No, GB News Isn’t “Far Right”

One of the most peculiar aspects of the culture wars is that while the word ‘fascist’ is deployed more than ever, very few people seem to know what it actually means. To take just one example, the journalist Paul Mason wrote a book called How to Stop Fascism in which he redefined the term so broadly that he was able to incorporate anyone who deviated from his own political worldview. Convenient, isn’t it?

This explains, although it does not excuse, Mason’s recent histrionic thread on “fascism” in the U.K., which culminated in the demand for more state censorship and the suppression of the press. That all fascist regimes in history have enacted such measures is an irony that appears to escape him.

Specifically, Mason argues that in order to curb fascism “we need a militant democracy”. This means that “Ofcom must revoke the licence of GB News”. But why? Does Mason genuinely believe that a news outlet that platforms voices from across the political spectrum is somehow connected to the rise of the far Right? Or is it simply that he hasn’t actually watched GB News and is attacking a phantom of his own imagination?

To be generous to Mason, it’s probably the latter, and he is not alone is being caught up in a hysteria that has fascinated me for quite some time. My weekly show on GB News, Free Speech Nation, has consistently platformed a mixture of Left-wing and Right-wing commentators. The core ethos of the show is the promotion of liberal values: free speech, individual autonomy, equal rights before the law. Only the most deranged fantasist could place any of this in the category of ‘far Right’.

And yet, at the Media Democracy Festival at the University of Sheffield in March, there was a panel discussion entitled “How to solve a problem like GB News”.

In a democratic society, a free press isn’t usually considered a “problem” at all. One of the panellists, the journalist Michael Crick, previously worked for the BBC for over 20 years. Given that the state broadcaster has completely violated its charter by becoming so ideologically captured on matters of gender and identity politics that it now routinely fails to report on key stories in the national interest, as well as openly propagandising for this identity-obsessed new religion, shouldn’t a more pressing topic have been “How to solve a problem like the BBC”?

Many commentators cite Ofcom rulings against GB News as justification for this need to eliminate the channel entirely, in spite of the fact that all news channels have been found to violate these rules from time to time. Last September, BBC’s Newsnight held a debate on GB News in which both panellists – Tory MP Caroline Nokes and former Sky News presenter Adam Boulton – agreed that the channel ought to be shut down. No-one was invited to defend GB News, and in the end it was ruled that Newsnight had breached the BBC’s duty of editorial impartiality.

So what is going on here? Why is there such an endless hysteria around GB News? We can trace all of this back to early 2021. Months before the launch of the channel, activists were insisting it would be “far Right” and would “stoke hate and division”. When the channel aired, and there was no evidence that any of these fears had been realised, somehow the claims persisted. It was almost as though those making the allegations were not interested in whether or not they bore any relation to the facts.

Even mainstream commentators continued to argue that the channel was “hateful” and “far Right” but could never offer any examples. The tendency of many people to hold fast to their views in the face of contradictory evidence is known as “belief perseverance”. According to psychiatric studies, this is a remarkably common phenomenon, one that could perhaps best be overcome through a greater emphasis on critical thinking in schools.

But with the channel freely available to watch, why were so many still falling for this unhinged narrative? It would have taken only a cursory viewing of GB News to realise that even Right-leaning presenters were consistently inviting Left-leaning guests to debate their points of view. Maybe these critics simply hadn’t made the effort to watch the channel before forming opinions. The argument that GB News “stokes hate and division” and is a “far Right echo chamber” cannot be honestly expressed by anyone familiar with the channel’s contents.

I do not use the term “hysteria” lightly. Those who regularly watch GB News can plainly see that there are hundreds of people passionately denouncing a version of a channel they have simply imagined. Or, worse still, one that has been imagined for them. Only last week I saw a post about the show Headliners complaining about the “far Right GB News”, in spite of the fact that all three commentators in that particular episode – including the host – were on the Left.

It is very easy to find clips of Right-wing views on GB News because the majority (although by no means all) of the presenters are inclined to the Right. But it is just as easy to find Left-wing views, even from contributors who are considered by some to fall into the “far Left” category. Cherry-picking to support an ideological agenda is one thing, but what we are seeing here is a general inability to engage with reality and a troubling disregard for the truth. I find myself disagreeing with opinions I hear on the channel on a daily basis. That’s the whole point of its existence; to challenge our certainties and enable discussions that other outlets seek to stifle.

