Speaker 1: Shake off the January chill with Tradfest Ireland celebration of
trad and folk music. This year, experience Eleanor McAvoy, Sharon Shannon,
Hothouse Flowers, Something Happens, Steve wall Monday, Kila Alton, Ralph mctel,
Frankie Gavin and Moore in Dublin's cathedrals, castles and pubs.
Bring your friends, feel the dunes, make a night of it.
Tradfest When Dublin Beats in real time. Tickets on sale
now at Tradfest dot Com.
Speaker 2: I'm doctor Erwin Gill, Consultant pediatrician at Children's Health Ireland.
In my line of work, I look after children who
suffered traumatic brain injuries. In the last year, I've seen
more than twenty children who have sustained a serious brain
injury after a full riding anescooter. Many parents don't know
it is illegal for children under sixteen to ride an
ees scooter. The average stay in hospital for these children
was nineteen days. These are serious injuries and some with
lifelong consequences. As someone who sees injured children on an
all too regular basis, I'm asked, can you please do
not allow any child under sixteen to ride an east
scooter A message from Children's South Ireland on the Road
Safety Authority.
Speaker 3: Meaning a live man like this man letting butterfly, flapping
his wing, big down in the forest. Man gonna cause
a tree fall, letting five thousand miles away. Man, nobody's seen, nobody.
Speaker 4: You know, mean, no man like you. A little story
and you got directed like that man. That's the way. Man.
Speaker 3: Don't like a dang on the pan. Man, No matter.
Speaker 5: Man all right. Peter Brimmelo, Welcome to the Jay Burdens Show.
Speaker 4: How are you doing? Thank you for having me on, Jay,
Happy New Year.
Speaker 5: I'm very happy to have you on. You and I
met at the East Coast Forum event put on by
the OGC the Old Glory Club and had a very
interesting conversation. I've been aware of your work for quite
a long time and I was really excited to meet
you face to face. But even though I've been following
your work for I mean gears at this point, some
of my audience might not have so Peter, who are
you well?
Speaker 4: I'm Peter Brumlow. As you can tell from my accent,
I was born in England. I've been here for fifty
six years. Fifty five years FI sixth and September, my
twin brother and I decided all was lost in England
in the late sixties, and so we organized ourselves to
go to the Business School of Stanford in California. And
I never returned to North America. I was in Carada
for ten years. I never left North America. I was
in Carada for ten years, and then in financial journalism,
and then I came down to the US. I worked
for Santa are in Hats from Utah, amazingly enough, for
at that time was thought of as a presidential contender
before he went native in Washington. And then I worked
in financial journalism. I was at Barons and Forbes and
Fortune and Forbes, and I wrote highly technical investment stuff
for CBS what was then CBS market Watch was subsequently
bought by Dow Jones. But I also I also moonlighted
in conservative journalism. On one stage in the late eighties
and early nineties, I was a senior International Review, although
I was never full time there, and I wrote a
piece on immigrationism also in a great interest of mine,
And in ninety two I wrote a peace called Time
to Rethink Immigration, which is occasionally credited with restarting the
American immigration debate, and that became a book in ninety
five called Alien Nation, Common Sense about America's immigration, which
is sort of a could hit. And then the other
side had struck back. There was a brief savage civil
war in the conservative movement about immigration, which we lost,
and immigration patriots were polished from Nash Review and vanished
everywhere that we had. At that point, we had no outlet.
But fortunately Internet came along and I started my website
v dare, which is named after Virginia Dare, who was
the first English child, not for first white chad as
there sometimes said to be born in the New World.
She was born in the Lost Colony in fifteen eighty eight,
and of course nobody knows what happened to her. And
we continued over twenty five years. I built be there
up into something of a force, and we had a
significant readership and we published a lot of significantly important people.
So you had Kevin Deana on on your show show
just recently. He worked for us off and on for
more more than ten years. But then VDARE was a
five one C three a charity. It was registered in
New York. We know it because in nineteen ninety nine,
when nobody ever heard of law Fair or or the
teacher James. Just almost four years ago, we suddenly received
a wave of subpoenas from the teacher James, and she
basically has law fired us to death. She drove us.
We spent over nearly a million and a half dollars
in legal fees, and we're trying trying to avoid giving
up our writers' names and our our donus names, and
we just rud right out of money. And I suspended
the site in April. In July twenty twenty four because
we'd had so many confidence we were trying to hold conferences,
and we had been trying to hold conferences, and between
about twenty fifteen about twenty nineteen, we had something like
fifteen different hotels cancel on us. The oars caved as
soon as they came under pressure, and everybody on the
distance right had this problem. American Nations, of course solved
it by going to Tennessee, to a state owned facility
in montgomer Bell State Park for its conferences. But we
solved it by buying our own venue, and that's the
Berkeley Springs Castle here in Berkeley Springs, West Virginia, which
really remodeled, and then we start begun to put conferences
on but we haven't been able to do that recently
because it's so pre occupied with this fan pass quid
that's attached itself to us.
Speaker 5: There are several things there. You and your organization were
very much a head of the curve. It's something I
find interesting talking to older people, particularly of the silent
generation in the Boomers, is that for many of them
it is hard to understand why immigration is such a
primary issue for younger people. Obviously, materials, the material conditions
have changed, but when I talked to it, you know,
even my own grandfather, who have a very good relationship
with he is continually confused by that fact. And he
says this was simply not a major issue for a
large portion of his life. And I think that that's
an interesting and interesting thing to discuss. You mentioned that
you wrote a piece that sort of kickstarted this debate,
But can you speak to sort of the beforetime when
immigration is not.
