All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 16, 2025 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters
01:31:41
The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #1275
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.
Welcome to the podcast of Lootis Eaters for Thursday, the 16th of October, 2025.
I'm joined by Stelos and Harry.
Hello, today we are going to be cathartically exploring my absolute rage against the government and the system and the amount of tax we have to pay.
I woke up this morning and I was just angry, just really angry.
Literally the first thing on my Twitter timeline, taxation.
I was just like, oh, sure, I think there's a libertarian.
For those doubting, who may think that this is some kind of show that Carl puts on, it's really not.
He just furiously began slamming his desk earlier with where all of us in the office could hear and see it and go, ah, ah!
And we thought we'd been demonetized or something.
But no, he was just examining how much tax we all have to pay.
I just really hate the government.
I just hate it.
And I was reading about it and it was just infuriating, genuinely infuriating.
And, you know, I'll try and keep my cool.
And then we're going to be talking about other less important things, frankly.
How the system's trying to harm you, which I'm sure you've worked out, but I think it's important to be aware of.
And how for our opponents on the other side of the system, this is just all about race.
This is all about race.
They're completely explicit about the racial organizing and how that's going to affect things.
But before we begin, of course, go over to courses.loises.com.
Sign up to the ancient Greek virtue ethics webinar that we have tonight at 6 p.m.
So do not miss it.
It will be very good.
The webinar is, of course, free.
And Stelius will be talking about ancient Greek ethics.
And Bo is going to be with me.
And we do have a secret that we're going to reveal to you that you don't want to miss.
There we go.
Right.
So let's begin.
So I think the issue is that people don't really understand how bad this country is, the shape of the country at the moment, right?
And I hate to tell you all of this, but Mussolini has won.
Mussolini, in the doctrine of fascism, said, look, the 19th century was the century of the individual, of liberalism, of people being free from government coercion.
And so we can say that the 20th century will be the century of the state.
This is literally how he characterized the 20th century.
And I'm sorry, but he's just right.
He has won this, unfortunately.
Look at taxation.
Even through the Napoleonic wars, taxation, they had personal taxes of about, what, 4%?
Can you imagine your taxes being 4% of your earnings?
Yeah.
No, you can't.
Never in your life was anywhere near like this.
Even obviously, it's only World War II where it starts going.
But even then, look at this.
Like, holy crap, man.
And it's after the war that our taxes explode.
I mean, it's the same in America as well.
The World War II, Henry Morgan Thau, the FDR administration to fund World War II was the ones who put in a proper federal income tax, which remained permanent.
Fun fact about that that I only learned in the past few months was that Milton Friedman was one of the advisors working with Henry Morgenthau who devised that tax.
So maybe everything that he did afterwards was an attempt to apologize.
Yeah, I'm really sorry I shouldn't have done this.
Speaking for Friedman, he gave advice to many people and he was saying that advice given is not always advice taken.
Great.
So, yeah, but there is one thing that has to do with the rising of a welfare state at that point, doesn't it?
Oh, yeah, this is.
When we're talking about welfare state, we're not just talking about, you know, you're disabled.
Oh, we're going to have a handout.
It's more like, let's fund all these crazy programs because we invent fake categories according to which people are.
Yeah, yeah, we'll get into all of that in a minute, right?
But what I want people to take away from this is it wasn't always this way, right?
It wasn't always.
Actually, things used to be better in the past in almost every way.
It's hard to think of a subject that wasn't better in the past.
Possibly medical technology, right?
That's probably the only thing I can actually think of.
Transport, maybe.
But when it comes to normal medical technologies to keep me alive and living with this.
Well, yeah, good luck if you need to get the NHS appointment that will save your life.
But if you look at this, just look at the amount of taxes they just basically didn't have to pay in the past.
I want that.
I want that.
I dream of the tax code of the Napoleonic Wars.
I'm dreaming.
wake up in the morning and just be like, God, I can't believe we have to, let me look at, so on the left, it's percent of GDP.
That's every penny that's made in England.
You can see how much of it is taxed.
And it is unbelievable.
So the consumption tax.
Are you going to mention the tax trap past 100k?
Oh, yeah, yeah.
We're going to get into all of it, right?
Because this is just unreal.
And you wonder why we basically are in a poor country now.
Well, this is why, right?
This is why.
Because I mean, what was it Milton Friedman that basically said every penny taxed by the government is a penny burned?
It's something that sounds like something.
I can't remember exactly what he said, but it's something essentially like there is no good that comes from state spending qua state spending, right?
So the state should spend where it has to, and where it doesn't have to, don't.
Because any amount of state spending is bad, basically.
Is essentially summarizing Milton Friedman's philosophy.
But look at this, right?
So look at this.
Just consumption taxes, relatively consistent, actually, since the 1700s.
Somewhere between about four to what, seven or eight percent.
So relatively low overall.
If you do look at the business taxes, again, they're very low, actually.
It's only a couple of percentage points.
And then other public sector receipts, not really that much.
No, the overwhelming majority is just the government saying, oh, you exist.
Do you?
That's convenient.
Give.
Absolutely give.
I mean, look at that huge yellow wedge that is just the government taxing you for having the temerity to exist within its remit.
Man is a taxable object.
It's so true.
And they were like, yes, actually, we can do that.
And I'm just, I honestly, I could, I could just stare at this graph more and more and just get angrier and angrier at this.
Because what this is essentially saying is about half the year you work for the government for free.
That's that's what this basically boils down to.
For about half the year, you work for the government for free because you are a fucking slave.
This is what this boils down to.
Honestly, I'm going to try and calm down because this just really, really pissed me off.
So anyway, the next thing that really pisses me off is the fact that literally there are more people on benefits than there are net taxpayers in this country.
Now, that shouldn't be terribly surprising when you look at that.
Why would you bother working if this is what you end up up with?
But this, unironically, is what the Office of National Statistics tell us.
So they give us some information.
The median equivalized household income in the UK before taxes and benefits was 38,900.
That's not very much.
For Americans, that's 60,000 or so.
That's a household income.
So that's the combined income of everyone in the household making money.
So that's not very much money, really.
But that increases to 41,900 after taxes and benefits.
Wait, what?
After tax, I'm making more money.
No, you're getting benefits because you are dependent.
You are just a dependent on the state.
The richest fifth of people's mean equivalized household income before taxes and benefits was $116,000, which is 12.2 times larger than the poorest fifth at 9,600.
However, this gap is reduced to only three times larger, 85,000.
So if you're getting 116,000, you're working really hard, both you and your wife are on about 60k a year, you're slogging it, right?
You're really slogging it.
That goes down to 85,000 between the two of you because of taxes.
So they've reduced the gap, they've deliberately narrowed it.
And of course, the person at the bottom goes from 9,600 to 25,000.
More than double what they're actually making through their work.
They get through benefits.
And they're incentivized to stay on benefits.
That's a lot of major problems.
You can't have an industrious economy.
This is absolutely mad because it's not like 116,000 a year.
That's a decent wage, right?
That's a good wage, 60,000 a year.
That's £5,000 a month before tax from two professional working people who are married.
Now, you've got so many goddamn expenditures that you have to pay for that this doesn't go all that far.
But you can get a half-decent house.
You can probably have a holiday a year and have a car reach so you can get to work.
Right?
That's that's a that's a that should be just a normal life for people, but instead that's not.
That's actually like the richest fifth.
That's oh my god, that's that's aspirational, striving people.
I mean, of course, even after tax, earning that kind of amount in the household, you should be able to afford far more than what you're suggesting there.
But inflation, inflation being the invisible tax that we all have to pay constantly means that, yeah, even that much doesn't go very far in this country.
Look at the amount of money you spend on petrol.
We've got the highest energy bills in the developed world.
Our petrol prices, whenever Americans see our petrol prices, they're like, no way.
And it's like, think how I feel having to actually pay them.
Yeah.
Yeah, exactly.
And then you look at our food prices, the grocery prices.
It's just unbelievable how bad everything is being run in this country.
But the thing is, you get down here, the proportion of people living in households receiving more benefits than they pay in taxes is 53.3%.
More than half of the population.
I mean, that's not sustainable.
That shouldn't be surprising for me to say it's not news, but it's really unsustainable.
And the important thing, though, is that this is just the first year of the Labour government.
No, it's just the second, the beginning of the second.
We still have basically four more years of this.
But this was under the Conservatives, too.
Look, that's the people over the last three years.
You're correct.
My point is that they seem incapable, of course, correcting 100%.
They're incapable.
You listen to LBC presenters and hosts saying, well, let's go to 100% income tax.
We have got all that to come.
Let's carry on, right?
100% income tax, so nobody has any incentive to work ever.
Everybody inheritance taxes.
Either sorry, I thought you said income tax, but I wouldn't put that passive either.
I wouldn't put that passive, but it amounts to the same goddamn thing anyway.
Yeah, nobody has an incentive to work.
So if the household median income, after benefits, if you're earning £38,900, actually increases, does that mean to be a net tax contributor, the household income has to be probably like £42,000 and above?
Probably somewhere around £50,000.
Yeah, because those people are all claiming benefits of some kind that actually bumps their income up.
Yes.
Yes.
It's wild.
Almost, you know, more than half of the people in the country are dependent on the state in some way.
