Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 8, 2025 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:30:47

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #1160

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Music Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.
	Welcome to the podcast of The Lotus Eaters for Thursday, the 8th of May, 2025.
	I'm joined by Dan and Charlie Downs.
	Great to be here, Carl, as always.
	And today we are going to be talking about the kind of lack of radical action from the Trump administration.
	We've all been waiting for a lot of things.
	And, you know, you said a lot of stuff on day one, and we haven't got it.
	The post-woke left and where they can go from the position that they're in.
	And what we should do to counter them.
	And what our response should be to counter them.
	Do they have a lot of options?
	I think they do.
	And I think that they're going to be a far more powerful force than any of us are ready for.
	Oh, okay.
	That's interesting.
	Because I was looking at them, kind of scratching around in the dirt, looking for something to glom onto.
	And I wasn't very impressed.
	I wasn't worried about them.
	So that'll be interesting.
	And, of course, why we as solar men have got to rise up against the den mothers and overthrow the matriarchal hegemony of the cave.
	Did you watch 13th Warrior last night?
	No, no.
	Right, okay.
	No, but I basically got the entire film memorised.
	Oh, I see.
	Okay.
	Along with Master and Commander.
	Along with Master and Commander and many other base films.
	Before we go into it, we also mentioned, I mean, we did a shout-out yesterday for the lovely coasters and stuff, but just a reminder, you know, you lovely people, you send us stuff, and if you'd like to send us more stuff, we'd love that.
	Yeah, just to be clear, absolutely lovely slate coasters.
	Oh, very nice.
	Yeah, very nice.
	So thank you very much for this.
	Anyway, let's begin.
	So, I thought I'd ask the question, I know you did Trump and his first 100 days, but he did promise some very radical stuff.
	He did.
	And the radical stuff, it's inching through.
	So, I just want to summarize what I was saying in that video.
	Overall, Trump's 100 days has been pretty good.
	He did get a lot of good stuff done, as in, he stopped the border invasion, he has made America.
	Something important in people's minds, and so he is putting America first.
	He's made mistakes, but he's generally been pretty good.
	But you are right, the really impactful, radical stuff...
	Has been kind of left off the table.
	It's a little bit tepid so far.
	And he promised a lot of very radical things before he came in.
	And, you know, you're going to struggle to find a UK media outlet that is more pro-Trump than us.
	Yes.
	So this criticism is friendly criticism.
	Constructive.
	Right.
	It's constructive criticism.
	It's be more radical.
	Do more radical stuff.
	And the thing as well, before we go into this, I do want to also...
	I understand that you are working within systems that are hostile to you, and there are...
	Hang on, hang on.
	But it's probably not that simple.
	There's a vast depth of complexity that underpins it beneath the surface that we just can't see it.
	That means that essentially...
	People will have sat down with other people and said, look, if you do this, this will happen, and this is terrible, so you can't do this.
	That said, I would like to see more people led away in handcuffs.
	Well, yes, I agree.
	So I just want to be clear that I'm not...
	I'm personally not trying to castigate the Trump administration.
	Again, big Trump supporter.
	But there are, I agree with you, a series of things that were promised that we actually, I think, are...
	They are, if nothing else, cathartically important to be done.
	It is interesting as well, because that kind of...
	Led away in handcuffs type imagery.
	I don't think the British public are ready for that yet.
	But I think the American public, actually, because of the American spirit, and because of the things that they've been subjected to, I think they absolutely are ready for that.
	I think they need it.
	I just beg the question why it's not happening.
	And the nature of some of the crimes as well.
	Yes.
	Like, you know, Epstein didn't have any customers, did he?
	Oh, okay, interesting.
	Yeah, so the first one that I think I'll come to is, you know, this chap here, Thomas Crooks, the Trump shooter.
	Known Blackrock associate?
	Yes.
	We were told he's a lone wolf immediately, and then it was sort of buried.
	Does this kid look like a lone wolf?
	No, he doesn't look like any sort of wolf, to be honest.
	Exactly.
	He looks like a prey animal.
	Yes, he does.
	As we spoke about last time.
	Yes.
	Does that qualify as Prey Eisen, does it, Charlie?
	I would say so, as a professional, yes.
	It absolutely does, though.
	But, yeah, I mean, there was clearly something going on at higher levels, and we haven't seen anyone led away in handcuffs yet.
	It's like the Las Vegas shooting as well.
	Yes, another memory hold.
	What happened to that?
	Yeah, that's gone very bad.
	He lugged all of that gear up the service elevator on his own, did he?
	Yes.
	Wasn't it something like 1,500 rounds he fired, something like that?
	That is a...
	Really?
	Anyway.
	Memory hold?
	Yeah.
	Completely memory hold.
	No one wants to think about that anymore.
	I mean, specifically on this guy, I've got a number of questions.
	You know, why did the DHS Secretary, Mjorka, deny Trump's request for additional security?
	Still don't have an answer for that.
	Great question.
	When did Thomas Crook scope out the building?
	And how did he know this was the roof to shoot from?
	Why was this roof unprotected by Secret Service and police?
	Especially when it was identified as a place where a direct assassin would have a direct line of sight.
	Afterwards, you'd see on the images they'd take the spot.
	It was the obvious spot.
	Yeah, it was just a direct line.
	Yeah.
	Why did the Secret Service and police ignore people literally yelling and pointing that there was somebody on the roof?
	Kind of JFK-esque, that, isn't it?
	Oh, they're on the grass?
	No, they're not.
	Shut up.
	Why the hesitancy in engaging Crooks?
	And how is it possible?
	This is another big one.
	How is it possible that Crooks has no digital footprint?
	Yeah.
	A young man in the modern world doesn't use the internet.
	Yes.
	It doesn't look like it gets out a lot as well, let's be honest.
	True, exactly.
	What was he doing?
	Before I go further on the details on this one, I just want to point out, and this is going to be a slight tangent, but it is going to be directly relevant to this thread.
	We've actually got an upcoming Lads Hour in which we're going to be addressing this question.
	If you're not already watching Lads Hour, that's probably because you're not a subscriber.
	I don't know if it's the best thing we do.
	It's definitely the funnest thing we do.
	So if you want to watch our Lads Hour, which are very popular, you can go to our website and you can join up there and you can see some of the Lads Hours we do.
	Anyway, the point with this Lads Hour is a lot of the debate will hinge on how effective is the shooter in the middle.
	So I've been doing some research for this Lads Hour and what I did is I got into shooting.
	Because I wanted to be able to address this question properly.
	So just as a quick side note, because Americans always get this wrong, Americans think that we can't have guns.
	We can have guns.
	We can have guns.
	There are millions of guns in the country, just in cities.
	Yes, yes.
	Well, I mean, some demographics in the city have handguns, but yeah, different question.
	But no, it is absolutely possible to get some serious kit in this country.
	Handguns are a bit more restricted.
	They tend to be amongst the criminal classes.
	But there's actually an awful lot of good stuff that you can get in the UK.
	It's just that, as you pointed out, we don't have a gun culture here.
	But, you know, we can have guns.
	We do have gun shops and all the rest of it.
	Anyway, so then, you know, I did a bit of, you know, bit of time at the range, which is thanks to the Ricochet Rifle Club.
	So I've got to give them a quick shout out.
	If you are looking to join a rifle club in the Oxfordshire area, get in touch with them.
	And what I'm all leading to here is I am a complete beginner at this stuff.
	I'd never fired a bolt-action rifle before in my life.
	Have you not?
	No.
	I've fired some guns, but not a bolt-action thing before.
	And the gun I was using was actually this one here, which is, you know, Ironsight's gun.
	And this is a target which is about the size of a child's head.
	It's about maybe that.
	The point is, it's smaller than Trump's head.
	And I was shooting at a distance which is about the same distance as Trump was away from this shooter.
	Complete and utter first-timer.
	That's how I did.
	Not bad.
	The point is...
	Only one of those wings is here.
	Yes, yes, quite.
	Ignore this one down here.
	That's the staple mark.
	But ten shots on target, and even a complete beginner Brit who'd never used a bolt-action rifle before in his life would have taken out Trump at least nine times out of ten.
	That one was possibly an earshot.
	Yeah.
	So you can sort of understand why whoever it was that put this crooks kid up to it was confident that he could get the job done because it genuinely was a...
	Charles Chopp.
	Yes.
	It was a genuinely easy job.
	So you can understand why.
	And, I mean, further questions on that point.
	Why did CNN livestream the entire event?
	Yeah, they...
	Why didn't they cut?
	Is that what you're saying?
	No, no, no.
	They're taken to just not live-streaming and broadcasting his event.
	I see what you mean.
	Because they're highly persuasive and fun.
	People were tuning in and being like, yeah, this Trump guy's making a lot of points and I like the cut of his jib.
	It's nice to just hear him go off script.
	And so it was a while ago, in fact, that they just decided we're just not going to broadcast them.
	And they hadn't covered any of them in that election cycle, except for that one.
	The Butler Rally.
	They live-streamed the entire thing.
	It's almost like they had a particular shot that they wanted to get.
	And they didn't cut the feed.
	That's the point I was sort of driving.
	That's a good point.
	They didn't cut the feed either.
	Because you'd think, I mean, the moment a shot goes off, cut the feed.
	Can't have people saying that, but they didn't.
	No.
	So that is deeply odd.
	And it's just, on that point, it's really ironic that Trump just comes up and he's just like, fight, fight, fight, get completely, turns into a completely iconic image.
	I actually tweeted yesterday that he has now commodified his own assassination attempt, which is about the most American thing I can imagine.
	I have other questions.
	Because, of course, it wasn't just Crooks, it was that other guy who took a shot up in the golf course as well.
	Why is it that both of the assassins were featured in Black Rock commercials?
	I'll kill the sound on that.
	There we go.
	There's one of the Trump shooters.
	Really?
	In a Black Rock commercial.
	Here's the other Black Rock commercial which features...
	There he is again.
	That's weird.
	What are the odds?
	What are the odds?
	Put it this way.
	And I'm not endorsing this, so nobody come and arrest me, but let's say people were taking pot shots at Keir Starmer, and 100% of the assassins were Lotus Eaters presenters.
	Do you think that some...
	At some point they might suggest that maybe there's a connection, yeah.
	Do you think somebody somewhere would be taking a good hard look at us?
