Neil Oliver and Tucker Carlson expose how banks and elites orchestrated WWII’s betrayals—like Poland’s 1939 handover to Stalin—to centralize power, repeating the pattern in COVID mandates, CBDCs, and climate hoaxes. They trace Western decline from WWI’s financial wars to Brexit backlash, warning neo-feudalism replaces democracy as elites weaponize digital IDs and mass migration. Rejecting fatalism, they frame resistance as a divine right, linking transhumanist agendas (sterilizing children via gender ideology) to Malthusian population control, while exposing climate hysteria as a tool to dismantle fossil fuels. The episode ends with a call to recognize systemic manipulation and defend inalienable freedom against elites’ global control gambit. [Automatically generated summary]
Well, there was probably a time when it would have done, but I've gone through this process in the last four years of realizing that I spent the first 50-some years of my life Believing and trusting a certain worldview that with COVID and everything thereafter, all of that fell apart.
It's like picking a thread on a tapestry.
The whole thing just fell away into it.
And once you lose all of the things that you had taken for granted and trusted, then I suppose...
Almost by definition, you're in territory that others who aren't on the same path as you would call conspiracy theorists.
But it's really just, you think, well, if I think now that they were lying to me about that and that and that, were they telling me the truth about anything at all?
You worked for BBC. Well, I worked for BBC in as much as I was doing contract work for BBC. But I was never directly employed by the British Broadcasting Corporation.
I'd be brought in to do a project.
A production company would pitch a project.
I would be the presenter that was associated with that.
And I would be paid by the day for the duration of the project, and then I wouldn't be working for the BBC. I'm just saying that people watched you on BBC. Yeah, I'm sure they did.
I wrote a column for the Sunday Times in Scotland.
I had been for a while the President of the National Trust for Scotland.
At one stage, I was a Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh.
So I was certainly associated with and part of...
The infrastructure of the establishment.
That's absolutely the case.
But I did all of it.
I hold my hands up and say I did it in a naive way, without really interrogating the integrity of those institutions.
I've always been a political atheist, struggling to vote in general elections, but...
Usually trying to vote for someone to make plain that I was taking part in the democratic process.
But I've never been affiliated to any political party, any ideology.
But I think I thought that the powers that be had mine and my family's interests at heart, whether they were red or blue or whatever.
I thought, basically, they're going to keep the lights on.
They're going to make sure there's food in the supermarkets.
They'll maintain the roads.
There'll be schools open.
There'll be a hospital if my family needs it.
Regardless.
But now I just don't feel...
Well, I now know that the establishment doesn't have mine.
Or my family's interests at heart.
And that's hard.
It's like a grieving process, I think.
The analogy I would make with that, you know, the five stages of grief that we're supposed to go through, the shock, the denial, the bargaining, the various stages that you're supposed to go through.
I'm still, I'm probably four years in, just coming to that point where I'm making peace with the fact that I, it's my responsibility that I didn't.
I would say I've lost touch with everyone from before, really everyone.
You know, I'm still, obviously, I'm still, my family, that's the family into which I was born, and also my married family, my in-laws.
we've all remained as close as we ever were.
Although, you know, there were differences of opinion about whatever what COVID was, about the products, the jabs and so on.
So there were differences of opinion, but it didn't cause any ill feeling or any schisms there.
So those people are still fully, we're still all very loving and close.
But work colleagues, friends, you know, people that I'd known in some instances, from university days, people that I'd worked beside.
Broadly, broadly, I've lost touch with all of them.
There's a handful of people, literally, you know, count on the fingers of one-handed people that, as it turns out, ended up with all of the same suspicions and have ended up every bit as conspiracist as me.
But as I'm sure you would testify, well, I don't know, I'm not going to prejudge your experience, but those people that I parted company with.
That void has been filled.
That vacuum drew into a whole other cast of people.
In many cases, very unlikely and unexpected.
It was very...
Trudy and I, my wife and I, we would laugh about, you know, who are you on the phone?
Who have you just come off the phone from now?
And I would say, and it would seem so bizarre and so unlikely.
People that a few years ago would never have...
I've been through this process of shedding one carapace, feeling very exposed, I suppose, like something that has cast out like a crab without its shell until the shell hardens again.
You know, it's a very raw, nerves jangling, but now...
It's forming again.
And I would say I'm supposed to torture that analogy a little bit.
I feel a little bit bigger.
I feel as if I have grown because I wouldn't go back if I could press a button and make the Covid debacle not have happened.
I wouldn't because what I've learned and what I feel I now understand or at least that which I think I now have enough wit to ask.
The relevant questions to better understand.
I wouldn't exchange where I was for where I am now.
I lost all those affiliations that I had, you know, because of the kind of television persona that I had when I was making soft history and archaeology documentaries.
You get invited to be patron of this, representative of that.
You know, just people want affiliation with you.
So, you know, I was connected to Combat Stress, which was a veterans charity, and I was connected to the Association of Lighthouse Keepers.
Is that a big one in Scotland?
No, it's a very fringe little group that people that look after the lighthouses.
I mean, under this immense downward pressure exerted on the West over the last four years, people sort of wound up on one side or the other, and it's not a clean political divide.
It's not even a political divide, as you've pointed out.
It's not left, right, you know, laboratory, whatever.
But I've never figured out, and I've thought about it a lot, what is it in people that...
Compel them to move to one side or the other, particularly to the side you're on.
You said it's unlikely people that you never thought you'd be talking to.
You would have hidden your neighbours because the black van was outside going to take them away.
That's how people are invited to think that they would be the maverick.
You would be the one that stands in the face of the tide.
And then it happened.
Before people realised what had happened they had been sorted in that way.
And I think part of what's really difficult now is that there's no going back, and yet we're all still living together.
All the people are broadly still there, those that jumped one way and those that jumped the other.
And we have to find this way to go on, because we were invited to see what some...
What a lot of people were prepared to do.
One of the most difficult parts of it, it sounds silly now because it's really a detail, but quite early on when the mask mandate was still very much, everyone had to wear a face mask.
And I was having to go up and down to London for work.
I was flying home every Sunday morning and it would be, I don't know, British Airways flight or whoever.
I wasn't wearing a face mask under any circumstances, and I would go through the airport, which was difficult enough.
I had known things going on, but to get back to the plane, it would be awkward enough, people watching you in the airport, but then I would go up the steps of the plane, the cabin crew would be masked, and they would say, you're not wearing a face mask.
Yeah, you could see, suddenly, you could see, I am actually at risk here, not from the establishment necessarily, not from the government in this moment.
I'm just, because I have made myself conspicuous.
I have stood out from the norm, and anything could happen in the next five minutes, and I'd have to do the long walk down to my seat, it'd be 27E or something, some middle seat.
