Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

May 23, 2025 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:29:09

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #1171

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hi there folks, welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Eaters for Friday.
	The 22nd.
	23rd.
	I had no idea.
	None of you can look at the date that's on your computer, or over there, actually.
	I couldn't.
	That's correct.
	Anyway, I'm joined by Harry and Charlie Downs, and today we're going to be talking about the unjust imprisonment of Lucy Connelly, Marco Rubio's strange glow-up in which he's That'd be fun.
	And five Marxist arguments against mass immigration that may surprise you.
	We're not being woke right about this, are we?
	Never.
	I've been accused and I was repudiating these accusations.
	Trying to learn from your enemies is the behaviour of somebody Of a communist, of a woke.
	Woke right, watch mojo, right here.
	Top five Marxist arguments.
	Good idea for a show, though.
	Anyway, let's carry on.
	All right.
	So, Lucy Colony...
	Colin...
	Lucy Connolly is now quite a famous case in England because she was arrested last year after the riots that were happening around the Southport murders for posting a tweet and given 31 months of prison time for it.
	and she has recently gone through an appeal for that prison time to see if she can get out early, and they said no.
	Currently, I believe that she is served about 280-something days in, A little bit less than a third into her overall sentence.
	It's nearly three years she got.
	Yes, and people are very upset about this whole fact because, well, the British government loves to punish people for tweets and things that they have said rather than things that people have actually done.
	Now, this is not to say anything to justify what it was that she posted originally because what she posted originally was quite stupid.
	Am I allowed to read it as reporting it?
	She said on Twitter, she said, this is on the day of the Southport killings back in July last year.
	Mass deportations now set fire to all the effing hotels full of the bastards for all I care.
	While you're at it, take the treacherous government and politicians with them.
	I feel physically sick knowing that these families will now have to endure.
	If that makes me racist, then so be it.
	So, clearly, something said, um...
	I would say maybe a fine is where I would go with it, given that, as we'll find out, as I'll show you, there are paedophiles in this country who get suspended sentence and don't see a day of prison time, and she currently has spent almost a year in there.
	And indeed politicians who assault their constituents, by the way.
	That's true.
	That was the Mike Amesbury case as well, wasn't it?
	Ten weeks suspended sentence.
	Oh, the system works.
	The system working as intended, punishing people for what they say rather than what they do.
	So again, she was jailed at Birmingham Crown Court after pleading guilty.
	She was told she would have to serve 40% of her sentence in prison before being released on license.
	That's how the system works at the moment.
	So that means that she's more than halfway through the sentence that she'll have to serve in prison.
	At the very least, there's that.
	But giving a written judgment, the three Court of Appeal judges said that her principal ground of appeal was substantially based on a version of events put forward by the applicant, which we have rejected.
	Her husband also rejected calls from local MPs for his resignation from West Northamptonshire Council, because he's a council member, I think a Tory council member.
	But he did lose his seat at this year's elections as Reform UK took control of the Unitary Authority.
	He said that Lucy posted one nasty tweet when she was very upset and angry about three little girls who were brutally murdered in Southport.
	She realized the tweet was wrong and deleted it within five minutes.
	Well, this is the point, I think, because I think anybody, you know, on that day, anyone could understand the way that she was feeling, right?
	Because I remember hearing about that news and just, you know, as everybody was just being distracted.
	I remember a very sinking feeling in my stomach.
	It really hit hard, especially as a father myself.
	Yeah, and those of us who do spend time online and have an ex-account like Connolly does, you can see the temptation to tweet something angry and stupid in that moment.
	Now, it's not advisable to do that, but that's what she did.
	And you'd think that the English justice system would be able to make some kind of allowance for that.
	There'd be a kind of human understanding.
	like look it was a stupid thing to say and maybe you do deserve...
	Maybe.
	I'm open to that argument.
	But actually, it's the coldness and the kind of clinical way that she's been dealt with where there's no understanding of that human element of this story that I think is so troubling, especially in the context of other far more heinous crimes going effectively unpunished.
	Other crimes that were being committed at the same time as this as well.
	This was just another one of those cases, like the way the police were hoovering up people who were standing around on the pavement near the protest.
	The government wanted to set an example and they wanted to let people know if you dissent against us this is how we're going to treat you.
	I saw an interesting take as well on this, which is that Lucy Connolly can now be used as a statistic to cite, here's the threat of the far right, and here's an instance of far right crime that someone's now imprisoned for.
	But there is extra context as well which this article puts forward, which is pretty...
	Basically, she has lost a child before.
	Her 19-month-old son passed away tragically because the NHS did not give him the care that he needed when he was very, very ill.
	They dismissed his illness, sent her home, and then he died overnight.
	Harrowing thing to experience, and she herself is also a childminder.
	So she's experienced this kind of thing before, has very close contact with children, obviously a very caring person.
	So this kind of news is going to affect somebody like this.
	Even harsher than it will affect many of the other people who were rightfully upset about the Southport murders.
	And following her deleting the initial tweet, later on in the week she was tweeting out other things saying, like basically condemning rioting, where she said, FFS, I get that they're angry, I'm effing raging, however this is playing right into their hands.
	I do not want civil unrest on our streets.
	Tommy Robinson is not going to say, but this is not going to get anyone anywhere.
	Protests, yes, but not riots.
	She also wrote at the end of that week, Last night was not protesting, it was rioting.
	People are playing right into the hands of the establishment and the media.
	We need people to come together intelligently.
	and articulately, not riots.
	And then to finish it off, she posted, I know people are angry, but violence is not the answer.
	So she clearly realized that she'd made a stupid mistake, backtracked it and tried to give the appropriate message, which is, again, violence was not the answer in response to this.
	And she was right in saying that she was being...
	That didn't matter.
	None of that mattered.
	None of the extra context mattered.
	Stamped immediately with 31 years...
	That would be excessive.
	Yeah, it would be very excessive.
	She was charged under Section 19 of the Public Order Act and also stirring up racial hatred, etc.
	and she pled guilty for it, as so many did immediately following the arrests because most people would have been Because I believe that she got a bit of a reduced sentence for pleading guilty.
	Many of these people probably could have actually got much better sentences or got off if they'd pursued it.
	But you're in that situation, you're intimidated, you're scared.
	Most of these people are not criminals.
	Yeah, they don't have any interaction with law enforcement or the judiciary.
	Outside of maybe walking past the police officer.
	Well, yeah, exactly.
	Like, no actual, like, knowledge of how the system works.
	Voice of Wales came on the other day, and they gave us the example of this Welsh squaddie who just said, I'm not pleading guilty.
	Because he had posted something not this inflammatory, admittedly, on Twitter or Facebook.
	And he was just like, no, I'm not pleading guilty.
	Because what he posted was just completely rational.
	And, yeah, okay, don't get me wrong.
	In Lucy's case, that was more inflammatory.
	But I do agree that there's not only mitigating circumstances, but the fact that she deleted it very soon after, and then was posting, don't write, don't do this.
	I mean, there are all of these mitigating circumstances that probably could have gotten her a better sentence, or maybe no sentence, maybe community service or a fine.
	Best case scenario.
	But she was intimidated.
	She had no idea how to navigate through the system, so of course she's get told by some guy this is the best you're gonna get.
	Don't fight it.
	She's gonna go with it.
	It's very clear that the cold face of the state has been turned against.
	Yeah, and I do think that the judicial system is one of those things where the complexity of the system is part of the, it's kind of part of a strategy.
	It's part of the point.
	Yeah, what do they say?
	It's the process is the punishment type kind of thing.
	Because somebody like Lucy Connolly, why would she have any knowledge of the intricacies of the British judicial system?
	If she's told by a figure of authority, plead guilty and you get off, or you'll get a lighter sentence, why wouldn't she?
	And yet, we've seen how that's It's purposefully labyrinthine and confusing, so that if you as the normal law-abiding citizen gets thrown into it, then you have no idea how.
	The average law-abiding citizen has the underlying assumption that the state is basically on their side, and that actually, if I just follow the procedure because I was well-meaning and I pay my taxes and I obey the law, therefore I'm going to get dealt with fairly.
	And we can see in the case of Lucy Connolly, no.
	The state had an intention with this.
	The intent, as Keir Starmer just came out and just completely flatly said, we are going to punish you.
	You are going to jail.
	We are going to make sure you're an example that other people, when the next tragedy happens, will refer back to and say, yeah, okay, maybe I can't do anything because I'll just be oppressed, basically.
	And certainly the system is not on your side because our...
	independent courts, as they are known as, are completely captured because the judge who handed down this 31-month sentence literally gave her a little diversity is our strength speech as he declared the sentence.
	He said, it is a strength of our society that it is both diverse and inclusive.
	There is always a very small minority of people who will seek an excuse to use violence and disorder causing injury, damage, loss and fear to wholly innocent members of the public and sentences for those who incite racial hatred and disharmony in our society are intended to both punish That's what Orwell would call duck speak.
	Yeah.
	You know, just parroting along the state lines.
	Interestingly, our judiciary is not independent.
	We aren't the United States.
	It's all part of the same institution, which is ultimately flowing from the Crown.
	So, we don't have independent judges.
	Well, I mean, Starmer, Starmer in defending this, he said we do.
	Rupert Lowe stood up in Parliament and said, Does the Prime Minister agree that imprisoning Lucy Connolly, a young mother with a 12-year-old daughter, for one foolish social media post soon deleted is clearly not an efficient or fair use of prison?
