All Episodes
Previous
Plain Text
April 24, 2026 - The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters
01:31:15
The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #1404
Transcriber: CohereLabs/cohere-transcribe-03-2026, MahmoudAshraf/mms-300m-1130-forced-aligner, sat-12l-sm, script v0.9, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
St George Day Merchandise 00:03:00
Hello, everyone.
Welcome to the podcast of the Lotus Cetus.
Today's Friday, the last Friday of April.
It's the 24th of the month, and this is the year 2026, in case you're wondering.
And I'm very pleased today to be joined by Brother Harry and Brother Luca.
And we are going to talk about Muslim only housing, Mexicans versus robots.
Are they going to have a Mexican standoff?
Yeah.
And also Hassan Paika saying the quiet part out loud.
Right, but before we do this, we have some announcements.
At 3 p.m., we're going to have the Gold Tier Zoom.
This is going to be the last Friday of the month, as I said.
And do come to join the people who are going to be on it, which is me and Harry.
Yes, so.
If you're not sick of me yet, check them out.
Join the Gold Zoom tier, the Gold Tier Zoom call.
Right.
Join Gold Tier anyway.
We also have some merchandise.
Right, so we have a St. George's Day sale.
That was yesterday, but the sale is still going on.
50% off selected items.
That's 15.
It did sound a little bit like 50 when you said that.
I put an N there.
I said N.
I was just making sure because I didn't hear the N.
And let's stop talking about the letter N before the chat gets us in trouble.
15% off the Igla D. You don't want me to say N?
For England, the Goth Mug, and the Gamazilla.
Two tone mug and also the faux England t shirt UK.
Definitely.
I assume.
I think that these are excellent sales.
This is an excellent offer.
Take advantage of it.
Say yes to life.
Carpe Diem.
Right.
We also have this interview with Stefan Larsen from Denmark.
And I interviewed him about the Danish exceptionalism.
Check it out to find out why Denmark, even though it Was governed by social democrats, can afford to be a bit more based than other members of the EU.
They did several things correctly in the past, and this has worked really well for them.
Right, so check it out.
We're talking about multiculturalism, about culture, we're talking about all sorts of things.
Also, Greenland, check it out.
There's just one more thing to promote as well, which is this St. George's Day daily that I recorded yesterday, where I did things a little bit differently, and I actually just recorded about 20 minutes of me reading.
A St. George's Day speech presented and written by the great Rudyard Kipling back in 1920 for the Royal Society of St. George because he has such phenomenal, meticulous insights into the English character, into our history, why we behave the way we behave, and why things turned out as they did.
The English Church Experience 00:02:36
And I think it's really interesting.
Many, many kind comments on it actually saying it was a wonderful thing to present.
So if that sounds of interest to you, it's there on the daily channel, which if you've not, you should go subscribe to because we're ticking up to 100k now.
So that'd be nice.
Help us out.
Okay, so for my segment then, let's start talking about housing, shall we, and how the Muslims don't seem quite as generous and colour blind, I suppose, or faith blind, or whichever other way you want to put it.
Who knew?
Who could have seen this coming?
So I went back for my sins when I used to live in London.
I'd often go to visit a friend in Barking, and whilst I was there, it was that thing that as soon as you got out of the Barking train station, You would just look around and you would honestly think that you were somewhere in Bangladesh or, you know, Arabia, wherever it was.
But last of all, you'd certainly wouldn't think you were standing in England.
And then I had this one occasion where I was doing some research on Captain James Cook, because actually he was married all those years ago at the little church over in Barking.
And so I went to a church to go and do the research and have a look around and speak to the members of staff there.
Wonderful, wonderful people.
The thing was that as soon as you stepped into that church, all of a sudden you felt like you were actually stood in England again.
Everyone in there was English, and you realised that actually what this church represents now is the last holdout of the English community in a place where, when they'd grown up in, you know, in the entirety of Barking, they'd never have anticipated, never have dreamed, never have seen on the horizon what was quite in store for them.
And it's always stuck with me that, just, you know, because for us, Right, being of the age we are, we actually kind of see a light at the end of a tunnel.
Right, we see a way that we actually win this, that we restore Britain and so many of the terrible things that you know our people have had to endure.
But for those people in that church, I just looked at them, you know, in the late 70s, early 80s, and I just thought, all they've known their entire life, you know, they were lucky enough to be born Englishmen and women, and all they ever got to really experience of that was slowly watching the places where they were born and raised taken away from them.
Piece by piece, house by house, street by street.
And I think it's perhaps for that reason why I just wanted to harken back to the Race Relations Act of 1968, because this was a very, very important piece of legislation.
Landlord Discrimination Issues 00:14:47
And I think it's one of the most early examples of obviously it was passed by the Labour Party.
So it was full of their own sense of ideological fairness, quote unquote, and charity to foreigners.
But it obviously presented that sliding effect.
Of watching the disinheritance of the English at that first hurdle.
And what we see if we scroll down to section five, which I should have had up beforehand, apologies.
Here we are housing, accommodation, and business and other premises.
It shall be unlawful for any person having power to dispose or otherwise concerned with the disposal of housing, accommodation, business premises, and all other lands to discriminate against any person seeking to acquire any such accommodation.
Premises or other land by refusing or deliberately omitting to dispose of it to him or to dispose of it to him on the like terms and the like circumstances as in the cases of other persons.
And going through it, essentially, what this means is that all of a sudden, someone who was English, who owned a house in England, who had done the grind of working, paying the taxes, owning property, right, that great aspiration that all Englishmen strive towards, owning their own property, for the government to come in and tell them, actually, you don't have.
As much of a say as you thought you do over who you rent out your home to, or any of these sorts of things, and even if you live in.
With that person, if you're the landlord and they're actually moving in with you, all of a sudden you're not allowed to prejudice based on your own taste, your own sense of identity, who you think would be someone of good character to welcome into your home and your property.
And it's for this reason, for many reasons, in fact, but this was one of the things that, of course, prompted Enoch Powell to give the Rivers of Blood speech back in 1968.
As a way to basically raise the public awareness and mount enough pressure on the Labour government so that this act was not brought into force because of the obvious damaging effect that it would have on English identity in our homelands.
Well, just communities in general.
One of the interesting knock on effects that I would imagine, if you looked into it, might have happened as a result of this is if you were somebody who was slightly more discerning as a landlord and wanted to maintain a community with a particular character and identity to it, there are ways around.
These kinds of laws, but they are ways that have knock on effects for everybody else.
For instance, one thing that many people might think to do in that case, well, they go, well, the immigrants coming into the country who might want accommodation are probably not going to be paid as well as the Englishmen.
Therefore, as a barrier to entry, I might raise the rental prices on my flat as a barrier to the immigrants who wouldn't be able to afford it.
And it creates a kind of selection mechanism where if somebody's earning enough to be able to afford this, they're going to be of a particular character and a particular identity.
Of course, that might help them and it might help the community, but for young Englishmen, that sort of thing just means that there's an even greater barrier for them to find their own place and be able to move out.
And I would imagine that has had knock on effects into the present time.
But there is also the other bit, I agree with you, Harry, there's also the other bit that this is a very subjective law.
And wherever you have subjectivity in legislation, you have loopholes for arbitrariness.
Because you could actually say, well, no, I'm giving it to person X. Because I think that they're going to take good care of this house.
And this is where I grew up, for instance.
And I don't want to, I may have to leave, but I don't want to see it being destroyed or something as property.
And they can basically say, no, we are basically trying to do some mental diagnosis on you.
We know better than you what you think you are.
And you're saying this because you're a racist.
And you need bias training and microaggression training.
And you need to basically not sell it to whoever you want to sell it.
You need to sell it to whoever we are going to tell you to sell it.
And I'm sure at some point they'll tell you something about the price as well.
Right.
But obviously, this speaks to just come back to that point about the British state purposefully, actively, basically lessening the strength of hand of the English people in their own homeland and their ability to buy property.
And so we get.
Well, just the one last thing as well is frankly.
Why wouldn't you want to keep cheap foreigners out of your accommodation?
We've seen plenty of times from the mayor of London, Sadiq Khan himself, going around to all of the various properties that have been rented out as social housing in London, where you go there, they've absolutely trashed the place.
They've taken no care, taken no responsibility for it, and now they're complaining that they want more handouts because they've taped up all of the ventilation, kept all of the windows closed, had the heating on forever, and now they've got damp.
