Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

June 2, 2025 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:29:26

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #1177

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.
	Welcome to the Podcast of the Lotuses for Monday, the 2nd of June, 2025.
	I'm joined by Stephen-Anne Furas, and today we're going to be talking about the rioting across Paris over the weekend.
	You may have seen that coming up in your social media feed.
	We're going to talk about the Attorney General and how actually Britain is just being governed by a cartel of its enemies.
	And finally, we're going to end on something quite fun, which is that fairy tales are actually based and...
	There's a reason that they don't want your kids reading these things these days.
	Anyway, before we begin, we've decided to extend the time for the code for the Trivium because so many people were essentially demanding.
	Because of the way that time works and the way that pay packets work and things like that.
	And so if you have watched the webinars, you can find the Trivium code there.
	The webinars will be on the individual courses.
	You just have to sign up for free to the courses.lotuses.com and then you can watch the webinars.
	Anyway, let's begin.
	What's going on in Paris?
	Right, well let's get in there first of all.
	I should go on this.
	There we are.
	I just felt, you know, I love Paris, or at least I did.
	Think about Paris in there, and just that little bit of music there is the traditional French guy playing around, and you see the streets filled with flowers, the old classic cars, and, you know, ambling along not many people there at all.
	And I thought to myself, you know, that's Paris then, just in the 1980s.
	That is like the kind of mid-1980s.
	Within our living memory.
	Within our living memory.
	And then, this is today.
	Frenchmen disturbed by Muslims praying on the street.
	I don't know if that can be played, but it's just a horrific sound.
	Maybe you don't want to hear it, but there are 500 mosques now in Paris.
	And not in addition to that, people are actually sat there in prayer on their hands and knees whilst they're flying the Palestinian flag.
	And as I say, that was Paris.
	Then, this is Paris now.
	And as you saw over the weekend, you know, Paris was in flames.
	Paris was burning.
	And all over, I kind of think to myself, is Paris Saint-Germain?
	Kick the living daylights out of Inter Milan in the football championship trophy, the Champions League.
	Good game for them.
	Generally, I thought the game was okay-ish, not particularly spectacular.
	But I kind of thought to myself, when you win a team, when United gets up there, there's something special to celebrate and just get out there and really give it a full kind of support for them.
	And Paris does it differently.
	I've got to admit, this is their method of celebrating.
	Paris Saint-Germain winning.
	Yes, as you can see, gab the Palestinian flags out, not the Paris Saint-Germain flags.
	Just a quick thing.
	When you can hear the video playing, you can't really hear the person talking.
	So can we turn the video sound off, please?
	Sorry about that.
	I just, it's kind of like...
	This is Paris Saint-Germain.
	And being retweeted across there by Linza Rosen, it's a flashback of what they do in support of their teams and how they stand.
	This is over a football match, yes.
	Oh, right.
	I thought it was some sort of ethnic conflict.
	I didn't look into it, because I thought, ah, someone will cover on the podcast.
	No, no, no, no, no.
	It's absolutely true.
	Paris Saint-Germain goes out there, you know, they do a good game, and as you look at Paris Saint-Germain there, and one with Macron, I just wonder if any of those players also got a slap from his wife.
	I don't know.
	I don't follow football, so is this the French team?
	Paris Saint-Germain is just like Arsenal or just like Chelsea.
	You know, it's a club in the middle of Paris.
	It's got a kind of relatively rich history.
	It's effectively owned and sponsored by Qatar.
	Do they not have Frenchmen playing for their team?
	Well, all of these are allegedly French people.
	The ones that they've been brought in from different countries.
	I appreciate they're administratively French.
	Yeah.
	But, I mean, just look at them.
	No.
	No, I mean, you can look at it.
	And, you know, there are obviously some that have been born in France.
	Probably the guy on the top left.
	Yeah.
	Well, actually, I think there's a couple of Poles in there, maybe one German.
	But there's various Turks and different nationalities over there.
	Many of them do come from the kind of bordellos of Paris, where they have training sessions in there.
	But it's just really, they're all jubilant.
	So is Macron.
	He's congratulating them with a big clap.
	On his hands there.
	And then, of course, whilst he's doing that, you know, Paris Burns, Radio Jenner has that.
	He's got this coming out.
	He gives that great quote.
	But this is then what happens afterwards.
	So, you know, on the streets of Paris, I just grabbed a few together.
	So whilst they're clapping.
	And in the World Cup, when I think it was the Moroccans, when they won, there was a riot.
	And then when they lost, there was a riot.
	So it seems that the riot in response to football outcomes is the default setting.
	And then, you know, there's a football match.
	Just make sure your car isn't parked on the street.
	Board up your shop.
	they're going to riot because football.
	So there's no...
	No, no, no, no.
	This keeps on happening in response to football matches.
	And so the rate of French cars burning as a result of just small localized riots, sometimes it's an arrest, sometimes it's a police incident.
	Sometimes it's political.
	Very often it's just because, well, it's hot outside, so what else are you going to do?
	Or there's been a football game, and what else are you supposed to do?
	So it's sort of a default setting.
	In the last big riots in 2023, I think the total cost was around a billion euros.
	That were sort of destroyed in the span of a few days.
	So it's not an insignificant issue.
	It's becoming something with a real economic impact for France, and it's pretty much continuous.
	Well, I mean, good thing they get taxpayers.
	You've got to say, I remember in the Euros, I think France was sharing the Euros with Holland or Belgium.
	And I was actually in the middle of Paris and they put a nice little big screen on like everyone else there.
	And we're sat watching it and the police are around the edges at the back.
	And then there was a mini kind of riot went on as loads of the local communities, shall we say, the people who had imported themselves into Paris decided they wanted to robber.
	And the police, literally as they do with the boards on the channel, sit there, light up a jeton, watch and do absolutely nothing.
	Because, you know, after all, isn't it nice to be a police officer, watch in full gear, all with all your kit protected there and just allow crime to happen in front of you?
	Because maybe it's...
	What's their incentive to stop crime?
	The police are damned if they do, damned if they don't.
	There was a riot.
	I think that was the 2023 one because they stopped a guy running them over by shooting him.
	Yeah.
	So he was trying to kill them.
	Yeah.
	They shot him.
	The result was a riot.
	And you don't want to end up being the police officer who does something to stop an incident, as justified as that might be, that then leads to something much bigger kicking off because there's no political will to actually deal with the problem of rioting.
	It's the same pattern that you see all over the West.
	The politicians, you're going to talk about attorney generals, the leadership of the police, they just want things to keep away from full-scale ethnic riots because they're terrified of that, but they're also not willing to do anything to address the risk.
	No, they're definitely not willing to address the risk.
	And I was kind of thinking to myself, I'm a massive Star Wars fan, and I'm kind of watching the second series, is it Caspian Argon?
	No, I'm not a Star Wars fan.
	And in there, you obviously, anyone knows, it's the Empire versus the good guy, the rebellions.
	But in this particular series, there's a brilliant scene where you've actually got the securitate, and they just don't.
	They don't care.
	And he basically says, there's a riot.
	String them up.
	Kill him.
	Now, I'm never an advocate that we go out guns blazing, killing everyone, but when you have this sort of level of riots regularly happening in Paris, when you've got police officers being run over, as you've talked about, and they're shooting at them.
	It doesn't make me a lot more pro-Empire.
	It does make you a lot.
	Darth Vader should be down there.
	Darth Vader would not tolerate this nonsense.
	He wouldn't.
	Bring back Darth Vader.
	I mean, but this, this I find particularly savage.
	And there are some police that come around.
	I just want people, I know there might be sound on this, and it's quite upsetting.
	But this is two defenseless young girls, look at their ethnicity in the car compared to the ethnicity around them.
	And then ask yourself why you wouldn't want Darth Vader and all of them coming and just beating the hell out of these people around them.
	What did the...
	Look, they smash the window.
	What the hell do they think they're doing?
	Right.
	And that, I find utterly two girls in a car, surrounded by a mob of clearly Moroccan or Algerian Muslims, and they're smashing the car on two Parisian girls.
	Or maybe they're not, but certainly not of their ethnicity.
	And no one's doing anything.
	Not only that, they're filming it.
	Yeah, this is funny.
	They might find it funny.
	It's disgraceful.
	It's just absolute anarchy.
	First, they find this violence amusing.
	Yes, and we just have to accept that The second point, I think, is slightly more important.
	the more tolerance is given to this, the more severe their reaction must be in order to stop it.
	As in, when this is done...
	Yeah.
	When this is normal, okay, what...
	Now you're telling us to stop.
	The time before.
	Exactly, exactly.
	So that means that the level of severity that you need to exercise to prevent it keeps rising the more you tolerate it.
	So tolerance is the destructive policy here.
	Or maybe it's the plan policy, because it helps them incorporate the rules and regulations that restrict our freedoms even more.
	when we're on ID cards, when we want to be able to have barcodes on us to be able to check, which is exactly like the extreme of all dystopian movies is the way that they control us.
	So there was a thing about this the other day where two, I think, Pakistani lads had stabbed an Indian lad with a, And now I'm not allowed to buy a decorative Japanese sword.
