him, It looks like they are.
	It's a strange tactic.
	Gavin Newsom was talked about, wasn't he?
	There's always the possibility of old Kamala.
	As much as he seems like an evil android, Newsom probably would be a good bet for them if they wanted to get somebody who is a bit younger because you could even run off the basis of saying, look, see, finally we've got somebody in who's running who isn't An OAP.
	Yeah.
	Now Gavin Newsom obviously completely disagree with his politics and his worldview and things he says and what he's done to California is a terrible crime.
	But I'm sure he would win more votes nationwide than Sleepy Joe.
	He has got some charisma.
	Again, don't like the man.
	But you could not like someone and admit that they've got some sort of presence about them.
	You can recognise character traits and still, you know, dislike them.
	But didn't they impeach Trump for some sort of health issues?
	There was some controversy over him maybe bogusing some of his health stuff.
	Really?
	The double standard.
	Really?
	Come on!
	Yeah they did.
	During his presidency, or maybe it was just before, I think it was during his presidency, there was talk of we need to make sure Trump does some cognitive testing to make sure he's not mad.
	I could have sworn that was.
	And yet here we are.
	I said another thing in that same article towards the end.
	I said there isn't anything particularly funny about a president of the United States with the ability to launch nuclear weapons who doesn't have complete control of his faculties.
	You know, that is the bottom line, really.
	You're supposed to be able to nuke people or send in the Marines or send in the Pacific Fleet or something.
	Well, regardless whether he is actually in power or not, whether there's any apparatus around him that's controlling him, it doesn't matter because he's the face of the apparatus.
	And if he is so cognitively impotent at this point in time, he still may slip up on things, as he clearly does, which can still affect things on a geopolitical scale.
	That's still a liability.
	You know, regardless of whether he's actually in power or not, he's still the face.
	So I'm surprised that they allow it to continue.
	Because that's still a massive, massive liability.
	Still influence massive changes.
	It's crazy.
	And it's embarrassing to America, to their prestige.
	Now, I don't want to dunk on Americans.
	I am half American.
	I'm massively embarrassed by Rishi Sunak and other things.
	But, you know, it's just not great to see it because the President is the Commander-in-Chief as well.
	So even if it is just on paper, It's just not a great look.
	So Biden's clear decline should not really be the subject of comical cheap shots.
	It's far more serious than that.
	The stakes are absurdly, stupidly high.
	They are.
	It's a stark and alarming indictment of the US political system that he was able to get anywhere near the presidency in the first place.
	So that's the sort of point I wanted to make.
	I don't want to take a shot at Joe because when he did have all his faculties he was an arsehole.
	To take the piss out of an old man like that who's struggling is not really cool.
	But the people that put him there and that are keeping him there, they're demons.
	They're doing a terrible, terrible disservice to America.
	They're evil.
	It's unbelievable to see.
	PrimetimeAlecStein99 did say it was elder abuse.
	It does seem to be like that now.
	Let's just trot him out.
	You know, we do that sometimes.
	Sometimes it happens when a Pope gets very, very old.
	Sometimes it happens with our kings or queens.
	They get very, very, very old.
	You still have to sort of, sometimes physically, will them out so the public can see them.
	See that they're still alive, just about, or something like that.
	And they're a figurehead and they don't set policy or anything like that.
	But they're still alive.
	Here, see?
	That's where Joe is now.
	And it's not OK for the President of the United States, for a Pope to get away with it.
	For a King of England, or Queen of England, you can get away with it.
	The cockpit of power doesn't necessarily sit with them, or it's kind of OK if it doesn't for a while.
	It's not the case with the President of the United States.
	It's a lot more difficult to stage manage in the era of mass media as well, where everybody's got a camera in their phone constantly, because maybe you would have been able to get away with it 30 years ago.
	Maybe you could get away with it like they did towards the end of FDR, where he was suffering cognitive decline, physical health issues, but they had enough control over what got released to the public through the media, where they could hide it until all of a sudden he drops dead one day.
	Joe Biden is being filmed constantly, and if he's going anywhere, you can be sure that there's going to be someone filming it and posting it online.
	So you can't hide those gaffes the way you used to be able to.
	Yeah, I mean, Ronald Reagan was beginning to suffer.
	What just happened?
	I wonder if the cameras are still on.
	I doubt it.
	Well, this is new.
	Yeah.
	John, what's going on?
	Wow.
	Oh, are they?
	Oh, OK.
	All right.
	We'll carry on in pitch darkness.
	Can we?
	Welcome to the spooky Halloween episode.
	I guess I'm talking to the end of YouTube.
	I guess we're going to have to edit some of this out when it goes on YouTube.
	John, has it affected the rest of the office?
	Oh, Nate, this is literally, this has never happened.
	So welcome to the... All right, so we're still streaming live.
	There's one for the blooper reel.
	Oh yeah, yeah.
	Here we can go.
	This is going to make a great ending to Lotus Eaters Out of Context, isn't it?
	All right, we've got lights on.
	We've got lights on.
	The computers are rebooting.
	Everything is working.
	Your sheer magnetic presence clearly blew a fuse in here.
	That's fine.
	I'll take it.
	There we go.
	And I think, well, we're almost back.
	Let's wait until the screens come back on.
	I wonder what the chat are saying.
	There's been some funny comments.
	John, do you want to?
	Here we go.
	It looks like we're nearly there.
	Oh, all right then.
	than Fairpoint.
	- Oh yeah, I don't have powers to turn everything off. - Your godlike powers. - We did have a power cut in this building in the morning time, about a week ago, didn't we? - Yeah.
	- The building, right, it looks like Remember, guys, everything works great.
	The modern world is fantastic.
	Things are running as they should.
	Okay.
	Well, what was I even saying?
	What was I blathering on about?
	Elder abuse, will-out, totem of power and yet dangerous.