Patches and black mold, and oh my god, I've got asthma now, and I can't breathe, and I'm dying.
Well, that's your own stupid fault for not opening a window and taping up all the vents, and also nothing's enough for them.
No, no, it's never enough, and it's all compounded as well.
Particularly, just an anecdotal piece of evidence back when I was living in Lincoln, um, towards the beginning of last year was the first place that I moved into in Lincoln.
Um, there was a Nigerian gentleman who moved in into the house with me, and then before you know it, it's like he has a friend, and he has a friend, and then before you know it, it's not.
Because if it was like there's an Indian, there's a Pakistani, there's a Nigerian, it's like at least that forces them to all speak English because it's the only language they might understand or commonly be able to speak.
But when all of a sudden everyone is of the other block, like a consolidated block, all of a sudden you find yourself that they're all speaking Nigerian in the kitchen.
You don't know what's being said.
You come into the kitchen, they're all being very rude and hostile to you.
And on and on it goes.
And these are just instances and types of scenarios that British people are now having to live in.
As they go in, and because the property agencies are so impersonal and so hostile, they just see, oh, this person has this job and they can put without any real regard for what you know extra second order effects this may take.
But all of this is to work to basically disempower ourselves at the behest of foreigners.
And the thing was, as well, we compromised our own position on this, and I assume, in the folly of.
Of the people thinking in the 1960s.
I don't know.
Did they expect that people were coming from the Commonwealth so they might have the same sense of fair play and colour blindness that Britain was trying to foster at the time?
Well, absolutely not.
Now, although full facts say that this is a false claim that Sadiq Khan last year was building 40,000 new homes for Muslims only, I will read the actual quote because I feel like they're splitting hairs here where they really.
So, Sadiq Khan said The other big issue facing Londoners.
Particularly Londoners of Islamic faith, is the issue of housing.
And so we need to build far more homes in our city because they know how often from, sorry, because you know how often people from minority communities want to live near a mosque, near halal food, near places where there are other people like them for a variety of obvious reasons.
And they're priced out because there's not enough housing.
So we're going to build at least 40,000 council homes, at least 6,000 rent control homes as well.
So, within this, you see him literally saying, Look, people of a particular community have particular tastes, particular prejudices, and biases, and they would obviously like to live in the community surrounded by themselves.
And this is, of course, human nature.
They put it in the article and say, Well, he actually said, and give the exact quote that you gave there, and go, See, should stupid moron speaking on Twitter online?
He said the exact thing that you said that he did.
Yeah.
And there's no real rebuttal there.
It's like.
Not particularly.
Great, good job.
Well done, fact check.
Thank you.
So it's just another example of foreigners moving in, taking advantage of the level playing field that we created, sabotaging ourselves for their benefit, and then once having access to influence amongst housing and as the mayor of London and all the rest of it, they just get to turn around and post advertisements like this.
And now we have London landlords illegally advertising Muslim only.
Flat rentals.
Now, this was an expose by a actually good bit of journalism from the Telegraph.
Yes.
Yeah, I have a question to both of you because I'm definitely not the person to answer it, but I want to see why this happened and why things like this happen.
And one scenario that I find plausible and I want to find out what you think about it is that post that was signed in 1968, and by 1968, the colonialism was, let's say, up and running.
So, was this a sort of Predicament where people in power wanted didn't want to have the prestige loss going with, let's say, the decline of the empire, and said, Let us somehow recreate the conditions of the empire on a global scale within the country.
And when it comes to a global scale, yeah, you do have multiculturalism because you have multiple colonies.
So, the only way to recreate this and sort of have a sense of continuity with the imperial past.
Was to recreate the multicultural conditions within one country.
I would expect there was a lot of hubris animating the people pushing that legislation, opening the floodgates to immigration that meant that they did this.
I would imagine, yeah, a lot of it was probably ego.
Well, you know, 10 years ago, I was an administrator of the empire.
Now I'm just going to be an administrator of a vassal state backwater at the edge of Europe somewhere.
No, no, no.
I still need to feel like I'm in charge of a grand global empire.
So let's just bring it here.
I imagine there was a lot of that kind of thinking going on.
But similarly, when you have these people here and you see that they immediately form into ethnic blocks and ghettoize themselves, from a managerial perspective, everything is a problem to be solved and everything needs to be flattened.
So this simply just folds into the logic of managerialism.
Everybody needs to be an interchangeable unit.
And if we have them all blocked off amongst themselves, we can't treat them as such, or at least not as easily.
Therefore, they see it as a way to.
Push integration and quell any divisions that might exist between those communities.
And also, just to give themselves, again, something more to do from a manager's perspective.
It's the same thing with the Community Relations Service in America, really, where you go like, all right, we're going to force all of you together.
Oops, that's created loads of problems.
Well, in that case, we're going to need to create a government agency that can go in and stop there from being too many big problems all at once.
It's just the reality of trying to force all of these people to live together.
Who don't want to live together?
No, they don't, as evidenced by the fact that obviously these Muslim landlords only want Muslims living in the rented accommodation.
And obviously, I think one of the reasons why this is allowed to happen is chiefly because it's London, and obviously, everyone in London knows that there is a certain permissiveness, you know, just built around foreigners and their own agency and what they're able to get away with in a way that certainly would, you know, I don't want to imagine if this is reversed and everything, but like an Englishman would never be allowed to get away with this.
The moment that there was any sort of like whites only on the front of a rental, you would never get away with it.
The thing is, now that they're here, with the idea of deportations and remigration on the horizon, nowhere near where we are right now, it's something that we have to acknowledge.
If it's going to happen, it's going to happen in the future.
For the time being, while these people are here, I would rather that they be able to do this and keep to themselves.
So long as whites are able to do it as well.
Freedom of association, if there are people who want to communicate with one another and live with one another, whatever, but there are still plenty of people, I would say the vast majority of Englishmen, who would want to live amongst other Englishmen.
Of course.
So long as they're not being forced into our communities as kind of like the communal equivalent of a union breaker, a strike breaker, then that wouldn't be as much of a problem because everybody could know, okay, this is our part of the city, this is your part of the city, we won't interact with one another except for.
Minor trades.
So there's no forced integrationist experiment.
So there's no, yeah, because it is an experiment which just leads to lowered birth rates, higher prices for everything, lower trust amongst people.
But it's the fact that there is the double standard where they're allowed to do this, but if you or I advertised for the same sort of thing, we would have the police knocking on our door.
And it speaks to the fact as well just remember what is on the horizon if we don't get mass deportations, remigration, whatever you wish to call it.
Well, If we can see the system behaving so unfairly now, right, where actually minorities at their own discretion, you know, I mean, on this occasion, you know, just let's point to the fact that the Telegraph highlighted this, and now there are some probing questions for the actual company, you know, that rents out space and everything.
But were it not for the Telegraph's reporting on this particular story, the people from within that community were never going to, like, blow the whistle on it.
There would be no sense of unfairness or injustice.
They would have just carried on in their own devices, you know, filling it with.
Their own people.
And I understand that, right?
There is a natural human nature incentive to be surrounded.
Sadiq Khan himself admits it, you know, when it comes to the Muslims.
And so this is all very understandable.
Liverpool Council Ghetto Plan 00:04:00
And just to point out as well that further down the article, it goes on to say the listings posted on Facebook, Gumtree, and Telegram, a social media messaging channel, thanks, Telegraph, feature phrases such as only for Muslims and for two Muslim boys or two Muslim girls and Muslims preferred.
But others include direct appeals to Punjabi or Gujarati speakers or Kerala or Haryana people, while there are also job vacancies on the platform that advertise for men only.
I mean, kind of based.
On Facebook, a company called Russian Properties, which also has a TikTok account, had dozens of listings stating we prefer Muslim boys.
One double room is available for Muslims and suitable for a Punjabi boy.
So it's not, it's specific, it's not even like, you know, just sort of like subcontinent or anything.
It's like, no, specifically this group from within India itself or, you know, Hindus only, it says further down it as well.
So all of the communities are doing the hand at it.
And this points towards the fact as well that as time goes on with all of it, of course, if we go to, sorry, I've totally lost where this map is here.
It was supposed to be in Liverpool, but I don't know where it actually is.
That is Liverpool.
Oh, well, that's reassuring there.
It was somewhere down here.
There we are.
You can see the big blue lighting up.
But then you look at the fact that it's like, okay, so on the one hand, when left to their own devices, the minorities are going around basically saying no whites, no English, right?
