Speaker 1: To shaibto five and fifty five KRCV talk station, A
Speaker 1: very happy Tuesday to you. We're gonna get the Daniel
Speaker 1: Davis Steve Dae find on what's going on between Russia
Speaker 1: and you cred to the bottom of the air in
Speaker 1: the meantime. Welcome back, and you should bookmark the website
Speaker 1: Breitbart b R E I T B A r T
Speaker 1: Breitbart dot com because when Oliver Lane's writing about things political,
Speaker 1: you're gonna want to read them. Welcome back to the
Speaker 1: fifty five krc Morning Show, London Bureau Chief Oliver Lane,
Speaker 1: who is doing and empower you seminar tonight seven pm.
Speaker 1: Log in from the comfort of your own home, just
Speaker 1: registered empower you America dot org to do it. You're
Speaker 1: going to want to hear this presentation. Oliver. Welcome back
Speaker 1: to the Morning Show. It's always a pleasure talking with you.
Speaker 2: Well, thank you for a fantastic introduction. It's great to
Speaker 2: be back.
Speaker 1: Well, you know, I appreciate this subject matter, what's happening
Speaker 1: in Europe and what am I to portend to the
Speaker 1: United States subheading While authoritarian to authoritarianism has been on
Speaker 1: the rise among the political class, A populist reaction is
Speaker 1: taking place. In response, I mean, I guess I should
Speaker 1: start up by saying, Oliver, what did they our political
Speaker 1: elites expect when they opened the borders in the European Union?
Speaker 1: And then we felt the same thing mostly under the
Speaker 1: Biden administration open the borders, you had this unchecked, amazing
Speaker 1: inflow of immigrants with no connection to your political culture,
Speaker 1: no collection, no collection to your culture. Generally speaking, things
Speaker 1: got pretty bad and people started looking around in Italy,
Speaker 1: in France and the UK and Germany like, wait a second,
Speaker 1: what what happened to our country? We're not the same
Speaker 1: country we used to be. Our culture has been completely eroded,
Speaker 1: Our cities are overrun, the criminal element in the criminal
Speaker 1: the amount of crime has gone through the roof. Of course,
Speaker 1: there's going to be a populis revolt to that. Isn't
Speaker 1: that just sort of a natural reaction? Oliver, Well, what you.
Speaker 3: Couldn't see when you said what exactly did they expect?
Speaker 2: Was me grinning from here to way, because.
Speaker 3: That is the best possible question you could ask, And
Speaker 3: I wish I had an answer for you. What did
Speaker 3: they expect exactly when you force upon people who in
Speaker 3: countries across Europe and probably in the United States as well,
Speaker 3: who are voted against mass migration again and again and again,
Speaker 3: election after election for decades, and no matter actually the
Speaker 3: result of the election, you always get the same thing,
Speaker 3: which is more and more open borders. So what we
Speaker 3: have so called is this populous uprising, which is of
Speaker 3: course an entirely natural counter reaction to elite overreach because
Speaker 3: they decided they could do whatever it is they wanted,
Speaker 3: no matter how the people advised them, in the endless
Speaker 3: elections that we have in these wonderful democracies, which are
Speaker 3: democracies that hurt and they're in trouble, because if you
Speaker 3: have a situation where people vote again and again to
Speaker 3: stop something and it doesn't happen, then well is that
Speaker 3: a democracy.
Speaker 2: Worth the name.
Speaker 3: So it's good and it's healthy, and it's a natural
Speaker 3: reaction that we have these, as I say, so called
Speaker 3: populous reactions in Europe and in the United States, and
Speaker 3: I certainly think that President Trump is a part of that.
Speaker 3: In terms of encouraging your fine listeners to tune into
Speaker 3: this empower you seminar to item is going to be
Speaker 3: a short talk followed by questions, and I'm really looking
Speaker 3: forward to those questions.
Speaker 2: That's obviously always the best part. But the thing that
Speaker 2: you're going to have to tune into here is why
Speaker 2: I think.
Speaker 3: Populism is a bad word and one that we shouldn't
Speaker 3: use on the right.
Speaker 1: Fair enough, and I'm sure you'll provide a wonderful explanation
Speaker 1: of it, and maybe an alternative term to use when
Speaker 1: we're referring to what is this, Wait a second, what
Speaker 1: about us mentality? Our government has seemed to just turned
Speaker 1: its back on its own people, And yeah, you can,
Speaker 1: I think clearly connect the dots to this concept of
Speaker 1: this globalist, one world government. They view independent countries as bad.
