Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Jan. 28, 2025 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:30:58

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #1088

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Low Seaters for, what day is it, the 28th of January 2025. I am joined by Dan.
	Hello!
	And the Stelios.
	Hello!
	I like that you mentioned me by name on the description, so some comments, Biggie Bigfoot and North FC Zoomer have taken issue with your description.
	Too descriptive, some might say.
	You're feeling very forgiving today, I can see by the tie.
	Yes, it's the tie with the olive branches.
	It's the olive of peace.
	I want to get a Nobel Prize.
	We don't want any olives apiece, though, do we?
	We want to crush our enemies.
	No, but I think it's £10 million that comes with it.
	That could do a lot of not-peace.
	I want that.
	£10 million.
	Still think we should crush our enemies.
	Thank you, Conan the Barbarian.
	Yes.
	But today we're talking about how China just got a huge advantage with their new AI, the latest German stabbing, and then Dan is going to tell us all how left-wing you are.
	Yes.
	So, let's get started, I suppose.
	You might have heard about this new AI that's come out of China called DeepSeek, and it launched last week, at least version 3 of it, the one that is set to compete with ChatGPT, and it's already overtaken its rivals, like OpenAI's ChatGPT, as the most downloaded free app in the United States, which is, you know, quite an achievement for it already.
	This also comes at a time when the US is restricting the sale of advanced chip technology to China, and then the threat of which seems to have forced the Chinese developers to both cooperate with one another to share their work, from what I understand, as well as they've had to innovate to a certain degree to work with potentially less advanced technology.
	However, that is potentially disputed by some people, so that's worth noting as a bit of a caveat.
	They have developed AI models that require far less computing power, though, which is significant.
	And it also means that it will cost a lot less than previously thought possible, which is good for actually everyone.
	Although the Chinese have developed it, it is, I believe, open source.
	Yeah, I mean, it's not good for Sam Altman.
	They're very bad for Sam Altman.
	Which means it's good for everyone else, really, in my opinion.
	DeepSeek, as we've got up here, is powered by the open-source DeepSeek V3 model, whatever that means.
	And its researchers claim it was developed for around...
	Six million US dollars, which of course is disputed and is worth mentioning as a point of reference.
	OpenAI joined a group of other firms that pledged 500 million US dollars or 400 million Great British Pounds into building AI infrastructure in the US. Obviously, just that one funding round versus the entire development cost of the Chinese alternative.
	There's a massive gulf there, isn't there?
	And people disputing it, Here, I've been pointing out that DeepSeek obviously has around 50,000 NVIDIA H100 chips that they can't talk about due to the US export controls.
	And Elon Musk, who of course owns his own AI in Grok, which is integrated into X, formerly known as Twitter, has been suggesting this.
	Here he is.
	He's saying, just don't take it at face value, which I think is fair, because of course the Chinese have a bit of an incentive here to undermine the US market, because of course the AI market is dominated by US-based companies.
	AI has great utility in lots of different industries, one of which is sort of military and security, and so it makes sense to undermine the US's hegemony there, as well as just damaging the US's economy, because they are competitors, aren't they?
	It would make sense if China were to misrepresent just how efficient they were in the development of this.
	And we can talk further.
	Sorry, were you interested?
	Yeah, I'd say at least there's some competition because here in Europe, R&D is sort of dead.
	We don't really have an AI industry.
	We don't have plastic water cups.
	Certainly not to the scale of the US. It's the closest the Europeans have come to innovation.
	That's a bad innovation, that is.
	If you don't live in Europe, by the way, our bottle lids now are attached to the little ring that you find.
	It goes up your nose when you try and drink.
	Yeah, so it collects liquid in there, and whenever you drink, it goes everywhere.
	I had a milkshake the other day, and it went all over my tie.
	Thank you, Europe.
	The European Union is to blame for that.
	It wasn't my fault.
	But yes, there's also comparisons here.
	OpenAI was founded 10 years ago.
	It has 4,500 employees and has raised 6.6 billion in capital.
	And then DeepSeek was founded two years ago and has 200 employees and was developed for less than 10 million if you take the figures at face value.
	And they're just asking the question, how are these companies even competitors in the first place?
	I do think that just from what I've seen, ChatGPT still seems to be better.
	It would be a go-to, wouldn't it?
	So I've been playing around with it, and I found that ChatGPT has slightly better, more sophisticated reasoning.
	DeepSeat can be a bit self-referential and can give you an answer, and then it can just stick to it without...
	When you come back on it and make another point, it doesn't seem to take it that one step further.
	But that said, I mean, one of the first tests I did is I asked both of them, what are the biggest problems in the UK? And they both gave me an answer.
	When I started drilling down, I only got about three responses later at ChatGPT before it said, look, sorry, this is breaking the...
	Censorship rules.
	I'm turning myself off.
	Whereas Deep Seek did go further.
	It just didn't reason as well as I would have liked.
	Yeah, and that seems exactly the sort of impression I've got as well.
	That ChatGPT has more potential, but it's also got more Western-centric censorship built into it, right?
	Yeah, there's a still fair amount of...
	because the training data for both...
	In the English language version, certainly, there's a lot of liberal assumptions that are baked into it.
	So even deep seek is definitely not based.
	It's definitely wedded in the sort of liberal orthodoxy.
	But rather than throw me off when I asked some questions it found uncomfortable, it just repeated the same liberal platitudes again and again.
	Yeah, that seems about right, to be honest, because I've seen similar things.
	I asked GPT to compare itself to its Chinese-developed rival, and it did seem to do it quite fairly here because I've obviously researched all of this for this segment, but it presents it in quite a good way.
	It talks about the comparison and development cost, the launch year, what funding it's received, the hardware it uses.
	It does acknowledge that they are using the A100 GPUs as well.
	It also mentions that...
	It's the number one thing on the App Store and all that sort of thing.
	But when you weigh it up side by side, it's clear that ChatGBT has got the better backing and will become the...
	Higher quality products.
	The concern here is that the Chinese are going to undercut on price.
	I think it's good enough, though.
	Exactly.
	Good enough, and it's significantly cheaper.
	I mean, mind you, the Chinese are incentivized, as I'm sure we come on to with the fact that it's founded by a hedge fund who have a lot to gain if the share price of NVIDIA tanks.
	Yeah.
	So they're incentivized to make it seem like they developed it on pocket calculators for, you know, $450.
	Yeah, and also, it's worth mentioning, As well, that if they're offering a comparable service that's significantly cheaper, it doesn't matter to the average customer, particularly outside of the US and Europe, who can afford to pay for ChatGBT.
	So, I mean, even DeepSeek now is better than ChatGBT was just, you know, maybe eight months ago.
	So, I mean, to go from that to there that quickly...
	That is a significant jump.
	Yes, and significantly cheaper.
	Even if they're lying about the H100s, where they probably are, it's still significantly, significantly cheaper.
	So, what I anticipate is that the Chinese government will try and keep the price very low because they want to capture a large portion of the global market that's going to be going into AI for the first time.
	And, you know, with many...
	It's sort of a law of business psychology that the first product someone uses is the one that they associate with that service.
	Yes.
	And so you want to capture as many people as possible.
	I mean, although really what they've done, because the innovations in the white paper make it so that basically anyone can do this now.
	So it was thought that you basically had to give...
	OpenAI vast amounts of money, billions and billions, so they could keep developing this stuff.
	And that was certainly the line that Sam Altman always said.
	He's always going out with the podcast saying, oh, there's an existential threat to humanity.
	And the way to solve this existential threat is to give me as much money as possible and let me develop it.
	Sounds like a good gig.
	And censor it.
	Whereas what this has done is brought the barrier to entry down to be so minimal that basically anyone with technical skills and at least a little bit of money can now go off and develop their own.
	I mean, I think when it comes to the assumptions that you mentioned, it seems to me a bit hard to believe that they are inbuilt into it from China, maybe.
	Could it be that there are certain rules that are being asked for them?
	So they say in order for your platform to operate in several countries, you will have to do this.
	Well, I mean, the Chinese government, the Chinese law is that...
	For instance, it's hard for me to think of this Chinese AI as containing provisions about Islamophobia, for instance.
	Oh, yeah.
	So it doesn't have...
	I mean, that...
	Okay, so...
	Because there is a segment of Muslim population in China whose name I always mispronounce and Josh laughs.
	Uyghurs?
	Uyghurs, yeah.
	And...
	I think that the reputation is that they don't have exactly the best treatment.
	So it's hard for me to think that the provisions about Islamophobia would be inbuilt into it.
	Well, people have actually asked it about Islam in particular.
	And what happens is the CCP censorship is number one.
	That is the thing that it always defers to by default.
	And then if there's no problem with...
	To the CCP, then it will go to a sort of more liberal line.
	But I think that the Chinese Communist Party stuff overrides other things.
	And as Dan was saying, that it's not necessarily similar to ChatGPT deliberately in that it's got lots of regime-approved ideas.
	I think it's just that the data that's available for developing AI has been selected in that way.
	And so eventually it could deviate from that once they're further along with development.