GB News, in other words, exists in two forms. There is the version one can see on television, with a wide range of views represented. Then there is the fantasy version concocted in the minds of activists and commentators which, myth-like, has been sustained through continual repetition.

I suppose all of this is the inevitable consequence of a climate of political and ideological tribalism. It’s precisely the kind of groupthink that I’m keen to challenge, which is why I always want to hear from those who disagree with me on my show. But the hysteria is self-perpetuating. Most of those who oppose my views on identity politics and the importance of free speech refuse to appear on the channel, and this problem is escalated by its many critics. Sadly, claims that GB News is a “far Right echo chamber” act as a disincentive for Left-wing individuals to appear, and so we find ourselves in a vicious circle.

GB News is probably the only news channel where the presenters and guests are free to express their opinions without following an “editorial line”. In over three years of working at the channel I have never once been told to self-censor or to promote a certain viewpoint. And this is precisely why I have been able to cover stories that other news channels simply will not touch, such as the release of the WPATH Files in March, one of the biggest medical scandals of the century that has been ignored entirely by the BBC.

Perhaps the animosity towards GB News from so many establishment figures stems from the fact that they are unaccustomed to hearing views that deviate significantly from their own. Whether in regard to gender identity ideology, climate change, immigration or a whole range of other issues, there is a concentrated elite group who for a long time have enjoyed reinforcement from the media. Suddenly, a media outlet is challenging their prejudices. And they clearly don’t like it.

Or perhaps it is simply an example of group hysteria, of the kind we have seen play out repeatedly in the story of human history. I’m not attempting to offer solutions. Maybe the blinkers of irrational faith are a permanent fixture. Or maybe, in time, reality will prevail over the crazed narratives of social media. In the meantime, GB News will continue to platform guests from across the political and ideological spectrum, even those whose voices make some in the establishment uncomfortable. Eventually, I suppose, the likes of Paul Mason will see that they have been squabbling with a spectre.

Andrew Doyle is a writer, comedian and broadcaster who hosts the GB News show Free Speech Nation. He is the author of Free Speech and Why It Matters and The New Puritans. He created satirical Left-wing activist Titania McGrath, whose two books are Woke: A Guide to Social Justice and My First Little Book of Intersectional Activism. This article was first published on his Substack page. Subscribe here.

Subscribe
Notify of

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.

37 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Mogwai
1 year ago

More evidence of two-tier policing here. This guy wasn’t even carrying a machete;

”Did this distressed confused scared elderly English Man deserve this in Plymouth tonight?”

https://x.com/BGatesIsaPyscho/status/1820591196172943458

Meanwhile, see where the loyalties of the police lie. Listen to him even saying ”We’re here to help and protect you”. Well they certainly turned a blind eye in Birmingham;

https://x.com/DrewHLive/status/1820187091688624536

Mogwai
1 year ago
Reply to  Mogwai

Personally, I think these guys wielding weapons and looking particularly racist and far-right need to be removed from the streets. Disgraceful, offensive behaviour, this;

https://x.com/NippiestKrankie/status/1820827646290206966

huxleypiggles
1 year ago
Reply to  Mogwai

https://x.com/macca_0161/status/1820899310176727453?s=48

This video explains the new meaning of “Far Right.”

😀 😀 😀

Mogwai
1 year ago
Reply to  huxleypiggles

LOL yeah I saw that earlier today. Funny. You have to laugh though because it’s all so ridiculous. Basically the ‘far right’ slur has usurped ‘Islamophobe’ now it seems.

huxleypiggles
1 year ago
Reply to  Mogwai

Definitely Mogs.

soundofreason
soundofreason
1 year ago
Reply to  Mogwai

Yeah. Pure evil! They used to always have one in blackface too. B@st@rds!

JXB
JXB
1 year ago

“… “we need a militant democracy”.”

Isn’t that a key element of Fascism – the militarised State?

RW
RW
1 year ago
Reply to  JXB

If so, the French second republic must have been one of the most fascist states which ever existed because it was surely one of the most militarized ones (by far exceeding militarization quota of the German empire).

sskinner
1 year ago

For GB news to receive such flak means they are over the target.