	Fair point to make when also our prisons are almost entirely filled up.
	Which is Starmer's point.
	Yes.
	Keir Starmer said that sentencing was a matter for our courts and celebrated the independence of the judiciary.
	They're not independent.
	I mean, I don't know how to say it.
	They're literally not independent.
	Well, according to Stammerlund, Someone who knows how the British Constitution works better than him, apparently.
	I think you'll find Keir Starmer was...
	Well, but he does also say that he's strongly in favour of free speech.
	Oh yeah But also Yeah, yeah.
	But also, again, This is Mary Glinden, who has said that the 31-month prison sentence handed to her was unduly harsh, and that she doesn't pose a threat to the public.
	I don't mean to laugh.
	Obviously she doesn't.
	I don't mean to laugh, but it's...
	That has to be said by an MP.
	But the thing is, this Labour MP Mary here doesn't understand the nature of what is happening.
	What is happening is the British public, the white British native majority, are being expressly told here, you will not complain about what happens to you.
	You will not complain about what happens to your country.
	And if you get out of line, outside of the very tightly prescribed boundaries, we're going to come down on you with all of the force of the state.
	All of it.
	And then we'll lie to your face and say this is independent and, you know, ideologically neutral and all these other sort of nonsense catchphrases they use.
	It's just not true.
	You are being oppressed by your own government.
	That's what this is.
	It's the language of institutional democracy to make sure that you think that this is all just a nice, neutral, abstract system that runs by itself.
	Yeah.
	But on the whole point of no threat to the public, that this is unduly harsh, in response to all of this, The Telegraph put out this interesting article talking about the rapists, paedophiles and terror offenders given shorter sentences than Lucy Connolly.
	So she got 31 months for a tweet.
	What examples do The Telegraph give of people who've done far worse?
	Before we go on, let's just cast our minds back to...
	And within 24 hours, several of them had re-offended already.
	Big surprise, right?
	Yeah, he let out actual criminals and murderers.
	Yeah.
	And it's so, okay, right, why did you do that, Keir?
	Well, the prisons are overflowing, and the Conservatives left us with the prison population.
	The prisons are about to fail any day now, was their line.
	And so, okay, what now?
	Well, Lucy Connelly has to go to jail.
	All of these Southport riders have to go to jail.
	even though most of them actually didn't do very much.
	There's a handful of them who try and set fire to the...
	To the hotels.
	Yeah, okay.
	Those, you know, someone who threw a brick at the police.
	Okay, yeah, fine.
	But there were loads and loads of people who basically just posted things on social media, always shouting from the sidelines, and just grabbed, arrested.
	They needed to pump the numbers up so that the media could have a nice field day talking about how violent they were.
	Look at all these arrests that were made.
	People reading them will just get shocked by the sheer number of them.
	24-hour courts going to process them.
	And it's like, right.
	So just be aware the system is against you.
	That is just the thing to take from this.
	I think, by the way, that there are plans to release more prisoners, this time sex offenders and domestic abusers.
	That would be nice to have those people out there.
	I think part of the reason for the chemical castration is that they are thinking of releasing these people, and apparently it reduces recidivism on sex offenders by 60%.
	Is that it?
	I was going to say, I would have thought it would be more as well.
	I think what they mean by chemical castration is that they pump them full of hormones to reduce their sex drive.
	But it's not permanent, though, right?
	No, I don't believe so.
	If you want to prevent rapists and murderers from repeat offending, I have a much more permanent solution.
	But that's not been allowed in England for a while.
	That was banned in 1964, unfortunately.
	I am sort of enjoying the kind of schizophrenia.
	Enjoying is probably the wrong word to use.
	The schizophrenia of this Labour government is just, like, amusing to watch from afar, because on the one hand, it's all, you know, the diversity is our strength stuff we're hearing, and then on the other, it's chemically castrating sex offenders and putting prisoners to work.
	Let's break down the demographics on that.
	Is that a racist policy here?
	Because I think it might turn out to be.
	But also, the hardline anti-immigrant deport-them-all rhetoric.
	We're coming for you.
	Yeah, exactly.
	It's like, we're coming for you, we're going to deport you or castrate you.
	It's like, Jesus Christ.
	And the thing is, They're trying to play for the Daily Mail readers.
	100%, but it's absolutely not working.
	That's the thing.
	Keir Starmer's never been lower in the polls.
	And they did a YouGov poll that broke down by party affiliation or intentional voting.
	And 50% of Reform voters polled realised that Keir Starmer was trying to win them over, but only 4% were like, yeah, I might consider it.
	So it's not working.
	People know what you're doing.
	Well, I think people can hear the words.
	They can see you saying the words, but it's whether they believe you're actually going to follow through.
	And this raises the question of whether Starmer's actually going to last until 29. And I don't buy necessarily that he will, because I think that, as mad as this might sound, I think you could sell...
	She's got a little bit of that common touch about her, as much as people don't like her.
	She's not a detestable person like Keir Starmer is.
	Exactly.
	And I saw a story yesterday that said that she was positioning herself in that kind of way.
	I don't think she's her best and brightest or anything, but like, you know...
	The problem with that is, alternatively...
	Sure, yeah.
	I cannot take Angela Rayner seriously.
	On a pure aesthetic level, Angela Rayner is clearly a council estate...
	I want to say it, but I won't say it.
	Keir Starmer...
	Terrible.
	Terrible things, yes, but he's got things done and the British ship of state needs somebody in charge who gets things done.
	He's a Blairite for a reason.
	He has that behind it for a reason.
	But anyway, back on to this.
	So here's just some of the examples of people who got better sentences than Lucy Connolly.
	So Hugh Edwards, everybody's favourite disgraced BBC presenter.
	Yeah, yeah.
	I mean, need you say?
	Well, yeah, good point.
	BBC presenter.
	Tautological, isn't it?
	Yeah, so he had indecent pictures of children, quite a lot of them, some of them very young.
	Suspended six-month sentence.
	Jack Davies got images, I believe, off of the same person that Hugh Edwards got his images off of and also had Class A drugs on him at the same time.
	Suspended 12-month sentence.
	Has this guy another BBC presenter?
	No.
	I can't tell.
	But he did argue that he should get the same treatment as a BBC presenter.
	Of course.
	He and I were the same, you see.
	Yeah, well, they are.
	Child rapist.
	Oh.
	Suspended two-year sentence.
	Why?
	I mean, why do I ask?
	Why do I ask?
	Yeah, and then he breached the terms of his sentence by flying to Egypt without notifying officers.
	And then he had avoided jail again.
	It's...
	The judge said the only reason you have escaped immediate custody Is Lucy Connolly in his place or something?
	I would only assume so, because look, he was convicted in August of 2024, the month of all of the mass arrests.
	So presumably they needed, the prisons were in more need of putting Lucy Connolly behind bars.
	As was yelling racist slurs at the police, so you're going to have to go free.
	Unironically, she is a greater threat to them than a child rapist is.
	Well, yeah, I suppose.
	Domestic abuser, suspended 21 month sentence, and 10 year restraining order, but...
	Doctor with child abuse images.
	Mansur Khan.
	Suspended sentence.
	Eight months?
	Only eight months?
	Another rapist with a suspended sentence.
	Big surprise, eh?
	That was in Swindon.
	Yeah, Swindon rapist walks free, but he got 43 days in a sex offending program.
	Nikhil Chopra.
	And ordered to pay £187.
	Oh, wow.
	So, finally, the state has been reimbursed for your rape.
	Thank you very much, sir.
	And this man, Charles Cannon, who actually was, by the looks of it, planning on Oh, really?
	Collected documents on how to make homemade explosives and weapons and did a lot of Fed posting.
	A lot of Fed posting.
	also suspended sentence.
	So this guy Because he's a right-wing terrorist.
	Yeah, by the looks of it...
	That is wild.
	Sometimes it just seems like it might just be, well, obviously with Lucy Connelly it was the environment, given the situation, and it might just be look of the draw with the judge as well.
	Yeah.
	Because they're all so independent.
	But one of the other interesting things I just want to end on regarding this is just to clear up that whatever you may think of Lucy Connelly, she's definitely not an actual racist.
	She just seems like a bit of a normie.
	she might be a Tommy Robinson fan, like, centre-right normie type, because there's now reports come out since her appeal was denied, which have upset some people, that she helped a Nigerian family become British citizens by sponsoring them.
	Dr. Henny Enyi said the childminder had gone out of her way to help with her family's application for British citizenship, even providing character references, and this is also tied to the fact that part of the news media is now going with the ones that support At least she was sponsoring a doctor.
	Yeah, I suppose there was that.
	But I do find it interesting that she's just a very, very normie person who probably is just against mass migration.
	She even sponsors these people.
	But because of how horrific the situation was last year, it just tipped her over the edge into Fed posting.
	It's crazy how unjust this is.
	Yeah.
	Absolutely crazy.
	And, yeah, this is just how the British state works.
	We also have that old Middle East Eye article showing us that the next time that this will happen, they will do the same things over and over and over again.
	Anything to manage the perception, the media response to a crisis, rather than actually handling the origin of the crisis, solving the problem in the first place.
	They don't want to do that, so this is the system working.
	BrainBiscuit says, It's more by particular groups of people, actually.
	You're allowed to be angry about George Floyd happening all the way across the Atlantic Ocean.
