Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin - The Problem is Everything

All Episodes

Nov. 21, 2025 - Sargon of Akkad - Carl Benjamin

01:31:23

The Problem is Everything

My talk from the New Culture Forum event in Bath.

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Well, thank you for joining us folks.
	It seems that there's really only one subject to talk about, which is all of it.
	The entire country is falling apart and everyone can tell that the entire country is falling apart.
	And I think that a lot of people have patiently borne the numerous indignities and disappointments of the past 10 years or so, where it was promised that things would be getting better and things have not gotten better.
	And I think that this is on every front.
	There's just nothing that is improving and everyone can see it.
	And it's got to the point now where it's not even polite to deny it.
	And so every Liberal Democrat voter looks like a madman, someone just a stark raving lunatic.
	But I was like, no, everything's fine.
	We can carry on doing more of the same that we have for the past 25 years.
	And you just look at them, not you personally, but you look at them and think, okay, this guy's out to lunch.
	Like, what is this problem?
	And it's everywhere.
	And it begins, honestly, I mean, really, the problem is a completely demented view of what the country is for.
	So you'll be aware, no doubt, that we've had absolutely, well, 0.01% or 0.1% economic growth in the past year or so.
	And yet we've added 0.2% to the population.
	So that's one myth that's been shattered.
	And this continues on and on and on for every myth until it's become very apparent that we are basically surrounding the political establishment at this point.
	I don't know whether you watched the parliamentary debate that happened yesterday with Shabana Mahmood.
	She was just parroting right-wing talking points.
	These were just hard right, lotus eaters talking points coming out of the mouth of Shobana Mahmoud.
	And she was, honestly, I was actually quite impressed because every time someone stood up, she was just like, not listening to you, not listening to you, not listening to you, this is a problem.
	And the best bit about it was when she said, this isn't just right-wing talking points.
	No, it's not.
	It's true.
	It's real.
	And this is why we're saying it.
	It's not because, like, I didn't start out being right-wing.
	And I'm sure most of you people didn't start out being radical right-wingers like you obviously are now.
	You started off as just very normal people living in your world and looking at what you could see and saying, well, hang on a second.
	Why is this getting worse?
	Why are my bills getting worse?
	Why is the rent so high?
	Why is it so difficult to buy a house?
	Why are there so many potholes?
	Why are my taxes so high?
	Why am I not seeing any of the promised benefits that I was supposed to see?
	Why are there so many strange people here?
	What is going on?
	And why isn't the political class actually responsive to our concerns?
	And this has been a rolling boulder, an avalanche that has grown and grown and grown to the point now where the parliament itself looks besieged.
	That was the thing that really struck me from watching this the other day, is that the parliament itself looked like it was in a pressure cooker.
	It looked like they all knew that they were all culpable in bringing this about because ultimately they are.
	They are all culpable for what they've done to our country and what they've done to us.
	And so now they're trapped in their own paradigm saying, okay, well, look, I mean, the budget that's coming up is going to be brutal, but there's nowhere for them to go because they truly are believers in a certain regime of human rights.
	And that regime is infinite and eternal.
	They believe in human rights everywhere for everyone to be enforced by the state.
	And so this is why we've had such unbelievable bills to pay, because we are paying for the human rights of people who shouldn't even be in this country.
	And it's not on their radar.
	They can't bring themselves to make the necessary cuts.
	It's like the motability scandal is just one of the most ridiculous and just it's just a slap in the face, a continual slap in the face.
	It's like, look, you know, I'm all for doing those things that are actually necessary to help disabled people.
	Why are they getting BMWs?
	I don't have a BMW.
	Do you have a BMW?
	No.
	Why the hell?
	There should be essentially some sort of almost Soviet-esque car that is not very exciting, not very flashy, but is cheap to produce and could be gotten in large numbers.
	And you got that from the state for free.
	Right, okay, great.
	You don't have any room to bloody complain, right?
	Especially if the reason you got it was because of, I don't know, ADHD or something.
	Okay.
	But it's this kind of manifest injustices and unfairnesses that are being imposed on people.
	And I'm guessing that here you all work hard and you all pay way too much tax.
	Put your hand up, you pay too much tax.
	Right, that's literally everyone in the room apart from the retired people, which I understand.
	Don't get me wrong.
	We all feel the same way.
	And the new budget is going to be brutal and it's not going to get any better.
	And they know that you know it's not going to get any better because really what has to happen is a reduction in state spending.
	There's just no getting around this at all.
	But the ideology that they follow circumscribes this obvious truth.
	They can't bring themselves to admit that actually there are a bunch of people in this country who are getting things from the state that they shouldn't be getting.
	Now, I mean, we can talk about the amount of benefits, payments people are claiming and how certain communities have a belief that actually claiming benefits is shameful.
	And then you have other communities that have been brought here from overseas who believe that you're an idiot if you don't milk the state for everything it's worth.
	And these two communities have been expected to get along with the same benefits system.
	That obviously creates exploitation of the one community against the other.
	And that's not fair.
	And that's not including the illegal immigrants who just break into our country and cost us around £4 billion a year.
	And we don't know the extent of what it's going to actually be costing us for the entire regime, but it is billions, hundreds of billions.
	And everyone knows, and it's the reason why everything's getting worse.
	It's the reason why, like, everyone in the mainstream is currently dunking on the reform councils.
	Like, yeah, we're going to get spending down.
	Well, I believe they wanted to.
	But the problem is, there is a series of laws that were brought in from about 1997 onwards that mandate that they have to provide certain services to certain communities.
	And so this is why last year we got our council tax bill in Swindon explained to us.
	Honestly, I hit the roof.
	I hate the goddamn roof.
	80% of our council tax bill is redistributive.
	80%.
	And then when you look at your energy bills, 25% of that is a green levy for bloody what's his faces, millibans, boondoggles on solar panels in the country that gets the least amount of sunshine in the world, of anywhere in the, if anywhere in the world.
	And so it's just like, right, okay, so you've imported a series of ideological precepts from California where they get loads of sun and they've got lots of money and you're trying to apply them here because this is the ideology, the universal liberalism of it.
	And it's just ruining us.
	And it's not fair.
	It's not fair that we pay these things and we shouldn't be.
	And then, I mean, this is not even talking about questions of demographic issues or the problem that we're losing a quarter of a million young, sensible, upwardly mobile people a year to foreign countries.
	We are importing people from the third world who are effectively state dependents, and we are losing our intelligent, tax-paying, upwardly mobile young people to places like Australia or America or Dubai or wherever.
	And it's like, wait, we have to admit, when at some point that this has been a failure, the experiment of the last 25 years, if it's brought us to this point, this has been a failure.
	This can't possibly have been the goal.
	This has to have been a mistake on someone's part.
	What do you say the effect of the kind of lack of the change in the coherence of our society and the low trust environment that's come about has had an impact on all of the things you've just described?
	Because I feel like the import of all these ideologies and different communities has caused the breakdown in the coherence that means that suddenly the state has to come in and it's almost created a market for the state.
	It is a demand, explicit demand from the state.
	And I mean, one of the things I was wondering is, how did they find us?
	There's no way that when someone's in a village in Bangladesh or Uganda or wherever, they were like, one day I'm going to open up a shop in Fishguard.
	There's no way.
	There is no way they knew that this place existed.
	And so how did they get there?
	Like my wife's family is from Fishguard.
	So her nan and granddad are like, why is there some stranger from all the way across the other side?
	How do they know that we're here?
	I was walking through Swindon the other day and I walked past three separate groups of French-speaking North Africans.
	And I'm like, how didn't you arrive in the French version of Swindon?
	What are you doing here?
	If you were natural English speakers, I might understand, but you're not.
	So anyway, the problem with high trust societies is that they're not very common, actually.
	We, and living in the southwest of England, are very used to being able to essentially read the minds of the people around us.
	That's what fundamentally a high trust society is.
	You know that when you get back from work and you leave your bike just leaning against your house, you know none of your neighbors are going to take it because you never take their bikes.
	No one ever takes anyone's bikes.
	But that's actually an incredibly unusual experience.
	Almost anywhere outside of the Anglosphere, you don't do that.
	And this is, you know, if you were talking about like a second world country like Mexico or Brazil, lots of property crime, you've got to be careful about this.
	But that's not even talking about countries that are far less socially developed and assume a level of hostility between communities that we do not understand.
	Like we've got Ferraris at Load Seaters from Lebanon, and he's just like, you guys are crazy.
	You do not understand the Somali mindset.
	There are loads of Somali, you do not understand these people.
	You don't understand the tribal metaphysics that they carry in their head.
	Because your view of the world, your ontological view of the world, is that people are fundamentally good.
	There are loads of societies around the world that just assume the complete opposite and are basically validated in that assumption because that means that everyone around them is essentially a kind of bad person.
	And this is why you have...
	It creates a self-fulfilling...
	It creates a self-fulfilling prophecy.
	But it also means that you have tribes that are not necessarily at war with you on another but do not trust each other as the starting assumption of their social lives.
	So, oh, don't go over there.
	That's where that tribe lives.
	We're this tribe.
	They're not going to come over here.
	It's going to be fine.
	And it's like, I've never lived like that.
	I'm sure none of you have ever lived like that.
	But the government is importing literally a million of these people a year to come and live in this country.
	And what do these people think of us?
