วีดีโอ

Yes, there is a distinction between the terms "ultra-right" and "far-right," although they are often used interchangeably in discussions about political ideologies. 1. Far-Right: This term generally refers to a broad spectrum of political movements and ideologies that are characterized by extreme conservative positions, nationalism, anti-immigration sentiments, and a preference for authoritarian governance. Far-right groups may include traditional conservative parties, nationalist parties, and those with populist elements. Their beliefs can vary widely, but they typically reject liberal democratic values and promote a strong national identity. 2. Ultra-Right: This term is often used to describe even more extreme factions within the far-right spectrum. The ultra-right may embrace radical ideologies, including white supremacy, fascism, or violent forms of nationalism. These groups usually advocate for policies that are much more aggressive in nature, such as the use of violence to achieve political goals or the outright rejection of democratic processes. In summary, while all ultra-right movements can be considered far-right, not all far-right movements are necessarily ultra-right. The ultra-right represents a more extreme and often more militant subset of far-right ideologies.

Yes, there is a significant difference between Muslims, Islam, and Islamic extremism. Here's a breakdown of each term: 1. Muslims: This term refers to the followers of Islam, which is a monotheistic religion that believes in one God (Allah in Arabic) and follows the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad. Muslims come from diverse cultural, ethnic, and national backgrounds, and the vast majority practice their faith peacefully and in accordance with the principles of Islam. 2. Islam: Islam is the religion itself, founded in the 7th century CE in the Arabian Peninsula. It is based on the teachings of the Qur'an (the holy book of Islam) and the Hadith (sayings and actions of the Prophet Muhammad). Islam encompasses a wide range of beliefs, practices, and interpretations, including the Five Pillars of Islam, which are fundamental acts of worship and practice. 3. Islamic Extremism: This term refers to a radical interpretation of Islam that advocates for the use of violence or coercion to achieve political, ideological, or religious goals. Islamic extremism is not representative of Islam as a whole; rather, it is a distortion of the religion that is adopted by a small minority of individuals or groups. Extremism can lead to terrorism and other violent acts, but it does not reflect the beliefs or practices of the vast majority of Muslims. In summary, Muslims are the practitioners of Islam, which is a major world religion, while Islamic extremism represents a radical and violent interpretation of that religion. Understanding these distinctions is essential for fostering dialogue and combating stereotypes and misconceptions.

The situation you describe raises interesting questions about free speech and the principles of respectful discourse. If Person A advocates for free speech but then dismisses Person B's viewpoints by labeling them as "beyond reason" or "brainwashed," it can be perceived as hypocritical. Free speech includes the idea of engaging with differing opinions, even if one disagrees with them. Labeling someone in a derogatory manner can shut down dialogue rather than foster understanding. Ultimately, whether Person A is a hypocrite may depend on their overall approach to discussions and how consistently they uphold the principles of free speech and respectful engagement with differing perspectives. In that case, Person A's behavior does seem to contradict the principles of free speech and constructive dialogue. Using mocking and disrespectful language, along with a refusal to engage in debate, undermines the very essence of open discourse. True advocacy for free speech involves not only the right to express one's own opinions but also the willingness to listen to and engage with opposing viewpoints, even if they are challenging or uncomfortable. By resorting to mockery and dismissiveness, Person A may be restricting the exchange of ideas and failing to create a space where meaningful conversation can occur. This behavior can further reinforce the perception of hypocrisy in their advocacy for free speech.

