All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 29, 2018 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin
55:05
Middle-Class Woes ｜ Andrew Doyle Interview
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Is that recording?
I think it is recording, yeah.
How would you know?
Because I pressed record before I came down and said that.
Right, you're genius.
There's a reason that I've got the YouTube channel.
Everyone, I'm talking about Andrew Doyle in a pub with a single camera because he's not famous enough to get the two-camera treatment.
Oh.
I'm so offended.
Quite a nice pub, though.
It is, yeah.
We're both pretty knackered though, I should say.
Yeah, yeah, it's been a long, long couple of long days.
But yeah, Andrew writes for Spike magazine and does various other things, like go on Sky News and argue the pro-Brexit points.
Yeah, which seems to get that's when I get people tweeting.
It's when I make a pro-Brexit point on Sky, and people are outraged that it's happening.
But on the whole, Sky is pretty anti-Brexit, aren't they?
So most of the things that people hear on Sky area.
So a bit of balance is no bad thing, I don't think.
Well, I wouldn't have thought so, but I mean, I'm not the one tweeting.
What sort of things do they say?
I had one saying, why are you giving airtime to someone making these points?
that sort of thing, it's an odd, but also...
Why are you hearing the other side of the argument?
Yeah, exactly.
We don't want to hear it.
It's upsetting.
But also, I mean, as a comedian, it's not a common view that people hold in my community.
it makes you a bit of a pariah.
I think because people bought, everyone bought into this narrative that the Brexit vote was about race.
Yes.
And it was basically about the box may as well have said, are you racist, yes or no?
And of course it really wasn't that.
I mean, all of the polls tell us why people voted, but to buy into that narrative means that you just end up...
I think you could count the number of comedians who voted Brexit on one hand, couldn't you?
I don't think there's many.
Yeah, it's really sad.
And the thing is, the Ashcroft polling, like, the day afterwards was unbelievable.
It was crystal clear.
People wanted the decisions to be made about this country being made in this country.
Yeah.
Like the top fascists or something.
I don't know.
That was the top reason.
I mean, immigration was there, but that was the top.
The idea of laws being made in our own country was top reason.
But for me, it was that I can't reconcile being on the left with the EU.
I agree.
I find this baffling.
And I understand why people voted Remain.
They did it mostly for economic reasons.
They're thinking we will be more secure.
That makes sense to me.
That's a good reason to vote Remain, okay?
But I think for me, the EU is this big corporate block.
It loves corporate.
I mean, you know, it's so almost Thatcherite.
And what I love is recently you've got, so we've got all these left-wing people who are lauding and applauding Barnier, Tusk, Junker, you know, these are the most, that's like applauding Cameron and Thatcher.
Yeah, yeah.
I find this cognitive dissonance absolutely hilarious.
It is really funny.
It's amazing.
I saw a lot of them saying, well, basically, the far right want to leave the European Union, so I'm voting to remain.
It's like, yeah, but it's like a codified neoliberalism.
Yeah.
So the free movement of goods services capital people.
That's the neoliberal agenda right there.
Yeah.
That's playing into the corporate overlords right there.
And if you're an anarchist of any kind and you want to black mask it up and go and fight the fascists, then, I mean, you're helping the people that you spend all day tweeting about.
Yeah.
Why are you doing that?
I've been accused of being neoliberal.
It's like, well, I'm not the one who voted in favour of the EU.
I mean, this is...
I just don't get it.
And I think it was weird because before the referendum, not many people really knew or cared about it.
No.
But then it became a big, big, then it became a vote about what sort of person you are.
Wow, that's a good point.
It's really upsetting to me that it happened this way.
Did you vote leave?
Yes, I did vote leave.
So I know quite a lot of people who are now like pro-Brexit who voted Remain.
And they're always so sheepish.
And I'm like, dude, it's, you know.
Well, but for a while there, straight after the vote, you had to be careful because people went crazy.
I think most Remainers now accept that they went a bit mad.
I think so.
You know, because the Facebook feed was absolutely crazy.
And the hostility and the anger.
And they just couldn't get that people had different views on this.
Do you want to know something really interesting?
Come on.
I had a chat last night with a chap who works at FedEx.
And he was saying, our big bosses are preparing for no Brexit.
And we got a statement that we're supposed to tell the customers if anyone asks about what's going to happen with Brexit.
The statement essentially reads, don't worry about what the government or the media say, everything will be fine.
Yeah, of course.
Of course it will be.
They're like, you know, will delivery still happen?
And they're like, no, everything will be fine.
There won't be any difference in your service.
You won't even know.
We know, I'm sure that's the case.
I'm sure.
You'll just wake up the next day and be like, oh, what was that?
There's no sperm shortage.
It's the YCK thing all over again.
It is the YGK.
That's exactly what it is.
Yeah.
It's incredible mania.
And why are people buying into this stuff?
This stuff about food shortages, army on the streets, this utter apocalyptic nonsense.
We're leaving a trading block and we'll be able to trade with other trading blocks.
It's okay.
It's not.
Most countries aren't in the EU.
Most of them do use World Trade Organization powers.
It's funny to me as well that people, but everyone is like, I keep getting this thing about people didn't know what they were voting for.
Oh my God, I'm so sick of that.
I'm really sick of it.
But you know, I mean, you ask your average Remainer to explain how the EU works, what the Commission is, you're not going to get an answer.
They don't know.
But they don't need to know necessarily.
They need to know the basic principle, right?
And actually, you can vote on a principle without knowing the intricacies of how it works.
And the principle that, you know, we should be making our own laws is quite a fair, sensible principle to vote on, isn't it?
And also, if you're a racist.
Exactly.
And the idea that we didn't know we were going to be leaving the single market, this is incredible because literally everyone knew that.
Right?
And you can check this.
Because I've done it myself.
If you go back on YouTube and you know the big, big debate at Wembley Arena, which was the most televised debate and the most seen televised debate at the time.
They open it, that you have the opening statements, and then they show a video showing what the consequences might be of leaving the single market, right?
So they're quite clear to everyone.
Everyone knew.
So do people just have this amnesia?
Are they just pretending, or do they genuinely think...
I mean, it's so weird about David.
David Cameron was explicit when he said, right, this is going to be your vote.
We're going to do exactly what you say, and it'll be in or out.
Completely, you know, we're not going to be halfway or anything.
He was very clear about this.
And they're like, oh, nobody knew what they were voting for.
We knew exactly what we were voting for.
Well, they spent £10 million sending pamphlets to every house explaining what you were voting for.
