All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 4, 2022 - Stay Free - Russel Brand
01:08:53
New UK Leader - WEF Stooge Who’s Richer Than The King! #028 - Stay Free with Russell Brand
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
I'm going to go ahead and get the camera.
I'm going to get the camera.
In this video, you're going to see the C-Circle.
We're at the C-Circle.
Alright, we're at the C-Circle.
Hey, look, here I am on Stay Free with Russell Brand.
Thanks for joining me.
It's Guy Fawkes Night tomorrow in our country, as well as my daughter's birthday.
Can you imagine such a thing?
The fireworks lit up the sky the next day.
It was a euphoric occasion.
But six years later, it's crazy.
When it's Guy Fawkes Night, of course, I remember being a kid.
When I was even a kid, I was like, why are we celebrating?
They go, oh, well, this guy tried to block Parliament.
And even when I was really young, I thought, He sounds like a pretty decent sort of guy!
Like, I remember even when I was little thinking, like, I like the sound of him.
Yeah.
I still don't quite understand the, how it's turned into a celebration thing.
It's a sacrifice.
It's sort of like a, like you say, he's a scapegoat martyr.
This is what happens.
To bring to the forefront of your consciousness, if you try to Mess with us, we will kill you and burn you.
Right.
And I remember one time, me and another, it was Jonathan Ross, a British TV talk show host, one time we did something a bit silly really, we made a mistake, and I was burned as an effigy!
Yeah, I remember that.
Do you remember when I was born there was an effigy?
They're good effigies though.
They were good actually.
To their credit, they do a bloody good effigy.
Thankfully it wasn't voodoo, otherwise I wouldn't be here right now to tell you that we're looking at V for Vendetta as a kind of thematic device to study, are we already in the dystopia?
That they rendered in that movie, and do we need the kind of global uprising that was put forward in Alan Moore's graphic novel as the only solution to centralised corruption?
And while we're on the subject, Brad will be with us.
Brad Evans, philosopher, poet, snazzy dresser, raconteur, will be joining us to talk about 1984.
So if you want to talk about surveillance, if you want to talk about... The book.
Yeah, not just the year.
It's not like I love 1984.
Like, oh, what about Freddie Mercury done that?
Oh, what about when Madonna did this?
Eddie Murphy's suit in Raw?
Love it.
No, it's like the book 1984 by George Orwell.
We're going to be talking about that.
We could talk a bit about the year as well.
Well, if you want, mate.
I'm just saying.
It's ancillary.
Well, I'll look up some 1984 facts.
You see, go on then.
We'll see what the audience prefer.
Right, we're going to be talking about 1984, the book by George Orwell, and the year by everyone.
Right, we're going to be looking at that.
In our item, here's the news, no, here's the effing news.
We're looking at Rishi Sunak, W.E.F.
Stooge, Richard Van the King.
He has, by marriage, relationships with, what's it called?
Infosys.
Yep.
That's a stupid name, Infosys.
Infosystems, is it?
Short for?
Probably is, isn't it?
It's not like their sister knows a whole bunch of stuff.
No.
It's Infosys.
No, it's S-Y-S.
Ah, right.
Sys.
And is that like cisgender?
Or is that S-I-S as well?
I mean, I'll look it up.
Well yeah, instead of looking up what Madonna was doing in Desperately Seeking Susan, in an attempt to derail me and Brad's excellent item and brilliant book club that you can be a member of if you're in Stay Free AF.
For example, other things that come if you're a member of Stay Free AF, that's our locals platform.
I stream there live all the time, don't I Subi?
I just pop up on there, just in the middle of nowhere.
Just like, I could be doing BJJ, that's a type of cuddling and fighting.
Or I could be like, well... Eating lunch.
Have a lunch with Ol' Russ.
Have a vegan ploughman's.
I'm convinced about that.
You're not convinced?
Because a ploughman's is a type of British dish enjoyed, as you might imagine, by a ploughman.
Imagine watching this in America right now.
A ploughman's?
What is a ploughman's?
It's a disgusting concept, and let me tell you, the dish weren't that different from the concept.
If you're a member of Safer AF, right, you can watch our Jordan Peterson chat right now.
It was a fantastic conversation and I think the kind of conversation we're gonna have to have if we don't want the culture war to divide people so that we can never unify and focus our attention on centralised power like These bloody WEF stooges that keep turning up, running countries, lovely hair, give them their credit.
Great hair.
Great hair.
No one's saying Justin Trudeau ain't got nice hair.
When he cut his hair, that's what nearly ruined it.
But what we need is genuine democracy, real empowerment, which I think will occur through decentralisation, by allowing people to run their own community schools and hospitals, even though Gareth, a communist, He doesn't think it will work properly because he loves Jeremy Corbyn so much.
Jeremy Corbyn was a leader of the British Labour Party.
That's not the equivalent of your Democrat Party, because you wouldn't let Bernie Sanders have a fair crack at the whip.
But we let our one have a go, and it didn't go well because there was all sorts of intervention, propaganda, meddling from the secret services, some alleged.
Certainly Al Jazeera said as much.
Anyway, look, we've got some great guests coming up.
We've got a great show today.
First of all, we're looking at the midterms in your country, America, there, and how the polarising rhetoric ultimately distracts us from our true cause, uniting against centralised power.
We're going to be having a look at Trump's speech.
In fact, I'd love to have a look at Trump's speech already.
Say what you like about Donald Trump and say it in the comments and chat now.
I know loads of you love him.
I know loads of you despise him.
Me, what I say is, look at these new green MAGA hats.
Cool.
Really enjoy that.
And look at the way that he can sort of really rabble rouse.
He's a good rabble rouser.
Because there's a phrase he uses somewhere in like, very likely, very likely.
I don't think anyone else could make very likely, which as an idiom is just a sort of pretty anodyne, sound so potentially incendiary and exciting as Donald Trump does here.
Have a look.
Now, in order to make our country successful and safe and glorious, And glorious.
Interesting word choice that.
Glorious is a good idea.
Glory is overlooked.
I once heard Steve-O out of Jackass say that, like a lot of his stunts, he's in the pursuit of glory.
And I like that he said that because it made me think, yeah, glory.
Do things for glory.
Don't live this little limpid life where you're just a sort of barnacle on a system that doesn't love you.
We've lost your connection to love.
We've lost your connection to the divine.
The phrase that Vandana Shiva taught me when she was on the show, desacralization.
Everything has lost its sacredness.
I was even worried about that this morning on my child's birthday.
Have we lost the sacredness of this?
How it felt on the day that she was born, where I felt the presence of God in a real and vivid, not remotely metaphysical way, when I saw things that blew my mind, literal childbirth, obviously, and felt things that changed my neurology forever, and now by the time she's six, it's just like, you know... Pokemon.
There's two, yeah, Pokemon, like, she likes Pikachu quite a lot, and then just, like, dealing with a quarrel between, you know, like, because the other one, like, you know, probably should learn her name, that'll help them to feel...
That'll probably help them to feel like there's a bit more of a level playing field.
Now, Peggy, my two kids, like, when it's one's birthday, the other one's, like, you've got two kids, haven't you, Sue?
Yeah, I do, yeah.
What do you do?
Do a birthday present for the other one to... No, definitely not.
Oh, you're going in hard!
Yeah.
You're getting a birthday present, it's not your birthday, live with it.
He gets to blow the candles out at the same time with his older brother.
That's the compromise.
And what about when it's the reverse?
Does the older one not want to blow out the younger one?
No, absolutely not.
No.
The older one's cool about it.
He's progressed.
Yeah.
Well, in our household, it's like a sort of a... There's a lot of tension on birthdays.
