 Awesome. All right. Thanks so much, folks. We're excited to get into this one. I want to let you know we're going to do the same thing as what we've been doing all day, which is prior to the debate, we're going to do a vote in terms of which way you lean more. And this is for we are excited to partner with our sponsor for this event, Manifold, which is linked in the description box. If you're watching online, folks, I want to tell you to check out the link right now. You can actually predict who is going to win this debate tonight. If you check out that Manifold link in the description box, they helped us with this event making it possible. Don't wait. Vote now. And you can vote in person. So if you want to use your phone and get your camera, just get that QR code and you can actually vote right here as well. And last but not least, the way we'll determine the winner to settle the actual market from Manifold is by this vote of hands. Before and after, whatever percentage change goes in whatever direction, it'll make more sense at the end. All right. First, if you lean in any way, any degree, toward chud logic's position, the left has gone too far, please put your hand up. That's a good question. But let's say where you're like, I, it's a serious concern where you're like, yeah, it resonates. By the way, I feel like we put the left on trial so much today. Next time, I promise we'll put the right on trial to be as the right gone too far. If you would say no, I don't really think the left has gone too far. Could you slip your hand up? Okay, cool. So we'll do a percentage change at the end and we'll, you know what that is. But we're going to kick it into our opening statements. The first being from chud. Chud, we're thrilled to have you here. We almost missed out on having you. The floor is all yours. Thank you. First of all, don't forget to pick up your bumper stickers. I believe they're available somewhere. And if you're watching on YouTube, get the super chats in, let's get some fucking super chats on the go. Was I supposed to prepare, how long is this? Guys, guys, how long we're supposed to speak for? 10 minutes. 10 minutes. 10 minutes? What? Fight Jesus Christ. Okay. How's the left gone too far? I mean, I think that, you know, the reality is everyone here knows, and you know as well, this is just true. I think that everyone has seen that tape, they've seen that tweet, they've seen that stream of a lefty streamer, and they've had that feeling in their gut of, this is fucking insane. What the fuck is this person talking about? What is this person saying? I don't know what your position is and what your argument is going to be exactly, but yeah, I think we can obviously get into it. I've got a couple of things we can frame it around and if you want to bring in anything, obviously you can. But yeah, that's it basically. Let's just get into it. Has the left gone too far on social issues is the broad framing of the debate. I would need to, like, so how do we quantify too far? And Judd may have the quantification of what he considers to be too far. I will answer that question, but I want to provide somewhat of a historical perspective on this, because we can go back to when we look through the history of social progress, at least here in the United States, this country I'm from, I've never been in any other country, so I can't really speak for the countries, but here in the United States, when we look back through the history of social progress, we can start with, say, the feminist movement. The people who fought for women's rights, who fought in the feminist movement in the 1920s were not traditionalists and were not conservatives. They were liberals. They were people that are much closer to left-wing policies than they are right-wing policies. And then we can go from there to the civil rights movement, which was largely opposed by traditionalists and conservatives, particularly in the South. We've all heard of George Wallace and how he was a noted southern conservative man, not a liberal. So the people who fought for the rights of black people in this country were much more aligned with left-wing policies of egalitarianism and equality than they were the right. And we can even look at modern movements today, the LGBTQ movement, the trans movement. It's pretty obvious in the United States, at least, which side of the political isle stands in opposition to these movements and even other social movements, the green energy movement largely opposed by conservatives and supported by the left. So it seems that when it comes to social progress in our society, at least here in the United States, and fighting for that social progress, advocating for that social progress, that seems to be the left. Has the left gone too far on social issues? I would say no. I think that they haven't gone far enough. They focused too much on infighting rather than advocacy and organization. And I think that when leftists really start to organize and advocate that we can see more of that social progress that we, the left, have fought for throughout history. All right, we're going to kick it into an open dialogue. So we'll kick back over to you, Chad, for thoughts on what you just heard. Yeah, sure. Look, okay, it was a nice, nice thing there. I think the thing is there's this kind of romanticized vision of the left, where it's like, you know, about social progress and black people and LGBT and this kind of thing, right? But the truth of it is, that's not really, I mean, we can get into maybe some like cultural war stuff if you want. I'm thinking more so along the lines of like, terrorism, apologia. Terrorism? I don't see that on the left. And by the way, you said something about, like, it's more of a flowery image of the left, but everything I listed is concrete. It happened. Okay. And we fought for by the left. So you've not seen, I don't understand how you've not seen, you've not seen, you've not seen any terrorism apology. What we've seen is the left actually. You've not seen any terrorism apology. I've seen terrorism apology in the world, I think that, okay, but not from the left. From people on the left, but not the left. No. Right. Okay, so we're going to get into a debate then about what is the left, you know, does this person represent the left, does that person represent the left? I mean, no one person represents the entire left. But I think there's an adequate trend that we can point to around the Hamas terrorist attack on the 7th of October, to, to, yeah, clearly point out that there's just absolute insanity that has occurred around this topic. Like what specifically from the left? Okay, so on the day of the attack, there were numerous Twitter accounts that were posting just the most unhinged, talking about it being a revolution, talking about it being, you know, the, the oppressed rising up against the oppressors. Are you familiar with this at all? Yeah, I saw those tweets. I don't understand how that's the left. Right. Okay. So what is the left to you then? The left is a broad social movement, usually characterized by people pushing for egalitarianism, equality and fairness in the world. Now, I can get way more into like the philosophy of it, but I'm sure we're going to get into a conversation about like, what is the left? Okay, does, does a Sampaiker represent the left? Do you think? A what? A Sampaiker. I don't know what that is. A Sampaiker. Oh, a Sampaiker. I thought you said a sandpiker. I was right. So that's my British accent. Does the Sampaiker represent the left? Biggest, biggest, biggest political streamer, socialist streamer on the biggest streaming platform. I would say that he would probably identify as a leftist, but he doesn't represent the left. No. Okay. Okay. So I don't know how we're going to fall in off anyway. So that terrible example. Well, he's not really falling off at all. I don't understand how you can say that a son doesn't represent the left. It feels like a very easy opportunity if someone on the left does something that we think was worthy of criticism. I think he's a leftist. You can swerve around it by going, oh, but he doesn't represent the left. He does represent the left. A son is the leftist streamer. No, I don't think he represents the left. To me, that's like saying Richard Dockin represents atheists. No, we don't really have like these community leaders like that. So and that's some of the problem. Okay. I mean, if this is going to be a conversation where we're just going to deny that thought leaders on the left just don't exist and they're not relevant. I mean, a son, a son, a son put in representing. Okay. This is going to be very fucking retarded autistic conversation. I can tell already if so, I mean, you are not willing to, you are not willing to turn that way. Okay. You are not willing to admit that a son is a significant representation of the left. A significant representation of the left. I don't think so. Okay. So the biggest socialist political streamer on Twitch on the biggest streamer platform is not a significant representation of the size. I don't think really matters. So no, I don't care that. So I don't know how much two million sub YouTube gets 10, you know, 30, 40,000 views irrelevant to you. I mean, no, I just don't care about appeals to his popularity. That's not really an argument for anything. Right. Okay. But if someone is popular amongst lefties, they must have some representation of the left, surely some representation. I mean, they people might like his ideas, but he's not. I just think it's insane that you're not willing to admit a very simple point that a son is a representation of the left and a pretty significant. I don't think he is. I don't think Vosh is a representation of the left. I don't think any other of these. What is your representation of the left? What is your representation of the left? The ideas that it holds to those represent the left and what the left is and what the left. So how do we how do you criticize excesses amongst the left if we're not able to do that by pointing at individuals that have got a lot of sway? I just fucking said terrorism. Apologia. How can I criticize that by calling it out and saying this is done? People shouldn't do this. Right. Okay. But that's I mean, I don't know how we're going to really move forward. If you're not willing to accept that a son is like a representative of the left, a significant representative of the left, because apparently he's irrelevant because he doesn't. I mean, I don't know. It's just, I don't know how we're going to move on. I just haven't heard an argument that he is. You just you just appealed to at least popular with people on the left. So he represents that is that is the argument. Well, I don't buy your argument. I think it's kind of a shitty argument. Right. Okay. So I mean, yeah, it's just insane to me. It seems so absurd that there's no ground given on the idea that a son is representative of the left. When people think of lefty content creators, a son is like one of the top names that you're going to see and you're going to hear about. That's great. What is your broader point of bringing up? Well, the reason I'm bringing up Hassan is because I feel like as he is the biggest streamer on the biggest streaming platform, he is engaged in some of the most insane atrocity, apologia, one-sided ideologue arguments about Israel Palestine, the hospital explosion. He spent an entire stream just just pushing out misinformation based on analysis that you're seeing on Twitter. Like this is the kind of thing that I think is the excess of the left. And yeah, but Hassan isn't the left. I disagree with a lot of what Hassan has said. This is why you want me to admit that he's represented above the left. So you can say what this one person who happens to be a leftist is saying and doing represents probably hundreds of millions of people around the planet. And that's not the way it works. The left is no one person. The left is a broad group of people. The thing is, there's always going to be what one person has said is never going to show that that is what the left thinks or believes. Do you think you're too artistically focused on the exact name of the debate where the whole point of it is to speak about figures? I shouldn't be focused on the topic of the debate. We're trying to talk about figures within the left. That's the whole point of having this conversation. I thought this was about the left, not one specific figure in the left or a few specific figures in the left. Okay. Well, I don't know how we're going to move forward with this then. I mean, if you're not willing to accept so that Hassan is a significant representative