Speaker 1: Meaning a light Man like this man letting butterfly flapping
Speaker 1: and wing. They've down in a forest. Man, it gonna
Speaker 1: cause the tree fall, letting five thousand miles away. Man,
Speaker 1: nobody seen nobody else.
Speaker 2: See.
Speaker 1: You don't need no man, you don't like You follow
Speaker 1: another story and you got back to flect that I
Speaker 1: still win. Man, don't like to d on the panel. Man, Man,
Speaker 1: you don't don't better, Man, I don't.
Speaker 2: Anyway, it's so over, the line goes idiot, most often
Speaker 2: expressed in a somewhat joking manner, that the game busted, right,
Speaker 2: you're lost it all, there's nothing more to do. And
Speaker 2: again it's a joke, right, Most of the people saying
Speaker 2: it don't actually beat it. But there is a strong
Speaker 2: thread of pessimism on our side of things. And I
Speaker 2: understand why if you're interested in the arc of civilization,
Speaker 2: you pull the threads. You say, well, things are going badly.
Speaker 2: Now how long have they been going badly? And every
Speaker 2: group has their own answer. Is it sixty four? Is
Speaker 2: it forty four? Is it thirty four? Is it the
Speaker 2: sixteenth century? Is it the christianization of the Roman Empire? Right?
Speaker 2: We all have our own answer for where it went wrong,
Speaker 2: and look that pessimism is rational. Things are not going well.
Speaker 2: My last monologue I spoke to you about exactly that
Speaker 2: you're getting screwed. You've been getting screwed for a long time.
Speaker 2: And I think that there is a danger in pessimism.
Speaker 2: I don't mean a danger in realism, the desire to
Speaker 2: look at the cards you've been dealt and realized that, well, shoot,
Speaker 2: we don't have a lot of margin here. The consequence
Speaker 2: is for failure or dire something I've expressed over and
Speaker 2: over and over again. But the problem is when that
Speaker 2: realism morphs into despair. There's a reason that many Christian
Speaker 2: traditions have viewed despair as the sand right abandoning all hope.
Speaker 2: You look at Pilgrim's progress, the slough of despond, the
Speaker 2: swamp of despair, as we would say in our modern parlance,
Speaker 2: which is sort of like the death of the horse
Speaker 2: in the Never Ending Story, This sort of quicksand right
Speaker 2: that sucks you down and kills you. It stops your
Speaker 2: for momentum and condemns you to death. Similarly, I think
Speaker 2: of Second Kings right. It was Elijah, I believe, who
Speaker 2: called down fire from heaven completely emulate, immolated the altars
Speaker 2: of ball, killed all of his priests, and then just
Speaker 2: a few short lines later, he's in a cave by himself,
Speaker 2: asking God to kill him right. He's given up completely
Speaker 2: and totally. And again, I don't want to be a
Speaker 2: Pollyanna here. The situation is dire across the West. That's
Speaker 2: why we're all here. We recognize that things are not
Speaker 2: going well. But I think that there is this creeping
Speaker 2: feeling that it's too late, that there's nothing to be done.
Speaker 2: It's too far gone. We can't turn back. We're over
Speaker 2: the slope. We've hit the point where it's all over.
Speaker 2: But something has recently happened that is, in my mind,
Speaker 2: very hopeful, and that is the recent results out of England,
Speaker 2: the recent council elections. In the episode after this we'll
Speaker 2: go into the details how that system works, what it means,
Speaker 2: but suffice it to say England's been in a bad
Speaker 2: spot for a long time. The immigration they've experienced has
Speaker 2: been much more dramatic over a shorter period of time,
Speaker 2: producing a much more notable rise in violence and exploitation
Speaker 2: than we've seen in America. We got the slow acting poison,
Speaker 2: they got two shots to the back of the head.
Speaker 2: And because of that, there's been a desire from certain
Speaker 2: Americans to sort of gloat about it, particularly in the
Speaker 2: kind of maga slopulist for those unfamiliar term and illusion
Speaker 2: of populist and slop right, the kind of low quality,
Speaker 2: technically conservative engagement farming accounts to paint England is sort
Speaker 2: of super California. Boy mate, you got a license for
Speaker 2: that as a funny joke. But people take it very seriously.
Speaker 2: They view England as being completely and totally cocked that
Speaker 2: there is no one there standing up against it. And okay, look,
Speaker 2: if we compare apples to apples, the situation in England
Speaker 2: particularly bad. Their speech laws are draconian. Their enforcement of
Speaker 2: speech as well as you know, basic Western rights such
Speaker 2: as self defense is tyrannical. Right, just look at what
Speaker 2: happened after Southport. But we have a reason for hope, right,
Speaker 2: We have something that looks promising, that looks as a
Speaker 2: way to well arrest the decline. The recent elections were
Speaker 2: notable for a couple reasons, but I think foremostub is
Speaker 2: that we've seen that the populace is significantly to the
Speaker 2: right of the political establishment. There's a major gap between
Speaker 2: the ruler and the rule. The political formula, the core
Speaker 2: reason why the people are in charge justify their power.
Speaker 2: It doesn't work anymore. And look, when I speak derisively
Speaker 2: of populists, of course I am talking about populism TM,
Speaker 2: but also that conception, the idea that power works its
Speaker 2: way up from the bottom. We understand that is not true.
Speaker 2: But there must be a certain form of consent. And
Speaker 2: when I say consent, I don't mean liberal consent is
Speaker 2: in direct representation, but quite simply, a ruler needs the
Speaker 2: mandate of heaven. He needs to be seen to be
Speaker 2: somewhat legitimate. Legitimate doesn't mean nice, of course, Legitimate doesn't
Speaker 2: necessarily even mean popular. But no one thought Genghis Khan
Speaker 2: was illege. It's clear why he was in charge. Look
Speaker 2: at stalin his political formula. His justification is basically do
Speaker 2: what I want or else, and it works. But when
Speaker 2: you have softer rulers, rulers who aren't willing to well
Speaker 2: stack their ops like cord would. And I don't think
Speaker 2: Keir Starmer or our own rulers in America are willing
Speaker 2: to do so, despite their sort of genocidal fantasies about
Speaker 2: so called confederates. Right, we have a problem, and I
Speaker 2: think that's what we're seeing in England. Just to kind
Speaker 2: of allide over the results quickly. The right wing block
Speaker 2: nominal of course, by which we mean three Parties Reform,
Speaker 2: which is Nigel Faraj's populist party, think British Trump and
Speaker 2: it's not a perfect analogy, but close enough for what
Speaker 2: we're doing here. The Conservatives, who technically want a little bit,
Speaker 2: but to be honest, I think are going extinct as
Speaker 2: a party. Right, the oldest political party in the world,
Speaker 2: has so fully squad under all their political capital they
Speaker 2: seem to be ceasing to exist after a massive betrayal, right,
Speaker 2: look into the Boris Way if you're curious. And then
Speaker 2: a new force right restore Britain, which is, be honest,
Speaker 2: very exciting to me. And look I'm biased. I have
Speaker 2: friends there, people on who have been on this show
Speaker 2: work in that part. And look, I mean I get it.
Speaker 2: I might not be as out there as some of
Speaker 2: you guys want me to. But you know, name a
Speaker 2: Republican official who's been on this show. One tried and
Speaker 2: well he didn't exactly make it through the Senate again
Speaker 2: not his fault. He did good work, but that shows
Speaker 2: you the kind of difference. Well, the right wing block
Speaker 2: did quite well, Populace to pick up fourteen hundred of
Speaker 2: these sort of council seats, and Reform picked up a
Speaker 2: restore rather confusing branding that picked up ten. Now you
Speaker 2: look at that and you say, well, it's only ten,
Speaker 2: it's not that many, And that's true. But one, this
Speaker 2: is a very new party, a very new party, less
Speaker 2: than a year old. And two that ten was a
Speaker 2: clean sweep. They went ten for ten, one hundred percent
Speaker 2: success rate. And also if we look at those ten,
Speaker 2: well how do they win? They won massively. We're talking
Speaker 2: fifty percent of the votes, where the next candidate, the
Speaker 2: next party down ticket, hit twenty. Right, they could have
Speaker 2: had their vote share and still won incredibly high turnout
Speaker 2: in elections that historically do not have high turnout. We're
Speaker 2: talking about vote totals that are equal to an average
Speaker 2: year's total participation. Right did very, very well, and if
Speaker 2: we look at the tenor of the culture, people had enough.
Speaker 2: There was a sense that this is dire, that something
Speaker 2: needs to be done. Even in right a state that
Speaker 2: is tightly controlled where you can go to prison for
Speaker 2: saying no no words. Where if you play a video
Speaker 2: game online badly enough that the police of vice and
Speaker 2: virtue I can't remember what they call them, right, but
Speaker 2: the English Internet police will come knocking on your door.
Speaker 2: I'm sure you all remember the little browser game that
Speaker 2: was going around for a while, a woman with a
Speaker 2: delightfully regional British accent reading out to you the options
Speaker 2: for your insert character Charlie of course, a gender neutral
Speaker 2: name where you could react to different situations. Right, your
Speaker 2: friends spreading dangerous means, and even in a state where
Speaker 2: that is official government propaganda, right where children are being
Speaker 2: warned that even downloading a video of wrong thing can
Speaker 2: lead to jail time that prevent at the name of
Speaker 2: the outfit come knocking on your door. You could be
Speaker 2: stuck in counseling until you fix yourself leave and then
Speaker 2: there's some hope. I mentioned this in the episode, but
Speaker 2: there's something that came up maybe six months ago. It's
Speaker 2: really stuck in my mind. Obviously. One of the things
Speaker 2: that American right wingers will make fun of our cousins
Speaker 2: in England about is the decroni draconian weapons laws in England,
Speaker 2: and they are kind of absurd, right, we understand that
Speaker 2: when you have police pose like they've taken down a
Speaker 2: drug kingpin with butter knives, oyster shuckers and a potato peeler,
Speaker 2: saying we took these weapons off the street. We have
Speaker 2: pensioners serving time for wrestling a knife away from a
Speaker 2: home invader and stabbing him. When it's illegal right to
Speaker 2: carry pepper spray. It's easy to make fun of that right.
Speaker 2: It's embarrassing. But this has been done to these people.
Speaker 2: They've been subjected to this. It's not organic. If you
Speaker 2: look at the history of England, this is not what
Speaker 2: they've done. And Rupert Lowe, the head of this insurgent
Speaker 2: Right When party, but those statements says, if I'm in charge,
Speaker 2: we're legalizing pepper spray. And of course people were making
Speaker 2: fun of them, like, oh, I can't believe pepper spray
Speaker 2: is illegal in your country. It's embarrassing and to be farious.
Speaker 2: That's a bad state of affairs. But that's a sign.
Speaker 2: It's a sign that says no, you may defend yourself. You,
Speaker 2: as an Englishman, have the right to secure yourself. You
Speaker 2: don't need to phone the body when someone kicking down
Speaker 2: your door. You have an option. No, is it a
Speaker 2: great option?
Speaker 1: No?
Speaker 2: But directionally that's a change, and that's a minor thing.
Speaker 2: But when you look at what he is saying, what
Speaker 2: the people on that team are saying about remigration, right,
Speaker 2: not just the illegals, they all have to go. We're
Speaker 2: seeing success right. Ideas that we're completely and totally impossible
Speaker 2: to bring in are well politically viable. And look, I'm
Speaker 2: not going to blow this up to be more than
Speaker 2: it is. Ten seats isn't much at all. These people
Speaker 2: individually don't have much power. But we're seeing a trend line,
Speaker 2: which is one the left is fracturing. And I think
Speaker 2: that this is something we will likely see on our
Speaker 2: end of the Atlantic, that these individual ethnic patronage networks
Speaker 2: are realizing, well, why should I give you power in
Speaker 2: exchange for gibbs. Well, when I can have both, right,
Speaker 2: I'll start my own part. And so we've seen the
Speaker 2: rise in England of these Islamic independence and they are
Speaker 2: exactly what you think. And these have a Islamic urban centers,
Speaker 2: the communities are running their own representatives. Saw something similar.