A lot of tension.
I bought my kid a catapult.
Oh yeah?
She likes Bart Simpson.
That'll downplay the tension, I imagine.
It's like, when I looked at it, it's got an infrared sight on it, it's actually probably not so... You know they'll use that against you, don't you?
Yeah.
I've made mistakes like this in the past, when I once had a girlfriend who had teenage sons, and in order to curry favour with them, I'm afraid I did arm them.
and uh like that's what kids teenage boys they only want weapons that's all they want luckily i'm in the uk so it wasn't like you know that you know it's like pretty pretty relatively safe kind of you know air rifles couple of hunting knives and stuff but when i saw them with the weapons i thought of the relationship i had with their mother i thought i was possibly creating a Potential problem for down the line.
Unfortunately, the relationship didn't last long enough for that to blossom.
Should we use?
Anyway, I've got a sidetrack there because of Donald Trump's use of the word glory.
Interesting, again, I'm interested in the rebranding.
What do you think's with the green MAGA cap?
Just a way of revitalizing it?
It's interesting.
Well, it's not MAGA, is it?
It says Trump, so it feels like it's a new sort of aspect of Trump.
Yeah.
What does it say?
Something for Trump?
Yeah, certainly nice.
Did people before Trump do people in the background like that?
I think I suppose I've seen Obama with a backdrop of people.
Sure.
It's a good look.
But now they've fully branded it now though, haven't they?
Yeah, it's branded up to the wazoo.
It's more than football, isn't it?
It really is.
Everyone's got merch on.
Yeah.
We should have better merch.
We should have.
We should have.
Alright, let's see what he says now.
Very, very, very, probably do it again, okay?
Very, very, very, probably.
Very probably, very probably.
Like his tone is interesting.
Yeah.
Very probably, very probably.
So he's not fully Gunner.
No.
But it's so probable, he's said it a lot of times.
He has, yeah.
It's the repetition, isn't it, there?
He already says very, very, very few times and then he goes, I'll say that a bit more.
Very probably.
He's riding the applause with very probably as well.
That's one of the things that Trump's detractors refuse to acknowledge is his rhetorical skill and his power of persuasion.
And nothing really seems out of place when he says it.
You know, even the use of the word glory, that's not a...
Common word, I think, to have used in the context of, like, political language.
You know, it's, uh, he's thrown something in there that sometimes I think he knows exactly what he's doing and sometimes I think he's just operating on a different... he doesn't know at all what he's doing.
Is he an intuitive populist genius or is this sort of carefully staged?
It's very difficult to know.
I know that a lot of you really dislike Donald J. Trump and, like, as you know, I believe That we have to look for political solutions that transcend both the left and right and that true populism will always lead to the empowerment of ordinary people.
The ability for us to run our own lives free from corporate intervention and even free from purely mechanistic and materialistic ideals that our life should mean more.
...than what you earn and what you do.
These sort of modalities, I think, are at least a century old, and we have to look beyond free market capitalism, state communism.
We have to start looking at some new ideas.
But that's not as catchy as... Very probably.
Very, very probably.
Very, very likely.
That's so many verys at that point!
At this point, it's like a new catchphrase.
Yeah, he's catchphrased that already.
Like, if something's very probable, right, that means it's sort of almost like, now very, very probable.
Very, very, very probably.
I mean, how close to certainty can we get without something actually being certain?
You've never had as many people.
All right, we're off YouTube.
Well done, we made it.
OK, right, it's just Rumble now.
It's just Rumble.
Probably what we should do... Very probably.
Very probably.
Very, very probably.
Very, very, very probably what we should do, actually, is just before we leave YouTube, say something like, we're leaving YouTube now.
Join us over on Rumble, where it's the real deal.
Yeah?
Yeah.
We should, shouldn't we?
We definitely should.
Probably?
Very probably.
You're actually going to go straight to definitely.
Where's your rhetorical skill?
Yeah, make a note of that.
You make a note of that.
And that could be my new thing.
And you can tell me to do it in future.
All right.
You need a catchphrase for that.
That's what you need.
Probably.
Very probably.
Very, very, Very, very probably.
Very, very probably.
I just want to say this.
Carl Bittner, who I now love, says, where's the full interview with Jordan Peterson on Rumble?
You can get it immediately.
You can get it first and in full on Stay Free AF.
That's our members community.
And then we're playing out the whole interview Tuesday.
So the whole JP interview, you can watch it right now if you want it.
Don't, because I'm doing this.
But you could if you wanted.
Watch it right now.
In full and first on Stay Free AF.
That's my catchphrase.
Really good.
See?
Yeah.
I can do it.
I can do it.
All right.
What's the next thing?
Is it someone doing... There's that other dude saying that thing about Russia.
Republicans and Democrats.
I know this one.
Donald Trump endorses US Senator Chuck Grassley at Iowa rally ahead of the midterms.
Because your midterms, it's a real big deal over there, isn't it?
Oh, yeah.
I spoke to Dave Rubin because we sort of work in the same realm.
And maybe that's private what he said.
Oh no, why am I name dropping all the time?
What's gone wrong?
What's gone wrong today?
I must feel insecure.
Right.
I must feel insecure because I'm having to say that I know everyone.
That's all right.
This is a work context.
I think it's fine.
It's not like when you bang on about all those other celebs.
Do I do that though in my private life?
Do I?
No, no.
Do I?
In conversations do I suddenly go, yep, I've got a lot of powerful pals.
I don't think I do.
Who's the one?
I mean, you never seem to mention people like Tom Cruise and those are always the ones I want to know about.
It's private.
There was a moment when I was in the car with Tom Cruise and he did an impression out of, I think, Jerry Maguire.
And he went, show me!
Help me, help you!
And I was like, oh, that's cool that he did that.
That was my favourite moment of that whole experience.
And also that he did let me use his trailer to do the gym in.
Oh, I'm glad you said that.
Why did you think you threw the lavatory in there?
I did think you would do that.
No, absolutely not.
I don't think I even used it for that.
I just politely... Maybe I just thought, ooh, Tom Cruise uses this.
And I thought it was very kind of him.
He's very kind.
And when it was my birthday, he got me some nice presents.
That's what I thought about him.
He's a kind person.
Yeah.
There you go.
I'm not going to... certainly not going to start criticising folks.
But I'm more likely to talk about... I'm one of those that will go, my friends, they're normal people.
Oh, you are.
That's why I'm like that, aren't I?
Yeah.
I'm only really happy when I'm hanging out with truckers.
Yeah.
I know.
Look at any worker around here.
You say to my wife, if I see a white van, if I go, oh, Ross, from a white van, I'm like, all right, mate, how's it going?
Yep, the struggle.
Look at these hands, just like yours.
I broke that finger falling off my polo pony.
That scratch, I got it from my silver spoon.
No, no, no.
As you know, old Russ is one of us.
Old Russ is one of us.
So, um, that's another catchphrase.
One of us.
I'm the new Trump.
Right.
Except I'm much more about decentralisation, loving, absolute acceptance of people for who they truly are, and absolute love, and maybe you believe Trump is for that.
You tell me what you believe, because I don't mind, because I love you anyway.
Let's have a look at what, what's he called again?
Chuck Grassley.
Yeah, an Iowa rally.
So this isn't him, this is someone speaking at a rally for him.
For Chuck Grassley.
We don't see Chuck Grassley.
This is, this is like one of his supporters.
That's right, oh yeah.
This guy, I've seen this before, he's got too adrenalized and he's gone out of hand.
I see a lot of this.
I see a lot of it.
Let's see it.