	It's not cool that there's something clearly wrong with Joe Biden.
	Well, it's funny you mention FDR because he's the only president to be elected four times and he was clearly dying when he was running for his fourth presidency and he died not long into his fourth presidency.
	Well, there's diary excerpts and reports that you can get from the meetings that he was having with the other leaders of the Allied forces towards the end of the war where they're all saying, yeah, he kept repeating himself, he wasn't listening, his eyes kept glazing over while we're in these meetings.
	He's not all there.
	He's been ill for a long time.
	I was going to say Ronald Reagan began to struggle with Alzheimer's while he was still in office.
	It didn't really get banned until afterwards, but still there was, you could tell, because there's gaffes aren't there?
	People misspeak.
	Where I speak for a living now, done a few hundred hours worth of content, sometimes you misspeak.
	Now a normal person, when you misspeak, you don't even hear it.
	Well, that's what happens to me a lot.
	Someone says, did you mean such and such?
	I was like, oh what?
	What did I say?
	Because you don't even hear it, right?
	There's that.
	Right, and then there's sort of just going blank in the middle of a sentence and not really knowing what you're doing or... Well, I've got a few clips here.
	John, if you can play some of those example clips, or Karen, if you can play some of those example clips.
	I sort of feel a bit bad to sort of do this, but... But it's clear and it makes it clear, doesn't it?
	Yeah.
	I mean, again, the physicality of those little baby steps.
	and my administration are women.
	Yeah, that one.
	It's painful to walk.
	Is it not an indictment of the political American system as a whole though?
	and desperately trying to look okay.
	Is it not an indictment of the political American system as a whole, though?
	Because is that not clearly on show, the lack of power that he does actually have?
	The fact that they're so happy to have that personal charge.
	Yeah.
	And just that one alone, a good normal president would never be allowed to forget it.
	With the music as well.
	This all goes together quite nicely when you're talking about how they're trying to cover it up with that recent tweet that the Biden Twitter account put out with him with the meme red laser eyes.
	Dark.
	Just like- Dark Biden.
	Yeah, Dark Brandon I think it is, they call it.
	Where it's like, just like we drew it up, Jack.
	This isn't a YouTube thumbnail contest, guys.
	You can't just put red laser eyes on Joe Biden and go, see?
	Cognitive decline stopped, halted, reversed even.
	No, everybody can see it.
	You know, he's not shooting anybody with red laser eyes in any of these clips.
	He's falling over and stumbling.
	There's a few more clips.
	I think maybe we don't have to actually show them.
	I feel bad.
	Let's go, lady, lick the world.
	We cheer for Muslim athletes like Kareem Al-Jubu.
	And Joan, Shanga.
	I feel bad.
	Kowawa.
	Okay, to be fair, I can kind of respect mispronouncing foreigners' names.
	But I don't think that he's doing it on purpose.
	Well, that's the thing.
	Yeah.
	There's more.
	Do you want to?
	Can we just play the last one?
	Okay.
	Yeah.
	Transgender Americans.
	This one?
	The last clip.
	Oh, the very last one.
	This one speaks volumes from that one.
	I think it's this one.
	Yeah, it's this one.
	I'm going to say something outrageous.
	I have never been particularly poor at calculating how to get things done in the United States Senate.
	So the best way to get something done, if it holds near and dear to you, that you like to be able to... Anyway.
	That's not acceptable.
	That's not acceptable, because that isn't misspeaking or kind of forgetting what you're doing.
	You know, normal people, young people, you can forget what you're doing or talking about, missentence, it happens.
	But that's not what that is.
	It's really, it's obviously not what it is.
	So okay, I don't want to labour that point too much.
	It's quite sad because sometimes it seems like he has good days and bad days, but that felt at the beginning there like he was actually present again, like he was actually going somewhere with that sentence, but then trailed off somewhere.
	Yeah, just say there was that clip where Donald Trump walked fairly gingerly down a slope once.
	Apparently a very wet slope in dress shoes with no grip so in order to make sure he didn't fall over because in a lot of those events that's something like a real political injury to ever be seen to fall over.
	So he sort of very gingerly walked down the slope and I think about here The tiniest of missteps and people were saying, oh, he's too old, he's past it, he needs to have physical checks.
	And you can see once he gets off the slate, he's absolutely fine.
	And that was barely perceptible.
	Right.
	Yeah.
	And it's nothing anyway.
	Right.
	So the double standard, both physically and psychologically between Trump and Biden is just very, very stark.
	But as I say, as I started the segment with, it seems that even the left leaning corporate media are Well they can't ignore it.
	So even The Guardian, well recently there was some of Joe's extended legal problems.
	Even his actual legal enemies said look we can't even put him on trial as any sort of witness for things because he's not a credible witness.
	He can't remember He can't remember things.
	He can't remember what has happened to him.
	He can't remember his own life very well and so he's not a credible witness.
	Well, there's a quote, he's an elderly man with a poor memory, which is, you know, the nicest thing, nicest way of saying it almost, isn't it?
	It would be kind of like asking Ozzy Osbourne to testify in court, wouldn't it?
	Yeah, what happened, Ozzy, in 1972 when you did something... Ozzy's not going to remember, right?
	So there's The Guardian, I've got a clip there from CNN.
	Do you want me to play this one?
	No, no, it's just the headline really.
	MSNBC had one.
	Even HuffPo, even Huffington Post, you know, can't really ignore it anymore.
	And yeah, as I say, even just yesterday, it looks like the Democratic establishment are going ahead with him for another four years.
	Four more years.
	Four more years.
	Unless they want Trump to win.
	Well, the only last thing I'll say, because should we start ending the segment here?
	If you'd like.
	Yeah, is that, well, He could very easily, if he wins, just say he wins again, just say he wins again, he will probably die in office, right?
	And then the Democratic Party establishment can But it's just so dangerous.