Which is what it is in their property for the houses that they actually own and rent out.
But then when you get to a story like Liverpool here, Where you can see there is a Muslim enclave in this particular part of the city, you end up with something that is the actual opposite of it, where basically Liverpool Council have basically come into what's the term, basically requisitioning the street, which is apparently very derelict near this mosque where it's happening.
And as a result of this, they wanted to get planning permission to build some houses on it and actually build up the area.
But the Muslims don't want this because they have a mosque in the area and they see it as.
Their land to do with what they want to do with it.
It goes on to say that Liverpool's Muslim community wants to protect the city's largest place of worship and its status as a beacon institution, as the leader of the local authorities insists that no decision has been made about the future of an adjacent piece of land which could be used for housing.
Dr. Abdullah said that while the mosque and Muslim community want to work with Liverpool Council to find a way forward that suits all parties, housing development on the land would be catastrophic for services.
The land at Rosemary Street is part of a number of locations reclaimed by Liverpool Council following the end of a lease agreement.
And it says here as well that Al Rama Mosque serves around 3,500 people every Friday alone for prayer sessions.
And Dr. Abdullah explains why passions ran so high over the land.
He said, We've been in consultation and negotiation with the council for the last five years.
Rosemary Street is right next to the mosque.
And it's been derelict for over 30 years.
We don't have enough space and resources, and we think the centre could be good for integration for the community.
So now the plan is like, after it seems that, well, the council expects some sort of concession from the Muslims on this and can't just use it as basically dead space.
Yeah, but you can't have integration in ghettos.
And although there are issues, massive problems with forced integration as experiments, ghettos.
Unity Through Division Paradox 00:02:35
Are the exact opposite of integrationism.
Ghettos start when integrationism fails.
I think they just use the word integration when they're talking about this because they know it's a buzzword.
Yes, they do.
They know it's a buzzword that people will respond to.
So they're going, let us have our ghetto and it will help integration.
It's like a little Hail Mary that they're throwing out because they know the council's eventually going to go, well, if we don't give them exactly what they want, they'll call us racist.
Which is very ironic because multiculturalism tells you don't integrate, keep your culture.
That's what it tells you.
Yeah, it's all about unity through division, which is a very, very contradictory idea.
It's Hegelian.
Yeah, I'm trying it.
You have a higher synthesis.
Why didn't I think of it like this?
It's all in phenomenology of spirit or whatever it's called.
But anyway, in conclusion to all of this, I do actually agree with you that for the time being, it's actually.
I would personally find it preferable that the minorities do rent out those spaces to.
To other minorities, because at least as you say, then it slows at least a proliferation out towards other spaces.
And in the meantime, obviously, all we can do is just remember, right, that when we basically, out of our own free will, gave minorities a chance to have an even playing field in Britain, they decided actually that they didn't have to play by those rules and that actually they felt no sense of reciprocity or fairness or goodwill to the English who had granted them that in the first place.
And actually, just decided to take the mic.
Yeah.
Right.
There's a message for Harry here by Ochigdur for $5.
Thanks.
But, Harry, if the split happens, as you say, when will it be obvious of the differences?
And managers can have that.
Yeah, that's true.
I mean, the differences are already obvious to everybody.
Anyone and everybody knows the differences.
That's why the kind of like Tommy Robinson style anti Muslim.
Civic nationalism is so popular in the country among very, very normal people.
You speak to, you can go onto any street across the country and find lots of people who agree with that.
So the managers are kind of just playing a fool's errand if they want to try and pretend like they want to, like Wizard of Oz style, ignore the man behind the curtain.
Yeah.
It's very obvious that there's a man behind the curtain.
Cheap Labor Visa Loopholes 00:15:17
All right.
And moving on, we'll go on to a subject that's kind of related to this, which is why a lot of these people will be in the country in the first place.
Now, in England, we can say that there was an element of imperial hubris of wanting to bring these people home from a governmental perspective.
But similarly, you can say from an oligarchical perspective, having a mass force of cheap labour who have no connections to the community, no social lives available to them, and no ability to get home without having earned enough money is a very, very enticing prospect if you want to keep cheap labour costs down.
This is something that has been remarked on by many people.
But there is another aspect to it because we're talking about government and oligarchs.
Whereas in America, for instance, there's this video that's been going around recently which has caused a lot of controversy because it appears to show that same kind of deracinated, disconnected communal mentality displayed not by an oligarch, a large business owner, a billionaire, or a government employee, jobsworth, but by a farmer, somebody who Should be tilling the land,
should have a great connection to the soil and a great connection to their local community.
Whereas this video seems to show somebody who is almost angry and annoyed at the inconvenience that ice raids in America are causing for her labour costs.
Despite the fact, as will become clear, she actually has plenty of money with which to pay a fair wage to American native workers and even high schoolers.
Let's listen to this.
It's just been harder and harder and harder to find those people to work.
Bethany Gotts owns Quay's farm in Mountain Home, but now with fewer workers, a lot of the manual labor is left up to her.
She tells me she's tried hiring locally, but it's been difficult to find people willing to do the hard work.
Finding a legal.
Just going to add a little bracket there for cheap wages.
That's always the little asterisk that you need to add on when you hear something like this who are willing to do the hard work for the wages you're offering.
American here that is going to work as hard as an immigrant is nearly impossible.
She even posted job openings on Facebook.
I had seven people contact me about it, and when I sent them the description, I had no people respond.
She says hiring undocumented workers is not an option with serious risks for both sides.
One, you're going to get fined.
You're going to, you have a, unfortunately, an employee living in fear.
They could get picked up at any moment, and then you're without an employee.
To keep her farm running, GOTS is hiring high schoolers and is now looking into the federal H 2A visa program.
I have endeavored to spend $200,000 to build a small, small worker housing so that I can get H 2 workers next year.
GOTS hopes for long term solutions that support both farmers and workers.
The misnomer that farmers exploit immigrants is just so sad to me because, like I said, my friends and neighbors, we love our workers.
They're our family.
And they want to work and they will work hard, and there needs to be a path for these people in our.
Country because our government has failed them and it is failing, I feel, the farmers.
Now, perhaps people in the comments and on YouTube as well can help explain this to me because, frankly, it just seems like she wants cheap labor.
And I'd reported on this a few weeks ago in this segment of One Easy Trick to Save America, talking about how the Trump administration was actually currently looking to expand the H2A visa program to make it easier to hire foreign workers as farmhands for temporary visas.
But similarly, that they were looking to expand the visa program so that it wouldn't simply for Temporary workers, but also for permanent workers on, say, for instance, dairy farms.
And I was reading through a New York Times article that reported not only was it diminishing the wages and job availability for Native American workers, but there were also reports in that article itself that even illegal workers were complaining that the availability of cheap labor through legal H2A visas was meaning that the illegal laborers themselves were also being priced out of the market, which was quite a remarkable thing.
And this seems to be.
Expanding on that.
Well, you see, sorry, if I may, you see here the mechanism trying to work because she's saying, you know, like, oh, everyone I ask who is legal, it's like they won't do it for that work.
And her sort of like framing of that is like, oh, it's because they're lazy, like they wouldn't work hard enough.
It's like, no, these are people who understand the value of their labor and are willing to negotiate a better wage for their costs.
Whereas if you're in a legal, in a precarious position and you're in the country, ICE could come at any moment, of course.
You know, there is like a reciprocal kind of nature here of like her.
Protecting them, trying to keep them.
And in trading for that, they will work very, very cheaply.
Like, as well, the fact that she says high school kids and everything like that.
So basically, just anyone who's not willing to negotiate their own wage.
Yeah, yeah, go on.
No, just I have a very, I think this situation is a bit more complex.
And I say this because I'm very much aware of the farming sector in the southern Mediterranean.
And I think it's essentially a situation where you have the worst of all worlds here.
It's almost a situation that is so complex that it's designed to bring out the worst in everyone, in every party involved.
And what I'm saying here, it will initially sound like much more of a disagreement than it actually is.
Please feel free.
Please, honestly, it's entirely on good faith.
I think it isn't just an issue of either, you know, here, illegal farmer and, you know, native farmer here and this.
Because this, we need to bear in mind, first of all, lots of trading labor unions, right?
They make it almost, they make it very difficult for someone who wants to hire native labor to hire native labor.
It isn't necessarily that, yeah, you do want as a farmer to pay cheap labor.
That's what you want to do, generally speaking.
You want to minimize your costs.
That's not something new.
It isn't happening right now in multiculturalism, multicultural West.
