Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 20, 2024 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:32:38

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #875

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Good afternoon, folks.
	Welcome to the podcast The Low Seaters for Wednesday, the 20th of March, 2023.
	I'm joined by Dan and evolutionary psychologist Ed Dutton.
	Thanks for joining us, Ed.
	Pleasure.
	Good to be here.
	Good, and today we're going to be talking about Vladimir Putin versus our democracy.
	Who genuinely has the electoral mandate?
	Then we're going to be talking about immigrants and why they're so goddamn grateful to us for everything that we've done.
	And then we're going to be exploring a mysterious species of subs... No, I'm not going to say that.
	A mysterious species of human called the Chav.
	Maybe what's happened to them?
	I don't see any around anymore.
	Oh, I think they're still there, we just don't talk about them.
	We talk about mass immigration now, but the Chavs are still there in the background, I think.
	Right.
	You've got to go to the right places.
	The poor, unappreciated Chavs.
	Look under the right stones, we're saying.
	Okay, well, let's crack on then.
	Yeah, so congratulations to Vladimir Putin for winning his election.
	What did everybody get?
	Was it 87% in the end?
	Something along those lines?
	Are we congratulating him on winning?
	Well, you say that, but I mean, I kind of think we kind of have to, because didn't he kill one of his political opponents?
	Sorry, kill.
	Well, one of them died.
	Yeah, but I mean, a lot of people are dying suddenly these days, and I don't really know what to make of that.
	I'm not going to give him the benefit of the doubt, if that's what you're asking.
	I'm going to vary slightly here, because I don't doubt that he has put his thumb on the scale once or twice along the way in order to get to the election.
	But, the point that I think is more interesting for me is that... Yeah, but we do that too.
	What, murder people in jail?
	Well, no.
	I mean, we've got Julian Assange, who we're just leaving to rot.
	And then you've got various other figures who have been inconvenient.
	I'm not saying we turned up.
	I'm not saying we're angels.
	Yes.
	No, let me come back.
	I mean, just just just just one point of putting the thumb on the scale.
	I think Google filtered out something like 80% of Republican fundraising emails.
	They erroneously marked them as spam.
	So, yeah, I am certain that Putin puts his thumb on the scales once or twice.
	But I just wanted to highlight that it's not wildly different from our system, even though it is being presented different.
	I think there might be a slight difference in kind.
	It's one thing having your fundraising email filtered, and it's another thing being stabbed.
	It's a difference of extent.
	I mean, with Putin, you know what you're doing with it.
	It's honest, it's clear.
	If you are disloyal to Putin, then you die.
	And that's a black and white thing.
	I almost respect that.
	I almost like knowing where I am.
	In a society like that, if you say something against the leader, you're out.
	But it's much more subtle with us.
	It's people who are dissidents being stopped at the border and intimidated by MI5.
	It's people who are dissidents being demonetised.
	It's a sort of girlish version, a subtle version of what he does, where you don't quite know where you are.
	So you have to be careful what you say, there's certain words that will get you in trouble, that will mean that you, certain comments, like Lee Anderson for example, that if you, if you just slightly one word out of turn then that's it, you have to apologise and debase yourself, but you don't quite know the border and so therefore it's in your interest to just shut up.
	Well, there wasn't anything fundamentally different that Lee Anderson said from what Suella Braveman said.
	But there was some sort of difference about Lee Anderson and Suella Braveman.
	There was a difference in how well it was articulated.
	So she's more educated, whatever, more intelligent, I guess.
	And has been to Barrister, whatever, she's been to Oxford.
	And so she's able to put it in a slightly less offensive way.
	He puts it in a more blunt way.
	Also, he doesn't have the certain get-out-of-jail-free card that she has.
	I think the problem with the answer was specificity.
	He said it was London and Sadiq Khan who was friends with the Islamists, whereas Sweller-Braveman said Britain had been captured non-specifically.
	But I wanted to highlight this article from the BBC, who are predictably dunking on it and basically making out the argument that that place is a tyranny and we have a hallowed democracy and therefore it is fundamentally different.
	Because from the BBC's point of view, Putin winning 87% is clearly tyranny, whereas Rishi Sunak running unopposed, that's our democracy, isn't it?
	Yes.
	There is a fundamental difference there.
	So let me just read from the article and jump in, guys, where you go.
	As predictions go, a Putin landslide was the easy one.
	No crystal ball or tea leaves required there.
	After all, in Russia, the Kremlin tightly controls the political system, including the elections.
	Well, unlike here.
	As I've just pointed out, Rishi won unopposed after being parachuted into the safest Tory seat in the country, rapidly promoted, and he then operated two coups to get rid of two Prime Ministers, and was then shoved in unopposed by backroom deals.
	There is something Putin-esque.
	I hadn't thought of this before.
	There is something, not just the height problem, but there is something Putin-esque about our Prime Minister, isn't there?
	You're right, he was a very, very safe seat that he has absolutely no connections to whatsoever, but the attitude of the Conservative Party at the time was we desperately need more ethnic minorities or whatever, so presumably there was a thumb that was put on the scale, as it were, to bypass the concerns of the people of Richmond and Yorkshire.
	Well, he certainly was.
	I mean, Cameron came out and said, we did something about the fact that we were straight white men.
	But he came out of nowhere and then he's the Prime Minister.
	He's very similar to Macron.
	He was Chief Secretary to the Treasury.
	And then it was the resignation, wasn't it, of the Chancellor and whoever that was at the time, I forget.
	The bald chap.
	Yeah, the bald fellow, the bald... Yes, oh, Javid.
	Oh, Javid, that's the guy.
	Oh, Javid.
	And so then he's Chancellor, and then he's moved up with incredible speed.
	It was exactly the same with Macron.
	Came out of nowhere, shoved through the ranks utterly fast, and then he's in power.
	Were they both Goldman Sachs bankers?
	Yes.
	Yeah.
	So there is something putinesque about it.
	A young guy brought up by an overweight, charismatic fellow, And he then takes over and the overweight charismatic fellow is silent.
	Yeah, there are parallels.
	Let me just read that last line again.
	After all, in Russia, the Kremlin tightly controls the political system, including elections.
	Can we just go to the next link?
	Right.
	I thought it might just be worth reminding us that in the US, Joe Biden was elected after probably one of the most, well presumably, the most intense PSYOP in history.
	And because I'm a betting man, I was watching this on the night, with a little bet that I put on, and basically the betting markets were saying that Trump is five times more likely to win at, this was 3.30am, than Biden.
	And then there was a leak or something.
	How much did you lose?
	A bit.
	I did take some off the table, but I didn't take a... But the thing is, I was thinking, you know, I'm going to get a beach house with this, so... Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Well, you betted that Trump would win.
	Yes.
	Why wouldn't you?
	Well, because obviously they're going to cheat.
	Well, all the signs were...
	They forgot to the first time.
	Well, no, they were outwitted.
	There was these campaigning methods and whatever to individually target people and so forth using various algorithms that they just didn't know about.
	They weren't clever enough.
	They probably did cheat.
	They always cheat.
	Oh, yes.
	We know they cheated in 1960, for goodness sake, and they probably have always cheated, but they didn't cheat enough.
	They always cheat, it's where the cheating gets over the line.
	It's where the cheating gets over the line, it's where they cheated enough.
	This time they were going to make absolutely sure.
	Yes, so I just want to look at that line with the bit that the Kremlin tightly controls elections and then glance back at that.
	The other thing I'd point out, of course, is after his surprise win, the FBI director The FBI cooked up a Gretchen Whitmore entrapment scheme.
	A kidnapping scheme, yes.
	But interestingly, before it was a kidnapping scheme, it was supposed to be a raid on the state capital.
	That guy, after he gets found out and the FBI gets chewed out for entrapment, he then gets moved to the DC office.
	Six weeks later, wouldn't you know it, they have a storming of the Capitol, which basically justifies the jailing of hundreds of political opponents.
	Yeah, and he's in charge of the security at the time, isn't he?
	He was.
	He was.
	And that has been used to give themselves all sorts of power.
	I just think you knew it was the freest and fairest election when they had to put up barbed wire fences around the White House after the election.
	That just indicates everything that you need to know.
	Right.
	So let me read another line from this.
	Chances are that President Putin will continue along his current path of conflict abroad and crackdown at home.
	So again, comparing that to the UK.
	Can we talk about the Scottish hate crime legislation that's coming in the end?
	Sorry, am I pre-empting this?
	Yeah.
	No, no, no, no, no, no, no.
	Cracking down of dissidents at home.
	Well, literally in your home.
	Yes, literally in your home.
	You'll be cracking down on dissidents in your dad.
	Your elderly granddad sitting there saying, what about all these immigrants coming over here?
	And then that's it.
	Ring the police.
	At least Putin's waiting until you go on holiday to Salisbury.
	Now to be ultra clear for the viewers, especially the non-regular viewers because they're the ones who always get tripped on this, I'm not making the argument that Putin is a good guy.
	I'm making the argument that Putin is a bad guy.
	I'm just also making the argument that we're also ruled by bad guys, it's just the midwit seem to think that it's a good guy, bad guy dichotomy and it's not.
	Our bad guys are covered in our colours and therefore they're good guys according to the midwit.
	Yes.
	And actually, I don't know what you think about this, but my slightly unpopular opinion on this is that that vote, yes, thumbs on scale, but it's probably a broadly accurate picture.
	I would think so.
	The impression I get from Russians that I know, and Russians that are there, is that the one way you will unite a people is by making those people feel utterly persecuted by outsiders.
	That this creates an internal dynamic where you all feel a sense of togetherness, almost like a blitz spirit, which you wouldn't otherwise have felt.
	So what we've done by putting these economic sanctions on Russia, by making life difficult for the average, because it's the average Russian citizen that's affected by this, not billionaires, what we've done by this is created a sense of, you know, everyone hates us, everyone hates us, and so... And the Americans can't stop saying that.
	Yeah, and so yeah, so we will vote for this leader who, to be fair, has made the economy somewhat better compared to... Well, you say somewhat better.