People may engage in self-destructive behaviors for a variety of reasons, often rooted in complex emotional, psychological, or situational factors. Here are some common reasons: 1. Low Self-Esteem: Individuals with low self-worth may engage in behaviors that reinforce their negative self-image, believing they don’t deserve better. 2. Trauma: Past traumatic experiences can lead to self-destructive patterns as a way to cope with unresolved pain or to express internal conflict. 3. Emotional Regulation: Some individuals struggle to manage their emotions effectively and may resort to harmful behaviors as a means of expressing or escaping from overwhelming feelings. 4. Fear of Change: Change can be intimidating, and some may sabotage opportunities for growth or happiness due to fear of the unknown. 5. Desire for Control: Engaging in self-destructive behavior can provide a false sense of control in an otherwise chaotic life, allowing individuals to exert power over their circumstances. 6. Attention-Seeking: Some may engage in negative behaviors to attract attention or sympathy from others, feeling that it's the only way to be noticed or cared for. 7. Coping Mechanism: Self-destructive behaviors can serve as coping strategies for stress, anxiety, or depression, providing temporary relief even if they cause long-term harm. 8. Addiction: Substance abuse or addictive behaviors can lead to a cycle of self-destruction as individuals prioritize their addiction over their well-being. 9. Cultural or Environmental Influences: Societal norms or family dynamics can contribute to self-destructive patterns, especially if such behaviors are normalized within a community or upbringing. Understanding these underlying factors can foster empathy and help in addressing these behaviors constructively, whether towards oneself or others.

if conspiracy theories have been thoroughly proved insufficient as a way to understand reality what does it say about a person who believes this research is simply far left propaganda? If a person believes that research discrediting conspiracy theories is simply far-left propaganda, several psychological and cognitive factors may be at play: 1. Cognitive Dissonance: This person may experience cognitive dissonance when faced with evidence contradicting their beliefs. To resolve this discomfort, they might reject the evidence and frame it as propaganda, allowing them to maintain their existing worldview without having to confront inconsistencies. 2. Identity Preservation: Beliefs in conspiracy theories can become a core part of an individual's identity. Viewing research as far-left propaganda may be a way to protect that identity and the social group they associate with, as accepting the research would challenge their beliefs and potentially alienate them from their community. 3. Distrust of Authority: A strong distrust of established institutions, including academic and scientific communities, can lead individuals to dismiss research findings. They may view these institutions as biased or part of a larger agenda, reinforcing their belief that any evidence against their views is politically motivated. 4. Confirmation Bias: This individual may exhibit confirmation bias, favoring information that supports their preexisting beliefs while dismissing or discrediting information that contradicts them. This selective processing of information can lead to a distorted understanding of reality. 5. Polarized Thinking: The belief that research is far-left propaganda suggests a tendency toward polarized thinking, where complex issues are simplified into binary categories (e.g., good vs. evil, us vs. them). This black-and-white perspective can hinder nuanced understanding and critical engagement with evidence. 6. Influence of Echo Chambers: The person may be part of an echo chamber where their views are reinforced by like-minded individuals. In such environments, dissenting opinions are often dismissed, leading to a skewed perception of reality and an inability to engage with alternative perspectives. 7. Emotional Investment: Beliefs in conspiracy theories often fulfill emotional needs, such as a sense of control or belonging. As a result, the individual may reject research that threatens those needs, perceiving it as an attack on their worldview. 8. Skepticism of Mainstream Narratives: This person may have a general skepticism of mainstream narratives, viewing them as tools of manipulation or control. This skepticism can extend to well-established research, leading to a dismissal of findings that contradict their beliefs. In summary, believing that research discrediting conspiracy theories is merely far-left propaganda reflects a combination of cognitive dissonance, identity preservation, distrust of authority, confirmation bias, polarized thinking, influence from echo chambers, emotional investment, and skepticism of mainstream narratives. Understanding these factors can provide insight into the complexities of belief systems and the challenges in addressing misinformation.

