All Episodes
Previous Next
June 10, 2025 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters
01:31:24
The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #1183
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
If the mechanical world is just that mechanical, how does it become transcendent?
Galileo, Boyle, Newton and many others saw themselves as recovering this lost wisdom.
Technology had sufficiently progressed to reveal that mankind and the earth he inhabited was not actually the centre of the universe.
It threatened to upend their entire body of cosmological knowledge.
The process of distinguishing science from superstition had begun, and the great minds of the era dedicated themselves to this work.
Podcast of The Lotus Eaters, episode 1183.
I'm joined by Beau Praz.
Hello, and apparently we're going to be talking about the clash between Elon and the Donald.
Our London house prices are crashing, and what women in the West have to look forward to.
So, you know, look forward to that.
Right, so, um, there's you.
Okay, I thought we could just talk a little bit then about the Clash of the Titans.
Oh yes.
Their sort of epic fallout between the Donald and good King Elon.
It did escalate.
Quite fast.
Yeah, it got real serious real quick, didn't it?
It was funny.
And it was, I mean, it's only been going for, what, a week?
Maybe a bit more than a week.
I'm actually glad we didn't cover it immediately.
A bit like the Zia Yusuf thing.
Let it sort of simmer for a few days.
I did on the Daily Channel, but we're a bit more thoughtful here on the podcast channel.
It was like, you know, obviously there was some disagreement over the spending.
And then, like, in one afternoon, it went straight to, you're a pedo and you're a Nazi.
Yeah.
Okay?
You're a druggy.
There's a ketamine thrown in, wasn't there?
Yes, yes.
Although not by Donald himself.
He probably briefed it to someone.
I don't know.
Donald did the Nazi thing.
Did he all...
Maybe that was a...
Yes, yes.
And then you have no idea which ones.
Which one is real?
Yeah.
The ketamine stuff seems to be confirmed and seems to be prescription-based.
But it does have side effects, shall we say.
Well, he's been quite successful.
So if ketamine does that...
I mean, maybe I should try some.
According to the Washington Post, Adderall is also mixed into it.
That was what M. Bankman-Fried was on.
Sam Bankman-Fried.
Yes, and many others who have to focus for a pretty long time and struggle with it and then they end up using Adderall to help them do that.
I cannot pay attention to anything longer than about half an hour.
What is Adderall?
We don't really have it in Britain.
It's a pill?
It's a pill.
And it's also very frequently used by students who are cramming for exams and things like that.
It's used by a lot of lawyers as a sort of downgraded cocaine, shall we say.
Surely lawyers can afford cocaine.
Yes, yes, but there are other consequences, and it seems that the consequences of Adderall are less severe than the consequences of cocaine.
Oh, right.
So you see, I mean, you know, And you have a history of drug use, not just from, what's his name, Hunter Biden in the White House, but there is a certain history of the use of drugs among high-performing people in order to enhance their performance and keep them going for longer.
So ketamine is not performance enhancing.
It's not supposed to be, at least.
But when these drugs are mixed, nobody knows what exactly the total effect is.
Right.
You call the world's most powerful man a pedo.
Say again?
You call the world's most powerful man a pedo.
Hey, if you need an excuse to call the world's most powerful man a pedo, then saying I was on drugs is probably a good one.
Yes, it was.
So if you need to climb back, if you need to sort of backtrack a little bit, then yeah, okay, I was on drugs, sorry.
One quick note I will say, John Kennedy was in extreme amounts of pain.
I think he was on all sorts of different drugs, but because he was wounded during the war and was actually in all sorts of pain.
But anyway, that's a side note.
That's a side note.
So yeah, this Classical Titans, it fell out pretty quick, didn't it?
And because we haven't talked about it on the podcast yet, I thought it is sort of worthy of note.
It's all the mainstream media were.
Oh, there's your.
Yeah, your daily video, which I thought was very good, very interesting.
But all the mainstream media has sort of been commenting on it.
So a nice picture from the BBC.
And there's lots of, there are a few different angles to sort of take into account, whether it's sort of truly just about politics, about the future of America, about the deficit, about the economy, or whether there's sort of a, Whether Elon was always going to have left the Trump administration around this time anyway.
Whether it's a mountain out of a molehill.
It's not really anything.
It's actually a nothing burger.
Or whether it's actually a big deal or not.
There's just a few different takes on it.
So I just thought we could talk about that a little bit.
So one of the things I would say, one of the first things I would say is that you've got...
Yes.
More eyes on him and what he says than anyone who has ever lived.
Do you ever get retweeted by him?
Your replies just completely blow up.
if he follows you, you've made it.
But still, as powerful Quote, unquote, as Elon is, is no match in terms of pure power for the President of the United States.
Yes.
Again, as powerful as Elon is, you go one-on-one, head-to-head, lock horns with the Donald, whilst he's in the big chair in the Oval Office, you're not going to win.
Although Elon did point out he's here for four years and I'm here for 40 years.
Well, that's the next thing.
That's the next thing.
Elon's going to be around long after Trump's gone, not just out of office, but...
So Elon can bide his time, if anything, wait it out.
I think they'll make up.
Well, so that was one of the things.
You think they will?
I feel like there's no way back.
I feel like he burned all his bridges.
You bring up the Epstein stuff, and whether he's deleted those tweets or not, we'll talk about that in a moment.
Yeah.
Burning a bridge, though.
Trump doesn't usually forgive...
They kind of need each other, though.
He does sometimes.
I feel like if you personally insult the man, you're out.
So take Marco Rubio as a prime example.
Good example.
Ted Cruz, a bunch of the others who sort of tried to disrupt the 2015-2016 campaign.
He's reconciled with the vast majority of them.
That's true.
And they exchanged pretty nasty insults.
And Ted Cruz refused to endorse him.
They still managed to make up.
I think the Epstein thing was...
Definitely a very serious line.
But what I found strange was that Trump wasn't anywhere near as vicious as he could be.
We've seen Trump be extremely vicious, and he didn't really go that far against Elon.
Well, he doesn't want to have to send his astronauts into space using Russian launchers.
Which is one complicating factor.
They both need each other, really.
Well, I mean, perhaps need is a bit strong, but they're both stronger together, aren't they?
Oh, yeah.
It's much better having these two work together.
And actually, I mean, the issue that they fell out over, Trump was trying to make the best deal he could, but Elon is right.
The US needs to drastically cut its spending.
Okay, so let's start there.
So it started with this one big, beautiful bill where the debt ceiling is going to be raised.
Elon even tweeted that it's being raised more than ever before.
Yes.
And that's something Elon despises.
Yes.
And he's right to.
And that Trump was going to lower taxes.
and there's arguments to be made whether that actually increases tax revenue or not.
Like some people think, "Oh, you raise taxes, you make more." the Treasury makes more money.
Over the long term, it definitely does, but not immediately.
And everything is on such a short timescale.
You've just got to get through the next bond issuance that actually the next couple of months is kind of what matters.
Right.
that's really the fundamental problem that american politics is geared especially towards the short term because every two years there's an election and halfway through your existing term you have to begin campaigning for the next one and this imposes a degree of short-termism that is very very destructive um
Because it starts with the assumption that the tax reductions that happened in Trump's first term were going to be removed anyway.
Yes, that they would be raised back because it was a temporary reduction, whereas now they're being made permanent.
So new legislation would have to come in order to raise taxes again.
So which base do you count from?
That's one complicating factor.
The other one is the assumptions around growth.
If you succeed dramatically in cutting regulation and in reducing taxes, Well, the direction of the deficit is what's key there.
And the direction of the deficit is key there, as is the amount of growth.
So the broadest point here is that they disagreed fundamentally on the direction of the US economy, essentially, or what is to be done.
I mean, they both agree that you want to reduce debt, but how to go about doing it?
They're disagreeing on that.
I think they might agree on that.
I think Trump came in from the point of view is, look, I can't whip Democrats.
This is the best deal that I can do.
And it's not just Democrats.
He's got a whole bunch of strongholds Yes.
I want my pork.
Whereas Elon is like, no, I don't care.
You should have found a way to make it better.