	It's overtaken Germany.
	Well, I believe I was engaging in... I didn't know that!
	I believe I was engaging in laetitia.
	But you've got that golden mix of the perception of being, well, probably the correct perception of being persecuted by the outside world.
	But not actually suffering it because their economy... so they've overtaken Germany.
	Inward investment is at a record high.
	There's a lot of money coming from the Eurasian bloc and the emirate states and so on.
	So there's a lot of money flowing into...
	Russia is sort of genuinely booming at the moment, but coupled with your persecution overall narrative, how does that not win you an election?
	It wins you an election.
	I mean, it's the most basic thing that you do.
	If you're unpopular, if your popularity is on the wane, which it was to some extent with Putin, then what you have to do is do something nationalistic and gung-ho to unite the people.
	It's what Mrs Thatcher did, and it meant that she won the 1983 election overwhelmingly.
	Okay, I would agree, fair enough, outrageously they invaded the Falklands, but it was a It was brilliant for her because she was in trouble in the polls.
	It's what Mugabe did in the late 90s.
	He thought, I'm losing popularity, what can I do?
	I know, I'll persecute the white farmers.
	I'll go on and on about how our country is ruled by whites, how terrible it is.
	Who is this Rishi Sunak second term you're talking about?
	You are raising some really good points, actually, because at the end of the day, Putin has, whether you like him or not, performed a very effective judo flip on the United States.
	Because, of course, when you lay everything out on paper, the scales are not even between Russia and America.
	And yet Putin seems to have played an absolute blinder.
	He has actually taken territory for Russia and has actually expanded their borders.
	And he has actually shored up the position to the point now where we can't touch them unless we were going to have a full on invasion.
	Well, and the US has weakened its geopolitical position with the dollar.
	It's weakened itself on a military basis because a large part of US hegemony is that it can police the seas, that it can interdict shipping going from Russia to, you know, Brazil.
	But what you can't interdict is freight trains going between Russia and China.
	So they've weakened their political standing, they've weakened their economic standing, and they've weakened their geopolitical strength.
	Also, in terms of economic standing, what ultimately, I suppose, Russia and China would want to do is bring about a situation where the dollar is no longer the currency of international trade.
	If you have fiat currency, which they do, and there's mass inflation, these other countries are piling up gold.
	I was to say places like Kudogostan have more gold than we do.
	Oh, it's totally true.
	They're piling it up and they're doing that because there is, I think, a dim awareness that we are at that time of change where the dominant group in the world will no longer be the American.
	And coming back to your Russian friends, let me know what you think about this, because I think this might be true, but I don't know enough Russians to sort of properly check it out.
	I don't think Russians think about politics in the way that we think about it, which is the ding-dong between left and right.
	I think they just look at their political leader and they apply the following test.
	Is he weak and incompetent, or competent and strong?
	This is pretty... I mean, I interviewed a while ago Alexander Dugin.
	Oh, right.
	And he made this precise point.
	He said, basically, you must understand that the Russian mind is different from the Western mind.
	And you are interested in all of these things like democracy and individual rights and liberty and all this decadent stuff, from his perspective.
	We want to be led.
	It's almost like we want to outsource dealing with our problems to a big man.
	To a leader who will do that for us.
	And we much prefer to be wealthy and for our country to be respected.
	Like a group level mentality.
	Our country to be something important than to have all these individual liberties.
	So it's a very different way of seeing the world.
	Psychologically that must be healthy for a nation.
	Because what we get is young women in their twenties who think that it is their concern to solve big political issues of the day.
	And in Russia, if what you're saying in Russia, I'm sure it is right, is, okay, well, I'm going to get on with the things that I can actually do something about, and somebody else is going to take care of the political stuff, well, you're probably going to have lower instances of crazy young women.
	Well, I think that's true.
	But I suppose one way of understanding, this is a point Jordan Peterson made once, actually, one way of understanding getting involved in these big political projects is you do that precisely because you have unresolved mental issues, basically.
	You are a crazy young woman.
	You're high in social anxiety.
	You're high in neuroticism.
	You've got sort of a...
	Borderline personality or something.
	You deal with it by saying to yourself, oh, I'm morally superior, I'm important, I'm fighting for the good of the world, whatever.
	And that's how you cope with your negative feelings.
	Well, maybe they're going to be crazy anyway, but it's dangerous for me when they concern themselves with the political sphere.
	I would rather they just did something genuinely crazy, watering the plant pot on their head or whatever, I don't know.
	Just to bring it back to Putin for a moment, I think another advantage he has over almost every single Western leader is he actually seems to be acting in the interests of Russia.
	Yes, what a thought!
	I realise that sounds preposterous to Westerners, but he's obviously not controlled by someone else.
	But he doesn't seem to hate Russians, the way that our leaders do.
	He seems to like Russia.
	Yes.
	And doesn't seem to be the puppet of someone else.
	Yes.
	So, whether you like him or not, at least he seems to be the guy calling the shots.
	Yeah, I mean, if I were Russian, I think I'd like him.
	I'm not Russian, and therefore it's not my concern.
	Sure.
	But I can see why Russians like him.
	I wouldn't mind someone, maybe a giant orange ego, who might govern him, make him basically the same way, likes his country, likes the West, likes...
	If only there was someone waiting in the wings in this country who could feel that.
	I'll read another line from the article.
	Chances are that President Putin will continue along his current path of conflict abroad and crack down at home.
	So, um, well, conflict abroad, I mean, obviously, you know, as we mentioned, um, you know, any attempt at peace in Ukraine is being thwarted on the Western side.
	By Boris Johnson.
	But the, um, the, um, oh, and as was the other point on conflict abroad, does the US have anything to do with the conflict in the Middle East right now?
	I mean, two of them, basically.
	Probably.
	So there's that.
	And crackdown at home.
	Look, we're getting people in the UK who are regularly getting jailed and arrested for speech.
	And the speech policing is only going to get worse.
	Yes.
	So there's that.
	And of course, in the US, We have had hundreds of people jailed.
	I read in the paper there's a woman that's being, a barrister or something, that's being sued for saying that only women menstruate.
	Really?
	It's in the newspapers today.
	It's deeply offended some transsexuals and therefore she's being sued.
	Wow.
	Godspeed justice will be delivered.
	It's the anarcho-tyranny idea, that they don't investigate actual crime, burglary or whatever, anything like that, because they perceive that as, oh it's not the fault of the burglar, it's because of society.
	It's a form of social justice.
	It's a form of social justice, he's just retaking what's been taken from him.
	And so therefore you end up with anarchy on the streets, but they heavily police what anyone thinks, so that they can't actually stand up against this anarchy.
	I was the other day with a friend of mine and he said, oh, did I lock the door?
	And he went back, oh yeah, I locked the door.
	You've got to think about these things.
	As there's more and more crime, there's less and less space to think and to create and indeed to have the time to think about opposing your government.
	There's far too much to do.
	You've got to think about locking this and having a big cover around this.
	those hierarchy of needs.
	You're moving down precisely, moving down to a more basic life where you have to be concerned with just getting food ultimately.
	And that's what it's doing.
	It's moving us down massive hierarchy of needs so we just don't have the space and the time to think about greater things like politics because we're just about surviving.
	Well, the BBC continues, as for Russian civil society that's already under intense pressure may well intensify.
	So apparently Russian civil society is under intense pressure.
	But, yeah, on this show we give daily examples of how the US, UK, Canada, Australia and Ireland are basically at breaking point.
	Well, when you say civil society...
	Well, they say that.
	I think of that in terms of the sort of middle class, sort of civic, this sort of... It doesn't have to be middle class.
	Well, you know what I mean.
	Civic burger values, where you have the clubs and the gardening society, the local history group, all this kind of stuff.
	My understanding is that that's another difference between Russia and the West.
	That's never been particularly substantial in Russia.
	Not even under the Tsar.
	Now, part of that, I suppose, is because you have a dictatorship where everything was related to the Communist Party and to the party, and so you couldn't really have independent organisations of any kind.
	But even since the breakdown of that, these independent civil society organisations, they have arisen elsewhere in Eastern Europe that was under communism.
	Poland or whatever, there's loads of civil society stuff.
	There's not much of that in Russia.
	There's not much civil society.
	That's a big difference.
	The article even highlights a tweet from David Cameron.
	Apparently he said, in fact let's just call it up.
	So David Cameron says, polls are closed in Russia following the illegal holding of elections on Ukrainian territory.
	Blah blah blah blah blah.
	This is not what free and fair elections look like.
	How would you know Mr Cameron?
	Lord Cameron?
	Yes.
	Our unelected foreign minister serving a man who was appointed without contest after two prime ministers were cooed out.
	I don't actually feel like taking a lecture on democracy from the current government.
	No, quite.
	None of the people who rule the United Kingdom have been elected to that position.
	Apart from Siddhii Khan.
	You mean in the sense of winning an election?
	Yeah.
	I mean, if that's required.
	Yes.
	So the Welsh guy has been replaced mid-election.
	Rishi obviously doesn't do elections.
	So it comes to Youssef when...
	Yes, under Youssef.
	Yes.
	And, um...
	Yeah.
	So, none of the main constituent places in the... No, but that's not our system.
	Our system is you vote for a party, and the party... Well, not even that, though, is it?
	Our system is you vote for a candidate in a small area.
	Yeah.
	At least, that's the Westminster system.
	We didn't even have the names of the political parties on the ballot paper until, I think, 87.
	Sure, but there's always this sort of sense that there's the leader of the party, and there's something...
	So the way I've come to think about it is when you go and vote for your local candidate, that is the person you are surrendering your sovereignty to.
	Effectively.
	Another line from this.
	So the article goes on.
	Crucially, he can now claim to have a mandate for his war in Ukraine in the direction which he's leading Russia.
	In the end, it was the Kremlin leader who came out on top two months after the mutiny.
	Prigozhin was dead, killed in a plane crash.
	So before I talk about Prigozhin, I'd just like to briefly give a shout out to Dr. David Kelly, Julian Assange, the Boeing whistleblower from about a week ago, Seth Rich, have we got a picture of Seth Rich?