of the left, I don't know what to tell you. Do you have any other arguments for how the left may have gone too far? Do you just want to say Hassan said some dumb shit and then this other person said some dumb shit so the left has gone too far? Just so we don't go, this might be a good chance to refresh something new in terms of a prompt. So I do want to do something new that we haven't tried before, which is that if anybody in the audience has a topic that you think would be a good prompt. We do have prompts up here as well, but we do want to give you a chance if there's a particular, as just a quick example, someone online said the leftist position on and this is one I'm not trying to stack the deck. I'm not trying to imply that it's too far of the left, but it's something to debate is whether or not trans women and women's sports has the left gone too far on that or maybe it's not the case that the left has gone too far on that. That's just an example in case you haven't. Go ahead. Maybe like a clarifying question, how do you guys define what you consider to be the left? Like obviously you're not holding 500 million people and asking them are you the left? What do you believe them? What might be your way of deciding what the left believes? Who do you decide who is the left? Because you guys seem to disagree on that point. Yeah, if the question is regarding how do we define what the left is? And I did provide at least a brief definition. Yeah, I think your definition of the left is everyone in the world. That was not what I said was that the left, leftism, so the left would be people who are leftists and yeah, I would say that there's probably hundreds of millions of people around the planet that are leftists. That's not relevant to what it means to be a leftist, to hold to leftism, which is generally defined as a broad social idea centered around fairness, equality, egalitarianism, the reduction or abolition of social hierarchies, things of that nature. So when you believe things like that, that would qualify you as a leftist. I have no idea. I'm not Hassan. I don't really care. The question is does Hassan believe those things? I don't follow him. The reason I'm bringing up Hassan is because my view of the left maybe is slightly different to yours and that's why we're having this problem. Your view of the left must just be whatever Hassan thinks or says and that's just not how the world works. Okay, no, my leftist is not just what Hassan thinks. He's just a popular figure on the left with a lot of clout and a lot of viewership and a lot of sway with the biggest streaming platform in the world. So he's someone that's worth talking about and focusing on. And I would that most leftists in the world probably don't know who he is. Well sure, but the thing, okay, so this is what I'm trying to say. You're broadening it out to the entirety of the left. I think that the thing that's worth talking about in this conversation are thought leaders, you know, people with opinions, people with perspectives that have sway and are able to put thoughts out of it. I do understand that, but just because it looks like neither of you is, we've come to an impasse, I think we do want to go to a couple from. Sure. Would you ever say the right thinks this because Donald Trump or Ben Shapiro or Matt Walsh or Michael Knowles says this, or would you say they don't represent the right because the right stands for conservative principles, blah, blah, blah? Can you repeat the question for? Yeah, so it was about whether like Donald Trump and other figures like that represent the right or whether the right is more represented by their principles. And I think, well, you know, where do those principles come from over history? They've come from thought leaders, people that have pushed those ideas forward. We live in a modern social media age. It used to be that some of these principles and ideas came from books like Karl Marx is a big representative in my opinion of the left, but obviously times have changed. I don't think a son is calm like Karl Marx or that, you know, influential, but I think he is influential enough to be considered in a conversation about whether the left has gone too far because he holds a lot of sway over, you know, a broad, you know, sway of people in America and other places. So to answer Destiny's question, what I would say is that, yeah, I think there's a lot of people that agree with those figures. And I think that those figures do sway the way that a lot of people on the right think. But mind you, I never denied that Hassan sways the way a lot of people on the left might think. But the thing is, is that number one, I don't think that's most leftists. And number two, I think most of those people are probably going to be largely online. And I just don't think that yet that's representative of the left. Can you think of any representatives for the left that you would list and say these people are representatives of the left? I don't think so. Not for like those kinds of broad sort of... So how can you... Okay. No figure represents the left. By definition, the left can never go too far. Because you define the left as an inflexible ideology. That was the question. Well, I think, so Destiny's saying that, well, if you define the left in this vague way, then it's the left can never go too far because there isn't anybody that represents it that could do something that we could consider as going too far. And what I would say is that, I think that if we can show that most people who adhere to some ideology are engaged in some action, then we can say that that group has gone too far. And so I think that we can show that the left has gone too far on things. It would just be a matter of showing that a majority of people, even within a defined region like the United States, that hold to that ideology have gone too far on something. That might be a big task to me. It's like trying to argue with fucking jelly. It's impossible, isn't it? Because the left is a very disparate group. I literally just explained how it's possible. But I see you weren't listening. I actually haven't really looked into that enough to have to feel comfortable expressing like hard opinions, something that I'm like committed to. But from what I have seen and heard from experts, we really can't observe any immediate harm from allowing transitioned trans women to compete in women's sports. Okay. From what I know about it, my understanding is that there were more recent studies I believe about 2021 that showed that going through a male puberty led to an increased muscle mass and bone density in some cases, but I was 7 or 8 percent. So for certain, especially like high-contact sports, it does lead to an advantage that cannot be reduced even if you go onto certain hormones. So the problem you've got is you can't get rid of it. So unfortunately, in order to keep it fair, trans women in certain sports aren't going to be able to compete with cisgender females. So yeah, that's my understanding of it. I can't really comment or speculate to that specifically. I'd have to look at the research, but I can say that if it is shown that there are direct and explicit competitive advantages, then I do think that that qualifies finding a different approach. I'm not going to necessarily say excluding trans women from sports or trans men from sports, but finding some alternative path that is fair and equal. But the problem that you've got then, I'm sorry to bring about this again, but like there's lots of people on the left that do have different thoughts about this. Of course. This is why it's hard for people to be representative of very broad groups. Sure, but then that's the issue, isn't it? You've created a situation where it's impossible for your side to lose because it's so disparate and you could go, oh well this person on the left is this and this person on the left is that. And they disagree. Obviously the left eating itself is a big meme. So I just feel like focusing and talking about big figures on the left that have got a lot of influence. I'm willing to talk about them and things that they've said, but I'm not going to say that he equates to the left necessarily saying or believing that. Okay. Listen, all due respect, do we have to pronounce? I mean, sure, it's a polite thing to do, but you shouldn't. I mean, yeah, it's a polite thing to do. Well, firstly, to reiterate the audience members question for those in the live chat on YouTube and potentially other streaming services, he's asking in the instance, pronouns with respect to like somebody who's done something awful, like the trans person who shot. Where was that? I can't even remember where that was at. What was that? Nashville, Tennessee. Jesus, my listening skills are just terrible today, I guess. I think yes because I don't think pronouns has something to do with morality like that. Like they did something wrong. It shouldn't matter that this is who they are. Just like if somebody's name was Mike and then they shot up a school, they had their name changed to David and shot up a school, should we call them Mike? I mean, what difference does it make? I mean, yeah, I, you know, I've got a pretty progressive position on pronouns. I don't really have much disagreement with the idea that they shouldn't be taken away as a punishment for bad behavior. You know, I think the reality is, yeah, it's just a polite thing to do. So I don't know if there's much disagreement to get into that. So Leo, would you, so say like, so Chad brought out how Hasan represents the left, would you say that Tucker Carlson in terms of represents the right? I don't think Tucker Carlson represents the right. No, I think that these figures are big and are respected by people within the relevant, within the relevant ideological framework. But because there's so much variant, just like I don't think that any like very large trans figure represents trans people. And you know, you'll talk about people who represent the black community, you know, Morgan Freeman or other big names. I don't, I don't agree with that. I just, I don't look at broad communities or broad ideological frameworks that way. I just think there's too much variance. Influential on the left. I could agree with that, that framework. Yes. So maybe the question should have been have leftist influence has gone too far. Maybe that would have been a better debate topic because arguing about what is the left, oh, it's all of everyone in the world that's a leftist. And these values and these ideas, it's kind of fucking boring, isn't it? Let's be real. So have leftist influencers gone too far. Some of them, yes. Okay. So now some of them have some of them haven't. Okay. Well, you specified it to the influencers and there's a small amount of I can tell you autistic. That's all I'm going to say. Okay. Yes, I am guys. Let's not I'm going to ask anybody who wants to come and have a question or if they want to come up and say it in the microphone. So our audience can hear you. That would be appreciated. Kelly plum says, how does Leo feel about the stop oil protests? And how are they changing people's mind? A good buddy of mine actually changed my perspective on the just stop oil movement. I don't think what they're doing is in any way meaningfully helpful. I think it's largely pushing the the broad community largely within England, because that's where that's where they're at, or the United Kingdom, I should say. I think they're pushing the public opinion against them. And I think that they should find and I think that there are much better ways to go about the advocacy that they're trying to engage in than what they're doing. That's funny. What did you tweet out to that guy about that before you did? Yeah, that's the guy I talked to and he changed my mind. I just said that. What did you say in your tweet though? I don't remember. That was like three. It was something along the lines. It was something along the lines of basically, you were trying to point out that he cared more about traffic than human lives. Something like that. Yeah, I don't see what that matters. Well, it matters because you weighed in so heavily about topic. You clearly had no idea about. Well, I had an idea about it. My mind was just changed on it. Okay, help us. So I wanted to ask, independent of any individuals on the left or any influencers or whatever, do you think that there's anything ideologically like left that does go too far? That's what I thought the topic was going to be about is who's going to bring up the ideological factors that he thinks have gone too far. But that's not what it was anyway. Sorry. It's fine. You know, it is what it