Or claiming some kind of benefits to keep them going.
I mean, this is literally the South Africanization of our country, where somewhere like 72% of people are on benefits.
This is mental.
And as you say, it's unsustainable.
But I suppose it depends what you're actually looking for, right?
If you want a country that has rolling blackouts and they're able to sell on the black market.
I was going to say insufficient infrastructure, but I don't think that quite covers the point that you're making.
No.
It's destroying the road.
There are plenty of videos and photos of it happening, and you can guess.
Then, yeah, you can carry on like this, but actually, I don't want that country.
I want the country I grew up in the 90s, just a functioning country, frankly.
But anyway, what I love about this is like you get the Financial Times commentators like Chris here.
Chris is the economics commentator, honorary professor, blah, blah, blah.
There's no need for a moral panic about the UK's welfare system.
It's been like this for years.
Oh, great.
Oh, that's brilliant, Chris.
He has perfect Financial Times physiognomy as well.
Really, doesn't he, Just?
It's like, this is completely normal, says this Financial Times writer.
Anyway, so then we've got the Office for Budget Responsibility.
And I just want to talk about the UK's budgets because it's just mad.
And the idea that we have an Office for Budget Responsibility that will print stuff like this and not act like this isn't a national crisis is kind of wild to me, right?
So we'll just go down to the overview.
We don't have an incentive to do so.
Look at the spending.
1.2 trillion, if we use American trillions, 1.2 trillion a year in government spending.
But the receipts are only 1.14 trillion a year.
I mean, they're not going to declare this an emergency because for them, it's no reason to have a party.
Yeah.
I mean, this is just insane that we have this gargantuan consumptive state just chewing up all of our prosperity.
I mean, I'm not overstating it at all, am I, right?
This is precisely what is happening.
This is mad.
This is absolutely mad.
And even then, we're not being 24 to 25, spend 1.2 billion equivalent to 1.2 trillion equivalent to around 45 grand per household.
Yeah.
Well, I'm not seeing any of that.
That's the point, right?
Like, this is insane, right?
So, of course, the direct taxes are 39.7% of national income, 40,000 a household, but of course, we're going into debt.
And so, in total, it comes out to about 45%.
44.4% of national income is spent by the government.
So, for every pound earned in this country, 45p of that is spent by the government.
This is ridiculous.
This is just ridiculous.
And obviously, it's like, oh, but the welfare state is like, you know what?
Death to the welfare state.
Death to the NHS.
Death to this entire system.
I would rather people come to me and ask for charity, and I'd rather give them charity out of my own money than do this than just be robbed by the government.
It would still be a lot cheaper for you as well.
Doubtless, and I'd probably give away more as well in the end.
But there is also the other aspect of it, which is a bit more philosophical.
Go ahead.
But also very concrete.
Don't worry.
It used to be the case that charity was basically something that was the responsibility of civil society, as you said.
So what happens with the rapid expansion of the welfare state is people saying that we are outsourcing our duties to each other as members of civil society to the state.
That's why we have people who are less engaged because they're constantly saying, well, I'm doing my part.
And they are doing their part within that framework.
But the job doesn't get done.
And the purpose of the system is to not get the job done in order for the next politician to come and say, vote for me.
I have to do the job.
And in order for me to do the job, I have to raise your taxes.
But I will do the job.
And they won't.
And so just they give us a breakdown of how this is spent, which is worth going through.
So and how it's raised as well.
So taxes are 89% of this.
So this is taxes on you, the corporations, things like that.
Other taxes, such as VAT, is the most important.
But this only raises 171 billion of that.
So most by far the overwhelming majority of this is just them saying, oh, you exist.
Give me some money.
Give me some money.
The VAT, like I said, is only 171 billion.
Then you've got corporation tax, council tax, business rates, fuel duty, various other.
And basically everything you have ever used money on is also taxed to the hill.
VAT is what, 20% now?
So everything you buy is 20% more expensive than it should be because the government's like, where's mine?
Where's mine?
I want a fifth of that.
It's absolutely insane how this economy works.
So of course, we spend all of this on public services, state pensions, and debt interest.
Debt interest is actually a relatively small percentage of this, to be honest.
We always talk about it, but it's like, okay, but that's actually not that much.
Did they give us the actual number there?
I've got it later, I think.
So anyway, basically, there's always going to be a deficit because we just can't afford this.
So 44.4% of national income.
Reform the other day said, you know what, guys, I hate to sound like Ayn Rand about this, but maybe that should go down to say, I don't know, 35%?
Can the government only spend 35% of everything made in this country?
And the Green Party are freaking out about this.
Reform UK wants to take public spending down to 35% of GDP.
I'm like, down to 35%?
Just, God, it's, I don't know what to say.
I feel like I'm dealing with lunatics.
They are.
Yeah, I am.
That's a £275 billion cut.
A billion pound cuts, the equivalent of shutting down the NHS.
Okay.
Well, you got me there.
Go for it.
Yeah, I will get an insurance plan.
How about that?
Rather than this.
Or, you know, there are plenty of other services that are completely unfit for purpose that we could cut.
Yeah, I actually think we could keep the NHS.
We streamlined it down, made sure it was actually for nationals, and cut the administrative burden on it.
Like, there's a graph I didn't get for this one, but you can see on the graph, the number of doctors is relatively, you know, a fairly low incline going up.
But the administrators are going like that.
And it's just like, why do they need so much goddamn administration?
The answer is they don't.
They're just wasting your money.
Do you not need DEI officials?
I was going to say, do you not remember Callum a few years ago looking through all the DEI records and finding how many people were being paid over £100,000 to ensure that a particular NHS area was diverse enough?
But what I find about this is just, oh my God, I can't believe they want us to keep more of our own money.
Don't you realize what such good serfs we are?
We want the Lord of the Manor to take all of our money.
It's like, my God, man, what is wrong with these people?
And then, like this, here's a Green Party member on Ian Dale's show.
Just listen to this.
When has putting up taxes ever generated growth?
Well, actually, you know, 45% of the economy is what the government invests in, what the government spends.
We've got to get away from this idea that it's only spending money in the private sector that generates growth.
The Green Party wants the government to invest much more in social housing.
We've got a huge housing crisis.
We've got people paying out money.
And you're going to make it worse by abolishing private landlords.
If you look at the policy there, there's loads of really, really sensible stuff.
Right.
Obviously, there's no sensible stuff.
But look at the view.
The government can create growth.
The government creates prosperity.
The government doesn't have its own money.
It takes your money and then it spends it as it wants.
And so there's always, even in any amount of government spending, whatever the administrative cost is, that's just something that is a waste of money.
Could have been done privately without that.
I'm just fed up with how much of leftist rhetoric is just ignoring human nature.
It's like you are going to work more if we incentivize those who don't work.
Yeah.
And we're going to tax you in order to benefit from those who don't work.
Yeah.
Those who are unproductive.
So, what she means is that the borders are gonna, she intends to keep the borders open if she gets elected and in order to justify the perpetual need for more social housing.
But what she's saying there is, yeah, so basically, if we spend over-the-tax revenue, that somehow builds the economy, but all it does is create 137 billion extra debt every year, which we wouldn't otherwise have, which we have to then service.
I mean, this is just wrong on every level, and I'm not an economist, I'm just a layman looking at this going, right, okay, that's obviously yes.
Well, it's a GDP line, the GDP line goes up, but GDP is like inflated fiction.
It's a made-up, it's a made-up metric.
I mean, it's it's literally a bunch of it is literally debt.
Like, sorry, she's it's just mad, right?
And so, this is the kind of thing that they're gonna do.
So, this is a woman called Kate Waring.
There's a picture of her.
I really want you to see it.
Why don't we hand over the public finances to her?
Does she look like she knows what she's doing, right?
Because she's the executive board member for a housing association called Soha, right?
And what her plan is is for the government to give the council or housing association £80,000 a house to buy and do up property to give them to asylum seekers.
They want $1.75 billion to renovate £14,000, 16,000 homes to house asylum seekers.
It's like, what are you?
Are you mad?
And they're like, Yeah, well, guess what this will do?
Grow the economy.
Anyway, this woman is a natural HR manager.
Yes.
Which is why we need to banish all HR departments.
Yes.
And so, anyway, you had Lewis Goodall the other day suggesting, well, to pay for all of this, we're going to have to have 100% inheritance tax, obviously, because without an inheritance tax, you're not incentivized to work, and you didn't earn that money.
It's like the government didn't earn that money either, Lewis.
At least I have a better claim because they're my parents and not yours.
It's insane how this is like millennial left-wing fought in Britain.
Why don't we just have 100% inheritance tax in order to reduce income tax and make sure that the welfare state is funded?
It's like that's mental.
That's why.
That's mental.
Sorry, Go.
Sorry.
Apologies for.
No, no, no, no, no, no.
I will rant and rave.
I want to add to what I was saying before that these people are incapable of, of course, correcting.
I remember when this took place, and I searched that in Scandinavia, they had inheritance tax and they either lowered it or completely scrapped it because it created way more problems than it solved.
Yes, it does.
And also, look at the framing.
He says, you don't have a right to inherit money from mommy and daddy that you did nothing to earn.
First of all, what did the money, the government do to earn it?
And second, there is zero consideration about respecting the will of the deceased.
