Josh and Firaz join Harry to dissect the Democrats’ chaotic State of the Union counter-event, where attendees disrupted Trump’s speech—one chanting "KKK"—while Chuck Schumer dismissed it as a "state of delusion." Harry highlights Ilhan Omar’s militant guest and Schumer’s 2023 push for illegal immigrant naturalization, framing their priorities as misplaced. The episode then pivots to the UK’s housing crisis, where property prices surged 15x since 1968 while wages stagnated, exposing an immigration-driven bubble risking a 34% demand collapse. Green Party policies—open borders, UBI for illegals, and voting rights for foreigners—are mocked as destabilizing, potentially fueling trafficking and civil unrest. Reform UK’s civic nationalism clashes with critics’ fears of cultural assimilation, while Restore Britain’s strict stance earns praise. The discussion ends by questioning whether leftist policies prioritize foreign exploitation over British citizens’ welfare. [Automatically generated summary]
Hello and welcome to the podcast of Lotus Eaters episode 1363.
I'm your host Harry, joined today by Josh and Firaz.
Hello, hello.
And we're going to be talking about the Democrats alternative state of the union address.
That's what I see up on screen right now.
can't wait Josh is going to lost their minds Did they ever find it in the first place?
Nope.
Josh is going to tell me about how we might be able to afford houses soon.
Yes.
Are PO cruisers going to be happy about this?
They might not, actually.
Oh, my God.
It might actually be a very good thing if you don't own a house.
But, you know, basically good for me, you two get lost.
I don't own a house.
Oh, you don't?
No.
Join the club.
Hey, my demo box is a very great value, all right?
Okay.
You know, I'm spying on my neighbour's gardens.
Oh, that's rough, isn't it?
At least you got one.
Yeah, at least I got one.
And I'm going to be talking to everybody about just some updates of British politics.
It's the Gorton and Denton by-election right now, the most important election of our lives until the next one, which will then be the next new, most important election of our lives.
So I'm just going to give us an update on some stuff and a clip going around of Danny Kruger on Winston Marshall, which has generated some controversy.
Anything else that we need to announce, chaps?
No, I think we can get to it.
Watch the roundtable that we did last night talking about Restore as well, by the way, if you're subscribed to the website.
It was an enjoyable one, even if I was very sleepy.
I could tell you uncharacteristically quiet.
I'm sure everybody appreciated the break.
I did wonder why it was so well-balanced and polite.
Maybe I should get up at 4:30 more often for these things.
Yeah, whenever you're recording with me, could you please do that?
All right, yeah, we'll give it a go.
Can We Get Rashida Tleib?00:06:11
Anyway, I feel so mean jokingly saying that.
That's all right, Josh.
Whatever, you know, keeps you going day in, day out.
There mustn't be much.
Don't be a good sport about it.
That's even worse.
All right, let's get on with it then.
Killing them with kindness.
Or, in the Democrats' case, kill them with madness.
Yesterday, Trump gave his speech, State of the Union address, and it was, as usual, vintage Trump.
And it seems that he, again, managed to get the left to show that they are completely out of their minds.
And it's not even debatable.
Some of them boycotted the State of the Union speech and instead held an alternative event.
And for your sins, you are going to be compelled to watch some of the alternative performances that the Democrats had for you.
I'm fresh out of an ICE prison in Minneapolis.
I've been arrested three times by ICE over absurdity.
Over us being ourselves, over me singing songs like, Hey, Mr. Tangerine Man, get rid of brown people from me.
I'm Arian White.
There ain't no place I'm going to.
Still better than Bob Dylan.
You will notice the furry wearing women's underwear over his clothing.
I thought it was attended by sitting members of Congress instead of actually going to the State of the Union speech.
So what the hell is this?
Is this actually sponsored by the Democrats?
You said it was attended by some Democrats who's got this defiance.org thing in the background.
I thought it was only a matter of time before he exposed himself in some way.
I'm not aware that he did on stage.
I am relatively certain that he did in the after party.
And this wasn't really all of it.
You should see Chuck Schumer's reaction.
He described the State of the Union as Trump's state of delusion and went on to a rather big attack against him.
But I'm sort of wondering which one is more delusional: the furry in women's underwear on top of his clothes or Donald Trump.
And I think it's the furry.
I don't know.
I could be biased.
I could be biased.
During the State of the Union, there were the regular chants of USA, USA.
We know that the Americans love doing that.
But then there was somebody who chanted something slightly different.
And she's whispering KKK to Han Omar.
To be honest.
They're very under the hood.
They used to be a little more selective.
The Klan used to be a little more discriminatory in who it would recruit, but now, apparently, they'll just take anybody these days, goddammit.
Since introducing DEI measures, the Ku Klux Klan have really gone down.
Really, really.
David Duke really sold out.
It's quite terrible.
The most disappointing thing about that is: I mean, come on, if you're going to do something like that, don't be all sly and under your breath about it.
Go just do it full throat.
Harry says, shout KKK at the top of your lungs.
If you are this person in this particular situation, you're trying to get just do it.
Can we get Rashida Tleib on cameo so that we can get her to chant KKK?
I think that could work.
I think we could get her on cameo and get her chanting KKK.
It might be probably her next business.
Big Chungus, all sorts of nonsense on the harage line.
Exciting things that could happen.
I mean, the visuals from it were genuinely striking.
The visuals were really striking.
Let's have another look.
Who blocked the removal of criminal aliens, in many cases, drug laws.
So this person here is actually a man dressed up as a woman.
This is Ilhan Omar, and this is Rashida Tleib.
And they're just sort of yelling at Trump as he's talking about crime and the problems that come with illegal migrants and crime.
And they are sticking to their guns in terms of defending the illegals.
And this isn't sort of all of it.
We had the Capitol Police arrest Ilhan Omar's guest, who was there trying to just stand up and not let anybody see the proceedings and shouting and so on and so forth.
It turns out that the same woman had previously been arrested in a confrontation with ICE.
And this is who Ilhan Omar decided to bring as her guest to the State of the Union speech.
You kind of go, well, you're organizing militias now, and you're admitting it openly, and then you're inviting the militias that you organize to Congress.
But they don't seem to see any problem with that.
This is the sort of baseline that they're operating off of.
You had some pretty striking visuals.
This is Representative Al Green, a Democrat from Texas.
And I'm not aware of anybody having said that about him.
And I feel that he does protest too much.
But The video that Trump put out, isn't it?
Where the Satan put on apes' bodies, but then it wasn't actually Trump that did that, and also there were lots of other things about it that nobody else picked up on which could have been seen as egregious as well.
John Fetterman Controversy00:14:41
Right.
So, you know, there he was.
The Democrats have decided that they're so anti-Trump that they were attacking John Fetterman, who is a Congress who is a senator, I believe, from Pennsylvania, for having shaken hands with Trump.
And it fell to John Fetterman to defend decorum.
Now, famously, John Fetterman is a man who goes to the Senate floor in a hoodie and shorts.
And that's the last line of defense for decorum in the Democratic Party.
And it seems to be telling me something that things have sort of fallen apart quite badly.
Well, when he was going up for election, he shortly before suffered some sort of brain injury.
A very severe stroke, yes.
Yeah, and it's sort of telling that the man who suffered that is the most reasonable person in your party.
That he's the only one that seems to have some decency left and is trying not to rock the boat more than needs to be rocked.
I did notice when he had that stroke that a lot of people were commenting that he seemed more reasonable and well-spoken after it.
Strange things happen.
It's been known to happen.
Strange things happen.
This is a clip that you absolutely must watch.
And let's just talk about this for a second.
But surely we can all agree, no state can be allowed to rip children from their parent- Did we get the volume up?
I think that's a bit better for us.
We can all agree no state can be allowed to rip children from their parents' arms and transition them to a new gender against the parents' will.
Who would believe that we've been talking about?
We must ban it, and we must ban it immediately.
Look, nobody stands up.
These people are crazy.
I'm telling you.
They're crazy.
Like I said, I don't think it's debatable that the Democrats are crazy.
If you can't support the idea that the state doesn't have the right to take away your child and transition them, you are insane.
And you are asking for violence.
I mean, this isn't going to be allowed.
This isn't tolerable.
And they just gave Trump this massive win by refusing to accept the idea that the state doesn't have the right to take away your children and give them chemicals that castrate them, destroy their bone density, destroy their bone development, destroy their brain development.
Well, I'm just permanently permanent clients of the medical establishment, as well as mentally deranged.
Well, I was going to say, this is after two high-profile in Canada and America trans shootings as well.
Several over the last few years, but yes.
Yeah, but in the last few weeks.
Past few weeks, two very high-profile ones, yes.
I like how it cuts to a Democrat there with no one sat around him.
Just a funny bit of frankness.
Because a lot of them boycotted.
And it's just complete madness.
Here's Al Fazira English covering the event.
Donald Trump sparked uproar during his State of the Union address after asking lawmakers to prove their loyalty to the U.S., drawing calls out from Representative Ilhan Omar.
Again, you must watch this because you have to see this, because you have to understand what is actually happening.
You agree with this statement, then stand up and show your support.
The first duty of the American government is to protect American citizens, not illegal aliens.
You should be ashamed of yourself not standing up.
You should be ashamed of yourself.
That is why I'm also asking you to end deadly sanctuary cities that protect the criminals and enact serious penalties for public officials who block the removal of criminal aliens, in many cases, drug lords, murderers all over our country.
This is not subject to debate.
The duty of the state is first and foremost to its citizens.
You basically got an excellent campaign ad there.
That's perfect.
Yeah.
They refuse to stand up in defense of the idea that the first duty of the state is towards its citizens.
Again, I'm not trying to push a line here, but it is insane to object to this idea.