	Yes, I think so.
	Yes.
	So, yeah, 100% of the assassins were featured in BlackRock commercials.
	CNN decided to livestream the entire thing.
	The other thing that gets me is, do you remember that woman who was the head of the Secret Service?
	It rings a bell, but I can't remember.
	Yeah, she was the head of the Secret Service, and when this all happened, she kind of basically spoke about it as if it was, you know, somebody had...
	Accidentally ordered too many staples or something.
	It was a thoroughly bureaucratic measure.
	It's like, OK, well, yeah, we'll take a look at this and we'll put it on the list.
	Yeah, it's probably something we need to address.
	Yeah, no, I do remember that, actually.
	Was it her who also wanted to deny him more security?
	Was that the same person?
	Well, I mean, there was multiple people in that chain who denied the additional security.
	And the security that was around him, I mean, one of them was a short woman.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	She literally can't physically put her body between him and a bullet.
	His body is bigger.
	So much taller than her, and it's like, right, okay.
	But in addition, she was ducking.
	Yeah, she wasn't doing her job properly anyway.
	But even if she was...
	She couldn't have done it.
	Yeah, but a huge number of questions around this, and I suppose I need to be careful what I need to say for legal reasons, so I'll frame this delicately, but the Democrat Party were trying to get him killed and they were conspiracy with the deep state in order to do it.
	Is what people online are saying.
	Yes.
	Well, that is, yes.
	But, you know, there really, really should be people walking out in handcuffs over this incident.
	It looks that way, yeah.
	And isn't 100 days enough to make the first arrest on just this matter alone?
	Yeah, I do wonder about this, because I think Trump has essentially worried about them.
	I mean, they have already tried to kill him at least once, possibly twice.
	Yes.
	Yeah.
	It is interesting how, I mean, on your point of Trump not really doing anything particularly radical, how he isn't going after the individuals who have been responsible for his own persecution.
	Now, whether that's because he's been advised not to, because people are going to say it's a bad look, you know, persecuting the opposition or the rest of it, or for other reasons, you know, I don't think it's clear.
	But you'd think that a guy like that would, he'd have it in his absolute, you know, his blood must be boiling that he's not been able to go after these people.
	I mean, people trying to kill you is not the sort of thing you forget.
	No.
	Or even trying to put you in prison.
	And that.
	I mean, you know, I could talk about that as well, but there's many radical things that we are hoping to see, you know, and judges arrested as well.
	I mean, that's all part of it as well.
	So, yeah, you know, I do think that this needs to be addressed and we need to kind of see some arrests.
	We want to see, you know, people who are involved in this exposed.
	There's no way that this kid didn't have a digital footprint and there's no way that, you know, something wasn't going on.
	There's no way that there was Secret Service in that building, but somehow they overlooked somebody clambering out on a roof.
	Which was in front of a window which apparently they were stationed in.
	And it's so convenient they get shot afterwards as well.
	Yeah, and then they immediately hose down the area and he's immediately cremated.
	Yeah.
	And the story's immediately...
	I mean, something is obviously going on there.
	Moving on.
	This is the official Jeffrey Epstein paedophile arrest counter.
	Ah.
	It's not...
	It's been six years now.
	That's true.
	I mean, Ghislaine Maxwell's in jail.
	Something.
	I suppose.
	I mean, when you say Jeffrey Epstein, you may as well just have Anne Gislaine Maxwell next to it, because she was intricately involved in the procurement of young girls.
	I read through the files when he first went to jail, six years ago, whatever it was, and made a video on it.
	She was directly involved, completely involved in all of it.
	She would take part in the sex offences.
	I'm putting her down as an organiser, but none of the clients have been arrested.
	Also, he didn't kill himself, obviously.
	Obviously.
	Shocking.
	Very obviously.
	So that's something that could be...
	Exposed by Trump.
	And people could be put in handcuffs.
	I'm sure he mentioned this when he did his Joe Rogan interview, did he not?
	He said that he'd taken a look at the files at the time and had decided that the amount of furore that it would cause if he were to release them is almost like too much trouble.
	I can't remember that offhand.
	I've heard him say that somewhere.
	And it doesn't sound like Trump, to be honest.
	The thing is, though, I personally suspect that the...
	Depth and scope of this issue is literally all of them.
	Are we, for example, to believe that Republican donors weren't involved?
	Yeah, exactly.
	For instance.
	Sorry, are we suggesting that Lindsey Graham is completely clean on this issue?
	I don't know, but I'd love to find out.
	Allegedly, allegedly.
	I don't know.
	I'd doubt it'd be little girls in his case, but you see the point.
	There's clearly something going on.
	This thread, well, post, you know, highlights some of the issues here.
	But, you know, Pam Bondi said she was going to release the files.
	I don't doubt her sincerity.
	Yeah.
	And they had that thing where they called in a bunch of sort of tame reporters and they showed them redacted files and then they could tweet about it.
	But, yeah, there was nothing in them.
	Nothing we didn't already know.
	No names.
	Yeah.
	Yes.
	Yeah, and we should also acknowledge the elephant in the room that, Jeffrey Epstein was clearly an intelligent asset for a foreign power, possibly one aligned with the US.
	So I can understand the sensitivities there, and I can understand, you know, Republican donors may well be...
	I mean, he was trying to catch everybody.
	So it's entirely possible that, you know...
	Seems to have succeeded as well.
	Yes.
	So it's entirely possible friends as well as enemies.
	But...
	This is a cleansing that needs to happen.
	Again, we need to see people in handcuffs being led away.
	And if it hurts your own side, then it is necessary.
	And they shouldn't have been doing those things.
	That simple.
	Quite right.
	If you go to an influencer's house and he offers you something a bit naughty, then you should say no.
	You're a fool if you say yes.
	That's real.
	You must know you're being entrapped.
	You must know.
	So, I mean, I'll skim through some.
	I won't go through all of them now because I don't think I've got time, but she's making a whole bunch of points.
	Oh, there we go.
	There's the influencer thing.
	I do think, if I may very quickly, the whole Epstein issue, actually, I think there's a deeper point to be made about it, which is the kinds of people who are able to arrive at positions of leadership in the systems that we have in this country and in America, where they are the types of people who can be so easily compromised through the allure of, you know, sex, women, you know, drugs.
	Yeah.
	You know, the parties, all of it, right?
	The fact that, and maybe it's just human nature, maybe I'm being a perfectionist, but the fact that those sorts of people are the people who govern us and who our system selects for, you know, who actually, you know, the incentives seem to, you know, want...
	And also, very possibly, you're not allowed to rise up to a certain level unless you are compromised.
	Yeah.
	I mean, that's a possible fact.
	I mean, the system will literally select against you because if the system is made up of corrupt people, why would you want honest men getting to the top?
	Yeah.
	You need to gatekeep them out.
	Of course you do.
	There was, I think, a congressman, I can't remember his name, but the chap in a wheelchair, and he's a young, good-looking chap, and he's in a wheelchair, and he was saying that as soon as he got into politics, he would go to things, and he would have these 10 out of 10, 9 out of 10 stunners soliciting him for sex, quite obviously.
	He is a good-looking chap, but he is in a chair, and even if you are a good-looking chap and you're not in a chair, that...
	That doesn't happen.
	Notice how this was basically the end of his political career as well.
	Yes.
	Because I can't remember his name now, and the thing is, I really like the guy, because his rhetoric was just hardcore.
	Yeah, he was good.
	I can't remember.
	I know, I can't remember.
	I'm sure there was a compromising image of him released at some point.
	Something like that.
	At some kind of frat party.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	I didn't remember that.
	But I mean, you know, anecdotally speaking, I mean, anybody who has moved in political or media circles for any amount of time, as I have for the last couple of years, it's my job, you will, you know...
	Madison Cawthorn.
	Yeah.
	He was a young lad, 18 in 2014, and he had a really good-looking future in the MAGA movement.
	Somehow tanked.
	Interesting.
	But the extent to which this kind of thing is just ubiquitous.
	I can only speak to the UK scene, but like I said, the drugs, the parties, all that kind of stuff.
	Everything that people think goes on in the halls of power, it's all true.
	I've had conversations with politicians and aides of politicians who say, yeah, there is...
	This does happen.
	Yeah, totally.
	I've had people tell me, like Peter Mandelson.
	I'm not going to repeat what they've told me, but it's just like, oh, okay.
	Another friend of Epstein, that's not fair.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Another friend of Epstein, the current UK diplomat to the United States.
	He probably implicated.
	From what I've been told.
	I've heard some of the same similar rumours, and I'd love to talk about them, but we...
	No.
	It's an open secret, though, all of this kind of stuff.
	Yeah, they all know.
	In American and British political circles, you know.
	Let me just quickly play this video from Pam Bondi talking on this subject, since it's relevant.
	Actually, Samson, you do it for me.
	I'm not really good at the buttons.
	needs to press it twice.
	No, no, the FBI, yeah, the FBI, they're reviewing, there are tens of thousands of videos of Epstein with children or child porn, and there are hundreds of victims, and no one victim will ever get released.
	It's just the volume, and that's what they're going through right now.
	The FBI is diligently going through that.
	I haven't seen that statement, but I'll call him later and find out.
	I can be free to do the thing.
	So they're going through a whole bunch of things.
	And so I'm sympathetic to a point.
	So this framing bothers me, right?
	Because we know it's not just Epstein.
	Because we know on his little St. James Island, he had cameras set up to catch visitors.
	And we know that he would have had tens of thousands of videos of people.
	People who, for example, flew with him 25 times on his private jet.
	Exactly.
	So it's like, the framing itself, she's just saying, oh, it's all just Epstein again.
	Yeah, she's bringing it back to a single man.
	Not just Epstein, and we know that it's not.
	I mean, there is an interesting kind of moral quandary here, which is, you know, the actual materials themselves, should they be in the public domain?
	No, no, no, obviously the actual material themselves, but like the report describing what had happened, that's fine.
	But the point is...
	No, but I'm saying, but I'm saying, should they be?
	Because maybe it's in the public interest.
	I don't think they should just because...
	If there was literally no other way in order for something to happen...
	I think the nature of the thing doesn't need to be.
	I think an official report describing what's happening with various censored images or whatever, just so you can see the face of the perpetrator, right?
	You know, you can black out the whole thing except for this guy.
	That's fine.
