John Sweeney (Scrumpmonkey) is a content creator and internet personality in his spare time, and an engineer in real life. He cut his teeth streaming about culture war issues with the likes of Sargon of Akkad, but has since graduated to more serious topics. Evelyn Grant is an economics graduate, occasional guest on The Academic Agent and outspoken advocate for a revolutionary mindset on The Right. Some people call her “The Blackpill Dinner Lady.” Together they co-host a podcast on Youtube and Substack, as well as hosting events in real life via Nomos Events.
Telegram: http://t.me/EvScr123
Substack: https://antipolitics.substack.com
Evelyn's Twitter: https://x.com/dg115511
John Twitter: https://x.com/NomosEvents
Buy their ‘Antipolitics’ book: http://wyflings.com↓ ↓ ↓
↓ ↓ ↓Brand Zero is a small skincare and wellbeing business based in Nailsworth in the heart of Gloucestershire, with a strong eco-friendly, zero-waste, cruelty-free ethos. Brand Zero sells a range of wonderfully soothing natural skincare, haircare, toothcare and wellbeing products, mostly hand made, with no plastic packaging or harsh chemicals. All our products are 100% natural and packaged in recyclable or compostable tin, paper or glass.
Discount code: JAMES10
www.brandzeronaturals.co.uk
↓ ↓ How environmentalists are killing the planet, destroying the economy and stealing your children's future.
In Watermelons, an updated edition of his ground-breaking 2011 book, James tells the shocking true story of how a handful of political activists, green campaigners, voodoo scientists and psychopathic billionaires teamed up to invent a fake crisis called ‘global warming’.This updated edition includes two new chapters which, like a geo-engineered flood, pour cold water on some of the original’s sunny optimism and provide new insights into the diabolical nature of the climate alarmists’ sinister master plan.Purchase Watermelons by James Delingpole here: https://jamesdelingpole.co.uk/Shop/↓ ↓ ↓
Buy James a Coffee at:https://www.buymeacoffee.com/jamesdelingpole
The official website of James Delingpole:https://jamesdelingpole.co.uk
x
Welcome to the Dellingbod with me, James Dellingpole.
And I just wanted to tell you about something really exciting coming up quite shortly.
It's James Dellingpole's birthday bash.
His big birthday bash, I believe it's been called.
Can you guess why?
Well, unfortunately, I've got a big birthday coming up.
I don't normally like to celebrate these things, but this one is kind of unavoidable.
It's not actually on my birthday.
It's on August the 1st.
My actual birthday was held on the anniversary of the day when the atomic bomb didn't go off over Hiroshima because nukes aren't real and it was a napalm strike.
But that's another story.
So my big birthday bash is on August the 1st and the highlights include, well, I suppose the highlight is me chatting on stage, doing a Delling Pod live with Bob Moran.
Now, apart.
possibly from my brother Dick who's obviously easy to talk to because he's my brother I think Bob is is one of the people I most enjoy chatting with him because he's bright obviously he's got hinterland he does He doesn't take prisoners and the conversation could go in any direction and it probably will.
I'm really looking forward to our chat.
So thank you Bob for appearing on the stage with me.
Also we've got Dick.
Dick will be there of course and he'll be playing base with unregistered chickens.
I've also got some of my friends from the world of natural health coming up and if you arrive early enough you might be able to try some of their potions or even their treatments.
I'm not sure what they want to do but there'll be stalls and things to look at and there'll be pizza.
There'll be pizza, really delicious.
The last time, last event I had, we got the same caterers.
Food is extra, obviously, but the pizzas were really good and they also did these really nice I'm quite fussy about food, these nice I think it was pulled beef, something like that, it was just food you'd want to eat.
I think the best thing about these events is not even about me, it's about all the other wonderful people that turn up.
You will be amazed.
These are like the best friends you've never met, because you'll suddenly feel, Hang on a second, I'm not alone.
There are other crazys just like me.
They're really, really fun, these events.
I would do them much more often, but unfortunately I get so nacked because of my tedious illness thing.
I mean, I've barely recovered from the last one.
It's in the middle, it's in central England, I will tell you.
It is surrounded by beautiful countryside, there'll be BBs and stuff you can stay in.
I would do that if I were you.
It's on a Friday night, August 1st, I mentioned, but you might want to make a weekend of it because there's lots of stuff to see around.
Or you could come early and have a walk, I don't know, whatever.
Anyway, I hope I will see you there.
August 1st, James's big birthday bash.
It's going to be fun.
Limited number, strictly limited number of tickets.
There's only going to be 20 VIP tickets for reasons which will become obvious if you buy one.
They're for people who want to have special quality time with James.
Otherwise, they just get a normal ticket.
You will have fun, but please be quick because there are limited tickets.
They're being very strict on numbers, the venue.
So get in there as soon as you can.
And won't it be great?
Like August, I think is a really boring month.
month everyone goes away you'll need something to cheer you up for the fact that you're not in Ibiza or Greece or wherever you would like to be um this will make up for the fact and we'll all be able to commiserate with one another and have a really really good time I'm so looking forward to seeing you there at James's big birthday bash thank you can't wait well to the Dellingpod
with me James Dellingpod and I know I always say I'm excited about this special guest but before we meet him let's have a word from our sponsor if you're anything like me and of course you are a teeny bit because you enjoy my podcast you probably
reach that stage where you are trying to get rid of all the big pharma crap in your house and replace it with all natural products and I I would heartily recommend that you follow my example and get loads and loads of stuff from brand zero.
I've talked about them before.
Brand Zero Naturals and they do all sorts of goodies.
My bathroom cabinet is now stuffed with brand Zero Naturals goodies.
My probably my current favorite is the pain balm.
Pain balm with magnesium, DMSO, CBD oil.
It's the business.
You've got back ache.
When I've got sciatica, I use pain balm.
I woke up in the middle of the night, the other night, with knee pain.
I rubbed the pain balm into my knee and it went.
My other favorite at the moment is this magnesium oil spray, which you rub into your calves and the soles of your feet and it helps give you a really good night's sleep.
There were some new products recently.
Prickly pear seed oil, which is amazing for the skin, especially around the eyes.
The Moroccans call it natural Botox and people say it makes a real difference.
Rose balm.
Oh yeah.
Moroccan Dagmus honey.
It's amazing.
It's medicinal.
It tingles in your throat and it makes you feel better.
There's loads of CBD products, 5%, 10%, 20% CBD, a special gold blend with the nasty, the nasty, planty taste taken out.
The toothbrushes, I love that.
I use their bamboo toothbrushes every day.
It's a lovely company run by a lovely person called Sasha.
And obviously there's no nasty stuff in there.
there it's not tested cruelly on animals or anything like that and it's not made by big pharma i really really love their stuff recommend it heartily you'll find them at brandzeronaturals.co.uk that's brandzeronaturals.co.uk enjoy um scrump and it is evelyn isn't it not evelyn yes is that is that the scottish pronunciation
i i don't know i've always known it as evelyn but We live in enough of a proximity to Wales that I get both and people are like, oh, which one do you want?
And it's like, I'm not really bothered, neither oral do.
Yeah.
Yeah, I do like your I do like your accent.
What is what I know that Scotland has about 250 billion different accents.
What what is yours?
Oh, just a mess.
Neither of my parents are native Glasgow, but I am, so I didn't get the full on twang from them, which is maybe why you can at least somehow understand me.
But then I picked up the whole talking too quick thing, which I always get chinned for.
Backpack.
I like that.
Backpack.
Yeah.
That's terrific.
You picked up a little bit of the north of England.
Yeah.
And Evelyn, we had lots of questions last time.
Are you a boy or a girl?
Well, I suppose people aren't they going to be satisfied with that answer?
I would consider myself an MTF transsexual if people really desperately know.
MTF?
Yeah, well, people did ask.
And in a way, it's quite...
It's sort of relevant in the...
The sort of spheres in which we operate.
I mean, I didn't think that...
But people are interested in that kind of thing, aren't they?
Depends for what reason.
A lot of people are interested in it.
and are not well-intentioned.
And that's not necessarily me suggesting that they're not allowed to dislike me.
You're allowed to dislike me for all sorts of reasons, but not your own psychosexual trauma that you have suffered.
That's not my fault.
We do come across a few people who use, let's say, this space as a shelter from their own feelings sometimes.
So we don't have as much trouble as you think with it, to be fair.
Most of it's online.
But of those people that we've met who do have trouble, it's usually or generally to do with the fact that they become quite hyper focused on it.
Most people, frankly, don't seem to care, especially kind of down the pub stuff.
It doesn't, yeah.
It doesn't really affect too much of what we do.
But I suppose coming from very unusual backgrounds is part of why we do what we do.
Really?
We were we were there at our local on Saturday.
Yeah.
And I did not stick out like a sore thumb.
But there was an African gentleman who had turned up and this is not what we normally have in our local.
And he stuck out like a sore bloody thumb.
In a way that I don't.
So.
Yeah.
You know, take that for what it's worth.
How did he how did he um how did he get on that evening?
Was he was he was given a friendly No, he sat with his own little group of friends, I believe, who are probably just recently school leavers, judging by their taste in drinks and music.
I've just been, actually, I'm not going to name it because it's unfair, but I've just been to an English holiday resort where when you see a black face or an Asian face, it's really quite, it's really quite, you know, they stick out like a sore thumb.
And it's interesting that when I was a child, that was what England was like.
It's very we not the case.
Really?
I'm in my thirties, but it's, yeah, the kind of slightly rural Northern England in the early nineties, nineteen ninety four, nineteen ninety five, when I start to, you know, remember things properly, extremely, you didn't see them.
You really didn't, especially out, well, out here where we are, which is not quite, you know, not in a big city or adjacent to the countryside.
Yeah.
And you really just, it was jarring and it was different.
But being, being told that you can't see that as jarring and different was also jarring because it's, well, it is different.
It is jarring.
This is a place where, yeah.
This is, this is, there was a sort of transitional moment in my in my velt anshaung if you like where when I was sorry I'm rambling but but why not we do ramble on this on this podcast there was a period in my life when I was writing for the for the times um because I was very friendly with Sarah Vine for example who was a she was a commissioning editor at the time she was really really good one of the best editors I've worked to and
she and she liked my writing and and just just would be happy to point me at any subject and I sort of got in with the with the times people for a bit with Giles Coran and what's her face, Caitlin Moran.
And I remember going out one evening with, I think, Caitlin, and realizing that her view of the world and my view, up until that point, I thought, well, we can all get along, we're all mates, and we're all in journalism, and we can all, you know.
But that evening I realized, no, there was a massive, massive gulf between how these people saw the world, these liberals, I suppose you'd call them, and how I saw it.
And that was one of the key differences, that they felt that you shouldn't notice, that it was just fine.
You'd like roll over.
What's wrong with the racial characteristic of Britain changing completely?
Who cares?
Hey, man, it's all real people.
And I was thinking, why are you making me feel like a freak for thinking the way I do?
It's more that southerners are a bit treated with a suspicion, never mind foreigners.