I have to get into it and sometimes people either side of me would ring the service bell, put the light on, ask to be moved to get away from me and of course they couldn't because it was a full flight and then I would have to sit for the hour and 15 minutes or whatever of the flight back up to Edinburgh as pariah and then get off the plane and then rinse and repeat.
unidentified
Do it next week, do it next week, do it next week.
You may have come to the obvious conclusion that the real debate is not between Republican and Democrat or socialist and capitalist, right, left.
The real battle is between people who are lying on purpose and people who are trying to tell you the truth.
It's between good and evil.
It's between honesty and falsehood.
And we hope we are on the former side.
That's why we created this network, the Tucker Carlson Network.
And we invite you to subscribe to it.
Go to tuckercarlson.com slash podcast.
Our entire archive is there.
A lot of behind-the-scenes footage of what actually happens in this barn when only an iPhone is running.
TuckerCarlson.com slash podcast.
You will not regret it.
So you said that in public.
You said famously something close to what you just said, which is, oh, now I understand how totalitarian movements sort of move downward into the population, and the population by and large supports some genocidal agenda that...
Normal people wouldn't support, but they do support it.
And you said that, and you were attacked as a bigot for saying that.
you know you've clearly been more sort of I suppose bullheaded stubborn about things and being prepared to stand in the face of things for longer than me so what's it you know what's in when you were asking me what did I think was the common didn't what was it what was the common denominator what was uniting all of the people that were refusing to go along with it what's it in what do you think well I just grew up in a different way so So I just knew that, you know, the majority opinion was not always right.
What about then the plight of, you know, a concept like, you know, democracy?
We talk a lot.
We're brought up in the West to talk about democracy and liberty and freedom and rights.
What do you...
What's your take on the reality of what democracy even means now?
Because for me, I have been forced through a process of thinking about what democracy even is and wondering what it is that we had that we called democracy and certainly wondering what it is that we have now, if anything, of that which we used to call democracy.
Well, democracy, at least in my view, I mean, it's been redefined to mean...
Democracy is a system of government in which the people in charge, whether the elected officials, the agency heads, the people who run well-funded NGOs, when their views are represented, even though they may constitute 2% of the population's views, when those views are represented, when they're fully in charge and can do whatever they want, that's democracy.
That's not my view of democracy.
My view of democracy is much more primitive, kind of the peasant view of democracy, which is it's a species of private property.
It's ownership.
I am a citizen of this country.
I was born here.
So are my parents.
And I therefore have a share in this.
I'm a shareholder in the country.
Like, I own part of this.
Mine, actually.
Now, I own one 350 millionth of it, but it's still ownership.
It's still a share.
And you can't treat me like a slave or even your servant because this is my place.
And that's where I think democracy is.
It's almost like a temperamental It's a description of the certain worldview that you have about your government and your relationship to that government.
So that's how I feel about it.
It doesn't mean that if 51% of the population wants something, it gets it every time.
We have a representative democracy, a constitutional republic, as I'm often reminded.
But basically, if you have a system where the people in charge don't care at all about what the population thinks, we know for sure that's not democracy.
As you just said, I, you know, in a state of semi-slumber, just imagined that I was represented in the places of power by the fact that I was able to vote.
And I now realise that voting once every four or five years is nothing at all.
That's a completely meaningless transaction to me now.
It always was.
Oh God, it's a general election.
I better vote for somebody.
I was always very disconnected from it.
But now I partly think that that may have been some kind of semi-instinctive realisation that it was meaningless anyway.
But I worry now about quite a lot of people around me talk about direct democracy as a solution to our problems.
And it's always the Swiss model that's quoted referenda about this, that and everything.
Sort out everything by having a referendum about it.
And having gone through the last four years, that worries me because if there had been a referendum about face masks or lockdown or, God forbid, mandatory jabs, we'd have got all of them.
The majority vote would have enacted all of those things.
Mandated jabs, longer, tighter lockdowns, face masks and all of the rest of it would have been enacted by direct democracy.
So now I think the problem you've got there is the majority, you better hope they come to your...
Conclusion.
Because otherwise, if we take the step of thinking that direct democracy is the way to get us out of these problems, well, in short, I live in fear of direct democracy.
I mean, what people leave out, I'm very familiar with Switzerland.
I have ancestors from Switzerland.
I spent a lot, went to school in Switzerland.
I was there twice this year.
I'm not an expert on Switzerland, but I know it well enough to say conclusively their political system works because they have a Swiss population.
With certain attitudes that have evolved over a thousand years.
And it works for them.
And they vote twice a year and all this stuff.
And the cantons have a lot of independent power, very weak central government, etc., etc.
But that works with Swiss people.
They're changing the population of the West, and particularly of Europe, so fast that you sort of wonder, like, what is that?
I mean, the idea that, you know, there is a thing called a Briton or a Spaniard or a Frenchman or Portuguese people or Belgians or people from Liechtenstein or whatever, that there are sort of populations, indigenous populations in these countries that have a certain national character and language and shared history.
All of that is being obliterated by mass immigration.
It's on purpose.
It's against the will of the populations, existing populations of those countries.
And it's clearly tied to political power.
Am I missing something?
I mean, look, this is my view from 3,000 miles away.
It's obliterating the United States, but it's harder for Americans to fight back against it because there's no, I mean, our indigenous population, you know, or the American Indians, who aren't even really the indigenous population, but whatever, they were here before the Europeans arrived.
They replaced another population who was here before them, but whatever.
The point is, we don't have kind of the, we don't feel we have the moral standing that, say, the Scots would have.
Scotland was never, or has not been in a very long time, a colonial power.
Identity is a sense of identity, personal identity, the sovereign individual, and then that coming together to be, you know...
Maybe a sense of community in your town, and it broadens out to national identity, is problematic.
I'm utterly convinced that there's just a huge centralisation of power going on.
You know, there's an anonymous, faceless cabal of people whose names we don't know, whose faces we wouldn't recognise, who are centralising power.
And for the first time, the technology is enabling that to be global.
People have tried it in the past.
You know, whatever.
People have tried to be, have been totalitarian in the past.
But the technology and the reach has never enabled a tyrant to control the whole world.
But that is there now.
And I think that's what we are hurtling towards.
And, you know, people like Eric Hoffer in The True Believer and so on.
You know, he wrote so effectively about how every mass movement has sought to take away people's national identity and their personal identity.
So they want each individual to turn their back on their parents and on their family as being, you know, you can do better than these people.
Their ideas are outmoded.
They've messed you up and you'd be better off without that influence.
And likewise, they want to cut people away from their national roots, their sense of belonging in a place, and their sense that they are British or that they are French.
Because once you get people deracinated in that way, cut away from their roots, and the process is also about making people ashamed of their history, be it their own family history or their national history, so that there's nothing in the past but things to be ashamed of.