Speaker 2: You may remember the election of Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Fray
Speaker 2: is big in the news during the you know, the
Speaker 2: ice rates in that city. But he narrowly won his seat,
Speaker 2: or won his primary, which effectively is winning his seat
Speaker 2: at least in Minneapolis over a Somali ethnic interest character, right,
Speaker 2: a guy who was there specifically to represent the Somalis. Now,
Speaker 2: you know, there was some political chicanery in the background.
Speaker 2: But that's an interesting transition because, look, that Somali mayor
Speaker 2: would undoubtedly have been a progressive still who've done many
Speaker 2: of the same things. But we're seeing the internal contradictions
Speaker 2: in that base start to manifest. We saw another one
Speaker 2: in the tail end of the Biden years when migrants
Speaker 2: were being shuffled into places like Chicago, where all of
Speaker 2: a sudden, the pre existing client class, the kind of
Speaker 2: Oh Block type realizing, wait a minute, there's nothing left
Speaker 2: in the food bank. The Hon Durance took it. The
Speaker 2: immigrants took it, right, they're getting screwed too. Now does
Speaker 2: that make them into natural conservative Republican voters like Reagan
Speaker 2: or Bush or Ben Shapiro would tell you no, of
Speaker 2: course not. But it means that they're going to have problems, right,
Speaker 2: they don't get to abolish politics. And at the same
Speaker 2: time right, this generational delight divide on the right is accelerated.
Speaker 2: There's a dramatic age difference between Restore Right the real
Speaker 2: right ringers in reform in age, we're talking the difference
Speaker 2: between parents and pensioners here. That's an interesting sign, right,
Speaker 2: where is the future going?
Speaker 1: Right?
Speaker 2: Where is the next generation? And something very similar is
Speaker 2: happening right now with Thomas Massey's primary And look, you know,
Speaker 2: I'm not the biggest fan of Thomas Massey personally. I
Speaker 2: think he's kind of goofy and annoying. But he has
Speaker 2: come out swinging against well the administration, Epstein and Israel. Right,
Speaker 2: he's made himself an enemy of the regime and his
Speaker 2: challenger I can't entirely remember the name of his challenger.
Speaker 2: It almost doesn't matter. He's an empty suit has been
Speaker 2: artificially boosted. Right, We're seeing this sort of BS sex
Speaker 2: scandal trotted out around Massy, and we've been reliably informed
Speaker 2: by all the usual suspects that Massy's cooked. He's never
Speaker 2: gonna make it a sex scandal, has heard him, And
Speaker 2: of course the betting markets, which for some reason have
Speaker 2: replaced Poles, are telling us that Massy's cooked. Now one
Speaker 2: that's sort of a misunderstanding of what polling and betting
Speaker 2: markets reflect. If you play sports, you understand this, or
Speaker 2: watch sports excuse me, although let's be honest, depending on
Speaker 2: at what level you played, you probably did experience that.
Speaker 2: But anyway, right, you understand that there's a difference there.
Speaker 2: And there was some data published about support for these
Speaker 2: two candidates. Well Massy, oh again not my favorite guy,
Speaker 2: but you know some degree anti Zionist, anti Epstein at
Speaker 2: very least. And this new empty suit and that breakdown
Speaker 2: is exactly where you think it is, plus or minus
Speaker 2: forty five to fifty depending on who you ask, And
Speaker 2: it's dramatic, and so in my mind there is hope,
Speaker 2: there is something, there's a way out of this. And look,
Speaker 2: I understand the corrupting power of politics, and I understand
Speaker 2: the fact that Trump our Nigel fraud is not going
Speaker 2: to save us. But as I said before in my
Speaker 2: last monologue, it feels as if something is shifting, there's
Speaker 2: something in the air, or at least there will be soon.
Speaker 2: And in many ways I think we need to look
Speaker 2: at England as well. What's going to happen one if
Speaker 2: we get a Democrat in twenty eight, right, what sort
Speaker 2: of laws will we be facing when it comes to
Speaker 2: the Internet. And all I ask is, you know, if
Speaker 2: they lock me up, I mean, maybe take half your
Speaker 2: Patreon subscription or you know, I don't know, just a
Speaker 2: couple bucks a month and drop it into my commissary.
Speaker 2: I'd appreciate it, you know. And I hope that I'm
Speaker 2: at the cool part the political prisoner's way. They don't
Speaker 2: stack me next to like caterd and I know all
Speaker 2: those guys that'd be really embarrassing. But in all seriousness, right,
Speaker 2: they may be ahead of us, both in the tyranny
Speaker 2: department and also well the solutions department. And this is early, right,
Speaker 2: it's very early, but what we're seeing across the pond
Speaker 2: is effectively the populaces are getting cannibalized, right, they underperformed
Speaker 2: relative to restore, and as time goes on and their
Speaker 2: next real election, right, the big election isn't for a
Speaker 2: couple of years now, seems like that trend will continue.
Speaker 2: And the reason I bring this up is not because
Speaker 2: I'm particularly knowledgeable about electoral politics or I think that,
Speaker 2: you know, it's one election away from saving us, but
Speaker 2: just to illustrate the point that well, even when things
Speaker 2: are bad and really bad, and they are really bad
Speaker 2: in England I mentioned the legal tyranny, their economy is
Speaker 2: somehow worse than ours. If they were a state, they'd
Speaker 2: be poorer than all fifty. The unemployment, especially youth unemployment,
Speaker 2: is very high. Twenty five percent of adults are on disability.
Speaker 2: It's bad, but there's still something right, there's a way
Speaker 2: out of this. And so what I say to wrap
Speaker 2: this up is, look, the pessimism is to a certain
Speaker 2: degree warranted. The realism, the understanding that this will not
Speaker 2: be fixed easily, that there is much work that needs
Speaker 2: to be done. I'm not trying to dissuade you from that,
Speaker 2: but what I am trying to do is challenge the
Speaker 2: idea that there's nothing to be done, that it's all over.
Speaker 2: We just need to run away and hide. Another example
Speaker 2: is my friends from South Africa, right, the Afro Forum
Speaker 2: Dudes conscious Caracle first of them all. And we've spoken
Speaker 2: a lot about the Brazilification of the South Africanization of America, right,
Speaker 2: the fact that it feels less and less like a
Speaker 2: First World country every day. And that's true, but let's
Speaker 2: say it happens, right, let's say it all falls apart.
Speaker 2: We don't have power. And when I mean power, I
Speaker 2: mean like actual electricity. You know the lights turn off,
Speaker 2: that the police are non functional, crime is rampant. Well,
Speaker 2: look at the bores right, Look at what they've done.
Speaker 2: Are still workable. They are making it. They are building something.
Speaker 2: They're doing something to make things better for their projecty
Speaker 2: And look, am I going to tell you it's easy?
Speaker 2: Am I going to tell you it's fun? Am I
Speaker 2: going to tell you it's just as great as the
Speaker 2: lives our grandparents had, the lives that our great grandparents had. No,
Speaker 2: it would be better if we didn't have to face
Speaker 2: these problems. But fundamentally, one, you didn't get to pick
Speaker 2: the time you were born in so mad up. And Two,
Speaker 2: as much as I hate to say it, you've become
Speaker 2: the boomer you hated so much. Right, you were taking
Speaker 2: material prosperity. You're taking an easy life as your highest good.
Speaker 2: And sure it'd be more pleasant, one hundred percent. Sure
Speaker 2: it's it's less complicated, but there's at least some adventure
Speaker 2: in it. Right, you have some agency. Again, decisions you
Speaker 2: make hole practically change your life and those who come
Speaker 2: after for you in world where that agency seems very distant,
Speaker 2: when that courage seems very distant, I think that that
Speaker 2: is exciting. I think that even when it is all over,
Speaker 2: there's sort of this glimmer of hope that, well, what
Speaker 2: happens next? It's all so back and look, I know
Speaker 2: your objection, the one you're thinking of, is individually valid,
Speaker 2: but the question becomes, well what do you do with it?
Speaker 2: And what we've seen from South Africa, we've seen from
Speaker 2: England is they're option even with a bad hand of cards,
Speaker 2: there's something to be done, something to be played. And
Speaker 2: I think that this is a really important example right
Speaker 2: to push back against the black pilot. And when I
Speaker 2: say black pilling, I don't just mean negative sentiments, because
Speaker 2: those negative sentiments are entirely legitimate. I will reiterate for
Speaker 2: probably the tenth time we you and I both got
Speaker 2: the short end of the stick being screwed over. There's
Speaker 2: really no two ways about it. But that isn't necessarily
Speaker 2: the end. You don't have to accept that you have
Speaker 2: some latitude here. The old saying goes right. The enemy
Speaker 2: gets to vote too, And I think that we can
Speaker 2: look to our compatriots in other countries who undoubtedly have
Speaker 2: it worse materially, undoubtedly have it worse legislatively, and say,
Speaker 2: all right, well, if they can do that much, what
Speaker 2: can we do Anyway? Without further ado, we'll kick us
Speaker 2: over to the interview Dan Tubbs Up, Blow to the Eaters,
Speaker 2: good friend of mine, great commentator. Before we start, though,
Speaker 2: I should remind you of our sponsors, Axios Remote Fitness Coaching.
Speaker 2: Went to the gym with my wife today. I was
Speaker 2: using Axios. She wasn't. That's really nothing against JD's programming.
Speaker 2: I think he does do stuff for ladies, but you
Speaker 2: know she wasn't doing it. But he has good work.
Speaker 2: It's great programming, great camaraderie in the group chat. Tell
Speaker 2: him I sent you. It's been my sponsor for so long,
Speaker 2: and I'm so bad at letting people know that. That
Speaker 2: honestly just out of pity for him, not for me.
Speaker 2: You should send him an email, get free stuff out
Speaker 2: of it, and get two weeks of free programming. It's
Speaker 2: good programming. He probably just I mean, yeah, I should
Speaker 2: tell you this, but take the free programming and write
Speaker 2: down on a piece of paper. And I mean, you know,
Speaker 2: I didn't tell you to do that, but one could
Speaker 2: also if you want to support the show. And this
Speaker 2: is what I do full time, so I dearly appreciate
Speaker 2: that just a couple bucks a month on Patreon substacker
Speaker 2: gumer get access to the episodes early in ad free.
Speaker 2: I know the ads are annoying, but h you know,
Speaker 2: I got to keep the lights on around here somehow.
Speaker 2: All right, Dan, welcome back to the J. Burden Show.
Speaker 2: How you doing man, No, thank you for having me, sir,
Speaker 2: Always glad to have you. Whereas our politics across the
Speaker 2: Atlantic has been relatively stagnant for the last several weeks,
Speaker 2: there have been big changes in Britain and so I
Speaker 2: figured I might as well just turn it over to you. Well,
Speaker 2: what has happened?
Speaker 1: Well, I mean yeah, I mean for political junkies like me,
Speaker 1: quite often we get absorbed in American politics because there's
Speaker 1: something interesting going on, whereas actually British politics has been
Speaker 1: so interesting over the space of the last two week.
Speaker 1: Apparently you guys announced that aliens are real, UFOs of
Speaker 1: real or something like it. Anyway, the point is none
Speaker 1: of us cared. We paid no attention to that whatsoever,
Speaker 1: because because we've actually got interesting stuff going on, here,
Speaker 1: so we're able to skip that one. Now, what's been
Speaker 1: happening is, as you guys may well know, we ended
Speaker 1: up with the Labor government, which is not the sort
Speaker 1: of thing that is supposed to happen normally, the right wins.
Speaker 1: The only problem is is that the right aren't actually
Speaker 1: particularly right. They kind of write in name only, but nevertheless,
Speaker 1: the British like to imagine themselves a right wing people,
Speaker 1: but they just get for whatever, our political class gets
Speaker 1: scared off from actually being right wing at any point.