Yeah.
it's all there and promising that they would they would see you know but it's that thing it's this false remembering and whether it's deliberate things like the advisory referendum If one person had said that before the referendum, I didn't hear it.
No.
No.
Because they thought they were going to win.
Well, that's it.
That's what it is, isn't it?
The only reason they want a second referendum is because they lost.
Would they won?
They wouldn't be saying, yeah, we should have a second one, just to be sure.
Well, if they could just admit that.
And if they could genuinely say if it had been that slim a margin but it had gone the other way, I would have agitated for another referendum.
They don't want to call them a liar though, if I get it.
Well, because no, of course they wouldn't want them.
Exactly.
And to be fair, I'd say most Remainers don't want a second referendum.
I think most people, most Democrats...
Oh, we know that.
You know.
We know that.
And they were publishing headlines about a week ago going, 40% of the country want another referendum.
They say, yeah, well, 60% don't.
Exactly, exactly.
So it's just very loud people.
A lot of the celebrity millionaires are making their voice.
Gary Lineke can shut up.
Gary.
I don't think Gary Lineke can shut up.
This is the problem.
Oh, my God.
It's so entitled, isn't it, to think that just because you've got all this money and clout, that you should be able to have that kind of influence.
It's an overturn a democratic mandate.
Yeah, you've got your vote just like everyone else, Gary.
Yeah.
It's like the racist impossible or something, you know?
Exactly.
And pointing out some racist people who voted that way does not, I mean, this is bizarre logic, and they know that that isn't logical.
You can't smear an entire demographic on the basis of what a few people did.
They know that.
Let me point out that most Labour voters voted Remains, so that's a lot of anti-Semites who are pro-EU.
Well, there we go.
Exactly.
Honestly, the mind boggles.
I genuinely don't.
I don't think people are being honest about this debate.
Or maybe they're being honest, but everyone's convincing themselves or calling themselves, I think.
I think it has become a pathology of remains at this point.
They can't really accept that they aren't the moral majority.
So I think in their minds they think of themselves as the moral leaders of the country.
And when it turns out that the majority of the country are not in alignment with their opinions, suddenly it throws their worldview into doubt.
It's like, well, you know, what do you mean there might be another way of being a good person?
You know, I spend all this time committing and publicly showing everyone how good I am.
You can't tell me I'm a bad.
I suppose it's comforting, isn't it?
If you can just simplify the world to this idea, it's a comforting.
I mean, I wrote an article about this use of the word fascism and Nazism and far right and everything.
And the point I was trying to make was that this is like a fantasy land that they occupy.
they live in a fantasy Britain.
And I compared it to, do you remember like, if you go back to the 90s, the sort of the political correctness brigade of the 1990s, where you'd have things like Richard Littlejohn talking about how asylum seekers are being lavished with benefits and jewels and hotels and all this sort of stuff.
He had his fantasy world.
That wasn't really happening.
There might have been occasional abuses of the system, but it wasn't what he was describing.
It was his mind.
But what the people on the left are doing now, what the Guardian columnists are doing now, is a form of fantasy land that is comparable.
They think that everyone is a fascist and they are secretly fascist.
And more to the point, they think they know what's going on in people's heads.
They think they're just so certain that all of these people must be secretly evil and that motivated the vote.
Not what people were debating or talking about or openly saying.
Are you saying it might be projection?
I mean, possibly, but I wouldn't want to cycle on the line.
I'm joking, yeah, I'm joking.
I wouldn't want to diagnose.
But no, you're right.
It's really troubling to me that these ideas that people are buying into this narrative, you know?
Yeah, I mean, I just can't get over the idea that even if I lost a vote, I'd be like, okay, why do we lose?
And I would sit there and go, right, what is true about my opponent's position?
And this is the thing that the left is most guilty of, but the right obviously does this.
Yeah, absolutely, of course, yeah.
Obviously, it's not unique.
But, like, in each sort of political movement, there is usually some grain of truth.
Something about it that is true.
And then a bunch of bullshit builds up around that because of people with their own interests and their own sort of, you know, projections upon it and things like this.
So the sensible thing is to take the thing that's true and then incorporate it into your political position.
Sure.
So you now have another true point to add to the previous true points that you had, and you keep doing that.
And then surely you're building up a more secure political frame than they have.
And in a way that you're in control of as well, ideological.
So you're not just giving all this ground to communists or Nazis or something like that.
Yes.
But you're taking the problem.
And so when Hillary Clinton says, well I've been saying for years, incidentally, that mass immigration to Europe is causing a massive rise in the right wing, everyone's like, she's a right-wing neoliberal corporate shill now.
It's like, well, she's not a right-wing neoliberal corporate shill.
She's a left-wing neoliberal corporate shill, but she is right about this one point.
And she's done exactly that.
She's looked at the data and the information going, right, mass immigration is fueling this.
If we take away mass immigration, then this goes down.
Completely rational way of looking at the world, and she's getting castigated for it.
Yeah, how dare you say this, Ms. Clayton?
It's a really good point.
You made this book by Herbert Spencer, First Principles, which was sort of gone out of fashion.
But he opens that book with this idea of you should look for the kernel of truth in your opponent's views.
You should think about that there must be something, that it's built on something.
It isn't just necessarily, it's the assumption that that other person is either evil or just wrong-headed and has nothing to.
In other words, that you have nothing to learn from your opponent, which isn't true, right?
And it's also this just encourages better political discourse, doesn't it?
So, why have we lost that?
I don't know, because actually, I think a lot on the left and right, you see, this is why I mistrust ideology anyway, because if you just say, I believe I'm this or I'm that, it simplifies your worldview to the extent that the nuance has gone and it makes you resistant to, it closes your mind, basically.
It makes you resistant to change.
Exactly, and that's not a good thing.
But I think we all share, I think most good people share the idea of a concern about any kind of form of extremism.
So, if we take the far right, I think most people on the left and the right are concerned about when people are radicalised.
And I think that's a fair thing to say.
So, can't we share that?
I think that's a distinctly liberal position, though.
Right.
Because I've been thinking about this.
Like, I speak to a lot of communists online.
It's fun.
Yeah, no, it is, because they're convinced the Labour theory of value has weight to it, which is amusing.
But they're extreme in only because they're sitting there saying, right, we're in the wrong paradigm.
If we were in the communist paradigm, they would be a centrist in that paradigm.
And so, any kind of liberalism or fascism, they'd be like, oh, no, they're the extremes.
And so, I think we should be aware of our own initial assumptions.
And our initial assumptions are we can have dialogues with certain people.