	On a geopolitical scale, it's just so dangerous.
	You've got a weak, feeble old man.
	And that's not meant to be insulting.
	That's just the truth.
	In charge of what is arguably supposed to be the most powerful nation in the world.
	It's a laughingstock at that point.
	Everyone's going to take pot shots.
	You know, like it's dangerous.
	It's so fundamentally dangerous.
	The Democrats are playing with the West's life, essentially.
	The Western world is in danger because of whoever is in charge of the White House.
	Yeah, it's insane.
	It's absolutely insane.
	It is worrying.
	I mean, one last thing I'll say is that there are examples in the past when you've got someone who's the head of state or the head of a country Or whatever.
	And they might be mad, or they might just simply have no interest in government or governance.
	A classic example might be somebody like Nero, who just insisted on spending all his time, essentially, doing whatever he wanted.
	Chariot racing, singing, playing the lyre.
	And yet, government ticked over fine.
	In fact, the Roman Empire was still doing well, and flourished even under him.
	So hopefully, maybe, it seems that it is the case on some level, the United States of America can function without a chief executive who's got all his marbles.
	So that's something at least.
	It's not like a medieval king where if he's mad, it directly means that the whole kingdom will start falling apart in short order.
	Doesn't seem the case for the United States.
	However, as you say, it's just not good and it's a real worry.
	And if the Democrats do run with him in November, it's just one more reason to hope Trump wins.
	All right, let's move on to the last segment.
	So I thought this would be an interesting one because satire is something we often hear about these days.
	We often hear that X or Y is satire.
	We hear that this is supposed to be making fun of you but most of the time you then look at the thing, the product, the media product that you're supposed to be insulted by and you go well if it is trying to insult me it's not doing a particularly good job of it.
	I hope this is satire by the way because obviously the 1980s was peak cinema.
	Well, this was Dan asking a question, and I thought seeing as we've got you on here, Nate, that it would be an important question to ask you as well, or an interesting one.
	Because in this segment, from a few, I think it was last week, he was talking about how, you know, AI is going to be taking over making some films when the technology gets better and better and better.
	Probably be a lot of work still actually programming in all the commands and writing a script that will be able to understand.
	But you will be able to get to the point at some time in the future where you will just be able to enter in a load of commands.
	and have a product after an hour or two that you can then edit into something that's usable.
	But at the beginning of this, he asked the question, when do you think the last really good year for movies was?
	Where you could say the blockbuster releases that were good outweighed the ones that were bad.
	And I'm interested to get an answer from both of you here.
	I don't know, because in cinema you think of the era as opposed to the year itself, generally speaking.
	So you said the 80s.
	In the 80s, yeah, synonymous with fantastic cinema as a whole.
	Individual years, not something I would ever really boil it down to.
	I would always look at an era because that tends to You've got the sort of fashionable elements of the entire era, sort of, you know, all within one.
	Dan put his down to 2008, mainly because Tropic Thunder came out.
	Specific, right?
	Really specific.
	Mainly because Tropic Thunder came out and he finds Robert Downey Jr.
	and Blackface really funny.
	And to be fair, I respect that.
	So if you can't think of a particular year then, what would you guys say is the last really good era of movies where it's really consistent classics coming out?
	I would say the 80s.
	The end of the 70s and as it sort of went into the 80s was fantastic cinema.
	It was really really good.
	There's so many cult classics to this day.
	And films which, you know, you talk about AI as well, like you're never necessarily going to get the issues that were on set which generated such great cult classic films.
	And that's part of AI's sort of awful hygienic element which will just ruin art moving forward.
	Yeah, you can't have the same improvisational element into the film when you're having to really refine everything to a prompt that an AI can understand.
	I recently had a discussion with Chloe from Proper Horror Show, which will be appearing on the website very soon, where we were talking about the works of Stanley Kubrick.
	of the way through because his works are so interesting to talk about so much to talk about i was really shocked to discover that for a guy with a reputation as being so meticulous and so precise with everything that he did that he was actually really improvisational on the sets as well and would sometimes especially on the set of something like the shining would be giving new script pages yeah to the to the to the actors every single day where to
	To the point where Jack Nicholson said, you know, I don't read the scripts anymore, I wait for them to show up and I read the lines because I don't know if I memorize them one day they're going to change the next day.
	Which really shocked me, but that really adds to the tension of a film like The Shining.
	the fact that Stanley Kubrick was basically abusive to the actors on that set really got the best performances out of them.
	Yeah, well, exactly.
	Is he famous for doing a stupid number of takes?
	Oh, yes.
	Over 100 takes of the scene where the actor's coming through the door and Shelley Duvall is screaming.
	Completely unnecessary.
	He basically traumatized that.
	I'm a filmmaker and he runs the best of all time.
	Say unnecessary, but then does the product speak for itself?
	That's the thing, isn't it?
	It's the exact opposite of someone like Clint Eastwood, for instance, because obviously he's directed dozens and dozens of films.
	He does one take every time and then he says, put it, that's it, we're done.
	So if you've nailed it that first take, amazing, but there's so many stories of actors doing that first take with Eastwood on the first day when they're filming with him and going, oh, I feel like I could do this better.
	Should we go again?
	And he's like, nope, we're doing the next shot.
	Your question of when was peak cinema, I'm painfully aware that my answer might just be when I was still a kid or a teenager, but I feel like the 80s into the 90s, I think by the mid 90s, something like Jurassic Park or Terminator 2 or something, still in the mid 90s sort of time, they weren't infected with woke nonsense.
	So I think there's loads of great films from the 90s, even in the early 2000s there were still great films getting made.
	It started to bleed into the over-reliance on technology as well, so they would CGI stuff that very clearly did not need CGI-ing, or the limitations of CG did not allow it in the first place, and so that started to bleed into it.
