Welcome to the Weekly Sceptic, episode 73!
This week:
- As the world creeps ever closer to all-out war, Nick and Toby discuss whether they’d fight for their country
- Laurence Fox loses his lawsuit, but why is it libellous to call someone a paedo but not a racist?
- After distancing herself from the plot to replace Rishi Sunak, Kemi Badenoch turns out to be in a Tory WhatsApp group called ‘Evil Plotters’
- What accounts for the ideological gender divide and is it possible to have a relationship with a political opponent?
- The UN Secretary-General constantly warns us about the ‘global threat’ posed by online ‘hate speech’, but isn’t the fact that the UN employs actual terrorists a bigger threat?
- Is ‘Stand Off at Eagle Pass’ a genuine news story or a long-forgotten 1940s Western?
- Should Trump really have to pay $83.3 million to E.J. Carrol?
- Plus Peak Woke and, for premium subscribers only, Review the Reviews
Sign up for all the extra content on our new platform, BASED, here.
You can subscribe to the premium version of the podcast (audio and video) here.
You can purchase tickets to the Weekly Sceptic Live here.
You can listen to the podcast here and subscribe on iTunes here.
Donate to the Daily Sceptic here.
Join the Free Speech Union here.
To advertise to our large and discerning audience (1.3 million downloads and counting!) drop Toby a line.
Listen to Nick’s podcast – The Current Thing – here.
Subscribe to Nick’s Substack here.
Help Nick keep both of his podcasts going by buying him a coffee here.
Produced by Podscapers
Music by Tinderella
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Well, think about this. Carrol accused Trump of sexual assault with 0 evidence. Then it was proven in a court of law it never happened. Then Carrol admitted on public television there was no assault. Then Trump was ordered to pay her for defamation. Like… what?
Nick: You made me laugh with your confused rant about ‘grift’, a comment which I somewhat agree with. My view is I’m already paying for BTL commenting rights here on the DS. I’m not willing to pay extra for your Weekly-Sceptic ‘bonus content’, as I’m already subscribing to both DS and FSU.
For those not already here on the DS, I suppose the extra content may have some value.
But not for me.
Yes, I take a similar view. I would never go so far as to call you guys grifters but I don’t take too kindly to the suggestion that we expect free content. I pay a monthly amount to the DS precisely because I think it’s right to pay for good content and not to expect it for free, and the WS is surely part and parcel of the DS. I’m also a member of the FSU. I won’t be subscribing to Based as well.
It’s okay, Nick said he’d only reply to comments on Based.
We’re already last year’s news to him
Agree. It’s their business model, but I already pay for DS (and FSU, but I view that as an insurance premium so out of scope for this discussion) so I’d be slightly miffed if more an more of the content gets moved to Based, and I suffer shrinkflation on my current subscription.
Agree. I’ll either support DS or Based but not both.
“Fight for our country”? ————-But do we actually have a country anymore? Are we not now just a region? ——A region of the global community where hundreds of thousands of people are free to arrive as they please and are dispersed to all corners? —-Do we actually have a country anymore when foreign Regimes and Treaties dictate policies and tell us what energy sources we cannot use and insist we join them in pretending to save the planet? According to the dictionary an Independent country is “free from the authority and jurisdiction of others”—-So what Country are we exactly?
Yes, but in times past it was the working classes fighting for the governing class and I’m sure that point was made then.
The only physical conflict in which I can imagine fighting for now would be if there is a civil war in the US between pro-liberty red states and the blue state proto-fascist ones.
I was thinking of joining the new platform. Yes, to my shame it was me who confused base and based. However, on reflection I think it sounds like it will be more of a platform for men to vent, and that’s fine but as a woman I’m not going to pay a sub for that. I’m all up for throwing scorn on any wet woke liberals male or female, but I get a bit fed up with women referred to as one homogeneous blob. It’s just the general attitude that comes through, mainly from Nick, that’s turning me off. It’s a shame because I thought he was alright, but the ongoing side swipes at women are just annoying now.
Perhaps women generally are more agreeable but I’m not one of them. I’ve tried to argue with liberal men about Net Zero as disastrous public policy, akin to the Great Leap Forward, with facts in hand (thanks to the great resources from Chris Morrison here and the CO2 Coalition) but they too dismiss me as being captured by right wing male propaganda – it’s infuriating!
I’m a politically right leaning woman but I fail to find a home. i don’t appreciate being talked down to. In the meantime I’ll cosy up with my memoir of Leni Reifenstahl and dream of a new hope. Perhaps not Kemi, (although if the Tories were forced into a coalition with a Farage led Reform party, that might be interesting) but a beautiful hybrid of the the philosophy of Ayn Rand, the wit and intelligence of Mae West, the Machiavellian manoeuvres of Elizabeth I, the technological vision of Hedy Lamarr and the exceptional political ability of our former great leader Margaret Thatcher, of whom I was I was recently reminded how she briefed the SAS before storming of the Iranian Embassy, making it clear that she didn’t want any messy legal cases after the event, and what that meant.
Basically show women some respect if you want them onside.
For now I have suspended my meagre £5 sub and will donate as and when, like buying a magazine, if the content appeals.
Again no review of the week’s DS articles with Will Jones. Do I have to be a premium member or something?
I won’t be subscribing to the extra WS content. I very much dislike the way Nick criticises publicly anyone who dares to give WS a bad review (a few months ago, he was unhappy with someone who gave it 4 stars rather than 5 for goodness’ sake!) or has the temerity to be any way critical of the content because it’s ‘free’ and he ‘works so hard’. I subscribe to DS and FSU. (And I would only pay more if I could be sure that the discussion was very tightly focussed – hint!!)