Speaker 4: I mean thing about it. The thing about immigration to
the US is that it comes in waves, and there
have been really substantial waves, and then the map periods
when there's no immigration at all or very little immigration.
For example, after the Revolution, that wasn't really significant immigration
until the eighteen fourteries. Now what happened in the nineteen twenties,
there was a huge in between eighteen and eighteen nineteen twenty,
there was a huge wave. And it was also a
different way than than that it had come in before.
A lot of Eastern Europeans and so on. I mean,
they appeared different to people who were here at the time.
Of course, nothing compared to what we've had subsequently. Anyway,
in mid nineteen twenties, Americans just cut off immigration the
nineteen twenty four Immigration Act, and they not only cut
it off but extill it is allowed at tall it
was allowed proportion to the ethnic groups that were already
in the country, so that for example, Northwest Europe was
favored and other groups were completely cut out, I mean
the no ation, no Asans, and no Blacks and so on.
And for over forty years there was essentially no immigration
to the US from the twenty four until maybe six
sixty eight, and in fact there was emigration in the thirties,
and that meant that whole generation of people grew up
who would never thought about immigration, were completely unaware of it,
didn't give any thought to it at all. And you know,
generally speaking, and you see the same thing academics. You know,
it's not that one group of ideas defeats another group
of ideas. It's just that the academics hold the earlier
ideas die off and they're replaced by new people. And
that's what really needed to happen with the immigration debate.
I was always aware of the immigration issue for various reasons. Well,
I'm just back up a second. In ninety sixty five,
the Congress, in this law where nobody thought about immigration,
passed the Heart Salar Act, which basically through the borders open,
and it threw them open in a very peculiar way,
prioritize what they call family unification, which meant basically got
chain migration from the few countries that we're able to
come in and get establish establish a base here. And
it was also vastly greater than anybody thought was going
to happen. I mean, Teddy Keredy at the time testified
I think no Robert Caredy at the time testified that
he expected immigration, which was then running about one hundred
to two thousand year, might go go up to half million,
and then it would received. What's actually happened is it's uh,
it's been running that over mini a year consistently for
since in ninety sixty eight when they when the heart
cellar art took effect. And at the same time, the
for reasons would be were looking into the American authorts
has just simply stopped enforcing the law against the legal immigration.
So he got this tremendous surge of illegal immigration. There
had been a surge of illegal immigration in the fifties,
but eisen Now stopped it in six months with his
operation went back and the over a million and a
half illegal immigrants left the country. Uh, not all that
many were deported, maybe about two hundred thousand were deported,
but that was enough to trigger a stampede of them
leaving on their own accord. That's why we consistently said
that this would happen if the board, if it was
a serious effort to deport any number, any numbers of immigrants,
that will be will be massive self deportation. And that
is in fact what's happened now. I guess a straight
along way from your question, Jerry, what do you want
to know?
Speaker 5: And I wanted to bring something into that because of
course you mentioned the shift to prioritizing family reunification, because
obviously this runs into another one of the kind of
great American poison pills, which is birthright citizenship. So of
course you know if you have someone here illegally a
child is born, well you have a new citizen, any
new family which can be reunified. But what I asked
was specifically to talk about the time before immigration was
a political issue and how it became one.
Speaker 4: Well, you know, I've always been in an immigration issue,
partly because I'm myself an immigrants, so I went through
the system I can see how opuny and irrational it is.
And partly because as immensely influenced by Enoch Powell was
outstanding political figure of the twentieth century in Britain, and
that definitely includes to Winston Churchill. And I was thinking
about immigration that ever since he made his great speech
in sixty eight it's the so called Rivers of Blood speech.
So I was always interested in this question. And I
remember when I was a fortune in goodness me in
the in the early eighties. I tried to I tried
to get them interested in the question, but they just wouldn't.
They didn't see it being discussed in the page in the
New York Times, so therefore it wasn't it wasn't it
wasn't it wasn't newsworthy. If the New York Times hadn't mentioned,
it wasn't newsworthy. And in those days, that was before
the FCC changes which made talk radio possible, they had
this so called balance through where you weren't supposed to
express political opinions on radio without giving the opposite time
to the opposite side, with the result that radio stations
didn't express political opinions. But they were changing regulations in
the in the mid eighties, and they taught radio much
more active, and some immigrations began to occur there simply
because people would call radio hosts and ask about it.
But you're completely right. I mean, for example, in the
after I wrote my Time to Rethink Immigration piece in
National Review. In those days, I was I was pretty
well into the conservative cateacomb that exists in New York
of journalists and foundation executives and so on, people who
wouldn't be seen dead with me today. But I remember
we had a dinner at one of the Union League
I believe, and Bob Bartley to the Wards the Journal
was there to specifically to argue with me, which he
did in a very stupid way. He I mean, he
would say things like, it's completely impossible close the southern border.
It can't be done. And macross is that you know,
this is the character that sent a mount to the moon.
Of course it can close the southern border if they
wont spec there's the built forty thousand miles of interstate,
the southern borders two and a half thousand miles across.
Of course, to an offense from it, he could build
a hundred foot wall about it if they want to
do it. The problem is that they didn't want to
do it. The political elite didn't want to do it
for reasons which again are worth looking into. But left
and right didn't want to do it. But one of
the principal chief foundation executives there, who I won't name
or who were still active, who called him up afterwards
and said, I've never heard of anantissist before immigration Now
he'd never heard of it. He had no idea what
what was governing immigration to the country in those days.