Which was never politically viable without them reaching the threshold of 60 senators in order to defeat the filibuster.
Yes.
Although interestingly now the Senate is working on a version of this bill which is going to be significantly better and then try and send that back to the House.
There is that.
Right.
So we'll see how this plays out.
But I think the core of the argument was, on Trump's part, political realism and priorities.
The priority being the...
And if these promises are fulfilled, then we're in a better position to tackle the deficit and the debt.
Whereas Trump's position was, no, we should focus on this now and to the exclusion of political reality and other priorities.
This is what it broke down to.
The tech bros versus MAGA.
And you could argue that the Tech Bros versus MAGA was always a break that was going to happen at some point because one of them is nationalist and one of them is bring as many Indian developers as I need.
And so that clash was inevitable and we saw the first shots fired over Christmas 2024.
Where you had Trump, where you had Musk arguing for endless migration, essentially.
Endless H-1Bs.
Whereas the nationalist wing, the MAGA wing, was saying, hold on a second, we don't care.
You will have to train them here and pay them American salaries rather than use migration to depress wages.
you're rich enough to afford higher salaries.
Yeah, I mean, so...
They're both trying to achieve the same thing.
Well, yeah, in the end.
The good point you made, I think the key point in your daily video was that America's Yeah, it's about 100% of GDP.
Which is just an absurd number.
We've done content on this before.
It's just a crazy, crazy insane number.
Sort of barely got any bearing on reality almost.
It's such an insane number.
And as you said, it will come to a head.
Oh yeah, it's a mathematical certainty.
Right.
There's the 07-08 credit crunch.
I hate that phrase, but everyone knows what we're talking about when that happened.
And it was moved on to sort of sovereign debt.
It was moved away from sort of banks in various senses.
Yeah, there's nowhere else for it to go.
There's nowhere else for it to go.
So when it explodes in codes next time, there's no road left to kick the can into.
So it will be really terrible next time.
And Elon, well, they're both interested in dealing with it.
Just in different ways.
I feel like Elon's view is a bit more immediate.
We have to do extremely painful things right now.
Like, stop doing the debt ceiling thing.
Tighten our belts.
And Trump's more like, no, we can't do that.
I haven't got the numbers in the Senate, at least, to do that.
So we've got to do this instead.
We don't know when the next great financial crash is.
You said it could be a few months, it could be nine years.
If it's in, let's say it's over five years away, then yeah, Trump's right.
Let's just make the best deal you can and edge towards it.
But if it happens in 18 months' time, we'll look back at this and we'll be like, oh, why didn't we do what Elon said while we still had the choice to make the cuts voluntarily?
Let me tell you what the worst part is.
The worst part is that with the rioting that you're seeing, which we covered yesterday, and with the cultural conflict that you're seeing that's sort of happening in the U.S. between the left and the right, that ends up impacting the market's perceptions of American stability and therefore has an impact on sentiment and debt markets.
I think bond traders are smart enough to see that they're not getting paid anyway.
Hold on.
The flip side of it, no.
They all assume that they are getting paid.
The flip side of it is that if...
That too can trigger unrest.
But then the unrest happens in a political climate that's less favorable to the MAGA movement.
So there is a sort of...
The politics and the economics move in tandem, or there is a relationship between how they move.
And any kind of major destabilizing political event The question is, do you choose the political event to be one that is based on your agenda, where you get to set the tone of the debate and decide the narrative, which is what's happened?
Or does it happen because you got into power and the first thing that you did was impose austerity, including on your own base?
And that's the other side of this debate.
And my sense is that...
Yeah, no, I mean, absolutely.
I don't know if the recent unrest in LA, I don't feel like Trump or Trump's team, the White House, was sort of playing 4-5-D chess where they, because they sent like ice guys in to try and arrest 35 people and it turned into this.
I don't think they could have seen that coming necessarily.
I've been writing that a big wave of protests is coming.
No matter what.
If you promise mass deportations, you must expect protests to come on the back of it.
And now the Democrats have promised that on the 14th of June, they are going to massively escalate their protests.
I've saw that, yeah.
The thing is, these people protest and burn stuff down anyway.
It would have been something else.
It would have been another criminal who had given himself a drug overdose in the vicinity of the police, and that would have kicked it off.
These people are just scum.
Yes, yes.
So a bit of the tweet back in the days when Elon was super pro-Trump and there's pictures out there of Trump playing with his kids, Elon's kids.
Right.
Would you have done that if you thought he was actually a sex criminal?
And if you really thought he had questions to answer over sex crime, why do you only bring that up after you've fallen out politically?
so it all rings a bit hollow.
But I do feel like the two it was Elon that sort of spat his dummy out it was Elon that sort of Yes.
Which is, yeah, unfortunately, I guess it And he was definitely trying to keep the relationship as best as possible.
And he didn't escalate against Musk anywhere near as much...
The other way.
And you're quite right at the beginning.
Trump could have gone through his throat.
Yes.
Just in terms of tweets.
And didn't.
Doesn't seem to have done.
There's also the angle.
There are multiple angles if you look for them.
The angle of Tesla and EVs and taxis on EV.
You know, some people are saying that Elon's all pissed off because Trump's basically hurting Tesla.
I've been on the record for years saying that you should get rid of the subsidies.
So that's true.
Yeah, the Guardian obviously, all lefties really loving it.
Absolutely loving that the bromance is over.
Yeah, because it was such a dangerous team-up against them.
Yes.
I don't blame them.
I mean, both sides are guilty of it.
I'm guilty of it.
When the left suffers some sort of big defeat, you know, like Kamala losing, you're going to...
You're going to gloat a bit.
You're going to have a wry chuckle.
I don't really blame them for it.
It's just how the world is, isn't it?
There's one of your tweets.
Yeah, and so, yes, it seems like now he's deleted a bunch of...
Some are saying, maybe it's true, that he's sort of trying to gear up for a reproach more.
Whether Trump's people and Elon's people have Let's try and walk it back a bit.
And, you know, let's not be actual diehard enemies for the next three and a half years or whatever it is.
It makes sense for both of them to do that.
X is a very important weapon when it comes to regime change operations.
This has to be accepted as being a part of it.
And so the state needs X. If you want to repurpose the deep state and the ability of the deep state to affect regime change, you need Elon on side, unless you're willing to go Chinese and expropriate him or lock him up or something like that.
So there are these realities here.
And at the same time, without government contracts, all of Muslim...
And the national security part of the establishment that uses SpaceX and the satellite network that he's building, these guys want to make sure that Musk is on site.
Absolutely.
But they also don't particularly like Trump either.
So there are these layers there in this debate and this conversation that are...
The other angle is the space thing.
You mentioned it.
You've just mentioned it there.
Yeah, that SpaceX is more than just a billionaire's plaything.
Yes.
It's more than just one of Elon's toys.
Right, it's actually being used instead of NASA to ferry material and people into space now.
You can't use the Russian Soyuz forever.
No, especially if they want to start putting weapons systems up.
And there's no shuttle program.
NASA's got no shuttle program.
If they want to start putting weapons systems up into orbit, which we're probably very close to being at the point we want to do, are you going to ask the Russians to take them up for them?
Yeah, right.
I mean, they need each other.
Then there's Starlink.
Starlink's an important thing now, really important thing.
Ukraine, war can't operate without Starlink.
Right.
I mean, the American military establishment still dominates or is GPS, right?
They still, which is a key thing.
But yeah, I mean, this was a funny meme, I just thought.
Which Elon posted, didn't he?
Yeah, I could see why Elon's...
But I don't really see why he went full-blown crazy, like bringing up Epstein and stuff.
Now, I don't know.
No one really knows, do they?
Unless you were there when he was in the files.
But we do know there is clips, aren't there, of Trump and Epstein together.
Then there's a picture of Elon standing next to Ghislaine at a party.
Just because you met...
Loads of people that are clean knew Epstein or even went to the island.
Stephen Hawkins went to the island, didn't he?
He was always suspect.
One of the Weinstein brothers went for dinner or something at Epstein's house.
It doesn't necessarily mean you did any sex crime.
Maybe he was, I don't know.
Yeah, who knows?
