Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

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

01:40:04

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #1027

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Eaters for the 22nd of October.
	I am joined by Bo and I am Josh.
	A very tired Josh because I was up late last night watching the Hope Not Hate documentary and that's what I'm going to be talking about first and then Bo's talking about Bricks vs the G7. A bit of geopolitics, you know, a nice bit of light geopolitics.
	And then we're going to be talking about how the state deals with political dissidents because there's been lots of developments and I think it's an interesting thing to examine because there seems to be two different philosophies on either side of the Atlantic actually that we're going to talk about and I suppose it's quite important as well because you know there's an election going on in the US and these sorts of things might be of concern.
	But anyway let's get on with the news because I have no announcements and Hope Not Hate have released a movie.
	A documentary film on Channel 4, which broadcast at the very prestigious slot of 10 o'clock at night on a Monday.
	And, uh...
	Here is their poster announcing it.
	It's called Undercover Exposing the Far Right.
	And yes, very proud of it.
	And here they are, the members of Hope Not Hate.
	You've got Nick Lowell's there on the phone looking like he's in a heist film having a very hurried phone call.
	Is that not Penfold?
	Oh no, it's Nick Lowell, sorry.
	And you've got the other members of the team who I'll introduce there.
	Notes in particular, the gentleman with the camera pulling a face like a mixture of Dennis from Always Sunny in Philadelphia and Zoolander.
	I don't know why he went for that pose.
	I mean...
	I mean, you've got to give it to them.
	The composition's interesting.
	They've gone for something here.
	It looks professional.
	I'll give them that.
	However...
	Here is the trailer, and I thought I'd show this, although it is worth mentioning as well, on this poster, before I get onto the trailer, you know they say, a stunningly brave investigation.
	Of course, this is a bit of a meme, and I've pointed this out, that the meme has become reality, because in 2015, South Park had an episode called Stunning and Brave.
	Where they repeat the phrase, stunning and brave, when talking about basically following a woke orthodoxy relating to Caitlyn Jenner.
	Who's that?
	Do you mean Bruce Jenner?
	Yeah, yeah.
	Might get us in trouble, but I'm sure he's alright with it, you know.
	He seems like one of the more laid back about it.
	He's like, I don't care what people say.
	So, fair enough.
	But anyway, here's a little bit of a taster of the documentary, because I watched the whole thing, and I'm not going to subject you to the whole thing, but we are going to summarise some of it.
	Here we go.
	You just get a rough feel for the thing.
	The camera unit.
	One, two, three.
	That's going to be the fake button.
	Ooh, they're spies.
	Hey.
	Ooh.
	They're professional spies.
	Forget about it.
	It's going to be fine.
	It's a mixture of keeping people safe and also understanding, you know, what gives the far right their power.
	Far right often present one image to the world, and what they're saying when they think no one's listening is different.
	We have to be in the room when they think no one's listening.
	There are a number of rules you have to follow when going undercover.
	You need to know your story.
	Don't come across as too curious.
	You have to be patient.
	Let it come to you.
	The far right are dangerous.
	Their ideas encourage violence even if they're not explicitly calling for it.
	And that's something all of us want to stop.
	We realised there was something very dark and frightening because of connections to money and power.
	There we go.
	That's a good point.
	Dark and frightening.
	Dangerous.
	Yeah, you get the idea with that, don't you?
	I wonder what they say behind closed doors.
	I wonder what commie feels they come out with when the mics aren't on.
	Yeah, there are members of the Communist Party at Hope Not Hate.
	So, it's worth mentioning as well that Some of the spycraft aspects are not unwarranted because of course they have been shown to have links to British intelligence and in fact Connor on his show tomorrow is going to be going in great detail about who is funding them and that sort of thing and the other more back-end things and so I'm sort of leaving that to him and I'm just focusing solely on the documentary today however we've obviously said things about this before and of course We've had our run-ins with
	Hope Not Hate.
	You certainly have, Beau.
	Would you be able to tell everyone briefly what happened, if that's okay?
	Yeah, the great Gregory Davis declined to appear in this one.
	But yeah, I've been outed, had an expose on me that I wrote a piece that was on the Mallard that called for a remigration and the outlawing of things like the Communist Party, Socialist Workers' Party, even defunding the BBC, that sort of thing.
	Nothing all that strong, but yeah, they did an expose on me.
	But it's just describing truth, reality, things I'm not ashamed that I said.
	Well, it's things we say on the podcast all the time, so it's not really an expose.
	It's just like, we've exposed you for saying things that you say openly on the largest platform that is accessible to you.
	Our country has been flooded with hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of illegal criminal people that we don't know what they are or what their values are, and perhaps they should be sent home.
	Well that's the majority view of the British public and if that's far right extremism then so be it.
	But yeah, I mean the thing on the Spirecraft thing is I'm quite interested in all that sort of thing.
	In fact I'll do some content soon all about the Cambridge Five.
	I've been reading around the Cambridge Five for ages and I'm just finishing up a book about a slightly later period of the history of MI5 and MI6 called Spirecraft by Peter Wright.
	Fascinating book anyway.
	Yeah, they're still just complete rank amateurs.
	I watched it as well.
	It doesn't feel like they were given any instruction by MI6 or GCHQ. It's all amateur stuff.
	He's just got a little thing that he's sellotaped onto himself.
	It's nothing special.
	That was one of my takeaway things, is that they're LARPing as sort of counter-espionage dudes.
	And they're not, they're just...
	I also found that they were sort of going for small fry a lot of the time, weren't they?
	They weren't going for the big dogs.
	They weren't trying to...
	They mainly focused on Britain first, and an organisation that I'd not really heard too much about.
	I heard bits and pieces, which we'll get into.
	But I wanted to show some memes that people had replied to me, about the stunning and brave review, because people really enjoyed that aspect of it, that they included that on their poster.
	Yeah, stunningly brave.
	Their bravery is stunning.
	And, of course, this is a...
	I've forgot the name of it now, turning it up to Eleven.
	What's that?
	Oh, no.
	How am I forgetting it?
	You know, the film where they have Stonehenge.
	Yeah, what's it called?
	Oh, God, I can't remember either.
	Samson, put us out of our misery.
	It's a cult classic.
	It is, yeah.
	I've seen it loads of times.
	That's right.
	The film has turned it up to 11.
	Yeah, chat will tell us, won't they?
	Spinal Tap.
	Spinal Tap.
	God, of course.
	That's embarrassing.
	Anyway.
	Anyway.
	They've dialed both the stunningness and the bravery up to 11.
	That's brave indeed.
	Stunning and brave.
	I'm stunned.
	I'm stunned.
	And this one, Touch Mean, perhaps, describes them as the Soy Avengers.
	Yeah.
	It was remarkably low tea, the whole thing, the whole feel of it seemed very soy-infused to me.
	They seemed, as they were characterising it, they didn't necessarily seem like they were people who were in control of a situation.
	They were sort of reacting to the situation.
	They were saying, I'm scared, oh, these people could be violent.
	They were sort of setting themselves up to be passive and victims, weren't they?
	Yeah, classic, yeah.
	Yeah, cry bullies.
	They go around bullying the whole world, which is to the right of them, but the second anything comes back, oh, Joe Mulhall welling up.
	Well, you'll probably get to it, I'm sure.
	We will be going through these cry bullies and naming them, don't worry.
	Here is Nick Lowells, of course, everyone's favourite member, of course, the founder and CEO of Hope Not Hate.
	Here he is, a very serious profile shot here.
	And here is another, Joe Mulhall, as you mentioned.
	He, of course, was complaining about people leaking his personal information and how afraid it made him feel.
	Which is one of the most ironic moments in the whole documentary.
	Because, of course, that is their bread and butter.
	You know, speaking of which, our friend Raw Egg Nationalist, or Charles Cornish Dale, had his identity leaked by Hope Not Hate, even though he wanted to keep it private.
	And he has his suspicions that there was...
	They're claiming that they used some sort of source to do it, but he suspects that it might have been intelligence involved.
	But he's looking into it and I don't know...
	They're just fighting fascism, though.
	You know, like, Joe Mulholl is on the right side of history because he's fighting fascism.
	But the evil spectre...
	Of modern-day Nazism in the form of Roeg Nationalists.
	Yeah, he's not a fascist as far as I'm aware.
	A lot of the people in this as well, I didn't really see much evidence that they were actual fascists.
	But maybe, you know, they talk a lot about the far-right, maybe being charitable, you can say it comes under that umbrella.
	Well again, their definition of anything that's far-right is people that want to have a country, or want their country back that's been invaded, or the very concept that's been invaded, the very concept that there might be any criminality among any immigrants.
	That's far-right to them, isn't it?
	Did you find that a lot of the time their definition and understanding of the far-right was quite entry-level for an organisation that's meant to be studying them?
	I was just like, well, there's a lot more difference in the far right.
	You can't just make blanket assertions about, well, generally the far right believes this.
	Well, actually, no, there are plenty of groups that are exceptions to that.
	You could say that it's a very complicated thing, and some of them, or the majority of them, believe this.
	But it wasn't really how they were approaching it and I don't know whether they were simplifying it just for the sake of the documentary or whether that was genuinely their understanding that they completely missed out on a lot of the nuance involved in politics, right?
	Considering they had two hours to play with or, you know, minus adverts, an hour and a half to play with, it was very, very light on any sort of actual detail or investigation or anything, really.
	There were lots of scenes of fiddling with equipment that perhaps could have been cut for the sake of more depth in terms of exploration because I was actually weirdly looking forward to seeing what they had to say about the right in Britain because It's an interesting time to be following right-wing politics in Britain.
	I know that, you know, the right is not exactly prevailing at the minute, but there are lots of things going on at least.
	I thought the whole thing was sort of behind the curve, it seemed to me.
	Talking about Tommy.
	A bit strange, isn't it?
	He's not on the fringes of the right, is he?
	No.
	Tommy.
	They've been going after him for like eight years, ten years or whatever.
	Talking about Mark Collette and PA. It's like, yeah, they're not even a registered party.
	And you've been banging on about them for ages.
	Or talking about Britain First.
	It's like, yeah, they're not really...
	Or that website they did, the big chunk on, what was it called?
	Apora or something?
	Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.
	I've never even heard of that.
