Rupert Lowe exposes how Britain’s democracy collapsed under unelected bureaucrats, $100B+ debt, and post-war multiculturalism experiments reshaping the nation without consent. He links economic decline to Tony Blair’s 2000 financial deregulation backlash and China’s unsustainable trade dominance, warning of a 1970s-style IMF crisis. Free speech eroded—Lucy Connolly jailed for migrant-linked posts—while welfare dependency hits 9 million, fueled by policies he ties to globalist agendas like the WEF. His Restore Britain movement demands sovereignty over open borders and "DEI nonsense," framing the West’s unraveling as deliberate, not accidental. [Automatically generated summary]
And there's some great philosophers from that era.
But I think our parliament was structured so that you had MPs elected by the people, and they were effectively the people's representatives.
So the job of parliament was ultimately to put the interests of the British nation first, make decisions that was, first of all, and above everything else in the interests of the nation.
But at the same time, there were internal rivalries about regional competition between each of those MPs to try and do the best for their constituency as well.
But most of them were in some way invested in Britain.
They were landowners, they were businessmen, they were peers, they were aristocrats.
They actually had a big shareholding, if you like, in UK PLC.
And, you know, I look at prime ministers like Lord Salisbury, and I look at, you know, men who made great decisions.
And obviously, we can talk about Churchill, we can talk about the great leaders, Maggie Thatcher, who I loved.
We can talk about great leaders, but I think what's gone badly wrong, and this is why I've set up a movement, not a party, to unite common sense thought and to allow those people who share the view you've just outlined, that it doesn't matter who you vote for, the smorgasbord of opportunities that you've got at the moment, whether it's the Tories, whether it's Labour, whether it's the Lib Dems, whether it's the Greens, whether it's the Scottish National Party, whoever,
they're all part of this dying sort of remnant of what was Parliament.
So I think we've got to have some form of, in geological terms, rejuvenation and uplift to change the way in which we're governed and make sure that we re-empower the MPs,
the elected representatives of the people, and we disempower the people who run parliament, the quangos, the unelected civil servants who are largely represented by the permanent secretaries, many of whom I now see on the public accounts committee.
The country, Tucker, is just run by people who don't know which way is up.
So we've got a dying body of productive Brits who I have the greatest admiration for, who really fight all this regulation, this red tape, all of the oppression of government, of licensing, of regulations, of rules.
They fight their way through all this, not to mention huge taxes, which will probably increase dramatically tomorrow in order to basically debit the productive and credit the indolent.
The most extraordinary sort of formula, which is doomed to failure.
But so I think we need the people who ultimately care about the country to rise up now.
I don't think the way in which our government is structured is ever going to serve them well.
So all they will do is go around crying into their beer about the fact that they voted for, as you say, Rishi Sunak or they voted for Keir Starmer.
Well, I think what's happened is Parliament, as I say, whereas it was elected by the people and its interests were aligned with the people.
Now, Parliament and the MPs, an MP earns about £92,000 a year, something like that.
I actually give my salary to charity each month.
I give it to a great Yarmouth charity.
But I think a lot of the MPs need that money.
So they've become dependent on that.
They've obviously got status as an MP.
There's a lot of talk goes on in Parliament.
There's a lot of sort of video calls and meetings in room P and all sorts of stuff goes on and people feel important.
But actually, are they delivering for the people?
I would argue they're not.
So I think we've got to have some form of massive change.
And I watch what's happening in the US and I think we need some help from the US.
I think what's happening with Donald Trump and with JD Vance and with Rubio, I mean, you've got some great people who are really trying to change the way things are going.
I think I blame you partly for infecting us with this DEI nonsense and all the other stuff that is seeping into the veins of Britain.
But I think you've realized that that's not the way forward.
That's not how we're going to get the quality of life and the common sense and the logic and the fairness that we used to have.
We've got to expunge all that.
And the only way we're going to do that is by very strong people standing up and actually affecting change.
And I reflect on the US a lot because, as you probably know, there was a man called John Lambert who played a part in the Civil War.
