Latest / UK Column Radio / WEEKLY BANTER - No, we don’t want the West to collapse | Jerm Warfare

Transcript

WEEKLY BANTER - No, we don’t want the West to collapse | Jerm Warfare · UK Column Radio

0:35
None. I was having a chat this week
0:42
with somebody and they were making the point that this
0:45
perpetual criticism that comes from not just me, but from you
0:49
guys and just from alternative media in general, makes it out
0:54
as if we want things to collapse.
0:58
I think that's a nonsensical position or suggestion.
1:02
And the reason I say that is because two things, First of
1:06
all, what what we are doing, whatever anybody else is doing,
1:10
what we are doing is explaining what is going on in front of our
1:15
eyes. Now, I don't want the West to
1:17
collapse, but I go out of my house in the morning and there's
1:22
potholes in the road that are, that are as deep as anything
1:25
I've ever seen. I cannot, I need a 4x4 to, to
1:28
drive the, the streets of, of Plymouth.
1:32
We are watching the collapse of society in front of our eyes.
1:36
And what we are trying to do is to say to people, look guys, are
1:40
you going to sit back and do nothing about this or are you
1:43
going to become active, an active member of society again?
1:47
Because we have been taught through fear, through
1:50
propaganda, we've been taught to sit back and do nothing or we've
1:55
been taught that, that there's nothing we can do and we've lost
1:58
our agency. But so we can't complain really
2:03
about the collapse, but the collapse is real.
2:06
We've got to report the collapse.
2:09
And, and so that's one thing that's going on.
2:11
The other criticism that's very common is, is that, you know,
2:14
we're, we're voices for Russia and China and, and increasingly
2:18
China, because of course China is the, the, the resurgent or
2:22
the, the upcoming power here. And from my point of view, my,
2:29
I, I'm looking at what, again, our government is doing, because
2:35
you know what, what's whatever's going on in the United States
2:38
or, or in, in, in China or in Russia, to a certain degree,
2:42
that's not our problem because it's our government that we've
2:46
got to deal with, right? But our government has produced
2:51
a Russia report, it's produced a China report.
2:54
It's constantly bombarding people with the idea that Russia
2:59
and China are the great enemy that we've got to defeat.
3:03
And it's that that I am mainly interested in dealing with
3:08
because it because first of all, it's not true.
3:10
And second of all, the people that are pushing this, they also
3:14
recognize that their, their, their structures, their
3:20
establishment is in extreme danger at the moment because
3:24
they recognize that we are in a state of collapse.
3:27
Their financial system is at the end.
3:29
Their political system is at the end because it's lost.
3:32
Nobody trusted at all. Their, their media system is at
3:35
the end because nobody trusts it at all.
3:38
And so they are bombarding us with this propaganda because
3:41
they want to create a war. And I've no doubt about this,
3:44
they want to create a war because they recognize that
3:47
people are coming to the end of their tether with, with many of
3:51
the policies and the objectives that that these guys have.
3:54
So they're trying to, to, to use that, that fear porn that they
3:59
are generating to create a technocracy that that brings in
4:03
a, a degree of control that we haven't experienced before that
4:07
we got a little bit of a hint of with, with the COVID ocracy, but
4:11
we haven't experienced it at all yet.
4:13
And they're doing this for two reasons.
4:15
First of all, because they're scared of people.
4:18
And second of all, because that's how they're going to deal
4:21
with the collapse when it, when it happens, they're going to,
4:23
they're going to shut everything down, they're going to lock
4:25
everything down. They're going to make it
4:26
impossible for anybody to, to move.
4:29
And so, so these are the things that I think we've got to be
4:33
talking about, but that doesn't mean that we want the collapse.
4:38
We're we're warning about the collapse.
4:39
We're saying to people, look, you want to be dealing with this
4:42
now, not when the collapse happens.
4:46
I, I, I second that in the strongest possible terms.
4:49
I think the way I would look at it or the way I would set it
4:52
out. And I'm being particularly
4:53
because, you know, the way you asked the question was, it was I
4:56
think in, in quite a general sense.
4:59
And I'm just going to talk a bit more specifically about about UK
5:02
column because I think what we do is unique for a start in, in
5:07
so far as we are putting out a a news product that has very, very
5:14
tight parameters in that it's not just speculative commentary.
5:20
It is very well grounded founded research that is converted into
5:27
analysis with some sort of projection of the way in which
5:32
it looks like things are going. Now, the, the reason I set that
5:36
out is that along that path, there are always going to be
5:42
points at which things could be either changed to a certain
5:48
degree or or at least the pace at which something is happening
5:54
could be modified. And so I think what I would put
6:00
out just just to just to absolutely reinforce Mike's
6:02
point, we are not doomsayers and we are certainly not doomsayers
6:06
for the sake of doomsaying. Now I think the the reason I
6:10
want to qualify that or, or make that really distinct point is
6:14
that I think there are an awful lot of people who very much are
6:18
in that business. And what I find interesting
6:21
about that, and this goes back to what Mike's actually just
6:24
been saying about China and Russia.
6:25
I think China in particular is making a great fuss about things
6:31
that frankly are somewhat nebulous because people get,
6:37
they don't get drawn in, they, they decide to pick ground that
6:41
they really can't fight on. So I think, yeah, China is a
6:46
very good example. And, and look at the marvellous
6:48
distraction it is from not dealing with the potholes that
6:54
Mike's describing or the fact that you are unfit, overweight,
7:00
unhealthy. You know, you're not, you're not
7:02
in a great place mentally, all those sorts of things.
7:04
And I don't say that in a, in a sort of damning sense.
7:07
I'm not, I'm not trying to poke individuals here, but what I'm
7:12
suggesting is that a large part of this is, is a sort of a
7:19
subculture where there is a tendency towards the morbid and
7:24
unfortunately, OK, maybe not necessarily in, in monetary
7:29
value, but that that does sell. And it's, it's a really
7:32
disappointing element of the human condition that, that
7:36
people, I don't know if this has ever been the case, but people
7:38
are drawn into this idea of an impending disaster, however
7:43
prolonged it may seem to be. But the idea of of helplessness,
7:48
unfortunately is something that I think a lot, a lot of do I
7:56
call them commentators. I don't know are are trying to
7:58
sell people because they can point to things sort of over
8:02
there and over there and over there without ever once looking
8:05
at their immediate environment and saying, yeah, but you know,
8:08
this is what I'm this is what I'm doing about it.
8:10
Now. The way I the way I see UK
8:13
column fitting into what could, let's face it, be an output or
8:19
downward spiral. And I would always hope that it
8:20
would be output is that we do what I've described, which is
8:24
that we look at what's happened before we look at what is
8:30
happening now and we surmise what it looks like things where
8:37
it looks like things are going to go in the future.