is. Yeah, I mean, I think that there's the kind of biggest issue that I see is this kind of rationalization of hatred towards people. You know, I often quote this Aldous Huxley thing, where he talks about how if you want to, you know, drive favor in some cause, just promise people that I have the chance of mistreating someone. And I think there's certain things that have happened that often just online stupid shit, but it kind of speaks to a deeper issue where, you know, for example, you can call white people crackers, and that's totally fine because it's not as bad as calling black people slurs. And I think people kind of relish that and they enjoy it. It's like they've got a morally justified reason to just engage in pure hatred towards someone. And I think it's a very toxic kind of concept. And it just seems to have gotten worse and worse and worse as time has gone on, particularly with the recent, you know, a mass atrocity apology, you know, concepts like any settler is a justified target, you know, and so on. Obviously, there's the kind of a Sarnith and Klein drama that's happened, and they've fallen out over that. But yeah, I think that is a really good example of that kind of issue spilling out into more of a mainstream perspective. The only thing I would say with respect to what Chad Longick said is, and this is coming from a colored person who's obviously on the left, don't call white people crackers. Like, even if you don't think it's racist or anything, just don't do it. It's just dumb. Just stop, please. Do you think there is like a kind of this toxic idea of being cruel to people and that sort of thing? Do I think that, I'm sorry, can you repeat that again? Do you think that what I said about there being this kind of toxic concept of being cruel to people and taking pleasure in it and justifying it? Do you think that's a thing? Yeah, I think people do that. Yeah. Oh, yeah. I think there are a lot of people out there that are cruel because they want to be cruel. They want to feel superior to others. All right. Push our conversation there, Ozie. Chad Logick, do you think there are thought leaders on the left that are, in your opinion, on the right side of the Israel Hamas conflict? I'd say the one person I would recommend to go and watch would be a loaner box because, you know, he was able to give a very strong condemnation of a terrorist attack, whilst also promoting a pro-Palestine position, but doing it in a way that doesn't confuse it with any sort of anti-Semitism. And I think, you know, one of the issues that you've got now is, for example, if someone is saying from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free, is it a, you know, a sort of progressive lefty saying it? Is it an Islamist saying it? Is it a neo-Nazi saying it? You know, it's become impossible in some cases to determine who it is you're exactly dealing with. And I think loaner box really cuts through a lot of that. He's able to tell you about the history and is able to, you know, give you valuable insights so that I think can better allow you to better understand the conflict. I agree with you, Leo. Don't call people that. Yeah. Like, I don't appreciate it either. I like, like, I think it's all language. You're going to insult people, you can insult people, but it could turn into harassment. I think there are some things that we should just not say to certain people. You just shouldn't do it to whether it's black people, trans people. It doesn't matter. There are certain things you just don't say. And I think that in certain instances, if you happen to say, you deserve to get punched in the face like you see when these black men on these videos do that because some white crazy person decided to call them the unworded to their face. Finding more. You need to be hum, you deserve to be humbled. You just do. Yeah, finding words can be a problem in parts of the U.S. Any other thoughts on that? Yeah, I mean, I think that stuff like a sort of adoption of violence as a solution to problems is something that is kind of prevalent on the left. There is this kind of bloodthirst that people have. And I think you saw it very explicitly in this recent incident with Hamas Israel and the terrorist attack. But also, I think that it's been building up for a while. It started off with memes about punching Richard Spencer, and then that takes hold a lot more strongly. And the idea that violence is the acceptable solution to further and less egregious acts kind of takes hold. And yeah, I think it's a big issue. Just to follow up on that, that's a great point to use when your kin folk at church, I think, was when you said we've progressed far enough from barbarism to contain it. And I think that probably goes to the point that I don't think anybody should ever say anything to you that will cause you to act to violence. In other words, I think, especially in a debate setting like this where there's a debate on things we can say today that offended me, that I thought was crazy. But the point to the debate... Oh, you should have seen last night. Right. I should have come last night. Sorry. So at the end of the round, I think we have to look to say, is using the n-word or using the c-word or the k-word or whatever these other racial disparating comments are, should that then automatically allow someone to punch you in the face? And I think absolutely not. I think that is the downfall of what we've done over the last few years. And especially in America, it's become more polarized, more tribal, and more like othering people where it's on the right or the left. And then that becomes a huge problem, because then you can't actually have the free flow of ideas to discuss what doesn't mean to say you've gone too far. What is too far? Forget the whole debate of what's the left, but what is too far? Because progress by its nature is going to make conservative people feel uncomfortable because you're trying to progress through to a new thing and conservative people by their nature want things to say the way they were, because they're comfortable with that. And I don't think either one of those positions are right or wrong. But within the position, I think we could tackle various aspects of that to say that particular, like a man participating in a women's sport. You could say that's not correct. But now if you're a trans man or a trans woman, is it then okay, like opening up to an open field where anybody can participate in what's traditionally called the men's sport? But when you sectional or part of society is that just women can participate in the sport, there's part of it. They need to have the definitions of what that is. And that's pretty quick, tricky. But if we're allowed to punch people because they say things that offend us or countries by beliefs, then where do we go from there? I'll let them chew on that for a while. Okay. So what's next? What are we doing now? What's what I was now? I don't know. What is this? Get some super chats in. Come on. Is this where they bring in the dancing lobsters? I'm not seeing any dancing lobsters, I don't know. What were the issues that you had, are those all that you had in terms of? Yeah, I mean, I think that the terrorism apology, I think that although Leo seems completely blind to the terrorism apology. Oh, no, I heard it from Hassan. I just don't think he's representative of the left. Okay. Sure. So this is that, I mean, again, I feel like I'm just leaving him around to the same conversation where, you know, we can't ever say that something is prevalent on the left because we can just say, well, a certain individuals, when I think that, you know, even if you don't agree, I think certainly people here would agree and viewers would agree that there are certain trends that you notice by engaging with social media. Yes, it's driven by the algorithm and stuff like that. But, you know, for example, there's some guy called Black Red Guard, okay, he did a YouTube video and it was, it was gun control, no, cracker control, yes, right. He's some fucking shitter, okay, he's a glup shitto. No one knows who the fuck he is really, some Marxist Leninist retard, okay. But he bought our tweet that said, I want Hamas to win. And the last I checked about tweet had 60,000 likes. Sounds like a tanky. Tanks aren't leftists. Okay. Tanks aren't leftists. So this is exactly what I'm saying. You're just eliminating any group that does bad stuff. No, there's reasons why I think that, but I'm just, I'm not going to get into tankies right now. Okay. Well, tankies derive their theory from what you said. I don't think that because Hassan said something that this is now prevalent on the left, I just, I don't think that's how that works. You keep trying to like shame me for that. Well, okay, okay. That's the common sense of you. I don't think it is. Tankies derive their theories. Because I don't think that if like some huge young earth creationist, Protestant Christian nationalist, like our speaker's house right now, said some really dumb thing about like, the earth is only 6,500 years old that that's representative of Christianity. I don't think that's, because one person in some group says a thing, doesn't mean that, well, that's prevalent in the group. You might have some fucking whack job. I'm from Christianity. There's some crazy shit. Yeah, sure. There's some fucking whack job. I'm not talking about crazy whack jobs. I'm talking about prominent thought leaders, people that are big, fucking crazy. Yeah, prominent thought leaders like, you know, Joe Austin and many others. Speak to the house. Anyway, just to quickly, just to quickly speak to your point about tankies, this dismissal of tankies that I see from lefties is insane. Okay. There's a reason that most tankies derive their theory from Marxism, Leninism, okay, which Joseph Stalin created, blending together Leninist thought, Marxist thought, to put it very simply, right? I'm not Marxist. How on earth, okay, but how on earth are you going to deny that that is the left? That is the left, part of the left at least, because they tend to support authoritarian policies, not leftist policies. Okay, authoritarian policies can be left as policies. Like China and Russia and, you know, tend to support organizations like, listen, you are never going to be in a position where you can call out the excesses, because you will just chop off anyone that's doing bad stuff. No, I just think that if somebody's doing authoritarianism, then they're not on the left. The left is, of course, two authoritarianism. So the left are the good guys. Excellent, great. Okay, let's continue. Yeah, well, actually, yeah, that's unironically, the left are the good guys. I thought that was obvious. The left are the good guys. Okay, there we go. Mr. Philosophize very good guys. You want to talk philosophy? I'd love to. So I'm sorry to interrupt this great conversation. But Chutlogic, you said that there's been a homosapology, a peristology on the left, and I'm not going to discount that, but I want to understand from your perspective, maybe Leo's perspective, how to like better do that. Because if I say that there, some of the homos attacks are blowback, because of things the Israeli government has done, not justifying it, it's blowback. Is that me doing apology for homos, if they get fucked or not? Okay, so, right, the day of the attack, right, you had prominent lefties coming out and talking about it being a revolution and the oppressors rising up. Okay, so first of all, there's a lot of fucking concluding going on there. Okay, which is insane in and of itself. But referred to like a terrorist attack in that in that way is obviously disgusting. Some people have ended up, you know, deleting their tweets. There is a way to make that point. You can talk about, you know, Israel's, the Israel, absolutely. But I think it's got to come with a strong condemnation of Hamas. And it's become a bit of a meme, because sometimes people are not even saying anything that indicates that they support Hamas. And it's like, do you condemn Hamas? And it's kind of a bit insane, because, you know, why would someone have to condemn Hamas if they're not even really talking about that? The reason it's become so prominent recently is because at this particular at the start, there were people and it's like, not only are you not willing to condemn Hamas, you're fucking supporting them. So as frustrating as it is, we would have to deal with that if they're not really defending Hamas. I think it's quite clear that it's rooted in the fact that people were either not condemning it initially, or in some cases supporting it. So I think it's possible to do that. I've seen statements