That's always been the case.
But labor unions make it even harder for a farmer to hire native labor.
And sometimes there is such a thing as people who are very much complaining about the farming sector.
And they won't do the work.
Well, I'm not saying, let me say, I'm not saying that, I don't know about her in particular, but there can be farmers who do want to, who don't care about, have no care about, you know, helping the natives.
There are also natives who use rhetoric that is of a nationalist bent in order to justify more gibbs for them.
Well, and I don't know exactly when I'm just.
Shown a particular example.
I don't know exactly what it is here.
But there is such a thing.
But just let me say there is such a thing as people who just don't go to work the fields.
Well, I'll ask this question What is the inherent evil of unionized workers wanting a better wage for themselves and better working conditions?
For instance, his name has been taken off of it.
Was it Cesar Chavez?
Was he the labor union organizer?
In America, whose day that was named after him was recently renamed to Farm Workers' Day because of a number of alleged sexual assault cases that have come to light recently.
Obviously, morally, not a good man, but historically, and this was the case with him as well, and bear in mind his name was Chavez, clearly of a foreign extraction, he and his union fought like hell against.
Foreign workers being brought into the country because unions historically recognized that cheap labor was brought in internationally.
Foreign workers could come in both so that they could be used for cheap labor and also as strike breakers.
And this is not just foreign labor as well in America.
Southern blacks following the Civil War were used in the late 19th century as strike breakers as well because they didn't have any connections or attachments to the community or care for the people that they were.
Attacking essentially, and the thing is, unions have historically fought massively against immigration.
I'm reading a book at the moment, it is coming from a leftist perspective, but it's interesting to see an opposing view that's looking at the idea of international mass migration as essentially a form of economic imperialism.
Now, I don't agree with everything that he's saying, but he does point out this author that in the 1980s, you had people like Reagan and you had people like Thatcher, you could say the bastions of neoliberalism, crushing the unions.
Which meant that jobs that were previously high wage, that had good working conditions, no longer had those protections.
And in the 1990s, following the end of the Cold War, all of a sudden that leaves room open when people aren't going into those jobs anymore because they don't pay well enough and they don't give you enough protections to start importing mass cheap labour from the third world who are willing to work for those connections.
You could say it's illegals, but now here we can see as well that this current administration is looking to expand opportunities for people to come in legally.
Well, I don't want unions to be dismantled.
And I don't think that unions are bad per se.
But unions can be also used in order to harm society, for instance, by communist infiltration.
If you have labor unions that are being co opted by communists, and that's not exactly a well stretch of the imagination, you can actually get them to strike all the time.
When they constantly strike, and this happens in the South Mediterranean a lot.
We've got the strikes and transport for London right now.
Yes.
That's where you also give a massive.
That's why Nick's not interested.
Despite the stated intentions or the stated preferences, you have their massive incentives for people who say, well, listen, I want you to help me farm my land, but you're constantly striking.
Well, I need to get labor.
So it's.
It's a more complex situation.
And I do think that in some cases, labor unions can be good.
In other cases, I think their action can be bad.
But I'm not saying necessarily that they are bad.
It's not always black and white.
It's not always black and white.
But yeah, I think that in some cases, there is a sort of protectionist mentality, I think, is making things worse.
In some situations, it can.
But in this situation, for instance, I mean, she mentions that specifically in this incident, she is spending $200.
Thousand dollars on housing costs for H2A visa holders who she might be able to bring in next year.
That suggests to me that she does have money saved up, that she does actually have the capital funds available for her to be able to pay a fairer wage for people who would want to do that work.
But she might be saying, for instance, she might be saying, Work 12 hours a day doing this really hard work and I'll pay you pennies.
Get out of here.
Which most people, when given other opportunities, are not going to take.
And then she goes, Such a shame, I'm going to have to hire Mexicans.
I'm just going to give you one example why I'm getting a bit frustrated with this topic.
Not with you, but with the topic about Greece.
And it doesn't have to do necessarily with illegal labor.
And I know that I may get a lot of hate for saying this, but there is such a thing in Greece happening as people complaining about foreigners getting the farming industry, but they just won't go and work in agriculture.
And if they go and work, the few cases where they're going to work, they're going to ask three times the money and they are going to do a third of the work.
Not all of them.
I'm very happy to be disproven.
I'm very happy.
I want people to tell me you're wrong for this reason, and I'm very happy to be disproven.
But I do think that, and this should be called out, there are people who constantly talk about the ethnos and about the nation, not because they're going to move their ass in order to contribute to it, but because they want more gibs for themselves without working.
That's why you see me a bit more educated with.
Well, that's one of the things I don't think it's a problem when she complains that she's hiring high schoolers.
Well, actually, young people like that, it can be really beneficial for them to get out and do some hard work and earn a fair wage for it.
You don't have to pay them as much, yes, but also because they're young and they're still learning, they can learn the value of hard work and they can do more difficult tasks for longer because they've just got more energy to them.
So, that is something culturally, on a broader cultural level, that you could say.
People have been saying for ages, young people need to learn to work hard.
Well, this is one way that she could be helping these people, but instead she's complaining about it, saying, Sorry, I'm going to have to get Pedro from just south of the border to do it instead.
And on the discussion there of like real life examples and people wanting the work and then not actually doing it, there was a response to this that I thought was interesting from this person who said that for the past two months, I have been applying to numerous farms and nurseries.
And this was something reflected in the New York Times article as well, where somebody was saying, I keep actually applying for these jobs and they don't get back to me.
This guy says, I tell them I'm willing to take low pay, but not a single one hired me because they all hire non white people instead.
There is no shortage of hard working white Americans.
We're being denied opportunity because we can't work 12 hours a day for $7 an hour.
But because the foreigners are given welfare, food stamps, free healthcare, government grants, and don't contribute to our tax system, they can pocket the money and live better than us.
And that is another aspect to this as well.
They will get government benefits that the Native Americans do not have.
Access to, which is one of the reasons that they want to do it as well.
But that's one of the interesting things is that essentially H2A and these government programs, because of all the benefits coming to these people.
Farming Subsidy Controversies 00:09:13
Basically, it acts as a form of benefit to the farmers.
I've forgotten the term all of a sudden.
Do you know the word that I'm looking for?
I'm afraid not.
Where a government gives a business benefit subsidy.
Subsidy.
Yes, it's essentially subsidising agriculture and the farming industry, which is one interesting way to do it because it would seem like the government is very specifically subsidising an industry in a way that encourages foreigners.
To come into the country, particularly with the potential expansions on H2A to make it so that it's not just temporary workers, which you can say there is room for, but also for dairy farming and such, where you are kind of needed year round, which makes room for these people to come in, live in permanently, and then apply for citizenship, which will inevitably expand the foreign born population of the country.
Especially in something like farming and agriculture, which I suspect if America is anything like England, right?
Is obviously one when you have the entirety of the land, all the machinery required to actually farm it and everything.
It is obviously a very, very expensive profession to actually run.
And therefore, it's usually people that inherit the role of a farmer from the previous generations of their own family.
And if all those families have, historically speaking, been looking after actual heritage Americans and making sure they have jobs, they have livelihoods, they're being protected.
And then all of a sudden, you're bringing in illegals.
If those illegals are then legalized by some Democrat malarkey, you know, in four years' time, whatever it might be, and so on and so forth, these are the sorts of steps that are naturally taken that reconstitute the demography of America and basically take it away from the American people that created the conditions that her own family most likely would have been able, had led to the prosperity in which they'd been able to start the farm in the first place.
But it's interesting that the government creates the conditions where it's very, very difficult for farmers and then offers a solution to the farmers through a form of subsidy, which just guarantees that there will end up being more and more immigration into the country in one way or another.
And then they start to say, well, the immigration is a problem.
And then when they start to implement the ICE raids, for instance, well, all of those farmers who then began relying on immigration for their farms are still facing all of the other problems that the government puts in their way with red tape and such.
And so you then get New York Times articles like this one saying undocumented immigrants perform roughly 70% of the labor on the state's dairy farms.
At the O'Hara farm, the Republican family owners worry that immigration crackdown will hurt their workers and their business.
So you implement a problem, provide a solution, say the solution is a problem, and then provide a solution to the solution.
SPLC.
Yeah.
And then all of a sudden, there are reports saying, oh, the solution to the solution, which turned into a problem.
Is itself now a problem, so we need more of the original solution, which is inevitably as is the answer.