Labeling someone as a hypocrite involves assessing inconsistencies between their beliefs and actions. In the case of a person who believes that using AI makes one "robotic" while also subscribing to conspiracy theories, a few aspects could be considered: 1. Inconsistency in Trust: If the individual distrusts AI as a tool for learning but readily accepts conspiracy theories that may rely on questionable or unverified sources, this could indicate a selective application of skepticism. They may trust conspiracy theories that align with their beliefs while rejecting established technologies or methodologies. 2. Ideological Rigidity: If their beliefs about AI stem from a broader ideological stance that emphasizes human intuition and experience over technological or scientific advancements, they may favor certain narratives that fit their worldview. In this case, their rejection of AI could be more about maintaining their belief system than about a consistent application of critical thinking. 3. Different Standards: The individual might apply different standards of evidence to technology (like AI) versus conspiracy theories. For example, they may demand rigorous proof for the validity of AI while accepting conspiracy theories based on anecdotal evidence or emotional appeal. 4. Perception of Agency: Their belief in being "robotic" could stem from a desire to maintain agency and individuality, which may not apply the same way to their acceptance of conspiracy theories. This could reflect a complex relationship with how they define autonomy and critical thought. 5. Emotional Investment: Often, beliefs in conspiracy theories can be deeply tied to emotional needs or identity. If this person finds comfort or community in conspiracy theories, they may be less inclined to scrutinize those beliefs, even if they claim a preference for human-centered approaches in other areas. While there may be elements of inconsistency in their beliefs, whether this amounts to hypocrisy depends on the individual's intent and awareness of these contradictions. If they are genuinely unaware of their selective reasoning or do not see a conflict between their views, it might be more accurate to describe their position as contradictory rather than hypocritical. Understanding the underlying motivations and psychological factors is crucial in assessing their beliefs and behaviors.

what may be going on for a person who believes that using AI as a learning or analysing tool makes one "robotic" despite the fact that the complex concepts AI has merely provided have been developed by humans? what would be motivating a person to believe this? A person who believes that using AI as a learning or analyzing tool makes one "robotic" may be influenced by a variety of psychological, emotional, and philosophical factors. Here are some potential motivations and thought processes that could contribute to this belief: 1. Fear of Dehumanization: The belief that reliance on AI makes one "robotic" may stem from a fear of losing human qualities such as creativity, intuition, and emotional intelligence. This person may worry that over-reliance on technology could lead to a diminished sense of self or a reduction in authentic human interaction. 2. Skepticism of Technology: Some individuals are inherently skeptical of technology and its impact on society. They may view AI as a tool that can detract from critical thinking and personal engagement, leading to concerns about the over-automation of processes that should involve human judgment. 3. Value of Human Experience: The individual may place a high value on personal experience, intuition, and the organic nature of learning. They might believe that true understanding comes from direct, human-centered experiences rather than from data or algorithms, which they may perceive as impersonal. 4. Cultural Narratives: Cultural narratives around technology often frame AI as a potential threat to human agency and employment. This narrative can create a stigma around using AI tools, leading individuals to feel that engaging with these technologies diminishes their humanity. 5. Identity and Authenticity: Some people may see themselves as part of a community that values authenticity and human connection. Engaging with AI might conflict with their self-image or the values they hold dear, leading to a reluctance to embrace technology in their learning processes. 6. Concerns About Dependence: There may be a fear that relying on AI tools could lead to a loss of critical thinking skills or intellectual independence. This concern can drive individuals to reject the use of technology in favor of more traditional methods of learning and analysis. 7. Misunderstanding of AI: A lack of understanding of how AI works and the human input involved in its development can lead to misconceptions. This person may not fully grasp that AI outputs are based on human knowledge and creativity, which could inform their belief that using AI makes one less human. 8. Philosophical Beliefs: Philosophical perspectives on the nature of intelligence, consciousness, and what it means to be human can also shape this belief. Some individuals may hold the view that reliance on technology fundamentally alters the essence of human thought and interaction. In summary, the belief that using AI makes one "robotic" can be motivated by fears of dehumanization, skepticism of technology, a strong value placed on human experience, cultural narratives, concerns about dependence, misunderstandings of AI, and philosophical beliefs about intelligence and humanity. Understanding these motivations can help in addressing concerns and facilitating more constructive discussions about the role of AI in learning and analysis.