You can take your woke, fiscally irresponsible craziness and you can take it and go to the Soviet Union!
I don't care!
A few things really.
It's amazing.
Fiscally irresponsible wokeness.
Soviet Union, I believe, was dissolved in about 1989.
Yeah.
And also, like, the thing is with wokeness and the Soviet Union is... Do you know the other thing that's blowing my mind about this?
It's like the sort of like... Because I like... By the way, you know, I'm not... If you like republicanism or Trump or whatever, this is my belief.
It won't work.
It will not work.
Neither will, like, neoliberalists, left of centre, Biden-y stuff.
None of that will work.
But just to sort of have a bit of a dig at this dude, who is a child of God and I love, he's saying, like, go to the Soviet Union!
But look at where it's happening.
Rally coverage in Sioux City, Iowa.
And Iowa is a native word.
Sioux City.
That's the people who are like, this is our country!
Yeah, there was people here, but you have that very short memory indeed to believe in nationalism.
Yeah, also the idea that woke people would really get on in Russia is an interesting one.
It's quite strict in Russia.
I don't know that they're that pro a lot of the central woke issues in Russia.
No, and I really like the way that he like threw in fiscal irresponsibility, like that was part of a rant.
I can't think of a rant that would involve fiscally irresponsible.
Because if you were having an argument with your life partner, and you're like, listen, I don't like how you talk to me, I'm sick of you, I think you're a bad influence on the kid.
It's a fiscal irresponsibility!
You've done well, actually, to include fiscal irresponsibility.
It's vital.
Yeah, because I might say something like, you should just move to Russia.
I might say that, you know.
Move to Russia if you don't like it!
Yeah, yeah.
If you don't like it, move to Russia!
You're being fiscally irresponsible!
Yeah.
And Russia, they are fiscally responsible.
You can tell that from looking at their submarines.
They've kept them in mint condition.
Yeah.
Old ones.
Not trying to jazzy have the iPhone version of a submarine or the iPhone version of a nuclear missile.
Their old clunky 80s style.
Dun dun dun dun dun!
Been screwed in by proper Igor.
Yeah, there's nothing irresponsible there, is there?
They're looking after it.
No.
I think he's collecting gold, Putin.
Is he?
Uh-oh.
I think so.
That's not good.
That ain't good.
He's stockpiling.
He's stockpiling!
We've riled him up!
We've riled him up and he's armed to the teeth.
And was there anything else that we're going to look at or are we going into this argument about polemicism in this space?
Go to an argument.
There's a few things I wanted to mention before we get into sort of polemicism around the midterms and how the Democrats are spending a bunch of money to get people to focus on sort of hot-button topics like pro-choice, pro-life.
The Republicans are spending a bunch of dark money in particular, is it?
I think dark money's in both parties now.
What is dark money?
Well, it's anonymous sources ultimately.
It's a way of donating money without there having to be any kind of record of it.
Dark money, honey.
So what that shows is that these parties are being funded by and ultimately affected by and influenced by anonymous corporations.
Do you think that there are interests that donate to both parties?
Yeah, almost certainly there would be.
We know for sure that there are.
In fact, Gareth, I'm asking you a rhetorical question there to trick you.
To trick and discredit you.
Because I happen to know a bunch of stuff about this subject.
Whilst you thumb through your stuff, I'll tell you there's a record amount that's been spent for the midterms.
So this is almost 10 billion dollars that's been spent.
When you think at a time, 10 billion dollars.
On the midterms?
Yeah, between the two parties.
When you think this is a time of crisis that people are going through in terms of what they're able to afford.
Cost of living crisis.
Homelessness.
Opioid epidemic.
Mental health breakdown.
Inability to recover from the crisis induced by the pandemic.
10 billion.
But that shows you that you should ignore them both.
Because if you're willing to spend that amount of money just winning an argument with another party, you've become distracted.
It's gotten out of hand, hasn't it?
It's gotten out of hand.
It's become sort of a senseless tribal dispute that has forgotten what the dispute is actually about.
Should be able to sort of cut people and they should bleed.
This is my love of my country.
This is my love of my people.
This is my love of humanity.
I'm just in an argument, I can't really remember why now, just keep spending money.
And when it gets to the point, we've made content about this before, that the Democrats are funding MAGA candidates in primaries in order to bend the perception of the Republican Party as a whole, so that when Joe Biden says, this is a unique time, this is a vote to save democracy itself, Oh man.
Yeah, and Hillary Clinton likens Trump supporters to Nazis.
You can't do that.
That just isn't helpful.
It's not helpful.
You don't have to come either side of that without knowing that that's not helpful.
But Gareth, it must be helpful.
The divisiveness must be helpful.
helpful, they wouldn't do it. They're deliberately creating divisiveness because the simple truth
is a significant number of people don't vote, the people that do vote are interested in
these kind of tribalised issues and more broadly, this is something I'm guessing, I sort of
became aware that Brad Evans was listening, right, and I thought oh no, Brad Evans knows
so much more about it. Don't you ever find yourself, like Brad Evans is our guest, he's
doing our book club later, we're talking about 1984, if you want to join us on Stay Free
AF you'll get a sort of more in-depth version of that but it's on the show a little bit
But I often, because I'm a passionate orator, I often find myself telling people about stuff they know more about than I do.
Like, you know, like it's happened to me my whole, like not my whole life, but for a lot of my life, I find myself sort of sitting next to or in front of like a world-class musician or whatever.
No, but the thing is, what you do, see that, mate?
Like, telling it back.
I mansplain, or musician-splain, or philosopher-splain to them.
Anyway, my point is, is that what's happening is that we're in such a sort of a frenzied and over-emotional state around the polemicism that we've forgotten, actually, what our fundamental reality is about.
That we're not talking about Massive corruption like the stories I'd like to draw your attention to is like the FBI provided support to Ottawa police During the convoy protest that's mental.
Yeah, and I would have thought Illegal, so during those trucker protesters the FBI provided support to the Ottawa police sources.
Yeah Well that includes like financial support as well, so I think what that shows what that shows is that the FBI I like American You know, federal institutions were almost as worried about what was going on in Canada as anyone else.
Because what was happening was, this was starting to spread.
The German Revolution.
Exactly.
There were going to be trucker protests everywhere weren't there Will?
They would have been trucking like, you know, because... Well I think they were, they did start to emerge.
They started to do them in America, didn't they?
Yeah, they did, yeah.
Plus there's the Sri Lanka farm protest, the ones in the Netherlands, and like, that's why I love Vandana Shiva, because she'll tell you these things are all, it's all the same issue.
That centralised edicts coming down from unelected global bodies, WEF, WHO, IMF, World Bank, are affecting National democracies and ordinary people.
You can't do anything through political process, so you have to protest, but the right to protest is being impeded.
They can freeze your bank accounts and all that stuff.
Now we know that the FBI are lending financial support to the Ottawa.
It's a weird word to say in my accent.
Oh yeah, because you don't pronounce the T's.
The Ottawa.
The Ottawa.
Ottawa Police Services.
That's the wrong kind of internationalism, that, mate.
Yep.
Have you got more to say, Nick?
No.
Well, let me tell you some facts, because as you know, I'm an investigative reporter myself.
Oh, yes.
I forget this sometimes.
Yeah, you've got to stay focused.
What I do is I investigate it, and then I report it.
This is the bit where I've done the investigating, and here's the reporting.
Did you know that lobbyists in Washington have received at least $3.5 billion for their work every year since 2019?
Wow.
Every year.
There's your democracy!
There's your bloody democracy!
So essentially, this all points to one thing.
Corruption.