Cromwell, Oliver Cromwell's one of my great historical heroes.
He and Henry Ayrton, when Cromwell won the Civil War, he said, he always said, if I lose one battle, I lose my head.
The king can lose 100 battles and he keeps his.
Well, he didn't fortunately lose a battle and he won the Civil War.
And then they had to work out how to govern.
And this guy, John Lambert and Henry Ayrton, wrote this thing, this paper, which ultimately guided, it was called the Instrument of Power.
And its job was to effectively separate the powers that Cromwell was going to have as Lord Protector and put in the checks and balances, which is what you need in any form of democracy, proper checks and balances that controls any sort of aggregation of power, which can be damaging.
You need some power, but you don't want anybody to become omnipotent.
And this is an incredible piece of work, which was then used in our Bill of Rights.
And then some of it was lifted by your founding fathers, Jefferson, Madison, Adams and Jay, who effectively played a big part in writing the U.S. Constitution, which is the best, I think, attempt at setting out a sort of code for governance, which always returned power to the individual states and to the individual.
Because it's always the individual who gets oppressed by the state.
And here we've got a state that now accounts for 50% of our GDP.
We've got, as I say, all these quangos, unaccountable people who are doing things which are damaging the interests of Britain, aggregating money and influence to themselves, but damaging the interests of those people they're supposed to be serving.
You know, they're called civil servants for a reason.
And although it's a bit of a cliche, it really is important to keep Christ in Christmas.
Should we focus on cookies and presents or on the reason we're doing this, which is Jesus?
Obviously, the point is Jesus.
That's the whole point.
That's the only point.
And all the decency and good cheer of this holiday comes from Jesus.
The Hallow Apps Pray 25 Challenge reminds us of that.
It features Chris Pratt, Quinn Stefani, our friend Jonathan Roomi, and many others.
This 25-day challenge guides you through Advent and helps you keep your focus on the true reason for the season, Jesus.
Experience the Nativity story where Jesus brought peace and calm to a world in chaos.
That's exactly what we need right now, is peace and calm and still.
And Jesus is the only one who brings it.
Period.
Hallow has thousands of prayers and meditations and music to help you connect with God all through Christmas and after, including several Christmas original songs and albums.
There's a whole world on Hallow.
It's like unbelievable.
It's changed our family's life.
Check it out.
You will not regret it.
Get three months for free at hallow.com/slash TuckerExperience Greater Peace and Stillness this Christmas.
One of the maybe the biggest factors scrambling every one of these calculations and eliminating the historical knowledge that you just displayed is mass migration.
That is the one thing that I notice as a foreigner coming here that does not change regardless of who's in power is this constant churn in population, millions of new people.
There's never been any indication that Native Britons want that.
No Native Americans, you know, no one in the United States wants that.
We've gotten it anyway.
In my country, they used to say we need to do this for economic reasons.
Well, I think the essence of immigration is that targeted immigration is good.
So if you have a leadership of the country that can identify where skills are short, and you can actually attract people who've got those skills, who are going to contribute to the economy and actually...
No, I was just going to go on to say that what's happened here is it's actually been turned on its head.
So what we're doing is we are allowing millions or hundreds of thousands of illegal migrants from different cultures to arrive by boat.
And really, since the war, we've also brought in lots of legal migrants who have, in some cases, contributed, but in many cases, they still haven't integrated into what Britain is and what, you know, we are a Christian country.
We have our history.
We have our roots.
And now we've got sort of pools of people from a different culture with a different belief and a different sort of outlook on life.
And that's getting worse.
So we are now, and you're seeing this, we're now seeing our best people leaving Britain.
So the rainmakers are leaving in huge numbers now.
The non-doms who used to be here now have been taxed and they're leaving.
They don't have to be here.
As you know, in the modern world, you can basically do a job from almost anywhere in the world.
And what you have to do is create the conditions where people want to live somewhere.
And 10, 15, 20 years ago, everybody wanted to be in London.
You know, when I was young, London was a place to be because it was deregulated.
It was fun.