If you taught to people, they would think they regarded
immigration candid like rain or the weather or something. It
just came and went oous on a court. They didn't
realize it was a government policy. They had just no
idea of conception that at all. And similarly, the idea
of the birth right syste the point that you mentioned.
You know, in the early days, we quite often get
people saying, well, it's in the constitution. Of course you're
not in the constitution. It's just a judicial interpretation. But
even as later as when McCain was running for president,
people who will raise this question with him and would
say it was in the constitution. I mean, in his
case it was just willful ignorance. But you're right, the
amount of the amount of discussion of immigration, Sue was.
To anybody who wasn't there, it just it must be
amazing to think that they realize that there was no
discussion immigration. People just didn't realize that it was there.
But of course when it did really really suggly ahead.
In the fourth of my article, the for about after
I published my article, for about five years we were
campaigning and we campaigned the National View against immigration and
we challenged the walls to journal which was sort of
the intellectually leaves of the conservative movement which was fanatical
open borders, had a fanatical open borders line. And then
Bill Buckley basically established in the back. He fired John
as the earlier to a National Review, and he purged
the magazine of Immigration Patriots, and for several years they
didn't say anything about immigration to all. They went back
to top silence. As the Waters and I pointed out,
they said, immigration is no longer issue. This has ceased
to be a political issue. That was in about two thousand.
In about when you get to marriage. You have to
to keeping the decades straight. It must have been about
two thousand. Uh when when when they ran and paused,
You go, what the calm saying this ceased to be
a political issue. Well, of course it hadn't cease to
become a political issue, and they, naturally view went back
to discussing immigration. After nine to eleven a part they
got word from nail Concentral that it was now okay
to discuss immigration. I mean, that's the other thing that's amazing,
amazing to me that people have changed. Norman pot Horz
was the great leader of the of the this neo conservative.
It was a Jewish faction basically in the based in
New York, but had enormous influence all the rest of
the conservative movement. At the end of his life and
he died, I'm sorry to say, just a few weeks ago.
It was in his nineties, at the end of his life.
He suddenly gives into saying it's changed his mind. And immigration, immigrations,
there's a limit to how many immiuts we can have now,
he tells us. It was twenty years, twenty years, nearly
thirty years after he spent a great deal of time
undermining of Sullivan and getting pocketed fire and so on,
and of course he's arguably too late. She the same
thing with Ben Shapiro. He's in this war with Tucker Carlson.
And in the interview again, I guess i'll Megan Kelly,
he said, of course, of course Tucker's done some good things.
He's he's very good and immigration, Tucky's in favorite immigration moratorium.
You know, ten years ago Shapiro denounced me actually in
National View as a white supremacist for no other reason
than that who was calling for immigration to be reduced.
So he's given away on that too. I guess they
think they have more important things to worry about. Now
they're concerned about They're concerned about protecting Israel, and they
just decided they after showing their front and not some
of these other issues which were mostly attached to for
essentially rational reasons.
Speaker 5: Well, and that's an interesting point because Chris Zeman, uh,
you know, recently departed, consistently made this point about immigration
in the nineteen twenties, where and I'm paraphrasing here, but
he said immigration didn't end until rich people started being
blown up, and when you have anarchists running around, it
became dangerous. Sure, there was still the benefit of cheap
labor people who were unlikely to unionize. That was still there,
but it became real all of a sudden, there's a threat.
And I think you see a very similar thing happening
with exactly those figures you mentioned before. Where as much
as they like immigration, now there's something much closer to
home that is being threatened, and so they're sort of
pulling their resources, you know, away from this peripheraliation.
Speaker 4: Well, it's true for I mean parts in Shapiro Cours
the Zionists, and the fundamental interest is in protecting it,
and they have their hands full on that front right now,
and so they're not going to fight on the sort
of extension issue which was which was devascinating in the
US because they made them feel more common toively in
bidding deratinated as societies. But it is also true, and
this is why I think the elections mandam is is
so important in New York. It's also true that it's
quite clearly detabilized American politics. It's making possible. Elon Musk
treated this this morning. I think, though, well, the Democrats
intend to do is flood the country with immigrants and
then with harvest the votes and established one party state,
so as they're done in California and the certain center
in Maryland and so on. So I think that I
think Mandali means what he says, and that that life
is going to get quite uncomfortable rich people in New York.
And of course Mandama was elected because of the immigrant vote.
Native for Americans and who lived in New York vote
voted for Cuomo or for the sleeve world. If the
immigrants have they put him over with Tom. So I
would have thought that people draw conclusions from this, But
you know, I've been thinking people got to conclusions about
this for many years, and it's taken a hell of
a long time.
Speaker 5: Well, and on that point, I think there are two
interesting dynamics. So as I was saying, there are two
interesting dynamics as well that I think come into play here,
which is one radically different character of immigrant, like we're
taking from different places. Obviously, Hispanic migration is the I mean,
the major trend of the last sixty years. But also
we have seen a large amount of Islamic immigration, particularly
from places like Somalia, but also from Nigeria, Pakistan as
well as other nations. And I mean Mamdani is an
example of that, which is sort of a fascinating change
because look, I don't think and I'm not going to
pretend to be a you know, an expert on the issue.