	But the point being, she's not naming any names.
	She's specifically not implying, even, that there's other people involved.
	Well, and that's kind of the point of the segment.
	I'm sympathetic that they need to be careful and sensitive, given the subject matter, and they need to protect the victims and all that kind of stuff.
	But at the same time, you can't lead us around on this forever.
	You are going to need arrests, and lots and lots of them.
	It would be just.
	Yes.
	Can I also point out the fact, very quickly, just while we finish, that whilst Epstein may have been the person who produced these materials, whoever now owns them, whoever is the kind of final buck with whom it stops, they now have the power that those materials hold.
	They are the ones who actually now hold the Compromat.
	Which begs the question, what are they doing with it?
	Perhaps there's a reason they're not prepared to release it.
	Because it's a very powerful tool, having this Compromat on people.
	That's a great point.
	I didn't even consider that because I don't think in those sorts of ways.
	It's a very Machiavellian thing.
	But that's a good point.
	And are we to believe that the FBI is above that kind of thing?
	Oh, yeah.
	The FBI is full of angels, mate.
	Full of angels.
	So I would linger on that more, but we've got more to come to.
	Trump's statement about deep state overhaul.
	Let's play this from about 51 seconds in for about 30 seconds or so.
	I'll tell you when to stop.
	There must also be a complete commitment to dismantling the entire globalist neocon establishment that is perpetually dragging us into endless wars, pretending to fight for freedom and democracy abroad, while they turn us into a third world country and a third world dictatorship right here at home.
	The State Department, the defense bureaucracy, the intelligence services.
	And all of the rest need to be completely overhauled and reconstituted to fire the deep staters and put America first.
	We have to put America first.
	Finally, we...
	So, I mean, part of a longer piece, and he also goes on to talk about a truth and reconciliation committee for, you know, some of the many things that were done.
	Love the energy.
	Where are the arrests?
	When was this released, sorry?
	This was before he got elected.
	Yeah, you can tell.
	Yeah, these were campaign videos he was putting out before he got elected.
	But yeah, exactly.
	These are strong statements.
	Well, go on.
	What are we doing here?
	And is it going to be the way he's going after the deep state is he's going to change the head of department?
	No, he said reconstitute the entire thing.
	I mean, this is arriving in JFK territory of scattering them to the winds, right?
	Yeah.
	What we've seen so far...
	JFK files didn't really actually do anything interesting, which was very strange.
	We've seen good people put in the Kash Patels and the Tulsi Gabbards and stuff, so fine, happy with that, but that's a change of leadership.
	That's not reconstitution.
	That's not gutting them and rebuilding them.
	I think people overuse the whole containment thing, but it sure as hell looks like that in those cases.
	Quite.
	Quite.
	You know, a number of things that he mentioned that he was going to reinstate some executive orders.
	He did well on the executive orders, I'll give him that.
	Yeah, he did.
	A massive overhaul of national security and intelligence agencies.
	Not seeing it so far, just seeing their head changed, and maybe they need a bit of time, but...
	And to be fair, I can understand that it could take time, but like...
	At least seed it into the public consciousness.
	We're working on this at the moment.
	You'll see in six months or something.
	You know, something like that rather than just never mention it again.
	Yeah.
	And when was the last time you heard Trump talk about the neocon foreign policy establishment and this kind of rhetoric?
	I mean, that's, you know.
	Yeah.
	Well, didn't some guy just recently get fired?
	Wolves recently get fired for being too pro-Israel.
	Oh, yeah.
	So that's a start.
	Yeah, but I think it goes beyond one chap, to be honest.
	Yeah, I agree.
	Obviously, it goes...
	But that's a start.
	That's something.
	Yeah, but again, I'm not seeing people led away in handcuffs, and that's kind of what I'm looking for at this point.
	There are a bunch of criminals who need their comeuppance.
	Yeah.
	Reform FISA courts.
	I'm sure something is being done on that.
	A Truth and Reconciliation Committee to declassify and expose all documents related to deep state activities.
	I suspect that one's going to be put on the back burner, but we'd love to see it.
	Crackdown on leaks.
	I'm sure he actually will do that one.
	Independent Inspector Generals.
	He talks about audit the intelligence community and decentralised federal power.
	So, I mean, all of those are great ideas.
	I mean, other things that he sort of floated in the past of, you know, departments to go.
	Department of Education, Department of Commerce, Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Homeland Security needs to be entirely restructured.
	Agree?
	Mr. Trump, agree to do it.
	You know, do do that.
	What else have we got?
	I should give an honourable mention to the JFK files, because they were released.
	They were completely useless, but they were released.
	That's the point, isn't it?
	The one thing that gets done is something that's very safe and doesn't challenge the status quo.
	And once again, containment.
	If you'd said ten years ago...
	The JFK files.
	You don't even need to qualify what that means.
	The JFK files are going to be released.
	It would have been like, what are you talking about?
	That would upend the entire American state, but it did nothing.
	Somehow it did nothing.
	And now people don't talk about it.
	Well, they've had decades to clean those files out, so I wasn't necessarily expecting much.
	Might be a bit hopeful 9-11.
	Maybe a bit of a dig into that.
	I'd love to know more about Lucky Larry Silverstein.
	Tucker Carlson did an excellent interview, I can't remember his name now, but with a former senator who was on the Intelligence Committee and the way him and his family...
	Or the fact that it didn't include Building 7 in it, in their report?
	No, it's much deeper than that.
	It's worth watching, actually.
	I should have linked it here.
	But that Tucker Carlson with that senator, former senator, about him and his family, his life was destroyed because he asked one too many questions.
	And the thing that always stood out to me is the FBI raided his daughter's house.
	And Tucker was asking, OK, well, what was the charge?
	Oh, no charge.
	They never spoke to her.
	They took files and computers out of her house and sealed them in boxes and then returned the boxes a couple of weeks later unopened.
	So they didn't speak to her.
	They didn't look at anything.
	It was intimidation.
	No, but what they got out of it was a headline, which his daughter was arrested for corruption.
	He gets chucked off the committee and then they drop all charges against her.
	Right.
	Right.
	Yeah.
	Just because he was asking the wrong questions.
	That's just theatre.
	Doge, I should mention.
	Well, it's not just theatre.
	It's taking out a troublesome node.
	You know what I mean?
	It's all just, you know, confected nonsense.
	Oh yeah, it's confected, but they were doing it specifically to target that guy to remove him from the committee so they could carry on.
	It's well worth watching that.
	I'm going to give an honourable mention to Doge because good progress is being made there.
	400 billion, is that?
	Yeah, the thing I would...
	Pointing you out here is those are the Doge savings.
	That's got three commas, but the deficits has four commas.
	Yeah, I'm aware.
	It's a good start.
	It's a step in the right direction.
	So I will acknowledge he's being radical there.
	Go further.
	Go further.
	Like that.
	I'll have to give a mention to the tariffs as well.
	I'll be very quick on this, but I was saying at the time that...
	Oh, you guys aren't a member of TradingView, so you're not getting the full view.
	Okay, I was going to make the point that...
	The tariffs have basically achieved what they were trying to achieve in the early days.
	So, I mean, there was a lot of fuss at the time about the markets being down.
	The markets dipped 4% and they are now higher.
	The markets are always up and down.
	I don't care.
	Yeah, but they dipped 4% and now they're higher than they were on Liberation Day.
	And everybody was saying, oh, the markets are down.
	It's a failure.
	No, it isn't.
	DXY, which I don't know if we'll get that the next one.
	The dollar index, major win.
	So, basically...
	You know, you don't want the dollar to be too low.
	You don't want it to be too high.
	You want it around about 100.
	And it was simply too high before, and part of the tariff policy did indeed get that down.
	I don't have time to go into why that's a good thing and it's a necessary thing, but they absolutely needed to achieve that.
	And the other thing there was a lot of fuss about, you do remember how we crashed the bond?
	Yeah, all the bonds, the US government bonds are worthless now.
	Do you see the crash on that?
	And by the way, on this, up is bad.
	Right.
	So going up is a crash.
	If you saw some spike that went up, so that is what people were calling the crash in the bond market, that bit there.
	I mean, it seems to have been worse in the last few years, right?
	Yeah.
	Bond market was fine.
	So tariffs...
	And on tariffs...
	You need to wait years in order to see if the strategic reorientation of the economy happens, whether they can bring military supply lines back to them.
	And the other thing people talked about was damaging the midterms.
	The midterms are 544 days away.
	Yeah, a lot can happen.
	So I've got to give him credit for all of that.
	So he is doing some radical stuff, but come on.
	Let's see some people arrested.
	Just the final thing on this.
	It shows you what is actually structurally...
	Compromised in the United States and what isn't, right?
	The infrastructure of the political system somehow hinges on the Epstein files not being released, which is kind of terrifying.
	And I can't help but wonder, as a final thought, whether all the while this stuff goes unreported and undisclosed, how long it will be before a 2025-2026 version of Edward Snowden emerges, who has access to this stuff, and just decides, you know what?
	It's in the public interest.
	I'm going to sacrifice my own life.
	He shouldn't flee to Russia.
	It's been done before.
	It's happened before.
	That's absolutely true.
	So, you know, we remain supportive, Mr. Trump, but don't lose that radical zeal.
	You've got to follow through on this stuff, and I want to see people in handcuffs.
	Yeah, there's only one chance to do it.
	That's where Adam Name says, Trump spoke on Joe Rogan about the JFK files and his refusal might once again be because of his involvement from our greatest ally, just like with Epstein.
	I'm not suicidal, by the way.
	And Logan says, Hey lads, hope you have a great day.
	Can you make a broken omicron welfare?
	Yeah, probably can actually.
	I don't need that.
	Do you need...
	Yes, I will.
	Thank you very much.
	Right, so let's go.
	So, the right needs an answer to the post-woke left.
	Now, of course, that statement assumes that the left...
	Are, in fact, post-Woke, which is obviously a matter of some debate still.
	So, to that end, myself and Professor Eric Kaufman are running a debate next month in London with Matt Goodwin, Gadsad, and Batya Angusargon answering the question, is Woke dead?
	So, a little bit of a shill here.
	If you want to come along, the link should be in the description.
	It will be an amazing event, and tickets are selling very fast, as you can imagine.
	But it won't be one you want to miss.
	There'll be a lot of people you recognise there, and it should be a lot of fun.