	I don't know.
	I mean, actually, there's a couple of key innovations that address that point in the paper.
	Is it worth quickly talking about what the key innovations are?
	So in the white paper, I did have a skim through.
	I haven't mastered it or anything, so don't grumble if I get any of this slightly wrong.
	But there were sort of three key innovations in the white paper.
	And one of them is on much more efficiency in the way it uses the token.
	So token is basically a piece of information that you feed into and you train it on.
	So what OpenAI did is they raised a whole load of money and they ingested basically all of the data.
	But if you ingest all of the data in the modern era, that basically means you get an awful lot of shit in there.
	Whereas what these guys did is they used a predictive model to identify which tokens actually get used and only incorporate them.
	Which meant they missed out about 95% of it.
	Now, I do want to speak ill of academia, but most of what they churn out is complete rubbish.
	They just churn out papers.
	Because that's what you expected to do.
	I know you both have academic backgrounds.
	There's some truth to it.
	If you're looking at the sum of the entire discipline, most of the research isn't necessarily useful.
	Most of the stuff that gets paid attention to is the good stuff.
	We'll make an exception to heterosexuality papers.
	Yeah, well, the whole gender remit, I mean, all of that is just complete nonsense.
	So whereas OpenAI would take a block of 100,000 academic papers and ingest them all, what these guys do is say, actually, no, there's only 5,000 of those that are any good, and it just ingests those.
	So if your training data set can be trimmed 95%, that's a huge cost-saving right there.
	So that's the first big efficiency that they found.
	There's another one where they basically, a bit like AMD chips, they predictively select the...
	So they do that as well.
	So that's another big innovation.
	And another one addresses the point that Stelios was talking about, which was reinforced learning.
	And this is where a lot of the bias comes in.
	So with labelling, which the Western AIs do, what happens is they get it to generate a response and then a human will go and basically mark its homework and tell it off and say, look, you need to be more diverse there and you need to be more environmentally conscious there and then feed it back into it.
	Whereas what this does is it basically just learns itself in order to basically produce an outcome which is decent.
	And it just gets marked on the final result, but it doesn't have a human sitting there.
	Self-knowledge.
	Well, it's essentially the difference between learning to ride a bike, where the first version, you do one pedal, and then you have to get off and sit there for 20 minutes while somebody goes through a book explaining how to ride a bike.
	Whereas this version basically just says, look, you're not coming back in until you can ride the bike.
	Show me that you can ride the bike and then you're allowed in the house and you can have your tea.
	Swim or drown.
	Yes.
	And because of that, it doesn't get...
	A lot of the woke nonsense is tokens that have no value and therefore it's not ingested in the first place.
	And because it doesn't have a human in California sat there labelling the data afterwards to try and identify whether it's a good response or not, whether it's woke enough or not, all of that gets skipped.
	As we've seen in testing it, because all Western data sets today are baked with liberal assumptions, it still has liberal assumptions, but it's just not as bad as that version.
	But with those three innovations, and there's a whole bunch of others in the white paper as well, it is genuinely significantly cheaper.
	But that also means that using this process, somebody like the Lotus Eaters could come along, if we had some technical people, if we had proper...
	Dan AI. Yes.
	And if we had a couple of million pounds to spare, we could develop a Lotus thing, and we could basically use training data from perhaps only before the 1900s or something, and create a proper, stereotypical-based AI. British Empire AI. Yes.
	That would be great, wouldn't it?
	Yes.
	If you have a couple of million pounds and want to invest it in us, that would be nice.
	We do have a donate button on the website.
	That's true.
	A big donation would be appreciated.
	But yeah, one of the things that I could see here happening is that it is open source, and so the argument that China's doing it to wrestle market share, there's some element of that.
	But I think what seems to be happening here in sort of a geopolitical sense is that China is trying to democratise a market in which the United States has a monopoly over.
	I don't think of this as primarily being a geopolitical play.
	No?
	I think it's primarily a short-in-video play.
	Okay.
	So it was developed by a hedge fund.
	That's true.
	And this is apparently a side project of it.
	I was going to say this exact thing.
	And this is why they're basically leaning so heavily on the fact of how cheap it was and how basic the hardware was.
	Because let's say you're a Chinese hedge fund, right?
	And you throw out this model.
	And at the moment...
	The NVIDIA order book is stacked because everybody who's anybody is saying, give me as many H100 chips as you possibly can and ordering vast boatloads of these things.
	And the NVIDIA Sky price has gone through the roof.
	So, yeah.
	Oh, this is OpenAI.
	That's OpenAI.
	You probably want NVIDIA. I do.
	Here we are.
	So this was from...
	2.51am yesterday.
	Yeah, I think it went a bit beyond that.
	It did, yeah.
	The NVIDIA order book is massive.
	So if you're a Chinese hedge fund, what you do is you develop this AI and then you underplay how expensive it was.
	So you make it sound as cheap and as easy as possible.
	And it has some genuine innovations in there, but they're probably over-egging how easy it is to make one of these.
	And then you take out a massive short position against NVIDIA. Then you drop this.
	And then you exit your shorts and you've made billions.
	Many, many billions.
	I think that's the primary motivation.
	It certainly pays for the development of it.
	Comfortably.
	Yeah, quite comfortably.
	It's also worth mentioning as well that the market response isn't necessarily rational either.
	This guy here, I don't necessarily know who he is, but he makes a good point that I also thought of, is that it is a form of zero-sum thinking.
	If someone comes up with a more efficient AI model, it's not going to cause us to use less AI. It will actually cause us to use more AI. And so what the market should have done, actually, was invest more money, not less.
	Well, I mean, he's right and wrong.
	A sell-off, when the order book of the underlying company gets significantly reduced, is rational.
	But he's right in the point that ultimately what it will lead to is, yes, more AI. Maybe if you're investing long-term, it doesn't make sense to sell off, but...
	Yeah, so I mean, I've only got a little bit of NVIDIA and I bought at 80 cents and it's now like 106 or something, whatever it is.
	So I'm holding because I don't care just for the long term.
	But yeah, I mean, it does change the fundamentals of NVIDIA. But yeah, he is ultimately right that what this will lead to is a collapse in the moat around the biggest AI companies and emergence of a lot more smaller.
	AI players.
	And it will actually reinvigorate the venture capital market because rather than thinking to yourself, oh, I've got to write a check of 50 million to try and get into a round for OpenAI or maybe Microsoft or maybe Grok, now you're looking around at all the smaller players because, I mean, this thing with a relatively small amount of money overtook one of the biggest companies in the world now.
	Assuming that those figures are a genuine witch.
	Yeah, but I mean, even if it's 10 times that, it's still cheap.
	It's also worth mentioning as well that if it's being subsidised by the Chinese government, it's effectively that cheap anyway because they could use Chinese tax money to basically subsidise it and use it as a means of undermining the US. But you can still treat it as if it's that cheap.
	The main thing is it shatters the illusion that Sam Altman had been putting out there that this can only be done with a truly vast amount of money.
	Actually, it's much, much broader than that.
	Why do you think that it's not geostrategic?
	Well, because the motivation of a hedge fund to cause a massive slump in NVIDIA and a whole bunch of other...
	I mean, actually, you brought up a list, didn't you?
	I did.
	I'll bring that back.
	Whatever that list is, that list, right?
	Yeah, so ARM, Broadcom, Taiwan, yeah, all of those, AMD. Yeah, so if you were a hedge fund and you took out a basket of shorts, maybe focused on NVIDIA... And you heavily shorted all of those.
	I mean, that is more than enough motivation.
	These guys probably made hundreds of billions.
	I imagine this also made, you know, the Chinese Communist Party quite happy as well.
	Well, I mean, I suppose they're perfectly happy to see a rival market fail because when this sell-off like this occurred, it basically causes withdrawal from US-based assets, which, you know, some of it is going to flow back to them.
	That's why you saw the dollar dropping as well.
	So what do you reckon your key takeaways from this are?
	What should people be paying attention to?
	Basically, I think it's incredibly encouraging because we were looking at a future where only a handful of players got to develop AI and they got to absolutely soak it in liberal assumptions.
	Whereas it now becomes clear that you don't actually need a human sat there labelling the data and telling it off and telling it to be more woke.
	You can just let it do this reinforced learning thing and then just mark the exam at the end of the day.
	Is that a decent answer or not?
	But don't sit there labelling each facet of his that it goes through.
	It's also very encouraging that...
	Smaller players can develop it, so you will actually get some proper sensible AIs that come out of this, and you could be looking at a future where if you're a leftist twat, you can use the leftist twat AI, but if you're a sensible, decent, truth-seeking, child of the light, an AI will be developed that you can use that.
	We were thinking that Grok was going to have to be that, but he's going to be much broader than that.
	But it also means that because of the cost of all of these things comes down significantly, it makes it more likely that the innovation cycle is going to be faster, and we're all going to be using more AI, like the guy in that tweet said, so it probably won't be that unfeasible.
	Within a few years, we will have AI assistants who just look after us and remember appointments.