It doesn't seem to me that many El Salvadorans particularly
care about the state of Israel, but Muslims from areas
around Israel very much do. And so when you look
at someone like Mamdani, who I think that a lot
of the coverage of him from the kind of legacy
conservative press has been a little bit sensational. I don't
think he is a jihattist. He has other issues you
know that that preclude me from supporting him, But fundamentally,
I think that's an interesting element as well. That and
we've seen this since the you know, October seventh, that
there have been these sort of ethnic conflicts erupting across
the nation, setting aside even the anti Ice riots, which
certainly have a racial ethnic component to them. Right, people
chanting about Loraza. But all of a sudden, and this
is something Canada has faced with their Sikh population. You're
seeing other countries' disputes being waged on our streets. So
I'm curious, what do you make of that dynamic, the
fact that we are pulling from different nations than we
were even ten, twenty thirty years ago.
Speaker 4: Well, of course it's completely suicidal. I mean, what the
government is doing is electing a new There's a famous Joggler,
but how Brett made about fifty three rising in East
Germany against the Communists government. He said, what the government
should do is dissolve the people in the elect a
new one. Well, that's exactly what the American American government,
actually governments throughout the West are doing. For reasons which
bear thinking about, what is that is the purpose of
this The most important difference with this post sixty five
stream is that it was non white. It's heavily non white,
and I'm only about ten percent of the immigrants have
comments since since sixty five were including me a white
or all the others come from all over the world,
as you say, predominantly has created two new men artists,
basically Hispanics on the one hand and Asians on the other.
Decent ply weren't present in the US before. There were
some Chinatowns and so on, but it was from an
immigration wave in the nineteen cent that had been deliberately
cut off. So and what that's done is it's moved
the US from being about ninety percent white as it
was in nineteen sixty to being probably less than sixty
percent white now. And this is a particular poem for
the Republican Party that was too stupid to realize it,
because the Booking Party essentially is a white party all
the ninety pens of its world so wide, the Democrats
are actually a coalition of POC's people of color, use, homosexuals,
and some whites. But we've done calculations and showed saying
that the presidential vote that Democrats get, it's probably less
than half what you might call normal whites. Now it's
if you add the people called to the Jews and homosexuals,
they're more than half the electoral vote that the public
that the Democrats get. So there's kind of bipolar distribution ethnically,
these two parties, Republicans and Democrats, they're represented representing completely
different nations. And the problem that the Poems have got
is that they are allowing their own nation to be
driven even further into minority. And it's proved incredibly hard
to get Republican consultants to grasp this fact. I mean,
that is why you see this extraordinary ludicrous phenomena of Republicans,
the great Black Hope phenomenon. They're always running these black
candidates because they think it's going to get you know,
like they did in Virginia. This last time wins some
seers for governor. That is not going to help you
turn out the white vote. And in fact, they only
got about fifty three to fifty four percent of the
white vote in Virginia. It's not surprised, it's not surprising
at the lost, but for some reason it really appeals
to Republican consultants, and I think think because it's a
matter of the domos that makes the domors feel better well.
Speaker 5: And this is the core of a piece that hasn't
come out yet that I wrote for Chronicles, making exactly
this point that the myth of the natural conservative, which
has been around in the earliest instance I could find
conveniently on the Internet is Ronald Reagan with his infamous
line Latinos are Republicans, even if they don't know it
yet and will. Certainly there have been in the case
of Cubans in Florida, you know a few other edge cases.
There has been some growth through a Republican party, but
it's nowhere near a majority. It is a losing game fundamentally,
and I think that there is this, and whether you
want to call it residual guilt or whatever, which the
idea seems to be that our political project is illegitimate
unless we have broad minority support. That is what lends politics.
It's legitimacy. And this is obviously not what I think,
but it seemed to be what a large number of
Republicans think, including Rod Dreyer, someone I cited in that
article conservative luminary Brillin Holly Hand. Many of these figures
who even now are being touted as you know, the
great minds of this conservative movement are ultimately pulling from
the same playbook that has lost the Republicans every election
they've ever lost since nineteen sixty four. And it's so
frustrating to me because, again, sitting aside any of your
or my personal preferences, if you were simply looking this,
you know, if you were examining the politics of Peru
with you know, a similar situation, you would say, well,
why does Red Team do this? Seemingly if they wanted
to win, they'd make a very simple conclusion, and yet
they will not. Sorry, we've began a ranting.
Speaker 4: Particles and after two thousand election it'd be written by
Steve Saila. Have you had Steve on by the way.
Speaker 5: I have not, but I am not only am I
a big fan of his work, but my wife is
particularly in love with Steve Sailor. She thinks he's a
very nice man. So he's a big hit in our houts.
Speaker 4: As I can say from years of editing, it's extremely
difficult to get hold off. Isn't why these people who
believes are returning emails? But I think he would He
probably would like to come on because he is his
book and that he published a passive press. I think
as to some extent he got him a rehability to
a certain extent. Anyway, Sailor look at the time, at
the time of the two thousand election, Carl Rose's theory
was that what we have to do is expand a
minority outreach. As Steve said, you know, Bush in two
thousand got like fifty one percent of the white vote.
It was disastrous performance. And that was why I last
and Steve poted out that if you had if you
could increase that by only two or three percent, sports
will the shaff of the white vote, that would any
conceivable shift among the minority votes. But but the re
problems didn't want to hear that, uh, And so we
ran a whole series of articles and making this point.