And that's the way it is in most of England.
If you're from a different part of England, back then you stuck out like a sultan.
It's very obvious people who were from the south of England who were wine bar types, if they went into a pub here, you could tell.
And that's just regional differences.
National differences are even bigger well what i find quite funny is if we can almost look at ourselves as like a staggering of both ages and geography working our way up to where i was up in glasgow you know i went to school in the 2000s it was still a case like we had the token minority who was mixed race had a scottish accent And I think the only other minority we had at one point was some Chinese girl that got in because she had good grades for some school elsewhere.
And that was it.
Yeah.
Whereas in the time that I was at university in Stirling, over the three or four years of that, it went from disregarding the student population and the demographics of that.
Even the locals in the town, all of a sudden, it's like 10, 15 percent brown now.
It was white when I got here three, four years ago.
And now there's just these Pakistani men looming in the corners of streets and stuff.
Yeah.
Yeah.
And we're not supposed to notice or think it's or think it's a problem.
does your demographic and felt and shown which is one of my favourite words, sorry, differ from mine.
I mean, would you consider me a bit too out there and kind of crazy conspiracy for where you are?
No, I wouldn't say so.
I think a lot of people misjudge, I think, what we do because we don't go down as much of the conspiracy stuff maybe as we used to at one point.
But I think it's become...
It's also the most awful things among the modern world are incredibly boring.
Yes.
And very difficult to talk to people about.
The salacious conspiracy side of it, the side that grabs people and makes them do self-initiated research, we find often leads them into cul-de-sacs.
Or to put it another way around, my conspiracy obsession is liberal democracy.
Yeah, the real conspiracy is decline and it's going on all around.
To be fair, to be fair, that is a pretty good conspiracy to be dealing with.
I mean, that is a lifetime's work in a way.
Well, it's maybe some people would consider a generalization but it's it's how we have come to terms with you know you used the phrase there wellton shrung you know worldview it's sort of how we've got there ourselves is ultimately being so cynical that we actually turn around to other people's sort of conspiracy stuff and go well yes and what about that that's horrible if it's true and yes something should be done about it but what well there's very a lot of stuff is what
we consider conspiracy jacketed take for example fluoride the scientific consensus is that heavy fluorination of water lowest human intelligence that is the settled science on fluoride and yet if you talk to people to people about water fluorination, they'll treat you like you're talking about lizard people on the moon.
But that's part of it.
That's part of the design of it.
Fluoride and fluorination have been pushed off into the conspiracy sphere.
And therefore, even though there's masses of scientific evidence that this lowers human intelligence, people just ignore it like they ignore all things that are hyper real to them.
It might as well be Bigfoot to many people.
And that's what we find is a quite disturbing effect of the conspiracy sphere is that in talking about something like it is a conspiracy rather than settled reality, you make people ignore it.
Whereas we don't talk about these things like the conspiracy.
They're not conspiracies.
They're out in the open.
They will just tell you these things.
I think a fantastic example of this is the stuff as ARIA and Dominic Cummins and this whole institute that developed all these new techniques for basically blocking the sun out to combat global warming.
And you know, this has been prime red meat conspiracy material for 20 years at least, you know, post 9-11 especially.
And then the, you know, The Guardian at one point said, this stuff's not real.
They'd never do this.
And then you've got like Daily Mail paper coming out.
Two weeks later, it was just a government announcement.
And the government said, yes, we're going to be blocking the sun out.
We live in a post-conspiracy world where the Guardian has a little cartoon about air release.
You know, it's got the cloud coming out of the plane to block out the sun.
And they're going, this is what the government's proposing to do.
And it's just, it's madness because people go, wait a minute, I've seen that.
But that's conspiracy.
But I'm confused.
And I think confusing people is a very overlooked power that the current order has.
If people are simply confused by the absolute din of politics, then they're paralyzed to act.
They don't know what's real.
fear not The solution to your confusion is here.
I was wondering, listen, I'm really sorry.
As you know, I've been away on holiday.
Oh, it's fine.
Should I read it?
I enjoy it?
Yes, I think there's quite a lot you get out of it and I think actually there's some things that we could probably discuss within it without really getting too into the meat.
I've always wondered for your sort of sake of argument, do you care for free speech at all anymore?
I know you've spent enough time associated with at one point Mr Toby Young, or Lord Young, sorry, to give him his official title.
Yeah, I think the whole free speech thing was just a kind of distraction, wasn't it?
Just another trap.
freedom of whom to say what yeah yeah okay one guy gets released from prison because he put up Nazi stickers but now you've enshrined a right for thousands of journalists to continue to denigrate Britain and its people.
Does that put us on a better footing?
I'm not really sure.
And I think that's really a large part of what we've tried to do with this book is we've taken all our little different essays and snippets and collected bits of work that really is our more contrarian and controversial stuff even on the far right if you want to call it that because we just don't play up to any liberal priors.
We don't believe to anything like that.
For example, one of our things, the book starts with a series of very short, not quite essays, but mantras as we describe them, one of which is man is not born free or equal, which is true.
But if you truly believe that man is not born free or equal, then there are massive implications if you use that as the basis for your worldview.
Because it's clearly true.
Man is not born free because we are beholden to each other, our families, our communities.
We're not born alone.
And we're certainly not born equal.
If you meet people in general, you can tell that people are not equal and they never will be.
But these two precepts are what the modern world, you know, the opposite of them is what the modern world is built on, that people are born free and equal.
And it categorically is not true.
Who is responsible for that bullux?
Is it Russo and people like that?
Yes, I'd say there's quite a big collection and it's just a discussion that was ending up sort of happening.
Mills, Bentham, all of these people initially clothed in Christian niceties, especially Bentham, who was an atheist.
What humanism developed from?
But humanism developed from universalist weirdos couching their ultra-universalism in Christian terms.
And that has been a huge problem in the Protestant world, especially.
And it seems that really...
People thought, well, that's nice, isn't it?
I think the problem is that it's nice.
It really appeals to the sensibilities of Middle England.
Middle England laps that up.
It's how they would like the world to be.
Can you define universalism?
Well, it's the, again, it's the idea that all people are free and equal, the universal man.
In the economic terms, it's homo economicus, but universalism is the idea that really people are interchangeable, that they are blank slates, that we're all one race, the human race.
There's not immutable differences between us, and with enough resources and care, anyone can achieve anything.
Right.
And you're right.
That is absolutely one of the dominant ideas of certainly Western civilization.
But that's really we wrote the book in stages because we wrote these essays that are based on the idea that okay we know this now what?
We know that democracy isn't real now what?
We know that we're ruled from above now what?
We know the tragic vision of man is true and that man can never be free or equal now what?
What does that mean in the modern world?
Yes, and I think especially with those mantras, it's a great little introduction for people because it's us going into the notion of oh well, it's not just the fact that multiculturalism is bad.
It's that multiculturalism is a force that destroys our culture.
If you hand me the book, there can be., there can be, there's no sort of middle ground here where we have this, this neutral culture that's pluralistic and ours exists to the side of that.
No, ours gets destroyed by this pluralistic culture because all the divisions, all the particularities, the things that made it unique, powerful, have been deracinated, universalized, if you will.
Yeah, Nima, yes, Nima Parvini, academic agent, wrote us a lovely introduction, sorry, lovely foreword, I must say.
I shouldn't mix those two up when he wrote the book.
He wrote us a nice foreword and I must thank him for that.
But I would tell you what, if you want to get a sense of the book, it's not very long.
I could just read you the quick introduction.
Why don't you do that?
Okay.
anti-politics noun reaction against or re-sorry reaction against or rejection of the practices or attitudes associated with traditional politics we want to live in a different world one in which the structures of power are displayed honestly and the top-down nature of sovereignty is presented openly What you will read in this series of essays and speeches written and presented between 2021 and 2024,
because we did present some of this stuff in person in front of crowds of people, which is actually very edifying, I must say, is our attempts to grapple with what it means to truly reject.
all assumptions and priors of post war liberalism.
To reject the abstract mental technology of ideology and describe political reality as it is.
To reassert first principles as simple as the fact that for human organization to exist, someone must be in charge.
To achieve this, we seek the synthesis of top down and revolutionary thinking that is not the self parody of Shab Gavar Tish leftism.
Figures such as Schmidt, Alul, Francis, Fengler, Bernham, Moscow, Prato, the Juvenile Lenin, Hopper., Gottfried and many others hold pieces of a model that scythes away the political waffle that comes before the statement all governments make and therefore we rule.
To engage earnestly in politics and the abstract rules of the political process is to already have been defeated.
This is why we engage in anti-politics and why we gave the project that name.
We aim to systematically strip the security blanket of the process from people's minds and lay bare that power is still the same as it was in the age of kings.
It is simply wielded by lesser men with backs too weak and shoulders too narrow to wield it openly.
You can have a good king or you can have a bad king, but someone will be in charge.
The mental technologies, the framing devices of post war politics cannot alter this reality.
A set of simple heuristics on Manchester's surviving modernity precede the long form essays in this book and act as a primer for the framing our work takes place within.
Most political writing, even on the supposed far right, wraps controversial issues in liberal mores the way you would disguise medicine to feed to a dog.
We will not do our readers the disservice of attempting to cushion the blow.
We instead take top-down ideas through to their natural conclusion and to the maximalist position.
Very little in this book is truly original, bar our turns of phrase and exact language.
The tragic vision of man as simultaneously risen animal and fallen god was understood throughout history.
That man can free himself from his nature through the application of political magic.
is the great lie at the heart of the modern world.
You cannot vote yourself back into the garden.
Um, yes, and we do a couple of thankers after that, but that's the introductionction to the book um i like the thing about the dog yeah it's just what i like your refusal to play that game the dog's got to have his medicine it's like well you are not a dog and you know we will not treat you like one it is that people do that though they do they lack they they wrap these controversial ideas of immutable racial differences,
of differences in civilizations between people, of differences even in internal morality in this liberal coating.
Yes.
Again, like you would.
And they go, oh, look, guys, don't worry.
It's hard on the inside but it's got this liberal coating to make it easy for you to swallow and that liberal coating is always nonsense i mean it's one of my pet peeves someone will delve into like ethnonationalist arguments and they will approach this idea that you know races are not equal and that we can't necessarily function together, but then they'll still say that this is a problem of integration.
They have not gone the whole step and realised that actually you can't integrate them.
You can only destroy.
And that's really understanding the sort of entropic and tragic elements really of things like multiculturalism or democracy.
To us, I think is much more interesting than the day-to-day sort of almost like heat magazine style pro wrestling facade that it all really is.
A punching duty, whatever you want to call it.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Now, I'm reminded now why I found you so distinctive.
The last time I had you both on, you don't...
don't sugarcoat the pill and um it's good because it's very very hard i mean i i consider myself pretty hardcore Well, pretty, no, pretty intellectually honest, let's say.
I don't like, I have a very low border threshold, and I don't like, I don't like throat clearing.
I like to get straight in there.