	You know, why the hell?
	But obviously the government's like, right, we've just got to ban samurai swords.
	It's the same in all American cities that have the strictest gun laws.
	They also happen to have the highest level of crime.
	They only end up persecuting the law-abiding citizens who are not involved in the crime in the first place.
	Because they're the easy target and they can spin a narrative around.
	And they're the only people who are going to actually respond lawfully to the thing anyway.
	Like you say, you would have to have quite extreme measures to crack down on these people and they're just too weak and too soft.
	Well, you can see why people start to be aggressive towards them, angry towards them, why the mobs now want to divide themselves on cultural lines and saying, if this is what they're going to do to two women where there's a mob of them, then we need to protect ourselves and form our own mob to be able to take them out because the police aren't going to do it and the police are just sitting back and the politicians are sitting there in nice, comfortable, lovely areas outside of Paris might come in for their great place to stay just for a vote.
	Just a quick thing, if we can go back to that previous one a second.
	Those two women, you said pay attention to the ethnicity.
	They didn't look ethnically French to me.
	I thought the first one nearest to us looked a bit like a French girl.
	To understand the mindset, Carl...
	Maybe you're right there.
	To understand the mindset, they are uncovered and they're legitimate targets.
	It's not about the ethnicity, it's about the culture.
	They are culturally westernised.
	That makes them legitimate targets, regardless of whether or not they're of the same ethnicity.
	In the sense that these are guys who would sort of murder their sisters over this, that and the other issue.
	So there's that element to keep in mind.
	Yeah, it just kind of gets, the whole night carries on and it's still going today.
	Really?
	Yeah, and I've just picked out a few about the abuse of the girls.
	This was a bit of like bombing and more fireworks, but actually petrol bombs coming out on their orphanage.
	Again, there you go.
	You just see it.
	A couple of Petro bombs being thrown at whoever there.
	Set fire the cars.
	And, you know, you kind of look at that.
	I want to look at the numbers.
	Two dead.
	One cop in a coma.
	192 injured.
	559 people are arrested all over a football match.
	And as you say, the looting's gone into millions.
	They're looting all the shops all over the place.
	I mean, I just look at this as the streets.
	I've got two more that I'm going to pick up on this.
	It's just a casual bit of mass violence going on.
	That's clearly fireworks on this occasion rather than that.
	Look, this is going to only end when the police start using live bullets.
	Yes.
	They keep on tolerating this.
	This only ends with live fire.
	And then you end up with insurgency because the art of groups like Islamic State is to blend criminality, rioting, and jihad.
	And then you end up with much more violence when you try to stop it because you've tolerated it for so long.
	Yeah.
	And I just say, as the death toll rises, we put them in there.
	And there was one there that showed the day after, but maybe that's...
	Maybe I'll put a mixed one up.
	They say it's an uprising of African youths in the heart of Europe.
	up, I suppose they're right when they talk about mainly Algerians are the biggest amount of kind of immigrants in Paris now.
	Remember, a decent chunk of the Algerians came So these guys were taken as refugees by the French.
	They fought on our side so we owe them something.
	But then just some things don't work.
	Because now you've got a whole load of people who were there who weren't the ones collaborating who've come over and you've got this conflict between the two.
	And you do hear of Algerian communities saying, why are you bringing so many in?
	And it's the same sort of thing.
	But whilst we're looking at this, I don't know about you, but I think this is relatively significant.
	The number of dead, the arrested, the 400 cars.
	If anyone goes on to X now and looks at France 24?
	It doesn't mention it at all.
	So this is the French version of the BBC?
	Yeah, this is the official French show.
	It doesn't mention it at all.
	Yeah, there you are.
	A little bit of football.
	Well done, guys.
	You've done all right.
	It's a drone attack on Russia.
	You've got a bit of an opinion about the unsavitalised variants.
	You know, that came up now, but that wasn't up when I went looking at it.
	The other great one over there is Le Monde.
	Same sort of thing they make.
	Nope.
	They're New York Times, right?
	Yeah, Le Mans.
	It's all about Elon Musk and they're the, you know, it's Elon Musk.
	India.
	Someone else.
	Emmanuel Macron proposes Fisk of Pascal, a bit of sport.
	Yeah, no violence going on in Paris.
	Nothing in Paris on their main headline.
	And then, I think I kind of look at America.
	Jubilant soccer fans.
	I mean, they look pretty bloody jubilant.
	I don't know what you're complaining about.
	We've burnt another police car.
	We've killed another officer.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	I mean, is that the level of jubilance the New York Times talks about?
	Two people dead and the New York Times are like, yeah, jubilant soccer fans.
	One person died in a traffic incident and another was stabbed to death.
	Just Welsh choir boys.
	Random fans.
	Yeah.
	Unspecified fans.
	So the French mainstream media are hiding it.
	The New York Times kind of reports upon it, but just, it's a little bit.
	They misrepresent it.
	Yeah, and so you kind of look to yourself, and of course, I always get this every now and again.
	This is from the Half Decent Football magazine when Saturday comes.
	The problem of Paris Saint-Germain is notoriously far-right supporters.
	Oh.
	I saw a lot of far-right supporters there.
	This is them talking about the same sort of thing.
	Far-right supporters.
	Now, they're talking about other cases, but, you know, this is another game where they said...
	Historically, it kind of was, I suppose, what you would characterize as far-right football hooligans that were the problem with football, right?
	I mean, like, you know, British football supporters, English ones in particular, are quite famous on the continent for being...
	It's interesting how that stereotype is falling away now.
	Oh, absolutely.
	The times have changed and look how things have evolved.
	Are you happy with that?
	Because people didn't actually used to die during English football.
	Not very often.
	The old one here and there.
	The interesting thing about it, when you get the Chelsea headhunters would link in with Millwall or with the northern teams of Nottingham and Manchester City.
	When it went abroad, they all became mates.
	Or like supporting behind the England flag on terms of that.
	I somehow can't imagine that all happening in Paris Saint-Germain.
	The exact same thing has happened.
	I mean, Moroccans or with Algerians or with Tunisians or with, you know, Egyptians.
	They're all mates against the French now.
	That's how it works.
	And you ask yourself, why is this happening?
	And then I just picked this one up as just a general kind of look at the numbers of how the Muslim areas started to come into Paris' arrondissements, the departments in the region of France.
	Paris is just one French department.
	It's got several areas in here.
	But this is a 1999 census.
	1.6 million immigrants living in the Ile-de-France region of it, which is one of the biggest regions of that.
	Maghreb, Sub-Saharan Africa, Turkey.
	50% in 1999, the immigrant population lived there.
	That's why you can see in those pictures the vast majority of them supporting Paris Saint-Germain are from those suburban areas which used to be called like ghettos but they spent an awful lot of money trying to update them give them a lot of opportunities and it just doesn't work if they're willing to have your houses done up Air is cleaned, nice places to live, and they're still willing to come out and spend billions in rioting because you've not done enough for us, or we hate the state enough to have the riots.
	And it's clearly not working.
	That policy's not working.
	It's not really about doing enough, is it?
	It's really about them asserting their separate ethnic identity, or religious identity probably, against the French state, against the French society.
	This isn't about having done enough.
	There's nothing they want from you.
	It's more violence.
	There's a will to power there that's exercised in enormous violence that isn't in any way appreciated or respected by the leadership classes because they are of the firm belief that human beings are simply cogs and they are completely interchangeable.
	So they have zero respect for their own culture, which actually, weirdly enough, translates into zero respect for Muslim culture.
	And they think that you can just impose La Cité on everybody, and tomorrow morning they're going to be just as French as Joan of Arc.
	And so it's this delusion that they have about human nature, about culture.
	They would have actually burnt Joan of Arc on the stake before the English got a chance to.
	I'm surprised you didn't get the picture of them sort of sitting on her statue.
	yeah and well it was one of many There's so much destruction.
	So much abuse of the culture and history of Paris and actually of the French culture itself that these people are just coming and they're clearly saying it's not us.
	Because a conquering group's first target is to destroy the symbols of the conquered.
	This is why you see the epidemic of church fires up and down France.
	They're burning churches one or two a week and it's all clearly arson and the police are doing absolutely nothing about it.
	Even Notre Dame, and that was just, oh, well, who knows?
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	Who knows what happened in Notre Dame?
	And then they tried to sort of make it, they tried to desecrate the rebuilding of Notre Dame and make it absolutely horrific.
	And you saw the level of ignorance of the press because, anyway, that's a different story.
	I mean, I think what we're seeing there in Paris, is my view, is this is what's coming to Europe, the rest of Europe.
	I mean, we're already seeing it in different parts, where the communities are no longer mixing, where they will use the excuse of a football match to have a riot against the state.
	Well, this is what happened in Leicester with the Pakistani and Indian communities, we have a cricket match.
	Apparently it's about a cricket match, but it's not really about a cricket match.
	Everyone knows it's not about a bloody cricket match.
	No, it's about something much deeper, much more insidious.
	And we're seeing that out there.