All roads lead to Rome, and Rome in this case is mass immigration.
Sounds like quite a problem.
Let me just say this is one way in which, if you're a young farmer and you enter the farming industry, and let's say you just want to get a farm and you want to get up and start, you want to get it up and running.
In the beginning, you don't make money, it's usual for the first two or three years for you to not make money.
So if you are ordered.
In a way, to pay double, three times the price for a native worker that you may want to hire, it's virtually impossible for you to start.
I'm not saying that you should necessarily go for the illegal.
I'm just saying that many times the idea of a minimum wage law, and I get it.
Yes, people like protection and people like the idea of safety.
And in some respects, yes, it's important.
But there are negative consequences.
Because if you suddenly say, like Polanski, I'm going to take a minimum wage to $1,600 per month, all you're going to do is you're going to have mass illegal labor.
Well, there's going to be that amount of money.
Because people won't be able to close their business.
Yeah, because business, you know, people who, employers, won't be able to sustain this level of wage.
What's going to happen if Polanski got in charge and actually implemented any of his, any of his like giga brain plans is you'd just have a complete collapse of the country.
Yes.
Almost immediately, I would say if there was a full green government that had a majority and was able to implement its plans, within a month, you would have mass capital flight from the country.
And then you would also just have a complete collapse of the financial system.
And the only people who'd be surprised about any of it would be the Green Party themselves.
Maybe I can see why people are starting to vote now, actually.
No, I'm trying.
Can you imagine 55 per hour on motorways?
Well, I mean, we've already got.
Oh, God.
I forgot that was one of the things that they wanted to do.
But this is where I'm talking about with the subsidies the farmers are already getting, right?
You're starting to get massive subsidies through these immigration programs.
Why not just cut out the middleman?
Save all of the tears and the ice raids and the hand wringing articles talking about how terrible it is that all of these people are being, quote, hunted like animals.
And just cut out the middleman and go to the most obvious solution.
If the government is going to pump so much money into helping these farms to keep making a profit in the first place, just provide the subsidies so that they can automate their systems.
Now, there are articles and there would be articles in this situation complaining about all of the foreigners no longer being able.
To be used as cheap labor on these farms, because they say what replaces deported immigrant workers?
Not Americans, checkmate, magachuds, therefore you need to keep importing Mexicans for all time in all places.
But there are other articles talking here about just the benefits of doing it, and you don't actually have to stop hiring Americans.
The likelihood would be you'd be making more money, being more productive, which is a good thing, because you would have greater, well, potentially a good thing, because you would have greater surpluses equals greater amount of exports that you could sell internationally, lowering the price of such, etc.
Etc.
But you could still hire Americans.
They would just be higher skilled Americans.
And given that low wage industries tend to be destroyed in modern economies anyway, people tend to go for higher wage, higher skilled professions at the moment.
So you would still be able to hire Americans because this article talks about before he began using robots, Mr. Heminger's farm produced about 800,000 pounds of milk per worker per year.
Today, after automating, the farm produces 2.5 million pounds of milk per year.
Pounds of milk per worker per year, which is a ridiculous increase in productivity.
That's a lot of milk.
While still allowing room for workers who would need to work on the farm, because of course you would need the technical skills to be able to operate this.
One of the remarkable things I read about all this, speaking of dairy farms, which obviously H2A wants to expand into that realm.
Is that on dairy farms?
You can now get machines where the cows can literally milk themselves.
The self-milking cow.
The self-milking cow is a real thing.
The cow fills up with milk.
It goes to the machine because it knows what to do.
And then it milks itself.
And then it goes on happy as can be.
You just need a worker to go and collect the milk.
You don't need to hire Pedro for three cents on the dollar to do it for you.
And there's far left.
Less chance of the self milking cow to become a crime statistic.
And in the original article that I spoke about, sorry, in the original segment where I spoke about this, the White Papers Policy Institute had done the maths on it.
And I forget the exact figures, but essentially, to the cost of billions of dollars per year, if the American government simply traded out the subsidies for foreign workers for automation and slowly automating all of these farms, instead you would find that they would be saving the taxpayer billions of dollars every single year.
So, at the moment, the way that the system is set up, the way that the system is set up, and the incentives that are presented to farmers across the country for their own profit gaining motives, it does seem that the incentives are entirely set up to ensure that there is a constant flow of immigration so that people can get cheap labor.
Essentially, a slave class.
So, that's what it is right now.
And I say, in the battle of Mexicans versus robots, I would be rooting for the robots every single time.
And I'll read through my rumble rents.
Logan Pine, in America, we don't have a lot of small farmers.
Most were wiped out in the 1930s.
Yes, that is a problem.
FDR's FDR's social programs and farming programs did destroy a lot of this well, most of the small farms across the country.
I think it was Soviet Style.
Was it Soviet Style?
Resource Grab Anarchy Fears 00:09:18
Grain requisitions?
In the same way that they stole everybody's gold, they just stole a load of the.
They stole all the surplus grain and then like, burned it to maintain a higher price.
Instead of I was, I was unaware of all this.
That's terrible.
FDR's economic policies were less than genius.
Fallen Firebird says.
The urban managerial system Created a service based economy where white collar jobs are prestigious and aspirational.
Then they said, Oh, no, wait, we need farmers, bring in the browns.
That's true, but also again, like for those jobs where the blue collars were still earning good wages, they destroyed the unions in the 1980s so that they weren't earning good wages anymore.
And then said, Oh, no, now nobody wants to be blue collar, bring in the browns.
It's always bringing the browns ultimately.
Right, we got the next segment up.
Thanks, mate.
Yep.
Here we go.
Okay.
Let's see something before we start.
Great.
Okay.
Just the aesthetic of that podcast immediately lets me know this is going to be insufferable, isn't it?
It is going to be insufferable.
That's a promise.
Do you see the glee on his face, folks?
He loves doing this to us.
So, when people are telling you that they want to harm you, believe them, take them at their word.
Is it just a joke?
Well, if it's once or twice, they can say it was a joke because they are appealing to plausible deniability.
But if it is consistent, you better start taking them seriously and you better start paying attention to what they're saying.
And you could say that they are stupid or the R word or something, but start taking them seriously.
And if not what they're saying, start identifying them as a threat.
And we are going to talk about Hassan Piker and the new bad things he said.
The very.
Well, you couldn't have more to say.
Well, he is now talking about.
He killed his dog on stream.
He is now talking about social murder.
I don't know.
Maybe he wants to draw a distinction between social and antisocial murder.
Maybe there's a PR friendly murder for him, according to his perspective.
This is the Luigi Mangione murder of.
Yeah, yeah.
What was it, United Healthcare?
Was that the guy, the CEO of that?
Yeah.
Let's just normalize murdering people in the street for no reason.
We will get there.
But every time the left is putting the social epithet, adjective behind a noun, they just mean, well, it just means whatever I want it to mean.
It's just a way of sugarcoating whatever I find politically expedient.
And that is the leftist mantra.
That's what they're doing, social justice.
And that's now why Hassan Piker is talking about social murder.
But he isn't just talking about social murder.
Let's take one step at a time and see the kind of thing he represents here.
The rich don't play by the rules, so why should I?
Why petty theft might be the new political protest?
And right now, there is a very insufferable push on the ranks of the left for legalizing shoplifting.
Mamdani now is going to be in a bit of trouble.
Now that he wants to run a grocery store, he can't be openly in favor of shoplifting.
But there is such a push for shoplifting and for describing it as petty crime.
And we also have Polanski now who wants to legalize shoplifting here in the UK if he gets elected.
Wait, did he say that?
Yes.
He wants to legalize, he said he wants to legalize shoplifting.
Then we also have now Hassan Piker.
And this push.
But look at this podcast here.
So, this is a production that it's not a cheap production.
And she's also a journalist and two times bestseller author, bestselling author.
And they're talking here about shoplifting as an act of political protest.
And this is the opinion culture editor, Naja Spiegelman, who is calling this micro looting.
And she sat down to talk with Hassan Piker.
Your favorite, and New York writer Gia Tolentino, and they're talking about.
Social micro looting.
They're saying that this is, yeah, that they want to say that this is somehow justified.
But before we get into more into that lunacy, we have a good antidote that it's good for you to check out.
I interviewed Stefan Larsen from Denmark and we talked about why Denmark can afford to be more based than the average EU member.
So check it out to find out the secret of Denmark.
It's very simple, but because it's simple, it can be a sort of a white pill.