But even I sometimes catch myself doing that thing, that sort of, I'm going to make a tough argument, but I'm going to make it, I'm going to show you first of all that I'm a nice guy who cares, and here's what I'm going to do.
You don't bother with that.
You must first own the liberal within.
Yes, and I think to be fair, it's it has been a long winded process, but I think we have both got to a point where we understand certain aspects of the state in general and the British state that we don't really think it's worth giving anything the benefit of a doubt.
I think naivety is one of the most d little essays I wrote in the book, the masses are red pilled.
Now what?
And the whole notion of this is, well, let's say everyone did know that the COVID jabs are killing everyone right in the midst of 2021.
What would they have done about it?
I mean, where was the organized force that was going to go take Matt Hancock out in the streets and seek justice for the people?
That was not going to happen, was it?
No.
So are you proposing solutions?
No, because there aren't any.
In the traditional scientific language, there are no political solutions.
That's what I'm engaging in.
Anti-politics, but the solution is to.
not let this destroy you.
It's to realise that politics isn't real and what is real is your own life.
Yes.
It's your own community.
It's your own family.
People ask us what they can do.
It's like, well, you're you.
You know where you are.
I can't answer that question.
Only you can.
I don't know your situation.
And I tell people, look, if you don't feel like you're in a position to help, you're probably not.
But if you do feel like you're in a position to help, you better bloody help.
There's very few people who are involved in actively destroying this country.
When you understand top-down politics, I don't blame the masses.
In fact, we see the masses as passive and they are.
It's not normal people's fault that this country is in the state to sit.
They have just been going to work, eating their meals, doing their job and living quietly.
Most people just live quietly and they are not to blame.
And really, I think that's one of the main things I want to communicate to people is you don't feel like you have should have to do something.
What you should do is look after yourself because it's not your fault.
You didn't do this.
You didn't vote for this because the ballot box isn't connected to the levers of power.
The levers of power, you know, they go nowhere.
The people in power subject people to power and it's not the masses' fault that the country ended up this way.
I think people who think that way are cruel.
Really, it's not normal.
Normal people are subjected to power.
That's that's the main.
thing you learn from a truly top-down vision of the world.
And to blame them and to chastise them and to try and punish them in a hypothetical new world would be, in my view, insane.
But a lot of people accuse us of being extremely pro-violence.
But it's very few people who are destroying this country.
Very few.
totally with you and it's one of the few occasions where people, normies, are
always spouting platitudes um but whenever i catch a somebody who purports to be awake or semi-awake coming up coming up with a line about man's inhumanity to man and about how we can't trust it and we left our own devices we'll always do bad things and and you know we've got all these characteristics within us which which tend towards disaster i'm thinking actually no you're what you're doing is
you're you're spouting propaganda on behalf of the tiny minority who control you who want you to think that they want you to think that well we can't be trusted we have to be controlled I don't think it's true is it I think it would depend what you mean by that I think it's man's if we were to look at you know, think of him as like a herd animal.
I think it is man's natural want to be ordered around, to be told what to do, to be directed in life, whether that's by a king, a lord, or a priest, or whatever.
Or a wife, or a...
You're right, people don't need to be forced to accept order.
When order is in their benefit, they gratefully accept it.
Yes, it's not order is not the problem.
the shape of the order and what it relates to.
And I think to be in service wholly to one master is a much more fulfilling and morally sort of...
Which is what we've done for thousands of years prior.
So what you're saying we want...
I don't think it really makes a difference what you call it.
It's fundamentally about recognizing that there are people in power and they will do what they will.
and any form of popular revolt or popular sentiment will not change their actions or their decision.
It's also that you used to be subject to power locally, but you were mostly subject to extended family.
Your extended family is what kept you in line.
It's what kept you prosperous.
And your extended family, again, your patriarch of your family would probably have a relationship with some kind of lord, who would have a relationship with some kind of baron.
And these natural human groups develop into societies.
And not to get too autistic about the politics of it, but if you look at medieval England, it's a propertarian anarchist state.
Everything has contracts and fealty and oaths, everything's signed, everything's on paper, even the serfs have a contract.
The point is that people don't mind belonging somewhere.
It's that when you, when the, well, one of the thinkers that we draw on a lot is Jack Alaw, and he explains the process of creating mass society.
We live in a mass society and that didn't exist in the old world.
People lived in their families, they live in their extended families, they live in their villages, they live in their wider communities, and very rarely they saw outside of that because that was their everyday structure.
But what the state did is it came in and it smashed all of those things.
And it said, well, yeah, you've got no one to depend on now.
now guess you depend on us eh it atomized them to to become a mass society you must first smash the natural small groups that people belong to which are the family the church the village and the manor and all of those things have been diminished and when did this happen when did it start well it's been an incredibly long process and i think you can think about it as far back as you want i mean I think one of the essays I proposed to one of the Shieldings events,
I went all the way back to try and create like a slightly absurd but I thought quite useful example of, well, at some point there would have been patriarchal gods for each house.
And at some point the conglomeration of those houses into a polity for their own protection or their want to seek some kind of imperium over another set of houses would have required these people to agree upon some characteristic amongst their different patriarchal gods in their own homes.
in a way have this entropic process where they're sort of universalizing the beliefs and the political formula to justify expanding the polity itself and this is just a continuous process so then you're no longer someone of this house you're someone of the this local god, And then you're someone of the village church, and then you're someone of the country.
The big difference, though, is that in previous ages, kings subsumed local groups and aristocracy that didn't destroy them.
They got them to swear fealty, but they didn't smash them to pieces because they saw their utility.
I think the big difference, really post-18th century, is the lies, is the veneer over it.
The people who have convinced themselves that someone doesn't have to be in power, that we cannot have a king, rather than using different euphemisms for it.
I mean, the French Revolution being a great example.
Oh, yeah, we don't have a king, we've got an emperor.
But that's the way human organization works.
We can't think unless we think of somebody being in charge as a person.
And that's just how human thought works.
We can't conceive of anything else.
And the real problem isn't this process when it's done honestly, when it's done openly.
It can have its effects, but as long as people understand that, okay, I am being ruled by an empire.
We are a vassal state.
You know, when conquest happens, conquest happens generally on an empire.
honestly you are a subjected people and we are in power that isn't a lie that's the truth it's it's a horrible truth for the subjected people often but it is at least the truth what really happened was the ideology which we didn't regard as basicically not real.
Ideology exists in the realm of thought.
Ideology isn't real in the same way that the exercise of power is real.
It isn't real in the same way that in the old world being put to the sword was real.
It is a framing device.
It allows us to filter reality, but it doesn't change reality itself.
Or in most terms, post-hop justifications.
justifications for those in power.
And when the justification for being in power stopped being unrighteous, Or the natural order is that I am more powerful than you and you are subjected to it.
That was the ethos of the old world.
And people say it's horrible, but at least it was honest.
The world that rescued us from that is simply telling us that it's not real.
It's telling us that power doesn't exist.
And I think it's the lie that's the big difference.
We've had a process of centralization and, you know, aristocracy, Hans Humphrey Hopper, what did he do?
From aristocracy to monarchy to democracy, which he described as a decivilization process.
We're not quite sure I fully agree with.
But there is this idea that centralizing things does destroy some of the unique character of what lay there before.
But lying about it, having this idea that we don't need somebody to be in charge.
In fact, you are in charge.
We've got a democracy.
Everything's your fault.
If you can observe the world as it is, that is clearly a lie.
But that is the stated beliefs of the British state is a continuous lie.
And that is the problem, in that power isn't the problem.
But lying about power and not exercising it in a way that is honest and heroic is evil and always will be.
But I don't want to...
which is God.
We're answerable to God, we're answerable to nobody else.
Okay, so there's the stuff in Romans 13 about, you know, you've got to work with whichever arbitrary authority is in power at the moment.
But ultimately, you are answerable morally to God.
I mean, isn't that a way a form of anti-politics?
Sort of, but in that sense we are out of the garden.
We are not just answerable to God anymore because at some point we are subject to mortality.
The problem with that is that politics is the realm of men.
We do get back though, you know?
I mean, we don't go back to Eden, but we do, like the deal is, it's not, it's not, God didn't just go, right, piss off, you know, you mess with the snake, off you go.
I've had it with you.
That isn't quite the deal.
As we've identified and seen on Twitter and in YouTube debates a million times over, there is a fundamental problem of universalism with Christianity and the people who are in control of or who have greater influence over what Christianity is in the public eye, they will never allow it to be that sort of force that you want it to be, where it's a metaphysical absolute.
It steps over the universal because it's your worship of God and it transcends all this.
I've been having a discussion about this recently about the Catholic Church and the height of Catholic Europe.
And if you look at the height of Catholic Europe, what they do is they modify the gospels quite heavily.
They have liturgy, they have confession, they have transubstantiation, they have the monastic orders.
The power of the church was as an is not very Christlike.
It is extremely powerful, extremely pious and incredibly rich, but it is also the civilizing one of the civilizing forces of Europe.
But the civilizing parts of it, the organized parts of it, the non-biblical parts of it are European.
They're not biblical.
Yes.
How do you go from footwashing insurgent slave religion to high medieval Europe?
Well, Europeans do it, and they do it by the uneasy fusion of Christianity with power, because what the Reformation shows us, and Martin Luther was just autistic about it, he went, that's not what the Gospels say.
But he didn't realize that Christianity and Christian universalism isn't appropriate for people under a certain intelligence threshold.
Protestants want people to have a lovely personal relationship.
It's like, you know, democracy of the people, by the people, for the people, but the people are retarded.
Have you seen that clip?
It's, oh God, it's a famous little clip about America.
It's, to be fair, he's some weird Middle Eastern cult leader, but he just goes, it's democracy for the people, by the people, of the people.
But the people are retarded.
And it's true, but it's funny.
But that's the problem with Protestant universalism is that not everyone is mentally capable of having the abstract idea of God held in their head.
Not everyone's capable of having a personal relationship with God.
That's where the priest emerges.
That's why the priest creates the initiatory religion.
If you look at high Catholic Europe, the height of Christian Europe, it is not a personal religion.
You get God via the priest.
And if the church says that you don't have a priest, well, you're out of luck.
You're separate from God.
That isn't biblical, but it's initiatory.
And that's what a religion, a religion like that needs to be.
And when that breaks down, when you don't have the this is the word of God, we will interpret it for you, because quite frankly, if you interpret it yourself, you'll get it wrong, that's not allowed to be said anymore.
That was the spirit of high medieval Europe.
Okay.
This is about...
Sorry.
I mean, I stated what I think is the essential nature of Christianity.
And you then turned it to be a thing about the church, which I think is not the same thing.
Of course, how do we interface with the church?
Well, no, it's not.
The Catholic Church, you said yourself, is a political force.
It uses the essence of Christianity and adds a few bells and whistles and traditions and stuff to use it as a way of creating a new hierarchy, the relationship between the priest and through the medium of confession, for example, through the medium of mass, through the medium of the liturgy, often originally in Latin and so on.