	They're going to now have this big argument will happen.
	On the left, they'll say it's because they're all poor, it's because they live in poor housing, they've got no opportunities.
	Our grandparents were poor and they didn't do anything like this, did they?
	I didn't see my grandfather and grandmother going out and rioting down Burnage and setting fire to the shops and one or two cars that were out there smashing them up because we couldn't get a pint of milk that day.
	No, we didn't.
	This is just an excuse by the left.
	To use it, because that's part of their social construct.
	For them, rioting is a very communistic act.
	Because the minute that they respect culture, all of their worldview falls apart.
	And then they have to accept that what created Europe is Christian culture.
	And the minute they admit that, they have to review everything that they've done.
	So it is safer for them mentally.
	To not face reality and to keep on insisting that the only causes for this are just socioeconomic.
	It's also worth remembering that the entire purpose of the left is to destroy everything that is particular about our culture.
	These people are a weapon that they're using against us in order to destroy those things that we held dear.
	This isn't accidental.
	They're completely clear about it.
	Private property, that has to go.
	Traditions, customs, they have to go.
	To make us different from other people, that has to go.
	This isn't a secret.
	No, it isn't.
	And I think I'm just going to end that and say that, you know, whilst nothing's happening, I won't go into this one because the other aspect about attacking the state is this chap in a Palestinian flag was attacking somebody from the firefighters trying to put out the flames and also trying to help somebody who'd actually been knocked on the street.
	And you could see him swearing at him and screaming at him in whatever language it was, but he certainly wasn't French.
	And in the end, the firefighters had to back away and allow that to go on.
	And we have now something much deeper, I think, happening where you can see terrorist attacks regularly in Germany.
	You can see these kind of riots that are occurring in France on a regular basis.
	You see the riots that occur in Belgium, particularly in Brussels, on a particular basis.
	Holland, where you get this discrimination in particular areas where people aren't allowed to go into, but the police jump back off from it.
	The rapes are occurring in Sweden.
	And of course, we know what's happening across our country too.
	The whole of Europe, and yet we're the ones, when we point this out, when we give the intellectual arguments, when we discuss the facts about it, the evidence and the way that the police are backing down, all of that is that we're the racists, we're the xenophobes, and by showing this, we're actually encouraging it.
	Actually, we're reflecting the negativity and the bad attitudes of those who are perpetuating this, which are those in power.
	PHUK says, It's not a riot against the state.
	It's a riot against us and ours.
	They hate us because of a well-deserved cultural inferiority complex that's going to end in new religio-cultural wars in Europe.
	Basically true, yeah.
	Hapsification says club football is different to international football.
	Playing for your country is different from playing for a club.
	And this is so bad, I can't even make fun of the French.
	That's how bad it is.
	Yeah.
	But I think OPH UK is right.
	It's not a war against the state.
	The state is the one protecting and bringing in these people and creating these communities.
	They're there because of a result of policy.
	Anyway, let's move on.
	In fact, this is very closely connected, at least thematically, because we are in a terrible position in the United Kingdom at the moment where we have just avowed enemies of the British people in control of the state.
	I think it was a conquest third law where it was like to explain the decisions of any bureaucratic entity, just assume it's controlled by a cabal of its enemies.
	And that's true in the context of the British state.
	So let's have a quick look at how things are going for them.
	And I think really this is what's behind Starmer's complete failure to be able to claw back any kind of goodwill with the British public, is that everyone can tell...
	He is just against us.
	For everything, there's a great graph here that shows how governments tend to do favourability-wise in their first year in office, or the first ten months.
	And you can see that at the bottom now, in 2024, Starmer is just the biggest drop for a new government.
	That is an enormous number.
	a long way.
	A long way.
	Yeah.
	Starmer currently has an approval rating of 15%, with 50% absolutely against him, and the rest probably just Yes.
	So that's the closest it's got, is major, and then of course Rishi Sunak in 2019, or would that have been Liz Truss in 2019?
	Yeah, it would have been Liz Truss.
	2019 would have been Boris.
	Oh yeah, it's 2017, isn't it?
	Yeah, good point.
	But the point being is no one comes close to how unpopular Starmer is.
	And I genuinely think it's because everyone can see that Starmer and his regime is not only staffed by morons, right?
	These are not in any way our best and brightest.
	if you look at Rachel from accounts Stam himself is not a genius and just Lammy A government of just genuine incompetence, but hostile incompetence.
	Hostile.
	We can see that they don't like us.
	I think one good example of this is the person that Keir Starmer decided to make the Attorney General, which is Baron Richard Hermer.
	Lord Hermer, and Wikipedia has an amazing write-up of his career here, right?
	I'm just going to read it out.
	Because as I go along, you'll be like, oh, I see what you mean, right?
	So, Homer attended Cardiff High School.
	He went on to study politics and modern history at the University of Manchester and pursued a legal career, being called to the bar in 1993.
	So, he has been a lawyer for a long time.
	He joined Daughty Street Chambers in the same year and took the silks and became a King's Counsel in 2009 before leaving in 2012 to join another firm called Matrix Chambers.
	He later became the chair of the Matrix Management Committee and was appointed a deputy high court judge in 2019.
	Both of those chambers, by the way, Dagger Street and Matrix are international left-wing law.
	Yeah.
	That doesn't surprise me at all to hear that, because he has spent his entire career as one of those kind of insufferable lefty human rights lawyers, and this has been, honestly, the kind of myopic focus of his entire career.
	They give us some of his cases.
	He argued that Shemima Begum should have been allowed to return to the United Kingdom to participate in her appeal when he intervened for liberty in Begum versus Home Secretary.
	So he was in defense of Shemima Begum, obviously, as you might expect.
	He also represented the mother of one of the ISIS Beatles.
	So again, another Islamic terror.
	These were the worst jihadis in Syria, most famous for their gruesome beheadings, with perfect modern British accents, shall we say.
	Yes.
	Well, when you say perfect, they had the London accent, but yes.
	Was it Jihadi John?
	It was Jihadi John and his mates.
	there was the Kuwaiti guy, there was a bunch of them who were just Yes.
	And, of course, he found himself in defense of one of their mothers, which, of course, he does.
	He represented former Guantanamo Bay detainee Abu Zabudaya.
	Zubaida.
	Zubaida.
	I can't pronounce it.
	In his Supreme Court case against the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office, and argued against the deportation of Al-Qaeda operative Abid Nasir.
	Why would we want him deported?
	Don't you realise he has human rights?
	He also acted for convicted terrorist Rangzeeb Ahmed, a Saudi Arabian terrorist and Saudi Arabian terrorist, Mustafa al- I can't pronounce the name.
	Al-Sawi.
	Foreign terrorists.
	That's what he spends his career defending.
	Literally, all of these are jihadis.
	All of these are convicted jihadis.
	He was involved in multiple cases related to the war on terror, including representative victims in the Afghan unlawful killings inquiry and the inquest into Corporal Stephen Albert's death in the Iraq War.
	He also worked in cases relating to police misconduct, including cases concerning the shooting of James Ashley and the killing of Mark Duggan.
	He acted for over 900 victims in the Grand Four Fire.
	He represented the family of Adam Rickwood, the youngest person to die in custody in the modern era.
	And he represented the family of Ella Kissy Deborah, who was later found to have died of air pollution.
	Okay.
	So every environmental case, every terrorist case, every kind of nasty person who wants to blow up everything in Britain has had the Lord Hermer on his side.
	Yes.
	If not directly, definitely with sentiment.
	Yes.
	But remember very clearly, we as a barrister who was probably in chain, At the time he was called to the bar, I was called around the same time.
	I applied for Doughty Street Chambers in those days as well, you know, because it was seen as a good chambers.
	We do have this principle, what's called the Cabranc Rule, where if you're in chambers and a case comes your way, you actually have to act on behalf of whoever the solicitor has decided to instruct you, if you've got the capability and the skill, experience, knowledge, etc., to do so.
	There is always a proviso to that.
	The proviso is that you go to a set of chambers that is known not to represent the police, known not to represent the government.
	So therefore, the government's lawyers won't come to your chambers.
	only solicitors in that field and that area that might want to represent these individuals will come along and choose you.
	So it is an active choice that you're making by being in those chambers and deciding to to act for these cases.
	I don't think it's a coincidence that he just happens to find himself on every occasion against the British state and British people.
	Well, it's a decision made that you will...
	And to be fair, if I was in a set of chambers, there's a lot of work that I would want to do against the British state.
	I would like to take on the Home Office all the time for not stopping migration.
	On behalf of the British people.
	Absolutely.
	And it's interesting that he intervened for liberty in Begum and the Home Secretary.
	There's nothing stopping something like the Free Speech Union or an organisation being able to fund a barrister to take on the government on particular cases.
	It's just that unfortunately So every time I go, they get me, they interview me, they say yes to join, and someone says, I can't work with you, and it's reneged.
	So I'm going to carry on, because we're not actually at the end of this.
	No, no, no, this carries on, right?
	So he unsuccessfully challenged the Supreme Court over the assessment of the age of asylum seekers.