It's a very liberal worldview that we're starting from.
It's that not a given, though, isn't it?
It is in Britain, yeah.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
And it should be as well.
I think it's the best one, which is a nice one.
I support.
I don't know why I felt the need to point now.
But no, it's fair enough.
Sorry.
But no, no, I feel that, because I'm often accused of providing cover for the far right for defending free speech.
That's the big thing, okay?
But of course, my analysis of all of this is that the people who are helping the far right are the leftists are the, well, actually, not leftists, I'd say leftist identitarians.
Yes.
They're the ones above all else who I feel are promoting and pushing and helping the far right to grow.
I still don't think we live in a fascist world where I still think fascism is very much on the margin.
I mean, you couldn't fill a church hall with the number of actual fascists in the country.
But nevertheless, there are too many.
As in, I don't want any.
I don't want anyone to have that ideology in their head.
But I think it's being fed by these identitarians on the left who insist on telling people that they are oppressors, that they are evil, that they are racist and bigoted and all this sort of stuff, and generating all of this resentment and just feeding this movement.
People like Richard Spencer, they say, you know, they want this to go on.
Richard Spencer sounds exactly like Robin DiAngelo, a social justice Catholic professor, who has exactly the same plan for a white identity.
So what's Robin Spencer?
not familiar what's he uh coming from oh wait sorry white fragility Yes.
The author of White Fragility.
I do know.
Yeah, yeah.
Oh, it's terrible.
I haven't read it, but I've read.
Oh, no, I've seen her speeches.
And I've seen her speaking at universities.
And she is exactly the same as Richard Spencer.
premise of that book though i've been told i've read about the premise yeah i find it awful i find it oh yeah But the point is, though, she's got like a framework where essentially, when the left goes, look, we're like.
I don't say Black Lives Matter, but like, you know, if you say we're team black people, you know, because that's kind of what it is, team non-white people.
Yeah.
And then you say, right, white people are the big enemy throughout history.
Everything white people ever did was bad.
You know, they stole everything from brown people, they colonised everywhere.
They wouldn't have anything for more than brown people.
White people are the devil.
I think you're inevitably going to, once you set up that dichotomy, you say, right, okay, we're on this side, and you're not allowed to be on that side, I think you're inevitably going to get people going, well, I'm team white people.
Of course, of course.
And it's just like, why even set that up?
Why did you even decide that this is the way we're going to have the conversation?
Absolutely.
This is why identity politics is never going to work because each extreme feeds on the other extreme, you know?
And I think the xenophobia of the extreme nationalist.
I mean, that is a form of identity politics and it's very prevalent form of identity politics, but it really feeds off and is nurtured by the other form, the intersectional stuff, I suppose you'd call it.
Well, it's like two opposing teams on a pitch.
Yeah.
They both agree to play the game.
Yeah.
They just want control of the ball.
Yeah.
So why, you know, I mean, I tend to criticise.
You know what?
This is something I get all the time.
People say, well, you're always going on about leftist identitarians.
Why aren't you criticizing the far-right, fascist, racist?
I'd be like, well, that's a given to me.
Like, I would consider that, that would be virtue signaling because it's like people on Twitter.
I'm anti-fascist.
Yeah, well, whatever.
I said this in an article I wrote about how, you know, if you put anti-fascist on your bio on Twitter, that's like wearing a badge saying, I am not a paedophile, right?
I would assume you're not a fascist, right?
It's so weird.
I'm glad you got that badge, otherwise I wouldn't know.
Well, exactly, exactly.
But also, if you're saying that, I'm thinking, why are you saying that then?
Why are you wearing that badge?
That makes me really suspicious.
You don't have to declare you're a fascist.
That is the default.
Because not only are people not fascists, but people are actively anti-fascist.
Decent people are likely to be a family.
In their daily lives, just the things they do, you know, when they're sat there talking to their non-white friends or something.
That's kind of an anti-Nazi position right there, isn't it?
Yeah.
Well, I've got an argument up on Twitter about you, actually, because I'm saying that you were a fascist.
Oh, really?
So, you know, learn your history.
Yeah.
Just read a book.
You are so historically illiterate.
Next time someone says that, just reply with, was it Mene Fredo?
What does that mean?
I don't care.
That's what the Italian fascists used to say when people criticised the people.
That's really funny.
I'll do that.
That's good.
They'll get it as well.
Whoever you're talking to, I mean, actually, they might not get it, but if they get it, they'll be really angry.
That's really funny.
Yeah, that's really funny.
But so, I was just before we did the show yesterday, we had an interview with a BBC4 journalist.
Her and the sound guy.
It was me, Lucy Brown, and Candanko.
And they were asking us, so, like, what's going on with the new right?
And we're sat there going, we don't even really consider ourselves to be right-wing.
I mean, I'm not left-wing anymore because I'm kind of grossed out by the left at the moment, but I'm definitely a centrist.
And I'm happy to listen to good points from either side.
I would say Dankila's probably actually a left-wing state.
Yeah, I think he's more leftist.
And Lucy Brown's like a centre-right, so there's a good mix of the spectrum people, but very libertarian.
Yeah.
That's the point.
And she was like, so, you know, what about the accusations that you guys are far right?
And I was just like, well, can you define far-right?
And she just looked at me stumped for literally over 30 seconds.
She's like, no.
So she couldn't actually define it.
And she works for the BBC.
And it was like, well, why did you even ask?
How come we to.
And she was like, well, I'm asking you to define it.
Well, I would say.
That is an interesting point.
What is it that the media think far right means?
I don't know.
For me, far-right has to involve some kind of sense of not just an extreme form of patriotism to the point of nationalism or whatever, but a sense of superiority.
And Spence said, Our race is better than your race, or that sort of thing.
It needs to be that.
Well, yeah, I mean, it's weird, because in America, I would have thought far right would have been like measles or something, you know, like radical capitalist, and that would be a far, very far to the right wing position.
This is the problem, isn't it?
No one's got a shared definition of what this term is.
And since we've had this concept people fascist as well, and now that's become meaningless.
And actually racist has become meaningless, you know, and this is, and so therefore they had to leap to white supremacists the next by the way.
It's just becoming meaningless.
But isn't that terrifying that these words can become meaningless?
Because actually calling someone a racist is one of the worst things you can call someone.
It's a horrible thing to be.
That is not a good quality.
But to say it so flippantly with no evidence and the only evidence you have is that you suspect they might be, that's really not good enough.
It's staggering.
And I always love the people who are accusing me as well.
