The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #1075
Episode Stats
Length
1 hour and 30 minutes
Words per Minute
165.98354
Summary
In this episode of The Loadseaters, we discuss Mark Zuckerberg's video announcing the end of censorship, Trump's obsession with Canada, and Andrew T. Tate running for president. We also talk about the fires in Los Angeles and the potential role tech bros can play in the Trump administration.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Hello and welcome to the podcast of the Loadseaters. Today is Thursday the 9th of January and this is
00:00:06.240
episode 1075. I'm your host Elios and I'm joined by Josh. Hello! And we're gonna discuss Zuckerberg
00:00:15.580
announcing the end of censorship, Trump's obsession with Canada and Greenland and Andrew Tate running
00:00:22.080
for president. A lot of people talk about the fires. We are gonna talk about them tomorrow.
00:00:26.880
The fires in Los Angeles, what I mean. And without further ado, should we begin? We may as well,
00:00:33.500
why not? A little foray into the news, shall we? So, Mark Zuckerberg recently made an announcement
00:00:40.160
that his two companies, Facebook and Instagram, are going to be taking greater measures to protect,
00:00:46.080
and I quote here, free expression. I'll believe it when I see it personally, but the video is
00:00:52.620
actually very interesting. And I think that there's a lot of information in this five-minute
00:00:57.540
video that we can unpack that is quite rich because, of course, there are lots of different
00:01:02.200
factors here. One of the explicit reasons he actually says he's doing this is the recent election,
00:01:08.740
and that is, of course, the election of Donald Trump. And it's interesting that he just openly
00:01:12.620
says, well, Trump's been elected, so we're changing our policies, because that seems like something that
00:01:17.840
you wouldn't necessarily choose to do if you wanted to save face, because it makes it sound like you've
00:01:22.160
been made to do it. However, I'm going to break down why he might be saying that, and I'm going to,
00:01:27.440
you know, play the video a little bit in sections, and we're going to talk about the implications of
00:01:31.880
each thing he's saying, because there's a lot of important things there. And, of course, it's worth
00:01:36.380
mentioning as well. As of November of 2024, Facebook had just over 3 billion monthly active users,
00:01:43.840
and Instagram had 2 billion as of April of 2024. And, of course, assuming that he is being genuine
00:01:51.180
about what they are going to do, and isn't misrepresenting what is actually going to happen,
00:01:57.180
which is possible, that is going to be a huge thing, and a very large section of the internet
00:02:02.520
that is going to go a very similar way to Elon Musk's ex-formally Twitter. There's going to be
00:02:08.500
more avenues of potential free speech platforms. Is it going to be to the same degree as
00:02:13.660
Elon Musk owning Twitter? I don't know. I don't think there's the same appetite. And there's
00:02:20.600
also the fact, of course, that Elon Musk did suspend some accounts that disagreed with him,
00:02:24.760
which I don't agree with. But why is it happening now? And one of the things I've done here is
00:02:31.820
included a tweet, merely because I would forget how I put it previously, not to be, you know,
00:02:38.040
patting myself on the back, just like that was a good one, because it wasn't really. But it's,
00:02:41.820
social media firms have a strong incentive to cozy up to Trump, facing large-scale regulations and
00:02:46.940
hefty fines from Europe. Also, Zuckerberg explicitly mentions this, as well as countries like China
00:02:54.140
outright banning them. And we'll talk about this in a bit more detail. Trump might help them avoid
00:02:58.360
these penalties, but my worry is how much influence they'll have on his administration in return.
00:03:03.520
And that's something that I want to sort of continue to identify, because the allegiance of
00:03:09.600
the tech bros, as people call them, I think it's a bit of a lame name, don't give them that level of
00:03:15.140
credibility. The tech nerds is probably better. They've all aligned with Trump now. And why has
00:03:22.840
it come now, rather than over the past eight years, when Trump was potentially running for office,
00:03:27.940
right? Well, I don't think they've suddenly all changed their mind about Donald Trump's character.
00:03:33.520
I think it's just that he can offer them something that the Democrats couldn't. And we'll be getting
00:03:39.680
on to that soon enough. So here is the video of a newly human Mark Zuckerberg, you know, all of that
00:03:48.300
working out. He's been doing martial arts. He did that really cool photo op where he was on like a,
00:03:53.420
was it like a wakeboard being dragged around and he had the American flag or something like that.
00:03:58.220
I haven't seen it. He's in like in a tuxedo holding the American flag with sunglasses on.
00:04:03.560
It's just like, okay, that's kind of cool. I'll give you that. Probably been deliberately helping
00:04:09.220
repair his image because people speculating on the one hand, whether you're a robot on the other,
00:04:14.780
whether you're a reptile, isn't the best PR I've heard. No, it's not. But I'm going to play the first
00:04:21.360
40 seconds here. And of course, tell me what you make of it in the comments as well. But we'll be
00:04:28.060
breaking it down too. So here we are. Hey, everyone. I want to talk about something important
00:04:33.900
today because it's time to get back to our roots around free expression on Facebook and Instagram.
00:04:39.380
I started building social media to give people a voice. I gave a speech at Georgetown five years ago
00:04:44.940
about the importance of protecting free expression. And I still believe this today. But a lot has
00:04:50.180
happened over the last several years. There's been widespread debate about potential harms from
00:04:55.000
online content. Governments and legacy media have pushed to censor more and more. A lot of this is
00:05:01.180
clearly political. But there's also a lot of legitimately bad stuff out there. Drugs, terrorism,
00:05:06.800
child exploitation. These are things that we take very seriously. And I want to make sure that we
00:05:11.240
handle responsibly. Okay, so there are a few things I picked out here. The first of which is get back to
00:05:18.020
our roots. And of course, this is a tacit admission that they have strayed from the path of free
00:05:22.720
expression, because he introduces that as being their roots. And so in so doing, he's sort of in
00:05:28.340
a more polite way to himself, saying that, listen, we went a bit too far. Please forgive us, isn't he?
00:05:35.140
And of course, it's worth mentioning as well, that as a practical example of this, on January 6,
00:05:42.280
they removed the video of Donald Trump saying go home and be peaceful. Which, of course, allowed
00:05:48.660
politicians later on down the line to say it was encouraged by him, even though what he did do was
00:05:54.280
release statements on all of the platforms he had access to, telling them to be peaceful and to go home.