So you get people to disavow the past, to disavow their parents, to disavow the family, to disavow the nation, as it's been understood.
And then those people are just dots on a spreadsheet.
They're just flickering dots on a screen that can be put anywhere.
And now you have a global population that don't belong or feel connected to anywhere.
And so you can put them anywhere.
Because they have no roots.
And that's been tried over and over again.
All the great faiths have done something, attempted something similar.
All the great ideologies, all the isms, fascism, communism, whatever, they all seek to do, as Hoffer explains it in True Believer, they all apply the same tools to get people disconnected until you're just a lone individual that's ready to don a uniform and do something new in the face of utopia.
You know, the nowhere place that is the ideal future that's easy to sell people because it doesn't actually exist.
And so, you know, so what happens is, yes, indigenous populations are being flooded by people from elsewhere, but those people have been uprooted by the same forces of chaos and disruption.
You know, the West has done god-awful things to one country of the Middle East and elsewhere, one after another African countries.
And those people are...
I've been cut away from the roots and they're on the move as well.
So everyone's victim in this.
Everyone.
And where people turn up in large numbers, where they, you know, from an ethnic and cultural and heritage point of view, don't belong.
But that's also not their fault.
You know, they're pawns on the board as well.
And of course, what happens is that the people...
You know, the resident, the incumbent population, feel threatened by the arrival of the new, and they get angry with the incomers, when really, we should all link, everyone should link arms and say, who did this?
It's very difficult because, of course, everything, any kind of dissent, any kind of raising a voice in that way brings out the same predictable tools from the toolbox.
So you just get caught.
You know, I've long ago, I've been described as anti-Semitic for one reason.
I've been described as white supremacist for one reason and another.
You know, I've had all the labels.
And, you know, you said right at the beginning, you're now known as a conspiracy theorist.
If you're not being tarred with those brushes, then you're not doing your bit.
That old line about you know that you're over the target when you're taking flack.
If they've got nothing better than to call you anti-Semitic, white supremacist, whatever, then you think, oh, I must be doing something right, because that's just the same old box of clumsy, blunt tools that get brought out to shout down anyone who's actually asking important, pertinent questions.
But we're not going to answer them, because we're not going to give them the answer, because the answer will expose us, the baddies, even further.
So let's just...
Let's just dismiss them as racists or whatever.
Does it still work in Scotland, in the UK? Well, I think, as I say, because many people are now finding that it's a badge of honour to be...
You know, I've been a Putin apologist.
I've had that one flung at me.
I've been...
All sorts of things.
Just because I've said, you know, we're jumping into all of these stories at the moment, in the third act, was actually the expression that...
Jimmy Dore used to me when I had him on my show the other week, and he said, you know, everyone was invited to join the Ukraine story in the third act.
But, you know, there's pages and pages of this play before you get to the Russian tanks trundling across the Ukrainian border.
And everyone's invited to, like, that all started on October the 7th.
And you go, no, no, no.
So it's all obvious.
It's all obvious stuff.
And because those turn spotlights onto places and stories and backstories that the troublemakers, the original troublemakers, do not want to be confronted with, then hence shutting everything down, censorship, labelling, you know, dismissing people as...
Again, it's that thing about, you know, the first time you get punched, it hurts.
But worse than the pain, it's the shock.
But then the next time you get punched, you think, oh, yeah, that's that again.
And I suppose around the time, because I came into all of this, I suppose, or I was seen to come into all of this around COVID and lockdowns and vaccines for children and all of the rest of it.
But then, as I say, once I picked that thread and then everything started to, then the big tapestry all started to fray and unfurl.
And suddenly people who had, there was this loose coalition, I suppose, this fragile thing of people coming together around the COVID debacle and asking the right questions and being Militant enough and saying no.
There was a cohesion there.
But it was as though the powers that beat the right were being rumbled on COVID. Let's get a war going.
Wars are great.
And so Ukraine started.
And a lot of the people that had been...
It was like in Awakenings.
You know the Oliver Sacks, Robert De Niro movie.
People had briefly come awake.
Just when the Ukraine war started, they all just went back to where they had been before.
Listening to the propaganda, just taking the official line, accepting the official narrative.
And so I suppose it was when I started being accused of being an apologist for Putin, I thought, I've already been an aluminium tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorist, anti-vaxxer, you know, granny killer.
Now I'm a Putin apologist.
Well...
Fair enough.
I've seen the way this works.
And now that I've collected that badge, like a scout, I can put that one on my sleeve as well.
Now I'm putting apologies.
And I definitely don't, I really don't care now.
Because if you're not being, if you're not being accused of being a whatever label, then you're not in the debate.
Well, you know, I was talking about that experience on the plane with my bare-faced, literally, you know, defiance of that diktat.
It's extremely uncomfortable to stick out, to put your head up, to be noticed.
I suppose, you know, actually, in answer to your earlier question about what would be a unifying...
Characteristic of people that said no.
I suppose I had already had a long time of being recognisable to some people because of the kind of low-level familiarity, celebrity, whatever.
Some people would recognise me from television documentaries that I had made.
And so I had grown a kind of a harder shell about being looked at and, you know, whispered about, noticed.
So sticking out in that way, I was already slightly familiar with.
Whereas I think for people who had enjoyed complete anonymity and then it came to say the COVID thing and not wearing a face mask or asking questions about what their children should or shouldn't put in their bodies, it's very uncomfortable to stand up and be noticed, to be visible.
And so because I had a little bit of a callus, a little bit of hard skin about being noticed because I was a face from television, I suppose made it that little bit less uncomfortable for me to then be spotlit about, for the first time in my life, controversial issues.
I'd never been controversial in my life, but at least I was slightly familiar with being noticed.
And even where in our wider families, where people took the jabs and whatever, there's never been any trouble.
Differences of opinion and people thinking what was the right thing to do, what was the wrong thing to do.
But no rancor, no shouting, nothing like that.
And so I've always, I've mercifully, thankfully, I've never been more grateful in my life for Trudy because of the way that she responded in the face of all this.
I mean, if you're married to someone who's on television and who's famous for, I don't know, his views on the Vikings and everyone kind of likes you for that and all of a sudden, He's being called, you know, a white supremacist.
She's known me since I was 19. And, you know, when it comes to being called things like anti-Semitic or racist or misogynist or whatever, whatever, repute an apologist, she knows me.
But we also, I suppose, you know, you have to kind of think, well, we probably, you know, chose one another and stayed for reasons.
And then you think, as it turns out.
This being a testing situation, this would be part of why I chose this person because one way or another I think I probably knew that she'd be like this in a situation like this.