You can't have a government if everybody all over the world is that government's responsibility.
The only way to do that is to have a totalizing global government under the control of a tiny group of people who represent absolutely nobody.
And then you say, well, the alternative to this global totalitarianism is for each nation to have its own government.
And you get the Democrats saying, no, we don't support that idea.
What are they doing in the chamber at all, then?
If they don't believe in a national government, why even bother?
Good question.
Well, because they're representing constituents that aren't necessarily in the country legally.
That's true.
And Ilhan Omar almost explicitly.
Obviously, like how she's halting to stereotypes there and shouting out when everyone else is trying to listen.
Well, what else is she going to do?
You know, debates in Somalia are resolved in slightly less peaceful ways.
Yeah.
I'm going to assume, make some guesswork here that a lot of these people are staying sat down just because they're worried that it will go against the party line.
Yes.
To stand up, which is worrying in itself if that's the party line.
But also that people like Ilhan Omar and some of the representatives that have maybe Hispanic communities as their constituents are like, well, you know, like, I could stand up, but my constituents, whether here legally or not, are basically planning on bringing the rest of their family over here illegally anyway.
So best play for them.
And that just goes to show who these people are all representing anyway.
So, I mean, this is the fundamental point of government.
If you have a representative government, you're there to represent your own people, by definition, legal voters.
If you're there not to represent legal voters, what are you there for?
To destroy the country.
To destroy the country.
And that seems to be exactly what the Democrats want.
It's absolutely wild.
And then you sort of contrast it with what Bill Clinton was saying 20 years ago.
The first duty of the American government is to protect American citizens, not illegal aliens.
Only in the states most heavily affected, but in every place in this country are rightly disturbed by the large numbers of illegal aliens entering our country.
The jobs they hold might otherwise be held by citizens or legal immigrants.
The public service they use impose burdens on our taxpayers.
That's why our administration has moved aggressively to secure our borders more by hiring a record number of new border guards, by deporting twice as many criminal aliens as ever before, by cracking down on illegal hiring, by barring welfare benefits to illegal aliens.
In the budget I will present to you, we will try to do more to speed the deportation of illegal aliens who are arrested for crimes, to better identify illegal aliens in the workface, as recommended by the Commission headed by former Congresswoman Barbara Jordan.
We are a nation of immigrants, but we are also a nation of laws.
It is wrong and ultimately self-defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws we have seen in recent years, and we must do more to stop them.
Bipartisan applause Both parties supported this 20 years ago, except that when Bill Clinton said this, he was lying.
Well, yes, because the demographics of America were such at that point that even the Democratic supporters weren't happy about illegal immigration.
Exactly.
So he had to pretend to be something that he was not, but it was understood by all people of some mild sanity that you had to say that the duty of the government was towards its people and against illegal immigrants.
This was accepted.
Now they've allowed the demographic change to accelerate to such an extent that they no longer need to wear the mask, and indeed they can no longer afford to wear the mask because of their constituents, that now they can no longer defend this.
So it sort of casts the whole immigration issue in a different light.
This is basically, this is Bill Clinton doing what Boris Johnson did in Britain.
Pretending to be something that he wasn't, allowing things to get out of control.
And then now you just have to live with it.
There's nothing you can do about it.
And that's been the playbook.
And this is a complete mask off moment, but it discredits the entire idea of representative democracy.
And it really threatens the possibility that there are no longer any democratic solutions to this.
That's the risk that they're taking by removing their masks.
That's what they're doing.
And it is mad because anybody who knows anything about civil conflict would not want this.
But that's what they're pushing towards.
And it's just complete insanity.
Let's go on and see a few more things.
Trump honored Irina Zarutska and said that criminals should be in jail and that they shouldn't be tolerated and that people shouldn't be allowed to get out of jail 20, 30 times after committing violent crimes.
The Republican side of the chamber stood up and applauded.
The Democratic side of the chamber did not.
Their clients are very similar to that of the Bolsheviks, aren't they, really?
Essentially.
They're just the worst kinds of human beings imaginable.
And in the past, they had to pretend to be something else at least.
Now they no longer need to pretend.
And that's why when Kier Starmer took power, what was the first thing that he did?
He opened the jails.
Like, okay, thank you for that.
But this is completely crazy.
And this is not something that you want to do to your people.
But here they are.
They refuse to offer any kind of support.
Same thing.
They just refuse to stand.
And they are against Trump on everything, no matter what he says.
He brags about ending wars.
Sometimes he overplays his role.
But their reaction to ending a war, to a war ending, ought to be applause, ought to be support, ought to be, this is a good thing.
But when he says he ended wars, which, you know, in the case of India-Pakistan, he definitely played a big role.
And in many other cases, he played a big role.
He's failed on Ukraine, fair enough.
But he's the only reason there's a ceasefire in Gaza right now.
And when he says we ended wars, what do they do?
They laugh and ignore him.
I think they've just taken a blanket stance of defiance against anything and everything Trump is doing and saying.
Completely.
Well, it's virtue signaling to their own side, isn't it?
And the optics are so horrendous that Trump got a political prisoner under Maduto released and got him back to his family during the State of the Union address.
Very theatrical, very vintage Trump.
But that was precisely the moment when Rashida Tleib and Alhan Omar got sick and tired of simply heckling and literally left the chamber.
I mean, if you're going to oppose Trump on everything, at least have some political news, at least have some understanding of optics, at least have some respect for the audience.
But that was the moment they decided to walk out.
And it's just so striking that they would keep on doing these crazy things.
In another vintage Trump, Trump attacked insider trading by Congress, which I thought was fantastic because we know, I mean, if you've invested with Warren Buffett or invested with Nancy Pelosi, you would make more money with Nancy Pelosi.
And Nancy Pelosi, for all of her qualities, is not actually smarter than Warren Buffett.
I think that's pretty safe to say.
You know, we can say that.
And so he calls it out, and to their credit, a lot of Democrats applauded.
But he did manage to pick on Nancy Pelosi.
Rightly so.
She's one of the worst offenders.
She is egregious.
It's completely unacceptable.
But he did manage to dig, to sort of hit them with that dig.
And here's a moment that you're going to absolutely love.
We'll balance our budget.
The Somali pirates who ransacked Minnesota remind us that there are large parts of the world where bribery, corruption, and lawlessness are the norm, not the exception.
Cringe Politics00:09:53
Importing these cultures through unrestricted immigration and open borders brings those problems right here to the USA.
And it is the American people who pay the price and higher medical bills, car insurance rates.
It's kinder than I would be.
I mean, where's the lie?
Where's the lie?
Exactly.
Where's the lie?
Where's the lie?
Maybe she was shedding a tear thinking about, oh, I remember the good old days.
She was thinking of some good old piracy that she'd done.
She's thinking about her campaign donations and how Tim Waltz managed to assemble that war fund.
You see some voices on the Democratic side realizing that this is crazy.
And here is John Fetterman saying that if you have these dancing frogs running around, I mean, just look at this.
Just look at this.
You have to see this.
I don't care if it's a Republican or Democrat as a president.
Just don't do that.
Don't do that.
Respect the office, regardless who's in that.
And now, for me, it's like now when half the people in my party haven't showed up.
This woman underneath was actually dancing with frogs and had some kind of frog show as part of the counter-State of the Union protest.
Thanking the French for their help in the world.
I don't understand what was happening here.
During the halftime show of the Super Bowl, there was the turning point USA patriotic halftime show that they did, so people could switch over if they wanted and watch that instead because the other one was like cringe like Puerto Ricans speaking Spanish aggressively at you.
I don't have my wallet on me.
Sorry right now.
Please don't hurt me.
And people were calling that out as cringe, but it's like, I mean, they're doing the exact same thing.
Like, all of this politics is cringe.
I'm sorry, when people behave in this way, it is really cringe.
Fetterman seems to be mistakenly operating under an older paradigm of kind of wasp-ish decency and manners.
Pennsylvania is a purple state.
Yeah.
And so he has to make sure that the Republicans constituency still respect him enough for him not to be destroyed.
In America, in some places, you can see it exemplified by someone like Ilan Omar.
You're well outside of the realm of waspish decency and manners towards the opponent, where there is a fundamental and foundational agreement between everybody that there are certain rules that we all acknowledge as being true.
You don't behave in this way.
You don't do these things.
We all want what's best for the country.
This is tribal politics now.
That's just not the case.
They don't care.
Completely.
To their credit, some Democrat supporters saw that this was completely mad.
And CBS was critical of the Democrats refusing to stand when Trump said that the duty of the state is towards its own citizens first.
I mean, it might not play well with voters.
There are still plenty of Democrat voters, I would expect, again, probably the more waspy types, who are like, no, I still care about what's best for the country.
I just don't believe that what the Republicans are doing is best for the country.
And they don't see all of the side-order effects that come with Democrat policies.
And then they just see the Democrats explicitly be like, screw this country.
Ilan Omar.
The House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries advised your caucus, the Democratic members, to either skip the State of the Union address or sit there in silence.
Should you have just boycotted the address?
And do you think you violated the guidelines set out by your own leader?
No, I think it was really unavoidable.
The president talked about protecting Americans, and I just had to remind him that his administration was responsible for killing two of my constituents.
In Minneapolis, many members of your Democratic Party criticized their Republican counterparts when they interrupted President Biden's State of the Union address.
As a lot of us remember, do you have any regrets at all about the interaction we played between you and President Trump just last night?
I do not.
And I think many people look.
Zero regrets.
The far left has zero regrets.
They don't actually give a damn.
They don't really have any respect for their constituents.
And the Republicans saw it as an opportunity.
I mean, to her mind and her constituents, it's probably a vote winner.
Yes.
I know Minneapolis being synonymous with Black Lives Matter and the like.