You know, people actually could generate wealth.
You didn't have too much oppressive regulation and statism.
And gradually it's been strangled, a bit like Gulliver.
So I think a lot of people, and a lot of my friends are leaving.
They're going to live in Dubai.
They're going to live in Milan.
They're going to live in... Montenegro.
It could be Montenegro.
It could be...
It could be almost Mauritius.
It could be almost anywhere.
We just sent a whole load of English money out to Mauritius.
I mean, they're getting tax cuts out there.
So, you know, we've given the Chagos Islands away when we didn't need to.
Well, I think a lot of them do dislike what Britain was.
I think they have this sort of hatred of colonial Britain, which, I mean, if you have a hatred of any form of colonialism, you have to have a hatred of the Belgian sort of colonization of the Congo.
The EU Empire or even France's occupation of North Africa.
China is very cleverly positioning herself in countries which are struggling for money, obviously in Africa.
I mean, her tentacles are going almost everywhere.
And I think China, in a way, is an extraordinary economy because you've got this extraordinary relationship between communism and their capitalism, which Deng tried to introduce, which has generated a sort of class of people who, and the Chinese are enterprising people who have generated wealth.
But then, you know, you've also got this communist bloc.
And I visited when I was chairman of Southampton, I visited Qingdao, where we were Southampton's twinned with Qingdao.
And it's an extraordinary sort of relationship.
So very much the capitalist is effectively in hockey to the communists.
So they control everything.
And if you look at what happened to Jack Maher, I mean, he built an incredibly successful business in Alibaba.
So I think that their blend of communism and capitalism, which if you dig deep, all their state-owned enterprises are incredibly indebted and almost bankrupt.
So I don't think her model is sustainable.
Meanwhile, she's generated huge amounts of foreign exchange from effectively, if you like, she's undercut a lot of the Western capitalists in solar panels and in other things.
And she's running huge trade surpluses, even if internally her finances aren't great.
So I don't think her model is a sound model.
I think she is actually quite a dangerous influence.
She, I think, bears a very long memory.
She never forgets what's been done to her in the past.
And I read an interesting book the other day by Colin Thubron called The Amur River.
I don't know if you've read about the Amma River.
It runs through Mongolia.
And it's the history of the relationship between Russia and China.
It's a very good book to read, but she never forgets when people breach treaties.
It may not happen tomorrow, but it's logged and she remembers.
We've done a few things that she won't have liked historically.
So I think we've got to be very wary of China.
I'm in favor of basically liberating what I see as one of the best and most creative economies in the world, which is Britain.
And if we can cut away all of the regulations, I mean, when I was young and I worked in the city, London was almost the primary center.
We had the Eurobond market.
We had a hugely powerful stock market.
We were raising money for people all over the world.
Everybody wanted to be in London.
Gradually, the regulatory, and again, you have to blame Tony Blair for a lot of this stuff.
A lot of the regulatory legislation, it was called the Financial Services Market Act 2000, that basically tied the city down and it started this over-regulation, which has meant that London is now a shadow's former self.
So we don't have a position.
I mean, NASDAQ has flown on the back of London's failure.
You still have a much more capitalistic approach to your financial markets.
Ours are now so regulated that they've become arguably more interested in protecting the value of people's pensions than they have in matching risk capital with entrepreneurs, which is what they should be doing.
Well, it's a service industry, a lot of it, as you know.
And Jimmy Goldsmith talked about this.
I mean, Jimmy Goldsmith, great man.
He saved the pound through the referendum party where the parties promised he doesn't ever get enough credit for it.
So he spoke very well about this.
And it was happening in the 90s, really, when we were outsourcing our manufacturing to cheap labor countries.
And he forecast what would happen, which is that we would become a dependency culture rather than a culture of innovation.
Because actually, when you've got your factories in different parts of the world, it's there that the innovation takes place.
It doesn't take place in the consuming nations.
So I think what's happened is we've gradually been party, or our leaders have, to closing down our economy, damaging the interests of the British people.
But the British people are still incredibly creative.
