The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #1282

All Episodes

Previous Next

Oct. 27, 2025 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters

01:31:23

The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #1282

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Eaters, episode 1282 for Monday, the 27th of October 2025.
	I'm your host Luca, joined today by Firas and the Stelios.
	Hello everyone.
	Hello brother Luca.
	Hello brother Fans.
	Yes, yes.
	We are all brothers here as we very well know.
	Today we're going to be talking all about how Sarah Pochin was basically right about British ads.
	We're then going to be talking about Millet defeating the communists again.
	Again.
	Again, yes.
	And then we're going to be talking about why basically the Hindus seem to have it in for Christians.
	Yep.
	Yep.
	The sort of Christian, the violence against Christians in India and some of its roots and causes.
	We're not going to talk about a festival with...
	We're not going to discuss that particular festival.
	There's no need to discuss that.
	But we are going to talk about some sacred cows.
	We are going to talk about some sacred cows.
	All right.
	Before we talk about any of those things, though, I just want to alert you to the fact that we have the third webinar for Stellios's new course, which is going to be this Thursday, 6 p.m.
	I should know because I'm also going to be there.
	and we're going to be answering your questions so if you want to exactly and And this is a free webinar.
	Sign up for it this Thursday, 6 p.m.
	We're going to talk about Plato's criticism of democracy and how he thinks the tyrant arises from the Democrat, essentially.
	And I have a migraine, and if you join, you're going to cure this migraine.
	And also, you're going to cure, you're going to learn so many great things.
	And you're actually going to annoy the commies.
	Yes.
	So do join.
	There you go.
	Join to annoy the commies.
	What better?
	Oh, join to own the libs.
	Also, I'd just like to point to the fact that I now have the second part of my analysis of Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet up on the website.
	Very happy with this.
	There's been many, many really kind comments on it.
	So thank you for tuning in.
	And if you haven't, I think it's good work, if I do say so myself.
	So do go and watch it.
	And then also, just to remind you, Firas has Real Politique, don't you?
	Is that just today or is it?
	Today at three, talking about the Syrian civil war, trying to give some of the historical context as to why the West ended up backing the jihadis against Assad.
	Perfect.
	All right.
	Sorry, question.
	Are you going to, at some point, have some interesting guests about this topic?
	Because it's one of those topics where, are you planning on anything?
	Yes.
	Yes, I might invite a couple of people.
	Good.
	Yes.
	You're going to invite us out.
	Well, he's got a lot of free time.
	You can pull him away from the gaming chair.
	Apparently, he's now into video games in Moscow.
	So let's see.
	That would be funny.
	Assad, good.
	All right, then.
	So over the weekend, my timeline was flooded with all sorts of current things.
	But the one that stuck out more than any other was really this from Sarah Pochin, who's one of the latest MPs in the revolving door that is reform MPs.
	But she made a very sensible point here and one that she backtracked on slightly.
	But nonetheless, I thought we would just play the video for you all.
	A bit left field this one, but I think it's creepingly important.
	Would Reform do anything to look at the representation of the demographics of TV and public advertising?
	Because we're getting to the point now where adverts don't represent what this country looks like.
	And, you know, and actually positive demonization of white people just portrayed as criminals or inadequate when they're not portrayed anywhere else.
	Now, the reason why this is important, we've got a case of art imitates life, because we're getting to the point where a number of my friends think that we're being discriminated like in employment markets because white men are seen as useless and whatever and just invisible.
	And there's one financial institution which coincidentally uses a strikingly similar image of Nigel in their advertising for an incompetent, useless, arrogant white male.
	I just wonder if that's what we would look into.
	Okay, Stuart, stay where you are.
	Sarah, what do you think of what Stuart's saying?
	What would Reform UK do about it, if anything?
	I think Stuart is absolutely right.
	It drives me mad when I see adverts full of black people, full of Asian people, full of, you know, people that basically are anything.
	What's wrong with that, Sarah?
	What's wrong with that?
	Well, it doesn't reflect our society.
	And I feel that, you know, your average white person, average white family is like, I agree with you, Stuart, not represented anymore.
	There's lots of white people on television, Sarah.
	Are there not?
	There are lots of white people.
	Right.
	I'm not in this to listen to what the talk TV guy has to say.
	Right.
	You've heard Sarah's point there, and it was perfectly reasonable.
	Yes.
	Right.
	Perfectly reasonable.
	And not even, it's not some new breaking ground either.
	It's a conversation that we've been very aware of and we've seen it.
	It's very reasonable that one of my Pakistani friends pointed out that he's sick and tired of seeing all of the advertisements on the tube in London having absolutely zero British people.
	Right.
	And this is a point of consensus among the more sober members of minorities in Britain who will say, okay, I mean, I think his words were, thank you for trying, but you're trying too hard.
	And it's ridiculous.
	And it's absolutely ridiculous.
	And it's very conscious.
	Oh, yes.
	And this isn't the most nefarious part.
	I would say that the most nefarious part is the way that people are inserted in history.
	Like, imagine a film in which Malcolm X was white.
	Oh, yes.
	No, this is the thing that the ads, you know, just like just the sheer level of minorities in British advertising is just a small part of the overall just tapestry of representation and how skew-whiffed it's gotten in this country.
	Before I go on with everything, though, I just want to alert those listening to the fact that Stelios and I will be speaking on a webinar this Thursday.
	So it's free.
	You can come sign up and we're going to be discussing Plato's critique of democracy.
	Because if we're going to go back to Stelios' course on ancient Greek virtue ethics, then we need to understand the criticisms of these forms of government from the very beginning.
	This is a perennially interesting issue.
	It's free.
	Sign up and also ask us course-related questions and we're going to answer them.
	Indeed.
	So naturally, Sarah came out and apologised for all of this as well.
	She although, I mean, she didn't think she didn't, because she says that her comments were poorly phrased, but she didn't actually double down on the point that she was making, which is that a commission study by Channel 4, as part of its mirror on the industry, which we'll get to in a minute, found that black people were featured in more than half of adverts in 2022, up sharply from 37% in 2020 following the Black Lives Matter movement.
	By contrast, black people make up around 4% of the population in England and Wales, according to the 2021 census.
	Representation in advertising should reflect the diversity of modern Britain.
	Look, at the end of the day, she's still coaching it in very multicultural language.
	Yeah, that's not a way to end this message.
	But one thing I want to say is that, number one, advertisement doesn't have to reflect reality, which is what gets me when we listen to people from the other side, from the DEI side, that says, well, we need more representation.
	We don't have enough.
	Advertisement isn't about reflecting reality.
	But the other issue that I think is what is at people's minds here is the top-down attempt to enforce this.
	That's what annoys people most, I think.
	It's that you regularly see an establishment going woke.
	Woke means by definition, embracing the intersectional calculus, which by implication says straight white men are the oppressors and need to have power stripped away from them.
	So once you take this principle into account and you have the establishment that functions in this way according to such principles, all that they're going to do is attack straight white men and other groups that they consider to be more on the oppressor side in favor of the so-called oppressed side.
	And it's the sheer attempt to do it in a top-down manner that is what annoys people.
	And I'll just give you one example.
	Firas, you may have an issue with it because it's God-related.
	But there was a time, there was this movie called Bruce Almighty, where Morgan Freeman was playing God.
	At the time, I don't remember any person having any problem with it.
	And actually, Morgan Freeman was really great in the role.
	No one had anything bad to say about it.
	No one even noticed it.
	It sort of just happened because people were aware that the, no, they weren't aware that there was such a thing as enforcing all these stereotypes.
	Not stereotypes, all these ideas, because they are trying to create an image.
	So that's what I think what is mostly abhorrent about this.
	And yeah, just I think it's just really tiring.
	Well, this is entirely the point, though, isn't it?
	It is as much, if not more, about the fact that it's not just about giving the minorities this representation.
	It's more importantly, it's about taking it away from the native British people.
	That matters even more.
	Because it forms part, I mean, if you look at any average television show, the number of television shows showing a decent right-wing male stereotype or archetype.
	Non-existent.
	No.
	Non-existent.
	They did the Vikings show.
	They had to make every single Christian in that show to be some kind of pervert.
	Just to be in some ways completely inadequate, borderline evil, over-the-top evil, etc., etc.
	And you see that repeated time after time after time.