You know, they see her shouting out when everyone's trying to pay attention.
Like, she's just like me.
Exactly.
I mean, It was probably known by the Republicans going into it that there was a Democratic pact, that you just stay there, you sit still, you don't say anything, right?
So that played right into the hands of the Republicans, giving them the opportunity for this kind of aesthetic slam-dunk, the visual slam-dunk of, oh, then Donald Trump will just say, like, do you love America?
Stand up if you love America.
And because they all took the pact, they were all sat there like morons going, I guess I don't love America then.
Like, like, genius idea, maybe you should, like, be a bit more dynamic with these things so that you don't give them such propaganda.
It's a totalitarian party, and the Republicans are grateful.
The Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, was saying, you know, I could have thrown them out for some of their antics, but I figured, you know what?
Let them keep at it.
This is excellent campaign advertising for us.
Chuck Schumer is also on the No Regrets Brigade.
He insists that, you know, it was Trump that he should have been ashamed of himself, not the Democrats, for even asking the question.
I'm sort of running out of time, so I won't play all of the videos, but they are worth seeing.
But then he lets the quiet part out loud, and he says that what he wants is naturalization of all of the illegals.
And he'll explain why.
He's been clear about this.
He's been clear about it for a long time.
He's been clear about this for a while.
He's going on about it.
At least as far as I know, you can find articles going back to 2023 where he's talking about it.
You could probably find articles where he's talking about it decades ago.
I know you've sinned, but I won't punish you by making you watch this video.
Oh, cheers, bro.
Although you should.
For the call-out.
You should.
Not you personally, all of us.
All of us.
We're all sinners.
It felt kind of targeted.
Yeah, Harry.
Oops.
Oh, okay.
All right.
Bumped your microphone.
There you go.
Now they're getting aggressive at me, getting him to be a bitch.
But I won't punish you by making you watch this.
But here is a collection of elected representatives and other women.
It is ridiculous, but they're actually making fun of Trump for decorating a bunch of war heroes during the State of the Union speech.
Which, I mean, if you're a war hero and you get recognized in front of a joint session of Congress by the president, this is probably the biggest moment of your life.
You've given the country everything, you've fought, you've bled, and you get these cackling harpies making fun of you.
I remember when Westboro Baptist Church were picketing military funerals, and it didn't make them popular.
No.
No, these guys have a Louis Through documentary.
I don't think they will, funny enough.
But I wanted to point out that this isn't just an American thing.
And I wanted to close with a clip of Rupert Lowe, who was talking, as usual, a lot of sense.
We hear so much of the human rights for foreign paedophiles, sex pests, and murderers is not giving way.
Members may disagree with what he's saying.
What is in an orderly way?
What about the human rights of the British people?
The human rights of the British people, absolute nonsense.
Well, our remoteism.
leftism is a mental illness and i'm sick of pretending otherwise and there is they have no redeeming qualities Not at the leadership level.
Maybe there are some misguided individuals there, but at the leadership level, at the level of elected members of Congress, at the level of elected MPs, these are people who will say, what about the rights of the citizens?
And the reply will be, what nonsense.
Thank you.
Thank you, leftists, for making it so clear and so transparent and ending the debate in this way.
I appreciate it.
Anyway, quite a few rumble rants.
We have a bunch of rumble rants.
Also, I've just noticed what's happening trending.
Pedo.
Yeah, I know.
It's Twitter.
I don't want to know.
At least it's spelt correct.
I was going to say, it's spelt in the British manner.
Good.
Yeah, so.
We can leave it there.
A couple of comments here.
One from Refan80, which we have not read.
One from Sigrillstone.
I'm disappointed.
I was waiting for Trump to bring Bill Gates to clear, and now we're going to stop corruption and do something live on TV.
I can't read that again.
Stop Fed posting.
Please stop Fed posting, guys.
Please be careful with the Fed posting.
Not only is it, could it cause legal trouble for us?
If we read these out, we don't want people clip farming for us that could be used to attack us in the future.
That's a random name.
Nancy Pelosi is a ghoulish hag who sniffs.
Josh is familiar with adrenochrome.
Is he?
Median House Prices Crash00:15:58
Okay, thank you.
Not that he takes it himself.
Oh, it's not even a real thing, as far as I'm aware.
It's like a fictional drug.
So you say.
So you say.
And Magnus87 says, I'm very glad that I can no longer be said to be engaging in hyperbole when I call the damn straiterers and degenerates.
Shall we watch the rest of that dancing furry?
Do you want to see more of the dancing furry?
I'm all right, Josh.
And then we've got underpants outside of his clothes or we move to the next thing.
Like a superhero.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
All right.
I've got a nice palette cleanser for you all.
Thank you, please.
I stole my fundie, you little...
Well, you could say that the YouTube segment hasn't started yet.
Come on, say it for YouTube.
I've got to be original.
I've got to sleep at night, Harry, so I can't just copy what you've done.
Oh, all right, then.
I actually have some good news for once, and that is the housing bubble seems to be bursting, or at least the signs of the early stages of it happening seem to be going on.
And as many of you know, sorry if this is a little bit condescending, but just to make sure everyone's on the same page, here's a depiction of the housing ladder.
And the problem in much of the Western world at the minute is there are too many people on this top rung who are unable to sell their houses.
This is a new development because lots of people are stuck on the bottom rung because, of course, it is a ladder.
And by a ladder, each stage is connected to the next.
And so effects at the bottom affect the top and effects at the top affect the bottom and vice versa.
It is a connected chain.
And so if people can't get their own houses, they can't get their first apartment, as it says here, or flat in Britain, then it affects everyone else.
And we're starting to see those effects because, of course, you need, if you're in a property chain, someone's going to be upgrading their property up to a point.
And then maybe there'll be someone, as it has here, downsizing.
But usually there's a chain of maybe even eight, ten, twenty people sometimes, all relying on each other.
And if you break that chain, it disrupts the property market because people do need to live in a house.
You can't really have that much of a gap in between where you can just choose to be homeless.
And so that means that all of these are connected.
And so with lots of people who have had assets, had houses, and they've been very asset-rich from this because, of course, house prices have gone up significantly relative to inflation and lots of other assets as well.
And so they've been a safe investment.
But of course this created a massive bubble because by investing your money in property you're affecting the market in a way which will cause a very large rebound because by investing a lot in property and having lots of people who have money using it as an investment rather than just a home, it means that getting your first apartment or your starter home is much, much more difficult.
So there's been a growing number of people with property over the years and it's sort of gone stagnant now.
And what's going to happen is those people with property are going to need to sell it at some point, no matter what, whether they're downsizing, whether they're upgrading, you know, whether they're moving to a different area, whatever it might be, they need to sell to someone and they're not going to be able to.
And part of the problem is this, that this is from 1968 to 2024 in the United Kingdom.
The blue line is the average home price for all property types.
And then the orange one is the median annual earnings for all adults.
And as you can see, the median earnings have gone up steadily, whereas property prices have skyrocketed.
And of course, a significant factor here is increasing demand through immigration.
We've had unprecedented population increases from that.
And this is true of pretty much all of the developed world, all of the Western world.
On every single graph like this, the spike always starts in the same place.
It does, doesn't it?
Yeah, around the mid to late 90s.
And it just keeps going up.
Even a bloody housing crash couldn't make too much of a dent in that spike.
No, it's such a massively inflated bubble that people are in for a reality check.
Like, you can't just accumulate property infinitely because there has to be people to buy it.
There has to be people that can even afford to rent it if you're renting it out.
And by hoarding all the property in a select group of people, it's a self-defeating thing because it's going to have to return.
Well, I would expect in Britain this is part of the reason for the inheritance taxes is that obviously a lot of that housing is not only being propped up by immigration, which is going to be a vast majority of it, also a lot of the older housing is going to be held onto by boomers and Gen X's and people who are starting to get on.
Maybe they're thinking of downsizing.
Maybe they're going to die in their homes and eventually it will get passed on to their children.
But with the inheritance taxes, well, they might not be able to pay all of the inheritance taxes if those houses are worth a pretty penny.
You don't want to, you can't have them passing on all of that to their own family.
That would be immoral or something.
And so, well, you won't be able to afford to pay for all of that.
So you're going to have to put it back on the market or maybe a nice housing developer can snap all of that up for you.
And then you'll have the money to pay for the inheritance tax.
But all of the housing is now going to be held within an oligopoly.
So even in London, which is known for having the highest wages in Britain, you can see that wages have not kept up with the house prices in London.
Anyone who's ever tried to look for property in London will know this very well.
And in fact, even when you look at a regional breakdown here, we've got the north in blue, London in red, and the UK as a whole in green.
You can see that there's some sort of spike here from seemingly immigration demand, whereas in the north it's sort of static from about 2008 with a slight increase.
And this is house price to earnings ratio.
And so it's a bit more livable in the north, but in some places where the highest paying work is, it's gone up significantly.
And I think that this is more merit of people having to move for jobs increasingly.
This has become, you know, internal migration within the United Kingdom and other comparable countries has largely pushed, you know, capital cities and major cities house prices spiking.
And that's simply because the wages in places like the north aren't high enough.
You know, yourself, a good example of that.
You've come from the north for work, basically.
Pressure, close enough.
It's north to me.
Yeah, it's north to a lot of people.
From people further north.
Not the real north.
One of the other problems with London as well, and this goes for lots of different cities.
This goes for New York and loads of places as well.
Is that one of the big problems that this creates is obviously a lot of the jobs are being taken up by immigrants and a lot of that's coming in and there's a lot of movement to London for the jobs as well.
But there are a lot of menial jobs that don't pay very well, that need to be dealt with, that need to be filled in London anyway.
It's the classic, like, who's going to serve?