I have every faith in their ability if they're cut free.
But they've got to be cut free pretty quickly, Tucker.
I mean, our view is that if we haven't done it by 29, it could be too late.
We're sorry to say it, but this is not a very safe country.
Walk through Oakland or Philadelphia.
Yeah, good luck.
So most people, when they think about this, want to carry a firearm, and a lot of us do.
The problem is there can be massive consequences for that.
Ask Kyle Rittenhouse.
Kyle Rittenhouse got off in the end, but he was innocent from the first moment.
It was obvious on video, and he was facing life in prison anyway.
That's what the anti-gun movement will do.
They'll throw you in prison for defending yourself with a firearm.
And that's why a lot of Americans are turning to Burna.
It's a proudly American company.
Burna makes self-defense launchers that hundreds of law enforcement departments trust.
They've sold over 600,000 pistols, mostly to private citizens who refuse to be empty-handed.
These pistols, and I have one, fire rock-hard kinetic rounds or tear gas rounds and peppered projectiles, and they stop a threat from up to 60 feet away.
There are no background checks.
There are no waiting periods.
Burna can ship it directly to your door.
You can't be arrested for defending yourself with a Burna pistol.
Visit Burna BYRNA.com or your local sportsman's warehouse to get your say.
Burna.com.
And they're continuing, by the way, to change the population dramatically every year.
So like the calculation changes every year, as does the culture, et cetera.
But I don't think you have an election.
I think Labor's in charge until 29, unless I'm missing it.
Labor's in charge till 29, but I think the Achilles' heel there, possibly, is the economy.
So you talked about what is the British economy?
The British economy is, as you know, as the American economy was, relied on something I hate called quantitative easing, which is basically getting high on your own suppliers.
It's basically what third world dictators used to do shortly before their currencies descended into chaos.
But because you've got this sort of manufacturing taking place in one part of the world and the consumption in another part of the world, they've been able to get away with it so far.
But it's still further hollowed out productive Britain.
So I'm very worried about our level of debt.
You know, we're looking at a level of debt of around 100% of our GDP.
Our civil service pensions are off balance sheet, and there's another, we don't know the exact number, somewhere between 3 and 5 trillion, maybe a bit more, which is probably 200% of GDP.
That's not even on the balance sheet.
We have this accounting system called Oscar 2, which I think is probably delusional in that it leaves off chunks of liability and probably enhances chunks of the asset side of the balance sheet.
So I think we're delusional.
I'm just waiting for our currency to collapse.
And I think when you say there's not going to be an election until 29, we have the budget tomorrow where Rachel Reeves, who seems to believe that she can tax herself into wealth and prosperity, which nobody's ever done in history before.
So I think that the Achilles heel is if the economy starts to really go into reverse, which I think from my businesses, we're beginning to see orders slow, the sort of carryover from the COVID money injections and from what the Tories did in their latter days, which kept the economy going to some extent, although Britain's growth has been sclerotic for a hell of a long time now.
So if we start to see a challenge to our ability to finance our deficits, and you probably saw, I mean, our deficit's just out of control.
So, you know, it's going up every year.
And in the end, if you have a deficit, you've got to finance it.
So I always think the definition of credit is suspicion asleep.
So in the end, people who borrow or fund our debt, buy our guilts, if you like, at the moment, they demand a premium in terms of income over other people's debts, over the U.S. debt or German debt.
So eventually what they do is they decide they don't want to buy that debt.
And then you can't fund yourself.
And then you have a funding crisis, a bit like we had in the mid-70s.
And in those days, we went to the IMF and we got the IMF to bail us out.
I'm not sure that the IMF would come and bail us out at the moment because I don't think an economy which basically robs the productive to fund the indolent and to fund welfare, I don't think the IMF would put up with that.
But you're still importing hundreds of thousands of people every year as asylum seekers as if you're a global empire that can just like spend money with.
Well, this is where we're delusional because our own house isn't in order and we spend our lives worrying about what's happening everywhere else, including sending vast amounts of money overseas in overseas aid.
