The Podcast of the Lotus Eaters #1294
Episode Stats
Length
1 hour and 37 minutes
Words per Minute
161.90813
Summary
In this episode of Lotus Eaters, we discuss the current state of the UK economy, the failure of the Labour government to tackle the problem of unemployment, and the growing problem of youth unemployment. We also ask the question: what is happening with Sarkozy?
Transcript
00:00:00.300
Good afternoon and welcome to the podcast of Lotus Eaters episode 1294. I'm your host
00:00:07.060
Harry joined today by Stelios and Beau. Today we're going to be talking to you about the
00:00:13.020
death spiral that we are trapped in. I'm going to be asking and trying to answer the question
00:00:17.840
of who MAGA is for after the disastrous bit of PR that they've done over the past few
00:00:24.440
days and finally we're going to ask what is happening with Sarkozy which is a question
00:00:30.200
I don't know the answer to so I'm very interested. With that I don't think there's anything else that
00:00:35.820
we need to announce so let's get on with it. Right so the UK economy is not in the best of shapes
00:00:43.460
it's in one of the worst shapes it has been lately and the labour doesn't convince people that they
00:00:51.320
can actually handle the situation. Now I'm generally speaking very much against what I
00:00:58.640
consider to be excessive welfarism. I think that it's the perfect recipe to create a culture of
00:01:04.900
dependency and then everyone is treating the state not as the government of the people but basically
00:01:11.500
as a mechanism to extort resources for resource extraction from one group and give it to another
00:01:17.960
and essentially leads society to economic and then moral corruption or you could say the in the
00:01:25.420
reverse order. Or if you're a commie it's the redistribution of wealth which is a brilliant thing
00:01:30.680
always. Yeah there's always this question of are they doing it deliberately or are they stupid
00:01:36.260
or are they both in case are they doing a Pol Pot? Are they deliberately stupid? Right so just because
00:01:44.080
we are going to talk about welfarism and the culture of dependency that labour is presiding over but
00:01:51.300
which has been created before labour they're definitely not the only ones who are guilty of that
00:01:57.180
we have the symposium that I did with Josh symposium number 58 the evil side of welfarism
00:02:03.580
you can subscribe to us with as little as five pounds a month gain access to all our premium content
00:02:09.680
and here with Josh we are discussing several of the themes that we are going to discuss today
00:02:16.620
these things are not working. Is this mouse working? The mouse is on this screen. There we are. Yep right so
00:02:22.960
you see here this guy saying basically give me give me give me give me it's the recipe for creating a
00:02:30.120
well that's the government whenever they want anything. Yeah but also some of the some of the groups that
00:02:35.420
ally with the government to get resources from groups they hate. Well yeah the government is the
00:02:40.760
mechanism of force exactly redistributes everything that I have earned right to people who haven't earned
00:02:48.640
it. Right so labour got elected last July not last July July of 2024 about a year and three months ago
00:02:57.400
and textbook leftists as they are essentially promised lots of free things to people and to some people
00:03:05.280
they do seem to be giving free things we are going to talk about that but as a whole for the entire
00:03:11.420
country for the entire economy they seem to be accelerating a particularly negative trajectory
00:03:19.540
particularly negative course. Right so according to commonslibrary parliament.uk unemployment statistics
00:03:29.920
have been quite volatile in recent months and there were 1.79 million unemployed people in the UK
00:03:37.340
in July to September 2025 an increase of 282 000 from the previous year. The unemployment rate
00:03:48.080
the percentage of the economically active population who are unemployed was 5 percent up from 4.3 percent
00:03:56.320
a year before which is one of the worst eras since COVID and especially in the beginning in 2021 where it
00:04:06.100
was a bit over 5 percent then it went it went down now it's coming back up again and also we have
00:04:15.900
youth unemployment problems we have 60 000 more young unemployed compared to last year. Right now according
00:04:25.180
to this website we have 702 000 young people aged 16 to 24 who are unemployed in the period of July to
00:04:33.500
September 2025. Last year there were 60k less. Is that including people who are unemployed but in
00:04:40.460
in education in education there? I don't think so. I don't think so. They have other metrics for them. This is more
00:04:48.700
for the economically active population. The others would count presumably as economically inactive and we
00:04:55.740
have here a measure also of people aged 16 to 64 of economically inactive who are 9.08 million.
00:05:05.260
They're not unemployed but they're economically inactive. That's the fun thing when you start to
00:05:13.020
look into this stuff is the unemployment rates is basically hidden by the economic inactivity rate. They
00:05:21.340
shuffle most of it into there so that you don't get a true idea of what the unemployment rate is because
00:05:27.820
look that's 16 to 64. That's the prime working ages for people. 9.08 million. That seems like a
00:05:37.820
staggeringly high number to me. It's interesting actually, I think I've said it before on here, I'm
00:05:44.060
really interested in the politics of Britain during the 70s, specifically the 70s. And if you go back
00:05:53.100
before the 70s, we would sometimes have full employment, full employment. And of course,
00:06:00.300
unemployment is probably at its height under Thatcher in the early 80s, up to sort of 13 million,
00:06:05.580
something like that. Especially in the very beginning of her. Yeah, right. It was actually
00:06:10.540
the previous Labour government shock and Dennis Healey, which made all that happen really. Stuff that
00:06:16.060
went down between 1974 and 1976, where we had to borrow money from the IMF. Yeah, real, real terrible
00:06:23.580
economic times. Anyway, still, that number there, over 9 million. That's sort of disastrous to me.
00:06:33.340
Yeah, that sounds disastrous. Look, it's almost a quarter of people aged 16 to 64. According to this
00:06:40.300
graph, this one here, economic and activity rate, is what, 22, 23%? That's absurd.
00:06:49.020
If you count it like that, that is higher then as a percentage than even in the darkest days of
00:06:54.540
early Thatcher. Makes sense. Looking around the country, it makes sense. It seems like there's
00:06:59.820
loads of people on the streets not at work when you go out at lunch or something. Yeah. Loads of
00:07:04.700
people. Why aren't you in work? What are you doing? The streets are full. How are you still able to eat?
00:07:11.740
We also have less vacancies. The safe vacancies fell over the year to 723,000 in August to October,
00:07:20.540
October 2025, which is below pre-pandemic levels. And if you see, you can see here metrics.
00:07:26.620
Redundancies are also rising. Vacancies are falling. If you see, there is a steady fall in vacancies.
00:07:41.580
Yep. Really. It's staying pretty level. Employees are rising and the self-employed are not.
00:07:52.620
Right. So we do have some very negative data. Let's move on to more negative data.
00:07:57.980
Let's see here. So number of benefits claimants who never have to work hit 4 million for the first
00:08:08.700
time. And they're saying that this is a historic high. It has never been higher. So out of the
00:08:14.700
economically inactive, those who are basically not out of the economically inactive, sorry,
00:08:22.220
people who are not working, they are basically 4 million and they don't have, they are receiving
00:08:29.980
benefits without even showing that they're looking for work.
00:08:34.460
Well, surely this will be included in those economically inactive figures because, I mean,
00:08:40.220
4 million is more than the unemployment rate. Yeah. Or it's what you said before. I think what
00:08:46.780
you hinted at is that they are, they are moving some people from the unemployed to the economically
00:08:53.260
inactive depends on how they count it in order to shuffle things around so that the figures aren't
00:09:00.860
clear. So you can't get a true look at what is going on. But again, the statistics are fancy ways
00:09:07.260
of lying or lying to people or obfuscating. Just look at the streets if you want an accurate picture
00:09:12.780
of England. But also they are clear. They are very negative for the government. It's just that they
00:09:17.180
would be much worse. And most probably they are much worse than the government is already saying,
00:09:23.500
which already is a problem. Just to build on what Harry was saying there,
00:09:27.660
when I first became sort of fully aware of sort of politics and the political cycle,
00:09:31.660
probably during the John Major years, certainly by Tony Blair years, that was the thing they would
00:09:37.020
always do. Major, Blair and Brown. Well, they all do it, but particularly those will just come out
00:09:42.540
with new figures, say unemployment is down, but they've just, the Home Office has just twiddled
00:09:49.740
Right, so we have here the number of people receiving jobless benefits without having to
00:10:01.900
look for work has climbed above 4 million for the first time. Figures published by the Department
00:10:07.900
for Work and Pensions show the number of universal credit claimants with no requirement to look for a
00:10:14.860
job, rose to 4.03 million in October. This is up from 3.9 million in September and 50% above the 2.7
00:10:24.380
million level in July 2024, where Sarah Keir Starmer became prime minister. So it's as if...