Yeah.
I mean, I doubt it, right?
That's sort of the point I'm making, I doubt it.
Yeah, so, I mean, we're going to make the segment slightly shorter today, but I wonder where it will go.
I mean, as an Englishman, albeit an Anglo-Englishman, my father is American, I've got loads of cousins in America, I still find it a little bit funny.
It's both disappointing...
That they've fallen out with each other.
Also, a little bit funny.
Oh, it's definitely funny.
I mean, true MAGA fans, diehard Elon fans, will probably be annoyed at me saying that.
It's not funny.
It's not funny.
It's deadly serious.
I'm a fan of both of them.
It's kind of funny.
Yeah, me too.
And I want them to, you know, make up.
I just feel like too many bridges have been burnt, certainly from Elon's side, for them to have really make up.
I think...
And I think that this is still within the recoverable range.
You think so?
Yeah, I think it's still within the recoverable range.
There are too many codependencies associated.
They are dependent on each other in all kinds of ways.
No, you're right.
You're right.
So okay, there are lots more angles that probably could be talked about this and we'll sort of see how it plays out.
Yep.
I suppose.
Alright, I'll leave it there for today.
Very good.
You want to read a couple of the comments, or shall we go straight?
We'll do a couple of them.
Matty Gammon says, Raising taxes and not deporting illegals is a losing proposition for the US.
To survive, J.D. Vance needs to win in 2028, so he can guide the 2030 centres to only count US citizens and not include illegals, too.
Siglestone says, the man that gets all his money from the government versus the guy that controls where all the money goes.
I wonder who's going to apologise first.
Not exactly.
Not exactly.
He's less a lot.
The reason why SpaceX gets a lot of subsidies is because the government uses it a lot.
Yeah, if you call it a subsidy.
A lot of people say, I did a tweet when it first started blowing up saying, if I had to choose a side, like Team Musk or Team Trump, Like, it's a soap opera.
Yeah.
It was close in my mind, but I guess I'll go for Elon.
And a lot of people on Twitter were like, really?
You're forgetting the H-1B thing?
Yeah.
But, like, Trump's pretty much a globalist in all sorts of ways as well.
I'd probably make the same call, but I wouldn't like it.
I'd rather pick neither or both.
Well, yeah, the best answer is neither.
Definitely go with Trump.
The thing is, the guy that's sitting in the Oval Office has got real, real power.
Real power.
Well, at the end of the day, he's got tank divisions and the Marine Corps and fast jets, ultimately, and nukes.
Elon hasn't got any of that stuff.
Not that I'm saying Trump would declare war.
On Elon.
I'm not saying that.
Elon needs a billionaire's island shaped like a skull with a giant laser in it.
That's what I'm saying.
It needs its own strategic defence system as well because Trump could just nuke it if he wanted to.
Not that I'm saying he would.
I mean, that's crazy.
I'm not saying that.
Moving to our next topic.
But before that, I just want to mention again the documentary, The Death of Man, from Carl Benjamin, addressing basically the decline of the importance of man in our understanding of the universe and the rise of materialism as an explanation for the world we live in, and more importantly, the consequences that this has had in terms of reducing us to mere matter rather than spiritual beings connected to God.
And that is live on the website now.
So please go and check it out.
The topic that I wanted to talk about a little bit is the situation of London's property prices.
There has been, as anybody who's...
But now we are beginning to see that reversed.
Anybody who bought a property in London in the 90s is now a millionaire and perhaps a multimillionaire, or even in the 80s.
In this article, A house that was bought for $176,000 in the 90s is now $1.6 million, an 800% increase.
God knows how normal people are meant to be affording houses or to be buying houses in London, but we've seen this explosion as a result of cheap credit and immigration.
And high demand, right, ultimately.
Very, very high demand.
Because the economic priority for the government was constantly London and the South East, much less so the rest of the country.
So as de-industrialization set in, there was much less to do in other parts of Britain, and there were therefore less services to provide from other parts of Britain, and so everything ended up being concentrated in London.
Well, I mean, I know the calculation I made when I was coming out of university is if I wanted a high-paying job, I had to go to London.
Yeah.
That's what all the high-paying jobs were.
Pretty much.
The problem is, is house prices got so high, is that a lot of young people started to realise, well, actually, I can get a high-paying job in London, and then it's all going to go to my boomer landlord, and I'll actually be taking less take-home pay than if I just got a normal job outside of London.
Yes.
I do get why a lot of younger people are very resentful, especially when the older generation, boomer types, or even slightly younger than boomer types say, just save a bit.
I saved for a couple of years and bought a house.
You can do that.
It's like, no, I can't, though.
No, no.
No, I can't.
They don't understand, do they?
Yeah.
If you're on 30, 40k and you save 20,000 pounds a year, that gets you nothing in two or three years' time.
Do that for 10 years and then you might be able to buy a deposit.
But actually, no, you can't because house prices have tripled in that time.
If you do that for 10 years, you end up, let's say, with £200,000, which would barely be enough for a deposit on a house that's worth £1.5 million in London.
You have to keep earning loads to afford the repayments.
And you're just locked in.
And that's what's happening to some people.
When house prices go down, you end up in negative equity.
The amount that you've borrowed is more than the value of the house.
So when you see these prices going down, and in some areas they are going down in London by 15%, 16%.
Every year?
This is bizarre, because, you know, I spent a long time in London, and house prices just always went up.
Yep.
Like, for 30 years.
Is it that bizarre?
Because we've done a bit of content before, all about bubbles.
Yes.
Going back to the tulip mania.
Yeah, but truly, mainly, it was like, what, two, three years?
It was 30 years that London house prices were going to be.
Well, it's a big bubble.
It's a big bubble.
It so happened that these 30 years began perhaps in 1997 with the opening...
It was actually about then.
With the explosion of demand that resulted from freedom of movement, Subsequently, more kinds of immigration, and then the Boris wave was sort of the cherry on top of this very combustible mix.
I went and checked this out, actually, when you said you were going to be doing a house price in London segment.
I bought it in 2014 for $325,000 and I sold it three years later because I just eventually thought, what the hell am I doing in London?
I'm going to get out of London.
So I then sold it three years later and it increased by £200,000 in three years.
I remember I had the estate agent round and I was like, you what, mate?
Are you telling me this has gone up 200 grand in three years?
Yep.
From 325.
Anyway, so I looked it up this morning and it's now in the last, whatever it is, eight years, there's only gained 75. Right.
So what actually probably happened is it went way past that and then it's come down.
Yes.
So it seems to be a situation really where the highest priced houses are the ones that are going down the most.
There is some precedent for this.
It was completely overvalued.
Exactly.
It was overvalued.
So, according to one expert, there were several decades when it was a divine right that you would see 5-10% capital growth every year on your home.
Yep.
And now this is long over.
And the consensus of the experts is that the peak was around 2014 for some prices.
But then there's...
But I thought I'd share this clip with you a very short clip about what's been happening to the prices in that mid segment We're not asking price this flat was 450,000 pounds and there's a moment On the phone with the agent.
Well he just said, "I can't share your offer." With the seller of $250,000.
The last time a flat sold in this building in 2016, a small one bed, it sold for $310,000.
So how can I explain this to my client?
I said, look, here's the ONS data.
The prices are down 15% year on year in Prime Central London, Kensington specifically.
I said, the market is collapsed.
The reason why they will accept this offer is because they've got no other option.
They're on their office and they want to get out.
I said, the stress sale.
So I put forward the offer.
And I accepted it.
£250,000.
People cannot believe, to the extent, central London's collapse.
And what it marks is a tipping point of where so many people out there believe that that asset is worth a certain value, and really it's not.
And it's only when they really come to sell it, this guy started at £450,000 and ended up at £250,000.
This is remarkable, because you would have expected that, you know, this would be driven by the millionaire class, Rachel Reeves' policies, the consensus that was from the Conservative government through the Labour government that non-DOM should be abolished, that taxes should be put up, the actions of the previous Chancellor, what's his name?
I forgot, who raised the stamp duty on the upper end of the market quite significantly.
You would have thought that this was going to sort of only affect the richest classes.