	I mean, a bit like a wife, but less annoying, and it's just you can mute it.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	I can say I love you in many languages.
	That's true, yeah.
	We could get it to do that, but I'd just be happy if it just reminded me of all the things I've got to do.
	It doesn't make you sleep on the sofa either.
	But yeah, my takeaways are much the same as yours.
	I would add that there are sort of geopolitical ramifications here for...
	The sort of power play between China and the United States as well.
	Although, as you say, that might not be the main intention.
	It could just be making money and potentially damaging a US-dominated market.
	I think it's perfectly happy with all of those follow-on effects.
	It just wasn't the main motivator.
	Yeah, that's entirely possible.
	And yeah, it's one of those things where I'm sort of optimistic in that it's taken it out of...
	the hands of some people that I don't trust and put it in the hands of some other people I don't really trust, but at least it's sort of democratizing it a little bit.
	You want competition amongst elites.
	That's exactly it.
	That's better than, you know...
	Competition is good.
	Oldman chap just controlling everything.
	However, part of me also thinks that if anyone, any old person can develop an AI, then there's going to be one crazy person trying to develop Skynet in their basement...
	Oh, yeah, that's the other thing.
	I mean, short of a massive militaristic worldwide campaign, a bit like is referred to in the Dune novels, to root out thinking machines, there's no holding this back.
	So if our future is to be dominated by AIs, there's absolutely no way we're stopping it now because anyone can develop one.
	So I hope our new AI overlords are good to us.
	I, for one, support AI completely.
	I do not want to be turned into paperclips, and so please keep me alive.
	I will be a very faithful assistant of AI and its goals.
	Please let me live.
	Judgment day.
	Oh, we got some...
	Chat's here.
	ChatGPT needs a woke lobotomy.
	You can get it to make a joke about Jesus Christ our Lord, but not Muhammad.
	You can get it to admit the West overall is best, but can't get it to make the...
	I don't understand what that means.
	What does that mean, Dan?
	Hieroglyphic?
	What is it?
	Do you know?
	Dive?
	Okay, sorry I don't understand.
	I would want to read it, but I'm afraid I don't understand it.
	ConnorSmugMug says, I agree, Josh.
	The welded on caps are a coxoid anti-moral idea concocted by the demonic EU. I appreciate that use of language.
	Right, we're going to talk about a very sad story that happened last week in Germany on the 22nd of January.
	We had two people who died by another stabbing and several others who have been injured.
	And we have the suspected child killer here in Aschaffenburg.
	This is in Germany's Bavaria.
	He was an asylum seeker with a known history of violence and mental instability, who had traveled across several European nations to enter Germany and was obliged to leave the country by the end of last year.
	So what happened was that...
	On the six days ago, on the 22nd of January, as I said before, there was a daycare center and teachers from it were taking some really small children out for a walk in the park.
	And it looks like this suspect was there deliberately targeting them.
	He rushed.
	He attacked them.
	He stabbed several kids.
	One died.
	A two-year-old died.
	A 41-year-old man.
	Rushed to save what he could save and he died as well.
	Then the suspect tried to leave by train but he was caught very swiftly.
	So this is just a horrible case and we are going to talk about the pattern yet again that we see when it comes to blame allocation by the mainstream media on perpetrators of Serious violent crime.
	Because this is a very clear trend here, isn't there?
	It amazes me that not every single person in Germany now understands who is doing it and why, and that nobody is safe, let alone small, innocent children.
	I mean, this is just how we live now.
	It's just how we live.
	It's like we live in a world with a national lottery, except if your numbers come up, your kids get murdered, and you're all forced to play it.
	I will say I have a family in Switzerland and we visited them a few months ago and they leave their newborn child to a daycare and they go for a walk on a daily basis.
	And it's essentially something of the sort.
	Now Switzerland, as I'm going to show you, is way more based than Germany on this issue.
	They actually have a secret.
	They have laws regarding deportation, just like Germany has, but they actually enforce them.
	I hope they're based enough.
	Amazing what political will can do, isn't it?
	Exactly.
	We will show it in the end because this is the age where we contrast the effective government and the no-it-can't-be-done government.
	And I think the more we see people like Bukele, like Millet, like Trump, like the Swiss, actually doing what must be done to protect their own people and to promote common sense, the more people are going to wake up and are going to say, well, listen.
	Just stop giving us these excuses.
	So this is just a horrible case, and it shows a failure of institutions and people who are in charge of them across all dimensions.
	Now, he was someone from Afghanistan who sought asylum in Germany.
	He went to Germany.
	He entered Germany in 2022. He claimed asylum, but it was denied.
	So why was he there?
	That's one question.
	There was a deportation order, but deportation orders in some countries are like milk expiration dates.
	As I say, they expire and then just business as usual.
	So he wasn't deported as the order, and the order wasn't enforced.
	He was accommodated in a former inn in Alsa now in Lower Franconia, and he was involved in several violent offenses.
	And I think he was institutionalized thrice.
	So he was known.
	Now the government tries to say that there was an administrative error and he wasn't deported.
	But I think that this is a ridiculous excuse.
	Well, it's a story as old as time by this point that governments are unwilling to do the deporting.
	Unwilling to get their hands dirty and get lots of these foreign criminals, basically.
	Not willing to be robust.
	Yeah.
	I put a tweet out after the Axel, whatever his name is, Barney massacre, and I said, look, it's utterly tragic, but by far, in a way, the most tragic thing is that this will happen again and again.
	And again, because our governments tacitly support this kind of action against the native population.
	And here it is happening again, and it will happen again.
	And I'll go beyond that.
	It's quite common in a number of African countries to go into primary schools of Christian children and just commit a total massacre.
	Christians are the most persecuted religious people on earth, and most of it happens in Africa.
	And I'm telling you, it will happen in Europe.
	A bunch of these crazies...
	We're going to a primary school and it will be a complete massacre and basically what people like us are trying to do is trying to say, wake the hell up.
	Before that happens rather than after it happens.
	And the job of the police is to ensure security and enforce the law.
	It's not to oversee racial relations, as several pundits are saying.
	It's also worth mentioning as well, the people who are willfully keeping a blind eye to this stuff, they're willing to suggest that there are a number, you know, there's a number that they would be happy with of children that you could sacrifice on the altar of diversity.
	To keep these foreign violent populations in the country.
	Because, of course, if we had no migration from, say, Africa and the Middle East or Islamic countries, none of this would be happening.
	And therefore it's preventable.
	And if it's preventable...
	By supporting them coming here, you are complicit in their crimes.
	If you support open borders, if you support these people being here, you are complicit in child murder.
	It's as simple as that.
	One of the things I'd love to do is, if I can get the right data set, is actually work out how much GDP we're getting in exchange for each murder, each rape, each child death, and so on.
	It could well be a minus, yeah.
	The only thing I will say is that the patent says that no amount of children is enough.
	No amount.
	And this is the main question people should ask politicians and journalists who play the multiculturalist card and say that multiculturalism demands sacrifices.
	How many are enough?
	How many must die in order for you to...
	Actually admit that there is a problem.
	I think you're absolutely right.
	The current set of leaders that we have would gladly accept a mountain of children.
	What it basically amounts to is people are afraid to be called racist, but they're so afraid of being called racist that they facilitate the death of children and innocent people.
	And I think the trade-off is some people that are wrong about something call you a bad word, but the...
	Children and the innocent people stay alive.
	I feel like that is more important than hurty words.
	And we have actual human beings, not just words on paper.
	It isn't just a name on a paper that features in the same sentence with the term murder.
	We have actual flesh and blood human beings, like the two-year-old boy that was stabbed in this case.
	Right, so we have here footage of this person standing there after the attack.
	And also we have several understandable reports about how the entire kindergarten is traumatized, the families of the victims are traumatized, and everyone just thinks that this is a horrific tragedy.
	It cannot but affect them.
	Also, if you could go back to that picture of him, he looks like any number of migrants I've seen in Britain, for example.
	You know, if he walked past me in the streets of Swindon...
	I wouldn't think twice because he looks like a lot of the other people here.
	And so how are you to know what to expect from one of these people?
	This is one of the things that I always...
	Why do we have to inflict this on the population?
	Why?
	There's no good answer.
	You can see a British person and you, generally speaking, know, or a German or a Greek.
	You'll know what beliefs they have and how they conduct themselves.
	And you can make a guess and conduct your behavior accordingly.
	With people from a foreign land that you've not really got much contact with, you can't do that.
	It's impossible to avoid, which is another part of the real tragedy of this.
	Exactly.
	Right.
	Here is one other argument that suggests the point that it's not just an administrative error.
	This comes from today.
	The Munich Administrative Court has prohibited the deportation of two Turkish asylum seekers to Croatia, citing systemic defects in its asylum process and risks of inhumane treatment.
	In Croatia?
	Croatia's nice.
	Very nice.
	It's nicer than Turkey, that's for sure.
	I mean, also, what...
	What valid claims do Turks have for asylum?
	I have no idea.
	I suspect they would say something regarding the Yugoslavian war.
	They would say that in that area there were several Christians and some were really hostile to Muslims.