	You know it's difficult it's so difficult because there's so many films that I like over such a wide period of time but I suppose I would say yeah that early 90s to early 2000s period for me because by the time you get to the early 2000s you've had really great films like The Matrix come out then you've had the The Lord of the Rings trilogy come out at that time period as well and then since then um There's still been plenty of good films that have come out since then, but there's definitely been a shift.
	Oh yeah.
	There's been a shift in the quality, a shift in the type of production.
	As soon as green screens became this really affordable and quick, easy way to make a film is when, that's where you get stories of like Sir Ian McKellen on the set of The Hobbit.
	Where he'd been in the Lord of the Rings before and really enjoyed the experience, where he's on The Hobbit and all of his scenes are now in front of a green screen and he actually begins weeping on set because he says, you know, I didn't start acting so that I could yell at a tennis ball in front of a green screen.
	That's not what I started doing this for.
	Because that experience is just so unnatural for anybody to act in a realistic way.
	And, you know, as much as we all joke and say, oh, the prequels are better than people give them credit for.
	And in some ways they are, but they definitely helped start that.
	Yeah, yeah.
	It depends what, you know, obviously, what you define as a good film.
	I mean, we talk, say, the 80s was great for films, But then if you take, you know, one of the most quintessentially 80s films, off the top of my head, I think maybe like Commando or something, it's a good Arnie action film.
	But in terms of greatest films of all times, you know, nowhere near really.
	It's pretty silly.
	It's a pretty silly film.
	There are some really great Arnie 80s films.
	I think I like Commando.
	First Terminator, I'd say is a classic, low budget thriller.
	Among those, it's one of the best.
	Predator.
	That's an absolute classic Predator.
	I like Commando.
	I'm just saying, if you're going to make your top 20 films of all time, Commando's not going to make the cut, right?
	That's all I'm saying.
	You raise a really interesting point, and I think it's really valid actually, is that that era balanced it nicely.
	And that's what's lacking in today.
	There is no balance.
	It's one singular focus, one singular message.
	Subversive nonsense from Hollywood.
	And that's it.
	That's actually what we have as a range of films to enjoy.
	Clearly there are obviously some things which slip through the cracks, of course.
	But, generalisation, it's all homogenous.
	It's a homogenous story.
	Homogenous casting.
	Diversity through casting, not diversity through storytelling.
	So you saying that Commando was there and it's a bit silly and stuff, yeah.
	But we had good balance.
	It's fun though.
	Exactly.
	We don't have many good films these days.
	We had really good balance and good counter-programming.
	And the art of counter-programming is lost now.
	Generally.
	Real life squibs, no CGI.
	It's all real shenanigans.
	Oh yeah, Robocop was amazing for the squibs back in the day.
	What is it, the E something or other machine?
	The robot?
	ED-209.
	Yeah, ED-209 when he just unloads on that guy in the boardroom.
	That's an amazing scene.
	Yeah.
	I watched that when I was too young.
	I think I was about 9 years old and that scarred me.
	That was the first super gruesome killing I ever saw on celluloid.
	Anyway, yeah.
	And then he said, awesome.
	Super cool.
	Yeah.
	I think it's also this thing about, how to say it, that there's a humanity to older films from the 80s, from the 70s, from the 60s, or even old black and white films.
	There's a real humanity to them.
	I hope people know what I mean by that.
	And now films where you've got a Mary Sue or something like that, DEI just crammed down your throat.
	It's not the real human experience.
	Nothing is explored about the human experience.
	I think there's something to be said for the difference between then and now, filming on 35mm or different types of film, as opposed to digital, which is what most people do now.
	Because with film, you get the film grain, there's a certain naturalistic look to film.
	Even though it looks very cinematic, it feels like it's happening in front of you and can drag you in.
	Whereas digital, as high definition as it can get, You get that artificial, unnatural look to it.
	There's a bit of a sheen on everything that I don't like as much.
	They actually try to bring back in the older look in post.
	So a lot of it's noise.
	They try to add noise back to the digital.
	You can tell the difference.
	Yeah, absolutely.
	But it's even down to motion blur.
	So old film, it's shot on like 23.9 frames a second.
	And it adds a really nice motion blur, and it's what we're trained, and it's what the human eye appreciates.
	We like it.
	But now a lot of it's shot on a much higher frame rate, or sort of downgraded and things like that.
	Yeah, that was the problem with Hobbit as well.
	Yeah, 60 frames a second.
	It's awful.
	It's horrendous to look at.
	I heard stories of people... It actually hurts your eyes!
	I think they could only show it in that frame rate in certain specialised cinemas that were prepared for it.
	And people who went to go see it there, they reported lots of headaches.
	Yeah, it makes you feel really nauseous.
	Because I remember one time I was at my sister's And her mister at the time was watching Harry Potter or something on the TV and it was a really high frame rate TV.
	It was like, you know, 4K is in 60 frames per second these days.
	There's a precursor to that.
	And I looked at it and it was so strange to me because everybody looked like they were moving in fast motion, but too slow at the same time.
	It came, it felt really unnatural to my eyes.
	So strange.
	You know, I'd like to see, I'd like to see a film shot.
	Nowadays, with an actual old school, really old school, like 1960s Technicolor film, what is it, 35mm film or something?
	You know like how Cleopatra or Ben-Hur or one of these old 60s, sort of the early color films.
	Yeah, not a digital version to make it look like that, but actually do it.
	Get people that, I'm sure those cameras still exist even if they're museum pieces.
	Do a film in that again, I'd love to see that.
	You can still get that old school aesthetic, you just need to use the old school technology.
	I think, did the Lighthouse, I know the Lighthouse was filmed in a very specific old school aspect ratio.
	Do you know if that was shot on film or was that digital?
	The answer to that, I can't quite remember now.
	I think there was something to do with that, whether it was shot on film or not.
	I'm not quite sure, but I know that they went through quite a lot of issues making that, so it might have been that they were shooting it on film.