00:06:02.260
Right. So I think there are several things to unpack here. And the whole video is very rich for
00:06:06.820
interpretation. One thing is to say that what he says is an admission that free expression was curtailed.
00:06:15.040
He admits it. But he also says, I wanted to give people a voice without saying a voice about what,
00:06:21.620
in order to give the impression that he, his principles were pro free speech.
00:06:26.560
I also interpreted that as to say that he's not necessarily the one calling the shots 100%,
00:06:31.760
which I can definitely believe that, you know, I don't think it's Mark Zuckerberg looking at some
00:06:37.940
small account saying, you know what, shut them down.
00:06:40.420
Well, I think he's got a big team around him and, you know, they might be doing stuff that he doesn't
00:06:45.940
want them to. And also, does he really have 100% control over his own company?
00:06:51.620
I don't know to what extent he controls his company or not, but he is trying to give the idea,
00:06:57.040
the impression that he was against it, but it happened against his will.
00:07:01.080
Personally, I'm not, I'm a bit suspicious when I hear people saying this.
00:07:05.040
And also, I think that one of the reasons why a lot of the people, you know, within quotation marks
00:07:10.160
were called tech bros, are making statements of the sort is because they want to somehow
00:07:15.160
give the impression that as a lobby, they don't have the amount of power that they actually have.
00:07:21.820
And also, of course, if they cozy themselves up to Trump, a lot of them rely on selling people's
00:07:28.360
data to advertisers, particularly Facebook. That's how it makes its money. And so there are lots of
00:07:33.380
privacy concerns around that kind of business model. And if they're like, well, we're for free
00:07:37.520
speech, it sort of sanitizes this practice in a way.
00:07:40.720
Yeah, exactly. And let me just add something about the tech industry. The tech industry requires
00:07:46.520
a lot of raw minerals. A lot of them come from Ukraine, and others come from the, from me,
00:07:53.740
come from Greenland, as we're going to talk about in the next segment.
00:07:56.440
A bit of foreshadowing. But it is worth mentioning as well, that he uses the term explicitly
00:08:02.860
online harms. And in the UK, we have an online harms bill. And this is also the language of
00:08:09.200
the European Union. And so by using that word, he's sort of implying that he is on board with
00:08:18.320
what Europe is trying to do. He's like, listen, I understand there's some bad stuff, and we're
00:08:22.260
trying our best to remove it. So what he's trying to do is basically play both sides. He's saying,
00:08:26.320
I'm for free expression, but I recognize there are online harms. So he's trying to navigate this
00:08:30.900
tightrope between placating America and placating Europe. And by that, he means the political
00:08:38.440
establishments, not necessarily the people in the countries, right? Because I don't think people
00:08:42.740
in Europe are clamoring for online censorship. It's mainly politicians, so it can give them an
00:08:49.240
And the same applied for politicians in the US before.
00:08:53.320
Exactly. And, you know, it also gives them a lot of power, these European countries, because
00:09:01.600
and he states it's political. And he says, if you can threaten, no, I say, if you can threaten a
00:09:08.040
company with large fines, or a refusal to do business in that country, it basically allows
00:09:13.480
you to have negotiation power over what they can show. And so if they can punish the company
00:09:18.940
financially for, you know, platforming people that they disagree with, then they will do
00:09:24.980
so. And that's what's going on here. I think it's exerting power over this company by trying
00:09:31.580
to get them to do what they want politically, is what's going on with Europe in particular.
00:09:36.440
And if we quickly go to this before coming back here, Brussels, of course, which is where
00:09:42.140
the EU is based, fines Facebook parent company, 800 million euros, which is a lot of money.
00:09:48.440
And I imagine that is a point of concern for Mark Zuckerberg. And he's obviously also right
00:09:54.780
about the, there is some bad stuff out there that the vast majority of people don't want
00:09:59.900
to see. And I think him talking about child exploitation and terrorism, and I imagine what
00:10:06.140
he means by terrorism isn't necessarily, you know, we want to cover up that it happens more
00:10:10.360
so some of the videos you see sometimes, unfortunately, doing the rounds of the gruesome ways in which
00:10:15.700
people have died. And I think that it's important for people who are journalists to be able to see
00:10:21.440
that sort of thing. However, I don't think it should just pop up on people's feeds when they don't
00:10:26.540
want to see it. I think that that's a reasonable balance between the two.
00:10:30.860
Here, we are not talking about just someone expressing a critical view of the establishment
00:10:34.960
that being we're talking about the real thing. Exactly. And so let's carry on with this. And
00:10:41.040
this is a little bit of a shorter bit. But there's also a lot to so we built a lot of complex systems
00:10:47.240
to moderate content. But the problem with complex systems is they make mistakes. Even if they
00:10:52.940
accidentally censor just 1% of posts, that's millions of people. And we've reached a point where
00:10:58.920
it's just too many mistakes and too much censorship. The recent elections also feel like a cultural
00:11:04.880
tipping point towards once again prioritizing speech. So we're going to get back to our roots
00:11:09.620
and focus on reducing mistakes, simplifying our policies, and restoring free expression
00:11:15.180
on our platforms. More specifically, here's what we're going to do.
00:11:19.800
So one thing that is the most important to point out here
00:11:22.920
is he describes censoring people's opinions as mistakes. But the people within Meta, within
00:11:31.300
Facebook and Instagram, knew what they were doing and did it willingly. It wasn't a mistake.
00:11:36.960
I think that this is very clever reframing. Because he can say, well, in hindsight, they were mistakes.
00:11:43.440
I didn't want to do this necessarily. But it happened. So Zuckerberg can save face whilst
00:11:49.740
also suggesting that these things weren't deliberate choices. Of course, we know with the Twitter
00:11:55.900
files that the FBI was requesting people censor very small accounts that were critical of certain
00:12:04.620
aspects of the Biden administration. And that's very insidious. Of course, we don't know whether
00:12:11.580
that's going on with Facebook because they've not said. But I'd be very surprised if it hadn't.
00:12:17.800
Yeah. And that they weren't censoring people on behalf of governments.
00:12:23.880
Mm-hmm. Yeah. And he also says, we built a lot of complex systems, that specific phrase,
00:12:30.000
which makes it sound very computational. But there is, of course, a human element to this. A lot of
00:12:34.320
these choices were made by human beings. But it makes it sound like it's just our, you know,
00:12:39.440
our algorithm made a mistake. That's not how it works.