	But, moving on.
	I want to ask what we, as a movement, should be doing and should be thinking when it comes to the left, because I think that those people who are still banging on about woke, in certain cases it's legitimate, but I think, broadly speaking, and especially in the American context, woke is in the rearview mirror.
	And I think for those people who are on the cutting edge of left-wing thought in America and in the UK, they're aware of this fact.
	And they're already...
	Woke for them is already in the past.
	Who's an example of a cutting-edge left-wing thinker out of interest?
	Well, believe it or not, they do exist.
	And I'm going to go into some of them.
	So, yeah, we'll get on to that.
	So before we go on, I think it's important to note with the sort of post-movements, what they tend to do is take those things that weren't...
	properly overthrown in the conflict of the dialectic and just subsume them into their own positions as base assumptions and then move forward without the crusading zeal of the pride flag in your face.
	Yes.
	And I think we'll actually see that phenomenon play out in some of the stuff that I'm going to take this away.
	Yeah, so it's not that woke doesn't exist anymore, but it's not...
	The present force in politics.
	I think the victory of Trump over Harris and the Democrats represented, certainly in America, the final rejection by the public at large of woke politics.
	That's what I think Harris will be remembered as embodying, was that kind of mad period of four years in America where everything just went insane.
	People forget how radical she was as well.
	Totally.
	Although, with that being said, I still maintain that Harris was not an ideologue.
	I actually think that she was an empty suit.
	I agree.
	She's too stupid to get into ideology.
	But whenever she made ideological statements, they were just essentially the most radical form of communism you could imagine.
	Well, if you're going to do it, I suppose.
	I think someone just fed her the line, right?
	That's the line she remembered.
	I agree.
	She's an empty suit.
	But, as I said, the interesting question here is where the left goes.
	And I think, as I said, from the perspective of the cutting edge...
	If you will.
	They know that woke is done.
	They know that woke is dead.
	So, exhibit A. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
	I don't know if we can play this video.
	We won't watch all of it.
	I haven't got a mouse here.
	and if we could get some volume on this.
	So...
	I'm not seeing very many pride films.
	Oh, there's one.
	Well, this actually, as we watch through this...
	This was 11 months ago, right?
	So this was at the height of kind of Democrat campaigning, anti-Trump sentiment, and all the rest of it.
	And you can see the kind of things that are being said in this video, especially towards the end.
	It's just woke rhetoric.
	It's just like bog standard, our community, our identity, this, that, and the other.
	Yeah, Medicare for all, and all the rest of it, right?
	So this was...
	In my view, this is a woke...
	Oh, it's 100% woke.
	It's like women and soy boys.
	Yeah, something that will be studied in generations to come as a kind of...
	Swags, blah, blah.
	Yeah, yeah.
	So this was 11 months ago.
	What's interesting to me is this, okay?
	This was a couple of weeks ago.
	So Cortez has transitioned from...
	If you will, the woke rhetoric into talking about the fact that plenty of politicians on both sides of the aisle feel threatened by rising class consciousness.
	So just the point on that, do you not remember just after Trump's victory where she posted about what right-wing podcast do you guys listen to?
	So she specifically canvassed for right-wing podcasters.
	Who am I supposed to be listening to to understand the current wave that's coming out?
	And I think this is a great point.
	Yeah.
	Okay, so we're defaulting back to...
	20th century Marxism?
	And this is the point, okay?
	So I want you to put a pin in this for the moment, because this is going to be an essential kind of aspect of all of this.
	I now want to show you this, which was four days ago, okay?
	So if we just hit play on this, and again, we'll watch it, we'll just watch part of it.
	This is Cortez being heckled by a liberal in New York City Town Hall, who is decrying her as a war criminal, as complicit in the genocide in Gaza, saying, shame on you, you know, maybe if we could get a little bit of volume now, just so we can...
	I'm a nerd!
	You get the idea, right?
	And that woman in the crowd was Ocasio-Cortez just five years ago.
	And now she's in the position of power.
	She's the one who's being labelled a monster, effectively.
	And it's interesting.
	I mean, it's just a classic example of the revolution eating its own, isn't it?
	And that's because Cortez, as much as she has championed the issue of Gaza and has been kind of anti-Israel, she's very much wound back that kind of rhetoric in recent months.
	She's actually quite astute as a politician.
	She's very good.
	Well, this is the thing.
	She was the first one to take her pronouns out of her bio two hours after Trump.
	And this is what I'm talking about when I say cutting edge.
	Because as much as you might hate Ocasio-Cortez, she is actually a very savvy person.
	I don't hate her at all.
	I think she's quite lovely.
	But she's just stupid.
	But I was looking through all of her...
	In preparation for this, I was looking through all of her digital platforms and all the rest of it, social profiles.
	And she's got a really good brand.
	She's actually got a very slick...
	She knows exactly what she's doing.
	And she's got like 12 million followers on X. She's huge.
	Or she's attracted some...
	Background play about...
	Power players who think that she's got a team that is sculpting her online image.
	But she's incredibly effective, right?
	So the fact that she is moving away from woke, and that's the point here, I think is very interesting, because she clearly is.
	She's a trendsetter on the left.
	Totally.
	Because back to this, and this is the case in America and Britain, as we'll see, there is this emerging, or perhaps re-emerging, sentiment on the left that we need to essentially move away from identity politics and back to economics.
	And when I say post-woke left, that's really...
	What I'm getting at here, because another figure who is also doing this, perhaps the UK analogue to Ash Sarkar...
	It's our friend.
	Did I just say Ash Sarkar?
	Spoiler alert, it's Ash Sarkar.
	The UK analogue to Ocasio-Cortez is Ash Sarkar.
	Look at the thumbnail on that.
	Woke is over.
	And that's what I mean.
	You just have to search Ash Sarkar woke.
	And she did this a few months ago, going around all the lefty podcasts being like, listen, we have to change because the woke paradigm has failed, the voters are actually far right, and so we need something else to appeal to them, and it's going to have to be class identity.
	Otherwise, the revolution fails entirely.
	Now, bear in mind, Ash Sarkar, as you will, No, Carl.
	Was one of the absolute foremost warriors for woke politics in Britain.
	Maybe the foremost.
	I mean, can you think of anybody who was more woke than her over the last ten years?
	She was, I mean...
	Who was really, really mainstream.
	But she was also representative of the British intellectual vanguard of woke.
	She would go on long-form podcasts and explain at length...
	Why they wanted race, gender, and economic socialism.
	Yeah, well, redistribution along those lines.
	Exactly, yeah.
	That was precisely her definition.
	And so, therefore, it's very interesting to hear her, if we could play this, speaking in this kind of way.
	Anne Frank had white privilege.
	I mean, if she did, it didn't f***ing help her.
	Sorry, it's a 2016 song on here!
	She had white privilege.
	She had white privilege.
	She had other problems.
	You know, you have examples where someone was talking about the, you know, exploitation of, like, DoorDash delivery riders in the United States.
	And someone was like, but actually, what if you're disabled and then you need them to bring your groceries?
	And it's like, well, the person complaining about this DoorDash delivery driver wasn't...
	Disabled.
	Where's this come from?
	But I think that some of the examples which are most laughable, and I think actually get much less attention in our current media environment, is that there is a weaponization of this form of identity politics in the interest of pro-Israeli advocacy.
	So at the Francis Crick Institute, some researchers wanted to put on a bake sale to raise money for medical aid for Palestinians.
	There was then a flurry of complaints to HR saying that it was an allegedly peaceful bake sale, and it made them feel...
	Personally threatened and unsafe.
	Let's leave that there.
	I see your point.
	Some of these lefties are at least, they've got the finger on the pulse.
	Again, like Ocasio-Cortez, I've not met Ash Sarkar, but I've met a couple of Novara people.
	And I respect Novara.
	Tremendously.
	I think Aaron Bastani is somebody who I like and who I've been out for a drink with a couple of times.
	Good guy.
	And they really are, you know, they're very intelligent people and Ash is no exception.
	They're the left-wing version of Ash.
	Yeah, pretty much, right?
	And it's no surprise, therefore, that people like Ash Sarkar can see the way the wind is blowing and is therefore distancing herself, not just distancing herself, but laughing at the positions she previously held and advocated for.
	And the thing is, if the wind was going the other way, I would be finding a right-wing interpretation of left-wing philosophy.
	I would have no choice.
	Because you've got to be the bellwether that moves with the times.
	So they're doing exactly the thing that they ought to do.
	Yeah, it's clever.
	It's clever.
	And you said about the intellectual vanguard.
	This is how political movements work.
	So the likes of Sarkar and Ocasio-Cortez are holding these positions now.
	But if you give it a year, you're going to see those people who were championing woke politics for the last five to ten years.
	coming out and saying, oh, isn't that silly?
	You know, white privilege.
	I mean, they're literally just saying it now.
	And I guarantee you, you will hear people, especially on the British left, saying things like...
	You know, the kind of working class lads up north who can't get a job and who are, you know, where there's huge problems with drugs and alcohol and all the rest of it, well, they don't have white privilege.
	I guarantee you.
	I think I heard the other day that Angela Rayner and some of those other ones are terrified of saying anything that's woke.
	I covered up the podcast yesterday.
	One Labour Party organiser and activist had heard in the grapevine that the leadership are just afraid of doing anything that looks woke.
	And that's probably because the smart...
	You know, people who know what they're doing, Blair or whoever it is, has sent down orders, do not do anything woke, and they're internalising it as fear of doing so.
	Well, Dan, it's funny you should say that, because next up...
	We have the master himself.
	Now, this was...
	Back in 2021.
	This is 2021, right?
	Because Blair, obviously, being probably the tip of the spear, you know, truly, like, basically the guy who runs the British left, he could see the writing on the wall even back then, right?
	So this was, like, during COVID, all the rest of it.
	And in this article...
	Politically, Blair is two or three years ahead of everybody else.
	This is incredible.
	The Labour Party needs complete deconstruction and reconstruction.
	Nothing less will do.
	It's the party you made it.
	Yes, yeah.
	And in this article...
	I won't go all the way through it, but in this article he basically says that in the gap that is left, that...
	Where the Labour Party doesn't define a kind of social and cultural position, people will just label it woke, and they will just fill that gap in their own minds with woke politics.
