All Episodes
Previous Next
May 15, 2024 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters
01:33:07
The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #915
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Eaters for Wednesday the 15th of May 2024.
I am your host, Connor, joined by Dan.
Hello.
And Jake of RattlesnakeTV.
Thank you for having me, gentlemen.
Well, thank you very much for coming in.
I did an interview with you a couple of weeks ago, and when I heard you were lingering around in the UK, I thought I'd bring in the only reaction channel on YouTube that isn't hosted by a black man.
I'm really glad to have you here.
Do you fancy introducing yourself to the viewers?
Jake, Rattlesnake TV.
We've got a channel where I do debate analysis as well as podcasts.
We've got the reality-based podcast, which you can find on YouTube, Spotify, Apple, Google Podcasts, all those great places.
Connor will be next week's guest.
So we've got a great episode coming out there.
Otherwise, Instagram and Twitter at jakeraddlesnk.
Yeah.
And you've got the website of stuff that you can- Yeah.
I need to touch up the website.
I'm working on it.
Oh, I couldn't tell.
The haircut was different at all.
Yeah.
Look at my hairline.
It's much better there.
And today we will be discussing how nobody believes the Conservative Party during their election cope.
The question, why should we borrow money when we could just print it?
Why be homeless when you can just buy a house?
And whether or not white women are okay.
We're going to express some concern here because we like white women and they don't seem to like themselves very much at the moment.
Before we jump into it as well, we do have a thing to promote.
Currently, there is a merch discount going on because we've got new merch incoming.
So this is the last week you'll be able to buy the current line.
So if you like anything on there, those are the quote t-shirts and the aesthetic merch and the like, they will all be gone.
So you can currently go and get that.
There's a 10% discount on everything.
Discount is automatically applied when you put things in the basket, and then keep an eye out for the brand new merch when it happens.
So, without further ado, I thought I'd discuss the Conservative Party's post-election cope today.
Now, post-local election, pre-general election, which they're absolutely going to lose, because if you ever wanted a greater example of why Every thinking British person hates the Tory party, all the civil service, Rishi Sunak and thinks he's a totally insincere children's TV presenter.
He's just done a speech which I think rounds it all up very nicely and I thought we have a resident expat from one of our former colonies and you can tell us just how much you are going to mutually hate our Prime Minister as well.
So we'll have a bit of a cathartic thing of just going, government's rubbish isn't it?
The Prime Minister being from one of the other former colonies.
Yeah, quite.
Also not elected and installed at the expense of another Prime Minister, who we may be speaking to soon.
It'll be fun.
Anyway, before we get into it, I'll just direct you to a career opportunity on the website.
If you'd like to come and work for us and change yourselves to the desk and edit mine and Harry's voice talking about comics from here to the end of The heat death of the universe.
We've got a brand new production manager job.
You will need to be able to travel to both Swindon and South East London.
So do apply if you can commute to both of those.
I do do the commute, and even though GWR are a pain in the backside, it is rewarding enough.
So if you've got the relevant qualifications, go and pop those in.
So, right.
Local election.
They happened a couple of weeks ago, and the results were...
Less than ideal for the Conservatives, with Rishi Sunak insisting the plan is working while losing 474 council seats, 10 police and crime commissioners, and a mayor.
I think these numbers are possibly a little bit misleading, because it makes it look like Labour are doing a good job.
I don't think Labour saw a vote share increase, did they?
No, they saw a swing, but not a vote share increase.
Much like back when Richard Tice ran for the Bexley seat after James Brokenshire died, in a Conservative safe seat.
He got a sizeable portion of the votes, but the majority of the Tory votes didn't defect to Labour or go to Reform, they just stayed at home and didn't bother.
So Labour nearly edged out the seat from the Conservatives' Louis French, who's Oh, he used to work for me.
Oh, really?
There we go.
He was one of my financial analysts back in the finance days.
Very interesting.
Was he a particular bright spot?
Hardly ever.
I mean, he is a nice chap, bit of a yes-man, hardly ever spoke.
I can see exactly why the Drawbies wanted him.
Yeah, quite.
That's it.
But he is a nice chap.
Yeah, so you would think that this might be a moment for self-reflection.
I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, the Australian Conservatives just lost to the Labour Party.
Yep, and we've got a guy called Anthony Albanese now in office who dances at Taylor Swift concerts.
You shouldn't have raised Taylor Swift on this podcast because the audience is not happy that I, uh, yes.
Not happy that you what?
I could appreciate the music.
Have you got a bunch of Swifties watching?
No, no, not really.
But, um, I do like the music.
Anyway, before we derail this, sorry YouTube comments, I know that you're going mad at the moment, right?
Question.
Have the Australian Conservatives at any point thought, we just got beaten out of office, maybe we shouldn't continue on the globalist, we're going to lock you down forever train?
No, it doesn't appear that way.
Unfortunately, similarly to you guys, the Australian Conservatives are a soft left compared to the actual far left that is the Labor government in Australia.
I wish I could say so, but no.
We've got other parties and other politicians who are much better.
We've got guys like Alex Antich, who has a podcast called B.A.S.E., not Reality B.A.S.E., but B.A.S.E.
Podcast.
He's great.
He's doing some good things.
He's very much vocal against the globalist agenda in Australia, because Australia is in fact the testing ground, the globalist agenda.
We've also got Gerard Rennick, who's another great politician who's standing up.
He's a part of the Liberals, but otherwise, other than on an individual basis, party-wide, not at all.
As far as I know as well, much like Britain being, as I say to our American viewers, a landmass smaller than New York State, but having over a million people coming in every year, as far as I understand it from other Australians I've spoken to, you've had Yeah, unfortunately we've been pretty much sold out in that regard.
It used to be very much European immigration.
different from what it used to be.
You've got quite a few young Brits going over there and establishing themselves, but there's a lot more Chinese and Indian, which is causing a lot more cultural tensions.
Yeah.
Unfortunately, we've been pretty much sold out in that regard.
It used to be very much European immigration.
There's a chart that I watched the other day, which shows over the last 40 years or so, the level of immigration that's come to Australia.
And it used to be very much Italian and English and Christian countries and countries that could quite easily The Italians got a little bit of shit when my great-grandparents came over, but you know, they made it.
They assimilated.
Here we are.
But then, over the last 20 years or so, it's just gone Indian.
It's just gone up massively.
And I'm from a place called Footscray, which is in the western suburbs of Melbourne.
And it's a very, very ethnic place.
Like, there's lots of different ethnic enclaves in that place.
Literally, look to my I had and I've got the Indian enclave and then the Lebanese and the Sudanese and that's literally how I grew up so I'm well aware of how this works and the Indians tend to form their own little cultural enclaves and it's just it's it's quite different to the European immigration but something we've got to we've got to deal with at the moment.
Well I'm sure you can look forward to your own Indian leader in time.
So we can have a curry?
We can have a good curry can't we?
We have the recipe books instead you know.
That would be preferable than setting up slums that look like, as I described to Swindon, the mouth of the Ganges.
So the Liberal Democrats now actually have more councillors than the Conservatives, because the Liberal Democrats finished with 520, or 522 there, so that all the results would come in, and the Conservatives 515.
Now the Lib Dems are a total lamed-up party and they only seem to win by-elections, other than when Clegg was in coalition.
And the Lib Dems are beating the sitting party of government.
That's pretty bad, isn't it?
Pay no attention to all of those independent candidates that are just Islamist or Green Party candidates, of course, but I'm not going to go into that.
What I'm going to go into is the mindset within the Conservative Party because there seems to be a complete unwillingness to course correct.
It's almost like they want to be kamikaze pilots to destroy their own party and kick themselves out of a job because Rishi Sunak was interviewed and he said, There's work to do.
This is the first time he has conceded that maybe the next general election might not be going all on the up and up for him.
And he said, the election results suggest we are heading for a hung parliament with Labour as the largest party.
Hung Parliament.
Because normally what the Tories do at this point in the election cycle is they start campaigning against their own record in government and pretending that they're opposed to everything that they've done.
And they did start to do that for a while but he just seems to have given up and he's like okay I'm just going to double down on the immigration and the you know the other wankery.
Well he both says that he's a candidate for change but also that we should trust the plan.
So the plan's not worked but the plan is working but he's going to change the plan But not until after the next election, because the plan is currently working ahead of the election.
I happen to think that maybe some of his handlers might be on the old marching powder.
Or something, because they can't seem to get whatever they're putting into the telephone.
But he's somebody's puppy, so it'd be helpful if we knew whose plan it was.
He's a young leader of the World Economic Forum, isn't he?
I don't think it was who Sunak was, actually.
He did write for Policy Exchange, though, and he said a 2014 report about the changing face of Britain that just happened to notice, and he said politicians should take note of this, that, as he said about the Indians, they happen to vote Conservative more than any other ethnic minority group.
And then, when we get an Indian Prime Minister, we get an Indian Entrepreneur Visa, and then we get last year 250,000 Indians.
Purely socioeconomic factors, I am sure.
Alright, but hung parliament, that's what he's putting there.
How delusional do you have to be?
Because his own internal polling by David Frost, and rather than listening to him saying, oh, the submarine's got a hole in it, we might sink, they said, you can have the whip withdrawn.
David Frost said, we're going to suffer our worst election defeat for 100 years and get down from an 80-seat majority to nearly about, you know, like, 80 seats.
We'll be pretty worried.
Yeah, it needs to be zero, doesn't it?
Needs to be zero seats.
Yeah, and that's the aspirational goal.
There are some people in there that I'm like, I wish that you didn't have to suffer for your party's terrible reputation, but you do need a payroll.
No, it needs to be destroyed.
No mercy.
Fair.
What would you do if you were in this position?
Would you maybe, I don't know, listen to the voters and deliver on your election promises and stop hemorrhaging support from your own base?
What do you guys think that the British public want?
Do you think that the goalposts have moved so much that they want a sort of centre-right candidate?
Or do you think that they want somebody who's far more conservative or a soft left like Rishi Sunak?
The overwhelming polling suggests they want social conservatism, closed borders, and State spending in a competent way.
Most of the conservatives are like either microwave Thatcherites or one nation, one world conservatives that see Brexit as an opportunity to do global Britain and mass import everyone from everywhere all at once.
And most Brits want little to no immigration, the deportation of the over a million illegals here that they now say is there, a competently funded public service system, and not-gay-race-communism blasted from every institution.
But that's what we're getting.
But I mean, why ask the people?
I mean, they're sheep.
You just need a nice strong leader to come in there and set the tone of things.
You need a Bukele or an Orban or something.
Well, but the people want that.