00:12:45.700
He does at least admit they have made mistakes. And I think it's also interesting, again, that he
00:12:52.920
mentions the US election. I know I said that at the start. But if you're trying to be really
00:12:57.160
corporate and uncontroversial and try and please both sides to make money, you wouldn't necessarily
00:13:01.680
say that. And so what it makes me think is that he's signaling to the Trump administration that they
00:13:06.600
wish to have some sort of working relationship.
00:13:08.660
And imagine that this onus comes from the fact that there's going to be a vacancy where the
00:13:13.940
Biden administration was basically telling them what to do. And what Zuckerberg probably wants to
00:13:18.680
do here by cozying up to Trump is saying, listen, if we do what you want in terms of keeping our
00:13:24.900
platform relatively pro-free speech, then you can help us fight China censoring Facebook and Instagram
00:13:33.140
and also Europe coming after us with big fines. And, you know, I think Trump is probably the guy to do
00:13:41.520
Yeah. I mean, they're exchanging extra influence for them, for the tech bros, in exchange for the
00:13:48.040
image of Trump as liberating the society of America.
00:13:52.360
As creating that wave of liberation and maximizing civil liberties.
00:13:57.420
Right. I've been doing a lot of talking. I need to do more video.
00:14:00.420
First, we're going to get rid of fact checkers and replace them with community notes similar to X,
00:14:05.920
starting in the US. After Trump first got elected in 2016, the legacy media wrote nonstop about how
00:14:13.320
misinformation was a threat to democracy. We tried in good faith to address those concerns without
00:14:18.660
becoming the arbiters of truth. But the fact checkers have just been too politically biased
00:14:23.860
and have destroyed more trust than they've created, especially in the US. So over the next couple
00:14:29.120
of months, we're going to phase in a more comprehensive community notes system.
00:14:33.240
So there are a few things here that I wanted to pick up on. His use of the term legacy media
00:14:39.120
is interesting because this is a sort of dog whistle to right wing spheres, isn't it?
00:14:44.220
As a way of denigrating the mainstream media. It's a way to appeal to Trump supporters, basically.
00:14:50.680
we tried in good faith to address concerns about misinformation, right? That about misinformation
00:14:56.180
wasn't the direct quote, but that's what he's talking about. And of course, Twitter was censoring
00:15:00.580
people on behalf of the intelligence agencies and the Biden administration. But he talks
00:15:07.280
about the media wanting to censor people, which, you know, insulting the media with their popularity
00:15:13.440
as it is, is not something that's necessarily going to have much pushback in the same way
00:15:18.420
as him saying, actually, we're told to censor it by the government. And so he's pointed to something
00:15:24.840
that's more socially acceptable whilst avoiding something that would be more useful to society,
00:15:31.760
which sort of suggests that he's going along with this for self-interested reasons rather
00:15:39.200
It's not exactly like Facebook wasn't a mainstream platform.
00:15:46.380
He also admits that fact checkers are too politically biased and have destroyed more
00:15:51.220
trust than they have created, which is true. And he also mentions the X style of community
00:15:55.600
notes, which is actually quite a significant thing because it's a huge admission that they
00:16:00.340
work. And that's good because I think the community notes aspect of Elon Musk's X is the
00:16:06.460
best aspect of it. And I think the community notes easily, I don't know whether this is your
00:16:10.300
experience, is the best improvement other than the sort of democratization of the platform
00:16:17.220
Yeah, I think they're helping, especially on X. Community notes are good. Occasionally,
00:16:22.900
sometimes they're horribly bad. But it's better than nothing.
00:16:27.740
Second, we're going to simplify our content policies and get rid of a bunch of restrictions
00:16:32.440
on topics like immigration and gender that are just out of touch with mainstream discourse.
00:16:38.060
What started as a movement to be more inclusive has increasingly been used to shut down opinions
00:16:43.600
and shut out people with different ideas. And it's gone too far. So I want to make sure
00:16:48.580
that people can share their beliefs and experiences on our platforms.
00:16:52.060
So I think that it's interesting here that he says the content policies on immigration and
00:16:58.720
gender are out of touch with mainstream discourse. That's an admission that discourse has moved
00:17:03.500
rightward, really, isn't it? Because those topics weren't forbidden on the right. In fact,
00:17:08.500
they were our avenues of attack towards the left. So the fact that they're saying they're out of
00:17:13.920
touch is simply that we're no longer enforcing... That was a nice voice crack, wasn't it?
00:17:17.600
Yeah. We're no longer enforcing the hegemonic will of the left because we recognize we've got
00:17:23.060
new masters, basically. And one thing I did find interesting is that he's sort of twisting the knife
00:17:30.680
on woke a bit there by saying what started out as a movement to be more inclusive has increasingly
00:17:35.940
been used to shut down discourse and shut out people. And it has gone too far. And the it has gone
00:17:41.000
too far is the most forceful thing that he says in the whole speech. And although it sounds a little
00:17:47.500
bit manufactured, I think that it's interesting that he's placing a lot of emphasis on this. This
00:17:57.660
I think it is. And it's important in a way. I'll believe the changes when I see them, just like you
00:18:03.540
said in the beginning. But it's quite a thing when someone like Zuckerberg, who owns Facebook
00:18:09.780
and administrates it, if I'm not mistaken, when he makes out an admission of the sort.
00:18:15.840
Yeah, well, he's one of the most powerful people in the world, isn't he?
00:18:25.800
Third, we're changing how we enforce our policies to reduce the mistakes that account for the vast
00:18:31.440
majority of censorship on our platforms. We used to have filters that scanned for any policy
00:18:36.840
violation. Now we're going to focus those filters on tackling illegal and high severity violations.
00:18:43.300
And for lower severity violations, we're going to rely on someone reporting an issue before we take
00:18:48.360
action. The problem is that the filters make mistakes, and they take down a lot of content that
00:18:53.480
they shouldn't. So by dialing them back, we're going to dramatically reduce the amount of censorship
00:18:58.300
on our platforms. We're also going to tune our content filters to require much higher confidence
00:19:05.060
before taking down content. The reality is that this is a trade-off. It means we're going to catch
00:19:10.740
less bad stuff, but we'll also reduce the number of innocent people's posts and accounts that we
00:19:18.880
So, I think that what he's doing here in this part is sort of going along that tightrope between
00:19:26.300
America and Europe. He's doing two things by focusing on illegal and more severe violations.