	Like when the government imports a bunch of illegals, they catch them, bring them over, put them in a hotel in Epping within view of the school.
	What do they think about our intentions?
	They don't know anything about liberalism or human rights.
	They don't know anything about the Western view of politics.
	What they know is deep-seated tribalism.
	And the idea that a different tribe to them would allow them anywhere near their children is just alien.
	They couldn't fathom why we would do that.
	And so it's not a surprise when you get them hanging around the schools because essentially what we are telegraphing to them is, we want you to do this.
	That's what we're saying to them.
	Whenever we don't punish a rapist, what we are telegraphing to them is we want you to do that.
	Because they come from societies that are far more broken up and hedged off from one another.
	They don't live in free and open societies like we do.
	And so they have different expectations of life from us.
	And you don't understand them.
	That's where the kind of high trust breaks apart.
	If you are surrounded by a bunch of people that you don't have anything in common with, you don't understand, and they don't understand you, you know they're not like you in the way that they act.
	Even if they're not doing anything wrong, it's just the strange things that they do that you personally wouldn't do, the people you know wouldn't do.
	And so you're just sitting around going, okay, why are they just milling around in the middle of the street in the middle of the day doing nothing?
	Well, you don't know.
	So what's their next action?
	You have no idea.
	They're not predictable to you.
	And that's why it's nice to be around people that you understand, because it makes the world predictable.
	Sorry, Garnet.
	I was going to say, I think the thing is that our political class doesn't know what to do with them either.
	No.
	Which is the problem.
	Well, they've got to uphold their human rights.
	Well, yeah, there is that.
	But that's exactly the problem.
	What's worse is that I know I'm paying for them to be here as well.
	You can see Shibala Mahmood has just unleashed essentially a declaration of war against the Boris wave.
	It's like, no, you're going to have to wait 20 years.
	You're going to have to do this.
	You're going to have to do that.
	It's like, look, you know you should just deport them.
	Why take all of these executive actions against this group of people that Boris Johnson let in against our will?
	If you you, by taking all of these actions, you've recognized the illegitimacy of them being here, so just say to them, sorry, your visa has been revoked, you're gonna have to go home and millions of them will go home because we're paying for them to be here.
	And this this is honestly one of the primary problems is.
	It's kind of crazy that we have such free access to goods and services from the government, like no other countries, like other countries don't let them vote, they don't let them own property, they don't let them have access to any services and they don't have a problem with mass immigration.
	Because Macron was right when he said, look, you are acting like a magnet to these people because you're so liberal, you're so inclusive that they know you are going To give them free money on the continent, they used to do the same thing, but they wound that in.
	They realized, oh no, we can't do this.
	Not only is it bankrupting us, but keeps drawing more.
	And that's why Macron came over and said, you've got to stop it.
	I mean, how are we being advised by Macron on how to be less liberal?
	It's genuinely mad.
	And yet, that's what he did.
	That's why we're in the position we're in.
	So, what is actually required is a general reorientation of our own worldviews.
	And what that's going to mean is that we have to draw a line between the deserving and the undeserving.
	This is really going to be the challenge politically: is to be able to use our own judgment collectively to say who is actually undeserving of the things that we're paying for.
	And ultimately, that should rest with us because not only are we the electorate, but we are also the taxpayers.
	So, we should have the authority to say, Look, actually, I don't want Jamal, who's just jumped off a boat, to be given money out of my pocket.
	It's not unfair for me to say that.
	He's not entitled to it in any way.
	And actually, I don't care what Keir Starmer thinks about the word human rights that makes him do that.
	I don't care.
	This is a mysticism from liberalism.
	Oh, but what about the universe?
	I don't care, Keir.
	Why are they here?
	Why am I paying for them?
	Why is it my problem?
	Is the question we should be asking them over and over and over.
	Don't let them say, Well, what about the human rights?
	No, we're past the question of human rights because this is about really human wrongs now.
	Like, this is they are taking advantage of us.
	I'm tired of being taken advantage of.
	I'm tired of being bankrupted by the state, and things just have to change.
	Yeah, I see exactly what you're saying.
	And I just when you're being lectured by the French, you know something's wrong.
	We've been lectured by everyone, yeah.
	Well, yes, there are there are foreign leaders in countries that you would never want to live in who lecture us about how ridiculous we are.
	I'm not even joking.
	Do you think the Overton window has moved far enough that the human rights membership is toast?
	It's looking like it's moving, that people are actually starting to talk about it in Parliament now.
	Yeah, we're getting to the point where the situation has become untenable for them.
	Yeah.
	And like I said, they look like they're under siege.
	The liberal order looks like it's under siege.
	Donald Trump is, of course, not a big fan of the liberal international order.
	And neither is Nigel Farage.
	So on the plus side, it looks like they're on borrowed time.
	And in fact, it very much looks like they're the last men at the end of an era.
	Because they're desperately playing in the sandpit that they've built for themselves, but they can never actually fix any of the problems because all of the problems are caused only by them.
	We have only had Blairism.
	It's not even that.
	We've only had Blairism since 1997.
	Excuse me.
	Even the Conservatives had Blairism.
	And this is what Christopher Hitchens has been constantly banging on about.
	Oh, the Conservatives become a Blairite Party.
	He's right.
	And so there is just no one essentially in the living memory of anyone of about 30 or under who could have the finger pointed at them.
	You can't point at some radical right-winger or even Jeremy Corbyn or some communist types.
	No, it's just the liberal international order of human rights that is the centrist.
	That's the Roy Stewarts of the world in the Alice Campbells, literally in his case, who can be pointed to say, no, the reason this country is shit is because of you.
	So what do you think about Starkey's great repeal idea?
	I mean, it's a great idea.
	God willing, Nigel Farage just embraces it.
	I've spoken to David Sarkey a bunch of times and I've I like to think I might have pushed him slightly in this direction.
	Really yeah, but he's, but the thing is, but Starkey doesn't need me to push him in this direction either, because Starkey is, I mean, he knows he's probably the most right wing public figure in Britain on TV anyway he's, he's pretty right wing and he gets in trouble occasionally for that.
	Yeah, you know, but he does seem to have thought it through.
	Oh well, you know it's pretty watertight, you know.
	Oh yeah, absolutely.
	And David Starkey obviously brilliant, absolutely brilliant historian, a brilliant communicator as well, and he's absolutely right.
	Basically what, what we would want ideally is for Nigel Farage to have a really solid policy wing of the reform party.
	That just that just does the opposite of Tony Blair.
	Yeah, Tony Blair had a really strong policy division in the Labour Party and they, they legislated like the devil was after them, like they would pass dozens and dozens and dozens of acts every day in Parliament which we barely noticed at the point, which you barely noticed, because you didn't.
	Well, I mean, you know, you seem to have the sort of cultural cachet right, you say, oh no, this is, things can only get better.
	Yeah, and so literally thousands of pieces of legislation every year.
	They're saying well, hang on a second.
	The country was pretty great in 1996, so why did we need all of this, you know?
	And he knew it was elongating.
	And he knew it was elongating, but he also knew it was radical change that he was bringing.
	He knew it was radical change.
	And so David Starkey has the measure of all of this.
	And if Nigel Farage was serious about what he's doing, what he would be doing is consulting with David Starkey and I heard through the grapevine that he has consulted with David Starkey, by the way.
	Um, he would, he would essentially have uh, David Starkey's great repeal bill and have just a big list of things that on day one, he's just going to like, look, that's gone, that's gone, that's gone.
	Do we need to just um summarize what that is, just in case?
	Yeah, so Tony Blair undertook a series of constitutional reforms in the 90s, late 90s and 2000s uh, that the conservatives also carried on, by the way.
	So I just want to be clear, yeah, the conservatives are just as culpable on board absolutely, and this includes pretty much everything uh the, and it was all driven in in the same liberal direction.
	So it's about decentralization, it's about uh, separation of powers, which is a very American idea that's been imported.
	I mean yeah well, precisely the separation, like it's sorry that the it's the Crown Court, the King's Court, the King's ARMY, the king's this, the king's that, because we are actually an ancient medieval kingdom that's been dragged into modernity by accident.
	All of the devolved parliaments have to go.
	The Supreme Court has to go.
	The all, the all, the quangos, the very nature talk about yeah, the very nature of a quango yeah, has to be abolished.
	I mean, there is such a long list of things uh, but this is actually something that could be enumerated and could be done very, very swiftly absolutely, especially if, if Farage gets 400 seats, the great thing about that will There'll be 400 brand new people.
	There won't be factional infighting within his own party because these people weren't in parliament the day before.
	And so they are completely dependent on Nigel Farage for their position there.
	And so Farage will effectively be a dictator of his own party.
	So if he says, right, you just vote yes on this, we can get through anything, absolutely anything.
	And the great thing about having the unwritten constitution that we have is that basically the parliament is actually unbounded.
	In America, in Germany in particular, I learned that the German constitution essentially prescribes Blairism and it can't really be changed.
	And so I did an event last year in Germany and these Germans are saying to me, look, man, we can't do anything.
	Even if we get a majority, we can't do any of these things.
	We have proportional representation, so getting the majority itself is a problem.
	But even if we got the majority, we're constitutionally prohibited from doing all these things.
	And I was just sat there going, thank God we've got first past the post and no constitution.