	Oh no, I've actually got this entire list of Clinton associates who have mysteriously died after they've been chained.
	Where's the other chain?
	It's currently in Snowden.
	Edward Snowden?
	Yep.
	Yep, there's a bunch of them.
	Now to be fair, Seth Rich and Dr David Kelly and Julian Assange and the Whistleblower, none of them actually drove a column of tanks towards Washington DC.
	I don't see them complaining about insurrections.
	Yes.
	Well, the thing is, in any system, if you drive a column of tanks towards his capital, I kind of expect you to turn up dead.
	If you don't, win, yeah.
	Yes.
	That's what I don't understand about Prigozhin.
	Why did he, he must have known that he seriously crossed a line.
	Yes.
	If you cross a line, very seriously, in a fairly major way, you don't stop halfway.
	You do this or you die.
	I kind of assume he must have been, he must have had a psychological break being under intense pressure or something like that.
	But my point is more, not so much to discuss the Russian system.
	It's just, can you imagine how the US political system would react if Seb Gorka drove a column of tanks towards DC?
	Well, I'm saying Dr. Gorka.
	I'm not going to disavow.
	Would they just shrug it off and just say, oh, it's all part and parcel of the banter of politics?
	Probably not.
	I imagine there'd be a punishment involved.
	Yeah, yeah, so there is that.
	The article goes on, there is one more thing about the 87%, it's a great confidence boost.
	When you're president and you're told you won another landslide, it makes you feel even more powerful, invincible even.
	He's now the longest serving Russian leader since Catherine the Great.
	So just a quick note on who he's outlived.
	He's outdone Clinton, Bush, Obama, Trump and I'm sure Biden will, if he's not already, will You know, go that way soon.
	He's outlived Blair Brown, Cameron May, Johnson, Truss, Sunak.
	What's interesting, just as a quick thing, is it's not like the British and American leaders, the sort of people we're expecting a long shelf life for.
	Yes.
	Like, Putin doesn't look like he's going anywhere for the next decade or so.
	These people are looking like they're going to be out this year.
	Yes, yes, so there'll be a few more added into that.
	So, the article also says, critics point out that a confident political leader can be dangerous.
	I'm not sure about that, Lachlan.
	I think that's obviously true.
	Dr. David Owen has this idea of hubris syndrome.
	And it's very interesting.
	He became foreign secretary when he was quite young.
	He was 40.
	In those days, that was young.
	And the idea that if you're in power for a very long time, if you're successful, basically, and the world is telling you you're successful, it's quite a simple thing, really.
	It goes to your head.
	The world is telling you you're successful.
	The world is telling you you are.
	It boosts your confidence.
	And eventually, if you're in a situation like that where you have all-encompassing power for a very long time, you'll get more and more yes-men, more and more sycophants.
	Then you become hubristic, and you start believing the crap that the bootlickers are telling you, and then you make a mistake.
	That's with the poll tax.
	But just narrowly on that point, compare that to Rishi Sunak, who is weak and panicky.
	He came out and gave a weak, panicky podium speech a few weeks back.
	Towards Galloway?
	Yeah, about George Balloway.
	Oh, right.
	And then you've got Biden, who is weak and panicky as well.
	Yeah, but I would rather have the hubristic than the weak and panicky.
	I mean, I don't know.
	You've got to take the rough with the smooth with these things, I think.
	I mean, if a person becomes too hubristic, then they can do seriously dangerous things that can seriously endanger the entire country.
	Or Mrs. Thatcher, you cause riots, you cause all kinds of discord.
	With Tony Blair, you become hubristic, you go to war, think of all the problems that's caused, still ongoing with the Middle East and so forth.
	So that's the downside.
	Okay, with the weak and panicky, at least you don't do that, but it does mean that there's a sort of sclerotic dimension.
	But also, I think that we actually got a fairly good look into the kind of person Putin was through the Tucker Carlson incident.
	Yes.
	And one of the things that I came away thinking was, oh, he seems quite sober and rational.
	Measured.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	Which, you know, again, not trying to compliment the man, but the same.
	Well, regardless of whether you're good or not, sometimes even Putin deserves a compliment.
	Well, I'm not, it doesn't have to be a comment, it's an accurate assessment of a rise.
	His knowledge of the history of his own country is, I'm sure, more detailed than that of our Prime Minister.
	Without a doubt.
	Our Apostolic Majesty was not happy with his history.
	Oh no?
	Well, I don't suppose he would be.
	Yeah, but he's a bit finicky on this.
	As a general, broad thing, he wasn't bad, I think.
	No, no, no, he wasn't bad.
	But I do have some advice for you, Mr Putin, if you are watching.
	Basically, what you need to do in order to make your system compliant, because I've basically shown, but there isn't really any fundamental difference here.
	It is just a difference of presentation.
	So what you need to do if you want to make your democracy compliant with Western standards, is you need to take two of your body doubles, right?
	And let's call them...
	So we can have Rishi Putin and Vladimir Starmer, right?
	Now what you do is you basically just periodically swap between one or the other of these, and it's okay, right?
	Because they both have identical policies.
	Well, this is what he did with, is it Dmitry Mendev or something like that?
	Oh, he did it once.
	He did it once a few years ago and then he decided it was too much work.
	Yeah, but if he just does this... He tried to do it.
	And basically what you do is they have identical policies except they spend all their time trying to score points off each other by calling the other one racist.
	Literally the only difference between Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer is that Rishi Sunak believes 0% of women have a penis and Keir Starmer believes 0.1% of women have a penis.
	That's literally the only policy.
	But they've even got the same hairstyle.
	Yeah, but the danger is the nutcase that surround them.
	So with someone like Tony Blair, okay, he's just a Machiavellian that doesn't have any principles and whatever and just wants to get power and is very good at getting power.
	But the problem is that you've got people that are with him that he brings into power, really nasty people.
	A Jack Straw.
	A bitter, unpleasant, resentful people that hate everything beautiful, hate everything structured, hate everything ordered, and want to just bring it down.
	And that's the problem.
	That's the difference that Starmer has those people behind him.
	And opens up a possibility for them.
	Less clear with Tsunaka.
	I wasn't trying to imply that either of these were no threat at all.
	We're watching the continual destruction of our country, so it's just going to be more of the same.
	What I will note is we also have a lot of US viewers, and I thought, why don't we knock up an American version of this same plan, to see if you like that.
	So, basically, same sort of idea, but in this one... Pirate.
	It's Dan Crenshaw.
	No, no, no, this is Vladimir Crenshaw.
	Oh, yes.
	And AOP.
	So it's a similar notion to what I set out before, only this time you have them argue over wokeness and whether 0.0037% of the population can use a particular toilet.
	Yes.
	But, and this is the important thing, they do agree on stuff like budgets that rack up a trillion in debt every hundred days and shipping money abroad.
	I'm sorry, excuse my ignorance, but I'm not familiar with this part.
	Is it genuine that there's a man with an eyepatch that's risen up in American politics?
	Yes.
	He's a new version of John McCain.
	Okay.
	All right.
	I see.
	I see.
	So a sort of a weak Republican.
	No, but a weak Republican until it comes to the American Empire, then he's the most strident Republican you'll ever see.
	He's classic Uniparty, is what I'm trying to get at.
	So there you go, if you are listening Mr Putin, do this and the West will start liking you.
	So he'll be back on soon.
	Very, very proud of dodging debt.
	I imagine he is.
	I don't know if that's helpful.
	Anyway, let's, uh, let's move on because, um, there's one thing I hate.
	It's ingratitude, right?
	When you do something for someone else, it's nice.
	And you're entitled for them say, Oh, thank you.
	I appreciate you did that for me.
	Yeah.
	So, and if you don't do that, there's something wrong with the general tone of society.
	And you are justified in feeling put out.
	Justified in feeling.
	But actually... And anyone who drives has this every day, you know, somebody lets you out.
	Exactly.
	You wave, you know, someone just holds a door for you, say thank you.
	It's just, you know, part of life.
	And the larger the commitment the person makes, the more gratitude you're entitled to feel.
	I can expect.
	And so when you receive zero gratitude for quite a large commitment, that builds resentment.
	Resentment is not good for the body politic.
	As Aristotle describes in his politics, societies, civilizations, and states are built on the idea of friendship.
	Friendship is a sentiment, a positive sentiment, where we feel well towards each other.
	We're well disposed to the other person, and therefore we're not going to act directly against their interests, and we're going to show them the kind of respect and recognition That they feel might be appropriate to receive.
	They would do that to make sure that everyone feels good about things.
	And so when, for example, you get a Palestinian activist who is like, Oh, you're dropping free food to the Palestinians who are starving because Israel bombing them.
	This food sucks.
	You start thinking, okay, well, hang on.
	I thought you were starving.
	Thought this, you know, I imagine the people who dropped this food went a little bit out of their way to do it.
	And the response is this is the worst food I've ever eaten, which I think is actually what he physically said.
	So lots of young American men put themselves through absolute hell in order to get a career where they eat that all the time.
	Yeah.
	And, uh, I mean, just everything here is horrible.
	I was forced to eat it because nothing else is here.
	Like, this isn't about your enjoyment.
	This is making sure you don't starve to death.
	If you were genuinely starving, and you were a Muslim in Palestine, genuinely starving, you would eat anything.
	You would think, wouldn't you?
	Even pork.
	Yeah.
	I mean, you know, the, the, the community know, and this is, hang on a second.
	This is what the American military eats.
	It's not terrible.
	I mean, my, my dad was in the forces.
	I've eaten the canned, uh, apple pies.
	Yeah.
	Delicious.
	All right.
	With a bit of canned custard.
	Um, they're not delicious, but it's, it's, it's fine, but I wasn't starving and, uh, I had to eat it because my dad didn't want to cook.
	No, I'm joking.
	Um, and so this is just, it's like, what were you expecting?
	You know, people start making memes about it.
	It's like, oh yeah.
	Where's my salt-based steak?
	Say, the starving Garzons.