It can actually show you how to do negotiations with the EU.
So, yeah, if you want a white pill and if you want to be a bit optimistic, check out this interview that was released yesterday with Stefan Larsen.
You can check it out and let us know what you think.
Right.
So, let's go back to the lunacy and Hassan Piker.
So, he says, if you steal from the poor, you become rich.
If you steal from the wealthy, you go to prison.
There's only one direction where you can go do unlimited theft.
Wage theft is the most consequential amount of theft that takes place in the United States of America.
And he's pushing the Chomsky wage slavery gap, where almost every employer is supposed to be a demon trying to drink the blood of the workers because wealth isn't produced in his mind.
Wealth just grows on trees and it has to be redistributed afterwards.
And redistribution occurs only.
Not in terms of merit, but in terms of who are Hassan Paika's political friends.
Right, and I want to focus on several things here, but notice the following.
He says, Well, the rich are stealing, so why shouldn't I steal?
And he's presenting it as a dilemma, where in fact it isn't a dilemma.
Because the way I see it, you could say, Well, I want to be fair, I want to be a good member of society who isn't going to contribute to lawlessness and anarchy and disintegration.
I am going to be the good example.
I'm going to be the change I want to see in the world.
And all of my energy is going to focus on me being law abiding and a good citizen and someone who is resisting cultural decline and end in trying to rectify whatever theft I see.
If it's the rich, then in the rich class.
So instead of doing this, he says, well, they're doing it, so I'm going to accelerate and I'm going to become part of the problem.
Because why not?
Because it's not actually about morality.
It's just about resource grab.
You know, it's just, you have this thing, I can take this thing.
And I absolutely agree with you when you say, because there are just so many examples of immoral behavior, you know, particularly in Britain.
We don't go around and say, right, because there's Been this story in the news where this person has done this terrible thing, it becomes permissible for me to descend into that thing.
The point is that you're trying to represent something more admirable, right?
Yeah, what would Epstein do isn't exactly the best criterion for your moral conscience.
Well, that's the thing, isn't it?
One of the great ironies with this is everybody on this podcast is presumably ultra rich.
Hassan Piker himself is, he lives in like a $2 million house.
And you can see even those clothes there, I think I saw somebody.
Yeah, yeah, $2.7 million house.
I saw somebody found the glasses that he was wearing, the sunglasses, and they were like thousands of dollars.
He's an idiot because he does all of this and yet he doesn't have the humility not to just broadcast how wealthy he is.
And then when you actually bring it up, he starts screaming and crying, saying, What do you want?
I should actually die or something.
But the thing is, you can criticize the rich and you can criticize the system that we live under.
God knows that we know that plenty of rich people.
Across the West, they are all incredibly corrupt and break all of the rules.
But you are right that there is, that doesn't mean that you can then just break down society and turn it into a grand anarchy because you're not actually fixing anything, you're just breaking things.
He's not advocating kind of like an organized mass resistance that will fix anything for anybody.
He's saying, I want to live it up in a life of luxury while everybody else around me just descends into anarchy.
And similarly, when he says, like, we need to do X and Y to the rich, well, if, what if?
You try and do that to you.
It's not exactly poor.
Louvre Art Theft Debate 00:02:43
It's different.
It's different with him.
And then the final thing is just the inherent contradiction in saying that this broad rule where he says, if you steal from the poor, you become rich.
So do I have to then assume that he and all of the people he sat on the podcast with, because they're all rich, have done it inherently by stealing from the poor?
I would argue with Hassan, there's actually a much better argument for that, given that he relies mainly on Twitch donations.
And you can be guaranteed that most of those people sending donations to him that gives him the money to live this lifestyle are a lot poorer than him.
So, where is his redistribution to all of his supporters and fans who presumably have a much harder life than he does?
And who he respects so much.
This would be his message.
Yeah.
It's the old cake.
Right.
It's Antoinette.
Yes.
Let's look at the.
Well, there is the other bit here.
There was another link here, Samson.
There's another article.
I can't believe there's a paywall for the Daily Mail.
Yeah, I know.
That's mental.
Anyway, let's move forward.
But there was this article here, and it talked about the other woman on the podcast, Gia Tolentino.
And she was.
This is the article, isn't it?
Where she's talking about shop.
I had another one where it's not this.
Samson, if you could click, please, on the.
This one?
Yeah.
He's just getting it now.
Here's mate.
Oh, there you go.
Yes.
Thanks.
So, the New Yorker contributor Gia Tolentino37 claimed stealing food from Whole Foods Market is not very significant because the supermarket, which is owned by Amazon billionaire, can afford the losses and mistreat its workers.
She admitted to pilfering small value items, including lemons, to the New York Times during a sit down with millionaire communist Hassan Piker and culture editor.
Nadia Spiegelman, in a conversation about the rise of microluting from shops.
Tolentino, who has worked at Vogue publisher Conda Nast since 2016, said this is very low class.
It's very low class.
Yeah.
Said there were a number of items and products she would not feel guilty about stealing, also including sharing her Netflix password and partying music from other Spotify accounts.
But what is interesting here is that she added that she would cheer on anyone stealing priceless art from the Louvre.
And said her philosophy on theft was based on who the victim was.
Radicalism And Extremism Risks 00:15:41
If you are an enemy, I want people to steal from you.
If you're not, I don't want to.
So there is actually no principle.
The strange thing about that as well, about just stealing art from the Louvre, is that actually, by nature of it being a museum, the art in the Louvre is more of a communal experience, able to be shared by everyone, so long as you're in Paris, as opposed to someone just taking it, nicking it, and being like, this is mine now and no one else's.
And then as well, whoever is would.
Be willing to do such a terrible thing.
I don't exactly trust them to look after it either.
This is just a poor rationalization of low IQ third world behavior, trying to throw it out.
Just with some ideological trappings around it so that morons like Hassan Paika will defend it.
Hassan Paika, who.
Tell me if I'm wrong, but didn't he visit some like.
Cuba.
No, no, no.
Not Cuba.
I'm trying to remember.
Was it some like Hungarian or Czech or Bulgarian brothel that then a few weeks after he.
Visited it, was raided because it had underage girls in it.
Oh my god.
Well, I didn't hear about that before.
I'm sure I remember reading about that.
Right.
So we know that there is zero principle there when it comes to theft, and they are very much happy with.
People stealing from whoever they identify their enemies.
But there is much worse than this.
And there is much worse than petty theft that they are advocating for.
And in this case, I would say that I've had enough with the left making constant excuses about murderers.
And I don't care if they put the social adjective in front of murder or in front of justice or in front of anything.
Murderers are murderers.
And whether you think someone or a CEO of a particular company or something took a decision that wasn't favorable to you, it doesn't mean that you're justified going out and killing them.
Let's look at here what he's talking about.
And I want you to look at the casual manner in which he's talking about murder.
And we know that the left is making constant excuses about criminals, and particularly when it comes to crime of classes that they consider to be oppressed.
And we know this especially from the Irina Zarutska murder by DeGarlos Brown Jr.
The left hates people who mention it.
They didn't like the fact that even the MSM wasn't talking about it because they didn't want to disrupt this myth of the good oppressed people who never oppress anyone and never commit any crime.
And in the case of last year where we had the terrible assassination of Charlie Kirk as well, it wasn't beneath them.
To just purposely, like Jimmy Kimmel did, actively sow, in their own words, misinformation, basically blaming Kirk's murder on the right to get out of culpability.
Not just sowing disinformation in the first hours, which, you know, it was just a propaganda trick, you know, anger control.
It was also the sheer level of happiness that lots of them displayed on camera.
Yes.
And that was very widespread.
And it wasn't even two or three influencers who wanted to be edgy or something.
It was widespread.
And this level of happiness with the assassination, I don't think exists in any sort of crime that has been committed from the other side.
I haven't seen, if something from the right takes place, a crime of such a nature, I don't see right wingers going out and being ultra happy.
In fact, they want to marginalize people who are saying that they are happy about it and they are trying to make it.
Into something that they should make it.
Let's look at what he says here.
Engels wrote about the concept of social murder.
And Brian Thompson, as the United Healthcare CEO, was engaging in a tremendous amount of social murder, the systematized forms of violence.
Right.
So this is just absolute nonsense.
And this is just like the notion of wage slavery.
It's absolute nonsense.
And what they're doing is they're intentionally radicalizing people in order to get them to think.
That they are in a constant mode of existential threat.
The very structure of society, the very fact that people don't agree with them or their self conception constitutes an existential threat to them.