	Because we can do whatever we want.
	We can rescue the situation.
	We absolutely can.
	Do you think that that was actually Blair's goal?
	Was to recreate what you just described as well?
	100%.
	So Blair is the liberal revolution that Blair was continuing is just a continuation of the French Revolution.
	It's been a slow-motion French Revolution throughout this country.
	And the Labour Party have constantly been doing this.
	If you look back into the 60s, with things like the abolition of the death penalty and things like this, these are all things that were done on the continent decades before.
	And the reason they didn't happen here, frankly, is the inertia and the prejudices of the English.
	Because one thing that actually sets our country apart from other countries is that we put a lot of value on the irrational.
	We put a lot of value on the habitual.
	We are not merely a propositional people.
	Yeah, we put a lot of value on custom, history, and tradition.
	And if traditionally, I mean, and this is something that is still deeply embedded in the English people that just hasn't gone away despite decades of propaganda.
	For example, there isn't a single politician apart from Rupert Lowe now, but when this this survey was done in 2020, I think it was.
	So I think it was before Rupert Lowe was in parliament.
	But at the time, all of the politicians were asked, do you support the death penalty?
	Obviously, not one of them did.
	Now, this put all of the policy, every single politician in Parliament, far to the left of the average Labour voter.
	Now, the average Labour voter is well in favour of the death penalty.
	In fact, if you just ask the British public in general, would you like the death penalty?
	The answer comes back 50% yes.
	Without any questions.
	Yeah, of course we should.
	And that's without even asking the question in a more nuanced way.
	Are you for the death penalty for child murderers?
	Well, it goes up to 55%.
	Are you in favour of the death penalty for terrorists?
	It goes up to 60%.
	And then you start realizing, yeah, no, we aren't like the way that they want to be governed in Europe.
	This purely rationalistic, hyper-liberal, utilitarian position.
	Because the problem that the left and the liberals have with the death penalty is they think, oh, well, a person should be redeemed.
	It's like, no, I'm sorry.
	I think that there are certain things that you can do that are so heinous that redemption would be a crime in itself.
	Like, Axel Ruda Cabana is the best example of that.
	No, he should hang.
	He should hang.
	Everyone knows he should hang.
	What he's done is so egregious that we should be using him as an example to the rest.
	Oh, no, this is his body.
	We're going to do this in public and we're proud to do this.
	And that was always the English way.
	I read a book called In Search of England by a guy, a journalist called Henry Merton in the 1920s.
	And he's driving around England because he nearly dies in Palestine.
	And he comes across the bodies of a man and a woman on a gallows.
	And so he's like, oh my God, but they murdered their children.
	And so it's like, yeah, no, they should hang.
	They absolutely should.
	And that's the way that the English have always done things.
	Until Labour in the 60s were like, oh, yeah, but what about redemption?
	And it was never about, it was never about if they got the wrong guy.
	It was always about, well, how do we know that this will prevent future murders?
	I don't care about preventing future murders.
	I care about restoring justice to the people here and now that were victimized by that person.
	And so this is what I mean by it's not a rational thing.
	It's a felt thing.
	This is something sentimental that we feel within ourselves.
	And this is a very, very popular position.
	And yet the parliament doesn't represent us at all.
	I mean, but would you say that the whole kind of liberal edifice is exactly designed to prevent what you just described?
	You know, that's why there's so much emphasis on the Second World War and Nazism because it is seen as that, you know, like something that needs to be controlled.
	And we all need to be controlled because we're Nazi.
	There is a fear of that.
	And you are right.
	But it goes deeper than that.
	The real reason they hate Nazism and not communism is because communism is trying to achieve what the liberals promised.
	Communism is trying to bring about absolute freedom, absolute equality, absolute liberation from dependence on one another.
	And the liberals have argued for this, but have never brought this about.
	But the Nazis, what they've done is instead taken what the Liberals believe the state is and should do, and in the liberal mind, perverted it to targeting groups in society.
	And so this is the opposite of what the Liberals actually think the state should do.
	This is why they don't care about the atrocities of communism.
	Because the communists will always say, okay, but we were doing it for your reasons.
	And this is why the Liberals are so comfortable with communists.
	Like, you'll see Ash Sarkar on TV all the time, but you'll never see a Nazi on TV.
	And that's because the Liberals are on the same journey as the communists.
	just disagree about how to get to the destination so it's it you are is there is a Nazism to them is a kind of heresy.
	Yes, exactly.
	It's a genuine kind of heresy.
	And they treat them like heretics.
	But the average British person isn't ideological in that way.
	The average British person just goes about their day and does what they see in front of them.
	They don't have this plan that they've concocted in the abstract and want to impose on society.
	They're just getting about their day and they vote for whoever they think is going to lower their taxes.
	Would you not say that's a sort of classic, you know, there's a lot of talk about what British values are, right?
	And we're being force-fed that it's, you know, this, that, and the other.
	But are you actually describing what they really are there?
	know a kind of rejection of abstract principles in favor of a sort of pragmatism that's that's really not you know forget you know what they're telling us so So British values are a liberal fiction.
	They were invented in 1997 by the Blair government and popularized by the Blair government.
	And you'll notice that they happen to perfectly align with international liberalism.
	Oh, wow, what a coincidence that is.
	And what's remarkable, if British values makes you British, then Wellington was not British because, my God, was he not tolerant?
	My God, was he not up for democracy?
	And yet he's one of our greatest heroes.
	British values can be described either normatively or descriptively.
	The normative Blairite's version is to take this set of liberal values and say, right, holding these is what makes you British.
	The descriptive view would be, well, what is it the British believe?
	And that is just a general description of what we actually are.
	So for example, a 13th century Englishman had values.
	They're not the same values as now, but he was no less English.
	Because you don't become English or British because of your values.
	You become it because you inherited it from the past.
	And you can't escape that.
	You've got no choice in this.
	That's a really hot tip of that team.
	It's just true.
	It's just factually, objectively, obviously the case.
	And it's the case everywhere in all times and all places for every people.
	And it's not a moral judgment or anything like that.
	It's just a statement of fact.
	That is how lineage works.
	That is how you inherited your ethnicity.
	Everyone has an ethnicity.
	You can't get away from an ethnicity.
	And it is, like I said, objectively measurable.
	When they dig up your bones in a thousand years, they will be able to tell what ethnicity you are, what gender you are, what sex you are, shall I say, what you had for lunch.
	They'll be able to work out, frankly, from the isotopes in your bloody teeth or whatever it is they do.
	We live in this world of liberal mysticisms where it's like, oh, but if I believe this, I can become a Somalian.
	It's like, I mean, they never actually say that, of course.
	They only say that about becoming British.
	Obviously, there isn't a set of Somali values I can adhere to to join them.
	Fraser Nelson's approach.
	Fraser Nelson, I'm absolutely certain that at this point he's just a troll.
	I'm absolutely certain.
	There's no way he believes what he believes.
	He's what came out of his mouth out.
	There's no way he believes what he believes.
	And I think he's just got a fetish for being embarrassed in public.
	Because he is every day, every single day it happens to him.
	So he must be enjoying it.
	I wonder whether we should start to take a couple of years.
	Yeah, well, sorry, I've been ranting a little bit.
	I've been ranting a little bit.
	I could rant and rave about this all day forever because this is what I do as my job.
	And I was about halfway through where I wanted to go, but that's fine.
	No, do go on.
	No, I'll get to it.
	All right, so I'm going to give them my two ones.
	Yeah, yeah, please.
	Anyone want to put their hands up with a question?
	Hello.
	Hello.
	You mentioned in some of your videos that you've made recently that you were writing a book about liberalism.
	And I just wondered if you had some ideas or wanted to share what you were sort of planning that would look like.
	Yeah, I've just handed in the thesis to my master's degree in philosophy about liberalism.
	And I'll probably just expand that into a book.
	So it's going to be really boring and really academic.
	It's not going to be designed for popular consumption.
	But hopefully it puts the cat amongst the pigeons because essentially all of this is contained in the story that liberalism tells itself.
	Liberalism tells itself the story that actually we began in the woods all alone and for some reason bumped into our fellow man in the woods and said, hello, fellow, would you like to create a state with me?
	Should we have a social contract?
	And that's just not true.
	That's just a false anthropology about what a human being is.
	Like Rousseau in the beginning of the social contract says, well, man's born free and everywhere is in chains.
	It's like, have you ever seen a free baby?
	What's a freedom mean to a baby?
	Like, no one's born free.
	You're born into a web of relations, which are the chains he's talking about.
	You have mother, you have a father, you have a society, you have a community, and you're completely dependent on that community.
	And the goal of liberalism and socialism and communism is to create what Marx called socialized Robinson Crusos.
	So islands, men who are islands unto themselves and who just follow a set of rules in order to get along in society.
	It's like, well, I don't think that's a good end.
	I just don't think that's a good end.
	That's what the liberals are promising.
	That you will never be dependent on any of your fellow man.
	You will only ever need to be dependent on the state.
	And I just don't think that's good.
	I think that's the opposite of what's good.
	I actually think being dependent on your fellow men in your community is normal, natural, and perfectly fine, and actually very healthy.
	It helps, like, it gives the people around you a reason to do things, right?
	People like helping one another.