And when we had Jeffrey Sachs on here, and it was brilliant, and you can watch that interview right now.
Not right now, though, because I need you here with me.
One of the things that I really liked was the way that he explained, even around just one issue, the Ukraine-Russia war.
How it didn't begin when we are told it began.
He says, look, look, this happened in 2009, this happened in 2014, this is well documented, and when you see Jeffrey Sachs, he's so adorable, another great academic, and he does that face.
We made him do it a couple of times.
We got VT packaged for the number of times we made him do that.
We did it so many times.
Yeah.
I'd love to see it.
flirting with us and do that fucking face!
I think we had him do it.
He told us stuff about, like, various diplomats and high-level government officials that have worked for both administrations.
And if one agenda spans various administrations, what does that tell you about the efficacy of democracy and apparent explicit policy?
I'll tell you, because that was a rhetorical question.
It tells you that it's superficial and that, ultimately, there is an ulterior agenda being pursued.
It's not conspiracy theory, although there is a tinfoil hat.
Right here, if I need one.
This is just an underwritten academic fact.
I'm not going to put this on for a while because actually I'm quite pleased with how my hair's looking.
Now on the subject of globalist agendas, let's see a little, let's look a little more deeply into the relationships that Rishi Sunak, current British Prime Minister, how long has it been?
It's been two weeks now?
Couple of weeks, yeah.
It won't be much longer, I wouldn't have thought.
They'd normally, we only have him for a little while, don't we, Prime Minister?
After a couple of weeks, oh, it's still him!
Get another one in!
Pound's gone down again.
Bloody Pat, you idiot!
What have you done to that pound?
Get out!
Go and get someone to boost that pound right up tight.
So what we're going to do now is talk about Rishi Sunak's connections to the WF.
They're not tangential, not conspiratorial.
He's, like, misses his dad, works directly with him, through Infosys.
That does imply that he gets on with his missus' dad, though.
Oh, they might not get on.
Yeah.
I mean, do you get on with your... Yeah, Bernard, me and BG, professional golfer, you should see us on the 19th hole, which is what we golfers call the bar after.
I do a couple of rounds of golf each day.
Every day I do 18 holes before I come to work.
Golf grow up!
He's talking about golf.
I know a lot about golf.
Firstly, you're going to need your golf sticks.
And then you smash it.
Which is your favourite one?
I'd say probably the 9-wood.
And that's the one I use most of all to smash it down the golf hole.
One day I smashed it so hard down that golf hole, my ears went pop.
But we're not here to talk about my relationship with my father-in-law, Bernard Gallaher.
Respect to you, sir.
We're here to talk about Rishi Sunak's relationship with his father-in-law and Klaus Schwab, the comically villainous Klaus Schwab.
Oh, I didn't mean to pry.
I wish he was your father-in-law.
Klaus Schwab?
Yeah.
I like to say it at Christmas.
Yeah.
Klaus, mate, I've been... Why do you make these videos where you reductively condemn us some sort of conspiratorial mouthpiece for all of your various interests?
Before you say anything else, swallow that spit in your mouth because a lot of it's ended up in my eyelashes and I don't like feeling my eyelashes weighed down by other people's spit on Christmas Day.
Not on Christmas day in the morn, and we'd have to have it at his house, wouldn't we?
Of course you would.
Ganna, where are you?
We'll do it at Clow's house.
We've got to do it at Clow's house.
Come house!
We did it at yours last year.
Why's it always got to be at yours?
I want to stay in.
Can't we just have a casual Christmas?
Open our presents and stay at home.
Can't we just have a casual Christmas?
No, you can't.
We're doing Christmas Night.
Justin Trudeau and Angela Merkel, they're all coming over for Christmas.
We're going to have an eggnog.
We're going to have an eggnog together.
Russell, why don't you sip the nog?
Oh, shit, this nog.
That ain't good nog, Klaus!
You call that nog?
You call that no clout?
But I wouldn't, would I?
Because it's the fibronucleus, you see my actual fibronucleus.
Yes, yes, yes, very politely.
You've just got to front it up, haven't you?
That's the nature of an in-law relationship.
YouTube videos would be interesting.
Why do you mean?
When you were doing videos about your own father-in-law.
I'd like to see that.
Well, actually, I watched the one where it was said that I gave Albert Ball, our CEO of Pfizer, a very soft interview.
That's why you've got this lousy present.
Just itchy socks.
Feel how it's going to make your legs bold around the anklet.
That's the sort of thing that happens in my mind.
Well, thanks for watching.
We're all going to resign now from popular entertainment.
Nah, we're gonna keep doing it.
We're trying our hardest and this is the result.
Let's have a look at Rishi Sunak and his ties to the WEF.
Let us know in the chat, let us know in the comments what you think about all this, hmm?
No serious, nothing news, you know.
Thank you for choosing Fox News.
Thank you so much.
No, here's the f*****g news.
Rishi Sunak, even if that's not what Joe Biden calls him, is Britain's first Hindu Prime Minister.
And for what it's worth, I think that's a good thing.
But is Hinduism Rishi Sunak's real religion, or are his ties to the WEF and the billionaire class more important?
Let's look at the policies.
Let's see if they're globalist or not.
Another story, of course, about globalism and about another WEF stooge, trainee, acolyte, crony, making it through the ranks, all the way from being a billionaire to being a political puppet of powerful forces.
I don't know.
I want you to decide.
Let me know in the comments.
Let me know on the chat whether you think Rishi Sunak, Justin Trudeau, Macron, all these WEF boy band leaders are put in the interests of their nation first and the
inhabitants of their nation, or their strong ties to globalist bodies that are unelected.
In the case of Rishi Sunak, there's some astonishing information that I'm just longing to tell you.
Here it is.
Rishi Sunak has family ties to a technology partner of the World Economic Forum.
So, this is not conspiracy theory, this is conspiracy fact.
You might say, oh the WAF, really it's just, you know, they're just put on these conferences.
Well look at who attends those conferences, look at the goals and the agenda of the institutions and groups that attend that conference, and look at what's happening in the world.
See if you see a corollary that has advocated for a Chinese Communist Party style economy complete with trackable digital identities and currency.
So already, he has literal ties to a technology company that advocates for something that I imagine most of us would be resistant to, regardless of what we claim our political persuasion is.
You might be on the left, you might be on the right, you might be pro-Brexit, pro-Trump, you might be anti-Brexit, anti-Trump.
Do you want social credit scoring up the wazoo so that your every transaction, your medical decisions, and indeed your currency, we made a video about that recently, have a look at that one, All become increasingly centralised.
Surely you can see that's the way it's going.
Surely you can see the way that new protest laws are being ushered in in our country, the UK.
The way that the trucker protests were shut down.
The way that they were smeared, slurred, had bank accounts frozen.
That centralisation and control being exerted through the state somehow, because it's compassionate and anti-Nazi, appears to be the way things are going.
Well, what does this Prime Minister mean?
What do these ties mean?
What's it going to mean for you?
The father of Sunak's wife, Akshata Murthy, is the founder of Infosys, an Indian information technology company that provides services to a host of Fortune 500 companies and banks.
Infosys is listed as an official partner of the World Economic Forum, the WEF, which has been accused of seeking to develop the technological infrastructure to implement a global social credit score system.
Now, I don't even think that they think they're evil.
I'm not suggesting that they're evil.
I think that it's a form of new technocracy that will find itself ultimately expressed in the form of technological dictatorship, where the data does the thinking for you.
Sorry, we cannot permit you to travel.
Oh, it seems you're responsible for wrong-think.
I'm afraid that you will not be permitted to travel.