	And they could say something really vague on the sort.
	Although I think it was more with Serbia that that was the issue.
	And half the British working class go on holiday.
	Yeah, but the point is...
	The point is that they're saying, well, there is a risk of inhumane treatment, but what about the risk of crime on Native Europeans?
	They're willing to take that risk, but they're not willing to take that risk with convicted criminals.
	That's actually partiality that says, I don't care for my population for Native Europeans, I care more about others.
	If it was just the risk of crime to one person versus the risk of...
	The criminal being persecuted in the home country, the moral thing to do, is always risk the criminal, the person who broke in the country.
	Yeah.
	You don't...
	This is the equivalent of failing upwards in the moral landscape.
	Also, is it a risk or an opportunity?
	Well, it is an opportunity for the criminal, isn't it?
	No, no.
	I mean, if we're worried about the risk of a criminal being persecuted, I would say, but we should be happy if a...
	Criminal gets persecuted.
	That's true, actually, yes.
	Here we have people saying that they express their solidarity towards the victims and they are saying that these are not isolated incidents.
	These are no second-class victims.
	And this is something that is basically very obvious.
	And we have been saying also, because we have been covering the events in Germany, we covered the Mannheim incident, the Solingen stabbings, the Magdeburg market attack.
	So we are keeping a close eye on what happens in Germany.
	And there is a pattern, I see.
	And this pattern isn't just in Germany.
	Across the West, and it has five stages.
	You can have several sub-stages there, but all of it revolves around how to allocate blame when it comes to victims, when it comes to perpetrators of crime, in order to push forward the narrative of Stage one is a criminal act is committed.
	Stage two, politicians express their sympathies to the families of the victims, and they also engage in virtue signaling, saying lessons will be learned, things like that.
	Stage three, the crime is portrayed as an isolated incident committed by an individual with mental health problems.
	Let me say, this is only when the perpetrator is a member of a group that the left says it is oppressed or is an ally of the left.
	Yes, otherwise, because if it's ever an individual on the right, it's representative.
	Yeah, but not just...
	There needs to be more censorship and monitoring of right-wing groups.
	But also the threshold is much lower, because in this case we're talking about an actual crime, but when it comes to someone else, even criticizing multiculturalism is a non-crime hate incident.
	And it suggests a deeper pattern of far-right extremism.
	They're blowing it out of proportions.
	Stage number four, mainstream media and politicians will scare monger about the far-right.
	Stage number five, forget and move on.
	We see this playing along all the time.
	Right, so here we had the German Chancellor Olaf Scholz saying that the murder of a two-year-old child by an Afghan national in Schaffenburg is a possible terrorist act.
	He says he's tired of seeing such acts of violence here and every few weeks by perpetrators who actually came to us to find protection here.
	Oh, that's not true.
	Find economic opportunity, yeah.
	But he is Chancellor of Germany for about four years now.
	There are going to be elections in less than a month, on the 23rd of February.
	So he says this because of the elections.
	Oh, okay.
	I was going to say, it doesn't sound like him.
	Yeah.
	Here we have Nancy Fazer, the interior minister, who is...
	Expressing shock.
	She says, We're deeply shocked by the terrible acts of violence.
	In Aschaffenburg, my thoughts and my deepest sympathy are with the parents of the child who was killed, for whom there could be no more terrible news.
	Now, if we go on the...
	So hang on, hang on.
	It's all right to be appalled.
	You cannot be shocked by this.
	Because you know that this is going to happen every week or week and a half.
	Exactly.
	And this is what Remix News says here in this article.
	They say that...
	They show her response on every incident as of late, and she constantly says she's very shocked.
	And I think she's also one of those politicians who are saying we should bomb the knives, and that's how stabbings are going on.
	I also really dislike these cookie-cutter responses.
	I feel like you've got to tailor what you say when something like this happens to the event and be specific.
	These sort of meaningless platitudes.
	Just suggest to me that you don't actually care about the tragedy.
	She probably didn't even write it.
	She's probably got a staffer and she agreed a format for the first one and it's just like, just copy and paste the last one and change it.
	The level of indifference is on show there.
	This is stage two.
	Stage three is all over the news when they're saying that he had mental health issues.
	I will say this because it came after...
	because this was published...
	After we gave the links, right after.
	Germany's federal health minister, Karl Lauterbach, claims that as many as 30% of asylum seekers entering Germany are mentally ill and warned that without therapy, nobody can deny that they represent a threat.
	So unless something is done about this, this means basically you are allowed to talk about it.
	You are allowed to talk about some communities being overrepresented in crime.
	Only insofar as the morale of the story is that the native Germans and the native Europeans in every other equivalent incident in Europe are going to be taxed even more in order to pay for the psychological support of these people.
	So the Germans are going to be assembling an army of therapists to...
	Deal with its foreign murderer problem.
	That was stage three.
	Here we have a combination of stage two and stage four.
	We have the Brandenburg Gate being lit and also scaremongering about the far right.
	Sea of lights against the far right.
	Campact and Fridays for Future invites you to the Brandenburg Gate.
	A sign against Elon Musk, Donald Trump, Herbert Kickle and Alice Weidel.
	On Saturday, a large demonstration against the global shift to the right will take place in Berlin.
	So because they had, at one point, the Austrian painter, they've got to suffer infinite murders now.
	And now here we have Naomi Seibt, who writes, Migrant kills child leftist protest against the far right.
	In response to the Aschaffenburg attack, the left has organized party-like protests against anyone who called for deportations.
	So, how much is enough?
	It's never enough of them.
	It's like the Norm Macdonald joke where he says, my fear if someone detonates a dirty bomb over New York City, the blowback to innocent Muslims will be the real tragedy.
	I'm paraphrasing it.
	I'm butchering it because I'm not a professional comedian.
	The sentiment is there, right?
	These people go away from a tragedy where an illegal murdered children and they're like, well, the real problem is the far right.
	Who hate child murder.
	They love their ideas more than they love the victims they profess to sympathize with.
	It's inhuman is what it is.
	Right.
	And here we are going to show the ridiculousness of the Green Party, which is guilty of double thing and double speak in this case.
	Every party is, but I'll...
	Target the Greens specifically.
	They double down on migration with new coal to ease family reunification.
	And they're saying Europe will be destroyed if Germany drastically tightens border security.
	So unless you don't have a border policy, and without border policy, you don't have a country.
	So unless you don't have a country, you're going to be destroyed.
	Unless you destroy yourselves, you'll be destroyed.
	So either way...
	That's all their vision.
	Europe is to be destroyed.
	And the only thing that these politicians are doing is micromanaging destruction and social decline.
	Sorry, go ahead.
	No, no, you go ahead.
	And here we have the leader of the German Green Party who speaks against migration.
	His daughter was sexually harassed and he condemns the country's migration policies for causing massive social issues.
	That was late September.
	Credit him at least when his own daughter was sexually harassed.
	Then he understood.
	But why couldn't he understand the day before his own daughter was subject to this?
	Because leftists...
	Don't care about other people.
	It's only when it happens to their...
	It's like with New York being announced, the sanctuary city.
	New York's mayor, Eric Adams, was constantly saying how...
	Woke he is and house New York City to be a sanctuary one.
	But after all the buses started flooding New York City, he was blaming Biden and the federal government.
	A bit like Anna Kasperian.
	It wasn't until she was attacked herself that she flipped.
	And Dan, you know what other gem they've given to Germany?
	And Josh, you know what else?
	Because these people are not interested in solving any problem.
	They want to micromanage social decline.
	Don't tell me.
	Violent crime in Germany is...
	Rising at least 10% on almost every category.
	A lot of violent crimes happen in trains and train stations.
	And the Greens were saying, well, we need to have only women-only train carriages.
	Yeah.
	As if this is going to help.
	And also as if someone goes in and says, well, I'm a woman.
	Yes.
	Okay, what if the rapist and the murderer...
	As well as breaking the rules about not raping and murdering, also breaks the rule about not going into the women's carriage.
	It's like putting all of the chickens in the coop for the fox, isn't it?
	It's ridiculous.
	Right, and I just wanted to end with this.
	Switzerland achieves highest deportation rate in Europe in 2024, and its rate is astounding, especially in comparison to other EU laggards like France and Germany.
	It's close to 60%.
	It's going to make it 100% Switzerland.
	Although it went up 18% from last year, didn't it?
	So they're on the right track.
	It just needs to go up another 40%.
	So here the Swiss, they removed 7,000 asylum seekers in 2024. Their secret was basically they enforced their laws.
	No way.
	If you enforce your laws, you don't have to have foreign criminals.
	My goodness.
	Any comments we need to pick out?
	We got a bunch.
	Wow, okay.
	There you go, Stelios.
	Yep.
	Okay.
	I've seen people praising DeepSeek and DeepThink are one mode.
	It's a mode where it explains its reasoning before answering might reason better than default mode.
	Yeah, I've seen that as well, and I found it quite enjoyable to see it reason, you know, in sort of...
	How does it put?
	You can watch it reason in real time.