	And so you've got, like, you know, like my wife's aunt is like, oh no, I've got to go around to Mrs. Miggins or whatever and do this for her because she can't, I don't know, open the top drawer or something in a cupboard.
	She's happy to do it.
	She likes to do it.
	It gives her purpose.
	It makes it gives her meaning.
	If she was like, no, no one's ever going to rely on anyone ever again, she'd be like, okay, well, what am I doing today?
	I guess I'll drink a bottle of wine.
	Like, what am I doing?
	Like, you know, it's purely designed to destroy social bonds, which is why everything that it does destroys social bonds.
	And so the book I'm going to write is going to be academic and aimed at those people who are intellectually and philosophically liberals and say, look, you are retarded and I hate that.
	And actually, you are evil.
	In fact, you are a far greater evil than anything you can point to, which is why I've written this book about you.
	So I hope that explains it.
	Good.
	Do you have any more questions at all?
	If we don't, I can carry on ranting and raving.
	Firstly, thank you, Carl.
	It's been really good to get your thoughts on all of this.
	And I'll just thought I'd throw a question out there.
	Do you think what's been inflicted upon this country, is it intent or is it incompetence?
	Intent.
	Someone at the back has already answered.
	I think it's a combination of both, actually.
	Because I think that the people in charge have been marinated in the ideology and assumptions that they have for such a long time that I don't think they know that there is another way of looking at the world because they stigmatize that.
	Nigel Farage, I hear, is a radical, in fact, I hear from the media today that he's a Nazi.
	It's like, right, yeah, I think you've got him this time, lads.
	Didn't they accuse him of being in the Hitler youth?
	Like, he's not old enough to have been in the Hitler youth.
	But no, when he was a teenager, apparently he was yelling Nazi stuff.
	And it's like, yeah, I'm sure that's going to stop him.
	I think they genuinely believe.
	And the problem with having true beliefs that just do not represent reality is that you are not tracking how things actually are.
	And so the world is in a constant state of change.
	And if you believe a series of things, even if in the immediate present, nothing is directly contradicting that, things changing outside of your vision, outside of what you can see, eventually will force this thing to a point where your beliefs are demonstrably untrue and you won't be able to accept or understand why the world is so different.
	And this actually was shown really, really well with Shibala Mahmood and the Green Party and was it the SNP or Zara Sultana screeching.
	So we have a Pakistani woman screeching fascist, another Pakistani woman in left-wing parties in the middle of a fucking parliament at the dispatch box.
	It's like, what is happening?
	You lunatics, right?
	A none of you are fascists.
	But the difference is Shibana Mahmood, and you can look at her activist history of being like 100%, you know, Palestine, reparations, all that, you know, all this sort of Corbynite nonsense, because they all truly believed it.
	And then she arrived in government and she's like, oh, people are taking advantage of the system.
	Oh, these communities are a problem.
	Oh, we have too many immigrants.
	Oh, my God.
	The system is unsalvageable.
	It has to be fixed.
	It has to change.
	And what that means is that she is admitting that the narrative that they told themselves isn't true.
	Now, the sort of Carla Denyers and the Zara Sultanas will never be anywhere near that level of power.
	They'll never experience that.
	And so they are just holding on to the ideology because they are true believers.
	And so what do you do when someone has backslid off?
	You call them a fascist.
	That's all you've got to do.
	Because there's nowhere to go.
	Reality, you're being told by someone you agree with on literally everything morally.
	They're saying, no, this can't work.
	So all you can do is, right, no, you're the enemy.
	You're part of the enemy faction.
	So there is an incompetence in it, but it is also deliberate because they thought the world was different to how it actually is.
	They thought, well, a Somalian is exactly the same as a Dutchman.
	So if we have unlimited Somali immigration or unlimited Dutch immigration, what difference does it make?
	And so they intended to bring in millions of immigrants.
	It's just they thought they would all be the same.
	And it turns out they're not the same.
	So it's a combination of both, I would say.
	Good evening, Carl.
	Hello.
	I watch every single of your videos.
	Thank you.
	Every time you speak, I think, oh my god, it's like the words out of my mouth.
	Thank you.
	Now, I was hoping maybe you could help me a little bit.
	You probably noticed that I've got an accent.
	Yes.
	Spanish accent.
	Anyway, I was born abroad, but I married into the tribe.
	You do watch all of my videos.
	I married this English man 52 years ago.
	I married when I was a teenager.
	Oh, congratulations.
	And of course, my children have married.
	Yeah, yeah, of course.
	And of course, you know, I have some European genes as well.
	Spanish, a bit of German.
	Now, in some of your videos, of course, sometimes you get really angry about foreigners.
	Sometimes it happens.
	I'm an immigrant.
	Somehow I don't consider myself an immigrant because, in fact, my husband was working in my country.
	And because I loved him, I decided to come here.
	I didn't come here for the weather.
	But anyway, I'm just hoping that perhaps in the future, and I did find that in my comments, that maybe in the future you can be, I don't want to say not a little bit kinder, but take into account the people who have been born abroad who are culturally English.
	And I consider themselves culturally English.
	So when I arrive here, I totally take it to anybody else, but only English people.
	I totally take it.
	And it's very fair as well.
	Yeah, I think in English and I just love English.
	So the way that I look at these things these days is about strangers and friends, right?
	So some people are strangers and some people are friends.
	And obviously if you marry an Englishman, then obviously you're a friend.
	I think that's very important.
	One thing I want you to say is that I watch Mahmoud saying, oh, I am English.
	But I don't consider her English.
	So am I being a bit unfair?
	You are unfortunately a far-right bigger.
	This is an issue.
	David Lammy is the example I always use for this.
	Because there's a part of me that kind of wants to drop David Lamy into Africa, right?
	And with a camera crew.
	Not for mean reasons either, actually, right?
	Not for mean reasons.
	I want to send him there with a camera crew to get his reaction to living in Africa for a month or something.
	Because he wrote a book called Tribes, where he explores his genetic history between these various tribes in Africa.
	And he's always like, you know, I'm a Caribbean, we need our reparations.
	And it's like, yeah, but David, you're not really, are you?
	You're actually a moron.
	You're actually an idiot.
	But moreover, you are a British idiot.
	I'm sorry to tell you.
	Like, you would not last five minutes in Africa because not only are you thick, but you don't know anything about it.
	So there is a lot to be discussed on that sort of thing.
	Like, Shivana Mahmoud is ethnically not English, obviously.
	But she is culturally a product of the country.
	And there is, I think, you know, there are going to be people online who call me a soft leftist over this.
	But I actually do think we could be sensitive to these questions, right?
	There are definitely people who are a product of the country, even if they're ethnically not native to the country, who are our responsibility.
	And David Lamy, unfortunately, I think is one of those people.
	You know, like the Diane Abbotts of the world.
	Unfortunately, it would be unethical to release Diane Abbott into the wild in Africa.
	Same with David Lamy.
	So we've got to make him deputy prime minister instead.
	The point is, what I'm trying to get across is that I don't, I've come to the conclusion I just genuinely hate categorization.
	These kind of categories are actually the problem, I think.
	Because what a category does is it groups together things that are otherwise unrelated.
	And you can see this most brilliantly in the LGBT community.
	Sorry, where is this community located?
	How many children do they produce every year?
	How do they propagate themselves over time?
	A community is a group of people, a self-replicating group of people that exist in a specific place, a specific time, and continues throughout history.
	So where is this LGBT community located?
	And the answer is it's not located anywhere.
	What it is, is essentially a race.
	What they're saying is the LGBT race.
	So any instance of a gay person, a lesbian person, the bisexual person, or an ansexual person, and whatever in the plus nonsense is, they always flag up as being part of the category.
	So whether you like it or not.
	So what you've done is created a series of relationships between things that are actually not related.
	And so it's not fair to say, right, okay, now all gay people agree with this, all gay people agree with that, whatever.
	It's nonsense.
	And it's the same thing with ethnicity and race.
	I don't actually like taking these categoric approaches because there are lots of people in this country who came here before mass immigration, by the way.
	I mean, my grandfather was an example of this, married into the tribe because they were interested in joining the relationships that we have.
	And they work hard.
	There's a guy in Swindon who runs a cafe.
	And he's an Iranian guy.
	He's been here long before I lived in Swindon.
	You know, long before Blairism and all this sort of stuff.
	And his is the only cafe that has English bunting up on it.
	The only cafe that on St. George's Day puts up English bunting.
	Because he's, you know, so I don't want that guy deported, right?
	So it's about the relationship.
	Does the person have a relationship with the community?
	And this is why, actually, I don't begrudge the Spanish for deporting any Brits, by the way.
	The Brits self-segregate in Spain and act like a bunch of arrogant arseholes.
	Well, I'm sorry, if the Spanish have said, right, we've had enough, the Brits can just go home now.
	Well, you should have learned Spanish, you idiots.
	You know, you should have integrated into those communities.
	And honestly, every time the Libs are trying, well, what about the Brits in Spain?
	I don't care what the Brits in Spain.
	Deport them.
	We actually need them back.
	They have money.
	We need them back.
	Send them back.
	Because The real, the moral and nutritious content of human relations is what makes life worth living.
	Like the people you live with, the people you love, the people that you actually have a personal connection with and the place in which you have that connection.
	That's what really the good in human life actually is.
	It's not about freedom.
	It's not about equality.
	It's not about money even.