But in reality, what's happening in this case, and this guy knows his stuff about real estate, to say the least.
The middle and lower end of the markets are also crashing.
And then the question becomes, well, why do people don't want to live in London?
Because if it's a 450,000 property, you would have expected an offer at 400, an offer at 350, an offer at 300, but then the offer that was accepted was for 250,000.
Which is an enormous reduction.
If these London house prices are getting cheaper, you might wonder, does that make me want to come back to London?
Now that I can buy a million pound house, say half that, would I?
No.
Because London is still an absolute cesspool of crime and villainy.
So no.
How much you lower the prices, I'm not going back.
So the thing is, prices shouldn't be falling because there is so much restriction on supply.
You have a big amount of social housing.
And according to Reuters, fact-checking it, it's not 76% of the social housing going to foreigners.
It's only 48%.
It's just 76% in some areas.
What are we worried about?
In some areas.
but 48% are going to foreign-born people.
So, you know, I mean...
Unfortunately, I wasn't raised that way.
I should have come in by boat and demanded five-star meals all the time.
But this is insane.
So even with restricted supply, you're still seeing houses crashing.
It's certainly a thing.
I mean, I know London very well.
Until just a few years ago, three, four years ago, I lived and worked in London my whole life.
Somewhere like Kensington.
You mentioned Kensington, didn't you?
Somewhere like Kensington.
Somewhere like Pimlico.
Very, very exclusive.
Very, very, historically, very, very nice places to live.
The best places to live.
Regent's Park.
Anywhere like that.
It was always the case that, well, you're paying lots and lots of money, not just to live in a beautiful property, but to live in a very, very nice neighbourhood.
Well, it's just not the case then, now.
You go to Pimlico, say Pimlico, or around Victoria, you're next door to a Somali family.
Yes, yes.
So I don't want to pay 1.6 million to live there.
Even in Kensington, you walk two minutes up the road and you're in a trashy area again.
Yes, yes.
And so, in order to restrict supply of housing further, the council at Westminster, they were exploring ways in which to make more social housing available.
What did they decide to do?
they decided that they were going to give people who were already in social housing lifetime tenancies.
So they were going to subsidize Once you're in, that's it.
You're part of the aristocracy and of a privileged class.
And you get to live in Westminster.
Yeah.
Forever.
At the expense of the taxpayer.
Absolutely correct.
And so over...
Fair enough.
They do deserve it.
They do deserve it.
And then you see this kind of figure, and it tells you that the economically inactive portion of those who are living in social housing is something, you know, 20%, 30%, 40%, people who aren't working in any shape, way or form, who are doing absolutely nothing.
And they are getting the best housing in Britain, in the heart of London.
But now, by doing so, they are destroying the value of the properties of everybody in London who voted for this nonsense.
So there is a sense of poetic justice to it.
And then you want to ask, well, why aren't families snapping up these properties that are coming down in prices in London and moving back in?
All of a sudden, you could live in one of the greatest cultural capitals of Europe.
House prices have gone down.
The reaction from the market should be, well, we're going to move in.
I would argue that one of the answers was given to us in 2012 where it was revealed that British people were a minority in London's classrooms.
Now, this was known in 2012.
And the situation has become so bad.
That one in every four schools, closer to one in every three schools, actually, has a non-British majority.
And that is especially the case in places like London and Birmingham and Manchester, where I think that that is one explanation as to why people aren't moving into London.
They don't want their children to be that culturally enriched.
I'll tell you something else interesting as well.
If you ever look at the Well, if you go and look at the first tier of private schools in London, almost overwhelmingly black.
Yeah.
And the reason for that is black parents know that no way is my kid mixing with those street hoodlums.
Right.
So at least the first tier of private school is almost entirely black.
Right.
If you're looking for something which is a bit more traditionally British, you're going to have to pay significantly more.
Right, right, right, right.
So basically you're seeing this dynamic whereby the capital of Britain is literally falling apart.
It's colonized.
It's colonized.
It's partly because of the tax policies that have been followed.
The net result has been at least 30,000 millionaires leaving, of which 11,000 left in the last year.
Hi, Rachel Reeves.
Thank you.
And this is equivalent to losing one and a half million taxpayers.
Cheers.
70%.
The amount of money that is collected by the government.
The state used to collect 650 billion.
It's now 1.1 trillion.
It's up 70%.
It is madness, the amount of tax.
And then you see what it's going for and how it's being spent or wasted.
and then you see that the capital is falling apart.
And I thought just to sort of emphasize here, Do they not have Twitter or something?
What's going on?
It's a complete derelict sort of duty.
We did a segment on this not too long ago about specifically car theft in London.
Yeah, the police don't do anything.
Yeah.
They don't do anything.
They make a little number, give you a crime number, and that's it.
That's the end of the story.
Contacting the police is a purely administrative process, just so you can claim insurance if you have it.
And if you don't have it, good luck.
There's no point in contacting the police.
Or if the crime is not against something that is insurable.
Good luck.
That's it.
I recommend this clip from Alex Wilson where he tries to talk to Sadiq Khan about the policing and the situation of the policing.
And he points out that on every single metric, the performance of the Met Police has just gone completely downhill.
And most of it is either needs improvement or inadequate.
Except for one that is, I think, average, which is that they treat people with respect.
Now, this comes after one of the best police officers in Devon was sacked because he called somebody he was arresting a bitch.
So they do treat people with respect because if they don't, they get sacked.
Even criminals, who frankly do deserve to be called some names sometimes.
Shame is a powerful motivator.
But policing in London is collapsing.
And so when you're looking for the answer, we have an answer as to why is the top-level housing becoming cheaper.
And the answer is Rachel Reeves' tax policies, the end of non-DOM, which was a point of consensus between the Conservatives and Labour, stamp duty, things like that.
Fair enough.
But then what has to be explained is why are cheaper properties not being snapped up by British families wanting to live in London?
And the answer is because there's no police in London.
Yes.
And because if you send your children to a school in London, they will stand out as being a minority community that is largely loathed by the other community if they don't get stabbed.
If they don't get on drugs, if they don't get into all kinds of social ills that have become prevalent in London.
Another way of saying it is that it's simply not desirable.
It is simply not desirable.
The problem in London have become so severe that Greggs are actually putting sandwiches and soda behind the counter because you see these kinds of incidents.
Gangsters!
Gangsters!
Man says, "Yo, fuck that.
Man's grabbing everything today, you know.
He wants to Man says, "Work, you man, work." Yeah, and the criminals know there's not a damn thing you can do.
Exactly.
Well, they will if you try and stop them.
The police will arrest you if you try and stop them.
By right, you should be able to hurt this man very much.
By right, you should be able to physically harm him quite severely.
And he just knows he's going to get away with it.
And he knows he's going to get away with it.
Theft should be punished by the pillory.
Yes, at least a hand.
Flogging.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
It should be punished instantly.
justice needs to be seen to be done, and people need to be deterred.
That's the fundamental issue.
It was overpriced to begin with and now it's not desirable.
I mean, yeah, the price is going to go down then.
I've never regretted leaving for a minute.
It was overpriced but desirable, and now they've successfully made it absolutely undesirable to be in London.
And, I mean, do you see a way out with this crew in charge?
Tactical nukes, maybe?
I don't know.
Not with this crew in charge, no.
If there was a programme of mass remigration and native Brits took the capital back demographically, then maybe.
Nothing's irreversible.
For that to happen, there needs to be a defining of what is British.
And that is a material and spiritual question.
And that is a material and spiritual question.
It's not a purely material one.
As in, if it's ethnically British, but then we're going back to the values of the Vikings, you will see at least some looting as a result of that.
So the spiritual dimension has to play a role here.
We don't have to go back to the 9th century.
We could go back to the values of the 1950s, say.
Okay, fair enough.
Don't have to go back to...
And that would necessarily imply a Christian Britain.
Maybe we could have a little bit of 9th century.
Can we get back to the day where it's like, oh, these people are causing trouble, and it's like, son, get my battle axe.
A little bit of that.
I'll take 1996.
I'll take that.
Right, fair enough.
