Two new polls reveal what people really think of China
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
171.49521
Summary
Two new polls, one in Canada and one in the US, measure support or lack thereof for China. In the Canadian one, a list of statements are read to people, and they are asked if they agree or disagree with each of them.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Hello, my Rebels. Today, I take you through two opinion polls, one in Canada, one in the
00:00:04.140
States, measuring support or lack thereof for China. They're two very interesting polls,
00:00:10.780
quirky questions in the Canadian one, basic questions in the American one. I feel smarter
00:00:15.620
for having read it, and hopefully you will too. You'll be able to drop these stats with
00:00:19.380
your friends with great authority. Anyways, let me invite you to become a Rebel News Plus
00:00:25.120
subscriber. It's $8 a month, or $80 if you pay the whole year in advance, and you get
00:00:29.460
the video version of the show where I will show you charts. Okay, here's the podcast.
00:00:48.980
Tonight, two new polls ask people what they think of China. Very interesting. It's May 21st,
00:00:58.540
Why should others go to jail when you're a biggest carbon consumer I know?
00:01:02.260
There's 8,500 customers here, and you won't give them an answer.
00:01:06.320
The only thing I have to say to the government about why I publish it is because it's my bloody
00:01:17.300
I've got two new polls for you about China. The first is from a company called Research Co.
00:01:22.160
They're based in BC. I hadn't heard of Research Co before, but I had heard of their pollster,
00:01:27.860
Mario Canseco, and he's always struck me as a very smart and very honest guy, so I put a fair
00:01:33.760
bit of stock in this poll. There are some great pollsters in BC, including Angus Reid. As usual,
00:01:39.420
there are a ton of stats in a poll, so I'm only going to focus on a few questions that I think are
00:01:44.380
the most interesting. So you can see what they do is there's a list of statements that they read to
00:01:51.400
people, and then Canadians were asked, from what you have seen, read, or heard, do you agree or
00:01:58.320
disagree with each of the following statements? All right, I'm going to skip the first question,
00:02:02.780
and I'll come back to it later. So let's start with this one. The government of the People's Republic
00:02:08.060
of China should take responsibility for its role in the COVID-19 outbreak. So then people are asked
00:02:14.640
if they agree or disagree. Pretty straightforward and to the point, isn't it? And look at these
00:02:19.220
amazing answers. Strongly agree, 40%. Moderately agree, another 32%. So that's 72% who agree in some
00:02:29.100
way. That's overwhelming. Only 9% of Canadians moderately disagree, and only 9% strongly disagree.
00:02:35.440
In the next column, you can see that men are slightly more critical of China than women are.
00:02:42.100
Women are slightly less sure, but the numbers are pretty similar by sex. By age, there's a little
00:02:47.720
bit more of a difference. Let's compare millennials. 37% strongly agree. People my age, Gen X, it's 46%.
00:02:55.840
But again, it's overwhelming in every age group. And look by regions. British Columbians are likely to
00:03:02.400
strongly agree that China's to blame. 42%. That's one than any other region except the Atlantic. It's
00:03:09.320
interesting, because there's such a large Chinese-Canadian population in BC. I guess they know what China's
00:03:14.400
really like. Last point, by political persuasion. So how people voted in the previous election, conservatives
00:03:21.660
are the most hostile to China. 47%. Strongly agree. But liberals aren't that far behind. 42%.
00:03:29.620
Those are Canadians who say they strongly agree China's to blame. Add in the moderately agree
00:03:36.200
Canadians. Liberals are at 73%. Conservatives are at 81%. So again, both are very high. It's not
00:03:43.560
unanimous, though. But I challenge you to show me something else so overwhelming like this, so lopsided
00:03:48.820
like this in public opinion, other than the obvious and perhaps related question of restricting out-of-control
00:03:54.180
immigration, which is also in this 80% range. Now let me show you the next question on the poll,
00:04:00.760
which is a bit radical, a bit cheeky, probably a legal non-starter. But so what? It's a good
00:04:05.480
barometer for public opinion. And that's what we're doing here. From what you have seen, read or heard,
00:04:11.280
do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements? The government of Canada should consider
00:04:16.220
launching legal action against the People's Republic of China on account of the COVID-19 outbreak.
