Ep. 1824 - The Jason Arday Scandal Is EVEN Worse Than You Think

Hey, it's Ryan Reynolds here for Mint Mobile. Now, I was looking for fun ways to tell you that Mint's offer of unlimited premium wireless for $15 a month is back. So I thought it would be fun if we made $15 bills. But it turns out that's very illegal. So there goes my big idea for the commercial. Give it a try at mintmobile.com slash switch. Upfront payment of $45 for three months, $90 for six months, or $180 for a 12-month plan required. $15 per month equivalent. Taxes and fees extra. Initial plan term only. Greater than 50 gigabytes. May slow when network is busy. Black Londoners and other leftists did not take to the streets in large numbers following the murder of Henry Novak, a white college student who was butchered on the sidewalk late last year in Southampton by a foreigner, only for the police to mock him as he took his dying breaths. Nor did Black Londoners and other leftists hold massive demonstrations after a disabled white guy was nearly beheaded in Belfast, in the middle of the road, by one of the millions of barbaric fake asylum seekers who have been allowed into Europe. And they certainly didn't hold any. Any events in support of Anne Whitacombe, the elderly white conservative politician who was just brutally executed in her own home. She was hit 21 times on the head with a hammer, simply because she wanted to end the mass demographic replacement that's been underway in the UK for many years now. None of these horrific events, in the eyes of Black British activists and other leftists, merited any concern whatsoever. Instead, these ghouls have been biding their time, waiting for their very own George Floyd moment, to galvanize their fellow communists. For years now, they've been eagerly awaiting the opportunity to canonize a homegrown BLM martyr. Their very own. Someone they can call their own. Meaning a degenerate criminal, a liar, sociopath, who's a clear net negative for society. And with the untimely death of Jason Arday, the disgraced Cambridge professor, DEI hire, who lied about every aspect of his life story, while also fabricating data and plagiarizing all of his important publications, it's clear that leftist mobs in Britain have finally found the martyr that they were waiting for. That's very evident based on the utterly deranged and psychotic display that just took place in Trafalgar Square in London on Monday in support of Arday. This was a cult-like event that has no parallel, at least going back to 2020. And, you know, the footage from this alleged vigil is genuinely hard to believe. It's so extraordinary that after we go through it, we have an obligation to look, even closer at Jason Arday and his alleged "scholarship", which these leftists are defending, even though none of them have read his scholarship in the first place, none of them. That's exactly what we're going to do later on in the show. Today, together, we're going to sit through one of Arday's lectures, or at least part of one, as much as we can stomach. We'll get to pretend to be Cambridge students for a day, and we'll uncover just how vapid and mush-brained this guy was. We'll also page through some of his research. Findings and we'll bask in the preposterous, almost unbelievable incompetence of this total fraud who the left is now desperately trying to turn into a BLM martyr. But first, let's talk about what happened in Trafalgar Square. So to recap the backstory, if you didn't listen to the show yesterday, Arday was a plagiarist, a thug, a criminal, a narcissist and a fraudster. He is now also dead after having apparently taken his own life. Although given his track record for honesty, he is still a fraudster. But given his track record for honesty, I wouldn't be surprised if he were sitting on a beach somewhere right now. I mean, who knows? He was promoted to full professor by white liberal women at Cambridge, even though he lied about every single aspect of his life story. And even though he fabricated data in his academic work, in addition to plagiarizing entire passages across multiple articles, as well as his dissertation, Arday was hired for an extremely competitive position at one of the most famous universities in the world solely because he was black. These people were desperate to find a competent black scholar, and they had to settle on Jason Arday. And once they hired him, because no one at Cambridge has any integrity, there was no looking back. So when he claimed that he ran 300 miles in three days, or that invisible masked men with knives had chased him around campus, or that a pig's head was left on the front porch of his parents' house, or that he couldn't read or write until he was 18, or that he had multiple tumors and epilepsy, none of these obviously false claims bothered anyone. At Cambridge, they kept doubling down and tripling down, lashing out at anybody who told the truth. And in the end, rather than face the consequences of his own actions, Arday chose to end his life and leave his two children behind. Now, at the risk of understatement, there is no conceivable defense of Arday's actions, nor is there a legitimate line of attack against the media or against Nathan Kofnes, who's the former Cambridge academic who publicized Arday's fraud. This summer, Arday is the one who desperately courted media attention at every opportunity. He also wrote a memoir, which he sold to Simon & Schuster, that was full of outright lies about his biography. He went out of his way to deceive everybody in a very public fashion. And when people raised questions about his research or about his biography, he brought in a law firm to harass them. He even called the police on a professor who noticed the plagiarism. Any society that sees any value in a delusional, narcissistic conman like Jason Arday is doomed to fail. That's exactly what we saw on Monday in London's Trafalgar Square. Thousands of leftists gathered not to pray for the salvation of Jason Arday's soul or to reflect on how many white men have been subjected to discrimination in Britain for the benefit of incompetent black frauds like Arday, or to demand the termination of every white woman at Cambridge who hired him. That all would have been justified. Instead, the mob gathered to honor Arday as a BLM martyr, as a victim, as a victim of systemic racism, who, in their view, somehow led an honorable life. At one point, a speaker stated that Arday had been assassinated. And again, it was just mass psychosis all over the place. Watch. So whenever we say his name, we say Professor Jason Arday. Professor Jason Arday. Today of all days is very much a day for white people to live. To