They say, well, aren't you worried about the alt-right people in your audience?
And I'm just like, you've never met someone from the alt-right.
I have argued with dozens of people.
Yeah, dozens and dozens of these people.
Yeah, but you've given them a platform then, haven't you?
Exactly.
That's the problem.
Exactly.
But I've done more against the alt-right than these people ever will.
And all these people do is normalise them by constantly bringing them up.
I mean, how many alt-right people in the entire country do they think there are?
Because they don't know what it...
I think this is a really important point that people have got to clarify.
It's this meaning of alt-right because it's so...
I've been called alt-right so many times I'm getting sort of sick of it now, and if you use, basically the alt-right has to be, has to be, to do with an ethnostate, a belief in an ethnostate, white nationalism, right?
And it simply is wrong to use the word if you don't have those connotations.
It is actually wrong.
I sent you the link to know about the Associated Press.
The Associated Press, the gold standard of journalism, says explicitly.
It's there.
It takes you two minutes to Google it.
So if you're a journalist and you're claiming, yeah, it's a subjective term, you can, it sort of just means like people on the right who go on the internet and like, what are you talking about?
Do your job.
Like, that's just bad journalism.
I think it's deliberate.
I think they do it.
Well, maybe, maybe.
I genuinely think at this point they just do it as a way of dismissing people so they can just smell it.
I mean, I'm sure that's a possibility.
I think a lot of people are just ignorant about the term.
Who knows?
I actually don't know why people do it, but when, for instance, Suzanne Moore in The Guardian said that writers for Spiked were handmaidens of the alt-right, I'm not handmaiden, and I'm not alt-right.
And it's like you don't know what you're talking about.
And she should know what she's talking about because she's writing for The Guardian.
She's writing for a major newspaper.
I know that sounds hilarious.
That's a novel, novel take on The Guardian.
But you'd think someone at The Guardian should check and say, oh, Suzanne, have you actually checked the definition of that?
Because maybe you should do that.
Can you imagine what the atmosphere in the Guardian offices are?
I can't imagine.
It's a bunch of fantasists.
It's so weird.
And actually, The Guardian would be fine if it just stuck to news.
It's the opinion columns.
Because every now and then you just get one, where you think, oh, someone's mocked that up as a joke.
And then you check and it's like, oh, no, they're actually saying that now.
There are various Twitter accounts that are like Peak Guardian and stuff like that.
Exactly.
And it's non-stop.
I mean, it is a source of great amusement to me looking at the opinion columns because they're so extreme.
And they are, like I was saying, these fancy worlds that people live in, they are convinced.
I think, I have to take it sincerely, they're convinced we live in a world full of races, that the country is full of races and that we're...
More than half?
It's...
Experientially we know that's not true.
We know that we live in a society where to be racist is not just frowned upon.
You become a pariah and rightly so.
And that's great.
And that's one of the great things about living here.
And this is the other thing.
So when I've pointed this out before, people have said, oh, you're saying racism doesn't exist.
When did I ever say that?
And why would I say that?
Because of course it does.
The perception and the assumption that everyone is, is so damaging.
And so it's really nihilistic in that it's got it's a really low view of humanity, isn't it?
It's just assuming the worst American means.
But when someone says that you think racism doesn't exist, ask them for their definition of racism.
Because I'm pretty sure that every time they say that, what they mean is you think institutional racism doesn't exist.
The institutions themselves are designed to be racist.
Sure.
And they think they are.
They do, they believe, they've brought into this kind of weird half understood Foucauldian power structure thing that came from a bunch of arts degrees back in the 90s.
This stuff used to be fashionable when I was studying English at university, right?
And everyone was Foucault, Foucault, Foucault.
No one had read Foucault, but they'd read enough essays about Foucault, so they got the gist.
And so they'd always quote this stuff.
They'd use the same words, discursive, hegemony, you know, all that sort of stuff.
And all of that now is seeping into the, you see it in BuzzFeed or you see it in Guardian Commons.
You see these sort of these buzzwords that they don't really understand.
They don't understand these concepts of power structures.
And also it's such a nebulous idea.
Of course there's power.
Of course power is a thing.
Everything involves it.
But the idea that you can in any way quantify it or what intersectionality does, which is to try and break it down and say, so if you're there on the charts because you've got these grievances or you're there or you're there, that's not how human interaction works.
There are a million different variables that have to be taken into account before you can even begin to consider how you might compensate for any perceived grievance.
How can you do it?
Well, this is the thing that Jordan Peterson said a while ago.
He was like, look, would you rather be a white person who's phenomenally ugly or a black person who is unbelievably attractive?
Which person has more privilege in life?
No one wants that, no one, you know, being ugly is...
It's terrible.
It's a...
I'm blessed with my looks, but you know what I mean?
But so many poor people are.
Because actually, it's true.
It's such an advantage, the way you look and your height, all sorts of things.
But most of all, of course, your biggest advantage is money.
It's contacts.
Privately educated people, 7% of this country, 7%, but they disproportionately dominate everything, the law, media, journalism, everything, okay?
And those are the people with the clout.
And if they really cared about quotas, what they'd do is just institute a quota where we'd say, well, only 7% of our employees are going to be from private schools.
Imagine if the BBC did that.
Imagine if the Guardian did that, right?
Because you'd also solve all your other quota problems about race.
It wouldn't come from poor community.
It would naturally sort all that out, but they don't do that.
It's almost like they know.
I used to work at a private school, a number of private schools actually.
Because I wasn't from that background.
When I first went there, I was quite surprised.
And there was a really interesting moment where they come up and do talks and assemblies about the internships their parents had got for them at these places.
And then there was an auction for charity.
And one of the prizes was an internship at GQ.
So not only were basically working class kids wouldn't get that because they can't afford unpaid internships, but now you've got rich parents buying it for their kids.
This stuff really makes a difference to your life chances.
And it's weird to me that the left, if the left focused on class consciousness as much as issues, obviously homophobia, racism, we all abhor it, and they should stand up to it.
But if they cared as much about class consciousness, then I would be more forgiving of this stuff.
But they do one at the expense of the other, as far as I can see.
That's my perception of it.
But if you're an upper-middle-class kid who's white and has gone to various...
Well, not even white, you could be any race.
If you're rich, it doesn't matter.
Yeah, and if you're rich, if you've got a good accent, if you've got a great education, a good background, an excellent pedigree, as it were.
Yeah.
What have you got to say about cars?
Yeah, but they're all...
I don't get it.
They're all privately educated.