But sorry, whether you want to give something to your family.
We're going to get back to that in a second, right?
So he carries on whining about that.
But then we have this by Ollie Dougmore of the Politics Joe, the new statesman, who was having a debate with Chris Philp from the Conservative Party about this.
And this is just incredible.
I'd be looking at a punishing inheritance tax.
Such a lib Dem, aren't you?
Yeah, really.
Really?
Yeah.
Me, a Lib Dem.
So let's just figure out the air.
say over 10 million pounds 100% of that is returned to the state and i would then yes returned to the state Returned?
Because what they would they loaned me money that I earn.
All property.
This is why he goes, oh, you're on Lib Dem.
No, you're a communist because you believe the state owns everything in this country, right?
But watch Chris Philip's response because he's just like, okay, I can't believe the lunacy I'm hearing.
Believe it, Chris.
This is what they actually think.
Revisit 100%.
Yep.
Well, that really would have a size of millionaire.
People can be listening to anyone with more than 10 million would just leave the country.
Let them go.
Seriously, you want to say, let me get it straight.
Your idea, your genius idea is to say that anyone who's worked hard, been successful, set up a business and got more than 10 million quid, you're going to say, go away, we don't want you.
No, are you literally insane?
No.
You just did say that.
You literally did say that.
No, I'm not saying they should leave the country.
That's what I'm saying.
If you have the opportunity to leave 10 million pounds to each of your children, that's quite enough.
And if, as a good Tory like yourself, Chris, which I believe you are, believe in a meritocratic society, you should support it too.
I'm telling you what human nature is.
And if you say to someone who's got more than 10 million pounds, we're going to basically swipe all of it when you pass away, those people will simply leave the country.
You may not like that, but that's what they'll do.
I mean, they're doing it already, even though they're not.
Where would they go to, do you think?
Well, they're going to place anywhere else.
Anywhere.
They go to Dubai.
They'll go to Singapore.
They go to New York.
They go to Milan.
They would leave the country.
So not only would your idea, family country.
No, not only language counts for nothing, schooling counts for nothing.
People are leaving already as a result of high taxes.
Not only would your genius policy raise literally no money, in fact, it would raise negative money because the most successful people would just leave the country.
I love that Ollie was just sat there like smug and superior.
Like, look at how seething I've got him by wetting and shitting myself live on air right now.
What a fool to think that I didn't do it on purpose.
It's just the trolls.
It's just a new troll at this point, like, because they don't actually think anyone would be stupid enough to do such a thing.
So the question is, why are we having these people on these shows?
Why are they even invited?
These people are mad.
I mean, like, this is genuinely...
Sorry, Stiles, but for time, we've got to carry on, right?
This is genuinely insane because Ollie's just like, let them go.
Let them go.
It's like, no, Ollie, you need them to pay for your monstrous welfare state, right?
You absolute retard, right?
60% of tax income in this country comes from the top 10% of earners.
And 30% of that comes from the top 1% of earners.
So what you're saying is, we can just skim off 30% of the tax that's taken into this country.
You cannot afford, we can't afford the welfare state as it is.
There's already a massive £1.37 billion deficit every goddamn year.
And you're like, yeah, but why don't we just reduce the income by 30%?
That's what you're saying.
I'm trying not to swear, but my God, right?
And yeah, obviously, Chris is correct.
10,000 millionaires a year are leaving.
So the tax revenues are going down, basically.
Not good stuff.
We are basically a poor country, right?
Because to get into this top 10%, you need 60 to 70,000.
So that's not a lot of money.
That's not a lot of money to earn to get into the top 10% in this country because we are a fucking poor country at this point.
In America, as you can see, it's more than double.
In pounds, it's probably about 160K or something like that to get into the top 10%.
You need to get way more than we make in this country because we are not a rich country.
And all you're saying is, well, why can't we just drive off the rich?
Why won't that work?
It's because you are asking them to pay way more than we can afford.
200 grand is about 149,000 pounds.
Literally more than twice what it takes to get into the top 10% in this country.
That's how poor we are.
Ollie, you fucking retard.
And that means that only 4% of working adults in this country earn over 100K.
That's a tiny, tiny percentage.
A tiny percentage.
And a lot of people are trying to avoid what is called the 60% tax trap, which is a certain percentage over, what was it?
£100,000 you mentioned in the office earlier.
Yeah, there we are.
£100,000 to £125,000.
So you get an effective 60% income tax rate on that portion of your earnings.
And obviously it's worse off.
Wait, so that's specifically between 100 grand and 125,000.
So it's literally for most of your time working when you're earning that money, that goes to the government.
You are the slave of the government.
And so you get people who are desperately trying to avoid making 100 grand.
Imagine fighting to keep your income lower than it otherwise could be.
And that's the country that we live in in modern Britain.
Well, and for anybody who is confused about this, typically the way that wages should be allocated is the more productive you are, both in terms of whatever corporation or firm you're working at and also societally, you should be remunerated with money that's, you know, that's to your productivity because you're earning it, right?
So the more people are earning a lot of money, the more productive you are, the more the economy grows in real terms and not just imaginary GDP terms, right?
So people are fighting to be less productive because the government has incentivized them to not be productive.
And the best argument that the left-wing retards that we have on our screens can come up with is, well, let the rich people go.
That's not going to work, idiots.
Zimbabwe just saying, well, just let the white farmers go.
What's the worst that could happen?
are paying for your welfare state this is just chris phillips is completely right You are completely wrong.
And this is just mad.
This is sheer madness.
And this is major party platforms at this point.
Let's get some comments.
There are a lot of comments.
And for the sake of time, I'm going to have to skip some of them.
That's a random name is very concerned for my mental well-being in a number of comments there.
Harry, show me on this doll where the government taxed you.
Everywhere.
It's literally every everything about you is being taxed.
So you've got fingers or tax them, tax them taxes.
Your existence, all of your food, all of your any kind of health products you have, all of your clothes, the way that you got to the way that you got to work was taxed multiple times.
You've got road taxes, you've got fuel taxes, you've got the tax on buying the car itself, like everything, absolutely everything.
And we still aren't raising enough.
Like, isn't that insane?
Anyway, the shadow band says, glad we have such optimistic topics today.
Sorry, I literally woke up this morning, went on Twitter, and the first thing I saw was, I can't remember exactly what it was, it was something about the amount that we're being taxed.
And I was just angry.
You know, mine and Selios' segments are probably not going to be too sunshiny, but I don't think I'll get as viscerally angry at them as I did at yours.
My tall order says, death to the welfare state, death to the government spending.
Curse be upon the NHS.
Ka'al Benjami Al-Swindoni.
Yeah, basically, that's how I feel about it.
Eliyah says, taking care of your parents in old age is what earns you an inheritance tax and how a healthy society functions.
The nanny state destroys great societies.
And that's precisely why Lewis Goodall's like, well, why can't we just have a inheritance tax?
Because I'm doing nothing to earn it.
I'm not taking care of my parents in their old age.
Even outside of that, just like familial love is something that inspires your parents to give you money and leave you something anyway.
But the government, because they're inhuman communists, don't want love in families.
They just want you to love the state.
Yes.
It's literally to do anything they can to break up the family.
Death of the NHS.
Carl, if you're ever applying stands for election, you need to stop saying obviously true things like this.
Well, to be honest with you, I'm not, but I don't care.
I just, I'm so tired of this nonsense.
I'm so tired of this.
You guys can't even imagine my campaign slogan.
Yeah, exactly.
And the thing is, I'm not even against the NHS in principle.
It's just the way that it's being orchestrated is just terrible.
And I'm sick of being held hostage by it.
Principal Dancer says, a brother, my die-hard Tory, finally flew the white flag yesterday.
If either of us liked hugs, I would have.
Now to be disappointed by Nigel, oh God.
Well, yeah.
Right, let's move on.
I'm very critical of Nigel in my own way and reform, not least for screwing over two of my friends in the office.
Yeah.
But they can't be worse, can they?
No, it just can't be any worse.
Please don't play this clip back at me four years from now if they immediately make things worse in 2029.
From the position we're in now, there's no reason to think they could make it any worse.
Yeah, true.
Literally.
All right, then.
So moving on from that to sunnier topics, we'll talk about how the system is meant and designed to hurt you and does hurt you.
But first, if you want to have a proper grasp on life and everything that you can do to be a virtuous person, then you should sign up for Stelios' ancient Greek virtue ethics course.
And if you're watching this right now, on YouTube, the webinar will probably already be done.
But for those of you watching live right now, you can join the webinar later on today at 6 o'clock, is it?
For free on the website where you can speak to Bo and Stelios about the course and about ancient Greek virtue ethics and such things.
Well worth your time and well worth your money.
It is a fun course.
Yes, it truly is.
And there's been a lot of hard work put into it by Stelios and all of our wonderful, lovely, handsome editors.
And with that, let's go on to the more depressing subjects.
So, yeah, overall, we've harped on about this again and again and again.
The purpose of the system being what it does, the results that come out of it as an input-output thing.
The output shows you what it's all meant to be for in the first place.
We know that the system that we live under right now is meant to hurt you.
It's supposed to humiliate you, demean you, tear families apart, tear traditional societal and community structures apart from one another, and just put you in danger, right?