Speaker 1: So the right divided and Nigel Ferrage, who gave us Brexit,
Speaker 1: came along and started a party, and the Tories were
Speaker 1: so completely awful under Boris Johnson, and they brought in
Speaker 1: the Boris Way. Millions of people were brought in and
Speaker 1: we'd had enough of that, so the Tories had to
Speaker 1: get punished and Reform got a bit of an upsurge
Speaker 1: at the last election, but not enough to claim more
Speaker 1: than a handful of seats, and that dividing the right
Speaker 1: was able to get the left in. Now, none of
Speaker 1: us are particularly concerned about that, because, of course, destroying
Speaker 1: the fake right we felt was worth you know, losing
Speaker 1: one election. I know, It's a bit different in the
Speaker 1: US because if you lose one election, you probably are
Speaker 1: going to end up in jail and all of your
Speaker 1: kids will be frog marched down to the tranny center
Speaker 1: to have their you know bits, either sown on or
Speaker 1: cut off or whatever it is. So but nevertheless, we
Speaker 1: felt that we could drop one election. But that led
Speaker 1: us to kiss Starmer and kits. Starmer comes in and
Speaker 1: here is an absolute luncheon meet of a man. He
Speaker 1: has no personality whatsoever, and he's given interviews where he
Speaker 1: says that he and he admits this, he's never had
Speaker 1: a dream. He's never had a dream in his own life.
Speaker 1: He doesn't he doesn't read, he doesn't watch TV. He
Speaker 1: appears to have no personality whatsoever. There been nothing that
Speaker 1: livens him up apart from rules and proceeds and politics
Speaker 1: and so on.
Speaker 2: So very well, allegedly allegedly Ukrainian rent boys, but that
Speaker 2: is a filthy rumor. I can ayre confirm or denay.
Speaker 1: Yes, And that trial is actually ongoing at the moment.
Speaker 1: So it'd be very interesting to see what those Ukrainian
Speaker 1: rent boys have to say, what it was that made
Speaker 1: them want to, you know, go round to his flat
Speaker 1: and burn down his back door. You know, we can't
Speaker 1: we can't have the Prime minister's backdoor burning because you know,
Speaker 1: because of some Ukrainian rent boys. So we'd be keen
Speaker 1: to see how that goes. But anyway, no kis Starma
Speaker 1: came along and the upsetters all greatly with his response
Speaker 1: to the massacre of children in Southport a Rohande and
Speaker 1: that one, and he basically called the entire country far
Speaker 1: right for not being happy about that. And then recently
Speaker 1: we've had the Peter Mandleson thing. I know, I know,
Speaker 1: the Epstein files. I don't know why, but they seem
Speaker 1: to have passed by without great notice in the US.
Speaker 1: I'm not sure what's going on there.
Speaker 2: Well, that's actually an interesting thing this has been. It
Speaker 2: was sort of the wedge at the fault line between
Speaker 2: a large part of Donald Trump's base and the man
Speaker 2: himself personally over the Epstein stuff. Trump twenty twenty four
Speaker 2: was a big tent. The synthesis of Trump and RFK
Speaker 2: is kind of the perfect picture of that, where you
Speaker 2: have on one side sort of MAGA one point zero,
Speaker 2: you know, white working class, you know a lot of
Speaker 2: actually middle class business people, obviously you have the injection
Speaker 2: of tech who basically realized, if we have another Joe Biden,
Speaker 2: we don't get to be billionaires anymore. And then also
Speaker 2: this move of what you could kind of dismissively call
Speaker 2: the podcast Bros, the kind of Rogan Theovon audience much
Speaker 2: more interested in quote unquote conspiracy theory. So some of
Speaker 2: that's the make America healthy again. They're putting chemicals in
Speaker 2: the water, turning the frogs gay stuff. The other half
Speaker 2: is jfk Epstein. And obviously, at least initially, there was
Speaker 2: a great show of transparency on that matter, right the
Speaker 2: infamous file where you know the infamous photo rather where
Speaker 2: libs of TikTok got a giant binder full of information
Speaker 2: that was already public, and very quickly the administration and
Speaker 2: mister Trump in particular wanted to move on, basically wanted to,
Speaker 2: you know, shuffle it under the rug and say we
Speaker 2: did it, America, we got them, and where are the
Speaker 2: arrests exactly, And even the most recent tranche of files,
Speaker 2: which was very damning, that did not come out from
Speaker 2: the administration, that was actually forced through by Congress through
Speaker 2: this kind of weird left right synthesis, and so point
Speaker 2: is it is not a nude story, but it is
Speaker 2: still very big culturally. I mean even end to the
Speaker 2: point where mainstream comedian Shane Gillis did a roast of
Speaker 2: Chris Rock. Right, it should just be a normal kind
Speaker 2: of television event, but I believe it was. Was it
Speaker 2: Chelsea Handler who's in the files? He goes up but
Speaker 2: just rips her a new one for two minutes talking
Speaker 2: about how she was in the files she was at
Speaker 2: a seven per dinner at Epstein's house with him and
Speaker 2: Prince Andrew And you know that hit news slightly, but
Speaker 2: it is and it is an area in which culture
Speaker 2: and politics are misaligned. But sorry, Dad, back to you.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, I mean I can see that, but
Speaker 1: I was rather hoping rather than comedians doing the heavy lifting,
Speaker 1: it would maybe that's what the FBI could before. Maybe
Speaker 1: they could be kicking down doors and dragging people away
Speaker 1: in handcuffs for their involvement in this. For whatever reason,
Speaker 1: that doesn't seem to have happened. It seems to have
Speaker 1: had more impact here because there was Peter Bandleson, who
Speaker 1: was one of the architects under Tony Blair. And I
Speaker 1: mean he's banged right in these files. I mean, he
Speaker 1: was walking out of cabinet meetings and immediately texting Jeffrey
Speaker 1: Epstein with what the what the UK government was about
Speaker 1: to do? Very market market sensitive information. He's been arrested
Speaker 1: for it. And it makes Keir Starmer look very bad
Speaker 1: because he appointed him as US ambassador and he did
Speaker 1: it without bothering to get security clearance. And when the
Speaker 1: security clearance did get done, of course he failed it.
Speaker 1: Well at least he passed it with such caveats and
Speaker 1: asterisks as too. It wasn't really worth much. And so
Speaker 1: when it was emerged that he was ankled with an
Speaker 1: ecty in the in the Epstein files, he had to
Speaker 1: be removed as US ambassador. And I mean, I mean,
Speaker 1: and these two things, Southport and the Epstein files by themselves,
Speaker 1: I mean, that doesn't really capture it. There's a constant
Speaker 1: drip drip of things that I won't bother going into that.
Speaker 1: Just everybody hates this man. He appears to be sol is.
Speaker 1: He has no personality. Every major decision that he gets
Speaker 1: he normally you turns on. And fundamentally everything is just
Speaker 1: getting worse. Prices are going up. You know, every day
Speaker 1: is a nightmare story. We used to have, you know,
Speaker 1: one nightmare story a decade of children being killed or
Speaker 1: assaulted in some way, or stabbings and stuff like that.
Speaker 1: He used to have one a decade that would make
Speaker 1: the news like that, and everybody remember it. Now we're
Speaker 1: getting him on a daily basis. And there is obviously
Speaker 1: a result of the immigration we've got because it's always that,
Speaker 1: you know, they don't want to name the individual, and
Speaker 1: then six months later you find out where they're a
Speaker 1: Somalian or something like that. So nobody is particularly happy
Speaker 1: with this state of affairs. And whilst we don't have well,
Speaker 1: you guys have midterms, and we kind of do by
Speaker 1: having council elections. So the country is divided up into
Speaker 1: council authorities that run the local government area of things,
Speaker 1: and you're supposed to be voting on who can do
Speaker 1: your vote and empty your bins and maintain street lighting
Speaker 1: and all that sort of stuff. Nobody treats it like
Speaker 1: that at all. Everybody just treats it as a referendum
Speaker 1: on the government of the day and to indicate where
Speaker 1: the political mood is. And it's very useful if you
Speaker 1: are in Parliament where that where there is at least
Speaker 1: still a little bit of power, because local councilors don't
Speaker 1: really have much power to do much of anything. Really.
Speaker 1: It's useful then, because of course, opinion polls show that
Speaker 1: Labor are on track for about some between four and
Speaker 1: twenty seats at the next electure, down from a majority
Speaker 1: of eighty you know it having three hundred old seats
Speaker 1: at the last election. They could be down to somewhere
Speaker 1: between four and twenty. But those are opinion polls and
Speaker 1: you can always sort of think to yourself, well, maybe
Speaker 1: the opinion polls are wrong. But when you get live
Speaker 1: data from the voters and it came back and based
Speaker 1: on the council election, it looks like labourheaded for seven seats,
Speaker 1: So I suppose it's not the worst case scenario, it's
Speaker 1: not four, but it's still an absolute wipeout. It's taking
Speaker 1: a party which is one hundred and twenty six years old,
Speaker 1: has been the second major power in British politics for
Speaker 1: one hundred and twenty years, and it is basically shooting
Speaker 1: it through the back of the head behind the barn,
Speaker 1: at which point Labor and PS are starting to think
Speaker 1: to themselves well, look, I don't have any qualifications whatsoever.
Speaker 1: I'm a completely useless bastard and nobody will hire me
Speaker 1: again for anything of consequence, and I'll be lucky to
Speaker 1: get a thirty grand a year job working for some
Speaker 1: TV studio. I'd rather like to carry on being an MP.
Speaker 1: And therefore, what can I do about not losing my
Speaker 1: seat at the next general election? And they have alighted
Speaker 1: upon the idea, at least many of them. They want
Speaker 1: to get rid of Keir Starmer because he's such a
Speaker 1: truly uninspiring character. Unfortunately, Keir Starmer does not agree with that.
Speaker 1: He's showing some metal and some passion for the first
Speaker 1: time in his life. He seems to be truly energized
Speaker 1: about this. He wants to carry on being Prime Minister,
Speaker 1: and he said he wants to be Prime Minister for
Speaker 1: the next ten years, which is perhaps a little bit optimistic,
Speaker 1: but he wants to do it till the end of
Speaker 1: the term. And so currently our politics is breaking down
Speaker 1: because people in the government are resigning, Ministers are walking out,
Speaker 1: briefings are being had, Government business is not getting done
Speaker 1: because they're squabbling over who gets to be the prime minister.
Speaker 2: So several things. They're in my kind of survey of
Speaker 2: this data. A couple things jumped out to me. Of course,
Speaker 2: you have Reform UK, Nigel Faraj's party surgeon. And there's
Speaker 2: been an interesting divide that you and I have spoken about,
Speaker 2: you and I have spoken about with the Reform Restore breakdown,
Speaker 2: where it seems as if Reform is sort of running
Speaker 2: the classic populist playbook of saying certain things, sort of
Speaker 2: dog whistling and hinting. But you look one level down
Speaker 2: and wait a minute, why is there a Sikh? Why
Speaker 2: is there a Muslim? Why are there New Britons so
Speaker 2: to speak, running up this supposed right wing anti immigration party.
Speaker 2: And obviously we've gone into on this show before how
Speaker 2: Rupert Lows ousted, how Restore has been, I mean, honestly
Speaker 2: running a quite successful sort of insurgent campaign. But if
Speaker 2: you look at the raw vote totals, it looks as
Speaker 2: if Reform picked up I believe was it fourteen hundred seats?
Speaker 2: I might be slightly wrong than that, and Restore seems
Speaker 2: to have picked up ten. So do you want to
Speaker 2: explain that?
Speaker 1: And yes, there is a bit of detail there. So
Speaker 1: right as you correctly say Nigel Frag came back from
Speaker 1: Brexit and he set up a party Reform, and I
Speaker 1: mean actually he set up what was it? There was
Speaker 1: there was another part under a slightly different name ahead
Speaker 1: of the Boris Johnson election and basically at the last
Speaker 1: minute he pulled it, allowing Boris Johnson to get a
Speaker 1: huge majority, and he then went on to give us
Speaker 1: the Boris Wave. So Nigel Frog has done this a
Speaker 1: number of times. He's gathered up a lot of popular
Speaker 1: sentiment and then dissipated it at a key moment, blue
Speaker 1: balling everybody and letting the establishment win again. However, Reform
Speaker 1: seemed to be a bit of a goer last time.