	And he says that woke politics are deeply unpopular, out of touch with what people need, completely missing the mark in terms of, well, basically just the concerns of ordinary people, as in, you know, not abstract ideology, but putting food on the table, clothes on their children's back, and all that sort of thing.
	Very sensible, savvy politics.
	And as I say, he could read the writing on the wall.
	You know, nearly five years ago at this point.
	Or four years ago, rather.
	And we also had, just a couple of days ago, and this is related, it's not quite the same thing.
	Ed Miliband is Pratt.
	It's Blair saying that Net Zero is doomed to fail in Britain, which is a very, very surprising thing for him to say, because whilst he has never been woke, yeah, but whilst he's never been woke, he has always been a champion of climate.
	And climate, I find, is one of those...
	It's the issue that's...
	If woke is the centre of gravity, climate is in its orbit, but it's the one that's the furthest out, if that makes sense.
	Because where you have racial identity politics and all the gender stuff, that's absolutely at the core of woke.
	And if you speak to the people who believe in that stuff, they probably also believe in the climate stuff.
	But you also find people who believe in the climate stuff, but don't believe in the woke stuff.
	Claire being an example.
	The climate stuff for the woke is merely a means to an end.
	They view the climate stuff as a revolutionary tool, and the second it's no good as a revolutionary tool, they can just drop it.
	But Blair has a singular ideology, power.
	Yeah, sure.
	And digital ID.
	No, no, Blair actually has an ideology.
	He wants to essentially reconstitute the European Union in Britain.
	He wants us to be...
	He's all a function of power.
	The power is for a reason.
	The power isn't just for itself.
	And the reason...
	And this is why he's done everything.
	This is why he bureaucratised this country.
	He wants to recreate the bureaucratic European structures in Britain.
	Yeah, he's like the prime manager.
	That is his ideology.
	And I've got to say, we talk about Blair a lot in our circles because he's a very interesting man.
	But I think that people forget that he...
	There's a way in which you can view his vision for the world as being in one...
	Because if you read his work, if you read the papers that he produces from the Tony Blair Institute, it's pretty much always about efficiency, You know, leanness of the state, the effectiveness of the state in delivering the things that ordinary people actually need, and all this sort of thing.
	It's just the way about...
	He sincerely believes the little people need to be managed, and he's the one to do it.
	He also believes in the hyper-technocratic bureaucracy that will be the function that does this, and that's the bad part.
	But the point is that Blair recognises that woke was a doomed political formula from the off, right?
	Which begs the question...
	Where do the left go from here?
	Now, we've obviously already touched on this slightly, but I want to introduce Exhibit D, which is this gentleman.
	And you knew he was going to come up.
	So this is Gary Stevenson, who is a sensation.
	He is a phenomenon, whether you like it or not.
	And I've actually courted some controversy by my takes on Gary Stevenson online, on X and elsewhere, because I've praised him.
	For his efficacy and for the things that he's saying.
	And people haven't understood what I've meant because I've not been saying that he's right.
	I've not been saying that his solutions are correct.
	But what I am saying is that people are underestimating the threat that he poses to us.
	It's cut through.
	Yeah, totally.
	I mean, if you look at his numbers, he hasn't uploaded a video in a couple of weeks.
	I went through a period where I was just obsessively watching all of his videos because I was just like, we need to learn from this guy.
	He's effective.
	His numbers are insane.
	He pulls millions of views on all of...
	And if you can name me another channel on the UK political scene who can pull millions of views on YouTube, I've yet to hear it, of a single guy in his kitchen, right?
	And you can say that he's astroturfed and all the rest of it, and I do think that's the case, right?
	But at the same time, you can't astroturf...
	One and a half million views on every video.
	And there is a real cut through.
	And I know that because in my own life I've heard people reference him.
	I've said this guy seems to really get it.
	He seems to be a bit of a new kind of fresh thing.
	And that's the point, I think.
	Because he is not a kind of rainbow flag waving ultra liberal.
	He's recognisably a leftist.
	But he's certainly to young people who've only ever known the leftist.
	I was going to say that.
	So what's interesting is that like...
	Someone of your age, it's always been screeching harpy since, like, 2010.
	Yeah, and this is the point, right?
	And this is a more sober form of class conflict.
	Yeah, it is, dare I say, a more masculine form of left-wing politics.
	And that has a certain appeal that I feel, right?
	And I'm a man of the right, and I don't think his solutions are good.
	But there's a reason that I've been watching his videos, which is that they're good, and the stuff he's saying is, you know, I can sit there and kind of, if I switch my brain off, I'm like, yeah, this all makes total sense.
	And it's no surprise, therefore, that he is having such cut-through.
	With young people, because we've only ever known the left, as you said, as the kind of rainbow flag-waving, pink-haired, screeching, ultra-liberals.
	Well, agents of capital, and more concerned with abstract ideas about transphobia and racism than in the affordability of housing.
	But you could see this guy having a pint with a Wilson or a Callaghan or something.
	It is the left returning to what it always used to be and what it always used to platform.
	And so, and I think another aspect that is interesting about Stevenson is if you actually, you know, drill into him as a man, you know, his whole story, whether or not it's true, because there are people who think that he's embellishing a little bit, which I can believe, his story is interesting, right?
	He's a self-made, working-class multimillionaire.
	He's an ex-trader.
	And, you know, a trader is one of the kind of most aspirational roles for a young man in the 21st century.
	You know, you think of the Wolf of Wall Street, that's kind of a, you know, rightly or wrongly, it's viewed as an aspirational lifestyle.
	And, most controversially of all, he is a white male.
	Right?
	Which is interesting in and of itself.
	The fact that that's interesting is kind of funny, but...
	I saw a post from him on Twitter the other day where he was saying that...
	And this is what I mean about the post-woke left still embodies all of the woke left's worst aspects.
	They just don't make a big deal about it.
	For example, so he had said, oh, the, I think it was Reform or Farage or whoever it was, is always complaining about immigrants, but they're never complaining about business.
	And I just retweeted this going, it's incredible how we can't make the linkage between cheap labour exploitation and big business, right?
	And they deliberately keep this fracture there in order to never critique immigration.
	And I was going to bring this up because he made a video on immigration several months ago, which was quite interesting.
	Because his take on immigration is basically that it's a, and it's a very standard.
	Kind of old left take, which is that it's a distraction by the capitalist class to have your ire directed towards the immigrant rather than to the capitalist, right?
	Okay, that's actually not that much of an old, old left take, actually, because back in, say, the 1980s, you had people like Bernie Sanders, Jeremy Corbyn, they would have said, well, immigration is actually class warfare by the ruling class against the working class.
	The unions of the 60s and the 70s were very militant against immigration.
	Absolutely.
	And this is what's interesting, and this is why you can tell that Stevenson...
	Despite his radical aesthetics, despite the costume of the radical that he wears, he remains an agent of the establishment because he is not prepared to be truly radical.
	Well, can I give a very quick assessment of how his economics works?
	We're going to get to that in just a second, if you want to just...
	But he's relevant to that point, but I'll bring it back.
	Yeah, we will come back to that.
	Because the point with Stevenson and him embodying the kind of post-woke left that I've been talking about is he's cutting through in a way that the wokes never did because the things that he's describing are...
	They are the lived reality for a lot of people.
	Because since 2008, for example, he labels wealth inequality as being the kind of cause of all evil in Britain, right?
	And, you know, it's quite a compelling argument because since 2008, the wealth gap between the wealthy and the normal people, average people, that is, average wealth, has expanded by 50%, with the top 10% becoming £280,000 more wealthy, and the poorest 10% seeing...
	Basically no increase.
	And at the same time, the Gini coefficient, which is a...
	I mean, I'm not an economist, so these are all quite alien phrases to me.
	But the Gini coefficient, which is basically a number that represents the degree of inequality in a society, with one representing one person having everything, and zero representing perfect equality, the Gini coefficient in Britain is currently 0.59, which is high.
	There's a high degree of inequality.
	And the median household income before housing costs fell by 2% in 2023.
	In real terms, people are getting poor.
	I mean, I talk about this a lot on Broke Economics.
	So, I mean, I agree with the underlying things that he's talking about, and I talk about those too.
	The problem with him is, if you imagine a whole chain of events that lead to, you know, from starting conditions to lead to an outcome, both of us are concerned about...
	Income inequality at the end.
	But what he does is that's his entire world view.
	So for him, wealth inequality is both the cause and the effect and the problem and the thing you need to address.
	Whereas my analysis looks at the entire picture.
	And I actually think, okay, there's stuff right at the beginning of the chain.
	And so effectively what he's doing, and what it brings back to your point about how he's an agent of the system, he doesn't want to change this entire system.
	He only wants to do some extra taxes right at the end.
	He wants to treat the symptoms.
	So if somebody like me wins, I will change fundamental assumptions around here, around currency and the way the system works.
	If he wins, all he's going to do is add an extra layer of taxation and protect the entire chain that got you there.
	Yeah, and that's why he is ultimately still a subversive element, because the solutions that he offers, which is just a kind of flat wealth tax, tax the rich, basically, do not work.
	As if this is an argument that we haven't played out as well.
	Yeah, they don't work, right?
	And, you know...
	It's currently not working for Starmer.
	And this is the point, is that's already what's happening, right?
	Because here...
	Oh, sorry, we've been through this.
	So...
	Well, this is a report from the House of Commons Library.
	Actually, my apologies, we've already been through that.
	Never mind, I think I may have forgotten to put the link in there.
	Not to worry.
	The point is that wealth taxes don't work, right?
	And the government in the UK is already doing wealth taxes, in effect.
	There was a report literally the other day that showed that the...
	UK government is not making the revenue they're expected to make from the tax increase.
	And the reason for that is because of the things like the abolition of the non-domiciled tax status, it's leading to capital flight.
	You know, last year...
	10,000 millionaires a year?
	Almost 11,000 last year.
	Oh, really?
	Which is the equivalent of half a million ordinary taxpayers.
	Jesus.
	To get an idea of the scale that we're working at here.
	And the Adam Smith Institute estimates that over the next 10 years, capital flight will cost the UK economy 44,000 jobs and $111 billion.
	And so this project that's supposed to make life better for ordinary people actually is going to immiserate them further.
	And that's to say nothing of things like the VAT exemption on private school fees, the inheritance tax on farms and all the rest of it.