If you look at Onward's 2022 report, they've even said, among 18 to 35s, they are in favour, the majority of them, of a strong man who can avoid the trappings of Parliament taking charge, or just sticking the army in control.
Yes.
Even the so-called young woke snowflakes, I mean, some of them obviously want algorithmic governance and managerial experts and all that, but the ones that are going, well, hang on, why can't I get a house?
Oh, 89% of housing demand is driven by mass immigration.
Yes, and it's sorted out.
Therefore deport all the illegal foreigners.
That'd be wonderful.
They don't seem to have got the message though, because the one mayor that lost was Andy Street.
He was the mayor of the West Midlands, you know, the place that has now got no-go zones for all the enrichment having machete fights in broad daylight, and he was asked by Sky News, are you worried that the Conservative Party is drifting to the right, overemphasising the threat from reform and ignoring other voters?
And he said, I wouldn't advise that drift.
I wouldn't advise doing exactly what I'll The voters want to stop us losing our jobs, says the man that just lost his job.
Now, I wouldn't go to the loser for political advice.
But this is what the Tories always do after they lose.
They always say it's because we weren't left-wing enough.
Yes.
This was an article a little while ago from, I think it was the think tank Bright Blue, that came out on the same day they decided to censor Miriam Cates for being a bit too uppity on the backbench, saying the government isn't doing what they're meant to be doing.
And they said, we've let the radical right have their fun, but the grown-ups are back in the room now.
And it's like, oh right, okay, so the radical right was in charge when you had the highest levels of annual mass migration ever in history, more so than between 1066 and 1966.
I'm also just fascinated by the physiognomy.
It looks like what an AI would produce if you converted a Simpsons character into a real person.
It looks like if Beezus and Butthead went through four years at Eton.
Yes.
Anyway, so we've got other Tory MPs noticing that they might be out on their arse quite soon.
So Suella Braveman, former Home Secretary, Yeah, didn't do much while she was in there but is now an effective commentator from outside the tent pissing on it.
Braven said to Sundays with Lauren Koonsberg, there's no spinning these results, there is no disguising the fact that these have been terrible election results for the Conservatives and they suggest that we're heading to a Labour government that fills them with horror.
I love my country, I care about my party and I want us to win and I'm urging the Prime Minister to change course, to with humility reflect on what voters are telling us and change the plan and the way that he is communicating with us.
But she did say the Conservatives had run out of time to change their leader before a general election.
I don't think that's feasible prospect right now.
We don't have enough time and it's impossible for anyone new to come in and change our fortunes to be honest.
There is no superman or superwoman out there who can do it.
And I think she is right.
There's a very, very small part of me that feels sorry for these people who spend their entire lives trying to get to a senior office in Parliament or government and then they discover that when they get there that they can't actually do anything, that the system just runs itself and they're just there to You know, appear in front of the camera.
It was Liz, Donald Trump, they all said the same thing, of where they had a boom of naivety, that essentially the institutions work as they're told, and like a corporation, they follow what the boss says.
And instead, you've got people at the Home Office threatening legal action if they have to enforce Rwanda deportation orders, or giving out rainbow lanyards and talking about pronouns.
And one of them the other week, I think it was at the BBC, was saying that, could Rishi Sunak get even more fascist?
And it's like...
If you think that Rishi Sunak is the radical right winger, I mean, you have no idea.
Yeah, I think they have no idea what might be in store as well.
Because if you look around Europe at the moment, if you look around places in South America as well, you are getting candidates and you are getting politicians who are very scary to the left.
We talked about Bukele before and guys like this.
These candidates are people who are very much populist, very much putting their country first, and it's exactly what England needs.
And I actually think that somebody with a little bit of that English charm who comes along will be able to swindle the population.
We looked at that speech the other day from Winston Marshall.
And I think he's the kind of guy, I don't really know too much about Winston Marshall, but I think that he's got that sort of charm and that wit that might be able to... You need that rhetorical ability of someone like a Winston or a Douglas.
The thing is, Winston, I know Winston, he's a very affable chap, but he's very much, I'm an asking questions centrist.
And when I'm picking a candidate, I'm looking more to Because I'm thinking, who will take the tough decisions when they're under fire from the corporate press and the dinner party circuit?
Like, Bukele, I trust to build the prisons, fuel the deportation boats for the people who aren't meant to be here, and put a camera in the room and say, oh, you're all members of my cabinet?
Oh, you're all under investigation?
I'm sure you have nothing to hide, guys.
Like, I don't know anyone in UK politics right now who can fill that role.
You can't be a boomer.
Yeah.
Wrong mindset.
Yeah.
But imagine the support if there were someone.
I agree.
There would be absolute support.
So I went to Matt Goodwin's Substack Party thing like last week and this is an interesting question for you both because you want the desolation of the Tory party.
I don't know if a new party is going to solve it.
It's more about who's in the institution than the institution itself.
Matt is proposing setting up a party of his own.
Dominic Cummings is now proposing setting up his own party.
So you're going to get lots of little splinter satellite parties.
Is a new party what can solve it?
No, no.
The solution is not going to come from within the system.
It has to come from out.
In what sense?
Well, I don't know, but we have to delegitimize the current system and build institutions around it.
It just needs to become increasingly irrelevant.
Well, I'm glad you're wearing your prison orange already, Dan, because someone will interpret that as Fed posting, I'm sure.
Yeah, I mean, I think that it has to happen within the system because it just takes too long if you want to build different parties and institutions outside of the system.
It's got to happen quickly because Britain is in a place right now where it is dire straits.
And I lived here six years ago.
I'm a British citizen as well.
And it's even gotten way worse since last time I was here.
And it looks as though the country is more divided than ever.
And I mean, they want to throw the... They're talking about throwing the Prime Minister out just before the election.
If that's not dire straits then I don't know what is.
Well don't get me wrong, I want it to change quickly, I just fear that it won't.
What's very funny as well is that as of this morning it was unveiled that Penny Mordaunt has purchased back her domain for her leadership bid.
So her website for when she was running as leader.
So either they're betting that there's going to be an effort to oust Rishi head of the general election, which we'll just call the general election, or they're gearing up for after they all lose.
Even though Mordaunt's projected to Probably lose her seat as well.
I mean, a lot can happen in a small amount of time.
If you look at the Dutch Farmers Party, for example, that was a grassroots movement that was able to take seats in the House.
And that happened from the grassroots.
And there's other movements that have happened around Europe that you would never have predicted a few years ago from these really woke countries like Holland, for example.
Woke country.
Maybe we need a different electoral system more like theirs rather than First Class.
If you have somebody who, like I said before, has that wit and charm and the English people can really identify that has the right politics, I think that you could really swindle the English people.
And if they were there to revamp the Conservative Party, people don't want to see change necessarily.
I think if somebody was there to revamp the Conservative Party, I think that... Yeah, but I think places in South America are ripe for this sort of stuff because they have had decades of truly a dismal collapse and people are willing to try something different.
The problem with this country, it is worryingly stable.
I mean, it's bad, but it's not bad enough for the average Norby that they're sort of pulling their hair out.
So I think if we try and do it from within the system, it's going to take many decades.
The only person in the Conservative Party that seems to have an ounce of proper self-reflection is Miriam Cates, who decided to be a bit more blunt by saying, Reader, we blew it.
So yeah.
We blew it!
For a brief moment, Conservative voters across the UK, from our rural heartlands to post-industrial towns, believed the party understood their concerns and would deliver.
They wanted, and still want, patriotism, national security, rather than the vision of global Britain, which frequently seems to serve an international elite rather than ordinary UK citizens.
Our voters want a state that is neither big nor small, but one that just works.
They don't want the meaningless mantra of diversity, equality and inclusion.
They want to be proud of a family, neighbourhood, nation, and they want cultural security, not mass immigration.
They want affordable houses for their children and grandchildren.
Miriam's probably about the I mean, maybe one of three Tory MPs actually gets this and is trying, but again, is going to suffer probably by losing a seat because of the reputation of the party.
And there is zero avenue for someone like her to ascend from the back benches to the front benches because she's not part of the old boys' network that's friends with, like, Larry Fink of Blackrock.
But I mean, they had it all.
They had an 80-seat majority.
They had the backing of the country.
They could have done so much.
They could have been everything we wanted them to be.
But they are just culturally and mindset incapable of doing it.
Yeah, instead Michael Gove thought it was a great idea to put us all under house arrest.
Fun.
Brilliant.
And speaking of people with terrible ideas, Rishi Sunak did a speech, right?
So I'm just going to play a couple of clips from it, because this is the perfect example of why they will not avert course from destroying the country ahead of the next election, and why we're in for a terrible few years of a Labour Party, but they're basically indistinct from the Tories.
So I'll play this first one.
And in this world of greater conflict and danger, a hundred million people are now displaced globally.
Countries like Russia are weaponising immigration for their own ends.
And criminal gangs keep finding new routes to cross the European borders.
Illegal migration is placing an intolerable strain on our security and our sense of fairness.
And unless we act now and act boldly, this problem is only going to grow.
Extremists are also exploiting these global conflicts to divide us.
Don't notice.
People are abusing our liberal democratic values.
The freedom of speech, right to protest, To intimidate, threaten and assault others.
To sing anti-Semitic chants on our streets and our university campuses.
And to weaponise the evils of anti-Semitism or anti-Muslim hatred in a divisive, ideological attempt to set Britain against Britain.
No speaking there about the culture of the English that you've absolutely desolated, or the birth rates and demographics you're driving down via mass migration because people can't get a house now before they have a family.
But just something I thought I'd pick up on.
Did you notice what he said at the start there?
A hundred million people have been displaced.
They've just been moved.
They can't go back.
Just 100 million people have just been displaced.
He said it again later on.
There's a transcript here.
It says, Notice that it's coached in the terms of, like, it's a foregone conclusion that 100 million people are just sort of floating in the ether, just waiting to pick somewhere to land.
and we'll protect ourselves against illegal migration.
Notice it's coached in the terms of like, it's a foregone conclusion that 100 million people are just sort of floating in the ether, just waiting to pick somewhere to land.
Well, if you can do 100 million, you could do 10 million from here then.
In what sense?
Well, displace them.
Oh, yes.
Yeah, but we can't add to that.
We can only be the sort of dumping ground for the rest of the world's refugees, essentially.
People might think, oh, hang on a minute, 100 million.
Makes sense.
Big number.
I've heard that somewhere before.
So Full Fact last year ran a fact finder, right?
It's quite funny.
On Suella Braveman, because Suella Braveman said there are 100 million displaced people who could qualify for UK protection.