Speaker 1: It won a handful of MP's and it's certainly on
Speaker 1: track to become well, it was on track to have
Speaker 1: an outright majority at the next election. That has softened
Speaker 1: quite considerably because when Nigel Frag started speaking getting pressed
Speaker 1: as a serious candidate for Prime minister, it appeared that
Speaker 1: he wanted to rote back on So if you so,
Speaker 1: for example, if if if in a TV studio he's
Speaker 1: accused of being racist, I mean he goes into conniptions
Speaker 1: at that, and he's he's keen to suddressed. You know,
Speaker 1: I'm not racist at all. And look, I've just I've
Speaker 1: just found, you know, a whole bunch of Sikh candidates
Speaker 1: and we've got this guy who's a literal refugee who's
Speaker 1: now standing for us. And look at all these colored
Speaker 1: people who are now standing for us as you know,
Speaker 1: as candidates. And that that comes across as perhaps a
Speaker 1: little bit inauthentic when the white British are being basically
Speaker 1: replaced in their own country. You know, what what what what?
Speaker 1: What is your what? What is your primary motivation here?
Speaker 1: And when he gets pressed on things like immigration, he says, well,
Speaker 1: look it's it's impossible to send back, you know, the
Speaker 1: hordes of immigrants that have arrived heuring recent years. And frankly,
Speaker 1: for the British right, that is not good enough, because
Speaker 1: when we're headed to an extinction level event, now is
Speaker 1: not the time to pussy food around. You have to
Speaker 1: actually do something, and you may have to suffer being
Speaker 1: called racist by a bunch of London liberal elites. And
Speaker 1: so we had been worried for quite some time that
Speaker 1: that Nigel Fraj was not the man, and indeed he
Speaker 1: went to the US, he met with Elon Musk for
Speaker 1: a few days and then came back and Elon tweeted out,
Speaker 1: Nigel Fraj is not the man, and I think, I
Speaker 1: mean Elon got there before a lot of us, did
Speaker 1: you know, he saw through them. So we'd been very
Speaker 1: upset with Fraj and then but there was one character
Speaker 1: who did ring true or authentic, one of the reform
Speaker 1: MPs who won Rupert Low, and he had been talking
Speaker 1: very much about the grooming gang scandal that we've had
Speaker 1: in this country, and he was saying we ought to
Speaker 1: deport not only the members of the grooming gangs themselves,
Speaker 1: but they're family members who knew about it and were complicit.
Speaker 1: And because of that, Nigel Faraj threw him out of
Speaker 1: the party, because you know, he's so terrified of being
Speaker 1: seen as a character. And so Rupert has set up
Speaker 1: his own party Restore. And the way to remember it
Speaker 1: is that Nigel Faraj thinks that reform of the existing
Speaker 1: institutions is possible. Rupert does not think that. He thinks
Speaker 1: the country needs to be restored to what it was
Speaker 1: in a previous era, when we were indeed a great
Speaker 1: nation and not the shambolic, you know, cheap Somalian knockoff
Speaker 1: that we are we are rapidly becoming today. So Reform
Speaker 1: did do well at the council elections. They didn't do
Speaker 1: quite as well as they were supposed to though they
Speaker 1: were supposed to win something in the region of sixteen
Speaker 1: hundred to eighteen hundred seats. They actually got fourteen hundred,
Speaker 1: so it's a very solid election for them. They did
Speaker 1: very well, but clearly people are softening on them, and
Speaker 1: I expect this to be slow because quite frankly, you know,
Speaker 1: we got boomers too, and it takes a long time
Speaker 1: for information to permeate through to them. So most of
Speaker 1: the I mean, we can see the pole in data
Speaker 1: for who's backing Restore, and it's basically it's the mother
Speaker 1: and dad's generation. It's people in their thirties, forties and
Speaker 1: early fifties who are perhaps a bit more online, looking
Speaker 1: at their kids and thinking, we don't want to hand
Speaker 1: you the country in this state. We've got to do
Speaker 1: something about it. The older generations who aren't online, it's
Speaker 1: harder for the message to get through to them at
Speaker 1: the moment. And Restore because it is a very new party,
Speaker 1: it only launched about two months ago. It wasn't yet
Speaker 1: in a position to field candidates across the country for
Speaker 1: a secondary election. In fact, given the fact they've got
Speaker 1: three years, I think they'll be doing quite well if
Speaker 1: they can get six hundred and fifty fully vetted and
Speaker 1: onboard quality candidates by the next general election. Getting thousands
Speaker 1: of candidates for secondary elections a bit much so. They
Speaker 1: only ran in one seat, and this was kind of
Speaker 1: a test to see, you know, would the British public,
Speaker 1: even in a small area, go for an even harder
Speaker 1: line right party than Reform is meant to be. I mean,
Speaker 1: Reform is actually a very centerist party when you really
Speaker 1: get into it, but they pose themselves as a right
Speaker 1: wing party. And the answer was a resounding yes. And
Speaker 1: the most interesting thing about Restore is that they got
Speaker 1: much higher than normal turnout. And not only did there
Speaker 1: was their vote share, And in fact, their vote share
Speaker 1: was so high that you could have halved it and
Speaker 1: all ten of them would have still won. So they
Speaker 1: were winning like fifty one percent of the vote when
Speaker 1: the second place was getting like twenty percent. That kind
Speaker 1: of thing. So what what they had managed to do
Speaker 1: is get back people who had dropped out of politics entirely.
Speaker 1: And you've got to remember, I don't know what it
Speaker 1: is in the US for a presidential election, but in
Speaker 1: a general election, only about sixty percent of eligible voters
Speaker 1: actually vote. And so therefore, if you could, if you
Speaker 1: could activate a decent number of the forty percent who
Speaker 1: just feel that there's no point bothering, actually you could,
Speaker 1: you can do very impressively. And so the battle for
Speaker 1: the right now comes between over the next three years. Farage,
Speaker 1: who has a lead in the polls today and he
Speaker 1: gets a lot of media time, and he gets out
Speaker 1: there in front of the harder to reach you know,
Speaker 1: the boomers, the people who you don't really get access
Speaker 1: to as much on online media, and Restore, who most
Speaker 1: of us in this sphere feel is the is the
Speaker 1: right deal. And indeed we were one of the reasons
Speaker 1: we know he's the right deal. Is quite aside from
Speaker 1: what the man himself says. Our friends are working in Restore.
Speaker 1: There are people you know. In fact, we had we
Speaker 1: had one of them on the podcast. I've you know,
Speaker 1: this studio is just freed up because the podcast finished
Speaker 1: today and we had one of the Restore top guys
Speaker 1: on the panel. So we trust this party and it's
Speaker 1: you know it was. It was given a trial run
Speaker 1: in yes, okay, admittedly just ten seats in a in
Speaker 1: a secondary election, but it won all ten with absolutely
Speaker 1: stonky majorities and huge turnout and activating been voted before.
Speaker 1: So it is very encouraging for those of us on
Speaker 1: the British right that finally we have a vehicle that
Speaker 1: actually represents us and it is everything that we wanted
Speaker 1: it to be, which I don't know if you guys
Speaker 1: have that, No.
Speaker 2: We certainly don't. And I want to echo your comments
Speaker 2: because I have friends that restore Britain too, and they're
Speaker 2: the sort of people that aren't They aren't politics impressive.
Speaker 2: You've met politicians of course, and you know there's sort
Speaker 2: of a bell curve, but they're actually impressive young men.
Speaker 2: They're like, Okay, you're a serious person. You could be
Speaker 2: doing something else and you'd likely be very successful. And
Speaker 2: I think that's an interesting indicator on two levels. One,
Speaker 2: this is an institution that actually has the capacity to recruit.
Speaker 2: It can get good talented people, which is a problem
Speaker 2: whether due to organization Nigel Farage personally that reform UK
Speaker 2: has not solved. They don't have particularly impressive people working there. Again,
Speaker 2: I'm American. I don't know that these figures as well
Speaker 2: as you do, but I'm sure you see the same
Speaker 2: tweets that I do, right of this guy exactly. But
Speaker 2: also I think that it's an interesting counter to a
Speaker 2: narrative you see often in sort of the American populace sphere,
Speaker 2: which is very antagonistic towards Britain. They sort of imagine
Speaker 2: Britain as super California. You know, it's the sort of
Speaker 2: ultimate extension of oimate. You got a license for that, which, okay,
Speaker 2: is that true? Yes, However, I think it's a really
Speaker 2: interesting sort of perspective because, to be honest, like Britain
Speaker 2: has hope, and in my mind Britain hasn't really had
Speaker 2: a real hope in a long time, and it seems
Speaker 2: to have materialized very very quickly. And again, as someone
Speaker 2: who is not British, who's you know, certainly ethnically you know,
Speaker 2: actually I say majority, I am just ethnically British, but
Speaker 2: you know, four hundred years back has been incredibly encouraging
Speaker 2: to me. So I'm curious, can you speak to I
Speaker 2: guess that sense of hope? Are you seeing that on
Speaker 2: the ground that people feel. I guess if they are
Speaker 2: you know, recently recaptured voters, people who counted themselves out
Speaker 2: of politics. All I'm getting at their don Yeah.
Speaker 1: Actually, if we are super California, our elites are LA
Speaker 1: but the sort of rank and file of our stock,
Speaker 1: our people are Californian hinterlands. And I'm regularly told by
Speaker 1: Californians that actually, if you if you get out of
Speaker 1: the cities, they're they're quite based, they're quite sensible people.
Speaker 1: So our voters are not. Yes, we do have, course,
Speaker 1: you know about a third of our population that are
Speaker 1: just communists, but you know, you get that everywhere. But actually,
Speaker 1: the mainstream sentiment in this country is is right wing.
Speaker 1: The reason why we've why we've fallen down the hole
Speaker 1: so much, is because we've had party after party that
Speaker 1: has come up and pretended to be far more right
Speaker 1: wing than they actually are. But that and surveys show this.
Speaker 1: If you do opinion surveys of the of the British
Speaker 1: population as a whole, and surveys of members of Parliament,
Speaker 1: even on the right wing parties, members of Parliament are
Speaker 1: more left wing than the average brit It's well to
Speaker 1: the right of parliamentarians and labor MPs of course are
Speaker 1: just just extremely far to the left, although even those
Speaker 1: are not far enough to the left for some people.
Speaker 1: So yeah, I mean, we finally feel we have something
Speaker 1: which is authentic, and so people are starting to re
Speaker 1: engage in politics for the first time in decades. Really.
Speaker 1: But politics wasn't something that people did. Politics for something
Speaker 1: that people watched on TV. And you know, you might
Speaker 1: have voted for, you know, whatever was best in my case,
Speaker 1: whatever the most right wing option available at the time was,
Speaker 1: but you couldn't get inspired by it because you just
Speaker 1: kind of knew that you were going to be betrayed.
Speaker 1: Whereas restorers come forward and we're seeing you know, branches
Speaker 1: being set up all over the country, and you know,
Speaker 1: even if it's just in a you know, a small
Speaker 1: town or something, you're getting you're getting dozens of people
Speaker 1: turning up that I mean, for example, the branch cheer
Speaker 1: in Swindon, there's about two hundred people engaged with it.
Speaker 1: I mean, that's unheard of for local political organization Normally,
Speaker 1: normally don't get anybody, or if you do, you get
Speaker 1: a couple of little old ladies or you know, just
Speaker 1: maybe five or six people for the local Conservative Association
Speaker 1: or the local labor club or whatever it is. But
Speaker 1: we're getting hundreds of people getting into this and it's
Speaker 1: still early days. Because finally we think that if we win,
Speaker 1: we can actually do something and we're not hampered by
Speaker 1: your separation of powers. So let's say Donald Trump was
Speaker 1: everything that he promised to be coming in, and the
Speaker 1: promises that he made when he was coming in were
Speaker 1: absolutely brilliant. I remember doing a segment at the time
Speaker 1: because he made these sort of the little series of
Speaker 1: videos of things that he was going to do, and
Speaker 1: he put them out, and I remember saying that some
Speaker 1: if he does half of this, he's going to be
Speaker 1: the best president ever. He does appear to have got
Speaker 1: sidetracked on it some misadventures. But let's say Donald Trump
Speaker 1: came in or j the Evans comes into the next election,
Speaker 1: and he was and he did everything that people watching
Speaker 1: this wanted him to do well, as best I understand it.