And me for her, you know, we would just back each other up, which does make you very invulnerable because this whole process has absolutely, in a way that's cliched, you do get confronted with what matters.
You know, and we've, you know, when it, you know, we've, I mean, we're just, we're very, we've been thrust into this from really a very recognisable and ordinary lifestyle, you know, We've got a mortgage and we depend on a regular income to keep the wheels on the wagon, like everybody else, the vast majority of people.
And so we identify and have that commonality.
That's why I think a lot of people write letters to me from all over the world and they stop me in the street to talk to me because I think they instinctively realise that I'm not a credentialed academic and I'm not an expert on this, that or the other.
I'm very much just a regular person with all of the same concerns that they've got.
Kids at school.
All of it.
That people were, you know, were able to identify with.
But when I say that I've been confronted with what really matters, you think all that stuff about, you know, whether you could afford whatever, I don't know, you know, a second home or luxury cars or all that clichéd stuff that people are encouraged to think about.
You think, God, no, what really matters is spending 24 hours a day with somebody that...
It backs you up.
And my kids are the same.
You know, the kids were, they came through the whole, they were under pressure at the time to take jabs.
You know, you won't be able to go to the gym or you won't be able to go to, you know, you won't be able to have your socialised, you won't be able to travel.
And they were rattled by that.
They were, you know, younger then.
You know, they were teenagers when all of that happened.
Very, you know, impressionable and vulnerable.
But we got them through that.
But they didn't.
You know, they didn't.
They ended up choosing not to take the, you know, take the jabs either.
And I cannot put into words how much that means to me that they didn't get polluted with that product.
That's everything to me.
Never mind the fact that Trudy and I didn't.
The fact that it didn't go into them.
There's no salary you could give me.
There's no bonus you could bung me that would make any difference.
So it's all of that.
And so it's hard to talk about it in many ways without sounding almost like you're patronising people.
But the extent to which I've been reminded about what's important in life is worth all of it.
You call me any name you want because I know who I am and my family know who I am and I can look at my kids and my wife in the eye.
And she and mine and think, no matter what, literally, no matter what happens, we made the right calls.
You didn't have gunfights or you haven't, you know, since Christianity showed up, etc.
But it does seem, and I'm judging this from your media landscape, it seems like you and Russell Brand, maybe there's somebody else, George Galloway, there don't seem to be many dissenters.
I'm just simply appalled that we don't have anything that passes, in the same way that we don't have any representation in Parliament, we don't have any representation in the mainstream media.
Unbelievable and so discombobulating and stressful about all of this, because in the early weeks and months of what was going on from 2019-2020 onwards, there was that period of waiting for the people, the silverbacks of the media world, to stand up and do what was required to be done, which was ask some questions!
Don't propagandise!
Don't just give us the...
The government line and the pharmaceutical line on all of this.
So that incredible period of wait and every single one of them failed the test.
All the mainstream channels, all the big titles, you know, the Telegraph, the Times, the Daily Mail, the works, they all swallowed it and pumped it back out again.
So the media is...
Well, we don't have a media worth its name.
And journalism...
Scotland, for example, had a proud, proud, proud history of journalism.
Dundee were truly studied to be a journalist.
DC Thompson, you know, an iconic...
Publishing name in Scottish journalism.
Duke jam and journalism was the cry from Dundee.
And a proud, proud history of being ready to hold to the fire the feet of those in authority.
And overnight, either it had slipped away and we hadn't noticed.
It was only exposed by COVID. Or it slipped away as soon as the COVID debacle started.
And then...
Realising you're part of that process of casting around, looking for, God, we can't be the only people that think this is bonkers and bollocks.
There must be other people like this.
And then that process of going online.
And as you say, Russell Brand, God bless him.
He was an established podcaster.
He was already there doing other things.
And when all this started, he was suddenly to the fore.
But when it was required, suddenly he was there and we were watching, we were consuming Russell Brand as much of it as we could get and we were watching you and we were watching George Galloway on the Mother of All talk shows.
These funny things, these constellations, all the other stars went out in the night sky and suddenly all these new constellations appeared and you're looking at Thank God, right, who can we listen to today who may have many points of view that in other subjects and other concerns I might not agree with, but they're certainly asking some of the right questions about this.
And so the new media stepped into the fray.
And if anyone, and they are, if people were surprised to see me, a guy that used to make documentaries about Stonehenge and the White Cliffs of Dover, You know, in Waterfalls and Purple Mountain Majesty and all of that.
If they were surprised to see me suddenly, you know, spotlight on live television, asking questions about and refusing to comply with this, that, and the next thing, if people were surprised to see me cast in that role, well, not half as surprised as I was, or Trudy was, you know, looking at me going, how did this happen to you?
Oh, well, I would say that's part and parcel of something that seems to be happening around the world in a certain kind of Western country, which is to say either small countries with small populations or quite large land masses but small populations, so Canada, Australia, but places like New Zealand.
Well, I first put my head above the parapet and got into trouble as a contrarian all the way back in 2014. Actually, because that was the time of the referendum on whether or not Scotland would remain part of the United Kingdom or would strike out as a separate entity.
And God forgive me, I had kind of been keeping out of it.
I was just, I had my opinions, but I was keeping out of it.
Relatively late in the day, coming up to the vote, I think it was the Telegraph, but one of the big broadsheet newspapers asked me for, what do you think?
Would you write us?
You know, a thousand words about what you think.
And I wrote that, well, to cut a long story short, that I prefer to stay part of the United Kingdom.
Cue the opprobrium from the nationalists, those who...
And because of it, I had made television like the History of Scotland and I had been seen as a certain kind of Scottish TV presenter.
I think a lot of people made the broad assumption that I was probably nationalist in my politics, which I never have been and, you know, never will be.
So I got into trouble then, and so I've been under attack from the SNP and its little wizards ever since then.
So it's important, probably in the context of this conversation, to make plain that it actually wasn't COVID that I first got into trouble.
It was the independence referendum.
And so Scotland is run by...
Low-caliber people.
Low-caliber cacistocracy, you know, government by the worst of people.
And, you know, the SNP started out famously, well, it didn't start out, but at the time of the referendum, it was led by Alex Salmond, who at least was a, you know, he was an able, sure-footed politician and a good orator.
You know, so he had some game.
But subsequently it's been Nicola Sturgeon and it was Nicola and then more recently Hamza Youssef and now he's fallen over his own feet and he's been replaced by another one, another non-entity.
But it was Nicola Sturgeon through the Covid debacle.
And they just seemed to, they reveled in, she reveled in the power.
She reveled in, you know, appearing every day to count death tolls and insist on the continuation of lockdown and cutting the six inches off the bottoms of doors in school classrooms to let air circulate.
So you have, in the SNP in Scotland, people who are drunk with the idea of power.
You know, they really...