	No, I couldn't even find it on Google.
	Never heard of it.
	It's nothing.
	Well, it was a magazine that belonged to the foundation that they were targeting.
	Which I'd also never heard of in my life.
	Yeah.
	Have you?
	The Pioneer Fund?
	Have you ever heard of that before?
	I've heard of it in passing.
	But I just thought the whole thing was sort of behind the curve, you know, a bit out of date and super low resolution, but deliberately, I think.
	They'll talk about Cable Street in passing.
	They'll talk about Moseley in passing.
	Don't talk about the actual...
	They sort of threw it in.
	Yeah, don't talk about...
	Well, they did that over and over and over again, didn't they?
	Like, when they mentioned the riots towards the end.
	Just mention, oh yeah, it was actually in response to three of the most horrific murders you can imagine.
	But we won't talk about that or anything.
	There are a couple of things going on here.
	The first of which is that the way that Hope Not Hate quite often targets some of the right-wing people that it is focusing on Is that it smears people by association.
	And so, you know, they'll have, you know, talks about fascism, Oswald Moseley, and then they'll cut to something else that is a different thing, both temporally and ideologically.
	And the idea is that the audience is meant to make the link between the two.
	And they do this in passing out their material as well.
	In that they hand out reading material that will have unironic neo-Nazis on one side and then a classical liberal or someone of that stripe.
	These are not equivalent.
	They're political enemies, if anything.
	You're trying to present them as all far-right.
	It doesn't make sense.
	Yeah, smearing by association, classic.
	And really, it's really lame.
	Anyone that knows what they're watching sees it a mile away.
	They'll show one Molotov cocktail and then cut to Elon on Twitter saying Civil War is inevitable or something.
	They don't actually say, we're trying to smear Elon here.
	But obviously, yeah, they do it over and over again.
	And the second thing, and I'm curious what you think of this, is that I think the reason that they're so hot on Tommy is that He can get people out on the street, right, in great numbers, and I think that if they are these intelligence assets that people suspect they are, then that would be the point of most concern of the right.
	It's not necessarily how extreme you are, it's just, do you have a significant ground movement?
	And there's no denying, you know, rallies that Tommy...
	Puts on that he can get a lot of people to turn out on a day that he chooses.
	And that, to their mind, is power.
	And that's probably why they go after him the most.
	I don't know.
	Because he's got a high profile, relatively high profile, yeah.
	They seem to have such a boner for him.
	It was ridiculous.
	Like, how much time and energy are you spending on Tommy?
	They're so proud that they revealed him as Steven Yaxley-Lennon.
	Real name Steven Yaxley-Lennon.
	They're so proud of that.
	It's weird and gross.
	It's like, Tommy's milk toast, right?
	Tommy's position is basically like, yeah, let loads and loads of millions of people in, all Sikhs and Hindus, as long as they're not Muslim.
	That's not even that hard-line.
	He's not even a really, really hard-line guy.
	Go back 20, 30 years, that would be a left-wing position.
	Yeah, he was on Mayatusi recently, and he's not far right.
	But yet still, they've decided he's in their crosshairs and they've decided, you know, they'll do anything they can.
	I mean, it does seem that Tommy has made a few bad decisions, like getting himself arrested or getting himself done for contempt of court and things like that, missing a court case here or there.
	So maybe they realise, you know, it's possible to actually get this guy.
	Sort of smell blood in the water.
	Right, that's what I'm trying to say, yeah.
	But it's all just so...
	One of the things that I came away from it was the impression that I already had, but it's reinforced the impression that these are just really weak, pathetic people.
	Like, really weak.
	Like, we've got to get Tommy.
	Yeah, it was a little bit sad, wasn't it, really?
	There was one point where they said they spent hundreds of hours sort of reverse image searching the background in Tommy Robinson videos to find out where he is.
	It's like, what are you doing?
	Again, it's like the CIA or the NSA trying to find out where Bin Laden's cave is.
	It's like, you're not, you're not, like, MI6. Well, maybe they are.
	Joe Mulholl with his map and the elastic bands.
	It's like, what?
	What do you think you're doing?
	I mean, what do you...
	Well, let's go through some of the team, shall we?
	So here's Patrick Hermanson.
	He was sort of organising the undercover work, and he was the man behind the scenes, so to speak.
	The handler.
	The mastermind.
	The Amazon Screes.
	Exactly.
	And Georgie Lamming is another lady.
	She sort of features briefly in the documentary.
	You can always see it in the eyes.
	Mad.
	And then here is the guy who did the undercover work, Harry Shuckman.
	I believe...
	So brave, putting himself in so much danger, going out and having a dinner.
	I know.
	So brave.
	I know.
	I mean, most of his undercover work, he's in very public places, and I think he was probably...
	Kim Philby's got nothing on Harry Shuckman, one of the greatest counter-espionage operatives of all time.
	It is worth mentioning though, he has got it in his blood because I believe some of his family members...
	I can't remember exactly the relation because I looked it up whilst the documentary was going on.
	So I only could look at it briefly.
	I think some of them worked for the intelligence services.
	Interesting, isn't it?
	That's at least what I've read.
	I can't confirm that yet.
	Connor, I'm sure, will confirm that tomorrow.
	Allegedly.
	Yes, exactly.
	It's just rumours.
	I don't know.
	I actually don't know any of these guys, like that really obnoxious Patrick guy with his 2,000 followers on Twitter.
	I've never even heard of this guy before.
	I know Nick Lowell and Joe Mulhall, but all the other people, they're just nothing people, aren't they?
	An empty bag of trying really, really hard.
	To be taken seriously.
	It smacks of try-hard.
	I definitely got that as well.
	Because by the end of it, I'm jumping ahead slightly, but by the end of it, you're like, so what have you actually done?
	What have you really achieved?
	So, this is the final person.
	She also doesn't feature that much.
	She's not doing much of the undercover stuff, Anki Dio.
	But I wanted to talk about, Harry Shuckman here went on James O'Brien's show.
	Of course he did.
	Because of course, yeah.
	Why not?
	It'd be the obvious choice.
	And he talked about going undercover, and he mentions a couple of things right off the bat.
	The majority of referrals to the PREVENT programme are the far right, and the majority of terror convictions are the far right as well.
	That can't be right.
	That can't be true.
	And he uses that as a justification.
	So it's worth mentioning as well, we've talked about James O'Brien's book...
	In a very detailed book club, it was Harry who'd read the book and he was explaining it to Carl and I and it was torture apparently.
	Just throwing that out there, that's on the website if you want to have your blood boiled.
	Yeah, I was asked if I wanted to be on that.
	I was like, no, I'm not.
	I'm not reading James O'Brien.
	I can't.
	I can't.
	To sort of put in some perspective here to what Shuckman is saying, I did a calculation here and I basically controlled for a fair number of things and I said, despite the media warnings of the rising far-right terror threat, Islamic terror attacks account for 96.97% of terror-related fatalities since 2005 and that is in Great Britain.
	So what I said here is I selected 2005 because that's when the IRA attacks ceased and, you know, it's become sort of obsolete.
	And 7-7 was in 2005.
	Exactly.
	And so it's sort of a good cut-off point where the nature of the terror changed from Irish-related terror to Islamist-related terror, which we're still in today.
	And I also removed the death of the perpetrator and things like that.
	So, you know, that is, rather than just saying the, you know, the far right is on the march or on the rise or whatever, that is an undeniable fact, right?
	So Shuckman was incorrect, right?
	Let's not call him an out-on-out liar, he was just simply incorrect.
	I think he was mis-presenting the reality of the threat here.
	It's not so far right.
	Disingenuous.
	Yes, I think we can say that.
	So, it's also worth mentioning as well, he's talking about prevent referrals.
	Well, the prevent referrals here, prevent if you're not familiar, is the anti-terror scheme basically.
	And there was a movement, this is an article I wrote in January of 2021, to expand the definition, to include the far right, and what that meant was pensioners were regarded as terror threats, and that was up by 90%, according to a government report.
	And there's this really damning statement from Colonel Richard Kemp, who is a terror expert, and he's also chaired the government's Cobra Intelligence Group, so far more qualified than anyone at Hope Not Hate.
	To talk about this thing.
	And he says, There you go.
	There is someone who's probably one of the best qualified people in the country to talk about that, saying it's just BS, basically.
	It's nonsense.
	I can't recall the last time in Britain a right-wing terrorist blew up a bus in Russell Square.
	I can't remember the last time he turned up at a maternity ward in a cab, blew himself up.
	I can't remember the last time the evil far-right anti-gay mob stabbed gay people.
	I don't remember the last time that happened, but okay.
	On the tube as well.
	I don't remember them carrying out any attacks on the tube.
	Yeah, all those bombings the far right did on the tube.
	Oh no, there haven't been any.
	Manchester Arena.
	You know, they didn't do that.
	Interesting, isn't it?
	So Shuckman was objectively incorrect then when he said that on James O'Brien.
	That's clear.
	If we go back to the James O'Brien clip, the main thing he complains about is that one of the groups told an anti-Semitic joke and he's really upset about this.
	Oh no!
	Like, boo-hoo.
	Nooo!
	And he's also presenting it as if, like, wow, this is exactly what they believe.
	Let's bang up Mel Brooks then.
	We can't have that.
	We can't have that.
	Bloody Mel Brooks needs to spend.
	Is he still alive, actually?
	Not sure.
	Anyway, carry on.
	So, I did a massive thread where I tweeted out lots of stuff as it happened, basically to keep track of it all, because, of course, I was watching it live, and I'd be coming in this morning to talk about it, and so I needed to do that.
	And so I basically just tweeted everything that I could possibly see.
	I'm going to go through some of it.
	Obviously, I'm not going to read all of it, because...
	The documentary was boring.
	It was really boring.
	It was a mixture of pathetic and boring.
	That was my takeaway.
	One of the main things that I sort of objected to about the whole thing is that they mix the timelines together and the stories.
	So you go from Britain first to this group, this biology group group.
	And then back to something else and then Tommy Robinson and by weaving all these disparate threads together all it does is serve to make it more difficult to follow or less engaging because you start getting invested in one story and then it cuts to something else.
	A bit about poor Nick Lowell's.
	I know.
	There was a really good bit.
	I'll get to it in this eventually.