00:04:21.480
Like I said, we don't really sue countries. Countries have something called sovereign immunity,
00:04:27.800
but it's not unprecedented. And I think we can use suing countries as a proxy for other legal means
00:04:34.140
like sanctions or taking away certain trade privileges from treaties with China. So it's a bit
00:04:40.900
radical, but let's look anyways. 20% of Canadians are strongly for this. Another 11% are moderately for
00:04:48.640
it's a total of 31%. It's not a majority, but it's a sizable chunk. 22% are against it. 27% of
00:04:56.580
people are strongly against it. So 49% of people are against this. Not quite half, still more than
00:05:02.860
those who want to sue China. But the very question would have been unthinkable four months ago.
00:05:08.280
Don't you think? This shows that Canadians are open to radical solutions to deal with China,
00:05:12.720
even if this isn't the right solution. It's very interesting to me. The one group of Canadians
00:05:18.400
that's ready to rumble is not surprisingly conservatives. They're a total of 42% of
00:05:24.380
conservative voters strongly or moderately support the idea and 38% oppose it. Here's a quirky BC style
00:05:32.240
question that was thrown in. Do you agree that more people will consider adopting vegetarian or vegan
00:05:38.680
diets after the COVID-19 outbreak ends? Now, that's sort of confusing to me. I guess that implies that
00:05:45.260
bats were at the root of this or the wet markets where people in China go to buy and eat wild animals
00:05:53.140
and things like that. That's a Vancouver question asking about vegetarianism, isn't it? Not a lot of
00:05:57.440
people say yes to that, but funny enough, the highest numbers in Alberta and with conservatives.
00:06:03.200
Now, I said I'd come back to the first question and here it is. Do you agree or disagree with this?
00:06:07.820
It is acceptable to refer to COVID-19 as the Chinese virus or Chinese flu. Well, overwhelmingly people
00:06:16.100
said no. 53% of people are strongly against that and 22% more are moderately against that. NDPers are
00:06:23.040
the most adamant. Quebecers and conservatives have the highest support for using those words. I'm not
00:06:29.380
too surprised by this. First of all, most people just plain old say the virus or coronavirus or
00:06:35.540
COVID-19. So it has a name that's becoming commonplace. And I think Chinese virus is a
00:06:41.900
deliberate verbal weapon that was deployed by Donald Trump for political reasons only after
00:06:47.880
and in specific reaction to China. Incredibly, when they tried to blame the U.S. for the virus,
00:06:53.540
they were doing that. They were actually still doing that. And the thing with Trump is if you poke him,
00:06:57.900
oh, he's going to poke you back five times harder. Why do you keep calling this the Chinese virus?
00:07:03.560
There are reports of dozens of incidents of bias against Chinese Americans in this country.
00:07:09.620
Your own aide, Secretary Azar, says he does not use this term. He says ethnicity does not cause the
00:07:15.240
virus. Why do you keep using this? A lot of people say it's racist. It's not racist at all. No,
00:07:20.720
not at all. It comes from China. That's why. It comes from China. I want to be accurate.
00:07:26.780
So yeah, I don't even think Trump says China virus very often, just when he wants to poke at China.
00:07:33.640
I think there's also a shyness effect in this poll. People don't want to tell a pollster
00:07:37.420
an answer they think is politically incorrect or wrong. So those are Canadian numbers. But you heard
00:07:42.700
Gordon Chang on my show the other day. He said Pew Research had new U.S. numbers out too. And indeed,
00:07:48.200
they do. I didn't know that until Gordon said that on the show. And Pew are real pros. They tilt
00:07:53.440
liberal, yes. But I actually really trust their methodology. I think they put accuracy first.
00:07:59.160
They're very comprehensive. So let me just show you some details from the new Pew Research Info
00:08:04.260
just last month. It's probably worse because this is in late April. Let me read their headline.
00:08:11.260
U.S. views of China increasingly negative amid coronavirus outbreak. Republicans more negative
00:08:16.540
than Democrats towards China, though unfavorable ratings have climbed among both parties.
00:08:21.600
Okay. So let's go through it. It's so comprehensive, I'm only going to touch on some highlights. But if
00:08:26.300
you're curious, you can find it pretty quick on the internet. So this is the percent of people who say
00:08:30.900
they have a positive or negative view of China. Look at it during the Obama years. It really rose high.