00:10:33.980
It's as if the number of people who are incentivized to not work are rising under the Starmer government.
00:10:42.940
They were already present before, it was already a high number, 2.7 million, but Keir Starmer has
00:10:54.780
It means half of the record, 8 million people claiming Britain's main unemployment benefit are
00:10:59.500
now exempt from finding a job. What's the point of even working in this country anymore?
00:11:03.340
But that's the issue. That's one of the problems with welfarism. When it crosses a line, it's...
00:11:10.700
You come to a point beyond a particular threshold that there is no incentive for people to work.
00:11:17.100
And if you're being incentivized to get these benefits, basically, without having to look for work,
00:11:22.620
yeah, no wonder. You are going to create a class of people who are basically just feeding off
00:11:31.580
I mean, because what's the incentive? Because not every single one of those 4 million people
00:11:36.620
is actually going to be a position where they could never work again.
00:11:39.900
So there's going to be some fraud going on within that. So what are the major incentives to work?
00:11:48.780
But what are all of the cons that come with that? Well, you've got to...
00:11:53.580
You have to pay taxes. You have to take on all of these different responsibilities.
00:11:59.020
Or you can find some loophole in the system and claim money, and you don't have to work,
00:12:04.460
your day's free, you don't have to commute, you can just stay at home.
00:12:08.460
The problem is that when you're creating a culture of dependency by these policies,
00:12:13.740
and these are diachronic policies. It didn't just happen with this Labour government.
00:12:22.300
In Beau's Britain, the bar would be so unbelievably high.
00:12:25.740
You'd have to be like a quadriplegic or paralyzed from the neck down.
00:12:31.740
This is a culture of rights without responsibilities, basically.
00:12:38.380
the more the class of people who want rights and benefits without responsibility rises.
00:12:44.060
And that's what Labour is doing. That's the stuff that creates voters.
00:12:50.380
The DWP figures also showed the number of foreigners claiming universal credit is also at the record
00:12:57.020
1.24 million with EU citizens who settled status accounting for the largest share.
00:13:06.140
I believe that behind the description EU citizens lie other data behind.
00:13:13.500
Because lots of people may come to Europe, they may get European passports,
00:13:18.300
and then they can be called EU citizens and come to the UK, and then they may count as EU citizens.
00:13:27.340
So there was a big scandal with Poland handing out Polish passports in North Africa,
00:13:35.740
Yeah. And the reason I say this is not because I think that there are no EU citizens doing this.
00:13:41.660
I mean, out of 1.24 million, some of them will be.
00:13:44.940
But the point is that we have consistent data across Europe and across the Western world
00:13:50.780
that shows that particular groups are a net drain.
00:13:59.580
Maybe you go to Germany from Syria during the Merkel years.
00:14:05.420
So now you can go to the UK, claim benefits, and you count as an EU citizen.
00:14:09.500
Yeah, because this data consistently shows that it's not the European peoples who are doing this.
00:14:26.620
Record number of Britons receiving benefits that amount to more than they pay in tax,
00:14:34.220
According to this think tank called Civitas, they show that 83.83% of all income tax is paid by 40% of
00:14:44.140
British adults, and the studies also say the net dependency ratio is the highest on record.
00:15:00.220
a record number of people, 54.2%, 36 million, now live in households which received more in benefits
00:15:12.460
Now, what I will say is that this is just one study.
00:15:15.900
There are other studies that give roughly different numbers, but they're roughly the same.
00:15:27.740
But basically they're saying that last year, before Keir Starmer took over,
00:15:43.180
And they're saying that roughly 36 million people live in households that are a net drain.
00:15:53.020
And they receive more in benefits than they contribute in taxes,
00:15:55.980
which raises the number of those who are contributing, raises the degree in which those who are
00:16:04.060
economically productive and considerably need to help and pay taxes and help the rest.
00:16:13.420
Surely on the face of it, that's just completely unsustainable.
00:16:17.580
Surely just at a glance, common sense says that's completely unsustainable.
00:16:24.620
And here we have the other problem of the welfare states is that in the long term,
00:16:33.980
But we have politicians who are thinking short term.
00:16:36.940
They just think of their reelection and they're not thinking of how the country will be shaped
00:16:42.540
by these policies 5, 10, 15 years down the line.
00:16:46.780
The only thing they care about is how they're going to be reelected.
00:16:49.820
And in order for them to do so, they don't even have to do a good job.
00:16:55.900
They can tinker data and say, no, we are lowering unemployment.
00:17:03.020
But lo and behold, if someone checks you on the economically inactive population,
00:17:09.740
But here it goes, it's a massive problem and they can't hide it, basically.
00:17:15.260
The question for them right now is how much are they going to hide it?
00:17:19.820
I think the statistic that I saw recently, I think Carl mentioned it on one of his segments a few weeks ago,
00:17:28.620
was that you need to be having a household income of something like £39,000 or £41,000 per year combined across the household
00:17:37.260
to be paying more tax than you are taking from whatever benefits that you're taking.
00:17:46.860
So more than half of the households in this country as of 2023 in that article were earning
00:17:55.660
lower than £39,000 or £41,000, which for Americans watching this right now should put in stark contrast
00:18:03.980
just how much wealthier you are as a nation than we are.
00:18:07.820
Because that is, for a full household, if you've got two people earning in the household and they're
00:18:13.980
not able to get that together, that's not very great.
00:18:17.500
The problem with this, and yeah, I agree with you totally.
00:18:20.460
And I think that one of the main drivers of this is the idea that the state is going to be
00:18:27.500
the main engine for social change that lots of people have, especially the modern liberals and all
00:18:36.140
the leftists and the commies and stuff. But they are constantly trying to say, well, if we allow
00:18:42.620
if we allow the standard economic models to work where we aren't going to end up with
00:18:50.300
favourable outcomes, now that's very questionable, it's very questionable.
00:18:54.460
So we have to justify state intervention in the economy.
00:19:03.660
They constantly say, well, look, if we don't intervene, bad things are going to happen.
00:19:08.620
So let us intervene to prevent bad things from happening, but bad things are happening.
00:19:14.220
And as Beau said, this is completely unsustainable. So the next question is, how are you going to
00:19:18.940
change? And the answer is, give us more power so we can intervene more. Let us see what Rachel
00:19:25.980
Reeves has to say about taxes, where she and the Labour government did promise that there wouldn't be
00:19:34.540
a massive tax hike. But we all know that they can't fund their programmes otherwise.
00:19:41.180
They cannot sustain their voters. And it's not exactly that everyone's happy with Labour at the moment.
00:19:50.060
Will we discover in two years' time that for some reason why they've got to go up?
00:19:55.180
It's an absolute commitment. It's now on us. We've put everything out into the open. We've set
00:20:00.060
the spending envelope for the course of this parliament. But we don't need to come back for more.
00:20:04.940
We've done that now. We've wiped the slate clean.
00:20:07.100
So you're saying, actually, there's not going to be an Oliver Twist moment. You're not going to come
00:20:12.220
back and say, we want another tax rise. Or if you did, that would be a huge failure for your
00:20:18.380
government, wouldn't it? Yeah, look, I'm not going to have to write five years'
00:20:21.100
worth of budgets on this show today. But what we have done...
00:20:23.820
I'm just saying, will there be more tax rise? You're right, Trevor. There's no need to come back
00:20:28.380
with another budget like this. We'll never need to do that again. We've now, Trevor,
00:20:32.460
set the spending envelope for the remainder of this parliament. We don't need to increase taxes further.
00:20:38.460
So she says we don't need to increase taxes. But the question is, how are they going to fund this
00:20:45.420
state that they have created and this kind of society that they are capitalizing upon?
00:20:53.180
We all know that they're going to raise taxes. In their manifesto, they were basically saying that
00:20:57.820
we are not going to do that. We are going to help the middle class. We're going to help everyone,
00:21:02.460
because they're a typical leftist. But here, as a lot of people have noticed, they hid the
00:21:09.740
Labour manifesto from their website, because they don't want people to remember what they promised
00:21:17.420
and call them hypocrites. Wait, so they actually changed it since...
00:21:23.020
Yeah, they erased this part here. That's the before. That's the after. Yeah.