	And it makes you think, why?
	Why is this?
	But that's quite remote.
	That's quite far away.
	Let's bring it a bit closer to home.
	I really hated this.
	I really hated this.
	So you're allowed to come and live in Britain.
	And you're a Muslim.
	And so you're totally appreciative of them giving you access to all the wonderful things we had in Britain and the economic life.
	So you go and get a job and then you decide, oh, it's Ramadan.
	I'm not going to eat.
	And so you go and complain at this kuffar eating Ramadan.
	Look at this kuffar.
	Everybody's on Ramadan.
	I know, I actually feel bad for eating.
	And this guy's...
	I'm glad to play, so why are you not?
	This guy's stuck in his face.
	Watch out, Ron, watch out, watch out.
	Listen to the tone of voice of the guy holding the camera.
	You don't have any right to talk to this guy in that way.
	No.
	At all.
	But why?
	I mean, you mentioned earlier evolutionary psychology.
	From that perspective, why would you think he would be polite to him?
	Well, um, I'm not Nephilim.
	Well, I mean, why would you tell me?
	So you, this is group selection.
	This is, uh, this is, I don't know if I'm allowed to say it, this is the I word, you know, this is, this is, this is what, it doesn't help you to be nice.
	What the group that dominates according to computer models in terms of group selection is the group that is internally cooperative and externally hostile.
	And that man is the enemy.
	And your purpose is to pass on your genes at the individual level, of course, but also at the group level.
	How in prehistory did we do that?
	We go in, we take the land, we kill the men, we impregnate whatever the women.
	That's how you operate.
	And that man is part of a different group.
	And what you need to do is undermine the solidarity of that group, undermine the Undermine the sense of purpose.
	Undermine the sense of something eternal and something greater.
	Humiliate them.
	Humiliate their women.
	Do everything you can to drive them out.
	Drive them out so that you can expand more and more and more.
	In this, are you seeing an expression of hard-coded gene needs that are manifesting in the interaction?
	That Muslim, I assume, Muslim cameraman, he's going to be, first of all, he will have been under harsh Darwinian selection pressures for longer than us.
	So we revolved to be group selected, we revolved to be conservative, we revolved to be nationalistic and whatever, and these things correlate with genetic health, and they all co-correlate into a kind of fitness factor.
	We've had, by 1880, we had 10% child mortality.
	By 1880, where he's from, it would have been 50%.
	So, you're going to have a people that are basically more evolved to real life, more evolved to harsh Darwinian conditions.
	And of course those people are therefore going to be higher in ethnocentric feeling.
	Also, in that kind of context, they engage in Cousin marriage and things like this, which helps to elevate a sense of tribalism and a sense of outsider, insider and whatever.
	This is a person who is genetically very different from him, he's competing with him within the white working class, whatever, and you're expanding into his territory and he humiliated him.
	Yeah, and you can see this just by... Kindly, kindly man, who when 30, 40 years ago when we hadn't had 40 years of being got at and humiliated by our own government and being by our own individualistic government and told that you can't look up for your own interests, you can't look out for your group, you should be ashamed, would have just punched me in the face.
	But I mean I remember when I was at school and they were on Ramadan, I mean we used to I remember trying to persuade them to eat crisps, you know, at lunchtime, and you had Brannigan's crisps in those days.
	I was fortunate enough to not get schooled, wasn't I?
	Brannigan's crisps, pork and apple.
	And eventually I managed to persuade my friend Tarek Basrar – hello, if you're watching – to eat a pork and apple crisp.
	And he goes, oh, such bad things are going to happen to me when I die, man.
	That's what he's doing.
	So it's completely understandable.
	Ungrateful, grateful, irrelevant.
	What's relevant is that you win, that you beat, that you overcome.
	It's not irrelevant because that's how this sword chap is going to be looking at these things.
	And so he is in a position where there is a person here who has the high hand over And he has no recourse.
	And this is why you can see he's smiling.
	He's, Oh, this is going to be funny, but you can see by the, the body language, look at him.
	He is defeated, man, chest in sunken, hunched over, looking down, not even looking up at the person who is making this commandment of him, calling him a Kufar.
	This, this is important to a person like him because what he's expecting is some sort of mutual consideration.
	He lives in a society of friends and until Right now.
	Hopefully this will make him and people like him understand that this is not the situation that we have.
	You have a high trust society if that society is homogenous.
	That is a society of friends.
	You know the research on friends literally indicates that two friends, good friends, are more genetically similar than two random strangers from the same society.
	So why do you have friends?
	It's an indirect way of passing on your genes.
	That's why you have friends.
	Well, just to get away from the cold science of it, because I'm not saying you're wrong or anything like that, obviously, but I think it might be less persuasive to a man like him because this, I think, might be going over his head.
	But the point is, you can see here who is acting upon the other and who is showing consideration to the other and who belongs and who doesn't belong and who is being bullied, which is why everyone took this as being bullied, which, like I said, I'm sure you'd be completely correct on all of this.
	But it's the different levels of addressing this.
	And this is the way that I wanted to approach this one.
	Because I think this is where we can find genuine justification on a moral level.
	So, you know, I don't have to give you consideration back.
	And that's why this guy should have just looked him in the eye and gone, what?
	Yeah.
	He should have just looked him straight in the face and made an issue out of it.
	But he didn't want to because, of course, he doesn't feel supported by his establishment.
	Well, if it was me, I would have brought him bacon sandwiches all around.
	Yeah, absolutely.
	But what can you do?
	Anyway, so the next one is this chap who I think is hilarious.
	He looks very much like an extra from Four Lions.
	But I'm sure...
	Is that a bit?
	No, I don't think it's a bit because there are other videos of him talking about other things.
	But the reason that the Palestinians are losing to Israel is because there are queer people, pro-Palestinian protests.
	Wait, so the people who throw gays off roofs are queer?
	No, the people who support them, people who throw gays off roofs are queer.
	Strangely, gay people are at Palestine protests and therefore God in the West and therefore God is punishing the Palestinian people.
	Yes, because they have without meaning to induced support of gays.
	Yes, which is a certain level of ingratitude.
	That perhaps the people who are protesting in favor of Palestine might want to be aware of.
	So I don't want to go down that rabbit hole now because it would be too long, but I'll have to ask you after the show, because if you are a gay person protesting in favor of people who throw gays off rooms, you're several layers down on the whole gene replication thing.
	Won't go there now.
	But again, you can't help but feel there's a certain lack of gratitude.
	Right.
	So hang on a second, why are these people in our society?
	If our society is based on friendship, if our society, because it's totally plausible to have immigrants come here who are well disposed to this place, well disposed to the people, and who form those bonds of friendship and act in the interests of the people around them, don't make the people around them uncomfortable, and integrate, get married into the society, and then they have children who are a part of the society and life goes on and everything's fine.
	Well, I don't know, but I'd imagine that possibly the free houses and money might be a factor.
	Well, we'll get on to the free houses and money in a moment.
	Because why do they exist?
	Well, the answer is, of course, social contractism.
	Now, Britain is not a social contract society.
	Britain is an ancient and sentimental society.
	But when you have the Blair Order that's being imposed on us, the underlying philosophical principle of it is that everyone deserves the same recognition.
	And so if you have an imbalance in recognition, well, that means that the people who have more power need to be lowered and the people who have less power...
	Erased.
	And so you end up in a situation where the state is going to act in a certain way towards certain groups of people, regardless of how they behave.
	Now, this is the thing that everyone hates when they see something like this.
	A Muslim immigrant who goes to Germany and says, you are helpless.
	I conquered your land.
	I belong to the system.
	Everything belongs to me.
	Everything is under my feet, waving around a German passport.
	He's honest, though.
	Oh, he's very honest.
	He's very honest.
	But in a pre-modern world, that person would find themselves in a lot of trouble.
	However, in a modern world, they have rights.
	Individual, unbreakable rights.
	And here's the unbreakable right to have that German passport now and to mock as many Germans as he likes.
	And show as much ingratitude as he cares to, and they have no recourse whatsoever.
	But he's won a victory.
	Exactly.
	And he's not the only one.
	When you win a victory, you exult in it.
	Yes.
	And again, Ed, to your point, this, uh, very attractive lady, AFD, look what I have here.
	Fresh from the federal office in Berlin.
	It's over.
	You can't deport me anymore.
	I have many children.
	They will all have a German passport.
	She's got a lot of slap though.
	She does.
	I'm not here to judge her looks really.
	I'm just saying, look at the attitude.
	This is not true that she can't be deported, it just requires a higher level of will to be applied.
	That is true.
	It requires a fundamental change in what the ruling class think.
	Exactly.
	And that could happen though.
	But the thing that they would have to stop thinking is that the social contract is a valid method towards society.
	Because of course it's not.
	What they would have to return to is the Aristotelian Friendship Society, where we judge people on how they intend and how they operate with us.
	And if they act in this way, they're not our friends.
	And if you fail the test of friendship, you get deported.
	That needs to be the new standard.
	Because I mean, this is just something that is insufferable.
	Everyone might be familiar with the container migrants.
	Uh, these families are forced to live in shipping containers.
	Now you might think, wow, that's a bit harsh, except that actually they were refurbished into flats and given to them for free.
	So the subheading is coming here is mental torture.
	Aren't these people who are supposed to be fleeing certain death?
	Well, we all know that that is not the case.
	I mean, there are people that flee certain death, but those things exist.
	And that's very, very rare.
	Let's watch a bit of this very quickly, actually.
	But from the temporary, it became a long-term thing.
	The Healing Council have said that this is one of the ways in which they're trying to tackle a homeless crisis on their hands.
	No!
	Perhaps a lot of people say it's better than being on the streets.
	Oh yeah, we are just one step close to being on the street.
	People on the street are getting air.
	We are in a box.
	We're in a container.
	Container is not for human beings.
	It's for you to storage things.
	You get a sense, just there, how difficult it is.
	I had an Uber driver the other day, very intelligent man, if you're out there, Solomon, fascinating talking to you, from Ghana, and he told me he was brought up in a one-room house, With a curtain down the middle, his parents slept on one side, him and his five siblings slept on the other.