00:08:37.140
When Trump took over, it started to fall. And this year, it just plunged.
00:08:40.480
66% of people are negative. 26% are positive. That's the virus. It's also trade wars. It's also
00:08:47.520
Huawei and 5G and hacking and spying and a Chinese aircraft carrier and human rights and Tibet and
00:08:54.360
Uyghurs. It's everything. This graph breaks it down by party. Red is Republican. Blue is by Democrats.
00:09:00.120
So yeah, Republicans are and always have been more skeptical of communists. But the Democrats seem to be
00:09:06.200
moving in lockstep a little bit lower, but they're moving the same trend. 62% of Dems are still anti-China.
00:09:11.880
That's a big deal. You could definitely call this a bipartisan issue. Here it is by age. Young people
00:09:18.700
are more China-friendly. Really, no one else is. And young people don't really vote. This one's
00:09:24.580
interesting. What is it about China that you think are problems? Very serious or somewhat serious? So
00:09:29.980
91% say that the environment, isn't that interesting, the number one issue, the environment. It's amazing
00:09:36.280
that people know that, though, because Greta Thunberg and the United Nations, they never criticize
00:09:41.240
China. That's a hopeful result, isn't it? We're not all fooled, unlike, say, Justin Trudeau.
00:09:48.100
There's a level of admiration I actually have for China, because their basic dictatorship is allowing
00:09:58.860
them to actually turn their economy around on a dime and say, we need to go green as fast as we
00:10:04.180
need to start, you know, investing in solar. Yeah, you have to be dumb as Trudeau to believe
00:10:08.980
China's good on the environment. Cyber attacks are in second place, followed by trade and jobs,
00:10:14.300
then China's military, then human rights. Isn't that all very interesting? Here's one more. This
00:10:20.260
is the question, who is the world's leading economic power? Blue is China, green is the U.S. Look at that.
00:10:28.900
Almost immediately after Obama became president, remember, he was elected in 2008, inaugurated in
00:10:34.000
January 2009, America said that China pulled ahead. But that started to change in the dying days of
00:10:41.500
Obama's administration. And then America has zoomed under Trump, according to Americans. Seriously,
00:10:47.300
in 2013, only 40% of Americans said America was number one, now 59% do. That is not an accident,
00:10:54.320
is it? And this chart shows that both Republicans and Democrats generally agree. Last question.
00:11:03.000
The first question is, is the world's, is the United States the world's leading military power?
00:11:07.900
83% say yes. 6% say China is. I don't even think that's a matter of opinion, at least for now.
00:11:14.180
Obviously, America has the superior army quantitatively and qualitatively. But the second
00:11:19.080
bar is this. Is it better for the world if the U.S. is the leading power, or if China would be?
00:11:27.280
Now, that's 91% to 4%. Couldn't be more lopsided. And you know what? I bet if you ask Canadians that
00:11:35.600
same question, they'd more or less answer the same way. Stay with us for more.
00:11:53.680
Peter, I just want to get one final thought from you. Are there words that are used to describe men
00:11:57.340
that offend you? Not particularly. And if there were some I don't like, I certainly wouldn't want
00:12:02.980
them banned. But it goes, you know, it always goes back to that old adage, sticks and stones may break
00:12:07.640
my bones, but there will always be something to offend a feminist. Peter Lloyd. No, that's just
00:12:12.920
obnoxious. You have to give me a chance to respond to that. That is ridiculous. That, no, hang on,
00:12:18.000
I won't do your show again if you don't let me respond to that. Go on, Kate, have a word. Come on,
00:12:21.160
that's ridiculous. You know what? I watch that at least once a month. It just puts a smile on my
00:12:26.980
face. And it's a reminder that the battle of the sexes has been going on forever. As, you know,
00:12:34.420
someone in a different, less politically correct generation would say, women, you can't live with
00:12:39.140
them. You can't live without them. It's been a challenge for every young man and young woman to
00:12:44.620
figure things out. In the past, they were called hopeless romantics, or in the 80s or 90s, maybe emo,
00:12:50.820
short for emotional. But now, young men and women who are having trouble finding a mate, they're
00:12:56.020
called incels, involuntary celibates. All right, fair enough. But now it seems that political
00:13:03.540
activists are trying to turn that into some sort of ideology, some sort of terror group. And in fact,
00:13:11.420
here in the city of Toronto, there has been terror charges laid against a 17-year-old man for murder
00:13:19.740
in a, quote, erotic massage parlor. He killed a 24-year-old woman, allegedly. Is that a crime of
00:13:28.040
passion? A hopeless person wrestling with his own demons? Or is it a terrorist act? Well, joining us
00:13:35.340
now is the man you saw in that clip. Peter Lloyd is his name. He's an author and journalist in the UK,
00:13:40.780
and he joins us now via Skype. Peter, it's great to see you. Thanks for coming on the show.