I mean, the very idea that a majority would have put that bunch actually in control of an independent country makes my blood run cold, because it was a close-run thing for a while.
But it's gone now.
The threat's gone for a generation, if not forever.
It was, well, you see a manifestation of it in Canada.
Trudeau has brought in similar legislation.
I don't know if it's called the hate crime.
It's almost the same name.
But you see it all over.
The same thing is happening in Australia.
The attempt by these would-be, these tin-pot dictatorial politicians.
To have control of what people say and what people think.
Humza used to have wanted to criminalise what people were saying in the privacy of their own homes.
So the idea was that if mum and dad were having a conversation in front of the television one evening and dad said something, if the child inadvertently repeated it in school the next day, let's say, my dad said so-and-so, the police could come to the house hypothetically and say to the father, What was that you were saying in this house last night?
Yes, you would think that any rational person would respond to that kind of notion in the same way, but look at the way it's happening all over.
It's not just happening in Scotland, it's happening all over.
It's part of a pattern of behaviour of a certain kind of controlled leader in one Western country after another, who are demonstrably working from the same script.
It feels as though, I think it's getting harder and harder to overlook what seems like the certainty that we're on the cusp of change.
Yeah.
A paradigm change.
I would say that we're being herded towards feudalism.
Most people, for most of 5,000 years of human history, most people pretty much live in serfdom.
In a feudal state.
You can describe it any way you like, but it's a narrow, very, very small group at the top with everything, with all the castles, ownership of everything.
And everyone else is so far beneath them as to be at insect level and treated.
The way, the kind of way of life that has been possible for some of us, a relative handful in the scheme of things, a blinking of an eye in the great story of human civilization.
A tiny, tiny lucky group for a couple of hundred years in the West were able to live lives of unbelievable...
Liberty and opportunity and equality and aspiration and, you know, if you wanted to, you could, you know, get whatever you were capable of achieving for yourself.
And enough generations have taken that for granted that now it has fallen.
And people think that, you know, food in the supermarkets, lights on in the dark.
You know, police on the street that actually care about the people rather than being enforcers for the establishment.
They think there's been a misconception that somehow it's just in the natural order of things, that society works like that.
And just the merest glance at the rest of the world at the moment, never mind 5,000 years of history, will show that the possibility of living the kind of lives that some of us have been able to live for a very brief period of time is vanishingly, it's impossibly unlikely.
What we've had.
But too many people have finally been taking it for granted one after another.
Now those who would return us to feudalism have seen, saw the opportunity and have been working towards it.
And populations all over the West taking it for granted, being tolerant, being nice, keeping their heads down in return for safety and convenience.
Have laid themselves open.
They're not in a fit state to defend themselves against a well-organised, well-motivated small group that wants to return the whole thing to some sort of neo-feudalism.
But, I mean, that's not to say it's too late.
You know, I don't want to be completely negative here that I do think it's still possible.
I think enough people have realised, are realising all the time.
But I think, you know, when in 2016, you know, when we had Trump elected here and Britain voted Brexit, subsequent to that, we got COVID and goodness knows what all.
Trudy said, perhaps she wasn't alone, but she was the person that I heard say it.
She said those two things were not supposed to happen.
They were not in the script.
Somebody took their eye off the ball and allowed a figure like Donald Trump to be elected in America.
And for the population of Britain, by a narrow margin, but nonetheless by a majority, to leave the European Union.
And Trudy said, everything we've had since has been a sustained punishment beating to put those populations back in their box.
So everything that's happened, including the evaporation of your southern border, all of that...
All of that that's happened has been a panicky response by a narrow group that saw two things happening off script that were of great significance because it was democratic.
You know, those were popular votes.
And now populism is being stamped on.
All over the world.
The tractors, the truckers' revolt, the farmers' protests all across Europe.
All of these things are being mischaracterized by the authorities as far-right, as extremist, as, you know, all of the same labels.
Yeah, 52 to 48% in favour of leaving the European Union.
And from the moment that ink dried on that decision, all of the powers that be in the establishment, in the civil service, all across the political parties, moved heaven and earth to thwart that decision.
And so it's been Brexit in name only, Brino, they've called it, because it's now worse.
I would say that the situation for those people that aspired to Brexit, they've got less now than they had before the vote happened, because they've been so comprehensively punished, and Brexit has been so eviscerated, the very concept of it has been so hollowed out, that the people that wanted it have got less than nothing from it.
Because it was populist.
And notice also that in the last four or five years, populist has become a pejorative.
So then you sort of wonder when you go to Japan, if you go from London to Tokyo, There's no evidence that the side that won actually won and the side that lost actually lost.
If you didn't know the history, you would think, well, obviously Japan won the war.
And when Poland was invaded, Britain said, We will do whatever it takes to restore freedom and democracy to the people from whom it's been denied, stolen.
And then, you know, you've only got to read any coverage of the Second World War to know that at the end of the Second World War, Poland was left swallowed whole by...
And when you look at the murkiness that happened at Yalta, between Roosevelt and Stalin and Churchill, and the fact that agreements were arrived at somehow where Many people who wanted whatever you would call West, the West, they wanted to be the West.
They were just allowed to be swallowed whole by the communist bloc.
But the gamble is that the technology is evolving so quickly that it'll allow them to harness...
You know, the surveillance state and various tools of violence that are so overwhelming that there's nothing the population can do anything, could do about it.
You know, drones and AI are going to be enough to sort of force people to accept this.
It's never difficult to tell the difference between a Scotsman and a ray of sunshine, as the saying goes.
But you have to...
When we spoke earlier about being brought to terms with being made to confront what really matters, and it is difficult to talk about it in many ways.
It almost makes a person blush because of the things that you find yourself having to say.
But the Constitution of the United States, the First Amendment, It's at times like this that these things are suddenly a light comes on inside them and suddenly everyone sees them as though for the first time.
It's only because they're being threatened that people see them.
And the language, the inalienable right, is so important.
You know this.
You get this at school.
But, you know, inalienable is to say that your freedom is not...
You're born with it.
It's there.
It's from God.
It certainly isn't given to you by any person.
And it can't be taken from you by any person.
But the third and most important bit about inalienable that I only really began to contemplate in recent years is that even if you want to surrender your freedom, you can't.
Because it's inalienable.
You are lumbered with it.
You're stuck with it.
It's like your leg.
You can't...
It's part of you, your freedom.
And it's when it's challenged in this way.
And it's under...
Freedom.
And people talk about freedoms as though it's plural.
There's only freedom.
It's a single thing.
And because it's inalienable, it's at the moment when it's being threatened that people...
None of us has any...
We have an obligation to defend it.
You don't get the choice.
If someone offers you slavery, will you be my slave?
You can't.
Because it's your inalienable right to be free.