Infosys president Mohit Joshi has penned articles for the site in favour of digital banking, which provides the technological framework for the social credit score system the WEF has come under scrutiny for attempting to effectuate across the world.
Okay, so there you go.
There's a deliberate definitive tie between Rishi Sunak and the WEF in the form of Infosys owned by his wife's father.
That's before we get to Rishi Sunak's financial life and financial history.
Experts say Sunak has not been transparent with his finances and that his hedge fund background raises questions about his commitment to fighting tax avoidance.
Again, these are ordinary, normal practices in the world of finance.
Having hedge funds is acceptable.
It's certainly not anything that is criminal.
We're just talking particularly about a man who is now charged with the social responsibility of running a country and doing what's best for a country, the vast majority of whom are not multimillionaires or billionaires or investors,
what does his background, his class, and his affiliation with certain organizations tell you?
Sitting on a combined wealth of £730 million, Rishi Sunak and his wife Akshata Murthy
have a fortune which is around twice the estimated wealth of King Charles III.
That's the person who's in charge with helping the poor people of this country.
Oh, also, he's heavily tied to the WEF.
So, to paraphrase Butch and Sundance, if the fool don't kill ya, the drowning will.
The Chancellor's extensive property portfolio is just one source of his wealth.
After studying at Oxford University, Sunak went on to work for US investment bank Goldman Sachs for four years.
He left to pursue a business degree at Stanford University in California, where he said influential figures in the multi-billion US tech industry left a mark on him.
The Mark of the Beast!
When the idea of public assemblies, new forms of democracy are discussed, people are very dismissive.
You can't change anything.
This is the best way of doing things.
Do you know why they say that?
Because if there were true forms of democracy, where you could run your own community, schools, hospital, where there were voted for assemblies, where people democratically discussed what to do with community budgets independently, where laws were formed locally, Acted upon communally and consensually, it wouldn't be possible for Oxford and Stanford graduates, former employees of Goldman Sachs, affiliates of the WEF by design and by interest and by shared agenda, to rise continually to power all over the world.
Nothing good can come out of these systems now.
It doesn't matter if the people in charge change their tie colour or even the colour of their skin or their sex.
It's not the solution.
If you listen to Jeffrey Sachs in our brilliant interview talking about the military-industrial complex, what he calls the war machine's agenda, being pursued for the last 30 years, it's clear that it transcends party politics.
You can watch it for yourself, you can listen to it for yourself.
What you can see From there, Sunak had a stint working at a hedge fund back in London.
He was a partner at the Children's Investment Fund.
address and change the institutions themselves if we're to interrupt this process.
That's just what I think, let me know what you think in the chat.
From there, Sunak had a stint working at a hedge fund back in London.
He was a partner at the Children's Investment Fund.
Which sounds like a good thing, doesn't it?
Ha ha ha ha!
But I've not read this yet.
But I hear, Children's Investment Fund, well, you're investing in children, you're helping children, it's not to, like, somehow mess with children, right?
So, is gas going to be a good thing?
Let's find out.
Where he's believed to have made millions of pounds from a campaign that helped trigger the 2008 financial crisis.
Remember all that poverty?
That devastation?
All the political bifurcation and chaos that came from that time?
Yes!
It was one of the best times of my life!
Soaring gas prices, falling home prices and rising unemployment.
Sunak then left to co-found his own firm, Thaleem, which had an initial fund of £536 million and is also registered in the Cayman Islands.
Oh, what?
What?
You think registered it in the Cayman Islands to somehow avoid tax or not pay tax in legal ways?
You know.
He placed the investments he held from his years of working in finance into a blind trust.
Which is what we're expected to give the powerful.
Such agreements are intended to avoid conflict of interest by handing over control of assets to a third party.
But they don't necessarily come with any legal mechanism to prevent the owner of the assets actually dictating what happens.
Blind trust!
Keep saying it to yourself till you have it for the operations of these powerful forces.
Blind trust that the WEF, this big tech company, hedge funds, Goldman Sachs, political power, Oxford University, all these institutions of power, these same words that you hear again and again and again all over the world, don't have any connection to your life and your poverty.
If you wanted to define the WEF in the least conspiratorial terms, You could call it a smokescreen that helps billionaires present themselves as philanthropists with funds that are one day going to help people when in fact their money is held in blind trusts and offshore tax accounts while they talk about how we have to change and treat people fairly and respect individuality which by the way I totally believe that we should mean while they keep all their money in blind trusts and Cayman Islands
This is how power operates.
These are the symptoms and the symbols of true power.
This is not just conspiracy theory.
These are the markers of what happens.
Because real power, as you know, is not in Congress.
Real power, as you know, is not in Parliament.
Real power is corporate power.
Real power is global.
They have their own theme.
Their own air.
Occasionally it breaches and you see it when they have parties while you're locked down.
But this is how it's organised.
Legal ways of not playing by the rules.
Sunak has refused to disclose whether he will profit from a surge in the share price of the COVID-19 vaccine manufacturer Moderna, one of the biggest investments held by the hedge fund he co-founded before entering Parliament.
I suppose he's refused to disclose because the information's so good, So good, the information about what went on with that Covid vaccine, that if we knew, it would just blow our minds.
During the pandemic, billionaires such as Enon Narayana Murthy, which is his father-in-law, of course, saw their wealth increase.
Murthy's fortune was up 35% to 2.3 billion in 2021, while inequality between the richest and the poorest grew.
Don't worry though, because we can all come together to protest legally.
Britain, like the United States, has a long history of civil rights and opposing power.
And luckily, in a democracy, you can always be sure that you'll be able to oppose power freely.
Same way they got their Cayman Islands funds and their blind trust, we'll always have the right to take to the streets and make our voices heard.
As PM Sunak reappointed Sweller Braverman as Home Secretary, Braverman, before resigning for a breach of ministerial rules, pushed through a last-minute amendment to a widely criticised anti-protest bill that would allow her to apply for injunctions against anyone she deemed likely to carry out protests that could cause a serious disruption to key national infrastructure, prevent access to essential goods or services, or have a serious adverse effect on public safety.
The proposal would also give police the power to arrest anyone they suspect of breaching such an injunction.
Which is a law so vague they could include anything.
Oh, that could affect safety.
Beep, that could affect commerce.
Also, a protest is meant to be disruptive.
It's good if it doesn't annoy the very people that it's trying to get onside, I would contest, but it has to be a disruption, otherwise it's not a protest.
Essentially, what they're saying is, shut up!
According to Liberty, the amendment will effectively give the Home Secretary the power to clamp down on protests as and when the government chooses.
Well, I'm sure they wouldn't misuse that power.
Just look at Canada, where they didn't misuse that power.
National emergency now to end the trucker protests.
This will have devastating consequences for dissent.
The only option we have now is dissent outside of ordinary political spheres.
Within political spheres, power has been co-opted and captured.
Within media, power has been co-opted and captured.
Our only chance is to organize together to look beyond cultural differences and unite against centralized power and demand real democracy.
Other measures proposed in the bill include giving courts the power to issue serious disruption prevention orders which can ban individuals from attending protests.
Amnesty International said the proposed law would go further than similar legislation in Russia by giving courts the power to issue them without a conviction.
Bypassing judicial process, bypassing jury, magistrates, any ability to form a conversation beyond even what, wait for it, Russia, led by that Maniac, that cancerous, cadaverous, insane imperialist Putin himself.
And I'm not saying he's not any of those things.
Maybe he is.
But also, this is worse than what they do in Russia.
The range of conditions that can be imposed on individuals under the orders include 24-7 GPS monitoring and restricted internet usage.