00:13:45.660
Great. Thanks for finally having me. This is my debut on Rebel, so it's great to be here.
00:13:49.800
Well, it's a pleasure. And I saw you were published in RT. You had a great column on the subject. And the
00:13:55.940
very fact that you were in RT, I want to remark on that because your point of view is considered,
00:14:03.120
I mean, you're, I would call you a, I don't know, a men's rights activist might be too much. I'll let
00:14:08.220
you describe yourself. But your point of view is generally pushed out of mainstream media in the
00:14:14.260
West. It doesn't surprise me that you have to go to a foreign outlet like RT to say the things you say.
00:14:20.380
Right. I mean, that is a telling sign of the state of journalism. I've worked for a number of
00:14:26.140
newspapers and magazines in my time. I'm nearly 40 now. And I've reached the point where I just no
00:14:32.640
longer want to try and fight to get column inches in a paper where my view isn't going to be kind of
00:14:38.180
respected or treated with, with any kind of reverence. So now I've gone to one of the outlets
00:14:43.120
that will give me the freedom to say what I believe is true and to let the audience decide for
00:14:48.000
themselves. That's one of the great things about RT, which allows people to do that.
00:14:52.380
It's so unusual that we have to go to foreign press to have the freedom to say things in our
00:14:58.340
own countries. Well, Peter, let me know what you think about this Toronto case. You're in the UK,
00:15:03.440
but it looks like you've done a lot of research into it. I mean, being a teenager is a phase. It's
00:15:10.620
hormones. It's figuring things out. It's how do I relate to women? Or am I gay? Or what's going on?
00:15:17.880
There's a lot of questions to turn that into some sort of terrorist ideology seems a bit of a stretch
00:15:23.520
to me. Yeah. And me too. I'm totally with you on that. I mean, my first reaction when I heard of
00:15:29.460
this case, if I'm honest, was to cringe. I thought, my God, just when you think Canada can't get any
00:15:35.140
more woke, it surprises you. I mean, obviously, look, this crime was terrible. It was a brutal homicide.
00:15:41.840
It was made worse by the fact that this woman was young. She was an innocent victim. And she was also
00:15:47.360
the mother to a young child. So it's terrible on all fronts. Nobody would disagree with that.
00:15:52.360
But it's clearly not terrorism. I mean, I've witnessed terrorism firsthand. I was 12 when the IRA
00:16:00.600
detonated bombs in my local town centre. I was on the London Underground when 7-7 happened. And about
00:16:08.120
two years ago, my niece was at the Ariana Grande concert in Manchester, where an Islamic extremist
00:16:13.860
detonated a bomb and killed more than 20 youngsters. So I know, to some degree, what terrorism looked
00:16:20.860
like and what it resembles. And this was not it. It wasn't nowhere near on the same scale.
00:16:26.600
9-11, as the Bataclan massacre, or any of those other atrocities which are performed crucially
00:16:32.340
with a political motive. As you said earlier, what happened in this case, it's clearly either
00:16:38.800
some kind of derangement or mental illness crossed with a crime of passion. I think it's really
00:16:45.040
important that we maintain the integrity of the word terrorism, because the West is going to experience
00:16:49.600
a lot more of it over the next few decades. And we need to be able to have a term that accurately
00:16:54.560
describes it and does those events justice. Yeah. You know, my theory for why they're trying to
00:17:03.280
rebrand a young emotional man's violence, sexual frustration as right wing, they're trying to
00:17:11.040
brand it as terrorism so they can have another cudgel to go after right wingers. I don't see anything
00:17:18.020
right wing or left wing about, in this case, a 17-year-old guy. Crime of passion, confusion.