	As long as an American cop has killed a black man in America.
	Go and protest and burn things down as much as you like, apparently.
	But anyway, yeah.
	That's not our advice, by the way.
	Yeah, no, that's our assessment of what the British state thinks.
	And the drunk changeling says, the police put another weight on the pressure cooker and congratulate themselves on the job well done.
	Yeah, but the thing is, you've got to remember that the police are hardly our best and brightest.
	So, you know, what are you going to do?
	Anyway, so I thought we were talking about something a little more cheery, which is Marco Rubio.
	Because Marco Rubio has revealed himself to be something of a dark horse.
	And nobody really saw this coming because Marco Rubio, as far as I was aware, was just some rhino.
	who was just some normie Republican, you know...
	A conic kind of character.
	Yeah, just very normal.
	I've never paid much attention to him, frankly.
	I hadn't paid that much attention to him because everything I'd seen was him, just the cookie-cutter Republican, safe narrative.
	American commenters have a lot more knowledge of him, but looking from across the ocean, there were always much more interesting and notable American politicians to take note of.
	He just seemed very black.
	And so, I mean, you may remember that back in 2015 when Trump said, you know what, I'm going to do it.
	And everyone freaked out about it.
	I mean, after Trump was like, you know, the Mexico sending us people who have a lot of problems.
	They're bringing those problems to us.
	They bring drugs, bring crime, they're rapists.
	So on the normie Republican narrative with that back then.
	They were enemies at the time.
	Oh yeah, yeah.
	So I mean, that wasn't the other thing.
	He called Donald Trump a con artist, called him embarrassing, called him the most vulgar person to ever aspire to the presidency.
	And it was Marco Rubio who coined the small hands thing, I think, as well.
	But yeah, like, you know, We can't let him take over the Reagan and Conservative movement.
	And so it's like, right, okay, that was pretty normie.
	Like, pretty mainstream, centre, right, Republican.
	Talking points.
	Boring.
	Really uninspiring.
	And so it was nice when Donald Trump smacked him down, obviously.
	Marco Rubio is a total lightweight who I wouldn't hire to run one of my smaller companies.
	Highly overrated politician was one thing.
	Called him sweaty.
	Called him a puppet.
	Called him a nasty guy, although for some reason Facebook won't let us see that.
	And of course calls him Little Marco.
	And so this was a strange thing, how little Marco then became kind of one of Trump's closest friends and best buddies, which was interesting.
	So basically, Marco had been ingratiating himself into the Trump circle after Trump won the nomination and after he declared for 2024.
	And Trump passed over him for J.D. Vance.
	And so instead of acting like a salty bitch, Rubio was like, okay, well, I'm just going to work harder.
	I'm going to double down and I'm going to get the job done.
	And so he and Trump actually started working amicably on shared policy goals.
	And Trump realized, okay, he took the sort of, you know, the public ribbing quite well, gave as good as he got.
	Okay, so Marco Rubio basically starts getting a bunch of big jobs.
	He's now the top diplomat, foreign aid chief, national archivist, and national security advisor.
	And so he's doing a lot for Trump.
	It just shows you Trump's magnanimity, doesn't it?
	It does, doesn't it?
	The fact that if you can take it on the chin, Trump will respond.
	He likes it.
	Yeah, exactly.
	The king approves.
	Exactly.
	And so Marco Rubio.
	And I won't play this one because it's about four minutes long and it goes on.
	But I'm going to play a bunch of clips that are just, okay, I didn't realize you had this in you, Marco, and I'm loving it.
	So you've got this first one about USAID, where Marco Rubio is just like, no, everything that Elon Musk did with USAID is good, and we need to do more.
	And I have to tell you directly and personally that I regret it.
	I yield back.
	And I respond.
	You may sit.
	We can't hear this one very well.
	I think it went down in volume for me.
	Yeah, that went the wrong way.
	As you can see here, quote, I'm very proud of what we've done with USAID.
	I don't regret cutting $10 million for male circumcisions in Mozambique.
	Yeah, good.
	Why would you be doing that?
	We spent $227,000 for Big Cat's YouTube channel from USAID.
	We spent $40 million from social cohesion in Mali.
	Whatever the hell that means.
	So I can go on and on.
	I got the list here and there's more.
	I didn't even bring the whole list.
	I don't know how this makes us stronger and more prosperous as a nation.
	Well, I can't explain how male circumcisions in Mozambique make America stronger.
	I have to admit.
	Something to do with inclusivity and diversity.
	I don't know.
	Democracy, surely?
	So in an RPG sense, diversity inclusivity is always a plus 10% buff to strength.
	That's how they seem to treat it.
	So if you're doing that and it's more diverse, then you're buffing your strength somehow.
	I guess you must be.
	Let's not forget, during Covid as well, the British government was doing very similar things to funding the YouTube channels.
	Remember, I think it was Philosophy Tube and a number of other of the BreadTube lefty channels were getting...
	I would have done it.
	You know, how much care?
	You're always looking for that big sell-out paycheck that never comes on.
	I know!
	I'm constantly being told we're being funded by Israel, but I'm like, I've never received a cheque.
	I would have more bedrooms than I do if we were being funded by Israel.
	But then you've got Marco Rubio on foreign aid, which is, again, just highly strong.
	Yes.
	We cancelled a bunch of contracts in USAID.
	Some were stupid and outrageous.
	Others didn't serve the national interest.
	And others we kept.
	And we are folding it under the Department of State.
	And you know why?
	Because we want it to be part of the toolbox of foreign policy.
	Not a standalone.
	It is not charity.
	Foreign aid is not charity.
	It is designed to further the national interest of the United States.
	Totally solid.
	Yeah.
	It's amazing the way that Trump is, like, terraforming the Republican Party.
	Oh, it's so good.
	People like Rubio, who, as you said, were just rhinos before, you know, conservatives, who are now basically, I mean, they sound like him.
	They sound like Trump.
	Yeah.
	It's great.
	Hardline nativists at this point.
	And it gets better, frankly.
	So, Rubio going on about immigration and just being like, no, no, no, no, no.
	Look, you understand.
	It's our immigration policy, not yours.
	Our immigration policy should be based on the national interest of the United States.
	Period.
	End of story.
	If there is a subset of people that are easier to vet, who we have a better understanding of who they are and what they're going to do when they come here, they're going to receive preference, no doubt about it.
	There are a lot of sad stories around the world.
	Millions and millions of people around the world.
	It's heartbreaking.
	We cannot assume millions and millions of people around the world.
	No country can.
	So you have to have a We do it all the time.
	We do it in our immigration system now under our current laws.
	Unfortunately, it's primarily based on family connection and not on what they're going to contribute to the society from a merit standpoint.
	That should be changed, but that'll require statutory changes.
	But the bottom line is, this notion that somehow we have to accept anyone who wants to come to the United States is absurd.
	No country in the world has an immigration policy like that.
	yeah but but again notice that what he's doing that he is explicitly carving out wheat I love that he keeps using that phrase national interest as well.
	Yeah.
	Because that's such a, you know, you think that's such a sort of politician-y type phrase.
	But it's not one you hear our leaders use.
	No.
	You never hear Keir Starmer talk about Britain's national interest.
	you know, Chagos, mass immigration, etc.
	On an international scale, there is such a thing as a national interest.
	So it is a completely legitimate political term to use.
	Like you say, we just don't use it anymore.
	Because our national interests are giving away our things to the global south.
	I love that he's talking about every apparatus of the state as being a tool to further the national interest, whether that's foreign aid.
	Or immigration, which is obviously the correct way to look at it.
	But again, our leaders don't look at it like that.
	It's been many years since I've heard someone speaking so clearly and forthrightly about what the purpose of government is, which is to advance the national interest, using the tools at their disposal for the advantage of the American people and not...
	Well, it's interesting to pair this up with the South African government's announcement regarding the Boer refugees going to America.
	Because one of the things that they put in there that was interesting that people mainly highlighted the fact that they were saying, oh, we're going to, we're not punishing them, we're making them pay for historic injustice.
	But one of the other things that they said that was very interesting was that they said that...
	Really?
	That's an interesting mask-off moment.
	That was very interesting, because basically what it says is that, and I think this is absolutely true, since 1948 and the UN being established, international law has basically been a resource extraction mechanism from Western nations to the Third World.
	I mean, that's literally what Keir Starmer is giving away the Chagos Islands for.
	So this kind of thing where you're reframing national interest to be actually national interest and instead of, let's just give away our stuff to crying non-white people.
	Yeah, that does go against the international order.
	and by the way you know i had a recent experience uh where i raised the idea of national interest on lbc as you may know um and you know every single other person in the room from the snp communist to the tory was saying how dare you speak in the language of you know they didn't literally say but they were effectively saying how dare you speak in In the language of moustache men.
	Yeah, well indeed.
	It's not though, is it?
	It's the language of every normal state prior to 1948.
	Yeah, but that's for you just being somehow outside the realms of acceptable discourse.
	It's mad.
	We're liberal global internationalists, says Ian Dale.
	Conservative.
	And that says it all, doesn't it?
	But that's the thing.
	SNP, communist, radical, Ian Dale, conservative.
	How could you, sir?
	Remarkable.
	Which is why it's so gratifying.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Not just Trump, but also Trump's agents in every place.
	It's like, no, no, no, this is the way it's going to be.
	And this is another great one, right?