All these books that come out, like the Athiwa Hirsch book, which is just about what a victim she is.
I read that book.
I'm like, you're so privileged.
She even talks about growing up in Wimbledon in the leafy suburbs and holidaying in the Pyrenees.
I'm not kidding.
Oh, wow.
And it's like, I would have loved to have been oppressed like that.
Give me that oppression.
Did you?
Yeah.
Where did we go?
Butland's a boggeringist.
Oh, I went to Butlin's Pafelli.
Oh, wow.
Was it good?
No one from a private school goes to Butlin's Pafelli.
Oh, no, it's awful.
Even I thought it was awful.
But it's so like this.
Well, it's like Munro Bergdorf, isn't it?
Munro Bergdorf, the Labour activist who, she went on this week.
What was it she said?
The white race was the most violent force of nature.
Some of that.
And she had said previously that you can still be homeless and have white privilege.
Homeless and have white privilege, right?
And this coming from a very privileged person who's had so many things on a plate, right?
Is obviously very attractive, has all the photogenic qualities, is a model, you know, she's got so much going for her.
But because she's trans and mixed race, suddenly she's got to be the victim, right?
No, you're not.
I'm not saying that rich people can't have problems, right?
Of course I'm not saying that.
Or that they can't be disadvantaged.
Or that indeed a rich black person couldn't experience racism, right?
I'm not saying any of this.
I'm just saying to then make the leap and say that you are therefore less privileged than any white person.
Even the homeless ones.
Even the homeless ones, you must be insane.
You mustn't.
Or just massively narcissistic.
Like hugely entitled.
And that I see all the time.
I read these articles and I just think it smacks of narcissism.
Everything about it is like me, me, me.
But why, I don't understand why you want to be the victim.
Oh, rich people, tell me about your problems.
I really care.
I'm sorry, Guardian Communist, who went to Brighton College.
I don't care about what a tough upbringing you had, right?
Because have some fucking perspective.
How useless must white privilege be if it can't even stop you from being homeless?
I know.
Yeah, it's terrible.
Why?
You know, like, any other kind of privilege is surely more useful.
Yeah, absolutely, absolutely.
It winds me up.
We've got to stop thinking in these terms, like just dividing people up in this way.
I don't know how we affect that change, because I feel like we've sort of gone too far.
I don't know how we can roll that back a bit, you know?
Well, I mean, I don't know.
surely it's just got to be a public rejection of the concept like like with being racist you know people like you know it it was just the cognizant and sort of mindful rejection of being a racist We're going to have to essentially treat insectionality like racism.
Which it is.
Well, I agree.
It's a form of terrible prejudice.
It involves assumptions.
So it is by definition prejudice.
You're prejudging.
It is a terrible ideology, and it's no accident that it is bolstered predominantly by prominent middle class figures.
It's so bourgeois.
Like you said, they can't talk about class, can they?
No.
They've got the winning hand when it comes to class.
They can't sit there and say they're oppressed.
So maybe that's it.
Maybe that's why the class consciousness is gone because they don't feel they, you know.
Well, they've lost the argument.
They've lost the argument.
And even the middle class need to be victims.
It's so weird to me.
You know, I still identify as left-wing because I still believe in the idea of past-punchment.
Seasonaries of reproduction.
No, I'm not a Marxist, but I believe in the...
You know, I...
I know, I know.
And I do agree to some degree with...
But it's fair, it's fair.
That's the thing.
There is definitely social classes based on wealth, especially in this country.
And like you were saying, 7% dominate the entire country.
And the other classes, well, I suppose the middle class probably are moving towards that because of ideological reasons.
But the people being left behind who voted for Brexit and who are against mass immigration, they deserve to have representation.
Of course, of course.
And I think the left has lost this.
It's so weird to me that...
They used to write something.
Yeah.
Yeah.
But how have we got to this position where Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party is more middle class than Tony Blair's?
Why?
What's the question?
I don't understand it.
I don't understand it.
And I genuinely don't know the answers, but I do think the way that this is going to pan out, or at least the way that we can solve it, is if the left reclaim the class issue.
And, you know, I do think, I do see socialism as a response to capitalism, as the idea that we should, you know, I believe in ambition and I believe in working, and you should be able to get money and do well, all right?
But the egregious examples where people have billions and billions and billions, I do believe in a degree of wealth redistribution through taxation, right?
So, that makes me a socialist.
I know you don't agree with me on this, but I think that makes...
No, I'm not even...
It's not...
I'm not against the idea of progressive tax in principle.
I think that it can certainly have advantages and disadvantages.
The question I have is what are you doing with that money?
Are you just handing it out to poor, dependent communities?
I understand what you're saying.
I think it's a probably bad idea.
I understand what you're saying.
But there are things that can be done to help building schools or something like that.
Exactly, I think there's a balance.
I do believe in the welfare state.
I believe in free health care.
I like these things.
I think these things are really valuable and do make a better society.
Does this make me right-wing, though?
I'm curious, because people do keep telling me how right-wing I am, but I don't think these are right-wing values.
I think they're very left-wing values.
Well, I always thought so, but apparently I'm on the right.
Far right.
Far right, people tell me I'm on the far right for this.
David Cameron's here, you're all the way.
All the way over there.
Because I don't like identity politics and because I support free speech.
Isn't that weird?
That's weird.
Why are you pro-hate speech as well?
Why am I pro-hate speech?
Exactly.
This is so interesting.
i i think we need to scrap the concept of hate speech um and i know that probably will get me into trouble for saying that but but i find i know i i find it really okay bottom line as a principle and i have thought a lot about this i don't believe the state and i really worry when the state are controlling what people say and And that's what a fascist would say.
I remember seeing some, I think it was in Leeds, seeing some mad preacher shouting about gays being evil and how they should be, they're going to burn in hell and all this sort of stuff.
And I thought it was quite funny, right?
And I could understand why that would be upsetting to some people, right?
But I also think she should be able to say it.
And, you know, if I cared enough and had a, you know, I would stand there and argue with her.
Although you couldn't argue with this one.
You should argue mad, right?
Or you walk away laughing or you do something or you ridicule.
There are ways.
The way to do it is through speech.
Bad speech, you attack with more speech.
That's the bottom line.
And I think as soon...
What?
It's the other thing.
Why are people on the left calling for more state restrictions on speech?
This is not a left-wing value.
It just really isn't.
Well, I mean, it's...
This is...
Honestly, I think this plays into the argument of what is a left-wing value?
Right.
Right, exactly.
I would love that clarified now.
Because at the moment, the left seems to be entirely statist.