Basically meaning that the ECHR, the UN Refugee Convention and various permissive liberal laws about resettlement mean that up to 100 million people could just say, well I want to move so I'm going to move to the UK and you might have a right to remain.
What do you mean by displaced though?
What's the definition of displaced?
Because you have conflicts all over Africa, like what's happening in the Tire region in Ethiopia, what's happening in Sudan, you've got Boko Haram.
In Western Africa as well you've got obviously what's happening with Palestine at the moment and what's happening throughout the Middle East so it kind of does make sense but it depends what you mean by displaced.
But also they're going to say climate change and poverty and things like that so an unlimited number of qualifiers and also under the UN Refugee Convention the definition is a refugee is someone who is unable or unwilling to return to their country of origin.
Okay yeah.
So just don't fancy it mate, prefer the British weather.
But if those hundred million turned up on our shores I mean, we'd just try and find hotels with them, wouldn't we?
Yeah, quite.
So this global catastrophe of displaced people who are going to carry ethno-cultural baggage with them, resentment possibly towards our country, because people don't live on numbers, they live on stories, and sometimes we are the villain in the story that they tell themselves, are going to come to the country and it's a foregone conclusion that these people are not going to be where they are, so it's up to Rishi Sunak and the global constituents of the managerial class of the UN and the like to just Administer exactly what allotted number needs to go where.
You don't get to say no to it.
Now, at the time, Sewarda Braveman was fact-checked.
Fact-checked.
It's incorrect.
But now Rishi Sunak is just saying it as if it's a thing.
So I'm glad that we've got the progression of the dialectic from it's not happening to it's happening and it's a good thing because these were just the UN's own numbers at the time that she was citing.
You know there are people who actually do believe that though, that you could fit that 100 million people into Britain.
I mean I did a video on this when Rafe Haddleman who was debating that queer guy, I can't remember what his name was.
That doesn't narrow it down on British TV mate.
Gay Jewish guy, I can't remember what his name was though.
He was wearing a sweater, does that matter?
In many such cases.
Yeah, exactly.
So he was debating him and the guy was like, we just need to keep going until we've got no land.
If you can still sort of see the land, then we can bring in more immigrants.
So we ran a little test to see, could we theoretically fit the entire population of the world into Britain if we tried?
And actually, guys, you'd be happy to know that we can.
How many heads need to be stood on?
Do we need to look like the outside of an Indian train?
You need to look like Manila, but one big massive Manila.
Just one giant liquid flesh ball directly on Parliament Grid.
I think if you stand shoulder-to-shoulder you can get the entire population of the world into the Isle of Wight.
That used to be the case before the populations were... Because I remember my dad used to tell me that fact when we were driving around the Isle of Wight.
You're a proper dad's dad.
That's why I knew it.
You need to build up and lab drone meet and just have little drones dropping us off our food.
Oh, like the Saudi Arabian line?
Yes, exactly.
Yes.
Yeah, if you just say the wrong thing, then your bug burger doesn't get delivered for the day.
Fantastic.
Cheers to games.
Stay off Facebook if you're hungry.
Speaking, so, yeah, we could be running on dad facts, but unfortunately we're not.
We're not running on sense.
So, how could Rishi Sinek possibly think this is a good thing?
Well, I've got two more clips.
He seems to double down on the diversity built Britain agenda, which is absolutely fantastic.
These are the conservative achievements he decides to tout, right?
Isn't this just wonderfully conservative of him to reflect upon?
Well, I cannot accept.
Is Labour's idea that all the worries you have are because of 14 years of Conservative government?
That all you need to do is change the people in office and these problems will magically disappear?
It's just not true.
In the last 14 years, we've made progress in the most difficult conditions any governments have faced since the Second World War.
A world-leading economy.
We've seen the third highest growth rate in the G7 and created 4 million jobs, 800 a day.
We took difficult decisions to restore our country's financial security and control national debt.
And that allowed us to support the country through COVID, deliver the fastest vaccine rollout in the world, provide record funding to the NHS and protect pensions with the triple lock.
We've reformed welfare by capping benefits and introducing universal credit to help people into work.
We've reduced absolute poverty, pensioner poverty, child poverty.
We've cut carbon emissions by a third, maintained our position as NATO's second biggest defence power, halved violent and neighbourhood crime, and improved standards in our schools with English school children not just the best readers in the UK, but in the Western world.
We've legislated for equal marriage and It is now not even surprising for people from ethnically diverse backgrounds to lead Scotland, Wales, and the United Kingdom.
That's pretty stunning.
Christ.
I mean, equal marriage isn't gay marriage.
Yeah, yeah.
So we've destroyed the institution of marriage.
We've made men and women's roles vague and interchangeable, because that's right, we're conservatives.
I thought you deracinated your culture.
Yeah, quite.
Again, driving down birth rates.
But also, oh!
Isn't it great that there are more Browns leading Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland?
Because that's the qualifier of a competent leader.
Bear in mind, they're meant to be opposition parties, so Rishi Sunak's taking credit for the fact that parties that are actively seditious to the United Kingdom because they hate the English are now led by leftists just because they share a skin tone to him.
And also, none of you were elected, you were all installed.
Homza Yousaf just got chucked out for incompetence as well.
I mean there was a time when I used to watch mainstream media and I would look at something like that and I'd analyse it and break it down but I just can't be bothered.
Just do one, Rishi, you unelected Indian midget puppy.
I'm just not interested in your bullshit.
He just kind of reminds me, though, of a friendly accountant.
This is what always gets me about Rishi Sunak.
He is not a conservative leader politician.
There's nothing that says that.
What makes you say that?
He's just this sort of flaccid... I love it whenever he does a speech and he'll say something like, men are men, and he'll look around and be like, oh, that was quite based, wasn't it?
And he's just like, yeah, I can't imagine him going into the roundtable with Putin, with Xi, with Mohammed bin Salman and being like, this is how it's going to happen from now on.
You'll have to put him in a high chair so he can meet you.
But something very insidious in that statement, and again, I may be accused of overanalyzing this, but when he said, ethnically diverse backgrounds lead to Scotland, Wales and United Kingdom, hold on a minute.
Is there not ethnic diversity between the English, the Scots and the Welsh, as is, the native population?
So you've got Celtish, you've got the Celts, you've got the Britons, you've got the Anglo-Saxons, you've got the Jews, you've got all of these lineages.
So there is ethnic diversity in England.
So what does he mean?
Well, here with his diversity-built Britain coin, again particularly insidious, by ethnically diverse he just means non-white.
So diverse means non-white.
So what he is saying there is that it's not even surprising for people who aren't white to lead Scotland, Wales and the United Kingdom.
In our conception, who aren't English to lead England, Welsh to lead Wales, and Scottish to lead Scotland.
And so, when you put this with this coin that he minted while Chancellor, Diversity Built Britain, if he's using diversity, ethnically diverse is synonymous with non-white, he's simultaneously saying we need more diversity because it's a strength, So we need to import it.
But also, somehow, the diversity predates the Britons themselves, constructed Britain.
You have no history, no culture, and no infrastructure you should be proud of, or at least grateful that your ancestors imparted onto you and should sustain.
And somehow, they constructed this great country.
But they didn't construct their own country, which is why they need to be here.
So it not only doesn't make sense, but it's a really slippery confiscation of your cultural, national, ethnic and historical identity.
And you wonder why the Conservatives are hated by any British patriot.
So, the final clip I would just like to play is a clip from... I was in the audience at NatCon when Michael Gove had to show up and play containment.
And he was asked, what are you proud of after 14 years of Conservative government?
And you can tell where Rishi Sunak's getting his talking points because Michael Gove has been in every single cabinet other than Liz Truss's one, most notably, because they used to be allies and then he stabbed her in the back so she decided to derank him.
and then she just so happened to have been cooed out very quickly to reappoint Michael Gove, they asked, okay, well, the Conservatives are probably not going to win the next election, economy's not great, conflict's everywhere.
What are you proud of?
Listen to what he answers.
It is the case also that I would argue that, as Ed Bowles has pointed out, we've had huge economic traumas visited on us externally, and yet the UK remains one of the most creative and welcoming and yet the UK remains one of the most creative Visibly diverse is a benefit.
God, I hate these people.
The other thing that I would say is also our cabinet, our parliament, and our leading institutions are I think more diverse, visibly diverse, and more meritocratic than ever before.
And I also think that...
Visibly diverse is a benefit.
God, I hate these people.
Conservative Party, more browns equals more good.
Again, not a standard by which to judge competent leadership.
So, um...
Last quote I'll finish on from Rishi.
When I stood for the leadership of my party and my opponent's policies imperiled our financial strength, I was sooner prepared to lose and abandon what I believe so deeply is right for our country.
Don't worry Rishi, I think that willingness to lose will come in handy very soon.
And also, I just want to say, anyone who watches my channel over the last year would notice I've got a different set every month, and that's because I like to go to different countries every month, spend time in places like, I went to Taiwan for a little while, South Korea, spent a bit of time in Asia, Europe.
Every single country that you go to has a much stronger sense of national identity than the Western countries.
We're the only ones who are not allowed to openly say, We're the best.
Or, you know, we want to preserve our national identity.
And this is what it means to be Romanian.
Bop, bop, bop.
This is what it means to be South Korean.
Boom, boom, boom.
We're the only ones who aren't allowed to say that sort of stuff.
So if anybody ever tells you you're a racist for saying, I love Britain because of X, Y, and Z, because of the beautiful countryside, because of all of the rich cultural history that has made us and synthesized our culture into what it is today.
If they call you a racist for that, say yes.
They can call me whatever they like.
I am a racist.
Don't care.
They've cried wolf too many times now.
Doesn't matter.
Right, so let's talk about why we borrow money as opposed to just printing it.
Now, before I do that, if you do have any printed money, go to our merch store, because we've got some merch on there and it's all about to go.
We're refreshing the shop, new stuff is coming in, so if you want any of the classic stuff, go there, you'll get 10% automatically applied, blah blah blah.
Anyway, go to the merch store.
Very good.
Right, now, let's have a look at...
At this chap.
So this is Jared Bernstein.
Now he is the most senior advisor to Joe Biden on financial matters.
Now whenever I want to know why somebody has a senior regime appointment, I always go and have a look at the early life section on Wikipedia.
So let's find out What makes this guy so qualified?
So he grew up in a musical family and he's a professional musician, which is obviously the chops you need for being a Chief Financial Advisor.
And he's got a Master's in Social Work.
So, anyway, so that is... Wait, so he's the Chief Financial Advisor for Joe Biden?
Yes.
That's interesting.