00:21:29.660
You see, campaign for labour, campaign for labour, labour people, labour people. And then the Labour's
00:21:38.380
Which again, talk about secure borders, national security, economic stability. Nothing of the sort
00:21:44.940
is what they are doing. And one thing that we need to mention, because we have been mentioning it
00:21:50.300
again, and I'm surprised I didn't mention it before in the segment, is that it's not just
00:21:55.500
welfarism, it's also the combination of welfarism with open borders. And it's a massive problem.
00:22:02.460
And yeah, if you're going to send the signal to the entire world that if you come here,
00:22:07.980
you're never going to, you won't be deported, because it's a human right to get money from the
00:22:13.980
British taxpayer, you are going to have more people coming here to get money from British taxpayers.
00:22:19.980
It's as simple as that. The combination of an open borders policy where there's no cap.
00:22:27.500
Yeah. There's no cap on the amount of immigration into the country. Any discussion on having a cap
00:22:34.380
is just racist and bigoted and off the table. That combined with welfarism is economically suicidal.
00:22:42.460
Yes. Absolutely. It's a recipe to destroy a nation. To collapse its economy, at least.
00:22:49.500
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And of course, she's going to raise taxes. She's planning to
00:22:55.180
raise stocks and shares, because they are going to market it as we are against the very rich,
00:23:00.780
we're going to eat the rich, and we're going to be for the middle class and the poor class. But we know
00:23:07.900
that that's not how the economy works. If you have, if you don't have investment, you don't
00:23:13.100
have opportunities. People like being promise free stuff, but that's not how it works. There is no
00:23:18.140
money tree. And this is a cliche, but it's a true one. And funny that they say that billionaires are
00:23:24.460
the problem. That's their mantra, isn't it? Yeah, but not the open borders that some billionaires
00:23:29.740
want for cheap labor. Right. They never do this. Yeah. This together. And here we have just this from
00:23:35.740
the Telegraph. Labor's U-turn on the sick benefits will cost each taxpayer about 600 pounds per year,
00:23:44.460
because there are surging numbers claiming sickness handouts that will raise the bill
00:23:50.540
to 27 billion pounds over the next four years. So the labor philosophy is to constantly accelerate on
00:24:01.660
this bad trajectory, because their whole modus operandi is to care only about the next election
00:24:09.420
and to win that next election. I think the best way to do so is to get to promise that they're
00:24:15.180
going to give free money. But long term, this is disastrous for the country.
00:24:20.140
Yeah, the irony being that they're almost certainly going to lose the next election anyway.
00:24:24.380
Yeah. So I had also get a massive washout. Yeah, I feel like what this is, this is,
00:24:30.140
these are Fabians, socialists, Trotskyists, communists, that want to the redistribution of
00:24:38.460
wealth. And they're just not saying that, but that's what they're doing. And that's what they're
00:24:42.860
doing, isn't it? It's absolutely this. And notice how they are, they went global in the sense that the
00:24:49.820
left before had a bit more of a local, had some local manifestations in its rhetoric, because they
00:24:58.620
were talking about the domestic working class and the rich and the poor. And now the rich are the
00:25:04.860
globally rich, and the middle class and even some of the poor people in England count as globally rich,
00:25:12.060
according to the globalist will to redistribute wealth. So if you want to go
00:25:17.980
redistribute, redistribute wealth from the globally rich to the globally poor, you're doing it with
00:25:23.660
global standards, not with domestic ones. And because we know that they hate Western civilization,
00:25:30.300
this means that most of the Western people count as globally rich. So they're saying no, you need to
00:25:39.820
Even if you rinsed everyone in Britain down to penury, down to starvation levels,
00:25:44.700
the actual breadline or below, that's a drop in the ocean for the globally poor.
00:25:49.660
Yeah. Well, it takes my mind back to all of those adverts that you used to get where it's like,
00:25:55.020
Mbali in Africa, he lives on $1 a day. And there you go, like, well, that's a lot,
00:26:01.260
that's a lot less than what you're getting. Even if we do rinse you down to your last pennies,
00:26:05.260
that's probably still a lot better than what he's getting right now. But the problem is,
00:26:08.940
I don't care about Mbali from Africa or anywhere. I don't care about these complete strangers who
00:26:17.900
have nothing to do with me. And if they were to ever come to my country, would see me as a tax pig
00:26:31.020
Anyway, Harry, can you get the Rumble Rants and Super Chats up on the screen for us down here,
00:26:36.380
so that I can actually see them? We've got two.
00:26:41.820
Squaw Blut, £5. Harry, I'll give £200 to a charity of your choice if you shave your head
00:26:48.700
live on stream. Joke's on you, I don't believe in charity.
00:26:52.540
And somebody else sends $50 in, thank you very much.
00:26:56.300
Bo, did you ever think you would one day have a digital harem on Twitter? They're a feisty lot too,
00:27:02.380
ready to throw down against any of your detractors. Have you seen this? Have you heard about this?
00:27:08.860
There's never any doubt in my mind that I'd ultimately have a giant digital harem
00:27:13.980
that worships me and hangs on every word I say. There was never any doubt, I mean...
00:27:17.500
How much do the... No, no, I'm joking. It's crazy, it's weird, it's flattering.
00:27:32.780
Having a cult of personality without actually ever trying to make one.
00:27:37.580
Because you are a personality, you know, just...
00:27:41.180
Yeah, it's like you remember in Pulp Fiction, you may not have a character, but you are one.
00:27:48.620
Now I wasn't talking to boys, just a cool line by Harvey.
00:27:52.220
I've not watched Pulp Fiction in years, or any Tarantino.
00:27:55.580
You saved it there. You saved it there by adding in years.
00:27:58.380
I've not watched a Tarantino film since I saw Once Upon a Time in Hollywood in the cinema,
00:28:02.780
and that was a good one, to be fair. Tarantino can be a little hit and miss,
00:28:06.540
but that was a good one. Anyway, moving on to the next segment,
00:28:09.980
we're going to go across the pond now and talk about America, specifically,
00:28:14.700
the MAGA movement, and ask the question, who is MAGA for?
00:28:19.020
Because that question is very relevant right now. After the past few days,
00:28:23.260
there has been one bit of disastrous PR after another.
00:28:28.300
The messaging that has come from Donald Trump himself and other parts of the movement,
00:28:34.860
particularly the more establishment members of the movement, like, for instance, Ben Shapiro,
00:28:41.900
telling New Yorkers that if you can't afford to live in New York anymore,
00:28:45.660
then you should just leave. Who cares if you've lived there your whole life? Who cares if your
00:28:49.900
family is from there? Just leave. That's the kind of messaging that got Mamdani into the
00:28:55.980
mayorship in New York. But alongside that, MAGA's been making some big mistakes recently,
00:29:01.340
and that's on top of it having been quite, for me at least, and many other people, quite a shaky
00:29:06.780
year. So again, it begs the question, who is MAGA for? And lots of people have been asking that,
00:29:15.020
and it's led to somewhat of a rift between the MAGA and America First sides, America First,
00:29:20.940
as being represented by the recent alliance of Tucker Carlson and Nick Fuentes, which has created a lot
00:29:28.780
of controversy and generated a lot of questions about censorship and free speech, particularly
00:29:35.500
from organizations like the ADL. Because you could argue, no matter what you think of them,
00:29:41.580
that this new alliance of Tucker and Nick represents a more grassroots, genuinely populist,
00:29:49.100
America First, right-wing movement that has come out of the MAGA movement.
00:29:54.060
And the ADL and other people have been very, very upset about this, that Nick Fuentes is somebody
00:30:01.980
who has received more of a platform recently. As you can see from Jonathan Greenblatt, the head of
00:30:07.340
the ADL, posting about how, you know, like Mamdani, Fuentes, Tucker, and mainstreaming anti-Semitism,
00:30:14.940
they want to really bang on this drum, say that this is the new rise of anti-Semitism. See,
00:30:20.780
MAGA did really birth a new Third Reich movement in the form of America First, and Nick Fuentes,
00:30:27.020
how scary. Jonathan Greenblatt explicitly calling out Tucker here, saying, given his own,
00:30:32.700
his own unrelenting anti-Semitism, notorious anti-Semite, Tucker Carlson. The disgraced podcaster
00:30:42.140
defended mayor-elect Zoran Mamdani on the soundness of his anti-Israel positions, and will do little to
00:30:48.700
convince Jewish New Yorkers of their safety. And there are other articles here.