So as long as we were around, and I call
it the Sailor strategy, You've got to have in reach
of the white base, not outreach to min ortis who
aren't going to work for you anyway. And the ironic
thing is that what Trump showed is that that by
you know all, they had the ideas if we mentioned immigration,
the minor artists will flee from US. Well, that didn't
happen with Trump. He did as well with mine artis
et least as well as any other Republican has done,
even though he was being constantly denounced. Has been extremely
immigration restrictionness, which which in fact he wasn't. But when
I started doing that, there was a thing what the
hell is it called? Oh, doesn't aggregate to there? Called
wasn't red state rest state news anyway, they immediately banned
any reference to you there because you've got the guy
said that appealing to the white vote is in itself racist,
and therefore nobody was allowed to post to be their
articles on this aggregator. And I got I got an
email from Judo Anisky, who you won't have heard of,
but he was the architect of supply side economics. As
a journalist, he was the crusader walstered journalists on and
he wrote books The Way the World Works and Song,
which are really important in the aged because it was
a theoretical rationale behind Reagan's task cuts and everything. I
get this email, fan, I know if you are to
get this email from and saying Peter, you've gone too
far by saying that the Republicans couldn't should appeal to
the white vaute. You're just not allowed to say it,
even though it's simply question arithmetic. You know, you're not
going to like people say California has lost and so on.
But there are many years when the Republican statewide candiates
in California don't get a majority of the white voate.
You're not going to get a majority of the white
vote in California. You're not going to carry California. But
they they are absolutely determined not to get this lesson
to the point where I think there actually is some
entryism and and and and the Republican Party. There are
a lot of Republicans who are actually cover Democrats and
happy with the Democrats system. And I think we've seen
that since Trump came into part because a lot of
these never Trumps and people joined the Republican Party. So
on the what are protections in the Bush White House?
But now now then, now they've become Democrats, they've revealed
themselves to the Democrats.
Speaker 5: Oh, I mean, there are you know, any any number
of examples, right you have you know, Crystal the Lesser
as well as a few others. One of the Dynamics
and look, I think if we're examining the Trump administration,
especially the second time around, the greatest successes have been
in the area of immigration, right setting aside other issues,
but one area that I think there's sort of a
pernicious game being played is legal immigration, particularly around obviously
H one B programs, which have gotten you know, very
have gotten a lot of press, but also the others
given to international students, the so called you know, genius
grants or the so called genius visas excuse me, and others.
And it seems as if there's sort of a game
being played, you know, to shut the southern border, which
certainly needed to happen, and that is a great win,
but to effectively accomplish the same end by importing labor legally.
And I think one of the interesting things that I'm
curious to see you were mentioning the sailors strategy and
how Trump appealed to implicitly he never said this to
a great number of white voters who had traditionally voted
for the Democrats. Working class whites and that immigration issue,
because again, a lot of low skill immigration affects working
class whites. I mean, I worked construction through college and
there are whole industries in construction which no one who
is born here actually does anymore because it has been
entirely outsourced. And those which remain when you think of
high paying blue collar professions are the ones where effectively
immigrants are barred from working. Electricians, plumber is something where
we have to be bonded and insured, and those have
high wages. The other trades do not. But point is,
he was able to pull in that part of his
new constituency on immigration. But as we've sort of moved
to this, the system has sort of shifted towards a
focus on high skilled legal immigration. We're starting to see
the burden of mass migration shift from the working class
and up into what we call the laptop class, people
like me who have jobs where they work from home
and you know, type all day. And you've seen this
in programming, engineering, these jobs which traditionally were jobs for
upwardly mobile middle class people. So I'm curious, and I'll
finally get to a question, Peter, what do you make
of both the fact that the burden of immigration is
shifting onto a different segment of society, one which is
quite left wing urban professionals, and what do you think
of that transition as well, from illegal mass migration to
legal mass migration. I'll throw it to you.
Speaker 4: The thing about the thing about skilled immigration is that
it does impact people who can fight back. For years,
the most articulate and best organized group on the on
the Pasier side of the immigration debate will computer programmers.
And they had they developed really serious rationales for what
they were doing, and they were very articulars and so on.
And that wasn't the case with genitism and and you
know the blue blue color workers generally, and of course
now it's getting it really is out of control with
the vast numbers of Indian Indians coming in who are
relatively high skilled. I say relatively, but it's not clear
than many of these H one B the temporary visas,
which were something that was created in I guess twenty ten,
it's not clear that they actually are high skilled. They're
just cheaper. But the problem is that But the problem
they've got is it really does, it really does irritate people,
articulate people. So it's a step really that it's a
sign really that the immigration debate is moving into its
file stages because they're mobilizing people who who can fly back,
and that's going to be a big problem for them. Well,
you know, the fanaticism of the of the immigration enthusiasts
can't be underestimated. I mean, in every Western country they
move to important vast numbers of not even vetting these
impigants coming into Britain, for example, a lot of them
will come across this the channel. Uh. And similarly with
with Merkel Angelo Merkele just suddenly letting a million refugees
from Syria. Uh. And they were invited either. I mean,
there's there's no question they weren't asking them what, what
the qualifications were, anything like that. It was at that
relatively late stage and immigration debate where all the countries
in Western Europe had anti immigration party getting off the
way and so on. It was a very extraordinary move.
But there's what Biden did. I mean, if you look,
they obviously quite deliberately throughout the southern border and they
went to great lengths to import people and to scat
them all around the country, no questions asked. And the
only rationalf of that is is that they wanted to
knock out the Wye majaritis in the country. The Democrats
are convinced that that they're going to get to they
can get these poc boats and they're not going to
have to bother up the white working class. It's tree,
of course, it's the but the will parle behind it
was simp extraordinary. And the same in Ireland. I mean,
you know, the Irish government is suppressing any kind of
resistance to this enormous immigration. And this is a country
where there's no immigration at all until very recently, and
now it's like twenty percent forum born, thirty percent forum born,
and they built the bulldoze in archaeological sites all around
the country to build houses for them and dump them
in and the west of Ireland, in the remote places,
they're just the will, the determination lects to people that
lect to new people with extraordinary It's something that you
know at some point there's going to be to seriously
have to be serious historical inquiries of this question, why
did they suddenly decide to do this?