My prett.
Right.
And you've got immigrants and you've got young people coming in there, but you can't afford to live in London if you're just working as a barista or a coffee shop, even on minimum wage.
So either you have to pack yourself into tiny, overly expensive flats where you need five or six roommates to be able to afford the place, or, as is the case with lots of immigrants, you're on the social housing ladder, which again actually just sucks up more of the property and makes all the rest of it less affordable.
It's a complete racket.
No, to be fair, London, just don't live there.
That's my advice.
Just don't live there.
Why would you do that to yourself?
And of course, this is from December of 24.
Left-wingers are blaming it on Russian money laundering is pushing up housing prices, fooling absolutely no one because obviously the Russians aren't buying up millions of homes.
I think the Russian state would run out of money if they were doing this all across the developed and Western world.
The British establishment has a single hammer labelled Russia.
And they everything is a nail.
So as I was saying, there's the same problem in the US.
Here's wages at the bottom, median income and median house price.
And in 2023, when this was published, it was 5.3 times the annual, you know, income, annual income versus house prices.
So it is almost exactly the same, which seems to suggest that it is the political paradigm which the West operates under of mass migration, basically economic liberalism, that sort of thing.
Right.
And you can even have a look at.
Oh, I'm missing a link there, Samson.
There's a graph which I've got from Australia that Samson's going to pull up.
I'll just highlight it for you.
This one.
Which shows construction costs and home prices.
And as you can see, construction costs have steadily increased, whereas house prices there skyrocketed, which suggests that it's not caused by that.
So I've tried to isolate as many factors as possible.
But there's an interesting phenomenon here.
Here, someone's saying, no one would have believed you that if back in 2013 that buying a 1 million property in Zone 2, which is one of the desirable zones in London, would result in zero capital growth in 13 years.
Yet here we are.
So they bought it in 2013 and it's being listed at the minute for exactly the same price.
That's very unusual.
Given rates of inflation, given the increase in property prices, this suggests...
Even the trend immediately prior to it.
But, yeah, everything would suggest that this figure would have gone up.
So they're actually making a significant loss here on this property after buying it in 2013 because the cost of a million in 2026 is much, much less.
Significantly less.
I mean, looking at that single trend over the course of 13 years there, you would expect it to, if it were to continue like that, be at least around 2.5 million.
Yeah, exactly.
And Callum, you may remember him from Lotus Eaters.
Who's that?
He was that quiet guy who would stare at you sometimes on the podcast.
Remember him?
John gets a lot of people staring at him.
Oh, it's okay.
Stephen Wolf?
Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.
It might have been.
Yeah, sounds like him.
But he collated lots of different examples.
Here, there's a property listed in 2022 that is now being sold for a million.
Here's one that sold for just over 2 million in 2023 that's being listed for 1.2 million just three years later.
So this is a recent development.
Very, very recent.
This is Yvette Cooper.
This is Yvette Cooper in action.
People with a lot of money are just deciding to leave.
Well, this is all in London, so these house prices are actually not that unreasonable for just a family home.
In London?
Well, I mean, a million pounds for a home is an insane amount.
It's not even outside of London, but it's not in London, yes.
At least in America, if you're spending that kind of money, you would expect like a McMansion.
That's very true, but American houses are much bigger relative to housing.
Americans rightfully laugh at us for what you get for your money for houses over here.
Oh, yeah.
It's a rip-off even before it was inflated to this degree.
Here's another one: one, you know, basically one and a quarter million to one million.
Here, 1.3 million roughly to 1.1.
Yeah.
Another thing here, that was nearly 2 million to 1.25.
You get the gist, right?
There's lots and lots of examples of people not being able to sell their houses because people don't buy them.
Nobody wants to live in London.
If you have a family, you don't want to live in London.
It's a bad place.
I mean, it stinks of weed everywhere.
I remember going to some meetings at 10 a.m., getting out of the tube station, and the waft of weed hits me.
What are stoners doing up at 10 a.m.?
I don't know.
They're still up from the night before.
That'll be it.
So here's a really compelling example.
1995, 1,500, you know, still a bit much for a studio flat.
It is, by our standards, but it is London.
2015, 2.2 million.
2026, 1.2 million.
Wow.
So that just shows the absolute collapse in demand.
Opportunities abounding.
Not that anybody's going to take them because it would mean moving to London.
This could in part be explained by the fact that Londoners are fleeing the city that they've ruined basically by their voting behaviour to the surrounding areas.
And being from this part of the world, I have special hatred against London.
I was going to say, get out.
Don't.
No, if you're in London already, if you're still in London, stay in London.
Just don't go to Devon and Cornwall.
Go somewhere else.
Or I'll get you.
Don't stop buying our houses, you scumbags.
You're horrible people.
I'm sorry.
Regional rivalry.
And then we have the Daily Mail here on the 21st, so only five days ago, why flats are flatlining, sales collapsing, prices plummeting, and free factors killing the market, stone dead.
Experts, untold story, blah, You know, Daily Mail headlines are very long.
But basically, this property expert is saying that the first rung on the property ladder is broken and it means stagnation throughout, which is exactly what I was saying.
And I 100% agree with that.
Prices are actually falling, particularly in London, where some flat owners are reporting losses of up to 34% on homes they bought six years ago.
And this is, of course, the place where if there was a massive housing bubble, you would see it.
You would see it.
That's where you see it first.
Yeah, in the most expensive places.
But it can bring down the whole market with it.
Of course, and I think it will.
Yeah.
It can trigger a banking crisis, which everybody has been warning that, you know, Britain is getting closer to a banking crisis because of the usurious nature of the economy.
And so we're sort of getting to that point.
And sorry, just to sort of sorry, the answer is not to keep the OBR and ask George Osborne what he thinks of your economic plans.
The answer is to take these economic plans behind the shed and end them and start anew.
There is going to be a crash more than that.
They want to plug their life support, to be honest.
Well, that, yes.
Although we oppose assisted dying, but in this case, the assisted dying of this bubble should be accelerated.
Crash Looming00:14:46
I would just like for the economy to not be entirely propped up on fake money that doesn't actually exist.
Yeah, well, that's basically how everything works.
So we've got a lot of work to do to undo this.
Thank you, Richard.
It carries on to say the trend is similar all over the country, especially flats in new build blocks, shoddy workmanship, fears about cladding, exorbitant service charges, and the financial burden of stamp duty are just some of the reasons why apartments are empty or occupied by people desperate to sell, even at a loss, as well as the fact that people have less money, obviously.
It means that entry-level flats in, for example, parts of Fulham in West London are worth less today than they were 10 years ago.
You could have sold a Fulham flat for £450,000 in 2016 compared with 443 in 2026, whereas price of flats nationwide grew much faster than those between January 95 and 2017.
And they say quite the reverse, in fact, has happened here.
Flats have risen by as little as 11% in the past nine years, where the price of houses during the same period has increased by nearly 40%.
So not only is there a barrier to get on the property ladder in the first place, once you've got a flat, there's also a barrier to getting a family home, which of course, given the difficulties of starting a family in this day and age anyway, is only going to compound that further.
And there's some interesting stats here that I just couldn't believe.
Last year, some two in every five owners of a newly built flat bought in the last 20 years, qualifies as newly built, sold at a loss.
Close to one in every five flat owners who bought an older property in the past 20 years sold at a loss.
Say that to me again.
So two in every five owners of a newly built flat sold at a loss.
Whereas only half basically sold at a loss if it was an older flat.
One in every five flat owners who bought an older property sold at a loss.
So even if it's old, you still run money on it, which given the cost of rent at the minute, because of the demand being so high, you either face being stuck in rent slavery, paying money that could be going to a mortgage realistically.
In fact, many people pay more rent on the property than they would have to pay if they had a mortgage on it in the first place.
In fact, why wouldn't they?
Because the landlord has to cover their costs.
So it's just this absurd situation where someone could in theory afford a house, but the financialization prevents them from doing so.
And it's getting to the point now where home sellers now outnumber buyers by 47%.
I think this is in the United States, isn't it, if I remember putting this together?
Yes, it is the United States.
And so this is just insane.
They almost double buyers, which is a bubble to a level that is almost incomprehensible.
I was about to say, when you've got that much supply versus demand, what's propping up value?
Well, it's just that the economy is so bad across the developed world that property is all you can really reliably invest in.
Unless it's tech stocks and Bitcoin, you're not going to make any money elsewhere and beat inflation.
A lot of it is people who are stuck in their homes because of higher rates.
And so a lot of these might be theoretical sellers who would sell their home and upgrade or downgrade or whatever it is, but they're stuck on a low rate of interest, meaning that if they commit to that transaction, because what they have in the US is mostly fixed rates for the life of the mortgage, whereas in Britain, it's mostly variable rates.
And so it leads to a bunch of people staying in place when interest rates go up.
So these might be theoretical sellers, people who are willing to consider selling, but if they don't get the right price that allows them to deal with the higher interest rate, they won't actually sell.
And so the value gets stuck where it is.
So this trend has actually been a long time coming.
Here's an article from CNN in 2025 talking about a similar thing, how home sellers now outnumber buyers by the largest margin in 12 years, but obviously it's gone up significantly since, like a big spike since then.
But it had been trending this way for a long time, and a reckoning is inevitable because the economics dictate it to be so, that you can't have lots of people owning assets and not be able to sell it to anyone without the price coming down.
That's just economics 101.
And so here we can see that all across the country, and here's a good example here, people just aren't able to sell.
And here they're saying sellers now outnumber buyers by 600,000, the biggest gap ever recorded.
And here's an example from Canada.
Canadian home prices have been falling for nearly four years.
So it's already started in Canada to a certain degree.
Only a small amount though.