00:19:31.720
He reassures European regulators that more resources will be directed to enforcing the law on their
00:19:37.040
platform, which is how they're framing the money grab and the grab for control over his companies.
00:19:44.020
And without sounding like he'll censor things in a way that would annoy Trump supporters.
00:19:49.320
And so it's quite clever, really. I mean, although it's relatively obvious if you follow politics,
00:19:53.760
that this is the thing to do with your company to navigate that difficult path between either side
00:20:01.340
He made two different statements there. On the one hand, he phrased it as bad and good stuff.
00:20:06.920
But on the other, he said about less severe violations and less severe violations.
00:20:12.000
When we focus on the violations bit, it means that the content policies won't change.
00:20:17.580
They are going to be there. It's just that they are going to go after the severe violations,
00:20:22.620
which is a reason for skepticism as far as I'm concerned.
00:20:26.360
Yeah. And it's also worth mentioning as well that he discusses the fact that reporting someone
00:20:30.840
could still lead to the post removal and to suspensions. It's just not automatic anymore.
00:20:36.820
Someone has to report you and then something happens and therefore it could be the case
00:20:42.300
that people will cotton on to the fact that, oh, if I report stuff I don't like, it might
00:20:46.300
be removed automatically, which creates the same situation more or less that existed in
00:20:54.140
So the sort of devil is in the detail here, even though he does say the threshold will
00:20:58.160
be higher for things being removed, which, you know, if you make that claim publicly, you've
00:21:04.020
got to back it up with something. If it's the same, then it's going to be embarrassing.
00:21:10.620
We're bringing back civic content. For a while, the community asked to see less politics because
00:21:15.880
it was making people stressed. So we stopped recommending these posts. But it feels like
00:21:20.680
we're in a new era now, and we're starting to get feedback that people want to see this
00:21:24.640
content again. So we're going to start phasing this back into Facebook, Instagram, and threads
00:21:29.620
while working to keep the communities friendly and positive. Fifth, we're going to move our
00:21:35.660
trust and safety and content moderation teams out of California. And our U.S.-based content
00:21:41.340
review is going to be based in Texas. As we work to promote free expression, I think that
00:21:46.540
will help us build trust to do this work in places where there is less concern about the bias of our
00:21:53.200
So there are lots of interesting things here that I wanted to break down. I know I'm going a little
00:21:56.720
bit over time, but I'm going to keep it quick. So the reintroduction of political content to his
00:22:02.600
platforms could either be a good or bad thing, depending on how they do it. And he hasn't really
00:22:06.420
given much information about how it's going to go about. So you kind of need to see more
00:22:11.480
information. You might have some opinions about just generally, do people want to see, is it
00:22:16.820
appealing to the right kinds of people to see this sort of content? But it's just difficult
00:22:21.260
to say now because we don't know what's going to happen. And I think moving their team out
00:22:25.740
of California to Texas is the funniest aspect of this, because the intention is, without explicitly
00:22:33.180
saying, that a Texas-based team will be less censorious than a California-based team, right?
00:22:37.720
Note that he also states that they're moving there because people will be less concerned
00:22:42.640
about the team-based there, not because they'll be better. So that's a little bit of a slip-up
00:22:49.840
on whoever wrote his speech for him, because if you've got the right set of ears, you can
00:22:55.240
hear that he's saying, I'm more concerned about perception than I am actual results, which
00:23:00.340
is important. And also, of course, Texas is more pro-business, and lots of Californians
00:23:06.040
are fleeing there anyway. So if you wanted your Californians with Texas laws, you can
00:23:11.260
do that. And so it doesn't necessarily mean that anything is going to change. So this is
00:23:16.520
the final part now. So you're almost free from having to look at Mark Zuckerberg. I'm
00:23:23.160
No, no. I just wanted to add that this is, I would say, a blow to the image of Gavin
00:23:29.560
Newsom as someone who is good, economically speaking, for California. Because in our circles,
00:23:35.960
if you say anything positive about Gavin Newsom in California, everyone say you're mad.
00:23:43.840
And you are. But a lot of Democrats think that for some reason that he has been exceptionally
00:23:49.700
good for California economy. Well, it's because California's got, you know, they've got a lot
00:23:55.420
of business there. But it's not because Gavin Newsom has made it so. It's that he inherited
00:24:00.120
a good situation. Yeah. But this is a blow in the public image. And as you said, images
00:24:08.100
We're going to work with President Trump to push back on governments around the world
00:24:12.540
that are going after American companies and pushing to censor more. The U.S. has the strongest
00:24:18.200
constitutional protections for free expression in the world. Europe has an ever increasing
00:24:23.300
number of laws institutionalizing censorship and making it difficult to build anything
00:24:27.700
innovative there. Latin American countries have secret courts that can order companies
00:24:32.960
to quietly take things down. China has censored our apps from even working in the country.
00:24:39.040
The only way that we can push back on this global trend is with the support of the U.S.
00:24:43.640
government. And that's why it's been so difficult over the past four years
00:24:48.080
when even the U.S. government has pushed for censorship. By going after us and other American
00:24:53.300
companies, it has emboldened other governments to go even further. But now we have the opportunity
00:24:59.100
to restore free expression. And I am excited to take it. It'll take time to get this right.
00:25:05.340
And these are complex systems. They're never going to be perfect. There's also a lot of illegal
00:25:09.980
stuff that we still need to work very hard to remove. But the bottom line is that after years
00:25:16.180
of having our content moderation work focus primarily on removing content, it is time to focus on
00:25:22.000
reducing the stakes, simplifying our systems, and getting back to our roots about giving people voice.
00:25:28.320
I'm looking forward to this next chapter. Stay good out there, and more to come soon.
00:25:32.440
Okay, so there's less to object to here, I think, but the questions are more about his intentions.
00:25:41.020
Do I think that Mark Zuckerberg is doing all of this purely for the preservation of free expression
00:25:47.780
for the American people and the other users of his websites and apps? No. I think it's that
00:25:55.960
these other countries are limiting their potential to make profit, and that's what's driving it.