	And Mark Ruby was like, yeah, we did.
	And we're going to do more.
	A student was a guest in the United States on a student visa.
	No one's entitled to a student visa.
	So you revoked her student visa based on an op-ed, which trumps the supreme law of the land, which is the Constitution.
	Someone's coming up here to stir up problems on our campus.
	We're going to revoke their visa.
	She didn't do any of that.
	Sorry.
	Okay, don't worry.
	But the point is, don't worry.
	The point is, in this, this woman is horrifically outraged.
	Oh, how could you?
	And Rubio just goes into it, and he's just like, listen.
	Can we get this right?
	Yeah, he's just like, listen, she was...
	And instead she decided she was going to join a radical left-wing organisation and start protesting and causing trouble.
	And so, yeah, no, we're going to revoke student visas for people who come here and cause trouble.
	And we're going to do more.
	We're going to keep doing this.
	It's not your human right to be in the United States.
	You have no constitutional right to a visa.
	There we go.
	Exactly correct.
	No, go away.
	It's completely within the jurisdiction of the Trump administration to say, no, not that person.
	Sorry, get out.
	And then you've got more like this.
	This is a long one, so I won't play it.
	But basically, he reiterates, again, the point.
	You are a guest in our country.
	And in fact, he says, if you invite me into your home and I start putting mud on your couch and spray paint in your kitchen, I bet you're going to kick me out.
	We're going to do the same thing if you come to the US as a visitor and create a ruckus for us.
	I encourage every country to do that.
	It's like, yes, why not?
	What is the argument against this?
	Sorry, you can't kick them out for causing trouble and, like, you know...
	It's like, yeah, no, we can.
	Whereas once again, compared to our situation, our leaders, when they are confronted with a situation where a guest is putting mud on the couch and spray painting the kitchen, will get out the fine china and say, do you want to throw these at the wall?
	Yeah, exactly.
	It's crazy.
	So anyway, yeah, Rubio not having any of it, and he keeps going.
	And so you've got this one.
	Hopefully we can hear this one.
	This is really good.
	In the case of El Salvador, absolutely.
	You cannot hear this one.
	Absolutely.
	We deported gang members.
	Gang members.
	And putting the vibrations of it through the wall.
	And that guy is a human trafficker.
	Basically, in this one, he's saying that, look, the judicial branch can just shut its goddamn mouth, right?
	Because, of course, the Trump administration's like, look, we're going to deport a bunch of gang members who are here illegally, and the courts have been trying to incede in this.
	And Rubio is just saying, no, no, no, no, listen, the courts don't get to decide.
	Our foreign policy or domestic policy when it comes to illegal immigrants.
	They just don't get to decide this.
	And you can see he's just not taking their shit.
	He's just like, no, this is how it's going to be because we're the ones who got elected and you aren't.
	It's about time.
	Yeah, no, it's absolutely about time.
	There's another one where the Pope came out and was like, well, And, you know, aren't you going to be compassionate?
	And Rubio's just like, listen, you're not a political figure.
	You're a spiritual figure.
	And there's nothing compassionate about illegal immigrants.
	Now, Marco Rubio is a Floridian Cuban, so I'm guessing he's Catholic.
	So to come out and be like, yeah, I actually don't care about what the Pope says about this.
	You could ask the Spanish during the Reconquista as well.
	Was it very Catholic of them?
	Well, I mean, to be fair, considering what they were up against, maybe.
	The Aztecs were pretty awful, and they were pagans.
	I was more talking about the Reconquista of the Iberian Peninsula.
	Oh, right, right.
	Well, yeah, I mean, I would say so, but I'm not a Catholic, am I?
	But the point being is that Rubio has been completely strong on all of these points, and he's making moral arguments.
	Against their attempt to moral shame.
	Rather than being just a standard conservative who goes, oh, good point, I'd literally have no principles or moral arguments.
	Well, it's just wild, because I'm a Catholic, right, and it's just wild to me that he's being presented with this argument, that somehow just being nice in a really vague way is somehow good Christian, literally, right?
	And yet, well, actually, you know, a lot of Christianity, you're sure there's a, you know, the mercy side of Christianity is what people think of, but actually there's a pretty substantial justice side of Christianity as well.
	People don't understand that what Jesus was actually preaching was a form of social justice.
	Circa about 2016.
	Just took us a few years to catch up.
	So yeah, again, he's just going on.
	And I think that the best one was this one, which I'm not going to try playing, so I'll just be disappointed.
	But he's arguing with Senator Tim Kaine, so, you know, Democrat grandee, about the South African refugees coming, and Tim Kaine is trying to accuse him of being...
	a racist.
	And Marco Rubio is just not having any of it.
	And so he says, you know, are you saying you've got a different standard based upon the colour of somebody's skin?
	And Rubio says, I'm not the one arguing that.
	Apparently you are because you don't like the fact that they are white.
	And, I mean, that's the bombshell.
	And it's so refreshing to hear a conservative figure not going, I promise I'm not racist.
	Yeah, exactly.
	He wasn't like, oh no, I'm not racist.
	He's like, no, you just hate the fact that they're white.
	And Tim Kaine's got nothing in response to this because he does hate the fact that they're white.
	And that is a good reframing of it as well because, yeah, well, obviously you have double standards.
	Yeah.
	I don't take lectures from people who just hate people because they're white because these people are in genuine danger of being murdered in a horrific way.
	Through racial grievance.
	So yeah, we're taking him in, because it seems to be the moral thing to do.
	And it's just, again, I didn't realise Rubio would have it in him, of all people.
	So, superb.
	And there was this one that was, again, just absolutely brilliant, just not taking the S. As Senator Chris here was like, look, I voted for you, and I regret voting for you to be Secretary of State.
	And Rubio was like, you regretting voting for me confirms I'm doing a good job.
	Completely unapologetic about all of this.
	And so, absolutely superb.
	Absolutely superb.
	I just wanted to give Rubio headpats for all of this.
	I just want to say, this chap is the, or he used to be the chair of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, so he's a big Democrat, and if he's saying that he regrets voting for Rubio, then yeah, it's a pretty good sign.
	Oh no, my enemies hate me.
	But that's the thing, right?
	He didn't think Rubio was his enemy.
	No.
	Interesting.
	I, a Democrat, I'm going to vote for you because I think you're a puppet.
	A little controllable, you know, uniparty Republican.
	And Rubio has actually come swinging out of the gates, being like, listen all you white-hating freaks, get out of my country!
	I regret voting for you.
	It's like, good, that means I'm doing something right.
	Do you know what this makes me wonder as well, is just about, you know, conservatives in general, in this country, for example, is how many of them are waiting for a Trump figure to emerge so that they can do a Rubio and come out the gates and start saying this sort of thing?
	I've been told by people who know a lot of, who have a lot of contacts on the inside, that the Tory and reform establishment is absolutely filled with people who think that they are the based one on the inside.
	Yeah, totally, totally.
	Somehow they're never the MPs, though.
	Yeah, they're just not the MPs, and they're not the ones in the position of power.
	Although there are Conservative MPs that I think, it looks like they're sort of, in a way, breaking ranks.
	Like Katie Lam is one who comes to mind, who's been incredibly strong on all of this sort of stuff recently.
	But no, it is something that I wonder.
	But the thing is, then I wonder, well, how is it that you can just sit there quietly and allow them to constantly trash your party, trash everything about the country, and be like...
	It's just a question of background.
	The time was yesterday, or now, or just immediately.
	I suppose what happened with Rupert Lowe was a nice wider message to spread to all the rest of them as well, which is that if you push a little bit too hard, we'll get the police involved.
	We'll get you arrested over trumped-up charges.
	Yeah, but the thing is, we just need some people who are just going to come out and be unapologetic.
	She's like, yeah, no, if you're not happy, that means I'm happy and I'm doing a good job.
	Yeah.
	Anyway, so Neo Amrila says, Rubio started out as one of the first Tea Party people elected.
	He softened when he got into the Senate.
	But since 2016, he came out as one of Trump's Florida mafia insiders, often seated behind Trump, besides Trump.
	Yeah, I know, it's been great.
	And the Engage View says, look, I don't care what caused Rubio's transformation from mincing metrosexual fop.
	Yeah, me too.
	A lot of people are just not really paying attention to just how much he's coming out and just slugging them, metaphorically.
	in the face and I wanted to.
	Yes.
	Anyway, let's move on.
	Can I grab the...
	Yeah, you can.
	Yeah, that's the one.
	That is interesting.
	I didn't know that he was a tea party guy to begin with.
	No, I didn't.
	So it seems like he let himself get swept up by the Washington establishment for the time there and then Trump has just fundamentally changed what Washington establishment is.
	Yeah.
	Last time I was on the show, I discussed the emergence of the post-woke left.
	And I'd like to continue in that vein, because I think there's a lot more to say.
	I specifically would like to talk about how the post-woke left, some of the figures that I discussed last time, are approaching the topic of immigration, which is the most pressing issue of our time in Britain.
	It's by far the most important issue to the majority of the public, as dozens, I don't know about dozens, but many, many polls show.
	It's hugely important.
	It has been for a long time, because the British public has been so poorly served by their leaders.
	Even on lefty polls like this, So, there should be a link down below to that if you're interested in coming.
	Let's begin.
	I want to present five Marxist arguments against mass immigration, okay?
	Because I think that it's important that we learn from our enemies.
	It's important that we take what we can from their ideas.