I mean, the countries that a lot of these people are coming from, we're sending them aid.
I mean, Pakistan, for instance, I think we send £130 billion, £130 million a year to Pakistan.
Well, I'm hoping, and it looks like there's some hope that there's been a breakthrough today on that front.
I mean, I feel for the young men who are on both sides who are needlessly losing their lives.
A bit like in our First World War, I lost relations in the First and Second World War.
But I mean, those people, if they looked at Britain today or they looked at America today, would they be prepared to give their lives as they did so valiantly in the trenches in Europe and Gallipoli and other parts of the world?
And many of them, some of them were American people.
And I think, you know, I think I've always thought that an important element of what made certainly the US and the UK successful was this Protestant ethic, this ethic of working hard, of contributing, of being part of something which is basically driven in order to create a better community.
And I think we've lost that ethic.
And we've now lost sight of what we are.
And somehow we've got to get that back.
And if we don't get that back, I don't think the outlook is very optimistic.
So the only way to, I think, show the sclerotic, dying organs of power that they need to change what they're doing is for a mass movement to grow spontaneously, which we are seeing.
I mean, our social media recently has gone stratospheric.
And I think people can see that we are trying our best to highlight the deficiencies in Parliament.
That's why it's so important to be in Parliament, because we're able to actually, from inside, expose exactly how deficient it all is.
And then with social media and thanks to Elon Musk, we actually have now got, I think, a far better, freer, more functional platform to get the message of what's happening out.
And actually, as you know, transparency is the best cleanser of any system, a transparent sort of look at what's going on, which is why very often a lot of these administrations try and keep things as closed down as possible.
I'm always a great believer in, you know, if it's transparent and open, it usually functions a lot better.
So, I mean, look, we haven't got long to do this.
And I think the people, if they agree with us, need to now show that they agree and actually do something about it.
And I say to my friends, that they've had life too good.
They have leveraged off the back of the people who did fight in the war, who did create this post-war respect for the US, for the UK, for the winners, for the Anglo-Saxon sort of alliance.
And in that, I obviously include New Zealand and Australia and India to some extent, other parts of the world who fought for freedom.
So I think we've got to stand up and be counted.
I don't think we can all sit back and think it's going to be okay and it's somebody else's problem.
And they help you sleep several degrees cooler than you would with other materials.
Their blankets make the perfect cozy gift.
With its textured bubble design and soft fur feel, it is perfect for reading by the fire, staying warm in a cabin in the woods.
Every single Cozy Earth product comes with a 100-night sleep trial and a 10-year warranty.
Everyday luxury at a decent price.
Cozyearth.com is the address.
Use the code Tucker of up to 40% off.
Order by December 12th for Christmas delivery.
After the 12th, the code Tucker will still work year-round for 20% off.
And by the way, if you get a post-purchase survey, mention that you heard about Cozy Earth from this show.
Some of what's happening here is so humiliating, and it's designed to be humiliating, taking migrants and giving them better lodging, better conditions than native-born Britons, many of whom are poor.
That almost seems designed to infuriate people.
It's too unfair.
I wonder, does it stay peaceful, the response to that?
My friends buy old motability vehicles when they've been used by these people who are on benefits.
So, no, I look, Tucker, there's a lot wrong.
And we have to have a society.
Britain voted for it.
Britain, the British people voted in 2016, despite the fact the government advised them not to, but they voted to take back their sovereignty from the European Union.
They voted for a British nation-state, right?
A nation state's job is to protect the interests of its electorate, its taxpayers, its people who live here, who contribute, have contributed historically, who basically fill in their tax reform, write the check, work every hour God gives, try and bring their families up and try and lead good lives.
That's what we should be rewarding.
We should not be rewarding an indolent, lazy culture.
But as you probably know, The socialist sort of view of life often benefits from a dependency culture because the people who are on dependency tend to vote for more dependency.
And this is why I think, you know, the danger in the budget tomorrow is that Rachel Reeves does lift the two-child caps at the moment.
You know, if you're on benefits, there's a two-child cap for benefits.