Speaker 5: Well, certainly, and in the case of it's interesting because
often in the case of both America and in the
case of your native land, the historical justification is it's
basically revenge. They churched up a little bit and they
talk about you know the legacy of colonialism, you know,
they point to the British Empire, they point to, you know,
our adventures abroad, and they say, you know, you have
you have, or your people have victimized others, you have
no ground to stand on. But in the case of
the Irish, it's almost comedic, right, because it's like, well,
who have the Irish victimized? I mean, look, I don't
like going to Boston, so maybe I have an axe
to grind, but realistically the idea of an Irish empire
is almost laughable. Similarly with the Swedes, right, I'm not
sure if you're you're aware of this, but there was
a I believe it was a plaque at a in
some major Swedish city. I know the photo. I don't
have the citation on that, but it's talking about how,
you know, Sweden bears historical guilt for its involvement in
the international slave trade because don't you know, Swedish iron
works made iron into links, which was fashioned into manacles
for slaves. And it's a laughable example, yeah, but it
does sort of show that whatever stick they need to
grab to beat you into submission, they will. And these
arguments are almost indeterminate. It is simply we want to
be in the elite. We want to replace white majority populations,
and whatever we have to say to do that, it
will be said regardless of if it's true. As you
know you've seen in the case of the residential schools
in Canada, it's completely fake.
Speaker 4: But all of those.
Speaker 5: Historical narratives will be created to make the justification. So
your point about the will being extraordinary is certainly true.
Speaker 4: Absolutely, I must say. In the case the Irish, you know,
it's interesting because in fact there were many great Irish regiments, right,
Catholic Irish regiments raised the Connaught Rangers, the most effusialers
and so on. There are serious component parts of the
British army throughout the imperial periods. So but of course
you're quite right. I mean, they weren't running it, so uh,
I mean the whole thing is have soon in his
face that the fact is that the colonial colonial empires
were the best things ever happened to these people, and
the fact.
Speaker 6: That they they can't after the empires were dissolved, that
they were not not able to use the infrastructure that
the colonists have built, is their fault.
Speaker 4: It's not the fault of the Europeans. The only areas
where it is successful is in is in, in China
and Japan. I mean they have been able to make
the transition to modernity, but Africa and Latin America have not,
and and i fact will not unless unless they recolonized.
So that maybe the solution here, maybe the solution at
the end. I mean mean that's why I'm interested in
Trump the action in venezuether. I me mean at least
that it may be that at some point they're going
to have to, you know, rule Mexico directly in order
to cross the cartel and to get its a column
into batter shape and to prevent people coming out from
the south. I don't know.
Speaker 5: My vote is that we give it back to to
the Belgian royal family. They had a good run as
empers of Mexico, I guess. But in all seriousness, you
spoke earlier about the immigration debate moving into it its
final stage. So you spoke about the fact that we're
seeing a new, motivated, articulate group of people facing the
consequences of immigration. But nonetheless you see this sort of
lack where people who are suffering in the economy, but
who have gone through progressive institutions have internalized that sort
of morality, are still very uncomfortable speaking negatively about immigration,
even with respect to Indians, who seem to be the
most acceptable target for any number of reasons. So I'm curious, one,
what do you see that final stage of the immigration
debate being and how do you think this sort of
new affected group will affect that.
Speaker 4: Well, there are really only two ways out. One is
that the Western world in general and the US in particular,
wakes up and cracks down and has another immigration pause
like it is in the middle of the twentieth century,
and encourages a lot of honor cell immigrants to leave,
and basically gets control of its own institutions. The other solution,
the other endgame, is what we see it seems to
be emerging in Europe, which is that the political class
simply goes into the wholesale repression or the resistance to immigration.
I mean the crackdown after the Southport killings. You know
in Britain it was simply extraordinary. I mean they were
jailing people for tweets and you know, there's no First
Amendment in Britain. It is actually a Plice state, it's
become a police state, and the labor going what wants
to drab that even further. And it's so it's it's
it's conceivable they will be able to repress all opposition.
They're just to completely devacinate these areas. But I don't
think so. I mean, it's did you know Nick Griffin
for BN Period Leader made a very interesting point recently.
He said that the apparatus of the British state is
not actually all that great. The armies. The army has
been purished and dismantle. He estimates for about forty thousand
soldiers who could actually take put put on the streets.
And the police forces, although they are they are paramilitary
now and they are certainly very left wing in Britain,
they still don't amount to all that substantial numbers. So
he's he's very in from the old situation Ulster where
there it's this low grade civil war that went on
for years and the authorities were not we're not able
to get control of it. So so you know it
maybe that will see a color a real color revolution.
These were in some of these countries that the dream
of the point that people would take to the streets
and overwhelmed the government. And yeah, I was very impressed.
You know, I lived in Canada for years and I
was just everybody regards the Canadian the angle Canadians has
been completely superhi and there's some reason for that. But
they did organize this enormous and it came out of Noah,
these trucks protests during the COVID the COVID strike, which
is simply extraordin. Again, they were crushed in the most
ruthless way about the government. They were debanking people and
all that kind of thing. But you know, it came
out of nowhere. Before these things come out of nowhere again.
So those are the two possibilities that were the thing
is solved. It's basically though, sensible legislation and sensible policy
all that. They just really really tried to completely suppress
the popular resistance and that could go like that could
lead to real chaos.