	But Nick Lowell's admitted to when he was a child hiding in a tent when his family were on holiday because he was worried he would get tanned skin.
	Absolute nonsense.
	Absolute nonsense.
	He's also, you know, his complexion's probably lighter than mine.
	So what's he worried about?
	We're probably about the same age.
	I mean, my early 40s.
	Maybe he's a touch older.
	We're probably about the same age.
	Kids in the 80s, teenagers in the 90s sort of thing.
	That wasn't a thing where someone would come back from holiday in their tanned and they start getting bullied for being a darker shade of brown.
	That just never, ever, ever happened.
	Probably the opposite, to be honest.
	You come back and have a nice tan and people say, oh, you're looking healthy.
	That's what I grew up with, at least.
	But he also complained about National Front, which, as far as I'm concerned, was a non-entity when he was growing up.
	Yeah, it was already...
	wasn't the clip like from the 50s or something?
	I don't know.
	There were loads of old clips thrown in there, weren't there?
	So he's trying to deliberately elevate the potential threat when actually it was pretty minuscule.
	Terrified his mum's gonna get deported.
	They were nowhere near government, Nick.
	They were never ever near government.
	So what are you talking about?
	Nonsense.
	Just again, just nonsense.
	That's what they survive on.
	They're bread and butter, isn't it?
	Liars and nonsense.
	It is, yeah.
	So, the main thing, the documentary started off with an undercover sting on the far-right race scientists and they talked about going to a conference held in Tallinn, Estonia, which You know, Tallinn, Estonia looks lovely.
	I actually really want to go there, particularly in winter.
	Looks like a nice place to go.
	I don't know why I've included that.
	It's a bit of a tangent, but just throw that out there.
	If you need a holiday destination, I suppose.
	They're not paying me.
	The tourist board of Tallinn.
	I wish.
	I haven't even been there myself.
	But, yes, they talk about this, and they have a talk from Mark Webber.
	They're talking about...
	Not that one.
	I did think that as well.
	I was just like, hang on a minute.
	He's a bit of a changing career from everyone, isn't he?
	And yeah, they talk about the Absolute State of Britain podcast and describe it as one of the most extreme podcasts.
	Then it cuts to adverts with someone saying that they're into high IQ breeding as if this was a bombshell.
	Just like, yes, I want intelligent people.
	Surely that should be what everyone wants, right?
	They want people to have more intelligent children.
	That is desirous to everyone with a functioning brain.
	And plus it's a classic thing that more intelligent people are drawn to the same.
	You're drawn to whatever you are.
	Vaguely, very, very broadly speaking.
	Lots of professors marry other professors, for example.
	Of course, yeah.
	It's strange.
	It's a problem, yeah.
	Then it talks about Nick Lowell's background, he talks about how his mother was half Mauritian.
	I don't think people would particularly pick up on that, to be honest.
	I just presumed he was English, to be honest.
	We didn't even know until he outed himself.
	And who cares anyway?
	Yeah, who cares?
	Like that Joe Mulhall said one of his grandparents was Indian.
	So?
	So what?
	Who cares?
	Yeah.
	Oh, so we can't have a country anymore.
	We have to have open borders and endless, endless immigrants because one of Joe Mulhall's Grandparents was an Indian man, so we can't have borders now.
	One of my very distant ancestors was Norwegian, therefore we have to have infinity third world immigration.
	Yeah.
	Alright, okay.
	And so, yes, they obviously brought up the Battle of Cable Street just in passing, as well as Oswald Moseley.
	Don't worry about the details of what happened that day, what really happened.
	They also discussed that young kid planning to murder Labour MP Rosie Cooper.
	They also, this was really strange.
	So that is bad, by the way, if that is true, which I think it is true.
	It is true.
	Because he was convicted, right, so it's true.
	That is bad.
	It is, yeah.
	But the problem is that they contextualise it by trying to smear by association again.
	That this kid is not representative of lots of other people, right?
	Yeah, right.
	But yeah, obviously I don't support that.
	So they also suggested that the term evolutionary psychology is often used by the right to suggest that there is a belief in biological differences between groups.
	And they said this is a bad thing, but for one...
	There are biological differences between groups.
	There are.
	Two, evolutionary psychology doesn't...
	You know, that might be how some people use it, but it's a lot more than that.
	I've studied a lot of it because I am a psychologist, so...
	You're a post-grad in psychology, so you should...
	Yeah, yeah.
	Yeah, exactly.
	And there's nothing to worry about there.
	I think, actually, evolutionary psychology is really interesting and useful for understanding human nature and is a good thing.
	But maybe, you know, they're just misspoke.
	The idea that there's no biological differences between groups.
	Are you mad?
	Of course there are.
	Again, just utter utter nonsense.
	They're hoping their audience are stupid, I guess.
	So they talk about the Pioneer Fund and bring up Mark Collette because of course they go in and out of lots of different threads.
	Pretty boring stuff.
	They explain what the Overton window is, and apparently moving the Overton window, the end goal of that is to get a white ethno state, which...
	See, this is where it starts smacking of desperation.
	Even mentioning the Overton window, the concept of the Overton window is dangerous and worrying.
	But Tommy Robinson talks about moving the Overton window, and he specifically says he doesn't want that.
	Leftists talk about it.
	They want to move the Overton window to the left, right?
	It's a bipartisan political phrase, really.
	It's silly.
	I liked this, that they kept on bringing up how well-educated many members of the far-right are, which, you know...
	Just give myself a pat on the back, you know.
	Well there's a whole bunch of post grads and a PhD or two flying around our office, aren't there?
	That's true, yeah.
	I mean it's funny how, you know, the left claims the institutions and a lot of the people that do get qualifications go on to create successful businesses rather than just being an employee in a pre-existing one, isn't it?
	Almost like there's more guts behind a certain group of people.
	They bring up the right rally in Charlottesville in 2017 for some reason.
	Then bring up...
	Oh, I didn't mean to do that.
	And then bring up Richard Lynn and his work on IQ. They, for some reason, claim that scientists view Lynn's work as wrong and misleading.
	They don't go into any detail about why, though, or why that might be, or if that's very...
	I covered it at university.
	Or if that's actually true.
	I covered it at university, and it wasn't presented in that way.
	They said it was controversial.
	They didn't say it was wrong.
	No.
	I don't think it is.
	No.
	I think it's sort of objective facts, isn't it?
	I remember one time Peterson and Murray started to talk about that and then both just decided they'd best just move on and talk about something else.
	Because...
	It may be controversial, but I don't think it's wrong.
	That's probably why they did it, right?
	Right, yeah.
	So, obviously they brought up Tommy Robinson because they love him, and there was a hilarious quote from Nick Lowell saying that the first time he saw Tommy Robinson's eyeballs, he described him as an angry man.
	You saw his eyeballs.
	Ooh.
	Spooky eyes.
	Nick Lowes strikes me as someone that under the surface is boiling with rage.
	Is nothing but rage under the surface, it feels like to me.
	I'll tell you what he reminds me of.
	The irony of hope not hate.
	They generate hate.
	You know in The Thick of It, there's the whip that's the rival to Malcolm Tucker with the moustache.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Very thinly veiled angry, comes across very pleasant, and as soon as someone does something he doesn't want, immediately furious.
	That's kind of the vibe I'm getting.
	But maybe I'm wrong, I don't know the guy.
	So it goes on to talk about many right-wing commentators believe, I've got that in quotation marks, that Europe is under assault by Islam.
	Yeah.
	I mean, so do we.
	So does anyone with a pair of eyes.
	Then they talk about Paul Golding.
	They talk about his dating life and record him using the N-word a few times.
	Who cares?
	It's a word.
	The terrible Paul Golding and Mark Collette and Tommy Robinson.
	Terrible.
	They're so terrible.
	And, yeah, they show Britain First in Poland at an independence rally.
	Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
	It keeps on going on and on.
	I'm not going to bore you with too much more of this.
	Of course, they bring up the Holocaust.
	To be fair, to give them credit here, they talk about a 19-year-old Tommy Robinson and Britain First supporter having been arrested by the National Crime Agency, and he was reportedly found with Nick Lowell's address, and apparently he bought a gun.
	Which they made a big deal about.
	Which, if it is true, would be worrying, to be fair.
	Yeah.
	Again, they're conflating things that are actually a worry with things that aren't.
	Like, if someone has your address and a gun and states that they want to kill you or something, that is something to genuinely be worried about, right?
	And fair enough.
	But someone like Paul Golding saying, I would like to have a country for my grandchildren, equate that with someone that has bought a handgun, which you're not allowed in this country.
	As if they're the same thing or whatever, as if they're all just silly, silliness.
	So they talk about the Human Diversity Foundation again, that organisation, and Emil Kierkegaard, whose work on Twitter is very good, I do suggest it.
	That's another one I've never heard of before.
	Oh, he's good.
	Because there's the real philosopher Kierkegaard, right?
	Yeah.
	But this guy, this guy that's young and alive these days, I've never heard of him before.
	Is he a geneticist off the top of my head or does evolutionary biology or psychology?
	Something like that.
	But I've just seen a few of his posts about and I quite like them.
	It was quite good for the Streisand effect, actually.
	There's a few things, loads of things I've never heard of before.
	I'm like, oh, okay, I'll give them a follow.
	It's basically a reading list.
	And I like this part as well, that at one point it cut to ads, and the first two ads after the documentary were for KFC and period pads, which I said was brutal targeted advertising.
	I had to just include that in.
	It's just a bit of fun.
	Don't expand on that.
	No, of course not.
	They obviously talked about Southport.
	They had an undercover Zoom call.
	In passing, the Southport thing, as in passing as they possibly could, what actually...
	It's funny that, isn't it?
	I wonder why they mentioned it in passing.
	Is it because Nick Lowell's accidentally tweeted a little bit of misinformation that caused lots of Muslims to go out and beat people up?
	Oh, I was talking about the actual murder.
	Oh, right, yeah.
	Actual murders.
	I mentioned it in a bit of text on screen.
	Yeah.
	Very quickly and moved on.
	It's funny that, isn't it?
	I actually talk about the actual horror.
	An actual slaughter of the innocents.
	A Rwandan man went in and murdered a bunch of innocent young girls.
	Didn't focus on that.
	It's not important to them.