listen. And not to speak. So I'm going to be really, really quick. The truth that as many of you, I think, know is that many white people do not recognize the richness, the common humanity of black people. I think you know that in your heart of hearts. And I think that it's important. That every white person stands on this stage and acknowledges it, and fixing that is many, many generations' work. But my promise to you is this: No other industry in the country, in the world, is allowed to monetize human pain and suffering. No other industry is allowed to profit from those pain and suffering. things without being regulated, and nor should our increasingly revolting press. Now, it's truly surreal to watch. A white guy gets up there, says, you know, white people shouldn't talk because they're white. Then he talks anyway, and he says that white people don't recognize the richness and common humanity of black people. Now, I've never met a white person in my life who fails to recognize or denies the humanity of black people. In fact, black people are much more likely to have their humanity recognized and explicitly affirmed than are white people. And as for richness, that's really a case-by-case basis sort of thing. I mean, Jason Arday's life, for example, was rich with deception and unearned achievement. So it was rich in that sense. And the white guy says, the media should be regulated because they exposed Arday as the fraud that he is. And the mob cheers. They're openly demanding that the government shut down the media for accurately reporting on an utterly humiliating degenerate DEI hire who disgraced himself and his university. It's not my commentary, but it's explicitly what's happening. To be totally clear about this, the average leftist, regardless of what they might say in public, understands that different racial groups, tend to have different outcomes in life. They tend to have different physical appearances, different athletic abilities, different average IQs. That's why there are many more black players in the NBA than white players, just as there are many more white professors than black professors. Doesn't mean that no white guy can be a good NBA player or that no black guy can be a good professor, but the averages are what they are. Everyone understands this. In any group, actually, you're going to have averages. In any group, you're going to have, similarities and differences. In any group, you're going to have positive traits that are generally shared and more negative traits. That's any group. And if you don't have any similarities, any common traits in a group, then it's not a group. I mean, by definition, calling it a group means that there are some things you can say about it that are generally true of that group that aren't true of other groups. And again, if you can't say that, then it's not a group, by definition. The left's mission is to make sure that we're not a group. And if you can't say that, then it's not a group. The right's mission when it comes to DEI is to invent an alternate reality where these disparities and differences don't exist. But they have a big problem. There simply aren't many qualified black academics available to hire. So instead of accepting the fact that some disparities are inevitable, they're desperately picking random delusional black guys off the street and making them professors at Cambridge. They're engaging in social engineering that's premised on lie after lie, and eventually it becomes unsustainable. And they feel like they're losing control of the debate, which they are, so now they're demanding that the government step in at gunpoint and shut down everyone who's exposing their fraud, which is fundamentally anti-white and anti-civilization. That white speaker in the footage, who was supposedly afraid to speak, I guess, is apparently named Julian Mogim. He runs a leftist organization called the Goodwill. Goodwill is a good law project. This is an organization that's been spearheading the push to turn Arday into a BLM martyr from the moment that he died. And eventually, true to his word, he did stop speaking, mercifully, and turned the microphone over to the brave people of color. And they proceeded to embarrass themselves as well at this so-called vigil. Watch. Racism did this, and I think we should be able to say that plainly this afternoon. There is another reason for my anger. For so many of us, Cambridge was once imagined as an arrival. We worked towards places like this. We believed in the university, in the academy, in knowledge. Perhaps we even believed that if we could make our way through these gates and take our seat in these rooms and learn their language well enough, become scholars ourselves, then we might finally have the tools to change. We had the power to change something, and somewhere inside that there was a hope that having arrived meant that we might belong. Jason's death and the cruelty and smear that surrounded him reminds us that, for many, we do not belong. Well, you're exactly right, ma'am. You don't belong there. You know, the vast majority of these non-white students don't belong at Cambridge or any other university. And it's not racism to point that out. It's a product of the fact that Cambridge and every other university openly discriminates against white applicants and gives enormous deference and privilege to non-white applicants solely on the basis of their skin color. No applicant who receives any kind of benefit based on his skin color, whether he's a student or faculty member, belongs at Cambridge or anywhere else. And if these people had any shame whatsoever, they'd admit that. Instead, she pretends that she's being transgressive by blaming racism. Oh, she's just going to come out. She's going to come out and say it. You know, hey, we shouldn't be afraid to say this. I'm going to come out and say it right now to this group of leftist activists. This was racism. Wow. That took courage. You know, it always takes courage to say something when you're surrounded by a mob that agrees with you. Actually, the transgressive thing would be. It would be to say that schools like Cambridge need to start hiring based on merit. And if that means that they have no black students. Tough. Black students need to work harder, I guess. You know, cookie crumbles how it does, whatever. No, no, racism did not kill Jason Arday. Anti-white racism got him the job in the first place. Anti-white racism got him a book deal and dozens of media appearances. Anti-white. Anti-white racism is the reason anybody knows his name. As long as we're being honest and speaking plainly, we should start there. In fact, if we're going to blame racism for Arday's