	My grandparents both came on both sides, came from desperately poor areas of the southwest or Wales.
	And yet they were all very happy.
	They had lots of kids.
	They had a very strong family life because everyone knew each other and trusted each other.
	And I mean, they had their problems.
	Obviously, you know, Jones down the street has just kicked a ball over our fence, it's broken a window, running, oh, bloody hell, you know, like trivial things like that.
	But it's the relations themselves that really matter.
	So I'm personally trying to get away from this kind of categorical, you know, foreigner.
	But the thing is, when I'm making a 10-minute video about something that's pissed me off, it's easy to fall into that language.
	So I apologise.
	No, no, but I do agree that you are English, really, if you are ethnically English.
	Yeah, and it's just true.
	And the rest, a person like me, I would never say that I'm English.
	I would say I'm culturally English.
	Yeah, but you married an Englishman and you've had children.
	The bonds there are just so much stronger than anything it would be justified to ever try and break.
	Whereas when I see a bunch of Somalians just sitting around on taxpayer money in the middle of Swindon, I know they don't have any bonds here.
	I know they don't care about this place.
	And I know they shouldn't be here.
	And so it's about using the sort of discernment, I think.
	It's a kind of diaspora in a way.
	Sorry, who is?
	Well, they're trying to promote the idea that there's this diaspora of people, that they're not linked to any one particular place.
	Yeah, I think that's correct.
	You've got a couple of hands over here, Oscar.
	And I have the microphone.
	Oh, you do.
	When you're trying to persuade someone who is formally unpersuadable, can you tell us about some of the moments when you've seen the penny drop?
	where someone that in response to something you said or some pill before swine, suddenly this pig has turned around and went, ooh, I get it now.
	Can you talk about your experience of when people have actually seen what you're trying to actually...
	It very rarely happens in person.
	Because when you're having a discussion with someone, even if you begin on factual grounds, it always degenerates into moral grounds.
	And as soon as someone feels that morally they are being attacked, they get their hackles up, they get their backup and they defend themselves rather than engage in the discussion in a disinterested way.
	But it does happen on Twitter every now and again, where you see someone who's not in the middle of an argument.
	In fact, I tweeted one the other day where some Jewish woman said, well, I was a liberal until I saw all these Islamists running around in London and now I don't think I'm for liberal immigration.
	It's like, oh, well, that was actually a predictable outcome, wasn't it?
	If we import millions and millions of Muslims into a country with 270,000 Jews, you as a Jewish person could have actually foreseen the consequences of that.
	And yet, because of the liberal mysticism in front of your eyes, you've been like, oh, no, that will be fine.
	Everything will be fine.
	No, actually.
	And the horrible right-wingers who come to watch Salon of a Cat give a talk on a Thursday evening, they were all right about this.
	And it was just because we were looking at this with a lot more clear-eyed perspective, where it's just be realistic, you know?
	And so you see that actually relatively often, but it's quite rare in person that a person will ever change their mind just because of the nature of the interaction.
	What they'll do is they'll get angry, call you names, and then stomp off.
	But you do see it happen every now and again.
	Hands down here.
	You can talk about Mr. Nigel Farage being a potential solution to the problems of facial reform, perhaps going with the migrants and what have you.
	But I would suggest this is probably a bit of a folly.
	I mean, Nigel Farage is, to be honest, a bit of a Tory.
	He's gone to many Tory events.
	I mean, there's a video of him dancing with Priscilla Patel and whatnot.
	I would suggest he's not going to do really anything.
	He's a Tory of a light blue tie.
	And I would also suggest that potentially, I mean, since the 1950s, the 1960s, 1970s, 80s, and so on, the vast population of this country has been vehemently against any immigration.
	Yet it seems to go up constantly.
	And how many politicians have said they're going to lower it?
	So I might suggest that Nigel Farage reform a total folly and a waste of time perhaps.
	Yeah, I agree with you.
	I think what's worth obviously, I mean, I said this at the last event of this that we did, that Nigel Farage won't do any of these things.
	And there were some people there from reform who were a bit upset about it.
	And I wasn't trying to be mean, but I obviously held your position, I still do.
	But I've been thinking about this a lot because I think that Farage is doing so consistently well in the polls, not because of Nigel Farage, actually.
	I think for a lot of people, reform are actually being used as a protest vote.
	And so it's a way of saying we do not want the status quo as it was from the Labour and the Conservative Party.
	And the Greens are being used in the same way at the moment on the left, from the Labour Party.
	So I do agree with you that I don't expect that Nigel Farage is the solution to the problems that we have.
	But what it is, is lovely to see the dialectic going in the direction that the online right would have it go.
	You'll notice that the only topic at the moment is immigration.
	That's all people talk about.
	It's immigration and taxes, and the two are intimately combined.
	And if I were in parliament, I would say I want to talk about immigration.
	If I were the one who set the agenda, that's all I'd be talking about.
	So it's quite nice to see the online right getting this series of dialectical wins and pushing the argument in the right direction.
	And so I don't think it matters too much actually what Nigel Farage does.
	Now, I think actually he's going to be a massive disappointment.
	And if there are any reform members in here, again, I'm really sorry, but this is just my opinion.
	I think that he's an excellent showman and rhetorician.
	He's really excellent at representing his position to about a third of the electorate.
	But I don't think, and he's not stupid either.
	There are plenty of infuss, long-form infused Nigel Farage, where he feels relaxed enough to properly enunciate what it is he believes.
	So he's not an idiot.
	I think that the problem is that during a revolution, you can never trust a man over 40.
	And what's going on here is a revolution of the British people against the system.
	And so at the moment, Nigel Farage is the tool that they're using to smash the two-party consensus, which is superb, absolutely brilliant.
	It has to die.
	It has to be that the Labour Party and the Conservative Party, as Peter Hitchens pointed out, two zombie parties propping each other up.
	They have to be smashed.
	And they are being smashed.
	So I'm very optimistic about that.
	But Farage himself, I mean, don't be wrong, I would love to be shocked for Farage, you know, Prime Minister Farage comes out with his 400-seat majority and says, well, lads, about those Hitler speeches.
	Just no, I'm joking.
	I'm joking.
	Bit it sat around, wouldn't it, no?
	No.
	What I would like to see is Farage say, look, I actually have a plan.
	We're going to abolish the Blero order.
	We're going to denaturalize a bunch of the people that Boris allowed to come here illegitimately.
	And we're going to do what we can to cut down the welfare state so we can lower taxes.
	So actually, Britain can have a future.
	So the young people can actually think, oh, all right, I could go home and actually make some money and do some work.
	But I don't think he's going to do that.
	I think what he'll do is essentially what Liz Truss was trying to do.
	So Liz Truss was ousted by her own party.
	Farage will never be ousted by his own party.
	So he might be able to kind of weather the storm and drive down some tax relief and benefits cuts and whatnot.
	That might actually come about, but it'll be small things that don't change the core of the real problems.
	But what it does is leaves us with a massively disappointed right-wing constituency in this country.
	And that's something that we can leverage going after Nigel Farage.
	Because remember, Farage is 62 and a lifelong smoker and drinker.
	He ain't going to be around forever.
	And we are going to want someone who actually has the willpower and the know-how and the ability to form a coalition, which is Farage's deepest weakness, his coalition building skills, atrocious.
	But what it does is it sets the scene for something to come along.
	There will actually be a space now after Nigel Farage for a series of people who are expecting certain things from him because, and for a lot of them, it's not even because he said it.
	It's because the media has put words in his mouth.
	They're constantly ascribing to Nigel Farage extreme right-wing positions that he does not hold.
	And so it's like, okay, well, you know, maybe we're getting that, but we won't get it.
	But we might get something useful.
	But it also shows that the direction of travel is to the right.
	Everything good and truly vibrant and energetic is going right-wing.
	You've got the sort of 17 to 20% who are going to end up voting for the Greens.
	But, I mean, they're not saying anything new.
	You know, there's actually, it's like, if you listen to Zach Polanski, he's just well-polished yesterday's talking points.
	And it's like, okay, but Zach, I know you hate the rich.
	Zach, I know you're for infinite immigration.
	Zach, I know that you're for all of this nonsense that brought us to this place.
	So why, you know, you can only, he's not persuading people who don't already agree.
	He's only gathering the faithful to the Green Party.
	It's like, great.
	You know, that's a nice cul-de-sac.
	So if you take that out, like what you've really got is a country that's about 50% just rock-solid, sort of conservative, but not the Conservative Party.
	And then about a third of the country that is not really sure and maybe like centre-left.
	And then about 20% that are just, you know, nonsense, ridiculous people who vote for nonsense.
	So we've actually got still got the demographic constituency needed to fix the country.
	So if Nigel Farage just essentially stops the problem from getting worse, that's a win for us.
	But I take your point completely on Farage.
	He's not a saviour.
	But it's nice to see things going in our direction.
	And when you do this full-time, man, you've got to take the small wins where you see it.
	Please, yeah.
	With Enoch Powell, have you not seen that exact same situation that described?
	Yeah, but the situation with the country was far different with Enoch Powell.
	It's the same with the BNP.
	The BNP got a million votes.
	Yeah.
	But the problem is that the situation in the country was, I mean, when Enoch Powell was in parliament, what percentage of England was English?
	It's got to have been like 97%, right?
	Like Enoch Powell was just a Cassandra.