	And maimed another eight or whatever it was.
	Yeah, of course.
	And some of the adults there as well.
	No doubt scarred them too.
	Don't talk about that though.
	No.
	But eventually they talk about something that they published in an article before the documentary anyway, that they named Andrew Conry as the CEO of Friend Finder and funder of this Human Diversity Foundation and basically the sort of finale of the documentary is that they take credit for Conry withdrawing funding from this one project.
	What a nothing burger.
	Yeah, slow hand clap.
	So, I'd never heard of that guy either, but okay, he's a billionaire, okay.
	And then, basically, at the very end, they flash up some text, didn't they, which only just about caught.
	Which, I think, to effect was, he didn't even really know or realise that some of his money, some of his billions, were being funneled that way, and he's now stopped doing it now, and...
	And you bent the knee.
	Diversity is great.
	You basically saw no consequences.
	So it didn't really amount to very much.
	I mean, a few people probably had to look for a new job, but that was it.
	Which is still a bit scummy, but at the same time, it's pretty small fry, isn't it?
	And that was it, and then it ended, and I was just like, really?
	Is that really it?
	And the final thing I wanted to end on was the usual suspects, of course.
	Here's the Guardian, Leela Lateef, whoever she is.
	She says it's the bravest documentary of the year so far, and gives it five stars.
	And I would like to point out another documentary that's come out this year.
	Is this one.
	And this documentary, I'm going to read a little summary.
	I feel like someone climbing three mountains with a spinal injury...
	Probably braver.
	That's actually brave.
	Yeah.
	You know, having a camera in your pocket and talking to some people posing as an investor in a fancy restaurant, or going to a meeting in public where people are sitting down and having a conversation is not brave.
	No one's going to beat you up.
	None of the people seemed like they were going to turn to violence.
	You didn't get that impression.
	They amped it up, but I feel like it was over-egged.
	Well that guy, that Harry guy's kid, that boy going undercover, was in no danger at any point.
	It required no bravery.
	Seen down and having a dinner in a really nice restaurant with people that aren't intimidating.
	It's just pure nonsense, isn't it, really?
	But that sounds cool.
	That actually sounds, like, worth watching.
	I only found out about it this morning.
	I was just looking at documentaries that have released this year, and apparently this is one.
	So, there you go.
	Touching the Void.
	If you want a decent documentary, it's a few years old now, Touching the Void.
	That's a good one.
	Don't waste your time on Hope Not Hates Nonsense.
	Yeah, watch something nourishing, something apolitical, something good for you.
	But yes, obviously Hope Not Hate's film wasn't very good.
	It's a shame it was boring.
	It could have at least been fun and hilarious, and it wasn't even that.
	I watched it so you didn't have to, and sorry for the long-winded coverage, but it was a long-winded documentary.
	Right.
	Don't worry, by the way.
	We do have extra time today, so I know I've gone double my allotted amount.
	That's okay.
	That's okay.
	Please forgive me, chat, okay?
	I have sinned.
	I repent.
	But we do have some comments.
	Are they talking smack about my beard in the chat?
	Samson gave me a heads up that I need a trim on the beard.
	I trimmed it a bit.
	I like your beard.
	I think you should grow it more.
	Going the full wild man.
	No, it looks good.
	Cultivating mass.
	I want to get a full Aristotle going on.
	Don't listen to the haters.
	No, people have been very kind in general.
	Okay, the chat has forgiven me.
	Thank you.
	No forgiveness.
	I'm not sending pictures.
	Dirty chat.
	Anyway...
	We do have to do a quick show of merch at the moment, don't we?
	We've got a merch store over at...
	Hang on.
	I've got to read comments first.
	Oh, sorry.
	One thing at a time.
	Too eager.
	It's all right.
	So Lowell's very judgmental of other's looks.
	Reminds me a bit of Eichmann's pre-execution.
	Blimey.
	Archbigot is right.
	Time to rectify that.
	Okay, they've said, okay, they can bring up all this nonsense, but Ellie Chat don't even get a mention, and we're the best bigots around.
	We're maybe more bigoted than anyone else.
	That's not right.
	Well, we recognise you, Chat.
	Don't you worry.
	The Streisand effect is great.
	It would be good if they talked about us more, did more on us.
	They still don't seem to understand that they are actually on the wrong side of history, and the more they mention this stuff, the more people are like, oh, Oh right, okay, cool.
	The last time they went after us, they got us more sign-ups to the website.
	Loads more, yeah.
	Yeah, it was great.
	And even my personal Twitter, when they asked me, it was like, oh, a few more.
	I got more followers off the back of them mentioning me than Harry Shuckman has got in total.
	That's really salt to the wind, isn't it?
	Not untrue.
	It's funny how they talk about physiognomy.
	I know.
	The irony of these guys.
	I wonder why they're against it, eh?
	Nothing screams anti-hate like doxing people who think differently from you.
	These clowns are pretending to be fighting forces of evil when in reality they're evil mutants causing strife.
	Yeah.
	It's interesting that they don't talk, they talk all about fighting fascism, fighting the far right.
	Don't talk much about their actual beliefs.
	It's funny that isn't it?
	Whether they believe in like actual communism or what.
	Well there are communists in there right?
	Yeah.
	Whether they want sort of an all-powerful state, sort of a Maoist state or what they actually really want.
	You're not really invited to think about that very much.
	What sort of nightmarish socialist world they would have if they were, if they could.
	Anyway.
	Take us away.
	All right, so can I get the mouse here?
	Why is this not working?
	You're up there, look.
	Oh.
	So, okay.
	Well, I thought we could do a little bit of geopolitics.
	I like the big picture.
	Rather than getting bogged down in the details of things, I do like to have sort of the big picture.
	So talk a little bit about geopolitics.
	There are sort of tectonic shifts going on globally, aren't there?
	Yeah.
	They're a little bit gradual, as all tectonic shifts are, but they are happening at the same time.
	And with all shifts, there are frictions.
	And I think that that's probably what you're going to be talking about, right?
	Yeah, well, so at the moment, there's the BRICS summit, the 16th one.
	It's being held in Russia at the moment, so obviously in Putin's manor, on Putin's manor.
	And I just think it's interesting to talk a little bit about sort of the shifting power dynamics in the whole world.
	Because there's this classic thing, sort of, who controls the world.
	I think we did a round table on it, or we did some sort of thing, I think it was mainly behind the paywall though, a few months back, where we talked all about this.
	We did, yeah.
	Remember?
	Yeah, of course.
	A while ago now, I can't remember exactly how it went.
	But my feeling is that the real, real reality is that there's not a single cabal of people running the world.
	Right.
	It's not just like a shadowy cabal of Wall Street bankers or something.
	It's like they can all fit into one room around one table and they're in this smoke-filled room with dark wood panelling on the walls and they're smoking cigars and putting their bars of gold on the table.
	That's not really how it works.
	So, for example, Moscow and Beijing do not have to answer to anyone at the State Department or on Wall Street or in the Federal Reserve or in the White House.
	They really don't.
	Right?
	Riyadh doesn't have to answer to Washington.
	They do sometimes, though.
	Oh, they do.
	Sometimes they do, yeah.
	Like, we don't have to.
	We nearly always do.
	But we don't have to, right?
	France...
	France doesn't have to do what America tells them, right?
	To be fair, France is one of those countries in Europe that is least inclined to do what the State Department tells them to.
	So I think there's all sorts of different levels to it, right?
	So there's money, money, and people argue, don't they?
	All sorts of people argue about which is the most important in the cathedral, whether it's, anyway, whether it's money that controls it, whether it's still military might, or all sorts of things.
	I think it's got to be a combination because, you know, these things are not worthless.
	I think that the way that a lot of these things work is there are networks of people And, you know, particularly in very elite circles, people generally know each other, don't they, quite well.
	And there are sort of business relations that form and break away, and it's organic.
	You know, at the end of the day, they're still human beings, and they operate in a similar way.
	But, you know, it's just that they have different concerns.
	But I think that...
	Money, political power, martial might, potential non-governmental organisational power as well.
	All of these things are tangible and tie into the nature of power and which elites rule and which ones are out of favour.
	So even within the West, even if we just talk about the West...
	We could start with maybe the intelligence services, the Five Eyes, you know, who really, really controls that on sort of a day-to-day or hour-to-hour basis.
	You know, the giant intelligence networks of the West and sort of Australia and stuff.
	You know, to what degree are they even...
	So take, for example, we've got NSA, the CIA, but then Britain, GCHQ, MI5 and MI6. Are they all exactly on the same page, controlled by the same room of cigar-smoking dudes?
	No.
	No, they're competing with each other, actually, largely.
	Oh, and the FBI. Throw the FBI in there.
	CIA, FBI. Anyway.
	So it's not as simple as there's someone, there's a handful of guys somewhere controlling all of that.
	It's not reality, right?
	And that's just the West.
	Mm-hmm.
	Because, of course, wasn't there a scandal where the CIA or the FBI were caught bugging each other at one point?
	Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.
	I mentioned earlier in the last segment, but I'll say again, I'm fascinated by the story of intelligence services.
	I've been reading lots about the Cambridge Fire at the moment.
	Burgess and Philby and Cairncross and all these guys.
	And there's a great book called Spirecatcher, which I'm just finishing at the moment by Peter Wright.
	And yeah, the relationship between MI5, MI6 and GCHQ is very fraught.
	And throw in special branch to the police on top of that.
	They each think they're the most important and trying to get funding off of each other and there's revolving doors at the top.
	It's a delicate, difficult, interesting relationship.
	And the same goes in America between the FBI and the CIA. That's how human incentives work.
	It isn't like someone is going to overlook their own self-interest within an organisational structure and how they ascend it and get more money, basically, by saying, well, actually, I'm going to defer to this other organisation that I'm not a part of.
	That's just not how human beings work.
	There's all sorts of like signal intelligence or pure military intelligence services like the army will have its own intelligence wing and all sorts of things so they're all competing against each other and even if in principle they're supposed to be someone at the top of it all like Homeland or something or the guy at the top of the defence department or something controlling it in reality they will be competing with each other and so that's just the west and that's just the intelligence services then you've got the money men And then you've got people at,
	say, the State Department or in the White House or in Downing Street that nominally, on paper, are supposed to control it.