	So we shouldn't be assessing their age.
	Obviously, we should just take their word for it because they've all been so honest about that.
	As well as unsuccessfully taking the UK government's court on behalf of Sri Lankan asylum seekers coming from the Chagos Islands.
	In 2022, he was appointed to a task force on the accountability of crimes committed in Ukraine following Russia.
	In 2023, he represented former Sinn Féin president Jerry Adams following damages claims.
	Again, is there an enemy of Britain that this person hasn't defended?
	It's incredible.
	It's so wide-ranging.
	Yes.
	It's just, okay, yeah, fair enough.
	You also defended Gerry Adams, and he also advised Caribbean nations on slavery reparations and represented Kenyan victims of torture during the Mau Mau emergency.
	So I was looking into these.
	The Kenyan victims of torture is probably the only one I actually agree with, because there was a stash of documents where the British had actually used torture.
	I'm obviously against torture.
	So that's the only one I can actually find any justification for, right?
	So that's very interesting how literally he's gone all around the world, found every enemy of Britain, and said, right, I will fight in your cause.
	So thanks so much, Baron Herma.
	But what's interesting as well is in the Wikipedia page, it tells us he's a former friend and colleague of Keir Starmer.
	the Dorothy Street Chambers.
	Yeah.
	He was a donor to Starmer's campaign in the 2020 Labour leadership election.
	And after Starmer became prime minister following the 2024 general election, Starmer appointed Herma to the government as the attorney general for England and Wales and advocate general for Northern Ireland.
	And he is the first person not to have served in parliament before becoming attorney general in over a century.
	Isn't that interesting?
	So this looks like some sort of cronyism, doesn't it?
	Maybe Keir Starmer didn't know about his background.
	Maybe Keir Starmer is a human rights lawyer of exactly the same stripe as this man.
	Maybe he agrees with him on every single detail.
	Exactly.
	I mean, Keir Starmer did exactly the same in his legal career, did he not?
	He did.
	So these two men are cut from the same cloth, and they both spent their time representing the enemies of Britain, and now they're in charge of our country.
	That's great.
	That explains everything, doesn't it?
	That really does explain absolutely everything.
	It's the point that I think most people, not only that he's represented people that are against the state, but it's the way that he was selected.
	Just because he's a mate.
	Because he's a friend of mine for such a long period of time that I'm just going to pull you in.
	We've probably had dinner with each other.
	We've had plenty of times out with each other.
	I'm just going to bring you in.
	I've got no politics.
	I'm not elected.
	Don't worry about not being elected.
	We can sort that out.
	Oh, you know how they sorted that out?
	Concurrently, as he was appointing him to Attorney General, he made him a life peer as well.
	So in order to sort of jump through that hoop, he elevated him even further, polluting the upper chamber as well as the rest of politics.
	A nice here, a baron.
	This is someone who doesn't like the state.
	Yes.
	Goes against the state.
	But he'll have the title of baron and become a life peer and work as the Attorney General.
	It is remarkable how obviously cronyistic this is.
	This is sort of Middle Eastern levels of cronyism.
	Even in the Middle East, you're meant to have some sort of loyalty to the state itself.
	You would think.
	The Egyptians, much as they humiliate the public individually, they don't insult the national sentiment of being Egyptian.
	The Syrian regime was extremely cautious, the previous regime, about respecting the Syrians' Arab and Muslim identity and Syria's heritage and doing everything that it could to say that it was on the side of that heritage and trying to minimize their own minority ethnicity.
	to sort of further the idea that, no, no, this is a Sunni Muslim Arab country and we're absolutely committed to this.
	It's only in Europe that you see this open hostility to the Islamists.
	And at least you never see that.
	You know what's interesting?
	I actually forgot to get this clip when I was preparing the segment.
	He did an interview about a year ago where he's on a stage and he just says, you know what, it's remarkable.
	Oh, yes.
	England is the only place where you can...
	You can attack the state and be lauded for it.
	Yeah, and it's just crazy how we are watching this play out, There's nowhere else for a lawyer to go, really, other than Prime Minister from that, right?
	Well, that's right.
	You've got Swayla Braverman was the Attorney-General before, and then I think, I can't remember who they, some person they put before that in the Conservative Party.
	But yes, it's a really significant position to have, because you're advising the government.
	You're the head of law for the government.
	It's crazy how Keir Starmer has arrived as the Prime Minister, obvious hater of this country.
	And he's just filling the position.
	I mean, people like David Lammy as our foreign secretary.
	David Lammy hates Britain.
	We know David Lammy hates Britain.
	He was calling for reparations, and I will never forget, first, his performance on that quiz show, which, if you haven't seen it, you must look it up.
	And second, when he thought that the black smoke coming out of the Vatican was racism.
	I mean, come on!
	They didn't need the dog whistle like that, did they?
	That was just...
	Can you?
	When you're looking at these individuals, you look at who they're selecting, who's in power for Labour, and they want to be seen as competent, they want to be seen as sensible, and no one is looking at them, and that's why it's pointing to the figures that you said of why Keir Starmer is loathed to the extent that he is.
	So anyway, Lord Herma, I don't know whether it's been made clear enough yet, but he's basically just a communist, right?
	Yes.
	He is a deeply partisan agent.
	And he was some sort of hero as far as they were concerned.
	So he's not practically a communist.
	No, no.
	He's just a communist.
	This is how he began his career.
	Same with Keir Starmer, though.
	They've never reneged on any of these values.
	They've just realized, oh, it's more difficult.
	than actually just getting a job and working your way through the system.
	So anyway, this is why he called the Conservatives and Reform Parties a bunch of Nazis, basically.
	Because, of course he did.
	Because there's no one else on Earth who would be like, ah, yes, the Conservatives, typical Nazis, the Conservatives.
	Uh, I personally would call them communists.
	But anyway, so he apologised for this clumsy remark.
	It's not really an apology if you ever read what he said.
	No, it's not an apology at all, actually.
	So, yeah, the point being he called the Conservative and Reform bunch of Nazis because they wanted to leave the European Convention on Human Rights because the European Convention on Human Rights, the ECHR, is...
	So we have to bring in every hostile foreigner on the earth, presumably so he can get paid tomorrow for defending them.
	Yeah, he was trying to link in the German jurist Klaus Schwab.
	I was going to say Klaus Schwab.
	That might as well have been the same person, to be honest.
	It was Klaus, who was an advisor to Hitler, who talked about the nation-state.
	Karl Schmidt.
	Karl Schmidt.
	It should have been the nation state was more important than international law.
	And that is not what any of us talk about when we're dealing with the European Court of Human Rights.
	We're actually saying around the nation state, yes, should have prevalence over the laws impacting us.
	Where the ECHR, we can't ever change it.
	We can't overturn it.
	This objection seems very much to be like Hitler saying smoking's bad for you.
	Yeah, but we're not actually saying we don't own human rights.
	That's the difference.
	We want our own human rights, whether it's a bill of rights, whether it's looking after our own common law.
	England invented the concept.
	We're not having a discussion with foreigners about what human rights are.
	We have them already.
	We're not removing them.
	We're just saying we're just not having a foreign court deal with it.
	There is no link or similarity at all to whatever was talked about.
	He thinks it's just like the early days of Nazi Germany, actually.
	Wasn't his apology something along the lines of, I'm sorry for calling you Nazis.
	That's an offence to Nazis.
	Not quite that bad.
	He said his choice of words was clumsy and regrets.
	He didn't actually say this.
	A spokesman for his office said this.
	But the choice of words was clumsy and regrets having used this reference, but added that he rejects the characterisation of his speech by the Conservatives.
	Because Kemmi Baden-Ock can actually come out and...
	She says, Obviously correct.
	And so he just comes out and goes, well, I reject the characterization of my speeches, and so I do think you are a Nazi.
	But I should have been more deft about calling you that, which is just awful.
	And yet this guy's the Attorney General.
	Good makes with Starmer.
	I'm kind of surprised so far that the Conservatives and Baden-Württemberg haven't tried to bring him to the foot of the House so that they can actually question him and challenge him about various things because he is making a slur about people in the House and surely there are rules where one member of the House is making these claims against another member of the House that this is so severe that he should be called to the bar.
	You would think.
	And I don't understand why they're not doing that.
	Well, the Conservatives are incompetent and pathetic as well.
	Anyway, so just for anyone who wants to know, Herma is the chap who signed off on Lucy Connolly being arrested and jailed for 31 months.
	The Telegraph have done a good article here.
	Pointing out that he declined to review the unduly lenient sentences given to actual criminals.
	For example, a rapist, a paedophile, and a terrorist's fundraiser.
	All three of these particular criminals were presented to him, and he decided not to review them, despite them being given softer sentences than Connolly.
	The criminals themselves, there was Ben Churcher from Wiltshire, who was given 28 months in prison for raping a woman in her home.
	Jamie Daniels from Droitwich, who spared jail after pleading guilty to attempting to incite a 13-year-old girl to engage in sexual activity.
	He was given 21 months in prison, suspended for two years.
	Suspended, yeah.