8:40
And that's done with a heck of a lot of consideration.
8:42
The point of doing that is to inform an audience who will not
8:48
be prescribed to at all by us. And I think that's a really
8:52
critical point to make. We're not there to say no, this
8:56
looks like that. So therefore do this that that
8:59
that is the route to disaster, I think.
9:03
But what we do see is that all over the world actually.
9:08
But, but let's just take our sort of core audience in the
9:11
United Kingdom, people will take on actions either at the
9:15
individual or family or community level and they will
9:19
push those boundaries. They will get results of one
9:23
sort or another and they will feedback to us.
9:26
At which point we can then report back as to how such and
9:30
such challenge to something played out.
9:33
Now, as I say this, this can work both ways.
9:37
I would hope that that would produce an upward spiral in that
9:41
that is an iterative process. And we are able, by doing this,
9:48
to report to the audience where somebody else has had success,
9:51
to inspire people toward individual and collective
9:55
actions that do actually make a difference.
9:57
So yes, it does look like the West is being made to collapse.
10:03
Does it mean that that absolutely, definitely has to
10:06
happen? And indeed, what exactly do we
10:08
mean by collapse? Because of course, if we're
10:10
talking about the collapse of certain frameworks that, let's
10:12
face it, well, or at least in my personal belief, actually, we
10:16
shouldn't really have in the 1st place then.
10:18
But that's slightly a separate debate.
10:19
So I don't want to get drawn into that.
10:20
But but no, we are not at all wanting things to collapse.
10:26
I think what we're wanting without, as I say, without sort
10:30
of trying to shame people into it, but but but what we really
10:32
want is for people to understand that that what we are providing
10:36
them with is ammunition is the word that brings to mind.
10:41
I don't, I don't, I don't like to use that.
10:43
That's necessarily that sort of terminology.
10:45
But you know what I mean? We're we're giving people the
10:47
information with which they can go and make positive differences
10:51
to their lives that that that is really what I think people
10:54
should be doing. And so therefore, if you're not
10:56
going to take that attitude, then yeah, I can absolutely
10:57
understand why you just look and say, oh, well, you know, UK
11:00
Colonel, just dragging everyone down into this and other.
11:02
No, no, no, we're not doing that.
11:04
If that's your, if that's what you think that is you, that's,
11:08
that's transposing your mentality onto it.
11:12
So it's, it's a, it's a very interesting psychological
11:15
question. And when you boil it down to the
11:16
individual level and you think, well, well, how does life work?
11:19
If I look at life in a positive way and I, I know, I pick a goal
11:23
and I know what I want to achieve, how I'm going to do
11:25
that and I set out to do it, You will do it.
11:28
If you look at it the other way and you think, well, it's all
11:30
too much, I'm not going to get that done.
11:32
You won't get it done. And and you, and that, you know,
11:34
that starts with, with one person.
11:36
And when people coalesce, the same effect can happen across
11:41
larger groups. I think I mean, I wasn't
11:45
referring to you get column. I was just talking about the
11:48
alternative space in general because it got me thinking.
11:54
Someone said to me the other day, yeah, but I mean, you know,
11:57
you just perpetually criticizing, right?
12:01
Because somebody mentioned after I, after I pointed out that
12:05
Trump was involved with Wolfspeed and then after that
12:11
Stargate, you know, which is just this huge mass surveillance
12:16
mRNA program that he's been proudly pushing.
12:20
But someone said, yeah, but he's pulled the US out of The Who.
12:25
And I sometimes wonder whether we should also accept the wins
12:29
where they are wins. I mean, that is a good thing,
12:30
pulling out of The Who rather than responding with more sort
12:34
of blackballed, yes. But you see, he's part of
12:37
Palantir, blah, blah, blah, blah.
12:38
I think. I mean, that is a win pulling
12:40
out of the The Who, no? No, I don't agree, Right.
12:44
I don't agree because because you cannot, you cannot look at
12:48
the, the, the, any presidency or any prime prime ministership or
12:53
any premiership of any kind and say, yeah, they did all right
12:57
over here. Because what is the general
13:00
direction of travel? The general direction of travel?
13:03
You've got to be honest with yourself.
13:04
If you're going to say on one hand, I am against digital ID
13:08
and the other hand I am pro Trump or I'm pro this or pro
13:12
that. These two positions are
13:14
incompatible. Trump is surrounded and
13:17
supported by the entire technocracy that is building the
13:22
panopticon, as our home secretary likes to to, to
13:27
describe what she wants to see. They're building this in front
13:30
of our eyes, and he is absolutely, 100% behind that,
13:36
right? Because the people that are
13:37
behind him are the people that are wanting to build this and
13:40
are building this it. The problem that we have here,
13:44
Jerem, is that we have people who are looking at the world and
13:47
saying this is really bad and they're dying for somebody to
13:52
come and save them. And what they don't realize is
13:55
that the only person that can save us is us, right?
13:58
If you're relying on somebody in the political class or the
14:01
billionaire class to come and do it for you because you think
14:04
that there's some benign dictator has come along, you're
14:07
off the planet, right? This is not the way it works,
14:10
and it's not the way it's working with Donald Trump or
14:12
with anybody else. Nigel Farage isn't going to save
14:15
us if he becomes Prime Minister. He's going to do exactly the
14:18
same things that are going on at the moment and he's going to
14:21
bring in it, no matter what he says about being against digital
14:24
ID, he will absolutely follow the the path because he's on
14:28
that path and he's always been on that path.
14:31
There are no heroes in the political or the billionaire
14:34
class. And we've got to realize, we've
14:36
got to recognize finally that this whole argument between
14:40
ourselves, at our level of society, between left and right
14:43
is fake. The, the real argument is
14:45
between the top and the bottom and, and these days it is
14:50
literally a top and the bottom because they have engineered
14:52
things to such a degree that there is a massive gulf between
14:55
the billionaire class and everybody else.
14:58
We've been talking about this for 10 years.
14:59
The fact that, that the money is flowing uphill, that, that there
15:04
that, you know, the, the top 1% of the income streams in the, in
15:09
the West own 99% of the, of the so-called wealth, right?
15:13
That that is, that is the, and that situation is reality.
15:17
They are absolutely destroying the middle class.
15:20
They're making everybody that this is what levelling up is all
15:23
about. They're levelling everybody up
15:25
at a certain level and, and the elites are at the top.
15:29
And there's this massive gulf in between.
15:31
There are no solutions in Donald Trump because he is absolutely
15:35
bringing in the regime that we are supposed to be fighting
15:39
against. Yeah, but the point was Mike.