	Or someone at the Foreign Office is competing with someone in the Cabinet Office.
	It's really quite complicated.
	There's loads and loads of levels.
	And that's just in the West.
	That's not taking into account that Moscow has its own flag, literally.
	You know what I mean.
	It's its own thing.
	It's its own power base.
	Beijing.
	Beijing doesn't have to answer to anyone in the United States.
	In India, they don't have to do what the Chinese are trying to force them to do.
	Well, they don't like the Chinese.
	They see them as political enemies, don't they?
	So, great leading to what I want to talk about then.
	So, there's, broadly speaking, and this is low resolution, but you can only really be low resolution when you talk about geopolitics, right?
	The sweep of decades and the whole world, when we've only got a few minutes to play with, we can only be fairly low resolution.
	But broadly speaking, you've got like the G7, the G7 biggest economies, you know, the US, the UK, France, Japan.
	And then the BRICS, Russia and China, Brazil, yeah.
	South Africa, isn't it?
	Yeah, yeah, South Africa.
	Well, the actual BRICS is, yeah, Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.
	But they also have now included, they've let in, there's like about 30 other countries that want to get in it.
	But so far they've lit in Egypt and Ethiopia, UAE, United Arab Emirates, and Saudi, Saudi Arabia, right?
	So, and there's lots of other countries where they're sort of proxies or they're just on that side of the ledger, like say Iran.
	Iran's going to be much more closely allied to BRICS than it is to the G7, of course, right?
	Obviously.
	Of course.
	But then, right, it's complicated.
	So, okay, you've got Iran and Saudi Arabia in the same block.
	Good luck with that.
	You're going to have complete cooperation, are you, between them?
	Yeah, sure, that's going to happen.
	China and India, classic example.
	No, no, no, they're strategic enemies, or if not enemies, rivals.
	Absolutely strategic rivals in all sorts of ways.
	But they're supposed to be completely on board and be working all exactly in the same direction.
	Even Russia and China, their relationship, going back to the Mao years, or before, going back to the pre-World War II years, is extremely fraught and interesting on my own channel, History Bro, check that out.
	I've got an 18-part series where I talk all about Mao, and I go back to the beginning of the 20th century when Mao was a child, and obviously you go through the Bolshevik Revolution.
	The relationship between China, even pre-Communist China, and Bolshevik Russia is extremely complicated.
	It's not like, oh, they're all, after Mao anyway, oh, they're all Reds, they're all Communists, so they're on the same page and it's one big block now.
	No, no, no, not at all.
	That's not how it works.
	Like GCHQ, MI5 and MI6 being completely working in unison.
	No, no, no.
	The FBI and the CIA absolutely working as one single organism.
	No, no way, not at all.
	Right, so, BRICS, like this thing, it's like this counterpoint to the G7. It's basically an economic block, isn't it?
	Yeah, right.
	That's what it's positioned as.
	I don't want to sort of steal your thunder here, but could I say what I think the main reason for BRICS existing is?
	Yeah.
	Go ahead.
	So my sort of working theory, and they may have even stated it explicitly, is not particularly revelatory, is that what they're trying to do is undermine the United States dollar as the default reserve currency.
	That's what Russia wants about.
	Because I think that that is the main source of the United States' power internationally, isn't it?
	Is that Ultimately, the United States dollar is used as a reserve currency.
	There was the petrodollar for a very long time.
	And this gives them real hard power because, of course, the dollar is controlled by the US central bank and therefore...
	What they choose to do has international consequences and so you want to be favourable with the US because if they affect the dollar in a way that is disadvantageous to you then you're potentially looking at losing a lot of money or potentially gaining a lot of money if you're favourable towards them.
	So there's a lot to be gained or lost and I think that what's going on here is this coalition is forming to counter this quite extensive power that the US government has created.
	Absolutely.
	Putin particularly has been squeezed by sanctions from coming from the West, from the United States.
	And if the world currency wasn't pegged to the dollar that would be extremely Profitable for him, so that's one of their main things.
	But that would be in the benefit of the Chinese as well.
	And the Saudis, and the Iranians, and whoever, and Brazil, and on and on and on.
	So after the Cold War, once the Berlin Wall came down, and in fact the entire Soviet project collapsed, We were in a world, really, where the United States was the sole hegemon of the world, really, to all intents and purposes.
	We're moving now into a world where that's being less and less the case, at least economically.
	I mean, it is worth pointing out that America still absolutely dominate in terms of military power.
	People look at recruitment ads for the US military and it's all a bit woke and fey, and they say, oh, America's weak now.
	No, well, no.
	Not at all.
	Their navy dominates the waves.
	Absolutely dominates.
	In terms of aircraft carriers and helicopter carriers.
	The US Air Force is absolutely dominant.
	It does hurt a British person to say this.
	We're not saying this to necessarily be nice as well.
	Yeah, yeah.
	If Britannia did once rule the waves, it's sort of a sore point for us.
	In terms of a nuclear submarine program...
	America's won.
	Won that.
	Yeah, America dropped out.
	No one can compete.
	I mean, Britain is probably one of the closest.
	China and Britain are probably the closest where we actually build our own nuclear submarines.
	But still, even our nukes, Britain's nukes, are just bought off the Americans, right?
	Like France, I'm pretty sure France completely manufactured their nukes from scratch.
	Of course the Chinese do.
	Of course the Russians do.
	So there's many lads talking about nukes, nuclear capability, then talk about a submarine program, then talk about just aircraft carriers, and then just sort of fast jets, fleets and fleets of fast jets.
	America dominates all this stuff.
	Because of course, when it comes down to it, you know, having diplomatic power and having power over currency is one thing, but the real hard power is martial might, and the US still dominates in that by a significant margin.
	You know, if it were the United States and Europe, for example, versus the Chinese military, presuming it doesn't go nuclear, of course, you know...
	There'd be no contest.
	There'd be no contest.
	Exactly.
	Assuming there's no nukes, if America deployed everything it's got against China, there'd be no contest.
	Yeah, America could do that to anybody, assuming no nukes are in play.
	Because the Chinese have got a few hundred nukes, we think, most people think.
	That's enough to, yeah, that's enough.
	So there's just many, many layers to this.
	So the BRICS thing, the way the BBC puts it is, they say this, the West has dubbed you, i.e.
	they talk about Putin, the West has dubbed you Putin, a pariah for invading Ukraine, Sanctions are aiming to cut off your country's economy from global markets.
	And there's an arrest warrant out for you from the International Criminal Court.
	How can you show the pressure is not working?
	Try hosting a summit.
	And they're basically saying this is just Putin trying to sort of show off, trying to sort of put a brave face on it.
	In fact, his economy is crumbling under his feet, which may or may not be true.
	I don't think it is particularly true.
	I don't think it is true.
	Wasn't it a big expose that a lot of countries were still getting Russian resources just through shell companies in Europe and that a lot of the sanctions were being circumvented and they're sort of sanctions in name only?
	One reality you cannot get around is that the size of Russia means that it's resource rich.
	If you've got a country the size of Russia or the United States or China, you're going to be resource rich.
	Both Russia and the United States don't, if they really really needed to, don't need to import anything from anyone ever.
	They really wanted to You know, just get all their own resources.
	Maybe with the exception of some rare earth metals and things.
	You need Africa for that, don't you?
	Maybe, yeah.
	But basically, you know, Russia is resource rich.
	You know, far more resource rich than...
	Britain.
	We're a tiny little island, really.
	But yeah, it's just...
	What I was saying earlier, where we were in a world post-Berlin Wall of America being the sole hegemon, and now we're starting to move away from that a bit, because BRICS does represent, if nothing else, I'm not saying China and India are on exactly the same page, you're going to be pulling in the same direction and have no animosity to each other whatsoever.
	I'm not saying that.
	But if BRICS represents some sort of bloc, That can stay in the post-Soviet era, which can stand against the might of the United States and the West.
	You know, BRICS is something like that, right?
	I mean, China, its economy is sort of monstrous.
	Yeah, but then again, they do have an incoming debt crisis.
	A lot of their local government was funded based on taking out loans on assets, which is not sustainable, and they're basically going to have to restructure their entire economy, and there is a risk of them being caught in the middle income trap.
	Which would be catastrophic for the Chinese, and I think that there's actually quite a likelihood of that happening.
	But of course, you never know with these things, right?
	But also Russia, a lot of fuss is made about Russia, their economy is the same size as Texas.
	Yeah, right, yeah.
	You know, which isn't necessarily a small economy, it's not nothing.
	However, to compare it to the entirety of the United States would not be an even comparison.
	When it comes to economics, I think, well, Dan has talked to our Dan Tubb.
	Check out his stuff on LotusEaters.com.
	His Brokonomics series where he talks all about economics.
	You know, the size of the American debt, 33, 35 trillion at the moment and climbing steadily every single day.
	But yeah, I mean, China is, you're quite right to suggest that maybe the Chinese economy is a house of cards.
	Well, I mean, lots of their structures are, aren't they?
	Well, literally, yeah.
	If and when the rest of the world, if there's some sort of large-scale depression, the rest of the world's Western economies collapse, we stop importing all their stuff.
	Will their internal economy be able to stand up to that?
	But there's just one graphic here.
	I mean, look how giant China is compared to even India or Russia.
	And like Saudi, for all their vaunted wealth with oil.
	Yeah, some of their royal family can buy a fleet of chrome-plated Rolls-Royces.
	But Saudi Arabia, compared to The Chinese economy, compared to India, is still, you know, nothing.
	Egypt, nothing.
	UAE, nothing.
	Well, I say not nothing.
	But, you know, in comparison, relatively speaking, relatively speaking, is what I mean.
	So China's the big dog.
	Absolutely the big dog.
	You know, dwarfs Russia, right?
	It dwarfs him.
	Nonetheless, nonetheless, BRICS does represent an actual counterpoint to G7. It does.
	And, politically speaking, They're not on the same page.
	It's hard enough for Britain and America.
	The story of that, I talked about the Cambridge Five and Peter Wright as spy catcher and stuff.
	How difficult it was just to get the NSA, this is in the 50s and 60s, just to get the NSA and GCHQ to talk to each other.
	Extremely difficult.
	And we're basically brothers, cousins at least.
	We're basically completely on the same side, the special relationship, especially during the early years of the Cold War.