	And it's very clearly conscious and deliberate.
	And it doesn't reflect reality in any way.
	I mean, I don't mind casting people as villains, obviously, but like a bit of unpredictability would be nice.
	Well, it's entirely.
	A bit of unpredictability would be nice.
	But it's entirely predictable.
	But it's entirely predictable.
	And the predictability makes it boring.
	Yes.
	So to the actual documentary that she was referring to here as well, Channel 4's mirror on the industry.
	This is the part where we get to, because all of a sudden, and I'm just going to leapfrog the entire backlash to what he was saying.
	Yeah.
	Because you know what she was saying.
	They all said she was racist.
	They all said that she was talking nonsense.
	And in many cases, as we had, of course, with Dan Hodges, we quickly got to the, why do you even care about this part of the conversation?
	We care about it.
	Because you make everything about it.
	That's why.
	You have said for decades and decades now that representation is the most important thing, right?
	You have said we want fewer white people in the countryside.
	We want fewer white people in advertising.
	We need the royal family to be less white.
	Everything, everything.
	There was not one single part of the British national character that could escape Sauron's eye, right?
	Just a freaking gaze as it just goes, that's too white.
	We need to do away with this.
	But one person, one person, Dan, from the other side says maybe it should be a bit whiter to reflect the fact that we're still actually a majority white country and actually Africans aren't half of the population.
	Then all of a sudden, good lord, we can't have that, can we?
	Let alone the entire population.
	Right, let alone the entire population.
	But we get to the point where, so we have Rack Patel, chief commercial officer at Channel 4, who said, at Channel 4, we believe deeply in our role as a catalyst for positive social impact.
	Mirror on the industry is more than an ad audit.
	It's our commitment to expose where diversity, sorry, where advertising still falls short and to light up a path forward, right?
	It's not arbitrary.
	They've defined positive social impact as more diverse.
	As less white.
	As less white.
	If they had defined positive social impact as being pro-family, as being anti-abortion, as being pro-religion, as being pro-love of nation, pro-love of neighbor, fine.
	But they define social impact as a positive social impact, that is, as a weird combination of diversity and degeneracy.
	And I don't believe them when they say that they're after positive social impact.
	I think they hide behind these words, whereas their revealed preference is completely different.
	And the thing is, as well, when you had the absolute peak of crazy with BLM back in 2020 through to 2022, of course, all of the advertising companies, every institution in Britain bent over backwards because some criminal in Minnesota lost his life, right?
	We decided that meant we have to transform our entire society.
	And you got to this point where because everyone moved in the right direction, because all of the rich and powerful moved in this way, then all of a sudden, what would have been, oh, this one particular advertising company, like Morrisons, have decided to make their Christmas advert with a black person or whatever it is.
	Well, then everyone starts doing it.
	So every single advert becomes inescapably just spurting off this message, this continuing.
	And the thing is, as well with this, that like so many of the things when it came to advertising, it would have been, and I don't say this in a way that means I agree with it, but I do mean it to delineate.
	It would have been one thing to have just simply put more minorities in adverts.
	But it's another thing entirely to make the actual character of the people who are white in it, just as you were saying, just idiots, just total buffoons.
	You probably don't get a ton of safety features.
	Whoa.
	It's a lot of cargo space.
	Might not be enough room for me.
	Okay, but with mileage this good, there's no way that it has any guessing.
	Get everything you love at a price you love.
	Now this is just a small one.
	This is...
	This is what, in your language, you would simply call a microaggression.
	But when you look at it, thousands upon thousands of ads, right?
	And they all have this really shrewd coding to them, right?
	Then you start to have the pattern recognition.
	Then you start to see what this is all about.
	And sorry, go on, Ferris.
	But the whole request is really don't make it predictable.
	Don't constantly repeat yourselves endlessly and make yourselves extremely predictable.
	If someone black is good for an advert, for a TV show, for a movie, okay, fine.
	We don't care.
	But if the pattern keeps on getting repeated and encroaches into historical replacement, the thing is that this side has a bit more than they can chew.
	I mean, the woke.
	Yep.
	They completely transgressed limits.
	And what they're doing, the whole reaction, especially, you know, the whole country cares about the viewing preferences of a particular MP when it comes to ads.
	Yes.
	Instead of actually debating topics that matter more, it shows that the people are not having it.
	Yep.
	They want to do something about it.
	And that's what I mean.
	It's an admission of defeat because they constantly say, well, why do you care?
	Yeah, as you said before, they do care because they make it all about race.
	Yes.
	When you make everything about race and you demonize a particular race because you're woke, because you accept the intersectional calculus, well, don't expect them to like it.
	But they did expect people to not notice.
	That's why they are trying.
	I don't think they expected people to not notice.
	I think they expect people to submit to an endless humiliation ritual.
	It's whether notice or not, they don't want the reaction that happens right now.
	They don't want the reaction, but the thing, I think the point that we've reached here is that the left is very content to use power decisively to get what it wants.
	Whereas the correct response should be, Britain is in Europe, Europeans are white.
	Therefore, the overwhelming majority of advertising in Britain must involve people.
	They don't have the culture with them.
	They have the illusion.
	They are creating the illusion that they have the culture within.
	And they want most people to think that they're stronger than they really are.
	They have the universities, they have the big corporations, they have the government, they have the people.
	They're talking about the people.
	They have parliament.
	They don't have the people.
	They're willing to make them submit.
	They're willing to break them.
	But it gets to the point, right, where it's basically just the new frontier of progressivism.
	And the reason that, of course, Sarah got so much kickback to this is not because as an individual, she's any threat, right?
	Sarah's not going to get into parliament and suddenly we're just going to find every ad just whitewashed under a reform government, right?
	That's not what's going to happen.
	But what you have with every avenue of with progressivism, like they had a few years ago with the overturning of Roe v.
	Wade, right?
	They treat every single one of their victories as just permanent ground war.
	And the idea that they could ever backslide, that actually you could take away federal right to an abortion, or the fact that you could one day perhaps conceive of not just seeing thousands and thousands of random minorities on your screen, right?
	They hate it.
	They hate the idea that they could lose ground in anything whatsoever.
	But as Carl points out here, you can't just let the memory hold the fact that they set the tone of this conversation from the beginning, right?
	When they say you've got Lenny Henry, of course, there, you've got question time panels, TV, all of this.
	Dan, I know you say, why should I, why does it matter?
	It's not that important.
	But I have spent a long time listening to the voices of minorities, as I was told to do to be a good person.
	And I've listened and I agree with them that representation is very important.
	I've just perhaps come away with a slightly different spin on it that you're not entirely happy with.
	But it gets totally ridiculous.
	And I know they all seem arbitrary, but like when did you ever see someone who was African wearing a barber jacket?
	Just ever.
	Well, because there was a point in which the right on social media was sort of advocating barber nationalism.
	And this is a deliberate reaction from the company to say we want nothing to do with the vast majority of our customers.
	We'd rather be like Jaguar.
	Yes, exactly.
	Exactly.
	And the answer should be, okay, well, thank you.
	You don't want business?
	Fine.
	We've got black professors being interrupted by old white men.
	Does anyone have thoughts on the reading from last week?
	I'm ordering another round.
	You're already on thin ice, Uber Eats, I won't push your luck.
	What's more, of course, oh, what were the odds that the people would happen to be in these positions and that this lottery would end up with the black guy just sitting on top of the white man just like this?
	Is that Fat John?
	It might well be.
	He's become a new table in the Chinese restaurant he always goes to.
	Obviously, I mean, we'll just play this in the background whilst we speak, but Russians just compiled here.
	The fact that this is just a relentless stream.
	We've all seen this by now.
	And again, I just want to stress, 4% of the population, right?
	4%.
	And yet it just keeps going on and on and on and on.
	And the thing is that obviously there has been a noticeable uptick in Africans on the streets since the Boris wave.
	Right.
	Really since the Boris wave.
	It's become kind of a thing where everyone's coming into contact with them now.
	But still, it's not enough of a presence to really warrant this.
	And what's more, it doesn't matter if it's...
	What a compilation, man.
	Right.
	Right.
	It doesn't matter if it's 20%.
	The point is that this is a symptom of something that was not supposed to happen, right?
	The elites did not have consent to demographically just overthrow us in England like this.
	We've rebelled against it.
	We've said no to it ever since it started after World War II.