You know when we talk about a demographic reversal, demographic change, and leftist traitors say, oh, what do you want?
What do you want?
I say 99% ethnic white.
I'll take that.
Let's start there.
Yeah.
They think they've cornered you when they make you try and put a number on it.
No, I'll happily put a number on it.
All as close to 100% as possible.
The trick that they play is to make you point out that the British are white.
And once you notice that they are, you're automatically a racist.
I think I saw this gentleman who goes by the name Otto English try to play that game.
Sad moron.
That guy is sad.
That guy is sad.
I just recently interacted with him for the first time.
I didn't know who he was.
I genuinely thought he was a sort of university student kind of Or a parody, you know.
But they try to corner you with this admission that Africans are black and Europeans are white.
And once you notice that, oh dear, how dare you notice.
But you then see, well, okay, these things are having an impact on life.
And we're seeing how it's playing out, and it's not really going very well.
I'm happy to be accused of being a noticer.
Yes.
Noticing is good.
Noticing is good, yes.
Noticing is good.
Noticing is definitely good.
If you haven't been called a racist by this point, you're doing something wrong.
Yeah.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Yeah, definitely.
Definitely.
Do you want to pick out a couple of things?
Sure, sure.
And hedonism?
I don't recommend hedonism, so if that means anti-hedonism, well done.
All people of English, Irish, Scottish and Welsh descent should have the right to buy firearms.
Currently, your gangs, military and police have a monopoly on force.
I do believe in a right to self-defense.
And when everybody knows that people are capable of defending themselves, they tend to be more measured in the manner in which they behave.
So, firearms are a great equaliser.
That's what a load of people say, particularly Americans, they say, you've been disarmed, you're not even allowed to own guns.
I don't know how many times they need to say, no, you can buy guns.
Can't carry them in the street.
You can't buy handguns.
There's a ban on handguns.
But that's what actually matters.
You should be able to carry them in the street, though.
Yeah, no, fair enough, yeah.
You should or shouldn't be?
Should.
Should.
And I want my sword as well.
Fair enough.
Fair enough.
In both Britain, thieves will receive their flogging and pillory at the hands of their victims.
Yes, that's...
That's a point of agreement, I think.
London police stopped being effective when they couldn't say, what's all this then, anymore?
The job isn't worth doing without that.
Yeah.
They've diminished a very long way, haven't they?
Yes.
I've, unfortunately, have had a couple of interactions.
They were complete parity.
And it's just heartbreaking.
It is.
It is.
It used to be a threat back in the 50s or whatever, the 60s or something.
Someone was threatening, I shall fetch a policeman.
Yeah.
And someone would start, oh, don't do that.
I'll start behaving myself.
I'll start being antisocial then.
Don't do that.
Yeah.
So we have just launched the Death of Man documentary.
That is up on the website.
Carl explained to us what it was all about.
And did you get it?
It's something to do with...
Carl explains it better than I do, so go and watch that.
So that is up on the website.
Do go and check it out.
Now, as you are no doubt aware, we made some changes and some improvements to the website.
And probably the biggest change and improvement that we've made is we have now launched Lotus Eaters AI.
The H1000s, whatever they are.
And it is the most powerful right-wing AGI computer system that exists in Britain today.
Now, what it enables me to do, and please don't be alarmed, what we're going to do is I'm going to run a program and what is going to access your webcam.
Don't worry if you've got a VPN or firewall.
It will just bypass straight through that.
It's really powerful.
It will access your webcam.
It will profile your face.
And then what it will do is it will tell you what your future children or grandchildren are going to look like.
It's very clever.
Very clever.
Now, we've only trained this on females so far, so it can't do your sons and grandsons, what they're going to look like.
But this will tell you what your granddaughters will look like in 2060.
So I'm just loading the script now.
It's just running.
Or wait for the dial-up modem to do it.
This is hyper-advanced stuff.
It is now accessing your webcam.
It's bypassing all your security.
It's taking a picture of your face.
It's just interpolating now.
I can see on my screen now the gigaflops are flopping.
And here we go.
It's generated an image.
So everybody's now going to get a personalised image of what their daughter or granddaughter is going to look like in 2060.
Are you ready?
There we go.
Ah, there we go.
So, that is the future of Britain in 2063.
I hope you like the resemblance.
My objection is to the high-tech skyscrapers in the background.
I think it's an either-or.
Yes, we probably wouldn't have that.
You probably wouldn't have that.
That's true.
But it is AI, so it doesn't make any mistakes.
But in Britain, in 2063, the British become a minority.
By then at the latest, if not a decade before, we're going to have this.
We're going to have the burqa.
The full burqa.
Not just Niqab, but the full burqa.
I'm glad you said that because that's why I wanted to do this segment.
It's because a lot of people don't.
I think you knew.
But I didn't know that there were subtle distinctions.
I've got them here.
Now, I thought, since this is Britain's future...
So I'm going to do a segment on it.
I'm going to explain to people because, you know, your daughters or granddaughters or whatever are going to be forced to wear this.
So you need to know the difference.
These are important distinctions, yes.
The sharia police in the streets and the women's are not being modest enough.
Having uncovered hair is just not allowed.
Britain's Middle Eastern allies are constantly complaining to British authorities about the amount of extremism that is coming out of Britain.
Who's complaining about that?
Middle Eastern Muslim-majority countries.
Not Muslim-majority.
Overwhelmingly Muslim countries.
Yes.
Saudi Arabia and the UAE.
You know, the only non-Muslims there are foreigners.
I've heard the Saudi intelligence minister publicly berate the UK.
It's like, what the hell are you people doing?
Yes, yes, yes.
You cannot let the Islamics run away with it.
And you are.
What are you doing?
So, it's basic things.
In Saudi Arabia, you're not allowed to have a mosque, to have a bucket collecting money outside the mosque.
You must do it through the banking system so that it is traceable.
Because they know from experience, very good experience, how that money gets used.
And they want to have some control over it.
And when big amounts of cash are suddenly dropped to organizations that are not known, you can be sure that some of that ends up doing things that don't benefit you in the long run.
in Britain, this is absolutely not a concern because you have Or, you know, the number of extremists who are here in the UK who are broadcasting messages that in the Middle East would land you in jail.
So there are clerics here in Britain who are more extreme than the clerics who are in Jordan.
In Jordan, these clerics are used and weaponized by the state to collect intelligence on its behalf and to mediate with jihadi groups elsewhere so that the West can pass messages to these groups and so that there can be some kind of diplomacy alongside the wars.
You know?
In Britain, these guys are just living on benefits in London, receiving social housing.
Yes, free house, why not?
And are completely ignored.
Yes.
There are loads of things that Islamists do and say and think that are banned in Islamic countries, including places like Saudi Arabia.
So, for example, when that new reform MP lady stood up and asked Sir Keir about banning the burqa, and Keir just said, we're not going to go down that route.
Basically, you're not even going to talk about it.
You're not even going to start having a conversation about it.
The burqa.
Yes.
The burqa.
I mean, that's full-blown Taliban.
Yeah, that's the grill in everything.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
And you'd have to wear gloves and the whole nine yards.
Yes.
Even Saudi Arabia, I think.
There's loads and loads of countries where that's beyond the pale.
Yes.
So Saudi Arabia, it's allowed.
I think in Morocco and I think Egypt, it's not allowed.
And I'm not sure about the UAE, but you never see it in...
You don't see it.
So this kind of thing is...
Even mesh across the eyes.
Mesh across the eyes, that's...
I don't remember seeing that in...
Outside of videos of Afghanistan and in London.
If you can't ban the burqa, then...
In fact, I would go the other way.
I'd make it mandatory for Muslims to bear this because I don't want it going under the radar.
Just how infiltrated our country is.
I want everybody to see just how infiltrated we are.
I'd like it to be, instead of banning people that wear the burqas, we recognise those families that endorse and wear a burqa, and they're the ones that can be re-migrated first.
Or that, yes, or that, or that.
We don't need them in our country.
But here's the distinction, everybody.
A hijab is just a bit of a scarf that you wrap around your head.
The burqa is the full, you know, you properly cover your eye.
Total Darth Vader moment, this.