And this is going to be one of those segments reinforcing that because, goddamn, every single time you look at the news, there is just a new reminder of that coming out.
And this is one of the big stories that people have been talking about in Britain right now, but we will also be traveling across the pond to America later in the segment.
So this is the story of a Sudanese immigrant, an asylum seeker called Deng Chol Magic, who followed a migrant hotel employee home and stabbed her to death with a screwdriver on a deserted train platform as she screamed.
Now, I've seen some people say, work for a migrant hotel, you're putting yourself in danger.
Thing is, oftentimes these hotels, some employees are already working for them.
They weren't much sprung on them.
They literally weren't migrant hotels.
Then the government was like, okay, we've got huge amounts of taxpayer money.
You're going to have a bunch of migrants.
And a bunch of unscrupulous migrant hotel owners were like, this could make me a billionaire.
And that's what genuinely has happened.
And sometimes as well, I've seen it myself where the hotels don't always make it clear that they're already housing these people.
So people will start working for them.
And it'll just be, oh, well, there's a big part of the hotel, maybe an entire floor, maybe a wing of the hotel, is entirely blocked off because we've reserved that for migrants who go about the place.
Either way, just because she was working for this hotel does not mean that she was asking for it.
And in fact, shockingly, we have to say that.
I know.
And it's an awful, awful thing to happen to a woman who was just trying to work behind a bar to earn some money, which as Carl has laid out in the last segment, would have been mostly taxed away from her anyway, sadly.
Either way, so this Sudanese national, Deng Chong Majek, claims he's 19.
We'll see some pictures of him later on.
I don't know if they have any pictures of him.
No, they don't seem to have any pictures of him in the article itself, but Remix showed the security camera footage and highlighted his face.
And we can see him here.
Oh, yeah, he looks like an average 19.
Yeah, average Sudanese 19-year-old, but you know, it's not like we can do that much about him.
So this is Rhiannon Skye White, the woman that he murdered.
And you can see here in this footage that he is sat in the hotel lobby while she's working the bar.
He's giving her the evils.
Yeah, and he's clearly just staring at her and chose to stalk her to her train platform as she was leaving home after she clocked off from work.
And then he stabbed her 23 times with a screwdriver as she waited to catch a train on the 20th of October last year.
So it's been a year since this happened, and now we're getting the news reports of a lot of the details of it.
We're getting the security footage coming out.
There is a trial against him that's ongoing right now.
So this is the information that's come out at the moment.
So she had actually been on the phone to a friend, and the friend heard two screams as the attack started, and then the line went dead.
And then she was found by a train driver slumped on the platform 11 minutes later.
Jesus.
So here are the consequences that we get of importing and letting these people stay here.
And we do basically import them because they don't just get turned around at the channel.
They get swept away into a migrant hotel where they can threaten and harass and stalk and murder the staff members.
Which is not only does this woman and all of her lose her life, all of her immediate family and friends lose their relationship with her.
Lives devastated.
Yeah, so many lives devastated.
That friend she was on the phone to gets the trauma of knowing that she heard her dying screams.
And then the train driver gets the joy of finding a corpse or someone dying on the train track when he's just going about his daily job.
And you get to pay for the privilege of this barbarian being here.
Yeah, and for this, you get taxed out of the arse to the point where you can't live a comfortable life like your grandparents could.
Does it all seem worth it?
Does it all seem unfair?
Yes, but that's the point.
That's the point of the system, what it's supposed to be doing to you.
So the opening of the case against Magic at Wolverhampton Crown Court was a few days ago now on the 14th.
The prosecutor, Michelle Healy, said that he left her bleeding to death and then casually went back to his hotel.
After she was attacked, the defendant was allegedly seen on CCTV running back up the stairs from the platform holding an object which the prosecution said was Miss White's phone.
He did not go straight back to the hotel.
He went to a local shop and bought himself a drink and he got back to the hotel at quarter past 12 at midnight.
And then in between the station and hotel, he had thrown Rhiannon's phone into a river.
Police later recovered it.
And in the CCTV footage, we can see that once he got back to the hotel, he was seen dancing and laughing.
Just a monster.
This wasn't, you know, like, if you or I, dear viewer, were forced into some kind of life-threatening situation where we were forced to take another's life for whatever reason, I'm sure that would be a harrowing, life-altering, traumatic situation for any of us.
For this guy, this human being, he can just laugh it off.
Literally, you can just go back and dance about it.
Who cares?
I mean, the moral society would just hang him.
Right.
We should be hanging him.
We used to hang murderers.
If you deliberately killed someone, you'd get hanged.
And we had all of the CCTV footage.
It literally couldn't be anyone else.
We've had all the CCTV footage since the 20th of October.
If it's clearly this guy, not only do we have all the CCTV footage, the police found the DNA of Rhiannon under his fingernails.
And they found him in possession of clothes, including the jacket the attacker from the CCTV could be seen wearing, as well as jewelry and a pair of sandals, all of which were found to have her blood on them.
Come on, Liptards.
What's the reason we don't hang this guy?
There is zero doubt he should definitely be hanged.
And what's the reason that we didn't fast-track it?
Why is it only just in the court system now?
Yeah, sorry, guns.
The thing is that you have to add to what you were saying before: that if he is incarcerated, people will be taxed to pay for him for life.
Of course.
And the reason why they want to do it is because you have people who you have leftists who basically want to virtue signal and say that we are compassionate.
There's zero compassion here.
No, this is evil.
All they want to do is just scream how compassionate and humane they are.
Meanwhile, they're supporting completely inhuman policies, policies with inhumane consequences.
It's monstrous.
Where is the compassion in not hanging this guy?
What's the society?
What's the moral benefit?
There are many questions that you can ask because personally, I do not see the argument against it other than some kind of like, well, we don't want to give the state that power.
The state already has a ridiculous level of power and makes my life worse in innumerable ways.
Hanging murderers is not one of the things that would make my life worse in any way.
So when the government deigned to speak about this back in March, they got her name wrong.
Rhiannon Skywhite was written as Rhiannon Sly White.
When Jess Phillips went and spoke, read out all of these names of women who had been murdered, she got the name wrong.
And I looked into this and was like, oh, why is Jess Phillips speaking about this back in March?
Well, like you say, she was naming women who were killed over the past year, women who were killed by men.
Anything else to add to that description?
Can we be slightly more specific about that dress?
No, this is just a man problem.
And it can't be defined down any more accurately than that.
We just have to accept that men are the problem and that there is nothing more to it.
Because if you it's it reminds me of that clip of Vorsch.
Right?
Do you remember the one where he's listening to the women talking about their experiences being sexually assaulted?
It's horrifying.
He's going like, you know, this is what happens to women when we live in the culture that we do, the patriarchy, blah, blah, blah.
Then the woman he's listening to says, oh, and they were Pakistani or looked like it.
And yeah, and he immediately goes, whoa, that's a dog whistle, bro.
No, I don't actually care.
It's not a dog whistle.
I'm stating it.
I'm just outright saying it.
So that's the current news that's going on in Britain.
Over in America, there was this news story where the guy who had been working for Doge, who went under the title of Big Bulls, which was a big meme back earlier in the year, if we remember, he got jumped in a carjacking and beat the ever-living hell out of by what he says was a group of 10 people.
Well, you know, the people who did it, or at least two of the people who did it, who were actually being charged, well, they're not going to jail.
They're not going to juvenile detention.
They're going to probation because this judge, this judge in the DC district, said, oh, yeah, yeah, the job of the justice system is not to punish, it is to rehabilitate.
When did we all vote and decide?
Because the British judiciary sees itself in quite a similar way as well.
When did we all vote and decide that the justice system was a form of extended psychotherapy, psychiatry?
When did we all decide that we needed to go with this psychiatric approach to fixing the brains of deranged criminals and juvenile delinquent children?
Because I don't remember voting for that.
And I don't remember reading in any history book where we all voted for that and it was decided upon that the point of justice was to fix people's brains.
I thought it was to keep everyone safer by taking dangerous people off of our streets.
And preferably, if they have earned it through murder or some other kind of capital crime, putting them underground.
Retribution against wrongdoers.
That's what justice is for.
Stellius, you were going to add something.
I just wanted to say that I've done a segment about this, this case when it happened.
And activist judges are just a bane.
They are letting really violent criminals off the hook.
And you know, she's done it because of race.
Yep, they were black, he was white, and therefore her job is not to punish, it's to rehabilitate.
Yeah, and all the DI thing is exactly what you're saying, Harry, is it's not about the common good anymore.
No, no, it's really not.
It hasn't been for a long time.
Because we have to accept that these arguments that they use about rehabilitation is all actually just euphemism and its equivocation to obscure the fact that, sadly, with somebody like this woman, you could argue it's reparations.
Kendra Briggs is, in all likelihood, I don't know any more about her, but just looking at her, knowing her position, knowing this decision, this is a racially motivated decision.
She wants to protect her in-group and believes intrinsically, she may not be able to tell you exactly why, but she believes that misbehaving black youths should not be punished, or at least not punished in the way that the white system would like to.
That's what it is.
That's what it is with this.
So it was a boy and a girl who were being charged for it, both 15, and you can say, well, oh, he got jumped by like 15-year-olds in large enough numbers.