	And I think using their language against them, I've done this myself, it caused them to just sort of short-circuit.
	They don't know how to come back against it when you reveal them to be actually agents of the establishment and not the radicals that they like to imagine themselves as.
	So I want to begin.
	With a letter that Karl Marx himself wrote to two of his collaborators in the United States, Siegfried Meyer and August Vogt.
	In 1870, in which he speaks of the impact of Irish immigration to England.
	So he says that owing to the constantly increasing concentration of leaseholds, Ireland constantly sends her own surplus to the English labour market, and thus forces down wages and lowers the material and moral position of the English working class.
	And most importantly of all, every industrial and commercial centre in England now possesses a working class divided into two hostile camps, English proletarians and Irish proletarians.
	The ordinary English worker hates the Irish worker as a competitor who lowers his standard of life.
	And in relation to the Irish worker, he regards himself as a member of the ruling nation.
	And consequently, he becomes a tool of the English aristocrats and capitalists against Ireland, thus strengthening their domination over himself." This antagonism is artificially kept alive and intensified by the press, the pulpit, the comic papers, in short, by all the means at the disposal of the ruling classes.
	This antagonism is the secret of the impotence of the English working class, despite its organisation.
	It is the secret by which the capitalist class maintains its power and the latter is quite aware of this.
	It's making some good points, though.
	Yeah, but there's some real truth in there.
	I mean, obviously, it's all couched in the language of, you know, the English working class have a false conscience and they need to break out of it.
	Yeah, but actually, a lot of what he says there is totally spot on and very applicable today.
	So the first argument we're going to look at is the fact that mass immigration is a weapon of capital against Labour.
	So in 2017, here as reported by Politico, the business group London First was lobbying the government in the aftermath of Brexit for an increasingly liberal immigration policy.
	So we've got various property groups, real estate groups, financial services organisations, and then huge companies like Deloitte and Uber.
	Of course Uber's on there, right?
	London Gatwick Airport and all the rest of it.
	You know, these are not like communist organizations.
	This is capital, right?
	This is the capital.
	It's international capital.
	And these were the people in 2017 lobbying for an increased, sort of a more liberal immigration system.
	We also have...
	It's not the immigrants, it's the business owners.
	And it's like, there is really no distinction between those two, because who do you think the business owners are using against the natives, you fool?
	Yes, exactly, exactly.
	And this is the point, and this is really what I'm going to be driving at here, is that the idea that mass immigration is some kind of Marxist plot is just, I think it's just nonsensical.
	The language of progressivism and kind of liberalism is used to sell it to the masses as it being a kind of compassionate thing that people should embrace.
	But actually, the people who are really benefiting at the end of the day are people like this chap, the boss of Next, who in 2022 was urging the government to let more foreign workers in to ease labour shortages.
	Now, at the time, I mean, again, he was another Brexitee.
	He's a conservative.
	He's a conservative peer.
	and yet he's one of the foremost architects of the current immigration system that we have.
	It's like, oh, imagine it.
	And that's still mad.
	And of course he was a Tory peer.
	I hate the phrase labour shortages as well, because there's no shortage of labour.
	We've never had more population in this country than ever before.
	Cheap labour shortages, perhaps.
	Yeah, yeah, exactly.
	Who was it the other day who was complaining that 25...
	It was like, 25% of Birmingham is on benefits.
	It's like, yeah, there's no labour shortage.
	It's just we are incentivizing people not to work.
	Yes, yes, exactly.
	So obviously, you know, it was revealed yesterday that gross migration is now a million, with net being half a million.
	So I hope Lord Wolfson is happy.
	And just to be clear, I covered this yesterday.
	If you look at the graph, gross migration of a million is unprecedented prior to the Boris wave.
	If you take the Boris wave out of this, a net migration of nearly half a million is record-breaking migration into this country.
	So it's just the Boris wave makes that look less damaging.
	But it's still insane.
	Well, I think they are relying on the public having a short memory on this topic, but I don't think they do.
	Because you can see it around you.
	Yeah, you look at the high streets.
	Yeah.
	So just to drive home this point then that mass immigration is a weapon of capital against labour.
	It's very easily shown that mass immigration suppresses wages by supply and demand.
	You inflate the workforce, and especially when you introduce people from...
	You know, India, for example, the average salary, yearly salary, is £3,500, okay?
	And so why wouldn't those people come here when the economic prospects are so much better?
	I mean, there's also...
	What you're actually opening up is your domestic labour force to competition with international slave labour.
	Yeah, exactly.
	And you can't compete with international slave labor.
	That's a quick thing on this as well.
	It's not like leftists haven't historically made this argument.
	Of course.
	Jeremy Corbyn was making this argument 30 years ago.
	There's something about being a woke liberal globalist that they use the language of Marxism to go full universal globalism.
	And the Marxists are completely hamstrung by it.
	Because you've got people like Peter Kropotkin in The Conquest of Bread who points out, look, the wealth of the capitalist comes from the poverty of the labourer, because if he wasn't impoverished, he wouldn't work in the slave conditions for the international capitalists.
	And so you must, you know, any kind of immigration argument, it's...
	if you are looking at your own population saying, right, they're actually not poor enough to work in this kind of deep, embarrassingly subsistence position, we will just import people who know nothing else as competition for them.
	You can't possibly say that that's...
	In any way good for the country, good for the people.
	There's just no argument for it.
	And George Galloway, for example, still says this kind of thing.
	Despite the alliances that he makes, he does still believe this.
	And it's because he is actually a more orthodox kind of leftist.
	He's a sort of classic leftist.
	And so this is shown by the fact, obviously there are other facts at play, but since 2008, the average wages have just not kept pace with inflation, not kept pace with GDP growth as well.
	GDP has gone up, but GDP per capita has essentially flatlined since then.
	And all of this leads to the fact that most migrants who come here are actually imposing a net cost on ordinary people, on taxpayers.
	But hey, thank goodness, next to getting cheap labour, right?
	And the Deliveroo economy is just like, you know, what are they paying into the thing?
	There is also an interesting argument to be made regarding the birth rates as well, because birth rates are one of the ways in which they like to continually justify, well, if we don't have the birth rates, then we're going to find another way of replacing the population that's already here, so we need to bring people in.
	Even more recent research done suggesting that a greater diversity of ethnic groups within the population suppresses the birth rates.
	So they're creating the problem or making the problem worse with the solution.
	Again, it's poison for the cure.
	And this brings us to the next point, which is that mass immigration makes class consciousness impossible.
	Because this idea that a 23-year-old Eritrean Deliveroo driver is going to have some kind of brotherhood or kinship with a 56-year-old builder is just absurd.
	It's a crazy idea.
	I've covered this.
	Amazon have studied it within their own warehouses.
	They have a unionization metric by which they score different factors that lead to their staff unionizing in the warehouse and factories.
	And diversity reduces the chances of unionization drastically.
	Oh, really?
	Well, as a hyper-capitalist, I need to get some different hosts.
	Yes, very good.
	Just a quick thing on this as well.
	This is something that has, again, been known by the communists for a long time.
	So you remember the end of the Communist Manifesto is the working men have no country.
	They've already been stolen from by the capitalists.
	So working men of all countries unite.
	Well, come World War I, And even then, if you disintegrate the class itself, well then, what have they got?
	And this is the point, in order to have class consciousness, the precondition to that is a shared trust, a shared identity.
	This idea of the kind of international working class is just as sensical.
	On that point, recently I read a very interesting book called Russia Under the Bolshevik Revolution by Richard Pipes.
	And he's talking in the chapter about the attempts to export communism in the immediate aftermath of the Russian Civil War.
	And he talks about how they were setting off to war against Poland, because there was that short war there where they were trying to take over.
	And the Russians, Lenin, was just expecting that the Polish proletariat would be so eager to join up with the Red Army and usurp their own government.
	It turns out, in the aftermath of the Treaty of Versailles finally getting some kind of...
	The Polish proletariat was a lot more attracted to their own nationalism than they were to being part of the international proletariat.
	So the Russians completely fell flat on their faces.
	And it's in every case that this has happened.
	There's never been...
	The Hungarians ended up fighting back against it.
	That's what led to the rise of Mussolini, was fighting back against the red communist years from, I think it was 1918...
	All of those big evil movements in the early 20th interwar period, that was basically saying, no, we don't want Bolshevism.
	It's all a response to communism.
	Yes, yes.
	And so every case of response to communism.
	And so this low social trust that we are experiencing in our country because of mass immigration is making costs Oh, 100 strangers.
	But it's making class consciousness impossible because 50% said that they feel disengaged from society in general.
	I mean, how do you have class consciousness or solidarity with people who don't speak your language, whose culture you don't recognise, etc.?
	Moreover, we get a really good example of this in Swindon, but it's the same everywhere, really.
	Because the...
	Yeah, they're from everywhere.
	And so they can't even understand each other.
	Yes.
	And so there's no solidarity between them.
	They don't care about each other.
	Again, they look at each other with suspicion as they pass in the street.
	Which is in the interest of the capitalist class, because it keeps the working class divided.
	Exactly.
	So the capitalist has essentially the whip hand in this.
	They say, well, I'll offer you a job, and what else are you going to do?
	You haven't got a social network to respond.
	No.
	It's either that or begging the government for money.
	Totally, totally.
	And that's to say nothing of the crime brought by mass immigration, which is also a factor in degrading social trust and making class consciousness impossible.