death, it would be anti-white racism that killed him, arguably. Because without anti-white racism, he never would have been in any kind of prestigious position, which means he never would have been able to disgrace himself on the national stage, which means he'd probably still be alive. Working as a receptionist at a dental office or something where he could make up all the stories he wanted and everybody. Everybody there would just kind of nod their head and smile. And it would have been fine. Here's another sordid moment from this vigil featuring one Lord Simon Woolley, principal of Homerton College, Cambridge. Presumably, he was also elevated to that position because of his skin color, because he seems like the very definition of mediocrity. Watch. This time last week. I was with Jason. Because we knew. Jason was suffering. We knew that he felt hounded by those rabid wolves. Jason wouldn't dare leave the house. And we said, we'll get a taxi for you. We held him in our arms. We told him he was loved. He held Diane's hands. And he said, I love you. But he said, they're hounding me to death. And I cannot see a way out. Wow. Well, Jason sounds like a weak, whiny shell of a man. I mean, here's a way out, Jason. Resign. Admit that you lied for your entire career. Admit that you fabricated data. Admit that you plagiarized. Then apologize. Be a man. Have some dignity. Beg the Lord's forgiveness. Commit your life to raising your two children so they don't repeat your many, many crimes against humanity. Would that be glamorous? Probably not. It would involve sacrifice and hard work and introspection. It would involve courage. That would actually take real courage. The kinds of things that, according to Cambridge, Jason Arday was supposed to be really good at. I mean, after all, this was a guy who overcame multiple tumors, epilepsy, masked bandits with knives. The complete inability to speak. Until he was 11, random pig heads on his porch, illiteracy, and so on. So he's used to taking some knocks, or so we're told. But it turns out he'd much rather leave his children alone on this earth so that demonic DEI fraudsters could pretend he's some kind of hero. He's not. He's utterly pathetic. And so was the parade of grotesque black activists who took the podium throughout this whole proceeding. The first woman you'll see here is a member of parliament, named Diane Abbott. Watch. He was first appointed as a professor in Cambridge three years ago. And for those three years, he has had a vicious campaign, a bitter campaign by anonymous people, by other professors, who just didn't believe that a black man should be a Cambridge professor. At his vigil tonight, thousands came to pay their respect, including one of his students. His scholarship mattered enormously to so many, but his greatest contribution cannot be found in a publication, a title, or a citation, nor in his talks. It is found in people who continue to love him, in the lives he changed, and the confidence he gave us, and the doors that he fought to hold open behind him. The MP, Bill Rivera-Addy, passed on, the family's words. The public cruelty Jason was subjected to was too much for any man to bear. Very intelligent. A lot of high IQs there. You look at that crowd, and these are people who, their IQ is exceeded only by their BMI, I think we can say. No man could have possibly bore this, is what they tell us. Really? No man could have bore it. I mean, there are men who have endured war, concentration camps, childhood abuse, horrific forms of cancer. I mean, you name it. And they've done so with infinitely more integrity and poise and grace than Jason Arday, who never demonstrated anything approaching integrity, poise, or grace in his entire life. The only thing that happened to him is that people told the truth about the scam he was running. That's it. They were led to believe that he had no other choice but to kill himself. Incidentally, they also believe he had no choice but to plagiarize and lie constantly, because after all, what's a black, left-wing professor supposed to do? Come up with his own ideas? Don't be ridiculous. And by the way, in response to the first woman, no, the accusers were not anonymous. They put their names to their accusations, which is why you people are harassing them as well. Now, we haven't seen public demonstrations this pathological, this detached from reality, the summer of George Floyd. I mean, these are people who truly believe that if you're not white, then you simply cannot be held responsible for your own actions. Everything you do, no matter how unethical, degrading, psychotic, animalistic, or criminal, is somehow caused by white people. You can commit violent felonies every time you get out of prison, as George Floyd did. You can fabricate every aspect of your life story and all of your work product, as Jason Arday did. Arday even managed to abandon his children, just like George Floyd. And none of it matters to these people. As long as you're black, it's never your fault. So whose fault is it? Well, at this alleged vigil, the mob was pretty clear on that point. They blamed Nathan Kofnes for Arday's death. They whipped themselves into a frenzy, in fact, about this, because Kovnes wrote a Substack article that proved beyond any doubt that Arday was a fraud. And because of that, the mob made it clear that he's their enemy. He's not welcome in London for telling the truth. We can't have any truth tellers in London. Your kind is not welcome around here, was their message. Watch. He calls himself a race realist. He was dismissed by Emanuel College because of his racism. And he insisted he campaigned for the three years. Now, first of all, at a vigil, after somebody dies, like at a memorial, you're supposed to memorialize that person's life. That's kind of the whole point. And the problem for these activists is that Jason Arday's entire life was a fabrication, and he didn't do any actual work either. Like George Floyd before him, Jason Arday was merely a fraudster, someone who would rather die committing fraud than live an honest life. So they can't actually talk about his life in any meaningful way. Instead, they have to look outwards towards men like Nathan Kovnes. In fact, it's quite clear that Jason Arday was quite telling that this was a vigil for a man who allegedly spent his life fighting off masked attackers with knives and breaking world records with his endurance running skills and evading demonic racists who leave severed animal heads on his porch and achieving academic prominence despite being illiterate and many other accomplishments. And yet the people memorializing him didn't mention any of that. That's