	And so when they come along and they say, oh, and don't you want all these minorities to just be put onto your TV screens?
	No, because we ask for them to be here in the first place, right?
	Now, I appreciate the fact I'm taking a harder line on this than what Sarah was, but I don't have to appease reform and talk TV hosts, right?
	I've been listening to Enoch Powell's interviews from the 1970s with William Buckley.
	And it's kind of surprising that the quality of liberal discourse, and yes, I would describe Buckley as a liberal, has always been quite low.
	And there's always been this deliberate intent to miss the point and to absolutely ignore what is being said.
	And it just doesn't change.
	And you see it with Dan Hodges' comment here, and you see it with all of the people reacting to Pochin's comments here.
	And like, guys, look, there is an objective reality, and you guys are the ones transgressing against it.
	And then when the other side points out that you're transgressing against reality, you shriek and use the word racist, which has got the same value as a Zimbabwean dollar, really.
	And you insist that somehow you've been offended when really the side with a legitimate grievance is the side that you're attacking.
	But they don't want to see it because they're far too ideological and they're far too worshipful of power to actually admit any error on their part.
	And the more they double down, the bigger the backlash.
	But what they're doing in terms of just demographic change is insane.
	I mean, it's just, it has never happened without military conquest.
	And even with military conquest, genetically, most people in the Levant are originally from there rather than Arab.
	So it's insane that this is tolerated.
	But we have to bear in mind as well, Firas, of course, that this is a good thing.
	This is happening as well.
	After all, let's not forget the fact that even though Britain invented modernity and the modern world and just books and books, lists of inventions and just gave the world so much, of course.
	One thing that we did need, and we were sorely lacking, of course, was just minorities coming to Britain to teach us how to be good people.
	Yes.
	The man in the grey suit is staring at you.
	would you report it?
	And as it points out here, this is Sadiq Khan using public money.
	There was a whole campaign.
	I remember when I was living in London and I'd go to a cinema, there'd always be one of these Mayor of London safety ads in the cinema before it started.
	Every single timing, every single time, the racial coding was always bad white man.
	And thank God all the minorities came along to shame him, teach him how to be a good person.
	Because as we know from the crime statistics and everything else, that's exactly what happens in Britain today.
	There wasn't an entire rape gang scandal that is still ongoing and was hidden up explicitly because of its race or anything of the kind.
	And so we obviously have that.
	And then what's more, as I say, it just doesn't match the reality.
	Now, I'm aware, of course, that the image on the right is from America, but it speaks to the exact same thing.
	And what's more, I'm not letting them backslide on this.
	They've basically said what happens in America or the West generally is one in the same.
	They did that with BLM, so I'm doing it here.
	Because even though we obviously have a photo of this, there are countless cases across London where something similar has happened.
	And so it's absolutely disgusting because this is truly the reality.
	And bear in mind that this is just two months' distance.
	Because Irina Zarutska was murdered on the 22nd of August, and the mainstream media said nothing about it for two to three weeks where X blew it up.
	And then they had to make an announcement about it.
	Yes.
	And then what's more, as Carl points out here, just don't let up on this issue because Sarah has accidentally scratched the surface and now they're acting as if they're mortally wounded because they can't win on this and yet it's essential to their worldview.
	If they can't replace us on TV, they can't do it in real life.
	And what's more as well, as it says, yeah, 45% of UK TV viewers believe ethnic minorities are overrepresented on television.
	But what's more as well, of course, let's not forget that the average person thinks that there are just more minorities in the United Kingdom than there actually are.
	And ads are a very powerful way of feeding into this perception, right?
	Of making you feel like you are constantly on the back foot.
	It both demoralizes.
	It also, obviously, as you see, they're always generally racially coded, whether it's from a car advert with the wimpy white man, or whether it's to more nefarious and sinister things such as crime and its prevalence in London.
	And so when Harry Eccles points out here, reform have officially defended Sarah Pochin's comments, meaning that they will now have their first official policy that there are too many non-white people on TV.
	Yes, you forgot the Chad face, Harry.
	That's exactly what it means.
	I'll keep going.
	Reform party officially and clearly a deeply racist far-right party.
	Look, wait till you see what comes if reform fails.
	Well, I mean, this is the thing as well.
	You can say this, Harry, but my God, you should be on your knees thanking Farage for holding back what's on the other side, I tell you.
	Because, and I'll just round off, because we're short on time, with Morgoff's point, which is just that we've had it all for this, like this for a long time now.
	TV programs are too white, the countryside's too right, the government is too white, the North is hideously white, the Army, Police, Fire Brigade is too white.
	Why are there so many black people in ads?
	Wow, how dare you see race?
	Well, you've made us see it.
	You're the ones who shoved it in our face.
	Do you remember the Hamza Yousaf in Scotland?
	Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.
	The politicians were constantly talking about, you know, too many white people.
	Yeah, I saw that going around as well.
	Obviously, West Streeting was entirely indifferent to it.
	I mean, you think what I don't get is that, you know, why do you want to be someone like West Streeting?
	I mean, even West Reading, was it his life's dream to become someone who is looking at each other, you know, in fear, as if, you know, they're going to slap him or something if he doesn't say the words.
	That's not a noble way to be.
	No, but when you see him as a bug man, you understand.
	When you see him haven't had the only interested in pursuing power and who's only interested in sort of having his picture hung up in some ministry because he was the minister of this or minister of that.
	That's all they are, you know.
	These are not real people.
	Don't expect nobility from them.
	These are sort of avatars for other interests.
	That's all they are.
	Yeah.
	And so all these people, you know, the minorities who are just like on the Corbyn side of things who are like, oh, it's a billionaires, it's a billionaires.
	It's like, look, the billionaires are the reason you're even in my country in the first place.
	And they're also the reason why you're literally everywhere.
	Everywhere I turn, I see your faces just on the ads.
	Right.
	So maybe you should be a little bit more grateful to those billionaires you're trying to tear down.
	I, on the other hand, am a little naffed off with them.
	Anyway, we'll end it there for the sake of time.
	I'll just go through the rumble rants.
	We've got that's a random name says, this is all a psyop to get university educated women, especially white women, to hate white men.
	They're the target audience for this propaganda.
	Women are too easily propagandized.
	And it should be said.
	And it's one of the reasons they shouldn't be voting, but that's a different discussion.
	We'll have it another time.
	And the drunk changing says, I don't care about representation in ads.
	I care that the people who spent decades telling me that not being represented in media is violent oppression, trying to violently oppress me.
	Well, exactly.
	But the thing is, that obviously only counts when it's one way.
	Okay, one from PA here on YouTube says, I'm almost scared to read this.
	Had a weird dream a few days ago where I was playing rugby with Luca harrying Josh.
	Chugtube has penetrated my subconsciousness to unforeseen levels.
	Well, I'm very sorry to have visited you in your dreams.
	That's all I'll say.
	All right, then.
	Over to you, Stelios.
	Right, so I'm very pleased to announce you that Millais did it again.
	He torpedoed the communists and he won the midterm legislative elections of yesterday, October the 26th of 2025, which were very important elections for him because they were sort of like a vote of confidence.
	And we all had the usual phenomena, polls lying about it, trying to create the idea that people turned their back to him.
	Nothing of the sort happened.
	In fact, it was the exact opposite.
	And all this was just an attempt to basically gain votes for the Peronists.
	So we are going to talk about this and we are going to talk about how he triumphed over some of the recent setbacks he had.
	But before we do this, we want to tell you that we have a webinar, a live free webinar this Thursday at 6 p.m.
	Brother Luca is going to be with me and we're going to talk about the new course that we have released, the introduction to ancient Greek virtue ethics that I did.
	And we're going to talk about Plato's critique of democracy and how he thinks that the tyrant is born out of democracies.
	Right.
	So come, join.
	It's free.
	Also buy the course and ask us questions and we are going to answer them for you.
	Right, back to our topic.
	We have Millet here exiting the building and being very happy when he's nervous.
	He's going to do the victory lap.
	Going.
	Great people.
	Right, so he is very joyous, very, very triumphant.
	It was a massive victory.
	Right, so this was something like the midterm elections.
	There were elections for the Argentinian Congress and the Senate.
	And he basically won a lot.
	And he had some recent setbacks.
	And this is why we haven't heard about him for a long time.