And by implication, if they commit violent crimes, Hassan Piker's philosophy implies that they were justified in using violence against whoever did whatever they didn't like because it was an existential threat against them.
This is this disgusting philosophy that is radical and extremist and should be treated as such.
And there is no, you can't make any excuses about it.
They don't care how much you're going to cite Hegel, how much you're going to cite Marx, how much you're going to cite Engels.
This is extremism, radicalism, and should be treated as such.
This shouldn't be allowed in society.
The New York Times disagrees.
Yeah.
But apparently, this is a much larger.
Problem and people are saying, well, this isn't radical.
This just isn't radical.
I understand, he says, Hassan Paiker, when he says he understands Luigi Mangione for killing United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson, father of two.
Well, that's very disconcerting and it shows how it's virtually very difficult to coexist with people who are saying this.
And I really hope that there can be a way to be found.
But and I really hope that this is much more hot air than they're saying is maybe maybe it's a grifter or something, a planter, not maybe he is a grifter and a planter, something.
But I think that this, if things go down this road, it's not going to end well.
I don't want them to go down this road.
Right, and I think we need to bear in mind some of the general claims that Hassan Piker has made and how he's constantly get away with them, and how people from the other side wouldn't get away with them.
And I'm going to be very honest, I wouldn't want them to get away with it.
I don't want them to.
I don't care to say just because the left doesn't have standards, the right shouldn't have standards either.
No, I think standards are important.
And conservatives should uphold standards.
And there have been some arguments regarding gatekeeping, or don't gatekeep, or something.
There's no such thing as no gatekeeping.
Everyone is gatekeeping, everyone is holding others accountable to standards.
So the very fact that the left doesn't have standards doesn't mean that people who aren't on the left shouldn't have standards.
So let's see some of his comments in order to detect that this is a pattern.
This isn't an isolated incident, just like we're listening all the time.
When crimes by within quotation marks oppressed groups are being committed, isolated incident due to mental illness.
No, there's a pattern.
And let's look at some of his comments in order to remember them, because let's face it, many people don't have exactly perfect memory.
He says here kill the mofos, let the streak soak in their red capitalist blood.
Democrats are campaigning with him, as Ann Wokner says here.
He says here America deserved 9 11, and the Democrats are.
Associating with him.
Mamdani in New York is associating with Hassan Piker and not just Mamdani.
They are associating with a person who says America deserved 9 11.
Also, as well, when you abstract it out like that, it's like, no, which people in the Twin Towers that day deserved to die, Hassan?
Whose life in that tower who lost it that day on 9 11 actually deserved to have their life ended?
And obviously, the answer is no one.
Absolutely no one.
And he says here, I don't.
He doesn't have any patriotism in his heart for America.
This was in a trip in China.
And obviously not, he's Turkish.
Yes.
Also, is he the nephew of Cenk Wiger?
Yes.
Yeah.
All right.
Also, Democrat Representative Ro Khanna here doubles down on support of Hassan Piker, who said that America deserved 9 11.
So it's.
They are associating with someone who hasn't made an edgy joke here or there, is consistent with what he is saying.
And yeah, communists are a major threat to the West, and they have been.
And the very fact that they lost the Cold War with the fall of the USSR, that.
Hassan Piker is lamenting here, quite in the open, doesn't mean that they stopped wanting to subvert Western society and European society.
They are trying to work in a more Fabian, incrementalist way.
They're trying to enact the long march through the institutions, and they have enacted it.
It's more than just an effort.
They have actually succeeded to a very large extent.
So people need to start waking up to the extent of communist infiltration within.
Western institutions.
And here he's saying the fall of the USSR was one of the greatest catastrophes of the 20th century.
Now, I will say this it is definitely the case that the fall of the USSR was followed by a very brutal decade for the Russians.
And this is something to feel bad about.
But let's separate those two events.
Hassan Piker isn't that much interested in the latter.
Is interested in the former because this is what explains his rhetoric consistently.
Right.
One thing I find interesting, right, is that he is permitted to continue saying all of this at all and gets the enormous platform on the New York Times in the first place.
And in the same way that the right wing has containment, I see Hassan Piker as a form of left wing containment.
As well.
One, because he's so stupid and nuts that he can dissipate a lot of energy because the right can look at somebody like Hassan Piker and say, all of my enemies are morons with no point at all.
When, in fact, Hassan Piker, some of the criticisms that he is parroting might be legitimate, but his solutions to those criticisms are always so beyond the pale that it discredits the criticism in the first place, right?
Secondly, ultimately, his solution is always still within the American two party system.
His solution is always still vote Democrat.
Therefore, vote Democrat.
Therefore, vote Democrat.
America's falling to fascism.
We need a revolution.
Vote Democrat.
This is something that Dave Smith criticized him for back in the day when he said to him, Listen, mate, ultimately, you're just a bog standard Democrat.
And what he allows to happen is anybody who would be considered a dissident leftist, for instance, somebody who is maybe not an insane lunatic, but somebody who is intelligent, who falls that way ideologically, they can get caught up.
In his rhetoric, yeah, we need to bring down the capitalists, we need to soak in their red capitalist blood.
I'm going to vote Democrat.
Right.
Because Hassan Piker said so.
And I do think that there is a reason he is allowed to exist within this system, whereas somebody who was an actual revolutionary, who actually took his ideas way too far, but acted on them in a way that he saw as a rational reaction to his ideas, somebody like Ted Kaczynski actually gets arrested and imprisoned, and he had to hold America hostage to get his word out, whereas previously they never would have.
He wouldn't have got the same kind of broadcasting and New York Times articles that Hassan Piker does if he hadn't held people hostage, essentially.
And that is not to defend anything that Ted Kaczynski did.
Innocent people were hurt, innocent people died because of him.
But there is a clear distinction between that kind of radical and a faux millionaire radical like Hassan Piker, for as much as Hassan Piker does do real world harm.
He's allowed to.
So I have several things to add here.
First of all, I agree with you completely that he.
There's something really fishy about him that goes without saying.
Yeah.
And I really think that, in a way, the average communist who isn't rich will look at Hassan Piker and say, well, that's not exactly who I had in mind as representing me.
Yeah.
I do think this.
Like someone who is literally as bougie as you can possibly be.
Yes.
Now, though, there is the other bit that.
Necessarily wouldn't help with the orthodox view of Marxism, where they have the very worker oriented mentality and the proletariat structure around labor unions that are going to be led by the avant garde party.
But when it comes to neo Marxism and the targeting of different groups as being the main engine for the revolution, it could be the case that people would be more happy to see him as their guy.
Now, when it comes to the two party system, that doesn't necessarily seem to me to be less.
Radical of him because it could definitely be the case.
It's very possible, and I think it's probable that he's thinking, not in terms of, hey, let's just have this centrist thing going on and occasionally let me just express left wing radicalism better than others in order to contain and sort of to contain and control it.
But if we see what they're doing, they could say, right, let's get the The Democrat Party, and let's infiltrate it from within.
I think that this is what they have been doing, and they are being more emboldened.
And look at this the same way that the young Zoomers.
Yeah, because you could say that in the last, after Obama, the Democrats completely lost their sensibles.
They became completely consumed by the radicals, and there is sort of a radical progress there.
Democrat Party Radical Shifts 00:04:46
I mean, they wouldn't go out to even try and say that the MAGA killed Charlie Kirk.
Just to sow division.
So I think that there's no organic section in the final.
I'm not saying these people aren't crazy.
The funny thing is, though, like neo Marxism in the first place, there's an argument to be made that that was essentially created by the CIA in the first place, with the OSS and the Frankfurt School being brought in by the American government and then helping to be funded by the American government.
Even if that's the case, you could say that that's a very interesting topic of discussion, I'm sure.
We could have it another time because we're short for time.
But even if that was created this way, it could have a life of its own.
Oh, no, that's what I'm saying.
I'm not saying that it doesn't go out to have a life of its own.
But it's funny that all of these kind of like Hassan Piker esque radicals cite Chomsky when, of course, we all found out earlier on this year that Chomsky himself was a big friend of Jeffrey Epstein and was, in fact, working side by side with Steve Bannon, of all people.
Again, Chomsky is another example of a guy who.
Does have some interesting insights in books like Manufacturing Consent, but ultimately has been a regime approved radical for a very, very long time, even if he has gone over the line quite a lot.