	And for some reason we're so unbelievably lax on this.
	And I guess the excuse they'll make is prison space.
	You could let out people for thought crimes.
	Yes.
	Put the actual criminals in.
	And then you've got Farad Mohammed from Essex, who sent money to his nephew in Syria, knowing it was to fund terrorist activity, who also avoided prison time, got a three-year community order in October.
	But Lucy Connolly...
	He personally approved her prosecution as well, despite having the constitutional power to prevent it.
	He also made sure it was Tommy Robinson who went to jail.
	The Attorney General's Office...
	So they could have just let this go.
	They could have said, well, you know, this has already been settled.
	But no, instead they decided that he was to spend something nine months in jail in solitary.
	And so there is, at this point, a lot of pressure on Starmer to sack him.
	It's not going to happen.
	Starmer's going to keep him.
	Because there's just nothing to be gained for Starmer at this point.
	He's not going to win back his reputation.
	He's not going to improve any alliances.
	He'll just see it as him betraying a good friend who agrees with everything that he thinks.
	That's right.
	Hermer's family also came as refugees.
	Yes, they did.
	And you can see why Starmer wants to protect him.
	Because the minute one stacking happens, Why is Ed Miliband still here?
	Why is Ed Miliband still here?
	Why is Reeves still here?
	etc etc so because this is such a clown show across the board of a government because this is so destructive because they have nobody of substance The minute the cracks begin to show, it all falls apart.
	And you can see that Starmer is panicked.
	I don't know if you noticed a couple of months ago, there was a bunch of appointments made of MPs to be trade representatives.
	So an MP originally from Ghana was made trade representative to Ghana.
	An MP who was originally Nigerian trade representative.
	And this was very obviously Starmer exercising his DEI agenda in order to keep laughably incompetent backbenchers happy by giving them financially rewarding and important jobs.
	So each of these, and I think they were all females, went on a jolly to her home country to sort of have a bunch of meetings and explain how this was going to be in the best interest of Britain.
	So there's a pattern there where Starmer's clearly terrified of people like Wes Steering, who are, if you remember his street Sorry, Streeting.
	Where he was making a big speech explaining how he will tackle Faraj two or three months ago.
	And this was this gentleman presenting himself as a potential future prime minister.
	Starmer barely has a lid on the Labour Party.
	And the big terror for the Labour Party is that they will end up exactly where the Conservatives ended up.
	You raise an important point about politics.
	I mean, I saw it, you know, when you've got Liz Truss and Kwaseng.
	No, they went for him straight away because they were the same sort of scenario here.
	Two very good friends.
	And Liz Truss's big mistake was letting him go.
	She should have turned around and said, no, he's staying.
	He's doing a great job.
	And if she'd done that, she would have held the court for a little bit longer.
	But Boris was the same.
	he was holding on to people that he could as long as possible as they tried to pick off all the Brexiteers who were supporters around him.
	And rather than the opposition taking him out, So there's a very, very good principle in place.
	It buys you time, gives you the opportunity to hope something else comes up.
	You hope this Ferrari goes down and somebody else that you might not like then raises their head and then you can give them the sacrificial lamb that is needed at some stage.
	But the moment you cut one, everybody else becomes open season to go for the next.
	And they know that's when it starts becoming a big issue.
	Yes.
	I think you're absolutely right on that.
	So yeah, exactly.
	I don't think he's going anywhere.
	So for at least the next four years, basically, we're going to be governed by a cabal of our enemies, proving Robert Conquest correct.
	Sigil Stone says, I read that Herma's next move is to advocate for the reparations for the Vikings, for the right to pillage being violated by Alfred.
	I'm shocked that he hasn't already done this.
	Sorry, go ahead.
	That's a cracker.
	There's always one great one.
	They've got human rights just like everyone else.
	Anyway, let's move on.
	Okay, so...
	And if you want to partake in that, you should definitely sign up for the Trivium.
	However...
	And fairy tales are extremely important because they form the minds of the young and they help them set correct expectations for life.
	Fairy tales are fantastic because they are ridiculously based.
	And I'm of the view that Little Red Riding Hood is actually a philosophy book disguised as a children's tale that is intended to explain to you how do you deal with degeneracy and why is degeneracy bad.
	Let's explain.
	Oh, I've got to go for this.
	It's being called the Big Bad Wolf.
	This is the Big Bad Wolf.
	So let's sort of see how it starts.
	Lillard Riding Hood is loved by everybody.
	Her grandma absolutely adores her.
	Her parents take good care of her.
	They give her everything that she needs.
	She's a happy child.
	She's well taken care of.
	Society functions as it should.
	And the father is a woodsman.
	In some versions, a huntsman.
	And this is important because this is a man who passes between the settled village life of the civilized urban people and the savage life of somebody who was in the woods.
	So he's capable of acting both in a highly civilized context, but also in conflict and in war and in taming nature.
	This is the setting.
	Little Red Riding Hood then goes off to take care of her grandmother and deliver some things to her.
	Bread and wine are the traditional items there, very Christian, very symbolic.
	And on the way, she meets the big bad wolf.
	The wolf is dressed very well.
	His looks are very deceptive.
	And Little Red Riding Hood is absolutely innocent.
	It is literally the innocence of children.
	Is it just me, though, Carl?
	But isn't he dressed exactly like Farage?
	I'll let that slide.
	In there, and the way that he's holding his hands up there.
	The garage doesn't tend to wear a waistcoat.
	I missed that one.
	So this is an innocent child.
	She doesn't know.
	She's never seen a wolf before.
	She doesn't know what it is.
	She just thinks that this is a large dog.
	So she engages with him in conversation.
	And there's a lesson there.
	Don't even interact with evil.
	Don't even entertain it.
	Stop it from the beginning.
	The story continues, of course, and you know how it goes.
	Where are you going?
	I'm going to my grandmother's house.
	What does that mean?
	It's tradition.
	The house stands under three oak trees.
	So it represents the past.
	It represents the eternal.
	It represents the little cottage in the middle of the woods.
	The basic, the bud of civilization.
	The grain of civilization.
	That's what it is.
	It's not in a town.
	It's not fully civilized.
	She's not living in a tent or a cave either.
	It's a house in the woods.
	Under the shadow of tradition, three giant oak trees.
	And also, because it's the grandchild and the grandmother, we've got the linkage between generations.
	Precisely.
	This is the tradition that moves through time and space.
	Precisely.
	And you are walking on the path between modernity and tradition, back and forth all the time, and the trick is to stay on the right path.
	And what does the wolf think?
	Well, I could eat both the grandmother and the child.
	So how am I going to do this?
	I will tempt the child.
	You should enjoy yourself.
	You should walk around in the woods.
	You should explore.
	You shouldn't stay on the straight and narrow path.
	That's for wimps and weaklings.
	You should express your strong identity.
	You should be yourself and celebrate yourself as a young woman.
	Go and pick flowers and play in the sunlight and have a good time.
	So this is the temptation of the wolf or...
	Yeah, I can see that.
	The tree of life, the serpent's now giving the idea, eat the apple.
	Exactly.
	Go and have a go.
	Exactly.
	Go for temptation.
	Enjoy the temptation.
	Have fun.
	What could possibly go wrong?
	What could possibly go wrong?
	Have the pill.
	Take the pill.
	And so, Little Red Riding Hood does this, and she goes off the path, and she's going around, picking flowers, having fun, enjoying the sunlight.
	This is a comment on the nature of degeneracy.
	Listen to this sentence.
	It's beautiful.
	When she had gathered so many flowers that her arms were full, she began to think again of her grandmother, tradition, lying ill in bed, how to save society.
	So you have to think here of these, God help them, these women who are going around exploring how many men they can bed in a single day.
	This comment is absolutely beautiful.
	When she'd gathered so many flowers that her arms were full, when she's basically explored the limits of degeneracy, when she's gone to the furthest extremes and still found no satisfaction because flowers, by their nature, when you pick them, are dead things and they will always fail to satisfy you.
	What did she think?
	Her grandmother.
	And her grandmother being sick.
	And how do I get back to the path?
	Interesting on a sort of slightly more like grounded level is the self-interestedness of this.
	You're meant to be taking something to your grandmother.
	Yes.
	Because she's ill.
	She can't get it for herself.
	And instead you've been indulging yourself in a very, well, selfish way.
	Exactly.
	Exactly.
	She returned to the path and went on her way.
	So she tried to put the whole past behind her.
	This is a redemption element.
	Exactly.
	Like the redemption movie.
	I used to be a drug addict.
	Now I've been able to go out and I'm going to kill the drug addicts.
	Precisely.
	Precisely.
	Drug dealers.
	This is her trying to save herself from her past.
	The online right likes to comment on the slut to trad wife chain.
	That's actually what it's expressing.
	But in a way that is fit for children.
	It is what happens in the interceding time, right?
	Because if I recall the story of Little Red Riding Hood well, the time she spends not traveling to her grandmother's house allows something terrible to happen to the grandmother.
	Precisely.
	Precisely.
	And so by the time she gets to her grandmother's house, the grandmother is gone.