But it's probably likely that this is all going to happen at a slightly delayed rate all across the developed Western world and that there's just going to be a massive crash in housing prices because if you look at them at the fundamentals of them, there's no reason for them to be as expensive as they are.
They're just a financial asset.
That's why they exist.
And I think one of the biggest signs that is irrefutable here is that Google searches for can't sell house hit an all-time high, higher than 2008, higher than COVID, higher than anything that has ever been recorded.
And you can see here, there's 2020 spikes here.
Maybe you could say, you know, after lockdowns, it was higher than it's already surpassed that.
And that's got no necessarily, you know, short-term cause that's causing that spike like COVID.
This seems to be an organic popping of the bubble.
Well, yeah, there's only if you can't sell your house at the price that you're asking, there's only one answer.
Lower the price, yeah.
And for many people, they're going to be unwilling to do that, and they're either going to be stuck in banks.
Yeah.
Potentially, yeah.
For the vast majority of people, their biggest asset is their home.
And so if they end up selling at below the price that they bought it, they end up basically in debt for a house that they no longer live in.
And so this crashes, this has a huge cascading effect.
And then you have to ask yourself, will they do the stupid thing again and bail out the banking sector as they did in 2008 and build up an even bigger bubble and even bigger political resentment?
If they do that, they decide to take the punch and let the market adjust.
if they bail out the banks, it is the death note of our civilization.
If you allow them to get away with it again, and prop up...
It's civil war.
Yeah, yeah.
There's no civil way of resolving that.
That's just stealing from the taxpayer at an unprecedented level for something that has caused them great harm in the first place.
Because it will be happening at a time when the level of debt to GDP across the developed world is unprecedented.
And they've been accumulating unprecedented debt since the 2008 financial crisis.
And then they set the, you know, threw gasoline on it during COVID with a lot more insane borrowing, even more so with the Ukraine war.
And now doing it again, it means that currency gets devalued to an extent that is unprecedented.
And then you're essentially working for peanuts.
There is no point in you working.
You might as well.
Yeah, you might as well pick up a gun and become a militiaman.
Like, that's how that transition happens.
Again, I'm not advocating any of this.
I'm simply saying this is analytically how it works.
Your area of expertise, right?
Yes.
Yes.
When you have these kinds of crises, you get to a point, that's where Syria got to.
Before the 2011 war, it wasn't property prices, but it was a bunch of economic factors that put you in a situation where you might as well pick up a gun.
I mean, it is what happened in Germany during hyperinflation, militias on the streets fighting one another.
There you go.
Just a way to accelerate civil unrest and potential civil conflict, doesn't it?
Exactly.
And then the government says, well, we're going to keep giving migrants welfare.
And then you go, this system is no longer worth me obeying the law.
I'm going to take the law into my own hands.
But this is what they're setting themselves up for if they conduct a bailout.
No, I very much agree.
But yes, I think that prices are clearly coming down organically simply because people can't sell.
It is a law of economics.
It is bound to happen eventually.
There are ways of handling it that can be more or less damaging to society.
But I don't have much confidence in developed countries with their approach to economics at the minute to actually mitigate the worst excesses of this bobble popping.
But it does mean that if you're trying to get on the property ladder, you can at least get one.
You maybe even get a family home if you've been saving up for one because the prices are coming down.
So that's at least a positive.
But also, as you say, if not handled correctly, it could have catastrophic consequences for the state of the economy.
That turned into a far more depressing segment than I intended.
Sorry.
It's going to be like, you're going to get your first home.
Yay.
Also, if they bail out the banks again, if this leads to a crash, you might end up having to join a street army.
Whoa!
At least you got something to fight for, I suppose.
At least you got something to do.
Yeah, idle hands, that's the problem of this kind of thing.
There's a comment particularly for you from Sigilstone.
That's true.
I think you should read that one.
I'm not reading that.
Come on, Josh.
I always read.
I think you need to read it with conviction.
Look straight into the camera.
Maybe, you know, like have a little fae hand going as well.
How do I read that, Harry?
Can you explain it to me first?
So I can't read it.
I think it really has to come from the heart.
Only you can convey it.
Well, I'm afraid I'm going to have to disappoint.
Ah, well, okay.
I appreciate the letting the people down.
That's me.
I just want you to know that Josh hates you.
I'm not a populist, right?
I'm an elitist.
I'm happy to let you down.
Gay elitist.
What?
It's true.
I'm not gay.
I might be faking elitist.
If you say so, you know, we've all heard the rumours.
Slopulist.
You're going to be using the slop siren in your tweets soon, you dirty clickbaiter.
At least I like women.
Unlike some people.
Baiteable, that long hair.
I don't know.
Can you say the same?
We need to stop bullying ourselves.
We've got each other easily.
Can we get Perry's segment, please?
I'm going to read Logan Pines quickly.
All I want is the housing market to crash and burn to dirt.
Cheap rates for young men.
That would be nice.
And Ramshakalotta says, We're buying with a budget of one mil in the West Mids, watching property prices drop like a Dutch auction.
Well, I'm glad to hear the prices are dropping.
I would wait for a little while, to be honest.
That's a random name.
As always, Josh's segment feels like micro-dosing on despair.
I'm more of a macro-doser, personally, but there we go.
Everyone, boo.
This man, boo, says Sigil Stone.
Boo, boo.
I've seen what makes you cheer.
You can't boo.
All right, so I'll try and get through this one quite quickly.
Sorry for catching on.
That's all right.
So it's the Gorton and Denton by-election going on today.
By the time the segment goes on out on YouTube, we will have the results.
So we'll see how it goes.
But the two ones in the lead are Labour versus the Greens, who are kind of neck and neck with it.
And it's worth reminding everybody that the Greens are absolutely mad.
Now, they're mad in a kind of Monty Python, so ridiculous it's funny way.
But it is, again, worth remembering that if these people were to actually get into government, they might actually just collapse the entire country.
And that's something that's been reported on recently: as people were able to get Green Party policy documents talking about their immigration positions, which, frankly, they don't really have an immigration policy.
They just have a red carpet that they want to roll out for anybody and everybody who wants to come into this country.
I think their policy is just they shower them with money as they step off the plane and start worshiping the ground in which they walk on.
Zach Polanski gets on his knees and begins praying to them and thanking them.
I don't know about it, but it'll be praying.
Well, you know, I didn't want to go that far.
So here's some of the stuff.
So the document, the document here is from spring of 2023.
Migration Green Party policy page updated.
I wish there was a way to get rid of the Daily Mail banners here, but I'll just deal with it anyway.
Their principles, the Green Party wants to see a world without borders.
I mean, there you go.
Just straight away.
Okay, so you're mad.
You're insane.
You're utopian.
This will never work.
And you want to destroy the country.
And you will kind of want to destroy the world as well.
So I kind of respect the ambition of going full Legion of Doom.
We're insane villains.
Look at how insane and villainous we will be.
Yeah, exactly.
It's not utopian.
It's demonic.
Yeah, this is the.
I mean, Carl yesterday on the roundtable, which you should watch, said that Zach Polanski is entirely sincere in being pure evil.
And that's what I'm reading here.
I don't think that you can read something like this without reading malignant intentions into it.
Controversial Migration Policies00:14:28
He says, it carries on saying, until this happens, the Green Party will implement a fair and humane system of managed immigration where people can move if they wish to do so.
I fail to see what the management of this looks like.
Of course, from a pure power perspective, if you are wanting to create a situation in which your party and ethnic rivals would not be able to achieve a victory in the future ever again and you'd maintain a iron stranglehold on power, then just having it so that your party is literally the party of everybody who isn't English is one of the best ways to do it.
Literally, somebody can just hop on a boat over here and immediately vote for you, and you can just maintain power that way within the electoral system.
It's tried and tested.
It's evil, but it's tried and tested.
It goes all the way back to Aristotle talking about how tyrants will surround themselves with foreign guard.
Carries on.
Green Party believes that migration is not a criminal offense under any circumstances.
So illegal immigration just doesn't exist under this paradigm.
The Green Party will treat all migrants fairly and humanely and without discrimination.
Actually, discrimination will probably be positive discrimination in that they will just be immediately given everything that they want for being here.
Green Party is opposed to forced migration and forced repatriation unless standard exclusions apply.
Now, what that can be translated to would be any sort of repatriation under any circumstances, if you're illegally in this country, could also be deemed to be a forced migration as well, or creating, let's say, a hostile environment where people would choose to migrate out of the country themselves.
They could say that this is all forcing people.
So just any attempt to remove people from this country, the Green Party will oppose.
It's all pretty insane.
And it goes on in the article to say that under the Green Leaders' Premiership, all illegal migrants would be handed a wage at the level of universal basic income.
So UBI for illegals, with no requirement to be either working or actively seeking work.
You just get here and just give them money.
Why wouldn't you do that for citizens?
If you weren't dealing with probably would do that for citizens as well.
Anybody across the world, including the people who are already here, can just sit on their ass doing nothing and get paid.
7 billion people in the world, then just pay all 7 planet without requiring them to come to England.
There is no limitation.
There's no limitation to any of this.
You either have open borders or free money.
You can't have both because if you have open borders and free money, what you do is you have no money whatsoever left because you're giving it all out to the entire world.
Obviously, you don't have either of those things.
Both are stupid ideas.
I mean, read this bit of the objectives, which sadly has been blocked a little bit by this border, but it actually states it in the border itself.
Thank you very much.
The Green Party seeks to establish a system that recognizes that all migrants are treated as citizens in waiting.
Okay.
So that's the whole planet.
Yeah, the entire planet can be a citizen.
And they already actually...
All of the 1.5 billion Indians and the 250 million Pakistanis and 200 million Indonesians and the half a billion Africans.