pretty rough. Imagine you do all that with your life and then you die and nobody at your memorial mentions any of it. I mean, you're going to be looking on from the afterlife thinking like, what was the point? Well, no, it's almost as though they know that it was all nonsense. In case you couldn't hear, you know, it's kind of hard to hear what the speaker was saying. It doesn't really matter. The speaker is attacking Kovnes saying that he was fired from his job at Emanuel College, which is part of Cambridge because he's an evil white supremacist. And the mob boos and jeers in response. They don't actually challenge the legitimacy of Kovnes' reporting. They don't dispute the accuracy of anything that he wrote on Substack about how RDA is a fraud. Instead, they attack Kovnes' work, you know, his history to imply that he's dishonest in some way. Well, the truth is that Kovnes was fired as a research assistant by Emanuel College in April of 2024, but only because he wrote a blog post that to this day, no one has refuted. In the post, Kovnes wrote a data-driven, dispassionate, against DEI. He said that we must, quote, accept that talent is not distributed equally within or across groups, because of course it isn't. He pointed out that according to Harvard's own internal data, the number of black students at Harvard would drop to less than 1% without DEI. And based on Harvard's finding, as well as similar data from other institutions, Kovnes concluded that without DEI in a totally merit-driven system, the number of black professors at Harvard would approach 0%. He also argued that black people would, quote, In other words, without DEI giving black candidates an artificial boost throughout their entire lives, the leaders of America's major institutions, generally speaking, would not be black. Now, you can disagree with that argument if you want to. You shouldn't, because it's obviously true and the data bears it out. But no one at Emanuel College or Cambridge was interested in this agreement. Instead, like virtually every other college, they're interested in enforcing left-wing orthodoxy. So they got rid of Kovnes, even though several faculty members supported him on free speech grounds. In every respect, this episode was shameful for Emanuel College and Cambridge, not for Kovnes. But to communists and black activists who have committed their lives to silencing anyone who disagrees with them, Kovnes deserved what he got. And now that he's refused to shut up and go away, now that he's still exposing these fraudsters, they want him dead. He's constantly getting death threats as these psychopaths stir up a mob against him. They're not furious that a black professor committed fraud. They're furious that a white guy exposed it. There are certain bills that arrive every month and you just accept them. You don't know exactly why they cost what they cost. You don't remember agreeing to half the charges. You just sort of assume that this is the price of participating in modern civilization. The cell phone bill is perhaps the finest example. Apparently, it costs a small fortune every month for the most part. But it doesn't have to. Pure Talk is currently offering any of their plans for just $15 a month for your first three months. And when they say any plan, they really mean it. You can even choose their top tier $65 unlimited plan and pay just $15 a month for the first three months. That's up to $150 in savings. Plus, there's no service contract, no cancellation fee. And when you need customer service, you get 100% U.S.-based customer service every time you need it. So an enormous wireless bill every month is just no longer necessary. Progress. For a limited time, you can get any Pure Talk plan, including unlimited data, for just $15 a month for your first three months. Simply go to puretalk.com slash walsh to claim this offer. Again, that's puretalk.com slash walsh to start saving today. The modern university system has become remarkably good at charging parents a fortune to undermine their values, the values they spent years teaching their children. If you're looking for an alternative to the woke university system, take a look at Grand Canyon University. GCU is a private, non-profit Christian university that builds upon faith, character, and purpose. Instead of treating them as obstacles to an education, students can choose from hundreds of programs designed to build practical skills and prepare them for meaningful careers, whether they study at GCU's Phoenix campus or online. That might mean preparing to lead a classroom, care for patients, build a school, or become a college student. But the goal is the same, leaving college ready to pursue something meaningful. GCU also understands that this kind of education needs to remain within reach. While the cost of nearly everything continues to rise, GCU has held tuition steady on a traditional campus for 17 years. They've continued investing in the student experience as well, with 75% of their programs and facilities built within just the last decade. More than 132,000 students have chosen GCU for an education grounded in purpose, leadership, and faith. Learn more at gcu.edu. One of the reasons this kind of propaganda can be effective is that if you're a normal person who doesn't have time to follow all the details of the case, then you might take their word for it. After all, how could so many people be so wrong about the basic facts of a major story? Of course, that happens all the time, and we saw something similar with the many. Tens of millions of Americans thought he said, hands up, don't shoot, before getting shot in the back. It's a lie that persists to this day. The average observer will hear a narrative like that. They'll assume it's true because they hear it everywhere, and then it becomes very difficult to change their mind. By the time you're explaining to them that Michael Brown was a thug who attacked a shop clerk and then beat a cop while trying to take his gun, and that all the forensics bore this even of Obama's own DOJ, it's too late. So it's important to highlight as directly as possible the sheer absurdity of the mob's position in this particular case. And instead of showing you how Jason Arday plagiarized most of his academic work, or how he lied about pig's heads getting left on his porch, or masked men chasing him around campus, or whatever, I'm going to do something a little unorthodox. I'm going to turn the floor over to Jason Arday himself. And before we get to his point, we'll start with the abstract of one of Arday's published papers. This was flagged by Drew Pavlou. And here's how it reads. I'm going to read exactly what it says. This is