	And that guy went into the army, didn't complain, didn't complain about it, he's like, that's home, that's just how you live.
	One room house, no running water, no nothing, curtain down the middle for a bit of privacy or whatever.
	That seems safe, and they are complaining about essentially a small house with running water, with all mob cons, with everything, compared to what they would be living in in Somalia or wherever it is.
	Cheers from Somalia.
	I've lived in worse places.
	And I had a Somali Uber driver the other day as well.
	Similarly, very intelligent guy, and he's expressing his disbelief.
	He's saying, I've never had a bit of racism here, never.
	But this is the point, right?
	She feels entitled to more than this, because the social contract guarantees a certain standard of living.
	She's not appreciative that the British public are paying for her to live in a house in London.
	I mean, I've lived in worse places than that, and I had to pay for the privilege myself.
	She is getting that money from... Look at the face!
	Look at her expression!
	I'm not having this.
	I'm not having this.
	These people have failed the test of friendship.
	And as far as I'm concerned, they can all go.
	I can't take it.
	It drives me mad.
	But also it's entirely, it's entirely disingenuous.
	This idea that you, if you are genuinely fleeing persecution, you will obviously not.
	You go to the next safe country.
	You don't go to the best country or the richest country.
	If you did, why would you come here?
	Maybe we should be the other way around.
	I'm sure that no one in Somaliland is going to say my research is racist.
	I've corresponded with psychologists from Somaliland about trying to get the IQ differences between Somalia and Somaliland.
	Oh yeah?
	I'm genuinely interested in it, because I think that the Somalilanders in the North will probably have higher IQ, which is why they have a functioning state.
	Are they the British ones?
	That's the British one, yeah.
	The Italian was the South.
	There's some fundamental way, I think, in which they, via osmosis, absorb certain nationalities.
	Do they have a different admixture, by any chance?
	Yeah, they're more Arabized.
	Why do we fix everything we touch?
	Oh, you always have to...
	Anyway, this, this, this is the, this is the point though, isn't it?
	Like you can tell that these people have come here on a lie and they're totally ungrateful for all of the things that your hard work providing.
	And it's just insufferable and I can't take it.
	And so I'm very, I'm very, very tired of it.
	And so this was just, I mean, we're going to listen to this and I realize that this is going to be very annoying.
	Yeah.
	We're going to have to grit our teeth.
	My perception is that they don't care about us.
	They really, truly don't care about us.
	That's how I feel.
	I feel that they don't care about us.
	And I've been talking about, you know, I'm coming up to retirement and I keep on saying I'm giving the NHS two more years of my life.
	In this country, I reckon, two more years because I just don't think That this country really values us.
	I don't think they deserve us.
	That's the first thing.
	But I can't, I don't feel I've got, you know, the energy to keep on resisting all of this stuff all of the time.
	You know, you talk about, we talk about systemic racism, and systemic racism is where their systems, where there are structures, policies and processes, that create unfair advantage for one group of people and unfair disadvantage for another group of people, usually people of colour, all right?
	And we talk about addressing systemic racism and it's quite covert, all right?
	But this is overt, in the open, you know, in your face!
	It does make you wonder, because if the leaders of this country can't call that out when it's in your face, when it's obvious, when they prevaricate, when they continue to take money from someone who does this, what hope does it give people of colour?
	We are not doing enough, clearly.
	What racism is this they experience?
	What racism is this?
	Uh, some chap didn't like Diane Abbott, and so he said, it doesn't make me hate all black women, but I really do hate Diane Abbott.
	So he did make it clear that he doesn't hate all black women?
	Yeah, but that doesn't matter.
	Did he get jailed for that, or...?
	No, he was the Conservative Party's biggest donor.
	So unsurprisingly, the Conservatives were like, look, we finally found someone we actually can't throw under the bus.
	And it's the biggest donor to the party.
	But the point is, to come under, like, it feels like they don't value us.
	It probably does feel that way, doesn't it?
	You don't feel very valued.
	You don't feel very valued.
	We've made one of you Prime Minister.
	Yeah.
	And some countries wouldn't tolerate that.
	No.
	India wouldn't.
	Well, I was just about to say.
	You go back, was it 2004 or 2005, and there was a fair election.
	Sonia Gandhi was the leader of the Congress Party.
	Everybody knew if Sonia Gandhi wins, then Sonia Gandhi is Prime Minister, Sonia Gandhi is ethnically Italian, she's integrated, she speaks fluent Hindi, whatever.
	And they won, fair and square.
	And then the BJP, who are now in power in India, the Nationalist Party, just said, no, no, no way.
	This is a national disgrace.
	It's a national disgrace that a foreigner should be running the country.
	And Sonia Gandhi's husband, of course, was assassinated.
	And she realised that India is not as safe as some other countries.
	And she said, my inner voice tells me.
	That's what she said.
	It's an interesting phrase she used.
	My inner voice tells me.
	When was this said?
	2004.
	That is a superb example.
	I'm surprised I didn't know that.
	Yeah, I didn't know about this either.
	No, I had no idea.
	Why did you mention India for them?
	Because I just knew they wouldn't take it.
	I've met many Indians, I just didn't know there would be an actual example.
	And so then there was a case in point, the symbolism of it.
	There was a puppet prime minister, Mr Singh.
	And so I guess that there was probably a degree to which Sonia Gandhi was putting the string behind the scenes, you know, but, but, but yeah, they just would not take it.
	It's like, we are Indians.
	We are an ethnic group.
	We are, we are, we're not ethnic groups.
	We are, we are the Indians and we're not Bloody having this.
	And there was no resistance even in Victorian England.
	We voted, those that could vote, voted in Benjamin Disraeli despite him being an ethnically Jewish.
	Okay, convert to Christianity but ethnically Jewish.
	And Rushdie said, like, we'll lose but he's not going to lose because he's ethnically Indian.
	He's going to lose because he's Crabbe.
	Yeah.
	Which is, you know.
	But I don't even remember us having the conversation of, you know, you could have had the talking heads of the mainstream media just before Rishi Sunak was installed saying, well, look, the Indians didn't do this in 2004, you know, is there some question about why we would do this?
	But no, none of this is reciprocal in any way.
	Well, no.
	It has been in the past.
	For example, in the 1992 election, the Conservatives put up a candidate, a black man, I forget his name, in Cheltenham, which was a safe Conservative seat.
	Think how different it was in 1992.
	You had people voting who were born in 1910.
	And they wrote to the local newspaper saying, I was vote Conservative all my life, I'm voting Lib Dem, I'm voting against the invader.
	And the Liberal Democrat candidate, he, white guy of course, he played to this and he actually said, vote for your local candidate and everyone knew what he meant and of course they lost one of the safest seats in the country.
	So yeah, the point behind this is just I'm very tired of the way that we're talked to by these people and the lack of respect that we're given and I'm just done with it.
	Right, let's go back in time and talk about The Chav.
	So, for Zoomers...
	Which of you wants to explain to Zoomers what a chav is?
	A chav is the product of Blair's expansion of the welfare state to support an increasing number of single mothers who then raise children, young men primarily, who, not primarily young men, but the young men.
	Oh, there's definitely chavettes.
	There are, but the young men became street-latched key-style kids who then became a bit more violent than the average Englishman and were considered to be essentially an underclass.
	So I have heard that it stands for council housed and violent.
	And in the 90s and 2000s, this...
	Yeah.
	is the thing that we all talked about.
	These days, it's so insignificant compared to mass immigration that this just doesn't get a mention anymore.
	But in the good old days, the underclass were the chav, and they might punch you, but they generally wouldn't stab you or throw acid in your face.
	Um, it's not that there wasn't any stabbings.
	Um, but I remember David Cameron's hug a hoodie campaign and everyone's like, I don't want to get stabbed though.
	Um, fair, but I mean, very few machete attacks.
	Yes.
	Definitely very little acid.
	Yeah.
	So I've got a little clip that sort of gives us a taste of the chair.
	It's a decade, isn't it?
	The word "chab" had been circulating in Kent for several years.
	Then, plucked from obscurity, it stormed the web.
	The Chav Scum website, launched in December 2003, turned chav baiting into a national pastime.
	And it's weird because before the word child kind of came about, you probably would look at these kids on the street and not really think so much about them.
	but once you've now got this derogatory label, suddenly there seems to be so many of them.
	When we first heard the word "a chav" was a white working class man, He spent his money on heavily logoed sportswear, gold chains and sovereign rings.
	No, drugs.
	His girlfriend, a chavette, had hoop earrings and a bit of an attitude.
	Chav is quite a clever word because it has a comic component.
	There's something quite funny about it.
	Their bad taste, their haircuts, their lifestyle seems almost comically, grotesquely vulgar.
	They want money, and they want fun, and they want to behave in a very chav-like manner.
	But they're not aspirational, they're not trying to become posh, they're not trying to become middle class.
	They were full of themselves, they were quite into bling, they were white.
	Yeah, so I stopped it at that point because... As you are coming out with the real condemnation, they were white.
	Yes.
	With this attitude.
	Can you imagine a BBC documentary today talking about the new underclass of the mass immigration and just going through it, you know, they're ungrateful, they're black.
	You know, it just simply wouldn't happen.
	But it was almost permissible, permissible, to sort of really hate these guys.
	Oh no, it was desirable.
	Because, I mean, they do represent an offensive underclass of people who really shouldn't have come into existence.
	Like, all of these people should have been forced to get jobs, and their parents would have been unable to have been separated in the way they are, because the state is now paying for them all.
	And so this is all totally incentivized.
	- The government used to impose on them a morality, at least that morality. - And the community itself. - And the community itself.
	I think that's the interesting point about social aspiration, which is that what you, veritocracy has lots of benefits, great.
	And it means that you get the best people are doing the jobs.
	That's understandable.
	But it does have some downsides, and I think this is relevant to the development of the chat.
	First of all, we had a period of massive social movement.
	You bring in meritocracy, but let's say they started at the grammar schools or whatever around about the 30s, 20s.