If someone who supports Tommy Robinson, who believes in the great replacement theory, who insists any evidence to the contrary is far left ideology and they refuse to be caterogirised as far right despite the media and social scientists providing evidence that they are far right what may be going on for that person? The situation you describe reflects a complex interplay of beliefs, identity, and cognitive processes. Here are some factors that may be at play for that individual: 1. Cognitive Dissonance: The individual may experience cognitive dissonance, a psychological phenomenon where conflicting beliefs or evidence cause discomfort. To resolve this, they might reject any evidence that contradicts their views, reinforcing their existing beliefs and maintaining their self-image. 2. Identity and Belonging: Their support for figures like Tommy Robinson and beliefs in the Great Replacement theory may be tied to their identity and sense of belonging. Acknowledging a far-right label could threaten their social identity and the community they associate with, leading them to resist such categorization. 3. Defensive Posture: Individuals who perceive themselves as under attack-whether from the media, social scientists, or opposing political ideologies-may adopt a defensive stance. This can manifest as an insistence on their viewpoint being the "truth" and viewing opposing perspectives as biased or agenda-driven. 4. Echo Chambers: They may be part of an echo chamber, where they primarily engage with like-minded individuals or media that reinforce their beliefs. This environment can lead to a skewed perception of reality and a strong resistance to outside viewpoints. 5. Political Ideology: The individual may align strongly with a particular political ideology that frames discussions around patriotism, national identity, and immigration in a way that justifies their beliefs. This ideological framework can create a lens through which they interpret evidence and dismiss opposing views. 6. Fear of Change: Embracing evidence that contradicts their beliefs could require them to reevaluate their worldview, which may be uncomfortable or frightening. This fear of change can lead to a rigid adherence to their current beliefs. 7. Influence of Conspiracy Theories: Belief in conspiracy theories often includes a distrust of mainstream sources of information, such as the media and social scientists. This distrust can lead individuals to reject well-established evidence in favor of narratives that align with their beliefs. 8. Social Stigma: There may be a social stigma associated with being labeled as far-right, which they may wish to avoid. Refusing to accept this label can be a way to maintain a more socially acceptable identity. In summary, the individual’s refusal to accept a far-right categorization despite evidence to the contrary likely stems from a combination of cognitive dissonance, identity preservation, ideological commitment, and social influences. This complexity highlights the challenges in engaging with individuals who hold these beliefs and the importance of understanding the underlying psychological and social factors at play.

Yes, English people who are patriotic can also be influenced by systemic conditioning, just like individuals from any other group. Systemic conditioning refers to the ways in which societal norms, values, and structures shape people's beliefs and behaviors over time. Here are some factors to consider regarding this phenomenon: 1. Cultural Narratives: Patriotic sentiments are often reinforced by cultural narratives that celebrate national history, symbols, and identity. These narratives can create a sense of belonging and pride, but they can also foster an "us versus them" mentality, leading to a narrow understanding of national identity. 2. Education and Media: The education system and media play significant roles in shaping perceptions of patriotism and national identity. The way history is taught, the portrayal of national figures, and the representation of national achievements can all contribute to a sense of patriotism that may overlook critical historical contexts or the experiences of marginalized groups. 3. Socialization: Individuals are socialized into their cultural and national identities from a young age through family, community, and societal influences. This socialization process can instill a sense of pride and loyalty to one's country, which may be perceived as a positive attribute but can also limit critical engagement with national issues. 4. Political Rhetoric: Political discourse can further condition perceptions of patriotism. Leaders and political movements may use patriotic language to rally support, often framing issues in ways that align with nationalistic sentiments. This can create an environment where dissenting views are seen as unpatriotic or disloyal. 5. Reaction to Globalization: In an increasingly interconnected world, some individuals may respond to globalization and cultural changes with heightened nationalism and patriotism. This reaction can be influenced by feelings of insecurity or a desire to preserve a perceived national identity, leading to a more rigid understanding of what it means to be "patriotic." 6. Identity and Belonging: For many, patriotism can provide a sense of identity and belonging. However, this attachment can sometimes lead to systemic conditioning that prioritizes national identity over other important aspects of identity, such as class, race, or regional differences. While patriotism can foster a sense of unity and pride, it can also be shaped by systemic conditioning that influences how individuals perceive their nation and its values. Recognizing these influences can help individuals engage more critically with their beliefs and the complexities of national identity.