	Absolutely should have been pulling in the same direction, but they were still standoffish with each other and not really prepared to give each other secrets and stuff.
	Took a long time, a long, long time.
	Before Britain and America could truly, really sort of pull together.
	So, whether countries like China and India will be able to, whether Russia and China will be able to, is a different story.
	And I think they've got two very different agendas, don't they?
	In two very different situations, and I feel like the circumstances alone Are enough that they're not going to unify under a single cause because they've got their own people to worry about ultimately.
	They truly are a power base in their own right.
	The Kremlin will never ever want to have to answer to, truly answer to, Beijing.
	And vice versa.
	And Washington goes for the same.
	Probably.
	Maybe.
	Unless they're already completely infiltrated by the CCP. Which may or may not be the case, but speculation for another time.
	Okay, we'll move on from that, but Bricks is going on at the moment, and they may be a true counterpart, or they kind of are a true counterpart to the G7, and we're moving into a world where there's more than simply one hegemon.
	Interesting to note.
	Okay.
	I enjoyed that.
	We don't do enough geopolitics, do we?
	So, we recently, well, I say recently, in August, had a roundtable discussion with all the hosts about how the state kills dissidents.
	And this is dated, if we can scroll up, 27th of August.
	We discussed this as the riots were going on in Britain, you know, shortly after they sort of ended, really.
	They fizzled out, didn't they?
	And the point of this was saying that you can jail these dissidents for sometimes quite questionable things and send them to prison and the punishment, the formal punishment, isn't necessarily the actual punishment.
	And what do I mean by this?
	Well, this video is a good means of explaining.
	And people are being told that if they do appear, whether they're pleading guilty or not guilty, they're very unlikely to get bail.
	And if they do end up in prison, somebody who told me, somebody who knows about these things, told me that any right-wing, far-right protester landing up in jail, well, they can expect a pretty cold reception from what he says are Asian gangs Inside prison who will be looking out for them.
	So that's pretty ominous all on its own, isn't it?
	Would you be able to?
	Yeah.
	I've got it.
	There we go.
	Never mind.
	So that seems like a realistic warning, really, that these British people, nationalists perhaps, I don't know how you want to describe them, but the people that were out on the streets during the riots are obviously a very different group than Who is populating our prisons these days?
	You know, there might be some overlap, but I imagine not as much.
	And particularly because a lot of them went on up north, these riots and rioters who've been arrested are probably going to go into prisons that are more or less run by Asian gangs and that their safety is going to be compromised at all times.
	Asian?
	What?
	South Koreans?
	Yeah, that's right.
	It's just the Japanese, you know.
	Sri Lankan.
	Sri Lankan gangs.
	The Yakuza.
	No.
	Tamil Tiger gangs.
	Normally Muslim.
	Oh, right.
	Okay.
	All right.
	And of course...
	They were the one faction that went out in their droves to counter a lot of the protests and actually cause real tensions.
	There were quite a few of them seen with weapons.
	I saw examples of them even in protests where there were no mosques nearby that they were defending, but they still pulled knives, machetes and things like that.
	And also them getting annoyed at the police being there.
	They're like, we can sort out ourselves.
	We don't need you.
	And obviously the implication there is we can kill these people.
	We don't need you here.
	What are you on about?
	They've got no weapons.
	We have weapons.
	You're just in the way, stopping us.
	The police are like, would you mind stop filing your weapons in the local mosque?
	They ask them very politely to put their weapons away in the mosque.
	Madness.
	Absolutely madness.
	Yeah.
	And you do or say anything about it.
	Mm-hmm.
	You go to prison and then...
	This is a sort of blueprint that lots of other governments can employ because I'm imagining that we're going to see a lot more of this whereby our prisons have always been pretty overcrowded.
	There's not a particular need to do it and therefore the notion of releasing lots of prisoners...
	There's a new prisoner release soon, I believe, that was announced this morning.
	Another 1,100 police being released?
	No, prisoners!
	They're not releasing the police.
	And, yeah, they're releasing all of these prisoners to put in more dissidents.
	It's not that the prisons are overcrowded, there's no problem, because we can see, actually, if anything, there's...
	No change in how overcrowded the prisons are.
	And also, why should we care about the state of, you know, the conditions of prisoners, ultimately?
	If they've broken the law, oh, boo-hoo, it's a bit overcrowded.
	Well, you shouldn't have done it then.
	I'm not going to lose sleep over, you know, oh, there's a man too close to me in the prison.
	Tough.
	You can build hundreds of thousands more homes to put Albanians and Somalis and Bangladeshis and Pakistanis in.
	Yeah, it's funny how that works.
	But can't build a new prison.
	No.
	Can't build a new prison.
	Well, the elephant in the room is that a lot of the prisoners in our prisons are foreign and that would require deporting them.
	Can't do that.
	No, no, no.
	We can't deport our precious foreign criminals, can we?
	We can't deport foreign criminals and we can't build any new prisons.
	Of course.
	Most of those things are off the table.
	Yeah, they're definitely not reasonable things.
	But what I'm trying to say here is that These prisons are being cleared for political dissidents and they're going to be imprisoned on spurious charges and there are going to be conditions created that are going to be so adverse that it's pretty inevitable that worse things than imprisonment are going to happen to them.
	You know how when there was the Trump assassination people said it was stochastic terrorism that they made the likelihood of a random person Taking a shot at Trump and killing him far more likely by their actions without directly doing it themselves.
	It's a very similar thing here with political dissidents in Britain, and I think this will get used in a lot of Western countries as well.
	I think we're sort of a pioneer in a way, although we will talk about January 6th as well briefly later.
	But it seems to me that they know the treatment that these sorts of people will get imprisoned from these largely foreign criminals, people they want to deport, and that a lot of the time there are Prison shankings and people get stabbed and they're gonna have a massive target on their back, right?
	And the funny thing is that they're more than happy to take paedophiles and remove them from the general population because they get harsh treatment, but if it's a British person that's convicted of, say, rioting, that's very, very different for some reason.
	Yeah, just throw them in a prison in Hull with a load of Muslims.
	Exactly.
	They'll be fine.
	So, it's also worth mentioning, the prisoners that they're releasing are being picked up in Rolls Royces and Bentleys, and one of them even said, big up Keir Starmer.
	And look at them, look.
	These are the people we want on the streets.
	Unbelievable.
	But it's also...
	It's a commie tactic 101, though.
	In lots and lots of communist countries.
	Lenin did it, didn't he?
	In the Russian Revolution.
	Loads of people did it, yeah.
	The communists in the Spanish Civil War.
	There's lots and lots of examples of where the communists just opened the prisons.
	Because they're looking to destroy the fabric of society.
	That's how you know they're bad, by the way.
	If you release lots of murderers on people, you're a bad person.
	It's not that difficult, really.
	It's sort of a war on the people, because they need the people to be cowed and to absolutely do as they're told, to need the state at every possible moment, every possible rung of civilisation.
	It's funny how a lot of countries are now disarmed and we've got to defer our own protection to the state, isn't it?
	So that gives them an enormous amount of power and if they want to impose criminals on us, they can and there's nothing we can do about it to protect ourselves without becoming a criminal ourselves.
	So if you look at Bukele, he's sort of done the opposite.
	Now I will build a couple of massive prisons or a few giant prison complexes and round up all the criminals All of them.
	And throwing them in prison for a very, very long time.
	It's about as easy to spot a criminal as humanly possible because they show it.
	And his country went from one of the most violent and dangerous to one of the least.
	It's got an 89% approval rating.
	One of the most massive transformations of a country's crime rate in human history.
	It's an absolute phenomenon.
	So he's doing it right.
	He's actually a leader who's got the safety, the best interests of his people at heart.
	And in the West, or certainly Keir Starmer's Labour, it's the opposite.
	Of course not.
	No.
	No, very much so.
	Anarcho-tyranny.
	In fact, dozens are being freed by mistake as well.
	What?
	What?
	This was a while ago now, this was in September, and one of those people who was released by mistake re-offended within hours and committed a sexual offence.
	So the government was directly responsible for a sex offence there.
	Oh, just one more life ruined.
	Yeah.
	That's fine.
	Just one more life ruined.
	So let's take us to this man here.
	So he was involved in the riot in Rotherham.
	And the BBC reports that he died in prison.
	And that word...
	Yeah.
	So we can't use the actual word because this is going to go on social media platforms.
	He just shuffled off this mortal coil...
	So, the reality, as I pointed out, is he...
	I'm going to have to use a euphemism here because of the algorithm picking it up.
	He unalived himself, right?
	I can't say that.
	No.
	Really?
	No, you're not allowed to.
	Really?
	It's ridiculous, isn't it?
	That's absurd.
	I know.
	Because if you even say that word, it perceives it as if you're trying to encourage it or you're bringing it up in people's minds.
	It's like, no, obviously don't do it.
	But you should be able to talk about it without having to censor yourself.
	It's silly.
	But a lot of the mainstream media presented it as, he just died, you know.
	But no, it was that he was driven to this.
	this and if we actually have a look here, GB News does report on this because they say a source told the Telegraph, of course the Telegraph is paywalled so you can't see that, so the only article that actually tells you and is publicly available is the GB News one here that tells so the only article that actually tells you and is publicly available is the GB News one here that You wouldn't have known that if it wasn't for this.
	Lots of the other outlets didn't report that.
	The impression I got was just that he was alive and now he's not.
	And that's it.
	That's all you need to know.
	Next thing, move on.
	Don't ask why.
	Hang on.
	I should have a link to the BBC article here.
	I'll click on this one quickly.
	So I wanted to have a look at this because...
	Well, what did he do, for a start?
	So, I'm going to read from the BBC. This is how the BBC presents it, okay?
	Family man Lynch, who suffered a heart attack earlier in the year, also had been diagnosed with diabetes, had gone to the hotel to protest against immigration, his defence barrister said.
	He had a general conspiracy theory against anyone and any form of authority, sounds like my kind of guy, and had taken placard referencing the deep state and the space agency NASA. Not exactly...
	You know, sort of boomer-tier sort of conspiracy theories, isn't it?
	That, you know, when you're talking about NASA in particular...
	I've heard about immigration into the US and NASA. Well, the deep state, I imagine, includes here as well, doesn't it?