00:26:02.120
Maybe I'm cynical. I mean, Zuckerberg has said some things publicly that were controversial.
00:26:08.660
Like, he talked about how he personally didn't object to people denying the Holocaust on Facebook,
00:26:17.160
which is a very bold thing to say publicly. But it at least suggests some degree of understanding
00:26:25.240
of the problem, whether he was saying this to try and placate people in the past, I don't know.
00:26:29.820
But maybe there is some belief there. I don't want to be unfair, necessarily.
00:26:35.280
But yes, it seems like the ragging on Europe for being censorious and Latin America for being corrupt,
00:26:42.580
and China for blocking them entirely, that's fair. I don't think I can object to that much.
00:26:47.420
And I also think it's interesting that he did refer explicitly then to the Biden regime censoring,
00:26:51.740
which at the very end is good, but a lot of the meat and potatoes is out of the way,
00:26:56.960
and it's sort of like sweeping it under the rug a little bit by mentioning it right at the end.
00:27:00.920
And two final things I wanted to mention before I finish up is that Meta says fact-checkers were the problem,
00:27:09.620
and then fact-checkers rule it false, and that fact-checking groups have fact-checked Mark Zuckerberg's claim about fact-checkers,
00:27:17.660
and they found him false, because they want to have a job, and he disagrees.
00:27:23.120
And then it's also worth mentioning as well, I don't know how true this is,
00:27:25.880
the International Fact-Checking Network, which I didn't even know existed,
00:27:29.380
has convened an emergency meeting of its members tomorrow following Meta's announcement
00:27:33.380
that it will end third-party fact-checking partnerships in the US.
00:27:36.880
And they were basically propping up the industry, and so this means that a lot of fact-checkers are going to go out of business,
00:27:42.220
which is music to my ears, if this is true, because I hate fact-checkers.
00:27:49.080
It's basically saying my version of reality is true and yours is wrong, even though they're no more valid.
00:27:58.340
And so if everything Zuckerberg says is as it seems, this is a very positive development,
00:28:04.820
however, we're obviously both very cynical about his intentions,
00:28:09.500
and the legitimacy of the pursuit of these things, I think it might well be motivated by money.
00:28:14.740
Doesn't mean it won't necessarily get better, but that's what seems to be happening.
00:28:25.900
Sorry, that segment went on a bit longer than I intended.
00:28:35.560
I'm so sorry you cannot aspire to the fog life, Josh.
00:28:38.120
I know you can handle it, but when we have your bark, just watch out, dude,
00:28:45.860
Are these all references to my daily video where I talked about playing classical music to criminals?
00:28:53.080
If so, that was well done, and I appreciate the puns there.
00:29:07.420
See his appearance on Joe Rogan for a great summary of his work.
00:29:16.400
Mark Zuckerberg colluded with the FBI and government.
00:29:20.680
Jail for life is up, and all the FBI agents and assets.
00:29:24.940
Hey, but unfortunately, we don't live in a world where justice exists.
00:29:31.500
It's good that Meta has partly changed its stance due to Trump's presidency.
00:29:34.500
It's a small win for freedom for the individual and public discourse.
00:29:37.640
Now it's just the issue we have at home and the EU.
00:29:42.580
Right, to my European friends, wherever they are,
00:29:52.880
Right, we're going to talk about Trump's obsession with Canada and Greenland,
00:29:57.000
and whether we are going to talk about whether his rhetoric has gone too far.
00:30:00.780
And also whether what lies behind some of his statements and his aspirations.
00:30:06.600
He published a map here where Canada appears to be one of the states of the U.S.
00:30:19.000
They're saying that it's a manifest destiny 2.0.
00:30:28.640
And as you can understand, Twitter is full of discussion about this,
00:30:34.460
And let us talk a bit about Canada first, and then go to Greenland.
00:30:39.060
So there were several people who were focusing on Justin Trudeau's answer.
00:30:45.420
Justin Trudeau said that we are not going to talk about this merger.
00:30:52.780
Girl, you're not the governor of Canada anymore, so it doesn't matter what you say.
00:30:57.100
So he's repeating Trump, calling him the governor of Canada.
00:31:02.140
Then we had some people from Canada saying that,
00:31:12.580
well, it's our weakness that makes Trump and Elon Musk and other people talk to us like that.
00:31:18.340
And here we have a really good answer by Pierre Pauliever,
00:31:22.480
who says Canada will never be the 51st state, period.
00:31:27.380
And he says essentially that our weak and pathetic liberal government
00:31:35.660
he is going to rebuild the military and take back control of the border
00:31:41.000
So he is talking in a different tone than Trudeau is.
00:31:44.860
But he says that, you know, I'm not going to talk about it.
00:31:48.200
Well, Trudeau's failure is his victory, really.
00:31:51.340
And whether he will actually achieve those things in any satisfactory way
00:31:55.240
to the Canadian patriots, I suppose, remains to be seen.
00:32:03.520
I think that he's a little bit too centre-right to be able to do the things to an agreeable degree.
00:32:13.260
So basically you think that maybe he is going to be a light Trudeau on issues like immigration, is that?
00:32:22.160
I think I prefer him to Trudeau and I hear a lot of people...
00:32:27.140
It's like, do you prefer a sandwich or a punch in the face?
00:32:31.300
But I do appreciate concerns with regard to his policies.
00:32:37.860
Because I think that when it comes to X, it's fun sometimes.
00:32:43.700
But I think that when you're a leader of a country, you have to be a bit more responsible.
00:32:50.860
And then you have the response, well, this is the negotiation of power.
00:32:58.820
But when you care about nations, and a lot of nationalists should care about nations,
00:33:04.720
one of the main arguments is that nations aren't just businesses or economic zones.
00:33:09.200
So when you're talking to nationals and when you're talking with foreign nations,
00:33:19.260
It's like being a guest in someone else's country in a similar sort of way, isn't it?
00:33:23.240
Where you sort of follow their rules and behave yourself a bit more because you're not on your home turf anymore.
00:33:28.500
And I think Billboard Chris here is right to point out that this is how Trump negotiates.
00:33:33.420
He asks for something big to get something smaller because that's how you negotiate well.
00:33:39.400
But I'm very hesitant to believe that whatever he's negotiating for is worth saying these sorts of things.
00:33:48.460
No, I think that on a Twitter level, on X level, it's fun to – it's occasionally fun.