15:42
No, I, I understand the point, but, but no, you don't take the
15:45
wins because if you take the wins, you make excuses for the,
15:48
for the losses. And, and what is the net
15:50
outcome? The net outcome is that we are
15:52
being taken down a path towards total surveillance, total
15:55
information awareness. That was, that was what
15:57
Poindexter was talking about 25 years ago.
16:00
And that's what Edward Snowden exposed, exactly the same
16:05
policy. And we're seeing exactly the
16:06
same policy being implemented right now.
16:09
There are no answers in in these guys.
16:11
We've got to do it right. We've got to do it.
16:14
Yeah, you have to have a macro view.
16:18
Well, both, I think, I mean, yeah, you do.
16:20
But but I think really the the the micro, the the individual
16:25
view is the the one that should dominate, the one that should be
16:28
more important because otherwise you get so frustrated.
16:31
And I think this is exactly what we see happening more and more.
16:34
I mean, we've apologize for the sort of repetition to to an
16:38
extent, but I think the further we go from the terrible period
16:44
that started in 2020 when people's lives really were
16:48
destroyed, I think the further we go from there, the more
16:53
discombobulated people are made to feel because there's no
16:56
longer just one thing. Then it was just one thing.
16:58
It was the, IT was either the lockdowns or the pressure to
17:01
take the, the jabs and that particular wave has receded and
17:07
it's left a whole load of stuff which has confounded people and,
17:11
and left them wondering exactly what they should be thinking.
17:13
And I, and the reason I mention that is that is I think, yes, if
17:17
criticism is the word and we talk, I mean, Donald Trump in a
17:22
poor chap is, is always the, the sort of donkey who were sticking
17:25
the tail on. But it but the the issue and
17:28
this goes right back to the the sort of the founding principle
17:32
of of UK column which is concerning corruption.
17:36
And now what I mean by that is the inconsistency which is in
17:42
effect what what corruption is. So that's why when you raise
17:47
warp speed and Stargate, that is in effect inconsistent or put
17:53
the other way around, if you are prepared to support somebody who
17:58
who, you know, has done something that is completely
18:03
outside of the sort of espoused vision that he puts forward of,
18:09
you know, a free America, I mean, strongly whatever,
18:12
whatever he's trying to sell. And yet he has these incredible
18:15
inconsistencies. Well, that is, that is a
18:18
corruption his his narrative, his vision, his ideal is, is
18:24
utterly corrupted by that. And therefore I would say it
18:27
follows that if you are going to subscribe to the sort of, well,
18:31
you know, cure its egg, I mean, it's kind of good in part then
18:34
then that is that is also corruption.
18:37
You're, you're, you're selling yourself short.
18:39
If you're allowing yourself to believe that somebody who has
18:44
made not not just minor, but absolutely massive incursions
18:51
into the sort of destruction of civil liberties and all the rest
18:56
of it, then then that's completely wrong.
18:59
And, and I think that's the, that's the most important bit.
19:02
I mean, otherwise we're, we're the everything is a compromise.
19:05
We're, we're back to sort of, well, free speech, but territory
19:09
or whatever, you know, you can't there.
19:11
I think in terms of, you know, we talked about principles
19:14
before, but I mean, the whole point of the principle is that
19:16
it is uncompromising. And, and, and I think that
19:20
should be, you know, one should overlay principles on top of
19:23
these suppose sort of policies or deals or, or whatever they're
19:27
called these days with, with people like Donald Trump.
19:30
But let's make it more blurry, because this this has come up
19:35
plenty in my circles. Robert F Kennedy has adjusted
19:39
the vaccine schedule. This is a good thing on the face
19:44
of it, although, as Catherine said recently on my show, Robert
19:53
himself is compromised. Yeah, I I mean, it really
19:58
doesn't make. What has he actually done there
20:02
that has it really made a difference?
20:04
Not really. So, you know the the point that
20:10
that Patrick Anningsen was was constantly making from before
20:14
Kennedy decided to before Kennedy was.
20:17
Was accepted into this role was that this this effectively
20:24
pulled his teeth. Same with Tulsi Gabbard.
20:27
They pulled their teeth getting into these positions because
20:31
because they're running around trying to to do what they're
20:34
now. They're now in a situation where
20:36
where they're within the, the, the, the political machinery
20:42
that that is putting roadblocks in their way at every stage.
20:46
And, and the question is, where would Kennedy have been more
20:50
effective? Would he have been more
20:51
effective in the role that he's in?
20:54
Or would he have been more effective continuing to do what
20:56
he was doing when he actually could have perhaps run on a
21:00
presidential platform himself in the next election?
21:04
And, and you know, his, his teeth are pulled at this point.
21:07
I don't think that I don't think that that is a win.
21:10
Now this, this, some people will say that this is overly
21:14
pessimistic, but I think we've got to be realistic about, you
21:20
know, what actually has been achieved because it doesn't look
21:24
like very much from where I'm standing.
21:26
Well. Also, I mean, let's face it,
21:29
it's a smokescreen. Why on earth should we care
21:34
about whether one vaccine has been added or subtracted from a
21:38
list of vaccines that frankly, nobody should be under any
21:41
pressure to take in the first place?
21:44
So why does that list even exist?
21:47
You know, what he's done to it really is, I would say is, is
21:50
immaterial because what you're doing there is you're, you're,
21:54
you are putting front and centre the idea that you should adhere
21:59
to what the department of accountable HHS, I can't forget
22:04
what it's called, Human Health Services.
22:08
You know, you should be listening to what they say.
22:10
You should follow exactly what they say.
22:13
Well, why? Why would you do that?
22:16
So, so this is where the this is how these sorts of actions carry
22:21
people into territory that I don't believe they should ever
22:24
be in in the 1st place. Why?
22:26
Why on earth should Robert Kennedy or anyone else be
22:30
telling you that this is what you should do?
22:33
Or indeed that you shouldn't, you know, I can't forget what
22:37
what it is that's been taken off the list.
22:38
But you know, I mean, presumably there are going to be parents
22:42
out there for whatever reason who believe that actually their
22:46
child should have that product. So I think and, and you know,
22:52
and this speaks to so much of, of what it is we do deal with.
22:58
We, we look at these people and we consider we, we, I would say
23:04
fall into the trap of considering how we should regard
23:08
them based on this thing that they either have done or haven't
23:13
done. And in doing so, we are, we are
23:17
ascribing an enormous amount of relevance to them that that I
23:22
don't think they should have to our lives now.
23:28
OK, that that the logical endpoint for that kind of point
23:34
of view is, is anarchy. But but you know, I think
23:38
there's a there's a debate to be had about that.