	For us, here is taking it out on the table.
	Maybe he roots for the moment.
	Celebrating his victory against maybe.
	Trying to make sure the microphone doesn't fall in my lap.
	Right.
	Millais recently had some setbacks.
	And we haven't heard about him in a long time now.
	But let me tell you a bit what happened.
	So he was vetoed by the Kirchnerists in the Congress.
	And they were blocking some of his cutting spending initiatives.
	He also lost the Buenos Aires elections in September by 14 points.
	And this led many foreign investors to be particularly Worried and it did trigger an effect.
	Some people lost, some foreign investors especially lost their confidence in Argentina.
	And he went to meet Trump and Trump basically gave him help conditionally.
	He says if he wins, we're going to help him.
	If he doesn't, we're not.
	And we aren't going to be particularly helpful towards Argentina.
	And it looks like he won.
	Now, let's look at this point by Daniel DiMartinez.
	He tells basically that he was underestimated by the polls yet again.
	I checked some of the polls and basically they gave him max 30%, 30 to 35%.
	Even his own party believed that.
	And they were saying if we achieve a 30 to 35 percent, it will be a victory, which could be seen as a sort of more conservative downsizing of expectations, curbing of expectations.
	But they won basically 41%, which is a massive win.
	Now, also, let me show you here.
	They won 64 deputies.
	Right?
	All of the purple here areas are areas where Millet won.
	And let me also show you, these are the Kicknerists.
	They're not particularly happy.
	Right.
	And let me just give you some numbers.
	The Argentines voted to renew half of the lower house, 127 seats out of 257, and a third of the Senate, 24 out of 72.
	So La Libertar Vansa will gain 64 new seats.
	So it's the majority of those that were contested.
	Right, I see.
	64 out of 127 is a bit more than 50%.
	And suppose the other ones all got divided up against various opposition parties.
	Yes, right.
	And also the main opposition party, the Peronists or the Kirchnerists, they performed really poorly.
	They did do well in the previous September Buenos Aires elections, but this shows actually that, yeah, they did one of the this is one of the worst performances of theirs in decades.
	That's what I hear.
	Right.
	And also he says, along with his ally.
	No, sorry, that was on.
	Sorry, got mixed.
	Right.
	So let me tell you just a bit what happened here.
	So he won 40.8% of the votes and the Peronists won 31.7%.
	Right.
	And gains in Congress in the Chamber of Deputies.
	He had 37 seats.
	Now plus 64, he has 101 seats.
	And in the Senate upper house, he had six seats and now he has 20 seats.
	So why is that important?
	That's very much important because he, although he doesn't have the majority in either of these two bodies, he has crossed the threshold where he can veto the Congress.
	Whereas previously they had the majority and they could veto some of his resolutions and some of his policies.
	Now he can also veto them back.
	And especially he can veto motions for him to be indicted.
	So there should be very little obstruction going forward.
	There is considerably less obstruction than there was before.
	And this is one of the good things about Millet is that he's call him a libertarian if you like.
	He knows how power works.
	He knows how you have to win within politics.
	It's not just an issue of creating a comfort zone where you just lament about how the bad government is taxing you.
	He knows how to actually fight the game, both politically, and culturally, as well as economically.
	So he doesn't just constantly complain about taxes.
	He actually does the work.
	And he knows that there needs to be a full across the board, whole scale cultural revolution of liberty-loving principles that are going to aid Argentina as opposed to just treating it as a merely economic thing.
	And just don't get me wrong, he constantly talks about economics, but he also talks about politics and culture.
	This is what libertarians in other places really don't get.
	He just leave culture to the leftists.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Let them salvage it.
	Yes.
	Right.
	And what's important here is that these elections were sort of seen as a referendum for him.
	Because of his setbacks, of his recent setbacks, lots of people lost their confidence in him and in Argentina.
	But now this seems to change.
	And now, as they say here, Millay is a key ideological ally of Trump.
	Actually, the Associated Press may be trying to dispose readers negative towards him by saying this, but yeah, whatever.
	And what they say here about the high stakes of it, there is a 40 billion dollar help from the US, and it was conditional.
	So as they say here, Trump appeared to condition a 20 billion currency swap deal with Argentina's central bank and an additional $20 billion loan from private banks on a good showing for Millay in national midterms, threatening to rescind the assistance for the cash-strapped country in the event of a Pernist victory.
	And as Trump said, if he wins, we're staying with him.
	And if he doesn't win, we're gone.
	And this is a big deal because what the Americans are doing is that they're tapping the resources of Latin America in order to rebuild their own industries.
	They need alternative supply chains to the ones that are controlled by China.
	So this money, in a way, it helps the Argentinian economy, but it also secures American investments.
	It's sort of a subsidy for American companies in a way.
	That's why this money is being poured into Argentina.
	And they need somebody like Millay to guarantee it.
	Previously, they would have relied on a nice and friendly military dictator, Peter Shea or someone like that, to sort of toss communists from helicopters and solve that problem more permanently.
	Now they're relying on a more democratic process and a mandate from the public.
	And it's good that they have it.
	It's important.
	Also, I read that Argentina has vast lithium resources.
	Lithium, rare earth minerals, every single kind of agricultural product, oil, hydrocarbons, all kinds of things.
	Yes.
	Like the mineral wealth of Latin America is immense.
	And it's insane how, you know, if you have communists and socialist thinking people, how they can completely be sitting upon a treasure and not knowing what to do with it.
	No.
	Or thinking that it's a bad thing to take advantage of it.
	And what is interesting in Argentina is that you have essentially a gang that was governing the country and trying to emotionally blackmail the entire population and culture in order to make them think that if they do something to become richer and have a greater part to disseminate unequally, they're going to end up better off.
	They try to prevent people from seeing that.
	Yes.
	Because they were basically socialists and statists who are trying to say that if you want to honor the profit motive, you're a bad person and you're drinking the blood of people.
	It's the exact opposite.
	It's the exact opposite.
	So the Peronists have been statists who have been governing Argentina like a gang.
	Millay is trying to do something about it.
	And I absolutely respect this because he isn't one of those libertarians who constantly try and complain, just complain, knowing that they're really well in a particular comfort zone.
	He actually gets the job done.
	And I really respect this.
	Right.
	So this was about the setback.
	Before here, Trump is congratulating him.
	Congratulations to Millay on his landslide victory in Argentina.
	He's doing a wonderful job.
	Our confidence in him was justified by the people of Argentina.
	Millay is thanking him as he's also thanking Treasury Secretary Scott Besant for his support.
	Right.
	And that's it, basically, that he scored a massive win.
	And also Guardian is lamenting.
	And it says here, Javier Millay Hill's tipping point is the party wins Argentina's midterm election.
	And they're talking about result falls short of giving Millay a congressional majority, but surprises many analysts after a series of scandals.
	And they're saying something like his wife or sister, a member of his very close environment, was chief of staff.
	And just this was just an amazing scandal.
	But the real scandal is that he's doing the good job.
	That's the real scandal for the Guardian who is supporting despicable statists across the globe who are just a gang and try to make everyone equal in poverty except themselves who basically own everything.
	Because really what goes on is that socialists are talking about equality all the time, but in fact they're in favor of absolute power.
	They just want everyone else to be poor and they want to basically own everything.
	And instead of saying that we are going to be kings, they are going to say, presumably in Latin America, they'll say, well, capitalism is linked to European absolute monarchy.
	So we're going to be endless dictators because we want to fashion ourselves as a republic.
	They're going to say something.
	If somebody were to talk about the corruption of the Kirchners or to talk about the corruption of the Peronist parties in general or the corruption in all of the left across the world, they would be writing books after books after books.
	A newspaper wouldn't do it justice.
	But what these guys do is that they pick a couple of stories and inflate those.
	So I'm very open to the possibility that there's some corruption around Millais.
	I mean, he did that thing with his coins, with these coins, and it was clearly a nasty rug pull.
	He was clearly being very corrupt with that.
	So yeah, fair enough.
	But the reality of it is that you will always have wealth and power being interconnected.
	And we've adopted this ideal where we pretend that they shouldn't be and that they can't be when all of human history records the opposite.
	And the question therefore isn't our powerful people getting rich and are rich people becoming powerful.
	The answer is, are you holding them to some kind of account that makes life better for everyone else?
	And that's what people like the Guardian completely fail at.