They seem very pro-state.
It's because I think they think they're going to control it.
They think they're going to be the ones in charge.
And then Donald Trump gets elected.
And now he can undo everything Obama ever did, just like that, you know.
And they sit there and complain.
It's like, yeah, but you made this bed and you just thought you were going to lie in it forever.
It is so short-sighted, though.
If you really want to get a bigger state, you want more state control, how are you guaranteed that the people you like are going to be in power forever?
I mean, it's so myopic.
I don't get it.
Especially when you're opening the borders and letting millions of people come in, and even Hillary Clinton can see that's driving the rise of the right wing.
You're creating the people who are going to replace you, like right-wingers in government.
Because this immigration issue, because I don't see it as an immigration issue, I'm for immigration.
I think it's about multiculturalism and the way multiculturalism has panned out.
And I don't like the idea of ghettoising people and making assumptions about people based on race.
What you're advocating for is like is how integration actually works.
If you bring in any other population, let's say Polish people, so we're not talking about a different race, and then you say, right, the people that they've moved next to aren't allowed to criticise them, otherwise that's hate speech.
This is it.
Then you've created a guarded camp of culture that can't interface with the rest of the people.
Absolutely.
Because there might be some sort of offence.
And that's normally how things become normalised.
So you've created this barrier.
I totally agree.
And now it's effectively a colony.
Yeah.
It's not good for anyone to be protected from criticism, even unfair criticism.
That's the other thing.
And being hurt is sort of part of being alive, isn't it?
And having your feelings hurt in it.
It's just your feelings.
It's just your feelings.
But also, I get offended all the time.
Do I want those people to go to prison?
Well, probably.
But that's me being a spiteful child.
It depends on whether they've heard Remain or not.
Well, there we go.
I agree it's it's but why is it do you know I genuinely think I think it ties into what we were talking about earlier, about the idea of power structures, this faith-based position that they have.
It is a faith-based position because they believe in these power structures that control everything.
They can't put their finger on where they are or how they work.
They just know it happens.
So the BBC has to, for instance, have internships for non-whites only, right?
And they have to do that because there's an institutionalised racism at the BBC.
Really?
So you're saying that the people...
I believe it.
But that's an incredible thing for the BBC to say, because they are effectively admitting that they hire racists.
And they are racist.
And that they are racist.
Why aren't racist?
But why would you say that about yourself?
And especially because it's not true.
Why would you do that?
Well, it wasn't true until they started saying white people can't have this job.
Now it is racist.
They're like, we're a bunch of racists.
So, yeah, I know.
So that's great.
And these kind of initiatives often end up being filled up with lots of very middle-class people who happen to be ethnic minorities, right?
Well, great.
And you just happen to live in London.
Yes.
Which isn't great for ethnic minorities who are from working classes.
But there we go.
Exactly.
Exactly.
But, again, they don't care about class.
But the point I was trying to make, I suppose, is this faith-based position of intersectionality, and this idea, I think it's...
Well, firstly, it's something that we've got to resist, because I think it permeates absolutely everything.
I can't remember where I was going with that.
Well, no, no.
It is a faith-based position.
It does permeate everything.
And the only option we have is to just say, look, I've rejected your dichotomies.
But can we?
This is what I'm struggling with, is that I feel like it's gone too far.
I write about it all the time, and people I know talk about it all the time.
And I get very frustrated because whenever I think people might start thinking, no, actually, this is going too far, they just double down on it.
And they think they're doing good.
That's the other thing.
It's a kind of well-intentioned authoritarianism.
That's what it is.
That's what I was trying to say.
I found that a lot of the left now have started to just deny the existence of radical leftism in this way.
They just say, the left doesn't have any power, the left doesn't do anything.
I'm just like, then how are people going to jail of hate speech?
So they can't do.
I think the thing that often I hear is things like, well, you know, there's a Republican president, there's a Conservative Prime Minister, right?
You've got the DUP in power in Northern Ireland, right, etc.
Fair points.
Absolutely fair points.
So what you've got, though, is right-leaning governments in control.
But culturally, leftist identitarianism is what has sway, even in the Conservative Party.
So actually, that is the power.
I mean, I get this as a comic.
Like, we talk about punching up and punching animals.
Let me just give an example because, a very quick example, when you say even in the Conservative Party there are going to be people who are snorting like, oh don't be silly.
Sajid Javid recently came out and suggested that misogyny and disabilism became hate crime.
Right.
Why aren't the Conservatives repealing all hate crime laws?
Exactly, because which is why I think it's not really about left and right anymore, it's about whether you are an authoritarian or a libertarian.
That is really now the big.
And I think with this hate crime stuff, sorry, I just remember what I wanted to say.
I think with the hate speech thing, I've only had like an hour's sleep, right?
Shouldn't make excuses.
With this hate speech thing, it's a belief that there are all these power structures out there and they all exist.
But it's a belief that if you hear certain types of language, or the general populace, shall we say, hear certain types of language or certain words, that it normalizes concepts, and then they just behave in a certain way like drones, like robots, you know?
And it's this thing, it's this media effects theory, which right, which has been discredited.
There's been six decades of research.
We know that there is no direct causal link between mass media and behavioural traits in the public.
Obviously, there's always mad people who get triggered by, you know, I saw an advert there where I watched this film and whatever.
That's not what we're talking about.
Because you can get triggered as easily by something a relative says or something or whatever.
We're talking about behavioural traits and trends.
So we know this isn't true because the study's been done, the data's out.
So we know that's not true.
But clearly, when people talk about hate speech, they do believe it's true.
They just believe it.
believe that if we allow people to say certain words, they become racist.
Or they believe that...
Oh no, they think it needs to violence.
And that it leads to violence.
Exactly.
And that there is this slippery slope idea.
Yes.
So all of this, if we look at the data, we know isn't true.
So we know it's not true.
So why are we...
Why do...
Any kind of hate speech legislation is based on a fallacy.
Yeah.
And...
I think the correct term is falsehood.
Right.
Okay, you know what I mean?
Sorry, I know I'm such a fan.
Sorry.
But you know what I mean?
Like, it doesn't.
It doesn't work.
It's not true.
It's just not true.
Right, so why can't we reach that point where we say, you know, look, it's horrible when you hear horrible things and it's awful, but the price you pay for a free society is that some people are going to say awful things.
It's a lack of moral fortitude.
That's all it is.
Because people are afraid.
And I see this all the time.
Where they're just afraid to stand up and say, no, look, what you're saying is not only just factually incorrect, it's morally reprehensible.