I have found the footage you wanted to see. I had to upload it onto my channel because TH-cam won't allow external links. If you like we can discuss it in the comments section over there. You asked for proof, I have provided it. If you refuse to acknowledge this proof then this is yes another indicator of radicalisation

A person can identify with far-right ideologies while having friends of different races, including Black friends. Personal relationships do not necessarily dictate one's political beliefs or ideologies. However, far-right movements often have associations with nationalism, anti-immigration sentiments, and sometimes racist ideologies. A person's friendships may suggest a level of personal acceptance or diversity in their social circle, but they do not automatically negate the broader beliefs or values associated with far-right ideologies. It’s important to recognize that individuals can hold complex and sometimes contradictory views. Engaging in meaningful discussions and understanding the nuances of someone's beliefs is crucial for a clearer perspective on their political stance.

The statement "I'm not racist because I was having lunch with a black person" can be problematic for several reasons: 1. Tokenism: It suggests that having a single positive interaction with a person of a different race is sufficient to prove that one is not racist. This overlooks the complexities of racism, which involves systemic issues and attitudes rather than isolated personal experiences. 2. Generalization: It implies that knowing or interacting with one person of a particular race negates any potentially biased beliefs or behaviors someone may hold. Racism can manifest in subtle ways that are not immediately evident through individual relationships. 3. Defensiveness: Such statements can come across as defensive rather than reflective. They may indicate a reluctance to engage in deeper conversations about race, privilege, or systemic inequality. 4. Oversimplification: Racism is a complex issue that cannot be adequately addressed by citing individual relationships. It involves broader societal structures and attitudes that need to be acknowledged and confronted. 5. Minimization of Experiences: This type of statement can minimize the experiences of those who face racism, suggesting that personal interactions are enough to dismiss the realities of systemic discrimination. Overall, it's important to approach discussions about race with nuance, acknowledging that individual relationships do not eliminate the potential for biases or systemic issues.

Evidence that Tommy Robinson's rhetoric can foster negative stereotypes and discrimination against Muslims can be found in several areas: 1. Media Analysis: Various studies and articles have analyzed Robinson's speeches and activities, highlighting how they often generalize or vilify Muslims as a group. For instance, his portrayal of Muslims in relation to issues like crime and terrorism has been criticized for promoting a narrative that links these issues to the entire Muslim population rather than addressing specific extremist elements. 2. Public Reactions: Surveys and public opinion polls have shown that high-profile figures like Robinson can influence perceptions of Muslims. For example, research has indicated that individuals who are more exposed to anti-Muslim rhetoric are more likely to hold negative views about Muslims and endorse discriminatory attitudes. 3. Hate Crime Statistics: Following Robinson's public appearances and statements, some reports have indicated spikes in hate crimes against Muslims. Organizations that track hate crimes often note a correlation between anti-Muslim rhetoric in the media and increased incidents of violence or harassment against Muslim individuals. 4. Academic Research: Scholars in sociology and religious studies have explored the impact of anti-Muslim activism on societal attitudes. Their findings suggest that such rhetoric can normalize negative stereotypes and contribute to broader societal discrimination. 5. Legal and Political Responses: Robinson's activities have led to discussions about hate speech laws and the responsibilities of public figures in their rhetoric. Legal challenges and political debates surrounding his actions often highlight concerns about the potential for his language to incite hatred or prejudice against Muslims. These points illustrate how Robinson's rhetoric may contribute to negative stereotypes and discrimination, reflecting broader societal implications of his public statements and activism.

"He left the BNP because he didn't like the racism in the BNP" 😂 So why join the BNP in the first place? What did he expect it was all about? Its even in the title