from like Ilhan Omar, AOC that made it very explicitly clear about condemning the Hamas attacks. Bernie Sanders also condemned the Hamas attacks. He's also spoken repeatedly in the past about Israel and continues to do so. And I've not really caught up on it because I was on a flight. But people now are turning on Bernie Sanders because apparently he's not saying exactly the right thing about what Israel should do, which is kind of insane to me. Maybe Bernie Sanders doesn't represent the left to you. But you know, certainly I think that the idea that Bernie Sanders now is getting turned on by people like Breanna Joy Gray, who was the press officer for Bernie Sanders. You know, it's absolutely fucking absurd. But even that is not adequate enough to to placate these fucking bloodthirsty lefties. All right. Here you go. Yeah. So over the past few years, we can kind of agree, I hope so, that on the right we've seen a kind of divide up here because of Trump and the separation between Neocons, Trump, rhinos and so on. Would you at least say that there's a similar rift that started to form on the left, at least with the social understanding with the pro-Palestinian versus pro-Israeli conflicts, how BLM has started up and started kind of justifying these illiberal processes or ideas like justifying shoplifting or so on actions like that. Those have become more and more sporadic on the left. And it just started to get larger and larger. Yeah, sure. I mean, you know, there's now at this point, multiple like a bread tube videos, although that is kind of dying off a bit as a concept. There's like multiple videos where people are just justifying like endless wanton shoplifting. You know, I think that that's rooted maybe in a good place somewhere. You know, if someone's hungry for a loaf of bread, by all means go and take a loaf of bread if you need to and we'll look the other way. You know, but I think that it's difficult because there are lots of Twitter videos that are very kind of provocative and they make you think, oh, this is prevalent, this is happening everywhere, how regular it's happening, often it's happening, obviously, not certain. But I think, you know, it really gets to the heart of an issue that I think some lefties have where they just can't look at someone and go, yeah, that's kind of fucked up. That's bad. I don't think people should do that. I don't think that a horde of shoplifters should run into a store and just steal a load of stuff because regardless of whether or not we want to make an argument about how badly it affects the store, it definitely affects like the social cohesion of our society where, you know, people are potentially afraid to go into a store because that might happen, or their shop and experience fucking sucks because everything's locked behind per-spec screens. I actually agree with that. The whole shoplifting thing, I don't... doesn't make sense to me. I mean, if you steal a t-shirt from Walmart, should you be thrown in jail for 20 years? No, I mean, but should there be reprimand, yes. Yeah, and to keep going off that, would you say that at least populism has kind of like enamored the right? Would you say a similar type of populism has started to enamor the left? This kind of goes back to the... has left gone too far? Sure. I mean, yeah, that's absolutely true. And I think, you know, there is... there is... Horsy theory is kind of mocked a bit, but I think the populist left and the populist right do tend to come to agreement on certain topics. And yeah, it's an issue. And I think that there is a troubling trend where we're moving away from fact-based analysis and actually thinking about is this true, is this true? And, you know, just engaging with kind of the ultimate provocative types of content off of Twitter and things like that to come to our conclusion. I would also agree with that. I do see that on the left because there are a lot of idiots on the left. I'm actually quite critical of the left, particularly the online left myself. So, yeah. Chad, is there anybody on the right that you think is a good representative of, like, the positions that you have that you would... you would be open to being criticized? Aid off Hitler. No, no, okay. On the right, on the right. There probably is someone. When someone asks me a question like that, bang, it's difficult for me to think of a name. But yeah, no, I think... I don't know. I had off Hitler's the best I've got, okay? That's... I'm going to leave it at that. Go ahead. Is there anybody on the right that... No. No. Sorry. There's people that are... I guess you could say on the right that I, like, okay with, you know... I'll tell you, okay, name some righty influencer types and righty thought leaders and I'll... Anyone? Trump? That is one thing we should get into, is talking about politicians who represent those values and what that could be for society. What was... I didn't catch quite the beginning of... So you're talking about thought leaders, but we should also try to talk about politicians and lawmakers and people that are... Oh, you want us to talk about politicians, you mean? Isn't that a politician, thankfully? Are there any politicians that you think represent the left or the right ideology and what kind of implementation of their values do you think is good for society? Well, I mean, I think, you know, it's tricky at the moment, isn't it? Because, I mean, polling at the moment is like neck and neck between Biden and Trump and Trump is on the precipice of becoming like a convicted criminal. So it's pretty fucking insane that that is the state of American politics. There's a fucking joke over here, man. So, yeah, and the problem is, is that because of the kind of purity testing on the left, and we're seeing this right now happening right now on Twitter with Bernie Sanders, you know, Bernie Sanders has not got a strong enough position on Israel-Palestine, despite the fact is an extremely difficult thing to get right as a politician. You know, there is just a sort of flurry of blood for him, a sort of backstabbing, if you like, of all these lefties that are turning on him, going, oh, I fucking... I canvassed for you and I did this for you and I did that for you. You know, so Trump isn't going to be a fucking convicted criminal, and he's widely supported on the right. You know, Bernie Sanders says something a bit wrong about Israel-Palestine, still says the bombing is bad and should stop, but says humanitarian pause rather than a ceasefire, and that is enough for all these people to turn on him. So, you know, I think it just demonstrates how the purity testing of the lefties do is just utterly out of control in that circumstance. For me, there are politicians I like and support, but I would not say that there are any that represent me because there are no Marxist politicians in the United States of America as far as I know, unless it's at some local level in some town somewhere in California or something like that. But politicians like Bernie Sanders, I still largely support, and I do think you are right that there is a lot of purity testing on the left. That's one of the things I'm quite critical of about the left. I do like AOC, Ilhan Omar, the squad, the eight or nine that are relatively progressive. I like them, I support them. This is the thing, right, is those politicians are squeezed by the further left. Like the way it's supposed to work is you've got further left politicians in like a political party and then the left of them squeeze them to move them in a direction that maybe you get a compromise on. Sometimes it feels like they're just moving in completely the wrong direction, you know? Like justizing a politician over whether they say humanitarian pause or ceasefire seems utterly insane when there's likely other issues and topics that you can kind of focus on as a focus point, you know? Just as a follow up, could you explain to us what those purity tests are for our audience? Stuff like he was saying, like holding people to extremely high standards that are just unreasonable for the position that they hold, like talking about how you're not going to support Bernie Sanders anymore because of the language that he used to describe what's going on and, you know, potential temporary solutions, potential solutions to what's going on. Do you prefer final solutions? What? Do you prefer final solutions, generally? Yeah, there we go. No, it's just either a ceasefire or a humanitarian. That was a joke about the Holocaust, okay? That was a joke about the Holocaust, okay? I was just clarifying, no, I don't, no, no, absolutely, absolutely not. Okay, so, Judd, I'm hearing you, but I would like for a little bit of clarification about how some of the issues that you raised are not also equally applicable to the right, because I see a lot of the things that you're saying, I see that on the right as well, like the far right influencing or pushing politicians to the right. I see the right doing a lot of apology for things that I would also consider to be, you know, horrible human atrocities. So I've seen a lot of the things, on my perspective, I've seen the right doing, like the far right doing that as well. So, do you differentiate about why this is specifically the left going too far and why the right hasn't gone too far? Well, the main reason I would talk about the left is, despite what people say about me, you know, I am a progressive, I am on the left. You know, despite the grooming that some conservative people are trying to do to me, you know, I do still exist on the left and I find it frustrating to see. And I don't, I'm not any illusion that my, you know, abrasive takes on this are going to really do anything meaningful. You know, I do think that is absolute insanity occurring on the right. So it's like, but that doesn't really interest me. You know, if I see something or there's something that comes up that I think is crazy, I'll talk about it, you know, and there's definite hypocrisies and issues with them. I mean, at the moment, the right are kind of focused on this idea that cancelling people for speech because they happen to say something pro-Palestine, you know, they're kind of laser focused on that. There's maybe a bit of a Schadenfreude lefties that support cancer culture and now getting canceled. But yeah, it seems like there's a lot of people who are up for some kind of tit-for-tat cancelings because they got canceled. So then it's actually justified to cancel them, you know, rather than just laughing but still having the principle. So yeah, there's absolutely issues on the right. It goes further than that. Like Matt Walsh is obviously fucking insane in some of the stuff he says. He wants to outlaw like transition for adults and, you know, things like that. So if it comes up, I'll talk about it. But I think being on the left and always more interested in, you know, looking at and discussing what the left are doing, really. I have a quick question. So the concept of purity testing came up. Regardless of the party, this is my personal curiosity, is whether it be left or right doing the purity testing, would you guys care to speculate on like what's the motivation behind purity testing? Well, I would say wanting whoever it is that you're performing the test against to just rigidly ideologically align with what you think. And then that's where it's, oh, there's this one thing that doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things that you don't agree with me on, then fuck you. And that's kind of, that's at least how I see it. Yeah, I think that it is an issue on the right on certain topics. But I just think they're able to come together more adequately at like election time. So like, you know, if Trump's on that ticket, the fucking right is going to be voting for Trump. But every time there's a discussion about vote, blue, no matter who, at the moment in the UK, we're experiencing this, despite the fact that Stammer is like smashing the polls. There's people that are saying, you know, we shouldn't vote Labour, we shouldn't vote Stammer, even though it's always better to have a lefty party or a progressive party in or a liberal party in, you know, because you're going to likely get more concessions and be able to organize better to push them in a certain direction, you know, than you would do with a right-wing party. You got it. But in terms of the motivation underlying it, motivation, I think that, you know, political labels have become like an identity, I think. We're all functionally liberals at the end of the day. No matter what we call ourselves and what we label ourselves, our day-to-day activities is being a liberal. And