	You bring in meritocracy, and what this permits Social class is a movement of intelligence and of pro-social personality, things that predict social class, out of the working class, wholesale, and into the middle class.
	And once you have done that, then there will be a very, very long period of social stagnation where there's just no social movement.
	And if you carry on doing it, if you have that kind of system, you create a social class among whom there are no intelligent Um, pro-social people.
	So they just get sucked out all the time.
	So, so this would have already happened pretty much by the time I went into the city, but a big thing was the recent influx of the Barrow Boys.
	So it would have been the, the East End trader who had worked at a market store, was very quick on the mental maths and done all that sort of stuff.
	And the city recognized that these guys, uh, had something about them.
	So they said, okay, let's take them out of that and make them Forex traders or something like that.
	So those guys would have been pulled out.
	And, and basically I think what you're alluding to is a process Right across the spectrum where the quality people would have been pulled out, meritocrats, wonderful for them individually, they're now driving Range Rover Sports and all the rest of it, but I think what you're describing is essentially a hollowing out of what was left behind and it's like taking the carbon out of the steel.
	Yes.
	I mean, I think the comparison I was talking about earlier is, in a meritocracy, imagine a postal sorting office in 1920.
	So the average intelligence is, even in the heritability of intelligence across time, sorry, of social class across time, is about 0.75.
	That's because of just intelligence is highly genetic.
	It's because people sexually select for similarity and so on.
	So you have this heritability, but that means that by definition, occasionally some intelligent people are born into the working class.
	Of course they are.
	And if you, of course they are.
	I don't know how else I can put it in a more sophisticated way.
	I'm not disagreeing.
	Of course they are.
	No, I was originally working class.
	My mother was council president.
	I'm not having a go at them.
	No, no, no, it's fine.
	These are the facts.
	No, a lot of them are fake.
	The correlation between IQ and socioeconomic status is about 0.5, 0.6.
	So, you have this postal sorting office, and you're going to have people in it where it's not a meritocracy, where they have to leave school at 14 and start, you know, earning money for their family because they're so poor.
	You've got someone, let's say, he's intellectually capable of being a doctor, but he's working in a postal sorting office.
	So if something goes wrong in the postal sorting office, there's someone there who's way, way underpromoted, and he can solve the problem.
	Now, in a meritocracy, that person is not there, and therefore things can go wrong, and there's no one to solve the problem.
	So similarly, in these kinds of communities, in days of old, you're going to have the people that are going to, as it were, rise to the top of their class, be the effective policemen of the community that stay working class or middle class or whatever, be understood to be that, but they're going to be highly intelligent, they're going to be pro-social, and they're going to enforce certain standards on those around them.
	The sort of Alfred Roberts types, Margaret Thatcher's father, you know, you're a green grocer and you get onto the council and you become mayor, those kinds of people.
	The factory foreman, the sergeant major, etc., etc.
	Precisely.
	Whereas with meritocracy, we bring about a situation where that person is capable of being a doctor and he becomes one.
	But also, in this sort of pre-Blair era, you also have something to hold over those people.
	You won't get the job you need to get some money to go get the drugs you want, or whatever it is.
	When it comes to the expansion of the welfare state, well, now that person actually doesn't have something physically to hold over them either.
	Because, no, the government's going to give me a house, the government is going to make sure that I have money in my bank, the government is going to provide what I would have got from my community connections.
	Well, that sort of hollows it out from the other end, because if we're saying, okay, you've got the working class and it's a mixture of the indolent and the high IQ, Ed's talked about the high IQ of these.
	It's not just Indians.
	They can fall on their worst vices, which is total lethargy.
	These are fast life history strategists.
	These are people that have evolved to live fast, die young.
	And if they live in a society which brings about an incentive structure through education, through financial systems, whatever, to force them into a sort of, as it were, slow-lifing strategy mould where they invest in their children, where they have to work, then, of course, they'll do so.
	If they don't have to do so, then that kind of person, which they don't, when a welfare state is so substantial that you get an extra, I don't know how much it is per child.
	Oh, it was £500 a month.
	And there was a fascinating book called The Welfare Trade by Adam Perkins, you know that one?
	I haven't read it.
	And he showed that they gamed the system, so they were clever enough to understand how to game the system to get as much money as possible, which is these big Philpot types, where they can then spend the money on whatever they like.
	Not stupid at all.
	I mean, you know, I've been to Council of States, I've lived around these places, and there are definitely young women, or there were in the early 2000s, who were fully aware the government was going to give them £500 per child, and so deliberately got pregnant to get a house.
	And they get pregnant young, and so they don't just have more children, they have more generations.
	But also, if they're bad parents, the state will just take care of the children for them.
	Yes.
	So there's absolutely no burden of incentive on them to be better people than they were.
	Whereas there was a burden of incentive a hundred years ago because you end up in the workhouse.
	Yeah.
	And nobody wanted to be in the workhouse.
	It was not pleasant.
	And it was deliberately not pleasant.
	Yeah.
	Because they didn't want people to be in the workhouse.
	They wanted people to do everything they could to stand on their own two feet and to survive.
	But you give them these substantial payments.
	And we've got to a situation now, according to the welfare trade, where if you divide society up into those where Both parents are working, IQ about 100.
	Those with one parent on welfare, IQ 90.
	Those with both parents on welfare, 85.
	And those where both parents are on welfare and you get social worker interventions and police interventions, IQ 80, I don't know.
	That's the only group that's breeding above replacement fertility.
	Yeah.
	The only group in Britain that has got a replacement fertility rate, those with an average IQ of 80.
	Among the whites, yes.
	If you subgroup it along those lines.
	Right.
	So it's idiocracy?
	Yes.
	Right.
	That's not good.
	And we're deliberately financing it.
	And the heritability of intelligence is about 0.8, so it's very, very high.
	There's other things, though.
	I mean, among the more intelligent, if you just look at the top quartile of intelligence, then the big predictor of fertility is that you are religious and that you are conservative.
	And those things are about 60% genetic.
	And the big predictor of sterility is that you are liberal and that you are an atheist.
	So what we would predict is that Conservatives will become more intelligent, or will become stupider slower, and Liberals will become less and less intelligent.
	They will become less and less intelligent and just stop breeding.
	I mean, just die out, basically.
	So you might get a flip among the elite.
	The elite will perhaps flip back at some point, in a context of decline.
	I have many questions on that, but I think I'll save them for the brokenomics that we're going to do afterwards.
	But that is a fascinating chain.
	One thing I wanted to point out was the sort of the moment at which there was that breaking point.
	Can we, Jack, can we have an, yes.
	So the moment of that breaking point, this is also something that was popular in the early sort of 2000s.
	This is Keeping Up Appearances and it is a working class family Where they're basically bifurcating.
	One of the daughters of this family, Hyacinth Bucket, pronounced Bouquet, is aspirational and wishes to go upwards.
	Other members of her family basically couldn't give a damn and they're emulating.
	They are sort of early daughters.
	If they had kids they would be chavs, basically.
	Um, well, except they do have a child, and she's a hippie.
	And she's in the early episodes.
	Maybe if it was made a couple of years later, she would have been a chav.
	Her children were chavs.
	Were they?
	The unmarried young woman.
	You mean Rome?
	Oh, I don't know, I've never seen it.
	Oh, you've never seen it?
	Generationally.
	Well, I mean, I've seen it, but that was tremendously boring when I was like 13.
	I loved it when I was 13.
	Really?
	It was like 30 years ago, so you could be forgiven for not remembering the details.
	I was going out and playing football and climbing trees.
	But more broadly to the point, Ed, what's going on here with this divergence in the working class where they used to look up and now they look down?
	Well, I suppose there's a number of, that's sort of a separate issue then, but I suppose a big part of it is, one, that among the working class, though you're going to get people that are born, as I was saying earlier, by just chance or whatever, unlike peteric combinations, bad, all kinds of things can do it, that are highly intelligent among unlike peteric combinations, bad, all kinds of things can do it, that are highly intelligent among the working class, and they will police their own class with the values of the broader culture, and those values are competent, and those values are hierarchical, and whatever, and so then you imitate those values, and you pass
	and whatever, and so then you imitate those values, and you pass them around, and so you have a working class that looks up, you have a united society, and that society takes the view that we have a certain way that we should be, a certain thing that is good, and that is instilled in the churches, that is instilled in the And that is instilled in the churches, that is instilled in the education system to the extent that they are educated.
	It is just instilled through social osmosis, essentially.
	And so everyone understands that it's bad to be low down.
	It's good to be high up in the great chain of being.
	What you have then with the sociological process, once you have veritocracy, is you suck out of the working class all those people that have ambition and whatever for genetic reasons, who may then inspire others within them to imitate them.
	and they will see, oh look, you can come from among us and you can go up Remember him?
	So-and-so's son.
	He's a teacher.
	Wow.
	He's a teacher.
	Wow.
	He's a policeman, is he?
	Wow.
	And so there's role models in place that you imitate and whatever, and so there's just a general sense.
	Of course, there was always people who didn't go down, but there's just a general sense that there's one culture, one society, it's based around this structured order, everyone agrees, and you imitate.
	Take that away, remove from the working class those people, Completely, one or two generations who have any kind of ambition or drive or intelligence or whatever, then you just create an underclass.
	And then also you give them incentive structures not to have to be forced, because there's a degree to which you're compelled economically to imitate the higher classes, because if you don't, you starve.
	So you have to have some kind of work ethic.
	So you take that away, and then you have the higher classes, once we get a sort of virtue-signaling society that becomes concerned with equality and harm avoidance rather than group-oriented values and structural order and so forth, and they start saying, oh well, we shouldn't encourage children in school to talk properly.
	We shouldn't teach them to read properly.
	We should appreciate the culture that they come from.
	We should have a much more respectful attitude.
	In fact, they swear and won't sit down, won't sit still and whatever.
	And so actually we're no longer trying, even trying, to bring them up to reasonable civilized standards.
	And so I think all of these things kind of come together to create, but not these people, this is a separate, I don't see... Yeah, it's not these people.