Mogwai
1 year ago

Aren’t these guys/gals far-right? They’ve gone up a notch or several from mere vandalism and started physically attacking people;

”Video of heavily armed Palestine Action saboteurs using a (stolen?) prison van to smash their way into the headquarters of a firm supplying the British military and destroy equipment. They later injured two cops with a sledgehammer. Clearly terrorism but no Keir press conference?”

https://x.com/JackBMontgomery/status/1821096952261489091

Source;

”Two officers were attacked with a sledgehammer during the incident. One had to be taken to hospital with back injuries and the other officer was treated at the scene by paramedics after being hit on the back of his legs. Police seized sledgehammers, axes, whips and other homemade weapons that were left at the scene.”

https://eutoday.net/palestinian-saboteurs-attack-uk-based-israeli-elbit/

Steve-Devon
1 year ago

To my mind it demonstrates a profound level of uncertainty and insecurity in your own points of view if you cannot tolerate anyone proposing a different approach. If they were to visit our village pub or our village coffee morning they may well hear views that would make GB news sound like Listen with Mother. Amongst the ordinary hoi-polloi of the UK there is a huge level of concern and frustration which, if you want to go and listen, you can hear in clubs and pubs around the country. In my view, it is these repressed feelings that have burst out in the riots of recent days.
The most horrific aspect of all this is that the response of TPTB is to bring in more repression more legislation and more restrictions. They do not want to listen they just want to silence people. They are not prepared to try and understand what people are feeling and why they feel that way, they just want to bring in the iron fist of totalitarian oppression. To my mind it is not a good recipe for a peaceful and settled society.

Jeff Chambers
Jeff Chambers
1 year ago
Reply to  Steve-Devon

They do not want to listen they just want to silence people.

It’s obvious now that our rulers are anti-white, and that when they prosecute white people for protesting about the murder of white children by the Establishment’s imports, our rulers are pursuing their anti-white, Great Replacement agenda.

huxleypiggles
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeff Chambers

Indeed.

Jeff Chambers
Jeff Chambers
1 year ago

very few people seem to know what it actually means.

The thing is that It’s easy to work out what fascism means. For example, here’s a quote from one Benito Mussolini: this [the 20th century] will be a century of authority, a century of the Left, a century of Fascism. (from The Political and Social Doctrine of Fascism by Benito Mussolini). So Mussolini, a Marxist, thought that fascism was of the Left.

Here’s a quote from one Joseph Goebbels taken from an article in “Der Angriff (The Attack)”, December 6, 1936 “In accordance with the idea of the NSDAP [Nazi party], we are the German left. Nothing is more hateful to us than the right-wing nationalism of the propertied bourgeoisie”. So, Goebbels though that the Nazi Party was a leftwing party.

It is well-known that Hitler though he was a socialist – as he said so again and again.

Fascism is leftwing.

JXB
JXB
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeff Chambers

Mussolini was an activist in the International Socialist movement. His experiences in WWI – workers fighting each other (instead of the bosses) in their national interest – led him to consider that Socialism wasn’t a class struggle but a struggle between nation states.

He adapted the Socialist ideology of collectivism, sovereignty of State over the individual and economic planning and control as the embodiment of Statehood run by technocrats. He published his Fascist manifesto explaining this in 1916. It was nothing to do with racism.

Far Right – must by definition be the antithesis to Fascism, that is, for sovereignty of the individual, property rights, free market capitalist economy.

That is why the ruling elite hate “Far Right” and misrepresent it, because it transfers power away from them to the individual.

RW
RW
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeff Chambers

Fascism is leftwing.

Yawn. Not again. Political Americanism is celebrating one’s own ignorant navel gazing because the own navel is really the only interesting thing in the world. I could quote Hitler on socialism here — ultra-condensed version: the ideal ‘really socialist’ (as opposed to Marxist) organization was the strictly meritocratic German/ Prussian army — but I’ll skip that as you (all of you) will be repeating all these ridiculous platitudes just as mindlessly at the next opportunity for that.

Free Lemming
1 year ago
Reply to  RW

What an amazingly condescending post. I assume you’ve done a bit of studying that you believe makes your opinion superior? I can’t be sure, but wasn’t it you that made the bizarre statement that capitalism is neither left nor right?