	The third argument, from a Marxist perspective against mass immigration, is that it is neocolonial exploitation.
	That's totally true.
	Yeah.
	So between Q4...
	So these are countries that are teetering on the brink, where there's really no health infrastructure, and we are poaching their healthcare workers to prop up our own failing public services, and they're failing for a number of reasons, including immigration itself.
	It's like a kind of, you know, self-fulfilling thing.
	Cure off the poison, as you pointed out.
	Yes, exactly.
	So it's really, and that's to say nothing of the, again, sort of with my Marxist hat on, the kind of Western imperialism into the Middle East, for example, that has disrupted and destabilized that region, which has led to displacement of people, which has in turn led them to seek refuge, often illegitimately, in Europe.
	So there's an interesting sort of dovetailing here in the advance of medicine.
	It's not that society is actually that much less dangerous than it used to be.
	People survive from violence.
	Yes.
	This was Steven Pinker's sleight of hand in his The Better Angels of Our Nature book.
	Exactly.
	It's like, oh, we die a lot less than we used to.
	Yeah, because we can save a lot more people from dying.
	Exactly.
	But if you're in a third world country that just has naturally a much higher rate of violence, and we are stealing all of your highly trained doctors.
	Or disease.
	or disease or whatever it is.
	But, you know, you can see how And one would think that any self-respecting leftist would look at those countries which are genuinely in a terrible state where people are dying and there's immense human suffering, and they'd think, actually, maybe I shouldn't be supporting this project of exporting all of their labour to my country to prop up my quality of life.
	And it is so genuinely extractive as well, from purely a materialistic perspective, where it's like, look, those countries paid and raised and trained those people.
	All of the resources that required to make a doctor in Uganda or whatever.
	We're just pinching for £40,000, £50,000 a year or something like that.
	Which, that's, you know, we're stealing something.
	And how are they expected to compete when we have such a more powerful economy and are able to offer these people such a better quality of life?
	I'm going to have to drag us away from this wet sentimentality that the two of you are engaging in right now.
	And point out as well, a significant number of these will have been done on completely illegitimate grounds.
	That's also true.
	That is true, but that's the right-wing view.
	Yes.
	Well, I guess I have to be the right-wing view as usual.
	But the point is, from the left's own premises, from their own concerns.
	And that's how I'm approaching this.
	Which is just totally fair, because, you know, if you are a leftist watching this, what are your answers to any of these things?
	Yeah, and that brings us to point number four, which is that mass integration is...
	But seriously, though, also, what's the left's response supposed to be that, well, I mean, a lot of these people are coming in here illegitimately on fate, well, not on fake visas, but illegitimate visas because they've lied about their qualifications and they will actively admit it online.
	Just filling in my cousin What's their response to that?
	They don't have one.
	No, but they don't care about that.
	That's the point.
	They just wouldn't care, whereas this challenges them on their own grounds, and they then have nothing to say, right?
	Which brings us to point four, which is that mass immigration is bourgeois virtue signalling.
	Now, I don't think I need to necessarily explain that.
	It's obviously true that the managerial middle class who run our country...
	The Lundem's are a party.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	The professionals who run society in the West, it makes them feel warm and fuzzy when they go to bat for mass immigration and when they facilitate it, because they think it makes them a moral person, and it's at the expense of the well-being of the working class.
	Moreover, it's also at the expense of the well-being of the people that they're bringing in, because there is an implicit class dynamic between this.
	Who's going to serve our coffee at Pret?
	Who are our new proletariats that we're importing, because we don't like the white proletariat?
	Who's going to clean your toilet, Doctor?
	It is explicitly hierarchical.
	Yeah, yeah.
	And exploitative.
	Domination.
	If you're a leftist, you can't deny these aspects to it.
	And if you do, tell us why.
	Tell us what your argument is.
	And the final point, which I think kind of encapsulates everything I've spoken about so far, to use the language of Louis Althusser, is that mass immigration itself is a repressive state apparatus.
	Because if you have an indigenous English working class who feel they're being mistreated, well, they can strike, or they can organize, or whatever else.
	They can demand better pay, better work.
	But if you allow mass immigration, you can make those people irrelevant by just replacing them, right?
	So the message they receive is get in line or you're getting replaced.
	Get in line or you're going to lose your job, you're going to lose your livelihood, and all the rest of it.
	And in order to keep those people in line, as we saw with the case of Lucy Connolly earlier today, the ideological state apparatus of the British state exists almost solely at this point to prop up the narrative that mass immigration is good for our society, whether it's the media or the education system.
	or whatever else, all of these mouthpieces of power, they tell the working class that mass immigration is good for them, despite the fact that their eyes tell them that it isn't, and their pay packets tell them that it isn't, and the price of housing tells them that it's good for them.
	It's a weapon of capital.
	It's a weapon of people who are ultimately self-interested, who want to make themselves feel good and line their own pockets at the expense of basically everyone else in society.
	If you are any kind of leftist who claims to care about the working class, As far as I'm concerned, this is just an open and shut case.
	If I may, just as a conclusion, the post-Woke Left, who I spoke about last time I was on the show, people like Gary Stevenson and so on, Stevenson has...
	I've been watching this, I don't know.
	But he says basically that immigration is just a distraction tactic by the capitalist class, and I just think that if you're saying that, you're not a radical.
	If you're prepared to defend the project of mass immigration, then you're kicking at an open door, right?
	If you're just going to say it's inequality, well, okay, if it is inequality, what's causing the inequality?
	Who's causing the inequality?
	He's the insufferable lefty on Twitter posting the picture of the cookie saying, hey, that immigrant wants your cookie.
	That's not the point.
	The actual is, hey, give him your cookie.
	He needs your cookie more than you do.
	Because when you talk about the working class, a lot of the left these days, unless they are very old-school Labour-style leftists from 100 years ago, they see it as an international global working class.
	Some guy in the slums of Manchester might have it hard.
	But does he have it as hard as a starving child in Africa?
	That's the way that they look at it.
	Stelios has explained it quite well in the wealth transfer of, well, we need some kind of equitable wealth transfer and redistribution, but it has to basically be across the entire world.
	Just as a quick thing here.
	So what's interesting about this is how the liberals have managed to kind of one-up the classical Marxists, right?
	Because it used to be the Marxists had the edge on the liberals quite significantly by saying, well, look, you concede that it's private property that creates...
	You say you're for equality, therefore private property has to be the thing that goes.
	And now the liberals have got one up on the Marxists.
	So even someone like Gary Stevenson has got to be like, well, I can't possibly criticize mass immigration because of universal liberal human rights.
	And what I'm essentially forced to do is dodge the issue and just say, oh, it's those guys who are using them as a tool.
	In order to destroy the economy.
	And this is the brilliant trick that the capitalist class has played on the left itself.
	They've co-opted them, captured them, and are using them to their own ends.
	And so I think if the post-woke left want to be a serious force and a seriously radical force, they need to reckon with these critiques.
	And they need to recognize that so much of their instinctual...
	Actually, it's in the interests of the capitalist class that they're seeking to tear down that they continue to go to bat for these things.
	So I think they need to break with this stuff completely and come and join us.
	So I actually, just a quick end thing here.
	I don't think they're going to be able to do it.
	No, not at all.
	The woke liberalism that we talk about is the consequence of the synthesis of Marxist class dynamics applied to non-economic factors, therefore rendering a kind of synthesis of old Marxism and modern liberalism, which means that essentially they would have to admit that they were reactionaries in order to do it.
	So I think that they're in a bind there and they can't go anywhere.
	But again, if you're a leftist, let me know.
	I'm open to changing my mind.
	Anyway, Habsification says, Has anyone seen the Google VO3 AI videos?
	Yeah, they're insane.
	Yeah, they're wild.
	It's something to talk about next week, probably.
	It's kind of like modern CGI, though.
	You can still detect that it's CG because there's still the uncanny valley about it.
	For now.
	Yeah, for now.
	The one that I saw earlier was they put it through the Will Smith eating spaghetti test.
	Yeah, yeah.
	And it's done a much better job than they used to.
	And the thing is, like...
	For now, I think the easiest way to tell, even when they've merged it with actual footage, is the mouth movement is very unnatural and slightly blurred.
	So we'll see how they develop that.
	There was one where this guy was interviewing a girl on the street.
	I saw that one, yeah.
	Very convincing until you start looking at her mouth and it's very slightly not...
	Not necessarily desynced, it was just kind of like...
	Yeah, like it was mechanical or something.
	But I could totally...
	Oh yeah, that's going to get the boomers.
	Well yeah, that's the point.
	And I was like, Christ, at first I didn't see that this was AI.
	Oh no, there's going to be next level Nigerian Prince scams coming up for those poor boomers when they can't identify that the Nigerian Prince video is AI.
	That's terrible, but the thing is, like, I'm really worried about retweeting something that's just AI slop and not realising it's AI slop.
	I think I'm pretty good at identifying it.
	The day is getting closer when I'm the boomer on Facebook who gets one-shotted by it.
	We all need to be following Carl on Twitter so that we can be there for that day.
	I'm really worried about it because the thing is, again, these things are getting so good that it is actually really hard to see.
	It'll come for you too.
	It'll be you one day.
	And Miller says, I used to vote SNP, now I want a revival of the British Empire.
	Well, the argument for the British Empire has actually never been stronger, has it?