23:41
But but effectively, no, really what is it that the that the
23:46
state does? Do you know, might, I mean, you
23:50
know, going back to the the pothole thing, what does the
23:53
state do? I mean, I'm talking
23:54
specifically, I suppose about the United Kingdom, but I mean,
23:56
I think, I think anyone listening from a Western country
24:01
which still somehow has convinced the rest of the world
24:03
that they've sort of got the got a grip on, on, on a functioning
24:08
democratic, sophisticated society.
24:11
But really what, what do they do or what should they be doing for
24:16
us? And, and, and I think it's it's
24:20
dangerous for people to be manipulated by the fine details
24:27
and forget the fact that actually, should any of it be
24:30
relevant to them at all. Yeah, but it was the state that
24:40
imposed those restrictions, the vaccines, saying you must do
24:45
this. And sure, you on the ground
24:48
level can say no. The reality is that most people
24:52
don't. And So what happens is that you
24:55
get huge mass compliance and then those who who, who resist
25:00
are easy to target, you know, they're easy to, to basically
25:03
snuff out. But then when you have somebody
25:07
going in like Kennedy to try and then dismantle that exact same
25:15
imposition, that is an attempt to change things from within,
25:21
isn't it? It's not possible to change
25:23
things from within in that sense.
25:25
And he is demonstrating that at the moment.
25:27
And in fact, what what is the effect being in the United
25:30
Kingdom or in the European Union?
25:31
The effect has been that, you know, for example, he has
25:35
changed the CDC website to say something about vaccines and
25:39
autism, and he's changed the CDC website to say something about
25:43
paracetamol. And, and the other agencies in
25:47
the West have simply doubled down on their original position.
25:50
And they've said that what what Kennedy is doing is, is
25:53
nonsense, right? What what Kennedy should have
25:56
done, in my opinion, was to because he had he had a
26:00
grassroots support base there, he should have taken it.
26:03
He should have built on that. That would have been the more
26:07
effective way to do that. What Children's Health Defense
26:09
was an effective campaign and and to to great extent and it it
26:17
misses, I suspect it's, you know, his, his his personality
26:22
and his leadership. But aside from that, this, this
26:29
look, this, this sort of boils down to the the question of what
26:32
is the state? And the state is not and never
26:35
has been the people that are the public facing personalities,
26:40
right? And and so no matter what, there
26:44
was no prospect of him going in and changing things from the
26:48
inside in any meaningful way. There is no prospect because
26:54
most because without people understanding what he's up
26:58
against and without people, without the the public support,
27:03
he isn't change is not possible. Actually, what it needs is for
27:09
is a complete root and branch reassessment of, of how we run
27:14
our countries. And that that's, that requires a
27:16
much bigger discussion than than we have going on at the moment.
27:20
And it's a discussion that, in fact, most people wouldn't even
27:23
know where to start with. So I'm, I'm absolutely certain
27:29
that Kennedy would have done better if he had.
27:32
And the same with Tulsi Gabbard, if we're talking about the
27:35
United States would have done much better if they'd stayed out
27:38
of that cesspool, which is the state.
27:43
And this, this applies in the United Kingdom as well.
27:45
This, This is why, you know, there is no prospect of reform
27:50
really doing anything at at the national level, at perhaps at
27:54
the at the local level. If people want to organize
27:57
around a, around a, a particular brand, if they can do that at a
28:03
local level that without, you know, taking too much direction
28:07
and instruction from, from the central command, as it were.
28:14
But, but at a national level, I think we've got to really
28:17
rethink about how our, how we are allowing ourselves to be, to
28:21
be governed, and particularly about the amount of money that's
28:24
being taken out of our pockets and being used for things that
28:27
we simply do not agree with. And, and we just, we just sit
28:32
back and accept it. I think this is this has to
28:34
change. Are you referring to revolution?
28:39
No, I don't. Am I referring to revolution?
28:43
Not in the sense perhaps that we have experienced revolution in
28:46
the past. You know, I've, we've, we've
28:49
said this so many times. The revolution begins with us as
28:51
individuals and, and you know, whatever, whatever we envisage
28:56
for, for how we want to live our lives has to be done at multiple
29:00
levels. But it starts, it starts
29:02
absolutely locally without, with the decisions we make about our
29:05
own lives. And, and you know, I, I, I see,
29:09
I don't see very many people making those decisions.
29:12
I, I see, you know, lots and lots of people complaining about
29:15
what's going on around them, but they're, they're not deciding
29:19
not to buy food from a supermarket and not to buy, not
29:23
to buy into certain narratives and so on.
29:26
So, so there is no easy answer to this German but but, but
29:32
Kennedy is not, I mean, what actually has been achieved
29:37
there? Not very much.
29:40
Just to add, add to what you're saying, so you mentioned
29:43
potholes earlier. Now, I don't know if you have
29:47
the same sorts of sort of groups as we do here in South Africa
29:51
because of the in many ways the advantage of having a broken
29:55
infrastructure and a government that is completely inept has
29:59
forced millions of South Africans to kind of evolve their
30:04
thinking into A to a more self reliant world view, which is a
30:09
good thing. And we've got groups here such
30:13
as a free forum and solidarity. These are completely
30:19
individually funded organizations with lots and lots
30:23
of members. And what this F reform group
30:25
does is they go with their own money, full potholes and fix
30:31
potholes and all that kind of stuff, right?
30:33
So that because they know that the government is not going to
30:36
do it at at any time soon. And then what they do later on
30:40
is that they send that bull to the government and and they
30:45
behind the scenes try and get the government to pay them.
30:48
So in other words, they act without even the government
30:51
asking. They kind of act as an agency.
30:53
That is, I think, a good thing because that is that is now in
30:58
many ways giving the middle finger to the to the government.
31:02
I think that's, I think that's brilliant.
31:05
We're starting to see in the UK videos appearing on, on social
31:09
media, on YouTube and other places of, of people doing that
31:12
kind of thing, clearing, clearing their own drains and so
31:15
on, filling in their own potholes.
31:18
That's great in and of itself, but if at the same time you're
31:22
still paying your local taxes, yeah, you know, Yeah, it's a.
31:27
Double. Just a double amount.
31:28
You're exactly you're, you're, you're paying twice because
31:31
you're paying them your, your tax money and you're paying them
31:34
in your time for doing the job that they're supposed to be
31:36
doing. So it's gotta be both.
31:39
It's gotta be, you know, by the way, we've done this work.
31:43
Here's the bill. We're not paying our council tax
31:46
as a group, as a, as a because, because, you know, it's as a, an
31:50
individual that becomes a very difficult thing to do.
31:53
But as you know, a proper campaign that's, that's
31:56
happening, you know, right across the country, but
31:59
certainly with enough people in each locality that, that, that
32:03
any with withholding of tax money becomes a real problem.
32:06
This I think is is a great idea. Although I don't know if it's
32:11
the same, I definitely don't think it's the same in the UK
32:14
but I read a a doctor point yesterday I think that said in
32:18
South Africa only 19% of South Africans pay income tax.