Control, power, the ability to regulate with a stranglehold, the actions of a vast population in order that you can pursue your globalist agenda more freely.
Police would be given powers to stop and search people or vehicles even if they have no reasonable grounds to do so, even if a senior officer believes protests, offences are likely to take place in an area.
I believe a protest could take place in this area.
Let's arrest all these people!
But what if they take us to court?
They can't take us to court.
So what we observed in Canada and were disgusted by, legitimate trucker protest, which is now admitted were not violent and never supposed to be violent, were just used to bring about the possibility to introduce emergency laws, although that was blessedly blocked, is not just Isolated to that region anymore.
It's truly becoming a globalist agenda.
Do you see?
Please, I'm not going mad, am I?
Are they doing the same thing all over the world?
So, shutting down protests, WEF style leaders, financial tyranny, social credit scoring, a global agenda.
Oh my god, all those people that we thought were conspiracy theorists and whack jobs, and hey, so maybe some of them were, a little while ago, said a lot of things that are starting to become just things that should be in the news, because they're actually happening.
Why do you think they're not in the news?
Let me know in the chat, let me know in the comments, let me know what you think we should do about it.
No, here's the fucking news!
Look at me like proper news.
I've got bits of paper and everything.
Really good that.
I fell totally in love, says Woonie, when Russell came on to Rumble.
I was sure he was a puppet when he was on YouTube, but now his energy is super flow and chill, showing me he's a legit man.
Woonie, thank you for coming on board.
Other people saying all sorts of things about that video.
Joseph, how much is Soonak's wife worth?
She got big bucks in that family.
I think it's 733 million quid, mate.
A lot.
There or thereabouts.
Give or take a few pence.
Depends how much is in the Cayman Islands.
We don't know, do we?
I can't look in the Cayman Islands. That's my journey and visit. What people do in their own private Cayman Islands,
in their own private tax havens, is between them and their conscience, if they have one.
Stacey Brue 79 says, I started to watch this on YouTube and it stopped broadcasting all of a sudden. Someone didn't
like what you said, Russell, you bad, bad boy.
Well, actually, we came over here on Rumble because this is where we're allowed to be who we are, man.
The Nerd Far Away, I found the whole thing odd. Trust suddenly steps down. Soon that comes in as the WEF's poster
child. Yep.
Yep.
It's all there in the comments, guys.
Poster child.
Would you have him as the poster child?
Yeah, as a poster child.
Yeah.
That just means he's on a poster.
Funny phrase, isn't it?
Poster child.
Get rid of that.
Yeah.
child and it's not yours, that ain't good. Get that out the house or have a really good
explanation for why you had it in the first place. What's this poster of a child? I don't
know really, I was in Athena, because it was 1984, which you're supposed to be researching
by the way and I haven't seen you research. I've done a lot of good research. And I was
in Athena and I got this cat in a boot and I got this guy pulling his denims down over
his black and white ass baby.
And the woman with the tennis ball.
Tennis woman scratching her ass.
She had a bit of ass.
That was around my Uncle Greg's house.
Was it?
He had a poster of that.
I didn't feel easy about it, to be honest.
That says a lot about your childhood.
I didn't like that poster.
I didn't...
It's not like I was anti-porn.
Very far from it.
Absolutely.
I was very pro-porn as a child.
Because, you know, it was a window into wonder.
But something about the mood of that I was always confused by.
Joseph, Sunak sounds worse than Boris.
Should have stuck with Boris.
Oh no, you've got to think of Boris.
Boris is mental.
Mental, mental.
So, um, Gareth, I mean, you've got some stuff about these WAF-style connections, or have you got stuff on these protest laws that seem all well-in, which is why I was shouting to Brad during that.
I was like, it's all well-in, Brad!
It's all well-in, Brad!
He goes, yeah, you're doing really well!
I give him an approving nod, so I'm really getting it.
Well, yeah, we'll save the protest laws for Brad, then.
I thought I'd look a bit, because we were talking about you going around Klaus's for Christmas, I thought I'd look into how much that might, it might cost you.
Go on.
So if you want a WF membership, membership and partnership fees range from $65,000 to $650,000 annually.
Partnership fees range from $65,000 to $650,000 annually.
If you want to go to an event, you know, one of the Davos events, attendees pay 28 grand
just for a ticket with a coveted all-access badge fetching more than 50 grand.
And that's before attendees spend thousands, tens of hundreds of thousands on private air travel, ski shallows and entertainment.
But also, did you know the American taxpayer helped fund the sponsoring organization with tens of millions of dollars?
Since 2013, WF received more than $60 million from U.S.
taxpayers.
You're paying for it anyway, even if you don't want to go.
So there you are, the WF.
Is it just a shell organisation that's just propagandist?
Is it sort of really whitewashing stroke greenwashing and offering a philanthropic bent on corporate interests?
Or is it even more nefarious than that?
So many questions, some of which we'll have to answer in our members community after the show.
Stay free AF, because now it is time for Books with Brad.
So do the titles for Books with Brad.
That's what I'm anticipating playing in right now.
It's time now for Books with Brad.
Suddenly, a white rabbit with pink eyes ran close by her.
Burning with curiosity, she ran across the field after it, and was just in time to see it pop down a large rabbit hole under the hedge.
In another moment, down went Alice after it, never once considering how in the world she was to get out again.
Hello and welcome to Books with Brad, with me, Russell Brand and philosopher and professor, Brad Evans.
What a lovely suit.
Thank you very much.
Thanks for coming again.
I've got some comments here.
Jennifer says, I read 1984 when I was in high school in 1983.
Cool.
Excellent book and honestly rather prophetic.
I also read Handmaid's Tale.
Then Danish, he says, I started reading and remembered some of it from my kids when they were in school.
So there you go.
People are joining in with us, Brad.
Will you give us a quick review of where we got to last time with our reading?
Because I'll tell you where I got to.
I didn't read enough of it.
Well, yeah, I think the last time we covered the idea of, you know, the dystopian present in which we live, surveillance, the increasing power of big tech and the way that influences our lives, some of the aspects in which Orwell got it wrong.
I think that's, you know, worth kind of considering.
And how we're kind of living in a moment where I guess, you know, this channel is a good example of this, where we think the fundamental freedoms we took for granted are now becoming true.
And as you say, what we used to consider as conspiracy theorists actually looks like evidential fact.
And I think that's what we kind of discussed in the last period.
So it's interesting to see how this conversation carries on in terms of, you know, particularly with the light of the things you've been talking about recently.
Even in today's show we're talking a lot about sort of centralized power that is able to circumvent what we would have regarded as democratic process.
We're talking about the influence of lobbying money.
Even in our item there, Here's the News, we talked about the protest laws that were snuck in During the time of fluctuation in British politics just a couple of weeks ago.
It's an extraordinary trend.
It's almost like you can track the emergent symptoms that lead to the full-blown disease of dystopia.
Yeah, well, I think we live in an age of dystopian realism.
And I think this is the thing which Orwell was really trying to push about, you know, is what does it mean when dystopia becomes the lived condition?
And this idea of, you know, thinking through these kind of catastrophic moments in which we live in, where in which governments can basically take hold of a catastrophe and do what they want in terms of government policy.
And I think the trucker example is a good example of that in response to the pandemic.
It was revealed that those truckers were entirely peaceful during that time, and that there was an internal memo within the Canadian government that suggested that even as they were applying for emergency powers, they knew that the protests were largely non-violent.
So I suppose that's an example of it.
Brad, are you going to read another bit of 1984 before we move on to our next book?
Um, I can do, yeah.
Is it going to be about stuff that happened in 1984?
It can be that, or it could be to do with protests, whatever.