	And so the point is the wealth tax as a concept just doesn't work.
	And this TPA report here, which came out in October of last year...
	Showed that in every country where wealth taxes are tried, they always fail, right?
	In the year 1990, 12 nations were trying them, and by 2017, 8 of them had cancelled their wealth tax policies, because what they lead to are capital flight, limited revenue, high administrative costs, and ultimately they are inefficient, unpopular and unfair.
	And that will remain the case because it just doesn't work.
	We used to have taxes at 98%.
	I hate to do this, but I feel we're going a bit off the subject, which is there is a new left emerging.
	Anyway, yes.
	Basically just like the old left.
	Yes.
	So to bring it back to the topic at hand, which is the emergence of the post-woke left, I'd like to open it up now to a bit of discussion about how you think...
	Unfortunately, we haven't got time.
	Oh, okay.
	Well, in that case, I will conclude by saying that whilst we...
	Whilst we can't buy into the same solutions as Stevenson, and we can't advocate for, basically, socialism, I don't think we should be advocating for, you know, kind of untramelled capitalism either.
	Because for the majority of people, because of, you know, cultural efforts by the left, capitalism, Thatcherism, free markets, these are all negatively coded ideas.
	And also right-wing coded ideas, which isn't really fair, because the right isn't actually radical capitalists.
	Because that's the point.
	the true right recognises that the economy needs to be enshrined, ensconced within a larger framework, a metaphysical framework that serves the interests of ordinary people and serves the nation ultimately in order to be effective because if the economy has made an end in and of itself then things go wrong because everything is sacrificed on the altar of profit and That's how we've arrived at this point.
	Can I ask a very quick question?
	Yes.
	Are we going to see AOC in the White House?
	I think that we may do at some point.
	We'll see.
	Longer conversation.
	So, I want to talk about the...
	Ancient metaphysics of primitive religions and how they affect us to this very day.
	Because there is a well-known phenomenon, which is the Venus figurine, as you can see on the screen here.
	Almost all representations of women have been in the form of Venus figurines from...
	As you can see, the Gravettian period, so 26,000 to 21,000 years ago.
	So back when mankind was living in small hunter-gatherer bands, this was a deeply important religious symbol, it seems, to those people, because, of course, fertility and high infant mortality is a huge issue.
	And then you can go forward to about 10,000 years ago, when you have here...
	The sinister figure of the seated woman of Catalhoyuk.
	Now, Catalhoyuk, from I think it's about 8,000 BC, oh, 6,000 BC, is a Neolithic sculpture just at the dawn of agriculture.
	And as you can see here, you have a corpulent woman.
	Sitting in quite a grim and intimidating pose.
	I think I've seen it on an M&S advert, actually.
	Right?
	And these themes, these overarching archetypes, are the things that I want to talk about here.
	It's going to get quite esoteric, but I'll show you why this is important, I think.
	And I think it's important for us on the right to think about the things that are being presented to us in this larger context of what is essentially moral revolutions that happened to the human race over the last 10,000 years.
	So a corpulent woman sat on a throne is actually something we would expect to see from modern feminism.
	But it's also what the earliest farmers...
	Had as their representations of the highest...
	As their idols.
	Spiritual idols, exactly.
	And in fact, that's exactly...
	That doesn't seem like a good idea to me.
	Well, exactly, and I'll tell you why you think that in a minute.
	The figure represented as a fertility goddess, of course, and you can see she's in the process of giving birth while seated on her throne.
	And she has hands resting on lions and leopards as the mistress of animals motif.
	And it's completely, as you say, as they say there, in fact, similar to other corpulent prehistoric goddess figures.
	And this is very, very interesting because we can go to our friend Frederick Engels here in his Origins of the Family, Private Property and the State.
	And in Chapter 9, he...
	Tells us what happened and why we don't have these symbols now, or at least we didn't until very recently.
	So he says this, quote, But humanity did not everywhere remain in the stage.
	In Asia, they found animals that could be tamed, and then once tamed, bred.
	And of course, what comes out of this is horse riding.
	Pastoral tribes therefore separated themselves from the mass of the rest of the barbarians.
	They are on foot, they are the early farmers, and they are constantly attached to the soil, they are constantly attached to a single location, and they create corpulent goddess statues.
	But the pastoral tribes of Western Asia separate themselves, and they produce not only more of the necessities of life than the other barbarians, but different ones.
	They possess the advantage of not only having milk, but milk products, and a great supply of meat, and skins, wools, goat hair, spoons, and woven fabrics.
	So they start producing what we as men now think are the good parts of life.
	As in the bread is actually not the good part of life.
	It's the meat.
	It's the milk.
	It's dairy.
	It's leather.
	It's horse riding.
	The masculine archetype comes from...
	The bread is just there to mop up the blood after your steak.
	Precisely.
	Whereas the primitive farmers had the much more of-the-earth view of their own lives.
	And so Engels carries on.
	So you can see how...
	The man suddenly becomes predominant because in the thesis of Marx and Engels, the productive forces gain political power.
	And if you have the productive force of giving birth as the sort of primary thing that people are thinking about, well, with it comes political power.
	However, if the productive force is now actually we've got loads and loads of resources and loads of cattle and we are now sort of heroic men riding horses around the steps, well, you can see why these people begin to predominate instead.
	And so he says the savage warrior and hunter had been content to take second place in the house after the woman.
	The gentlest shepherd, in the arrogance of his wealth, pushed himself forward to the first place and woman down to the second place.
	And this was done during the Indo-European expansion, what is archaically called the Aryan expansion.
	But the based Indo-Europeans, with their horses and chariots, came and absolutely curb stomped everyone.
	Everywhere across the entire of the Eurasian continent.
	Every corner of it.
	They trashed the The matriarchal civilizations, and they made them the second-class citizens.
	They made them the slaves of the Indo-European ruling class.
	So the based Indo-Europeans create an expressly hierarchical rule, and this is reflected in the mythology.
	So you may be familiar with the Titanomachy, which is the story of how Zeus overthrows Kronos.
	And this is a...
	Very common motif that you see in practically every pagan religion.
	And what it's describing is the world before the invention of agriculture, then the world in the invention of agriculture, then the Indo-European conquests.
	And it's fascinating how it's just such a universal motif.
	But of course, if it's the Indo-Europeans conquering everywhere, they bring the same story with them.
	And so in the beginning you have man as tiny hunter-gathering tribes, and the world is terrifying and scary, and...
	Unknowable.
	But then you get the sort of regulation of the farming, the earliest farmers.
	And to them, their gods are kind of gross, right?
	So, for example, you've got, during the tyrannical and degenerate reign of Cronus, who is the god who unleashed chaos and darkness by castrating his father Uranus, who then...
	Cursed Cronus to have his children rebel in his own stead.
	So Cronus, rather than doing something good and decent and noble, decides to eat his own children to prevent them from being able to rebel.
	This is a deeply sort of lunar archetype.
	This is a cruel, selfish, callous god.
	And this is the god of the primitive farmers.
	And Cronus himself marries his own sister.
	...has children with her, and then eats his own children.
	But Rhea, his sister, tricks Cronus into eating a rock instead of Zeus.
	And Zeus represents the sky-father god of the Indo-Europeans.
	And Zeus makes Cronus vomit out his own siblings.
	They then wage war on the Titans and the primordial gods, and...
	Of course, Zeus and the Olympian gods win, and they bring about the classical-style gods that we think of when we read the Iliad.
	Zeus is...
	And in the Iliad, Zeus is represented really, really fairly, right?
	So on one hand, you've got a series of gods who are like, we hate the Trojans, we want them destroyed.
	On the other hand, you've got Ares and...
	What's the love goddess?
	What's the love god?
	Aphrodite?
	That's it, yeah.
	On the other side saying, no, we like the Trojans, please.
	And so they're both trying to persuade Zeus to deal even-handedly with, or destroy all the other.
	And Zeus is in the middle saying, no, look, they're all my children, right?
	I'm the god of everyone.
	I can't just do one thing or the other.
	And eventually, what's Zeus's wife's name now?
	Hera.
	Hera tricks Zeus into essentially not paying attention by seducing him, and they manage to trash the Trojans.
	But the point being is Zeus is a fair-handed god, right?
	He isn't self-interested.
	He is the father of everyone, and so he is concerned for everyone.
	And so you can instantly see the difference between Zeus and Cronus, right?
	Zeus is bringing justice and order.
	Whereas Cronus is trying to desperately maintain his own power at the expense of everyone else.
	There is nothing to base or gross or degenerate for Cronus to do that he won't do.
	He will castrate his own father, he will marry his own sister, and he will eat his own children.
	He would absolutely fit in in the global elite.
	Oh, he absolutely would.
	But Zeus is...
	Duty-bound by morality to overthrow this.
	He is to bring in a just, lawful order in which both sides are recognized to have legitimate claims on what is happening.
	And this is what he does.
	And it's no coincidence then that, like, Zeus and the other Indo-Europeans, European religions, they all...
	Render their...
	I mean, Zeus means something like Skyfather, right?
	It means the...
	And you can think of it from the perspective of the Indo-Arians on the Great Plains of Asia.
	They've got the vastness of the sky.
	It's all sky in front of you.
	And so the ruler of the heavens is the commander of the wind and the storms and the rain, and he is something above the earth.
	He is transcendent.
	And many of the ancient heroes are emulating the Skyfather archetype.
	And mythologically, we see them, well, overthrowing the earthbound, telluric, chthonic mother goddesses, the den mothers, who sit on their squat, corpulent bodies on the thrones, and then just take.
	They follow the example of Cronus.
	And this is what Perseus and Medusa are about.
	Perseus is, of course, going into Medusa's cave to behead her, to bring her back.
	And you see this, again, in many things.
	Gilgamesh is another excellent example of this.
	We did, like, a four-hour dissection and interrogation of the epic of Gilgamesh.
	I know you're a fan of his story.
	This is probably my favourite piece of content on the website.
	Go and look at it.
	It'll be in the show notes.
	And it's incredible because you've got such a good example of this.
	So, Gilgamesh and his brother Enkidu.
	Kill the monster Humbaba, which is terrorizing the people of Lebanon in the Cedar Forest.
	And so Gilgamesh is, he's duty-bound to come and bring order to it so we can get cedars from Lebanon.
	So he goes and kills Humbaba, and then he returns to Uruk.