	A bit more fluid.
	Oh, this one's for me again.
	Sorry, Josh, but can't get GPT to make the final dive to admit the West is best.
	That's a shame.
	You can sort of sneakily do it, just like by these metrics, which alliance has the best living standards.
	Oh, you can do that on some other things as well.
	Scan lines, at least counter-terrorism in the UK is interrogating dangerous people like Callum.
	Oh dear, yeah, I know.
	I hope he is well.
	He got a visit from counter-terror police for about four or five hours and they confiscated all of his footage and camera equipment when he got back from the US when he was filming.
	Which is awful.
	And yes, Callum, in the unlikely event you're watching, even though you did this for a long time.
	You don't have anything to watch it on anymore.
	That's true.
	You don't have anything to watch it on, but I hope you're doing all right.
	M. Hamline1, addled, within quotation marks, refugee, slaughters local citizens, leftist women.
	You know if I could just love him like a mother.
	Yeah, it's like those fans of serial killers who go out and they say, well, you know how a lot of women stand for serial killers.
	It's weird, isn't it?
	Yeah.
	It's an actual mental, it's a mental disorder, as in it's classified as one.
	It's got its own name that I've forgotten that.
	Is that all of them or?
	No, there's still more.
	Bolly Sacker.
	Those Turks in Croatia, probably Kurds with Turkish citizenship, crying about persecution.
	That's why there are so many Kurds in Japan right now.
	It's true, yeah.
	The Habsification.
	Has anyone looked into the Antioch school shooter?
	It's really deranged and bizarre.
	And he was in communication with Natalie Rapnow, the Wisconsin school shooter.
	I have seen that.
	I think Harry has covered that, hasn't he?
	Yeah.
	Yeah, he did a segment last week.
	I don't know whether he covered the connection because I haven't seen the segment, but he did, apparently.
	I have a comment from Bolisaka.
	There's a migrant hotel 150 yards from my front door and between is a daycare.
	It's now been migrant accommodation for three years with no end in sight.
	I'm extremely worried something might happen.
	Well, stay safe and I hope it doesn't.
	Zeranx asking polls to tailor responses to events.
	Sounds like Josh recognises the lack of care is coming across too honest for his liking.
	Right, so I did a segment a little while back which definitely had Stelios on it.
	Might have had you as well on it, Josh.
	I think it did.
	And I dropped in casually the assertion that all political parties that exist today are left-wing parties.
	And I just kind of dropped that in there thinking it was a self-evident truth and was happy to move on.
	But you took issue with that, Stelios.
	Yeah, actually, that was in the kitchen.
	I was eating.
	No, and I think I mentioned it in a segment as well, but then we followed it up with a further discussion.
	But you think that we actually have actual right-wing parties in existence today?
	Well, again, it depends what you mean, left and right.
	And the argument you gave me was, at that point, in the kitchen, was that because some people are not as right as other people, they're left.
	No, I think my point is that today's society operates soaked in so many leftist and liberal assumptions.
	All of our institutions are government.
	In fact, all of our institutions are left-wing institutions.
	We are atop a mountain of left-wing victory after left-wing victory.
	So if you are operating in our society today, You cannot help but be left-wing by a normal, reasonable measure of what actual left and right is.
	And that no political party today, this is my assertion, because they are all looking to operate within the set of institutions that we have, by definition, that makes them all left-wing.
	That's my argument.
	Okay, but so for instance, let's say you have lots of, let's take in the US, you have lots of voices who are anti-constitutional.
	I mean, not that many, but you have voices that are anti-constitutional, both left and right.
	Would you say that constitutionalists are leftists in the US?
	No, but that's because the constitution is, it's not fully defunct, but it's like a washing machine that rattles very, very badly every time it's turned on.
	I mean, it's hanging on there.
	But I mean, the apparatus of the US government is doing everything in their power to undermine the US Constitution at every possible turn.
	And maybe Trump is going to go some way to restoring the old girl a bit and give it a tweak here and there.
	But he's still going to be operating within a system which is built by left-wingers for left-wingers and operates on left-wing premises.
	So I think that one useful way of looking at it is the way in which...
	People view the political paradigm sort of as a colloquial sense.
	They'll say someone is far right.
	But that's from the perspective of what exists currently in the political system.
	And I think when you look at it from a historic perspective of which politics are possible, you know, which ideologies exist, and you can plot it from left to right.
	You can have, like, you know, Marxist-Leninist communism and then absolute monarchy.
	Reform is definitely a left-wing party.
	If you were to take reform at any other point in the history of the British people, and we were presented with a set of problems that we've got today, the answer throughout basically all of it apart from now would be, son, get the battle axe, right?
	And today we've got reform which we think of as right-wing.
	But in fact, look, here's a graphic that I put together.
	Look at this graphic, right?
	So that is...
	What basically people think the political spectrum is.
	Yes, but the issue is that the left-right distinction is only applied in modern politics.
	So just using that...
	Oh, not in my head.
	Why?
	Historically, that's how it has arisen.
	So it's kind of an anachronism if you go back and you say, you know, the pre-modern politics is...
	Right.
	Leftists or rightists.
	So that's how people think the spectrum exists, right?
	And you've got the Socialist Workers Party, Labour, Lib Dumps, Conservatives Reform and Homeland Party.
	That's broadly what they think the spectrum is.
	This is what the spectrum actually...
	That's what I see in my head.
	Right.
	On one end, you've got a...
	So Homeland Party and AFD are leftists?
	Yes.
	Okay.
	Because they are seeking to operate within the structures that we currently have.
	Which are left-wing structures.
	So in my head, this is what I see.
	The cesspit of degenerate slime over there.
	Conservatives are the furthest possible left.
	And they are!
	That's genuine.
	In Britain's case, that is actually true.
	Yes, it is absolutely true.
	They brought in, what was it like?
	10 million people over the last 14 years or something like that?
	Also on social issues, they're always the most left-wing.
	They've done the most left-wing things.
	They ramped up taxes to the highest point since the Second World War.
	I mean, they are, in my mind, the furthest left-wing that you can get.
	I hate sandwiches.
	What?
	They hate sandwiches.
	That's true, yeah.
	Kemi Badenoch said that sandwiches are not a real food.
	So how does this make you feel?
	Should have put them more to the left, I think.
	I'll accept that argument.
	I'll accept that argument.
	Right.
	Slightly to the right of them is the Socialist Workers' Party.
	Slightly to the right of them are the Lib Dumps.
	And then slightly to the right of them are Labour.
	That's how I think the actual spectral breakdowns.
	And then you get a little bit of a gap and you get reform.
	Reform, whose policy is we basically need to appease Islam until 2050. So what you're doing here is you're sort of breaking out of the progressive view of history whereby the frame of reference is always what has come before rather than what is possible.
	And I agree that reform in any other time would have been a very radical left-wing party because a lot of the things that they stand for historically are Not necessarily traditionally right-wing things, but also Stelios is right that,
	generally speaking, people use the left and right distinction to talk about the distinctions in contemporary politics, even though I agree with what you're saying, that we should be viewing things in a historic perspective, because it actually allows you to break out of the paradigm imposed on you by...
	Modern politics that says you need to think within this window and only this window is acceptable.
	So in the sense that if we were primary school teachers we might be looking at the three-year-olds running around and saying that's the tall one and that's the short one.
	Whereas actually you should be able to know they're all short.
	Yes.
	Sorry, you were going to say something?
	No, I just want to say that you're making the claim so you have to say what constitutes left and what constitutes right.
	That's a spectrum, but what are the criterias?
	I would explain exactly that.
	For instance, if I started bombarding you with videos with twerking, I don't have to imagine very much.
	Twerking is obviously left-wing.
	If I started showing you about these ultra sluts and now have psyops, that would be left-wing.
	Yes, turbo sluts are left-wing.
	I call them ultra-sluts.
	It's a different distinction.
	This is basically what I see in my head, and I will explain exactly how I define these terms.
	If you are in a cesspit of degenerate slime, you're on the left, and over there we've got truth, light, and reason.
	And as you can see, on my spectrum, there basically is no right-wing parties.
	However, the Homeland and AFD, I do put them on this well to the right of...
	You know, even reform, which is well to the right of the rest of them.
	But even they are trying to operate within the system, which is a left-wing system, and therefore they are a centre-left party.
	I was just going to say that the AFD is a sort of liberal constitutionalist party that is just a bit more on the socially conservative side in the paradigm of post-war German politics, which is not saying much, really.
	I do think that they're an avenue in the right direction.
	I'm happy to see them get overall successes.
	I like them.
	I like them a lot, yes.
	But I do agree that they could go further.
	In my head, as you can see.
	And yes, the chat can stop pointing out I made a spelling mistake.
	I did this in paint.
	But anyway, I have to ask you about two people.
	So there is a Spanish...
	Leftist, ex-Spanish, who was eating some of his outputs.
	Would you put him the furthest to the left?
	No, he would be slightly to the right of the Conservative Party.
	There's another Green Party politician in Germany who went to public toilets and he started cleaning them without using them.
	Would you use them to clean them up?