The hijab is almost that, but you allow the eyes to stick out.
Do you have to wear gloves with the hijab?
With a niqabia, you'd be expected to wear gloves.
Oh, okay.
So it's just the eyes that get a little bit of freedom.
And the chador is apparently the Iranian one, where it's almost full-bodied, but you're allowed to have a face.
Yes.
Now, there may be women watching this thinking, well, I'm not going to do this.
I'm not going to make my daughter do this.
But what I would say is the British have already shown wonderful submission.
When it comes to this sort of face coverings, because COVID was only a couple of years ago.
The government came out and said, right, everybody needs to wear a mask, and like 99% of you instantly, oh yeah, right, then I submit.
I submit.
So do we really think that people, when they're told by some future Islamic British government that you have to wear this, they're all going to be virtuous?
No, you won't.
Here's the thing about diverse societies.
The most intolerant minority wins.
This is something that must be remembered about diversity.
It doesn't operate based on the majority principle at all.
And it doesn't really operate based on coalitions.
They play a role, but they're secondary to force and intolerance.
Because Islam views itself as a religion of government, and because it gives itself the right to govern Jews and Christians, It is willing to use force, and we see this all the time every week now, in some attack or the other, in order to gain its political objectives, which it believes are endorsed by God.
So in a diverse society, it doesn't have to be a majority Muslim society for certain things to happen.
The Muslims have to be a large enough minority that they can Use force more effectively than other groups against the majority and build a coalition with some willing others, such as the Labour Party, who are willing to allow them to have their way.
it also helps that they're allowed to use violence so if you look back to the Southport riots there was very clear you'd have a line of Islamics on one side, a bunch of If the native people so much as emptied a drink in the general direction of the line, they would get swamped by police immediately.
Meanwhile, the Islamics behind them, the police would have their backs in them.
They'd be throwing bricks and stuff, and they would be completely ignored.
So one side is allowed to use violence, so that helps as well.
I've got this story.
Police reissue terrorists' mugshot after ISIS complained that she wasn't wearing a cab in it.
So the police, you know, Oh, where's my little mouse?
Anyway, here we go.
So that was the initial mugshot that went out because she's a terrorist.
She was trying to get her kids to suicide bomb themselves.
So they put up a mugshot and ISIS was like, British police, how dare you?
And British police were like, oh, we do apologise.
So they took that down and put up that instead.
This is beyond parody.
On two or three different levels absurd, of course.
One of the main ones, not just that the police capitulated to it, but what's the point of a mugshot?
If you can't see what they look like, what's the point of it?
But it also brings up, what is the point of face covering?
And it's exactly that.
Because part of the reason that many Muslim countries ban this is because you have no idea if this is a man or a woman.
You can just use any sort of slight, lightweight man and have him dress up like this and use him to conduct an attack.
So there's a security aspect to this.
I still think it was very immodest of her not to have some sort of lace across her eyes there.
To clearly see her eyes there.
Trump hit.
Yes.
Drop it.
Right.
So I've got here a quick table of Islamic dress codes and women's rights.
So Afghanistan, they like to go for the full burqa and no educating those women beyond 12. Generous.
I mean, they educate them up to 12. Yeah.
Iran, it's the hijab or the chowder, the thing that shows the face.
It can't be seen in public.
No unveiled appearance in public, but you were saying to me that they can...
They can work, and in Iran, there's the whole movement around whether or not the state will succeed in imposing the hijab, with a number of women trying to protest against this, mostly failing, sometimes at horrific cost to themselves, some of them getting killed by the police.
Often just beaten, hitting with a stick in the street by the morality police.
Yes, yes, yes.
That's very common, isn't it?
Yes, it used to be a lot more common in Saudi Arabia.
It's stopped now.
In Saudi Arabia, under Mohammed bin Salman, there was the building of the religious police.
And I remember going there one time, and it was close to Eid.
And he had them put up posters of a music concert on the building of the religious police as a way of rubbing their noses and humiliating them.
So Saudi Arabia is nowhere near liberal, and the society is not liberal, but there is a real change that is happening.
So it's very liberal of them to allow music at all.
It was a deliberate insult.
Saudi Arabia, they go for the hijab, not Burqa, Sudan, the hijab and so on.
And I've got that in the right-hand column.
I won't read it all out because we're a bit impressed with time.
But you can read the restrictions on women in all of these places.
Rural Pakistan, they like to go for the hijab or the niqab.
Somalia, UAE, Brunel, all of those places.
But then I also got a table here because apparently Keir Starman says it is unthinkable that we should ban this stuff.
And actually I agree with him because I want people to see how bad it's getting.
But here's all the places that have banned this stuff.
France, Belgium, Netherlands, Austria, Denmark, Bulgaria, Switzerland, Sri Lanka.
They've all banned them.
But we obviously can't do that in Britain.
That would be ridiculous.
Chad, which is a very, very Muslim country.
Uzbekistan, Tajikistan.
I'm also going to point out Turkey.
Now, Turkey is a 99% Muslim country and has been for centuries.
From about 1900 onwards under Ataturk, they banned it in government buildings, which effectively banned it everywhere, because if you're in and out of buildings, it just becomes impractical.
They banned it for well over a century.
It was only because when this new guy came in, I mean, who is an Islamist, he lifted the ban.
But, you know, a fully Turkish country, a fully Muslim country banned this stuff for a long time.
You know, a whole bunch of other ones, Tunisia, Germany, Italy, Latvia.
But we obviously can't.
And then I wanted to come to my last bit of this table, is how do you enforce it?
Now, some of you may think that everything I'm about to say, because there's a lot of beating women up.
Now, a lot of you are going to think that's bad.
I just want to remind you that we live in the UK.
And if you think that our culture is superior, then you're a terrorist, right?
So here's the, you tweeted this out the other day, but this is the UK government.
You're a terrorist if you think that Western culture is in any way superior to any other country.
You're not allowed to think that.
think it.
Let alone say it.
Yes.
You are not allowed to think that our culture is better than this, what I'm showing you here.
And if you do think that, you're a bloody terrorist.
So how do we enforce this?
Well, in Iran and Saudi Arabia, women are stopped, harassed and detained.
In Afghanistan, public lashes beatings with batons and cables.
Iran, women jailed for not wearing hijab correctly.
India.
Now, remember, if you think that our culture is better than this, we're a terrorist.
Okay, government, you're a terrorist.
Extreme right-wing terrorism for thinking.
Yes, so you are not allowed to think that we are better than this.
No.
What else have we got?
Acid attacks, common in Pakistan, Bangladesh.
Economic pressures, visa denials, UAE in Qatar, women without proper attire denied jobs, access to survey or entry to venues.
I'm not sure about the UAE there.
Probably in government buildings you'd have to wear the abaya, but without the hair being covered.
Right, okay.
Is it not the case that different emirates, because UAE is a number of emirates, right?
Yes.
Some are more...
Sharjah is stricter.
Yes.
But anyway, so there's a list of horrific things that happen to women who don't dress correctly under this system, and you're not allowed to think that it's wrong.
Otherwise you're a terrorist, according to the UK government, which I keep saying because that's where we are now.
Yes, yes.
Now, you may also be thinking, I'll wrap up on this, you may also be thinking to yourself, if you're a woman watching this, it's like, well, I'm not doing this.
You and whose army is going to make me do this?
You and whose army is going to make my daughters and granddaughters do this?
Well, I've answered that question as well.
This is your tweet, Faraz, that you put out, and I just want to show this.
You and whose army, this army.
Let's play this.
So the army that is going to make you do this, they don't need to invade.
They're already here.
I've always wondered about people who raised the gay pride flag alongside the Palestinian flag.
Not the brightest, are they?
Not the brightest.
Unbelievable.
There is a humanitarian case to be made that what the Israelis are doing in Gaza is wrong.
And I personally believe at least big parts of that case.
But to go to this kind of event and raise the gay pride flag shows a level of ignorance, willful ignorance, bordering on, dare I say it, willful retardation.
That bit is a bit silly.
The point that I wanted to focus on is...
And this is, I know this is Paris, not London, but, you know, how do I bloody colours again?