Speaker 1: Under the US political system, you need the unanimous agreement
Speaker 1: of every ninth Circuit judge for the president to do anything,
Speaker 1: Otherwise it just gets vetoed or there's one hundred and
Speaker 1: one other mechanisms to make sure that nothing actually happens.
Speaker 1: That's not the British political system. British Parliament is sovereign
Speaker 1: and answerable to nobody. We have a Supreme Court, but
Speaker 1: it's got a different function that that's not going to
Speaker 1: hold up any any legislation. It doesn't have any degree
Speaker 1: near that degree of power. And because the executive and
Speaker 1: legislative are basically combined in the same body of people,
Speaker 1: that doesn't provide a challenge EVA. So if all we need,
Speaker 1: all we need to do is win once. That's it.
Speaker 1: We just win once, and then we can do everything
Speaker 1: that we wanted to do. With a simple majority in
Speaker 1: the House of Commons. We can we can start the
Speaker 1: process of remigration. We can change the voting system so
Speaker 1: that it's you know, net tax payers only, or I
Speaker 1: don't men, or whatever it is that you want to
Speaker 1: however you want is you want to change the voting system,
Speaker 1: and Labor have done this. They've changed voting from eighteen
Speaker 1: to sixteen. So it's entirely within the will of the
Speaker 1: party to that. We could take away welfare from non
Speaker 1: native Brits. You know, that alone will encourage millions of
Speaker 1: them to leave because they're not actually doing anything here,
Speaker 1: and actually the ones that be left are probably doing
Speaker 1: something useful, and that sort of dampens down the whole
Speaker 1: problem and the whole disquiet to beginning, we can scrap
Speaker 1: two tier justice. All of this stuff can be fixed,
Speaker 1: and we only need to win once, and that, for
Speaker 1: it gives us a great sense of encouragement. We've actually
Speaker 1: got something which is for once real and people are
Speaker 1: getting involved and we just need to win once. And
Speaker 1: so we're feeling a sense of energization at the moment
Speaker 1: which I've never seen before in my lifetime.
Speaker 2: If you can, can you speak to the broad left
Speaker 2: right blocks right, because you have a collection of parties
Speaker 2: on both sides kind of running the gamut from the
Speaker 2: nominal rate the slightly less normal right and then obviously
Speaker 2: restore and then on the left you have you know, Labor,
Speaker 2: the limb, Devs, the Greens, and then this new collection
Speaker 2: of I guess you would call them like Islamicist independents
Speaker 2: and one if you sorry being a little bit rude,
Speaker 2: but let's be honest, that's what they are. And but
Speaker 2: in our seriousness rate, so one, if you could, can
Speaker 2: you explain those broad blocks, like what trends are we seeing?
Speaker 2: And then also where is labor being cannibalized from right?
Speaker 2: What is there? What is happening to their base? Yep.
Speaker 1: So politics used to be nice and simple. We had
Speaker 1: left wing labor, right wing Tories, and then we had
Speaker 1: a We had a third party, which was the Liberal Democrats,
Speaker 1: which was kind of for people who didn't fancy going
Speaker 1: for one or the other because that was a bit
Speaker 1: bit sharp and a bit real for them, and so
Speaker 1: they just wanted to vote for this third option. And
Speaker 1: the Liberal Democrats pretended to be right wing in right
Speaker 1: wing constituencies and pretending to be left wing and left
Speaker 1: wing constituencies. So nice, straight for the lilitical map. Then
Speaker 1: Tony Blair comes along and he's like, okay, well, why
Speaker 1: don't I just pretend to be a right wing labor
Speaker 1: party and then I'll get right wing votes and the
Speaker 1: left wing hasn't got anywhere to go, and therefore I win,
Speaker 1: and he won, and then David Cameron came along after
Speaker 1: Blair and said, well, hang on, why don't I just
Speaker 1: pretend to be a left wing conservative party and the
Speaker 1: right wing have got nowhere to go, and therefore I
Speaker 1: can capture the center and maybe some left wing votes
Speaker 1: and then I win and he did. Now, Labor and
Speaker 1: the Toys were very clever. They thought they were very
Speaker 1: clever with this by moving to the center and overlapping.
Speaker 1: But the problem is they ended up in this situation
Speaker 1: where they both believed in the same things, they both
Speaker 1: have the same principles and ideals, and there was they
Speaker 1: created enormous flank on there, both their left and their right.
Speaker 1: And so I mean Nigel de Frage was the first
Speaker 1: to fill it with reform and then but then even
Speaker 1: Nigel Frag started doing the thing where he started moving
Speaker 1: to the center, he started moving to the left. So
Speaker 1: that are now three parties sort of overlapped that that
Speaker 1: middle zone, which of course was to restore emerging on
Speaker 1: the true right as we talked about. But also the
Speaker 1: Green Party. The Green Party, I mean it's been around
Speaker 1: for a long time. It was kind of a bit
Speaker 1: of a joke party. I mean it would sometimes win one,
Speaker 1: maybe two MPs out of six hundred and fifty and
Speaker 1: only in this sort of the most well to do,
Speaker 1: upper middle class areas where they had more money than sense,
Speaker 1: and they thought that you know, maybe restricting our CO
Speaker 1: two was a good idea while China was two hundred
Speaker 1: xing their output or whatever it was. The Greens, however,
Speaker 1: they kind of abandoned the green stuff. I mean it's
Speaker 1: in the name, but you never hear them talk about,
Speaker 1: I know, trees or whatever. What they did is they
Speaker 1: started becoming an avowedly communist party, and that very much
Speaker 1: appeals to basically young women, some young men as well.
Speaker 1: But if you're a young man with almost no testosterone
Speaker 1: in you whatsoever, or a young woman I mean, or
Speaker 1: literally a communist or weirdo, the Green Party if you
Speaker 1: in fact, we did a labs hour just the other
Speaker 1: day party guest, So I don't know if there's a US.
Speaker 1: I think there's a US version of this. But he
Speaker 1: shows you a picture of the part of the person
Speaker 1: and you have to guess what party they do in.
Speaker 1: Is very easy to tell who's in the Green Party
Speaker 1: because they are dysgenic freaks. I mean, seriously, something has
Speaker 1: gone wrong in their genome on a serious level that
Speaker 1: they're the Green Party candidates. So they they get they
Speaker 1: get a few students and communists, but they also start
Speaker 1: to pull in Islamists. So the leader, the leader is
Speaker 1: actually a gay Jewish guy whose mother is suspected to
Speaker 1: be a pornographer, and his deputy leader is a chap
Speaker 1: called Moffin Alley. You know, he's got the big, you know,
Speaker 1: Muslim beard, and you know where's all the you know,
Speaker 1: the get up and all that that sort of stuff.
Speaker 1: And they've been doing quite well in this in this
Speaker 1: strategy because of course that means they can win anywhere
Speaker 1: there's a U university with gullible young people, or anywhere
Speaker 1: where there's a large Muslim community. Now, Muslims are only
Speaker 1: about seven percent of the UK population at this point.
Speaker 1: I mean, I know we ring alarm bells about immigration
Speaker 1: early here, but that's because we want to keep it.
Speaker 1: I mean, it's still like seventy percent of white country,
Speaker 1: but we're ringing the alarm bells early because we understand
Speaker 1: how quickly, over the decades that can start to shift
Speaker 1: into minority status. So you know that they've been running
Speaker 1: this alliance and Labor for years had considered the Muslim
Speaker 1: block to be which is important for winning a whole
Speaker 1: bunch of inner cities. They had basically considered them to
Speaker 1: be part of their electoral inheritance, effectively belonging to them.
Speaker 1: But what they're doing is they're splitting out and they're
Speaker 1: either back in the Greens or or they're just running
Speaker 1: by themselves. Now at the moment, they're not really that
Speaker 1: viable as a Westminster force by themselves, and they are
Speaker 1: somewhat viable in the secondary elections like the council elections
Speaker 1: in made Muslim areas, but it remains to be seen
Speaker 1: whether they just wholeheartedly back the Green Party, which I
Speaker 1: think they might do, and just take over that and
Speaker 1: then you have an alliance between the lunatic left and
Speaker 1: the communists and the sort of Islamo fascists. Now if
Speaker 1: that party ever came to power. I mean, Iran has
Speaker 1: taught us what happens to the leftists the day after
Speaker 1: the election, but they don't seem to be aware of
Speaker 1: that at the moment. But yeah, I mean, I mean
Speaker 1: still at the last election we did have something like
Speaker 1: a dozen Muslim independents starting to run. So these guys
Speaker 1: are they've peeled away from the from the Labor Party
Speaker 1: for now they might be in the Greens, but it's
Speaker 1: only a matter of time, but all the numbers go
Speaker 1: up where they leave them as well, and will they
Speaker 1: either take over the Green Party entirely, or they just
Speaker 1: set up their own things. So it's starting to emerge.
Speaker 1: It's not quite fomented yet, but yes, Secretary, and politics
Speaker 1: is coming if we don't get on top of remigration soon.
Speaker 2: Well, just out of curiosity when you mentioned it, I
Speaker 2: pulled up Party guess or UK and just immediately went
Speaker 2: over for five because of course I assume like, oh,
Speaker 2: this this guy looks like the kind of guy who
Speaker 2: might I don't know, smuggle bomb into an aeroplane. Surely
Speaker 2: he must be a caredate for the Greens. Nope, Conservative
Speaker 2: Party caredidate. Like I even knowing that right talking to
Speaker 2: you guys, I am still too naive. It's still too
Speaker 2: naive for the Conservative Party.
Speaker 1: I think the Lord is it Bristol might I might
Speaker 1: be getting my situation, but I think the Lord Mayor
Speaker 1: of Bristol is actually an asylum seeker. I'm not joking.
Speaker 1: He is an asylum seeker, and yet he is now
Speaker 1: the Lord Mayor of Bristol. Reform. At these local council
Speaker 1: elections recently they ran somebody who was a former asylum seeker,
Speaker 1: a Boris waiver. He actually lost his seat and his
Speaker 1: four white British colleagues who were running with him. They
Speaker 1: were won their seats, so the British know they're something up.
Speaker 1: But all of these parties, apart from Rupert Low and Restore,
Speaker 1: hand to this multicultural Britain sentiment. We're expected to believe
Speaker 1: that Nigel Frag is just saying it and he doesn't
Speaker 1: really mean it, and he'd be based once he comes
Speaker 1: into power. But I don't believe in the secretly based
Speaker 1: theory because I've never seen an example of it ever.
Speaker 1: Whereas Rupert Low, he goes on TV and you know,
Speaker 1: the liberal left London Metro journalist will say to him,
Speaker 1: you know you've said this, and you know I think
Speaker 1: that means you're racist, and he just says and he says,
Speaker 1: I don't care, I don't care what you call me.
Speaker 1: We're doing this, we're saving the country and you know,
Speaker 1: I mean it's such a change from the others. But yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: they all, yeah, they all have a very dodgy set
Speaker 1: of candidates behind it. Unfortunately, Refought the Store might have
Speaker 1: to end up doing that because it is literally illegal
Speaker 1: in this country to favor the native British population. You
Speaker 1: can't it. So I mean Restore now has to walk
Speaker 1: the balance of you know, complying with UK law and
Speaker 1: they can and will shut down your party if you don't,
Speaker 1: while remain true to the core mission, which is restoring
Speaker 1: this country to what it once was, including its demographics.