Speaker 1: They want one size fits all, They want to control
Speaker 1: us all. And it seems to me that this importation
Speaker 1: of literally millions and millions of people into otherwise stable
Speaker 1: areas has an erosion effect on that. I poured a
Speaker 1: bunch of people from the Middle East into the European Union.
Speaker 1: They don't care about the borders of Germany or the
Speaker 1: UK or Italy. It just means nothing to them. They
Speaker 1: have no roots and no connection or foundation with it.
Speaker 1: So if they were eradicated, they don't care as long
Speaker 1: as they have a place to eat in someone feeding them.
Speaker 1: I suppose whatever you got by way of government is
Speaker 1: firing with them, because they've all grown up under authoritarian regimes.
Speaker 2: Anyway, a real cynic might argue, there's an element of
Speaker 2: dividing rules of this.
Speaker 3: If you have a country that has, for instance, two
Speaker 3: predominant factors, or two predominant factions, I should say, be
Speaker 3: they based on faith, or based on skin color, or
Speaker 3: based on class or anything like that, that's a perfect
Speaker 3: situation for civil uprising, for unrest, for civil war, even
Speaker 3: which are all horrible words and not things we'd like
Speaker 3: to think about. Because you have two groups that are
Speaker 3: powerful enough to fight, and if you want to have
Speaker 3: a peaceful country, from the position of an authoritarian, it's
Speaker 3: far better to have a country with a great many
Speaker 3: small groups, none of whom are powerful enough to do anything,
Speaker 3: are too busy bickering amongst themselves. You can then divide
Speaker 3: and rule. And when I look at the very diverse
Speaker 3: way in which our countries are being changed, as I say,
Speaker 3: a real cynic might argue that this produces a situation
Speaker 3: in the for instance, European states, which where elite control
Speaker 3: is rendered much easier.
Speaker 1: Well, yes, I can certainly draw, draw the dots or
Speaker 1: connect the dots again her on that. Now, the other
Speaker 1: component of this is, and you know, we face this
Speaker 1: struggle here in the United States, where I think, culturally speaking,
Speaker 1: we prided ourselves, you know, on this melting pod concept.
Speaker 1: We had Irish, we had English, we had Germans, we
Speaker 1: had Hispanics, we have all these different subgroups of cultures.
Speaker 1: But coming here with the freedom and ability and liberty
Speaker 1: to do as they choose, work under this umbrella of
Speaker 1: freedom without too much government control over their lives. It
Speaker 1: was really a motivation to draw people and that all
Speaker 1: worked for us, except in modern times with social media.
Speaker 1: And this is the point I'm gonna ltimately get to
Speaker 1: that division can be created and you start putting in
Speaker 1: divisive elements. It starts breaking these otherwise cohesive under the
Speaker 1: banner of freedom, people who could peacefully live together. And
Speaker 1: you start saying, no, you're in Asian America, No you're
Speaker 1: in Irish America. No you're an African American, and then
Speaker 1: you drive a wedge between otherwise peaceful groups. That's how
Speaker 1: you get this division that we're talking about, and even
Speaker 1: under a banner of freedom, it ends up collapsing on itself.
Speaker 3: Yes, I think there are two distinct elements here, because,
Speaker 3: of course, in the past, the United States has had
Speaker 3: these actually quite considerable waves of migration. Historically going back
Speaker 3: the past two hundred and fifty years, first British migranges predominantly,
Speaker 3: and I think if you look at the numbers now
Speaker 3: even now, the English settlers are the largest legacy.
Speaker 2: White group, followed very closely by the Germans.
Speaker 3: But you have the Germans, and you had the Italians,
Speaker 3: and you had the Norwegians and the Swedish who settled.
Speaker 2: In the north of the United States of America.
Speaker 3: But always after these arrivals, it seems there's an automatic response,
Speaker 3: a self healing instinct in the United States that when
Speaker 3: you have a sudden large arrival, you manage that then
Speaker 3: by actually having a period where the borders are closed
Speaker 3: and that group, which is not constantly being reinforced with
Speaker 3: new migrants arriving from abroad, is forced to to integrate
Speaker 3: and actually has to become parts of the American dream.
Speaker 2: And that's worked very well in the past.
Speaker 3: And the problem that we have now, as you absolutely
Speaker 3: rightly identify, with the emergency social media, which is great
Speaker 3: in so many ways and is a fantastic tool for
Speaker 3: fighting back against globalization, against a league capture, because it
Speaker 3: allows people like you and me to trade information so freely.