	You see this constantly with how they always attack Nigel Farage in this country from the left-wing perspective.
	Now, obviously, I have my problems with Nigel, but they always go after the fact that he's just a rich and successful person.
	It's like, well, if you're rich and successful, how can you represent poor people, working-class people, whatever it might be?
	And you constantly get this thing.
	It's like, because if they speak to my interests, then I think they can be my representative.
	But you always see from the left, because they're of the opinion that if you are for the working class, you have to somehow come from it, right?
	You can't understand, you can't champion their concerns.
	And most of them are Champagne socialists.
	And so you end up with stuff like...
	They never do the same for Bernie Sanders.
	Yeah.
	They never do the same for the fact that Nancy Pelosi is worth hundreds of millions of dollars, mainly on the back of insider trading.
	But it also always leads as well with people like Gavin Newsom, I saw, just making up some story about how tough he had it when he was young.
	It's like, dude, just own the fact that your parents were a rich socialite.
	It's like, it's fine.
	It's not a crime.
	No.
	Unless you're a leftist.
	Yes.
	In which case, then it becomes the greatest crime.
	But it's interesting to look at the rhetoric that they have and what they're trying to do because they are trying to isolate some facts out of a very complex equation when it comes to the economy.
	And they're trying to say, well, we intend to help people to be for the poor guy.
	And we are going to tax the rich and give to the poor.
	And we are going to disrespect the profit motive because it's bad people who are not benevolent.
	And we are going to split the population into the bad people who are taxable objects.
	And we're going to wage warfare against them in order to help the poor.
	But what they end up doing is completely disrespecting the profit motive, not taking advantage of the wealth that they have, come up with ridiculous plans, five-year plans, two-year plans, four-year plans, whatever, that don't work, and then wage warfare against the entire population when they don't work.
	So what happens is right now, and what Millay is doing, and what I'm really happy about Argentinians here, is that they refuse to play along to this emotional blackmail of the mainstream media and of the leftist rhetoric that tries to say that if you don't do things our way, you're a bad person.
	No, if you do things their way, you're a very useful idiot.
	If you focus on a more market-oriented solution, just like the one Millay does, you will invariably end up with a greater pie that you will be able to distribute then in ways that will leave poorer people better off.
	And that's why Argentinians seem to back him.
	And remember, when he won, there were many people who said, right, he's going to govern for six, five, six months, and then people are going to get really annoyed with him.
	No, because it looks like they're sticking with him.
	Yeah.
	So, congratulations.
	Impressive.
	All right.
	Thank you, Stelios.
	I'll just go through the Rumble Rank Shy from.
	I've got Ryan Hin Tugan says, watch New Jersey and Virginia.
	Virginia, Governor Races next Tuesday for a U.S. weather vein, both went to Democrat plus 6 last year, when New Jersey is usually D plus 10, and Virginia swings.
	Scott Prezor and Jack Soviak have been on the warpath in New Jersey.
	Pray for us.
	I do indeed, Ryan.
	I think it's in Virginia where they have an attorney general candidate who was actually saying that the children of the other guy should be killed or something like that.
	Oh, I remember that video.
	Yes, yes.
	So it's a particularly, I mean, that's not for the governor, but that's for the attorney general.
	But the candidate for governor didn't seem to care about this and in no way reacted.
	It was one of the most psychopathic things I've ever seen.
	Yes, and the fact that he doubled down in text messages saying that repeatedly in writing shows that this is genuinely how these people are.
	So yes, we will pray for you.
	And Drew from YouTube just makes a point: Guardian hates it.
	Try harder, leftists.
	Good.
	Yes, absolutely.
	Indeed.
	So let's talk a little bit about India.
	But before we do, it's important to understand the roots of Western civilization.
	And these can't be separated from Greek thinking and Greek philosophy and the Greek conception of virtue.
	And the man to talk to you about that is Stelios.
	And he's going to be talking about that with Luca on Thursday at 6 p.m.
	UK time.
	So please attend the webinar and then buy the course.
	The webinar is for free.
	The webinar is for free.
	Yes.
	So let's talk a little bit about India.
	Now, the history of Christianity in India is extremely old, right?
	It was St. Thomas the Apostle who went to India and was martyred there.
	Apparently, he was killed because some members of the royal family converted to Christianity and the local Hindu king did it like that.
	But truth be told, afterwards, Hindu-Christian relations were not that bad.
	Not particularly evil, not particularly bad.
	But things are beginning to change.
	And arguably, things have been changing since the 20s with the rise of the RSS and the predecessor party to the ruling BJP.
	But now what's happening is that you are seeing more and more Indian states.
	There's going to be, as of this year, 11 Indian states enacting anti-conversion laws where they will try to ban religious conversion.
	And these are some of the biggest states in India.
	I think Maharashtra is where Bombay is.
	So it's pretty significant that this is happening.
	But the logic, when you look at these laws to ban religious conversion, is ridiculously poor.
	So they're supposed to be banning coerced conversion.
	This is the idea behind them.
	However, they specify a procedure for what they define as a willful conversion.
	That is, a person who wants to convert his religion must make a declaration before the district magistrate.
	Then, after giving this advanced notice, the district magistrate will investigate to see if this is a coerced conversion.
	And coercion can mean anything from sort of allurement, which is a very ill-defined term, to actual threat of physical force.
	Now, if people are being threatened with force to convert, yes, arrest the person doing so.
	But allurement is a bit of a weird one.
	Post-conversion, the converted person must send another declaration.
	This is from a different straight.
	This is from the Rajasthan state.
	But that's a bill that's already in existence, right?
	And the new bill that's coming up in Maharashtra is supposed to be even tougher.
	They, after converting, the converted person must send another declaration.
	This declaration will be displayed on the notice board along with details about the persons who converted, such as the father's name, the date of birth, the address, the place of residence, and the religions between the person converted.
	Meaning that any random mob will have all of that person's information with the very clear suggestion: go and inflict some violence.
	Very often, these laws are presented as being anti-Muslim, and there is in India this obsession with something allegedly called love jihad, whereby Muslim men will try to supposedly seduce Hindu women and then marry them.
	But this is what the obsession is.
	The reality is that it very often results in violence against Christians.
	And anybody who doesn't follow these regulations of giving notice to the magistrate, having all of their personal details published, and so on, would be deemed, the conversion would be deemed illegal and void.
	I don't understand how you enforce that.
	Can you sort of what is the Christian population of India?
	So it used to be 2.5 something percent in the 1970s, then went down to 2.4, and now it's 2.3% of the total population.
	So it's a tiny population, but there are a country the size of India.
	Yes, that's still a lot of people.
	That's still tens of millions of people.
	That's still tens of millions of people, right?
	Not providing a pre-conversion declaration will be punishable by imprisonment between six months and three years and a minimum fine of 10,000 rupees.
	And then that can escalate.
	And anybody can launch what is in India called a first incident report.
	So that's when an incident is reported to the police against an unlawful conversion.
	So any member of your family, any member who is deemed aggrieved, including various relatives, can report it.
	And the burden of proof that a conversion is unlawful will be on the accused.
	So it's not that the prosecution has to prove their case, it's the other way around.
	Well, this means basically that it's entirely arbitrary.
	Yes.
	It's entirely whimsical because it's subjective.
	There are no ways to establish it in an objective sense.
	Yes.
	In a sense that it's accessible to everyone.
	Like you established that a murder has taken place.
	It's not that it's whatever the body, body, the decision-making body we're talking about wants to decide at that time.
	Yep.
	So this has been an ongoing issue in India.
	This is an article from the Hindu from 2016 arguing that there should be a law banning religious conversions because it's a huge national security risk.
	And it went so far as to having the Supreme Court finding that religious conversions are in fact a national security risk.
	Okay, that's an interesting take.
	But the argument is that people should be voting for a Hindu-friendly party.
	The world's most ancient civilization, if it's going to withstand the onslaught of external forces, we should have essentially Hindutva, the ideology of India as a Hindu first nation or as a Hindu-only nation.
	It's a very ill-defined term.
	I'll get into it in a second.
	Aren't the Chinese older as a civilization?
	Yes.
	The majority community, the Hindus that is, must destroy the case system and revive Sanskrit language to successfully thwart the expansionist agenda of the other religions.
	We're going to talk about expansionist agendas here.
	Revive the Sanskrit language.