00:30:56.060
I'm sure what Tucker Carlson is presenting, given that brief description that we saw there,
00:31:02.460
was that Mamdani, whatever you think of the rest of his policies,
00:31:05.980
in all of the debates leading up to the election, did present not necessarily America, but a New York
00:31:13.580
first position in terms of foreign policy, in that when people were trying to go on to discussions of
00:31:20.780
Israel, he tried to divert the conversation back to New York and the people of New York.
00:31:26.780
No matter what you think of the sincerity of that, it did play well with his voter base.
00:31:32.140
I mean, there are loads of videos of Mamdani constantly talking about the Middle East and not New York.
00:31:38.380
Of course, but in the actual election debates, that was the tactic that he took. I don't trust that
00:31:43.500
Mamdani is sincere if he says he doesn't actually care about Israel. Clearly, by everything that we've
00:31:49.500
seen of him, he's going to be very, very anti-Israel, and that's going to be something that will be
00:31:54.060
very much at the forefront of his mind. He has said that if Netanyahu were to step foot in New York
00:31:58.380
while he's mayor, he would have him arrested on the charges of international war crimes.
00:32:03.900
Yeah, and he'll be very effective in doing that.
00:32:07.100
But still, that's the kind of position that Tucker was putting forward. I don't necessarily agree,
00:32:13.580
but I don't think that you could charge him with anti-Semitism for that. And this article
00:32:18.940
here says that Daniel Kelly, director of strategy and operations at the Anti-Defamation League's
00:32:23.900
Center for Technology and Society, called the move, that being to platform Nick Fuentes,
00:32:29.340
a mistake. When you have bad actors, quote, like Fuentes on mainstream social platforms,
00:32:34.540
you're giving them a megaphone to spread hateful anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial,
00:32:38.380
and the like to many, many more people. The ADL described Fuentes' rise as a case study
00:32:43.580
in what happens when the major platforms backslide from enforcing safety and speech standards,
00:32:48.220
while Fuentes remains banned from Facebook and YouTube. The relaxation of content moderation
00:32:52.540
has eroded previous taboos against figures like him. So this is a call to, now that this movement
00:32:58.620
is picking up more steam, now that MAGA has been making enough mistakes to generate a positive
00:33:06.460
opposition who's presenting a different perspective on what America first should look like,
00:33:11.980
organizations like the ADL and some of the more mainstream establishment right, the center right,
00:33:17.980
are trying to censor him, they're trying to cancel him, they're trying to advocate for more censorship.
00:33:22.780
The ADL has worked alongside companies like YouTube in the past to try and get people and
00:33:29.260
to successfully get people banned off of these platforms. Some people are dancing around this
00:33:34.300
subject in his video on it. Ben Shapiro said, you know, this isn't cancelling, this is holding people
00:33:39.340
to standards. Mark Levin just came out and said straight out that, you know, we've cancelled Pat
00:33:44.380
Buchanan, we've cancelled Joseph Sobern, we've cancelled all of these figures in the past,
00:33:48.940
we're going to cancel you Tucker, and we're going to cancel you Nick. So he was much more
00:33:52.940
straightforward with it, that this is what this is trying to be. Whatever you want to say about,
00:33:57.260
like, old clips of Fuentes that you can dredge up of him trying to be edgy,
00:34:01.180
he is starting to make inroads and become a lot more popular thanks to his association
00:34:07.420
with Tucker. And these people see it as a threat.
00:34:14.220
I mean, isn't Tucker allowed to have a podcast and talk to whoever he wants?
00:34:20.220
Ben Shapiro I mean, even if you don't agree with Tucker and or his guest,
00:34:24.700
isn't he allowed to, isn't it the land of the free, oh I'm sorry, I thought this was America,
00:34:28.700
Well the point of the first amendment was not that you have to tolerate and agree with
00:34:33.820
everything these people say, it's that you have to, you're not allowed to censor them,
00:34:39.820
you're not allowed to use government power. And the ADL is not the government, yes, but I do think
00:34:46.860
that it trying to exercise its immense power being adjacent to government to try and censor these people
00:34:53.740
is immoral for the sake of shutting down conversations and shutting down opposition to
00:34:59.740
the mainstream establishment center, which sadly MAGA has kind of been swept into,
00:35:07.020
in my estimations. But we'll get more onto that in a few minutes.
00:35:11.500
This has wound up really getting a lot of people in trouble because some people, like the head of the
00:35:18.540
Heritage Foundation, Kevin Roberts, took a bow approach to this, saying that yeah this is America
00:35:27.020
actually, I don't have to agree with everything Fuentes does, everything that Tucker Carlson says,
00:35:32.540
or who he platforms, to be able to say that Tucker Carlson is still my friend, that he is somebody
00:35:38.220
that I'm going to support, and that there is a real sincere passion behind this movement that is
00:35:45.180
building up, that it will not help anybody if a large shadowy cabal of people tries to shut it
00:35:52.300
down. In fact, that is going to only add fuel to the fire of people's conspiracy theorizing.
00:35:59.180
That got him in a little bit of trouble. He immediately went out of his way to try and
00:36:04.060
clarify that, you know, I believe in free speech, but here are all of the awful things that I hate
00:36:08.700
about Nick Fuentes, again dredging up all of the same kind of old clips of him being edgy that Ben
00:36:16.380
Shapiro was talking, like used in his attack on the Nick Fuentes Tucker Carlson debate, oh sorry,
00:36:23.820
discussion that they had. And then it went even worse by him being forced to apologize for making the
00:36:31.580
video in the first place. It says here, in leaked footage of a heritage town hall from Wednesday,
00:36:37.820
staff has largely said that Robert's decision to align the think tank with Fuentes was a mistake.
00:36:44.700
Just to be clear here, to clarify, he never at any point aligned the Heritage Foundation
00:36:52.140
with Nick Fuentes. He said that Tucker Carlson is his friend, and that he can platform people if he
00:37:00.460
wants to, whether he agrees with it or not. But because they are close friends, he will not engage in an
00:37:07.100
attempt to cancel him. But apparently this, according to this, staffers within Heritage felt that that
00:37:16.460
was aligning himself with Fuentes. Robert said, I made a mistake and I let you down and I let down
00:37:23.020
this institution, period, full stop. He claimed that he did not know much about Fuentes before he
00:37:28.780
recorded a video and posted it on X, in which he defended Carlson as a close friend of the Heritage
00:37:33.660
Foundation. I'm just going to assume that that's not true. I'm going to assume that's him covering
00:37:38.940
his back. All right. He said that a chief of staff who has since resigned wrote the video's script.
00:37:47.980
Push that all onto this guy. He got fired now. Sucks to be you, I suppose. Goodbye. Trying to save his own
00:37:55.100
skin. But this is mafia group tactics that we're talking about here. That's what you're up against,
00:38:02.940
which means you're not good enough. Is Tucker allowed to have a conversation with whoever he
00:38:07.020
wants to? Yes. Yes or no? Yes. Is Tucker allowed to speak to whoever he wants to? That should be
00:38:12.860
and film it if he wants. Yes or no? Of course yes. Or the answer should be yes. The ADL, Kevin Roberts,
00:38:24.780
Heritage, whatever. Is Tucker at liberty to have a conversation with whoever he wants?