	And the goddess Ishtar, who in Sumerian is Inanna, but Akkadian Ishtar and Ishtar is easy to say, becomes infatuated with Gilgamesh.
	He's like, oh wow, this guy's amazing.
	I'm going to go down and try and seduce him.
	And Ishtar is a cruel, selfish goddess of erotic desire, fertility, procreation, and destruction.
	She delights in chaos, and she demands respect and submission no matter who it's from.
	Even other gods, kings, no matter who it is, right?
	And in some myths, I mean, she even threatens to break open the gates of the underworld and bring out all the dead to consume all of the living if she doesn't get her way.
	And so you can see in exactly the Cronus I'm just thinking Hillary Clinton here.
	Exactly.
	There is nothing I won't do if you don't give me my way.
	I will ruin life for everyone.
	And it is the solar masculine aspect that has to predominate over this lunar feminine aspect in order to make sure that justice and righteousness is brought to the earth.
	Because the Ishtar-style goddess will say, no, I'll ruin everything if you don't just give me what I want.
	And that has to be stopped.
	If I could just come in very quickly, I mean...
	I know you're not a man of faith, Carl.
	I'm a Catholic, right?
	And I can't help but see certain things worth commenting on in what you're saying, which is that the first thing is...
	That civilization that was most successful in ancient times was the one that recognized that the governing transcendent principle of the universe is father-like in nature, as opposed to either something selfish or like a slave driver.
	It's actually a father who loves you, a father who cares about you, which is itself obviously a very Christian idea.
	Well, it's an inheritance of all of this.
	I would argue that it's just a recognition of reality.
	Oh, it is, yeah.
	I agree.
	And the second thing I would say is, just in the way that these symbols kind of continuously re-emerge, a related symbol, I think, is the one in Exodus of the golden calf, right?
	The golden bull calf.
	And what that is, is a symbol...
	It's not quite the same in that it's not the feminine aspect, but it's almost the opposite in that it's an excess of masculinity.
	What it is, is the...
	Subsuming of things and of categories, right?
	So it is the...
	The solar aspect really is about definition and construction, and so it separates the good from the bad.
	Yeah, order.
	Exactly, order.
	Whereas, like you say, with the golden calf, it represents the destruction of categories, the subsuming of good into evil to corrupt the whole thing.
	Yes, because two points very quickly.
	The first is it represents the worship of money.
	It's made of gold, money.
	It's a bull, masculinity, power, strength.
	And what it leads to when the Israelites are worshipping the golden calf is a kind of insane period.
	of just, you know, orgiastic sex and degeneracy, you know, all the while Moses, who is the father figure, is absent.
	This is the ethos of the mother god, the den mother cult.
	This is how she controls her people.
	Now, it's important to remember that this is not just a man-woman thing, right?
	There are solar women and lunar men.
	And in fact, the lunar men are what Jordan Peterson is talking about when the weak men take over, Spiritually weak men he's talking about.
	Physically, they can be very strong.
	They can be very bellicose.
	They can declare war.
	They can fight wars.
	They can win wars.
	And they can do terrible things.
	It's not that they're physically weak.
	It's that they are morally crippled.
	And it is up to the Skyfather to fix this.
	And so, anyway, just to get back to this quickly, Ishtar is not in any way submissive or confined to traditional roles, and in fact, in the mythology, she ruins her own husband.
	Her own husband is a guy called Tammuz, he's the god of life, and he's lovely, he's very kind, he loves her, and she betrays him and condemns him to an eternity in the underworld.
	So when she goes to Gilgamesh and says, Gilgamesh, I'm kind of into you, you're a bit of a chad, he's like...
	Piss off whore.
	And he literally just, he rejects her, saying, piss off whore.
	I've seen all of these guys, because she's got a list of guys she's ruined, right?
	She's got a body count.
	He lists her body count and says, you've ruined all of these men.
	Why would you think I would be interested?
	Your thought go away.
	So how does Ishtar take it?
	Does she take it well?
	No.
	She goes to her father, Anu, who's like the sort of primordial king of the gods, and is like, look, release the bull of heaven, which wreaks havoc on the land, kills thousands of people.
	Bull, again.
	Yeah, exactly.
	But kills thousands of people.
	Out of her resentment and pain of rejection, she's prepared to just wreak havoc and destroy and kill loads of people.
	And of course, Gilgamesh and Enkidu slay the Bull of Heaven, and Enkidu takes the Bull's buttocks and throws it in her face to humiliate her.
	The point being is that this is very similar to, and very much encapsulated in Julius Savola's Revolt Against the Modern World, which is an entirely spiritual text, talking about this transference of moral authority.
	From the earliest agricultural, lowest-to-the-ground civilizations to the solar aspect that comes with the Indo-Europeans, the transcendence of the heavens, and actually the setting of order that is good for everyone, and not just for the power-seeking, selfish people who are in charge.
	I don't know if I'm sort of stepping on where you're going with this, but I can't help be thinking about the current situation.
	You are.
	You are.
	Okay, but I'll hold it back then.
	So the solar aspect is represented in masculinity.
	It's the mythology of the North.
	It's the sun, the sky, the light, authority, transcendence, masculine force.
	And so we get heroic, aristocratic, warrior-based civilizations.
	The Roman Empire, for example.
	The Indo-European traditions.
	Imperial Japan.
	Ancient Iran.
	He says Islam as well, in fact.
	It's another thing for him.
	But the point...
	Well, Islam probably is a solar.
	Yeah, in a way.
	I've got criticisms of it, but like, fine, we'll just let it go for now, right?
	But the Solar Man is setting an order which is designed to bring justice to the entire civilization.
	He is not just serving himself.
	And in fact, most of the time it's self-sacrifice that is required to bring this about.
	On the other aspect, we have the Lunar Man, the mythology of the South, where the Earth is excessively fertile and provides everything for you without any hard work or any differentiation between good and bad, quality and...
	Being poor.
	And so this is symbolized by the moon, the earth, caves, fertility, passivity, femininity, and you get the sort of matriarchal agrarian societies that come out of this.
	And this means that the Ketelhoek archetype of the corpulent...
	Den mother on her throne is it's designed to serve her in a tyrannical way to provide for her baseless desires so she can become fecund and continue to replicate this.
	If I just make a very quick point, this is a conversation I've had actually with my fiancé of all people recently about the fact that...
	Pathological femininity, the tendency of pathological femininity is to expand, whereas the tendency of pathological masculinity is to retract and to become small.
	And I think these are kind of related concepts.
	Absolutely.
	It's entirely the ethos.
	And the reason I'm telling all of you people this is because I want you to have this kind of image in your mind.
	There are two different ways of doing civilization.
	And for the last couple of thousand years, we've had...
	The Chad Indo-European Skyfathers in various geysers, you know, I'm not trying to make truth claims, but the general ethos has been of the Skyfather and his...
	Structuring an order through the patriarchal realm, and Engels is furious about this.
	He's like, no, look, the only way this can work, the communism can work, is we return to the ethos of the den mother, where actually everything is undifferentiated and returns to the earth and is the lowest common denominator.
	It's difficult to imagine you could understand it at that level and still choose it.
	Yes, yes.
	So, I mean, yeah, that's precisely correct, and that's why anything that infuriates Engels is an ally of mine.
	So, you know, God save the Skyfather.
	But just as a quick quote from Revolt, does this sound familiar, right?
	During festivals that celebrated Chthonic goddesses and the return of men to the Great Mother, all men felt themselves to be free and equal.
	Cast and class distinctions no longer could be applied, but could be freely overturned, and a general licentiousness and pleasure in promiscuity tended to be rather widespread.
	Because they are trying to return us to the civilization of the Den Mother.
	Because prior to this, we had standards, we had exclusion, we had status, we had good against bad, recognized as being different.
	And that's all the earthy religions of the previous...
	Whereas they're basically promoting the old version of Men for Harris, or whatever they called it.
	White guys for Harris.
	White guys for Harris, that's it.
	And so, have you ever seen the film 13th Warrior?
	Great film.
	Right, you should watch it.
	Zoomers, go on Netflix or wherever you can find this, go and watch 13th Warrior, because this is such a perfect pop culture representation of everything that I've just been talking about.
	And it's kind of crazy how it presages it.
	So the Norse warriors are, of course, pagans, who are the followers of Odin, and they take an Arab along with them to discover what is actually important about their religion.
	So somewhere in the north of Norway, a town is being attacked.
	By these kind of cave-dwelling savages.
	And it's just, where have these come from?
	There are hordes of them.
	Hordes of these absolute cannibal savages.
	And so the 13 warriors have been requested to come and save them.
	And in the process of this, look at what they find.
	A Venus den mother icon.
	And they're like, oh god, this is weird.
	And so we're seeing a direct conflict between the telluric, debased...
	Cannibal society versus the heroic Nordic.
	Because they're very much masculine energy.
	100%.
	It's 12 guys who are bound together by tradition and blood and shared customs and culture, and the 13th guy is not bound by any of that, but he wins his position through merit and through proving himself.
	Precisely correct.
	He does the right thing for the right reasons.
	This is the Den Mother.
	You can see the snake around her, and that claw she's got is a poison that she scratches people with.
	And it's up to Bulvai, the leader, to go and fight her.
	And he does fight her, but she scratches him in the process.
	And so Bulvai dies in the final battle.
	Oh, I was hoping you were going to do the prayer.
	I love this prayer.
	Yes, so you can see the prayer, and you can see that this is...
	Directly solar, masculine and exclusive and hierarchical.
	And he dies in the last battle, poisoned but fighting to the death, against the hordes of the now furious cannibals who come out of the caves because he's killed the den mother.
	But they win, of course, because this is how these things work.
	Do we have time to read the prayer for those who are listening?
	Go ahead.
	It is good.
	It's look there I see my father.
	Look there I see my mother and my sisters and my brothers.
	Look there I see the line of my people back to the beginning.
	Look they do call to me.
	They bid me to take my place amongst them in the halls of Valhalla where brave men lie forever.
	I mean what a sentiment.
	It's amazing.
	And so, yes, he dies during the battle, but it's epic, and it's amazing you should go and watch this film, because it actually exactly represents the conflict between these two ways of being that I'm talking about now.
	And so the reason I bring all this up is because...
	Which way of being does this represent?
	The idol has emerged again.