Yes.
So I don't know exactly what it was that Joe saw in his early life section that made him sort of appoint him to this incredibly senior position, but that's what it says... He can slap the bass, clearly.
So, well, yeah, exactly.
So, you know, draw your own opinions on that.
Now, let's see what this guy, um, you know, what you might find him talking about.
Here's a little clip of him addressing the issues of the day.
Can we play that?
I've never been part of a White House that is doing more than this White House to try to ease inflationary pressures.
Now, the president has been consistently clear about two things.
One, this is a real burden on household budgets.
And two, the Federal Reserve is first and foremost our national inflation fighter.
And there's five buckets where we've been dispatched to do everything we can to help ease these pressures and better align supply and demand.
That includes reducing energy costs, reducing transportation and logistics costs, reducing kitchen table costs, Taking down the deficit and increasing labor supply and in every one of those buckets We have plans that are not just underway, but have been so for a while Including releasing oil from the reserves including our work ports and with the trucks They are having an impact, but we're still of course facing unacceptably high levels of inflation so
I'm no financial expert, unlike Sam the Eagle from the Muppets here, but the Federal Reserve being the leading body which reduces inflation doesn't really ring true when they're the ones that print the money.
We might well get into that.
I just wanted to address his specific claims there about the five buckets of things that he's doing to sort this out.
So inflation's a problem, and he mentions energy prices.
Well, that's sort of because energy prices are high because Joe Biden's Explicitly trying to make the energy prices high.
So well beyond the proxy war with Russia, which is the sort of leading exporter of energy, there's also he shut down the Keystone Pipeline on day one, and if you listen to his people he explicitly says they want high energy prices to address climate change.
Well, they did executive orders to prevent fracking on federal lands as well.
Oh, they've done loads.
Loads on gas as well.
He says logistics costs.
Well, logistics costs are primarily high because of energy prices.
It's heavily affected there.
But also because, of course, the Houthis are blocking the Suez Canal.
So, that having a... They're still blocking that.
Yeah, they stopped talking about it, because they had this big thing at the beginning, this big Empire Strikes Back moment, where they're going in there to sort them out, and then they realise, oh actually this is hard, so they just stop talking about it.
So it's not in the news anymore.
But you know, that's the one.
It's always the away games.
Food prices are high again because of the proxy war in Russia.
So I think Ukraine is the largest producer of wheat and Russia I think is a second or at least a third.
So that's going to be a factor.
Also because his regime is sort of piling on the regulation on farmers Making it incredibly difficult with the regulatory agency, so there's that.
He says that they're going to be taking down the deficit.
They're doing the precise opposite.
They are ramping up the deficit.
The only one that I had to give him credit for was increasing labour supply.
Because you've mass-imported everyone from the southern border.
Yes, so we know that this guy's a bit of a liar, but increasing labour supply depreciates wages at a time of escalating inflation, meaning everyone's getting poorer.
Yes, but it does reduce labour costs if you're a big business or a donor.
Right.
OK, sorry, I wasn't thinking like an economist that has the American people's best interests at heart there for a moment.
So, you know, he's got five points there and he's just outright lying on four of them.
But that doesn't mean he doesn't know his stuff, because after all, that chap is the most senior financial advisor in the Biden government.
So when the president says, look, I don't understand this financial matter, I need this explained to me.
That's the guy who comes toddling through the door and sits down and explains what's going on.
So, Joe, you already asked me this question three times today.
Well, it's actually worse than that, because what happens when he is asked a relatively simple question?
So we've got a video here.
So let me just do the clicky thing and then that and then that's fine.
You can just press play.
Like you said, they print the dollar.
So why does the government even borrow?
Well, again, some of this stuff gets Some of the language and concepts are just confusing.
I mean, the government definitely prints money, and it definitely lends that money.
The government definitely prints money, and then it lends that money by selling bonds.
Is that what they do?
They sell bonds.
Yeah, they sell bonds, since they sell bonds and people buy the bonds and lend them the money.
A lot of times, at least to my ear with MMT, the language and the concepts can be kind of unnecessarily confusing, but there is no question that the government prints money, and then it uses that money to... So, yeah, I guess I'm just... I can't really talk... I don't get it.
I don't know what they're talking about, because it's like...
The government clearly prints money, it does it all the time, and it clearly borrows, otherwise we wouldn't be having this debt and deficit conversation, so I don't think there's anything confusing there.
That is, like, three hours before the deadline, in the university library, six cans of Red Bull, double space typed, and save it as a PNG so they can't check the word count level, I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about.
Yeah, so are we clear now why the government borrows money if it can just print it?
Yes, exactly.
No?
You've got the answer for that?
Yeah, 100%.
There's just the stuff and then the, like, we don't really know, but do we sell the bonds?
I don't know if we sell the bonds.
You know, the thing!
Um, yeah, so that- how do I- how do I get out of that?
Dan, don't boom the tech!
Oh, I'm booming- there we go, I've stopped booming the tech.
Did you just come in with the save?
I tried to, John was fighting for the mouse as well.
Right, so, um, yeah, so- Clearly, the Chief Financial Advisor to the White House hasn't got a bloody clue why the government borrows money if it could just print it.
So I thought I'd have a stab at it.
So when that sort of went viral, I did a reply to it, sort of giving my take on it.
And also, James Lavish, who has appeared on Brokenomics, wrote an article about it.
And he's got some fantastic charts.
So I'm going to borrow his article in his charts to go through this.
And we'll see if James and I can do a slightly better job of answering this question than the chief financial advisor for the White House.
So if you want to check out the original article, go to The Informationist and you'll see it all there.
But I will take a stab at this.
So let's start with some money stuff.
At the distinctions of money, first level you've got is what we call M0, which is basically just cash and cash at the bank, cash and reserves, stuff like that.
You've got M1, which I'm showing on the chart here, which is basically your sort of the M0 plus whatever's in your current account and other immediate deposits.
So basically immediate access cash.
That's M1.
Now, you may look at that, and even if you're not much of a chartist, you might spot that something happened around about 2020.
Yeah, Joe Biden's a big fan of those L-shaped graphs, isn't he?
Yes.
It happens at the Treasury, it happens at the ballot box.
Yes.
So if you're listening rather than watching, what you see is a nice sort of smooth line about, I don't know, what is that, like $4 trillion in total cash available, And then we had a COVID, and very quickly it became about 18 trillion.
So yes, that's a factor.
So that's M1, that's just your basic bitch money.
What we tend to refer to more for the money supply though is M2, which is everything that's in M1.
Plus it's anything that can very, very quickly be turned into cash.
So money market funds and other kinds of deposits.
Now you'll notice the same pattern here.
It was low and then 2020 happened and it went higher.
Now this one is a lot smoother.
The reason why this one is a lot smoother is because this is one step removed from the money creation process.
So if you think of the money creation process being at the nexus between government and finance, And if you think of it like a conveyor belt, the money comes out of the machine, goes along the conveyor belt, and the government and finance are right there at the top of it.
So they can load up on this.
Then it starts going to high net worth individuals and corporations and all kinds of things.
If you're wondering where you are as a wage earner, you're at the end.
End of the conveyor belt.
In fact, we're normally into the next liquidity cycle before you see a pay rise.
So the reason that's a little bit more smoothed out than the other one is just because even though this is primarily going to be high net worth individuals and people who've got a bit of cash to their name, it still takes slightly longer, although you still do see that large amount.
Now, I will come on to debt, but before I get on to the debt, I just thought we should have a quick look at government spending.
So this is U.S.
government spending.
So this is U.S.
Debt Clock.
You will see that the government is spending 6.8 trillion.
Which is quite a lot, especially when you bear in mind that they are collecting in taxes 4.8.
Yeah, so spending 2 trillion over what the budget actually is.
Yeah, a deficit of 2 trillion.
So they're indebting every single child that is born in the United States from here until the heat death of the universe.
Well, quite, yes.
I mean, and two trillion is quite a lot of money.
To put it in perspective, that's sort of about the GDP of Canada, Australia or Mexico.
Or whatever Alex Jones was ordered to pay them.
Yes, yes.
It's one of those sort of very, very big numbers.
So instead of running a deficit for a year, you could just buy, I don't know, Canada or Australia or something.
and not just run their government.
I mean, buy literally everything.
You could just buy Australia, ship your convicts out there.
Yes.
All the bad people.
Oh, that's a good idea.
Yes, we could do that at some point.
So, what have I got on this one?
Oh yeah, so this is the sort of debt levels that you've seen.
Now, yeah, so going back to my point about how you could sort of buy Australia, you will notice with this that yes, it has been going up fairly consistently for a long time.
The US government has definitely got a spending problem.
But if it wasn't for this pesky COVID business that sort of happened, you'd be coming out around about sort of this level here.
You'd be sort of, I don't know, 28 trillion, something like that.
So basically, if you're American, you had COVID.
And if you didn't have COVID, you could have bought Mexico, Australia and Canada.
I don't know about buying Australia, because they've got to spend a lot of money on those adverts convincing Aboriginals not to sleep in the road.
Oh no, you can afford it, with all of this.
I will accept that COVID was absolutely necessary in order to get the excuse for the mail-in barrets, In order to get you an election fortification.
Well all this money had to be printed so that they could obviously line the pockets of Pfizer and Moderna for that totally necessary medical treatment.
Yes.
Lots of money got spread around.
Some people got a Covid stimmy, didn't they?
Some of them got like a thousand dollars.
They all got like two grand, didn't they?
Just two grand blank cheque.
Yes.
I had to get my super out in Australia.
Yeah.
I've indebted my 60 plus year old self.
Yeah.
The amount that went on the stimmy cheques was very, very small compared to the amount that went elsewhere.
But, you know, nevertheless, that is the amount of money out there.
Right.
So let's have a look at who owns all of this debt.
Bear with us if you're listening, but we've got a split here.
So others, we'll start at the top.
That's going to be sort of basically people who like to buy bonds.
So it could be private individuals, it could be anyone who just fancies it for their 401k or their whatever sort of saving vehicles that they have.
So there's lots of them.
You've got your foreign holders there.
That's a pretty big bar as well, although that's going down.
I mean, the rest of the world uses a lot of dollars all the time for Buying stuff, because the US dollar has the depth of liquidity that you can just at any point drop a couple of billion on some oil or whatever it is.
And while they've got all these dollars floating around, they might as well stick them in dollar-denominated debt.
So that's a good chunk, but it's by no means, you know, overwhelming on it.
Then you've got the US banks, that little green bit there, and then you've got the Fed.