00:38:32.940
Well, if these people get their way, no, because the Heritage Foundation has a national task force to
00:38:39.580
combat antisemitism embedded within it. And as part of that, there are a number of different
00:38:44.860
people and people attached to other organizations like this one, the combat antisemitism movement,
00:38:52.060
who have decided to attack Heritage from the inside because of this video and have decided to all try
00:38:59.020
and pull out at once. And it's pretty shocking in this particular article, which is an open letter
00:39:06.940
to the Heritage Foundation. And Roberts personally, how far they go in the personal attacks,
00:39:14.300
which is not substantiated at all by the original video that he put out defending Tucker Carlson,
00:39:22.220
which, to remind everybody, was first started by the fact that people immediately tried to call for
00:39:29.260
Heritage to join in in cancelling Tucker Carlson because of his close association with the Heritage
00:39:35.340
Foundation. He took a principled stand and said no. And this is what he gets in response. They say,
00:39:43.260
after they go on about how terrible Tucker Carlson is and how terrible Nick Fuentes is,
00:39:48.620
they say, that's not the point, though. No. The genesis of this letter is our deep concern with how
00:39:55.660
you, Mr. Roberts, on behalf of the Heritage Foundation, have chosen to exercise your rights,
00:40:01.820
given the opportunity to apologise and retract your comments criticising a venomous coalition
00:40:07.420
of globalists, the globalist class, and their mouthpieces in Washington, comments that feed into
00:40:12.700
the very anti-Semitic tropes you claim to abhor, your speech at Hillsdale College yesterday fell well
00:40:18.460
short of the mark. Taken together with your defence of Mr. Carlson's decision to treat Holocaust denial
00:40:24.540
as a legitimate political discourse, begs the question of whether Holocaust survivors,
00:40:30.140
their families, and the American Jewish community at large have a home at Heritage. And then they go
00:40:36.300
on to talk about the Holocaust being an immutable historical event, and how Roberts is defending
00:40:43.900
tinfoil hat-wearing conspiracy theorists that believe the earth is flat and that Winston Churchill was the
00:40:49.420
actual villain of the Second World War. So this is going all the way back again to Tucker Carlson's
00:40:53.980
interview with Marta Maid, Daryl Cooper, around September of last year. And again, the willful, purposeful
00:41:03.740
misunderstanding that these people have taken from that interview where Daryl Cooper was talking
00:41:09.820
explicitly, explicitly about POW camps, which are different, and were different, from concentration
00:41:19.260
camps, and they try and take what he said about POW camps, assume that he was talking about concentration
00:41:24.940
camps, therefore assume that he was denying the Holocaust. And they are trying to take that
00:41:29.340
willful misinterpretation and put that on this guy.
00:41:33.180
So Harry, I think I'm against cancellation, right? I'm against cancellation, because I believe
00:41:46.940
in free speech. I've always been so. The only thing I've said was on the Jimmy Kimmel thing,
00:41:52.140
is that when people were saying he should get fired from the Jimmy Kimmel show, it's not an issue so much
00:41:58.780
of free speech, as much as it is an issue of the standards of the that they have, and freedom of
00:42:06.060
association. No one said he shouldn't be allowed to speak, speak his mind. So I'm against
00:42:12.300
cancellation. But I will say that I think that what I don't like about this discussion here, not ours,
00:42:20.780
not ours, but this discussion, is that everyone is screaming that they're being cancelled even when
00:42:26.700
they're not. And I'm not saying that there aren't people like Mark Levin who have said that
00:42:31.820
specifically, we cancelled XYZ individuals. But for instance, when it came to martyr maiden Daryl Cooper,
00:42:39.020
he was given the opportunity to debate Andrew Roberts. And I think he backed down. So it's not that
00:42:46.060
wasn't exactly a, we don't give you the opportunity to speak that was we do give you the opportunity to
00:42:52.460
speak and he didn't take it. So what I want to say is that when it comes to this, I think that
00:42:59.180
people who want to frame to form an opinion about this issue should be very careful about the framing.
00:43:04.860
And I will say this, that when it comes to the issue, I will say about Tucker and Fuentes very,
00:43:11.180
very, very briefly. I think I've said many times before, I don't trust Tucker Carlson.
00:43:17.100
I just don't trust him at all. Really? Yeah, not at all. Because I think he's constantly whitewashing
00:43:24.220
people who have a very, let's say, very authoritarian and totalitarian way of acting. He constantly tries
00:43:33.420
to normalize that kind of rhetoric. And anyway, I think I don't know much about what?
00:43:39.420
What? What? No, it's just I said base. I said base. Let's carry on. Do you want to carry on?
00:43:46.780
No, no, no. You can carry on. No, what I say this is because I doubt, I very much doubt
00:43:54.140
that the, that what Tucker Carlson is representing is representing an authentic grassroots movement
00:44:03.100
in the US. One thing, I'll give you a very small example. He, he did think that Operation Midnight
00:44:09.580
Hammer in Iran was going to lead to World War Three. He, he had a very, he had the rhetoric that
00:44:15.740
constantly said, I think, I think it's perfectly reasonable to worry about, to show concerns about
00:44:23.500
America striking. It is. It is. The point is that many people, many people thought that that would
00:44:30.540
cost Trump immensely, and it hasn't. And also, there's also the question, and I'll just,
00:44:36.780
just my opinion for, for the thing is just, I think that part of the, a significant part of
00:44:42.140
Tucker's audience is third world Hitlerites, who basically, they do love Hitler because they have,
00:44:48.300
they think of him as a sort of main engine for decolonialism. I, I find plenty of the,
00:44:53.100
the, and also very cringe. The idea that they're trying to promote this idea of Hitler as some kind of
00:44:59.260
multi-racial, multi-cultural coalitionist who was just trying to stop the Jews because they wanted
00:45:05.260
to stop black and white coming together is absurd. Yeah. It, it, it is absurd. It is completely, but you
00:45:12.140
do see, you do see that there are some people who are basically saying that the only, the one and only
00:45:18.060
criterion for anything in politics is not whether it helps America or England or Britain, it's whether
00:45:27.260
it harms Israel or whether it benefits Israel. There are many people who do politics through both sides
00:45:34.700
of this lens. And I think that what, what is interesting for me, who I'm trying to find out
00:45:42.700
what is happening here, I want to say who does each and sort of put them in a, put them aside and say,
00:45:51.660
right, sorry, these are not the only things that matter in politics. Uh, so it's not just either
00:45:58.140
Israel first or Israel or anti-Israel first as this, as a very large part of this conversation is
00:46:06.460
trying to, to lead towards. Okay. And I'm not saying, and with respect to Fuentes, I think he's a young
00:46:12.220
27 year old man. He's doing the edgelording things and whatever. I don't know that. I haven't watched him that
00:46:18.060
much to do to see him, but I would say that I have been very critical of Tucker. I think that he,
00:46:24.700
he is representing this side. Well, again, I think to steel man,
00:46:30.140
the Nick Fuentes, America first position, and then I will return to what you said about Marta Maid,
00:46:35.020
and then I'll carry on with the segment is that they are not purely Israel, uh, and anti-Israel.
00:46:43.260
It's not just the case of anything that is bad for Israel is automatically good for America. The
00:46:48.940
concern is that the Israel lobby and organized groups in America specifically are against the
00:46:58.220
interests of the American people, against the liberties and rights of the American people,
00:47:03.740
push foreign policy in America in a particular direction that is against the interests of the
00:47:09.020
American people and purely for the interests of the Israeli state in the Middle East. That is
00:47:15.900
their concerns. And when they see things like this happening, that Tucker Carlson can get some guy on
00:47:23.420
his show, and you could see it as well with Marta Maid last year, they get one guy on and immediately the
00:47:29.580
entire system coalesces to attack him and to try to, you can say it's not cancelling, but I think Mark
00:47:37.340
Levin was the most honest when he admitted that, hey, we're just going to try and cancel you, because
00:47:42.860
these were the same tactics used against Pat Buchanan in 1992 in his first presidential bid in the lead
00:47:50.140
up to the, to the Republican nomination. These are the tactics that William F. Buckley used against
00:47:58.140
Pat Buchanan and Joseph Sobern, and what ended up getting used against Sam Francis. And you can say
00:48:03.580
that it's not cancellation, but it is ultimately an attempt at reputation destruction. It's an attempt
00:48:09.580
to willfully... That comes also from the other side. It's not that he's the only one who does it.
00:48:15.340
I've never said that. I'm saying that that's what this is. It's everyone's trying to destroy each other's
00:48:19.980
reputation. Because when you have this situation that, when you have this discourse that we have
00:48:25.580
one myth and we have the other myth, and they're all using that myth to lie to you, yeah, you are
00:48:31.500
doing reputation destruction. Both of them. I don't know what you mean by that myth. But if, if he's
00:48:36.860
saying we, if the Marta Maid rhetoric is, we have the Churchill myth, which whatever Churchill, whatever he
00:48:45.180
says about the Churchill, we do know that there is this line of argument that there is the Churchill myth
00:48:49.740
and it sort of has a very negative effect upon Western nations. So by implication, you are saying
00:48:56.460
that everyone who is propagating that myth is either a useful idiot or does it deliberately.
00:49:04.700
And when it's the latter, it is reputation of destruction and also the former.