32:22
So. The majority of the UK column.
32:31
Yeah. That, that, that is a very
32:32
interesting one. I mean the the income taxing,
32:36
but yes, you see, going back to my point about UK column and the
32:43
sort of, you know, three parts cycle where where we would
32:47
analyze and deliver news and then see what how the audience
32:52
responded. And then we we report the sort
32:55
of successful or otherwise back. Those are the sorts of things
33:01
that are so incredibly powerful because it was not very long ago
33:07
that we weren't reliant or supposedly reliant or made to
33:12
feel like we were reliant on the state.
33:17
And of course, you know, describe in describing the state
33:23
for very many of those functions, what we're really
33:26
describing is a terribly inefficient and corrupt process
33:30
of contracting and subcontracting and sub
33:32
subcontracting all sorts of gigantic corporations to to do
33:37
this stuff and deliver a very poor return on investment.
33:42
But but but yes, to to be able to just get a grip and, and do
33:47
it. Yeah, I mean, it's completely
33:49
possible. But it clearly it it, it
33:53
therefore highlights exactly what is not being done by those
33:57
people that are receiving tax money.
34:01
This is this is really powerful. And I think this is where people
34:05
do have that they are faced with that choice of am I, am I going
34:10
to sort of do this or am I going to continue to, in effect,
34:18
distract myself by the idea that it's all too big or it's all too
34:22
remote or this, that and the other.
34:24
And, and it is, you know, I consider that it's, you know, it
34:31
is it's massively regrettable that people are susceptible to
34:37
having, I don't know, I suppose concerns that are liable to
34:43
trump these sort of very practical things.
34:46
And I'm just thinking in particular of your listen to the
34:50
your talk with Dave Weiss flatter Let's say no, no, but
34:58
there's, I think there's a really, there's a really serious
35:00
point to this. He he began when he, when you
35:04
were talking to him about this, he began by saying and, and by
35:08
the way, this is I'm, I'm not in any way attacking him as an
35:10
individual. I I, I think he, we, we were at
35:13
the same event in Dorset a couple years ago and we
35:18
exchanged pleasantries. So, I mean, you know, I've
35:20
obviously not criticizing him at all.
35:22
He's a nice guy. Yeah, yeah.
35:23
OK. But, but, but what he where he
35:26
kicked off was by saying that, that if you think we're on a
35:32
spinning ball with no control over ourselves, over our lives,
35:36
our energy, our agency, all the rest of it, then you're, you
35:38
know, you're kind of sunk. Now that that's, I mean, I take
35:42
an issue with that on, on a number of levels, But, but the
35:45
problem is that something like that, and I'm only picking that
35:49
out because you've talked about this recently.
35:53
But but but the problem is for, I'd say a considerable number of
35:58
people, they are absolutely absorbed by something like that.
36:04
Now, even he concedes totally that he doesn't know the answer
36:10
to this and the other. And again, I'm not, I'm not
36:12
criticizing him for it because as we talk about many times,
36:15
just just to say that something is not the case doesn't mean
36:18
that you have to be able to provide the answer for it.
36:20
I mean, OK, that's fine. But, but the, the point is that
36:25
people get drawn into this to at the expense of all the other
36:30
stuff that we're talking about. So if you're, if you're really
36:33
are, if you've been sort of pushed into a position where
36:35
you're convinced that the most meaningful thing in your life is
36:38
knowing that you're on either a flat plane or a spinning ball,
36:43
doesn't really matter what the what The thing is.
36:46
And that that therefore is the, you know, something is going to
36:50
absorb a huge amount of your brain power, emotion and all the
36:53
rest of it. You know, is that going to help
36:56
you with all the other things in life or not?
36:59
And I would contend that no, it is not at all.
37:04
I mean, just to go into the the sort of psychology of that,
37:08
maybe he does get to it. I what I found completely
37:11
bizarre is that even if you know, Your Honor, whatever he
37:16
describes it as a Flat Rock. I mean, even that's got to have
37:22
something underneath it or beside it.
37:24
So yeah. He doesn't.
37:27
He doesn't answer most of my questions.
37:29
Anyway, no, which is fine. As I say, I'm not having a pop
37:31
at him, but just just just the, the, the concept of, you know,
37:33
well, if, if space doesn't exist or, you know this now, I mean,
37:36
there's, there's still what are, So what are you saying?
37:39
If it's, if you're not calling it nothing, then then what is
37:42
the, what is beyond? But, but that's a that, you
37:45
know, let's let's perhaps not get drawn into that.
37:48
But, but I the reason I mention it is because it, it is in a
37:51
way, I regard that as being the same sort of distraction that
37:54
that Robert Kennedy is offering, which is sort of a, you know,
37:56
look at me, I've joined government and I'm really
37:58
working on your behalf to convince you that changing one
38:01
vaccine on a vaccine schedule that no one should be confronted
38:04
with is a win. No, it's not.
38:06
And, and it's it's the same thing of just stopping people
38:10
from thinking. But are you OK?
38:12
Sorry, but hang on, Charles. Let me just jump in there.
38:14
Are you not then setting the bar too high?
38:19
In other words, no, you can't. You can't ever win.
38:22
Then. Yeah.
38:23
Of course you can win. You can absolutely What I don't
38:27
know. I mean, let's say what do you
38:28
mean? I know.
38:29
OK, well, this is this is really good.
38:30
This is, this is a, this is absolutely a sort of critical
38:33
philosophical question. What it, what does it mean to,
38:37
to win? I mean, you know, do do you have
38:39
to compromise in order to, to win?
38:42
And, and that will vary by individual, but I would say, you
38:48
know, what is winning in life because let's face it, that
38:53
there are the vast majority of people would have no idea about
38:58
the sorts of things that we've discussed even to, to now in
39:01
this one session. In this day and age, most people
39:06
go through life without ever considering, or at least
39:08
consciously considering any of these things.
39:10
So it's the, the sort of idea of, well, what are we suggesting
39:14
that we have some sort of higher knowledge, higher purpose,
39:18
higher attainment? I don't think so.
39:19
But but what is it? Is it happiness?
39:24
And therefore you, you create a scenario within which you have
39:32
set particular goals that mean that you are happy in your life,
39:38
that you are living the way you want to live.
39:42
It will vary for the individual. But this idea of because I think
39:45
this went, you know, this went back certainly in 2020, there
39:48
was a lot of we will win, we will do this and the other.
39:52
And yes, I see what is meant by that to a certain extent, but
39:57
really it, it always still comes back to the individual.
40:01
And I think you again, going back to what I say earlier on
40:04
the, on the psychological side of it, if you know, you know,
40:06
doom and gloom, the West is going to collapse and whatever.