that's kind of boring for a lot of people, especially if you're on the left. You want to be, you know, a fucking anarchist, Marxist-Leninist, whatever, right? So I think that it becomes an identity and it's a bit like Xbox versus PlayStation, you know, I like playing Xbox. You know, I'm a Marxist-Leninist and you're a market socialist. And oh, my, my, and you're wrong, you know, Pepsi left or, you know, Coke left. It's very much like a branding thing. And I think that a lot of these online things, it's a consumption thing. You're consuming a type of content. And, you know, the political identity becomes very personal to you. And so you want to attack anyone else that doesn't agree with you even on a minute level. Yeah. All right. Did anybody else have any other questions? And all right. Bear with us, folks. How do you feel about companies or corporations expressing their opinions on certain social issues? And then one more question for you. At what point in time, like decade or event, or whatever, do you think that the left did go too far? Do you want to say the cool thing? I don't disagree with it. There's many corporations that express support for the LGBTQ community and there are some that express, that do not express support. And I just don't spend my money there. Yeah. I mean, I think that it's quite obvious that corporations are doing it, not because there's necessarily like a corporate level idea behind it, right? There's individuals that maybe have got certain perspectives, but a lot of the time it is to attract certain press coverage or certain perspectives. I think it's better, you're better off having a company being generally nice towards LGBTs than not or something like that. I think that there's obviously, it's difficult to put a pin in it exactly. I think for me, the kind of downturn was probably George Floyd's murder. I think that was the start of some very dangerous pathways that have kind of come to fruition, particularly recently with this Israel Palestine stuff. But yeah, I think that that kind of started us on a pathway where we kind of like became so obsessed with identity and we became obsessed with this idea that, say for example, a police officer kills a black person, there's no way it can be justified no matter what the circumstances are. And that then led to like further violence with the Kenosha riots, which led to Carl Rittenhouse, which is another aspect where I think the left got it very, very badly wrong. So yeah, I just think it's had this knock-on effect that I call Floydism. Obviously, there's a bit more to it than that, but I think this Floydism concept is kind of underpinning a lot of this, right? This kind of almost sainthood of George Floyd. He didn't deserve to get murdered, but he wasn't some martyred saint that we should religiously sort of bow down to. And I think it's led to a lot of other conclusions on these sorts of issues that have been progressively worse and worse for the left. Any thoughts on Floydism? Well, I guess I don't think the George Floyd protests were just protests. I think they were good because I think they kickstarted the national discussion. I think that there were some negative effects of them, but I think that they were far more positive. And research into them, I don't have my laptop in front of me right now, shows that roughly 95% of the protests that took place were peaceful. There wasn't any violence from either side or any side at them. So I think that given that, and I think that when you have in a nation protests on that level, look, there's going to be violence and some damage. We're talking tens of millions of human beings. We need to understand that we are human beings, things like that happen. It's not really very good. It's bad. And I think that local state and even the federal government should help people if they got a business. There should be some sort of recompense for people who were hurt in whatever way financially or what have you in those instances. But I think that if they're largely peaceful, they should be allowed. In the United States, we have something that protects that if they're peaceful, which I think these largely were. And I think it really helped at least for some time kickstart a national discussion concerning some issues that this country faces. I just want to throw one quick thing in there. What would you say are the top long term achievements of the Floyd protest movement? I actually don't know. I'd really have to just do a little research. There may not be any. Like I said, I think it more than anything, it just kind of got a national discussion going at least for some time. There may not have been any meaningful policy that changed anything. There probably wasn't. But yeah, I think I still think that protests are good. Didn't a lot of police reform come out of it? Perhaps. I just I really don't know because I never looked into meaningful stuff that happened after it. I just kind of... Sure. So I think there were some states got rid of qualified immunity. Some states did defund the police as it was to be in the labor movement, I suppose to be on the left. But it feels like they've been pushed out by some of the extreme directions that have been taken. Any other thoughts over there, Leo? No, I largely agree with Chet there. I think that's part of the left needing to organize and advocate. Why are you grooming me so much? What's going on? Dude, come on. Anybody else want to help push the conversation along? You're welcome to it. Anybody? No? Nobody's got any questions? Anything provocative you want to say? Anything provocative you want to say? Let's get provocative. Well, we don't have too much. Not too much either. So if anybody has any other questions or we'll try to like rock a Q&A section here. Let's like prompting the conversation more just questions. Sorry, Leo. This is the end for Chet. Is there anything that you feel like the left going too far recently has been... had a positive... like, positively happened? I mean, this is very niche Britbong stuff. So I don't know if it's interesting to what is largely an American audience, of course. But yeah, okay, this is so... This is like very deep cut. So bear with me. Okay? So in the UK, there's been rail strikes. Rail workers have been striking. Okay? They started off unpopular. This guy called Mick Lynch used this old school British labour guy Bulldogface talking about our labour rights are important. And now the politicians are taken from our pocket and all this kind of stuff, right? You know, as for for viciously, the public perception of the rail strikes increased. It's then decreased over time. I think that continuing to strike as public perception dwindles away would generally be maybe an example of going too far. But it's actually resulted in... I've understood basically they're going to close all the ticket offices in the UK for rail stations. Okay? The government has now you turned on that decision. They're not going to close the ticket offices. So something like that would probably be an example of that. But whether that's interesting to you, I don't know. It's a bit Britbong for the American taste perhaps. Any thoughts over there, Leo? No? All right. Well, what we'll do then is we will conclude and we will get our poll for the room. So I'll hand the mic over to James here. Unless James had any other super thought provoking questions. I just want to say, we did come to discuss a different thing, I think. So if anything, it's James' fault that this happened. I mean, it's James' fault that all of this happened, or I should say that we thank James that this is happening. That's what I meant. Yeah. Thank you very much. I want to debate, please. Thank you. That's nice of you. I do wonder, I'm just surprised that there aren't other possible issues. That might be relevant. Anything just in terms of topics? Well, we've got free speech. Is there a pressure against free speech by the far left? There's been this kind of rewriting of history recently from components of the left, I feel, because I remember a time when there's no such thing as council culture. It's consequence culture. The idea of free speech was literally a meme. If a righty was to talk about how important free speech is, the response was, free speech, free speech, free speech. It was like a mockery of the concept of free speech when the left additionally have been very good on free speech. Now, obviously, you don't know exactly what an individual's view is, right? Someone that's currently getting canceled for a pro Palestine take maybe has got a very good record on free speech and supporting it. But like I say, whilst you should still be principled, it's kind of funny that there's certain people now who are all of a sudden very concerned about free speech. There's people like commentators on Twitter where they're saying, oh, why are you not concerned about this person getting canceled? And there's like numerous examples of them previously just showing a callous disregard to the concept of free speech and others getting canceled or removed from a college or removed from a job or something like that. So yeah, I think that at the moment the left do have a very strong argument on free speech for the pro Palestine stuff, but it's very one sided, very time orientated. And it seems like they only really care because it's happening to them now more readily. Well, with the Palestine stuff specifically, isn't that because they were like kind of doxing people to a degree? You're in the live stream too. I'm sorry about that. So with the Palestine stuff specifically, there were a billboard going around York City, I believe it was, that had their people's information of name where I think where they live, but don't quote me on that one. But so wouldn't that be a bit beyond the cancel the consequences culture that the left talked about with people getting fired from their job because they did something kind of important for sure? I mean, yeah, doxing is obviously bad. Driving around in a billboard is bad. But you know, we there's obviously examples of people losing their job. But there's also examples of people getting doxed on the internet for having the wrong political opinions. So I think that the idea this is like a new thing where people are getting doxed for having the wrong opinions. You know, they used to be like anti for accounts. And they'd be like, let me introduce you to this Nazi. Here's his name. Here's his address. You know, I think that the doxing is a tool that's been used previously in regards to cancer culture. It's bad whenever it happens. But, you know, it's just a bit frustrating when people only seem to care about it when it happens to, you know, their side, you know, it's very. All right. What would your fellow's opinions be on Elon, the Twitter files, the takeover Twitter? Give us your thoughts on that and the free speech. I still call it Twitter. I still call them tweets. I still call them quote tweets. I ignore Elon Musk. I think he's the biggest fucking idiot on the planet. Do whatever he wants. And he has free speech. But he's a moron. He's an absolute moron. Yeah. I mean, you know, Twitter is a shit show these days. I think that especially, like, it's like there's some stuff he does and it's kind of 50-50 in some ways of how good and bad it is. Like getting monetized on Twitter is good. Not that I'm monetized, but that's good. But then the bad is people post engagement bait. If it's just one of those Facebook memes where it's like, you know, oh, what's what's your cat's name or something like that, based on your first letter of your name or something like that? Who cares? But when it's like this Israeli burnt baby is an AI image, which is fake news, obviously, you know, and that's the engagement bait. Yeah, it's kind of fucking insane. So yeah, I think it's cultivated this culture of just rampant misinformation. Community notes is good, but it's got flaws. Yeah, I agree with that too. So so yeah, it's it's I think there is some hysteria about it. There's people that are constantly leaving Twitter and the next week they're posting again. But there's there's definitely, you know, valid criticisms of Twitter under Elon Musk. I agree with that. I think there's quite valid criticisms of how Twitter has sort of, I would say, devolved under its purchase from Elon Musk. This one from online asking, is the left more concerned with equal outcomes rather than equal opportunities? And is this a problem? I think it I think it's 2016, isn't it? Jesus. I think it just depends on who you ask on the left. I think that could that could vary. So wait, wait, so the left is more concerned with equal outcomes and equal opportunities. Is