00:49:09.580
Well, I mean, I do think that there are plenty of people who use the mythologized version of
00:49:15.740
Churchill to push the current multicultural, uh, regime that we live under. Anyway, anyway,
00:49:22.460
to do with the Marta Maid thing, um, from back last year, you mentioned the Andrew Roberts
00:49:29.020
interview. Daryl Cooper comes on and refers to a lot of information which can be found in mainstream
00:49:35.580
history textbooks of the, of the second world war. Oftentimes works, um, that are from people like
00:49:42.300
Andrew Roberts, Ian Kershaw, Andrew Roberts, uh, Neil Ferguson, these kinds of mainstream historians who
00:49:48.860
came out after that interview and attacked him. A lot of the conclusions that Marta made drew were from
00:49:56.300
those works. Well, but why doesn't he participate in these discussions? Because if you care about the
00:50:03.020
truth of the matter, you presumably become a member of a community of historians. Is that how it works?
00:50:09.660
The community of historians, you say it like it's this apolitical neutral thing.
00:50:17.020
It's orthodoxy. And he came to a heterodox conclusion whether or not it was using their
00:50:24.220
work in the first place, which is what happened. They immediately come out and go on this huge
00:50:31.180
press round, which is still going on to this day, to try to smear him, to try to claim that,
00:50:36.860
to willfully misrepresent his points and say, you are a Holocaust denier. When in that interview,
00:50:43.580
he never once mentioned the Holocaust. He was talking about Russian POW camps.
00:50:49.980
Let me finish. Let me finish, right? So he comes out and sees that everybody is trying to smear his
00:50:56.060
reputation, willfully lying about what he said. And then Andrew Roberts, who's part of the orthodoxy
00:51:03.420
of historians, says, no, we've poisoned the well, come have a debate with me, which definitely will
00:51:09.740
not be politically stacked in my favour and against yours. I've seen the debate that Andrew Roberts
00:51:15.660
had with Pat Buchanan back in 2012. Andrew Roberts, frankly, is a woeful debater. But guess what?
00:51:22.860
In the right environment, with the right crowd, that doesn't matter because he is preaching to
00:51:27.660
the choir. This would not have been a fair standard.
00:51:28.460
If I were a fan of his, I would like to see him do the debate,
00:51:35.180
because in the debate, sometimes it's not about the opponent. It's about the audience.
00:51:40.460
I mean, that's fair. But at the same time, I doubt the audience would have been fair against him.
00:51:44.940
I think the well had already been poisoned. And after receiving that onslaught, I think it was
00:51:49.020
perfectly fair of Marta May to say, I do not want to step into this arena on terms that have been set
00:51:55.820
explicitly against me. Either way, we've addressed that. I hope you've enjoyed that little divergence there.
00:52:06.300
There you go. Thank you for your contribution there. Anyway, so they go out of their way.
00:52:15.260
And this is, again, what I'm talking about with what happened with Daryl Cooper. These are the
00:52:19.820
tactics that they always use. This guy comes out and says, I don't support Tucker being cancelled.
00:52:25.340
And they immediately try to smear him as having sympathy with Holocaust denial, which I think is
00:52:31.660
just a completely immoral and disgusting attempt to smear this guy, right? And then what else happens?
00:52:38.860
Well, all of a sudden, within the Heritage Foundation, the National Task Force to Combat
00:52:45.260
Anti-Semitism sends out this email saying, OK, here's what we're going to do in response to you
00:52:51.820
trying to defend your friend's First Amendment rights to free speech. Well, you've got to remove the video.
00:53:02.780
You've got to apologise to the Christians and Jews that you've offended with this.
00:53:06.620
That sounds like, that's literally what, when I got cancelled out of my band, if I was told that I
00:53:12.220
was able to stay in my band, I was told that I would have to apologise about what I said.
00:53:21.260
Three, condemn any content, any content that Tucker Carlson has hosted or statements he has made.
00:53:28.540
Just in general? Is there an explanation there?
00:53:31.260
No, just an acknowledgement that you and Tucker have disagreements and that you disagree with
00:53:37.100
and condemn his anti-Semitic content. Again, I don't believe that Tucker has made any.
00:53:42.700
But one of the big ones that people found amusing was point six.
00:53:46.780
The task force would like also to host Shabbat dinners with the interns and junior staffs of
00:53:51.820
Heritage in partnership with Heritage to host conversations on Judaism and the Judeo-Christian
00:53:56.860
tradition. So we would like to invite you around for struggle sessions over dinner.
00:54:01.660
Is what that reads like to me. Is that there are a lot of people who are going to be staff
00:54:07.900
in your organisation who are going to have views that we don't like.
00:54:12.300
We want to sniff them out. We want to sniff them out. And when somebody came up
00:54:18.380
at the Heritage Foundation town hall meeting and asked a question about it,
00:54:24.220
it. The response that he got was it was tone policing, school marming, trying to accuse him of
00:54:35.900
Thank you, Mike. That's a hard act to follow. But you did a really good job. And I just want to say
00:54:40.780
I'm grateful for for all of our colleagues who are speaking up today and especially for our colleagues
00:54:46.540
on the National Task Force to combat anti-Semitism. I'm especially grateful for their work.
00:54:50.620
I also have a question about it, given some of the leaks that occurred yesterday.
00:54:55.740
Right now, the National Task Force to combat anti-Semitism is demanding that Heritage host
00:54:59.340
Shabbat dinners with Heritage interns and junior staff. The faith of many Christians here at Heritage,
00:55:04.780
myself included, would prevent us from attending these dinners in good conscience.
00:55:09.260
As you know, for many Christians, Friday is a special day of prayer and abstinence
00:55:13.340
to commemorate the death of Christ. I assume that no staff will be required to attend the Shabbat
00:55:19.100
dinners. But my concern is that these dinners will serve as a sort of informal litmus test.
00:55:24.460
And I'm worried that they will hurt many Christians who are not anti-Semitic, but don't feel comfortable
00:55:29.500
attending a Shabbat dinner. I would like to know how you guys would respond to that concern and how we can
00:55:35.660
be sure that the dinners won't be used that way when the people requesting them or someone has already been
00:55:47.580
Thanks, Evan. The recommendations and that was the word there was no demand was made. That is a gross
00:55:54.220
mischaracterization of what was issued by the co-chairs of the anti-Semitism task force yesterday,
00:56:00.140
of which I am one. And I take some offense to that characterization.
00:56:05.020
This was a recommendation, one of six recommendations, that the co-chairs came to
00:56:09.740
in consultation with the task force to try to provide Dr. Roberts with a path forward.
00:56:16.220
As I said, they were recommendations. They came out of the conversation, which we were grateful to have
00:56:20.620
with you on this topic. And one of the offers was if any heritage staff would like to participate
00:56:29.100
in this kind of a dinner as an educational exercise, not as a betrayal of their faith.
00:56:35.580
That was an open offer from the task force. It was made in generosity of spirit and in the hopes of
00:56:43.740
And Evan, I'm deeply sorry that you could not see that as a generous offer,
00:56:50.700
but rather a personal attack on you. It was not.
00:56:55.660
The concern trolling there, the gaslighting in that response is pretty crazy.
00:57:03.020
But the Heritage Foundation situation is still ongoing, and we'll see where it develops from here.
00:57:09.500
There are other developments and other situations ongoing, such as Elijah Schaefer.
00:57:15.740
He was not somebody whose content that I watch,
00:57:17.820
but I know is a critic of Israel and America's involvement with Israel.
00:57:25.100
A few months ago, I believe, put out a Twitter post without any words on it.
00:57:30.620
It was a joke post. There are jokes going around that Kash Patel's girlfriend is, like,
00:57:36.460
an Israeli Mossad spy, right? I don't know if there's any truth to it. I just hear it as a joke, right?
00:57:43.020
I've never even heard her or seen her. I don't know her name or anything.
00:57:46.620
I know. Somebody put out a post saying about infiltration of the American government.
00:57:52.060
He, quote, tweets it with no words, just a picture of Kash Patel and his girlfriend, right?
00:57:57.180
He is now, for that, being sued for $5 million.
00:58:08.620
Potentially, but who knows? Who knows? Apparently they're seeking a jury trial.
00:58:12.460
According to this video, he explains that they are seeking a jury trial
00:58:16.700
in a constituency that is likely to be stacked against him in this.
00:58:21.340
And in the complaint, in the legal complaint sent against him,
00:58:26.620
it mentions, essentially, that you did not say anything,
00:58:29.980
but given this and all of your other criticism of Israel, the implication was loud and clear.
00:58:35.660
So he's being sued for implied criticism of a foreign government.
00:58:42.460
Is she Jewish or Israeli? Can we see a picture?