Speaker 5: Well it's funny you bring that up because Nick Griffin
will be on my show in two days from now,
so I'll be able to get it directly from him.
Speaker 4: I will. I think we follow each other on subside.
Speaker 5: Yeah, it's been I was surprised, not to say surprised,
But you know, I had been aware of him a
long time ago, and it seemed as if he kind
of went to ground for a little bit. And so
when I found his substack account, which is quite large,
I was, honestly, I was kind of surprised. I's like, oh,
I haven't seen Nick Griffin around in forever, so I'll
be you know, good to I guess formally make his acquaintance.
But several things there, which is one, I think that
there is a certain smugness from American conservatives towards the Anglos.
They're the Anglo sphere more broadly, and I think some
of this is a Second Amendment cope. You know, look
like I like guns as much as the next guy.
But either that that Second Amendment thesis of you know,
this is what protects us from whoever they are, it
clearly hasn't worked out. But also I think that there
is this sort of narrative, as you mentioned earlier, that
you know, the Canadians are souphine that the Brits are
you know, completely and totally done. And there's two things,
which is one, the demographics of a place like England
are much stronger than they are here and also they
have the other advantage that their government security apparatus is
nowhere near as competent as ours is. You know, as
you mentioned with Letitia James earlier, as badly run as
our government is, it is still more than big enough
to ruin any one of our lives if it is interested.
The same is true in the UK. But to your
point about the army, it is clear that this is
not a healthy, thriving nation with a lot of disposable power.
I've been sort of fascinated by, as you mentioned earlier,
the reaction to Southport, because it seems as if Starmar
and let's be honest, many of those laws were pushed
through by the Conservative Party, you know, before he ever
took off. It is effectively pursuing sort of a Stalinist plan,
or the idea is to throw every dissident in jail.
You know, you could have housewives, housewives facing three years
for comments about migrant hotels. And I look at that,
and on one hand, you know that the repression is incredible,
genuinely incredible. I cannot believe it. But also at the
same time it seems to be a weak, crumbling system,
and so I don't know when those two trend lines intersect,
because on one hand, you could look at Southport and say, well,
you know, all of those men were thrown in jail.
You know, they had judges working around the night. Clearly
they were able to tamp this down. But on the
other hand, it seems to me that the government of
the United Kingdom will use that word to describe it
because it's you know, accurate in this context. But to me,
they seem to be very scared. They seem to be afraid.
And when I see figures like is it David Bett's
constantly talking about a civil war, you know, sweeping the
sweeping the island. To me that I'm not entirely sure,
you know, a civil war. But the idea of as
you mentioned, a sort of you know, ulster esque low
grade conflict, I mean, that seems to be entirely plausible.
I mean, in France you already see things quite like
you know, they have obviously kind of a resurgent anti
immigration movement, but also just straight up ethnic mafias. You know,
you have you know, groups of uh, you know, North
Africans with very serious hardware conducting hits out in French cities.
You know, belt fed machine guns and all that, and
so that is a profoundly unstable mix. So a lot there,
I realized I threw you all at once. But I'm curious,
what do you make of, you know, the ability of
the government in the UK or you know, across the
world to manage a conflict between you know, the native
born population and immigrant populations.
Speaker 4: Well, they do have a lot of resources, but at
the same time, you know, they're behaving an extremely stupid manner.
I mean, they really do believe they're own propaganda. And
you know, one of the amazing things about that. I
don't watch the British political scene obviously anywhere near as
closely as Nick Griffin does. But one of the things
that was clear about the Southport reaction is it was
completely grassroots. The worst. There have been a number of
splinter parties in Britain that but tried to try to, uh,
you know, develop the immigration issue, and of course they're
repressed in all kinds of ways, and they kept off,
they kept off the social media and all that kind
of thing, but they were absolutely unable to get any
kind of vote in the local action that immediately proceeded
off that mattal In parliamentary action, but immediately proceed to Southport.
What happened was completely spontaneous. It wasn't it wasn't being
controlled by anybody. And that's the thing, the really scary
thing for the government. And I would say the same
thing is true with Canada, with the with the Trocke
protests we speak to some kind of Canada has been
overwhelmed by immigration, and I think that the population is
obviously getting really restless. And it had just happened that
the COVID stuff was was was what was what was
what triggered it? I mean, our problem, of course is
law fare, the ability of the ability of rogue rogue
prosecutors like Letitia James to try to throw a form
press United States in prison on that fantastically fantastic legal theory,
ludicrous and ridiculous legal theory. And and what he showed
is that the courts, the courts in New York State
will apparently entertain that they should never never have allowed that, okay,
those cases to go to court, but they did and
they're still in court. And and if if if I think,
if the Republicans lose in the twenty twenty eight, is
that what it says, yeah that there will probably shoe
try and go to jail, and the news effort to
get to get Trump to go to jail. And this
is quite new. I mean, this is what was going
on under Biden. Was what happened in Eastern Europe after
after ninety forty five when the Soviets got controlled the area.
But they didn't immediately impose communist governments on those on
those in those countries polled and check us a back
and so on. It took several years, and one of
the ways in which they did it was criminalized in opposition.
And they did it with the with the enthusiastic support
of politicized judges. And that's what we've got here. The judiciary,
both federally and but particular the statesline New York. It's
it's and not just the judiciary, but but the whole
prosecutor operatus is completely politicized. And you know they're going
to after in peace and convict judges by the hundreds
to clean this situation up. Ye of God, it's a
very bad lookout for us because we have no hope
justice in the New York States court system at all.