40:08
Yeah, well, if everyone thinks like that and no one is going to
40:12
step up and and do something, then guess what?
40:16
It it, it will happen. But but I think one has to hold.
40:23
You know, very strong that idea that that you personally can
40:27
win. I mean, otherwise what's the
40:28
what is the point? What do you think?
40:38
I mean, I'm just exploring the ideas.
40:40
I don't I don't know the answer, no.
40:42
No, no, no, and neither do I I think that's the, that's the
40:44
really important thing. It's not for me to sit here and,
40:46
and and sort of pontificate and tell whoever's listening or
40:50
watching, you know, you know, I don't.
40:53
Well, it's a sort of pep talks. Oh, go on then.
40:55
You know, you can do it. I, I don't so much mean that.
40:58
I'm just setting out the way, the way I feel about it.
41:01
So I know for me what those criteria are, what that looks
41:07
like, and for whether I'm getting there or not.
41:11
But I can't say for. I can't say for anyone else.
41:15
I've got an attempted answer. OK, So if, if you have a
41:22
perpetual cycle of criticism, right, and you don't, you don't
41:30
take small wins as wins because as Mike, you pointed out,
41:34
there's a, there's a macro trajectory which still points in
41:37
the same direction. Fine.
41:39
But then are you not creating an impossible benchmark?
41:45
In other words, under those conditions, you can never, ever
41:49
arrive at what you're wanting to arrive at.
41:55
Well, no, no, I think that's, that's absolutely not the case.
41:58
First of all, I mean, part of part of resisting actually is,
42:02
is even making the decision about what it is that you want
42:05
to arrive at. And, and this is something that,
42:07
you know, part of the problem here is that people have not
42:09
done the thinking in their own minds about what it is they want
42:14
to actually achieve or where they want to be or what kind of
42:17
society they want to live in. But and, and, and people, people
42:26
are looking at at the news agenda and are totally
42:32
destabilized by it in many ways. Now for me personally, I look at
42:41
what's going on in the world and of course I recognize that I
42:45
cannot do everything. I can't do very much about it
42:48
actually at this at this point in time, certainly not on my
42:50
own, but I'm part of an organization which is trying to
42:56
or is pulling, hopefully pulling the wool away from people's eyes
43:01
to a certain degree. Why are we doing this?
43:05
Because we absolutely believe that if we stay silent and we
43:09
are contributing to the problem by because silence is, is tacit
43:14
agreement and that is part of the problem.
43:18
So we're addressing part of the problem by not being silent.
43:21
We're speaking out and we're trying to explain what is going
43:24
on in the world. The problem part of the problem
43:30
is that there seems to be an expectation that then we will
43:33
also do certain other things in, in, in terms of providing
43:37
solutions and fixes and things like that.
43:40
But as, as Charles has has hinted at there, what we really
43:45
are in a position to do, because we don't have time to do
43:47
everything, what we're in a position to do is to give
43:51
publicity to people that are doing things to try to counter
43:58
the types of things that we're talking about.
43:59
So whether that's running campaigns to deal with the
44:05
surveillance state or whether that's running campaigns that
44:08
are anti war campaigns or whatever it happens to be, we
44:11
are in a position to help let people know what other people
44:17
are doing in the country to resist in their way.
44:21
So we are resisting in our way. We want to help people, let
44:25
people, let everybody know how they're resisting in their way.
44:28
And I, if I go back, you know, 10 years or so, whatever it was.
44:36
And the agenda that was being brought into the United Kingdom
44:40
at the time was, was fracking. And it had some really huge
44:46
names and huge money behind it. Jim Ratcliffe being one of them.
44:49
And, you know, big, big money coming in and it had some
44:56
significant political support as well.
44:59
And Ian R Crane at the time, who was a former oil man who was the
45:05
first civilian into Iraq after the Iraq war and saw the, the
45:09
brutality that had been meted out there, He basically chucked
45:13
his career in the bin after that and started campaigning on many
45:18
topics. But when fracking started to
45:21
come into the UK, he became really the a, a major force in
45:30
helping people organize against it.
45:33
And he was, for example, absolutely determined that there
45:37
would be no national level anti fracking organization in the UK,
45:42
that all the anti fracking campaigns had to be run locally.
45:45
He helped the local campaigns get going.
45:50
I and the UK column provided him with a platform for that with,
45:54
with a program that he was producing called Fracking
45:56
Nightmare. And every week he was bringing
45:58
on to that program people that were doing stuff in their local
46:01
communities to fight against what they perceived to be an
46:04
existential threat to their communities.
46:07
And, and I, I enjoyed that immensely.
46:09
It was brilliant because, because here we had people
46:13
around the country who were absolutely otherwise not
46:18
politically engaged. They, they didn't, they weren't,
46:21
this was, this was an issue that they grabbed onto.
46:25
It was something that was affecting them personally and
46:28
they, they ran with it and they organized themselves and they
46:32
won. They beat the big money, They
46:35
beat the big oil and gas money that was trying to bring that
46:38
industry into the UK. It was a massive win, right?
46:42
And we should, we should celebrate that forever as a
46:46
great example of how what people can do when they get their act
46:49
together, right? But people have forgotten about
46:53
that because in the meantime, Covid's happened and and so on.
46:56
Now COVID, COVID was not a win because it, it went away by
47:01
itself. It wasn't, it wasn't the
47:02
campaign that, that, that, that won the cat the COVID battle and
47:06
that sort of the whole lockdown issue and so on is something
47:12
which is hanging over heads, is something that could happen
47:15
again in the future. But whether they attempt to
47:18
bring fracking back again, I, I don't know what that they will
47:21
because because they know what they're going to be up against
47:24
because those people haven't gone away and they're going to
47:27
get organized again. And the problem with the, the
47:30
issue for the state was that a lot of the people that were
47:33
campaigning there were, there were younger people involved,
47:36
but a lot of them were, were pensioners and so on that Ian
47:42
called the Jerry, the Jerry activists.
47:44
But the point was that when those people went out and they,
47:48
they, they pulled out a deck chair and they sat down in it in
47:52
the way of a truck. And then Manchester Tactical
47:57
Police came along and and absolutely brutalized them in
48:00
front and on camera because people were recording this.
48:04
That immediately demonstrated, you know, to the extremes that
48:09
the state was going to support this corporate agenda and that
48:15
increased the level of of resistance against it.
48:19
But those people were prepared to, to a certain degree, put
48:22
their lives on the line to to nobody was seriously and there
48:26
were injuries. There's no doubt about that.
48:28
But there, there were no serious injuries or near deaths.