	I don't get it either.
	Okay.
	I don't get it either.
	I mean, yeah, I know.
	Anyway, anyway.
	The Hindus have never discriminated against other religions, but it has been facing an unprecedented threat from conversions which are highly detrimental to democracy.
	To save our democracy.
	It's another save our democracy.
	It's another.
	Exactly.
	The whole world raises a hue and cry when something happens to Muslims and Christians, but there is no one to espouse the cause of over five lakh lakh means 10,000 Kashmiri pandits who are living in exile in their own country, which is true.
	Like the way the Pakistanis and the Bangladeshis treat Hindus is absolutely abominable.
	But why this sort of becomes a law against religious conversion, I don't understand.
	Interestingly, anti-conversion laws began during the time of British rule because the perspective of the Hindus and of some British liberals was that we need to preserve some of these smaller communities and some of these weird tribal and lower castes who actually saw Christianity as liberating them.
	And rightly so.
	If you know anything about the Hindu case system, it's ridiculously rigid.
	It is deeply discriminatory to the extent that you have people in Microsoft or in Google complaining that they are being discriminated against by other Indians because they are of lower caste.
	It doesn't sound like a very American problems to have in Silicon Valley.
	It's a very American problem, but it's coming to Britain as well.
	Like in one company here, I know for a fact that this was happening.
	So you see this whole idea of India trying to become more nationalistic, and it's supported by the Supreme Court.
	I mean, I don't understand why the Supreme Court found conversion as a threat to national security.
	Mainly because I don't understand Hinduism, really, but that's a different story.
	But the reality is that this has translated into a lot more attacks on Christians in India.
	800 attacks in 2004, more than 2023.
	And I think now for this year, it's in the 70-800 range already.
	So it's sort of regularly picking up.
	And Modi tries to sort of be nice about it, but really he ends up being very mealy-mouthed.
	Part of the problem is that the police don't receive reports from Christians.
	So whenever an incident happens, a criminal incident, the first thing you have to do is to go to the police and register what is called the first incident report.
	I mentioned that.
	So India's prevent doesn't work.
	India's prevent doesn't work.
	Yes, unfortunately.
	But the police then decide that, no, we're not going to register one for you.
	And therefore, we're not going to initiate a criminal case against the person who attacked you, which means that there is total immunity.
	And if there's total immunity, what are you going to get?
	Well, you're going to get more attacks.
	Yeah, it just emboldens out.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Exactly.
	Or the police will usually try to pacify the victims, saying that if you file a case, then the attackers may become more aggressive, and then your life will become more dangerous.
	So that's the Indian police for you.
	Now, if anybody knows anything about the Indian police, they're insanely corrupt.
	I mean, it's insane.
	I didn't.
	Submit to the guilty.
	Yeah, exactly.
	Exactly.
	Exactly.
	I didn't know anything about the Indian police, but I couldn't guess that.
	I mean, I've watched Slamdog Millionaire.
	They didn't help.
	No.
	Reports for a newspaper called The Wire have highlighted how Hindutva activists have filed false conversion cases against people from marginalized castes who choose to follow the Christian faith.
	So if you're from a marginalized caste, essentially what the Indian karmic system tells you, what the Hindu system tells you, is that you are in a low caste because you deserve it, because of things that have happened to you in the past.
	And therefore, you're supposed to be worthless.
	You're supposed to be miserable because you've earned it.
	I think.
	Sorry, whereas the Christian message is pretty much the inverse of it.
	God loves the poor, God loves the suffering, carry your cross with dignity, carry your cross alongside Christ, and it will liberate you and literally lead to your salvation.
	And no, you're not stuck in an endless cycle of having to atone for things that you supposedly did in past generations.
	There is hope for you at the end.
	So you can see why this message would be very appealing to the lower castes.
	But from the perspective of the higher castes, if they don't have anybody to tread upon and to sort of humiliate and oppress, what's the point of being higher caste in the first place?
	Good question.
	So you can see why you get this objection from the higher castes to the lower case being converted.
	I think, I mean, I don't want to tell me if this derails the segment, but I think that there are seven castes.
	The lower is the Dalit.
	So there's four and the untouchables.
	So it's five.
	So it's four castes.
	The untouchables are considered a non-caste.
	The untouchables are the casteless.
	Right, okay.
	I think I read somewhere that basically we have seven groups and that in order that the idea is to achieve enlightenment.
	Yes.
	And that in order to achieve enlightenment, you need to do it seven lives in a row.
	And if you achieve enlightenment, a sort of nirvana in a particular life, you get an upgrade in the next one.
	And you need to go straightforwardly this way.
	So basically, you could be incarnated into an insect.
	You could be incarnated into an animal.
	But there is like a lot of things.
	But there are so many variations.
	There are so many variations.
	That's the thing, because there's no such thing as Hinduism.
	It doesn't actually exist as a coherent set of beliefs.
	There are very many different forms of polytheism alongside a couple of sort of epic myths.
	The Mahabrat or the Ramayana.
	The Mahabrat and the Ramayana.
	These are the two.
	Alongside some texts, none of which is seen as the final word in the sense of the Quran or the Bible, that are seen as the sort of, that's it, that's what the word is.
	And then there are various different kinds of traditions, some of them that practice animal sacrifice, some of them that think cows are sacred and animals are not to be harmed.
	It's a mental and moral model that pulls in very many different directions.
	And then the gods have different forms according to Hinduism.
	So one day this god is a creator and the other day he's a destroyer.
	And it's supposed to have a philosophical meaning that creation and destruction are sort of interlinked.
	Fair enough.
	Don't want to derail the segment.
	I think there's the Hindu Trinity where you have the Brahma.
	Yes.
	Vishnu.
	Brahma is the creator, the God of creation, Vishnu of balance.
	Yes.
	And then you have Shiva, Shiva.
	Yes.
	But each of those has different forms.
	And then there's a debate over whether or not it is all in the imagination of Brahma and nothing is really real.
	We're all part of God's imagination.
	Or if there is, in fact, a dual nature where there is something real and something spiritual, and nothing is actually established.
	So India, like Hinduism isn't one thing.
	But can't you say that the same applies for other religions like Christianity?
	Because in Christianity there are also theological debates.
	Yes, there are theological debates, but not sort of fundamental disagreements over the nature of reality.
	It's a completely different thing.
	It's a completely different thing.
	It's not even comparable, I would argue, to Greek or Roman religions or to Chinese religions.
	It's the only genuine paganism that has survived, that and African animism.
	And it has zero system.
	There's nothing final about any of it.
	The concept of dharma, duty, well, it changes depending on what you're trying to do and where your situation in life is, which leads essentially to complete moral relativism.
	And this moral relativism is why you will hear people saying, well, Hinduism is so tolerant.
	Help us oppress the Christians.
	It's a mental muddle.
	It's a mental model.
	But anyway, when Modi sort of attended this kind of event to say that he were trying to get him to say that he condemns it, but really all that he did was be a hypocrite.
	According to one journalist, after expressing his pain over incidents of violence in India, Mod did not mention a single incident from two daily cases of targeted attacks against Christians in 2024.
	Instead, he mentioned an attack in Germany on Christmas and an attack in Sri Lanka on Easter.
	So he sort of got India out of it and tried to pretend that there is nothing that is actually happening there.
	And even when he was saying nice things, he was saying, you know, teachings of Lord Christ celebrate love, harmony, and brotherhood.
	It is important that we all work to make the spirit together.
	Well, if you want to make it together, stop people attacking Christians.
	That would be nice.
	I mean, part of the problem, I suppose, is that India is so big that it's impossible to police.
	Like the sheer size of the country makes it very difficult to police.
	But then when somebody, when one Hindutva leader says that in March 2025, actually, he said that Christians should be killed and the women should be raped and their villages should be destroyed and any trace of Christianity erased from the region.
	And then he defended his calls for genocide by accusing Christians of engaging in the slaughter of cows.
	Look, man, the cows aren't sacred.
	I don't know how to say this to you, but there's no such thing as a sacred cow.
	It doesn't exist.
	They're a nice symbol of fertility in your religion.
	But the idea that the value of a cow is more important than the life of a Muslim or a Christian is absurd.
	Please stop that.
	He's called his followers to rally 50,000 people for scheduled attacks.
	If you're going to announce to the police that you're conducting attacks, maybe the police should do something.