You can't surrender to slavery.
It's not your thing to give away.
And that's why some of this, I suppose, had to happen.
People need to see the freedom of speech being taken away by hate crime legislation, hate speech legislation or whatever.
They need these things to happen before you look again at what freedom is, what democracy might be, what it is to have inalienable rights.
We don't have the option to give these things up, even if we're broken and we want to.
Because I believe, I also think a lot nowadays about natural law.
You know, I read about common law, which has become an obsession.
And I read about natural law.
And whether you're religious or not, let's say, if you accept an intelligent universe, and then natural law says that the intelligent universe does want the best for you, unlike our regimes and our establishments and our powers that be, the universe is there for you to be the best expression of Yourself and consciousness that there can be.
And all of that can be subverted by evil.
A bit like if you can hold a ball under the surface of water for as long as you've got the strength to do it, but the ball wants to be somewhere else because that's in the natural order of things.
And eventually the totalitarians will run out of the strength to subvert the...
The way that things are supposed to be.
And it's difficult to put a timeline on these things.
You know, I wouldn't say that we're going to see the end of it in our lifetimes, you and me.
And it might be for our children to see the end of it.
But it will end, because the natural law will reassert itself.
Another of the things I was sleepy about, in a state of slumber about, I didn't really think about faith.
I've always been a person of faith quietly.
I don't go to church, but I believe in a transcendent, intelligent entity.
And I think that was brought home to me and the light came on in it for me during this time as well because so many people wrote to me.
Thousands of people wrote to me from all over the world.
This game started where people One woman wrote a letter to me and addressed it to Neil Oliver near Stirling Castle, Stirling, Scotland.
And it doesn't, you know, differences are never made by the majority.
Not really.
That's not how it works.
You know, the crucial thing is invariably done by the one or just a few people who are right.
You know, sometimes you'll be sitting at a dinner table with friends and family and whatever, and you say something and the whole place just breaks up.
A great, perfect line.
You just say something and everyone laughs.
And if you think, often, most often, you didn't even think of the line.
You didn't compose it.
It was just there and you said it.
And everyone laughs because what you said, it's not just funny, it's also true, right?
People can instantly, true runs through people, you know, like lightning through a lightning conductor.
It just, oh, it runs through you and you feel it.
And I think that's what's happened for a lot of people.
A lot of people are able to identify very readily with what's wrong here, which is simply an inversion of natural law.
That evil is trying to assert itself.
Freedom is being taken from people from whom it cannot be taken, but with the ending of those people themselves.
These fundamentals are happening, and I do genuinely, hand on heart, think enough people think that.
Well, in our country, I mean, it's a different experience, but after 9-11, and I'm not, again, I'm not Muslim, I'm not going to become Muslim, I don't agree with Islam, but we were told again and again, and everybody in the world I lived in seemed to agree with it, that Muslims Islam, that's our enemy.
I don't know if you had that experience in the UK. We definitely had that here.
Hold my hand up and say, I absolutely, I grew up with absolute certainty that America were the good guys.
I watched the West Wing, almost all of it, and I thought that, you know, as long as there's Democrats in the West Wing, you know, the white-hearted cowboys are out there making sure everything's going to be on.
I mean, the second you allow an intel agency to murder your democratically elected president, as we did 62 years ago, and then sort of ignore that it happened, and be like, I don't think that's really what happened!
Shut up!
No, it's not a republic!
If you allow unelected bureaucrats to murder the guy that the majority elected, like, just by definition, the system is not what they say it is, obviously.
So, but I do think, I agree with you 100%, and I... I agree with our long-departed president, Dwight Eisenhower, that it really was the Second World War, in ways that I don't understand, but it's demonstrable, changed the nature of the country, changed the relationship between the population and its government.
Can I ask you a question that I always think about, but a UK-specific question?
So 1914, the UK, England, Britain, whatever we're calling it.
You know, is running the world.
And doing, I would say, a pretty good job.
Not perfect job.
Pretty good job.
Putting in railways and spreading Christianity and being kind of pompous, but basically being a fairly benign colonial power as colonial powers go.
There's a war four years.
The smartest people in the country are all killed for no obvious reason.
The country's really weakened by that war.
The United States becomes a preeminent power in the world by 1919. So it's a huge loss for Great Britain.
I would say the First World War, again, for no real reason.
20 years later, your leaders tell you, you've got to do it again.
For reasons that are clearly fake, liberate Poland and then hand it to Stalin.
That's not the reason, obviously.
Democracy is not the reason.
And then the country's really, like, wrecked, and the empire collapses, and it becomes sad.
Is there bitterness about that?
Like, why wouldn't that be the bitterest thing that ever happened in the history of your country?
Are people still, do they talk about that?
They brought us into two wars that just destroyed us, all these cool things that we had, this great society that we had, we made the...
You could say that Britain only became a second-rate power after Suez, which wasn't until 1956. So you could say that for whatever had happened to us, courtesy of the First World War and then the Second World War, it was that shitshow in Suez and that humiliation.
I think you do make me think about something that's not unconnected.
I do think that what's happening at the moment, we will not understand what has actually happened here.
Maybe in 50 years' time, people look back, maybe in 100 years' time, in the same way that I would say, you know, someone who went through the First World War.
Even if they were experiencing it, even if they were in the Western Front or whatever, with the bullets flying and seeing all of the horror of it, you couldn't possibly conceptualise the impact and the consequences and the significance and the way in which.
You don't live through a period and know that you might suspect that the world might be changed forever as a result of the period that you're living through, but to actually predict what will be the real consequences in 10, In 50 years' time is beyond all of us.
I think it's impossible.
I think part of why people won't wake up to this at the moment and won't confront it is because it's so big what's happening.
You know, someone said that the First World War was a set of iron railings between the past and everything else because you could see the past but you could never reach it again.
And I think, but that wouldn't have been a pardon right at the time.
You know, that wouldn't have been a pardon, even as the men were dying.
I mean, my wife's great-grandfather, whose picture is right over there, wrote a book about it, his service in France.
And I've read it.
Pretty great book.
And it's the most cheerful book ever written.
You know, sort of like he was a...
You know, successful guy in the United States and went over there to fight for something and he didn't understand what he was fighting for and he was in good mood the whole time.
I think at some point, again, in the same time frame that we're talking about, Second World War thereafter, I think the world fell finally into the grip of the banks.
It fell finally into the grip of those unelected, unaccountable, for-profit groups for whom everything was only about.
Money.
Money and power.
And for them, they became anywheres at that point.
They didn't care about...
They didn't care about Britain.
They didn't care about America.
They just cared about money.
You know, and I think that has been...
I think we lost in that slow motion consequence of the 20th century, or the first half of the 20th century, that all of...