Speaker 2: Well, all I'm saying is any of the restore guys,
Speaker 2: if you need someone to show up in a rubber
Speaker 2: dinghy as an immigrant, my rates are public, I'll put
Speaker 2: it that way. But in all seriousness, right, that's a
Speaker 2: really it's an interesting dynamic that right, kind of walking
Speaker 2: that tightrope because we've seen very similar things happen in
Speaker 2: the US, which is that the arm of the state
Speaker 2: will be used to check challenger. I think of during
Speaker 2: the Obama years, something that a lot of people don't remember,
Speaker 2: the Tea Party, which was this sort of insurgent proto
Speaker 2: MAGA but largely cast in kind of economic terms, as
Speaker 2: was the fashion of the time. But yeah, it turns
Speaker 2: out the I R S found a whole bunch of
Speaker 2: irregularities in their organization. And you'll never guess who who
Speaker 2: tipped them off. Turns out it was the president for
Speaker 2: Aack Obama, who said, maybe my political rivals I or
Speaker 2: should go and look at them. So I'm curious, have
Speaker 2: you seen any overchurch towards Restore Britain right, has there
Speaker 2: been a signal that there may be an attempt to
Speaker 2: if they can't beat them at the ballot box, to
Speaker 2: simply remove them from the ballot by legal or extra
Speaker 2: legal meets.
Speaker 1: Well, I mean that's the genesis of the party. So
Speaker 1: when Rupelo was still a member of Reform and he
Speaker 1: started speaking out against the booming gangs and saying, look,
Speaker 1: we need to deport these entire communities, he got thrown
Speaker 1: out of Reform, and Reform made up some spurious criminal
Speaker 1: allegations against him in order to try and get him jailed.
Speaker 1: And the way they did that is their their Sri
Speaker 1: Lankan deputy as Yah Yusif, who is who is a
Speaker 1: man of about thirty five, said that Rupert Low, a
Speaker 1: man of sixty five, was physically roughing him up. Now, look,
Speaker 1: I appreciate in the subcontinent that grip strength is not
Speaker 1: is not monstrous, but still it's a bit of a
Speaker 1: silly story to say that this old man was sort
Speaker 1: of beating him up. And the police actually launched a
Speaker 1: inquiry into Rupert Low as to whether they were going
Speaker 1: to bring charges that would would see him jail for
Speaker 1: threatening to kill this man half his age. Now it
Speaker 1: turned out all of this was complete nonsense, and you know,
Speaker 1: Reform don't like to talk about it these days, and
Speaker 1: they shut it down if you if you try and
Speaker 1: bring it up to him, he's like, well, hang on,
Speaker 1: what happened to those allegations that you that you made up?
Speaker 1: But I mean Frodd did actually, in an unguarded moment
Speaker 1: on stage not so long ago, admit that the reason
Speaker 1: that they that they made up those charges is because
Speaker 1: Rupert Low was talking about deporting people. So that, I
Speaker 1: mean that caught them out already. I mean, plus the
Speaker 1: fact that they chucked him out, they made him stronger,
Speaker 1: that they brought these charges. They made him stronger with
Speaker 1: all of that. So whether they're going to try anything
Speaker 1: else underhand, I wouldn't put it past them, but they
Speaker 1: they've tried it twice and it's backfired immensely on them already.
Speaker 1: Whether the state will do anything, I mean very possible.
Speaker 1: It's hard. We're not quite like Germany where they where
Speaker 1: they're always on the verge of outright banning the AfD.
Speaker 1: But then we've never had anything real before. To vote for.
Speaker 1: So whether the deep the UK deep state, will allow
Speaker 1: a genuine restoration of Britain to take place without sabotaging it,
Speaker 1: I'm not sure, but it seems like it's they've got
Speaker 1: an open track ahead of them for now.
Speaker 2: I think of even relatively recently, uh, Lotus Eaters alumni
Speaker 2: Connor Carmlinson, I believe had a fake police port report
Speaker 2: excuse me, uh, you know, levied against him saying that
Speaker 2: he had been knocking his wife around. Obviously, I feel
Speaker 2: like I don't even say that it was not true.
Speaker 2: The police didn't find anything to support that, But I
Speaker 2: mean that is that kind of example of low level harassment, right,
Speaker 2: sending the arm of the law after political rivals. And
Speaker 2: of course I hope it doesn't happen, right, I hope
Speaker 2: this is a successful political project. But if you've been
Speaker 2: around long enough, you're always on the lookout, right, especially
Speaker 2: when you have you know, the starmer bought, you know,
Speaker 2: sitting there just steaming. So I'm curious, Dan, what has
Speaker 2: been the media reaction to these the spat of elections,
Speaker 2: Because what I've seen, and admittedly it's Twitter and the
Speaker 2: algorithm's garbage, it pushes you what you want to see
Speaker 2: has been effectively university student meltdown. Right, Britain is literally
Speaker 2: Germany in nineteen thirty three. It's so over they're going
Speaker 2: to put us in camps and so sure that's off
Speaker 2: the internet. You can find people on the internet saying anything,
Speaker 2: but both on the kind of cultural level and the
Speaker 2: media level, what have you seen?
Speaker 1: I haven't seen any of that. I mean i've seen
Speaker 1: it online. Is one of those things. A journalist will
Speaker 1: go off and they'll find some excitable student and they're
Speaker 1: are some for their opinion and stuff. But I haven't
Speaker 1: seen any of it on the ground. I mean, we're
Speaker 1: generally too sensible to I mean, those people are sort
Speaker 1: of kept away out the way for a good reason.
Speaker 1: So they can have their hysterics over there, but it
Speaker 1: doesn't really trouble the rest of us. And you know,
Speaker 1: if only reform were what left his students imagine them
Speaker 1: to be, we wouldn't need restore. And so I've seen
Speaker 1: them coming out saying, oh, you know, if Nigel Frage
Speaker 1: comes in, he's going to take away my reproductive rights
Speaker 1: and he's gonna he's going to deport all the nons
Speaker 1: and he's going to do this, that and the other thing,
Speaker 1: and it's like, oh, for god, I wish if he
Speaker 1: was doing that, I'd vote for him myself. But he's
Speaker 1: not doing any of that. But so that they're behind
Speaker 1: the track on this. So no, and more broadly the media,
Speaker 1: there was about forty eight hours of rumination on the
Speaker 1: actual results themselves, and that there is even a bit
Speaker 1: of chatter of Restore starting to break into the mainstream
Speaker 1: because they generally if they if they, they can tell
Speaker 1: that Restore is a genuine threat, so they so the
Speaker 1: way they address that is by never mentioning them at all,
Speaker 1: because they did this once with Nigel far years ago,
Speaker 1: where they tried to put him up as a as
Speaker 1: a as a sort of comedy character who wanted to
Speaker 1: leave the European Union and they ended up actually getting
Speaker 1: Brexit as a result of it. So now the media
Speaker 1: is very careful. When they see something where they don't
Speaker 1: want to be a thing, they simply don't cover it.
Speaker 1: And but that's only sustainable to a point. So no,
Speaker 1: all of that got swept away quite quickly because then
Speaker 1: the question became is Keir Starmer going to remain as
Speaker 1: Prime Minister?
Speaker 2: Uh?
Speaker 1: And that has basically all we've been talking about since.
Speaker 2: And I think that you mentioned the fact that is
Speaker 2: Starmer has this kind of death grip on power. I
Speaker 2: can think of conversations you and I've had going back
Speaker 2: two years where after scandal after scandal, and there have
Speaker 2: been many, right, we allied it over them for time,
Speaker 2: because if we went through all of them, that would
Speaker 2: be all we did today. But the question has always been,
Speaker 2: surely he will step down now? Because you know, Liz
Speaker 2: Trust stepped down over effectively nothing right. She got bullied
Speaker 2: out of it very very quickly. And traditionally, at least
Speaker 2: from the outside looking in, it seems as if there
Speaker 2: is a dignified position at which you're expected to kind
Speaker 2: of realize that the game is up you should step down,
Speaker 2: and Starmar has blown past that point so many times
Speaker 2: that we're effectively in unmapped waters. I mean, as far
Speaker 2: as I understand, he is the least popular PM in
Speaker 2: history by a fairly significant margin. And so what does
Speaker 2: he do if everyone else resigns? Will he be the
Speaker 2: lone Japanese soldier, you know, out in the jungle? Like
Speaker 2: what happens? I guess you could say constitutionally, you're you know,
Speaker 2: by the bylaws. Can he just simply be one man
Speaker 2: in ten Downing Street or by himself.
Speaker 1: I mean, potentially if it comes to that. So, I mean,
Speaker 1: because our executive is drawn directly from the legislative. Whoever's
Speaker 1: in your party when you form a government is your option.
Speaker 1: So he's got three hundred odd MPs which he can
Speaker 1: draw from, and he needs a bit less than one
Speaker 1: hundred to fill all the different government roles up from
Speaker 1: Minister you know, Chancellor of the Exchequer, the number two
Speaker 1: all the way down to a parliamentary aid. You know,
Speaker 1: it needs a bit less than one hundred of them.
Speaker 1: And at the moment a whole bunch of them have
Speaker 1: been quitting and he's just been quietly replacing them. So
Speaker 1: if if more than you know, two hundred of them
Speaker 1: say no, we're never working with this man, he's got
Speaker 1: a problem. You know, he's going to need to start
Speaker 1: getting some job shares going. But he's not at that point. Yeah,
Speaker 1: he's at the point where he's just finding some no
Speaker 1: hope or MP who was basically just there to march
Speaker 1: through the lobbies and vote and saying, you know, would
Speaker 1: you like to be a parliamentary aid the first step
Speaker 1: on your ministerial journey, you know, and maybe you could
Speaker 1: be something mean. Of course, they're not going to be
Speaker 1: anything one day. But for the moment, he's able to
Speaker 1: get through it. Now, you're right, in a normal, normal individual.
Speaker 1: The entire country is saying we don't like you. His
Speaker 1: own cabinet is saying we don't like you. His parliamentary
Speaker 1: party is saying we don't like you. If you or
Speaker 1: I went to a party and it was quite evident
Speaker 1: nobody liked us, we'd bugger off and do something else,
Speaker 1: because we're not complete psychopaths. But you have to remember
Speaker 1: this man, he doesn't have a soul. He's never had
Speaker 1: a dream, he doesn't he doesn't have hopes or aspirations
Speaker 1: outside of the political He has been focused on the
Speaker 1: acquisition of power since he was about sixteen. He lives
Speaker 1: for this stuff. So now that he's actually there, the
Speaker 1: absolute last thing he wants to do is let go.
Speaker 1: But his situation does I mean for any other prime minister,
Speaker 1: this situation will be considered untenable. Now that the at
Speaker 1: the moment. So Carl and I did a show a
Speaker 1: couple of days ago, and Carl was like, no, this
Speaker 1: man is so inhuman he simply doesn't respond to human incentives.
Speaker 1: He will stay on. And my view is I'm a
Speaker 1: lot less sure because trying to actually govern them from
Speaker 1: this position where you've effectively lost the power of patronage
Speaker 1: and nobody listens to you because I don't expect you
Speaker 1: to be there, I think is a hard ask and
Speaker 1: as you turned on so many things. So anyway, we
Speaker 1: put a ten pound bet on it, and if he
Speaker 1: goes before next Tuesday, then I win a tenor if not,
Speaker 1: if not, Carl's right, But yeah, this is the current
Speaker 1: hot button issue in the UK.
Speaker 2: One other element and I know that you come from
Speaker 2: a finance background, this won't be a super technical question.
Speaker 2: Is we have seen, really across the entire world exploding
Speaker 2: fuel costs and the knock on effects right worsening and
Speaker 2: already diehigher cost of living crisis. And a few weeks
Speaker 2: back I was seeing videos of fuel riots in Ireland.
Speaker 2: Now I realize that's what the mis do. They get
Speaker 2: a little excitable and they burn stuff down, sort of
Speaker 2: like the French. It just seems to be their reaction
Speaker 2: to most things. But nonetheless, your country is in a
Speaker 2: cost of living crisis that has been exacerbated by, to
Speaker 2: be fair to Starmer, issues outside of his control. But
Speaker 2: seemingly that would place him in an even worse situation
Speaker 2: that many of the issues that are making him unpopular
Speaker 2: are becoming more dire. So one is there a fuel crisis?
Speaker 2: Is there a cost of living crisis? And two how
Speaker 2: does that affect the current electoral landscape.