that right? Is that what they're saying? Yeah, it's asking for the problem. If it is the case, the blood does do that, has that position, as well as if it's a problem. Yeah, I mean, you know, it's from each according to their ability to each according to their need. It's a very simplistic way of looking at it. And I think there's a lot more to it than that. But I mean, you know, there's there's some people, I mean, if someone's a fucking vegetable with no arms and no legs in a bed somewhere, you know, no amount of opportunity is going to benefit them. There's some people that do need more help. And obviously, you know, we should set up society to reasonably administer that help in the direction of those kinds of people were required. But you know, on the other side of it, I think that there doesn't need to be an owner song, you know, he cannot work will not eat. I mean, that's obviously a bit absurd. But if someone is able to work, I think that there should be a sort of pressure like, okay, this is one thing I think that's really frustrating is this GoFundMe, the GoFundMe industrial complex. Okay, you've got generally speaking, some sad saps that sat at home. They don't have a job. They don't have any meaningful gainful income from anything. And every month they need money for rent. They need money for rent. Most people will go and get a job to fix that issue. But inevitably, they've got, you know, a whole range of mental illnesses that prevent them from doing anything beyond, I guess, posting on Twitter and laying around in bed. Sounds a bit like a conservative meme, but these people do exist. And yeah, I think that's kind of insane. And it makes the left look like kind of lazy layabouts, rather than I just think that's a bad image. Not beyond what I said before that equal opportunity or equal outcome, I think kind of depends on the situation. And amongst leftists, I think it's probably going to depend on who you ask, which one they would prefer or which one they hold to. Maybe you, depending on what your guys' thoughts are coming into this question, whether or not the left has as a political party moved more to the left. And likewise, maybe the right has as well, like those could both be the case. I think there has been a polarization that each side is moving further into is sort of like solidifying itself and moving further. Now, look on the leftist, so I think that moving further to the left, like, yeah, we got cookies, come on over, but moving further to the right. No, no, that's fascism. Well, it depends. I mean, if, like I say, I think the left should be a primarily labor movement, and that should be the focus. And some of this stuff is not even necessarily moving left in a traditional sense to more labor, labor politics and stuff like that. It's almost like it's going in the wrong direction. You know, listen, I'm all up for equality, and I am obviously up for black people and LGBT people, all that stuff, genuinely. But I think there has been a kind of spiraling down to a almost obsessive focus on identity issues at the cost of class-based, labor-based politics. And I think that's a detriment, you know? We need to argue more. We're not really disagreeing. Come on, there's supposed to be a debate. What are we doing? Get us fighting about something. Come on. You'd mentioned George Floyd being a catalyst for this move to the farther left. Yeah, Floydism. Floydism. Floydism. Thank you. And I'm wondering, Leo, you mentioned, you think that the party has indeed moved further to the left. What are your thoughts on what maybe caused this? What are the contributing factors? I think that the Trump movement starting in about 2015 and watching somebody push this nation that close to fascism, the guardrails of democracy held up, as they should, really made people look and go, oh, this is bad. No, we should structure a society more around people rather than around people in power. Also, I should also add, I think it's generational. So I think that as millennials have aged up to now and as now Gen, Gen Z, I think it is, is aging and getting into their late teens and into their 20s, that they're more, much more left-leaning generations than the generations before them. And I would say that I think the data bears that out. And I think that the generations following Gen Z are probably going to continue that trend. That seems to be a trend, at least going back to the last 100 years. The boomers were a little bit more progressive than the silent generation and then Gen X a little bit more progressive than the boomers and the silents and the millennials are certainly more progressive than the boomers. And so I think that there's just more of a progression towards leftism generationally. And I think, I just think a lot of that has to do with the left has better ideas rather than being rooted in traditionalism and centering society or structuring it rather around traditional values and mores, making society much more progressive and sort of opening society up to more people and affording them similar rights is what a lot of people want. They want everybody to be able to live comfortably in society and they want to knock down those hierarchies that that have existed that keep people. Yes, absolutely. The question was the right has no good ideas. The right, the right in the right in the U.S. It's very much for the not for me. You know, it just sounds like you're saying to touch point we're the good guys. Yeah, I think we are. And I think around a lot of circles, you know, including right wing circles, one of the things that right wings don't do, right ringers don't do is say that we are the good guys. Now they will say the left is the bad guy, but it's so much more focused. Now, I don't agree with that, but you know, you can't just say we have the better ideas and they have no good idea. That's one thing to disagree with them, but you can't be a little charitable to the right at all. Not the right in the U.S. now. No, there are some like moderate conservatives that talk about things and I'm like, okay, that makes sense. That's decent. But I mean, most of their economic ideas are rooted within a capitalist mode of production. I'm just going to reject that entire mode of production. So even if the idea is like good in capitalism, I don't care about capitalism. So and the social ideas, I mean, there's either conservatives that are just a little bit more socially liberal, or it's that knows that socially, I think conservatism just does not win at all. Because it's either that they're a bigot, or they are just more socially liberal economically. I think that within the capitalist framework, conservatives can have some pretty good ideas. I think this is an issue, though, is when you put yourself in the position of we are the good guys, right? This leads you to this issue that I think you've got, where you're sort of- I was being a little bit ironic when I said that. I was just kind of- No, no, no, sure, sure, sure. Okay. But the point, but you clearly think that the left is the best superior, you know, the right side- I do think leftism is superior to conservatism as a way of looking at and framing society and how we should carry it forward, absolutely. Yeah. Because I just feel like when people have this kind of perspective, you know, it leads to a sort of a less- I'll sort of put this. It's like an ideologue situation, right, where the truth becomes less important being an ideologue and pushing ideology is the thing that matters. Because what if you came across some information that showed you that, well, capitalism is superior at this, right? Or that the market is good at doing this or something like that. So I would just change my mind in that instance. Okay. I was met with data that conflicted reasonable, reliable data that I accepted that conflicted with you that I had. So is that data- if let's say I had a file here, okay, and it was foolproof, 100%, capitalism is the best, you would look at it and go, I'm a capitalist now. Probably. Well, it would come down like reading it, understanding it, thinking about it, and then, yeah, my mind would probably change I'm almost certain it would. And that's how I became a Marxist. Right, okay. Could you repeat the question for them, Leo? Oh, could it be possible that I'm so ideologically rooted that it sort of hinders my ability to change my mind or would prevent me from changing my mind? I don't think so. I really don't. Could you give you an opportunity, Leo? Leo, this whole time you've been saying, the left is great. I love the left. There are countless examples of cities and states in the United States, except for California and the West Coast, where the state government, the city government, every government all the way down, they're all lefties. The lefties are running everything. And we still have, in my opinion, really bad things happening. But could you talk about, would you have any criticism for that? Yeah, I would criticize that. But I would also say I do not think California is run by leftists. I think California is run by liberals. And I don't agree with most of the policies that liberals. There's another group cut out. Boom, liberals. They're liberals, they're not part of the left. There is. You can just slice that wherever you want, can't you? Well, they're not a real lefty. They're not a real lefty. Go look up classical liberalism. You'll notice that it is distinct from leftists. You are like the Hannibal Lecter of political ideology. No, I just, I understand. Cut out the bits that you don't want. Political, no doubt. I understand the nuance between different views, where liberals are, classical liberals are more left than conservatives. They're not leftists. They don't hold to leftism. They hold the classical liberalism. Classical liberalism and leftism do share a couple of things. They are still different political ideologies. I just understand the nuances because I've studied political philosophy and political science. What is it? Um, have you watched my content, by the way? What's up? Have you watched my content? I'm not being egotistical. No, I watched a little bit of like some videos and then I was just like, this guy really isn't seeing anything that like mad. So I was like, okay, I'll just see what it's like when we get there. I thought your debate on the fucking adjustable thing was terrible, to be honest. My debate on the what? The just stop oil protests. That's fine. My debate. I had a debate on that. Yeah, yeah, you had a whole debate on that guy. Listen, okay, listen. I'm being obnoxious. I'm being obnoxious. Okay. I'm going too far. Now I'm going too far. Okay. Let's just relax. Right. Sorry. What are we doing again? What's happened? I forgot. We're gonna have Leo. If there's anything you feel like you're especially well read on and you would love to ambush Chudwick and say in terms of making a case for a far left position saying like, Hey, a chance for you to go on the offense. Um, yes, but I really don't want to. I just don't want to get into it right now. You probably don't know what I think. Exactly. We do have a lot of time. We have 41 minutes until the next debate. We have 41 minutes to the next debate. So we do have plenty of time. Oh my God. Jesus Christ. I thought we've been here for like two hours. Jesus, like putting teeth, isn't it? You need to get, we need to get fine about something. We're gonna have to have a fucking boxing match in a minute. Jesus Christ. Um, okay, fuck me. Um, what else? What else is there? Jesus? Wait, the question for Leo, if you have anything. Sorry, sorry. I'm taking look. I'm going to shut up for a bit. I'm sure he probably believes in universal health care. I mean, for Christ's sake, he lives in the United Kingdom. I would imagine he sounds like he's sort of, you know, a labor person, somebody who's going to believe in higher wages, probably stronger unions, maybe better labor protections, things like that. So, I mean, he said he considers himself progressive and on the left. He may just have criticisms about the left and it going too far. So, if he's largely going to be progressive and on the left, we're probably not going to disagree on much unless it gets in the Marxism and I just don't think we need to get into that right now. You got it. I don't, that I don't know. I don't know his positions well enough. That he is a leftist. I don't know. I don't know. I can't honestly. We're all liberals. Everyone in this room is a liberal. I'm not. I'm not a liberal. Okay. What have you done that's leftist? What action have you taken in the world that's just talking about ideas? That's not really what defines leftism. Like the ideas you're told