She's intending to lift that.
And she's then intending to raise the taxes on productive Britain who can't afford to probably have more than two children so they can pay for people who aren't working who want to have more than two children.
So the whole thing is completely arse about face.
And I don't know how long it can go on before people do lose their temper.
Hopefully they will join Restore Britain and give us the platform to be able to lobby for change and to affect change now.
I don't think we've got time to wait.
And I do think if the economic conditions turn down very badly, we will be forced into an election at some stage.
And we recently had a debate in Parliament because with our membership now, in Parliament, you can have a debate or force a debate in Westminster Hall with 100,000 signatures on an e-petition.
So to your point, the best example of this is probably Lucy Connolly, who was caught up in the Southport in the whole sort of emotional upheaval of the Southport killings, where three young girls were stabbed to death.
And I think the country spontaneously reacted.
Labour say it was some sort of right-wing planned.
I get death threats, Tucker, and we report it to the police.
I think I've had eight death threats in the last three months.
And we report it to the Metropolitan Police and the square root of nothing happens.
So I would have thought people making death threats is far more dangerous than people posting something in the heat of the moment on social media that they then redact.
Well, that was because reform, for some extraordinary reason, politically assassinated me and made some false witness statements that I had.
Mohammed Zia Ruddin Youssef said that I had threatened him in a meeting, which was palpable rubbish, and that I stood over him and I was threatened to hit him.
Well, I'm 68 and he's 38, so that's a bad idea to start with.
And it just didn't happen like that.
So, you know, at the end of the day, we had a debate about Great Yarmouth and my branch office in Great Yarmouth, no more, and the WhatsApp chain proved it.
But he gave this witness statement, and then Lee Anderson gave a witness statement to say that I was going around Parliament saying I was a very fine shot and I was going to shoot Zia Yousaf.
Well, as a result of which, the Metropolitan Police arrived mob-handed and took my guns away.
And it took me about five months to get them back.
So, look, and they also suggested I had early onset dementia, which was, again, pretty unpleasant thing to do.
But this country, its authorities can just show up and take your guns without producing a conviction, putting you on trial, proving you did anything wrong.
Who I think made some very meaningful comment about sort of people being free and equal and equal and free or not equal and not free, whichever way you want to look at it.
And I don't think any of them have ever really answered that question.
I think obviously Ireland is a function of what's happening here.
I mean, you've obviously got the wretched Northern Ireland Protocol, which morphed into the Windsor Agreement, which is a shocking division of the United Kingdom, which effectively was, if you like, sacrificed on the altar of Brexit.
But on the multiculturalism, again, this goes to, you probably know we've got a big...
I like nation states who interface with each other, who respect each other, who respect each other's culture, and who basically interface with each other like that to try and create this.
And again, does it go to the World Economic Forum?
Is it the Bilderbergers?
Is it the Council on Foreign Relations?
Look, where does the truth lie?
I mean, I find it, probably like you do, incredibly difficult to work out where the truth lies often in our modern age.
Most people want to live a healthy life centered around their community and their family, and they want to be able to wake up in the morning and feel that they've done the right thing by everybody.
But it does seem that there is this malign agenda to break down families, to break down communities, to create this multicultural world where I guess arguably a small global elite are able to exert undue influence on how everybody else leads their lives.
That's the only solution I can come up with with my limited intellect.
And I remember hearing people 30 years ago hint that there was some multinational or pan-global conspiracy from the groups you just mentioned and thinking this is obviously a mentally ill person talking.
And now you just watch the accumulated evidence is overwhelming.
But what I do know is the people who care about it happening need to now coalesce and actually start to show those people who are perpetrating this on us that they don't want it.
And if that means that they get turfed out of power, that's what's got to happen.
We've got to turf them out of power and make common sense prevail.
It's common sense we're lacking everywhere.
But I think there are, you know, as I said, there are some signs that in the U.S., you know, people are beginning to address it and people are beginning to take action.
But it's like walking through glue, isn't it?
I mean, there's this malign power base that doesn't lie down very easily.