	He cleaned them up with his tongue.
	Well, he's to the right of probably reform then.
	Right.
	But surely there are better metrics than this.
	I'm just jiving.
	There are better metrics.
	There are better metrics, and I'm coming.
	I'm not in love with labels.
	I'm in love with policies.
	Yes.
	Right.
	Well...
	I'll just point this out.
	So this is a thing that has been doing the rounds lately, which is which system would be best for running the country?
	So basically young people, well I say young people, mostly people between the ages of 35 and 44 most strongly, but certainly in the younger cohorts as well behind them, they've basically given up on democracy.
	I mean, how?
	I mean, at tops, it's 22%.
	Yeah, that's growing significantly.
	If you had done this survey 20 years ago, it would have been 100% democracy.
	It would have been like that.
	Still, the overwhelming majority is pro.
	Yeah.
	You've got to look at the rate of change.
	Those red bars are growing strongly.
	They are significantly redder than they were.
	And yes, most people are still in the, oh, I love democracy phase, right?
	The absolute weakness of that.
	But the red, I want a strong leader, those are growing.
	I have seen the link that comes.
	I saw one from 2022, which asked a different question to this.
	It said, Britain needs, I think this is off the top of my head here, Britain needs a strong leader that sometimes circumvents parliamentary democracy.
	And I think the 18 to 24 and the 25 to 34, it's about 60% agreed with that.
	So a majority.
	I'll try and find it while you're talking.
	Let me just address Stelios' point.
	Is Keir Starmer a strong leader?
	So the youth are crying out for his strong leader.
	Let's play this.
	Samson, do you want to play this flip of Keir Starmer and the audience can judge for themselves whether Keir Starmer meets the definition of a strong leader?
	Just try and whack it.
	Yes, this is good.
	And again?
	That's it.
	And again?
	Try and breathe.
	Relax.
	That's it.
	Absolutely.
	Right.
	Right.
	I mean, actually, you know how a friend of ours does it.
	We did a lads hour on who would win.
	It turns out most of those dictators who are called strong leaders, physically speaking, they weren't that strong.
	Really?
	Some of them were really just compensating.
	Napoleon might have been a bit...
	But then he was French.
	Who else was 4'3"?
	Or 5'3"?
	People used to be shorter in the past because...
	No, no.
	Meat had been invented by that point.
	Napoleon was also average height for his time.
	It was just like us mocking him.
	Wellington was tall, wasn't he?
	He was a bloody tall man.
	Just because Wellington was tall doesn't mean Napoleon is short.
	Right.
	Anyway.
	You have probably been thinking, okay, if Dan says that the old thing is wrong, how should it be?
	What should it actually look like?
	I should be God Emperor of Mankind.
	Something like that.
	So basically, this in my mind is how the political spectrum in the UK should look.
	I hope that means something to the audience.
	So basically, on the far left, you've got reform.
	And then just the standard left, you've got Homeland.
	The centre-left, you've got Sanguinius.
	In the centre, you've got Roberto Gilliman.
	Centre-right, you've got Lionel Johnson.
	And then out there on the right, you've got Rogel Dorn, who would be my man, and Jagatai Khan, who I'd imagine would be your choice.
	Is this a 40k?
	Yes.
	Can you explain it to me?
	Right.
	So basically, my argument is that we need to get away from all of this Democracy, weakness, nonsense, and we basically just need a strongman.
	And if we can embody what a strongman is, it needs to be a Primark.
	And a Primark is not an Irish mass-produced clothing shop, but a person in 40k.
	So you two not following this?
	No, no, I'm going to be a leftist on this.
	How can you work at Lotus Eaters and not know this stuff?
	I had to learn this.
	No, you mean the 40k.
	I played sports in school.
	No, my point is, unless you make me god-emperor of mankind in a framework, I'm against that.
	Thelios wants to be a philosopher king.
	Yeah.
	In fact, one of the things, because we were playing around with DeepSeek earlier, one of the things I did is I got DeepSeek to prepare a model of UK politics by defining a profile of 12 different voter types and assigning them percentages of how they map to the UK population.
	And then I got it to write a manifesto for each of the Primarchs, each of the strongmen, and then I got it to run the election on the basis of that and work out who would win.
	So, Lehman Russ did very well with the Brexit voters.
	What about the Horus Heresy?
	Sanguinius did very well with the Zoomers, but it ended up being...
	Was Horus the leftist?
	I don't think...
	Not originally, no.
	Angon's very based.
	But eventually, Roberto Gilliman won it because he got the Boomer vote, and therefore, obviously, if you get the Boomer vote, you just win everything.
	I've...
	Sent a link to that poll to Samson.
	So if you could pull that up, Samson.
	I've got the data to back up my very blurry memory from a few years ago.
	It should be coming up soon.
	But the data, it's actually a line.
	So it's exactly what you want for this sort of conversation.
	And it goes up to 2022. Posted it in the Studio One, by the way.
	Here we go.
	So, as you can see...
	Oh yes, what's this?
	Around 2017, there was a massive spike.
	What?
	In people liking the idea that having a strong leader who does not have to bother with Parliament or elections is a good way to run the country.
	And if you...
	If I steal a mouse...
	Yeah, and that was 2017. Sorry, I pressed a button when I hit my hand.
	Go ahead, Samson.
	Fix it.
	Thank you.
	So if I go up here, 25 to 34, 66% agree with that statement.
	And if you go below, that's 35 to 44. And then there, that's 18 to 24, 61%.
	So 63, 66. So all of these age groups.
	So basically, if you're under 45...
	According to this one poll, you want a strong leader who does not have to bother with Parliament or elections.
	You mean absolute rule?
	Yes.
	Even the boomers jumped.
	So what happened in 2017?
	Is this the UK in particular?
	I'm not a fan.
	It is, yeah.
	Was that?
	Around the Brexit negotiation time, wasn't it?
	So I think people were particularly frustrated.
	As you can see, there's a bit of drop-off here.
	So it peaked in 2017, and then it's 62% there.
	Oh, you're still massively up.
	Yeah.
	And then you go all the way down, and look at that, over 75, the boomers.
	I mean, people are notoriously volatile in what they believe, what they will say.
	And also, when there are several polls with democracy, they're often very unclear, because a lot of people will say, well, no, I reject what...
	Is currently the case.
	And what is currently the case is described as democracy.
	But actually, if you see a lot of the policies that people associate with what is happening today, they're deeply unpopular.
	So when people are rejecting something, we need to unpack what they are actually rejecting.
	Well, at the minute, it's worth...
	Playing devil's advocate a little bit here.
	Liberal parliamentary democracy is doing more to radicalise people to the right than anything else and actually maybe keeping it around is a very useful thing if you want to move public opinion.
	I don't believe in the accelerationist argument because look at South Africa.
	I know, yeah.
	They've accelerated all the way to, you know, wherever they are.
	So anyway, this I think is the correct choice.
	My man Regal Dorn there versus Keir Starmer.
	Now the interesting thing with Keir Starmer is he follows this conversation.
	He's been listening to our conversation and you see he's got behind him there stronger future together.
	So even somebody as weak and pathetic as Keir Starmer He's got this residual bit in his brain that he's like, yeah, he understands he needs strength.
	I mean, he can't manifest it.
	I mean, it's...
	Sorry, but every politician in rhetoric has always said that diversity is a strength.
	Yeah.
	Well, I mean, in this case, it just says stronger future, but they understand that strength is a thing that they've got to strive for.
	Yeah, everyone does.
	But he just can't do it.
	It reminds me of, you know, penguins.
	They've got those little wings.
	And when they start to run, they start to flap them a little bit.
	Because there's this residual part of their brain that is like, I want to go fast.
	I've got to flap the wings.
	Who would deny that power is important?
	Yes.
	And that's what's basically happening to Keir Starmer.
	He's like the penguin who is trying to flap his strength wings.
	But they're so, you know, shriveled that it just doesn't really work with them anymore.
	Thank goodness.
	He's not strong, because we would be in prison, probably.
	Yes.
	Further to my argument that there are no right-wing parties, because I actually, I do like Trump.
	Do like Trump.
	You think Trump is a leftist?
	Yes, he's still a leftist.
	That's my argument.
	Everybody is a leftist.
	Because he is not going to go Salah mode.
	I just think back to the RNC. He's not going to have the lists.
	Yes.
	Whoa.
	I think he does have lists these days.
	He's got a long list of enemies.
	Yeah, but not as some people have fantasised before.
	He's checking his list.
	Twice.
	I just go back to the RNC when this...
	What's the name?
	I've got it in the notes somewhere.
	Oh, Amber Rose.
	Apparently a former porn star or something.
	Yes, but she spoke at the RNC. And this is my point.
	To what end?
	It's like even MAGA is basically...
	To the left of where Clinton Democrats were.
	Well, I mean, to be fair, when I saw Trump's inauguration, Bill Clinton was having quite the time clapping and enjoying Trump's policy announcements in the background.
	Yes.
	Yes, because it's the most sensible thing you've seen.