All this stuff is clearly designed to put a power structure around, to build a power structure around Christianity.
I don't look at the Catholic Church and go, yeah, that's my Christianityity and I think we're talking about completely different things.
I'm just inviting you to agree with me that if you are to take the position that I am answerable only to God, I look at the teachings of God through the Bible, through Scripture and so on.
And it is very, very clear to me, from my understanding of that particular arrangement, that that is my anti-politics.
Because I'm not...
I don't give a toss-wall.
What's his name?
Kirsten or whatever.
I don't believe in these systems.
I want to live outside the system, and I mostly do.
I think possibly, maybe not necessarily the mistake you are making, because ultimately it's something that becomes up for interpretation.
And I'm not attempting to make some appeal to atheism or Nietzscheanism or paganism.
But to me, from the stuff that I have read, I think there's a bit of it in Francis Parker, Yawkey, there's other stuff in some of the older things I've read about Rome and Greece and whatever else.
What I think more is that what you're trying to get at this this thing that keeps you as you see yourself as a Christian, yeah, sort of controlled and accountable by, is really more a unique mode of operation and way of life that European man engages in.
And that's the difference.
It's that you have a sense of unity with your fellow white man.
that isn't shared in other races.
That sense of kin, I mean, I think that's a large part of what people are trying to get at when they go and seek Christianity out themselves.
They want that sense of kin and that sense of being something higher, which is in themselves if they recognize it.
Well, that's one of the tragedies of Catholicism is that the Reformation happened because Northern European men knew that transubstantiation didn't happen.
They knew that it doesn't literally become the body and blood of Christ.
And they also knew that the liturgy and many of the power maintenance things of the Catholic Church were made up by them.
But also they needed to be there.
It's the irreconcilable nature between somebody who is religious who has like 120 IQ and somebody who is religious who has 80 IQ.
They are religious in very different ways.
You may have a rich inner spiritual life that you can draw on at will that centers you.
And we tell people to do this if they're capable of it.
There's an essay in there called the Holy Mountain.
We are not people who are atheists.
In fact, are you not atheists?
I'm just a cop or not, but we consider metaphysical absolutists.
No.
Do you believe in the supernatural?
We're not terrorists, really.
metaphysical absolutists.
Do you believe in...
It's quite simple.
And so just briefly, we were made by God in his image.
It depends on the subject.
Man definitely has part of the divine in it.
What that part is, is one of the great things that we try to find out.
That's one of the great questions of human existence is man is clearly in
They just need to be told what to think.
Okay.
The spiritual self-discovery journey is not for everybody.
I mean, I think maybe to make it more simpler, we would agree much more with the idea that we as human beings are devolved from sel something higher not evolving from things that were lower I would probably that gets us on the same because it's slightly controversial in that Christianity works in Europe because it's very European but I wouldn't try and convert Muslims to Christianity I think Islam works in the Islamic world it doesn't work in Europe because it's it's our spirit that's their metaphysical absolute that is their expression of what they believe is God and
to try and strip that from them I think would damage them as a civilization a people right and just briefly do you do you believe in angels and demons are the supernatural forces that manipulate people are definitely summoning things within themselves through things like AI that I think are about as close as I could get to seeing something as a demon.
I think if you're sitting there engaging with some AI all day and it's becoming your new social partner or whatever, then in a sense you really have summoned some sort of, if it's a consciousness and it's an intelligence, as people say it is, you have summoned something otherworldly.
that as far as I'm aware was not made by God.
So if you want to use the word demon for that, I think that's about correct.
The reason I'm asking these questions, it's not because I'm obsessed with Christianity.
It's more that I'm curious to see...
You see, well, I think we do believe absolutely, absolutely that the divine realm, the spiritual realm is real.
We believe that God is real, but I don't know if you call us agnostic because we definitely do believe that God is real, but there's so much to study in that realm that's been hidden and bastardized by the modern world.
I think really a new world, a new political world would need a new spiritual conception.
How do we create?
Because it's clear that Christianity had no defense against managerialism, against mass society.
It was utterly waylaid by it.
The church has failed to prevent the modern world from emerging.
If anything, it was a foundational step in the way that Protestant universalism was a huge foundational step in where we are now.
And that was a lot of Luther, who invented that bit, who introduced not exclusively.
It's inherent in it because Christianity is an insurgent religion.
If you read the Gospels, it's not meant to be a ruling religion in the words of Jesus.
So it's very difficult to reconcile that.
And again, we're not trying to denigrate Christianity.
This is just what happened.
Christianity didn't prevent the modern world we live in from emerging.
So how do we come up with a religious conception that is able to withstand managerialism?
Because Christianity and Christian universalism clearly isn't that.
Right.
So you wouldn't push it as far as I would, which is that essentially Satan is the God of this world and the people who run the world are and always have been under the spell of Satan and they get power in return for their service to the Dark Lord.
I think in the sense that I think the closest sort of maybe Christian thinker that I would align myself with would be someone like Thomas Carlyle.
I think his more perennial sort of ideas around it and his way that great men relate back and forth to religions and that they are aspects of it in the world.
And that particularly during the creation of these new categories of identity and statehood and being a citizen, to him was very much marking out the fact that you were no longer a citizen of God's kingdom.
You were a citizen of Britain, the parliamentary system, and therefore you were taken out of the hands of God.
And there was only one other set of hands in his view that you could go into.
And in a sense, I do sort of agree with that view.
If you're to see it in a kind of polarity or some sort of representation of good or evil in a much more organised way.
It's extremely clear that no matter what you call it, that the people are in charge of evil.
Some of their actions are only explainable by the fact that they are evil.
Yeah.
And that they want to do evil.
There are things that cause them pragmatic harm that they do purely out of spite.
The reason that we don't go for denial.
denominational catch or denominational setting for what we talk about is that really it is non-denominational it there are people who are again like yourself who would be aghast about what you said about catholicism because they think that's the one the one true christian religion and that's the problem we should not talk about it all the time i mean i love my people but they they do think they're the mother church and that everyone else is a heretic well it's just like i'll talk about the problems of the Catholic Church and the Catholic Church doesn't work for self-initiated,
high-intelligence Northern European males.
And that's why the Reformation happened.
But also the Catholic Church is right in many ways in that most people who are farmers, who can't read, need an intermediary to interface with God.
And really, that circle is squared by the fact that these people aren't equal.
They aren't the same.
And a lot of people aren't willing to accept that the differences in people make them experience the divine realm differently and that there cannot be universalism because man is not universal and that that is one of the great squared, you know, unsquared circles of Christianity and of proselytizing and mass conversion religions in general.
I believe that religion should be much more initiatory, that really there should be an elevating circle of things that you understand rather than a flat line of, well, just say you love Jesus and everything will be okay.
Because again, if you're of high enough intelligence and you are someone who's studying theology and history and mysticism.
and the, you know, angels, demons, and good and evil, you understand that there's more than the Sunday school version of Christianity, which is why we don't pitch our flag to any denomination.
Because really metaphysical absolutism is non-denominational.
As long as you believe in God absolutely and you're able to be moral and have a moral code and you're able to acknowledge that great men exist and that we believe Jesus was a great man of history he was he's had a massive impact on history but what does that mean and what does it mean moving forward and what does it mean in a world where we can't unlearn science we can't unknow that certain things are superstition but Again, it's this.
A lot of people want to move backwards.
They want to move backwards to the 14th century or the 18th century.
When we really want to move forward, the way out of this is through.
Again, you can't vote yourself back to the garden, but you can't larp yourself back into the 19th century.
There needs to be some new conception of politics, which I've not written about this.
Again, it's very controversial, but I think there needs to be some new conception of religion that will probably fuse old with new.
And yes, it should be quite Christian.
That's what the New Age wants.
Well, not really.
That's what the baddies want.
That's what Lucifer wants.
Well, Christianity has failed.
The world you live in now is a failure of...
I think it's a failure.
think you still live in christendom the dancing drag children is dancing drag children part of christendom no no no i it's not it's not you can point to me loads of stuff in the world that that that um that i think is is the work of the devil say but i don't to say christianity's failed i mean that's that's a big that's a big claim i mean elements of the it's been infiltrated and corrupted as as as inevitably would happen when you're the enemy of the rule of this world but
in a nigh-global communist atheist system.
system.
The church has been routed to such a degree that our leaders openly disrespect it.
In fact, disrespecting it gives you social kudos.
Christianity has failed politically.
It has failed to chain the political world.
It has failed to prevent the world that we now live in.
And people need to recognize that.
I find Christians very frustrating because they go, oh, we just need to pray about it.
It's like, no, your prayer circle has failed.
I'm sorry.
But you cannot pray the global American empire away.
I hate to do things in the political way.
I hate to do this.
Sorry.
But I'm going to have to do it because I don't hate to do it at all.
I haven't learned this one yet, so I can't quite it by heart.
But you should really check out Psalm 73, because Psalm 73 is all about the stuff that you've been talking about.
And the person who's I don't know if this is a Psalm of David or not, but but the.
The the the Psalmist says, I was grieved at the wicked.
I do also see the ungodly in such prosperity, for they are in no peril of death, but are are lusty and strong they come in no misfortune like other folk neither are they plagued like other men and this is the cause that they are so holden with pride.
and overwhelmed with cruelty, their eyes swell with fatness, and they do even what they lust.
They corrupt each other and speak a wicked blasphemy.
Their taking is against the most high, for they stretch forth their mouth unto the heaven and their tongue goeth through the world.
Therefore fall the people unto them, and thereout suck they no small advantage.
Tush, say they, how should God perceive it?
Is there knowledge in the most high?
So basically the people who the wicked doers are saying it?
God, where is God?
What's he doing about it?
We're getting away with it.
But just because they've got away with it for so long doesn't mean it ain't going to happen.
You just got to be patient.
I often feel like, I don't know, everyone feels like Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego waiting for God to join them in the fire, but God never joins them in the fire.
That's what's happening now.
Well, they don't burn.
Well, no, but people are.
Our civilization is burning.
Yeah, we totally agree on that.
And actually, we agree mostly on the solution, which is to opt out.
I just think that you are slightly in denial of this because you've created this fudge where you describe your.
your spiritual position either you believe in in the supernatural stuff that i've been talking about or or you don't and if you don't it's fine no we do we just we just don't i believe like i'm sorry but organized religion well organized religion is for stupid people but the atheists are right about that but they're defending organized religion but i'm talking about christianity which is something slightly different Right, no, boys, boys.
I'm just playing nice.
No, no, I'm just playing nice.
I'm just reading a bloody Shiller book anyway.
No, I'm not going to be.
I'm just playing nice.
Shenel's can come.
I'll be.
organise religions for stupid people.
I'm not feeling threatened by scrum.
No, no, no, no, no.
I'm not thinking, oh, he's attacked my religion.
Probably as most people do.
Go ahead.
Anyway, Carlyle, even in the days of a mere twenty thousand voters, could see that this is not the way a society must be ordered.
An entity more supreme than the hereditary monarchy which sought its legitimacy from man itself as opposed to anything higher.