00:17:25.380
I don't know if he was right wing or left wing. I think people of all political stripes and no
00:17:31.100
political stripes have curiosity and frustration and hope and sorrow and are figuring things out.
00:17:37.860
I think it's sort of a trick to try and say, we're going to brand all young, emotionally brooding
00:17:44.940
men as right wing to demonize all right wingers. That's my theory.
00:17:51.060
Yeah, I actually think it's, I think it's broader than just right wing men. It's just
00:17:55.320
young men in general, specifically young, white, straight men. I think that is really the target
00:18:00.560
group. I mean, if this charge of terrorism is successful in Canada, it will be the first time
00:18:06.460
that that code of criminal conduct has been used against someone who wasn't an Islamic extremist.
00:18:14.140
So I think it's two-pronged. I think really they want to try and find a new category to criminalize
00:18:20.280
straight, white, young men. And I also think they want to try and make terrorism look less connected
00:18:27.540
to Islam than it actually is. I mean, if we face reality, all of the major events that have been
00:18:32.300
terror related have all been connected to Islam. You know, that's a very good point. You're right.
00:18:37.620
It's not even right wing, left wing. It's just men. And as you say, I mean, we don't, I don't think
00:18:42.300
we know the identity of this 17 year old because he's, his identity is shielded. Although there was
00:18:48.260
another case of an incel attack in Toronto. It looked like a Muslim man of age 30. But I think
00:18:54.580
you're right. I think they're trying to de-Islamify the crime of terrorism. And they're trying to take a
00:19:01.340
swipe at all men at masculinity itself. I think they're trying to turn masculinity into a political
00:19:08.280
ideology and say, if you're too masculine, your toxic masculinity is a form of extremism.
00:19:17.580
That's exactly what it is. And I view it as a form of kind of almost chemical castration. It's like
00:19:23.620
the social castration of a way. It's saying, well, you're, you're only allowed to be so masculine
00:19:28.020
and you're only allowed to have certain views about feminism and you're only allowed to have
00:19:32.260
certain views about certain women in your life. Uh, and if you, you violate those boundaries,
00:19:39.020
then we're going to define you as a terrorist. Meanwhile, women can say whatever they like
00:19:44.380
about men. They, women can attack their boyfriends and their husbands and they say whatever they like
00:19:49.240
on social media or in person. And they are beyond reproach. Nothing happens to them. So that alone
00:19:56.000
is proved that this is clearly driven by some gender agenda, as I would say.
00:20:01.620
Now I, I follow you because I think you're a very entertaining and articulate speaker. I get a kick
00:20:07.620
out of your video appearances and I just, I have a mouth like a sailor sometimes.
00:20:13.060
Well, that's half the reason I like you. No, I'm kidding around. You've, you're, you're. So when I saw
00:20:17.480
that you were talking about something Canadian, I thought, well, we got to get Peter Lloyd on. Um,
00:20:22.080
let me ask you, you're in the UK, which is a very politically correct place. I mean, in some ways
00:20:26.900
it's worse than Canada. Um, have you ever seen this kind of thing? I, I think you hinted at it
00:20:33.740
before that this is new. Have you seen this in the UK or in other jurisdictions? Uh, maybe, maybe in,
00:20:40.660
in Holland, maybe in France, uh, maybe in the European union. Is this new? Like is Canada on the
00:20:46.440
leading edge of this, this wokeness or is this coming from somewhere else? Uh, I think it's
00:20:53.700
maybe slightly ahead. I mean, you know, you've got Trudeau, so that's a, that's a pretty powerful
00:20:57.280
woke force you've got there. Um, but I know that here in, here in Britain, there have been
00:21:03.000
politicians who've been trying to make misogyny a hate crime, which is kind of a very similar
00:21:08.720
category to what we're talking about, what's happening in Canada. Um, they're literally trying
00:21:12.440
to make a dislike of feminism, a criminal offense, which is punishable by a custodial
00:21:18.540
sentence. I mean, it's all well in, you just wouldn't believe that this was a potential
00:21:23.600
reality. And what really scares me is that in my lifetime, I fully expect that it will
00:21:29.280
be women and feminists will be allowed to say whatever they want about men. They will
00:21:33.000
have complete free speech, but men will not have free speech and they will have their actions
00:21:38.000
ruled by legislation, which essentially castrates them. It will just, it will curtail their opinions
00:21:46.240
and their thought. It's like the thought police that all are used to, you know, wrote about
00:21:49.400
it. It really is. We are approaching that situation.