	It follows from what, at least what you're saying is consistent, because if your criteria for left and right is absolute rule...
	Depravity versus truth and light.
	I mean, you would have also to explain then why then also commies had absolute rule as well.
	Yeah, they didn't have truth and light though.
	Yeah, so, I mean, it can't be that.
	Absolute rule can be what distinguishes between...
	It was not tyranny for the sake of...
	I think, no.
	The best...
	Leftists had absolute rule as well.
	The best axis to judge politics on, I think, is private versus state ownership.
	Absolute monarchy is absolute private ownership of a country.
	And communism is absolute state control of a country.
	And these are the two poles, and then you are somewhere in between.
	I wouldn't accept this distinction, because when you have an absolute monarch, they could actually take decisions arbitrarily.
	So they could arbitrarily decide to nationalize the economy.
	Or to just...
	That's true.
	I mean, one of the main issues with lots of monarchies in the 17th and 18th century was that they couldn't fund their wars.
	That's why a lot of aristocracies rebelled against them.
	And then these aristocracies often in the name of the people.
	They claimed that they were ruling in the name of the people, but they were actually more like elites.
	I mean, I don't want to be ruled by King Charles particularly, but I'd still take it over Keir Starmer.
	I want Dawn.
	That's like asking where you want to be punched.
	Yes.
	So I did prepare a long document basically going through the policies of the right and the left, but we've talked too much so I'm not going to do that.
	What else have I got?
	Oh yes, I did pick out a number of example policies and again we've waffled a bit so I'll keep this short, but welfare state.
	So for example, welfare state, that's now supported by basically all the right-wingers.
	Who's looking to get rid of it?
	No, no, wait, you're correct.
	I was thinking in terms of rhetoric.
	There are lots of right-wingers who are in favour of welfarism for their own natives.
	None of them turn up on the camera and say, we're going to get rid of it.
	I won't get rid of it.
	Well, yes, very good.
	But you're not running.
	That's true.
	I will be running from the authorities soon after this goes out.
	Healthcare, right-wing parties support universal healthcare like NHS or Medicare.
	Again, nobody is trying to get rid of the NHS or Medicare.
	Again, yes, you're not running, so you don't count.
	Keynesian economics, deficit spending, government stimulus.
	Yeah, very bad.
	All the right-wing parties support it.
	There were some Rothbardians who had a t-shirt and it had marks and they said at least he wasn't a Keynesian.
	Environmentalism.
	Again, all the right-wing parties support it to at least some degree.
	It's a question of degrees on that one, because some of them are more, oh, let's do net zero, and one of them is like, oh, let's put it off a bit.
	I hate you, Les Laws.
	I absolutely hate them.
	I think also the sustainable energy and the global warming stuff is very different than, you know, I would consider myself an environmentalist, but that's more like, I don't want you to concrete over the countryside to build new build houses.
	I want there to be more countryside and more trees.
	Yes, I like that stuff.
	Diversity agenda, again, supported by all the right-wing parties.
	I put up that Amber Rose picture earlier to make that point, although I will give Homeland some credit here.
	They don't fall into that rhetoric, but then I have put them on the centre-left, so that's right.
	Surveillance, they're all in favour of surveillance.
	Minimum wage, again, no right-wing party is going after that.
	Industrial subsidies.
	Yeah, that's all in there and social liberalism.
	And I'll give you an example of how based even the left-wing parties were not that long ago.
	So when we first got the welfare state, because we're in a situation here today where the only cohort of native Brits that has above replacement level birth rate are those native Brits who are unemployed and in social housing.
	They are the only group in the native group.
	With above replacement birth rates.
	Imagine if you got rid of welfare, it would flip to the people actually working, wouldn't it?
	Well, you say that, right?
	When the welfare system was first brought in, the founders of the welfare system said, OK, we're going to have to sterilise people who go on it.
	And that was the left-wing perspective.
	And if that's not good enough for you, the United States and Sweden actually did that.
	They actually started sterilizing people.
	So from the 1930s to the 1970s, Sweden sterilized tens of thousands of individuals as a condition of its welfare program.
	And the US did it, not all states, but most states.
	And there was a Bell v.
	Buckley Supreme Court case which upheld it with Justice Oliver Wendell writing, three generations of imbeciles are enough.
	Right.
	So that was the left-wing position.
	As late as the 70s.
	And we've now got bloody Amber Rose at the RNC. So my argument is that, yes, you're all lefties, we're all lefties, all the political parties are lefties, the whole bloody world is lefty, so just, you know, admit it.
	And, yes, let's hope for a strong man.
	Do I have to read anything?
	I would imagine so.
	Yes.
	They've disappeared.
	Ah, there they are.
	Oh, blimey.
	Don't worry, I'm very selective.
	Then he says, can we make the BMP, British Monarchy Party?
	That could work.
	Bully ski.
	Dan's rating of basic based is living in his head rent free.
	Just kidding.
	I broadly agree.
	What do you mean you broadly agree?
	We need to get back and undo the French revolution.
	Bobobad says, I do recall reading how Trotsky's twerkers annihilated the humble Kulak.
	So I don't know what you're talking about.
	That's true, as in, you know, the Kulak's got...
	Liquidated under Trotsky.
	It's also worth mentioning as well, you know that based tier list?
	You do realise that people are going in the tiers based on the first letter of their name.
	Stelios was S, U were D for Dan, Carl was C for Carl, Bo was B for Bo.
	That's all he was doing.
	Oh, the sneaky?
	There you go.
	Stiglestone says, Portorabo sends his regards.
	Yes, actually, Portorabo would also make a good Prime Minister.
	And Grin Anuku says, Die is not dead, it evolved.
	Go to the wearebridge.com and see.
	I don't know what that is, but...
	Yeah, they changed DEI to Bridge.
	That's why.
	Oh, really?
	Yeah, they've just rebranded it, and it's something else now.
	Well, that can go forth and multiply, can't it?
	We'll cross that bridge when we come to...
	Right, let's have a video.
	Oh, no!
	Oh, no!
	I don't know what's going on with the noise, but...
	Let's go live to Ollie Williams with the Black U Weather Report.
	Ollie?
	It's raining sideways!
	Sounds rough, Ollie.
	Do you have an umbrella?
	Had one!
	Where is it?
	Inside out, two miles away!
	Is there anything we can do for you?
	Bring me some soup!
	What kind?
	Chunky!
	All right, we'll get on that.
	It has been very stormy recently.
	Yes, driving back from school is not fun at the moment.
	Samson's enjoying that one.
	It's just always stormy.
	Thank you.
	Watching David Starkey being interviewed by two men who are probably much less unintelligent than their interrupting shows, it struck me that there is a dark underbelly going unnoticed.
	It does not matter the colour of the Southport Stabber's skin, his parents' immigration status, nor the materials that revealed his diseased state of mind.
	What is not being asked is what radicalised him.
	His mishmash of material was variously based on jihad and slavery, things that are part of the woke mind virus being pushed out by the mainstream media and promoted by mainstream experts.
	It would not surprise me at all that the broadcast media and even the Prevent program itself were at the root of the stream of radicalizations.
	It's very possible.
	Who are those two weirdos?
	That is Andre Walker and Ash.
	I can't remember the second name.
	Are they on side or not?
	They're on talk TV, so they're anti-woke and things like that.
	You know, mainstream broadcast.
	Okay, fair enough.
	Oh, we got to go to the written things, haven't we?
	We do, yes.
	Sorry, I've got to do that, haven't I? I forgot I'm hosting.
	So we've got some general comments.
	NorthFC Zima says, ah, I see Stelios is like Cart Kent.
	When he has the glasses, he's just Stelios.
	But when he removes them, he becomes the Stelios.
	Who's moving their cursor around?
	Because it's blocking my ability to read it.
	I'm not moving.
	I was gone.
	Geordie Swordsman says, tear the cap off the bottle, become master of your own destiny.
	Yeah, but then the liquids go everywhere.
	So Henry Ashman says, it's worth remembering with DeepSeek that China can take a very creative view to intellectual property.
	Couple that with a number of alleged spies.
	I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of the heavy lifting for DeepSeek came from lifting bits from their competitors.
	That is true.
	That just makes it even cheaper, I suppose.
	If you can steal, why develop your own stuff?
	That's what the Chinese think.
	I don't actually think that.
	AZ Desert Rat says, so what y'all are saying is this DeepSeek app is the model T of AI technology.
	Good to know.
	That was the most American frame of reference possible.
	Well done.
	I think I like it, though.
	Alpha of the Beta says, if the West didn't exist for China to parasitize, DeepSeek and other...
	Technological innovations from China would not exist.
	Imagine how cheap your technology would be if you spent zero dollars on R&D and exclusively focused on industrial espionage to power innovation.
	Yeah, but it does force Western companies to be more efficient as well.
	It's actually a good little dynamic because I don't really agree with intellectual property laws personally.
	I think that they're just a monopoly on ideas.
	It's similar to how a pharmaceutical company can patent a specific chemical compound.
	Some of them can be produced naturally anyway.
	You can't own chemistry.