	She's already been eaten by the wolf.
	The wolf is dressed up in the clothing of tradition.
	He's trying to tell you what your own country's tradition is.
	This is the same as saying Britain was always diverse.
	This is the same as saying it was always such.
	What are you talking about?
	Nothing has changed.
	Britain was built by diversity with her.
	Britain was built by diversity.
	That's the wolf dressed up as the grandmother telling you what you're meant to think and lying to you about tradition.
	And then you start to notice, what are these big eyes?
	What are these big ears?
	What's this big mouth?
	Well, I'm going to eat you now.
	By the time you notice, it's too late.
	By the time you notice, it's too late.
	This is why prejudice is actually a virtue.
	This is why prejudice is a virtue.
	Because prejudice allows you to think, well, people in the past have tried this.
	And it's led them on a one-way road to hell.
	So, I'm actually, for my next Islander article, I've actually written about this, because I think Burke makes a really persuasive defense of prejudice, actually, saying, look, this is the iterative trial and error of centuries, that actually, you can't rationally explain why this is the case, but you realize there's probably something out of this.
	You're going to love the mess.
	Well, yeah.
	You're going to love the mess.
	Let's continue.
	So we see that by the time you've decided to experiment with things on your own and try to do things your own way, the wolf's stolen your grandmother's clothes and is pretending to be your grandmother.
	And then the wolf gets lazy.
	He's consumed the past.
	He's consumed the future.
	He's snoring so loudly that the chimney begins to shake.
	And that's when men notice, when evil has become so comfortable and so entrenched.
	That only then does the woodsman come in.
	He's heard an awful noise coming from the house of grandmother.
	He wonders what it is.
	He goes in and he finds the wolf there.
	And the man says, I'm going to kill you straight away.
	Even worse, you wicked creature.
	I have long wanted to get my hands on you.
	Sorry, I have these committed to memory practice.
	I've read them that many times.
	And he swings his axe and he kills the wolf straight away.
	He thinks he's saving tradition.
	He's doing this to save grandmother.
	He's literally trad.
	That's what he is.
	But by killing the wolf, what he saves first is actually Little Red Riding Hood.
	And then the trad man who is between civilization and the wilderness and is therefore capable of extreme violence when necessary and capable of being a civilized man when necessary.
	And that's how tradition is actually saved.
	So this is the beauty of it.
	It's a strong message for saying that you can be good, you can be kind, but you must always be able to use your hands and be violent when it's necessary to protect the interests of you, your family and those around you.
	The harmless man is harmful.
	The harmless man is a destructive force.
	That's what it is.
	And then Little Red Riding Hood goes back on the path and promises her mother, as long as I live, I shall never again leave the forest path when you have warned me not to do so.
	And that's a very Christian line.
	And that's a very Christian line.
	Very Christian line.
	Very, very thoroughly Christian line.
	Stay on the right path.
	Instead of, let's experiment with this, let's try that, etc., etc.
	You know where it ends up.
	You end up in the wolf's belly.
	You end up in the wolf's belly.
	Violence is required to extract you from it.
	And only violence can save you from the wolf's belly.
	And this is something that you want to keep in mind in terms of analyzing the world that you see around you today.
	That things have got exactly as we saw with the French riots.
	The level of tolerance to endless rioting is only going to end when there is extreme violence used to terminate.
	The rioting.
	But we have this philosophy.
	We understand these in conceptual ideas.
	You talked about some of the philosophers we read.
	Those who go to Oxford and Cambridge, the Sorbonne, Harvard, Yale, are reading those materials as well.
	Yes.
	But they're taking a very different message from it.
	Their message is more of the tolerance because they've already drifted off the path.
	They've always wanted to experiment with all the things that don't work in life.
	We know that are bad.
	And then they justify their actions to themselves.
	And in doing so, they think everybody else should be able to do that as well.
	So the purpose of their philosophy is to allow you to live in the woods and pick the flowers forever.
	Exactly.
	But that's not how a human life works.
	And this is something that a lot of millennials are realising is, oh, I'm getting older and I don't have any of those things that lead me to grandmother's house.
	I don't have a family.
	I don't have a wife.
	I don't have children.
	I don't have a plan for the future.
	And no, you don't.
	You were picking the flowers well into your late 30s, early 40s.
	Now what?
	What's your plan?
	It's a very good message for men to turn around and say, you know, don't do that.
	Finish it very quickly, as what my grandmother used to say.
	Go out, you know, go and enjoy yourself, but come back and deal with it very, very quickly.
	And get married younger.
	Get a family.
	Get a responsibility behind you.
	Get out of the house.
	Do something.
	And if the women are not willing to stick along with you at that particular journey, leave them.
	Yes.
	Because then you get the sorts of women on the front page of the, what was it, the Guardian and the Independent this week that had five women all in their late...
	You're in the woods.
	You didn't go to grandmother's house.
	What do you want?
	Well, that's right.
	You made the choice.
	You listened to the wolf.
	That was stupid, wasn't it?
	Yeah, and you've listened to the limited number of men that are left capable for what you want, and they can pick and choose whoever they want.
	And they can choose women 10 years younger than you, so get lost.
	It's really tragic.
	Talk to the young generation.
	Oh, yeah.
	So, I wanted to pick on a couple of other fairy tales that really focus on feminine virtue and how feminine virtue is different from male virtue.
	Beauty and the Beast, classic, everybody knows it, everybody loves it.
	The youngest daughter was the prettiest, but she was when her father faced misfortune.
	And lost all of his money.
	She was absolutely pleasant about it.
	She decided that she was going to take care of the little house in the country, even though they didn't have the city and the big parties and the fun that they used to have.
	She's going to cook.
	She's going to clean.
	She's going to take full responsibility for all of the feminine chores in the house, even though her sisters refused to do it.
	So she took the burden on herself.
	She picked up her cross.
	That was her cross.
	She decided to carry it.
	She decided to do what was required of her.
	The merchant goes off on business.
	He gets lost.
	He finds himself in a palace.
	He doesn't know anything about the palace.
	But it's clear that the person who controls the palace is extremely capable.
	First, he has a palace.
	Second, the man walks in and he finds a full dinner.
	Then he wants to go to bed and he finds a perfectly set and very tidy bedroom.
	So there's someone there who knows what he's doing.
	Except that this someone is literally a beast.
	The father tries to go and pick a white rose because that's what his daughter had asked him for.
	Beauty, the youngest, asked for a white rose.
	The other two asked for pearls and diamonds.
	They wanted extravagance.
	Jesus wanted a white rose.
	He's more likely to get what they asked for.
	Just a quick side.
	This is a lesson I learned when I was a kid, right?
	So every year I'd be like, Dad, can I get a Transformers toy or whatever?
	And my sister would be like, can I get a pony?
	Well, who got what they wanted?
	I learned this very early in life.
	Be reasonable.
	So basically...
	That would have been a shock.
	I was pretty convinced it was never going to happen.
	So this guy is literally a beast.
	He finds the merchant trying to pick just one rose and he decides that he's going to kill him there and then.
	And the only thing that saves him is the law of surprise.
	The first thing that you encounter when you get back home, you have to give it to me.
	If it's the dog, I'll take it.
	But if it's your daughter, I'll also take her.
	And it turns out to be exactly his daughter.
	But, and this is really the clincher here, Beauty insisted that once a promise was made, it should be kept.
	Her father didn't want to take her to the Beast.
	Obviously.
	But she insists that no, promises must be kept, commitments must be seen through.
	You don't get to quit halfway, even if you've committed to something inconvenient.
	And this is the essence of feminine virtue.
	Commitment.
	It's emphasized here in an absolutely staggering way.
	And then she gets to know Beast, and she gets to love him, and so on, but she refuses to marry him because he's a beast.
	He's hideous.
	The story goes on and on, and I won't...
	But then she also follows through with her commitment one more time after having flaked for a little while for a good reason, to take care of her father.
	Because she has different priorities and she's trying to satisfy them both.
	So fair to her.
	But then she goes and finds the beast and he's dying.
	And she says, alright, I will marry you.
	And there's no beast anymore.
	It's a prince.
	So feminine faithfulness, feminine ability to give.
	Literally transforms a beast to a prince.
	And you see the same theme expressed in The Princess and the Frog.
	You see the same theme in memes that go around of the wild young man with a woman and just over time how he becomes much more civilized.
	Yes.
	And this is definitely true.
	I think that's the point about the responsibility.
	Yes.
	We can be wild.
	We want to go off and do, you know, sow your oats when you're younger because maybe genetically that's what we're supposed to do.
	Yep.
	You want to go wild with the lads because, you know, we used to go out and fight and kill people and now we just went to the pub.
	Perhaps you do an odd riot in Paris every now and again, you know, just on a casual Saturday afternoon.
	But then as you meet the right woman and they teach you.
	But that also should be taught to you from your parents as well.
	And it's clear in this case, Beauty and the Beast, the beauty is also being given that education from her father about responsibility.
	The importance of having a family and that long line of telling you what you should or shouldn't do.
	And why you should also listen to your parents most of the time, not all the time.