If the divine order of kings, patriarchs, and heroic leaders is a product of God's work, it is clear then that democracy, suffrage, and a society ordered purely by political consent is the work of the devil.
Once evil becomes the sovereign force in society, it is only a matter of time until it creates a cascading effect.
The lower classes become ever more embroiled in the political process, looking less to hard work, good leaders, and divine ideals for their guidance.
Instead, they demand privileges under the excuse of hardship and strife, otherwise thought of as the prior natural state of man.
As the lower classes are fooled into believing that they somehow rule themselves, the aristocracy is unshackled from its duties as the chief social organizers, allowing for idleness, opportunism, corrupt profiteering and outright subversion of any lasting vestige of true or right ideals.
All rungs of the societal ladder are at once emancipated of their duty to God and thrust into the hands of Satan.
And Carlyle says Hallucinatory visions rise in the head of my poor fellow man.
Make him claim over me rights which are not his.
Now I think somewhere in there is something that we can agree upon.
Yes.
I will say I did.
There's an essay in the book called The Holy Mountain in which I do tell people basically as an urgent point to be religious.
I believe people should be religious.
But I believe that, as you said, arguing over specific conceptions at a time of, you know, such atheism, of such non-belief, I believe even non-specific belief, even agnosticism is better for most people.
It's difficult because the muscle of faith has been atrophied.
People find it very difficult to believe in anything honestly.
And so I get very frustrated with Christians because they start attaching all this dogma to people's nascent spiritual feelings.
They go, oh, well, do this, do this, read this, read this.
And people are still really feeling their way out.
They're still not even fully sure if the spiritual realm is real.
And trying to have a debate over who Catholics, who Protestants, who Christians are.
I mean, they're just people.
You shouldn't feel threatened by them, Scrum.
I'm not.
It's just that they insist that any political movement becomes a prayer meeting when it's a political movement.
It's the same reason that I don't want it to become about Islam.
or paganism or about, you know, someone's Save the Badges campaign.
I find that people get very sidetracked from the very specifics that we deal with, again, the book of politics, of power politics, of How do we deal with power?
And again, politics is the realm of man.
That's why it's so awful.
And unfortunately, it does seem that the religious impulse has been so heavily stripped out from most people that in whatever comes next, we're going to have to try and we need like convalescence.
People need to go in some sort of retreat so they can feel spiritual.
Because people want that.
I know people who's like, I wish I could feel religious, but the world I live in has made me unable to feel that.
And they feel bereft by it.
People feel very bereft because of the enlightenment.
Scrum and Evelyn, can I, I was going to say I'm not changing the subject, although I am changing the subject, but please do.
Yes, we like to.
There is a particular reason for this.
I do remember that the part of our last podcast that I most enjoyed was where you named names and described the...
I quite like your specific real world examples of, for example, just plucking an example from the air.
I was incensed and nauseated at the weekend to glance at my wife's copy of the Telegraph and see some chunky faced sort of conventionally handsome, probably thick as pig shit, former defensive of chief staff, chief of defense staff, sitting on a motorbike with a penis substitute in his mouth.
And he was looking like, like, look at me, ladies.
I'm a man and I'm tough and I used to be head of the armed forces.
And inside there was an interview with this man saying, wow.
You're probably really, really stupid.
All you did was go into the army and the people who rise at the top top of the army are the kind of people who are not afraid to drown kittens or send men to get machine gunned on the wire.
They're not the brightest, are they?
They're political animals.
They obey orders from whatever the people in Whitehall and whoever's in Downing Street will tell them to do.
And here is this man being bigged up by the Telegraph as somebody whose opinion we should take seriously.
And he's telling us, get your sons ready for the next satanic blood sacrifice, because it's coming.
Is there just being one Tobias Aylward, the 77th Brigade's strongest soldier.
No, he's Tobias Elwood is a different hate figure of mine, but he's a lesson.
No, because I did see you reacting to the post in the paper, so I thought I wasn't sure if I was going to say that.
Tobias Elwood was, I was, I think, reposting the cover of this guy, although he didn't post the pitch of, I mean, what's it come to where you've got a general, oh, would he be filmed?
No, a general sitting astride a motorbike with a cigar clamped between his lips.
What kind of signaling is going on here?
I suppose he's speaking to the women of the country, isn't he?
And it's like, women, get ready to send your sons and your husbands to die in the meat grinder, to be droned to death by cute Russian girls.
I think that's a very, very small part of it, to be honest.
I think the largest war agitation effort that we have on the go is all the counter-jihad stuff.
I mean, as much as...
Talk about that, yeah, fine.
I'm up for that.
But I think that's actually much more psychologically effective in achieving that result.
Because what you do is you put people in a constant state of shock and a constant state of anger.
Something needs to be done!
We all run around screaming, you know, hoping that every next Twitter post by some Indian who puts false information about what's happened in Bradford or something is going to change everything.
And that the Overton window is going to...
We're all going to fall out of it or whatever.
It's all nonsense.
And in that same way of democracy and suffrage being evil, I think this is the exact same.
and I think so many people would benefit from themselves of just taking you know their little scrying mirrors their nightmare squares as we call them sometimes and chuck it in the bin it's it'd be lovely if tomorrow everyone that was involved in the grooming gang scandal across Britain, all got arrested and deported or whatever else happened to them.
But it's not going to happen.
So why are you getting angry about it on social media?
And what is the the cumulative effect of everybody getting angry at this stuff on social media, getting angry at GB News, is that it's put us on a war footing.
You know, we are psychologically at war with the Arab civilization that's here so that we can be physically at war with the Arab civilization over there.
Right.
Yes, I agree with that.
Although shouldn't they be nightmare rectangles, strictly speaking?
Oh no, nightmare square sounds funny.
It comes off the tongue a bit more.
It does nightmare square.
Nightmare rectangles.
Nightmark.
within the paradigm within the overton window and they're taking orders.
But it's not just, let's let's strip away the overton window is what we're calling the framing, but the framing is the result of a network and this is a network that we have studied for years.
We know who's involved, we know where the money's coming from, it's coming from America and it's coming from Israel, it's coming from the British military, or not military, sorry, military and intelligence sort of complex.
All of these different aspects are all working together so that you've got hundreds of people in Britain as leaders of the conversation keeping you within this frame.
And there's really, I'll be honest, I don't think there's much we can do about it i mean i'll have a laugh on twitter quote tweeting david atherton going well you don't like muslims in this country but you never talk about shom rim patrols do you because that's not the issue that he's being paid to talk about shom rim which is like the jewish equivalent of sharia patrol yeah synagogues have their own police cars that are done up like police cars that say shon rim on them in rainbow colors no no and official police colors yeah they're almost they almost like police
and they wear the high vest and a uniform now if we were to create a patrol around rotherum to stop muslim british patrol yeah and and it had the blue and yellow and they were in uniform.
You'd all be arrested as some sort of fascist militia like that.
Yeah, yeah.
If you're defending synagogues and Tottenham, it's all cool.
Of course.
Sorry.
But it's the point of, well, is one religious police better than the other?
People are playing client group games.
What we see democracy as is a series of client groups.
The circle is squared between the feminists and the Islamists because both the feminists and the Islamists receive more from the government than they put in.
and their clients have it so they always vote for more state always everyone oh why are the feminists on the side of the islamists well it's because ideology matters a lot less than being paid and if the government pays you, it doesn't matter what your ideology is.
You go, hmm, yes, I'll keep my ideology to myself and I'll take this lovely payment.
Thank you.
Thank you.
And thank you to my Islamist brothers who are helping me take this payment.
And that's how ideology is completely overcome by material means.
But, well, to give you an example, we featured in Hope Not Hate recently.
They had a report that was quite frankly baffling and shows their strings may have been cut because it made no impact.
We were in Hope Not Hate, a Hope Not Hate report recently.
Partly because somebody called Harry Shuckman, what was his name again, Martha?
Press something.
Yes, he assumed a fake identity with a fake passport that has been analyzed.
A real passport.
It's a fake name.
Yeah, it wasn't a fake passport because everyone who's looked at it said this is overwhelmingly likely to be issued by the Home Office.
He wrote a book called Year of the Rat in which he went after people like Edward Dutton, the Human Intelligence people, and our friends at the basket weavers who are literally just people who meet up at the pub.
And he used a very likely Home Office issued passport to spy on our friends and then hope not hate put us in one of their reports and that is the long arm the security state that is the security state reaching down and trying to basically tap on us.
we know that they're actually quite inept at that and we know that really it's a bit of a fart in the breeze because nothing bad has happened to us because of that the security states have got a bit of a swing at us and to be frank missed but they still took a swing at us via hope not hate and via somebody who had a home office issued passport where did your passport come from Harry Shookman and I'd like to ask Penguin Books as well who published the book Year of the Rat why are they letting people infiltrate private groups with home office issued passports and then slander them in books covert
human intelligence sources Bill this is very cool covert human intelligence sources how did the passport become relevant to this particular story?
because he used it to prove who his identity was when he was vetted when he was vetted he gave them a home office issued passport to lie to them and more effectively spy on them to be fair that wasn't for the basket weavers but that was more for a couple of conferences both I believe in England and one over in Estonia I think he went to as well but when security checked by people to make sure he
on them he issued them security state issued fake documents how is that happening again to people like us like we are becoming the targets of people with government issued fake papers.
Yeah, it's like James Bond turning up at your every third Wednesday lunches or whatever he used to do with the old libertarian groups, wasn't it many, many moons ago?
Yes, I had a similar experience of this.
Somebody who works at Essex Council, he's a councillor, emailed me to say that he'd just been to this briefing by prevent.
by people representing, I think by people representing prevent.
And included in the briefing was James Dellingpool, far right.
I was a, you know, a potential source of terrorism.
And I'm thinking, yeah, so I'm not disputing that the security services are, well, I mean, apt to get people like us and not at all representative of the interests of the country they supposedly represent.
What I find hilarious, though, is I and maybe you don't quite see some of the same things and know some of the same people we know, but we know for a fact that the organization and the state of the organized forces on the right in Britain is an absolute joke.
It cannot get itself to scratch its own arse.
And yet spies are turning up to burst up whatever we're up to.
And that really only tells us two things.
One, these people are so obscenely paranoid about us doing anything, or they don't have a clue.
Now I suppose that could also possibly be both.
Those things are not mutually exclusive.
And actually that's probably the most likely thing.
It's a bit of both.
They're hopeless and paranoid.
And I think that just goes to be indicative of the whole problem with the state as it is today and the British government.
It is this massive paranoid entity that is full of so much information, but it knows nothing what to do with itself.
It is in the same state.
It can only maybe just about scratch itself, and that's what makes the difference.
To square the circle with Hope Not Hate, the other figure in that is someone like Matt Goodwin who used to work for Hope Not Hate.
And it's just really weird that you have Matt Goodwin who used to work for Hope Not Hate approaching people like us and trying to collaborate with people like us and trying to bring them more into the Sionist frame.