Now that's the bit we want to sort of focus on when it comes to this sort of money printing business, because Um, new bonds, when they're issued, doesn't, I mean, that doesn't create money.
That's, um, you know, uh, they fund the U.S.
government and they go into the, um, Janet Yellen's treasury general account, I think it is.
So that fills up.
Old debts, old bonds are a little bit different, though.
With those, the Fed, that blue section at the bottom, they can either create or destroy money.
So I explain that because the Fed has a sort of magic bank account.
Now if you had a magic bank account like this, the way it would work is you'd look at your bank account and you'd see a zero balance.
You'd see you'd have no money.
But whenever you went and bought something with your credit card, you would be able to afford it, no matter what it was.
Or even though your balance was, say, zero.
If you then sold that thing later on, you wouldn't get the benefit of it because it would go back to zero.
But of course, if you're just buying stuff all the time, that's a pretty good deal to have.
A zero-balance bank account that you can just buy whatever you want.
So when the Fed goes out and buys old bonds, there wasn't money existing before, but they bought it and the other person gets paid at this magic money account.
So now, money has been created by buying that old bond.
That's how we actually do money printing.
This sort of magic account that the central bank has.
Now to be fair, when the central bank buys bonds back, the balance still goes to zero, so that money is destroyed.
So the Fed can create or destroy money, although it mostly creates it by buying these bonds.
Does that make sense?
Are we talking about bonds underwear?
No, very close, very close.
So right, what this gives us then is this sort of picture you see, where you end up with the Fed accumulating more and more assets.
And it coincides with these periods of high inflation.
So this, I'm giving you a chart now which looks at about sort of 2008.
When something happened again.
Yes!
Are you reading the chart then?
Yes.
So something happened and the Fed started buying lots and lots of these bonds, ergo creating money in the process.
Now you might look at that and think, That's quite a big increase.
Because that's going from, whatever it is, less than a trillion to 4.5.
Wait until you see the next graph that includes 2020.
Right.
Blimey!
Okay.
Yes.
So, that is basically what we were looking at before, this little bit down here.
And that looked scary, didn't it?
Right, then that happened.
Yes.
And you'll see, and remember, this is the balance of the central bank.
And as we explained, when this goes up, money is being created.
When it goes down, money is being destroyed.
So if you look at this, what has happened is they created a whole load of money, and then you look at 2011, and they thought, oh yeah, maybe we overdid that a bit, and they started to Reduce the money supply, so destroy money.
So they started tepidly starting taking it down, something broke, oh shit, create more money.
Right before the Obama election.
Yes.
They might have wanted to spend some money.
Yeah, there's definitely an election cycle aspect to this as well.
So then it sort of floats along and then they start to think, oh yeah, maybe we overdid it, so let's try and pull back a bit, oh shit we've broken something and it shoots up again.
Then you get that sort of long period there that plateau and then it's like okay well look we created quite a lot of money we're gonna have to row this back a little bit.
So they start to wind it down and then we get the pandemic and the and the big printing.
Now I've always wondered if there's something more going on with the pandemic?
Because they printed such a hell of a lot of money so quickly, and it was all so conveniently and hastily arranged.
I wonder if something really fundamental broke on the back end of the financial system.
And I can see lots of sort of markers pointing to it, but don't quite have a smoking gun.
So whatever happened, happened behind the scenes.
But yeah, if you're wondering why you can't afford anything anymore, it's because of that expansion that then trickles through.
And because of that process I explained a little bit earlier with the conveyor belt, your wages get diminished pretty much straight away.
I mean, assets go up straight away.
So all the financial assets go up straight away.
Things like houses respond quite quickly as well.
So you're being priced out of it.
And then eventually you get a pay rise, but probably in time for the next time this cycle repeats and the prices go up again so you're you are permanently lagged so So this is basically why the government doesn't just print all the money because the other thing I'll point you to is you can look at that number there.
What is that?
That's their balance sheet of 7.3.
So going from 4 to 7 did everything that you've seen over the last few years.
All of that inflation was just going from 4 to 7.
Can you imagine what would happen if they just monetized the debt and added 34 trillion to that number?
The amount of inflation would be, yeah.
I'm curious though, when you say that they pull it back, how exactly does that process work?
Because it looks like there's a slight pullback happening at the moment.
For example, if there were to be a situation, hypothetically, where BRICS was to achieve its ends, which is to de-dollarise the world and they were to start to go off the Chinese Yuan or another currency, If that were to happen and there were all of these dollars in circulation around the entire world that had to come back to the United States, how would that process work?
So, in answer to the first question of how does it pull back, so that was the process I talked about, about how this magic bank account the Fed has.
If they buy a bond, they create money.
Because, you know, that money now exists in order to pay the person they bought the bond from.
If they sell a bond, they're destroying money because they then get paid that money.
But remember, they've got a zero balance bank account, so that money is therefore destroyed.
So they've been doing quantitative tightening down there.
And I'm pretty sure I did a Brokeronomics on this last week.
It was called It's All About the Change.
I'm pretty sure that this is about to start ripping higher.
Oh, yeah?
Yeah.
Yeah.
Big time, actually.
It was election year and other factors, which I sort of outlined in that.
So then your second question, what happens if the rest of the world stops using dollars, which was the main driver for whatever colour it was, the orange colour in the previous chart, the rest of the world stops using dollars because they're using something else instead, those dollars then flow back to the United States, and there's going to be an awful lot of them.
And if that happens, Well, I mean, the dollar might as well come on a roll, be very thin, white and absorbent, have little perforations between each sheet.
I mean, the currency would be absolute toilet paper at that point.
Do you think this could be a reason why they may be trying to move away from a cash economy?
Well, they would definitely like to have a central bank digital currency.
There's some technical challenges with that.
But if they could get one of those working, yeah, it would give them even more tools to manage the situation.
Yeah, I guess when it's cash, like you look at the videos of the Great Depression in the early 20th century, and you look at videos of people literally burning wheelbarrows of cash.
To stay warm, it has that effect on it.
But you could maybe create somewhat of an illusion with it if you had a central bank digital currency and you had a universal basic income for everybody.
I think that's how they get people on it.
So I think the actual process for getting onto a central bank digital currency will be, first of all, it's for businesses, where if you're a business and you're paying your taxes, you have to use this.
And businesses will just be like, oh, well, I have to then, so I'll do that.
And then it will be offered to people if they want to or something like and then early adopters will come on and they use it and then it will be, you know, we know times are tough so we're going to give people an allowance and if you sign up for one of these digital wallets then you know you get whatever it is like a grand a month or something and then everybody's just going to do that and then some people like me saying for God's sakes don't do that but
How you can convince somebody to not take £1,000 a month, whatever it is, and then it would be like 93% adoption.
They just require it.
It'll be too easy.
In America, you can't convince people not to eat in an outburger.
You say, you eat that, you're going to get fat.
Eat that now, tastes good, get fat.
You can't convince them not to do that.
But I'm curious to know how realistic you think this is because Ray Dalio did a chart or he did this video where he explained that every sort of a hundred years the global reserve currency tends to change and it's been around about a hundred years since the US dollar became the global reserve currency at the, what was that meeting that they had?
Starts with a B. Bretton Woods?
Bretton Woods.
It's getting towards that hundred year mark.
So this could actually, I mean, that doesn't really mean too much, but hypothetically, this could actually happen.
And if you look at the charts that show how much different currencies are being used around the world, the Chinese Yuan's going up, the dollar's going down.
Yeah.
Could this happen?
Well, I think it is happening, yeah.
I mean, part of that is that at the moment the dollar is predominant because nothing else has that depth of liquidity in order to do transactions with.
The euro was starting to creep up and then we had the Ukraine war.
And it was played in such a way that Germany was just sort of completely taken out and the share of euro transactions has fallen quite significantly.
So I know that people think that, well, the normiest view is that Russia invaded Ukraine.
Then you've got people who say, okay, well, actually, no, the US provoked Russia into doing it and it's a sort of civil war between Donbass and Kiev and stuff.
But another layer of it is that it was actually a targeted takedown of the euro, which was the biggest threat to the dollar.
Now, the dollar is really the US's superpower, and you don't want to mess with that because that is the basis of their power.
And I'll go into this in more depth in Broconomics.
I guess the energy scarcity in the North Korean pipeline would lend credence to that.
Yeah, absolutely.
But one thing you absolutely don't want to do is give people a reason not to use the dollar.
And what Joe Biden did in order to score a quick win is he took the Russian dollar-denominated assets.
So then the rest of the world looks at that and says, well, hang on, what if I don't do what the US tells me to one day?
OK, well, we better start getting rid of our dollar-denominated assets.
So that process could well be in track at this very moment.
In fact, you're starting to see it.
And also Saudi as well.
Saudi don't like Joe Biden.
I don't know if you saw, they gave him the fist bump.
They didn't shake his hand.
Yeah, wouldn't shake his hand.
Gave him a fist bump.
And you know, obviously with the petrodollar, Saudi is the biggest customer.
Well, after the thing you mentioned, the Bretton Woods agreement, After that, the dollar just floundered.
After that, it was set to gold.
Then there was the Nixon shock in the 1970s.
And after that, the dollar kind of floundered until they pegged it to oil, which was dependent on a deal with Saudi Arabia.
So they are a key cornerstone part of the dollar system.
And, again, as well as taking Russia's foreign reserves, Biden just completely disrespects MBS.
But this is the thing.
This guy, this Jared, I mean, you see the level of financial sophistication that these guys have.
They simply don't know what they're doing.
At least Trump was honest and he'd get on his plane and say, we're going to do the best arms deal with Saudi.
At least he was friends with the Saudis.
Yeah, they don't like Joe Biden and they're a big customer.
The fact that they're just openly brazenly now joining BRICS, that should be concerning to anybody who has a vested interest.
Yeah, they've got a bit of work to do.
It's a sort of global reserve system.
I don't think they necessarily want it to be a global reserve system, but there are certainly moves being made.
Yes, so I hope that provides an explanation that the White House's chief financial advisor could not give.
The reason they don't just print the money is because it would turn the US dollar into toilet paper pretty fast, and even when they do a small amount of this, it's not good.
So anyway, so that's my opinion.
Obviously, you know, James Lovish and I sort of agreed on this one.
Other opinions are available.
So Paul Krugman and the MMT lot, they think that, oh no, this is fine.
You can just monetize debt.
So, you know, pay your money, take your choice.
You can either follow Brokernomics or Paul Krugman.
And yeah, take your view on that one.
Anyway, hope that helped.
Right, fantastic.
OK, on to the last bit.
Hello, white women, if you seem to have stumbled across this segment.