	Another politician offered, also from the same party as Modi, from the BJP party, he offered 350,000 rupees for assaults on priests and a million rupees if you kill a priest.
	It's just paying for bounty hunters.
	Yes.
	To murder priests.
	Yes.
	Which is okay.
	This guy is going around destroying a statue of the Virgin Mary.
	Say a Hail Mary for us at home and for Christians in India.
	In Manipur in 2023, they killed almost 200 people, 71 missing, almost 300 villages torched.
	And this is just truly medieval stuff.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	Well, the medieval times were actually.
	Anyway, I'm not going to go there.
	But I want you to see this video and to see what sort of happens in some of these instances.
	So they've caught a Christian here.
	And they're making him say that he surrendered all books related to Jesus and any icons and the Bible.
	And if anything is found in his house that is related to the Christian faith, with some threats, obviously, then it's his responsibility what happens to him.
	And he's being made to say that from now on he's going to follow the Hindu religion and all of its faith and it's all of its rituals until he dies.
	That's forced conversion.
	Like, that's forced conversion.
	And then glory to India, glory to Bharat.
	Okay.
	Like.
	And then they do this again to another guy and to another guy and to another guy.
	And they film themselves doing it and they put it up on social media.
	Yeah.
	So this is a bit disturbing, frankly.
	And the Trump administration says that it's pro-religious liberty and all of that.
	But really, come on.
	If you're going to defend Christians, mention this kind of thing.
	Show us some backbone.
	Show us some objections.
	Matt Forney here has a post saying that, look, if they're doing this in India, if they could, they do it elsewhere, frankly.
	And yeah, that's a bit of human nature.
	Again, another attack by a mob on Christians.
	Like, you could just find so many of these incidents dispersed all over India.
	Here is an interesting one.
	These are security guards, and they are supposedly protecting Christians.
	And then the mob arrives, and the police run away.
	Basically.
	Yeah.
	Which is a bit strange.
	You see this guy signaling to them.
	I'm not sure if he's telling them to go ahead and come in.
	But okay.
	This guy is armed.
	He could stop this.
	He doesn't.
	So this is clearly tolerated by the state.
	And in this incident, you had tolerated, but aided.
	Yes, yes, aided.
	In this case, Aided.
	In this case, Aided.
	You had nuns who were attacked by Hindus because they'd recruited three girls to come work with them.
	And this was considered a forced conversion because, again, allurement or enticement or anything of that sort is supposed to be illegal.
	And so I'm not going to show you the video, but they humiliate the nuns.
	They shout at them.
	They abuse them.
	And then they say that they are the aggrieved party.
	Which is kind of weird, frankly.
	But this kind of incident is really repeating.
	Now, they say that at its source is this ideology called Hindutva.
	And the idea behind Hindutva is that it defines the cultural identity of India in terms of Hinduism.
	And it wants to make India an overtly Hindu nation state.
	Okay.
	But then I don't want to hear from any Indian in the West any objection to Christian nationalism.
	You'll hear it anyway.
	I'm sure we're going to hear it anyway.
	I'm sure we're going to hear it anyway.
	And it's important to point out that these attacks aren't happening just against Catholics.
	They're happening against Protestants, against Baptists, against all kinds of different Christian communities.
	And again, these like the Catholic Christian community goes back literally to the first apostles.
	So it's not new.
	But this is a big deal.
	And this is important.
	Do you think that this is, I mean, how far does this go?
	I mean, the escalation.
	Because lately there have been geopolitical has been geopolitical trouble between the US and India, yes.
	How much is this escalation owing to this?
	Look, I don't think that's what's driving it.
	I think the BJP as part of their identity, I mean, you have to remember that the BJP traces its roots to the 1920s, to before Indian independence.
	And the idea of Hindutva goes back to the 1920s.
	But for the BJP, the big boogeyman is the Muslims.
	And understandably so.
	If you've seen the number of terrorist attacks from Pakistan-sponsored against India, and if you see some Indian Muslims acting as fifth columnists, you get it.
	And Hindus, frankly, they have a very deep inferiority complex compared to the monotheistic religions.
	Because everybody knows that polytheism is silly at this stage.
	Like, come on.
	Either there is one God or there aren't any.
	These are the two defensible positions.
	But the idea of a god embodied as a monkey and an idea of a sort of God, one day he's a destroyer, the other day he's nice.
	He has his wife.
	He has his monkey form.
	He has his elephant form.
	Come on, guys.
	Get over it.
	It's over.
	And so the result of that, when confronted with very strong monotheism on the part of Islam, is that they get angry.
	And the Christians are sort of beaten in the storm.
	Like they get beaten up as part of the general wave.
	They get attacked as part of the general wave.
	And it doesn't help that Christianity focuses on evangelizing the downtrodden, as it has always done.
	Because if you remove the lower castes from the case system, again, what's the point of being uppercaste?
	In a relativist morality, as Hinduism has, you know, power also has to be relative.
	And if the lower castes exclude themselves from the case system by becoming Christian, then, okay, it renders the whole thing pointless.
	So I don't think it's very tied to geopolitics.
	I was talking, I wasn't talking about the phenomenon.
	I was talking about the escalation of it and the sort of phenomenon where the police is turning a blind eye to it.
	Whether right now it's exacerbated or not.
	I don't think that's the game that they're playing.
	I haven't seen any evidence of it.
	If somebody knows more than I do about this, please help me.
	But anyway, in the West, in Middlesbrough, there's a Hindu temple.
	In London, there are many, many Hindu temples.
	And apparently, this is the right kind of Hindu Shiva temple with the right Tamil Brahmin Vedic pandits.
	I don't know half of these words.
	And in Texas, they've built the biggest statue of Hanuman, the monkey god.
	Oh, yes, I saw this.
	Yes.
	Because of assimilated.
	Yes, apparently, this is assimilation.
	Apparently, this is assimilation.
	Like, it would be nice if it was two-way.
	I'm not of the view that we should be tolerating polytheism to begin with, so I'm not a big fan of tolerance to begin with.
	But I just want to remind you that while you're tolerating monkey gods, the monkey god worshippers aren't tolerating you.
	That's what I wanted to say, really.
	Anyway, shall we go to the comments?
	Yes, all right, then why not?
	Sounds fun.
	All right.
	Habsification says, Firas, do you think Calvinism is just like woke ideology because they seem weirdly culty to me?
	I am not going to go down that rabbit hole right now.
	You don't want to have Servetus' fate.
	I'm not that worried about that, but we'll see.
	Okay.
	We'll see.
	I don't want to talk about Calvinism.
	It'll take me a long time.
	All right.
	Let's go to the video comments then.
	Hey, Lodestas.
	I'm in Kilnsey in East Yorkshire.
	I've got something to show you.
	This is something called an acoustic mirror.
	There's only two of these left in Britain.
	Now, during World War I and at the start of World War II, Britain needed some kind of early warning system in case of an invasion, particularly enemy aircraft.
	So they built one of these next to the sea just over there.
	So essentially, there'll be a microphone on that stand, and this giant structure, concrete structure, would be used to catch the sound waves like a giant air.
	Wow.
	That's fascinating.
	That's amazing.
	Yeah, very cool.
	Russian.
	Last month, the notorious rapist Hadush Kabatu was blasted back to Africa on a one-way rocket flight to spend the rest of his life amongst his kind, posing no further threat to British women and children.
	But it was later revealed that he was sent into London by mistake and even gave train and food money to this monster.
	A spokesman said, This is the one thing we didn't want to happen.
	Yeah, that whole thing is such a degree of incompetence in the British state is breathtaking.
	Clown world.
	And the fact that nobody's resigned.
	The fact that nobody's resigned, that's really upsetting.
	Nice and non-elect wiener.
	Fantastic a cappella work.
	That's great.
	I think we should mention that it was why Game of Thrones fans don't like Lord of the Rings.
	That was excellent.
	Yes.
	Very funny.
	That was excellent.
	Go on then.
	At recent events, I'm seeing a lot of interest in all things Christianity and lots of new Christians too.
	So I made a thing to help out, called it Navigating Christianity.
	Just answering some of the basic questions of good old-fashioned Christianity, like what is a Christian?
	Also, talk about prayer and Bible reading and just all those basics to find some terms.
	So if that's of interest to you, come find me over on Substack.