	I don't know.
	Because I can completely understand from a practical mindset why you would choose to shoot on digital.
	It's so much more convenient, you don't have to lug around as much technology, you don't have to... the editing process, you're not having to actually go through film reels and splicing them together that way, but...
	It just looks better.
	For me, it looks a lot better.
	But going on to what we talk about with classic 80s and 90s films, one of the big bits of discourse that happened recently was, the thing seems to have stopped working one moment, was the Starship Troopers discourse.
	And there was the big idea that there was a certain type of person on the left who had decided that because Paul Verhoeven had decided not to read the book that it was based on, or at least not read past page 50, And went, ah, people love their country and are willing to fight for it, this must be fascism.
	And then said that his film was a fascist satire.
	Then lots of leftists watch the film and say, well, no point thinking for myself, it must be a fascist satire.
	And that was a big interesting thing, because they like to trot out this new term that's only really started popping up in the past year or so, which was the media literacy.
	If you disagree with my take on a particular film or piece of media, you need to get some media literacy.
	Which means...
	Read an interview with the author so that he can tell you what to think.
	Or, as I saw someone point out, which is much more likely in what they're doing, watch a video essay from a leftist who read some interviews so he can tell you what to think by proxy.
	Which is interesting.
	And the same thing seems to be happening with this new game that I've only just heard of.
	But whatever you do, don't read the original Henley novel.
	No.
	Whatever you do, don't do that.
	No, because you're not a fascist, are you?
	You wouldn't read fascist literature, would you, Bo?
	That would be verboten.
	Fascist sci-fi.
	Yeah, comrade.
	There's this new game that came out recently, which I've only just heard of.
	Karl and some other members of the office have been telling me that it's really awesome to play.
	And I saw that you've spoken about it recently as well, which is Helldivers 2, which is very clearly, to me, we couldn't afford the Starship Troopers license, so we just made a Starship Troopers game, but called it something else instead.
	Uh, where a lot of people are very annoyed that people like it, despite the fact that, don't you realize this is a heckin' satire of fascism, bro?
	This is the opening cinematic, which I watched earlier, which is actually pretty funny, so... Super Earth.
	Our home.
	Prosperity.
	Liberty.
	Hi there.
	Democracy.
	Our way of life.
	Oh, hello.
	But freedom doesn't come free.
	Sweet liberty!
	No!
	Look familiar?
	Scenes like these are happening all over the galaxy right now.
	You could be next.
	That is, unless you make the most important decision of your life.
	Prove to yourself that you have the strength and the courage to be free.
	Join the Helldivers.
	Become part of an elite peacekeeping force!
	See exotic new lifeforms.
	And spread managed democracy throughout the galaxy.
	Become a hero.
	Become a legend.
	Become a Helldiver.
	I mean, sign me up.
	That looks great.
	That looks fun.
	And from what I've been told in the office, it sounds like a really fun game.
	But people are sharing stuff like this.
	Friendly reminder.
	This is from the Helldivers Alerts.
	Your true value should be placed in something greater.
	Kindness and morality.
	Don't be cringe, choose to think.
	Okay, so from what I saw there, one, I've got a question.
	Do you think the guy in that was supposed to look as much like Richard Spencer as he did?
	With the hair and everything.
	if this is supposed to be some kind of satire of fascism, which is what some on the left on Twitter seems to think it is, once again, we have a problem, a similar problem that shows up in Starship Troopers, which is a fascist, multiracial, multiethnic family, which is multiracial, multiethnic family, which is not what I remember Mussolini and Hitler advocating for.
	Not classic fascists.
	I can't really remember that part of it, but okay, you see some people say, well, of course, the most ethnically diverse people on the internet are the racists.
	So maybe that's something to do with it.
	Also, once again, it's really difficult to get me to sympathize and empathize if there is really a legitimate threat from massive, demonic alien bugs that want to rip my face off.
	You're not going to get me having much sympathy for them.
	I've also been told that the other enemies of the game is like Terminator killer robot.
	Yeah, I just, the left don't know how to have fun.
	They just don't have fun, do they?
	Let's be honest.
	And also, they literally use the term managed democracy in here, so if anything, the most this could be said to be making fun of is America spreading trans rights across the world.
	But even then, if you're looking at this and going, well, those bugs are obviously supposed to be Middle Eastern Muslims... That's a self-report on the individuals, isn't it?
	It's the classic thing, though.
	Defending yourself in any way is fascist.
	That's sort of the overriding thing they're saying there.
	I noticed 9 million views.
	That's so incredibly popular.
	A lot of people are making fun of this.
	But also it seems to be a very popular game at the moment.
	And other people are pointing out this classic meme.
	Woah, a satire on how heckin' bad fascism is?
	No, the real message?
	Shut up, nerd.
	And remember, if you're having fun in a game, you're having fun with the mid-century moustache man.
	Do your part to stop fun and fascism by joining your local media literacy commune today.
	Oh, is it an Xbox game?
	I assumed it was a PC game.
	I think it's a PC game, but I don't know if you can... I think you can play it on.
	Yeah, you can get it.
	Shockingly, I don't know if this is a real image.
	I think there might be some editing trickery going on here.
	But I was pointed to this by Carl who shared with me that the actual makers of the game are maybe not in on this whole satire joke thing going on as well because there's these screenshots from the Steam page where people are leaving reviews saying friend got banned for asking to add one LGBTQ cape My friend got permabanned from the Discord without a warning when all bro did was ask if there's a chance they will add LGBT cape or background.
	Dude was permabanned and even got death threat in his DMs.
	Okay, I get it that a lot of people that play this game are COD fanboys from Shroud and Summon Tings 1 fanbase, but dude it is pathetic how toxic this community.
	WokeHammerL's saying that I will now buy your game.