	Like, sorry, he was doomed to prophesy the future and have no one believe him in his own time.
	Well, we're living in the ruins of that, and it's so much worse than he expected.
	And now, you've got the Labour Party Home Secretary of Foreign Extraction saying, fuck them immigrants.
	So, you know, like, I think the situation is just too dark and the hour too late for them to be able to ignore this now.
	I hope that answers everything.
	Hello, Carl.
	Thanks for another great speech.
	You've already hit a good point.
	In Kier Starner's famous Rivers of Blood 2, the Middle East, good work.
	I don't know who wrote it.
	We've already admitted it was a failed experiment.
	You've seen the most left-wing MPs who were on dinghies bringing migrants into Greece now saying they've got to go back.
	You've got today, I think Beanosh Obama used the Boris wave.
	They've already admitted it failed.
	It is moving in the right direction.
	But the thing to remember is, look, if these rotten, evil elites want to keep their power, they're going to have to deport these people because they will just vote for their own ethnic interests.
	They don't care about the liberal order.
	They're not interested.
	Like you said, Somalia has no concept of global human rights or whatever.
	So if they do want to stay in power, whether it be Farage carrying that order forward, they will have to send them back and lots of them.
	Otherwise, they will lose.
	And if they don't do it before the top-heavy demographic of boomers sadly pass away, then it will be a lot worse.
	It will just be the Zoomers left.
	You can tell that we're a bit more stupid right-wing.
	God willing.
	It is going that way.
	They have to send them back.
	I think you've hit on a really good point that they're already admitted it failed.
	It's a lie.
	There are African HMOs on my road breaking into my car and I'm 25.
	I shouldn't have to live like this.
	No, you shouldn't.
	It's been done to me.
	You are the victim of this agenda.
	That is true.
	Every person that has something terrible happen to them, not even terrible, just something bad, inconvenient.
	It's Ed Davey on the train listening to some bloody guy.
	And that, just to be clear, that was the most racist thing Ed Davey has ever said.
	And he doesn't even have said...
	Sorry, as a quick aside.
	The Lib Dems are a racial party.
	Like...
	People are like, what do you mean?
	They are the party of Middle England.
	They are racially appealing to Middle England and the prejudices of well-to-do middle-class people who don't live around immigrants.
	They just are too stupid to understand that's what they're doing.
	And so it's just like, okay, are you surprised that your party is like, it looks like the demographics of like Perton or something, right?
	It's like 98% white English in the Lib Dems.
	What a shock.
	And you're over in the South West where it's like 98% English.
	What a shock.
	It's an expression of the prejudices of the English in the Lib Dems.
	But getting back to the point, all of this has been done by policy.
	All of this is a policy choice.
	It wasn't forced upon us, our politicians externally.
	They did it by choice because they thought it would work.
	They thought it would grow the economy.
	They thought it would pay for pensions in the future.
	It turns out that immigrants grow old as well.
	And immigrants, actually, if you look at the birth rates of the immigrants, they're tanking too.
	Everyone's birth rates are tanking.
	So it's one of those things where this whole experiment failed.
	And when you say they've got to change their mind or lose their seats, I think they're going to lose their seats anyway, even if they change their mind.
	I actually don't think there's any coming back for these people.
	It looks like basically all of the Labour front bench are going to lose their seats in the next election.
	And basically every almost every last 100 Conservative MPs are also going to lose their seats in the next election.
	And so it's like, right, we are looking at a kind of historic bloodbath in the next election that we've never seen before.
	Like this, both parties, just both the traditional parties getting wiped out, is unprecedented.
	And I just don't think they can recover it.
	I mean, there are a lot of, like you say, a lot of them are against independent MPs in the Labour constituencies that have a large number of Muslim immigrants in them because they great replaced themselves.
	It's like, okay, that was silly.
	But they can vote, as you say, for their ethnic interests, and they can vote for their ethnic representatives.
	And they will and are.
	And honestly, the entire parliament at the moment looks like a dead man walking.
	It's a condemned man.
	And so Keir Starmer and the rest of them and the Conservatives are standing around acting as if they're not all about to get the chop, but they are all about to get the chop.
	Literally all of them, actually.
	And it's going to be Niger Farr.
	They've gone about Nigel Farage.
	And when he sat up in the back and Keir Starmer or whoever is having a go, I don't know why he gets offended by it.
	It seems to bother him.
	If I Nigel Farage, we'll be like, you know, tick-tock, tick-tock, you know, just you wait.
	When's the next thing?
	You're all dead.
	I'm going to be the one who kills you all.
	You know, this is going to be a reformed heal parliament.
	You know, Nigel Farage is not that kind of aggressive guy.
	But if I were in his place, I would be.
	But yeah, so you are right.
	They're all on borrowed time.
	And it is going to have to be up to the people who come after.
	I think we are a bit too cynical on reform as well.
	I think there are a lot of good people in reform, a lot of based people who understand the problem and want to push the party in that direction.
	So once Farage is securely in power, maybe he'll be receptive to his own party saying, look, we need to deport a bunch of people over these things, gather the ECHR so we can actually get rid of a bunch of them.
	So we may be being a bit too cynical about Farage because of Farage's history, but I don't want to sound too optimistic about it.
	But you completely correct, basically.
	Completely correct.
	Sorry, that.
	Hi, Carl.
	It's been good to hear from you tonight.
	I just wanted to ask you about a comment you made before about the existence of people who are culturally British but not ethnically British.
	And a couple of the examples you made were Diane Abbott and David Lamy.
	Now, I'm not being funny, but none of the people who live on my street have ever advocated for a trillion pounds being sent to Jamaica.
	But David Lamy has.
	So can these kinds of, you know, people who live in places abroad, maybe ex-colonies, can they be truly British if they advocate for policies that are not necessarily in the interests of British people or, you know, in the next generations, perhaps not even in the interests of British people?
	I mean, I wouldn't say that they are ethnically or I suppose it depends what you mean by truly British, right?
	I assume that you mean natively, ethnically British by that.
	But I mean, David Lamy obviously can never be ethnically British because he comes from like Tureg tribes in Africa or something.
	But I think that there will always be a percentage of people who live here who are not ethnically British.
	I think that's probably likely to persist long into the future.
	And it has been the case that there's always been a very tiny minority of people who are not ethnically British here.
	But those numbers have always been really, really small.
	And so the question isn't really so much one about purity.
	The question is really one about quantity.
	Well, if I may, it's not necessarily about purity.
	That doesn't concern me particularly.
	It's more about competing interests.
	So if you come from Jamaica and you live in Britain and you're culturally British, you may have interests that lie in Jamaica.
	And none of the people that I know who are both ethnically and culturally British have interests that lie abroad.
	Only in their local area and where they come from.
	Yeah, and maybe nationally as well, they have an interest.
	But the reason I think that actually, I wasn't trying to impugn you either, sorry, it just occurred to me that if I say purity, that's got connotations I didn't ascribe to you.
	What I meant was it doesn't really matter if we have a Jamaican population of say, you know, 0.5%, they can have any interest they want, they're not getting them.
	They'll never have any kind of demographic power to be able to win a vote on those issues to get what they're looking for.
	So they can want what they want, it doesn't matter, and if they don't like it, they can go home, right?
	But the way things are at the moment, we do not know what percentage of England is actually English, and that's a real issue.
	So in 2021, it was probably about 75%, including the projected illegals that were here.
	But the thing is, the projections of the illegals are definitely undercounted by a huge amount.
	Because the problem is, when you have large ethnic enclaves, people move to them illegally because they know people in these ethnic enclaves.
	And so these act as a magnet for people who come on holiday from wherever and can just stay with a family member who got a visa.
	They don't need to get a visa.
	They'll get a job with a corner shop or something, cash in hand.
	We just have no idea.
	And when you look at the people running the supermarkets or the sewage system and things like that, use the roads, man.
	The traffic is unbelievable everywhere.
	So it's like, right, okay.
	I think that there are actually way more people here than they realize.
	And the 2021 census is before the Boris wave as well.
	So that's another 4 million people or so added to the population.
	So the real concern, I think, is just the sheer numbers that is actually the most important thing.
	Some Jamaican guy in your village saying, oh, I want reparations.
	Well, go on, then vote for it.
	Who cares?
	He's not getting what he wants, as long as the numbers are kept sufficiently minimal.
	And this is why I do agree with the remigration thought where we have to be encouraging people who came in the last, say, 10 years, that, no, you have to go back to where you come from.
	This is not something the British people agreed to.
	This was never on a manifesto pledge.
	It's not been appropriate.
	It's not going well.
	And we would like to incentivize these people to return.
	And if it comes to revoking visas and denaturalizing people, then fine, you know.
	But when it comes to someone like David Lamy, I mean, maybe I'm just being soft-hearted, but he's born here and he's kind of part of the furniture.
	Like when Starma was going to kick Diane Abbott and the Labour Party, that's a bit mean.
	I share nothing in common with Diane Abbott, but come on, man.
	She's not about to lead an insurrection against you kid.
	Yeah, exactly.
	She can't get the shoes.
	I think you are right about these people, but I think keeping it in proportion is the important thing.
	I think it's very reasonable for the English, the Welsh, the Scots, and anyone else, anywhere else, to say, no, I want my country to demographically be 90% of the people to whom the country truly belongs.