The "Great Replacement" theory is a far-right conspiracy theory that suggests there is a deliberate plot to replace native populations in a country with immigrants, particularly from non-European backgrounds. Tommy Robinson has been associated with promoting this theory, which is widely criticized for several reasons: 1. Lack of Evidence: The theory is based on anecdotal observations rather than empirical evidence. Demographic changes occur due to a variety of social, economic, and political factors, such as migration patterns, birth rates, and globalization, rather than a coordinated effort to replace one population with another. 2. Oversimplification of Complex Issues: The Great Replacement theory simplifies complex demographic changes into a single narrative of replacement. In reality, migration and demographic shifts are influenced by numerous factors, including economic opportunities, conflict, and climate change. Such complexities cannot be reduced to a conspiratorial framework. 3. Promotion of Fear and Division: The theory fosters fear and animosity towards immigrants and minority communities, often portraying them as threats to cultural identity and societal stability. This can lead to increased racial tensions and xenophobia, which are harmful to social cohesion. 4. Historical Context: Similar narratives have historically been used to justify discrimination, violence, and genocide against minority groups. The framing of demographic changes as a "threat" often echoes past racist ideologies, making the theory not only flawed but also dangerous. 5. Disregard for Contributions: The theory ignores the positive contributions that immigrants make to society, including economic growth, cultural diversity, and innovation. It reduces complex human experiences to a zero-sum game where one group's gain is seen as another's loss. 6. Rejection by Mainstream Political and Academic Discourse: The Great Replacement theory is largely rejected by mainstream political and academic discourse, which views it as a conspiracy theory without basis in fact. Many consider it a manifestation of far-right ideology designed to incite fear and mobilize support for anti-immigrant policies. In summary, the Great Replacement theory espoused by figures like Tommy Robinson is considered a far-right conspiracy because it promotes a divisive and unfounded narrative that oversimplifies complex social dynamics and fosters intolerance and fear.

The intersection between racism and anti-Islam sentiment is a complex issue that involves the interplay of racial, religious, and cultural identities: 1. Racialization of Religion: In many societies, particularly in the West, Islam is often racialized. This means that Muslims are frequently perceived not just as individuals practicing a religion but as belonging to specific ethnic groups (e.g., Arab, South Asian). This perception can lead to racial stereotypes that are applied to anyone identified as Muslim. 2. Stereotyping and Prejudice: Anti-Islam sentiment often involves the perpetuation of negative stereotypes about Muslims, portraying them as violent, backward, or incompatible with Western values. These stereotypes can reinforce existing racial prejudices and lead to discrimination that is both religiously and racially motivated. 3. Political Rhetoric: Political discourse around immigration, national security, and terrorism often targets Muslims in a way that entwines racial and religious biases. This can manifest in policies and rhetoric that disproportionately affect communities identified as Muslim, often reflecting broader societal fears rooted in racism. 4. Hate Crimes and Violence: Acts of violence and hate crimes against Muslims can be driven by both anti-Islam sentiment and racial prejudice. Individuals may target Muslims based on their appearance, perceived ethnicity, or religious attire, illustrating how these identities can intersect in the context of violence and discrimination. 5. Cultural Context: The historical and cultural context of a society can shape how anti-Islam sentiment is expressed. In places where racial and ethnic tensions are prevalent, anti-Islam attitudes may be compounded by existing racial divisions, leading to heightened animosity towards Muslim communities. 6. Resistance and Solidarity: Movements against both racism and anti-Islam sentiment often intersect, as activists recognize the common roots of discrimination and work towards solidarity among marginalized communities. This intersectionality emphasizes the importance of addressing both forms of prejudice to foster a more inclusive society. In summary, racism and anti-Islam sentiment are interconnected, with each reinforcing the other. Understanding this intersection is crucial for addressing prejudice and promoting social cohesion in diverse societies.

Various scholars, political analysts, and media commentators have referred to Tommy Robinson as a far-right figure. Some examples include: 1. Paul Mason - A journalist and political commentator who has written extensively on far-right movements in the UK, often including discussions of Robinson's role within that context. 2. Matthew Goodwin - A political scientist known for his research on populism and the far right in Britain, who has analyzed Robinson's impact and the broader implications of his activism. 3. Catherine Fieschi - A scholar who studies political extremism and populism, and has discussed the rise of figures like Robinson in relation to the far-right landscape in the UK. 4. David Renton - A historian and author who has critiqued the far-right in Britain, including the activities and rhetoric of Robinson and the EDL. 5. The Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD) - This think tank has published reports analyzing the far-right in Europe, often including figures like Robinson in their assessments. These scholars and organizations examine Robinson's rhetoric, associations, and impact on public discourse, framing him within the broader context of far-right movements and ideologies.