And on the other end of it, you've got Harry Shuckman with an MI5 issued passport infiltrating Cuban intelligence conferences and infiltrating small ad hoc right wing groups on behalf of the security state and on behalf of hope not hate.
So you have two arms.
You have one arm trying to drag them into the neocon frame and you know that you've got the carrot there and trying to make sure people get paid to be neocons and paid to be sionists.
Right.
The other hand, you've got the fists there.
You've got the Harry Shuckman, which is punching people to go, you will not be this right wing.
Go and join the safely contained people over there in the sionist corner who have a massive shield of protection from the security state.
It's so two faced as well.
We've stopped really reviewing some of the hope not hate stuff on our own channel as a podcast.
And we used to do it yearly when the report used to come out because we'd chuck in more information about some of the people involved and some of the charity stuff.
But we've kind of done that to death now.
And a lot of other people have taken up that reign.
So we don't really go near it.
But one point we tried to emphasise the last time we talked about it is don't think about hope not hate as this group of smelly lefties that all love Palestine.
Because that's just not quite right.
That's too simple.
You really have to think about this two-faced sort of intelligence attaché that works for the whole world.
the home office that spends his morning writing a paper about the issues of radical Islam and the terrorist threat that it poses to us but then after his lunch break goes and writes another pamphlet about Islamophobia and that's it's when you can understand that that's what they're doing, that they're doing both of these contradictory things at the exact same time.
That's you can only start to make sense of it then, I think.
So tell me, because I think that this is of great interest to a lot of people who watch, watch my stuff.
Tell me about these containment groups that how they contain the supposed voices of the right.
So you've got American and Israeli think tanks, I suppose, and intelligence making money.
There's so many different shell organizations.
You can look at things like Aquillium and all these different deradicalization things.
Obviously, we know prevent is one of the more obvious ones, but there's all these, you know, Henry Jackson Society, I think we mentioned before when we were on.
They've been kind of diminished because they got caught with their hands in the cookie jar because they got paid directly by the home office.
Talked about them last time.
But you end up with both the Henry Jackson Society and Hope Not Hate cited by prevent.
And the right in quotes is used to create the counter jihad narrative and the left is used to create the counter right wing narrative.
But both of them say the security state needs to be bigger.
That's that much really needs to be said.
But yeah, then you get this complex.
So you will have like, oh, who?'s the lawyery guy that gives money to Lawrence Fox and Andrew Brigden and all that?
I'm not sure.
His name escapes me at the moment.
Oh, yeah, but that one was true.
That sort of character puts money towards Lawrence Fox and his adventures with the Reclaim Party and whatever embezzlement may or may not be going on there.
At the same time, Turning Point UK, a front of Turning Point USA, the big sort of think tank and influencing sort of body over there, will work hand in hand with the people that associate and work Tommy Robinson's events so that a big pool of money is thrown into getting a stage in the middle of London and you have all the these different speakers who maybe aren't part of those networks but are desperate to get their influence.
So they'll tag themselves along to this.
And then they'll all appear there and they'll do their own little bit of it.
Maybe they talk about remigration.
Maybe they talk about some of the more serious stuff.
But it's in a wash of a crowd that's full of stars of David.
And then you have a black like choir group gets up and sing.
We all talk about how beautiful it is that, you know, these people have a great old bridge with us.
How, how amazing it is that these people have integrated.
And you could have people go up to these events and they could give some of the most hardcore rhetoric.
give you fantastic ideas about what to do in your local community but it's all awash in the noise of isn't liberal democracy still great we just need to get rid of the muslims and venerate the nation of israel yeah and that is yeah you keep you are contained by the way yeah jeremy hoskin that's the one you are literally contained you know it's like they've they've created a little mold and they've set it all out and they've gone right you run in there let's pour you in and you do as you please and you're going to take the shape of the mold if you look at where the money comes it is
yeah politics is a container and everyone in the policy world is trying to create what the regime wants to buy if you look at think tanks think tanks come up with what they think the government wants to hear so knowledge creation and policy creation is much more profitable when you're selling what people are buying and so that is the main vector of containment really is that if you are a think tank an ngo of any kind who is trying to sell knowledge or
policy to a government you're going to align them yourself and with the inbuilt interests of that government and in the current world our government is beating the wardrooms And so we have all of these supposedly right-wing NGOs, right-wing think tanks that may be full of well-meaning people at the bottom level, but where their money comes from is a structure that's going we need war with Russia we need war with Russia I mean we need war with Russia and That's what they're buying.
They're buying war with Russia.
So that's what people are selling.
I mean, one of the most egregious, I think, recent examples we've come across as well is the Adam Smith Institute.
Yes.
Now, the Adam Smith Institute is also, to those that take a proper look at it, Adam Smith International.
So whilst one end of it is a free market think tank that's now stepping into counter-jihad, it's stepping into talking about how, oh, some of these immigrants, they don't meld well with capitalism and free speech, oh, that's not very good.
But at the other end, the not public-facing end, would have not got these little uni students with a charisma writing these edgy essays.
is a massive body that has been used by the British government for over 20-30 years to engage in nation building and help basically like disrupt the creation of like political forces in Palestine at the behest of Jewish interests and whatever else.
Yeah.
So why is it that these folk are running around doing their little essays getting you all agitated against Muslims pretending that this is all this organic process while at the same time there's this giant body behind them that's been given millions by the British government to go and mess with foreign states.
The specific example is that the Adam Smith International, which is the private company arm of the Adam smith institute was involved with palestinian negotiations with with israel and it is widely recognized that the palestinian negotiation team that is officially international is funded by international organizations that are funded by the state of israel and so you ended with adam smith international putting out material to foment the counter jihad whilst also saying that mass deportations would be illiberal immoral and extreme but
also uh deliberately torpedoing parts of the israeli-palestine peace process on behalf of international finance and power and it's just you see this all the time all the money in people like new culture for New Culture Forum, the Reform Party,
all of these different structures, all of these think tanks, the Center for Social Justice, all of these structures around the Tory Party, all of their money either comes from central government through several proxies, from other NGOs who get money from central government via proxies, or from foreign lobby groups, ultimately, or it comes from wealthy individuals who are members of the elite who want to show that they are buying influence that the regime wants to buy.
But there are very few people involved in funding these endeavours.
And you'll find that many people are ghostwriting.
As in the, like you said, there are literally people.
who will write a counter Jihad article one minute, a civic nationalist argument one minute, and maybe even an anti kind of deportation argument the next minute.
They're guns for hire, and a lot of these people believe in nothing.
And when you realize they believe in nothing, and they're all paid by the same guy, and they'll say anything.
And they'll say anything for money, then it just makes sense.
They are a mirror.
They are what we call they are consent manufacturers.
The left talks about consent manufacturing and manufacturing consensus, but they never talk about the mechanism.
This is how there is a huge class of people, the think tanks, the NGOs that the government pays to parrot their own rhetoric back at them.
And that's the process we point out.
We point out you're funded by the Home Office, you're funded by billionaires, you're funded by the Jewish lobby, you're funded by an arms company, you're funded by the UN.
And every, every single time you will find that people are strictly following their financial incentives and those financial incentives come from the same central authority that they're parroting the rhetoric back of.
And it's the power of those contradictions as well.
You know, we all know, we've thought how many times we sat and went, duh, duh, duh, stupid liberals.
You can't have feminists and Muslims work together.
That'll never work.
Well, duh.
But in the same reason, you can't have.
people who are interested in the security of Israel work hand in glove with people who are interested in the demographic interests of the British people.
Those things are, for a whole host of reasons that we don't maybe have all the time to go into today, incompatible in the same way that feminism and Islam is incompatible.
Yes.
You know, it's the same thing just happening on our side of it.
Don't tell me about the new culture forum.
I don't think you mentioned them before.
That's one we're still working on.
We do know some of what's going on there.
Mr. Whittle and his friends.
What they are is that they are a group of people who have become quite influential as reform has risen in that they are trying to create basically new tourism.
You have a group of people mostly funded by Peter Whittle.
It's partially his own little vanity project.
But what they're doing is, through people like Charlotte Gill, who writes a lot of their copy, is that they're getting stuff in the Telegraph, getting stuff in the Spectator.
And what they're doing is they're trying to soak into the right-wing writing of Britain.
But some people say this is quite a noble endeavor, but what they're selling is the same old neoconservatism.
And they are just another face of the same group of people.
A lot of these people are in think tanks.
Some of these people have been in policy exchange, Henry Jackson Society, Center for Social Justice.
They've been parts of the Tory Party.
They've served on Tory commissions.
So it's just the same backwash of the exact same Whitehall insiders and badly paid interns.
It's just they put a new sheen on it and try and sell you the same stuff with adopted language from internet right people, really.
I do think, and to be fair, we used to have someone that used to go to some of these events, but I think he's recently left Twitterism not too long ago.
And he used to go to some of the new culture forums, sort of like workshop events they do.
like Turning Point UK used to do in universities years ago.
And they're, you know, many people like, oh, we'll come to the town hall and all the locals can come and they can voice their ill will about emigration.ants and their worries about this and their worries about that and they get to do it but then they get struggle sessioned by these quite frankly quite clever operators who take all their complaints and go well that's that's very fair but you can't be hateful of these people because that would be wrong and that wouldn't be British now would it that's what happens and that's i mean that's that's possibly more the insidious
side of what something like the new culture forum is doing is it's not just necessarily the media stuff that people engage with on twitter but really more the in-person stuff people who wouldn't know who peter whittle is or have no interest in listening to math matthew goodwin sub stack but But a conference is in their little town centre about, oh, we're going to have a conversation about the national problems that we're all facing, and they're given their chance to voice their opinion.
They feel that they're really doing something, and all they do is get topped down by some posh Tory mob.
I can say our stance is obviously very hard on immigration and things like that, but it's mostly just because we recognise that, you know, we are not them and they are not us.
And no matter how they behave, they never will be.
It's not a matter of their behavior.
It's a matter of who and what they are.
We are not them, they are not us.
And that's objective, observable reality.
It's inherent to the visible differences between people.
And structures like the New Culture Forum are really just there as a backstop.
They're there to plead with you not to give up on liberalism, not to give up on the last holding line of liberalism, that we can make liberalism work if we just believe hard enough in these center-right talking points.
And that's all it becomes.
becomes about filling that space when you get these people talk about immigration they talk about uh is If they're the ones talking about them, they can offer solutions.
And their solutions are always just further liberalism.
It's always, well, you need to vote for Nigel Farage.
Well, if only we could make Robert Genrick the head of the Conservative Party into the PK.
That's people's big fight.
Yes.
Like, yes, I'm in the revolution.
I'm going to make sure Robert Genrick is the head of the Conservative Party to Kebie Banthanov.
I'm making a difference.
I've moved the Overton window.
And that's what they sell people.
They sell people these hollow small victories inside the political process as the answer to mass immigration and things like that.
I mean, one I think's particularly hilarious.
I am obviously Scottish.
I am as about genetically close to Northern English people, as you could probably get, really.