48:31
But the, IT, it we look at what's going on in the United
48:34
States. Here we are 10 years later and
48:36
what's going on in the United States at the moment and people
48:38
are dying. Now, no matter what you think
48:40
about the, the situation that that ICE is supposed to be
48:46
dealing with in the United States, the way that they're
48:47
dealing with it is simply wrong. Now if, if, if, but my point is
48:54
that that a local campaign or local campaigns absolutely can't
49:00
be effective. And it can be.
49:02
It's been demonstrated they can be effective.
49:04
But for our point, from our point of view, we would love to
49:07
be doing a lot more promoting that kind of activism, but but
49:12
people have got to actually get themselves organized and become
49:15
that kind of activism before we can start promoting it.
49:18
We can't do it as well as do what we're doing.
49:21
That's my point, I suppose. Yeah, COVID, if you think about,
49:28
I mean, there were no wins. I mean, I don't know of any
49:31
major lawsuit that actually I don't know if anybody anywhere
49:34
was held accountable for anything in any country.
49:37
Actually, now that I think about it.
49:38
I mean, you're right. It just kind of it, it didn't
49:40
even go in its own. It was just replaced by Russia
49:43
going into Ukraine. Well, I, I'd worse than that
49:48
because because the, the, as Charles has said earlier in this
49:53
discussion, the the one issue has been replaced with many
49:56
issues and, and some of those issues are divisive because
50:01
people have different views on, on the particular issues,
50:04
Israel, Gaza being being one, but just one.
50:09
So yes, the, that you're absolutely right, there were no
50:14
wins with, with COVID other than the fact that people survived it
50:19
without, you know, being forced to submit to a vaccine mandate
50:24
in many, in most cases and so on.
50:28
So, so that, that is slightly problematic.
50:31
But in the in the meantime though, we've got this, we've
50:34
got this digital ID slash CBDC slash panopticon surveillance
50:39
state based, which is building itself, AI based, this building
50:43
itself. And that seems to me like a
50:45
brilliant target that that is something that actually people
50:48
could, most people could get organized around because it's,
50:54
it's a topic which everybody agrees is not the direction we
50:57
want to be going in. Another one that we might want
51:00
to get organized around would be assisted dying because we're
51:05
seeing what's going on in Canada in particular and, and how that
51:08
that legislation in Canada was the beginning of a slippery
51:11
slope. And that actually it is it is
51:14
turning into something really quite horrible at the moment.
51:17
So, so there's, there are a number of of opportunities for
51:22
people to get organized, even at a local level, just get
51:25
organized around the state of the streets.
51:28
And the fact that that that it is destroying our cars right
51:31
now. Maybe this is not a problem as
51:34
far as the state is concerned, because their intention is that
51:37
we're not going to be driving our cars in 10 years time.
51:39
Well, maybe that's something that people should be getting
51:42
organized, right. There's a host of topics and
51:44
opportunities out there. But, but for whatever reason,
51:48
you know, we're not seeing the, the motivation and the
51:52
enthusiasm people are it's, it's almost like people have have
51:56
resigned already. And that that I think is is
51:59
problematic and and something that that we need to absolutely
52:04
encourage the opposite to to take place.
52:08
But then you can kind of understand why some people
52:11
become acceleration as they just go, OK, well in that case then
52:15
it all just happens so that we can then rebuild.
52:19
If they survive. And if they have a clear vision
52:24
of something they're after, I mean, you know, I think any of
52:27
these things can have either a negative or a positive slant or,
52:31
or connotation. I mean, I just just to go back
52:33
to the idea of winning. I think there are, there are
52:35
two, there are two separate but obviously completely
52:39
interrelated things. You know, Mike's been talking
52:41
about campaigns or actions that that have a tangibles, perhaps
52:49
not quite the right word, but but a, a measurable result.
52:55
And there's no doubt that for that to happen, the individual
53:01
qualities of those involved have to be very specific.
53:07
And I think that what, what I would like to do is is to
53:12
separate out the idea like so fracking, for example, in actual
53:18
fact, the, the winning part as far as I'm concerned is, is just
53:23
joining that fray. And exactly like during the
53:28
COVID period, it is going into that and not having your spirit
53:33
broken and that that's the win. That is where you win.
53:37
So it's very easy, you see, because the the government and
53:42
the media and all the sorts of, you know, Ned dwells that we
53:47
spend a lot of time talking about because they hold in
53:51
particular the the organs of communication.
53:54
It is very easy for them to try to convince people that that
53:58
they are in effect winning. And but but asymmetric actions,
54:05
small scale community actions and whatnot can certainly
54:09
demonstrate that that's not the case.
54:11
But I, but I must say, I think individually it is about
54:16
pursuing, yes, OK, at times, practical goals, but mostly it
54:21
has got to be a mental state and one that concerns your, your
54:27
spirit and just not being broken and knowing that you're going to
54:31
push on because if you don't and you capitulate, you're not
54:37
passing that torch. And, and that's the danger.
54:40
Look at where we are. You know, we, we can all think
54:43
of people who are generations above us, who share values,
54:48
fundamental principles and who have stayed faithful to them.
54:52
And that is what we need to do. We need to be thinking about our
54:56
philosophy, our values, our principles being passed on in
55:00
order that, you know, OK, spirit and spiritual.
55:04
We, we, we talk about this, this element of being a, a spiritual
55:07
battle, spiritual war that is absolutely critical to
55:11
absolutely all of it. So even if there wasn't a mass
55:17
sort of back down in terms of lockdown policy or vaccine
55:21
policy or whatever, actually you should really be considering how
55:24
you conducted yourself individually and how you
55:28
responded to the people around you that you knew during that
55:31
period. That's the most important thing
55:33
because that's the bit that nobody can take away from you.
55:36
So I think that's really important.
55:37
And I'd just like to crowbar in a, a cricket analogy here,
55:42
mostly for germs benefit, but also because I think there's a,
55:46
there's a humorous attachment here.
55:49
Graham Smith, the former South Africa cricket captain,
55:53
prodigious run scorer, was always said to have the motto
55:57
never satisfied. So no matter how many runs he
56:00
scored, it was never enough. And he, I remember reading an
56:05
article sort of having a go at him for this saying, Oh, well,
56:09
you know, that's how, how gloomy if he's just, you know, he's
56:12
never satisfied. But but to me, I, I absolutely
56:15
understand that you're, you are always wanting to push on.
56:17
It doesn't at all mean that you're disappointed by anything
56:20
that is happening either at that time or, or in retrospect, but
56:25
you always want to be pushing on to to the next point.
56:28
And I think that's the that's the way in which I view the
56:32
world now. That's, that's what we want to
56:33
do. You know, why would you ever
56:35
limit what it is that you want to achieve?
56:38
You just want to go on and on and on.
56:40
The the reason I mention it particularly is the first time I
56:42
ever saw him play in this. Country.