They'll just get up and tell the black juris that
that with neo Nazism, and that that's the end of
ours well, and.
Speaker 5: It reminds me very much of the quote we mentioned
from z Man earlier about how the situation changed when
rich people started being blown up. Because I look at
the Republican Party and I look at Donald Trump, and
to me, I think your analysis is spot on. That
is the way to solve this problem and the consequences
for him as well as for you know, you and
I are completely and totally explicit. He will, by all
likelihood die in jail. They will again for something completely
and totally made up, decide that he has broken some law,
charge him five hundred million dollars for you know, a
routine you know, reporting violation, and then his life is over.
It already debanked him, his entire family. They've threatened to
throw Pete hag Seth in jail and send him to
the Hague. And Okay, ten years ago, maybe that's you know,
strident rhetoric, but they basically did it. In between twenty
twenty and twenty twenty four, they raided his house. You know,
a number of his associates were either sent to prison
or given you know, hefty fines and when you throw
on additionally the level of political violence, Trump himself being shot,
Charlie Kirk being assassinated. This this kind of wave of
leftist terror. And to me, that's what I find so
frustrating is that apparently, even for their own self preservation,
these people are either too useless to incompetent or unwilling
to do exactly what you said, which is smash this
rogue judiciary. It needs to be smashed or else. Effectively,
the president is not the president. We don't live in
a real country anymore. We live under this, you know,
Rabbinic Council of Judges and.
Speaker 4: Were the right federally who I used to who was
a whistleblower and the Immigration services uh both he he
he uses the term cry talk uh. And that's why
Vida was excluded from the news bulletsin that was put
out by DHS. One of the immigration judges complained that
this was the we used to post articles by or
something on the daily round up of news articles and
we were excluded because one of the immigration judges said
that kritar was that obviously anti Semitic term. Of course
it's not, it's not a is a Greek term meaning
rule by judges. It's not antismic at all. But you know,
in the climate we were in and with Biden and
a similar stemp still you know, to be accused as
to be found guilty.
Speaker 5: I mean, not not to take this in another direction,
but assuming that it might have been a little naive
to assume Trump would have a more forgiving view of
anti Semitism than President Biden. But I will leave that
where it is and not address it. But Peter, we
are fast coming up on time. This has been a
fascinating episode. Where can people find you and where can
they find your work?
Speaker 4: Well, vdare dot com is it's still there. It's suspended,
but you can still get to it. And we have
something like twenty thousand articles going back twenty five years
which you can search and read, and you can fall
see all the Steve Sales articles there that we posted
and so on. I myself, Ma'm Peter Brimlaw dot com,
which is actually a substack, but I've start to do
that just a less than a year ago, and I
write there as often as I can, and I will
occasionally repost articles from vidad I think need to be read,
cycled and commented on For example, I reviewed Dinesh to
Susan's book on race uh way back when, and I
reposted with comments when I went to Susan was in
the news recently, and actually I just reposted yesterday. We
did a video of of how Jay six would have
been played if it had been if Trouble been a Democrat,
And the answer is, of course that he would have been.
They would have been regarded as heroes and and and
they the media would have been going on about police
brutality and all that kind of thing. So I reposted
that yesterday because that that issue is not going away either,
the total control of the mainstream narrative. It's it's one
of the effects of the Internet, paradoxically, has been to
impose the enormous discipline on the manstrym media what it
will actually cover uh. And that's the way where they
were they were to get away with is like the
Sharksville Hoaks, you know, I mean, obviously the First Amendment
rights of the UTR, the United the Right demonstrators were
were completely crossed by by by this Charlesville government and
the and the Virginia State government. And they've been unable
to get redressed in the courts. The only reason that
hope that was that worked politically is because it was
tremendously tight control of what you could say what happened
to Charlottesville as they wanted to as there was on
Jay six. Have you looked at Jason Kessler's book on Charlottesville? No,
I have not known. Let me pull it up now,
I'll send you. So here's somebody you should perhaps have
on He's moved to West Virginia. I'm infair. Everybody moved
to West Virginia is a feeshtong Appalachia. This is this
is one state that's not going to flip. It's not
there's not there's no big black city here that the
Democrats can use it to kick around everybody else. Uh.
And of course they met the election, the election, the
twenty twenty election. I mean, that was clearly a suspect election,
but you just weren't allowed to say that. I'd better
check with it. By the way, we love to say
that's on YouTube.
Speaker 2: Uh.
Speaker 5: Probably, I'm a very lazy editor. So we'll probably just
leave it in and see if I get a strike
or not. I think I could afford one.
Speaker 4: Yes, I will be commonist. Vida dot com is still
for those anybody who who wants. I mean this is
ues on. These issues aren't going away. We've covered all
these issues. Go to our so on. All that's happening
is to become the becoming more mainstream anyway, Steve Miller's
making them mainstream.
Speaker 5: Well you were, You were ahead of the curve identifying
trends which have become impossible to ignore. I mean, well,
I say impossible to ignore. Have you met Dinesh Desuza,
But I'll.
Speaker 4: Leave it at that.
Speaker 5: He's one of many people I shouldn't talk about live
on air or I'll say something, uh say something intemperate. Anyway, Peter,
it was great having you.
Speaker 4: It was.
Speaker 5: We'll have to have you on a consume.
Speaker 4: Thank you, thanks so much.
Speaker 7: Why do sail lads have to be so over the top?
Why can't they be more relaxed, more like the air
Lingus January sail. Sure, great savings on flights to Europe
and North America are worth shouting about, but that wouldn't
be very air Lingus, would it. Book now at Airlinus
dot com