Speaker 3: The other side of that coin, the issue to be
Speaker 3: dealt with, is it also allows getivization because those new
Speaker 3: communities that arise never have to experience life outside of
Speaker 3: their own social miliu. There's never any pressure to integrate
Speaker 3: into the American society, to participate in.
Speaker 2: The traditional American dream, because if you're a newly alived migrant,
Speaker 2: you can do.
Speaker 3: Everything online in your own language, with people who talk
Speaker 3: and think like you.
Speaker 2: Why would you have done anything else?
Speaker 1: And then you also have authoritarian governments who try to
Speaker 1: crack down on what they deem to be offensive or
Speaker 1: hurtful comments, and they curtail speech and don't prevent or
Speaker 1: don't allow for the free exercise and exchange of thoughts
Speaker 1: and ideas. And that to me is I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: I live in the United States. We have a really
Speaker 1: really well protected freedom of speech here. But when I
Speaker 1: look over the pond and I see what goes on
Speaker 1: in the European Union, I mean, you can you jail
Speaker 1: people for someone deems offensive or hurtful and it just
Speaker 1: runs such a foul to our traditional notions of free speech.
Speaker 3: Yes, well, the way I think of this is this,
Speaker 3: when we have discussions and I'm going on a bit
Speaker 3: of a tangent here, I hope you forgive me. But
Speaker 3: when we have discussions now about the future of artificial intelligence,
Speaker 3: we say, one of the problems that we have with
Speaker 3: our future computer overlords is that whoever programs them.
Speaker 2: Gets the sway on where they go.
Speaker 3: So if a computer's greatest good, if the highest possible
Speaker 3: moral outcome for them is that there's never any racism,
Speaker 3: or you know, transgender people are never misgendered, as the
Speaker 3: example goes, then the computer, the artificial intelligence might do
Speaker 3: things that ordinary people find quit totally abhorrent, totally terrible
Speaker 3: to uphold those standards. So if the computer thinks that
Speaker 3: somebody not being misgendered is a higher moral good than
Speaker 3: a misgendering individual is, say an ordinary person being shot,
Speaker 3: then the computer will choose to shoot the person who's committing.
Speaker 2: That thought crime.
Speaker 3: Now, when I look at the way that our political elites,
Speaker 3: which are now being dismantled by the populist uprisings we
Speaker 3: have in Europe and the US, I look at them,
Speaker 3: I think these people are not actually much more intelligent
Speaker 3: than a stupid AI computer software as a whole. The
Speaker 3: way they think and collectively they decide what their their
Speaker 3: greatest goods are, their their moral imperatives, and that might
Speaker 3: be that the greatest moral good this government can deliver
Speaker 3: is that we don't have intercommunal, intercommunity strife, so there's
Speaker 3: no riots between different ethnic groups in the United States.
Speaker 3: And as long as we're achieving that, which, lets be
Speaker 3: honest between you and I, that is definitely a good outcome.
Speaker 3: Nobody wants that, right, But if that's your highest moral good,
Speaker 3: then you will stop at nothing to achieve that, even
Speaker 3: if that means putting essentially normal well meeting people in
Speaker 3: prison just in case they do a little naughty, wrong thing.
Speaker 1: Now, in terms of the makeup of the European Union,
Speaker 1: I mean it's almost as if you have a version
Speaker 1: of the United States, you have Degreece, you have Germany,
Speaker 1: you have Italy, of all these different countries under the
Speaker 1: larger banner of the European Union. Now has that resulted,
Speaker 1: because it seems from my perspective, it's resulted in the
Speaker 1: erosion of the autonomy of any given country to go
Speaker 1: in a different direction. Oh no, no, Brussels says you
Speaker 1: can't do that, and therefore any election in France maybe
Speaker 1: doesn't bring about the outcome that the French people want
Speaker 1: out of an election because they have this bigger power
Speaker 1: tone than what they can and cannot do. Have I
Speaker 1: kind of got that right a little bit.
Speaker 3: Yeah, absolutely, the United State, sorry of the European Union, wants
Speaker 3: to be like the United States. The political I keep
Speaker 3: on using this friend that praise the political leg You
Speaker 3: have to forgive me for sounding like the broken record
Speaker 3: that we have. In Brussels and Strasbourg, which are the
Speaker 3: centers of power of the European Union, they look at
Speaker 3: the US with envy.
Speaker 2: They want that power. They want to be the federal
Speaker 2: government for Europe. They're not quite, but they're.