Jason Arday. Replete with espoused discourses of equality, diversity, and inclusion within public bodies is the UK, wherein lauded initiatives reward its universities' commitments to increasing the access and positioning of women in higher education. Now, this is, of course, horrendous, ugly, clunky writing with all the grace of a washing machine falling down the stairs. It's also exactly what you'd expect from a sociology professor, by the way. Sociology is a pseudoscience where academics just make up a bunch of gibberish and try to compensate for the lack of substance by using big, important-sounding words. Also note the hideous clashing mixture of modern bureaucratic jargon on one hand and these archaic formalities on the other. On the other hand, like wherein. Another hallmark of halfwits who have nothing to say, but, you know, will spend 10,000 words saying it anyway, a very reliable general rule that many people have noticed is this. Smart people make complicated subjects seem simple. Pretentious morons like Jason Arday make simple subjects seem complicated. And academia, especially sociology, is overrun by the latter group. Or, you know, to put this in words that sociology professors would understand rather than, you know, rather than just saying that Arday's writing is ugly and bad, which is all that needs to be said, I will only say that the aforementioned syntactic assemblage revealed itself to be an aesthetically deficient and stylistically ungainly construction, one whose profound paucity of substantive intellectual content left it entirely bereft of any meaningful conceptual profundity or discursive rigor. And moreover, its compositional architecture was marked by an utterly gratuitous proliferation of ornamental rhetorical flourishes and elaborations whose sole effect was to amplify an already excessive prolixity, thereby transforming what might otherwise have been a simple utterance into an exercise in wholly superfluous and baroquely inflated verbosity. See, I can use a thesaurus also. Took a while, but you know. Someone give me a PhD. I mean, I can do this too. So let's take a look now at the title page of Arday's dissertation next to the title page of the dissertation that he plagiarized. And this was first noticed by Hans Menck. This is pretty incredible also. So notice that the apostrophe after the word teachers appears in both titles. Well, the problem is, you know, I'm not an English major, but the apostrophe makes sense only in that other dissertation. It doesn't make any sense in Arday's. So you see, when you say teachers with an apostrophe, you're saying that something belongs to the teachers. And in the original dissertation, the author is talking about a reflective practice that belongs to the teachers. But Arday's title, which he copied, reads simply, quote, an exploration of peer mentoring among student teachers. And then he adds the apostrophe for no reason. You know, it's astonishing to think about. He plagiarized everything from this other dissertation, even the title. But he couldn't even do that right. He includes a glaring typo in the title of the most important document of his academic career. But it's not really a typo at all. He simply carried over the apostrophe from the original document, without looking at it. And nobody at Cambridge, that prestigious university, noticed this. The odds are extremely high that none of these people read the dissertation or any other dissertation. But things get even worse for Arday when you put yourself in the position of one of his students and actually listen to what he has to say. So this is from one of his recent lectures entitled Engaging Pedagogically with Race and Racism. We're going to watch some footage of the master at work so we can judge whether or not he actually deserved to be a full professor at Cambridge, which is the most prestigious level they have. And we'll give the mob the benefit of the doubt. You know, we'll forget about all the plagiarism and all the dishonesty and narcissism, and we'll just kind of listen to the man speak to see if he deserved to have the position that he did. We'll start with the beginning of Arday's lecture, where he discusses the sinister nature of whiteness. And now, before we go any further, you should make a mental note about the fact that this particular DEI hire, like every other DEI hire, is only capable of talking about how we need even more DEI hires. That is the extent of Jason Arday's contribution to academia. Now, your expectations are probably already pretty low, given that he was a professor of sociology. But the reality of this guy's drivel is even worse than you might think. He never makes a single original or interesting argument about anything. He just makes more demands and more complaints. And the arguments don't even make sense. So behold the beginning of Jason Arday's lecture, which you can watch without being a student at the highly prestigious Cambridge University, if you can imagine it. Bask in your good fortune as we all absorb the wisdom of Jason Arday. Watch. You know, whiteness, the centrality of whiteness is all-encompassing, and it very much still defines a lot of what we do in our learning, teaching, and university spaces. I think the monopoly and the proliferation of white people is a very important part of our society. And I think that if we don't have this kind of dominant white European canons, it compromises all our curriculum. You know, if we think through kind of STEM, if we think through kind of things around English literature, if we think through things around engaging in social sciences, human sciences, a lot of it is centered around kind of dominant white philosophies. And I think one of the things that becomes really important is this idea of where do black, Asian, and minority ethnic learners in the classroom space, how do they then conceptualize other people that have contributed to the canon? How do they develop that knowledge that, in essence, is supposed to equip them to undertake their place in the world of work? Well, we're off to a great start here. The centrality of whiteness is all-encompassing, he says, which seems like a contradiction because something in the center cannot be all-encompassing. By definition, if you're in the center, then you're not everywhere else. You're just in the center. Centrality indicates a focal point within the larger thing, all-encompassing indicates that it is the larger thing. So a thing cannot be within the larger thing and also be the larger thing at the same time. This might seem like a semantic point, but as you'll see, it's a recurring theme with Jason Arday and DEI activists in general. They say