	You're absolutely right.
	This is a great...
	Yes, precisely.
	Because women, of course, view their husbands as a project.
	Darling, I'll take the bins out tonight.
	She wants you to become a different kind of man when she meets you, whereas men are the other way.
	You never want your wife to change.
	That's pretty true.
	It's totally true.
	And so it's very interesting how that's the case.
	And then, Another little piece on female virtue.
	This is the wolf and the seven little kids.
	The story is about, so this sort of, There's a goat.
	She takes care of her kids.
	Her one fear is that the wolf might catch them.
	She isn't safe.
	There are wolves prowling around.
	There are wolves prowling around.
	That means that there aren't men killing wolves.
	That's the hidden implication here.
	Why are there wolves prowling around?
	Exactly.
	Why are there migrants running around the street spitting on women?
	Yes.
	Why are there rape gangs?
	Where are the men killing the wolves?
	Exactly.
	Exactly.
	So she finds herself in this dilemma.
	What is she going to do about it?
	Well, let's see how the wolf succeeds first.
	She explains to her kids that, look, the wolf's voice is different from mine and his appearance is different, so don't trust whatever you hear.
	And so the wolf tries to change.
	He firstly swallows chalk so that he gets a softer voice.
	Don't try this at home.
	Then he goes to the baker, and the baker is afraid, and he helps the wolf knowingly.
	And he goes...
	There you go.
	Jesus Christ!
	There you go.
	And then he goes to the miller.
	And the miller says, the wolf wants to deceive someone, so he refused to help him.
	And then the wolf said, if you don't help me, I'm going to eat you.
	And the miller complies.
	I'm just hearing Sir Lindsay Hoyle saying, I just don't want anyone else getting stabbed.
	Exactly.
	That's all I'm hearing from this.
	Exactly.
	These are cowards who are in power, and the cowards who are in power empower wolves.
	That's what they're doing.
	It's very obvious.
	It's going back to Paris.
	We've got Macron in power, and we're empowering those to go out across the streets and just destroy Paris.
	Exactly.
	Exactly.
	Because I'm too afraid.
	Because they're too afraid.
	Because they won't let the men deal with the wolves.
	Because they won't allow the men to deal with the wolves, and the men allow themselves to be turned into sheep instead.
	So, the wolf manages to get in.
	He eats six out of the seven kids, and then the mother and the last surviving kid, they go around, and they see the wolf, and again, the nature of evil.
	It's complacent.
	He's asleep.
	He's snoring under the tree so loudly that the tree is shaking.
	It's complete complacency, just as we see with Keir Starmer tolerating the incompetence of his own government.
	That's what we're seeing here.
	And so what does she do?
	She doesn't confront the wolf head on.
	She sends the kid back home to get scissors and thread.
	And then she slowly cuts open the wolf's belly while he's still asleep.
	And saves all of her kids and stuffs his belly with rocks.
	And then the wolf goes to get a drink of water and he falls in the well and he dies.
	And good is celebrated by everybody around them.
	The wolf is dead.
	No longer did the mother goat need to be afraid to leave her kids alone when she went to the forest.
	It's not good, though, that she has to do it via subversion.
	But that's the only option left open, too.
	Her only option.
	Well, it is.
	One's tyranny has taken control.
	And as we're finding now, as our freedom of speech is being removed, then you've got to try and find ways.
	You have to box clever to be able to get around those particular rules.
	And they're becoming more narrow each day.
	Exactly.
	By us having to, in a way, subvert our own natural instincts of being fair and good and kind, we actually have to find ways around it.
	And that's what we've done.
	In new media that we're doing now, we've had to subvert the classic mainstream media who are holding on the message that evil is fine as long as you ignore it, but will enable it and you keep quiet and just accept it.
	And it's permanent.
	You're constantly terrified of being banned.
	You're constantly terrified of being demonetized.
	You're constantly terrified of being canceled.
	They're always trying to find a way to get you over anything.
	And that's the nature of tyranny.
	You can't leave vulnerable things on their own and know that they'll be safe.
	I'm just waiting for the moment, I hope, when we get actually some form of tyranny, actually a moment of sleep, so we can go and indeed cut it open and release freedom and decency.
	Maybe.
	It's the belly of that.
	Alternatively, there is always the axe.
	But this is The beauty of these stories I went a bit berserk And I literally bought 200 Of the little Because I thought they're going to get banned one day.
	Why not have my own collection at home?
	Well, I do have a few of them.
	I was looking at one of them going, I recognize that, to be honest, for my daughter.
	And then you look at the art itself.
	Each of these scenes is beautiful.
	Each of these paintings is actually...
	And then you look at something garbage like Peppa Pig.
	And everything is copy-pasted.
	It's ugly.
	The messages are stupid.
	Be polite.
	And you can become a doctor.
	And what does the doctor in Peppa Pig do?
	She flies in her doctor's airplane and she turns over a lizard that had gotten stuck on her back.
	That's the extent...
	That's what it is.
	Meaninglessness for everyone.
	Enjoy it.
	I've pushed Peppa Pig out of my memory a long time ago.
	Oh, man, no.
	We were tortured as parents.
	Tortured as parents with that.
	I've banned it.
	It's not allowed anymore.
	My wife despises Peppa Pig.
	I'm actually fairly ambivalent towards it because I've never really watched it.
	You should hate it with a passion.
	You should hate it with a passion.
	It's uncreative.
	It's demeaning.
	It lowers your intellect.
	It makes you dumber.
	You've been forced never to go to Peppa Pig World.
	No, no, I have actually been to Peppa Pig World, actually.
	Unfortunately.
	My children don't know that it exists.
	And I'm keeping it that way.
	And if any of you spills the beans...
	Big Bad Wolf World.
	Very good.
	Very good.
	You don't want to go there.
	But this is the heritage of these fairy tales.
	These are the lessons behind them.
	They're eternal stories of wisdom.
	They teach you something eternal.
	And the genius of them is that they are coded for every age.
	They're coded for every age.
	You read them as a child, you learn, I'm going to stick to the path.
	You learn how to deal with wolves.
	You read them as an adult, you explain why, you understand why they were read to you in the first place.
	So there's something there.
	And replacing them with this garbage is just purely destructive.
	It's the perennial issue of stripping away a plan for your life.
	Because this is something I've really realized that young people just have not...
	There was never think about what's going to happen later on in your life.
	Think about where you're going, where you're going to end up.
	And this attitude of the here and now is the only thing that is important.
	So just think about now.
	That's it.
	Just go play in the woods and collect flowers.
	The point of the fairy tales is to tell you that every life is a story, and you're going to get to the conclusion of the story at some point.
	So which conclusion do you want it to be?
	The first impression that I had when I got to Britain and started socializing with people was the number of people considerably older than I was at the time, in their 30s and 40s, who lived with the only objective of remaining 21 forever.
	who wanted to just enjoy the things that were I didn't live as good a life as I could have.
	It took me a long time to fall out of that.
	I'm the same.
	I lived in London.
	I worked in London.
	I had to leave London to actually become myself again.
	To understand that there is not the hedonism and the Sodom and Gomorrah of London and what it's all about.
	It can be very positive if you're looking at the cultural aspects about it that are still there, going to the museums.
	But that's not why most people are in London.
	It's like Pleasure Island and Pinocchio.
	You can see it's the sort of thing that turns you into a jackass.
	That's the point of it.
	Exactly, exactly, exactly.
	So, fairy tales.
	I'm going to have to start rereading some of them as well.
	Fairy tales are a beast.
	Don't ever forget that.
	Read them to your children.
	Yes.
	The thing is, it is actually totally true.
	And I was just, when you mentioned it, I was thinking, yeah, there's a reason that, you know, don't cry wolf is something that persists in the culture.
	It's a really important thing.
	Don't lie to people.
	Exactly.
	It matters.
	All of these things genuinely matter.
	Don't deceive.
	Don't lie.
	You will sell your future.
	You will destroy yourself if you do it.
	Now we're going to have to have a quiz.
	Which is our favourite little story tale, to be honest?
	Is that Hans Christian Andersen one?
	Are we all going Germanic?
	Anyway, let's get to the video comments.
	Yeah, brilliant.
	You can't build a tax prison whereby you lure immigrants into your city with low taxation, then suddenly pump the tax rate to 25. It turns out the desire to emigrate is so strong that people simply phase through walls.
	Reinforcing the theory that even lower on Maslow's hierarchy of needs is the physiological requirement.
	For a human being to evade taxation.
	For anyone who doesn't know who that is, that's Seth Zench.
	He's a YouTuber and he makes very amusing videos about video games.
	From a based perspective.
	Go for the next one.
	One of the underlying themes in the Harry Potter franchise is not trusting corporate news.
	Heck, one of the major plot points in the fifth book was the government conspiring with the mainstream media to push several false narratives and demonize truth-tellers, and then manipulating academia to make the youth unable to defend themselves.
	The fact that progressives can't see these obvious themes just goes to show how far gone they really are.
	Only reason the false narratives and Harry Potter collapsed was there was a legit attack in their halls of government.