	Like the Welsh, like there are more Pakistanis in England than there are Welsh people in Wales.
	This is mad.
	Like every Pakistani can be like, yeah, we're going to move to Wales now and just call it New Pakistan and we're going to vote for it.
	Like that's actually something that could happen in this country.
	It's like, sorry, no, that's mad.
	Why are we allowing that?
	So yeah, I think actually worrying about the raw numbers in demographics is the most important thing.
	I think that 90% is a reasonable thing to ask for.
	It's not at all unreasonable to ask for us to have a 90% homogenous country.
	And that doesn't mean we have to kick every foreigner out or anything like that.
	It just means that we get to be conscious of the fact that actually this could go the other way.
	We could end up like Lebanon.
	We could end up like South Africa if we aren't conscious of this.
	And so we should take steps to, I think, to guarantee it.
	Thank you very much for your time, Carl.
	My next question pertains to the election in 2029.
	So as you've established, the Reform Party do not have what it takes to face all the problems.
	But they've amassed huge support from normal people.
	Yeah.
	Now, my question's twofold.
	How do people like Lowe harness the popular support for reform?
	and how urgent is this?
	I think that when it comes to politics, the normal person isn't very plugged in like we are.
	And so when they change their mind, their mind tends to stay changed.
	And so I don't think there's any way of usurping Farage's influence over the normal right-wing people in this country.
	I don't think there's any way of doing that.
	Although saying that, I mean, it took him four years to do it.
	You know, we're four years out.
	Who knows?
	I'm not saying nothing is possible, but I think it's less likely.
	And I think essentially the sort of the attitude has just been, I'm not happy I'm voting for this because you've told me I shouldn't vote for this.
	And so with the general political will of normal people who don't pay attention to politics, I don't think there's much room for nuance.
	And I think you just have to kind of ride it out.
	And so when Farage doesn't do what we're expecting him to do, the average person, when they vote for Farage, what they expect is, why are there foreigners here, Nige?
	I thought you were getting rid of these people.
	And when that hasn't happened, because I mean, like, you know, Baz down the pub is not a very sophisticated thinker, but he's entitled to have his opinions and he's entitled to representation.
	And he wants a thing that isn't going to happen.
	So he will be aware of that.
	And, okay, well, we need something else.
	And so the only problem is that Nigel Farage and Rupert Lowe are the same age.
	And don't go, in fact, Rupert Lowe's a bit older than Farage, in fact.
	And so I love Rupert Lowe.
	I love watching him in Parliament.
	I love just how he doesn't care.
	He's not here to apologise.
	He's like the one good parliamentarian.
	And I don't know why Farage doesn't take a hint from this.
	It's like, look how popular Lowe is.
	Like, sorry, Nigel, why aren't you acting like that, mate?
	You know, like, people are tired of it.
	But I think it's too late in the day for Rupert Lowe.
	I think that the timing has just been poor.
	And unless he were to do something quite bold, like expel Kenny Badenock from the Tory Party and Michael Gove, take it over, give it a clean, a really, really deep, clean house, basically expel almost all of the Conservative Party, and then just start going wild with it.
	I don't think Nigel Farage can be stopped at this point.
	So I think we've just got to come to peace with the fact it's going to be Farage.
	Put a bit of pressure on him, you know, online politically and say, look, why aren't you doing this?
	Why aren't you doing that?
	But I think it'll be someone who comes after this.
	Because what this is, is the end of the Blairite paradigm.
	Because Nigel Farage was always a part of the Blairite paradigm.
	He was always a part of the cultural movements of the late 90s and early 2000s.
	He was just that sort of men behaving badly style of it, right?
	Because you always have the sort of love actually types who Kier Starmer properly represents.
	But Nigel Farage definitely represents the men behaving badly, which was super popular, by the way.
	Super popular.
	It was a real cultural phenomenon.
	And the love actually types have failed.
	They're the ones who have ruined all this.
	And so the member Higgin Baddy gets to go, no, with my pint of beer and my cigar, you're wrong and I'm right.
	And I'm, but he's a part of the same system.
	Well, what'll happen after these two people?
	They're in the 60s now, right?
	Farage and Starmer.
	What happens after that is we get whatever the millennials and the Gen X's and the Zoomers cook up.
	And if the Zoomers are anything to judge by, it could be a lot of fun.
	Thank you, Carl.
	I wanted to ask you: now that it appears that the Greens are the main vehicle for the left going forward, temporarily at least, do you think this changes any way that the right needs to approach the next election?
	And do you think it's a long-term trend that could be maintained?
	Or do you think there's a way back for Labour even?
	So, like I was saying earlier, the Greens and those types are true believers in the liberal order.
	They really believe that all people are the same.
	They really believe the state has an obligation to give everyone exactly the same, so everyone becomes equal.
	But these people are actually quite a small minority of the country.
	And even within the Green Party, the people who are like the radical left wing are still only about 10%, about half of their constituency.
	You've got obviously the sort of 8 or 10% of the Greens who are environmentalists, if you remember the Greens ever talking about environmentalism, right?
	So I actually don't think this is a sustainable thing.
	And I think that the left coalition splitting in the way that it's done is superb news for the right.
	That's another reason why I'm not like, oh, we have to go against Nigel Farage.
	The right is bigger than the left, thank God.
	But the last thing we want to do is actually split the rights at this point.
	They tactically vote very well, don't they?
	They do.
	And in fact, what we should be doing is putting pressure on anyone.
	If you know anyone who votes conservative, you need to give them a dressing down and say, no, their day is over.
	We're not voting for an African immigrant, being an idiot.
	I mean, come on, of all the like the timing of the Conservative Party.
	It's like, yeah, yeah, everyone hates immigration.
	Great.
	We've got an African immigrant here.
	It's like, look, I don't even dislike Kemi Babennock.
	It's just like, what are you doing?
	This is bad optics.
	But anyway, which is why no one cares about the Conservative Party anymore.
	No one even talks about them.
	But the point is, you're not allowed to vote Conservative anymore, unfortunately.
	We kind of got to vote for Farage, whether we like him or not, because we just have to make sure that we have the overwhelming coalition and overwhelming numbers that the left can't generate.
	This is shown precisely with how we got Keir Starmer.
	He was never going to get the numbers to win, except Nigel Farage came in and legged the Conservatives, took about a third of their vote away, and suddenly we get Keir Starmer.
	Well, this is an abject lesson to the rest of us.
	If we don't want that, it might be better to have the devil we know who might not get everything done that we want than allow like a Zach Polanski government.
	I mean, to be honest with you, there's a part of me that kind of wants to see it.
	You laugh, but man, it would be wild.
	It would be like genuinely, he wouldn't understand why the thing is collapsing really, really quickly.
	So if you're an accelerationist, maybe you do want a Zach Polanski government.
	But for those of us who live here, I think we've got to keep the coalition together.
	Should we just take two more questions?
	Sure.
	And do you want to maybe do them together and then you can answer them?
	I'd rather answer one at a time.
	Sure, yes.
	I hate this habit because I've got a terrible memory.
	Okay.
	It takes seven goes to change someone's mind.
	If you're number one, you'll get abuse.
	If you're number seven, you'll get thanks very much.
	Don't bring yourself.
	It's a long road because fear makes you stupid.
	Correct.
	There's some doubts.
	I think you might have already sort of partly addressed the issue.
	It was just speaking of David Lamney, reminded me of Lenny Henry and the theoretical invoice that he has presented to the indigenous British people.
	Wasn't it like 18 trillion or something?
	It was something like that.
	I'll check my pockets.
	So this is just not a question.
	It's a seed of an idea.
	If individual people or the New Culture Forum or the Lotus Eaters could put together a similar invoice to present to him everything British people have spent on Africans.
	With all the whiter people, the rich people that were enslaved by Muslims.
	I believe there's something like three times the number, so we need to present, apparently I could have a figure I mean, it's definitely over a million.
	Yeah.
	It's a lot.
	I was going to figure that 338,000 Africans were taken to America.
	No, it was about 2.6 million, I think.
	But I mean, we're still talking in numbers in the millions, right?
	So it's still, and it's not like the records are particularly good on these things either.
	We actually have no idea.
	It's just estimates.
	But you are right.
	I mean, the moral debt is not just one way.
	And moreover, they don't care.
	If this was something that was genuinely something that bothered them, they'd go to the Arabs and say, a thousand years.
	It was a thousand years of castrations and slavery.
	Where's our reparations?
	But they know the Arabs will say, what are you doing here, Raisinhead?
	Why are you here?
	I'm not even joking.
	That's what Muhammad calls them.
	The Arabs will say, you're getting nothing.
	In fact, we might carry on.
	Why are you here?
	And the only reason they bring this demand to us is because they think we're stupid enough to pay it.
	They think we're the sort of bleeding heart liberals who will open up and say, oh, yeah, good point.
	I feel bad for you.
	They're not really that bothered.
	Otherwise, they'd be banging the door of the Arabs.
	They'd be banging the door with other people.
	They don't really care about it.
	They just think, we can get money out of you.
	They just think we're in a dispensary.
	It's like, sorry, we can just say no.
	We can just say no to all of it.
	And we can just look at them coldly and say, sorry, our sympathy has just run out.
	I've got none.
	And moreover, I don't know whether you've noticed, we're broke.