	Right, yeah.
	Anyway, anyway.
	So, video played to the court showed Lynch revving up the situation before it turned violent and calling the police scum.
	That's it.
	That's all they say he did.
	And he was serving two years and eight months for that.
	Seems a bit harsh.
	It does, doesn't it?
	So, obviously he had some health conditions, but he did also have a family.
	And he was driven to what he did because of what the state did.
	And I imagine the situation in the prison, because I believe...
	Yeah, he's in HMP Moorland in Doncaster.
	I imagine Doncaster is going to have a very diverse prison population that isn't going to be nice to a 61-year-old English man involved in those sorts of things, right?
	Yeah, yeah.
	It's going to be incredibly hostile.
	From what I've just heard there, I don't know his case.
	I don't know anything about other than what we've just heard about what he actually did.
	But from that, from the strength of that, it doesn't sound like it warranted a custodial sentence at all.
	But okay, so he went in there and then was driven to extreme lengths.
	Yes.
	And that, to my mind...
	Just another family ruined.
	Yeah, just another life lost.
	To my mind, that seems like part of the intended outcome here, because they clear the prisons out to put people...
	Like him in, who haven't really done that much.
	Many of the prisoners they're releasing have done less than he has, and because of the conditions, the continual threat, and probably the despair of the injustice of the whole thing.
	Apart from his family, apart from the injustice of it all, the poor Lynch family, apart from the injustice of everything along the line, what about the actual despair of the man himself?
	Yeah, because putting yourself in his shoes, he must have been hopeless, right?
	I mean, 61, that's not that old.
	He could have had a good few years left.
	Yeah, he would have been able to live to see outside of prison.
	I don't know how bad his health conditions were.
	Obviously, he had a heart attack and diabetes, which isn't ideal, but when you're in prison, at least you can focus on taking care of yourself, if nothing else.
	You know, on some level, they do want you gone.
	People like him, people like us, gone.
	Of course they do, yeah.
	And to talk about the US, you know, obviously we've got a line of merch for the upcoming US election.
	Seems a bit macabre to talk about that now, but it was the only point I could put it in.
	Don't crop that.
	So obviously we've got...
	That didn't even occur to me.
	So we've obviously got lots of Trump merch.
	I really want the Trump grilling t-shirt personally, so I'm looking forward to getting one of those.
	So get them while they're gone, because after the election they will be gone.
	So they're limited edition.
	But anyway, obviously I did a lot of work on January 6th in the United States, and they've got a very different philosophy of dealing with prisoners.
	It's not quite as...
	It's not quite the same methodology that our state is employing.
	So obviously we did a lot of work.
	We plotted what happened on January 6th to the minute and it stood the test of time.
	No misinformation in there, unlike lots of other outlets that say that they fact-check but don't really.
	And also, I had someone on the ground taking pictures of the whole thing, including the rear entrance where all the violence was.
	These are pictures exclusive to load-seaters.
	So, you know, we did a lot of work on it, and I've interviewed Edward Jacob Lang, who was the January 6th prisoner facing the most charges, and I even had a follow-up interview with him.
	So the first one was July of 2022, and this one was September of 23.
	What he told me about the condition of the January 6th prisoners, because this was really illuminating to me, is that basically they've been sat awaiting trial for such a long time now.
	Loads of them haven't even faced a trial and they've just been held in prison.
	High security prison.
	Held on remand, what we would call it.
	Not having a trial, with no sort of date in sight really.
	It keeps on getting pushed back.
	They're held in isolation, not really allowed to see their families very often.
	They're basically being held with no one but each other.
	Away from the entire world and without any end in sight.
	And so what Jacob was telling me here, Edward, sorry, was saying here, was that a lot of people were giving in to despair and saying, oh, I don't, you know, Trump's abandoned us.
	You know, I don't know whether I believe in any of this anymore.
	And he still was holding on.
	He still believed in being an American patriot.
	He hadn't given up.
	The idea is if you just put people in a hopeless situation, it eventually erodes their resolve.
	You know, it's like keeping a rat in a bucket of water with no sign of escape.
	Eventually it will stop swimming voluntarily.
	And it's that same philosophy.
	It's a different philosophy to the British one, which seems a bit harsher, really.
	They're obviously political prisoners, aren't they?
	They are, yeah.
	Like the Zeks in the Soviet Union, in the various archipelagos of gulags.
	Yeah, just keep you there until you're entirely broken.
	So rather than, you know, killing you off, they're instead just waiting to crush your resolve, it seems like that's the case in the US at least.
	And that's two potential ways in which the state can basically crush dissent.
	They arrest you, they put you in prison, and either await other prisoners dealing with you, or leave you in such isolation from the world, that you just give up on what brought you there in the first place.
	And I don't think this nearly gets enough coverage that it does, because...
	If we saw this from China, Russia, North Korea, Iran perhaps, we would say, hang on a minute, these people are political prisoners, they're being held, they're not being given trials, this isn't fair.
	But because it's ourselves, well, all of a sudden we're assessing ourselves to, you know, a different standard.
	And I don't think that that is reasonable.
	Yeah, different men have a different breaking point, of course.
	If you look at, for example, political prisoner Nelson Mandela on Robben Island for what was in 30 odd years or more, something in that ballpark.
	You know, communist, militant, terrorist Nelson Mandela.
	True.
	It's a matter of record what they did.
	It didn't break him in the end, he got out even after decades.
	So I just hope Edward Jacob Blag and the other January 6th people hold out, because hopefully the Donald will move their cases along at least, if not just pardon them or something.
	Yeah, well...
	It's obviously the Biden administration is holding them like a Guantanamo Bay type situation.
	Just holding you there very, very deliberately.
	Or the Department of Justice.
	Is it Mayorkas?
	Yeah, just holding them there.
	Just like Solzhenitsyn.
	Pure political prisoners.
	Mm-hmm.
	Mad, right?
	In this day and age, in the land of the free.
	A few members of Congress did visit them.
	My name is Marjorie Taylor Greene, went and visited them in prison a couple of times.
	I think maybe Thomas Massey did as well.
	I can't remember.
	It was, you know, years ago now.
	But a couple of further to the right Republicans actually went and visited them and made sure they were okay and, you know, did the best they could within their power.
	Which is something, at least.
	But they are political prisoners, and I don't think the state is going to be above imprisoning more and more people in the future, depending on how things go in the US, certainly in the UK, and other countries in Europe as well.
	And so I wanted to warn people about this.
	So Edward Jacob Lang has been being held on remand for what three years, knocking four years or something now?
	Seems like it yeah.
	What did he actually do just out of interest because according to Kamala that day was as bad as Pearl Harbour and 9-11?
	Well it's alleged that he was fighting with the riot police in the rear entrance, the one that where we've got the photos of people fighting with the riot police.
	That's also where I think it's Brian Sicknick, the officer that died later, seemingly to an allergy to pepper spray, was.
	And so that's what they're alleging.
	But of course he's not had a trial yet.
	But we'll have to see.
	Right, we have some comments that I forgot to read from your segment there.
	If you'd mind.
	Of course.
	Where's the mouse?
	There we go.
	Okay.
	So, if they kick out Brazil and let in Pakistan and North Korea, they can rename themselves Pricks.
	I've got a very childish sense of humour.
	That's funny to me.
	I am partial to it.
	So, the US Federal Reserve lost control of the US dollar after World War II when European banks started fractional reserve lending in US dollars.
	This is called the Eurodollar.
	Oi, Samson, give us the mouse.
	Sorry, I've got to read these.
	There we go.
	I'll scroll up and then you can take the mouse over again.
	There you go.
	It's all yours.
	That's Random Name says, I don't think BRICS can ever prevail because the moment the US lose their spot as world hegemon, BRICS' whole purpose is gone, thus leading to infighting and probably disillusion.
	That is also true.
	Fair point.
	You're referring to the standalone complex where unconnected individuals without coordination or knowledge of each other's actions contribute to a collective effort achieving a common goal.
	Yes, seems like it.
	Same thing happened in Quebec during COVID, when our PM called all the non-vax reprobates and blamed us all for society's ills.
	People were getting harassed in the street for not wearing masks, etc.
	And then cases like this old man is why I completely agree with Josh when he says we need Nuremberg-style trials for every traitor who participated in the betrayal of our nations.
	Here, here.
	Right, let's have a nice palette cleanser, shall we?
	October was a great month for stargazing out here.
	The geomagnetic storm made it all the way down here.
	It looked like a red fog against the night sky.
	We were in West Texas for the supermoon and I thought we were in Tatooine there for a minute.
	And best of all was the Atlas Comet.
	Pictures seriously didn't do it justice.
	It was incredible.
	It was so huge and bright.
	Stars at night are big and bright.
	Deep in the heart of Jackson.
	I was going to say, obviously that's peewee heavens, big adventures, Nick.
	Of course.
	Yeah, I was actually going to say that.
	When it finished, I was going to say, the stars are bright, they're big and bright.
	I was going to do that exact bit, but she picked me to it.
	Brilliant.
	Brilliant.
	Guys, don't worry about these robots, okay?
	They might cost $30,000 right now, but then you need to take into account labour costs of maintaining the damn thing.
	Not to mention all the insurance costs when it finds out that if the batteries on these things go into thermal runaway, this happens.
	They're not going to out-price human beings because they're ultimately going to turn out to be so much more higher maintenance than regular people.
	That's both reassuring and more depressing than before.
	I wouldn't want one of those things if you give it to me for free.
	I'm old school.
	I like old paper books.
	I don't want a tablet, right?
	I don't want AI in my life.
	I don't want ChatGBT to write anything for me.
	So no, I don't want one of those monstrosities in my home.
	Thank you.
	I'm not going to help the evil scientist accusations, but I would like them as sort of henchmen.
	I'd have it walking a few paces behind me, preferably armed, carrying my stuff for me in a backpack.
	And I'm sort of walking ahead with a cape, maybe, into my lair, which has a lowering platform.
	That's what I'm imagining.
	Really specific image you've got there.
	Okay, cool.
	Fair enough.
	Some of us have goals, though.
	As much as I've been busting on David Lammy, at least he is only an appointee of England's prime virtue signaller, Cunt Starmer.
	Worse by far is that we in the United States have a candidate for president who is David Lammy in drag.