00:33:55.460
But when we're talking about, you know, leadership level,
00:33:59.340
I think we need to have a much more responsible leadership and demand for more responsible leadership.
00:34:04.760
Because reality is not X, what's going on in X.
00:34:09.140
We had Donald Trump Jr. visiting Greenland, landing on Greenland with a Trump airplane.
00:34:26.340
Trump refused to rule out the possibility of using military or economic coercion against Greenland,
00:34:34.700
the Panama Canal, and if I'm not mistaken, Canada.
00:34:41.260
Very few people think that this is going to be – this is going to happen.
00:34:50.020
Greenland and the Panama Canal, so what – can you assure the world that as you try to get control of these areas,
00:35:00.360
you are not going to use military or economic coercion?
00:35:04.080
And can you tell us a little bit about what you're –
00:35:06.300
So I think that that's just Trump, you know, keeping all of his cards close to his chest.
00:35:11.820
You know, you don't rule out anything, particularly if you're trying to negotiate with someone
00:35:15.960
and you say, oh, yeah, by the way, we're not going to use military action.
00:35:22.400
Then all of a sudden the temperature comes down and it makes negotiation for, you know, what you want a little bit more difficult.
00:35:40.380
I don't actually think he's going to use the American military to invade Greenland or Canada because it would be political suicide for a start,
00:35:50.200
as well as the fact that I think he's more interested in doing business than this sort of thing.
00:35:56.640
So I will give you a response after we play this short clip as well because I think that they're connected.
00:36:04.640
Well, we need Greenland for national security purposes.
00:36:08.280
I've been told that for a long time, long before I even ran.
00:36:11.680
I mean, people have been talking about it for a long time.
00:36:17.680
People really don't even know if Denmark has any legal right to it.
00:36:22.480
But if they do, they should give it up because we need it for national security.
00:36:32.520
You look outside, you have China ships all over the place.
00:36:43.260
And if Denmark wants to get to a conclusion, but nobody knows if they even have any right title or interest.
00:36:50.480
The people are going to probably vote for independence or to come into the United States.
00:36:54.880
But if they did do that, then I would tariff Denmark at a very high level.
00:37:02.380
So he's using tariffs here as a sort of punishment because obviously a high tariff is going to be really damaging to Denmark's trade.
00:37:14.060
And I think saying it's for national security purposes is a little bit of a red herring from Trump.
00:37:20.960
I don't actually believe what he's saying there.
00:37:23.400
Because, of course, the United States has military bases in lots of European countries.
00:37:31.220
I imagine they could come to some agreement with Denmark.
00:37:33.840
It's not like these military bases have caused any problems really in a lot of the host nations, maybe one or two.
00:37:41.620
And so if they're worried about national security, surely they could just come to some sort of security agreement.
00:37:46.280
Because it's not like Denmark is aligned with China or Russia.
00:37:49.880
And so if there are security concerns in those respects for the United States, they're also concerns of Denmark.
00:37:57.600
And so I think what's probably going on here isn't that he needs the entirety of Greenland for national security.
00:38:05.760
What he actually wants is perhaps more influence in the region to be able to make more bases or have a better deal in that respect.
00:38:17.440
However, he's being a bit hyperbolic for, again, negotiation.
00:38:25.140
And it's important to remember he talked about Russian ships and Chinese ships.
00:38:32.300
Now, we are going to talk about the new Arctic Silk Road in a bit.
00:38:36.220
But I want to say that when he's simultaneously talking about the national security purposes, which is, it's a lie, number one.
00:38:47.000
And you can use the national security rhetoric for a lot of...
00:38:52.080
I mean, Britain needs to invade France to secure its own borders.
00:38:57.420
I mean, you can make a very good argument for that.
00:38:59.360
But it doesn't mean that we should conquer all of France.
00:39:02.700
There are a few people picking up the longbows.
00:39:07.220
But also, I want to say, when you're talking about being the leader of the free world and you want to liaise with the free world,
00:39:13.600
it's better if you try to liaise on terms that respect your opponents rather than terms that generate resentment.
00:39:21.620
Now, I know to a lot of people this sounds wet.
00:39:28.820
If you are the United States and you alienate Europe by strong-arming territory out of them,
00:39:36.180
then all of a sudden Europe starts to see America as a potential political enemy.
00:39:41.040
Because you only need to look at how strongly Europe has reacted.
00:39:45.040
You know, we've put a lot of money and resources, despite what Trump said, into the Ukraine effort.
00:39:57.980
It's just that our establishment really hates Russia.
00:40:01.280
And there's lots of financial interest for elites there.
00:40:04.240
But I think that if you start taking territory, Europe will turn against you.
00:40:12.640
Yes, and this is actually splitting the Western camp into...
00:40:20.080
You're basically just saying, I want more for my own.
00:40:25.720
So it's not the idea of the leadership of the free world that a lot of people have tried to capitalize on.
00:40:32.980
I would make the argument that having control over Greenland isn't worth alienating Europe
00:40:41.280
And I think part of the reason is that if there was a strong Europe that was economically successful,
00:40:49.460
In the same way that the United States is scared of China, was scared of Japan.
00:40:56.180
And, you know, if you have a monopolistic power over countries, you do have advantages.
00:41:00.980
If you have the world's reserve currency, you have advantages.
00:41:06.980
And so by keeping potential competitors, that's why the United States played such a role in the destruction of the British Empire.
00:41:14.580
We were in the way of the United States hegemony of the world.
00:41:20.180
And it isn't the American people that did that.
00:41:22.540
It was a select few people in the American government that did it.
00:41:25.620
But for that reason, and I think it's this same reason again.
00:41:32.640
Now, there were several European politicians who made statements.
00:41:41.100
A lot of them said that we are going to defend Greenland if there is any kind of military action.
00:41:49.080
Now, personally, I don't think that there is going to be.
00:41:53.060
So I'm not going to fight Americans for the sake of Greenland.
00:41:56.040
I don't want to fight Americans for any reason.
00:42:04.960
There is here a profile of Greenland that we have from the BBC.
00:42:20.880
I've seen a lot of claims about the Inuit discovering Greenland in the BC.
00:42:29.380
2500 BC, I think, the figure that is banded around.
00:42:33.500
But also they're saying that Denmark is from...