to. That can inform your actions. I just personally think that actions speak out of the words. That's great. As my mother used to tell me. Okay. Anyway, sorry, I'm being really obnoxious. I can't resist. I'm sorry. For the sake of argument earlier in the debate, it was focused to a, in the very start of the debate on leftist leaders. Leo, let's say for the sake of argument, you were going to grant that if you were willing to entertain Chud's point as a leader on the left, let's say that you were going to grant and kind of go with the flow on that point that Chud was kind of trying to make where before I said, okay, it looks like there's an impasse here. We'll go to somewhere else. For the sake of argument, if you were to grant Chud's point going into that conversation. Okay. Yeah. So yeah, what about Hassan being representative of the left? Okay. We're back again. Let's go. Here we go. We're looping. We're looping again. Okay. And this is the bit I guess I came to have. I just am concerned. And the reason I say the left has gone too far is you've got prominent voices, like Hassan Piker, who are saying things on their streams and on their content that is leading them to be on mainstream news programs. He's been on the BBC. He's been on Piers Morgan, which is a big YouTube channel. And there's even an article written in the daily, okay. No, you said Piers Morgan, which is a big YouTube channel. That just makes me laugh a little bit. Why? You know, because he has his own TV show that's aired and everything like that. Oh, okay. Right. Yeah. He's got, yeah. I mean, I know him from... He used to edit the mirror. He's a big journalist guy. Anyway. He's kind of concerning to me that he's able to go on these platforms and he is presented, you know, regardless of what your perception is, he is presented as the left. You know, he is the progressive streamer. He is the lefty streamer. There was recently a Daily Mail article that was written about him. The Daily Mail is the second biggest news website in the UK. I think it's like the 129th biggest website in the entire fucking world. And it gets about 400 million views a day. Now, this article, the headline was written in a pretty harsh way. I think... It's the Daily Mail. Yeah. It's the Daily Mail, right? However, the things that Assange said, it's not a million miles away to suggest that the kind of tone that was set in the article was totally and utterly unreasonable. There was some level of kernel of truth, you could say, in the article. So, you know, my concern is that he has put himself in a position where he's got all this attention and all this viewership and even getting mainstream news attention now, and they were able to take what he's saying, not make too many leaps and present an absolutely insane image of progressives and the left. And they can underline it with biggest streamer on the biggest, you know, biggest political streamer on the biggest streaming site. And it just, you know, it's poisonous. It's poisonous, you know. I would just say that's the media taking somebody who is a leftist and who is very influential and very large, probably the... I think he is the largest streamer in general, let alone leftist streamer, and taking his words and then using that to represent an entire group. Because I'm a leftist. I don't agree with a lot of what Hassan has said. I don't know if you would consider yourself a leftist, but it certainly seems like you don't agree with a lot of what Hassan said. So, while Hassan has said bad things, and that does open up that window for the media to then jump in and run with that, I also think that some blame does go to the media there. Yeah, sure. I mean, for me, it's just about... And again, I'm just a retard with a fucking small YouTube channel in stream. But it's about asking, demanding better from these thought leaders, so that, you know, all these people that are going on these shows to have a more, more, not even a more moderate position. You can have a strong position about something, but root it more, in fact, an analysis than emotion or sort of a vitriolic stream that is extremely, you know, just go on as an ideologue and present one side of it exclusively and don't give any, you know, ground to other information. Yeah, I just think it's a shame that the people that are now representing the left predominantly from the online space are people like Hassan. And yeah, this is kind of what I wanted to get into. I appreciate we came from different conversations, it seems. But yeah, it's very frustrating to see and, you know, I don't know how it's going to get better. Because, sorry, one more point. I know I've spoken a lot, I've spoken way too much. But you know, provocative, me coming out and going, Israel fucking bombed the hospital and there's no two ways about it. They definitely did it. And they also slaughtered a bunch of fucking babies as well. And that's a lot more entertaining than going, well, let's wait for more information. This organization is saying this, that's that bias, that's that bias and so on. So yeah. Yeah, I do think his comments regarding specifically that hospital incident were very, very, I don't know, premature, I guess he had premature would be a word I could use there. I'm just, I'm really not, I'm probably going to agree with a lot of what you say about Hassan because I'm not myself really a very big fan of Hassan. I mean, I don't think he's like a horrible person. But I just, he has a lot of takes and I don't agree with them. He approaches things from a perspective that I don't really agree with myself. And I think that in finding ways to improve this is just other large leftist streamers coming out and criticizing him because I think it's probably pretty obvious that his audience isn't going to do that. You got it out of curiosity. What age would you say this a question from online? What age did you say the majority of Hassan Piker's followers are? I don't know why they're I really don't know. I could throw out a range and I'd probably be wrong. But if I had to guess, I'd guess anywhere between probably the average, probably like 17 to 24, maybe 25, something like that. Yeah, that would probably constitute 60% of his audience. You know, 30% the next age bracket up and then it would kind of taper off from there. So yeah, predominantly a younger audience. And yeah, like these are the people that are going to be going forward. In the end, those younger people are more malleable than, you know, older people that kind of have been watching streamers and been a part of that community long enough to actually have a little bit more of that common sense. And that is something that does kind of concern me because then that that has the potential to solidify those younger people in the views that aren't the greatest that they keep moving forward rather than changing or being able to get a broader view of things and sticking with only with their favorite streamer says. I'm cute. Okay. So it sounds like you guys understood the question. The reason they asked it you guys are thinking is because as you said, Leo, they're wanting an explanation for why it is to that they're so young. And one other question is someone in the chat had said, is it the case that they're going to age out of this? In other words, I think I don't know if this is true. I've heard that there's research that people become slowly more conservative on average. Whether or not that's actually empirical, I don't know. And I really don't know either on that. But what they say is that if you're not a liberal by the time you're 20, you don't have a heart. If you're not conservative by the time you're 30, you don't have a brain. That is the truism of the situation. So whether that's true or not, I don't know. But I think as you get older, you get your family, you know, your sort of tax, you're going to want to pay less tax because you want to want more for your family to build a little nest and so on. So I think generally you will trend more conservative the older you get. One question for me personally is I wonder about the idea of deplatforming. And so for example, modern day debate, we get pressure. Though I want to be fair, it's certainly not all, and I wouldn't even say it's the majority of people that lean far left that are critics of modern day debate. It's kind of like pockets out there in different groups. Is deplatforming, that philosophy, because you know we've hosted controversial people on modern day debate, is that a problem among some people on the far left? As in they want it more than they should, or as in they don't advocate it as much as they should a problem, and I can just address both. Is it bad that, or but maybe to be fair, I want to give you a chance. Like you might want to make a case for deplatforming. I want to give you a chance. I don't want to like kind of prime you for going in a certain direction. I think that deplatforming can work. I'm not going to say it's the solution in every instance, but I think that there are instances where it should be the solution, and I think that deplatforming works, and I think that Tucker Carlson shows us that as his viewership dropped massively when he was let go from Fox and is doing his thing somewhere out there in the ether that nobody cares about because he's not on Fox anymore. So I think that shows that deplatforming works. Whether Tucker Carlson should have been deplatformed, I don't really care because I don't watch Tucker Carlson and I don't watch Fox and I don't care what Fox does, but I don't think that deplatforming should be used in every instance, but I do think that there are some instances in which it is the right decision to make. Got it. Shout out any thoughts? I mean, the thing is, one issue I have with conservatives when I speak about this sometimes is they want to make it very simple. Someone should never be deplatformed, right? I think maybe in principle, there's an argument that someone should always have a voice somewhere, but the problem you've got with these platforms is they're run by advertising money, right? And Kellogg's Corn Flakes does not want to run an advert next to your fucking holocaust and our documentary, right? You know, they don't want to have you going into gruesome detail about trans surgeries and how terrible it is next to a fucking Nike advert, right? It's quite obvious that there needs to be some moderation in order to allow these platforms to be profitable and as a creator, yes, I'm biased, I obviously get a cut of that money too. So it's a bit more complicated than conservatives like to make out. And I think when you look at platforms like Rumble, I've said this for a long time, they like to present themselves as the free speech platform. Meanwhile, they are doing under the table moderation. You know, Nick Prentes has had streams taken down. You know, other creators have had to have streams deleted and things like that. So they're presenting this free speech image while doing this kind of under the table moderation kick, which started off as a bit more free, I think that it is now has had to put in place more rules as people have pushed boundaries and things like that. They're thinking about advertising in the future. So you can have the all the principles you want about free speech. And I agree with a lot of them. I'm a big free speech guy. At the end of the day, who pays the fucking bills? It's the advertisers. And who runs the advertisers? Not Jews, capitalists. Just in case you were wondering where I was going with that. But yeah, so, you know, it's a bit more complicated than the right like to make out. In principle, I'm against it. But if your presence is that detrimental to advertising cash, I don't want to fucking lose a pay packet because someone else wants to say some crazy shit about COVID. So unfortunately, in some cases, you've got to go to Rumble. Got it. Thank you. We do have time for Q&A. Any additional questions? You got it. Would love to hear it. Come on down. Next jab. At least someone's debating. So, you know, you said, I don't read follow Tucker, right? Like, maybe you probably don't watch Fox News. No. Do you digest anything on the right? I mean, like, how do you even know anything about your enemy if you don't even? I live in very rural, white, conservative Iowa. I really don't need to go online or be in online circles or even watch Fox News or the Daily Wire to understand what conservatives believe. Because I hear it in the offices at the co-ops in the morning when all the old ass farmers are in there talking about how they just hate trans people because it's so different from how they were raised. I hear it directly. And when I see