	I'm shocked, if this is true, if this is real, then that's a shocking amount of deviance from the prescribed narrative from the developers of this game, if it's the developers discord that this person got kicked from.
	Most companies would go like, oh don't worry, we've already got the gay stuff planned.
	Yeah well, I mean that's the thing with a lot of these is that, so there was, I think it was, I can't remember what game it was, it might have even been I don't know another online service game that you could sort of mod and people were making mods to remove a bunch of the political messaging and they clamped down on it and was like no no no no no no we're gonna ban you if you mod this stuff and remove it and it's like well this is the this is the alternative of that which if this is true great good Do you want to have fun with our games?
	Well great, we won't shove anything down your throat.
	You can have fun with our game where you shoot big evil bug monsters in outer space.
	It's also weird, doesn't really make that much sense to me, is that okay I want to play the game where we export quote-unquote democracy across the galaxy at the point of a machine gun killing massive bugs.
	I'm up for all of that but only if I can have a rainbow skin On my futuristic machine gun.
	Only then will I be comfortable.
	How many genders exactly are we exporting to these alien planets?
	And there was other reports as well where some people were just saying like, no politics in the game.
	I was banned from the Discord, blah blah blah.
	Can the whole democracy bravado be toned down?
	But I dislike the nationalistic fascist theme that it has.
	I thought it was supposed to be a joke.
	Bro, you obviously don't have the media literacy to be able to understand and comprehend what's going on here.
	But from what you were saying, we know what happens to a lot of games that, you know, I think Go Woke, Go Broke has got a bit of a 50-50 hit rate.
	Yeah.
	But when it does hit, it hits hard, and you get lots of games these days that do really pander.
	As I spoke about recently with you and Callum, Bo, the Suicide Squad game, which came out and was very unpopular, decided to crap all over the franchise that it was part of, disregard the legacy characters, can literally piss on their corpses at points disregard the legacy characters, can literally piss on their corpses at points where one of the characters urinates on the Flash after you kill him, because that's what you want to do when you're playing a fun superhero Murder the heroes and then urinate on their corpses.
	Well, it turns out that doesn't really do very well.
	It turns out that people look at that and say, one, the game doesn't look fun, Two, this is really insulting and hates me.
	So I'm not going to pay.
	I'm not going to pay for it.
	And Warner Brothers Discovery have said that it's fallen short of our expectations.
	Which is always, it's basically corporate talk for has tanked.
	Well, yeah, I mean, they go on to say how the rest of the year is going to be really, really, you know, tough and they're not going to recover.
	But ultimately, you know, You get what you deserve at this point.
	You employed Sweet Baby Inc.
	You only employ them if you don't want money.
	You know that's what they're there for.
	The remarkable thing that I found looking into it was I think it was the CEO of Sweet Baby Inc.
	was one of the head writers on it.
	They stuck Sefton Hill and some of the other old Rocksteady guys names on it who had left the company halfway through production of this game so that you would think that oh it's the same creative team but really they'd airdropped in a load of The thing about games now, this is a AAA game, supposedly a AAA game as well, I mean people's cynicism with these games are so sky high and the games developers should know this, right?
	Because you release a game, day one patch, the equivalent size of the game, like you're selling a broken product and yet they still have the audacity I think there's a part of them that want it to fail so it can generate headlines saying misogynistic gamers refuse to buy game because they hate women.
	I think that when you talk about the cynicism that might be fueling part of it.
	The other thing is, I haven't played this game or the other one we were just talking about, but from what I understand, from what Carl said, the actual game, regardless of the storyline or anything, the actual gameplay, in-game gameplay, is fun and good.
	And for that one apparently it's not.
	No, this is like an actual crap game.
	This is going to give you an epileptic seizure if you play it because the amount of crap that it throws on screen at all times.
	I watched a supercut of Mauler playing through it and the amount of crap on screen on the UI means you can't even see what you're doing half the time, which is not a fun recipe for a game, shockingly enough.
	It's the same with movies.
	You could make a left-leaning, wokest movie.
	I don't think one has been made yet, but it would be possible to make one that was well-written and well put together enough that, as a piece, was a good movie.
	I think that would be possible.
	Same thing goes for something that's super based or right-leaning.
	If it's put together poorly enough, it won't be a good movie.
	Obviously, the same would apply to games.
	Is the actual game fun?
	People don't even ask that much anymore.
	But anyway, according to Carl, that Starship Troopers game is a good game.
	Yeah, there you go.
	I did have some more stuff, but it's not as relevant and I think it can be saved for another time.
	So, with that, let's go on to the video comments, shall we?
	Hello, Lokesy.
	I hope you're all well, excluding your recalcitrant scroller.
	I joined Twitter when Elon bought it and I found many awesome memes and gifs.
	But this picture put out by a weather manipulation conspiracy site blew my mind.
	It is archived, and it is or was word for word, or it was at the time, if people would like to check.
	The signs are settled, and it makes sense with what we know of cloud seeding.
	So why don't they do it?
	Interesting.
	Move on to the next one.
	Regarding the last hour about the Top 10 Generals, I have a few things to say.
	Europeans introduced the weapon of gun to the Japanese during their Sengoku Jidai, also known as their Civil War era.
	The Japanese discovered their inner Americans and that made Europe very, very concerned.
	So, in order to avoid a potential conflict, the Europeans decided to spread the Christianity to Japan.
	Actually, the most I know about Anglo-American-Japanese relations is that when America showed up at the borders of Japan in the 19th century and just said, open your borders or we'll open fire.
	As thanks for opening the borders, they said, oh, by the way, here's a train.
	Look at the amazing things that we've been able to do.
	And the Japanese took that and they just ran with it.
	Now they're really good at trains.
	Chandler opened up Japan for the Americans.
	I mean, Matthew Perry, Commodore Matt Perry.
	Yeah, I'll do a bit on that.