He's still been allowed to exist in the public space so that he could, purely so he could occupy that public space in lieu of somebody else who might actually organize and do something more useful for their cause.
Yeah, I want to ask you the last bit about containment because to my mind, he's basically not containing, he is accelerating.
The extremism and radicalism.
Because you could say that containment could be someone who would try to create a sort of restraint.
He's trying to sort of contain the extreme radicalism that is consuming the Democrat Party at the moment.
Because I can definitely think that someone like Gavin Newsom would have at least.
At least a three digit, you know, at least 100 IQ, and say, Well, I don't want them to come and backstab me.
Oh, no, no.
The thing is with containment, it's not necessarily about like stopping people from having extreme ideas and thoughts.
It's about channeling that back to the same solution.
Ultimately, the containment is not that Hassan is not an extremist moron.
Clearly, he is.
It's that ultimately, He is a fraud because he's just as much of a bourgeois as anybody else.
He's rich.
And his solution is ultimately to vote Democrat.
Now, the Democrats have clearly.
Identical to Bernie Sanders.
Yeah, progressively been getting more and more crazy.
But it's the fact that it's within the two party system that can still, under the security apparatus of the American government and the deep state, be hemmed in like they did with Bernie Sanders.
Yeah.
Could be, but where I am a bit more skeptical here is that.
The fact that he's bourgeois doesn't necessarily mean that he's not dangerous because lots of people who led communist revolutions, and I'm not saying he's going to do this, I don't think he will, but I think he is contributing to this.
But people who did this were bourgeois in a way.
Well, it's not out of the possibility.
These things have always gone out of control.
I mean, just look at the case of Germany supporting Lenin during the First World War.
They were the ones who got him that train ride into Russia when the revolution happened so that he could ultimately take over.
They put him in as an agent so that he would be able to pull Russia out of the war so that the Germans could free up their east flank.
That's over 20 years later.
Yeah, and then 20 years later, Russia is their biggest threat that they're worried about, and they end up doing a preemptive invasion of.
So these things can run really out of control, but I would say there is a massive gulf of intellectual difference between a Lenin and a Hassan Piker.
Any last thoughts in this?
No, just even our enemies are in a decline.
So the last bit I'm going to say for the end of the segment is that this is.
Pretty clearly, incitement to violence and not just incitement to violence, it's the creation of a framework where violence is almost always justified if it is done in the name of leftist causes.
And this is something that shouldn't be allowed.
This is, yeah, it's just straightforwardly incitement to violence.
I don't think this should be allowed.
Right.
Incitement To Violence Framework 00:02:43
Um, got two ones here from the top.
Two one here, yeah.
Logan 17 Pine says, or he could just be a communist and an idiot.
Unfortunately, sometimes it is a simple answer.
I agree, he is a communist and an idiot.
The thing is, why the question becomes, why is he allowed to spread violent extremist rhetoric that gets people killed?
He's a communist and an idiot that people in such places as the New York Times have a purpose for, right?
And they're trying to use him as a tool for their own ends, yeah.
And uh, Rafnek MP 173 agrees with George Joseph McCarthy.
About communism.
And he does it for $10.
So thank you very much.
Thank you very much.
Let's go to the video comments.
Hey loads, see, so still at Hopton Castle.
If you didn't know, the Hopton Castle Preservation Trust is working with the Pendragon Foundation.
This is the first castle that Pendragon's working with, so hopefully together we'll help to preserve the castle.
I currently volunteer for them as well.
There's also the magazine as well, I think there's a few copies still available, so you can get them if you want.
I hope this is the first step of many in the future to help preserve castles like this.
I happen to have an issue of the magazine on my desk, Zesty.
And yes, I'm very familiar with Nathan's work.
I did a segment some months ago when they first started promoting the Pendragon Foundation.
And yeah, I'm very eager to support them in the future because you're right, they are doing very valuable work.
All right, that was the only video comment, was it, Samson?
Looks like we've got the website comments.
All right, so Zesty King again says At university, I was sharing facilities with a.
A Renai issue.
Yes, I. From East London, a roadmap.
Yeah, I'm so sorry, Zesty.
Yeah.
He tried multiple times to get me to swap rooms so a friend of his could join him.
He offered me Gucci bags, money, and even women.
I said no.
A few weeks later, he destroyed all my crockery.
Gucci bags?
What?
Yeah, this is.
Presumably off the back of a lorry somewhere.
Right.
I mean, that's just.
I mean, that's terrible, Zesty.
I'm sorry you had to endure that.
Yeah, that was another thing as well.
When I was living in Lincoln with those nights, they also stole my cutlery.
As well, and just like took things from my drawers.
I thought uni houses look what they took from us.
My knife and fork is what they took from me.
I thought it was bad enough in normal uni housing.
I'm so glad I never had to live with any foreigners for it.
Alexander Roberts says in Seattle, Washington, there is an all Japanese apartment complex on top of a Japanese shopping center, grocery store, and food court.
Slave Labor Civil War Parallels 00:02:58
A civil rights lawyer could destroy the place.
They won't, though.
No, they won't, will they?
And Myrmidon, and as much as I obviously do love the Japanese, again, that's not acceptable in America.
Myrmidon 2010 says For housing, if the courts and government don't stamp this out, will other groups also start offering racial, ethnic only access?
And will they be able to fight the courts to maintain it because they have precedent when this, what's never stopped?
Well, we know that some demographics will be able to get away with it and others won't.
And obviously, you know which is which.
Here for my segment, we have White Rider who has looked this up saying, I looked this up last night.
She, the farmer I was showing the video of, is trying to pay $8 an hour under the market rate for live in hard labour.
So she is essentially looking for slave labor in that case.
That's the thing is that when she's like, oh, I've got $200,000 spare to build housing for these people, it's like, so you've got money to pay them then.
So you just don't want to pay them a decent wage.
Annie Moss says Americans do not want to be exploited.
My uncle is a farmer in rural Indiana who has livestock and crops.
The nearest town is 15 miles away and has 1,500 people.
He has always hired local Americans from the area.
He doesn't have problems getting them to work.
He also pays well.
As he knows it is hard work.
There are no labor unions involved, and my uncle pays the appropriate taxes.
There you go.
It should be as simple as that.
Your uncle's a good man, then.
A lot of people want to avoid that, and then they go, oh, sorry, guess I've got to flood the country with Mexicans instead.
Diogenes Nuts says dairy farms are largely automated now.
You can look up videos of these milking machines using laser guided systems and automatic cleaning methods to milk cows who learn to walk into the milking pen to get their daily feed.
If you're trying to compete with automation, you're deliberately underpaying your labor force by definition of economics of automation lowering costs.
Government should provide subsidies for their farms to upgrade their systems rather than import the kind of people who can be paid third world wages in first world countries.
Yeah, that's great.
I love that the cows can just milk themselves.
Yeah, in my head, I just feel is this going to be comparable to the American Civil War and the fact that eventually the industrialized North was just able to out compete the South?
In the same way that eventually just modern technology and all of these solutions are going to.
That's the thing with the subsidies, isn't it?
We're going to subsidize your ability to get cheap labor in so that we can keep you open.
Okay, well, then just subsidize them to automate and industrialize a bit and improve their technology.
I'll also read some comments from mine due to considerations about time.
California refugee is heading down to put up a bunch of poor black people to live in Hassan's mansion.
He'll also save his dog while he's there.
Gold Tier Upgrade Offer 00:01:33
Oh, please do.
Good, man.
Jimbo G says at least Hassan just straight up says you deserve.
To be killed if you oppose him, whereas Zach hides it behind more creative language.
In their utopia, we would all be wearing shock colors to correct wrong things.
And Maria Manzi says the issue with containment as a political strategy is that it will always slip from control.
That is a problem as well for people doing containment.
Right.
So, three o'clock, Gold Tier Zoom, those of you who are Gold Tier members, Check it out.
Those of you who aren't, consider upgrading to gold tier to be on this lovely call and enjoy this time, brother Harry and brother Luca, in a more intimate way.
I'm joking.
What?
What are you setting up for?
I'm not mean it in a sexual way.
Well, what are you setting up for?
I'm joking.
I just didn't want to create pictures in people's minds.
Right.
Okay.
So, thank you very much.
I really enjoyed it.
I hope you did as well.
And see you at 3 p.m.
And those of you who want to see him, you bastard.
Impish laugh.
And also, those of you who want to come to the Gold Tier Zoom, we hope to see you next Monday at 1 p.m.
Thank you very much.
Giggity.
Export Selection