Anybody can take you out if they salt you and they surprise you, right?
They were just sentenced to probation.
That's it.
12-month probation, allowed to return home under strict house arrest, whether they'll enforce that, who knows.
And the girl was given nine months and remanded to a local youth shelter.
Great.
Right.
So, so they'll have they learned a lesson.
Have they been rehabilitated to make sure that they don't do it again?
They have learned the lesson that the Democrats try to tell them: is that the system is racist against you?
I think they've learned the lesson that they can get away with it.
Yeah, I think so too.
And I think that's what the system reinforces again and again and again.
So what I'm showing right now is in England and in America, there are these client groups who are there to hurt you.
And if they do hurt you, you know, if you're lucky enough not to be killed straight away, the justice handed out to them will not be proportional to the crime.
They will get a light touch because of their racial characteristics.
And the final part is that, you know, this obvious race grifting, the racial, ethnic, in-preference narratives that are used to justify all of this, well, eventually they wrap back around and they have an equal and opposite effect.
Well, there's a rational response to this.
Yes.
There's a response to it, which is that equally racialized right-wingers will rise up and they will start to try to gain power.
But one of the things is that if you try and do that, even if you have legitimate reasons for doing so, you might get sold out by your own people and have your life ruined anyway, which is what happened with this Politico article leaking messages and exposing the young Republicans' racist group chats.
Now, what this is, is a bunch of young men.
By the way, not even all of them white.
This is the classic multi-racial racists get together where they all get to be racist with one another at one another.
Have good fun making jokes.
Essentially, making harmless jokes in a group chat.
Okay.
But because of inter-group fighting with other people in other parts of the young Republicans' groups, they get leaked and they get their lives ruined.
This is team fire.
This is friendly fire that we see.
So in this, I don't know if I should even read some of this because of YouTube, but they referred to black people as watermelon people and mused about putting their political opponents in gas chambers.
They talked about cuddling their enemies and driving them to self-deletion and lauded Republicans who they believed support slavery.
Now, this is jokes, right?
This is young men, they're young Republicans, after all.
This is young men in a private group chat joking, right?
Get their lives ruined over it.
With the Democrats, you see leaked messages of some guy running for the Attorney General who actually wants to see his opponent's children die and is unapologetic about that.
And the Democrats shrug their shoulders and they go, yep, sounds like our policies.
White kids dead.
That's the Democrat platform.
That doesn't violate any of our rules.
Yeah, I mean, the thing the Americans and the left should really take from this is that honestly, Zuma men are way more racist than you realize.
And it's because of this two-tier system where one racial group gets preference and the other doesn't.
There's just no justification in the Zuma man mind to not be the same kind of racist that they perceive that's happening to them.
It becomes irrational.
Why would you let this continually happen to you when there's only one rational response?
And this is what we've been warning about for years.
If you keep racializing society like this, you will get this kind of, this is the product of that.
And whenever you see a Zuma man, he's a racist.
Even on the left, they're still racists.
They're all racist.
This is just how they feel about that racism.
And I'm sorry if you're a Zoom man, you feel like I'm dobbing you in here.
But it's just true, isn't it?
Listen, we're all parts of some group chats that if they got leaked, we'd all be in trouble, right?
But I'm saying that, you know, especially when it's friendly fire like this.
So they're alleging that some guy called Gavin Wax, who was an opponent of the main leader of this young Republican group, leaked all of this as a way to destroy these people's careers, which is just an awful thing to do because when you're joking with the boys, I don't think that you should get your life ruined over it over interpolitical petty squabbles going on like that.
The young Republicans, they put out things saying, we know that nasty words were said and nasty words are obviously the worst thing that can ever happen.
Forget all the other problems in American society.
It's nasty words that the young Republican board of directors are most concerned about.
Well done, guys.
The Democrats approve of you now.
Yes.
You've got their approval.
Thank God.
Finally, finally, the Democrats and us can work together.
But I will say there's one silver lining here at the very least, which, you know, is that JD Vance actually did come out and publicly support these guys and say, listen, it was jokes.
Posting the Jay Jones leaked message where he's saying that only when people feel pain personally do they move on policy, which is an endorsement of terrorism.
That's literally what that is.
When you say that the only way to get my political opponents to agree with me and do what I want is to hurt them, that's terrorism right there.
And JD Vance posted that and said, this is far worse than anything said in a college group chat.
And the guy who said it could become the AG of Virginia.
I refuse to join the Pearl Clutching when powerful people call for political violence.
So I will at least say that there is one guy in the system who is not wanting to cancel you and ruin your life over hurty mean words said in a group chat somewhere.
So at least the vice president of the United States is on your side.
Now, if only the rest of the political system and the media could grow as thick a skin as he has, I suppose.
Can I have a mouse?
Sorry.
There you go.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Garvin says in tomorrow's episode, Carl throws crates of tea into the river.
I would never waste tea like that.
The issue in modern times is not tea taxes.
Well, I mean, obviously our tea is taxed.
But do you think voting for Nigel and reform will go unpunished?
Things will obviously get worse.
Did they reward you for Brexit?
No, but the point is we have to just push through everything, right?
So whatever it is, we just have to keep going.
It is a step in the right direction.
And besides, with Brexit, Nigel and his team and the sorts of people that he's working with and around now weren't in charge of that whole transition and deals.
Tony, thank you very much.
DeVirium, again, thank you very much.
He's no comment, just 10 bucks, although Tony has said that Harry's a ginger, Carl's black, and Stalus is a Turk.
I think, for once, I've got the least insulting one there.
Thank you.
Well, I don't mind being black, but, like...
Who said this?
Yeah.
Who said this?
No, this is right.
He's going to find you.
He made it on my list.
He made it personal.
Shin Suban says, I'm not normally a fan of the blue suit, but Stelios has absolutely won with it.
So that's good.
Thank you.
He also sent 20 Aussie books.
G'day, lads.
Congratulations to your incredible recent successes.
Been watching from Melbourne for almost a decade.
We'll be marching on Saturday and waving our flag.
Have had a gut full.
Big love.
Well, send us across any good video or articles or anything about it.
I assume this is a kind of your sort of Unite the Kingdom style rally, right, that's happening in Australia.
So, you know, superb.
But right, let's move on.
Right, this guy made my list.
I bet.
Yeah, and I'm checking it twice now.
Right.
Right, okay.
So there is a debate going on in the Supreme Court of the United States about congressional voting districts and gerrymandering and mainly section two of the Voting Rights Act.
And the race grifting coming from a particular justice, her name is Katandri Brown Jackson, is literally off the charts.
It's insane.
That woman is the leftist memes put into a person.
Absolutely.
Yeah.
When you see her, the amount of words that she does versus the other justices, my God.
I'm going to give you more context about what happened here.
We have a new course that we are releasing, Ancient Greek Virtue Ethics.
Definitely enroll on it.
Also, join us for our live webinar today at 6 p.m.
Where Bo and I are going to take questions about the course, and we're going to have just a good chat, and we're going to reveal a very good secret to you, a secret you do want to know.
But of course, loadsees.com.
Yep.
Right.
Last time.
So, what is at stake?
Civilization itself.
Civilization, of course.
This is a spiritual battle cry.
Yes.
Right.
So, some context, congressional voting districts are basically geographic divisions within U.S. states that are drawn for the purpose of electing representatives primarily for the U.S. House of Representatives in Congress.
And there has been lots of racial gerrymandering of voting districts in order to ensure that particular people, members of particular groups, get more representation within Congress than they would otherwise get.
At least that's the idea.
So there are several judges who are against this.
Looks like it's going to be revoked.
And let us see what's at stake here.
So they're saying here, what could happen without section two of the Voting Rights Act?
And they're saying this is the current map.
And this is the plausible scenario.
So it looks like it's going to be a bit more Republican.
Things are going to get to do it.
Yeah.
Right.
Let's press X here and move on.
Seriously, Republicans, you should be making it impossible for the Democrats to get it.
And it also seems like they're consolidating some of these congressional voting districts as well.
They seem to be reducing some of them.
Could there be any reason that they had been drawn up in the way that they were?
Yeah.
Yeah, it wasn't politically neutral that they were drawn up in such a way, right?
Yep.
No, it wasn't.
Actually, it was part of the Voting Rights Act.
I think it was voted in in 1965.
Oh, really?
Yes, and it's considered by the Democrats to be an integral part of the Civil Rights Act and all the relevant legislation.
Right.
So we have here conservative justices on the U.S. Supreme Court signaling a willingness to weaken parts of the Voting Rights Act.
They're mainly focused on section two of it, which has to do with racial gerrymandering.
I assume this is being led by Clarence Thomas.
There he is.
You have here Clarence Thomas torching the practice of drawing Voting Rights Act districts to favor minorities and Democrats, indicating he wants to abolish the practice.
Basically, the main argument is that it is unconstitutional.
Listen, right?
I know we have a lot of Christians watching this show, but I want you to pray for Clarence Thomas.
And I really mean this.
Pray for his continued success and good health.
Right.
And it looks like at the moment, five are going to be in favor of scrapping that clause.
Good.
And four are going to be against.
And there are some really delicious debates going on about it.
This is what Joe Biden gets for alleging that he was a rapist.
This is what he gets.