	But the chaps, what I think is more interesting about that is, like, think what the new hire synth would be like.
	So she wouldn't be saying, Richard, Richard, it's my sister, Bruce, Bruce, Bruce has gone out again, he's dressed as a woman, we must stop him, Richard, we must stop him.
	It'd be, it'd be, Bruce, Richard, Richard, Bruce has misgendered somebody, Bruce has misgendered somebody, quickly, Richard, quickly, Richard, we must stop him.
	That would be the new hire.
	You're telling me the remake of this, she would be woke?
	She would be absolutely uber, super, super woke.
	I think you're right, actually.
	I think you're right.
	I've got another clip for us to play, and then I'll get... Oh, look!
	It's from a show called The Jolly Heretic.
	Ah!
	Yes.
	Is that good, Ed, do you think?
	I think it's a pretty good show, yeah.
	Pretty good show.
	Right, let's have a look at what this Jolly Heretic... Oh, no, other mouse.
	Let's see what this Jolly Heretic says, because I think that he's found...
	last preserve of a easy so you know we used to put well not we but the americans they they rounded up all the indians and they put them on preserves we might have done something a bit like that so let's have a look at clacton shall we and to experience one of the most dysgenic towns in the uk under the harsh darwinian conditions that were prevalent
	until the industrial revolution where child mortality was 50 percent as against one percent today there was strong selection for intelligence mental health and physical health They became bundled together into a general fitness factor.
	On average, intelligent people have genetically better mental and physical health, and intelligence is the big predictor of socio-economic status.
	With the end of the British seaside holiday, so many of the businesses, so many of the intelligent people, left places like Placton.
	Turning not only into one of Britain's poorest towns, but one of its most unhealthy as well.
	Cueing in the chemist, I mean it's people with, obviously very obese.
	Of course they're ill.
	I'm not doing this, this isn't some poverty porn, this is genuinely poignant.
	The people here aren't just elderly, they're ill and elderly.
	And that's the fundamental difference.
	You can be elderly and be quite healthy, and then just suddenly die.
	If you're selecting against intelligence, and you're selecting against impulse control, and you're selecting against mental health, And you're selecting against physical health, which is what we're doing, then this is what you're going to get.
	Reanimate Francis Galton and bring him here and plonk him here, what he would say.
	I mean, he would just say, I told you, I did tell you.
	I was very, very clear in some detail.
	I wrote a number of books on this.
	And you did not listen to me, did you?
	If a farmer does anything other than only breed the best of its animals, then the strain degenerates.
	And it does so extremely quickly, both physically and mentally.
	And you didn't listen to me.
	You just said I was evil, eugenicist, evil, evil.
	Even you people at Oxford University.
	In 2023.
	Evil, evil, evil.
	Well, this is what you get.
	It's like how when the Romans left England, pigs got smaller because they were no longer being bred for correctly.
	We are seeing something similar here, except the size of the livestock is always increasing somewhat.
	It is like stepping back in time.
	Look at this butcher's shop.
	Butcher's shop, only butchers, not supermarket, run by British people.
	There's things here that I haven't seen since I was a child in the 90s.
	I haven't been to a Wimpy since 1988.
	Oh my God!
	Because there are no Wimpies.
	And there's a Wimpy here, it's extraordinary.
	It's like stepping into another world.
	This is where the burgers of Clacton...
	Congregate once a week to talk about what they're going to do about Clacton.
	This is the Lady Mayoress of Clacton crossing the road.
	No, no, no.
	Little interactions like that you can only get in a mono-ethnic society, right?
	That's England.
	That's what we're losing.
	That's what we will lose and are losing.
	He's filming me!
	There is a definite downside to the obituary of Britain, which this town seems to be.
	And that is, of course, the... that word, the chav.
	What people in my grandfather's generation called people that are rough.
	People that are rough.
	And they're expanding.
	When was this filmed?
	October.
	This year?
	Or last year, sorry.
	Yeah.
	Oh, that very warm period in October.
	Yeah, because... I mean, I felt that this may have been filmed, like, 2012 or something.
	You know, before the decline really struck.
	No, no, it's it's a it's a real, I mean, that's the thing.
	In the beginning, I almost felt, I mean, it is true what I said, that it is highly dysgenic and so forth.
	But I almost felt bad about saying that because by the end of it, I do say... I quite like it!
	Yeah, I felt, I'm sorry claps from people.
	It's objectively true.
	I felt at home.
	I felt relaxed.
	I felt I was in my, as it were, evolutionary match.
	And ask any animal, you know, you put a monkey in a zoo, they don't like it.
	Put a monkey in where he's supposed to be, he's happy.
	Without a doubt, I would rather live in Clacton than Tower Hamlets or Lewisham.
	Because in fact, I was talking only a couple of days ago.
	I was in my Whitechapel station and I found these two old Cockney girls and all their family had moved out.
	Where to?
	Clapton.
	I said, why do I like my own?
	They say, we're the only white people on the bus, we're the only white people at the doctor's surgery.
	They've all come from the East End.
	I was in this pub in Jaywick, which is even poorer than Clackham, and I was talking to this guy, he was from Custom House originally, and he said, I bought my council house in London for nothing, Sold it for a lot of money and then moved out.
	99 out of 100 people here come from East London.
	It's a rational economic calculation.
	Absolutely, absolutely.
	And then he's got the life that he's in the film, I think, somewhere at the end.
	And he's got the life that he wants.
	And so there is a very, very welcomed I think you end up in the pub at the end of this, don't you?
	I mean, I won't play it now because we don't have the time, but I was just watching and thinking I could just quite happily spend an afternoon there.
	Yeah, I did.
	And they were so friendly and perfectly happy to be filmed.
	I was at Oxford University the previous day and people were like, why are you filming?
	Why?
	And then a number of them Would let me film them and interview them and then they come up to me afterwards, oh I've changed my mind, I said please, if you don't mind, can you not use it?
	Because they were so concerned about me on camera saying things about how bad free speech is or whatever.
	I stood outside the library, outside the Bodleian library and I said, and I asked questions about free speech and intelligence and whatever and then I got out and measured their skull, you know.
	calipers.
	Just to say that this used to be acceptable at Oxford.
	And then I said, I'd eventually got to a point where I would say, well, at Oxford, you used to be able to talk about race differences, IQ and things like that.
	What do you think of that?
	And then they would say, and there was one woman, one overweight, narcissistic, mental BPD woman who was, when I got onto the race issue, What's this?
	This is something dysgenic.
	I don't like this.
	What's this?
	What's this?
	And made us delete the footage of her.
	And then her friend comes along.
	What are you doing?
	And they get nasty so quickly.
	And she's like, you're a dysgenicist.
	Are you a dysgenicist?
	I'm not.
	Well, you're holding a eugenic instrument or calipers.
	Well, that's inherently eugenic instrument.
	And then off it went and it spirals out of control.
	It just takes one, if you, One person.
	One woke person.
	Otherwise, they're perfectly friendly, perfectly reasonable, intelligent people.
	One woke person.
	And in they go, and then this fat, ugly librarian comes out and says there's been a complaint that you're measuring students' skulls.
	That is funny.
	And then two security guards come out and stand there to reassure students against the bad man.
	And then I just stood there carrying on.
	And then eventually I was talking to the security guards and they're just doing their job.
	And one of them admitted to me, this is crazy.
	And they stood there for a while and they got the sign that says students only and moved it closer to the gate.
	Somehow that was going to reassure people.
	And then we just carried on.
	And then other students became aware of what was going on.
	Based students.
	There are secretly based students at Oxford University that have like underground societies where they discuss evolutionary psychology.
	And they were very interested in this and they were talking to me.
	Oh, it all kicked off.
	It was amazing.
	That is fascinating.
	That's on YouTube as well somewhere.
	The question I wanted to ask, and I don't know if you know anything about squirrels, but I think I get to the same point as you with the chavs, which is A bit of sympathy, really.
	So my question about squirrels is... We should never have done this.
	...is we used to have grey squirrels.
	No, no, we used to have red squirrels, didn't we?
	Yes.
	And they were out-competed by the grey squirrels coming in, they just displaced them.
	And now the grey squirrels are being out-competed by the black squirrels.
	Oh, I didn't know that.
	Right.
	But are the chavs just being out-competed by the mass immigration?
	Yeah.
	Yeah, because... 100%.
	Yeah, because if you come over, who would you... I mean, let's go back in time ten years.
	Who would you rather employ?
	You're an indolent, lazy, chav girl behind the bar, or you're a pretty, intelligent, educated Polish girl that probably has a degree from Poland, but she's your barber.
	And she will be, in terms of being better at everything, so she will just be a better worker, and she'll be more pleasant to look at, and she'll pull in the punters.
	And so you of course employ the Polish girl.
	And so they're out-competed because people that are more intelligent than them, ...and are higher in pro-social personality, we call it GFP, General Factor of Personality, than them, i.e.
	the predictors of socio-economic success, are coming in and competing with them.
	And they have lower standards, they have a lower sense of what they're worth, they send money home, all this kind of thing.
	Yes, and also they don't have the White's major disadvantage, which is outgroup preference.
	So once they ascend to the position of manager, right now everybody in the store is going to be from that particular region of India or whatever it is.
	Yes, they don't have that.
	That's also a problem.
	There's some evidence that we tend to judge Um, in some ways less harshly, in some ways less harshly, uh, members of Outlaws.
	Um, we're actually less able to discern things like ugliness.
	among members of Outlooks.
	Because we're not used to the signs.
	We're not used to the subtle markers.
	So you will often rate a foreigner, all else controlled for, as being better looking than a native.
	Because we don't assess the signs.
	But do foreigners have that same defect on the other side?
	No, they do.
	But what is true is that we British, I did a study on this a long time ago, we Europeans are particularly low in the show.
	So that's good, in a way, as an evolutionary strategy.
	Because you can adopt what one might call a genius strategy.
	I think that's our strategy.
	That's why we're behind the Industrial Revolution.
	That's why we're behind all this.
	We English.