You're going to all put them in this time.
Using these very divisive terms like Afghans, Somalians, when really just they're already British.
They're just British over there.
I mean, I agree that they're already British, they just don't know it yet, but that's because I'm a shameless imperialist.
Yes.
Yes, they're British over there, and we're going to keep Cape Town to Cairo.
Yeah, and was it Rhodes or that was Rhodes' vision, right?
Cape Town to Cairo.
I believe Rhodes basically had a global empire where he wanted to bring the Americas back into the British Empire as well, which is still kind of the foundations of some conspiracies that believe that the Empire never ended and that Britain and the British are still controlling the world.
Which would be immediately instant.
Do you feel like you're in control of the world?
I feel like I'm in control of my own life in this world.
I feel like Rhodes and people like him would not have destroyed Britain to control the world.
But perhaps perhaps there's a certain elite character that I'm not getting into the mind of right here.
But it carries on in the article as well.
Migrant families will be accommodated in a house or flat with exclusive use, so they each get their own full flat or house to themselves.
It's not even that you're just packing them into hotels.
Circo will just commandeer the house next door to you and just be given to a migrant, which they already kind of do, but it would just be even furthering that along.
And lone men would each have their own room in shared accommodation, but would be given their own property if they claimed to be gay for safeguarding purposes.
So what I'm hearing is that if I throw my passport into the sea, come over and speak only French and pretend I'm from North Africa and say I'm a persecuted homosexual, that's going to get clipped.
At least you wouldn't be lying about all of it.
Shut up.
Then I would be able to get a free house.
Yes, you would.
I knew you were going to say that and I said it anyway.
I wanted to make the point so badly.
You just wanted a point so badly.
Oh dear, Josh.
Oh.
What a panel with a 10-year-old.
Oh, dear.
Oh, dear.
President A.
He was sort of completely subdued and now he's making a lot of people.
Bring out the worst in him, I think.
Oh, it's just lads.
We're just lads, Josh.
Just accept it.
The proposal add that illegal migrants will be allowed to take up employment with no restriction and be provided free access to all NHS facilities.
They basically already are.
If they can get a deliveroo app, then yeah, they can already take up employment.
But this would just be making it more official.
There would be no theater.
I respect that.
It kind of this whole thing removes the theater of the system that we live under right now, where governments like Labour kind of have to pretend, or the Conservative Party had to pretend that they weren't supporting all of this.
Green's just like, no, we'll just lift the veil.
We're evil.
We hate you.
We prefer brown people and we want to give them all of your money.
Vote for us, question mark.
And people of Gorton and Denton are going, well, this is pretty convincing.
We might just vote for you, which is ridiculous.
Immigration detention will be abolished.
And illegal migrants who have exhausted all asylum appeal rights won't be deported because presumably that would be forced repatriation.
So again, what's even the point of having an asylum system?
Seek asylum.
I get to come in.
Okay.
The party's official immigration policy suggests that migrants will be free to travel to Britain using fake documents as, quote, penalties imposed on commercial carriers for transporting undocumented migrants will be abolished.
So this is actually kind of encouraging human trafficking.
As with all kinds of policies like this, this is just a huge encouragement for illegal activities elsewhere in the world to force people into this country so that then they can claim all of this and somebody could just kidnap you, get you here under threat of harm or danger and say, you will collect these benefits from the government and we will collect them from you.
But this strain of left-wing politics is actually perfectly happy with human trafficking because wasn't there, I can't remember whether it was a Labour MP or someone, it was either Labour or the Greens, either a councillor or a member of parliament, was actually convicted of human trafficking at some point.
Yes.
Yes.
The Greens.
It was someone from appropriately.
Yes.
And it was also an Erwandan UN judge who was caught with a slave in her house.
That's true as well.
I remember talking about that.
I mean, I. Thank you.
I think, well, shut this down.
And the final bit that just cements everything that we've been talking about in terms of this being a pure political strategy to maintain power by using rival ethnic groups as a block against British interests.
Polanski's plans for Britain also state that foreign students and anybody with a visa, apart from a visitor's visa, would be given the right to vote in elections and referendums.
Why would anybody get a visitor's visa?
I can get my holiday paid for.
Yeah, there you go.
You get a holiday visa.
You get accommodation and you're provided with income regardless of work.
And you're already citizen and waiting.
Exactly.
So like you just come over here, you go, this government's already given me everything that I want and more, and they want to give me even more than that.
And now they're saying I can vote as well.
I'll just keep voting for these people.
And the British people get screwed and they get actually weighed under by all of this.
So this is kind of laughable.
And I think this is almost beautiful in crafting the worst policy I have ever seen in my entire life.
This is the worst policy regarding immigration that I have ever seen.
And I respect them for it because they've just gone full mask off.
We hate you.
Screw you.
We want to steal from you and give it to foreigners from across the world.
And could work.
Well done.
The fact that some people are wanting to vote for this in the first place is insane.
But who's really surprised at this point that this is where our politics is and that people are considering voting for this in Gorton and Denton today, although it might probably most likely just end up staying a Labour stronghold.
Either way, so that's when we're coming up to 2029.
This is what's being put forward as the party that may represent the left, or at least the extreme far left, in the collapse of Labour, because Labour are not very popular right now.
They've not done much to win constituents over for the 2029 election.
Not that they really did much for the 2024 election, anyway.
The Conservatives just lost.
I think that's putting it lightly.
I think the Labour Party has done more to make everyone hate them in such a short space of time than even their enemies could have done were they controlling it for them.
Yes.
It's also noting as well, I mean, this is just asking to be spied on.
This is inviting spies and other foreign agents in who might just want to blow up the country in one way or another.
So what are we looking at in terms of the opposition, given that the Tories are not really making any kind of electoral rebound recently, with Reform being the ones who have been leading the polls in the right wing for a long while now, and also Restore coming up on the rear as well.
Reform being the main competitors, what are their policies?
What are they looking at?
It might be good to look at something that's been going around recently that's caused a bit of controversy regarding some of Reform's migration policies because that is the big issue in this country that everything else revolves around.
Really, that's the thing that always leads the discussion in Britain.
And we can go to one of Reform's most high-profile people, which is Danny Kruger, a Tory defector from September of last year, who had been part of the Boris Johnson governments, who had been part of David Cameron's government.
He'd been a speech writer for David Cameron.
He actually, I believe, wrote the Hooker Hoodie speech.
No.
Yes.
No.
That's how out of touch he is.
Yes, he wrote the it says in this article here that he wrote the hooker hoodie speech.
Be clear: swirlier hoodie, wedgier hoodie, roundtree kicker hoodie.
It is in here somewhere, but I'm not going to go and try and like fish through for this.
But it was, it was, um, it was something that he wrote.
Either way, uh, he's been in a successive number of conservative governments and conservative, um, conservative uh not cabinets necessarily, but either way, he's been through a number of different leads with it within conservatives.
Then last year, he decided that he was going to jump ship to reform because the conservatives were no longer electorally viable.
And he did voice some concerns about the way that the party had betrayed the constituents.
Either way, you know, you read through interviews like this, and he's got some good social conservative, um, social conservatism behind him.
He's an opponent of abortion, he wants to encourage pronatalist policies, etc., etc.
He's Christian, so there are a number of policies that he's deriving from his Christian faith.
He's anti-assisted dying, a number of things that, for me, are just common sense, a lot of things that are common sense.
So he does have his positive sides.
But the clip that's been going around as of earlier on today has been from the Winston Marshall show.
And the Winston Marshall show, you know, fair play to the guy.
There are always amazing clips that come out of it of people giving some pretty questionable statements.
It was on the Winston Marshall show, I think, that Farage has made a number of gaffes in the past.
But he was asked about a passage in his 2023 book regarding citizenship in Britain and who holds the right to be able to say that they are British, who holds the inheritance of Alfred.
And the answer, given that Kruger is somebody who I believe is in the position of head of preparation for government in reform, which seems like a very informal title, but that's what it's listed as under here, saying that he's head of preparing for government.
So he's the guy who's in charge of making adjustments for if they are elected in 2029.
It's interesting to hear his views on British identity.
Let's hear that.
I had different thoughts about the book, and perhaps coming from compared to Lord Finkelstein and coming maybe from the right of my critiques here.
Civic vs. Ethnic Nationalism00:11:55
But although there's one thing we have in common, which I'll come to, but as well as the sort of case for Oikophobia and sort of laying out your worldview, it's also an argument for civic nationalism as opposed to ethnic nationalism.
And you make that case throughout the book.
This is, I think, in the online right conversation that's been going.
I'm not sure it's something that necessarily has reached much further than that, but it's certainly a conversation on the on right, right.
And there's one statement here, which I'm going to read, which I think is perhaps the most striking from your book, which is: the British are bound by something quite other than blood.
Ours is a civic, not a racial nationalism, an artificial brotherhood forged by centuries of peaceful enjoyment of the common inheritance to which all newborn citizens, whether ethnic Saxons or Afghans, are equal heirs.
Now, this strikes me because of your inclusion of Afghans there, not least because I don't think Afghans have been here for centuries.
So the Afghans who have been here, it would have been they're probably first generation, possibly second generation.
But you're suggesting that they are equal heirs to those who have been here for 1100, since earlier than England's existence, even.
Well, I talk about newborn Afghans being heirs to the civilization that they're born into, and that is correct.
And that is the value of a genuine democracy in which the rule of law applies, in which we're all equal under the law.
Magic soil.
Also, I find this notion that it's a civic nation absurd because the United Kingdom is called the United Kingdom because the ethnic Scots, the ethnic Welsh, and the ethnic English wanted to be joined closer in some examples.
However, they wanted to keep their own distinct nations because they were a distinct ethnicity.