I don't know what we're doing in YouTube recommendations.
Are you OK?
And I ask that sincerely because I think there's a lot on the online right at the moment.
They've kind of entered a sort of gay phase of woman bashing.
I do think that we should be leading from the front.
We should show a bit of biblical headship.
We should be considerate, but also not putting up with anti-man-hating nonsense.
But You kind of need women onside to get anywhere because victory is an intergenerational demographic project and if you want to have families, which lots of people do, and they're frustrated by their inability to do so, maybe don't confuse them with the enemy.
And at this point, if we want to reignite solidarity between the sexes, we've got to do something about the fact that white women seem really miserable and seem to hate themselves.
Don't put this through lightly.
But before we start, if you want to be miserable, Work anywhere else except the Lotuses, because we're great!
If you have the qualification to become a production manager and you can commute between Swindon and London, go to our website page, look at the spec, and possibly apply to come work with us.
It'd be wonderful to see you there.
Now, we hear quite a lot these days, and you've obviously spoken quite a bit about this because you have descended into one of the circles of hell by going on the Whatever Podcast before, that young men are struggling with dating and relationships.
We are seeing The rise of the average age of virginity, the average age of marriages creeping up, 50% of women in the UK have reached 30 with no children, and despite this everyone seems to be self-reporting, actually I'd like a family and kids and relationships.
So this is leaving a lot of people miserable and bereft of purpose.
And I'll come onto this first because There was an article about two weeks ago on Psychology Today – sorry, this was an older article, there was a more recent article in The Hill, I believe – and this was what's behind the rise of lonely single men.
And I've brought this up because a lot of the time, Young men are blamed for the adversarial conditions between the sexes that is stopping them from getting dates.
Yes, on an individual case, some men are overweight, earning potential has been robbed from them, but some men are neat, not in education, employment and training, and so you could go to the gym and get a job and get a bit more confidence and not be resentful online, but it is still very difficult even if you put yourself in the sufficient shape to get a girlfriend so here's this article says younger and middle-aged men are the loneliest they've been in generations and it's probably going to get worse dating apps
the profile of people on them 62 of the users are men and many women are overwhelmed by the number of options they have so if you're on a dating app it's you're in competition with a very large pool of men and And Dan and I spoke about this before on Brocanomics.
We did a Brocanomics of dating apps, where I essentially said that dating apps have an active profit incentive to keep their users apart, not in a permitted relationship, because you don't want to lose two customers at once by fulfilling their specific purpose.
They can work, in spite of perverse incentives.
I mean, I'm now a living example, thankfully.
But it's...
Don't try and outsource all of your dating prospects to bureaucratic engines.
Young people, do they not do the pub these days?
Do you not go to a pub on a Thursday and a Friday and a Saturday and Sunday lunchtime?
Oh, we might, but as the generations get younger, as we get younger and younger in the modern day, it's very much all about TikTok and Instagram.
This is the culture that is coming next, is basically the TikTok culture.
People whose dopamine receptors are just constantly fried.
You have young girls who are just, you can just get attention so easily these days if you're a half decent looking young girl.
Yes.
And you know, people will say that, oh, you know, you're blaming girls and not blaming girls at all.
I think that, like you said, this is a problem that we both have to have together.
But I am remarkably sympathetic towards the red pill movement compared to a lot of other conservative creators, because I do believe that this is a direct and antithetical response to feminism.
We've seen feminism come and take over the culture and then we had a few edgelords like Carl Benjamin come in and say, hey, look, you know, this is not so great.
And then I believe what's happened over the last few years is that guys have gotten together and thought, okay, well, like what are the more practical responses?
And then you get a few good faith actors who are, you know, looking to actually get some numbers together as men do.
They'll say, these are the numbers and these are the dating stack numbers.
And then you get the grifters who come in behind and then want to sell you a bit, a Bitcoin course.
Or who say, like, Islamic polygamy is the only solution.
Exactly, something like that, right?
So I've delved very deep into the red pill and I think I really get the movement and I think that there is some good faith and goodwill there and there are a lot of guys there who are getting together to try and sort of figure this out, right?
What do we do now?
This is how the world's changed.
These are the numbers.
These are your options.
If you want to have a secular relationship, this is what you're looking at.
If you want to go down a religious path, this is what you're looking at.
It's very, I find, I'm fascinated by it.
I was telling Connor before the show that if I ever see a red button, a movement that people don't like, I just want to press it.
So I've gone into the Red Pill stuff, I've been on the Whatever podcast seven times and I find it, I'm going to bring you along one day Connor.
Oh blimey!
One day I'm going to have you there, I'll mark my words.
See the Red Pill guys, I mean I've brushed up against the sphere a few times just because I think those that are providing just a data packet are Fair and sensible, and they're genuinely in good faith trying to make those assessments.
And that's what it started out as.
Unfortunately, people have hijacked the mantle of Manosphere and have since styled themselves as people who are just giving second-hand, rote-learnt talking points, but then playing Motten Bailey with saying, oh, everything's lost, you can't get a wife, Modern women are all whores and irredeemable.
Marriage isn't worth it.
But also, I just converted to Islam.
My wife only speaks via whiteboard.
And I don't provide advice, but also don't get married.
You know, like, just be honest about it, because then people can at least know what they're buying.
Yeah, I do think that accountability is a very important part of this.
And one of the big things that's discussed in the red pill sphere is like, As a man, you've got to be accountable, you've got to go to the gym, you've got to get your money up, but then there's never the accountability of, all right, we have to lead culture.
If we are necessarily the ones who are better at everything, as Pearl Davis says, what are women better at than men?
I said they're more flexible and better long-distance swimmers because they're more buoyant.
But if we do accept that responsibility as being the leader, of women and being the ones who are meant to lead and provide and protect, then we must necessarily lead culture.
So I don't like the defeatist point of view where they say, basically just sit back and watch it burn.
I like solutions.
So this is sort of my take on it all.
Yeah, and it's also not all over.
And looks maxing is like not the only thing you can do.
And anyone who's telling you, oh, as a man, you need to go and get like plastic surgery so you can get a girlfriend, they're selling you a sort of false bill of goods because just changing your cosmetic exterior doesn't change how you think about yourself on the inside.
Patrice O'Neill, who was actually way better than any of the red pill guys, said, because he was a big fat bloke, but he still had lots of girlfriends, he always said, look, man, you can be a fat guy and you could lose 200 pounds and you can get an amazing shape, but you're still a fat guy in your mind.
And so you're going to approach women like a fat guy.
So you need to have an ethic and to look yourself in the mirror and justify yourself to yourself before you can understand.
I mean, women do respond to looks, but primarily they respond to confidence and sense of purpose and just knowing what you're about.
Yeah, that's what I actually always say when I go on these shows.
The girls will sometimes ask, what advice do you give to men?
And I'll say, purpose.
Know what your purpose is, aim single-mindedly at it, like Jordan Peterson says back in his heyday.
But yeah, I think that's the greatest advice that I give to young guys, is just find something, become extremely competent at it, and then you actually, there's a magnetism about you when you're on your purpose, and when you're a man who's, as they say, on his grind, but a meaningful grind.
But to wrap around back to your question about how are people meeting, well increasingly they've been funneled down the dating apps and you've spoken about like the children of the algorithm, the ones that just sit inside and sit on TikTok all day.
There's a stat that I found out recently that is more Zoomers have sexted than had actual sex.
So, that doesn't say a lot about relationships that are being formed and the like, because the Zoomers are now in their mid-to-late-twenties, some of them.
What counts as sexting?
Is that when you say, come round in 30 minutes or something?
No, no, no.
I'm not going to talk about expletives on a family show, Dan.
Right, OK, fair enough.
Tell me afterwards.
Point being... I'm not the Snapchat generation, I see.
There you go.
We spoke about basically dating apps being not designed to work per their specific purpose because the function of a system is what it actually does.
Dating apps have resulted in fewer people coupling up and people have taken notice and actually been burned out by this and although that article says, oh women are so burned out by choices of men, option paralysis is a thing, also men are really fed up of dating apps and loads of dating apps are taking a tumble In terms of the amount of money they're earning on the stock market.
And this has meant, now that Bumble, so Bumble was, remember I was trying to explain to you all the different dating app types?
Oh, this is, this is one where the women take charge.
Not anymore.
Right, because that's a disaster.
Yeah, it is a disaster.
Yeah, it's an absolute disaster.
Right, Bumble have changed it, okay?
So this is a brief from UnHerd about this.
So, Bumble has lost $40 billion in market share value since 2021.
In an attempt to rebrand, Bumble has dropped the requirement that women must message a new match first, claiming they're responding to feedback that female users are becoming burnt out by having to make the first move.
Well, yeah, just recognise sexual difference and recognise the fact that women want a confident man because they're attracted to confidence, and you're going to have a...
Yeah, I never understood the point of this one, because that's not what women do.
All of this stuff about women's rage and all them jumping up and down in the forest, it's because they're out of their evolutionary match.
They should find a nice bloke, a leader, get some pregnant, they have kids, they're happy.
That's what we want.
And the economy should be redesigned to facilitate those single provider households.
I've spent some time on Bumble myself, and I can tell you it's not productive when the woman starts the conversation.
Because if you do start the conversation, generally you want to leave Some sort of like a nice taste in their mouth, for lack of a better word.
You want to say something that you've looked at my profile and you've observed something about me.
You want to demonstrate a fact that you've taken interest in me, so you give a unique opening.
Exactly.
How does someone open a Bumble then?
Or they just put a hand.
The hand emoji.
I had once my brother showed me a girl that just said H. Didn't even put the I in.
Just H. Couldn't even be bothered saying the whole two-letter word.
So yeah, that's the level of discourse.
And a lot of the time it's just sort of on dating apps.
This is one of the big problems.
I don't use dating apps anymore.
Is that there's a big portion of girls who will go on there because guys when they go on dating apps, they mean business.
They're not going on there for an ego boost.
A big portion of girls will go on there and they will just for their ego.
Oh, he likes me.
He likes me.
Or they'll create an account and let it be dormant and put the Instagram in the bio as a promotional.
This is what I was telling you last time I was on there.
If you ever see the Instagram in there, you know that they're not serious.
They're trying to get Instagram followers.
Right.
It's a whole strategy, I tell you what.
It's a marketing metagame.
Now, there's a paragraph in this, which is very interesting, though, that also feeds into some of what the Red Pill guys have rightly observed, I would say.
The Bumble strategy change is a fundamental misunderstanding of Bumble's problems.
Dr. Martin Graff, who's a lecturer at the University of Wales, said the app's business model no longer works because women are far more selective in evolutionary terms than men are.