	Really, if you think about it.
	Also, the Scottish were over-represented in the British Empire as well.
	So that's actually the classical Scottish position you've taken there.
	It absolutely is, and I'm so sick of the Scottish victim narrative on the British Empire.
	You liars.
	You loved it.
	No, no, but it's very similar to the feminists with the patriarchy, right?
	Oh, no, no, no, no.
	White women absolutely loved it when they had plantations, right?
	They were totally on board, right?
	They had all the wealth and the riches, and they had various levels of servants and stuff, and then suddenly, oh, and Bill Burr's got a great thing where they just step over the fence and go, oh, yeah, we've always been oppressed by the patriarchy.
	No, get back over here.
	You bloody liars.
	You know, and it's the same with the Scots and the British Empire.
	We know, okay?
	We've got all the receipts, actually.
	We know the percentage of the Scots.
	Scots make a massively disproportionate percentage of colonial governors.
	Because they were really good at it.
	They were!
	You Scots, I mean, Dutton's been saying about, like, per capita, the Scottish are the most, like, genius-gifted people in the world, which is quite remarkable.
	Fair on you.
	Remarkable talent.
	So if you put the needle down, maybe save the book fast for the weekends, you can go back to being a great country.
	All we're saying is the opportunity will be available in the future.
	Cranky Texan says, It seems Woke Right is a framework that Lindsay created while he was working on an identity crisis with the Daily Wire to go after people who disagree with certain Middle East policies, money talks.
	Yeah, Lindsay uses Israel and Jewish people as the canary in the coal mine, as in, if you have any critiques of Israel, then you've gone off the liberal plantation.
	That's the character from Tropic Thunder.
	Vasily Grossman.
	Vasily Grossman, I think, is the one who basically said that.
	And Douglas Murray likes to use him over and over again as well.
	But Vasily Grossman was a Soviet propagandist during the Second World War who was complicit in covering up all of the atrocities that they were committing.
	Interesting how the neocons, very happy to just, like, para-Soviet-era propaganda talking points when it's convenient for them.
	The point being, essentially, Lindsay, what he's trying to do is make sure nobody ever criticises liberalism.
	I'm not having it, basically.
	And Alex says, ContraPoints was playing this hierarchy game with Vorsch in regards to intersectionality.
	ContraPoints is the leftist who wanted her coffee from Pret.
	Avoid Philosophy Tube, of course.
	I don't know.
	I've watched a lot of ContraPoints videos, actually.
	There is also some deep law between Philosophy Tube and ContraPoints.
	That is also true.
	Allegedly.
	Allegedly.
	I don't know if ContraPoints is actually the one who wanted a coffee from Pret.
	I think ContraPoints is a disappointed idealist, actually, when it comes to leftism.
	because she, she, she, she is, they are smart.
	And I think they do understand the inherent inability of leftism to ever accomplish its goals.
	And so the descent back into sort of cynicism and sarcasm and comedy is coping You've got to know your enemy, right?
	Of the three of those, the most I've interacted with is Vorsch, and mainly to watch him go into red-faced, spittle-flecking rage arguing with you that one time.
	I don't know why he was so angry.
	I didn't know who he was.
	He came straight out of the gate furious at you.
	I didn't know who he was.
	I was just like, what have I done?
	Did I shag his girlfriend or something?
	I don't know.
	He'd probably like that, to be fair.
	Well, yeah, exactly.
	And you wouldn't.
	No, no.
	If that picture that goes around is of him and his girlfriend.
	Matt says, Carl, watch this guy.
	It's a Swedish movie that used an avid AI plug-in to change the mouth flaps and had Swedish actors re-record the dialogue in English to release the movie in the US.
	Yeah, I've said this before.
	Basically, AI is going to make it so that you go to the computer and say, I want to watch a movie about, you know, war or something.
	And it'll just, okay, sit down, got your movie ready, and it'll be a completely tailored experience for you.
	You won't know that it's not like a fully done Hollywood movie, because it'll look perfect, and it will drive us all apart.
	Because actually a huge amount of social interaction is shared experience.
	Not for the shared experiences stuff, that's gay.
	More because, like, a...
	It should be the exclusive realm of people who are exceptional enough to produce exceptional art.
	Sure.
	Computers is just going to be a complete, even greater slopification.
	That is a good argument, but when you think about it, so much of your interaction with other people is just talking about the shared artistic experience.
	That's also true.
	Tune in for the Breaking Bad Lads hour in about 45 minutes.
	Music, movies, television shows, any books, any novels, anything like that will all be taken away from you.
	You'll have nothing to talk about.
	You see that AI thing that I generated yesterday?
	No, of course they didn't.
	And it arises out of that kind of individualistic mindset, doesn't it?
	Where the only thing that matters is just me.
	Pure consumption.
	What satisfies me.
	And it's really depressing.
	Ultimate utilitarian.
	I think it's evil.
	All art except that sponsored by aristocrats should be banned.
	We need to go back to a system of pure patronage.
	My aristocrats.
	Aristocrats on my side.
	Art sponsored by ContraPoints.
	What?
	Well, that's what you're arguing for.
	Art sponsored by ContraPoints.
	Why?
	ContraPoints isn't on my side.
	Yeah, I didn't say on your side, but you're art by aristocrats.
	Okay, well, who are the modern-day aristocrats?
	I do not think ContraPoints is an aristocrat.
	Well, by any sort of modern metric, I think they are.
	That's the problem.
	So, unfortunately, we're getting ContraPoints art now.
	Or certainly the mouthpiece of our show.
	No, no, no.
	ContraPoints would be the person who is sponsored by them.
	I mean, did ContraPoints get money from the government during COVID?
	I don't know.
	Wait, no, actually, they're American, aren't they?
	Yeah, yeah.
	But the point is, that's, you know, where the George Soros money will go.
	Goddamn it.
	Anyway, let's go to the comments.
	All of these suggestions are once we have won.
	Until then, I go to their principles, and we appeal to their principles until we win.
	Hang on a second.
	What's going on?
	It's too quiet, the Pebble speaker.
	Oh, the...
	What speaker?
	Oh, this?
	Alright.
	Alright.
	Talk much yourselves.
	We've got some very high-tech speakers.
	Show people the magic.
	Alright, I've turned it up.
	Do you want to play it now?
	This is another follow-up to Harry Sigmund in the music industry.
	The preponderance of writers and producers everywhere is really functionally the accreditation rules for royalties spawning from the musicians' unions.
	Turns out, if all the money is an accreditation, being a part of the act is actually kind of ancillary.
	This is called the Nashville Writers' Room model, which grew out of the country scene in America.
	As a function, all these modern artists don't actually own any of the fancy mansions.
	It's all built under the contract.
	It's owned by the record company, which is actually given to them as a debt.
	And finally, the business has always been a cartel.
	I have it in good authority from someone who was playing the game at the time that a book called "Hitman" by Frank Hitman by Frederick Dannen.
	I will check that book out.
	Thank you, because that seems to conform a lot to my experiences and understanding.
	What I used to do as a teenager, which is how I got a lot of the information that I do about the music industry, not many people do this anymore, is read magazines.
	And in the magazines, they would always have these big articles talking about how so-and-so artist from the 60s and the 70s managed to produce one particular album that's a very famous album.
	And it was always amazing to me back then just how much of it was determined entirely behind the scenes.
	By wrangling with the record labels, even in this time of great artistic freedom.
	Which is why I felt the need to make the segment that I did last week, because seeing that there were still so many people who seem to be under the misapprehension that music was just a case of, at least until recently, oh, people just got discovered because they were amazing, and then they got- Yeah, it was just pure meritocracy.
	This is my innocent view of the music industry He'd been a very successful session musician working on behalf of the record companies.
	So he's like, I want to do my own original music.
	So he headhunts The best musicians that he can find to get an already agreed upon record deal for what is essentially an industry band.
	The critics hated them, but they went on to be very successful.
	But it's very interesting how people, if you didn't know that, you'd just think that Led Zeppelin, they were just a band that were really, really talented, that appeared out of nowhere, and the record labels had to snap them up because they were just that damn good.
	check that book out, thank you very much.
	And that is another interesting thing as well, which is that if you work for a record label, you don't own your own music.
	This is one of the reasons that Michael Jackson was in so much trouble during the 90s.
	Did he fight with Sony to get half the label or something?
	I think he owned half of Sony music by the end of his life and also owned all of the Beatles catalogue.
	But he had to fight very, very hard to get even the rights to his own music.
	This is something like the Sex Pistols, going back to the 1970s.
	they had to fight really hard because they didn't have any of the rights to their music.
	So that's one of the reasons the record labels want so much control over it, because once it's been released and once it's been licensed out under them, it's not your music anymore, it's their music.
	Something makes you wonder about the stuff about Michael Jackson though, right?
	If he's engaged in a power struggle with the record label.
	"Oh, here are a bunch of allegations.
	Oh, he's died of a heart attack, guys." Yeah, yeah.
	To be fair, just very quickly on this topic.
	Harry, I missed your segment, so apologies if I'm repeating it.
	But I always kind of had a sort of implicit sense that there was some kind of coordination that went on in the music industry, just based on the fact that, you know, through my teenage years, for example, I noticed that all pop music just sounded like the same factory-produced trash.
	Well, the biggest example of this, I mean, you can point to any number of industry plant acts.
	One of the most telling examples was, do you remember that awful...