Jeff Chambers
Jeff Chambers
1 year ago
Reply to  RW

cc

Jeff Chambers
Jeff Chambers
1 year ago
Reply to  RW

You don’t seriously believe that Hitler and Mussolini were “far-right”, do you? That myth was demolished years ago by A J Gregor in The Faces of Janus: Marxism and Fascism in the Twentieth Century, which shows in detail how the Russian Marxists invented and developed pure twaddle about “fascism”, twaddle that was adopted by the Western Left. And actually, it was Lenin who thought the institutions of Prussia/Germany which could be the basis of a socialist order. In his important theoretical work The State and Revolution, published in 1918, Lenin extols the virtues of the Post Office of Imperial Germany (which he also called a “militarist, Junker, bourgeois, imperialist state”) as a ‘socialist form’. And as Hitler pointed out about the November 1918 revolution in Germany, it failed because it didn’t fundamentally change the class relations of society – a change that Hitler DID intend to carry out. But you carry on with your deluded little dream world rather than looking about the facts.

RW
RW
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeff Chambers

I do seriously believe that “far right” and “far left” are completely meaningless terms people playing American domestic politics like to toss at each other alongside the eternal accusation that those on the other side are really just “Nazis”, thus causing “Nazis” to yoyo between far left and far right depending on who’s presently the accuser and who’s presently the accused. I’m also firmly convinced that people on both sides liberally make up quotes to “prove” that whoever their opponents are, they must really all be Nazis. Due to Hitler’s stream of consciousness style, it’s difficult to create coherent excerpts from Mein Kampf for people who didn’t really read it, but here’s one about the German revolution in November 1918: And then, one day, disaster struck: Sailors arrived on a lorry and aroused the revolution, a few jewish yobs being the leaders in this fight for the “freedom, beauty and diginity” of our people. None of them had ever been at the front. Reportedly, the three orientals had contacted gonorrhea during a military transport and were discharged right back to their ‘fatherland’ from a rear area hospital. Now, they were hoisting the red rag there. […] All our¹ sacrifices had… Read more »

Jeff Chambers
Jeff Chambers
1 year ago
Reply to  RW

Now you’re prevaricating. When you write ““far right” and “far left” are completely meaningless terms”” you’re uttering is a weasel-word sentence designed to divert attention from the fact that Hitler and Mussolini regarded themselves as left-wingers set on the revolutionary transformation of society.

RW
RW
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeff Chambers

No. I’m claiming that your factually wrong insistence that Hitler regarded himself as “left-winger” (whatever) even after being provided with a quote from him showing how he felt about the bolshevist/ USPD uprising in Germany 1918 and Marxism in general just, because you happen to refer to your political opponents as left, is complete and utter tosh. In the Germany post-1918, Hitler was counterrevolutionary with strong monarchist sympathies. That’s why the monarchist rathers liked him while the “left wingers” of the day (SPD, KPD) feared and hated him.

Hitler’s idea of the november revolution was not that “it failed because it didn’t fundamentally change the class relations of society” but that it was a crime the international Jewry had committed against the German people and that his mission was to undo it. He also believed that “class” was a term invented by Jewish Marxists with the intent to harm the racially more valuable Germans by causing disunity among them.

Jeff Chambers
Jeff Chambers
1 year ago
Reply to  RW

even after being provided with a quote from him showing how he felt about the bolshevist/ USPD uprising in Germany 1918 and Marxism in general just,

Oh dear. You actually believe that there is only ONE left – the Marxist one, and that if anyone repudiates Marxism, then they’re not leftwing!!! As to Hitler’s view of the revolution, I’m guided by Zitelmann’s Hitler’s National Socialism, Chapter 2.

EppingBlogger
1 year ago
Reply to  Jeff Chambers

The name NAZI is derived from its full name which says it is a socialist party. Why do those who claim to be our betters can’t figure that out.

transmissionofflame
1 year ago

“Does Mason genuinely believe that a news outlet that platforms voices from across the political spectrum is somehow connected to the rise of the far Right? Or is it simply that he hasn’t actually watched GB News and is attacking a phantom of his own imagination?”

Neither. He knows his position is weak and fears GB News because it speaks for a point of view that would undermine Mason’s power/agenda/worldview.