	I think there's an old bit of content with me and John Wheatley.
	We've talked about it, but I've talked about it, oh no, I did another thing, a road to, I did an epoch, the road to Pearl Harbor, where I talked about that, at least in passing.
	Yeah, it's interesting, very interesting bit of history, but yeah, we did a bit of content about top ten generals in history, and it was very western-centric.
	There was one Japanese general in there, but you can't please everyone.
	We've only got ten picks.
	You're going to leave out so many greats.
	The principles of non-derogability and accountability frame the seven absolute rights as follows.
	The right not to be subject to extrajudicial killing.
	The right not to be subject to emergency measures that have no legal or constitutional justification.
	The right not to be tortured.
	The right not to be subjected to arbitrary detention.
	The right not to be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment or excessive bail.
	The right not to be punished for what is said in the course of parliamentary proceedings.
	The right to be tried by an impartial judge who is a member of an independent judiciary.
	Quite a lot of people in the West don't have all seven of those at the moment.
	That's bad assailant.
	An independent judiciary.
	Emergency measures.
	You want the moon on a stick, don't you?
	That's pie in the sky.
	I would kind of like to see people punished for what is said in Parliament but that's far beyond my power to be able to do so.
	I respect all of these, I think these are very fair rights for people to hold.
	The problem with it is that you need to rely on the honour and accountability of the people who administer those rights, who are in positions of power to be able to protect your rights, and we just have people in power at the moment who don't give a shit.
	Yeah.
	That's a fair assessment.
	Hello.
	Last week, Beau asked what was behind me on my wall.
	This is my collection of archery releases.
	I make accessories for them, and I do reviews for them on YouTube.
	For anyone who doesn't know what they are, they are mechanical triggers that you hook onto the string of a compound bow and you draw with that instead of pulling with your fingers.
	The one I think you noticed was this one.
	It was discontinued, but it was made by a company called Bernie's Archery.
	It is aptly called the Equalizer, and it is pretty much a knuckle duster with the head of a hinge release.
	That's nice.
	That's all really cool.
	Thanks for that.
	Really appreciate that.
	Actually, when I came out of the studio, about three different people immediately told me what they were.
	Oh, really?
	I didn't even hear.
	Yeah, yeah.
	They were like... Well, I learned something then.
	Anyway, they're pretty cool.
	What the hell is this?
	This looks less cool.
	Oh, no.
	It is quite easy to manipulate user input.
	I do it all the time to properly format voice commands for the Robo Waifu.
	Play music.
	Here's a quick example of how easy it is.
	That was quite a trip right there.
	Well, I'm glad that when people talk about, you know, when they're building the AI waifus, I'm glad that somebody is actually working on that, because that might solve a hell of a lot of the incel problem.
	Now we are talking about travel logs and the decline of our civilization.
	I just want to recommend the YouTube channel from Tyler Oliveira, where he goes to the actual most dangerous places on the planet.
	San Francisco.
	And even worse than San Francisco, Canada.
	And honestly, these videos are worth watching just for how eye-opening it is when you simply take the camera to these places and film and let these people speak.
	I would call it a third world country, but I have been to Vietnam and Vietnam, even in their slums, wasn't this.
	Yeah, I think even in third world countries, there's probably standards of behavior that people are sticking to.
	If you're a crack addict in San Francisco, you're not adhering to any standards really, are you?
	Yeah, I've been to a few places in the so-called third world.
	Some very poor places, Cambodia, Laos.
	And yeah, there might be slums and even massive piles of rubbish, trash in the streets and things.
	There doesn't seem to be a pandemic of drug addicts around.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, I've never... I've been to some third world countries and never ever feared that I'm going to be randomly stabbed.
	Yeah.
	I've usually felt very safe in the small number of third world countries I've been to.
	But it all depends, doesn't it?
	Yeah.
	Alright, so... One thing I absolutely despise in France.
	Well...
	In America, in very small towns, you're never going to get graffiti.
	Our police enforce the laws.
	We're very, very, very vitriolic to the people who graffiti.
	But even in small towns like this, there's graffiti all up and down.
	And it's not good.
	When I get the chance, I'll send a video of the city of Nantes and how just covered it is.
	It's really gross.
	I think it sounded like France.
	It's funny, different places you go in the world have differing degrees of problems with graffiti.
	One of the things I found remarkable is in Italy there's a massive problem with it.
	You go to Rome, not necessarily on the Colosseum or anything, or at the Forum, but in their normal buildings, it's covered.
	covered in graffiti.
	In London, some places you go, there's graffiti problem, other places not.
	In some places like Manchester, it's just almost part and parcel of the city that a lot of it is sanctioned.
	A lot of it will have been commissioned.
	These big pieces of hideous graffiti on the sides of walls that somebody has They sanctioned that and yet they let Victorian buildings fall into complete disarray and disrepair.
	What would I rather look at?
	and such.
	It's amazing isn't it?
	They sanctioned that and yet they let Victorian buildings fall into complete disarray and disrepair.
	What would I rather look at?
	Beautiful architecture or some scummy scrawling on a wall.
	Drag queens advertising Baileys painted on the wall.
	That is legitimately something that is in Manchester right now if you go near the Arndale in the town centre.
	It's hideous and they're pulling the most demonic facial expressions as well.
	I hope some I hope...
	Not that I would ever condone it, but if some brave vigilante were to go and scrub that off the wall, it would be an immense improvement to the atmosphere of that city.
	Again, it's all very, very deliberate.
	It's people that run the councils and things want to destroy Our cities and things.
	One very small example, in East London, in Peckham, there was a mural of Only Fools and Horses.
	Really well done, of Del Boy and Rodney.
	And the council just ordered it painted over.
	Why wash over that?
	Have some pride, you know?
	Some pride in where you live and some pride in the sort of buildings and things.
	It's just gross, gross.