All of what had been before, that kind of love of country, that kind of patriotism, that kind of identity, I think that was unmoored, unhitched at that point.
And something very large and slow moving just began to drift like a great liner that, you know, was no longer on its safe anchorage.
And it's only now that with our kind of...
2020 vision of hindsight, they were able to look back and see that that happened.
And there's a state within a state that's like the Vatican.
It's a separate entity.
People don't, you know, fully appreciate the extent to which the city of London is not Britain.
It's a separate.
It's a separate, it seems to have its own police force.
The monarch has to seek permission to enter the City of London.
There's a nominated person in Parliament, the city remembrancer, who most people don't notice, who's there all the time to make sure that the unique rights of the City of London are maintained and not compromised by any subsequent legislation.
So there's been a long period of that.
So to get back to a time before the banks' thrall, you'd have to be before The Bank of England was given that magical power to create fiat money.
David Lloyd George was the person they sought out.
The Treasury, the government, must have had an inkling that it was happening because within three days legislation was rushed through Parliament.
So they must have had something kind of ready to go.
And they created Treasury notes.
And the first Lord of the Treasury was a man called, I think it was John Bradbury, Bradbury anyway, and his signature was on these notes and their nickname was the Bradbury Pounds.
And so the banks reopened.
The people were still queuing up, wanting to transfer their bank notes into gold.
They were persuaded to take these Treasury notes instead.
And people said, well, what's the value of...
And they were debt-free and interest-free, and they were underwritten by the notional value of Britain.
Everything that Britain was or is, its creativity, its people, its labour force, its industry, everything, that's what underwrote the Bradbury pound.
And for whatever reason, people accepted it.
Okay, I'll take these Bradbury pounds, I'll take these treasury notes, not bank notes, treasury notes, interest-free, debt-free.
And that saved the day.
The run on the bank was averted.
Now, almost at once, the banks said or realised, we can't have this.
This is debt-free, interest-free mode of exchange.
What's in it for us?
And so very quickly, they went back to the government, said, withdraw these Bradbury pounds.
Let's go back to the old days.
We'll buy government bonds.
We'll give you bank notes.
We'll call it 3%.
3% interest sound fair?
The Bradbury pounds were great.
I think the last one actually didn't come out of circulation until maybe in the late...
Many years later.
I can't remember exactly when the last one came out of circulation.
Britain's national debt in 1914, before the war, was about £650 million.
By 1918, it was £7.5 billion.
Because the bankers had regained control.
But for a moment, for a moment with the advent of this debt-free, interest-free treasury note underwritten by the notional or real value of Britain, there was a currency went out into general circulation that could have changed everything.
Imagine if people, imagine if the banks had been disempowered because they didn't have the power of debt, they didn't have the power of usury, interest, whatever you want to call it.
Well, I get, I host, I seek to host conversations about, about, about...
Bitcoin and crypto from time to time.
I'll make no bones about it.
I'm not really sure that I properly...
I'm an expert in a position to say whether I think it's the freedom of humanity or not.
I hear very strong voices on either side.
People say it's a Ponzi scheme and a con and don't go near it.
Other people say, no, this is the foundation upon which we will rebuild society.
And somewhere between those two polar extremes must lie the truth.
I think there are elements about it.
Distributed ledger, blockchain.
I think somewhere within there are profound solutions because I have asked and had a vague yes whether or not you could use the blockchain protocol to have, say, a news channel that couldn't be shut down.
Because the currency exchange with Bitcoin is peer-to-peer, person-to-person, without the intercedents of a bank.
And hypothetically, they say, yes, you could distribute information.
You could transact.
Bitcoin, essentially, is a transaction of information.
So therefore, hypothetically, you could exchange news in that way, and the baddies couldn't get at it.
Hypothetically.
The cryptocurrency or Bitcoin and blockchain interests me for that reason.
And although I listen to very strong voices saying, don't go anywhere near Bitcoin.
It's been hacked.
The banks have got control of it and so on and so on.
If you're living in a country that is trying to criminalize conversations at your dinner table between you and your kids, send you to prison for seven years for having the wrong opinions.
I think it's a bold, not me, I mean I'm a small fry in these things, but I'm a minnow swimming in these waters.
But nonetheless, these are bold moves because I think The people that are seeking the control with everything, with digital currency, with digital IDs, with all of it, are cowardly, frightened people.
I think we're dealing with, I think we have created an ecosystem that has enabled to thrive the most frightened, psychopathic, parasitic, cacostocratic leadership the world has yet seen.
We have created the conditions for them.
We've got to take...
Responsibility for the fact that they are our fault.
I mean, once the virus, intentionally or not, got out of the lab in Wuhan, the COVID virus, then they moved immediately to institute totalitarian rule.
That will happen again.
They're still doing gain-of-function research, as you well know.
So does it strike you that the way that you think about people is influenced by Freud and by people who think about human behavior in non-chemical terms, in moral, spiritual terms?
That whole way of thinking has kind of disappeared.
I mean, that was a feature of our childhoods, where people would say, well, you have unresolved issues, guilt, whatever.
You didn't live up to your own standards.
You take that with you.
Now it's like you've got a chemical imbalance.
Like, we can't even...
I don't think young people can even analyze human behavior in those terms.
That what has been done fundamentally is anti-human.
And it's being done to people who see no inherent...
They don't know what it means to be human and alive.
And therefore they can be casual and contemptuous of people in account of billions.
Because they have got away from the sovereign human being and what it means.
You know, we've barely floated a dugout canoe onto the Pacific Ocean of the unknown as the human consciousness.
But we've already got the transhumanists, not the transgender, the transhumanists, who are already preaching that the human being Mark I is sub-optimal and needs an upgrade via technology.
They want to blend humans with tech, digitise ersatz human beings, because the time of the biological human is apparently over.
But that's a product of the wrong kind of people not even asking what it means to be human and alive.
I mean, if, you know, as Christians certainly, but I think Muslims and Jews also, certainly Jews do, believe that human beings were created in God's image.
You know, to deface that image is to attack God, right?
It's bound up with many, as I say, it's going to be a hundred years or more, but you know, obviously, you're like in 1968, Paul Ehrlich wrote The Population Bomb.
And at the same time, actually, Garrett Hardin wrote The Tragedy of the Commons.
And they both speculated about the basic crapness and rubbishness of people in large numbers.
You know, they'll just make a mess of everything.
And it was that return of that neo-Malthusian Approach to people.
There's too many of them and they're not worth having anyway.
So this is going to be the ending of us.
And the predictions of Ehrlich and so on were wrong.
You got it completely wrong.
And I talk to people, I interview people all the time who are saying, and you'll be across this, that birth rates are plummeting.
Across the West.
It's not just in the West.
Japan is poised to disappear in 100 years.