And this is what drives me crazy about the Conservative Party.
Like, Theresa May just keeps giving in to the left and Jeremy Corbyn, the identitarians.
So, oh, yeah, we're going to do this better than Jeremy Corbyn would.
No, you say no.
What he's asking for is wrong in this regard.
Yeah, he shouldn't have asked in the first place.
And all of his grandstanding on whatever issue it is, you need to repudiate that on your own moral terms, or you don't have your own moral compass.
Yeah.
And this is the problem with Conservatives.
Sadiq Javid, like, should we have more hate speech laws?
No.
Yeah.
Well, you've got Sadiq Khan who will ban posters.
You know, the Protein World poster is a good example, which had the woman in the bikini.
So he's...
He just believed.
No.
It's not a religious thing.
He just believes.
I know you're joking.
He just believes that.
I hope so.
He believes.
It's not motivated by that.
He believes that that image damages women because women see that body image and they then go and starve themselves and cut themselves.
And he has such a low opinion of women that he thinks that they are that malleable.
But if they were wearing burkers, that wouldn't be a problem.
Well, maybe not.
I don't know, I suppose, because you wouldn't have to.
It's a bikini, right?
It's about the.
Honestly.
I know you are.
Although, you know, they are slimming, you know.
Well, you know, you say that, right?
Actually, I read a book about Saudi Arabia actually, the police of vice for virtue, and what they would, what they would do, because obviously bad people joined the police advice.
This was a report, like an interview with a guy who'd left it because he felt like it was making a terrible person.
And what they would do is if a woman was wearing a tightly fitting buyer, I think it was, you know, whichever.
If it was a tightly fitting one, they would harass her and like, you know, call her a slut and stuff.
I'm thinking, Jesus Christ, you know, there's no end to that.
No, you can't win.
Yeah.
Your bin bag is too tightly fitting.
Oh, God.
I'm not getting into this bin bag thing, honestly.
It was like Boris Johnson all over again.
What's funny about that was that he was actually defending the Liberal position that he should be able to.
I know.
That you should be able to wear what you want to wear.
And he was acting in a liberal way that he thought that I'm going to criticise him.
Yeah.
I think the same.
I think you should be able to wear whatever you want ultimately.
I know people, I know you've got reservations about the covering of the face.
And I do too.
I do.
But I think ultimately you should have that choice to wear what you want.
But I also think that you need to have a discussion about what the symbolism of that garment means.
And the truth is, it is loaded with misogynistic baggage.
But is it even a choice?
I mean, a lot of the time, I think a lot of these women are in certain communities.
I think there's essentially a kind of cultural pressure.
Yeah.
And experts.
Not just from men, from men and women.
Religious cultural pressure.
To wear it.
And the BBC did their little thing where they were interviewing women who, you know, little bugs, women, whose terms, don't you?
I don't care.
But they do look like postboxes.
But they were asking them why do you wear it?
And they were like, oh, it's not religious, it's cultural.
It's for glorifying God.
And I'm like, it seemed like a contradiction.
Well, look, everyone's got their own individual reasons why they might.
And I actually, I also understand why in the current climate you might feel that, you know, you want to be able to show a symbol of your religion.
You know, I get it, I get it.
But I, you know, and I'm nervous about any kind of state legislation about what you wear.
Yeah, yeah.
You know, ultimately I am.
But, you know, anyway, it's not my area of expertise.
It's also an area I'm bound to say something that's going to upset someone, so I just avoid it.
Well, yeah, but that's moral cowardice.
It's only moral cowardice, it's me acknowledging that I'm not really qualified to talk about it.
That's definitely cowardice.
But it's interesting when it comes to the, because that's one issue, for instance, with comedy, where you can't, like, a joke about Islam, for instance, would get you, well, you can see in audiences.
Yeah, what happened to fat wows?
I know they weren't out of fashion, totally out of fashion.
But, yeah, it's Rushdie, that was it.
And then, you know, there's some authors who can do it.
And even now, put a fat wow on him.
I hate his books.
He's terrible.
Well, I didn't feel it with that bad.
Oh, he can't write.
Really?
I think it's a legitimate form of literary criticism.
think it's fine.
Admittedly I only...
I only read the last book because I read when I was like 15 so I can't remember now.
To be fair, I've only read one.
So, if you're making a joke about a sensitive topic, as a lot of comics do, you know, Islam is...
Do they?
Well, maybe not so anymore.
But the idea that, say for instance, you shouldn't joke about Islam, right, is based on this awful patronising premise.
I mean, really, how low is your opinion of Muslims that you think they can't take a joke and that, you know, I mean, I feel like it's based on the.
I feel like it's that, well, it's the bigotry of low expectations, isn't it?
Well, it could also be the reverse.
I mean, it could also be the glorification of Islam.
If something is so sacred that you're not allowed to joke about it.
But nothing should be so sacred that you're not allowed to join.
Well, no, of course, it's a given.
Again, it's a given.
But I think, I think they're.
I mean.
But I think it's also about offence culture.
I think it's also a bit.
You know, it is also, I've seen it more and more in comedy clubs.
It's like, so you make a joke about gay people, say, and you'll get a vocal response.
Now, a heckle is one thing, right?
Yeah.
And I think there's a distinction to be made between someone heckling because they're trying to fuck up the gig or they're trying to have fun or whatever with someone who's actually like a little Mary Whitehouse who's trying to police the event and make sure that you don't overstep a moral boundary.
And I think that's a very that I don't even think is a heckle.
I think there's something that's something else that's gonna go it's trying to undermine the comics position as the sort of leader of the event.
Yeah, yeah, and I'm not saying because it sounds really hypocritical if I say, well, you shouldn't be able to do that.
But what I'm saying is we should be able to criticise it for what it is, which is a kind of philistinism, if you like.
It's someone who doesn't really get what the event is about or what a or what stand-up comedy is about.
I guess good faith and bad faith.
Right, exactly.
Yeah, they don't trust the comic.
They don't trust that the comics made the decision to say that and maybe to provoke and they don't, yeah, and they don't think, well, why would they want to provoke them that way?
And all of that, which is what makes comedy so interesting.
Particularly sometimes when I hear someone talk and I think, oh God, do they really mean that?
I love that feeling.
No, no, I'm talking about, well, I know I'm talking about.
I know people like Jerry Sadowitz or people like Scott Kapuro, where it's like it's so near the knuckle and you just think, but you know they're playing with something there and maybe it's interesting if they sometimes do think these awful things.
And you know, this idea that an artist has to be pristine and morally pure.