	Don't get any funny ideas now.
	See, I'm too old for Harry Potter, right?
	Never read it, I've never watched any of the movies.
	I know about it through cultural osmosis, because, you know, I'm not a millennial, it wasn't around when I was a kid, I never read it, right?
	But everything I hear about it just makes it sound really based.
	Some parts of it are.
	Really traditional and reactionary.
	And so, you know, J.K. Rowling still being a shitlib on everything other than gender.
	Dispointing, Miss Rowling.
	Anyway, I might have to give them a read at some point.
	Well, I've had to watch all the movies and then they come out and what's interesting, my daughter doesn't like all the prequels where, you know, Harry Potter, fine, like them, but where they've got these others where they're creating creatures in different films, other people who are not in the original, she's saying, that's no good.
	And that's not just me.
	It's all the other kids.
	They like the originals.
	They don't like the spin-offs and the recreations.
	Who wrote the spin-offs and recreations?
	Was it Rowling?
	It was Rowling, but I can't remember the names of them now.
	The audience will probably remember them.
	I'll have to give them a read at some point.
	Let's go to the next one.
	And just when you thought Britain was leading the way in political retardation, the Democrats say, hold my shard in hay.
	Democrats desperately need to win back young men.
	But how?
	Do they go with David Hogg, the twink?
	Do they go with Tim Noballs, the raging incompetent?
	Or even Cory Booker, the senator who's taken more balls to the chin than a footballer?
	No!
	They pick an obese lesbian.
	At this point, the Babylon Bee will have to shut down, because the Democrats are the biggest satire.
	This is genuinely something I've been following, is the Democrats'attempt to...
	We've been villainising men for a decade now.
	And men have suddenly woke up and gone, yeah, maybe I'm not for the Democrats, maybe I'm for Trump.
	And watching them trying to figure out what they can do is really, really funny because What do you think this kind of idea of taking some of the big YouTubers like?
	I mean, I don't really know much about the Tates or the case, but they really hate the Tates as brothers.
	And they hate the English guy that's just gone to Magistrates Court two days ago.
	Not sure who that is.
	Used to be like a TV star, film star, movie star, long beard, and he became a Christian and has got a massive following.
	Oh!
	I've forgotten his name.
	Russell Brand.
	Russell Brand.
	Same sort of thing for things that he did 30 years ago.
	because he's seen as a big kind of guy for the, Oh, is it?
	Yeah.
	Andrew Tate, though, is obviously mostly men.
	Yeah.
	But I just see them as taking them and wonder whether it's like that kind of their Me Too movement towards them.
	And then we can cleanse ourselves by getting rid of these influence and then we can put in Rory.
	I think Tate is genuinely awful.
	Yeah.
	I think Tate is genuinely awful.
	Even if he's right about a few things, he's a genuinely awful human being.
	He's quite funny, though.
	Fair enough.
	Fair enough.
	Russell Brand, I don't know how.
	Something that happened 30 years ago that came out now.
	It's not even 30 years ago.
	It's about 10-15 years ago.
	But even then, stories about Russell Brand probably have some legitimacy.
	Drug-addled sex addict.
	No, he definitely was that.
	I mean, I remember seeing him in Solo House.
	And I don't even dislike him personally, but it's probably something to it.
	But anyway, let's go on to the next one.
	Yes.
	I mean, we are literally run by our enemies.
	I don't know how else to put it.
	Of all the countries in the world do this too as well.
	It's like Britain just gets...
	I actually looked this up, right?
	So we get...
	We get 1,000.
	Yeah, we get unfiltered sunlight.
	The only places that get less than that are some parts of northern Russia and Alaska.
	And they want to block out what's left of our 1,000 hours.
	Yes, everywhere else on Earth gets more sun than we do.
	And we're like, yeah, let's block out the sun and put up solar panels.
	Good God, man.
	Anyway, let's move to the next one.
	And now a brief video commercial.
	Well, here I'm taking the first part of the trivia and the foundations of writing.
	Carl, I obviously was in school a lot earlier than you were because a lot of this stuff is stuff I remember from when I was a lot younger.
	And then there's a lot of details that I've forgotten.
	So, hey, on foundations of writing, I'd say it's worth it.
	Looking forward to logic and rhetoric.
	Well done, him.
	Yeah, so I...
	Oh, God, that takes me back.
	I know, right?
	But these are things we should all know properly, and we don't.
	Personally, I'm going to be going through the rhetoric one with a fine-tooth comb in the near future, because I just found that really fascinating, frankly.
	Let's go to the next one.
	Much noise is made about King Charles doing a land admission speech here in Canadian Parliament, but few seem to understand what it actually means.
	Under Trudeau, we passed Bill C-15, which renders the UN Charter on Indigenous Peoples sovereign above Canadian law, compelling all Canadian law to be altered to adhere to it.
	Even though it has no legally definable terms contained within it, this contains, among other things, a prescription that natives must have full control over traditionally held lands, which is, of course, claimed to be all of it.
	So, regrettably, it seems we finally answered Cromwell's question as to if the king can be treasonous to himself and the crown.
	Apparently, he can by denying his own sovereignty over his dominion.
	This is mad.
	That's insanity.
	That's just an unnecessary humiliation ritual.
	It really depressed me.
	It really depressed me.
	But yeah, I mean, I guess he's following the tradition of kings called Charles, which is being...
	Anyway...
	anyone take that as a literal sentence Henry says the French Not least because rioting keeps a community poor.
	Of course it does.
	Money spent on repairing the damage, pay it to police, etc.
	Could have been spent on other more productive things.
	I think this is obviously just not about that.
	It's just obviously not about that.
	This is about flexing a kind of cultural power over the native French.
	That's what it's about.
	Baron von Warhawk says, "Now Paris is learning the lessons that Egypt, Lebanon and Jordan and Kuwait have all learned with blood and chaos.
	If you let jihadists into your country, The thing is, a lot of these people won't even be jihadists, as we think.
	It's someone who's ideologically entrenched in Islamic doctrine.
	What these people are are more tribals.
	They're like, we are us.
	I mean, I bet none of them have even read the Quran, but they're like, no, we have the identity Muslim, we all agree on the identity Muslim, and you're not us.
	So it's literally us versus you.
	That's what it comes down to.
	Yeah, it's so self-evident.
	Arizona Desert Rat says, the same kind of thing happens in Tuscan whenever the University of Arizona basketball team makes it to the national championship.
	Win or lose, there are riots on for me.
	How many people die?
	Henry says, first the cricket match in Leicester, now the PSG win.
	Are the knife-blunting crowd going to call for banning team sports next?
	That's a good one, yeah.
	That's a very good point.
	It turns out it wasn't the knives after all.
	OSAP says, is Paris secretly in American City?
	American City's also right whenever there's a football game.
	Win or lose, they're right whenever the police prevent crimes to.
	Possibly.
	I just don't see it.
	I've never seen a massive right over a football match.
	It doesn't really happen here.
	Even when it was like, you know, football hooligans...
	They're not going to burn your car.
	No.
	Like, you know, they'd be crazy.
	They weren't going around looting either.
	No, and they weren't just like targeting random people on the street.
	And smashing windows of two girls in it.
	You'd actually have everyone coming back to the guys.
	What the hell are you doing?
	Yeah.
	You know, if you're not wearing a football shirt, they don't care.
	Yeah.
	Why would they?
	Anyway, Hector says, Herma, I will defend all of Britain's enemies rather than let a single native Brit be free of terrorism.
	Yeah, that seems to be the case, actually.
	Mason says, all of the useless MPs that Keir has in his cabinet, yet he pulls the strings to shove one of his human rights lawyer mates into the AG job.
	Very telling what his priorities are.
	Yeah, I mean, this is...
	And so, you know, get used to this being the future under the Labour Party.
	Zombie Philip says, All of fairy tales are philosophic, as a lot were told to children to teach them good ideas.
	That's why Aesop's fables have existed for centuries.
	In fact, all good stories are philosophic stories, used by humans to learn from other people's mistakes, like the Bible, for example.
	Totally true.
	Frogger says, this is also a theme in the Frog Princess, keeping one's promises.
	Though it is imposed upon her by her father, these stories are the best, especially when rediscovering them when reading to your children.
	Yeah, I think I'm going to have to go and get all these fairy tales.
	Because at the moment, for my kids, I've got like modern...
	They're ugly.
	And they're crap as well.
	They're ugly.
	And the worst thing that's happening is that they take these old stories and then tweak them.
	And by doing so, they take away all of the wisdom from them.
	Yeah, there's no substance.
	There's no substance.
	And it boils down to, why don't you just be nice?
	Exactly.
	It's all about nice.
	And Dan says, thanks for the fairytale analysis segment.
	Very Petersonian type beats to clean my room to.
	Well, that's good.
	I personally actually really enjoyed it as well.
	I knew it was going to be good.
	Weeks ago that Firaz came up with this idea and we're like, yeah, yeah, we'll definitely do it.
	I'm glad it turned out well.
	Anyway, thanks for joining us all, folks.
	We will be back, of course, tomorrow.

▲