	Yes.
	It's almost the same statue, just bigger.
	It's...
	I mean, like, to...
	Like, it's so...
	For those who are listening, we've now got the Venus figure, but a 12-foot version that's been put in, what, New York?
	Well, let's see how it's described in the headline.
	12-foot plus-sized black woman statue who wants to talk to manager.
	That's how it's described in the headline.
	Yeah, but that's precisely what we have.
	And there's a...
	This is the return of the den mother.
	The return of the self-centred, corpulent, excessive, selfish way of living that feminism has brought about.
	Unexcellent.
	Uninspiring.
	Absolutely.
	There is no standard.
	There is just me.
	There is just the devouring ego of the den mother.
	You could almost have a caption on that image of just me.
	Yeah, no, that's precisely it.
	And in fact, they've got a quote from the author of this piece, the artist.
	This was installed at ground level on a low, wide base.
	The work invites engagement with hundreds of thousands of people who traverse the plazas every day.
	The woman in Grounded in the Stars cuts a stark contrast to the pedestalled permanent monuments, both white, both men.
	So there are two white men monuments that she's between.
	While she's, quote, embodying a quiet gravity and grandeur.
	Well, she definitely has gravity, I'll give her that.
	I mean, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that she doesn't grab attention, but for what reason?
	Now, the two statues of the white men...
	Are men who did things.
	You'll be surprised.
	What a contrast.
	They're real men.
	One of them is a famous actor, and then the other is a chaplain in the US military.
	I can't remember much about his story, but he did something important.
	I looked at Wikipedia very briefly.
	But the point is, they're there for reasons.
	They're not there for themselves.
	They are there because they helped others.
	And go back to your points of the 13 warriors.
	I mean, if you watch the film, they're very much aware that they're probably all going to die.
	But they're doing it for a reason.
	They're doing it because they have to do it.
	To uphold a transcendent order.
	And upholding all of those things that were in that prayer that we talked about just a minute ago.
	And you're so right, Charlie, this is just...
	There is nothing beyond her but besides herself.
	It's like spiritually downward facing.
	Whereas the other two, I imagine, are spiritually upward facing.
	She wants to be on a throne in a cave with you bowing at her feet and providing her with resources.
	She provides nothing.
	Absolutely nothing.
	It is all about her.
	It's the most self-centred thing I've ever seen in my life.
	This is just, I'm important because I am.
	And it's like, well, I'm sorry, that's not how the Skyfather has these things.
	I don't agree.
	I do think secular...
	People massively underestimate the importance of these symbols, because this is in Times Square, right?
	Millions of people will see this, and it will be, whether it's in their peripheral vision or directly, it will make an imprint on their psyche.
	And that does actually have a real effect, because, again, what is being embodied, what's being celebrated and worshipped here?
	Well, it's not excellence, as we've been saying.
	And I find it so fascinating, which is your point, Carl, how these images and idols always come back.
	They always re-manifest themselves, especially in times of chaos as well.
	Because we live in a time of chaos, and surprise, surprise, people are worshipping the self, ultimately.
	And this is the entire point of it.
	It's the dark heart of the Den Mother that is being on display here.
	It's the selfish tyranny of the lunar archetype.
	And they are just open about it.
	And the thing is, the reason they get away with this is because we just don't think in these terms anymore.
	It's like, no, I want the heroic solar masculine who conquers and sets the righteous order for everyone, not someone who represents a selfish, consuming tyranny.
	And I really think this is actually important.
	I say this as someone who's an atheist who couldn't help but read a bunch of this stuff and go, yeah, no, this does map onto a bunch of things that are happening, actually.
	And I think this is just such a perfect example.
	This is the modern Venus statue.
	As one just other point, there is a statue of a golden calf on Wall Street.
	Yes, there is.
	What does that tell you?
	It's another one of these things.
	People just walk past it and think nothing.
	These things matter.
	These are deep symbols.
	The symbols that we have around us matter.
	But your point about how the sort of...
	The age of great men is coming back.
	Yes, the age of great men, the age of hard power over soft power over managerialism, and at the moment that is only represented in something like China and perhaps Russia.
	You know, those kind of solar empires.
	The West needs to get its act together and become a solar empire once again.
	Otherwise, that whole curb-stomping thing is going to happen again.
	To us.
	Yes.
	Yeah, exactly.
	If we become the weakened civilization of the Den Mother, we'll come.
	We don't stop.
	If we don't reverse this trend, then we're in trouble.
	But we'll leave that there.
	Pete's pointed out that it is VE Day today.
	We're going to do something about tomorrow, I think.
	It's not that we don't, obviously.
	It's not that we're obviously not thankful.
	Things are time-based, unfortunately.
	Anyway, do we have video comments today, Samson?
	Hector says, the main reason Trump isn't being radical is the judiciary keeps stonewalling him legally, and should he violate it in any way, he uses his excuse to impeach him, and he's trying to give him as little ammunition as possible.
	Yeah, now that is a fair point.
	It is, at the moment, ruled by judges in America.
	Stephen Miller's making this point very persuasively, frankly, because, I mean, they just shouldn't have the authority to do what they are doing, is very clear, but we'll talk about that another time.
	Let's go for it.
	I need a weapon!
	He knows!
	Fear me!
	Okay, moving on.
	Let's go to the next one.
	So I've got a couple of dollars here, but this one has been freshly minted, and you know this because on the back of it, you've got old King Charles.
	Well, this one here has got Queen Elizabeth.
	We haven't made too much of a difference with our currencies lately.
	We've just minted this one last year, as you can see from the date for Ikea, although you can't see it very well.
	This is a $2 one, which is the last one that they minted of the late Queen Elizabeth.
	Why do the Australians use dollars, not pounds?
	Yeah, it's very subversive.
	Yeah, I don't like it.
	Sort it out, lads.
	It's been a very strange time here in Canada since Trump took office.
	The hitherto docile Canadian people, to whom the word patriot was roughly synonymous with third positionist, are suddenly boycotting American products and flying Canadian flags everywhere.
	Turn on CBC on any given day and you'll be seeing unironic blood and soil arguments that the American and Canadian peoples are simply too distinct to truly mix with constant appeals to the Canadian identity.
	Of course, none of this when Herr Trudeau was importing millions of people claiming that there's no such thing as Canadian culture or proudly announcing that Canada is the first post-national...
	I should like to imagine this energy might be more productively oriented, but I fear time is fast running out.
	Yeah, I watched Dave Green's podcast, Fiddler's Green podcast, talking about this.
	He visited Canada, thinks he's an American with an American license plate on his car, and so he was just getting racially abused, being an American, when he went to certain Canadian stores and stuff, natively Canadian stores.
	And it's just like, Jesus Christ, like...
	Canadian boomer nationalism is on the rise.
	Infinite Indians but no Americans.
	I can't wrap my head around Canada.
	I really can't.
	I don't know enough about the planet.
	I think it's Canadian boomers is the primary issue.
	Perennial boomer.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Carney is an incompetent and a security risk.
	Americans won't know about the socialist payments between provinces, but the British will recognise it as a parallel to the Barnet formula.
	In order to pay for Carney's incompetence, Alberta and Saskatchewan will be screwed footing the bill.
	This gives Trump exactly what he wants.
	They may consider seceding, and Trump will give them incentives.
	This is how Trump turns Canada into the 51st state.
	The Chinese will try to prop Carney up, but they will fail and instead rip Canada apart for Trump to sweep up.
	I mean, that is a bold prediction.
	I look forward to seeing how that plays out.
	I mean, it's actually the Quebec and that northern bit, Natura, that's the bit he needs to control the Arctic flow going in between Greenland, but I suppose you can do it piece by piece.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Afternoon, Lotus Caesars.
	I was just looking for your opinion on a hypothesis of mine I came to when doing the research for military elective monarchy and the precursor to English hegemony.
	That the Anglo is really at his peak when he embodies this holy trinity of Latin honour, Germanic invention and work ethic, and then, quite frankly, our love of small towns and this Tolkien-esque, Hobbit-like behaviour.
	Thanks very much.
	That was wonderful for you, Cole.
	Honestly, we've only got two minutes left.
	I don't have time to get into it.
	But I will consider doing something on that, because I think there is something to be said for it.
	Let's get to the next one.
	music
	I wonder what this is representing.
	Very good, yes.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Do not come.
	I'm gonna come.
	Jeff Bezos came, Bill Gates came, Mark Zuckerberg came, many of them came numerous times, the bankers have all come.
	Okay, highbrow content.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Thanks to these guys.
	Somewhat related to my first segment.
	Someone online points out that Zeus also married his own sister and he was a slave to his base desires.
	Look, man, I was summarizing many thousands of years of mythology.
	Give me a break.
	Zeus never ate his own kids, all right?
	Arizona Desert Rat says, how much do you want to bet the feminists interpret it?
	Gilgamesh's rejection of Ishtar as an early representation of the oppressed patriarchy.
	Yeah, I mean, you can easily find Gilgamesh being represented as a base misogynist hero.
	So, yes, they of course absolutely do.
	Cronus is a leftist confirmed.
	Yeah, I mean, this is the thing.
	All of these things is genuinely the ethos between left and right.
	But it's older forms mapping themselves onto...
	You know, our modern political spectrum as we think of it.
	Because things haven't actually changed that much.
	Exactly.
	Well, the human nature doesn't change.
	The human condition hasn't changed.
	Exactly.
	Therefore, you know, these things, if allowed to, they will always re...
	Manifest and re-emerge.
	This is why young men have to think about embodying the solar archetype.
	You have to be the person who sets the order.
	It's just going to be that simple.
	And it's difficult.
	And often it involves self-sacrifice.
	But you get a better world out of it at the end.
	Unfortunately, on that note, we are out of time.
	Which is a real shame, because I'd love to have talked about this way, way more.
	Yeah, likewise.
	But, Charlie, where can people find more of you?
	You can find me at cfdowns underscore on all social media platforms.
	Again, I would encourage you to go and buy tickets to the Is Woke Dead debate.
	It's happening on the 4th of June in London.
	It's going to be a lot of fun.
	Otherwise, you can see all of my work at cfdowns.uk.
	Thanks so much for coming on, and we will see you in half an hour for Calvin's Common Sense Crusade, or tomorrow, if you are, for some reason, not subscribed to the website, go and subscribe.

▲