The United Kingdom is an ethnic state because those boundaries wouldn't have existed.
Surely, if it was a purely civic state, we wouldn't have an independent Scotland, an independent England.
We wouldn't be named, the countries wouldn't be named after primary ethnic groups.
Exactly.
Welsh, the Scottish, the English.
And if you're born in an Afghan household, you're not born in an English culture or a British culture.
You're born in an Afghan culture.
The assumption here is that a few years of education under Catherine Bilberl Singh will somehow transform your identity completely and influence you more than your parents and your home.
This is absurd.
Well, this is.
I was born in Jordan.
There is nothing Jordanian about me.
We were genuinely leaving, we genuinely left Lebanon because of the war, spent there the first 10 years of my life.
Nothing Jordanian about me.
I could pull a Jordanian accent if I had to.
That's it.
That's it.
And the idea that it's just sort of, you know, you're born here, therefore you're one of us.
I was in Libya, and it was explained to me how these guys weren't actually real Eastern Libyans because they only moved there 300 years ago.
Well, I mean, he does elaborate in a larger interview, which is from about four weeks ago, I believe, that he means only if these people abide by our laws and customs.
So he is putting some guardrails here, and he's saying it's not that they're given automatic birthright citizenship because we don't have that, but that they have the right to claim citizenship if they are born here.
But the language that he uses is actually kind of worse than birthright citizenship, though.
Because he's like, citizenship in the modern civic manner is a purely legalistic thing.
You are given a piece of paper and a passport that says that you are British.
He's actually going further and going to the kind of metaphysic of heirs to Alfred.
Yes.
Heirs to Alfred and we're looting our ancestral claims, basically.
And also that the notion that they just have to, you know, follow our laws and abide by our customs.
What if an ethnic British person breaks the law or doesn't abide by our customs, which, you know, happens quite often?
Do they cease to be British?
What do they become?
Well, credit to Winston.
Does actually point this out, especially given Afghans are particularly relevant given not only the social issues that they cause and their statistics and the crime rates and such, but also because Robert Jenrick, who is also now part of the Reform Party, was as part of Boris Johnson's government responsible for bringing in thousands of Afghans without notifying the people, without notifying the electorate.
Yes, tens of thousands, basically under our noses without telling us.
It was a very clandestine thing.
So Winston does follow this up and let's see his response to that.
Territory there because I think just before Christmas, there were three Afghan asylum seekers who all commit, all three of them committed terrible rape and terrible crimes.
And so they weren't born here.
But are you suggesting that they could be British?
Well, they could have become British citizens.
I don't know.
No, I hope not.
I mean, we shouldn't be...
Oh, I hope not.
We shouldn't be accommodating any people who arrived here illegally.
They should immediately lose any claim to asylum on arrival by dint of the fact they broke into our country illegally.
No, no, these are asylum seekers.
They might not be illegal.
They probably were.
Well, okay, I don't know how they arrived here, but let's take for the sake of argument that they came legally.
Okay.
Yes.
Well, okay, so they came here legally, but if they're asylum seekers, they are not naturalized citizens and they should be treated humanely, but they do not have the same rights as a Brit.
But if their kids were born here, those kids would.
Yes, those kids would have the right to be British.
I think that is right.
And they would be equal heirs to the Saxons.
Yeah, but heirs in the way that you expect your children to grow up respecting the rules of the household and honouring their parents and ancestors.
So they're not.
Honouring their ancestors means honouring Afghans in perpetuity, though, doesn't it?
my son doesn't abide by the rules of my household, he doesn't stop becoming my son.
The whole thing is just sort of trans-citizenship.
It's wishy-washy.
It's trans-identity.
And it's basically saying, well, I hope that the Afghan rapists weren't British citizens, but their kids could be if they were born here.
This is one of those conversations where people forget that genetics exist.
And in my field of psychology, people have come around to the idea that genetics are the majority influence in most things.
And who's to say that, you know, thousands and thousands of years of unbroken chains of ancestry has shaped the English in a way to our land that our behavior is so rooted in that genetic heritage that it can't be emulated by anyone.
If you doubted that, you would have to look at the political systems across the daughter countries of Britain.
The United States, Canada, New Zealand, Australia.
They all have the same kind of system because they have the same inheritance.
We're a bit stretched for time, so I'll cut off the conversation there and just basically say my point basically being that in comparison to their primary opposition that we're being touted for as being the main two parties come 2029, Greens versus Reform, this is actually only one step removed from the green position of the entire world is just British citizens in waiting and saying, well, actually, no, that's not the case.
Their children are.
I don't like that.
I think this is a negative conception of British identity.
I don't think it's going to be good.
And if this is the kind of thought process of those who are around Farage, I know that there has been some discussion recently of the secretly based Farage theory, which I've seen going about.
The problem is, if these are the people surrounding Farage, even if Farage does have more radical instincts than he lets on, these people are going to moderate that and always push him to moderating himself rather than pushing forwards with more radical ideas if they are to get into government.
And on the Afghan thing, just to hammer the point home, the fact of the day from a few days ago from the Center of Migration Control was in 2024.
Afghans accounted for more sexual offence convictions in England and Wales than the Americans, Germans, Canadians, New Zealanders, Australians, and French and Japanese combined.
And again, I don't care if they're here legally or illegally.
These are still the same people.
Whether they have a piece of paper that says that they are British or not does not change this fact of their aggregate group behavior.
Similarly, if we're to look at things from a purely economic point of view, it doesn't look great either.
So the White Papers Policy Institute, who are a fantastic account who everybody should be following at the moment, and I did an interview with their director recently, which will be coming out very soon.
They looked into a paper released here, the borderless welfare state paper done by the University of Amsterdam that looked into a lot of this.
They looked at the net financial contributions of different groups across Amsterdam and found that Africans were minus 600,000 Euros lifetime loss to the treasury.
Moroccans, minus 550,000 Euro loss.
Refugees, minus 625,000 euros.
And this is per person.
So this adds up to an astronomical account amount.
And we see these kinds of statistics replicated everywhere across Europe, anywhere that does these kinds of studies looking into the net fiscal contribution of migrants.
If they are not from East Asia or other parts of Europe or America or Australia, Anglo countries or East Asian countries, they are just ultimately a massive financial drain on your country.
I ever quickly say something.
I know it's pressed for time, but I showed some numbers like this that were very similar.
And it was to the point where someone like an African here who is minus 600,000 was something like six times more in the negative than the average native person was in the positive.
So one African cancels out six net native tax contributors, which is just absurd that they're that much of a burden.
Like it's unbelievable, incomprehensible that you could be that much dead weight.
But there we are.
There was also a graph that I wanted to point to in the further on into the document, which kind of here we go.
Hammered the point home on Afghans.
This one, which was the percentage of a population that is in, that takes benefits, how much of the population of that group takes benefits, contrasted against the chance of the immigrant leaving within 10 years.
And you can see that there is a downwards correlation.
The more of any particular group is on benefits, the more likely they are to stick around.
And who was at the absolute worst end of that, where they take most benefits and are least likely to stick around because, I mean, they entirely rely on you.
Zia Yousaf's Influence00:02:52
Yep.
Afghans.
Afghans, Syrians, Iraqis.
There is no benefit whatsoever to accepting Afghans, legal or illegal, into your country.
So the fact that Danny Kruger decided to use them as his exemplar is even worse because he used the worst example.
They do not contribute anything to your society but rape.
And this is one of the things that concerns me when you see that these are the sorts of people who surround Nigel Farage when you come up to the 2029 election.
Farage may very well have more based instincts than he lets on, but he's surrounded himself with people like Danny Krueger, like the people who undersaw the Boris wave, like Robert Jenrick, like Zia Yousaf, all of these people who are going to push him to moderate whatever based instincts that he may have.
He has Zia Yousaf, when they made some points towards maybe they will ban the ability of people to convert churches into mosques.
Zia Yousaf immediately came out and said, oh, I don't know, that might be a bit extreme.
He is always going to moderate this.
People around Farage are always going to moderate this.
And I think Morgoth put it best, saying that the mistake for reform supporters, and I'm not trying to insult anybody by saying this, I just think he puts it quite well, is that this is not a policy issue.
Yes, there are lots of overlaps between reform and restores policies, but this is a trust issue.
It doesn't matter how far right the party lurches on policy if everybody is just assuming that they'll get shafted and backstabbed anyway, which is all the more likely given that the current shadow cabinet of reform includes a lot of people from the previous Tory government that did shaft everybody, that oversaw the Boris wave after everybody voted them in on the implicit understanding that there was going to be a reduction in migration.
So this is the big concern that really we're getting the far left, but really as the opposition to them come 2029, we're getting something that is not going to go as far as we need that we can't trust to make the necessary steps, which is why so many people are so enthusiastically supporting Restore already so early on into Restore being a party.
And there we go.
Let's go through a few of the rumble rants.
And do we have any video comments that we need to go through, Samson?
He's pulling them up by the looks of it.
This is why it's going to be like dozens of them.
One letter.
One, three.
That's all right.
Here we go.
Video comments.
We do have a few, but we can go through them, Samson said, that we can overrun a little bit.
Robin Hood's Rise00:04:23
Random people.
We went from micro-dosing on despair to micro-dosing on zestiness.
Again, Josh doesn't micro-dose any of that.
He buffs that shit, right?
Fictageous.
Ask these open borders leftists if they'd be okay with thousands and thousands of Russians coming over and voting for their interests.
Watch them say, no, that's different.
I don't know if they would, because you've got to understand they're retarded.
They would pretend that they're like, oh, they're fleeing Putin.
They're refugees.
Oh, they're liberals.
They're just like me.
They might be Siberians or Far East Asian Russians.
You can trust Far East Asian Russians, can't you?