This is just Clarence Thomas's 30-year war against the Democrats.
Playing the long game.
So he has.
Now they have the oral argument stage of the debate.
And the decision is...
Myron Stolmos is just like, fuck them Dems.
Most likely.
Most likely going to be around June 2026.
But now we heard lots of arguments.
And one person really stood out, and this is...
I have to undergo an arduous journey to read this leftist meme.
Yeah, Tangi Brown Jackson.
Now, I really like her smile.
I have to say this.
Oh, yeah, she looks very friendly.
Yeah.
No, actually, this is the kind of smile that I trust.
She looks like she works in HR.
They all do.
I know.
They all do.
Right.
So basically, what it says here that she was a Biden appointee.
No kidding.
As it says here, she served on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia from 2013 to 2020.
Do you not remember how Biden introduced it?
We have a black woman now.
Yeah.
That was literally her.
So I remember reading some of the articles giving her biography back in the day when Biden was introducing her to the court.
And one of the ones that stood out to me was a BBC article talking about how she was so proud that when she was at university, some guy who was presumably a southerner just had a Confederate flag in his window because he was proud of his heritage.
And she complained to the university administration and forced him to take it down.
Right.
So this is part of the legacy of Joe Biden and part of his gloating and his boastfulness with respect to appointing her.
I don't know if he would suspect that she said what she said here, which in a nutshell is that if you're a black person, you are like the disabled unless you are member of a voting district which is specifically designed to be a black majority voting district.
Can we watch the so is she arguing that comparatively when they're forced to be in a white majority situation, they're comparatively disabled?
Yes.
Interesting.
No, yes.
Not forced to.
It's when they just are.
Because this was the piece of positive legislation that tries to do the racial gerrymandering.
Does she estimate what percentage?
Not like three-fifths or something, right?
I don't know.
I don't know.
But that's essentially her point.
Let us listen to what she says here because I want to expose you to the joy of listening to Justice Jackson.
If this is torture for you, I don't care.
You have to listen to it.
I guess I'm thinking of it of the fact that remedial action, absent discriminatory intent, is really not a new idea in the civil rights laws.
And my kind of paradigmatic example of this is something like the ADA.
Congress passed the Americans with Disability against the backdrop of a world that was generally not accessible to people with disabilities.
And so it was discriminatory in effect because these folks were not able to access these buildings.
And it didn't matter whether the person who built the building or the person who owned the building intended for them to be exclusionary.
That's irrelevant.
Congress said the facilities have to be made equally open to people with disabilities if readily possible.
I guess I don't understand why that's not what's happening here.
The idea in Section 2 is that we are responding to current day manifestations of past and present decisions that disadvantage minorities and make it so that they don't have equal access to the voting system.
Right?
They're disabled.
In fact, we use the word disabled in Milligan.
We say that's a way in which you see that these processes are not equally open.
I would never say something like that.
Yeah.
I mean, it's wild.
I have been evolutionarily programmed when detecting a woman talking like that to translate it to white noise.
That is crazy.
Yeah, that's also so stupid.
And also, I'm sorry, like, we're not blank slates.
Nobody is blank slate.
No individual or group is made up of blank slates.
So there will always be disparities.
You can't legislate that away.
That's not the point.
That's not the argument there.
I know, but that's the point of the legislation in the first place.
Yeah, yeah, but like the idea that she can equate just being black to being disabled is genuinely wild.
I mean, there is a leftist logic into it.
Oh, I agree.
We'll get to that in a minute.
But the point is that she gets finished reading the bell curve and she's like, oh, wait, Clarence Thomas just slams it down on her desk.
You were right.
Let us look at the let us look at basically what she said, which is an absolute lie, is that unless you are a member of a voting district in which you are the majority, you're not equally represented into the voting system.
I love the but like the criterion was usually like Democrat and Republican, but for her it's just black and white.
Yeah, it's always about race.
And it's basically a way of, it's what shows that they're never going to honor the promises they made of liberation because they want to spread victimhood mentality and basically create ghettos.
Well, they just can't imagine that you wouldn't vote for the black candidate.
They're like, oh, I'm black Democrat candidate.
Which is white.
Yeah, exactly.
But, you know, they would say, I guess something like the black interest candidate, which is always going to be the Democrat, as far as they're concerned.
Right.
But she also has really good sources.
Oh, okay.
And basically, she said, trust me, bro.
of the shit, aren't they?
No, no, I want to listen to it, because...
Yes!
That means yes, Telios.
Listen to it.
She is talking to Benjamin Aguinaga, who's the Louisiana Solicitor General.
Yes, he is.
And he basically says what you told me and the people you're advocating specifically asked for a second black district.
Oh, and if they were white, they wouldn't be getting a white district.
No kidding.
Let's listen to what she says here in response.
I don't understand why your answer to Justice Kagan's question about is this a compelling state interest is no.
The answer is obviously yes.
That you have an interest in remedying the effects of racial discrimination that we identify using this tool.
Whether you go too far in your remedy is another issue, right?
Your Honor, I think step zero in all of these cases, it was certainly step zero in the Robinson litigation, is the plaintiffs came in and said, we want another majority black district.
I thought they came in and said we are not receiving equal electoral opportunity because our votes are being diluted.
Which is the same way of saying we deserve a second district.
No, it's not.
Because that, again, just trust me on this.
The second electoral or second district is a remedy that one could offer for a problem that we've identified.
And the whole.
So that's the issue.
We have an organization that is ours.
We control it.
It comes along with a report.
The report is talking about a problem.
You don't listen to people within a district because the majority may not think that this is as much of a problem as you think it is, or some of them may not even think that it's a problem.
And we are going to gerrymander along racial lines in order to ensure that this problem is going to become more mainstream than the people want it to be.
Yeah, and just saying the quiet part out loud straight away there.
Basically, you have an interest to do what I want and benefits me.
Why?
Why?
Because I'm black and my fellow black people want a majority black district or else.
But also, trust me, Bros.
But it's good for you.
But trust me, bro.
It's like the mafia coming into my shop and going, like, oh, there's some nice counters you've got here.
Right.
So part of this has to do with, again, the rhetoric that white people don't vote for black people.
And also, as this woman says-Which is why Barack Obama was never president.
And also, this is what this woman says here, Janai Nelson, that white Democrats were not even voting for black candidates.
So maybe this could also be an issue of an inner democratic civil war.
I don't believe that for a second.
Yeah, let us listen to it.
I could believe that it's more widespread than you would expect, but all it proves is that it turns out that you can't socially engineer people's biases away quite as effectively as they wish that you could.
But, bros, you're telling me that you don't trust her.
No.
Yeah, we should trust a bro.
Right.
So she says here, they're making it basically an issue of protection from racial discrimination.
Here we have the Independent having an article saying Supreme Court could deliver a catastrophic decision on voting rights act and blow up protections from racial discrimination.
And as you can guess, the mainstream media is basically talking about this far-right epidemic of conservative judges that don't care about race relations and want to harden.
Don't care about letting criminals go free or shit.
That's right.
Leave them.
And here I have two good clips to show you again from the discussion.
And again, we had another woman judge who was in favor of this.
And this principal deputy solicitor general, Hashim Moupan, literally gave the chef's case in this case.
Let's listen to this.
You could control for partisan effect.
There was racially polarized voting even within the Democratic Party.
That's where Section 2 matters, where you have a reason to think that a racial group is being treated.
You have proof of that here, too.
You have proof of that here.
No, you don't.
What you have here is that Republicans and Democrats are different.
There's no you have some that even white Republicans or white Democrats won't vote for black candidates.
Right, but if these were white Democrats, there's no reason to think they would have a second district.
None.
And so what is happening here is their argument is because these Democrats happen to be black, they get a second district.
If they were all white, we all agree they wouldn't get a second district.
That is literally the definition of race subordinating traditional principles.
Absolutely.
Finally, I love that they're being completely explicit about this now.
No, just be completely explicit.
Just be honest.
Let's put on the table what's on the table.
But also, I really think that this shows that they just want to weaponize victimhood narratives in order to constantly say tell black people that you should think of yourselves as victims and you need basically to be members of ghettos and voting districts where you are a majority.
It's as if there's no other way in which you as a person can get representation in Congress.
They want that.
They think of themselves as a nation within a nation, separate to the broader population.
Well, there's the famous Lyndon B. Johnson quote, but I'm not going to.
No, yeah, and there's also.
I mean, he wasn't wrong, right?
Well, if it's a real quote, which I could believe, they are still voting Democrat.
And there's also the other bit which shows the opposite, how much this is rigged in favor of Democrats.
And we have here Andrew Follett saying Democrats currently enjoy very favorable maps.
New England votes about 40% Republican and has literally zero Republican U.S. House members.
It is also the whitest area of the United States.
Yeah, but it doesn't matter.
They don't care about this because evil whitey.
Right.
And we have here Clarence Thomas again being based where he says basically that that's basically makes the point the black district would not exist in Louisiana without being forced by the courts to consider race.
Yeah, and basically what I want to talk about is that this looks like this shows us a lot about how the left is operating, but also how the left will evolve in the future, the kind of agenda that they have.
Because right now they're focusing on white versus black, but they will also change groups in the future.
Oh, yeah.