Well, there are clips, I have seen clips before, in places, particularly in East London, places like Whitechapel and East Ham.
Places like that with very, very strong Islamic colonies where they already have Iran-style morality police.
They will stop you on the street sometimes and say, sort your attire out.
And there are thousands of them in Europe and they're already turning out for something like this and we're talking about 2060 when there's a majority.
Yep.
No, it's, again, the intolerant minority wins, and this problem has a spiritual dimension.
What is the West?
The West is Christian.
This has to be said, regardless of any sort of pushback, because it's only Christianity that can fight this.
It's only Christianity that successfully ever fought Islam.
Secularism has failed against Islam every single time.
In Turkey, it's failed.
Catastrophically.
In Syria, it's failed.
In Iraq, it's failed.
In Egypt, it's failed.
In Tunisia, it's failed.
It's been tried.
And if we're going to treat history as a guide, or history at least as an experiment that we learn from, well, this is what history teaches us.
Yes.
So we can either carry on doing what we're doing, we can carry on making sure that we're not terrorists and our daughters will be living like that.
Right.
Some comments.
No, Punk, you're not allowed to think that.
wrong anti-hedenism I beg you lotus eaters learn your gun laws and how disarmed you are unless you think muzzle loaded revolver or bolt action rifles will save you you're wrong rest restored at a shooting Yes, I appreciate it's not ideal, but it's not like we don't have any.
That's kind of the point we're making.
Okay, fine.
Let's do some videos.
During World War II, one of the problems the Allies faced was tanks getting stuck in the mud.
So British company WH Allen& Company Limited noted horses could deal with mud easier than tractors and decided to investigate the possibility of a 1,000-ton walking vehicle.
They ended up building a 60-centimeter tall model capable of walking over piles of books using a Waldo system.
But the UK War Department wasn't yet ready to abandon their tracked tank so the program was halted.
However, the concept saw new life in GE's walking truck in the 1960s.
That's a shame.
The Second World War would be so much more steampunk if we had that.
Next!
My wife, she still struggle in Afghanistan.
But I want very much to go pure gym.
UK already feel like home.
I download Deliveroo and apply for universal credit.
One boat, seven country, now I get pillow say live, laugh, love.
I risk life for freedom and for Tesco meal deal.
Three pound, you get drink also.
They give me house, money, even HelloFresh subscription.
Is that real?
Are these actors?
So I don't watch TV anymore, but is that what adverts on TV are like these days?
It wouldn't surprise me.
Surely they're actors.
I don't know if they are.
Oh, okay.
AI, yes.
Okay.
But still, it resonates because it's not...
My question is, where's the lie?
Yes.
Yeah, right.
It rings true because it rings true.
Yes.
Right, what's this one?
Will the member agree that this isn't about animal welfare?
We once saw Nazi Germany put forward into place, into law, similar policies.
The justification then was to animal welfare, but in context, this was a thin pretext for antisemitism.
The ban was part of a broader program to marginalize and dehumanize Jewish people, stripping away their rights and religious freedoms.
He's in favour of Jewish rights, is he?
This guy is basically attacking the ban on halal slaughter that Rupert Lowe proposed.
And you see this kind of thing escalating all the time.
So Hamas now regularly makes a habit of calling Israelis Nazis and fascists.
Now, these concepts don't exist in the Middle East.
It's a pure cultural import.
And it's there purely because Westerners fall for this kind of slop.
Yes.
And now you're seeing it happen in the British Parliament.
And the idea is constant.
I spoke about it in the segment yesterday about Labour and Muslims.
You see these guys using the worst aspects of the language of the left to push their agenda, and you see the leftists clapping like seals, essentially, in full agreement.
They're very easy to play.
I think Majid Nawaz is on record saying that when he was part of a terrorist movement, which I believe he admits to, They would laugh uncontrollably at the leftists who fell for their shtick and the lawyers who helped them, and, and, and.
They knew that these guys' turn would come when they took power.
I have a lot of people on my Twitter feed reminding me that this happened in exactly the same way in Iran, in an alliance between the leftists and the Islamists, the so-called Dread Black Alliance.
And the same exact thing is happening now in the West constantly.
And we see them using this language incredibly cynically.
So thank you, Russian Garbage Human, for sharing this clip.
It is very cynical.
The argument is, you know, let us do halal slaughter, otherwise you're a Nazi.
Yes.
Well, it ends up with, let us stone a woman that isn't wearing the niqab correctly, otherwise you're a Nazi.
Yes.
Just be intolerant of our intolerance.
No reason at all.
Yes.
You must be tolerant of our intolerance.
Yes, yes.
Right, let's find out what's happening with the Titanic.
And now for the strangest things you'll find in the United States.
This is the Museum to the Titanic.
It's located in Branson, Missouri.
Now this is an excellent little tour, but the reason it's here is because the second man who commanded the dive onto the wreck was from this local area.
Some of the artifacts in this place are absolutely outstanding.
you I wouldn't have guessed Missouri.
I wouldn't have guessed Arkansas.
Do those states have beautiful coastlines?
I don't know.
No sir.
You're joking, right?
That's the joke.
Missouri's in the middle.
It's like Nebraska.
It's like we're going to have a maritime museum in Nebraska.
Right, this looks pretty.
Good morning, Lotus Eaters.
I recently purchased a new camera, so now you guys can get video hiking.
Before church on Sunday, I decided to sneak up the Sunrise Mine Trail.
It's a gruelling climb, 4,000 feet of climbing and only three miles going to the very top.
I'd include the ambiance of the crease and birds chirping, but most of the audio is me panting like a dog.
The forest opens to a fern-covered alpine, and the sunrise only added to the beauty.
I hope you guys are doing well.
Thank you.
Thank you for that.
We just don't have anything like that in Britain.
Yeah, that is better than Winchester.
You've got to go to the Alps before you get anything.
Remotely like that.
Yeah.
We don't have anything.
What have we got, like, Snowden, Ben Nevis?
This is the best you've got.
Yeah.
In England, it's like something in the Peak District.
We don't have mountains.
Big mountains, anyway.
No.
Proper mountains.
Is that all of the video comments now, is it?
Yeah.
Right, okay.
Now, Colby, Do you want to do some of your comments?
Well, if you read them.
Right, okay.
So, Matt D says...
Long story short, the left already tried to lock him up on a shedload of flimsy charges, but if there was even a sliver of truth to any of that, the Democrats would have dragged it up a hell of a long time ago.
There's absolutely no way whatsoever he's anywhere near that list.
Now, I agree, but it's possible that so many people on their side are compromised as well, that they just...
That's what I was gonna say I can I can Right, yeah.
Clinton and the Podestas or whatever it is.
They just don't want to open that can of worms at any cost.
But it may well be, as Matt D says as well, it may well be.
Mason Royce says, apparently Trump's team cutting Elon's pick for NASA director was the trigger point for Elon.
It was a petty thing for Elon to piss him off.
But his whole life mission is not to make money, it's to go to Mars.
The money is just a route for him getting them there.
So a good NASA director is probably important to him, but I don't agree that that was...
The director was some kind of progressive lefty, something like that.
And Trump decided that, no, we're not going to have anybody anywhere in a senior position who isn't on board.
And that seems to have been a contributing factor.
George Ham says, I definitely agree with Elon here.
You can't throw sand in everyone's eyes and create a department about reducing waste, only to reaffirm said waste in different areas.
Trump was awful on spending in his first time, and even worse now.
Never forget that the lockdowns and free money happened under Trump.
Yeah, some of it did, actually.
Yeah, actually quite a little bit did.
Yeah.
I mean, that is fair.
Trump is a big spender.
Yeah.
Yes, I can see why Elon got Yeah.
Yeah, I can see why.
Grant Gibson says, the problem with budgets and party politics is it's a team that is willing to see reality, make the hard choices and the right of the ship are always associated with the necessary pain that follows from having lived beyond our means for decades.
The polity is far too stupid for democracy.
That was actually a point that you brought up in response to, I think, my thing on Elon.
Yes.
You tweeted out something like, you just can't solve these problems in a democracy.
No.