	I'm going to check on S Club 7, aren't you?
	They did have a hit written by one of the industry songwriters.
	But Rebecca Black was just some girl whose dad was rich.
	And I think he just literally went to a record label and bought her a hit single.
	That was written for her and released by a record label who did all the marketing for her and it was inescapable.
	How much does that cost?
	I don't know, but there's also examples of a His surname is Sandburger.
	He's a Swedish songwriter who in the past 30 years has written 27 I think I saw that going around Yeah, he wrote 27 number one hits over the past 30 years for people like Taylor Swift, Ariana Grande, The Weeknd.
	So my point was that when you listen to these acts and these particular songs, what you're not listening to are individual artists expressing themselves, you're listening to...
	And you go back to the 50s and you have the Motown system, which was very explicit about this, where they had a team of songwriters, they had professional bands playing everything, and the people who were the named acts were just faces who could sing.
	And that's how that system worked.
	Now you don't even really need them to be able to sing, because you've got auto-tune.
	Same my time has come.
	Yes, Carl.
	You just need to start looks-maxing, and then you're ready for it.
	Because they just need you to be a pretty, marketable face who's going to be very compliant.
	Well, someone like Sabrina Carpenter seems to me to be the prime example right now.
	I hate to drag this back onto the subject, but this is a wider conversation that would be interesting to have.
	Scott says, Well, I mean, God, that's the problem we've all got, isn't it, mate?
	We're all in that bloody boat.
	And on that note, I do actually feel sympathy for the Scottish who were like, maybe independence could help.
	I said, yeah, but your parties were woke.
	Yeah.
	Worse.
	Like, weirdly enough, like, wasn't it, was it Boris or...
	Yeah, I remember that.
	No, that's just not happening.
	That's for your own good.
	Anyway, let's go to the next one.
	Hello, diseases.
	I'm currently at the Reform UK pub in Blackpool.
	I've just spoken to the owner and a few people in it.
	They love the place.
	The local Reform branch meets upstairs.
	Good prices.
	Lovely working class people.
	It's a great place.
	And Charlie Downs, great interview.
	Thank you very much.
	Cheers.
	Yeah, I know people who've been to that pub and apparently it is actually quite Really?
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	Well, that's won me over.
	Let's get to the next one.
	Friday, Art Journey Update.
	So I started a new project where I tried to draw my version of the Nordic Gods.
	And this is quite interesting because I need them to look recognizably like the Nordic Gods, but not too much like other very popular versions of it.
	And I actually think the restrictions made me make something quite interesting in my life.
	I quite like it.
	So remember to follow me on X or Tumblr, give me hints, tell me what to do, give requests.
	I have only drawn since October, so I'm actually really new at this.
	But I think I'm doing pretty good.
	I was quite impressed.
	Way better than what I could do.
	Way better than what I could do.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Happy Friday, Lotus Eaters.
	Happy Friday, Lotus Eaters.
	I do enjoy shooting Rangers.
	Nice.
	Solid.
	Look like good fun.
	Yeah, yeah.
	What?
	The most popular program television ever made.
	Some people are sexually aroused by the idea of violence of a sexual nature being carried out against primates.
	I'm not.
	I'm not, but some people are, and that's And by 2010, this show dominated the ratings.
	I'm sorry.
	I can't come out.
	Rape and ape is on.
	Gunshot
	Okay.
	I don't even know what to say to that.
	I'm going to need to find whatever program that's taken from.
	To be fair, I think he's making a good case for political correctness at this point.
	Yeah.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Hey guys.
	Last couple of weeks people have been sending me messages on my website asking for advice on how to get self-published and I've only just seen them right now.
	I've been so busy with so many other things but I've responded to them.
	They should be in your inbox.
	So sorry that it's taken me such a long time and I look forward to working with you.
	Okay.
	Lovely.
	Is that the last one?
	Theodore says, chemical castration is actually way less dramatic than you would imagine.
	It's not permanent sterilization or disabling of the sex organs.
	It's an ongoing hormone injection or pills that reduces sex drive.
	They stop taking the hormones, it all comes back.
	In my mind, chemical castration is like pouring acid on your genital.
	Yeah, right.
	This is going to sound quite psychopathic, but I imagine, like, James Bond-esque strapped down to a metal table and they just lacy and it falls off.
	That's not chemical.
	It's close enough.
	I imagine what it is is they just basically give you lots of estrogen pills and injections.
	something like that.
	But the point being is if they want to they can just choose not to and then, you know.
	If that's the case, Radiohead's no surprises should ever be played in the UK again.
	It's when it's point by point, step by step, akin to a recipe or an instruction manual, that's something else entirely.
	Well, we had an example of that guy, and he was given a suspended sentence.
	Yeah, actually, that's a great point.
	I think what the inciting violence was was her saying burn the hotels down.
	But even then, deleted.
	Yeah, but I actually think the For All I Care is an important extension on the end of that, though, because that changes the context for me.
	I mean, I appreciate that in the context of there's currently a lot going on, you can see why they would consider that too difficult.
	But as Jimbo points out here, if I say, quote, free Lucy Connolly for all I care, am I inciting a prison break?
	And no, not really.
	It's definitely muddy.
	It is.
	Like you were saying, some sort of concern for the human condition when judging this would have been appropriate.
	Personally, it was obviously a stupid mistake.
	I wouldn't have had it punished at all.
	No, exactly.
	I wouldn't either.
	That Texas gal says, it's crazy to me that this is considered a crime in the first place.
	Yes, but we live in England.
	Hector says, the funny thing about Rubio is that he was confirmed by the Senate with something like 100-0.
	He seems to have entirely deceived the Dems.
	I love it.
	I didn't think to look by what his confirmation was.
	I should have done because that I regret voting for you.
	It's like, good.
	There is this idea, I think, that some people think could be viable, which is to kind of infiltrate and then reveal your power level when you're at the highest possible level.
	Yeah, well, I know that.
	But like, you know, Rubio, it seems like he's had some kind of conversion.
	But it does also show that that kind of thing does happen.
	Impressive that you managed to deceive literally all of the Dems.
	Yeah, exactly.
	It's like, yeah, no, I'm just a milquetoast conservative, and I'll do everything you tell me.
	And now everyone's getting deported.
	Omar says, it's rather amusing to note that all the hempecking against Rubio is falling apart simply because he disregards the framing.
	He doesn't need to make an argument because they aren't making one either.
	Do you realize that you're a bad person?
	Capitulate.
	No, next question.
	Moreover, they can't get rid of him either, can they, really?
	Like, you know...
	He's part of the administration.
	Trump was elected.
	He's been appointed by Trump.
	He's been confirmed by the Senate.
	I'm going to do what I like now.
	I'm here for four years.
	So, get effed.
	Theodore says, Trump seems to know how to make enemies into allies and accept former rivals as friends.
	Yeah, this is the most important aspect of any leader, really.
	Yeah, totally.
	Is the ability, Mr. Farage, to take people who have been mildly critical of you and turn them into your strongest supporters.
	I mean, Rubio was more than mildly critical.
	I know.
	He was calling for him to never be able to be president and everything.
	I know what you're saying.
	Because most of the people that Nigel Farage has cast into wilderness have just been mildly critical of him.
	And he never got over it.
	So yeah, I mean, for all of the talk of Trump being just a giant ego on stilts, he doesn't demonstrate it when he's dealing with people.
	No.
	He actually seems to be very, very quick to give out largesse when he's congratulating people or forgiving people and bringing them back.
	And, yeah, Matthew says, another positive with Rubio is he's fluent in Spanish, so he can browbeat Mexico and Central and South American countries to get in line with that translator.
	And there's no point calling him a racist over it either, is there?
	Because he's just like, you know, hola!
	Roman Observer says, Marx understood the labor market better than modern Marxists.
	We call this progress.
	Well, no, the thing is, modern Marxists are completely on the hook for woke liberalism.
	And at this point, basically, they're kind of disabled by it.
	It's not that they don't understand it.
	They can't allow themselves to admit.
	Because then they have to admit, yeah, I was fooled.
	Actually, the Marxist project entirely is kind of nonsense, which we already know.
	And I can't go anywhere from here and still be a Marxist, at least doctrinarily.
	And those modern Marxists, I mean, you know, like Thomas Piketty, for example, is like a kind of modern Marxist type person But from what I understand of what I've sort of heard of him, he's just another kind of, like, lib, you know, globalist-type character, and yet he casts himself as a Marxist.
	They absolutely all are.
	And Dirty Build says, Charlie, your work doing freedom of information requests to inform the public is great.
	Have you considered making any guides explaining how to make such requests?
	I'd like to start badgering my local council, but I don't know where to get started.
	That's a good idea, actually.
	Very good idea.
	Everyone should be doing that, by the way.
	Yeah, yeah.
	There's no reason not to.
	For some reason, they left that backdoor in because it seems like the liberal thing to do.
	Yeah.
	Malicious compliance, folks.
	Yeah.
	Just start making their lives a living hell easily.
	Totally, yeah.
	Anyway, so on that note, we are out of time.
	Join us in half an hour for our Breaking Bad Lads Hour, where Harry will be giving a spirited defense of Walter White against the evil witch.
	Skylar Wright.
	That's not the whole thing, but that is a bad part.
	And various other attacks on the narratives that have been going around attacking Walter, the patron saint of straight white drug dealers.
	Thanks, Jodius, folks.

▲