56:44
He was great. Yeah, he was great.
56:45
He. Was great, he was, he was great
56:46
and I and I saw him batting at Lords score.
56:49
I'm pretty sure he scored a century first first game he
56:52
played at Lords 20 odd years ago.
56:54
And I was sitting in the grandstand with a friend who,
56:58
during the just as the lunch interval was starting, turned to
57:02
me and said, by the way, do you know that we're sitting directly
57:06
in front of Graham Smith's parents?
57:08
And I thought, gosh, how bizarre.
57:10
And turned round. And sure enough, the the man
57:12
sitting behind me was absolute dead ringer for Graham Smith,
57:15
except they had a moustache And so having he just scored his
57:19
ton. So I thought, OK, great.
57:20
Well, I've got a, you know, really got a lay it on thick for
57:22
the parents. They're over here.
57:24
And what a what an amazing moment.
57:26
So I turned round and the husband actually had already
57:29
shot off, I don't know, for A to go to the bar or whatever.
57:32
So the, the the mother was there and I just turned round and
57:35
said, Gosh, what an amazing moment.
57:37
You know, you must be incredibly proud.
57:39
And she just looked completely blank and had no idea what I was
57:43
talking about. So I thought, right, OK, this is
57:46
odd. It's not at all the reaction I
57:47
was expecting. So, so I said, you know, you
57:53
are, you are Mrs. Smith, aren't you?
57:55
And again, just blank. She she just, she was completely
57:58
wrong footed. So then I thought, OK, now I've
58:00
got, I mean, I know I've got this right.
58:02
So what is she? Maybe she's a friend of his
58:05
father or a sister or something. Anyway, we went through the
58:10
whole thing. Turned out there was absolutely
58:12
completeness, identification, nothing to do with them
58:15
whatsoever. And then, and then I had to, I
58:17
then had the entirety of the afternoon session with these
58:19
people sitting directly behind me thinking, gosh, who?
58:22
Who is this lunatic? But anyway, but, but I, you
58:26
know, it is a silly story, but, but I do think there's a serious
58:30
point to it. And it is that it is the, the
58:34
idea that that there aren't, there aren't limits, you know,
58:37
you, you just you, you keep going and.
58:42
You're striving for excellence. Yeah, I think, I think you
58:45
absolutely are. And I think I think people need
58:49
to, to a certain extent, I think be able to separate what might
58:55
look like practical success or practical failure from from
59:00
individual or spiritual success or failure.
59:04
Because I think it's, you know, it is absolutely possible that
59:08
let's say the, you know, the fact that a vaccine mandate, you
59:15
know, sort of properly enforceable one was never rolled
59:18
out in the United Kingdom, you know, is that really a win?
59:22
I don't think so, but what was it a win if you yourself managed
59:29
to do what you thought was right during that period in terms of
59:34
the way that you communicated with people who were trying to
59:36
put pressure on you or you communicated with people who had
59:41
different views or, you know, adverse experiences?
59:47
I would say that that is the win there, you know, to be able to
59:51
maintain your sense of composure and and your own vision of your
59:57
life. Well, Graham Century was also a
1:00:00
win, yeah. Well, yeah, OK.
1:00:03
That that is, that is also true. Yeah.
1:00:06
So yes, if we're if we're to further that one here, true.
1:00:09
Now, of course, that was 1 moral of your story.
1:00:11
The other moral of your story, Charles, was you.
1:00:14
You, you accepted what you were told without checking your
1:00:17
facts. And, and of course that that
1:00:18
that is another. That is another.
1:00:21
Point is to call. Is, is, is we, we do put this
1:00:24
information out there, but we do have an expectation of, of
1:00:27
positive engagement from our audience.
1:00:29
Yeah, we, Yeah, well, absolutely.
1:00:31
But now, I mean, come on. I, I went straight to the source
1:00:33
to, to, to verify, to verify the information and with egg on my
1:00:37
face. But but otherwise I would be
1:00:40
telling an outright lie. I wouldn't otherwise be telling
1:00:41
the story about Oh yeah, how I, I sat, sat right in front of
1:00:45
Graham Smith's parents and never spoke to them.
1:00:46
Na na, I sat in front of people who weren't Graham Smith's
1:00:50
parents and made a complete ass for myself.
1:00:53
Well, just just before we bowled the final ball.
1:00:58
Hey, how's that for an analogy there?
1:01:00
Continuing it, I was at a wedding a couple months ago and
1:01:05
AB de Villiers was there and he used to open alongside Graham
1:01:10
Smith, also one of the best cricketers in the world.
1:01:12
I'm just quickly trying to remember.
1:01:14
So that was a good era of cricket 20 years ago.
1:01:16
So I'm trying to think now, who was England's captain?
1:01:20
What is his name? I've gone blank.
1:01:22
It was, I think it was still Michael.
1:01:24
Vaughan, Michael. Michael or Atherton, wasn't it?
1:01:27
No, Atherton, I think had already finished by then.
1:01:31
Yes, I think, I think I'll tell you what, it was an odd period.
1:01:35
It was Atherton had had the no, I wasn't tampering with the
1:01:39
ball. It was just a little bit of soil
1:01:40
in my pocket. So, you know, let's just pretend
1:01:45
that didn't happen. I think what had happened is is
1:01:47
Atherton had been binned as captain, Vaughan had taken over
1:01:51
and Atherton had come back into the side and not.
1:01:55
As that wasn't cricket was still fun to watch, but it's all
1:01:58
changed now it. Has changed now, right?
1:02:01
I just quickly want to check. Sorry.
1:02:03
I want to confirm something Earlier I said that I heard a
1:02:06
data point that South Africa's taxpaying population is around
1:02:10
19%. I checked it it I'm incorrect,
1:02:13
it's around 12%. And in fact, it's even worse.
1:02:16
Listen to this the concentration of tax burden is even more stock
1:02:20
when examining who pays the majority of income tax.
1:02:23
Just 2.6% of the population paid 76.2% of all personal income tax
1:02:31
in the 2023-2024 financial year. So that explains why the
1:02:36
potholes have to get fooled, Mike, by individuals and their
1:02:41
communities. No, no, it doesn't because,
1:02:44
because we have more potholes than you do.
1:02:46
And I'm, I'm pretty sure, I mean, I, I, I, I have no
1:02:50
evidence for that statement whatsoever.
1:02:52
I want to stress, but, but, but you know, we're paying,
1:02:57
everybody is paying something like 70 or 80% of their income
1:03:00
in one form of tax or another. So, so, and we're not getting
1:03:04
them filled. So, you know, we still have to
1:03:07
take the personal action if we want, if we want it done.
1:03:11
Well, on that very uplifting note, Charles and Mike, I'll
1:03:13
catch up with you next week.