things and write things and copy-paste things that make no sense and are meant to sound a whole lot smarter than they really are. It's all just gibberish. Then you get to Arday's really interesting and original take, which is that the proliferation of dominant white European canons is all of our curriculum. Now, far be it for me, a lowly podcaster with only a high school diploma to critique the grammar and vocabulary of an esteemed Cambridge professor. But in context, it seems that the word he wants here is comprise, not compromise. He seems to be trying to say that dominant white European canons make up, encompass, and he says that, the curriculum, which would mean comprise, not compromise. That'd be the correct word. And he specifically says, that STEM, which is short for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, is, quote, centered around kind of dominant white philosophies. Of course, he never explains what he means by that, which is another recurring theme in his fake scholarship. He just throws it out there. STEM is compromised by dominant white philosophies. And we're led to believe that this is a bad thing because Black and Asian students will struggle to conceptualize other people that have contributed to the canon. And somehow this will hurt them when they leave college and enter the university. And so, as you can see, this is a very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, world of work. None of this makes even the slightest amount of sense, no matter how long you spend thinking about it, which you shouldn't spend any time. It sounds like he's complaining about the fact that Europe was the birthplace of the scientific revolution, that he wishes Copernicus and Bacon and Galileo and Newton had been morbidly obese Black women instead, which, you know, there's really nothing we can do about that at this point. The ship has sailed. Newton was who he was. The reality is that the people who contributed, the most to the advancement of civilization, the 17th and 18th centuries, especially, and before that, forming the basis for modern day STEM were white men. In fact, nearly everyone who contributed to those advancements during that time were white men. The non-white male contributors were the rare exceptions. That is an inconvenient fact for DEI activists to be sure. It might lead people to wonder what exactly Africa, you know, why exactly Africa lags so far behind what was going on there. But it still doesn't explain what Jason Arday wants to do about it. It is what it is. It was what it was. There's also the fact that inventions like algebra and Arabic numerals are obviously a part of mathematics education, even though white Europeans did not come up with those. It's almost as if when you're learning about biology or calculus or the laws of thermodynamics, it doesn't matter who contributed to the canon. You're learning objective facts where quote unquote lived experience and political ideology and skin color are irrelevant. So what is he talking about exactly? Hey, it's Ryan Reynolds here from Mint Mobile. Now I was looking for fun ways to tell you that Mint's offer of unlimited premium wireless for $15 a month is back. So I thought it would be fun if we made $15 bills, but it turns out that's very illegal. Give it a try at mintmobile.com slash switch up from payment of $45 for three months, $90 for six months or $180 for 12 month plan required $15 per month equivalent taxes and fees extra initial plan term only greater than 50 gigabytes may slow when network is busy. See terms. The midterm elections are heating up congressional control and president Trump's agenda hangs in the balance. Every headline has the potential to shift the odds. And then the key Senate race, James Tallarico is currently trading at 52% to beat Ken Paxton. That means a hundred dollar trade pays out over $100. $180 with a win. Use code daily D-A-I-L-Y to get up to $20 when you trade $20. Kalshi, K-A-L-S-H-I, Kalshi trade on anything. 18 plus only restrictions and eligibility requirements apply. Event contract trading involves risk and may not be suitable for all investors. Kalshi products are not available in all jurisdictions. Prices, values, and available markets may differ from those mentioned. For more information, see kalshi.com slash regulatory. Instead of explaining himself, he moves right, right along to discuss another meaningless string of woke cliches. Uh, watch. So one of the things that I think is really important is this idea of kind of systemic racism and stereotypes against ethnic minority groups. I think when you don't have pedagogically speaking people, um, who are from those backgrounds in those spaces, I do think that there is license to misconstrue particular dynamics and concepts. So for For example, I may talk about gender inequality, but actually os ydw i'n ddysgu fel aelod hollbwysig sy'n arwain mewn sefydliad cyfrifol, mae llawer o bethau nad ydw i'n gallu cyfathrebu â nhw. Felly gallaf siarad amdanyn nhw, ond heb i ddweud modestiaeth gwirioneddol, yr hyn rwyf bob amser yn ei wneud pan dwi'n siarad am faterion dydw i ddim. Dwi'n eu deall ond dydw i ddim wedi'u profi. Mae llicensiaeth i gael pethau'n anghywir. Mae llicensiaeth i gyfathrebu amdani. Mae llicensiaeth i. cymryd ymchwil gwahanol sydd efallai ddim yn effeithiol. Ac rwy'n credu, pan fyddwch chi'n gwneud hyn, wrth gwrs, nid ydych chi'n gallu bod yn effeithiol. Ond mae'n rhaid i chi fod yn gallu siarad am brofiad byw, a deall y peth, os oes unrhyw beth arall. Wel, un peth rydyn ni wedi'i ddysgu yw bod y dyn honno yn hoffi'r gair "pedagogiaeth". Mae'n amlwg wedi clywed y gair hwnnw cyn ei fod wedi mynd i fynd i roi'r sgwrs hwn. Ac mae'n debyg, mae hwnnw'n gair gwych. Felly, rwy'n gwybod, weithiau rydych chi'n clywed gair a'ch bod chi'n hoffi'r gair. Mae'n rhaid i chi roi'r gair i mewn i'r sgwrs. Ac mae'n gair hwyl. Mae hyn yn wir. Roeddwn i erioed wedi defnyddio'r gair "pedagogiaeth". "G-O-G" ar y diwedd, sydd, dwi'n meddwl, yn sgwrs cywir. Roeddwn i'n ei ddefnyddio mewn "scrabble". Roedd yn y mwyaf gweithgaredd sy'n ymwneud â'r gwaith bwrdd i'w ddefnyddio. Yn ymwybodol â'n ddiddorol fel gweithio 300 mylai yn dri dydd. Ond, chi'n gwybod, ni allwn ni gyd fod Jason Arday. Felly, mae'n dweud ei fod yn ymwneud â siarad am materion nad oes ganddo profiad personol gyda'i gilydd, sy'n dda oherwydd bod ei brofiadau personol yn hollbwysig. Ond mae'n dweud, pan fydd yn gwneud hynny, y bydd yn gyhoeddi modestiaeth yn hollbwysig. Felly, yn ymwybodol, mae'n fel pan fydd Michael Scott wedi cyhoeddi fancrypsi yn y swyddfa. Bydd yn seilio ymwneud â'r sgwrs ymlaen ac yn sgrinio, "Fyddwn i'n cyhoeddi modestiaeth gwirioneddol". Gwestiwn