00:58:44.700
I've never even seen a picture of her. I don't know her name.
00:58:50.380
Either way, he is being sued for the implication of criticism to a foreign government.
00:59:04.860
I have also seen the people post screenshots of the actual complaint as well.
00:59:13.900
It is just saying the implication is why we're suing you.
00:59:23.500
That's what some factions, that's what some clients of MAGA get.
00:59:27.980
You, the person at home who voted because you wanted a stable economy,
00:59:32.620
who voted because you wanted to bring back industry into America,
00:59:39.260
because you believed in the idea of an America-first MAGA
00:59:43.580
that was going to prevent legal immigrants coming into the country,
00:59:50.300
Well, Donald Trump comes out in a recent Fox News interview
00:59:54.860
and plants his foot squarely in his mouth when talking about H-1B visas.
00:59:59.580
Everybody remembers the big controversy last year with Vivek Ramaswamy and Elon Musk
01:00:04.540
going to bat because in Vivek Ramaswamy's words, you can see here,
01:00:09.820
uh, Native Americans, uh, just, uh, have a, have an American culture
01:00:18.860
It's a culture that venerates Corey from Boy Meets World
01:00:22.300
or Zack and Slater over Screech and Saved by the Bell
01:00:27.500
which means that you just don't produce the best engineers.
01:00:30.780
You're too busy living good lives to be productive,
01:00:35.340
like Vivek Ramaswamy and his army of H-1B Indians.
01:00:40.300
And what does Donald Trump say in this interview about H-1B as well?
01:00:47.420
And does that mean the H-1B visa thing will not be a big priority for your administration?
01:00:52.220
Because if you want to raise wages for American workers,
01:00:54.780
you can't flood the country with, with tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of foreign workers.
01:00:58.300
I agree, but you also do have to bring in talent when a country...
01:01:05.340
No, you don't have, you don't have certain talents and you have to, people have to learn.
01:01:09.500
You can't take people off an unemployment, like an unemployment line and say,
01:01:13.740
I'm going to put you into a factory or we're going to make missiles or I'm going to put you into...
01:01:18.380
Well, let me just give you an example in Georgia.
01:01:23.020
He gives in this example of South Koreans working on very particular batteries,
01:01:31.420
But he's completely ignoring that that is not what H-1Bs are actually used for.
01:01:35.420
H-1Bs are used to bring in hundreds of thousands, well tens of thousands at least, of people
01:01:44.860
And he also is ignoring here that there are countless university-educated young men
01:01:52.860
because those companies would rather bring in lower-wage foreign workers.
01:02:06.220
Yeah, this is explicit, this is the opposite of what Bannon wanted.
01:02:17.500
The universities which have been ideological strongholds against Donald Trump.
01:02:22.940
The universities which people go through so that it can take hundreds of thousands of dollars
01:02:28.140
And then, because of things like H-1Bs and mass migration, illegal or otherwise,
01:02:33.820
are unable to get work in their chosen field of specialty.
01:02:43.260
Folks are not thrilled about this idea of hundreds of thousands of foreign students
01:02:52.060
At one point during COVID, you were going to push to get them out.
01:02:57.820
You've said as many as 600,000 Chinese students could come to the United States.
01:03:04.780
When so many American kids want to go to school and there are places not for them,
01:03:09.660
and these universities are getting rich off Chinese money.
01:03:13.740
Never said about China, but we do have a lot of people coming in from China.
01:03:20.700
We also have a massive system of colleges and universities.
01:03:25.020
And if we were to cut that in half, which perhaps makes some people happy,
01:03:29.180
you would have half the colleges in the United States go out of business.
01:03:36.940
Yeah, but you would have, as you know, historically,
01:03:39.820
black colleges and universities would all be out of business.
01:03:45.900
We have to import half a million people, because otherwise the ideological strongholds
01:03:51.980
that hate me and my supporters, and also black colleges, might go out of business.
01:03:59.180
One thing that China is doing, because it has so many students who are going to other
01:04:07.100
nations to study, is it brings English-speaking personnel to Chinese universities.
01:04:15.740
So this is one of the measures that Trump may be doing in order to try to offset this.
01:04:26.140
One of the other things China likes to do is...
01:04:32.460
One of the other things that China likes to do is then spies.
01:04:39.100
When you have lots of people from another country on your...
01:04:42.540
On your ground, you could have extra leverage against that country.
01:04:55.500
I just don't believe that it's in the interest of the United States to have 600,000 Chinese students.
01:05:04.860
Alongside Russia, I thought they were supposed to be the biggest geopolitical rival that America has.
01:05:10.300
And you want to train up their students who are going to take that knowledge back to build China.
01:05:14.620
And you're going to invite them into the universities where...
01:05:17.340
One of the reasons that China is as successful as it is, is because of all of the industry espionage.
01:05:24.540
And you're sending people over so that they can just perform more espionage.
01:05:29.100
Again, Bannon must be very disappointed, because I quite like the Bannon stripe of MAGA.
01:05:38.380
Just basically, the number one thing is deporting millions of people in the United States that shouldn't be there.
01:05:47.420
He makes it explicitly clear that everything comes after that.
01:05:51.900
And the Bannon's just not really doing it, is he, really?
01:05:54.860
No, and also, just the last thing, you're going to get a 50-year mortgage.
01:06:06.460
Because the economy is doing so great in America, and I'm sure it's doing better than England, but that's not saying much.
01:06:13.180
That you're going to get a 50-year mortgage, so that you can save $200 a month.
01:06:22.140
And people could say that there were ways to spin all of this.
01:06:25.580
Donald Trump, in that Fox News interview, it's like she was trying to give him a leg up at points.
01:06:38.680
Yeah, she was like teeing him up for him to hit a homo, and he's like, no.
01:06:46.900
There were ways to talk about this, or there were ways to just ignore it altogether.
01:06:53.420
So for them, they get to, you know, destroy foundations, cancel people without any consequence, trample over first, like, freedom of speech expression, and the First Amendment of the Constitution.
01:07:16.280
And I'll go through the super chats and rumble rants of what I'm sure was a very popular segment.
01:07:25.560
Ryan Hannigan, Vivek's business acumen, comes from scamming $360 million from his mother's fake Alzheimer's cure company.
01:07:37.620
Lone Wolf, H1B visa program, is why whenever a young person just starting out asks about going into it, I tell them not to waste their time.
01:07:45.500
Sigil Stone, we have to import talent, people have to learn, and the people doing the learning are going to be 600,000 Chinese instead of Americans.
01:07:55.340
That's a random name, says that Harry and Samson should cover Halo for Journey to the East.
01:08:01.380
Might be a little bit out of the remit, but we'll think about it.
01:08:05.920
We should just do something Halo-related, because I do like Halo.
01:08:09.180
Sigil Stone, this cancellation attempt is so similar in style, tone, and structure to Democrats.
01:08:13.500
Cancellation attempts even involves the same groups.
01:08:17.660
Cranky Texan, people like Tucker Carlson and Alex Jones are in danger of moderating Fuentes.
01:08:27.140
Jairo Sanichiban says, don't let famously anti-MAGA people tell you what MAGA means.
01:08:35.440
I don't know which side you're referring to when you say famously anti-MAGA people.
01:08:39.840
I know that Fuentes has had a lot to say about MAGA.
01:08:42.660
Didn't he say people to vote for Kamala Harris?
01:08:47.360
Yeah, yeah, he told people to vote for Kamala Harris.
01:08:50.660
Yeah, I think he was, I think what he wanted, because the Republicans weren't giving people,
01:08:55.340
what they were voting for from Republicans was kind of like a zero seats style American campaign
01:09:02.320
of punish them so that next time they give us what we want.
01:09:06.780
Yeah, well that's the thing, is that there are definite drawbacks to that kind of tactic.
01:09:12.560
Yeah, and I'll read the two, some of the super chats, 1950s, there are 120...
01:09:19.040
The point is who it harms for some people, they don't care if it's good for...
01:09:23.820
Again, the logic to steel man it is if it harms the Republicans enough, they will know
01:09:30.040
to actually work with us and give us what we want next time.
01:09:34.300
Yeah, I understand it, it's not that complicated, I get it, I just...
01:09:40.280
No, I think the example with Labour in the UK is not looking great at the moment.
01:09:44.840
I'm thinking it's like the lesser of two evils, don't go...
01:09:57.040
Anyway, on YouTube, 1950s, there are 120 million Africans who desperately need your help.