What good would that be?
That would be hopeless.
Chris, I mean, I can't even imagine what kind of art a sort of like well-rounded, healthy-minded person would produce.
Exactly.
It would just be an oil painting of like a town or something.
Oh, that was going to be a painting of a ship or something.
Yeah, I know what you mean.
I know you mean.
It's just going to be some boring-ass oil painting.
You know, the really interesting stuff comes from damaged human beings.
Yeah, there's a no, you're right.
There's a great article by Christopher Hitchens about Roald Dahl, and he's addressing the anti-Semitism accusations.
And he said, yeah, he probably was an anti-Semitic, and I'm sort of glad in a way because he's so twisted.
And that's how he could come up with it, because he's a bit of a bitter, nasty old fucker, right?
And that's how you can come up with this stuff.
So it's not to say his attitudes are good or that he was a nice person even.
Because he did say some dodgy stuff about Jewish people.
But the books are brilliant.
So why was Hitler's art so milquetoasted?
I've actually seen his art, really.
Is it rubbish?
It's not rubbish.
It's like, I mean, I'm not an art critic, I think.
But I mean, it looks like, you know, just a Vienna Street or something.
Yeah, but it's just really normal.
Yeah, but being a cunt isn't a guarantee that you're a good artist.
That's not how it works.
Yeah, but it's not even interesting art.
Oh, is it like there's nothing to it?
No, so maybe the whole course is a hoax.
i feel like you're trying to make me say something i would make a joke that i'll get in trouble for you can get away with it because you're i'm gonna get in trouble Everyone already thinks you're a fascist.
I am joking, obviously.
The whole course wasn't a hoax because Hitler was a shit artist.
What a thing to say.
I'm buried at that.
No, I think it's funny.
The thing is, people go, oh, that's a dog whistle, though.
That's a dog whistle.
Yeah, no, right.
Look, can I, we've got time to talk about this?
Because I think this is the whole thing with Dankla, for instance, right?
There's this misunderstanding about joking about provocative things, right?
That whole shit post-posting world, right?
So when I went up to Dankler's place in Scotland and he showed me the Discord server that he goes on, right?
I can believe some of the stuff they were putting there.
It's gross, isn't it?
It's really gross, right?
Like my eyes were burning.
I don't go in there.
Yeah, and I can't deal with that sort of stuff.
But I can see what they're doing.
And I've spoken to, like, I'm not of that world, right?
I'm a normie.
But I've dipped my toe in to see what it is, and I get what they're doing.
It's teenage provocation because they're kids, basically.
They're trying to one-up each other and they're trying to piss each other off and stuff.
And so they will say stuff that is so awful.
And I guess a legitimate problem, which actually David Bedeal pointed out, which was true, he wrote a really good balanced article about the whole case, was that, well, yeah, if you are of a fascistic mindset, maybe you would go in there and you would enjoy those jokes and you would participate.
But just because there is that overlap, just because some bad people enjoy that sort of humour, that doesn't mean all of the humour and anyone who enjoys it is a bad person.
It seems obvious, I suppose, when you say it like that.
Well, yeah, it sounds remedial.
Yeah, yeah, exactly.
But you still have to.
But this is another thing.
Again, we've tried to explain to the BBC journalists yesterday.
So, look, I can't believe I have to say this, but humour comes from surprise.
Like when I was connecting, like, Holocaust and Arta hit the Zarf, right?
Yeah, yeah.
It's a funny thing.
Yeah.
Because you didn't expect it and it tickles your brain in a certain way.
Yeah.
And so, and this is the, this is the, and then when you add the sort of thrill of being pushing the boundaries.
Yeah, absolutely.
It makes it alluring and fun.
You know, it's edgy, it's exciting.
It's something that is, you know, it gets the juices in the brain going.
It's funny.
It's not a literal belief.
And anyone who thinks it's a literal belief is, I think, being disingenuous.
Again, isn't it weird that it has to be spelt out?
Yeah, well.
The idea that a comedian is literally saying what they think.
What are you talking about?
They're making jokes.
And also, like you say, it's that frisson of being shocked by something and being put, you know, it is enjoyable.
And it's also kind of a reminder of why we don't talk about those things.
And that's really, that's, you know, these jokes are premised on the fact that they are taboo and that they are shocking people.
Like, when I do stand-up, I'm not an edgy comic.
That's just not the way I write.
You're self-deprecating.
Self-deprecating, fine.
But I don't, I don't, but I enjoy watching the most extreme form of comedy.
That's something I really enjoy watching.
This is why I used to be a huge fan of Franky Boyle.
I mean, some of his jokes...
Oh my god!
You can't believe how far they were.
He was like 10, 15 years.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
He was so out there.
He would say stuff, and he's walking around with this smoke grin in his face, and he's about to say the worst thing.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
And he knows that he's about to say something that any other situation would be massively offensive.
But if he's on a stage in the Apollo and everyone just laughs, suddenly it's okay for him to say.
It's also because his stagecraft is so good and it's a professionalism of it.
And there have been times when I've heard jokes by him, people like him, where I've thought, oh, that shit I don't like, I don't, you know.
But actually I quite enjoy even that.
I quite enjoy the feeling of having my sensibilities broken a bit.
And I think there's something really, there's something in that.
And I just think there's a perception now in comedy that that's not what comedy is for, that actually comedy is just there to reinforce your values and reinforce your ideas.
Actually, how is that different?
But how is that different from like a say a Bernard Manning gig or Roy Chubby Brown gig where people go along because they just want to laugh at black people, right?
And have those views just reinforced.
How is that different from someone going off to a Lefty comic and just having Guardian columns read out with punchlines?
What...
I don't...
It is artistically, they're on a plane.
They're the same...
There's nothing interesting about that.
It's boring.
But of course, the lefty ones will win the awards, won't they?
Yeah, I mean, that's because we're controlled by the far right, you see.
Oh, I see.
Okay, yeah.
And you're like the head of that.
I am.
I'm apparently very, very important in the far-right movement.
And actually, me doing a video with you, that makes us.
Because it's contaminating.
I'll become.
I found that they know my name means your far-right too.
Yeah.
Well, the ship sailed, isn't it?
Yeah, maybe we should just go off that hit the right because of it.
Oh, yeah, the one you told me about.
Sounds good.
Sounds good.
I'll leave a link to Andrew Doyle's Twitter in the description of this.
Andrew, thanks, man.
Yeah, thanks a lot.
Thank you.
You're gonna edit that out, aren't you?
▲
Export Selection