00:21:52.960
Let me ask you one more thing, because one thing I would say, you mentioned Islam and I
00:21:57.980
don't think that wokeness has affected Muslims, uh, at least not on mass, at least not those
00:22:06.720
who identify as Muslim, certainly not the ones that I have come into contact with in
00:22:11.160
the UK or Canada. It's typically a post modern, uh, Western post liberal, like it, it just feels
00:22:19.220
like it's the residue of the, a decaying Western liberal empire. Um, is there something about
00:22:25.500
the fact that Muslim men are confident, maybe physical, certainly not emasculated and the
00:22:33.120
Western man, uh, is not allowed to show any manly traits? How do those, I mean, obviously
00:22:40.940
we don't want certain manly traits. We want violence to be channeled and governed and, and,
00:22:46.140
uh, used only properly. I mean, there is, there, there are crimes that have an aggressive
00:22:52.300
masculine hue to them. Um, do you have any thoughts on that? Because this, I think you're
00:22:58.000
right that this is targeting meek male feminists who up talk and who are woke and who take women's
00:23:07.000
studies degrees. And I think there's something there. I don't know quite what it is. Have
00:23:11.060
you done any thinking on that? I mean, it's hard to analyze and kind of quantify those theories,
00:23:16.180
but I think you're definitely onto something. Men who exist within the religion of Islam and the
00:23:22.320
community of, of, of fellow Muslims, that society still respects men and masculinity, whether that
00:23:31.540
be as fathers or as sons or as, you know, people in the workforce or in the, in the masks or the faith,
00:23:37.840
men are still, are still respected and they are subjected to the same level of kind of misandry
00:23:44.600
and man hating that I think a lot of Western men are, uh, uh, Christian men, Jewish men. And I think
00:23:50.580
that is the crucial difference is because really the venom that we see in the press from a lot of
00:23:57.040
like feminist, uh, columnists and, you know, celebrities, most of, most of the venom is directed
00:24:03.680
at straight white men, which is what I was saying before. And, uh, that they are now the one demographic
00:24:10.740
that it's, that it's okay to kind of abuse. And this is what I was going to say as well is that
00:24:15.460
a lot of people are talking about the existence of these so-called incels, but really maybe we should
00:24:20.860
be asking why do these people exist in the first place? I mean, it's clearly some kind of mental
00:24:25.340
derangement, but what is driving people, young men to, to, to that level of despair, whether,
00:24:32.860
but they are feeling that level of hatred to women and they're acting out on it to the point where
00:24:36.980
they're, you know, they're killing somebody, they're committing homicide. Maybe we should be
00:24:40.940
asking ourselves that, you know, the question culturally, what is leading men down that path?
00:24:45.440
What is forcing them to feel so disenfranchised and so resentful of women that they would do those
00:24:51.500
things? I mean, I would suggest perhaps it's the level of man hating the media and society.
00:24:57.540
Maybe that has got a role to play. You know, that's a great question. If there was another
00:25:01.300
terrorism, there was another ideology that was manifesting itself in terrorist violence,
00:25:06.120
we would say, what are the root causes? What, where has society done wrong? Who pushed them
00:25:11.160
away? Could we have been more welcoming? Could we have a day of the year, a week of the year to
00:25:18.200
celebrate their masculinity, you know, to make, there would have been some way to include them in the
00:25:24.620
vibrant rainbow of society. But I think even the word incel is a disparaging way of saying a guy who's
00:25:33.980
having trouble, you know, with the opposite sex, it's loaded in a negative way from the outset.
00:25:40.800
Last word to you, Peter, it's been great to catch up with you. Do you think we're going to see more
00:25:45.560
of this? Do you think we'll see more personal crimes of passion rebranded as incel terrorism?
00:25:54.220
Yeah, I do. Unfortunately, I think so. I think, you know, this is a war that's being waged by
00:26:02.100
woke politicians on the left. And unfortunately, masculinity and men are the quarry. They are in
00:26:08.520
the crosshairs of the gun. And I think we're just going to see more and more of it. It could be scaled
00:26:15.560
back. Maybe we could try and avoid it. And we could limit these kind of instances. But I think we'd have
00:26:21.340
to have a bit of a cultural revolution where we start treating men and boys with a little bit more
00:26:25.800
common decency and not humiliating them and degrading them at every given opportunity.