dymunol, rwy'n credu, ond mae'n rhywbeth yn paradoxol. Dwi'n gofyn, sut mae un yn cyhoeddi rhywbeth yn modest? Sut mae person modest yn cyhoeddi modestiaeth gwirioneddol? Fel arbennig, os ydych chi'n modest, y peth olaf y byddech chi'n ei wneud yw cyhoeddi eich hun i fod rhywbeth. Yn fawr, ymwybodolwch y byddwch chi'n ei wneud yn rhywbeth. I ddeglu eich modestiaeth yw negu'r ymwybodolwch, gan wneud hynny. Nawr, mae'n dweud, os nad ydych chi'n cael y profiad byw iawn, yna mae'n dweud, "y llicens i gael pethau'n anghywir. Licens i amgylchu, licens i ddod i gyflawni gwahanol disgwrsiau a allai ddim fod yn llawr yn llawr. Yn amlwg, nid ydych chi'n gallu bod yn gywir iawn, ond mae'n rhaid i chi fod yn gallu siarad â phrofiad byw a deall ei fod, os oes unrhyw beth arall. Nawr, nid wyf hyd yn oed yn deall rhywun sy'n academaidd a'n ymwneud â bod yn ddysg iawn a'n defnyddio'r holl gyfraith cymhleth honno. Yna, yn defnyddio'r term 1000%. Nid wyf hyd yn oed yn deall hynny, rydyn ni'n gwneud y llun hwnnw. Rwy'n meddwl, gan "licens", mae'n golygu "tendensi". Ond, mae'n ddweud, mae'n ddewis yn anhygoel iawn, o'r holl bethau sy'n cael ei ystyried. Mae'n ymgysylltu â'r holl adnoddau arall. Nid ydym ni'n mynd i ddwylo ar y ffaith bod profiad byw yn adnoddol. Mae pob profiad yn byw, gan ddeffiniad. Os nad ydych chi wedi'i byw, nid yw'n profiad. Ac os ydych chi wedi'i brofiad, mae'n rhaid i chi fod wedi'i byw. Nid ydych chi'n gallu profi rhywbeth nad ydych chi wedi'i byw. Allwch chi gael profiad heb byw? Nawr, mae hefyd yn dweud nad ydych chi angen i fod yn hollbwysig yn hollbwysig, ond yn yr un pryd, mae'n beth anodd os nad ydych chi'n hollbwysig yn hollbwysig. Wel, beth yw hynny? Ac yn ystod ein bod yn ymwneud â hynny, pam yn unig y mae'n rhaid i chi gael profiad gyntaf yn gyntaf gyda pwnc penodol er mwyn ei ddysgu? Nid yw hynny'n llwyddo pob person byw gan ddysgu pob pwnc erioed? Sut ydych chi'n mynd i gael prifysgwr gyda phrofiad byw am y Crusades? Yn bennaf. Nid ydych chi'n cofio'r ffaith y bydd academaethau Cymru fel Arde yn parhau i fynd yn ôl ac yn ôl am bwysigrwydd, er nad ydych chi'n cael profiad byw gyda bod yn bwysig? Dyma gwestiynau y byddai, os oedd Jason Arde yn academaeth mewn gwirionedd, efallai y byddai ganddo atebion amdanyn nhw. Byddai'n cynnig syniadau sy'n cyflawni rhyw fwrdd o ysgrifennu. Yn hytrach, byddwn ni'n cael gwasanaeth mewn gair ac yn gair. Felly dyma un clip mwyaf o'r lleser hwn i ddeall beth mae'n ei ddweud yma, i'r amser y byddai'n bosibl. Mae angen primer cyflym iawn ar "wokespeak", felly "BAME" yn golygu myfyrwyr Cymraeg a'r Asiantaidd, ac "tariff" yn ymwneud â sgôr test y mae myfyrwyr y DU yn eu gwerthu cyn mynd i'r coleg. Felly yn y clip hwn, mae'n gwneud y pwynt bod myfyrwyr Cymraeg yn cael yr un graddau uchel fel myfyrwyr Cymraeg yn ysgrifennu, ond pan fyddant yn mynd i'r coleg mae'r myfyrwyr Cymraeg yn perfformio'n llawer gwaethaf, ac mae'n ei ddweud ei fod yn y canlyniad yw rasism. Beth arall allai fod yn ei wneud? Dwi'n meddwl mai'r un o'r pethau sy'n bwysig iawn yw'r syniadau hyn o amgylch y gwahaniaethau a'r amgylchedd, pam mae hynny'n digwydd. Ie, mae'r cyfrifon amlwg i'w ddrysio rhwng BAME a myfyrwyr Cymraeg y DU, ond o ran y gwahaniaeth, un o'r pethau sy'n bwysig iawn i'w gydnabod yw bod llawer o'r myfyrwyr BAME wedi dod i'r UCL gyda tariffau uchel yn y cyntaf, oherwydd roedd y UCL yn gofyn am tariffau uchel o ran gallu astudio yma. Felly, os ydyn nhw'n dod allan o hyn a dydyn nhw ddim yn cyflawni'r hyn y ddylai eu cyflawni, mae'n bob amser bod y myfyrwyr yn cael eu cyflawni oherwydd nad yw'r myfyrwyr BAME yn cael eu cyflawni fel y myfyrwyr gwael. Maen nhw'n dod ar yr un tariff, felly mae rhywbeth yn seiliedigol sydd wedi digwydd, neu'n digwydd yn ein sefydliadau o amgylch y sector, nid yw'r myfyrwyr UCL, sydd angen newid i gweithredu'r myfyrwyr i gyflawni eu potensial cyflawni. A ydych chi'n dweud 'dysbariaeth', fel, 'dysbariaeth' ond 'dysbariaeth'? Efallai, efallai y byddwn i wedi cofio'r un hwn. Ni fyddwch chi'n gwybod. Mae'n anodd i mi ei ddweud, oherwydd nid yw hynny'n gyrraeddol. Ond efallai y byddwch chi'n ei ddweud. Mae'n anodd i chi ei ddweud ei bod yn gadael ychydig o fariadau yma. Nid yw'n gwirioneddol, ar ei wyneb, bod myfyrwyr yn cael yr un graddau fel myfyrwyr yn ysgol, ac wedyn yn perfformio'n llawer gwaethaf pan fyddant yn dod i brifysgol oherwydd rhagor. I un peth, rydyn ni i gyd yn gwybod bod yr ysgolion yma'n mynd allan o'u ffordd i ddiogelu myfyrwyr yn gwledig ac felly mae'r ysgolion uchel yn ei wneud, a'r holl fathau o ysgolion. Mae'n gwneud llawer mwy o ddyluniad i gyflawni bod y gwaith gwasanaethau ar lefel y brifysgol yn llawer mwy heriol o'i hytrach na'r hyn y mae'r tariffau'n eu mesur. Nawr, dydw i ddim o'r DU, yn amlwg, diolch yn dduw, dydw i ddim wedi defnyddio cymaint o amser yno, dydw i ddim o ddiddordeb yn ei wneud, dydw i ddim o brofiad arferol gyda'i, ond hyd yn oed yn ystod y gwaith gwasanaethau, fel clases ar flwymo a chyflawni. Felly mae'n bosibl i myfyrwyr gwledig gael tariffau uchel, neu adnoddau test, mewn, ddweud, flwymo, rhywbeth gwasanaethol, gan fod myfyrwyr gwledig yn cael tariffau uchel mewn cymdeithasau cymdeithasol a'r gwasanaethau hynny. Nid yw'n rhywbeth amrywiol os, pan fydd y ddau myfyrwyr yn dod i'r ysgol, mae'r myfyrwyr gwledig yn cyflawni'r un gwledig ar bethau academaidd. Nid yw hynny'n rhacysg. Mae'n broblem mewn sut rydych chi'n cymryd myfyrwyr oherwydd eu bod yn gwledig, er nad ydyn nhw'n cael eu codi allan ar gyfer ysgol. Ac fel Jason Arday, pan fydd y ddau myfyrwyr gwledig yn cael eu cymryd allan mewn amgylchedd sy'n allan o'u lleyg, maen nhw'n llwyddo'n gyflym yn gyflym. Felly ble mae hyn yn mynd oddi ar hyn o bryd? Wel, yn seiliedig ar yr adroddiad hwnnw a'r adroddiadau o weithwyr gwledig yn y DU sydd â'r cefnogaeth y Prif Weinidog, gallwn ni ddisgwyl cyfnod newydd ar ysgrifennu. Mae hwnnw o ganlyniad gyda'r prosiect Llywodraeth Dda, yr oeddwn i'n ei ddweud yn gynharach - gwylio. Y nos o'r diwethaf tragedig Jason Arday diwethaf. Yn gyntaf, hoffwn dweud, cadwch yn fawr, ac mae fy mhrofiad mwyaf i'w teuluoedd i'w teulu a'u ffrindiau. Nid ydw i'n gallu ystyried, nid ydw i'n gallu dechrau ystyried beth maen nhw'n mynd trwy ar hyn o bryd, ond nid ydyn nhw'n unig. Rydyn ni wedi ysgrifennu llythyr cyhoeddus, llythyr agored i'r Prif Weinidog. Mae'r llythyr hwnnw wedi cael ei anfon gan ddwy unigolion, llawer ohonyn nhw yw unigolion cofnodol gwledig gwleidydd Cymru, sydd wedi profi'r lefel o gydymffurfio a chynrychiolaeth, a chynrychiolaeth sy'n ymwneud â rhwydwaith y DU. Nid yw'n rhywbeth y byddwn ni'n parhau i'w golygu. Rydyn ni'n credu bod hynny'n ddigon i'r DU a mae'r diwydiant y DU yn rhaid iddyn nhw gael cymorth