There won't be any Japanese people.
So it's not even a Western phenomenon.
Swathes of populations are not producing enough people to keep themselves going.
It's true in Britain and France, all across Europe.
It's true in America.
It's really bad in America.
People are having like 1.4, 1.5 children on average, which is not enough to sustain.
And people are not appreciating that they are sitting in the cheap seats on a plane that is in a tailspin.
It may not be possible even if you could get to the controls to pull the plane back into level flight.
It may have gone beyond that point.
And you've got that information out there at the same time as people like Bill Gates and others are saying, we've got to check the human population.
We've got too many people.
And in a hundred years time, there's not going to be anybody here.
Well, I'm using hyperbole, but populations are in steep decline.
And the explanations for it are existential.
It has to do with maybe possibly falling fertility, and God knows what we've done to fertility with these products that we've jammed into several billion people.
We'll see what the fertility consequences of all that are in due course.
Having children, and so many women, when they do reach a point where they do want to have children, maybe their mid-30s, their late 30s, the relevant partner is not there at the right time, and so they miss that.
There's all sorts of existential reasons, societal reasons, for the plummeting.
So there's a football player, you probably haven't followed this, but in the United States, the kicker, who gave us a college commencement speech the other day.
Now you're deeply steeped in the politics of the United States.
But then you saw how moderate it was.
He's like, you know, as you grow older, you might want to have kids.
Because that's a source of enduring joy.
And...
All these politicians and cultural figures and I can't remember that chick's name, but Taylor Swift, some sort of fake entertainer, gets out there and denounces the guy as a Neanderthal and as evil because he suggests that having children may be more rewarding than your stupid career.
What is that impulse?
Why would you be mad at someone for encouraging young people to have children?
When they started measuring temperature, we were just coming out of the Little Ice Age, which had lasted for hundreds of years.
And temperatures were as low on planet Earth as they'd been for thousands of years at that point.
So when it comes to measuring temperature, there was only really one way for, unless we were going to go extinct or go straight into another full ice age, there was only one way for the temperatures to go, which was up.
And so the fact that there has been sustained increase in temperature, well, it would be because it was coming from the bottom of the well.
The only way was up.
Also, it used to be accepted fact that increasing carbon dioxide follows a rise in temperature.
It doesn't cause it.
As the world gets warmer, there's a kind of a several hundred year lag and then there's more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere as a consequence of that warming.
And so to tell people...
That carbon dioxide is causing the increase in temperature would be like seeing a horse and cart on a road from space and imagining that the cart was pushing the horse because you could see it moving.
That would be how wrong you are.
It's the horse pulling the cart.
And likewise, CO2, there's more of it once the planet's warmer.
But I think it's 800 years is the lag.
So there are all sorts of reasons for...
Being aware that this way in which people are being frightened into thinking that there's a catastrophic apocalypse coming because they've got gas central heating and they drive fossil fuel cars is a hoax.
There's a big complicated picture to do with the climate changing.
Talking about, you know, we were getting into an ice age.
That was just the 70s.
And then it became global.
Warming.
But then because that isn't holding up, it's become climate change.
Well, yeah, of course climate changes.
And then in any event, what's being done in response to it is not green and it's anti-human.
You know, as advocates of fossil fuels say, if we are, if we are, let's say we are going into a time of climate uncertainty and instability, that would be the very time you wouldn't want to do away with the ability to...
Cheaply and readily heat homes or air condition them.
I mean, if something's going to happen, this would be the, you know, you do not throw away your matches, you know, at the time when you might need to light a fire.
And also the, you know, the wind turbines that now are at the end of their life cycle and they're just being landfilled.
These vast, unrecyclable plastic things are just being buried in the ground.
They're being made, in any event, using fossil fuels.
They can't be recycled.
Electric cars, that's just a means to get people out of their cars and back onto, I don't know, horses or Shanks' pony or whatever.
So it's not green, what is being done.
The planet, we're making a mess.
Look what happens in the extraction of the lithiums and other rare earth metals that are required for electric batteries.
Look at the child slavery that that entails.
Look at the scarification of the planet that's involved in the extraction of those things.
The destruction of ecosystems and habitats in pursuit of green energy.
And the one clean green energy that is available, which is nuclear, is strictly verboten because, well, because we've been told that you can't have nuclear energy.
So in Europe you've seen a spate of climate cultists destroying medieval art.
It's never modern art.
It's always Christian art, I've noticed.
But they've gone into museums and spray-painted or slashed paintings.
I don't think you've seen any vandalism of private planes at all.
So if you believe in the kind of schematic, if you believe in the story of climate change as an existential threat, the first thing you would do is get rid of private air travel.
Well, you've got that bizarre situation where the rich at the World Economic Forum in Davos and other places are openly saying that because of carbon credits, us rich people will buy the carbon credits of poor people that can't afford to go on holiday anyway.
And that will offset our private jets and private yachts.
You're not using your carbon credits anyway because you can barely afford to feed yourself or your family.
So you're definitely not going on holiday this year.
So I'll take your carbon credits off your hand and I'll use that to legitimise the perpetuation of my luxurious lifestyle.
The hypocrisy of it, the rubbing of people's noses in it is off the scale.
And again, it's anti-human.
For want of the kind of farming techniques and the fertilizers that we have, there's very good reason for thinking that half the world's population will starve to death for want of the kind of fertilizers that are made from oil.
Well, I think, again, being absolutely an inalienable responsibility to be positive, I would have to answer yes to that question.
More people do say, well, I can say for one, I see it now, and I didn't used to.
So I've added to the count by one.
And Trudy sees it, and she didn't used to.
So that's two.
And our kids do, so that's five.
Just in my immediate circle, I'm seeing people wakening up on a very personal level.
So yes, I do think that enough people are seeing the way in which we are being played.
We are being an attempt, a galactic scale attempt to pull the wool over our eyes is going on.
And more and more people are seeing it.
And they're seeing that people are being uprooted from their...
They're homelands and have been for generations.
And they're turning up where they, you know, maybe oughtn't to be.
And instead of people pausing for a moment to think, why is this disruption happening?
They just get angry with the victims of it.
And I'm not saying, I'm sure there are bad lads and criminals and absolutely the sort of people of whatever creed and colour that you wouldn't want in your communities.
But the bigger picture is, I mean, look at the, you know, they're building a bridge in the Darien Gap to make it easier for the NGOs and the WHO and the UN and the rest of them to drive people into the United States from the south.
If you can, as I say.
I'm seeing it, and more and more people are seeing it.
And all it really takes is for people to realize that the trouble is not beside you, it's above you.
And it's not a big group.
And actually their techniques are old, worn out, and transparent from overuse.
And, you know, there's nothing to fear but the fear they sow, I would say.