As the electoral mix or the population mix changes in the U.S. Yeah, it'll be like Cubans versus Mexicans, whatever.
You know, they don't care.
And here we have DC Draino saying that basically that the Democrats have close to 19 government-enforced congressional districts based purely on skin color.
They've fully gerrymandered almost every blue state and this is geared in order to give more representation to Democrats and give them more of a foothold within Congress in order to talk about this very divisive agenda.
But the point is, what they're doing is essentially they are saying, let us create ghettos.
Let us say that, let us come up with reports.
These reports are going to say that the people within these areas aren't integrated enough because bad systemic racism.
And therefore, they need to be able to vote their own representative in.
I mean, they're literally carving out the racial division.
I mean, look at that district on the left.
Look at that.
It goes into a tiny little pinch there.
That must be like a single road.
Yeah.
But it's part of that whole district because it's a road where black people live, presumably.
So that's essentially what the left has been doing.
They have lost the working class of Western societies and they have turned elsewhere.
And that's why you listen to all the democratic socialists that come forward and say we are the democratic socialists.
And not only them, talking constantly about illegal migrants, about benefits to illegal migrants, about how giving healthcare to them is a human right.
I think Bernie said this about his rhetoric.
This is their agenda.
Their agenda is, like Chuck Schumer also was saying, we need to go multicultural to change the electoral mix.
They're just full-throatedly doing it now.
Yep.
Anyway, let's go to the video comments.
Harry, will Comics Corner ever return?
Well, wait until next week for some news on that.
There may be not the exact same, but something equivalent coming very, very soon.
Made to be a the view presenter, forced to be an SCJ, Supreme Court justice.
Yeah, that's that basically does summarize her as well.
Well, I love, I love, I just love watching Clarence Thomas just slapping down everything with just the most terse statements.
Like, she'll write like 11,000 words and he'll write 90 words and he's correct.
She's just full of shit.
It doesn't take many words to be right.
Yeah.
No, it doesn't.
That's the point, right?
It takes many words to gaslight.
Exactly.
You know, you can tell that he's just being completely straightforward.
Apparently, Katanzi wore an African talisman necklace to ward off the evil Trump's inauguration, which I believe.
Let's go to the website cons.
We don't have any video comments.
Why don't we send us some video comments?
Yeah.
Gold tier subscribers.
Kevin.
Also, I've seen the poll that somebody put up.
75%.
Asking, is Harry Ginger?
73% say yes, 27% say no.
My response, argument ad populum.
Reality is not democratic.
This is a fallacy.
Believe what you want.
I know the truth.
I live in reality.
Carry on living in fantasy land.
Kevin says, the tax system in the UK is all a con.
I served 22 years in the military and now get a pension of £1,154 a month after tax.
The state pension is not taxable.
However, once I start getting my state pension in January next year, my army pension will drop to £947 a month after tax.
So if the state pension is not taxable, why doesn't my army pension drop?
Because while not taxable, it is counted towards your income.
And so therefore, it increases the amount of tax you earn.
So as of January, my income will be £1,647 a month.
So just under $20,000 a year.
But isn't the government set living wage $24,000 a year?
Surely then anyone who has income below the figure should be tax exempt.
Yeah, the whole thing is just.
It's a con, like you say.
But also it's so unworkable in Byzantine.
Like this just can't go on forever.
And so you've got the retards who are like, yeah, well, we'll just have 100% inheritance tax or whatever.
It's like, look, that's not going to save it.
I just don't understand.
It's all just a racket.
It's a total racket.
At the end of the day, it's the government swishing money to like swirling it around in a big pot to make it seem as though the country isn't collapsing slowly.
Yeah, exactly.
And look, there was.
Sorry, I missed this one.
Brother Doom sent a super chat ANCAP Sargon.
I don't even think this is ANCAP.
I don't even think, I'm just reasonable.
This is sensible anti-tax policy.
Exactly.
Like, I'm just against having most people in the country on benefits.
I'm just against the NHS being an international health.
The funny thing is, you started off your segment by just flashing up the doctrine of fascism.
Yeah, they've won.
But it's so much further than anything any ever conceptualized.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Mussolini and them, they were just like, well, let's keep the communists out of government and make sure the country kind of runs well and the trains run on time.
I don't think they were eager for the entire country to be on benefits.
Let me just check.
Although, to be fair, it would be kind of very Italian of him.
What was state spending under Mussolini?
It was probably not even remotely comparable, I'd imagine.
Yeah, well, I'm trying to find it now.
I'm actually...
I'll have to look.
But anyway, going back to the...
But you are right.
It just wasn't this bad.
Again, it's so much further.
I mean, somebody earlier on I saw in the Rumble Rants posted the old AJP Taylor quote about, you know, the average Englishman in 1914 on the eve of the war could go about his life without ever encountering the government, except for the postman and the pensioners.
Yeah.
I would just like to go back to that.
It doesn't mean the state has to wither away and everyone becomes communists or everyone becomes, you know, like ANCAPs or anything.
It just means that I get to live my life mostly unimpeded by bullshit.
It's really not that much of an ask either.
I mean, Steve here has sent a message saying, we have an empire running on 7% tax.
We controlled the world on 7% tax.
Yeah, with about 150,000 civil servants too, worldwide.
Now we have 550,000 just in Westminster.
And we still taught half of the world to use the toilet.
Yeah, and we built the railways.
Didn't get them to run on time, though.
If reform get in and do nothing to fix this, I'll set up my own party purely based on the abrogation of this theft.
Well, that's the thing.
Like, I don't see how Fras can lose.
If he's just like, yeah, so we're going to stop the amount of money that we give off you from benefits and make sure you pay fewer taxes.
Yeah, I'm for it.
I will vote for that.
Henry says, fuel is ludicrous because you end up paying VAT on the fuel duties, so you're paying 20% tax on your tax.
These already make up about 25% of the cost of the pump as well.
It's the same with energy as well.
25% of the electricity in this country is a green levy.
So they just take money out of your energy bill to build wind farms and shit.
It's just an excuse to steal more money from me.
What am I supposed to do?
Not heat my house at winter.
I suppose.
I'm not supposed to heat my house at winter.
I suppose.
I'm just supposed to freeze.
Yeah, get yourself a nice big thick coat that you can wear in your freezing cold living room.
Granny.
Andrew, yeah, in fact, they did, didn't they?
Cut the fuel allowance for the pensioners.
Just come on, man.
Come on.
Save Granny.
Stay at home.
Don't go out or you might catch a cold and kill Granny.
But now it's Windsor.
Fuck Granny.
Yeah, fuck Granny.
Who cares?
The budget, man.
I mean, and Rachel Reeves is going to raise taxes on the few people in this country doing quite well.
So my taxes are going to be.
The problem with the technocratic society that we live in is the whole thing is predicated off of this kind of weird scientific basis of efficiency where everything's supposed to be like as efficient as it would be in scientific laboratory conditions.
The problem is that both life is not like a science lab.
And two, the actual technocrats running it are profoundly retarded.
True.
That's true.
Zesty King says, these leftists think that if you earn money without government intervention, the government is owed some of it for not stopping you.
This is exactly how the mafia works.
It's extortion.
Genuinely, it is extortion.
And the idea that they can just be like, I mean, literally, why have you got people fighting to earn less money?
Like, that is so ridiculous.
You wouldn't make it up in a story, right?
You wouldn't make up a fantastical world where actually people are struggling to earn less money because of whatever reasons.
It would sound stupid, and yet that's the reality in this country.
Radicalized Zuma says, I'm guessing a lot of the benefits that people are receiving are indirect benefits like children's schooling, roads, healthcare, etc.
Oh, it's like child tax credits and all that sort of stuff.
Well, the government will literally just give you money because it's decided you deserve some more money.
And even then, because you get those indirect benefits, it still means that the amount that you have to earn to be a net tax contributor is ridiculous in this country.
Yeah.
Yeah, because the taxes are so high.
Hector says, Carl, what do you mean my parents?
They're our parents, comrade.
And even then, the government is your parents now.
That's literally the Lewis Goodall position.
And again, these people are mainstream commentators.
They get the big platform that everyone apparently listens to.
And it's just, okay, great.
These are just the mainstream ideas.
Lewis Goodhall, who tried to make all sorts of excuses for the murder of Charlie Kirk.
Why is he still on the air offcon?
I assume Rory Stewart has come out and endorsed everything of this proposal as well.
Derek says, Rachel from Accounts wants to dry her tears with £1,000 notes.
Yeah, just, I mean, it's so ridiculous.
Government is the only native body that runs entirely on Gibbs.
Yeah, I know.
Like, everything, the government isn't productive.
That's the thing.
Baron von Warhawk says, Scott Adams was right.
The UK is now filled with ticking time bombs that can kill you for no other reason than just existing.
Well, with that woman stabbed to death with the screwdriver, that's exactly it.
We don't know what a motive would be other than just she was there and he wanted to kill someone.
Yeah, I mean.
The only other thing that was mentioned in the article was that there had been some kind of row over broken biscuits that she'd been involved in.
Oh, I heard about that.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
So if that's what it was, so what, she has a minor raid of the biscuit tin, gets stabbed in the face for it.
Yeah, no, this is the thing, because what it'll have been is essentially she's going to have offended his sense of honor in some way.