01:10:07.580
There are 1.2 billion Africans who desperately need your help.
01:10:14.340
Ben Shapiro and Mark Levin don't seem to understand how their rhetoric lands.
01:10:17.860
We can't spend years objecting to being called Nazis and then turn around and spew the same accusations.
01:10:24.560
That's the thing, is it turns people against them, and after the whole Charlie Kirk thing,
01:10:28.580
where we all rightfully said that, hey, demonising the right-wingers all being Nazis and fascists
01:10:35.440
is what led to people trying to kill him in the first place,
01:10:39.040
Mark Levin then turns around and starts using the exact same rhetoric.
01:11:06.400
Was he the president of the 127th French Republic?
01:11:16.220
So one of the first things I'll say is that he was, if anyone doesn't know, he was the
01:11:23.320
Now, some people that are young, if you're in your early 20s or even mid-20s, you was
01:11:29.560
You've probably not really heard of him, don't know.
01:11:32.780
Or if you're foreign, you might not have ever cared.
01:11:48.180
I mean, Pétain went to prison after World War II for being a Nazi collaborator.
01:11:58.420
But anyway, he doesn't count as a special, that's a special case, really.
01:12:01.500
So in a normal run of things, the head of state very, very, very rarely goes to prison,
01:12:10.200
Like someone like Nixon, you know, gets a pardon from Ford.
01:12:16.300
You know, someone like Boris Johnson, there's no question of him going to prison.
01:12:20.980
If you're in the top job, it's very, very, very rare that you end up going to prison.
01:12:31.080
So I just want to talk a bit about it because it's been in the news a fair bit over the last
01:12:42.540
I was already sort of deep into my adulthood at this point.
01:12:44.840
I mean, do you remember much about those times?
01:13:06.880
Do you remember when Cameron and Sarkozy were bombing Libya and Gaddafi got lynched?
01:13:12.080
I was not paying attention to the media at the time, but I do know that that happened.
01:13:16.100
Are you bombing Libya in a war game or something?
01:13:22.640
So I just want to run through the story because it's quite a big, long saga, really.
01:13:28.480
Just try and explain it for people that might be interested in it.
01:13:33.800
So Sarkozy's been in and around French politics for years and years.
01:13:36.640
He was like an interior minister long before he was ever the actual full-blown president.
01:13:40.100
And quite often he gets described as center-right.
01:13:43.840
I mean, he's a bit more right-leaning than most French socialist politicians.
01:13:50.700
But they describe him as center-right all the time.
01:13:54.960
No, I've heard conflicting reports about him exiling a particular community.
01:14:03.080
Yeah, but I've also heard the other French people saying that he actually didn't.
01:14:17.840
Some say he got rid of gypsies and then others say that they came back and he did nothing.
01:14:24.160
And now we have all this video with French farmers spraying them manure.
01:14:28.740
Well, so anyway, to stay specific to this thing.
01:14:37.280
He's actually been convicted three times of criminal things, right?
01:14:41.660
Back in 2021, he was convicted of basically corruption, a type of corruption,
01:14:47.900
sort of interfering with a judge in his own case, which he really shouldn't have done.
01:14:52.980
He got convicted of that and got sentenced to like two or three years,
01:14:57.800
And then again in 2023, he got convicted of a similar sort of corruption type dealio,
01:15:05.860
Again, he was supposed to serve a year in prison,
01:15:08.280
but they said you don't have to actually go to prison until your appeal is done.
01:15:15.760
You can draw out for years and years, especially if you've got the best lawyers and endless money.
01:15:25.120
I mean, already there, an ex-president that's got a tag on his ankle and a double conviction.
01:15:32.020
And then now they've got him for a specific thing to do with Gaddafi in Libya, of all things.
01:15:38.640
And he was convicted, he was convicted of it and sentenced to five years in prison.
01:15:49.860
He was up on charges of criminal conspiracy, i.e. just whispers behind closed doors with Gaddafi.
01:16:04.480
Corruption, just general, just a charge, corruption.
01:16:19.740
Now, he was acquitted on all of that, apart from criminal conspiracy.
01:16:24.260
So his enemies, OK, so here's the two sides of the equation here.
01:16:31.560
Sarkozy and his supporters are saying, this is all just lawfare.
01:16:35.380
This is all just my political enemies going after me.
01:16:41.980
I wouldn't dream of taking money from Colonel Gaddafi.
01:16:47.460
Didn't I get him, like, ousted from power and ultimately murdered in the streets?
01:16:57.380
Because no, there's never been such thing as a backstab in political history, has there?
01:17:02.920
Also, that's the other, the other people saying, no, there's some evidence here or there that,
01:17:07.620
how come your campaign in 2007 suddenly seemed to be really well funded?
01:17:13.560
So, OK, he's been up on all sorts of charges and he was largely acquitted,
01:17:16.640
and a couple of co-conspirators, people that were his right-hand men during his time as president.
01:17:22.680
But he was acquitted of it all apart from criminal conspiracy.
01:17:26.700
Now, that's like a quite a nebulous thing to prove, really.
01:17:32.000
Like, you know, what exactly was said behind closed doors and what exactly...
01:17:36.820
The idea is that, the allegation, is that Gaddafi gave him money, literally suitcases full of cash.
01:17:45.940
Like, three different times or more, suitcases with, like, one and a half million dollars in it,
01:17:51.100
another one with, like, three million dollars in it or whatever.
01:17:53.700
And in return for that, well, which Sarkozy then spent on his election campaign in 2007,
01:17:58.280
and in return for that, Sarkozy will bring Gaddafi into the fold of the international community.
01:18:09.940
Yeah, trying to bring him back into the fold a bit.
01:18:18.380
I hate Gaddafi, by the way, just to be clear on that, before anyone says anything.
01:18:23.900
So, he was convicted of this, sentenced to five years,
01:18:28.160
and he'll be serving it largely in, or almost entirely, in fact, in solitary,
01:18:31.880
with, like, one hour a day for exercise and all that sort of stuff.
01:18:39.800
Anyway, after three weeks, he was visited by the current Justice Minister,
01:18:50.520
And after three weeks, they said, you're right, we'll let you out.
01:18:58.320
Well, actually, it's not quite as simple as that.
01:19:03.820
They said, you can have the sentence sort of suspended,
01:19:08.560
or you can go home, but only until the appeals process is finished again,
01:19:14.440
You can work on your own bench press or something.
01:19:20.360
he will have to go back to prison at that point and serve the rest of the time.
01:19:23.140
But for now, he gets to go home to his very pretty wife,
01:20:01.140
And so this story is all wrapped up with Gaddafi.
01:20:04.180
Now, the Brits, the Italians, but a lot, the French,
01:20:09.020
have got a long and storied past in North Africa.
01:20:12.720
Particularly the French, in Algeria, for example.
01:20:23.160
They controlled it for a while, as did Britain.
01:20:25.980
I mean, we won the North African campaign in World War II,
01:20:42.980
probably the biggest influence in sort of Algeria, Morocco,
01:20:52.000
But anyway, so Gaddafi does a military coup d'etat in, like, 1969.
01:20:59.480
Gaddafi and his military, a cadre of his military officers take over.
01:21:08.840
he said, we'll open up Libya, we'll make it much more democratic,
01:21:16.440
but this is like a new open golden age for Libya, it will be.
01:21:21.900
But quite quickly, it turned out that he was just,
01:21:23.840
he was basically just collecting powers into his own person
01:21:41.240
being kind of a classic example of a dictator, really.
01:21:44.760
I don't think he wouldn't really be surprised by.
01:21:52.040
oh, there's some of his opponents that were murdered.
01:22:30.920
are accusing him of basically funding terrorism
01:22:37.840
A discotheque in West Berlin in, like, 1985 or something
01:22:44.760
Reagan had an address where he was telling the Americans
01:23:17.780
280 plus people in that killed and 11 on the ground.
01:23:23.720
Like, the intelligence services came out very quickly
01:23:32.920
So at this point, there's no doubt that it was.
01:23:56.480
Well, the country to this day is a complete mess.
01:24:00.340
I mean, Gaddafi is your classic dictator strongman.
01:24:08.480
You can usually keep the lid on certain things.
01:24:11.340
But without him, even that has just gone to pot.
01:24:24.420
I'll give up all my plans to make nuclear bombs
01:24:38.420
You can find pictures of Tony Blair and Gaddafi