“Far right” is a meaningless bullshit term designed to make people think of Hitler, Mussolini or whoever. Someone on here posted a list of “far left” positions and suggested that “far right” would be the opposite of each position. The result was rather interesting. I wish I could remember who it was, or when.

Jon Mors
Jon Mors
1 year ago

This is North Korean usage of ‘Democratic’. Recognised as a “good word” but divorced from its actual meaning, which is “rule by the people”.

If a Democracy where to be militant, the most natural reading of that is that military measures would be taken against alternatives to Democracy, such as Oligarchy (arguably what we have at the moment), Aristocracy, or Totalitarianism.

Or, in the most charitable reading possible, against street mobs trying to effect change by non-democratic means. Whatever you may think of the recent protests, this is what they are.

However, none of that has anything to do with GB News!

What they probably means is that GB News are not supporting their world view (or as they see it, the true world view) and consequently are tricking people into supporting policies they ‘shouldn’t’. Sadly, this way of seeing things is very common among the left.

JohnK
1 year ago

I came across GBN when I was unhappy about how the health panic was being handled by the bureaucrats and established media, and it’s good to see that it is still active, despite the efforts to disrupt it financially and otherwise; well done!

The concept of Left & Right is a somewhat simplistic attempt to classify policy views in a binary fashion, with the terms dating back to the French Revolution. In the real world, we are not binary, or digital, but inhabit a broad spectrum of views that sometimes fit together, and sometimes not.

I normally watch it via channel 216 on freesat, and browse some items here at my desk; not a member yet, though.

varmint
1 year ago

We constantly get told by leftist commentators that we must watch our language. What we say can incite people into violence or extremism, and Social media gets trawled now for any hint that someone might be encouraging law breaking, terrorism and the like. But what about this constant categorising of anything and any person that contradicts or questions the Liberal Progressive World view that all of polite society are supposed to hold as “Far Right”? This attempts to paint anyone who is not part of this Liberal Progressive Polite Society, who sit in their little castles on top of the moral high ground preaching down to everyone as some kind of “NAZI”. ——This is the language used not just by the Guardian or the BBC but by the actual Prime Minister himself. Does this not have the effect of whipping up hatred against anyone at all on the right of centre of politics who are simply conservatives with a different outlook to Marxists (like Miliband) and Socialists? We never see the right of centre in politics trying to silence the left. We simply just don’t agree with them and we tell them why.

RW
RW
1 year ago

This is obviously patterned on one of Nancy Faeser’s recent exploits, namely, outlawing the Compact (print) magazine by ukas on the grounds that it was “far right” and “agitating against the government”. The militant democracy or rather, the democracy that’s able to defend itself (wehrhafte Demokratie) with its slogan No freedom for the enemies of freedom! (Keine Freiheit für die Feinde der Freiheit!) is a cornerstone of the German post war order originally based on Allied law diktats to ‘denazify’ Germany and the Germans. The obvious problem with this is that, when the home secretary may decree that such-and-such a person or organization he or she doesn’t particularly like would be an enemy of freedom and thus, not worthy of having any human or other basic rights, then, there’s no freedom for anyone to do anything except toe whatever the present party line happens to be. Eg, Gerhard Schröder (SPD, ex-chancellor) once implemented a policy of preferred visas for Indians with somehow defined “IT qualifications”. By that time, the CDU used the slogan Kinder statt Inder! against it (slightly generalized Children instead of immigrants!). In present political climate, such a statement would qualify as ultra-extreme-far-right and Faeser would feel very… Read more »

stewart
1 year ago

It’s all upside down.

It is the state that is extreme and radical and the people who are trying to resisit it are the moderate ones.

The state has for some time now been promoting extreme liberalism with it’s immigration policy, it’s LGBT rights policy, it’s climate catastrophism, It’s health catastrophism. And increasingly it is doing so by force

Part of that effort of forcing us involves calling it’s opponents, who are clamouring for moderation, extremists.

It is the state and it’s ideology that is extremist.

Claphamanian
Claphamanian
1 year ago

A militant democracy? Does the rioting demos indicate that there is already such a thing?

How to solve a problem like GB News? Like the Nuns trying to figure out what to do with a problem rather like Maria in The Sound of Music. When I’m with her I’m confused / Out of focus and bemused. And, she’s a demon. She just won’t fit neatly into the authoritarian structure and the straitjacket of orthodoxy.