ar gyfer eu cyflawniadau. Felly, rydym wedi ysgrifennu at y Prif Weinidog. Mae yna ymgyrch cyffredinol i hyn, sy'n bwysig iawn iawn o ran y gymuned ymddygiadol. Ac os ydych chi'n teimlo'n fwyaf fel rydym yn ymwneud â'r cyfrifoldeb a chyfrifoldeb y diwydiant y DU, byddwch yn rhaid i ni rannu'r llythyr a'r adroddiad, ac rydyn ni'n gwerthfawrogi'ch cefnogaeth cyffredinol. Wel, mae'r nod yma yw gwneud yn wlad yn y DU i weld unrhyw beth sy'n anodd i gydweithwyr Cymraeg. Rydych chi'n gweld, maen nhw'n cael eu llwyddo â chyflawniadau heb unrhyw ymddygiad llywodraethol, ond os ydych chi'n dweud y gwir am yr hyn maen nhw'n ei wneud, dylai i chi fynd i'r prifysgol. Fel rwy'n deall, mae Project Llywodraeth Dda yn brifysgol yn y DU, ac maen nhw'n ymwneud llawer â rannu llyfrau i ddyfynnu Arde. Felly, os oes unrhyw beth, fel y dywedodd Andy Ngo, "Mae cyfweliad cyhoeddus yn ei angen i'r prosiect Llywodraeth Dda i wneud rhywfaint o'r cyhoeddus â chyflawniadau bod Arde'n ymchwil ymddygiadol a sain". A fyddai hynny'n digwydd? Wel, wrth gwrs, nid. Rydym ni i gyd wedi gweld y sefyllfa o gymdeithas yn y DU pan aeth Charlie Kirk i Oxford, lle roedd yn ymwneud â'r Prifysgol y DU, eu cymdeithas o ymwneud gyffredinol. Ac, chi'n gwybod, y Prifysgol, ei enw oedd George Aberonier, oedd rhyw un o fforddwyr yn gwneud swet pant a th-shirt, yn edrych fel a oedd yn hollol allan o'i meddwl. Ac yn ystod yn ôl, pan oedd Charlie Kirk yn cael ei hymddygiad, fe wnaeth yr un grŵp hwnnw ddechrau'r adnoddau. Roedd yn ysgrifennu, "Charlie Kirk yn cael ei sio, gadewch i'r cyffredin yn mynd". Felly dyna'r ddiweddaraeth ar gyfer y ddigwyddiadwyr Cymreig hyn. Ac ni allwn ni ddysgu hynny. Nid yw'r stori yma yn unig am un fforddwr a'r dynion gwleidyddol gwledig gwydn, sydd wedi'i allu ei wneud. it's that, it's about that. But also, if you stand in the way of their ideological takeover, if you have the wrong skin color, these people want you dead. They're not upset that Jason Arday took his own life. They're upset that a white person like Nathan Kofnes wasn't killed instead. They would have preferred to see Kofnes gutted like Henry Novak on the sidewalk. And they're infuriated that he's still alive while the highest-profile DEI hire in the entire country, the fraudster they expended so much energy to defend, the guy who could supposedly run 300 miles in three days, is not. This is an unusual position for these leftists. You know, they're so used to killing their political opposition that they genuinely can't process the fact that they've lost one of their most prominent pieces on the chessboard. But it's happened. Because in their quest to place a DEI hire at Cambridge, they overlooked his obvious psychosis and mental instability. And even now, when the evidence of their immorality and corruption is laid so bare that a blind man could see it, they're refusing to engage in an ounce of introspection. They'd much rather resort to violence. As Jason Arday himself used to say, and I quote, yeah, I'm chilling on a dirt road, laid back, swerving like I'm George Jones. Ain't it funny how rumors spread? Man, that talk is getting old. You better mind your business, man. Watch your mouth before I have to knock that loud mouth out. Actually, just a correction. I think that was Jason Arday. I don't know if you've ever heard of Jason Aldean, not Arday, my mistake. But in the spirit of the late Jason Arday, well, just pretend he said it. And the point is, never forget these scenes in Trafalgar Square. Do not forget the lies they will tell and the atrocities they will commit in order to defend their bankrupt ideology, especially now that it's been exposed so publicly. I saw somebody observe that, you know, this wasn't really a vigil at Trafalgar Square on Monday. It was more like a last stand. It was the last gasp of an ideology that's on the verge of defeat. And if you're the optimistic type, then one way to read the sheer incoherence and depravity that was on display is just that, you know, it was a stark reminder of what these demons are capable of and how we must commit ourselves, especially with some very important elections coming up, to ensure that they never again hold power in our own country. That'll do it for the show today. Thanks for watching. Thanks for listening. Talk to you tomorrow. Have a great day. Godspeed. In all of my years of public life, I have never profited from public service. I welcome this kind of examination because people have got to know whether or not their president's a crook. Well, I'm not a crook. For more than five decades, from Iran-Contra to Monica Lewinsky to Russiagate, every political scandal has been measured against one, the Watergate affair. But what if Richard Nixon was the one who did it? What if he was the one who did it? What if Nixon was telling the truth? What if Watergate isn't what it seems? What if hundreds of thousands of pages of sworn testimony, memoirs, and newly released government documents tell a different story than the one you learned in school? In 1972, Nixon won the biggest electoral landslide in modern American history with grand plans to remake the federal government. Two years later, he was out of office. You were taught that Nixon's men broke into the Democratic National Committee headquarters to spy on his political opponents. You were taught that when he found out, Nixon covered it up, and that the cover-up was worse than the crime. You were taught that two heroic Washington Post reporters, guided by a righteous FBI whistleblower, brought the most powerful man in the world to justice. But you were never taught what really happened. I shall resign the presidency effective at noon tomorrow. The real history of the Watergate scandal is available now on Daily Wire Plus. Do you hear that? That sound, right? That means that summer's officially here. It means that grown adults just sprint into the street for a frozen dessert shaped like a cartoon. But this summer, Mint Mobile has a better treat. Every plan, including Unlimited, is $15 a month. And unlike ice cream, it won't drip down your wrist or look nothing like the picture. Does anyone have any cash? Taxes and initial plan term only greater than 50 gigabytes may slow when network is busy. See terms. The midterm elections are heating up. Congressional control and President Trump's agenda hangs in the balance. And in a key Senate race, James Tallarico is currently trading at 52% to beat Ken Paxton. That means $100 trade pays out over $180 with a win. Use code daily, D-A-I-L-Y, to get up to $20 when you trade $20. Trade on anything 18 plus only. Restrictions and eligibility requirements apply. For more information, see kalshi.com slash regulatory.