those same things repeated by conservatives online like Matt Walsh and Ben Shapiro, for me, that just solidifies that that is probably a very popular conservative position. So, for me, my understanding of conservatives comes from being entirely entrenched in conservative culture, if you haven't noticed my hat. Of course, I am wearing it backwards, so that's kind of my fault if you have. Judd, I don't expect you to weigh in on this. I don't know how crazy the laws are in the UK about bashing stuff, but how do you see the hate speech laws in the UK? And if you approve them, would you want that same version or worse or better in the United States? What are the hate speech laws in the UK? I really don't know what the UK's laws on that are. Are they a bit extreme or something? For example, there's a young lady that had a visit from the Metropolitan Police for quoting the lyrics to a rap song on the Facebook wall of her dead friend. Incidences of this happening in the UK. Then there's, of course, these kind of rectangular things. I think that's kind of bonkers. I would not want that in the United States. Thank God that I don't believe in for the Constitution. So, I would say that, yeah, I think that that's going too far or there's something in that law that allows it to go too far. And I would not support that. I'm pretty like, I think that on TV and radio, I do still think it should be within reason. You shouldn't be able to make a commercial using the N-word and poking fun at black people. But I do largely believe in no censorship. So like, where they censor movies and TV shows, get rid of that. As a parent, if you don't want to see it just yourself, don't watch it then. But don't bitch about it being on there. As a parent, if you don't want your children watching it, then be a parent and be responsible. And don't let your children watch it. And I honestly think the same thing should be on the radio. We should stop censoring songs. If you don't want to listen to it, change the station. If you don't want your children listening to it, change the station. But don't bitch that it's there. So I'm actually pretty big on free speech, more so than you might find from other leftists out there. Maybe my mind is just poisoned from, you know, hearing my dad watch Fox News in the side room. But wouldn't a Marxist-Leninist work really hard? I'm not a Marxist-Leninist. I'm a Marxist, but not a Marxist. The Leninist Party is not. Like I said, I only got my news from the Fox News in the office. I don't know what the fuck the people are saying. I don't know what that is. I don't know what that is. But in your worldview, if you had the world going the way you wanted to, and somebody were to hold a pro-capitalist rally, would you allow them to have that rally? Absolutely, because if I had it my way, I think everybody would just walk right past it. I mean, I couldn't, I can wait a bit. I mean, I've spoken a lot. No, okay. I'll just, uh... Come on in. We're in. Okay, cool. I just feel like I've spoken so much and I feel... Okay, I'm going to keep talking because I love the sound of my own voice. Okay, so to answer kind of the Marxist-Leninist aspect, I think maybe what you're referencing is something that has happened in history, and it's that if there's been a successful revolution, often there will be like reeducation, or there'll be atrocities that are committed against capitalists and things like that. It's something that has happened before. So yeah, I think I can see where you're coming from there. In terms of the UK, that's the main thing I wanted to talk about is there's all sorts of insane speech laws that existed in the UK. The way that like the hate speech legislation is worded, I don't know the exact name of the law and the exact wording, but it's to do with like, if you cause like offence and stuff like that. So just causing offence to someone can potentially mean that you're... The language is quite vague, isn't it? Yeah, it's vague so that they can basically do what they want with it. And there's also things that's something called a public order offence. So to put it in very simple terms, I recommend going and watching a video about it with more details. But let's say there's a protest, and there's those are Palestinian protesters there with the Palestine flag. If I come up and I've got my fucking Union Jack or my St. George's Cross, the police can potentially, if they feel that my presence there is causing an issue essentially, they can ask me to move on or potentially arrest me. So there are big problems with that. And it does kind of lead, and we've seen this recently of this kind of almost mob rule, where if there's a big enough protest, you want a counter protest, well it's easier to get rid of you than it is to deal with the fucking hordes of angry, whatever they are, you know, coming against you. Sorry. Anyway, just want to throw that in there. You're all good. I'll start off with a little protest that I'm not your father. People online, we're insisting that Hassan is not the case at all. So that aside. But to your point, Tucker Colson, I was just looking online, Hassan Abih has like 1.8 million followers and Tucker like 10 million, and it shows you get like between 30 and 90 million hits. So he's quite a formidable force on that X platform. But the reason I'm bringing him up was just to give you a context point is he talks a bit about this replacement theory. And I know it's in the news a lot with the folks coming from the Southern border. I think it's a little loopy for sure. I think it's very racist. No, fair enough. And I don't entirely disagree. Maybe xenophobic more than racist. Perhaps, yeah. But the Southern border is an issue, right, with a lot of folks there. And the more tribal we become, the more polarized we become as a society, I've lived in America now 32 years. This is the most polarized I've ever seen it. What would you both think of, and maybe more of an international perspective, is how do you think close we are to this integrating into a civil war kind of situation where people become that tribal that they just want to kill each other? I honestly, I think that we are quite polarized as a country. I've only lived in the country for 28 years and have been consciously aware of what's going on for maybe 20 of it, if you know what I mean. But I do agree that this is the most polarized I've ever seen this country. How do I want to word this? I think a lot of that is just public. It's not, I think that like when we get in these kinds of conversations and in these kinds of situations, I think we tend to find more common ground and tend to, and I think a lot of it has to do with actually being here face to face without a screen in front of us. There's a little bit more humanity to it, and I think people, I think in that sense this country maybe isn't quite as divided as it seems publicly, or at least that we would be more likely to find that common ground and that have discussions with each other. So I hope that was a decent response. I think it was. I think I got everything there. I have a follow up to that because I think we'll see things through our present lens. But if you look back at past historical debates and stuff like that, you can see the same vitriol in different areas in history. And by golly, we fought a civil war in this country. So there have been points in the past of this history of this country where we've been much more polarized today. What we're seeing now is social media. We're exposed to these opposing views and opinions. I think that's what you're seeing. And in some cases, I do believe the left has gone too far when it comes to policy positions like he brought up. I think like laws against holocaustinalism, laws against talking about vaccines. So and the reason why I don't want those laws is because I want to confront those bad opinions. I want to provide the context and the evidence and refute them so they don't go into hiding into their small insular private communities and develop these deeper conspiracies theory. Yeah, bring the Nazis out into the world so that we can all intellectually beat up on them instead of letting them fester and putrify in their own echo chambers. I very much agree with that. On the other side. Yeah, I mean, I'm against holocaustinalism laws because I want to be able to deny the holocaust without getting arrested personally. Oh, this one's more for Chad. I know it seems like you were kind of focused on or expecting to debate again of the leftist influencers. But would you say whether it's the left has gone too far or have the leftist influencers gone too far? Because for instance, like you mentioned Hassan, he himself called himself a propagandist on the Paris Morgan debate. And he also says he calls himself just a dumb YouTuber who has no influence, but he's also making these quick decisions. That's like a Carlson's head as well, right? Yeah. That's like a Carlson's defense in a court case. So, yeah. Yeah. So do you feel like whether the left has gone too far or like the leftist influencer has gone too far? Well, it's kind of a moot point in many ways because if leftist influencers are going too far and pushing bad ideas, that's going to have a trickle down effect to a broader left movement in some way. You know, and I think that this is evidenced by, if anyone's followed it. So Ethan Klein, they do a podcast together, Leftovers podcast on Ethan Klein's channel. Ethan obviously an OG YouTuber, big channel, lots of influence. And, you know, Ethan has got a very strong anti-Israeli position, but he knows people from Israel. His wife was in the IDF. So, you know, he has got a very strong anti-Israel position. But all he was saying was let's have a moment to just reflect on how insane it is. That, you know, 1,400 Israeli civilians were killed. And, you know, he was called a Zionist and he was criticized and this is likely coming from Hassan's audience. So, you know, it's like it trickles down. And then what's the perception of people who aren't as it integrated into these spaces that see that, that can kind of contextualize it. Because I can contextualize it as what it is. But if you're looking from the outside, looking in, you're seeing a bunch of people say, coming in and going, you're a Zionist. If you're an Ethan Klein fan, maybe a bit more of a normie because he's a more of a normie YouTuber. You know, you're going to be thinking, what, this is insanity. Like, I've heard him talk about this and criticized this issue before. You know? So, yeah, I think there's this kind of trickle down impact and effect that just leads to more and more bad press for like a progressive movement. All right. So, yeah, we're going to move into the poll that we're going to do at the end. So, I'm going to hand it over to our chief here to get our poll and the raise of the hand. Thanks, Ryan. All right. Well, I can't. Thanks very much, folks. If you are leaning even to a small extent or to a great extent toward has the left gone too far in particular, yes, you raise your hand. And then if you would say no, or you not think that the left has gone too far, would you raise your hand? Okay, great. While Ryan does the math, I want to direct our online audience. You can predict the outcome or this vote at the manifold link in the description box. Click on that link right now. Get your prediction in for this particular debate. There have been some surprises today. Oh, Joe. So, as, by the way, I want to explain just for the in-person audience, in case you hadn't heard it yet, as well as for the online audience, the way these polls work is it's just a percentage change. So, let's say theoretically that Chud got maybe 80% at the start of the debate when we put our hands up, but now you see he has 88%? Well, then that would mean that Chud won. So, sorry, I didn't do the first one. So, at the beginning, we had 68% in favor of Chud. And at the end, we have 85% in favor of Chud. So, we saw an increase there, a difference of, what, 58 to 35? No, I'm sorry, 17 points difference there. So, I want to give our speakers a huge round of applause. Thank you, guys. Gentlemen, this has been a true pleasure. Thank you for being in the hot seat. And I want to give a huge thank you. Again, we really do appreciate Manifold. They are linked in the description box. We'll have a final vote for the final debate, which is starting in roughly 15 minutes. I'll give you guys a chance to use the restroom, stretch your legs, whatever you need to do. And we'll see you in about 15 minutes. That's our headline debate. Destiny versus Sean Fitzgerald. Trump versus Biden, who is best for America's future. Looking forward to seeing you there.