Bumble isn't struggling, it laid off 30% of its workforce earlier this year, because of biological differences between men and women.
It is struggling because of the sheer exhaustion that comes with the online dating experience, the superficial soul-destroying swiping transactional formulaic conversations, the impossibility of finding genuine compatibility among the constant conveyor belt of faces.
Women aren't burnt out by having to initiate chats, they're burnt out by Bumble and other dating apps in and of themselves, because if you're commodifying yourself like an Amazon like market listing, then you're going to see people as a carousel of commodification.
And as you just said, if you can get instant gratification and attention online, why would you want to narrow the parameters of where you're going to get that attention from to just one person?
You can have a carousel of people constantly validating you and it's novel, so you get more dopamine from each interaction.
Yeah.
And also, if you think about what in the short term men and women both seek, I would say that in the short term, that instant gratification that's not necessarily healthy is attention for women.
And And for guys, it's quick sex.
It's casual sex.
Stephen Mullen, you once said that attention is porn for women.
Exactly.
That's a great one.
That's a great one.
So guys, internet porn, that's such a good one.
Internet porn is exactly like dating apps for girls.
Guys can get their sexual gratification, get their rocks off, or if they're good and skilled at using the dating app, like swindling girls, the Tinder swindler or whatever, then they can do that.
But yeah, for girls, it's attention.
They get the dopamine hit of, oh, he likes me, he likes me.
They feel pretty.
So, yeah.
So the Coolidge effect sets in and then you become emotionally desensitized in the same way that a guy is looking at increasing the extreme stuff and can't get aroused unless there's six people and a horse or something involved eventually.
That's the equivalent, right?
So, Bumble has decided to rebrand its marketing in light of this change and they've immediately had to take down the marketing because they started doing billboards about celibacy.
So, it told Forbes on Monday that the celibacy ads were a response to the frustrations of dating, but it's in the process of removing the ads due to concerns it received from customers.
The customers in question were TikTokers who had a bit of a whine.
Is it possible to play this, here we go, without the music, there we go.
So someone's complaining that people are having the coupling up.
They're not complaining because this is sort of like anti-christian thing saying that, oh, a celibate life is is incorrect and you can have a life of meaning by not having kids, but being spiritual leadership, funny glasses and stuff.
Yeah, quite.
Instead, it's it's saying that a tote bag.
How how how dare you suggest that a man and a woman getting together might provide some meaning to women's lives?
So I do think the people on the billboards, though, they should be celibate, though.
I don't want that.
I don't want that little boy.
Weird progressive people.
Yes, very much so.
I don't know their pronouns, and I don't want to be disrespectful, heaven forbid.
Look, frankly, the kind of people that complain and set the marketing and tone for dating apps are the exact kind of people who are unmarriageable, who will never have a functioning relationship, and are just resentful of the fact they know they won't reproduce.
But when you use a dating app, do you just not go, right, I like that one, And the message, I like you, do you want to meet in this bar?
Well, you only message if you match.
And the problem is, if there's a disproportionate number of men to women, there's more men competing for the same woman, especially if loads of the profile accounts are fake or marketing arms.
So the amount of times that you end up swiping through, and the algorithm rations the amount of people you can swipe on, so it's not trying to get you to meet your spouse.
And they've done studies on this as well, where they show the level of engagement that men and women get.
Men will In general, we'll swipe on something like upwards of 80% of the women, and then women will swipe left on something like 3% of the guys, and then about 1.5%, maybe 1% of guys they'll actually meet up with.
- Oh, sorry, they'll engage with about 3% of the guys.
And then about 1.5%, maybe 1% of guys they'll actually meet up with.
Whereas guys are just like, a lot of guys will just go in there, just everyone.
Everyone.
And people say, like, the law of attrition is the way to do it, but the things that you continually do, that you fill your frame of reference with, shape how you feel about the world.
So if you're constantly consuming content that makes you feel like you're going to give up on the prospect of having a relationship, and you're burnt out because you're endlessly swiping every day and it's not coming up a cropper because the algorithm is disadvantaging you, because you're just an average bloke that in any other time and place would have married the girl in the local village, then you're going to feel really burnt out and give up on dating.
And it seems that women are feeling the same way via option paralysis, or the fact that the way that dating apps work are designed more for how men engage with relationships than women engage with relationships.
For example, Grindr came before Tinder.
So all women are following the way that gay men hook up via the main way that they meet men.
Because it's very profitable for the dating apps thing, but it's not leading to any relationships.
You're right though, because it informs the way that you view the other sex and the way that you view marriage.
You know, growing up I'm lucky I had two great parents who I have a fantastic relationship with and I watch them have a great relationship as well and I've had good relationships with women my whole life and that's what's informed the way that I view the other sex.
If you're now in this culture where it's like you just jump on a dating app as soon as you're, I don't know, can you do it when you're underage?
No, no, no.
I don't think you can.
The former safeguarder of Twitter did want teenagers on Grindr.
Oh, really?
Yes.
Gosh, yeah.
He wrote his dissertation on it.
It makes sense, but we won't go there.
But yeah, I don't know if there's probably not a teenage version of it or something like that.
That would be weird.
But yeah, if that's what you're doing, as soon as you're 18, as soon as you're of age, It's so much easier.
Why would a guy, especially in this day and age, why would a guy want to go to the gym and work out?
Yeah, but it's obviously pointless though, isn't it?
Because it's just an app, unless you're in the 1% that actually does something.
Well, it makes you think that it's increasing your amount of options, but then it outsources it.
You've got to do what works, haven't you?
Yeah, but this is the thing.
Most people think, because it's the default thing, they think, this is providing you more options, you can tailor your taste, so you outsource it to a bureaucracy that you presume has got your best interests at heart, rather than taking action and, you know, going up and speaking to someone, for example.
So it's actually more passive, but it's deluding.
Well, that's what I do in my day, because we didn't have the apps, you just, if you see someone you like, you wander over and say hello.
Yeah, but now the very existence of phones has meant most interactions are through the phone, therefore it's not the norm.
The fact that these are hemorrhaging profit and having to change means that people might start straying away, so that's positive.
Yeah.
I mean, I've done a fair bit of what you just said in terms of approaching people in person.
I much prefer it.
In the West these days, I think that the apps and the social media has a big role to play in this.
If you think about it, if a young girl is on these apps and she's just constantly swiping through all these guys and then she's got these blue checkmark athletes in her DMs, she's going to think, well, that's my bar.
That's my standard.
Those are the kind of guys that are giving me attention.
So those are the kind of guys that I wouldn't settle for any less.
So then average Joe comes up, and really she's just average herself, comes up.
And if she's really indulged in that attention-seeking behavior, average Joe comes up and she just would not want to know from him.
I mean, he's got to really screw them up because women are biologically designed to pick the best man in their tribe or their village or whatever it is.
But you're talking about like maybe 20 guys at most that they get to select from, and that should be the evolutionary match.
Whereas these days, it's every guy within 20 miles all the time.
That's the problem though because you've been out about Instagram and if you have an open profile on Instagram and if you have some cute photos you've got guys from Dubai trying to fly you out to Dubai just like sliding into your DMs.
I will say that is not the majority of most women's experience.
However, because it is some women's experience, that sets the incentives for most of the women in the middle who therefore can't find an average bloke because this system is not meant to permit it so that average people find average people.
It's more profitable to keep you in the system.
So most women are not getting messages from athletes and football.
Most women are not the women on Fresh and Fit.
But the thing is, though, if you do have, and I do agree with you, though, but I think that what we were talking about before, this is just as much a problem for young women in terms of that sort of attention-seeking as porn would be for young men because this is instant gratification that you can go to on the internet and you don't have to this is just as much a problem for young women in terms of that And if there's one thing that young people don't like doing, it's putting in effort and seeing long-term rewards.
So I think that this is a problem on both sides.
And it's not like every girl is being flown out to Dubai and what have you, but it is an option.
It's just like going down a path of watching more and more hardcore porn and never meeting a woman in your life is an option.
So don't allow both to be in your frame of reference, ladies and gents.
So how are women coping with this?
Because this is the main thrust of this segment.
Right.
you This has been recent.
Rage rituals.
Do you want to have a listen, gentlemen?
Audio warning.
There we go.
Right, that's quite enough of that for the audio.
Look, they're selling notably, predominantly, white women here and Jabba the Hutt by the looks of it.
Courses where they go into the woods and just hit things.
It's like, you... Civilization should not be set up in such a way where you need to do this.
You should actually, like, have people around you that love and care for you, and that don't cause this much trouble, and you shouldn't have an existential scream that you need to pay hundreds of pounds to go into the forest and unleash.
The reason they're in this rage in the first place is because they're listening to all the bullshit that leads them to be single and skewed expectations.
Well, not just single, right?
Now, there's so much propaganda that some people, the TikTok generation, have been convinced to hate their children.
So this woman has said, I'm really angry at my kids, so I was told by TikTok to throw ice on camera to get rage out.
It's like...
Even if this is performative, even if it's just to generate clicks, right?
The people that consume it, that don't realize it's performative, get it as a downstream effect, and they jump on the trend, and so they become actively resentful of the people in their life.
Like, I saw a clip recently, Matt Walsh was responding to it, one woman went, normalize hating your husband.
Like, because sometimes you do, and so sometimes, you know, you can sit there on it for an hour, or a day, or even a week, but then you can come back and make the choice to love each other again.
It's like, You shouldn't allow yourself mentally to resent other people in your life.
Either don't have them in your life or have some humility and realize you might be contributing to the situation why you're miserable.
Yeah, I think we've drawn out a few parallels throughout this episode.
Another one that I have to point out here that the feminists are going to hate is that what the red pill is, is like we said before a bunch of guys getting together and using logic.
To solve the problem.
What we've just seen there is a bunch of women getting together and using emotion, like just pure unbridled emotion to like pour out their problems.
I just find it interesting to see that taking place.
When the men get together they're just like sort of making graphs and talking about how they can do this, this and that and then mathematically they can find a girlfriend.
I don't know if you guys have seen the channels like HoMath?
I've heard of it, but I haven't seen it.
This guy's channel is hilarious.
He just draws pictures and does all these equations and stuff talking about the way that the dating market works.
I want to watch that.
He's this dorky guy.
It's amazing.
So I will say, though, with that set up, of course, because that's how men and women's brains work.
I mean, even the bestselling book, Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus, laid this out of where, you know, when a woman tells a story and you offer a solution, she gets mad because you've offered a solution.
Like, our brains are literally set up in different ways, where men will respond to problems practically, but women often just want to be heard.