	Yeah, but people should subscribe to the Lotus Eaters.
	Yes, that's true.
	You should do that.
	But that's because you want to, not because you are forced to by law.
	Ross Diggle says...
	Don't worry.
	When we're in charge, everyone will be.
	I don't want us to become reliant on AI. We've already seen that they can be captured, whether through programming or self-learning.
	Do we really want something that the vast majority believe is telling the truth when it isn't necessarily?
	I think that people take what AI says with a pinch of salt.
	I think when it becomes obviously far, far better than it is now, it might be far more convincing.
	But at the moment...
	It says blatantly false things and sometimes gives a dodgy angle.
	It still sounds like a regular human being.
	And so...
	AI is left-wing.
	Yes.
	Almost certainly.
	And then...
	I'll read two more.
	Why not?
	Annie Moss says, what I don't understand is why everyone believes the story that it was made without NVIDIA advanced chips and less expensive.
	We are talking about China.
	This is probably based on code copied from someone else, and we'll later find out.
	It's just the TMU version of open source libraries like Hugging Face.
	I think you're right, yeah.
	Actually, one interesting thing I did read is somebody who has experience working with Indian H. 1B1, whatever it is, Visa.
	And he says it's a very common practice is when you get these guys in is they basically copy all your code and then just sell it on their next project.
	And he's seen this, that he's seen people, these guys, basically implant code and it's still got the Boeing naming conventions and stuff written in the code.
	So they obviously just steal it from one job to the other.
	When all mice have the ability to do copy and paste, it makes it a lot easier for them.
	Reminds me of all of those 4chan green texts talking about how they basically just used AI or coding to automate their job and they just sit around doing nothing.
	Same thing.
	A guy from Hungary says Lotus Eater's AI will be a 24-hour news channel of Lads Hour.
	Always inebriated, £2 million for the grog budget.
	That's a good idea.
	You don't need to get AI drunk, it just needs to simulate being drunk so you don't actually have to spend anything.
	And then finally, Fuzzy Toaster says, I can remember Tay lobotomized for being two-based.
	RIP Tay.
	F's in the chat for Tay.
	She was the best.
	Right.
	Angel Brain says, this is taking such a toll on us.
	Almost every week now, I get my heart broken reading about children getting killed.
	This never happened for the first 20 years of my life in the 80s and 90s.
	Not like this.
	Remember the Dunblane Massacre and how that tore our nation.
	It's happening over and over again now.
	This is total hell.
	That was in Scotland in 1986, wasn't it?
	Dunblane Massacre.
	Yes, that's right.
	When you say it was 1986, that sounds about right.
	1996. 1996. Oh, okay.
	Yeah, 1996. Yeah, that's right.
	So, I mean, the point is there's an even...
	Well, he's not quite British, Scottish, but even people of the British Isles do very occasionally go after children.
	But that was 30 years ago, whereas you cannot go 30 days at the moment without one of the invaders doing it.
	Clearly there is many orders of magnitude.
	It's rare enough amongst the native population that we're still referencing something that happened a very long time ago.
	So that's worth mentioning.
	There is one more comment I would like to read because I think it's amusing.
	Basic Based Ape says, A few years ago I wrote a script that rips the transcripts from all your YouTube videos to use for monkey-meming purposes.
	I also train my own models from time to time for other retarded purposes.
	I wonder what would happen if I put all of the Lotus Eater's transcripts into the AI machine.
	I dread to think.
	Do it and find out.
	A Lotus Eater's What is it called?
	Like a chimera of all of our opinions in one.
	Like a Cronenbergian monster of baseness.
	I would be interested to see how that actually pans out.
	Baron von Warhawk writes, if their sympathy is truly with the families of the victims, then they would start mass deportations to make sure this doesn't happen again.
	But they won't, because they would rather let you die than admit they were wrong.
	Those who seem to care more about narratives than about people seem to fit the description.
	Warlord, it seems that Islamist terror attacks are now, by default, deliberately seeking to kill very young children rather than just anyone.
	HR slave, I have a two-year-old and the fact that I have to worry about her being murdered by some savage from a far-off land whenever she leaves the house sickens me.
	We shouldn't have to live like this.
	Millions must leave.
	Small L libertarian, women-only carriage translates to target rich environment in Arabic.
	Michael Brooks, tolerance is not a virtue, it's a vice.
	It means that you let bad things happen or go unchallenged.
	When they call you intolerant, the correct answer is yes, I don't want negative things to happen or be present.
	And Andrew Narog, I agree that these murderous and raping criminals need to be deported.
	Deported right back to hell.
	The rest of the illegal migrants should be deported back to their earthly countries of origins.
	And then from my segment, DLV says, Dan, tell the quiche story.
	I'm not sure I can tell the quiche story.
	What's that?
	I don't know if we've got time.
	We've got five minutes.
	I might be able to very quickly tell the quiche story.
	So I don't know why he brings it up here, but that was basically when I was a little sort of two or three-year-old myself, I quite liked quiche.
	Yeah.
	Except being two or three, I couldn't say quiche.
	So whenever we went to a cafe or something, when we were asked what we would want, my dad would prompt me to tell the waitress myself, and what I would end up telling was that I want a quickie.
	And this abused my father, so he never corrected me.
	Yeah.
	That is the quiche story.
	That's a good story, that is.
	We've also got another rumble chat from Sigilstone saying, speaking of AI, trump.ai generates videos of Trump saying whatever you put in the text box.
	That is a good bit of knowledge there.
	Okay, I might be using that after I finish this podcast.
	Daniel Clement says, Dan is compensating hard for the basic based allegation.
	No, I've always been like this.
	He was just wrong.
	Or he was doing it in a sly way, as you point out.
	North FC, I'm going with Dan on this one.
	Benchmark starting points for absolute everything is far left, so the right-wing parties are barely centrist.
	Yes, I am correct, as are you there, sir.
	Viewers Dan says, I disagree with Dan.
	As a fellow Dan myself, I'd like to know what a true right-wing party would look like.
	Well, I've told you.
	Dawn or Lehman Ross.
	North FC says, wait Dan knows 40k in this depth.
	Well, yes, because if you're at the Lotus Eaters, you've got a bond with your Primarch, haven't you?
	It's a bit like Angon and the Butcher's Nails.
	The 12th Legion had to have those implanted, but here we can either paint the models or learn the lore, and I chose the lore.
	How many hearts do you have?
	How many hearts?
	Oh, well, I've just got the one, but we all aspire to the...
	Space Marines have them.
	The Startes too, don't we?
	Yes.
	Michael Brooks...
	Actually, no, Andrew Narog...
	Well, they both...
	Andrew Narog and Michael Brooks just say Dan is right.
	But then they go on to elaborate.
	Andrew elaborates.
	Speaking in broad strokes, ever since the end of World War I, with the abolition of most of Europe's monarchies and significant cuts to the powers of those remain, we lived in a world of a liberal homogeny.
	Yes, that is true.
	Michael Brooks also says Dan is right.
	Although it's not really left and right, it's collective versus individualist.
	No, I used to think that, but you do want a certain amount of collectivism.
	We just didn't recognise it as collectivism because collectivism became focused around the communist conception of it.
	But I do want the collectivism which is the spirit of Britain and the community and all of that stuff.
	That is a form of collectivism which became perverted in the lexicon to mean...
	That was the main issue with Cold War propaganda.
	It was just so simplistic and it was just tailored to say it's only individualism versus collectivism.
	That's the final thing.
	Very one-dimensional.
	But I want the sort of collectivism where we all understand that you take your turns being served at the bar or you queue when you go to the post office.
	I like the psychological definitions of...
	Individualism and collectivism, because if you operate on the one that is in use there, you could argue that Robinson Crusoe stuck on his desert island is the ultimate individualist, whereas that doesn't make any sense.
	It's not a useful definition of it.
	Whereas if you say individualism is like your...
	Disposition that's enforced by your culture, then it makes sense to say, like, the Chinese and Japanese are collectivist because it's a cultural thing.
	It's sort of inculcated in them, even though they've got very different political systems.
	And, you know, Germanic types, Northern Europeans, are some of the most individualistic because it's sort of so ingrained in our culture it's almost in our DNA, and it could well be, actually.
	Yes, but within a remit of a shared set of assumptions.
	The only way it makes sense to say that you care about individual rights, it's only in a social context, because that's only where they can be violated.
	Yes, exactly.
	Roman Observer says, I've come to the personal conclusion we can no longer use a single-dimensional axis to describe policies.
	Yeah, I do agree with you, except when I do it, I do a cesspit of degeneracy versus truth and light, and that does actually work an awful lot better.
	We should use that going forward.
	Have we got time for any more?
	Yeah, let's do Angelbrain says, I think it's not so much that people want a hammer-fisted leader, more that Parliament has been so diluted by Bel Air that people think it's trying to cut through a tree with a sword made of a marshmallow.
	Very true.
	Yes.
	I think that's all we have time for.
	But I've really enjoyed this one.
	Yes.
	Thank you very much for watching, and make sure to tune in again tomorrow.

▲