Speaker 1: Well, there isn't a fuel crisis in the nowhere is
Speaker 1: run out of fuel and fuel was already pretty expensive
Speaker 1: anyway in the UK because it's attacked so heavily, so
Speaker 1: people are grumbling about it. But I mean, really, with
Speaker 1: what's going on with the straight offull news, it's going
Speaker 1: to be a long time before it reaches a first
Speaker 1: world country like Britain, because basically we can just outbid
Speaker 1: Pakistan and Thailand and Tri Lanka and all of those
Speaker 1: other countries. We can just we can just afford to
Speaker 1: pay more. So it's very annoying. And because we used
Speaker 1: to hire I mean you guys, because you're used to
Speaker 1: lower prices, it's a bit of a shock when the
Speaker 1: fuel goes up. But I mean even now it's it's
Speaker 1: cheaper for you than it was for us. Before all
Speaker 1: this began, so we're just kind of tolerating it. Cost
Speaker 1: of living crisis, I mean yeah, I mean basically there's
Speaker 1: there's been no real terms increase in people's pay since
Speaker 1: the financial crisis, and it's just a different way of
Speaker 1: it getting stripped away. And then the COVID inflation, I
Speaker 1: mean that took a knock as well. People started people
Speaker 1: have started to get pay rises after COVID with that
Speaker 1: huge quantity of easing inflation surge. But yeah, we can
Speaker 1: just feel we're getting ground down. And it's just quite
Speaker 1: obvious that for best part of twenty years now we've
Speaker 1: been going nowhere. You know, in Britain, if it was
Speaker 1: a US state, would be ranked fifty first out of
Speaker 1: out of fifty one for GDP per capita. You know,
Speaker 1: we did a segment about this the other day, about
Speaker 1: how how much poorer we are than the US and
Speaker 1: how even a bloody BUCkies manager earns more than you know,
Speaker 1: you know, senior professionals here, and a BUCkies manager in
Speaker 1: the US centers a big box of goodies with a
Speaker 1: note attach saying you need this more than me because
Speaker 1: you're poor. I mean, that is that is you know
Speaker 1: that that is quite true. So yeah, people know that
Speaker 1: they're being squeezed, and it feeds into this sense of
Speaker 1: complete dissatisfaction with the political class that no matter how
Speaker 1: many times we change the government or prime minister, things
Speaker 1: are not getting better. The whole set of governing assumptions
Speaker 1: need to be torn away. We've got something like twenty
Speaker 1: five percent of or maybe is it twenty percent of
Speaker 1: people are registered as disabled receiving some sort of disability benefit.
Speaker 1: Clearly what five people are not actually disabled. The system
Speaker 1: is being played. People are coming in on dinghies and
Speaker 1: getting given bloody council housing. And yeah, you know we
Speaker 1: are we are a first world country, and we've got
Speaker 1: the Protestant work ethic, but there's only so much state
Speaker 1: blow that the most productive people on earth can actually stand.
Speaker 1: And we just feel that no matter how hard we work,
Speaker 1: we're being ground into the damn ground. And we know,
Speaker 1: we know as Englishmen what we can be if we're
Speaker 1: set free, if we're cut loose, wet, We've got pretty
Speaker 1: good examples of that, so we want to get back
Speaker 1: to that.
Speaker 2: Well, I think that's what is so frustrating. I mean,
Speaker 2: you've rightly said that America is very wealthy. I've done
Speaker 2: any number of shows on We're in a very similar
Speaker 2: situation where the in real terms productivity is down, the
Speaker 2: in real terms camp or sorry is up, while in
Speaker 2: real terms compensation is down. People are working more and
Speaker 2: receiving less asset valuations through the roof right, whether it's housing,
Speaker 2: whether it's used vehicles. I've really kicked a hornet's nest
Speaker 2: a while back making this point because people above a
Speaker 2: certain age simply cannot comprehend that cheap used cars do
Speaker 2: not exist anymore. You know something that every financial expert says.
Speaker 2: You know, if you need to drive to work by
Speaker 2: a good, cheap used car and drive it into the
Speaker 2: ground and.
Speaker 1: You need to get Hamshaw, you can You're done.
Speaker 2: Yes, And so you know, Look, we can complain about
Speaker 2: boomers all you want, but we're seeing a very similar
Speaker 2: dynamic of rising dissatisfaction. And I think in certain ways
Speaker 2: you are ahead of us. You have an alternative, You
Speaker 2: have someplace for that energy to go, and in the
Speaker 2: current system in the US, we do not. And it's
Speaker 2: my mind of fundamentally unstable sort of round of the game.
Speaker 2: For exactly that reason. Say what you will about Trump,
Speaker 2: you know, We've gotten more than I would have expected
Speaker 2: from it, you know, striking down the vra certain things
Speaker 2: that were definitely positive. But particularly young people and young
Speaker 2: men have nowhere to go. And it's why I'm so
Speaker 2: interested in the rise of restore Britain, because there is
Speaker 2: an alternative, There is a place for that energy to go,
Speaker 2: for those ambitious young men to seek or redress at
Speaker 2: their grievances. We do not have. And so look, you
Speaker 2: know cat Turd and all of these you know, eighty
Speaker 2: five IQ, you know, magatards whine and whinge about Britain,
Speaker 2: how it's so over. You know, you're going to be
Speaker 2: swamped with you know, Islam accords and who knows, you know,
Speaker 2: the immigration. May we'll get worse. But in my mind,
Speaker 2: you guys have hope. And it's a silly example, but
Speaker 2: Rupert Lowe said something maybe six months back about legalizing
Speaker 2: pepper spray, right, and when that hit American social media,
Speaker 2: we were all like, there were a lot of people
Speaker 2: laughing about it, like, oh, you can't even use pepper spray,
Speaker 2: and yeah, sure that is ridiculous and embarrassing. Right, an
Speaker 2: Englishman should not have to ask permission to use pepper spray, right,
Speaker 2: you know, effectively wasp spray for a rapist.
Speaker 1: But if I wish, but that's not where we are.
Speaker 2: Yes, But to me that that is a very fundamental challenge, right,
Speaker 2: that is saying you have a right to defend yourself,
Speaker 2: which directionally is a huge improvement, you know, from banning
Speaker 2: swords and pointed knives to saying no, if I am
Speaker 2: in power, you will have the ability to look after yourself.
Speaker 2: And so look, the current position of the UK seems
Speaker 2: rather dire right as it looks now. You know you
Speaker 2: mentioned the poverty, the you know, the sort of explosion
Speaker 2: of you know, social programs, these just fraud rings. But
Speaker 2: to me, I look at it as a very hopeful place,
Speaker 2: a very hopeful situation, because there is a direction and
Speaker 2: it seems as this, as you said multiple times, uh,
Speaker 2: the populace is right wing pretty dramatically. So and can
Speaker 2: I ask you yes, yes, m so.
Speaker 1: I mean off mutual friend Aaron McIntyre, you know, grapples
Speaker 1: with this quite a bit. And then the question is, look,
Speaker 1: let's say, because because the reason we are where we
Speaker 1: are in Britain is because we were willing to put
Speaker 1: up with a labor government in order to destroy our
Speaker 1: fake right wing party. And if if Nigel Franch turns
Speaker 1: out to be fake as well, well we lose another
Speaker 1: election and we destroy that. And we will keep destroying
Speaker 1: what the right puts up until we get something genuine,
Speaker 1: which I think we have now we've restored Britain. Because
Speaker 1: in your situation, the left is so clinically and utterly insane.
Speaker 1: Where do you stand on the issue of what right
Speaker 1: wing individuals should do when they're given a choice between
Speaker 1: an insane Democrat and a fake right winger, you know,
Speaker 1: some Zio pushing you know, Rhino who is you? You
Speaker 1: just know he's going to betray you. Do you vote?
Speaker 1: Do you vote for the betrayal? I mean you're obviously
Speaker 1: not going to vote for the left. Or do you
Speaker 1: sit it out? What do you do in that situation?
Speaker 2: Yeah, so this is interesting. I wrote an article a
Speaker 2: while back called the Republican Samson Option, named for Israel's
Speaker 2: first strike nuclear policy, basically making the argument, I guess
Speaker 2: it was almost a year ago. I think it was
Speaker 2: last November, but basically making the argument then that the
Speaker 2: neo cons right, the Zio conservative part of the Republican
Speaker 2: Party were basically going to explode the Republican Party and
Speaker 2: the sort of nascent Maga America First movement. Rather than
Speaker 2: seed control of the Republican Party, they would rather blow
Speaker 2: it all up. They would rather see their institutions die
Speaker 2: with them than lose control, which turned out to be
Speaker 2: remarkably prescient. Right. You look at the situation at Heritage,
Speaker 2: you know, one of the big conservative think tanks. You
Speaker 2: look at what is currently happening and polling where Trump
Speaker 2: has now lost white working class voters for the first
Speaker 2: time in his entire political career. We're going on what
Speaker 2: almost twelve years of that. So look, I get it,
Speaker 2: but also look, I'm I live in Virginia, and what
Speaker 2: happened in Virginia is they ran a astoundingly bad black
Speaker 2: Jamaican immigrant woman who hated statues and hated Donald Trump,
Speaker 2: and then were surprised when she got absolutely shellacked. And
Speaker 2: what happened is what had been the candidate, Yes, and
Speaker 2: she lost by a historic merchant, absolutely demolished. And the
Speaker 2: woman that came after her, Abigail Spanberger. I know what
Speaker 2: you're thinking, she's not, but she came in and basically
Speaker 2: went full chairman now and attempted to redistricts the entire
Speaker 2: state to basically take it from a five to six
Speaker 2: so slight Democrat advantage, which if you look at the numbers,
Speaker 2: was about the electorate to ten to one. Right, completely
Speaker 2: rewrite the map and make politics in policas. Yeah. So
Speaker 2: the reason I bring that up is one, is it
Speaker 2: because I am person only but hurt that that's happening
Speaker 2: to my state. Yes, all right, yeah, I'll admit that. Now.
Speaker 2: It was later struck down by a court. Going back
Speaker 2: to your earlier comments about the American political system being
Speaker 2: biased towards nothing ever happened. But point is, that's a
Speaker 2: situation where that is, to a certain extent, existential right.
Speaker 2: If you are in a ten to one Jerrymanderd situation,
Speaker 2: you are that farmer in California, you have no way
Speaker 2: to represent yourself whatsoever. You're screwed. So in that situation,
Speaker 2: I did what many people did, which is I went
Speaker 2: to the polls and voted against it. I vote didn't
Speaker 2: end up mattering, right, It was a narrow vote, but
Speaker 2: the redistricting one. But in that situation where it directly
Speaker 2: affects you, where it's like your life will measurably get
Speaker 2: warse like you're gonna get screwed. The place you love
Speaker 2: is going to be irrevocably harmed. I get that now.
Speaker 2: On the national scale, I'll be honest, I'm not voting
Speaker 2: for the Republican and the next presidential election because I've
Speaker 2: been screwed, especially not if it's Marco Rubiu. And I
Speaker 2: think that many other young guys are in a very
Speaker 2: similar situation. Men under thirty broke for Trump. It was
Speaker 2: a historic victory, right, really pushed him over the edge.
Speaker 2: And a lot of that was the economic and the
Speaker 2: social issues, right, young guys being tired of being told
Speaker 2: you are the cause of all societies problems. You just
Speaker 2: need to take it right, bite the pillow, basically, and
Speaker 2: they swung for Trump and got betrayed. The immigration stuff
Speaker 2: has been great, some of the court stuff has been great.
Speaker 2: I'm not going to look a gift horse in the mouth,
Speaker 2: but fundamentally the purpose of my government is not to
Speaker 2: benefit me. It's to benefit a certain Mediterranean nation, and
Speaker 2: that idea has has escaped containment. I've said this on
Speaker 2: my show multiple times, but my non political friends, right,
Speaker 2: the guys who I went to school with, who live
Speaker 2: around me. Who Yeah, sure they might pull the lever
Speaker 2: for a Republican every couple of years, but they don't
Speaker 2: know what's happening. They don't think about this stuff all
Speaker 2: day like we do.
Speaker 1: Dan.