Speaker 3: Getting there in terms of the the impact this has
Speaker 3: on ordinary Europeans, You're completely right, and it is an
Speaker 3: enormous issue. So if we look at the United Kingdom,
Speaker 3: for instance, post Brexit, we have recently left the European Union,
Speaker 3: so we no longer have the EU limiting what we
Speaker 3: can do. And it's actually very interesting to witness essentially
Speaker 3: how mentally stunted. The British political class is because they've
Speaker 3: had fifty years where they've never actually had to make
Speaker 3: any decisions. I think if every single item of consequence
Speaker 3: is decided abroad, it's imposed all you're doing.
Speaker 2: Really, And that was this is how the saying went.
Speaker 2: It was government by facts. You're being faxed.
Speaker 3: Laws from the European Union and your only job as
Speaker 3: a legislator was to implement those laws into your own system.
Speaker 2: So we now have this situation where the entire political.
Speaker 3: Class has grown up in a world where they never
Speaker 3: have to think, they never have to innovade, because it's
Speaker 3: always done on their behalf.
Speaker 2: And I think actually.
Speaker 3: We're in a bit of a situation because it's going
Speaker 3: to take entire generation. The people who are capful of
Speaker 3: independent thoughts, they're teenagers now, the people just getting into
Speaker 3: politics for the first time, just thinking about the way
Speaker 3: the world works, and why the people who are going
Speaker 3: to be the government ministers, the activists, the prime ministers
Speaker 3: in thirty.
Speaker 2: Or forty years. That's how long it's going to take,
Speaker 2: I think, to escape from this.
Speaker 3: And if you look at and this is not just
Speaker 3: a UK thing, this is all across Europe, the present
Speaker 3: generation of politicians that we have are afraid of power.
Speaker 3: They rejected and the best possible proof of this totally
Speaker 3: you cannot contradict it.
Speaker 2: In my view.
Speaker 3: As you look at the way the UK works, the
Speaker 3: government still doesn't make decisions. Every possible area of competence
Speaker 3: is farmed out to non government or rather non ministerial organizations.
Speaker 2: We call them quangos.
Speaker 3: So if you know, if you want to make a
Speaker 3: decision on prisons, the minister doesn't make a decision and
Speaker 3: have it implemented.
Speaker 2: Like you're doing the US.
Speaker 3: The president signs a piece of paper by presidential decree.
Speaker 2: This thing happens.
Speaker 3: They say, okay, we recognize there as a problem the
Speaker 3: prison system. We're going to call for a report, an
Speaker 3: inquiry from an arms length body and they'll tell us
Speaker 3: what to do.
Speaker 2: And actually every single area of government is run like this.
Speaker 3: And we remember not perhaps the world's greatest example, we
Speaker 3: remember Liz Trust, the very short lived British Prime minister.
Speaker 3: Conservative Party came in said we need to change things.
Speaker 3: The way the international monetary system works, the way government
Speaker 3: debt works, everything it's all broken and we want.
Speaker 2: To change it.
Speaker 3: And all these little organizations that the government has created
Speaker 3: over the past forty years. When no, you didn't ask us,
Speaker 3: we don't agree, and with that, the.
Speaker 2: Government collapsed instantly.
Speaker 3: Because this network of organizations have been created to control
Speaker 3: the government did not give its consent. It's going to
Speaker 3: take a lot of work to.
Speaker 2: Get beyond that, but I very, very believe it's possible.
Speaker 1: I'll tell you what, Oliver Lane. Now you'd be surprised
Speaker 1: how similar we are to written in that regard. We
Speaker 1: call them non governmental organizations, quite often funded by very
Speaker 1: large left wing dollars and the taxpayer dollars. We have
Speaker 1: a very similar political situation. Lots of the work gets
Speaker 1: farmed out to these crazy organizations, and politicians tend to
Speaker 1: not do what they're well elected to do. It's going
Speaker 1: to be a fantastic conversation. Empower Youamerica dot org, register
Speaker 1: from home, tune in, make sure they're at seven pm.
Speaker 1: Oliver Lane's going to give you a mucher, larger and
Speaker 1: broader presentation on these and the opportunity to ask him questions. Oliver,
Speaker 1: It's always great talking with you do such a wonderful job.
Speaker 1: I'll look forward to our next discussion here at fifty
Speaker 1: five krs the.
Speaker 2: Talk station, and so that's always been a pleasure.
Speaker 1: It's always mine as well. A twenty at fifty five
Speaker 1: krs the Talks