	It's free and I look forward to seeing you there.
	Cheers.
	Thanks for that.
	Yeah, that sounds like a very noble pursuit.
	Alright then, I'll go to some of the comments from my segment.
	There's one more I want to mention.
	Moses told me what to do if you worship a bull.
	Yep.
	But by the way, before we do this, I really don't think Calvinism and wokeness have anything to do with each other.
	Okay.
	Okay.
	Let's do this another time.
	Wipe my lips and wipe my tongue.
	We'll get through these segments.
	Alright, so Sophie Liv says, another aspect I realized for decades, you've only been allowed to make fun and create caricatures of white people.
	If Elmer Ford or Mr. Smee were any other colour than white, they'd be marked as hugely offensive.
	Well, yeah, and indeed there were caricatures in Peter Pan that were branded hugely offensive.
	Tom and Jerry have to change a couple of their episodes over this.
	And also they ended up inserting into Tom and Jerry and into all kinds of Looney Tunes disclaimers with apologies over racism.
	Most likely.
	Yes.
	Yes.
	So it has been going one way for a very long time.
	We know this as caricature characters of other races from the same time period who are in no way worse than Elmer Ford are pretty much banned from TV now.
	I actually think this matters.
	It's a very subtle way of enforcing a protected class saying you can't even joke about them.
	I honestly think we either should be able to make fun of everyone or no one.
	You can't say that Elmer Ford is fine, but Mamma Too Shoes from Tom and Jerry is just too horribly offensive.
	It's ridiculous.
	Well, I mean, I personally thought that Mamma Too Shoes was a great character.
	I thought she was hilarious.
	She's the best.
	I read it to Thomas.
	I sometimes call him in her exact voice.
	I'll just go, Thomas!
	Like that, he's just out of nowhere.
	And they'll be like, right, yeah, okay, what do you want, Luca?
	Kevin Fox says, the adverts coming out about female harassment both in the UK and Australia show people of colour women being harassed by white guys in suits.
	Could they get it more wrong?
	And why can't we show people of colour males as the oppressors?
	Not only factually correct, but if Anne Boleyn, Princess Charlotte and Isaac Newton, can be played by Isaac Newton.
	That was a Doctor Who episode, yeah.
	We can't be a husband in the breakfast serial advert, but be played by a white guy, or Brad Pitt play Malcolm X. Well, yeah.
	The other thing as well is I talked about this when they recently cast Mozart in that new Amadeus film as like some Japanese guy or everything.
	And they always say, you always say to them that exact point.
	It's like, well, why don't we just have Brad Pitt play Malcolm X?
	And then they'll always pivot to, oh, well, that's not the same thing you see, because that, like, race is such a fundamental part of who Malcolm X was.
	It's like, and it wasn't for Mozart.
	He was a product of European civilization.
	Like, that is about race, whether they like it or not.
	But obviously, when they say race, they just mean what white people did wrong.
	It's just crazy.
	How can they expect that they're going to make everything about race and people will not see race?
	Yes.
	Well, it's not even that.
	Because it's not based, it's hierarchy being enforced.
	It's a humiliation ritual.
	You are the underclass.
	You're not supposed to have.
	You are meant to be the untouchables.
	You are meant to be the Dalit.
	Dalits.
	Exactly.
	There isn't really a thing as white people.
	There are minorities and their races.
	and then there is just this blank canvas by which to just...
	Minorities happen to be the global majority, but okay.
	Well, Well, no, I know what you mean, but of course, it's country.
	And then Man of Kent just says, it's as well, every type of family unit, namely mixed race, so in advertising, apart from a white family unit, as they no longer exist or should exist, as it seems in the adverts.
	Yeah, exactly right, Man of Kent.
	All right, then, Stois, you want to go through yours?
	Yeah, let me.
	You're on it.
	You're going to worry, Luca.
	I'm on the comments.
	Right, where are they?
	Sorry, I was.
	I was sent a very funny thing.
	I understand.
	Right, these are right.
	Okay, so South Dakota pastor, representation in Malay.
	Someone needs to remind the press and the advertisers that the Nuremberg propagandists were held accountable for their actions during the murderous regime for which they provided cover.
	Yes, I want to, I just posted, I had it scheduled basically.
	I wasn't posting while online, but there was a Bloomberg in Buenos Aires was saying yesterday.
	Let me give you the exact word.
	Millay approval hits new law ahead of key election.
	Millet's chainsaw infuriates voters he needs.
	That was a day ago.
	It infuriates voters.
	It won him the first election.
	He won with a chainsaw.
	That's the point.
	That's the point, though.
	The Peronists and all statists and socialists are resting upon their emotional blackmail machine in order to make people think that them blocking Malay and raising obstacles to Millay is going to be perceived by the majority as Millay being weak.
	And that it's going to turn people against Malay.
	Didn't work.
	Brian Tomlinson.
	If gay race communists stopped insulting all the political opponents, we'd be looking at how useless they are at everything except name-calling.
	Yeah, they do this to divert attention away from the important things to the non-important ones.
	Well, even the name calls.
	Jimbo G. Wasn't long ago that it was necessary that people had to see people who looked like them on television.
	I wonder what changed.
	Russian Garbage Human.
	It's almost impossible to reverse the brain rot in women after they go through university.
	Kevin Fox.
	Actually, I have seen the opposite.
	You've seen a reformed woman.
	Yes.
	Right.
	Kevin Fox.
	Could you ever imagine Kier Stalin living in a building like Malay did?
	No without full PPE, none of the energy and a phalanx of police to keep the plebs at bay.
	Except for the black and brown ones.
	Of course, he needs the votes.
	And Ben Gale, Millay crashed the economy and had to get bailed out of the USA.
	What he done is play economics while the US taxpayer pays the bill.
	Right.
	Okay.
	And a couple of comments from here.
	Michael Dribelis on the Firas segment.
	I remember meeting an X-ray tech who was a Brahmin caste.
	He explained that he left India because India was trying to uplift the untouchable caste.
	He explained that he was denied education because he was Brahmin.
	But being untouchable is still a social liability.
	So the Indian government has a very wide array of programs that are meant to lift up the lower castes and some of the tribes and so on.
	They've embraced the sort of gay race communism that is in the West and where supposedly has Modi has gone woke.
	So, this has been an old thing in India where they do all of these special services for the lower case, but the numbers are insane and the impact is minimal.
	And which is by design, I assume.
	Which is partly by design.
	And so, you don't really get very much.
	The explanation of religion of the Hindu religion sounds oddly like the philosophy of the writings of Michael Moorcock.
	Yes.
	Or is it the idea of law, chaos, and balance?
	And yes, this is his name.
	Thank you.
	Thanks for that.
	Tess Diggle.
	The thing with Christianity is we seek to have people come to us, not forcing people to convert under threat.
	So why are these not cases targeting Christians?
	Yeah.
	Derek Power, master of Chippies.
	Saint Thomas the Apostle, pray for India.
	Oh, amen, brother.
	Amen.
	Levy the Texan.
	Have you heard of the book, The Book That Made Your World Have the Bible?
	Yes, I was just looking into this author.
	What do you think of his other books?
	Tag me on X and tell me what you think of his other books because there's the one that's on Gurus.
	Moorcock's books.
	Say again?
	Moorcock's books.
	Mangalwadi, but okay.
	Not Tess Diggle, was it?
	Well, that's all.
	That was wonderful.
	Come on, Ferrara.
	You're right at the end.
	Finish it.
	Von Warhawk, sir, sir.
	Do not redeem your faith in Christ.
	Do not redeem, sir.
	Why are you redeeming?
	Sorry.
	And thank you, Tim Witten, for the honorable mention and enjoying Romeo and Juliet.
	Yes, I will do Timon of Athens at some point soon.
	Well, I do believe that is definitely all we've got time for today, ladies and gentlemen.
	I hope you've enjoyed the podcast.
	We've definitely enjoyed presenting 3 p.m.
	Thanks for that.
	In half an hour, we'll be talking about Syria civil war.
	Are you going to have a jolly take on it?
	No, no.
	No, come on.
	It's freaking miserable.
	Let him get his business face on.
	All right.
	And you can join Stellius now.
	Sign up for the webinar because, as Stellios says, it will make you feel good.
	It is anti-commie and it's very sensible.
	And we'll see you there.

▲