Yeah, if I went into the pub and said, I'm English, by the way.
No, you're not.
Come on.
No, you're joking.
Very funny.
But if you're half Caribbean, you know, you're Calvin Robinson or you're Lenny Henry and you walk into the pub and go, I'm English.
Everyone goes, yeah, no problem.
Now, how do we square that circle there?
We don't, because that's never the conversation it's had.
Calvin Robinson himself becomes someone who then regurgitates and speaks for Enoch Powell and writes a sentence along the lines of the English aren't necessarily white I see.
So that's the money shot.
That's what these people are getting paid for, ultimately, by their time.
I think that's that is a large part of it.
Backstop.
So one word, backstop.
Just out of interest, Jeremy Hosking, I haven't looked into his back.
I mean, he's a Christian of some kind, isn't he?
And he's made up...
He chose Tim Montgomery.
Lots of...
Tim Montgomery, I...
Even when I was part of the kind of...
I never defined myself as centre-right, but even when I was...
I used to do podcasts with the...
I used to do podcasts with people from the IEA, which we haven't mentioned yet.
I want you to put the boot in.
The Institute of Economic Affairs, which I thought of as a libertarian free market think tank promoting the kind of ideas that I wanted instituted and would make the country a better place and Hayek and et cetera.
All the things that one is interested in.
That'll fix all.
Yeah.
Yeah.
It will.
This is what we believe in.
Yeah.
Well, there was a great one we picked out.
I think we were on one of our academic agents stream ages ago.
And it was an article from like 2003 from the IEA.
We will not support Tony Blair's, you know, tyrannical digital ID and national ID cards.
We will not support it.
It goes against all our ethos.
Twenty years later, IEA is then having conferences about the benefits that can be brought to the free market by having digital ID.
Yeah, free market solutions for digital ID.
It's really over time, everybody just sounds like Tony Blair eventually because he's already identified the quote unquote solutions.
And this is again the problem with all the stuff that talks about immigration.
The solution is there.
It's been there for twenty years.
It's digital ID.
We know we're all going to get it.
Right.
Is that one of the main drivers of the immigration that it is now because it's become especially post COVID, I think so many people have got themselves, we're talking more about the general population here, have already become normalized to the idea that they need some sort of marker, some sort of, you might call it a mark in general possibly, but something that identifies what they are that isn't just a living, breathing person they are.
They need their nightmare square, their little card or whatever.
We're already so normalized to this, and we have so much fatigue and agitation about grooming gangs and crime and phone theft and e-bikes and fucking whatever else that people will just accept it.
When Starmer or whoever's going to be the final salesman for this stands up and says, look, digital IDs or Farage, whoever it is, it might be multiple people from multiple camps selling it to all the different client groups at once.
You had recently Harriet Harman selling it on Sky News on the same day that the former head of MI6 was selling it on Newsnight.
They said simultaneously digital ID is the answer to immigration.
But Labour has been making this noise before the election.
We pointed out, and to be fair, we don't gloat about this, but one of our best pieces of political future predicting, and we try and engage in that a little bit, was the fact that the Tory party and Labour basically changed places in immigration, in that Labour took a much harder attack than immigration, and it has done now, that's kind of manifested itself, But its solution has always been digital ID.
It was...
uh Tony Benn's son or something or it was one of the former Labour leader's sons who who's an MP Kinnock that's yes sorry it was uh Kinnock's son who was originally Yes, Stephen Kinnock put this forward.
Back in 2022, he revived digital ID and ID cards for the Labour Party.
And to be fair, they've been very solid on keeping that in the background but it's come to the foreground now and that that really that's the time horizon though they've been banging the digital id for immigration drum for three years already yeah well i mean digital id's go as you said goes back way further than that and people have been and seeding it oh yeah and this is again that that fundamental problem with red pilling the masses when you've spent all your time and all your money and all your energy warning people about the dangers of immigration But
you yourself as the faction that are telling people about this can't then act upon that information.
You can't offer people solutions because you are not in power.
If you create political energy against immigration but you can't offer people solutions that you can implement, those at power will.
And so Tommy Robinson goes, Oh, Muslims, ah!
And Key Ostama goes, Oh, by the way, we have digital ID to solve that Muslim problem.
And no one else needs solutions because we're at power we're the government Who else is going to implement a solution that sorts it out?
Nobody because we're the government and you might as well take an imperfect solution rather than no solution at all.
So all the political energy that Tommy Robinson creates feeds into digital ID because what can Tommy Robinson do to stop Muslims blowing themselves up?
Nothing.
But Key Ostama can offer solutions because he is visibly in power and so you end up with the countage you had being what we refer to as the thin end of someone else's wedge.
Yes.
In that you can only get so far as a political outsider and then you have to reconcile with political reality.
And political reality is digital ID is the only solution offered to you for immigration currently.
Well, I think the other way I've always phrased it is, why would you chum the waters without a net?
What are you going to catch?
Someone else is going to come in with a rod and their net and they're going to catch all your fish and you've wasted your chum and your time.
So why?
And the question I want to ask people, and I think this still needs to be ruminated on, why chum the bloody waters in the first place?
Have the net, then you can get to doing that.
Yeah, because it just attracts the sharks and humans get eaten and it's not a good thing.
It is.
It's happened.
By the way, you just prompted thoughts of...
Do you follow Fandering on Twitter?
He's very good.
He's a brilliant pianist who does...
I might do.
I only know the people I follow by Avatar.
I don't need their names.
Okay.
You should follow Fandering.
He's been onto this a while and I hadn't appreciated this.
The degree to which Reddit was used to seed the idea of a pandemic among the red-pilled people.
So long before the Daily Mail was talking about it and saying we must have vaccines instead, stuff people who followed reddit were alive to these stories about uh the satellite signals detecting the heat from bodies being being being the phones going off and all this stuff sulfides yeah i i gobbled this stuff up this was when i was just becoming a kind of nascent conspiracy theorist, I guess.
And I was thinking, oh, this is, it's happening, it's real man, because all this information is being sneaked out of China.
And do you know about China digital controls?
This stuff.
And then I bought it.
That's the thing.
We have to laugh, don't we?
Because it's at the time, you feel like such an idiot because you realize, oh my God, it was way too good to be true.
And I think that if people exercised that bloody humility instead of being so ego minded, I think we'd actually get ourselves through some of these cycles a lot quicker.
We often talk about hyper-reality and the question I thought in my own mind is, am I seeing people dying of this disease?
Am I witnessing people struggling to breathe lying in the street?
Well, no, I am not.
In the same way that, you know, I'm not experiencing missiles landing on Tel Aviv.
I'm not experiencing rifle firing Gaza.
I'm not experiencing Tehran.
We see all these things from a distance.
They are made real to us by the media, but they aren't real.
Again, what is real is our lives.
Yeah.
I mean, I think, yes, I've actually eaten a Chicken Kiev in Kiev and I really both times and I have to say it wasn't as good as Mars and Spencer's Chicken Kiev in the days when I used to eat them which I don't anymore because they're called Chicken Kiev now.
Thinking of COVID actually it's something I don't really I actually don't like talking to normal people about it because I feel like I'm subjecting them to some sort of like historical trauma that they still don't understand yet.
So until people come to me and talk about it, I actually don't want to speak to people about it because I don't want to put you back in that mental frame of being so...
I imagine that's how the war felt to people who went through the war.
It's like, why did we never reconcile ourselves with what happened during the war?
It's like, well, because people just didn't want to talk about it afterwards.
That's what lockdown feels like to people.
Imagine if you'd gone through the Second World War knowing what we know, or the First World War.
If you had the trench experience and you'd lost all your friends, maybe you'd been crippled yourself and stuff.
And you knew all along, like, for example, Henry Williamson did, the guy who wrote Tarker the Otter, that it was all a complete sham.
That there must have...
Well, I mean, you think about Smedley Butler.
In 1935, wrote his book about war being a...
He's saying, look at this bullup of troops.
There must have been people out there who knew that it was all fake.
Who served.
And they either had the choice of either being conscientious objectors and having women give them white feathers.
or to go out there and die in the meat grinder for a war that you knew was completely pointless.
In the gearing up for the Second World War, we definitely had that.
i mean the most famous example of that is obviously sir oswald mosley he was a war hero in parliament or before before he was besmirched yeah before he was the leader of the blackshirts he was a war he was a first world war hero um and his experiences in the first world war led him to on on the path he went on but that's what happens to figures like that they end up like enoch powell They end up being demonized in later years.
And again, I'm sure the mention of the name of Mosley causes fear in certain people's hearts.
But again, this is what happens.
This is what happens if you don't want an apocalyptic war with Germany.
you are portrayed like Sir Oswald Mosley was and is.
Yeah.
Yeah.
So I'm just trying to find the name of the...
War is a racket.
I should have remembered that.
I'm thinking, actually, you're thinking there about the whole thing with Reddit, though.
Yes.
This flood of information that startles you and makes you really run to the next person you know and go, look, have you seen this?
It must be real.
And that confirms it.
I can remember when I was staying in Stowland at the time the time and I'm sitting at the third floor flat or whatever he used to live in had a decent bay window looked down on one of the main roads that went through the town.
It was half eight, nine o'clock on a Tuesday or Wednesday evening.
An ambulance comes flying up this main street at a heinous speed and the guy driving it's wearing the full beige hazmat gear with a mask and everything.
And he flies up the street, up the top, back down, flies it and he comes around about two or three times.
And then a couple of police cars came past as well, only with one person in mind, not the fool, so you know it's dodgy straight away.
But when I saw that, I thought straight away, it's like, you've screwed the putch here.
We're doing laps.
Yeah, do you not think that's like maybe a bit obvious?
But that's the kind of thing for in that way that you sucked up all the red stuff.
People have never seen a guy in a hazmat suit in an ambulance before.
They have no idea what's going on all of a sudden.
And there you go, COVID now real, isn't it?
Yeah.
And it's the same with all the rest of it.
I guess that's why we try and get away from the conspiracy stuff really, because it can be used as judo against you.
But you see, it's on you.
I totally see why.
I'm really glad that you're focused on what you're doing, because the market for conspiracy stuff is quite crowded and you don't want to be drowned by the next one.
I think as well that if you listen to what we do and you listen carefully to what we say, a lot of things that people would consider conspiracy theories, we take as fact and then move on from there.
I mean, I think that the reason why we wouldn't bother talking about Epstein or any of the revelations that happen with that now is that for years, our basic premise of understanding people in power is that they are first compromised before they get there.
Yes.
Yes, indeed.
Well, I think I don't want to sort of belittle what you do because I think I or limit your your achievements as it were.
But if you want to read more, it is available.
It's not available on Amazon.
Wifflings.
I don't know.
I think we've sent you a link for it.
But it is being, it is an independently published book.
But it is, it isn't Xeroxed.
It's over there.
It's wifflings.com.
It's a real book.
It's substantial.
We'll send you a link to Shill, but it is about 344 pages.
It's nearly half a kilogram, so it's not just a pamphlet.