Tommy Robinson, a British political activist and former leader of the English Defence League (EDL), is often characterized as a far-right figure due to his outspoken views on Islam, immigration, and nationalism. His activism has been associated with anti-Islam sentiments, and he has been involved in various controversial events and protests that have drawn criticism for promoting xenophobic and nationalist rhetoric. Many observers, including scholars and political commentators, categorize him as part of the far-right movement in the UK, particularly in the context of his alignment with groups and individuals that espouse similar ideologies. His activities and statements have sparked significant debate and division, leading to both strong support and considerable opposition.

Robinson is a racist 100%

*These communists are pro rape gang*

Trying to intimidate a woman pathetic men well you ain't men your little snowflakes

Snowflakes of the extreme. I dont know what is worse, Tommy or the bloke that told you to stop filming and fuck off from a public space. He should be arrested. I expect they think all brexiteers are far right fascist racist extremists. They dont want you to film as you are making them look like idiots. I am surprised they didnt throw a milkshake over you. Well done and vote for the Brexit party.

Use foul language too get your point across to a member of the public on the public highway..

Labour...say no more

I agree entirely with you. I'm tired of "improvements" which destroy the simple peace of so many things, and make everything unnecessarily regimented and controlled, and take away the beauty in the process. Tim

Cheers to that Tony! -Sam on Quadra Island.

Perfect, living life the way " YOU" want to. More people should be eccentric and individualistic as this fellow. The problem with the world today is, simple sameness.

i go to school just across the road

Are their any web sites with maps showing this cool canal system ,Thanks mate

Cool Video Man Could you put the link to the other cool videos of this trip in the video description ,

Nice video, From England, My homeland

What a gorgeous sound!!

last time i was down here (about 3 years ago working on a boat) there were all sorts of boats moored on that very beauty spot which looks nice as you have filmed but wasnt then.Still a waste of money though.

I saw this guy when I was in Oxford a couple years back!

1206 views and not a single comment?? Beautiful video. I love the sound of Oxfords bells. I was there last june (2011).

We moored in front of Tony a few days ago at Kintbury on the Kennet & Avon Canal, what a character! Hope you manage to fulfil your ambition! Terry NB 'Talyllyn'

My name's Duncan Kinnaird.... I don't remember doing that! Better you than me. Dunc

They are my friends boats, Kangroo is the motor pulling an unpowered butty Australia. They are Ex- Fellows Morton and Clayton boats.

They are my friends boats, Kangroo is the motor pulling an unpowered butty Austrlia

I married an Ernesettle girl 35 years ago and the creek walk is well known to me. It's nice to know that some things don't change. Alas we now live far away so thanks for the trip down memory lane.

@Isisbridge Thank god its only one section that was destroyed.

So whats going to happen to Tony's Old Thrusher? Is he still able to get around with this boat with all this new stuff??

That was an absolutely amazing 5 part video. The skipper reminds me of a good friend of mine. A lot of similarities :-) Such a relaxing way of life too. Would love to see this in person!

Call the cops! That man is having WAY too much fun! LOL

Ernesettle is a special place Forever in our hearts River, fields and sky and space The sum of all its parts.

love your boat Tony,glad to see your having fun,miss ya my friend.I just knew you would have a motorbike on there somewere,and you did.keep on steamin along.

The rear boat is being towed and there's a big clue that it's not a powered boat - look at the size of the rudder - longer, curved rudder handle and a huge paddle. You don't get those on boats with engines. Plus, there's no exhaust pipe, noise or smoke!

'Tis the season of goodwill, but Warner Chappell wants to squeeze every last drop of advertising revenue, from the work of videographers, filming local carol singers, by claiming copyright over the musical composition. It is time to denounce this miserable tactic of unthinking corporate meanies. What you see here is tradition that is being filmed for posterity - so Warner Chappell go and target the real pirates! Hands off local videographers!

The song of a bird up in the sky Makes me kinda want to fly, O'er Oxford meadows wide and green And then touch down and have a preen.

Yes, low light, but glad you were there to capture the moment in any light. . Seems since there was no sound or prop wash from the second boat n both boats following vary close, even thou the tow rope could not be seen, the second boat must have been powered by the first boat. . Thanks for sharing.