	And you hear this from India all the time.
	Oh, you owe 44 trillion.
	It's like, I don't think anything, our entire country probably isn't worth that.
	What are you talking about?
	Where are you expecting us to get this money from?
	But anyway, I take your point.
	You know what's really interesting as well?
	Is that Americans feel a huge amount of white guilt?
	Are you from South Africa?
	I can tell by it.
	And I think the South African whites, the Anglo-whites, probably also feel a great deal of white guilt as well.
	But what's weird is the English feel no white guilt at all.
	I don't know whether you've noticed.
	They've been propagandising us against the British Empire for 100 years now.
	And still 50% of people are like, yeah, it was a good thing.
	We should do more of it.
	Still.
	That is a remarkable level of just arrogance.
	No, we're proud of the British Empire.
	And if it wasn't for World War II, we'd still do it.
	So it's just very strange how the British themselves just don't carry the white guilt that the colonies carry, right?
	And so the demands for reparations, I've never thought were actually very strong here.
	I always feel they're a lot stronger in South Africa or America or Australia or somewhere like that, Canada.
	We just don't really believe we did anything wrong.
	So I'm not worried about the arguments for reparations, actually.
	Like the other chap behind you said, I'm genuinely not worried about them because people just don't seem to be very receptive to them.
	Yeah, I know.
	Do we have one last question here?
	Hi, Colin.
	Just a quick question.
	Do you support a right of return for the indigenous British diaspora?
	No.
	Why not?
	Because there are something like 300, 400 million of them, and we are overcrowded as it is.
	And also, you were kind of kicked over there to be because you were criminals.
	So I'm sorry, you're just going to have to accept your fate.
	You've gone to lovely sunny climates with beautiful fertile soil, far more sunshine hours than we'll ever get, and you've got to stay there, I'm afraid.
	Well, if you need the immigrants to offset demographic decline, don't you think it's better to take immigrants that don't have an assimilation problem?
	It obviously would be better on those circumstances.
	But I'm actually very leery about this demographic decline, therefore we must have immigrants thing, right?
	So I don't think the situation is actually as bad as they project.
	I think there's a bit Malthusian, where they're making a certain number of predictions on a certain number of assumptions that, oh, yeah, God, if nothing else changes and this carries on, then the world will starve to death because there'll be 500 billion people or something like that, right?
	But obviously, that didn't happen.
	Things change.
	Different farming techniques evolve.
	Different technologies are invented.
	Social structures change.
	People stop having so many children, right?
	And I do think that the worry about the pension system and all that sort of thing, I feel that that's on a bit of a Malthusian track as well.
	It's like, yeah, that does appear to be the case now because without any other variables, but we're not taking into account various things, automation and whatever other innovations and whatever other way things change.
	And at the end of the day, if the system is unsustainable, then it shouldn't be sustained.
	We can find other ways of doing things.
	There are historically ways of dealing with these problems that weren't through taxation and redistribution.
	And okay, it might mean that you might be forced on a Sunday to go and help out your elderly neighbor, right, that they're not related to, but they're a neighbor.
	It might mean you have to go and do that, as they did for thousands of years before right now.
	And I'm actually in favor of exploring those options because honestly, there's something kind of unwholesome about the pension system, right?
	The idea that actually people shouldn't be dependent on the people that they raised and birthed into the world and brought forth and made into the community.
	It's like, no, I'm separate to you now, but you're not.
	And why should you be?
	This is, again, all part of the sort of liberal fantasy that no one will ever be dependent on anyone else.
	And I honestly think that fundamentally is what is tanking the birth rates.
	If people felt that they needed children, they'd have them.
	Like they did in the past.
	They had children because they thought they'd need their children.
	And I think genuinely, because I mean, all of the birth rate initiatives that every country like Denmark and Hungary have tried, they get like a 5% increase in the birth rate, which is not nearly enough to solve the problem.
	And so it's obviously not that, right?
	It's obviously not tax breaks.
	It's obviously not any of these things.
	What it is, is I think people think, well, I'll just rely on a pension and an African who's been paid to wipe my ass or something, right?
	It's like, no, sorry.
	If that option is taken away, you will make provision.
	And that means having families.
	That means raising children.
	That means, you know, actually loving the people around you rather than just relying on the government.
	So, I mean, and I realize it's gone quite far off a right of return.
	And I'm being a bit flippant there, obviously.
	If we're going to take any immigrants, man, I would much rather take Anglosphere immigrants than anywhere else, frankly, because obviously it makes perfect sense.
	But I don't want this constant retreat either.
	I'm very tired of the constant retreat.
	You hear this from the Americans all the time.
	The Americans are like, oh, if you don't like it, we'll just move to another place.
	It's like, all right, so you're just going to leave that to them?
	You're just going to let them take that, are you?
	Oh, how much further are you going to retreat?
	Are you going to retreat all the way to Alaska?
	You know, what is your plan here?
	Like, the last whites in America are going to be just a colony in Alaska, are they?
	You fucking pussies.
	No, you should be...
	Like, we used to conquer stuff.
	We used to take stuff over.
	Why are we retreating constantly?
	No, we should be standing our ground and saying, no, this is how things are going to be.
	Because actually, we are good people.
	Look at our societies.
	There's good societies.
	These are moral societies.
	These are productive societies.
	We actually do know how a civilization should be run.
	And I'm just tired of taking advice or demands off of people from failed societies.
	Why have you come here?
	You've come here because we got this right and you got it wrong.
	The reason it's not the other way around is because we're doing the right thing and you're doing the wrong thing.
	So we're not changing a damn thing for you people.
	That's what we should be saying, I think.
	I think we're going to...
	I'm going to take another one over here.
	Do you want to take another one?
	Yes, Alice.
	Hi, Carl.
	Great to see you here tonight.
	Quick question as we head towards the end of the evening, if you don't mind.
	Do you have in mind any practical steps that people like us could be taking?
	So people who share the sorts of concerns that you raised here tonight, in terms of what we should be doing, what we should be doing to change things.
	I mean, things that come to mind are other things we should be donating money to, other things we should be donating time to.
	Should we be campaigning politically?
	And if so, how?
	Who are people like blotting in your source and that?
	So there's no one answer I can give because everyone's situation is different.
	So like we were saying that you couldn't really talk to this with your friends because of the social circles we're in.
	Totally understandable, totally normal.
	I assume that everyone here supports the new culture forum or subscribes to Lotus Eaters or something like that.
	These are really, no, no, but these are really tangible things you can actually do that makes our lives a lot easier because of course there's no big money behind us.
	Like if Elon is listening, we're happy to take your big money.
	It's just there isn't any around.
	So it is a grassroots movement, this sort of, you know, the right wing in Britain is very grassroots.
	So supporting whoever it is you like, whether it's, you know, Saga of Akkad or Richard IV or, you know, the New Culture Forum or whoever it is, that's always worth your time.
	Because for most people, it's going to be like five pounds a month on Patreon or whatever.
	To them, it's everything, right?
	Because our funding is always precarious, as Thomas can well attest to.
	Our funding, it's always precarious.
	It could always disappear like that.
	And so actually knowing that we're going to be able to pay the rent next month on the building or pay the BT bills so we can actually broadcast on the internet, that is actually really important.
	And I don't doubt that goes for every right-wing influencer or organization in the entire country.
	And overseas, I mean, maybe overseas is different in America, but like in Australia, you know, in the non-American areas of the Anglosphere, this is genuinely important.
	So I'm not saying donate to me, just help whoever it is you like, right?
	The people that you like, don't take them for granted.
	Because especially in this country, I mean, it's entirely possible that tomorrow we get a knock on the door from the cops who say, no, we've taken exceptions, something you tweeted, you are now a thought criminal, you're coming down to the station with us.
	We're going to need all the help we can get in situations like that.
	So those, for us as influencers, are the real tangible things.
	But there are also real tangible things that you can do in your social life.
	Like one thing is really important, and I think Dominic Cummings talked about this.
	It's basically you want to lead like a right-wing jihad of your local council, right?
	Because local councils are really unpopular.
	Nobody wants to be on the local council because it's boring.
	You have to do boring things that are not very interesting.
	It's not paid.
	However, it would be better to have a bunch of like-minded, non-libby, lefty, you know, freaks running the local council than not.
	It would be much better to have our guys in charge of something than their guys in charge of something.
	And if we don't show up, their guys take it by default.
	So we have to get involved.
	And it does mean sacrificing some of your time.
	It does mean getting off your ass.
	I know it's cold out there.
	I know you've got Netflix or the internet and it's just so much easier to set home.
	But that's how they won the war so far.
	We have to be active and have to get involved, which is why I've come here for free tonight.
	It's just costing me money.
	I'm not getting anything from it.
	But I think it's important.
	I think these sorts of events are genuinely morale raising and important for people to be a part of.
	And I'm so glad that you've all come, by the way.
	Otherwise, this would have been already embanking every room.
	But it's these small things that really are what we, the small people, we can do.
	It's genuinely, and it's the sort of thing you can't really quantify either.
	You'll never know how genuinely useful what you've done is.
	But when you can see the tide that's raising everything up, you'll have been a part of it.
	And it's all like, you know, it couldn't be done individually.
	It can only be done collectively.
	So it's basically we all have to just pitch in, even if it's only a little bit, even if it's only infrequently.

▲