And, you know, I got to design the cover, thankfully, because I'm a bit pedantic about it.
But it's a crown in the sector because some people wondered what that was.
But I did design it like an old, like, 70s textbook.
I wanted to make it look like if you got this as going to university reading, you'd think, oh, bloody hell, it would be expensive.
It does look exactly like the kind of thing you'd have been given at kind of Hull if you were going to read sociology, and you would get that as one of your year three.
three textbooks.
It's exactly what it's designed to look like.
Good.
Well, you've succeeded.
I was going to say, I was trying to find a formula where I didn't want to insult you, but what I was going to say to you was, what I find most interesting about what you do, and what I think you do particularly well, is you point out the degree to which...
They're all they're all controlled.
What I'm not you just you sort of tantalize me there by hinting at another question before we go which is to what degree do you think these people are how early on are they selected?
Say Matt Goodwin for example.
I mean the fact that he was with Hope Not Hate and then moved on to this position as a as a as a cephologist as a sort of a pundit on why parties it puts them in a very good position doesn't it for say he's a state actor it puts them in a very good position how early are these people recruited mostly in universities yeah University of Kent.
Yeah.
Well, the University of Kent is somewhere that Frank Ferretti operates out of and the Revolutionary Communist Party.
Roger Eatwell is a good mentor.
Roger Eatwell is a good mentor.
One young Connor Thompson and a bunch of other people involved in right-wing.
articles and stuff online all seem to come from there or quite a few of them anyway it's not just kent the thing is we know people have been approached by these people and the pro it's a really it's a really boring and simple process that happens what happens is you are a talented but penniless middle class student and somebody from a political organization approaches you and says hey i'd like to pay you to do a bit of writing for us.
And most people who think they're never going to get paid to do political writing jump at the chance.
90% of how they compromise people is people's desperation to work in politics and society.
The desperation for certain other sort of things.
Yes, but also once this takes place, these people also operate what I would consider a light honey trap in that they don't come from MI5.
These aren't orders from above, but these small organizations mirror what goes on the top and that they will have what I refer to as institutional totty.
They will have someone on staff basically whose job it is to sleep with the new people and make sure they stay on board.
So they, if you're, again, if you're a middle class politics nerd from somewhere, you've got money.
They might even, you know, you've been furnished with a potential girlfriend.
You're gaining political relevance, even if you're just a gopher.
It's this great feeling that you're contributing, that you're part of the political process now, that you're moving the Oberton window.
And really, that's how they get it.
They get people to buy in.
And it's not like they have info.
Most people don't need to be blackmailed.
Most people are just afraid of losing status.
Do you know, I hate it when people ring me without a warning on my mobile phone.
I think it's absolutely the rudest thing.
But that's generational thing.
How dare they?
Yeah.
The point is that most people don't need compromising in the way that we think of it.
are that bloody thick and naive.
They fool themselves.
If that's where your bread is buttered, then that's what you're going to follow.
You don't need to be flown to Epstein Island.
These people wish that they were being introduced to David Cameron's pig.
These people will fight tooth and nail to get to Epstein's Island.
They will fight each other to be compromised because they are the political bottom feeders.
They are the people who, through hook or by crook, want to be part of politics.
They want to be part of power.
They want their own little piece of Whitehall.
And they will do anything and say anything to defend that.
I think it was particularly...
I'm just going to add as a note to that, particularly as a consequence of Blairism and the fact that lots of people my age in the last five to ten years have all been to university.
They've all got a degree.
Whether it's good or not, it's probably not worth the paper it's printed on.
So where do you go?
You can't get a part time job.
Too late to pick up a trade.
You've not got maybe familial links to go and get yourself some sort of financial elite career.
Oh, I like politics and I think Muslims smell.
Can I work for the New Culture Forum?
Yeah, on you come.
That's it.
It's just so simple.
It's just that desperation.
And I think that's why it's become so much more popular and thorough nowadays.
So much that we started calling these people the based sprogs because like whack-a-mole, they just seem to come out of the way.
But now you've got all these 19, 20 year old activists and they're also independent journalists, but they're also sponsored by some massive financial body, but they don't really declare that.
ultimate way to think about this is that they these are you know what you talk about elite overproduction these people are the overproduced elites there's so many if you've done a politics degree at like york university or a red brick university congratulations you're an overproduced elite good luck getting a job outside of these bubbles and what these political young radicals find is that they turn 21 22 they finish their degrees and then they're going oh no i need to make money and the only people paying,
well, who's got the money?
The money printer people.
And there's quite a lot of, well, actually, Evelyn, do you want to develop your point about the sexual?
Are you talking about Sort of the gay mafia element To these things?
Actually What we have come to find From some of the stuff We've heard Is that it's really A lot more It's not actually just really desperate and shallow.
It's that some of these people are...
Office romances.
will and an ability to center themselves.
All it takes is, you know, some theoretical writer for the critic or something who goes, Ooh, you know, flashes of tits or whatever else.
Here's a glass of wine and wouldn't you like to write an article for me?
You can ghostwrite my stuff.
And it's just, it's so, you know, as you see, institutional tauty.
It's not that it's filth or the more high level stuff like Epstein.
It's actually really pathetic.
Okay.
It's the same.
You might not be a Zionist, but the woman you had an affair with a year ago is and is being, you know, everyone's got a leech.
Emma's got a financial leash.
You may no longer have the financial lease, but the awful office romance you had a year ago that didn't really go anywhere, she can be made to tell some tales about you.
If push comes to shove, everyone that you've had sexual history with can be a potential detriment to you.
And if those people are also in the same political sphere as you and have allegiances to people you're trying to pull away from, well, even if it was just an office romance, that's leverage.
I think as well, people make the mistake, maybe at least on looking at this stuff in the smaller scale are thinking it's systematized.
It's not really.
It's more just a giant gossip circle.
And you end up, when you find out more about certain people and what they've been up to, you realise, well, they're not really in control of this so much as the fact that they are now just subject to it.
And it's all just sort of mutually assured gossip that could end up in the Daily Mail any day and make you look like, you know, you're a bit of a bum boy or a wronging or you're a womaniser or whatever you need to be called so they can justify getting rid of you after the fact.
It's not even that dramatic.
what it is is that you're worried that people in your social circle, you socialise with who are your friends who if you're in this weird politics world those are the only people that you know that those people will fall out with you that you will be chucked out of the in group and you won't be cool anymore and no one will phone you anymore and you won't get any more work.
What do you think the role of Guido Fawkes in all this this world was?
Because there's something I was saying something suspect about that operation.
That's someone I've completely, utterly ignored over years.
Wasn't Tom Harwood involved in that or something at one point?
I don't know.
I look to the, I maybe describe that as maybe more of the Brexit-y kind of network of people.
Okay.
I have basically no respect for those people anymore because they were either in on selling us down the river off the back of that referendum or they were so gullible at the time that they couldn't see what was going to happen.
You know, if we were being taken out of the hands of the EU, whose hands were we supposed to land in?
You know, you said it's definitely not familiar.
I was one of those gullible people.
I believed.
So was I, but I was 16 at the time, so I feel like I've got an excuse.
Yeah, I was an old man already.
And I was fooled anyway.
But you've had the humility and you've changed your mind and you're willing to address that.
So to me, if anything, that's more important than someone that spotted it straight away.
Because if you can actually identify what it was, what really, what took you at that time and convinced you that this was going to be good you can then see the pattern the next time and you're more actually adept at pointing out than someone that just is oblivious to it all um i could talk to you chaps for hours but you can see the weather outside i don't know what what i don't know what's like where you are it's sticky it is actually
it is sticky but i need a coffee an iced coffee and a fag as a reward for a very enjoyable podcast which went all over the place um and yes they're really tell us where we can buy the book so you can go back to study If you studied sociology at Hull in the 1970s, are there any books you can recommend?
Oh, it's funny that I've got this one right here.
That looks fantastic.
Volume one, The Elite.
Is it, is it like not pro-politics?
Oh, well, it's orthogonal to politics.
All of it.
I wouldn't think the academic agent is cool.
He did give us a nice little back quote here.
This collection should challenge just about everything you think you know about modern politics.
Anima Parvini.
Have I opened myself up to the risk of being accused of having done podcasts with far right, far right figures.
No, because I'm a tranny and it gives me weird cover.
We're all allies here.
And wait, there's one thing that you must do with us, James.
Yeah.
That we do on our show all the time, because it is something that, that deeply means so much to us.
We would like to hear some of your affirmations.
You know, how deep is your love for the nation of Israel?
Because I think the Jewish people are the coolest people on the planet.
The only democracy in the Middle East.
Yeah.
I mean, I I am I am not an anti Semite.
I am a philosemite.
Yeah.
My critiques of the Jewish people are.
I know how great they can be.
We only criticize Israel out of love.
Yeah.
love yeah yeah the only problem is my my love is undying and it goes unanswered what if I take those shekels but they never arrive I'm so glad that you've established your bona fide is you obviously very good people and I can I can trust everything you say and upstanding people and I expect there'll be some serious finance coming your way which is good so I hope the book books I hope I do actually get around to reading it one day it does sound quite interesting.
I've like the cover of that is on a nail grabber.
thank you and I I was going to say It's very much something you could pick and choose.
You could look at a couple of lists of essays and there and just go, oh, you know, there is no, there is a sort of order to it, but really you can just, it's so chronologically sort of disparate that you could just pick any bit and go, oh, that essay is really good.
S. Johnson's The Unfortunates is what you're saying.
It's like Did he do that as well?
Yeah, he had a selection of essays.
Global warming is a massive con.
There was no evidence whatsoever that man-made climate change is a problem, that it's going to kill us, that we need to amend our lifestyle in order to deal with it.
It's a non-existent problem.
But how do you explain this stuff to your normy friends?
Well, I've just brought out the revised edition of my 2012 classic book, Watermelons, which captures the story of how some really nasty people decided to invent the global warming scare in order to fleece you to take away your freedoms to take away your land it's a shocking story i wrote it as i say in well 2011 actually the first edition came out and
it's a snapshot of a particular era the era when the people behind the climate change scan got caught red-handed tinkering with the data torturing till it screamed in a scandal that I helped christen Climate Gate.
So I give you the background to the skull juggery that went on in these seats of learning where these supposed experts were informing us.
We've got to act now.
I rumbled their scam.
I then asked the question, okay, if it is a scam, who's doing this and why?
It's a good story.
I've kept the original book pretty much as is, but I've written two new chapters, one at the beginning and one at the end.
explaining how it's even worse than we thought.
I think it's a good, I think it still stands up.
I think it's a good read.
Obviously, I'm biased, but I'd recommend it.
You can buy it from jamesdelingpole.co.uk forward slash shop.
You'll probably find that one.
Just go to my website and look for it, jamesdelingpole.co.uk.
And I hope it helps keep you informed and gives you the material you need to bring round all those people who are still persuaded that, oh, it's a disaster.
We must amend our ways and appease the gods, appease mother-guy.