Yeah, they could be Chechens.
They've never done anything wrong in history.
Exactly.
Habsification.
So we have a housing bubble, more migrants coming into the country, and we're giving them free money.
And the solution is the government is to house them, and we have 9 million unemployed.
Great.
Pretty much sums it up.
And who is this?
Random name.
Guy is unironically saying that the real Brits were the minorities we oppressed along the way.
I hate the fact I understood every word of what you said, Harry.
This is true.
I wish I didn't know these terms as well.
The internet has poisoned us all.
Let's get on with the video comments, folks.
So it looks like I might not be going back to the UK anytime soon because of new UK laws requiring me to have a British passport due to the fact I am a British citizen, despite the fact I have an Australian passport, making me an Australian citizen.
What makes this worse is not only do I need a British passport, but I also need an electrical passport.
They will do this and say, we are tiny border security, yet they will allow thousands of undocumented migrants into the country.
This is nothing short than money grab.
Just turn up in a dinghy.
Why not?
I'd rather an Aussie.
At least we can get along.
Aussies are Brits.
They are, basically.
And they don't even.
We mean that affectionately.
They don't even deny it.
Unlike the Irish who want to have nothing to do with us while being heavily related to us, at least the Aussies accept it.
One of us.
I like the Aussies.
So I saw them putting out a new crappy Robin Hood movie in the future, and it seems like they're going to take a very subversive take with him.
But I don't think any take they have can ever be as biting as like this terrible kid show called Time Squad's version of him.
He's just a thief who's trying to curry favor with the king, but gets no respect.
So they convinced him that you should steal and give to the poor.
They'll respect you more.
Which he does.
And then the poor immediately riot and start robbing each other.
And then they start robbing Robin Hood too because he showed weakness.
Basically, ungrateful wretches, the lot of them.
I mean, thank you for recognizing my game.
Yeah.
Is the new one that you're saying is going to be subversive?
Is it going to be like Robin Hood steals from the rich and gives to the migrants?
That's going to be.
He wasn't a hero.
I thought it was going to deify the tax man.
Actually, the taxes were going for refugees.
Truly subversive yet accurate Robin Hood for today, if they wanted to go for it, was like that he is some.
He is a now Robin Hood is a tax man stealing from the middle class to give to migrants.
One of my old jobs in 2020 replaced much of its staff with AI.
Now they're begging for employees to come back.
All the stories you hear about AI becoming sentient or whatever are actually just marketing employees to attract more investors.
The AI bubble is probably about to boost, much like the dot-com bubble.
And I say like a lot of the AI stuff when you hear them talk about it, one sounds like Star Trek utopian nonsense.
Elon Musk saying that, oh, once AI is fully up and running in 20 years, no one will have to work.
I mean, that sounds like a mix of Star Trek and WALL-E.
That sounds horrible.
Like, everybody will become fat, disgusting slobs and pure consumers.
I don't want that.
I would rather smash all technology to prevent that, frankly.
The other thing is that, like, it's just a confidence game, isn't it?
They want to keep pushing the numbers up for investment so that AI will literally pull your trousers down on a Saturday night and suck your dick for you.
And then people clap and they say, I'm going to invest millions of dollars in this.
Ai Bubble Boom00:03:27
Somebody told me it did that.
Okay, that's it.
Literally.
AI will go shopping with your wife for you so that you don't have to.
How much can I invest?
Exactly.
is working already.
Thank you for going back to the clay mills here.
The pancake day thing, like, actually gave me an aneurysm.
That's why I was so quiet on the round table of my brain was fried.
Harry's northern mind is satisfied by machinery.
It honestly is.
There is something beautiful about it.
Oh, it's fantastic.
There is something beautiful about it.
Red bricks and chimneys.
The smoke industry.
Oh my god.
You gotta remember my like great-great-great-grandfather.
I think on my mum's side was like a Derbyshire industrialist.
So, ah.
It's in his blood.
Penguins.
Castle.
Castle.
Penguins.
I understand what you're doing.
But what are you doing?
Just licking a fence.
Look how relaxed this wolverine is.
Just letting us back.
Doing nothing.
Sliming in a dream.
Oh, big stretch.
You're pretty damn cool.
Give him a pen.
Titty monkey.
Wow.
This is a monkey after my own heart.
You're kind of monkey.
I need to get that in monkey news.
He flip-flops.
Typical politician.
How would you know, Harry?
Random name appropriately says, in Josh's case, he'll pull the AI's trousers down and go to work.
I've done nothing to deserve this.
You started the podcast.
You started the podcast bullying me, alright?
I did, but that's all.
This is all just like payback.
See how Josh cries out in pain as he strikes you.
I'll strike you again if you're not careful.
He cut your hand again.
That is true.
When we used to do boxing for a while, and I had some new gloves, and the inside was still sharp.
So when I hit Harry in the face, it cut my hand.
Yeah, sure.
That's the reason why.
It's the glove.
It wasn't your jawline.
Mogged.
Utterly mogged.
Cortisol rising here, Josh.
I can't even tease you for having multiple chins either now.
You got too skinny for that.
I am putting a bit of weight back on.
Anyway, we've probably gone well over time at this point.
So I think we're going to have to cut it there without reading some website comments.
Well, okay, let's read one or two each.
All right.
Furious Dan says, if Trump took a big drink of water amid speech, how many Democrats would die of first?
Yes.
Too few.
Danny Delatin says, it was amazing to see Elizabeth Warren of all people stand up and clap when Nasipelosi got called out for insider trading.
The entire event was a showcase and how much the fabric has frayed.
Yeah, they don't have any leadership.
They're confused.
They're stupid.
They all hate each other.
Yes.
And the lack of leadership means that they're all sort of being like crabs in a bucket and trying to grab each other and pull each other down.
And I mean, who is the figurehead for the Democrat Party at the moment?
Could AOC Visit?00:04:42
Maybe, maybe, maybe Gavin Newsom.
I was going to say, Newsom is like the only person who has been put forward.
We've got a few years until 28, but could be AOC.
Oh, God.
Could be AOC.
Who knows?
Gonna win Carl's vote.
It's gonna be hilarious.
It's going to be hilarious in any case.
Do you want to read some of your comments, Josh?
Of course.
Michael says, looking at my own house, hearing what the English are paying, I'm grateful I live in the US.
Thanks for rubbing our noses in it.
Mike I say, you rightfully laugh at us for having tiny, overexpensive houses.
Yeah, when I hear Americans complaining about their property prices, it's like me hearing, oh, my steak is too juicy.
Oh, it's terrible.
You guys have one of the best deals in the Western world.
And it's not to say that it's getting worse, isn't bad for you, but you know, you're not going to get too much sympathy from Europeans.
I hear Americans complain about McMansions.
And yeah, there's a tackiness to them, right?
But they're so big.
You get so much space in them, right?
I would kill for that many bedrooms.
And a garage as well.
And a garden?
Crazy.
Yeah, people forget in America that in Europe, a lot of our housing is very dense.
We're a densely populated continent.
Yes.
And where was it?
There was a good comment I was trying to find.
I've lost it now.
I'll just pick one at random.
Henry Ashman says, I think with London, there's also a degree of impact from things like hybrid and remote work.
If I only need to go into the office once a week, the cost of travel to London from somewhere nicer and more affordable suddenly becomes more viable than if I had to do it every day.
And I think that is a good thing.
And I think that moving work out of London is a necessary step to making the country good again.
Not great for property developers, though.
I know.
All of those big glass high-rises might go to waste.
I hate them and I want them destroyed.
Yes.
But if they don't get destroyed, which would destroy the investors in one way, you know, they might have to get turned into housing, which might also destroy other parts of the property.
Although prices are already dropping in London, so.
If I were dictator of the country, if it wasn't Wasland Daub, Stone or Wood, your property would be taken down.
So Ed Milliband harnessing Enoch Spilling Grave says, guys, how does this help the environment?
That's the fun part, actually.
It doesn't.
Well, part of the policy on the actual document is kind of blocked a bit here.
But they're saying that the Green Party accepts we all have a collective responsibility for the climate emergency and the UK has a duty to support people forced to move due to changes in their home environment, whether internally or from abroad.
So they're trying to justify it by saying, like, well, you know, people, all of these refugees, they're not fleeing like war.
Not that many of them are fleeing war in the first place.
They're not coming here for like economic advantage or anything.
It's because they're fleeing the climate change.
So they're trying to justify it that way and saying, therefore, it's our problem.
We need to take them in, despite the fact that the UK's actual CO2 emissions annually is minuscule, tiny, complaining to China.
2% of the global migration causes a bad environment for me.
How about that?
True.
But they don't classify you as important.
Fair enough.
You're just an indigenous Brit.
One thing the Green Party and you have in common.
Hey, hey, hey.
Zach's not all bad.
Reese Sims says, currently making my way through Restore Britain's retaking the English Castle policy document.
So far I am yet again impressed by Rupert Lowe, Harrison Pitt and the Restore team's hard work.
It's so nice to be able to finally support a party that overwhelmingly aligns with my values rather than having to choose which poison tastes bitter.
Let's hope we will soonly be able to finally be proud of our country's future and not just its past.
That is important.
The policy is important.
But again, people are actually right when they say that reform and restore have some overlapping policy goals.
But it's who I actually trust to implement them rather than betray me again.
And when you fill your party full of people who have already betrayed me, why am I supposed to trust you?
Just off the back of, trust me, bro.
It's the same kind of logic that you get with the plan trusters.
I know the people involved in Restore personally, and they're all very stand-up people, aren't they?
They're good, they're polite, they're hardworking, they're everything you want in people running a political movement.
And with that, that's all we've got time for today.
Thank you for sticking with us as we ran over time.