And so, to accommodate that gives you a happy relationship.
There's no point getting mad at each other's nature, because then you'll just be bitter, lonely, and dead.
So, if you want a relationship, you have to accommodate each other's nature.
The problem is culture has set us at odds, pathologized that nature, and said, we have to eliminate that nature in order to be equal.
Rather than say, okay, of course the women are going to get together at brunch and talk about things emotionally.
It's not so positive on social media when they're publicising their entire private lives, maybe keep some things private.
Of course men are going to sit around and autistically do grafts and build sheds and things like that.
But we need to be able to have those spaces to come apart so we come back together with a bit of understanding of one another rather than hating each other so much that we do rage rituals.
You're right about how men and women process this stuff, so this is something I definitely learnt from being married for quite a long time, is now when she starts talking, I actively make sure I do not listen to a single word that she's saying, because what I used to do, is I used to listen to it, and then I'd be like a lawyer.
And I'd break it down.
It's like, okay, well, you're saying this.
And then I would argue and I'd find solutions.
I'd do all that stuff.
And then she would just get angrier.
So now I make sure that I do not listen.
I just go over, I give her a hug and say, don't worry, I'm there for you.
I'm your man.
It's all going to be okay.
And it doesn't matter what the hell it is.
It just stops.
And she's happier and I don't have to listen.
So everyone wins.
That's perfect.
That's perfect.
Yeah.
I think that there's like a good point to that.
And like you were saying before, but embracing it is the important part.
And the thing is, I used to be a lot more degenerate myself in terms of the way that I would date, right?
And if it wasn't such a nice gentlemanly podcast, I'd tell you guys some stories, but we won't go there.
There's no need.
And then as I've gotten older, I've leaned more into my faith over the last few years and I've completely changed my ways.
And dating Christian girls and dating even girls who have never even had sex, girls who are virgins, the difference is just unbelievable when you don't have just that tension straight away.
But one of the things that I've noticed is that the Christian girls tend to understand the idea of submission and not like under my fist sort of submission, but understand the idea of submitting to a responsible man and actually admiring men for that.
And on my part, I really love dating a girl who's very feminine and who knows how to lean into that femininity.
With your girlfriends, that's what he said is just perfect.
I hear the Asians are also a bit like that.
The what?
The Asians.
I think that's just your personal predilection, Dan.
I do like the Asians.
Just to wrap up the segment, and that's a perfect note to end on, this is why I said headship at the start, because, I mean, if we're defining love per the sort of Christian definition of the willing of the good of the other without expectation in return, it requires vulnerability on both parts.
That doesn't mean that women should be put in a subordinate position, but all women want a confident man they can look up to and entrust, will handle their problems and listen to their problems, but then doesn't necessarily give them solutions so they can go solve the problems themselves.
They trust the man to solve them, and that makes them feel more comfortable and relaxed.
And so the submission is, per the writings of St. Paul, mutual in that the man can defer to the woman in her domain of expertise, but she absolutely will defer to the man for dealing with the rest of the world, which is of greater threat to her.
This is why in wedding vows, there is the obey for the woman, but not for the man.
And so rather than be scornful of women, we can look at things like this and go, are you You don't seem very happy.
We can offer a better set of cultural incentives that involve a bit of tradition, but it will require some humility on your part, and you'll probably be happy.
So, provide men with a better story, provide women with a better story, and hopefully we can help each other out.
And also, just to finish that off as well, it's like...
In a more traditional relationship, the woman will really appreciate the logic side of things and she'll be like, oh yes, this is my husband, he solves my problems.
And also in a more traditional relationship, I truly believe that as a man, you're not meant to be alone and you're not meant to be just on your grind and hustling all the time.
And as a man, it's very easy for your heart to go cold if you're just dealing with the traumas of life all the time.
And there's nothing quite like a woman's warmth as well to balance that out.
It's beautiful, man.
That's spot on.
Right, so, on to some of the comments.
No video comments today, but we do have a Rumble rant right at the top, which you can send in.
We don't do Super Chats, and we're not even on YouTube this week!
Brilliant!
And relevant is $50 from the Shadow Band.
Sorry to hear about YouTube striking again.
Yes, I pointed out that The Great Replacement is not a conspiracy theory, but it's also not what Carlson and Vivek said.
It's actually more innocuous, but also insidious.
And they noticed that, like, a few weeks later, and were like, right, don't like that.
See you later.
Six-week ban, so...
I suppose we'll be leaning more into Rumble in the future, let's hope.
So on the first segment- See you there.
Yeah, quite, yeah.
Richard, stop thinking the answer will come from the political arena.
It will not.
The answer must come from outside, from the people.
Time is not on our side.
With politics, it is a game of delay.
Put off and kick down the road until the next election and so on.
Both.
The business of the state will always exist, and so you can't just abandon the political arena, because politics will be interested in you even if you're not interested in politics.
But do not think also that everyone getting involved in party-style activism will change everything, because you can only put your own house in order first.
I've given up on the masses.
rather than betting there will be a self-correction mechanism.
That's where I am now.
I'm at the point where I don't think we can save everybody, so I'm just willing to save the people who want to be saved.
Yeah.
I'm trying to do a bit of both, but I'm not betting that the political reform will come up.
No, I've given up on the matters.
I don't blame you.
John, Connor, why don't you become the change you want, Connor?
Why don't you become the English Bukele?
What's stopping you?
I'll never be allowed near Parliament, ever.
Because it's definitely not something that I'm interested in.
Because it's very sordid and the selection mechanisms are not there.
And also, I don't know.
I just... shrug.
You ever go into politics?
No.
I got asked this the other week and I was like... I've got no appetite for it.
As well...
I'm not very stage-managed.
I'm, like, an ideas-focused obsessive, and so I can just ramble at length for, like, two hours, but I'm not gonna be... I mean, the place has a certain charm to it, but it must be a soul-destroying job just milling around waiting for the bell to bloody ring so you can be filed into some lobby.
Yeah, it's like an African waiting at a train station.
I think you'd be a fantastic right-hand man for a politician, somebody who's got the knowledge that can come in below and just sort of, like...
dissect all the ideas well and then you got the person out the front doesn't really know too much but he's like we can build a wall so like so basically like dominant cummings but not shit lip yeah good um you've got some super chats on your one i have yes and the shadow band says for 50 thank you very much sir doffs me cap to you uh this is me being slightly more responsible with my money than the government uh you you You are indeed, sir.
The Shadow Band also says, um, also, the whole MMT thing is scary.
The belief that inflation occurs because taxes are low.
Yeah, I mean, I just saw the other day that Biden is trying to solve the housing problem by subsidizing demand again, by giving people subsidies to buy houses, and he thinks that will make house prices go down.
You could just not import, like, a million South Americans and Chinese and that every year so that you can have more houses.
Well, as I think they established, he's not that hot on the economic stuff.
Yvonne says, thank you very much for your rumble rant, I suspect that the retardation levels of mass migration in the US is part of monetary policy.
They realise there will be hyperinflation of the US population, say, static, so they're quickly increasing the pop.
Yeah, and that would certainly explain why every Western country is doing it at the same time.
Let's have a look.
Right, so AZ Desert Rat says, so many financial decisions made by the Biden regime are starting to make sense.
Yes, unfortunately they're doing that sense.
Omar Walters says, considering they printed trillions during the pandemic, right as we had the toilet paper shortage, can we be sure they aren't already toilet paper?
Has anyone seen the dollar and toilet paper in the same room together?
Yes.
Good point.
And Californian Refugee says, I love Dan's sexual money.
It makes my late grandpa look less crazy and more genius.
Good.
Well, I'm sure he was a sound chap.
Brilliant.
I'll do two quick ones before we wrap up and plug your stuff.
Sophie Liv, women are very attracted by men who are strong in their own.
If you're strong in your own and you're able to rely on yourself, We, women, know we can rely on you as well.
Even, I think, at a caveman, a cavewoman level, that's what women look for.
Fiction tells us that we want a man who can't live without you, but in reality, it comes across as desperate and repulsive.
You want to be a fully-fledged, self-reliant person, and women are just as likely to come to you.
Well said.
Absolutely true.
Yeah, that's the kind of advice that young boys need to hear, rather than the advice that they get today, where it's just like, you know, cry more and... I've always had a theory, because I don't know if you guys have ever found this, but quite often, women in a relationship, right, around the second or third month, They will pick an argument for seemingly no reason.
This is called a shit test.
Yeah, and I've always thought it's because it's biologically programmed into them.
They don't want to be like eight months pregnant and have a saber-toothed tiger up their arse.
They need to know that their man can stand his ground.
That's why you can't have a Red Pill podcast.
I've never done the Red Pill stuff.
You'd be good.
You'd be better than most of the other people in that shit at the moment, I'll tell you that.
But my point is, I don't think they are aware of it at all.
You can't be mad at it.
This is genetically programmed into them.
You just have to, like, allow the emotional waves to break, like you would on a rock.
Be the shore, not the wave.
Exactly.
Perfect.
And one last one.
Furious Dan.
Dating apps should be seen as a black swan strategy.
Small portion of your efforts may provide wildcard dividends or blind dating experience.
Sure, I'm going to end with the recommendation to the boomers in the audience and the Gen Xers.
Go on, Dan.
If you know a nice young Zoomer, to get them off the dating apps, and you know another nice young single Zoomer, just set them up, because that's what used to happen.
And you've got their interests at heart more than Silicon Valley companies do, so...
Yeah, I think that there is, we are moving towards an economy of communities as well.
So right now we're in this economy of, you know, quick fix dating apps, but communities, even if you look at content creators, they're all creating these communities of like-minded people because we're going from this, this strange change has happened over the last few decades where people used to be in church communities and used to be in, and these are all great and obviously I would encourage people to still do this, but now, because online is so pervasive, People are creating online communities as well.
So I'm curious to see how that sort of shifts the dating landscape because dating apps, like we just said, they're terrible.
They're not going to be around forever.
Maybe there's something better on the horizon.
Hopefully so.
And with that optimistic note, Jake, we've got your links back up for those who are obviously convinced to go and follow you per this podcast.
You can find Jake on YouTube, Twitter, and his Mainly a reality-based podcast which is on Spotify, Google and Apple.
You just type in reality-based and we'll be seeing your episode up next week.
Fantastic, thank you very much.
You'll be seeing a future episode with Carl as well.
We are back in half an hour.
I'm going to be doing Tomlinson Talks in case I haven't bent your ear off enough.
If not, then see you tomorrow, one o'clock, usual time.
Thanks for watching, take care and goodbye.
▲
Export Selection