Or a ‘problem’ as in the Sixties TV advert for washing powder. Are your clothes whiter than white, says a woman narrator to the housewife. Create the ‘problem’ and then create the solution you want to sell.

GlassHalfFull
1 year ago

Paul Mason became a laughing stock years ago. Some intelligent people think that Paul Mason is an MI6 asset. “But what other myths are at play in stoking the Islamophobic riots across the UK? MI6 agent Paul Mason conveniently ignores the two important corollaries to the Great Replacement conspiracy theory: 1. The ‘Eurabia’ conspiracy theory, invented by Zionist asset and former Mossad operative Bat Ye’or (real name Gisèle Littman). This is the idea that European elites and Arab states are engaged in a secret plot to create a homogenous ‘Eurabia’ by flooding Europe with Muslims. 2. The ‘Red-Green Alliance’ conspiracy theory, also a Zionist invention. This claims that the Reds (socialists) and the Green (Muslims) are secretly orchestrating a Muslim takeover of the West through immigration and the weakening of traditional values, and the European left (which is, in reality, deeply Islamophobic) is attempting to ‘Islamise’ Western societies. Both of these conspiracy theories are key facets of Zionist Islamophobia, funded by the State of Israel, amplified by its propaganda assets, and turbocharged by the ‘Abraham Accords’, which has led to Arab Zionists like the UAE Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed amplifying Zionist Islamophobic ideas, such as that Islamophobic European regimes… Read more »

huxleypiggles
1 year ago

A major problem with GB News – they failed to support their employees…Mark Steyn, probably the greatest broadcaster of our generation and Dan Wootton and Calvin Robinson.

Shame on them.

RTSC
RTSC
1 year ago

Extremist lefties like Paul Mason simply don’t want the public to be able to watch/hear right-wing opinions.

Apart from Talk Radio, until GB News came along, there was no significant challenge to the left-wing BBC, C4, Sky News and (to a slightly lesser extent) ITV.

Those from the old MSM, like Adam Boulton, also fear a challenger broadcaster which they know speaks for a large section of the population who have been unrepresented for decades.

iconoclast
1 year ago

Keir Starmer lit the fuse for the riots when he cancelled Rwanda – the only deterrent there was. So he is responsible directly. It is so frustrating to see GB News presenters repeatedly failing to pick up on main points like that and getting sidetracked. Been watching this morning. Today they failed to pick up that the supposed peace demonstrators – as also claimed in the legacy media today – are in fact well funded far left rent-a-mob bussed in from elsewhere: some with Palestine flags and definitely socialist workers party as they had SWP newspaper displayed for sale and Palestinian head carves and lots of professionally printed pre-prepared signboards held aloft. They were being offensive and abusive calling ordinary people nazis, far right etc and highly provocative including threatening and highly abusive messages on their signs. Police did nothing. Across the street was an ad hoc spontaneous protest of real locals [Aldershot] who were clearly not so well resourced and funded, and had no signs at all. As the reporter noted they just turned up to opposed the far left threatening and abusive rent-a-mob. Lest we not forget – they are Starmers Army – ready to roll at the drop… Read more »

iconoclast
1 year ago
Reply to  iconoclast

We know from Northern Ireland that it was the scrapping of Rwanda which caused the resentment which led to the the unrest there. The Union Flag was seen flying side-by-side with the Republican Tricolour. And demonstrators expressly stated that for them it was the cancellation of the Rwanda scheme which sparked it off.

And only a fool would believe Starmer could “smash the gangs” when that is just a game of whack-a-mole – assuming any moles could be whacked at all.

iconoclast
1 year ago
Reply to  iconoclast

How can one get the message across it is the same old far left again.

They are stoking the embers into flame with signs saying immigrants welcome and deport far right.

Highly highly offensive.

Shocking they are presented as the peaceful opposition in the legacy newspapers today.
And unlike the supposed far right who were in fact not far right but locals in Southport – including the majority of those convicted – these far left agitators were clearly shipped in.

There is no funded organised opposition to them.

This is evidence of George Soros’ millions invested in the far left in Europe. It is shocking.

This is why we have all this woke nonsense and biological men beating up women in the Olympic boxing ring.