00:26:30.780
All right. Well said. Well, Peter Lloyd, what a pleasure to catch up with you.
00:26:34.520
Great to see you. We hope to have you back on again.
00:26:37.120
Yeah, I'll buy you a pint next time you're in London, Ezra.
00:26:39.160
Hey, that sounds great. Hopefully that'll be soon. Well, there you have it. Peter Lloyd,
00:26:42.660
an author and journalist. And he goes by the nickname, the Suffraged Gentleman,
00:26:48.860
which I get a kick out of. And you should follow him on Twitter on the handle on your screen. Stay
00:27:04.460
Hey, welcome back on my monologue yesterday about temporary foreign workers. Guy writes,
00:27:08.860
there's a shortage of work. Canadians deserve these jobs. Yeah. And you know what? I'm just the
00:27:15.460
excuses that were in the Globe and Mail felt like reheated leftovers, like excuses that they've
00:27:21.240
been using when unemployment was 6% or 7%, not when unemployment was 15% or 20%. You know, it's time
00:27:29.360
to hire Canadians. We don't need to bring in foreign workers in the middle of a recession. That's just
00:27:33.860
crazy, especially deliberately underpaid foreign workers. Ian writes, there are plenty of Canadians who
00:27:41.740
are willing to do this work. I'm a veteran on a pension. And I would have no problem going out
00:27:45.120
and picking fruit and vegetables. You know, I think some people would like physical labor,
00:27:51.160
especially young people. I mean, when I was in college, it was a thing to go out and tree plant.
00:27:56.220
That's backbreaking work. You know, there's a lot of young, I bet you a youth unemployment,
00:28:02.020
because all the waiters and waitresses and bartenders and retail clerks, they're all hit the
00:28:07.500
hardest. I bet you, I mean, I haven't seen the youth unemployment stats yet, but I bet you it's
00:28:12.360
25%, 30%. Of course, some of them would like to work on a farm. On my interview with Jim Carahelios,
00:28:18.640
Harry writes, I'm thoroughly disgusted at what the conservatives and you did to Jim. I also find it
00:28:24.920
cringeworthy when you told Jim to his face that he could not win. With these kinds of actions, my opinion
00:28:29.460
of the conservatives and the rebel has changed. With your influence, do you realize how many people you
00:28:34.060
could have discouraged to vote for Jim and how Jim must have felt when you said that? I think you
00:28:38.060
need to apologize to Jim and your audience. Wow. Okay. You know what? I see your point. I guess I
00:28:46.400
should have kept that thought to myself, but you know what? I mean, I like Jim, if it's not obvious.
00:28:52.020
I like his issues. I like his style. But do I not owe you, the viewer, my candid thoughts?
00:28:58.780
I don't think Jim can win. I think he's a small, you know, army of one kind of thing. He doesn't
00:29:06.060
have a big network or a team that I can detect. Now, he says he has people working here and there,
00:29:11.400
and he did raise the third largest amount of money. So he is in that, you know, he's third out of five,
00:29:17.880
I suppose. I don't know. I mean, if my affection for Jim was not evident, let me clarify that I feel
00:29:24.940
affection for him. And I'm rooting for him. And that's what, my third or fourth interview with him
00:29:30.460
on this subject. But I suppose I could have been a little bit more polite in person, though I didn't
00:29:35.660
feel rude saying him. I just want to be honest to you, the viewer. I don't think Jim can win because
00:29:43.800
of how the rules are. I don't think they're going to let Jim win. And whoever wins, I don't see them
00:29:52.200
beating Trudeau. I'm sorry. That's just how I feel. Maybe I'm wrong. Hopefully I'm wrong.
00:29:56.820
Dave writes, I thought you guys may like the lawn sign I had made up. Enjoy. Take a look at that.
00:30:03.620
Ah, good for you. You know, I should get back in the lawn sign business. We had some fun lawn signs
00:30:08.240
ourselves in the day, didn't we? Well, folks, that's our show for today. Until next time,
00:30:12.260
on behalf of all of us here at Rebel World Headquarters, to you at home, good night,