00:42:37.440
In 1982, Greenland is discovered by the Norwegian Eric the Red.
00:42:42.480
Who calls his discovery Greenland to make it more attractive.
00:42:50.440
I mean, the names of Greenland and Iceland need to swap around, by the way.
00:42:54.880
Whoever named them got them around the wrong way.
00:42:57.640
Like, Iceland's got lots of green moss everywhere.
00:43:01.140
Obviously, it still gets icy and cold, but still.
00:43:03.540
Well, it says that there was a little ice age there
00:43:06.660
and temperatures fell significantly and the Norse settlements disappeared.
00:43:10.240
And then in 1721, there was an expedition led by the Danish-Norwegian missionary, Hans Egedessi,
00:43:21.480
They established a new colony in the capital called Newark.
00:43:25.760
In 1940, Denmark is occupied by Germany during World War II.
00:43:29.880
Then in 1941 to 1945, the U.S. occupies Greenland to defend it against a possible invasion by Germany.
00:43:40.820
So, the defense of Greenland has been a huge issue for Denmark, we need to say this.
00:43:47.040
In 1950, Denmark agrees to allow the U.S. to regain the use of the Thule Air Base,
00:43:52.740
which is greatly expanded between 1951 and 1953 as part of a NATO Cold War defense strategy.
00:43:59.620
So, there are bases there. It's not that there aren't.
00:44:02.100
Yeah, and I don't see why Denmark and the U.S. won't cooperate on a lot of these things.
00:44:07.880
I think they both have something to gain by doing so.
00:44:11.380
And I think that there must be something that Trump's not telling us to make this all come together.
00:44:18.400
I think that people might react more strongly than he might expect to this sort of thing.
00:44:27.800
But he's obviously working towards something big here, isn't he, to do this.
00:44:31.660
So, in 1979, there was a referendum in Greenland.
00:44:36.520
And they voted for a kind of administrative independence.
00:44:41.500
And then they left the European Economic Community because they disagreed with the regulations over fishing and seal skin products.
00:44:51.060
And then the Greenlanders in 2008 vote in a referendum for more autonomy and greater control over energy resources.
00:45:03.200
So, there are some, Trump has offered to buy Greenland.
00:45:07.520
And it's not the only time in history that the U.S. has bought lands.
00:45:12.500
They bought, I think, the Louisiana from Napoleon, if I'm correct.
00:45:19.220
So, it's not the first time that talks about this occur.
00:45:23.460
Right, so, and in Greenland, there have been some people who are saying maybe we should go to the U.S., others who want to go to, who want to remain affiliated with Denmark.
00:45:34.740
I would say that they're quite a distinct country on their own, aren't they?
00:45:38.700
So, I could understand why they might want to be independent.
00:45:40.780
But then to go from, you know, Denmark to the U.S. seems unusual to my mind.
00:45:51.200
Right, so, I have here a tweet by a friend of mine, Nagelos Koryanopoulos, who is talking a bit about Denmark.
00:45:58.460
And he's saying that, essentially, the rare minerals that Denmark, that Greenland has a very rich supply.
00:46:08.620
Whenever there's any international contention about land, it's always over resources.
00:46:14.320
It's almost like all the politics is about resource acquisition or something.
00:46:17.400
And, for some reason, they're very much involved into the tech industry.
00:46:24.620
So, we have here a map that was published in the Wall Street Journal that shows where, allegedly, there is a huge supply of iron, gold, uranium, zinc, copper, and other minerals.
00:46:38.080
I imagine the gold and uranium would be of interest, and potentially zinc.
00:46:44.300
But iron and copper, you know, are relatively common.
00:46:50.340
I don't think anyone's going to turn down more gold mines.
00:46:56.500
They're saying that Ukraine has also a really high supply of those minerals.
00:47:06.100
And one of the reasons why, we should remember that one of the reasons why the tech industry was so much involved into the narrative pro-Ukraine was also this.
00:47:14.340
Let us not forget Starlink's, Elon Musk's, Starlink's involvement into the defense of Ukrainians, weren't they?
00:47:24.660
So, it's not exactly that, as some of our colleagues have said, that the U.S. was interested in gay rights for Ukraine.
00:47:33.900
Well, yeah, also Elon Musk, you know, runs Starlink.
00:47:37.460
He's part of the administration, and, you know, he was involved in protecting those Ukrainian resources that are going to be used by companies like Tesla.
00:47:46.020
Yeah, so, the thing is that we need to remember the reason why Trump is interested in this is primarily economical.
00:47:55.240
And it's economical for the U.S. because the tech industry is going to be the industry of the future.
00:48:05.680
Right now, the vast majority of the resources for the minerals required for that industry are controlled by China and Russia.
00:48:15.380
We're getting a little bit better on that front, at least.
00:48:17.980
We're discovering lots of new resource deposits, and it's looking less likely, as well, that China's going to have hegemony over places like Central Africa
00:48:30.240
because they're finding working with Africans quite difficult, which is amusing.
00:48:34.660
And, yeah, I think it's not as set in stone as politicians might want to make it out to be.
00:48:44.440
As far as I'm aware, maybe I'm missing something.
00:48:47.380
Yes, but still, there is a new trade route that is slowly but steadily opening up.
00:48:55.540
That's called the $240 billion Silk Road that a lot of people think is going to be the international trade route of the future.
00:49:05.700
Experts say the route could cut up to two weeks off the travel time for ships journeying from China to Europe.
00:49:13.080
That's going to be going north over Europe, I imagine, and past Russia.
00:49:18.300
So the idea is that the ice in the Arctic Ocean is melting.
00:49:22.620
Here we have a really strong Russian icebreaker opening routes that can be used for extra, as trade routes as well.
00:49:33.980
I mean, it goes on across northern Canada as well, doesn't it?
00:49:38.140
So they're saying that this saves a lot of time for shipping companies.
00:49:46.880
And they say, for instance, that it could save up to 50% of the time to transport goods from China to the UK.
00:49:56.120
And that's a massive amount of economic efficiency.
00:50:02.320
So they say the Arctic Silk Road is a £240 billion megaproject led by Russia and China, and it has been hailed as the future of international trade.
00:50:13.840
And the U.S. has to somehow respond to the opening of the trade routes, and they want increased presence in the region.