	Yeah, and like he said, I think in America it's the case where a lot of places still have local law enforcement who will crack down on that stuff.
	In here, there doesn't seem to be will from those in power to actually do anything about it, except for very specific exceptions.
	Like, if somebody did Some brave vigilante out there did scrub off that hideous mural.
	The police would be on him immediately.
	You know that because that whole mural, like you say, demoralization, it's there from the local council to let people know that you are controlled.
	You are under our power.
	My impression is that in small town and rural America, they largely live as they nearly always have, i.e.
	with law and order and everything, and it seems largely nice.
	A bit like in Britain, it's really the inner cities, bigger inner cities where civilization is collapsing.
	In actually the majority of the country, it's much as it's always been.
	There's still some very nice rural areas in the country.
	Absolutely.
	But I'll read through some of these written comments while I've still got time.
	Luke Edlin says, Hi, bloody love Nate's videos.
	It's fantastic to see him as a guest.
	Charles Francis Montmercy Gilead Oliver says, This is what happens when you let a historian tell you the date.
	Oh yeah.
	Hector Rex, always enjoy when Jason Statham is on the podcast.
	The real Jason Statham.
	Not that fake that you'll have seen in the movies.
	WinPillSeeker sent $2 on Rumble, thank you very much, and said, Hey Mr. H, it's me, Sketch Therapy, great to see you here.
	Tell them about your Datsun 510 project and your car nonsense channel.
	Yeah, so I have a sort of penchant for Japanese vehicles.
	Absolutely adore Japanese cars, old Japanese cars.
	I've got two or three very rare ones.
	I've got a Datsun 510, 1968 Datsun 510, which preceded the Hakosuka, which is the original Skyline GT-R.
	Iconic, loads of people love that.
	And then I've also got a Datsun 720 pickup truck.
	I've got a Corolla when they were cool.
	Actually, when they were cool.
	They were cool at one point, believe it or not.
	And yeah, I have another channel where I tinker around with vehicles every now and then.
	Oh, cool.
	I didn't even know you was a petrolhead.
	Oh, yes.
	Sounds really fun.
	Have you got a really big driveway or multiple garages?
	No, unfortunately not.
	So, yeah, I've got like a... How my house is set up is that there's a driveway in the garden.
	So I co-opted part of my grass as part of the drive as well.
	Fair enough.
	Alright, not just a string sent in $3 on Rumble and said nearly a new all-time high on Bitcoin.
	Dan doing any segments on it soon?
	A lot of excitement there.
	One of my hopes to end the money printer and save the country.
	I don't know if he is doing any segments on it.
	Maybe he will next week.
	I imagine it's of interest to him.
	Because he probably has some Bitcoin squirreled away somewhere.
	I was saying in the office the other day, when I was still working on the phones back in the day in the call centers, this would have been 10 years ago now, when Bitcoin was still worth about 300 quid, a strange African lady called in and didn't even want a phone claim or anything.
	And she was telling me over the phone, you need to buy Bitcoin, you need to buy Bitcoin.
	And I thought she was some crazy hookster.
	But now I look back and say, you know what?
	You were trying to look out for me.
	And I made a mistake.
	I should have.
	I could have afforded a Bitcoin or two back then.
	That was one of the native Britons, your ancestor, trying to look out for you from beyond the grave.
	I think what it was was some African witch doctor had read something in her voodoo and decided to let me know.
	And do you know what?
	Damn it, she was right.
	I missed out there.
	I could have so much money right now.
	Me and Dan should do something on Bitcoin, a brokenomics on Bitcoin.
	I've got a small amount of Bitcoin.
	I'm pretty sure Dan's got some.
	I've got a very small amount.
	I used to have a bit more.
	According to John, it apparently just hit 60k.
	Wow, that will be a PB.
	That will be an all-time high, I would have thought.
	It feels like a bubble though, so if you want to sell now, or now-ish, when it starts to fall again, it might not be a bad time to sell some.
	It's not a great time to buy some.
	That's what they always say.
	Yeah, well, you know.
	Last comment, because we've run over time, so I'll go over this last one now, which is Shadowband, again on Rumble, sent in $10.
	Thank you very much, saying, I miss comedies.
	There used to be like dozens of comedies released every year.
	Teen comedies, silly comedies, kids' comedies, rom-coms.
	Now there's like five per year max.
	I'm trying to think if there's any comedies I can remember.
	Coming out over the past year.
	The only one I can think of was some Jennifer Lawrence one where she was starring as a woman hired to basically lose some kid's virginity by the parents.
	That's the only one I can think of and that's only because it kept being advertised to me on YouTube before a video would play.
	But the selling point to that was she got naked in the movie.
	Oh did she?
	Maybe I will watch it!
	Apparently it's a full frontal.
	Well, so I'm watching that less for the comedic value in that case.
	That's literally the only one I can think of, is that Jennifer Lawrence one.
	Can you think of any comedies that came out recently?
	Yeah, I think it was a movie called Anyone But You, which was a rom-com, Sidney Sweeney, one of the chaps from the latest Mission Impossible, Top Gun.
	But I didn't watch it.
	It's not my cup of tea.
	I mean, arguably Madame Web is a comedy.
	But the stuff they put out now is just funny by default.
	Yeah, by accident.
	Was Barbie a comedy?
	I didn't watch it.
	I know Carl and Connor couldn't shut up about it for a while.
	It wasn't funny, remotely.
	So I didn't watch it.
	But anyway, that's all we've got time for.
	Let people know again where they can find you.
	Yes, you can find me over at YouTube Mistakes Reviews and Twitter, Mistakes Reviews.
	Wonderful.
	So find Nate there at Mr. H Reviews.
	And thank you very much for tuning in.
	I know we had some technical problems, but I think we managed to muddle our way through it.
	It's been a pleasure having you on, Mr. H. It's been a pleasure as always, Bo.

▲