	Because if you are low in ethnocentrism, then you can expand and you can trade.
	And then your gene pool gets larger.
	And then you get more genetic diversity.
	And then you are possibly, by unlikely genetic chance, you're going to have an outlier high intelligence plus the psychopathic, sub-psychopathic or autistic or whatever personality.
	And they come together and you have geniuses.
	And the geniuses come up with brilliant ideas.
	And that allows you to expand more, more, more, more, more.
	And as long as your ethnocentrism doesn't drop below a certain level and ethnocentrism is highly instinctive, it's built into us.
	And so if we're in our evolutionary match, our evolutionary match is death, mortality, salience, whatever.
	So as long as we're in that situation, then it's fine.
	The problem is that we've now created, with our geniuses, such a relaxed period of selection, like such a paradise, that our instincts, which are brought out by our evolutionary match, mortality salience, things like that, are not induced.
	And so if you expose people to mortality salience, they desire to have children, they see children as less expensive, they desire to have more children, they desire to name children after themselves to create a kind of symbolic immortality.
	If you prime them with materialism or just make them rich, they don't want to have children.
	So you're essentially saying that we have a psychological profile which has been very useful up till now, but it has started to metastasise and turn cancerous?
	I think that's a good metaphor, yeah.
	Whereas another way of doing things would be more like the Finns or the Japanese.
	They have a small gene pool, they are low in genius.
	They're more intelligent than us, on average.
	And they have a smaller gene pool, bunched towards the mean.
	Totally clustered, yeah.
	Totally clustered, but they don't produce geniuses, but they are highly ethnocentric, positively ethnocentric.
	That's their strategy.
	It's a different strategy, possibly because it's so harsh, the conditions, that you have to be group-oriented, and the downside of the geniuses, of course, is criminals, psychopaths, and you just can't afford that.
	So if we were to have an adverse event, whatever that might be, a Carrington event, a volcano going off, whatever it was, but basically to get our group back on track, it kind of needs a bit of hardship from somewhere.
	I read a book many years ago called Churchill's Headmaster, the Sadist, and he saved the British Empire.
	And I looked at Herbert S. Kennedy, the headmaster of George Lascaux.
	And one of the things that the public school system did, it was deliberately modeled on Sparta.
	The public school, the upper class were big fans of Plato.
	And the idea was, well, look, you've got these people who are rich, who are privileged, who are, they could quite easily become just decadent.
	They could quite easily.
	And so you deliberately expose them, quite deliberately.
	I'm sure it was frightful if you were there, but you deliberately expose them to extreme harshness early in life.
	So that even though they're rich and they've got everything and they don't have to care, these instincts of group orientation, whatever, are induced.
	Ed, where can, where can viewers who like the cut of your jib hear more?
	I'll, I'll, On the Jolly Heretic, which is on YouTube, and also my substack jollyheretic.com, where I put stuff that I wouldn't dare put on YouTube.
	Check him out there.
	I can't help but notice some of the previous comments like that.
	Clacton looks like paradise these days.
	I'm telling you, really good.
	I'm tempted to take my kids on holiday there.
	I've met people that have done just that.
	I've been to Clacton.
	I liked it.
	I was expecting, of course there were people there that were very unhealthy and all that.
	I really liked it.
	It looked great.
	I'm not even joking.
	I'll stop you there, chaps, because we've got some comments to go through.
	Maureen says, love the cravat.
	Oh, thank you very much.
	Yeah.
	Evan sends us three superchats saying, Ed is here.
	Ed, Ed, Ed.
	Hi, Ed.
	Hello, Evan.
	Hi, Dan.
	Good to see you.
	Josie Angels sends a super chat saying, have you ever heard of David Wood?
	That's Dr. David Wood.
	He runs Act 17 Apologetics.
	I'm a massive fan of David Wood because he was an atheist, went and got a PhD in philosophy, became a Christian and decided he hated Islam.
	And so runs a YouTube channel shitting on Islam.
	I shall look into him.
	He's very funny as well.
	And he's very good.
	George says, the West has no grounds to criticize Russian elections considering our unelected Prime Minister and fortified presidential puppet.
	In fact, I'm pretty sure that more people in Russia like Putin than Brits do Rishi Sunak.
	Doubtless.
	I'd be shocked if that wasn't the case.
	Derek says, the thing that keeps the West failing to understand about Russia is, sorry, the thing that the West keeps failing to understand about Russia is they will choose a strong and confident leader over a weak one every time, exactly as you were saying.
	They don't care about whether anyone else approves of their choice.
	They definitely don't care what Clown World West thinks of them.
	Yep.
	Probably true.
	Sophia says, Western leaders don't kill.
	Oh, I'm getting grilled here.
	Hillary Clinton would like a word with you, sir.
	Also Jeffrey Epstein.
	Good point.
	Can't argue that case, actually.
	North FC Zoomer says, why can't we have photos of the British politicians that look like the one of Putin with the same background characters but without Russian levels of pressure where they're intrinsically linked?
	I would guess they're intrinsically linked, unfortunately.
	Someone online says to make your democracy compliant with the West, you must institute DEI, destroy agriculture in your country, and build a surveillance state.
	Yeah.
	Yes.
	fauxpas says the genuine hardworking immigrants do not report experiencing racism because they are here to genuinely lead an industrious life, unlike their grifting counterparts who wield racism claims against the native populace.
	It's nothing to add, is there?
	It's just so demonstrably true.
	And again, these various highly intelligent Uber drivers I've had are all the same thing.
	I don't get racism here.
	These people work hard, earn a lot of money, and they're more than content.
	And they're great.
	They are great.
	Every Uber driver I've had in London hates Sadiq Khan.
	What we would do.
	Yeah.
	Well, yeah, exactly.
	Lance here in joy says, occupied nation.
	There's no other word for it.
	Well, it does look like an occupation, doesn't it?
	That's the thing.
	Yeah.
	If every high office in India was occupied by Englishmen.
	I remember that being the case.
	It was called something like Empire.
	I've heard the word, but I'm not familiar.
	Yeah, I'll have to look it up.
	Charles says, as an aside, isn't this allowed to eat non-halal food if it's that or starve?
	Interesting how Allah would put them in that position, isn't it?
	Someone online says, I think we should stop giving free, asterisk, we paid for it, food to foreign terrorists.
	But that's just me.
	Well, it's just you, isn't it?
	Arizona Desert Rat says, if you're fasting, why would you sit in a room where other people are certainly going to be eating?
	Well, why indeed.
	Why indeed.
	You can't intimidate him if you're not in the room.
	Exactly.
	How exactly can I flex on this guy?
	AJB says, one for Dan on the chav issue.
	Without our overinflated debt economy and the pointless jobs it creates, your average Dino wouldn't be able to afford his Barrett new build and River Island trackies and remain a chav.
	As much as we might bemoan the inevitable consequences, the current financial system has afforded the Dinos a semi-decent facsimile of past mobility And if you ask Adino whether they would rather live as Dinos in a decaying system or as Chavs in something more sustainable, Conor will take his Audi A3 and Jamie Oliver instant... I'm not sure I'd go along with that one.
	Adino is a kind of aspiring middle class modern man who has everything on credit and is not really invested in anything.
	A Dino.
	Yes.
	Until I don't live in this country.
	I don't know.
	It's the modern variant of Chav, but it's basically the same.
	But they're quite harmless and fairly nice.
	They're not Chav.
	They're not.
	But they're a product of modernity.
	If you were to cross...
	It's a Dino from Gavin and Stacey.
	If you were to crossbreed a Chav with a lower middle class, a Dino is what you'd get.
	Right.
	Someone non-violent but still very bourgeois in their tastes.
	They still have the bling.
	Yeah.
	Oh, I see.
	Yes.
	So a hard-working chav.
	Yeah.
	I'd say they're hard-working.
	Fair enough.
	They do their nine-to-five job Monday to Friday.
	A higher chav.
	It's an upgrade on chav.
	Yes.
	It's not wonderful.
	Chav premium, perhaps.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Premium chav, yeah.
	Executive chav.
	Did you get the Neo-Unrealist one?
	Oh, I haven't actually, no.
	He says, you should get Callum to knock out an AI-voiced David Attenborough narrator describing the behaviours of ghetto English chavs, male or female.
	I actually have a David Attenborough AI trained on my computer.
	Really?
	Just for fun.
	I could put it to malevolent use.
	Supreme Duck says, Carl you also forget the cultural politeness.
	If you set yourself to be an outsider by being rude, yelling in a bus or something, and my god isn't that annoying when you put people on their phones in the middle of public, of course you are not going to get a positive treatment in return.
	People will simply not like you.
	Not because of racism, because there's an incompatibility between the culture the person is in and the person.
	Yeah, well obviously.
	The point is, you're not giving any consideration to the people around you.
	In Finland, as a foreigner that lives there, you're always talking too loud.
	No matter how quietly I talk, I'm talking too loud.
	And they use the word, if you just raise your voice slightly, the huuta, which is shout.
	They have no concept of raising your voice.
	It's just shouting.
	I do like to boom at people so that, yeah, maybe I shouldn't go to Finland.
	No, I like to bark at people.
	Yes.
	I can see.
	Get on with it.
	Henry says, a lot of the chavs I went to school with ended up either morphing into dinos or some stayed true to the chav life, but not many.
	That's interesting.
	The chav to dino pipeline.
	It's quite a commitment to do it in your 40s.
	I imagine it's down to drug addiction.
	Yes, maybe.
	But it's interesting that that's the pipeline.
	So the dinos are the ex-chavs.
	Yes.
	I wanted to meet a Dino so that I can fully understand what you mean.
	Are there going to be any around Swindon?
	No, probably not.
	They're not bad chaps.
	They're just agents of the matrix.
	Bedford is more Dino town.
	Anne says, I'm most impressed with Dan's selection of chav topics.
	Very insightful.
	I thought it would be a good one, especially for Ed here.
	Yeah.
	And on that note, we're out of time.
	So join us again in half an hour when Connor is doing comments and talks, and otherwise we will be back tomorrow.

▲