00:50:23.320
If they're going to have this going over the north of Europe, then if the U.S. controls Greenland, and the U.K. has the other routes as well,
00:50:38.300
It gives us bargaining power over those countries, because we have the potential to damage their trade to a significant degree.
00:50:45.140
But also, if that trade route opens, and opens even more, and it's controlled by Russia and China, that will mean that, to a large degree,
00:50:56.740
the tech industry and the products in the tech industry that are rich in those minerals, that, to whatever degree, a lot of them are controlled by Russia and China,
00:51:07.760
that's going to give them more negotiational power over the tech industry of the U.S.
00:51:14.860
So that's one of the reasons why they're involved into this.
00:51:17.880
And they say that the project also taps into the Arctic's immense natural resources,
00:51:23.340
which include oil and gas reserves estimated to be worth 28 trillion pounds.
00:51:28.540
Now, one thing to say is that I've heard a cynical, or not so cynical, geopolitical analyst who was saying that the only reason why the U.S. establishment was interested in promoting green energy and the net zero craze
00:51:50.680
was because there is a tremendous amount of resources underneath the ice.
00:51:55.900
So if the ice melts, that's going to give a tremendous amount of natural resources to Russia.
00:52:04.180
Or at least it's going to make them much more accessible to Russia.
00:52:09.360
They want to deny them potential wealth by making the Western countries less dependent on so-called fossil fuels.
00:52:36.180
It's worth mentioning as well that the Crimean War between Britain and Russia, part of the reason that that went on was that we wanted to deny the Russians a winter port,
00:52:51.240
because in the winter, obviously, Russia is cold, and a lot of the water freezes, and so it's difficult to get ships out.
00:52:57.060
And of course, in the past, that was more important.
00:52:59.480
Now they've got these icebreaking ships, and so they can manage it.
00:53:02.160
But it's still more useful to have a ship, you know, a port where it doesn't freeze over, militarily largely.
00:53:09.000
And so I think that that's certainly a part of it, isn't it?
00:53:14.580
And I'll end the segment with a tweet that infuriated me, a post that infuriated me by Guy for Hofstad.
00:53:24.560
He responded to Elon Musk's decision to host Alice Weidel from AFD on an ex-space.
00:53:41.140
Musk wants to decide who governs Germany and the UK.
00:53:45.820
Foreign billionaires looking at a map with dreams of carving up the world.
00:53:59.920
Because the main reason why Europe is weak is European bad leadership.
00:54:09.000
The reason why, for instance, the EU is behind in the tech industry is ridiculous socialist policies of the EU.
00:54:42.020
Who frequently don't show any will to integrate.
00:54:45.060
And they have an establishment that tells them, don't integrate.
00:54:48.000
And I shouldn't get very much started with that.
00:54:51.520
But let's just say also, who will defend post-1945 Europe?
00:54:55.980
Well, if it's a European, if it's a continent that is structured upon a union that completely demonizes national, any kind of national sovereignty,
00:55:09.820
So, don't protest a lot against people from non-Europeans acting aggressively and having aggressive rhetoric.
00:55:23.580
So, Trump isn't crazy to want Greenland and Canada.
00:55:53.080
When you add the territory to the nation, it's not an international issue.
00:56:02.520
The U.S. is offering Denmark money for Greenland, who currently spends $600 million a year on it.
00:56:10.340
Britain chose their fate when they created the NHS and stopped funding their military.
00:56:20.180
Josh is correct to be pessimistic about the CPC.
00:56:24.060
Poiliever said he'll increase and decrease immigration.
00:56:27.740
Back in 2021, the CPC hired a firm to call anti-immigration racist, moving the Overton left.
00:56:42.800
It's not quite Friday, but I'm not on on Friday, so I'm treating this like a Friday segment.
00:56:47.240
So, Andrew Tate wants to be the Great British Prime Minister, which is not a sentence, I thought I'd say.
00:56:55.940
Whether you think he's serious or not, or whether you think he should be taken seriously,
00:57:00.220
some of the policies he suggested are clearly satire, but some are serious, I think.
00:57:05.400
And with his reach, you know, he was the most googled man in Britain, I think, for at least a couple of years,
00:57:12.080
and the most googled in the world, well, top ten at least.
00:57:17.280
So, he's a pretty significant figure, and we've been critical of him in the past before on this podcast,
00:57:23.420
but I wanted to look at his announcements, because it's come at an interesting time,
00:57:29.000
because obviously we've had Elon Musk putting a lot of pressure on the British government,
00:57:34.460
and now at the same time, we have Andrew Tate as well,
00:57:38.240
criticising how things are being run, and putting forward potential solutions to things,
00:57:44.440
and some of them are quite interesting, and I think it's interesting as well,
00:57:47.560
because he's very popular with people that are probably younger than us,
00:57:51.060
I think we're a little bit too old to fall for all of his flamboyant nonsense,
00:58:02.360
Maybe we just don't go to the gym enough, Stelios, that's what it is.
00:58:08.340
If we went to the gym more, we'd be able to afford some Lambos.
00:58:12.260
But I actually do think some of the things he's put forward are quite good,
00:58:22.440
I also don't think he's going to be that serious,
00:58:34.280
Don't get me started, or get me rambling, just like,
00:58:38.380
But anyway, it is worthwhile talking about what he's put forward,
00:58:42.360
because it is useful stuff to sort of shift things rightward,
00:58:48.560
because some of the things he suggested are quite radical,
00:58:53.620
particularly if it's something that's going to be discussed publicly,
00:59:00.700
it's going to be things that he's going to put a lot of weight into,
00:59:03.740
because he feels a certain sense of belonging to Britain
00:59:10.660
I might question some of his decisions as to how he goes about fixing it,
00:59:17.620
He doesn't need to go out of his way to suggest how to fix it,
00:59:27.580
Can you think of Andrew Tate speaking about a budget?
00:59:36.920
I couldn't see him doing anything other than coming out to the lectern of the Prime Minister
00:59:48.740
yeah, we saw politicians who spoke about a budget.
00:59:52.980
You challenge party leaders to fight him in the ring or something.
01:00:01.560
But here someone says the United Kingdom needs someone who is a warrior.
01:00:04.940
Yeah, politicians are not saving them at this rate.
01:00:09.840
They need someone as ready to go to war with the state as Trump,
01:00:23.020
Should I enter politics and run for Prime Minister of the UK?