And it's like, okay, but that's because you don't understand him.
There's nothing in the British psyche that could justify murdering someone over a bunch of broken biscuits.
They're not like us.
You don't understand them.
Yeah, there's no reason that some random Sudanese boat migrant should be in this country.
You see the one the other day that was from last March or whatever, with the guy trying to kidnap a woman just outside on the bloody bus.
Yeah, I was going to mention that, but it didn't flow at all.
Yeah, yeah, I'll do it.
I'll do a thing there.
Is it just infuriating?
And the thing is, I think I mentioned this when I did it.
A few, like, I think it might have been last year at this point.
On Proper Horror Shows streams, I was doing a series with her where one of the films that we covered was about the experiences of a bunch of South Sudanese refugees in the country, right?
And the film was literally about them facing off against voodoo demons that they thought was real.
And I was just watching that and I was like, this is the fiction that they're telling, showing to us about themselves and their own experience in the country.
And they're facing off these voodoo demons because on the boat over, one of the main characters chucked somebody else's child out of the boat that they had kidnapped in the first place so that they could look sympathetic to get on the boat.
Oh, that happened as well.
There was an actual occurrence of like 20 of them took over a boat of like 500 based on witchcraft and voodoo magic.
So the film, the film that was supposed to be like telling me that they're just like us and they can integrate actually said they are voodoo worshippers who will kidnap and murder children for their own benefit.
It's not so much worshipers, it's they just believe that's an intrinsic property of the universe.
Yes, they fear the voodoo demons.
Yeah.
But anyway, Omar says, even monsters like Ruda Cabana get to play video games in prison.
Without the death penalty, the only disincentive is the change in venue.
Yeah, and like they're everything paid for already.
What difference does it make to them?
Fuzzy Toaster says, oh no, I said spicy words in private to friends about friends.
The reality is they're upset they weren't included and you can't convince me otherwise.
Just jealous and not insane the injokes.
No, it's it's I mean probably for the person who dubbed it in, but um I think that was more into political rivalry with the young Republican group chats and stuff.
But like, it's just it's so petty.
And I'm really glad Vance has got a very clear distinction between friends and enemies at this point.
So yeah.
Oh, the Democrats are attacking us.
That's the right response.
Why hold myself to your standards when every one of your standards means that I lose?
Yeah, that's the point of standards.
They're designed so that I lose.
Yeah, the point of your standards is to ruin me.
So no, get stuffed.
Arizona Desert Rat says, how did no one notice this guy covered in blood?
I don't know.
I have no idea.
Good question.
Yeah.
Baron von Moorhawk says, I often hear comic book fans complain about how unrealistic it is for the city of Gotham to not sentence the Joker to death for his crimes.
But actually, it's just a left-wing city.
Just literally just a left-wing city.
This is how Democrats run their cities.
Yeah.
There's a reason that people say that Batman is inherently right-wing coded is because he's like the one guy in Gotham alongside with the police commissioner who's running over an incredibly corrupt police force.
He's the one guy who actually wants to try to keep people safe in Gotham.
And there's punish criminals.
And there's an incredibly based page of one of the comics called The Man Who Laughs, where Arkham Asylum, all of the inmates are released.
Batman's clearing them up.
And there's the narration boxes saying, you know, these people don't know what they're doing.
They can't control their actions.
They should be helped.
And then it just cuts to him punching them in the face.
And it says, I don't care.
It's like, yes, Batman.
That's why we love you, Bruce.
Okay, I was never a Batman fan, but this is wigging me around.
Justin says, gerrymandering is in this country too, Britain.
Look up the redrawing of Huddersfield's districts for next year.
They haven't announced the final positions yet, but the early drafts look like they are reworking Muslim areas to ensure their votes in order to retain control of the council.
Yeah, what's interesting is that the Conservatives in the Southwest lost a bunch of places.
Like Jacob Reesmog lost his seat because of redistricting.
And it's like, but the Conservatives did this.
Yeah, what are you doing, retards?
You know, you should be making it so that Labour can never get elected again.
But anyway, First Keeper Orland says, Gammonzilla versus Laborzilla.
Sounds like a story I want to see.
London Aravar says the purpose of a system is what it does.
Hector says, Clarence Thomas, this is illegal because it violates the constitution and it's racist.
Yeah, I know.
It's really not like very difficult.
And he adds as well, Clarence Thomas has had leftist fatigue for decades.
Yeah, I know, and I love watching him getting his way as well.
Like, you know that Clarence Thomas was just enjoying every single one of these things.
Roe versus Wade.
Don't think so, you whores.
There's a very funny link I had at the end.
Oh, yeah.
We're doing play.
yeah yeah go on let's run it's from the babylon b uh you've got oh you guys have the mouse I think the box is probably down here.
Yeah.
That's from Babylon B is basically.
Yeah.
Yeah, I do absolutely love Clarence Thomas's judgments.
Arizona Desert Rat says she needs to stick to words that she can pronounce.
Is he mentioning the paradigmatic?
Yes, paradigmatic.
Whoever said she was born to be on the panel of The View is totally totally right because listening to those clips of her talking, it was like nails on a chalkboard.
And now you've given Carl the idea to do another review of The View, I bet.
I mean, I haven't watched the view in a while, actually.
Maybe I should.
Oh, no, now I've done it.
Baz says, I sent a video comment.
Oh, sorry.
I guess our handsome production team didn't catch it in time for the podcast.
It's a little more haggard by the moment, it seems.
Yeah.
Sigil Stone says, we see those roots through your hair dye.
I assume he's talking about.
I know.
Who's he talking about?
He's calling me Ginger.
Oh, oh, right.
I've never had hair dye.
Yeah.
Like.
I don't think.
Clearly, I don't think seething Mediterraneans understand what Northwest European hair does, which is start out very blonde and then just get darker as you get older.
Yeah, no, that's totally true.
This happens with babies.
I was blonde when I was a baby.
Yeah, so is my oldest son.
Now he's got like hair exactly my colour.
Yeah, mine just went slightly less dark than most people's did.
But I'm still like, you can see pictures of me as the Milky Bar kid when I was younger, if you'd like.
Apparently, Nick Fuentes has declared war on Gavin Wax.
Yeah, I saw a clip of that, but I think this Sigil Stone is also pointing out that Nick is doing that while after already trying to get his followers to mass flag other accounts as well.
Yeah, but a lot of it is just interfactional fighting on some of the edges of the right.
That's a random name says, everything about our system screams Longhouse.
Feminized justice means publishing the notices for pointing out evil.
Instead of the evildoers, the Skyfather must retake us.
Yeah, I mean, it is.
It's very much like this is why it's constantly we're being tyrannized by the HR ladies.
Like, this entire system is designed to do that, and I hate everything about it.
I've seen some, we should cover it at some point, like the HR lady phenomenon because I have seen some things where it was like some guy posting on Reddit saying that no, no, it was a woman posting on Reddit saying that she was a HR person who was in charge of hiring new starters, and she was on a video call with some guy who's doing a really great interview, giving all the right answers, seemed like a good fit.
But you know, he leaned in really close to the camera at one point, and it made him seem really desperate for the job.
I didn't like that vibe, so I didn't hire him.
Sorry, sorry, you rejected a guy for a job because he visibly wanted the job.
Are you insane?
He came off as an idy.
The vibe is not, bro.
You're not auditioning a boyfriend.
You don't go there.
She's telling them that you know, you don't want to seem so interested.
They have to work to get your attention.
Total HR annihilation.
So, if I'm ever in a job interview situation like that and it's a clear HR woman, I'm just going to lean back and I'm just going to be play it cool.
I'm just going to, yeah, sure.
I don't call you.
I don't even really need this job.
This is one of the things that I'm going to do.
And apparently, that's a 100% guaranteed success.
I always hate when they're like, why do you want to work here?
It's like, because I need money.
Duh.
Like, why else would I be here?
Anyway.
Yeah, I'm really eager to work this corner shop.
Exactly.
Yeah.
For me, it was literally tech support.
It's like, why do you want this job?
It has always been my dream.
Anyway.
I have a dream.
Right.
So, courses.litsees.com.
I assume there's a link in the description.
Go sign up.
Bo and Stelios will be talking about.
Isn't this the one, the webinar, The End of Democracy?
No, no, no.
Is that no?
No, no, no, no.
We're going to do something different this time.
Oh, okay.
We're going to introduce, we're going to talk specifically about what the course involves and how it helps people.
Why it's good for you.
Why it's good for you, how it helps you.
And we're going to talk about the restoration of the ideal of education, which is basically, I think, part of the mission of people who are conservative in some respects.
Also, it's, you know, just well, this, this, this is the problem.
This is the point I was making the other day.
It's weird that I have to say it, you know, but the weird that we have to say.
But the whole point is that liberal morality has literally destroyed what real morality actually is.
It's the collapse of standards.
Yeah, well, that's the point.
And this is the restoration of all of that.
And so basically, if you want to eject the liberal morality you were born and infused with, this is what this course is for.
Like, we're not producing these for frivolous reasons.
This was a lot of work, and it's here for actually the restoration of the West.
So, anyway, go join the course.
There'll be a Zoom call later that you can join and ask Stellios questions.
Thank you for joining us, folks.
▲
Export Selection