Speaker 2: They're mad, and they're not only mad, but they're saying
Speaker 2: the sort of things about certain prime ministers, certain you know,
Speaker 2: tunnel digging religious figures that you know, fifteen years ago
Speaker 2: you had to go to fourhand. And when I say
Speaker 2: it's unstable that there is no redress for grievances, that
Speaker 2: is a very common feeling that, look, we we did
Speaker 2: what we were supposed to do, and there was hope
Speaker 2: in those first couple moment months, right the fulury of
Speaker 2: executive orders, what Doge was doing, this would be an
Speaker 2: actual substantive change, and effectively the Republican Party said, Nope,
Speaker 2: we've got to keep boomers stock portfolios and home values up.
Speaker 2: We've got to keep sending aid to you know, our
Speaker 2: our favorite Middle Eastern democracy and all that other stuff. Yeah,
Speaker 2: it doesn't matter, we'll get to it. Maybe we won't.
Speaker 2: And so in my mind, I think we are going
Speaker 2: to see something very similar or well, we would have
Speaker 2: to what happened to the Conservative Party in the UK
Speaker 2: where the Democrats don't win, the Republicans lose. Now, the
Speaker 2: situation with redistricting, I'll mention this because it's quite important,
Speaker 2: seems to have allowed Trump to skate on this because
Speaker 2: previously the stakes of this game were very high, because
Speaker 2: if he loses the legislature, well, he gets impeached, he
Speaker 2: goes to jail, either for something he actually did do
Speaker 2: and there's some stuff there, or just for whatever they
Speaker 2: come up with. Right, you know, like Letitia James style
Speaker 2: deciding he owes the state government five hundred million dollars
Speaker 2: because his accountant made a mistake. It doesn't it almost
Speaker 2: doesn't matter. Right. Well, this redistricting in Virginia has hit
Speaker 2: has sort of created this cascade where other states have
Speaker 2: basically realized like, oh, shoot, we can do this too,
Speaker 2: and so you have states, a lot of Republican states redistricting. Now,
Speaker 2: I mentioned the VRA, the Voting Rights Act that had
Speaker 2: a part in it that was legitimately absurd. Unless you
Speaker 2: wonder why America has been lurching to the left for
Speaker 2: the last sixty years. The Supreme Court had basically said
Speaker 2: that particularly evil, racist, bad Southern states are required by
Speaker 2: law to have minority representation, which means you have these
Speaker 2: absurd they look like computer hard drives, right, these like long,
Speaker 2: stringy districts in places like Louisiana and Mississippi, so that
Speaker 2: they can artificially create a black by extension democratic majority
Speaker 2: in that district that's been struck down. So you have
Speaker 2: multiple things. One Republican states becoming more Republican because they're like,
Speaker 2: all right, this is how we play the game. Now,
Speaker 2: you know, we're just going to become one party states.
Speaker 2: Also the disillusion of these artificial minority districts, and so
Speaker 2: what that's done is seemingly it will allow Trump and
Speaker 2: the Republicans to skate. They won't have to pay the
Speaker 2: consequences of alienating a large portion of their baits, both
Speaker 2: young men, white working class voters. A lot of people
Speaker 2: are very alienated. But if you stack the deck to
Speaker 2: such a degree, well you might lose the Senate, but
Speaker 2: you keep the House, and so fundamentally nothing changes. So
Speaker 2: that's my analysis on this. At the state level, or
Speaker 2: continue voting Republican because I've seen the alternative, you know,
Speaker 2: and at least where I live, that matter is quite
Speaker 2: a lot. But on the national level, they can take
Speaker 2: a hike. Hopefully it actually ends up hurting them and
Speaker 2: ends up mattering because seemingly Donald Trump seems to have
Speaker 2: slipped consequences once again. But you know this is all
Speaker 2: hypothetical at this point. We don't know until November.
Speaker 1: Well, that's the thing I've always been wondering. Because you
Speaker 1: do have so many layers of government, I can understand
Speaker 1: that you want your local representatives to be all Republican,
Speaker 1: even if you have to put up with a few
Speaker 1: bad ones, because the alternative is too horrific. You end
Speaker 1: up like Bloody California, where your kids will be getting
Speaker 1: taken off you and all the rest of it. You
Speaker 1: would be getting arrested over nonsense. But ultimately you can
Speaker 1: just walk away from the national elections. And yes, okay,
Speaker 1: if you lose the national elections, you're going to get
Speaker 1: some idiot in the White House backed up with the
Speaker 1: legislative who will do things like you know, kick you
Speaker 1: off YouTube and sense you in a whole bunch of
Speaker 1: different ways and waste your money and all that kind
Speaker 1: of stuff. But ultimately you are insulated because as long
Speaker 1: as you're in a Republican state, they can't come after
Speaker 1: your person quite that hard. You have got that protection level.
Speaker 1: So you know, it's just not clear to me why
Speaker 1: Republicans are putting up with being offered these quite fake
Speaker 1: right wiggers.
Speaker 2: As long as hobouly Dan. So this is another interesting
Speaker 2: development as part of this redistricting conversation. One of the
Speaker 2: states that came up for it was Indiana, right, a
Speaker 2: quite right wing state, one that should have all Republican districts,
Speaker 2: but it didn't. And so the President and others were
Speaker 2: basically looking at him like, all right, guys, fix it,
Speaker 2: come on, you have a power to do it. And
Speaker 2: a couple of these you know what Rus Schlimbaugh would
Speaker 2: call rhinos, right Republicans in name only, exactly those type
Speaker 2: of you know, kind of chamber of commerce types, they
Speaker 2: didn't do it. You know. One of the me infamously
Speaker 2: had a uh, what's the polite term, a mentally infirmed daughter,
Speaker 2: and he said, Donald Trump used the word retard. I
Speaker 2: have a retarded daughter. You can't say that, I'm not
Speaker 2: voting for you. And so it didn't end up happening, right,
Speaker 2: It's stupid stuff, But point is, uh, he got primaried
Speaker 2: and lost massively. It was kind of a clean house.
Speaker 2: And it seems as if we are starting to see
Speaker 2: a changing of the guard. Right. All of the really old,
Speaker 2: horrible American politicians, the ones you've known about forever, are
Speaker 2: getting old, dying, or dropping out, you know, Pelosi, Feinstein,
Speaker 2: Mitch McConnell. We're seeing a changeover, and that is on
Speaker 2: the representative level. We are also within the American populace
Speaker 2: seeing a dramatic changeover since we've had a breakdown in
Speaker 2: generational terms on both the left and the right, nominally
Speaker 2: over the issue of Israel, and it is about Israel,
Speaker 2: but it's also about a bunch of other stuff too.
Speaker 2: And for instance, with the lefties, this happened with the
Speaker 2: pro Palestinian protests right after October seventh, where the activist class,
Speaker 2: the kids at college were getting beaten with truncheons directed
Speaker 2: by predominantly older Democrats. We've seen a breakdown there. Similarly,
Speaker 2: in the Republican context, we're also seeing a breakdown. I'm
Speaker 2: sure you've read all these stories about the young Republicans
Speaker 2: the I can't remember the other organization heritage, where effectively
Speaker 2: there has been a desire to purge Grouper's quote unquote
Speaker 2: and Grouper's. Sure. Are some of them fans of Nick Flints,
Speaker 2: I'm sure, But functionally it's just a slur. It means
Speaker 2: you're a bad person. Get out. And these organizations like Heritage,
Speaker 2: like the Young Republicans have basically decided that they are
Speaker 2: going to attempt to purge basically anyone under forty because
Speaker 2: they have offensive positions, and the sort of astro turfed
Speaker 2: fake right wing figures are landing flatter than ever. I'm
Speaker 2: sure you've seen the coverage that Ben Shapiro's Daily Wire
Speaker 2: is hemorrhaging money due to some back end contexts. There
Speaker 2: are people at the Daily Wire who are making money.
Speaker 2: They are not Ben Shapiro, and they do not say
Speaker 2: Ben Shapiro things, I'll put it that way, and so effectively,
Speaker 2: it seems as if the kind of twentieth century brand
Speaker 2: for both the Democrats and the Republicans is running out
Speaker 2: of steam and will not no longer be viable. Interesting
Speaker 2: on that front, I don't really know where that energy goes,
Speaker 2: but in my mind I think that Israel is so
Speaker 2: unpopular and by extension all of the other things that
Speaker 2: come with it, I think that fundamentally it will become
Speaker 2: an electoral non starter on both the left and the right.
Speaker 2: I'm curious to see where that goes. Sorry, massive diversion there,
Speaker 2: but this is the sort of I mean.
Speaker 1: I remember when Ted and I used to like Ted Cruz.
Speaker 1: I mean, he's an intelligent guy, he's got some interesting
Speaker 1: things to say. But I remember it wasn't so long
Speaker 1: ago that he came out and he said the reason
Speaker 1: that he joined the Senate was to protect Israel. Now,
Speaker 1: I'm an Englishman and I was bloody offended at that.
Speaker 1: If he had said the reason I joined the Senate
Speaker 1: was to protect my Christian faith, USA or Texas, any
Speaker 1: one of those would have been a suitable answer. But
Speaker 1: coming out and saying Israel is the problem is is
Speaker 1: to the rest of the world, the US looks like
Speaker 1: a client state of Israel.
Speaker 2: I'm sorry to say it just looks looks like is
Speaker 2: a very generous way of phrasing that I mean, and
Speaker 2: that attitude for a lot of people. It isn't even
Speaker 2: the most sophisticated version of that idea. You know, talk
Speaker 2: about lacude, the money streaming into American preachers and American politicians.
Speaker 2: A lot of it's way more simple. A lot of
Speaker 2: it is. Hey, you promised to do a bunch of
Speaker 2: stuff for me. Why is gas five dollars a gallon?
Speaker 2: Oh wait, it's because of this war. Why did we
Speaker 2: get into this war? Oh well Marco Rubio said, we
Speaker 2: got into this war because of them. And again, you
Speaker 2: know that's not the kind of like one hundred and
Speaker 2: thirty five IQ, you know, protocols of the Elder whatever
Speaker 2: your favorite schizo theory is. It's not that, but that
Speaker 2: general sense to your point that we are not a
Speaker 2: country run for our own benefit. That's that's broken containment.
Speaker 2: And look, man like I would be offended if he
Speaker 2: said that his the purpose that he was in power
Speaker 2: was to promote you know, the English, the interest of
Speaker 2: the United Kingdom, and I like the United Kingdom or
Speaker 2: written much more than Israel. Right, It's there are two
Speaker 2: levels to it, you know. Anyway, Dan, this has been fascinating.
Speaker 2: I appreciate your expertise in your time. Where can people
Speaker 2: find you? Where can they find more your work?
Speaker 1: Well, if they want to get into stuff like this,
Speaker 1: Carl and I do a weekly political chat. So if
Speaker 1: you if you search political chat and Lotus eaters, I'm
Speaker 1: on I'm on Twitter. A series of based and a
Speaker 1: reverend tape at King Bingo. But yeah, mainly my output
Speaker 1: is is on Lotus eaters and yeah if you if
Speaker 1: you come to it. When we cover a lot of
Speaker 1: American politics as well, a bit a third of our
Speaker 1: audience is US, so we cover plenty of that stuff already,
Speaker 1: h and we cover the interesting stories in the UK.
Speaker 1: And yeah, I mean we're boyed by a sense of
Speaker 1: optimism and uh, you know, I just hope that that
Speaker 1: you guys find a political solution that is real quite soon,
Speaker 1: because you know, I've been following the ups and downs
Speaker 1: of the American political system for many years at this point,
Speaker 1: and honestly, there was such jubilation when Trump on the
Speaker 1: first time and the second time, you know, we were
Speaker 1: very excited about it. We didn't all light election stream
Speaker 1: for the for the second win, and it's and it's
Speaker 1: really disheartening to just find a return to type. So,
Speaker 1: you know, thank you to all the Americans who support
Speaker 1: us and on our political revival, and I hope you
Speaker 1: guys have one coming your way soon too.
Speaker 2: God speed, Dan, never run at home, keep your head up.
Speaker 2: I can't last forever. Good Night,