	And here we begin our Kamala-mentations.
	This woman is so bad that even though there's a way to remove Joe Biden and boost Kamala by making her president, this wasn't done.
	Even her own party recognizes that she is unpopular.
	There's some people, you know, at school where they haven't really done anything really to be bullied, but everyone sort of bullies them without, you don't even mean to, you just find yourself being a dick to them.
	I know exactly what you mean.
	And they can't redeem themselves, whatever they do, because they're just unlikable.
	Some people are just, it's just unlikable.
	Like some people are effortlessly interesting or cool, right?
	Some people are just...
	Some people.
	Some people just can't help but be unlikeable.
	Obnoxious.
	It's hard baked into them.
	Everything they do and say is obnoxious.
	Kamala Harris is one of those people.
	If she can't win...
	But to be fair, she not only is one of those people, but she's also done a whole lot of things that are questionable, to say the least.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Yeah, yeah.
	There is a tendency among the Lotosi to staff to describe people who, through masturbation, render themselves disinterested or incapable using the internet parlance of akuma.
	With a Greek on the staff, I'm surprised this is permitted when Stelios knows of a much better word.
	A malakka is someone whose mind is so degraded and befuddled by masturbation that he is incapable of cogent thought.
	Additionally useful is that it's an anagram.
	I've never heard of Malacca before.
	It's got a great ring to it, doesn't it?
	I've never heard of Kuma before until I joined Lotus Eaters.
	Well, full of them.
	Malacca sounds a bit like...
	It sounds like a nickname for breasts, doesn't it?
	To my ears.
	Get your Malaccas out, love.
	Yeah.
	I don't know why I said that, but there we go.
	So you notice that one of the hooded feet is a little shorter.
	I cast vicious mockery.
	Nat 20, let's go.
	You're a short motherfucker and nobody likes you Short!
	Everybody says, I'm fucking sure that guy is And that stops you from roaming me eating full relationships When they were born, everybody thought that you were just a head But then the doctor said, wait The stupid motherfucker tiny short ass baby Got a tiny little itty bitty body and I hate it Your attack lands and absolutely shatters the mind of the cloaks.
	Figure perception check, please.
	Mat 20, let's go.
	That was high-octane.
	It was indeed.
	Well done, Fane Scotty.
	I appreciate anyone mocking Napoleon.
	If anyone's interested on the epochs of the Lotus Eaters behind our paywall, if anyone's still watching this that isn't already a member, there's an eight, nine-part series on Napoleon and then a further three-part series much later on, Arthur Wellesley, the Duke of Wellington, and some other bits and bobs in and around that period.
	So I have covered...
	If you don't already know the story, the incredible story of Bonaparte and Wellington.
	Good plug there.
	Right, let's go to some comments.
	O deity Samson, how much time may you ordain?
	Okay.
	Can I take the ten minutes rather than the five to do the comments?
	Is that alright?
	Thank you.
	Samson has granted us ten minutes.
	Hallowed be thy name.
	So...
	The all-powerful Samson!
	Praise him.
	Anyway, Hector Rex says, hope not hate, could have just asked Bo for an interview and made a better documentary.
	Yeah.
	True.
	I'd do it.
	Would you?
	I'd sit down with them and pour scorn at them and reject all of their premises, yeah.
	Just go to their interview and just abuse them the entire time.
	Verbally, of course.
	Yeah, right, yeah, verbally, verbally.
	And Captain Charlie the Beagle says, ah yes, Undercover, the best political movie created since Triumph of the Will.
	Tut tut.
	Still at least Lenny Riefenstahl had the decency to be innovative with her films.
	We've got another comment here through.
	Fred Knott says, I've actually played Assassin's Creed Odyssey and Malacca is translated in the game as PHUK. Don't know how accurate it is.
	Me neither.
	Need to talk to Stelios here.
	So we have, Josh, you have to remember the majority of these left-wing activists have room temperature IQs who try to use its nuance as a shield for their positions, but when you actually try to engage with them about nuance, they shut down because they're not intellectually capable of comprehending the subject.
	Their belief is, you either believe and agree with what I say, and are therefore good, or you are 100% evil.
	Yes, well, what I was doing was I was trying to be very charitable because they're no doubt going to watch that and I know that Hope Not Hate are litigious.
	And I was just trying to be on my best behaviour and, you know, not give them enough rope to hang myself.
	I can say that now, I'm not on YouTube, so we're alright.
	Thomas Howell says, look at this example of fascism.
	Also here is an image of Tommy Robinson.
	That's true, yeah.
	And, um...
	That's true, actually.
	And, uh, finally for this section, uh...
	Arizona Desert Rat says, do they not realise that people have evolved based on the regions that their ancestors are from?
	People who are descended from people in sunny regions tend to have a sackless skin.
	I don't know.
	I've never come across that term before.
	Is that an Arizona term?
	I don't know.
	People who are descended from people in cold zones have a higher ability to digest dairy and meat foods.
	And in fact...
	No, there's no biological differences between people's...
	That actually made me jump.
	Sorry, sorry.
	I was going to say, yeah, in fact, Britain, the Netherlands and Norway is like the most concentrated hub of lactose tolerance.
	So we should be proud of ourselves.
	There's a million and one things, sickle cell anemia.
	There's a million and one things, right?
	No, there's no biological differences between humans.
	To suggest such a thing is the same as being a guard at Belson.
	It's the same thing, morally, to suggest it.
	Would you like to read some comments, babe?
	Okay, Michael Meguar says, The war in Ukraine and the endless support for the US makes more sense if it's over fighting about bricks.
	That's pretty much what it is about, really, isn't it?
	Yeah, there's all sorts of proxy conflicts, not necessarily hot conflicts where bullets are flying around and 105mm howitzer shells are flying around.
	There's all sorts of conflicts.
	I liked having it up on the big screen, by the way, Samson, because the glare on this thing is bad, particularly if I'm sitting there.
	Almost can't see the screen.
	Okay, can you scroll up a little bit?
	Monkey Smoke says...
	I was sympathetic to the whole BRICS thing and the diminishing of American foreign policy.
	I've had to reassess when through desperation the Russians have recently tried to sell the idea that North Korea and Iran are the pinnacle of human freedoms etc.
	The world is changing no doubt but I'll never be convinced that starvation and extreme religious hypocrisy is after the Enlightenment.
	Yeah, no, fair enough.
	If I still had to pick between the G7 and BRICS, if you had to live in one or the other...
	It's probably still best to live in the United States or Western Europe or Australia than in Saudi or Iran or China.
	Well, obviously the best place to live is the United States, but also I would never move because...
	Yeah, I'm not leaving Britain, yeah.
	You know, I'm going to go down with a ship.
	Even if the island is plunging into the ocean, I'm going with it.
	Yeah, yeah, I'm going nowhere.
	Yeah.
	I will die on this sceptred isle.
	Ah, Albion!
	You're gonna break into song.
	Someone online says, being resource rich doesn't do anything if you aren't allowed to get to the resources.
	Cough, cough, Africa.
	Right, yeah.
	Fair point, but that doesn't really apply to Russia.
	No one's stopping Putin from mining wherever he wants within Russian territory.
	But still, I mean, generally speaking, a good point.
	Crumpets says, thanks for covering geopolitics, Boris.
	It's alright, it's my pleasure.
	It'd be great to see you and perhaps Dan cover it more on the podcast.
	Perhaps you could do a video on more modern spycraft psychological operations and so on.
	Yeah, so I've done a couple of things with Dan, or at least one.
	We did a great, I thought it was very good, Brokonomics on a book called Memoirs of an Economic Hitman.
	Where there's a guy who worked for, well it would take a while to describe exactly who he worked for, but basically during the 60s and 70s and even into the 80s I think, how sort of forcing third world or poorer countries to take massive loans from the US or the World Bank and things and then you end up stripping them of their resources and things and they end up owing you more money than they ever borrowed and all that sort of thing.
	Memoirs of an Economic Hitman.
	It's not a rare book.
	It's a famous book because it just spills a lot of how it's done.
	Sort of dollar imperialism.
	How you can control the world without having to send the Marines in, like in the Korean War.
	The Americans didn't want to send the Marines in like they did in Korea in the 50s anymore.
	But they still wanted to dominate the world.
	They still wanted to defeat the Soviets in every possible sphere.
	There's other ways of doing it.
	There's one way to skin a cat.
	So there's that.
	And I will do...
	I'm doing a long series at the moment on Epochs all about Caesar and Pompey and the End of the Republic.
	And I've got a couple of things in the pipeline after that.
	But after that, I am going to do at some point some content about...
	The Cold War and the Spy Game.
	Probably about the Berlin Tunnel.
	Yeah, the Cambridge Five and a few other bits and bobs.
	Maybe the Klaus Fuchs thing and how the Soviets stole nuclear secrets.
	Yeah, I'm fascinated by all that sort of stuff, so I will be doing something along those lines.
	Okay, do you want to go and see your dissidents?
	Of course.
	Omar Awad says the sentencing will continue until compliance improves.
	The law is not for keeping you safe, but a cost-benefit analysis for the regime.
	Very true, and the cost-benefit analysis is the correct frame for it in this neoliberal dystopia.
	BreakableLitany says, it's really simple, we don't need to be flooded with prisoners, just a moderately sized wooden frame and some rope.
	Yes, I do agree with the death penalty.
	And there are some honourable mentions actually, so do you want me to read the ones about your beard, just to save you the dignity?
	So, nobody should quote Lord Flashheart when commenting on Beau's beard, with a wink.
	And Bow, when your beard reaches Norse status, you should start coming to work wearing an eye patch to complete the dark bow aesthetic.
	Lady Dragonhawk says, I, for one, love your beard, Bow.
	Don't listen to any haters.
	Yeah, I think your beard looks good as well.
	And then the final thing I'm going to read is, Rhysim says, just got my copy of Islander 2, Lotus Eaters Boogaloo, on Monday.
	Another great addition that has been a pleasure to read so far.
	I'm glad you're enjoying it.
	I hope you like my poem.
	And I suppose that's time to end the show.
	And I've enjoyed myself.
	I've had a good time.
	I hope you have as well.
	And of course, make sure to tune in.
	Same time tomorrow.
	Same time as always.
	Thank you very much for watching.

▲