If people can vote money for themselves and you have a universal franchise that isn't restricted by your contribution to the state, then everybody votes for money for themselves.
And that becomes a structural problem.
What would you go for?
Property requirement, national service?
I would go for a property requirement and national service, yes.
You shouldn't be...
It should not be.
Yes.
Socrates and Plato even more Plato talk about this in great deal of detail Plato would say you should train a certain number of people for their whole life and weed out anyone that's not good enough before you can even think about That's what aristocracy was.
That's what the aristocracy was.
That was the whole purpose of the aristocracy.
aristocracy solved the problem of nepotism and competence.
You get the most competent people to marry each other, and then their nepotism...
In Plato's Republic, he talks about how it wouldn't really be any sort of democracy at all, but at the age of about 12 or 14, you weed out anyone that isn't clever enough, essentially, and they're manual labourers for the rest of their life.
You let the remainder, a small number of people, go through education and travel, and then when they're about 35, 40, even older, they have another test.
And the vast majority of them will fail and they go off and be bureaucrats and administrators and the tiny number that are left get to control policy for the Republic.
I quite like that.
And that's it.
That's how you do it.
I quite like that.
And I quite like your thoughts on aristocracy as well.
You know, it's not nepotism.
He is the most qualified of all of my sons in order to be the, you know, the Chancellor of the Exchequer or whatever it is.
Very sensible.
I like that.
I like that.
Lord Nerovar says, The Trump-Muss dispute is sadly necessary.
As much as I enjoy the warpath Trump is on, he needs to be kept in check and Vance doesn't seem to be the guy to do it.
It's also unfortunate the bridge between Trump and Muss seems to be very much burnt now, hoping to be proved wrong.
I mean, I think that was our sentiment as well, wasn't it?
Do we want to do some of yours?
Sure.
Sophie Liv says, let's not forget that in some countries, mostly China, you are not allowed to invest in stocks.
So to invest in the future, they purchase property instead, just based on the promise that it will always increase in value, even when unused, bracket from me, and even when the demographics are collapsing.
And in England, England has now allowed foreigners to just purchase property as an investment, and that's why a majority of London is now Indian and Russian-owned.
Many of these properties may be empty because the point is the investment with the lack of stock options.
Yeah, it could be.
It's true.
There's loads of property in London which is owned by foreign people in lots of countries in the world.
You're simply not allowed to buy a property or own a business unless you're a full-blown citizen.
In Lebanon, it used to require approval from the Council of Ministers, which is a huge threshold.
And of course, our enemies will just say, oh, that's ethno-nationalism or something.
It's just reasonable.
It's just reasonable.
Meanwhile, in the suburbs of Novi and Northville, houses start at a half million, a mere 25 miles away.
London, the new Detroit.
They used to call it white flight.
Now no one talks about it at all.
Yeah, that's what's happening.
It's definitely white flight.
Binary surfer.
Part of the reason the dip in house prices is the ability to work from home for many professional careers that over-index massively in London and home counties.
People used to have to physically turn up.
Now you can work mostly or entirely from home.
Yep.
An example of this mate of mine who is an IT security consultant at a big bank, earnings around 100k per annum, a former lifelong Londoner that now lives in North Devon 30 minutes from a train station and just goes in once a week or so.
ownership is good for the economy because it frees up your money from rentals to go towards goods, etc.
But boomers with investment properties, because negative gearing is a thing, lock young people out of the housing market.
Hence, there is resentment.
Yep.
it.
There's a very simple explanation.
White flight.
Yep.
People with money do not want to live in London anymore.
Why would you?
Given the choice, I'd rather live in a small town or a village than an area that is only going to get worse over time.
I made that exact same decision, went to a small town, and now it's becoming more and more like London.
Binary surfer, still think we're voting our way out of this, lads?
This isn't just London.
This is the picture in every major city in the UK within the decade.
So what Firas is saying is we should send ICE to London Would you please?
Beau, there's a couple of comments for you.
Oh, I think I'm the last one.
Yeah, go on.
Oh, there's specifically four Beau, are there?
Yes.
This one is for the future of women.
Oh, okay.
Yes, that's me.
Yes, so Sophie Liv says, I keep saying it, if you're fleeing Islam, but then identify as a Muslim and want a mosque, deport now, you're obviously lying, you can't be fleeing from Islam and wanting to take it with you.
Yes, that is a bit curious.
Let me just mention one thing.
In Germany, the first thing that the Syrian refugees migrants demanded when nice Miss Angela Merkel opened the border was to get halal meat.
Once that concession was made, they knew that the Germans were a bunch of mugs, and they started demanding anything and everything, and started being absolutely horrific.
they had been told no you will eat whatever we offer you and if you don't like it you can go back yes I think something different might have transpired when the clues in the name is doesn't it mean is that mean it's a So if you continually submit to it, it's like they know what to do with that.
Exactly.
You had a good tweet about Halal food.
You know?
Yes.
What was it?
I can't remember.
Something about Genghis Khan.
Oh, yeah.
Yeah.
Yeah, apparently Genghis Khan did ban Halal slaughter in his empire.
Right.
So Genghis Khan, who set fire to entire cities who likely defied him, he took one look at Halalmi and was like, no, we're not doing that.
That's a bit harsh.
A few people on Twitter were demanding a citation for that.
A copy of The Guardian dated whatever it is.
I got it from the Fall of Civilisations podcast who quoted the secret history of the Mongols.
So it's their own words.
And people thought it was a gotcha to say that some of the subsequent Khanates of the Mongols became Islamic.
Yeah, after they annihilated the Khawazmurian Shah and raised Baghdad and killed the Caliph.
Yeah, some small part of the Mongol Empire did become Muslim.
That is the most twattiest reply possible that you can do on Twitter, which is source.
I just want to slap those people.
It's like, oh, I'm not your Google.
Yeah, you look it up.
You look it up.
Literally, all you need to do these days is type in, is this true at Grok?
Yeah.
Well, a fair few people did that, and Grok just said, yeah.
So we've gone from computer says no to grok says yeah?
Yeah.
Corax80 says, it's not that the government wants to stop our freedoms, it's just they're jealous of our ability to think.
They can't have people doing things so they can't ban it all.
They can't have people doing things they can't do, so they ban it all.
Yes.
You're reading much better than me.
me.
I should...
That's what I would go.
In order to not be a terrorist if you make it legal to beat women in the street.
Yes, that is the way that I would go.
Make it compulsory and then people can see this is your future.
Do you like it?
And a federal agent has a comment that says, I read a book a few years old from someone who encountered terrorism.
There was an account of somebody under surveillance going into a mosque.
And leaving disguised in a burqa.
He was picked up by his cousin in their car, being rammed into by terrorist police who suspected an imminent attack.
They were en route to a local school where kids were about to be boarding on coaches for a school trip.
In the back of the car was explosives and a rifle.
They were planning to kill them.
It never made the news.
There's no reason why we should know about something like that.
A school massacre almost happened.
Why do we need to know?
Just gloss over it.
Bloss over it.
It definitely is a historic thing.
Often you get a slight man who hasn't got very broad shoulders, who isn't too tall.
Dress him up in a burqa.
I mean, Lawrence of Arabia went behind enemy lines wearing a burqa.
Tommy Robinson says in his book that he wore a burqa once and went into an event by a Guardian journalist, had one of his black friends ask if Tommy was, in fact, a racist.
The Guardianista said yes, and then Tommy removed his burqa and told him, actually, that's my best mate, and he's black.
So what are you on about?
It's not beyond imagination.
There's a comment from...
There's a comment from Sophie Liv.
Man, I have to say, Firas was a top-tier hire.
This insight and willingness to say it invaluable.
I've known you for a week and I love you.
Well, I'm married, but that's absolutely lovely.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
I think Sophie would make an excellent side piece.
I stay away from anything of that sort.
Yeah, she's quite charming, though.
Right, so...
Hope you've enjoyed it.
Hope you're liking the new site.
Check out the new documentary.
We've got loads and loads more stuff coming in 2025.
All of us are extremely hard at work doing stuff.
So I hope you like it.
Goodbye from me.
Thank you very much.
▲
Export Selection