What would you actually prefer?
Do one of each while Brad finds a passage.
Alright, so in 1984, the top song was Like a Virgin by Madonna.
He didn't predict that, did he?
You're so clever, why didn't you know Madonna was going to be in the charts?
And now do you want something about protest?
Yes.
Or do you want more fun facts?
Don't give me another 1984 fact, it was disrespectful to Brad.
Yeah, sorry about that Brad.
So, what I thought was really interesting when we were talking about the protest and also we're talking about 1984...
Is this element to the anti-protest bill that would allow Sweller Braverman, who's the Home Secretary, to apply for injunctions against anyone she deems likely to carry out protests?
So we're not even basing protest laws anymore on whether people do or do commit protests.
It's now whether you are likely to commit them.
So we're moving to a new phase of essentially kind of anticipating people's behaviors and ascribing our own ideas as to what those behaviors would be.
Well Orwell talks about this in terms of thought crime, right?
And thought crime in itself is, you know, crime in anticipation of a potentiality.
And the thing about a potentiality is you can never disprove it.
So that's part of the narrative.
How do you disprove a potentiality?
The potentiality for violence is always there.
And I think that's part of the narrative, which Orwell is really trying to deal with this idea of the thought crime.
Yeah.
What bit are you going to read then, Brad?
It'd be really good if it was a thought crime bit, now that you've said that.
That's a lot of pressure.
No, you didn't know that Gareth was going to bring that up, because Gareth's a rogue.
He's a rogue element.
If I always had those powers to arrest people for likely crimes, this guy, I'd arrest him right now.
Because you never know when he's going to come up and say 1984, Tiswas was the most watched TV show, or JR, or the whole of America was concerned about Bobby Ewing or something in Dallas.
You could say something like that at any moment, couldn't you?
You've got a bit there, Brad.
Well, I've got a bit here, yeah.
Since about that time, war had been literally continuous.
Though, strictly speaking, it had not always been the same war.
For several months during his childhood, there had been confused street fighting in London itself, some of which he remembered vividly.
But to trace out the history of the whole period to say who was fighting whom at any given moment would have been utterly impossible since no written record no spoken word ever mentioned any other ailment apart from the existing one oh my god that's already happening
Few street crime is such an amazing like turn of phrase and don't you feel that with the pandemic and the sort of ephemera around it whether it's regulatory or medical is already being sort of posited as the sort of the yesterday news and now we're We're invited to focus our attention on this current conflict which, when we spoke to Jeffrey Sachs on this show, has dubious origins.
It's somewhat understood that NATO infringement on the Ukraine and Georgia was a sort of a factor in Putin's eventual aggression, but he talked too about dabbling in elections, the complexity of members of the Ukrainian fighting forces being explicitly Nazis.
Do you feel that that has a sort of a Well, what is the conflict?
And I think the lesson from Orwell is that the conflict doesn't matter.
The conflict invokes a hierarchy.
The conflict produces hierarchy.
So the nature of the conflict itself is irrelevant as long as there is conflict.
And I think that's the key lesson from there and something which we see again in terms of you know with the pandemic there's a war against the virus and it doesn't matter what the war is as long as we can structure society in that way and I think that's one of the key lessons.
You think that the objective is to induce these hierarchies and systems of power rather than to address the apparent object?
Yeah, absolutely.
And it's about creating the very conditions through which governments can create states of emergency.
And if you're in a state of emergency, you can bypass any normal laws, any normal systems of governance, because you're in this emergency condition.
But we're in an age today of unending emergency.
Emergency never ends.
It's pretty amazing.
Let us know in the chat and the comments what you think about Brad's analysis here.
And what was it in 1948 or whenever it was that Orwell was writing that made him feel that this was the way that culture was heading?
What was happening, Brad?
I think he's dealing in response to the aftermath of World War II.
There's this real kind of horror of that history.
He's fearful of the impending apocalypse from nuclear attack.
So he's kind of imagining this kind of dystopian environment in which the world is on the precipice of absolute collapse.
Now, governments have mobilized that narrative and said, yes, you are on the precipice of absolute collapse.
How can we invoke the very conditions which Orwell was warning against?
So the warning becomes the prophecy.
And I think that's one of the key narratives that comes through it.
Morning becomes the prophecy and it sounds like a wonderful way to induce fear.
Okay, well I hope that you will continue to read 984 and give us your comments on it.
It's time now to tell you who gets this beautiful bit of art, Chantelle's art here.
Look, apparently the 33 people had winning entries, so who do we give it to?
We can't reproduce this 33 times.
It's value diminishes with every single reproduction.
We simply won't do it.
The question was, who does Winston fall in love with and ultimately become betrayed by?
The answer was, of course, Madonna, as Gareth revealed.
No, it was Julia.
It was Julia.
It was Julia.
And three of you got that right.
How are we deciding who wins?
There's a name and a hat.
Oh, there's a hat?
Oh, Brad, will you be... Oh, you think... No, I can't take that kind of responsibility, Brad.
I'm corruptible.
You choose it.
I'm not good with that level of authority and power.
Pamela Pittman.
Pamela Pittman, you are victorious.
You have triumphed where others have failed.
You will be elevated to the status of a deity.
You will have this wonderful piece of art sent to you, which I think will only increase in value.
And I suppose, do you know what I'll tell you?
That's what capitalism has done to me.
I see everything in terms of its value.
And I'm meant to be against this stuff.
Like someone told me that they had a chateau, I said chateau, in France and that they opened a wardrobe door and that the house had previously belonged to Francis Bacon and he'd sort of scratched some painting on the inside or like etching on the inside of wardrobe and straight away I thought, what's that worth?
I wasn't able to think of like the beauty of it.
I'm like a sort of a car dealer.
I mean, what's happened to me?
We've all been intoxicated by it.
Bacon's priceless now, so I hope you kept all of it.
Well, whoever it was, like, yeah, it's a priceless work of art they've got there.
But this idea of having your thought policed, your private intellectual and conscious spaces monitored, formulated and shaped happens in ways that, I mean, sort of obvious.
What is civilization?
What is acculturation?
Other than the sort of set of systems that we all have a consensus around.
But when it becomes like when the entire framing is unquestioningly and unconsciously accepted, even in the manner that I just Also, the question is, what is the purpose?
And Orwell just says, the purpose of 1984 is no purpose.
It's just an experiment.
I hate that.
To see what we can do with humans.
And we're living in an experiment, a constant experiment.
I don't like it.
And there's no purpose, and that's what makes it so banal.
No.
And that's what makes it, because it, you know, what's the enemy in 1984?
It's love.
And it's an experiment to destroy love.
You would call it spirituality, right?
Yeah, I would.
And I would say that's nihilistic, Brad.
It's nihilistic.
And the destruction of love, I would say, is not purposeless.
I would say that, you know, I'm doing that thing.
I'm doing it right now.
Right, like where I tell people about stuff they know more about than I do.
This is what I would say, is that on some level Orwell was writing about this kind of collapse of values even beyond what was happening politically in the post-war era as materialism and rationalism reached a point where it was beginning to erode meaning in a way that was even beyond the geopolitical consequences of the huge loss of those successive wars.
The materialism, post-enlightenment rationalism, the kind of loss of purpose, perhaps that's what he was able to prophesize and envisage, that love itself is being annihilated, everything is being measured, everything is being desacralized and banalized to the point where there is no legitimate purpose.
Purpose, love, in the end we start to see that these are correlatives.
Well Orwell asks what do we love?
Peace!
Orwell asks, what do we love?
Now, you know, you can't have personal love, but you can love the party.
There's this brilliant quote Orwell has about nationalism.
He says, nationalism is the habit of categorizing human beings like insects.
So whole blocks of millions or tens of millions can be conveniently labeled good or bad.
And this is, you know, this idea of we love something so much, but it's not real love.
It's kind of a supplement love through which you are willing to kill for rather than just simply love for.
And I think that's a different, you know, Oil is really bleak, and you kind of think, well, where is the optimism?
Because if you read the book, it's a really dark, brutal book.
The glimmer of revolution in Orwell, which I know you've touched upon there, is love.
This little guy, by a certain little somebody, trying their hardest to make their way through life.
But it's the word you've highlighted, it's love.
The only thing which Orwell talks about as the only glimmer of hope in Orwell is that concept of love.
And it's an intimate love, which the state has to destroy.
Though we talk about today, you talk about, you know, brilliantly about the divisiveness of contemporary politics.
It's just trying to break actual human connections between people.
That we can have a simple care for one another.
That we can tolerate one another's petty differences.
And I think, you know, that idea of love, unless we can start from that point, then what do we have?
Well, we have an experiment.
And that's Orwell's lesson.
That's pretty good, isn't it?
It's a good conversation.
Now, our next book is Lewis Carroll's Alice in Wonderland, which we're not even going to be able to introduce because we've run out of time.
Have we run out of time?
Because I've got to wrap up the show.
So we're going to have to, Brad, you're going to have to give up your job as a lecturer in both Bristol and wherever the hell it is in Germany, you're lecturing, disappearing mysteriously for weeks on end, and commit yourself full time to being in this armchair, illuminating and edifying us.
Can I say two things before?
First of all, happy birthday to your daughter.
Thank you.
Remember the first time we met, I actually exchanged Alice in Wonderland, so we can talk about that next time.
And also, you keep explaining stuff to me.
I think you humanise politics better than anybody I know.
Aw, Brad, you've given me a compliment.
1984.
Arthur Ashe!
Pete Sampras?
McEnroe.
Oh, Becker!
Oh, McEnroe.
Navratilo.
Becker!
Oh!
Was it Becker?
Nope.
Becca!
Absolutely not, no.
Boris, Becca!
Becca!
You can't be serious.
Becca!
I'm still high on my humanising politics compliment and I'm going to return to the other area.
Hold on, why don't we just have a look at... No, this is a good time to play in.
If you want to see a conversation with Gabor Maté, talk about humanising politics, have a look at this little chinwag between me and Gabor Maté.
Will you stay with us for Stay Free AF?
Of course.
Have a look at me and Gabor Maté.
This is available on Stay Free AF right now.
Addictions, these qualities, connection, self-worth, pain relief, are they good things or bad things?
They're good things.
Yeah.
In other words, addiction, the addicted person just wants to feel like a normal human being.
So addiction is neither a choice nor is it a disease.
It's an attempt to solve the problem.
And that problem is rooted in trauma.
So, once we recognize that, why are we judging people for desperately seeking to escape states of extreme emotional distress, isolation, disconnection, pain?
So the addiction is not the primary issue.
The primary issue is the trauma that induces the mind state from which the person needs to escape.
I've told you before and I'll tell you again, there ain't no such thing as aliens, but is there though?
We'll be talking to Jeremy Corbell at some point, who claims that he can bring these extraterrestrials right into the fold of our very families.
Now, Jeremy Corbin though...
I thought you'd got them mixed up then.
We're getting Corbyn on to talk about aliens.
Jeremy, what the hell happened in Roswell that day?
Well, it's not really interesting, Russell.
The important thing is, is that if you don't nationalise health services, people are going to suffer.
What?
Are they the grey ones with the eyes like almonds?
Or are they the big tall ones?
Um, he ain't coming on because he's got a bad back.
We should have Jeremy Corbyn on Monday.
Do you reckon we can pressure him?
Yeah, or send him some stuff for his back.
Or one of those stretchers they take footballers off on.
That's right, yeah.
Or that thing that Hannibal Lecter was in, where they sort of pushed him like luggage.
Yeah.
Why don't we push Corbyn in here like luggage?
Like, you know, with a mouth guard on.
Yeah, get him some cantake.
Yeah, have a cook some fava beans.
It's a nice canty.
Can't give fava beans though to Chris Pavlovsky, CEO of Rumble.
Lurgic to him.
Yep.
Lurgic.
That's what I say.
Alright, so next week we've got some good stuff coming on.
We do a deep dive, proper good analysis on Elon Musk.
Like Elon Musk, Willy Wonka hero.
Or just another billionaire.
And how does his Twitter agenda interfere with the unipolar objectives, you'll like this Brad, unipolar objectives of American hegemony through their sort of proxy agencies like NATO and all that kind of stuff.
It's complex analysis.
It is complex.
You won't get it anywhere else.
You won't be able to.
They won't allow it.
I think the system's trying to even get to us.
They're trying to get to us.
Like lefties won't come on here.
Well... You lefties, you'd better get... Well, Brad's a lefty.
We're not so reductive, actually.
You lefties!
Better get on here!
What?
We don't?
We're not reductive?
We don't see them like that, no.
Those taxonomies.
We're not insects.
We're not in a nation of insects, are we?
It's more complex than that.
These categories don't really exist.
There's a brilliant... You'll know about that Bourgeois thing, won't you?
That Bourgeois thing was the Chinese emperor's emporium.
Have you heard of that?
The same course where I first heard of you, Brad, where I did a university course for about an hour and a half, but in it I learned about Edward Said and Foucault and Brad.
And like, in it, there was this bit where they read this short story by that, isn't he Argentinian?
Borgia.
Borgia.
And they said that he's got this essay where he talks about this Chinese emperor, and he divides animals up.
Instead of dividing them up like rodents and birds and primates, he says like, this area is animals that hurt my feelings last Wednesday.
These are animals that shouldn't ever be allowed to stand near a lamp.
And like, in so doing, ask you to recognise that our systems of taxonomy to some degree are arbitrary.
Yeah?
All right.
Pretty good.
Get on here, Corbyn!
You take some back medicine and get your fucking ass here if you want a revolution.
We're committed.
Sorry, so that's the wrong message.
Jeremy, come on.
Gareth loves you.
She will fix it, but with less subtext.
Jordan Peterson is going to be on on Tuesday.
Jordan Peterson is going to be on Tuesday, and we're going to talk to Dr. Joe Dispenza, which you can watch first and in full 7.30am PT, 10.30am ET, 3.30 GMT. When I'm
saying that I don't know what it means. No. Don't know what it means. Not a clue. And
sign up to StayFreeAF to get direct access to me. I do stuff on my phone all the time on there.
It's like 33 quid a year. We give all the money to junkies. Well, one junkie. Me. And
like, and like, you get proper access to me. Where do you think you'll go next with it? Thinking
of going, er, I'm thinking of going to do a little trip to Kilimanjaro.
Oh, yeah.
Or going up the Nile.
I'm going to recreate... Beg your pardon?
I don't think they want to see that.
It's just too much access.
Only a safe reaction!
Straight up the Nile!
A little less access, please.
Then I'm going to spend a bit of time in Hindu Kush!
Half an hour in Hindu Kush is what you need, my man!
And also, you get to join us for these Q&As that go in-depth, and, you know, you'll like it.
Of course you'll like it.
You'll certainly like it up the Nile, I'll tell you.
I'm recreating things I've done in films, but in real life.
Get me to the Greek, do me up the Nile, why wouldn't you?
See you next week for another fantastic week of earth-shattering truths.
Love you, stay free.
See you in a second if you're Stay Free AF.
Bye.
▲
Export Selection