Latest / UK Column Radio / Weekly UKC Banter: Episode 5

Transcript

Weekly UKC Banter: Episode 5 · UK Column Radio

0:38
Speaker 1: I don't know if you saw the very very polarized
0:42
Speaker 1: responses to my Stupeter's interview.
0:45
Speaker 2: I haven't had a chance to see that yet, nor
0:47
Speaker 2: have I, but do pray see them as best you can.
0:51
Speaker 1: Some people are saying things like that was great, really
0:54
Speaker 1: enjoyed that, And others are saying, oh, I'm no longer
0:56
Speaker 1: supporting UK column anymore. It's all gatekeeping. You guys are
0:59
Speaker 1: limped to hang out.
1:00
Speaker 3: Well, this is look jeremally. This is a common thing.
1:04
Speaker 3: It is so spectacular. I cannot quite get my head
1:08
Speaker 3: round how this works. But this is a very common thing.
1:12
Speaker 3: And the other common thread, and this is the opinion
1:18
Speaker 3: that if we were to speak to someone and broadcast that,
1:22
Speaker 3: that therefore implies some kind of support for that individual.
1:27
Speaker 3: And sometimes this is not correct. Sometimes this is because
1:31
Speaker 3: we feel that our audience needs to hear what somebody says.
1:36
Speaker 3: There was an interview done in twenty eighteen or something
1:41
Speaker 3: like that with General Sir Richard Barons. Now General Sir
1:44
Speaker 3: Richard Barons is a great friend of Chris Donnelly, who
1:48
Speaker 3: most people will know was running the Integrity Initiative exercise
1:53
Speaker 3: to demonize Russia for many, many years. He's formerly nittle
1:57
Speaker 3: and General Sir Richard Barons of course absolutely Brittish military
2:00
Speaker 3: establishment totally falls on the on the pro war camp.
2:06
Speaker 3: But if we interview him, that means we support him.
2:10
Speaker 3: This is not reasonable, it's not logical. Sometimes it's good
2:16
Speaker 3: for people to hear what some people are saying and
2:20
Speaker 3: they can draw their own conclusions. We aren't necessarily making
2:24
Speaker 3: any or taking any position on anything that anybody says.
2:28
Speaker 3: I would imagine that's the same for you.
2:30
Speaker 1: It's very odd. So one of the comments under YouTube
2:33
Speaker 1: was how can UK column align with Stu Peters And
2:39
Speaker 1: it's so it's so woke, is what it is when
2:41
Speaker 1: you completely play the man and not the ball.
2:45
Speaker 3: This is something that I'm noticing, particularly in the last
2:49
Speaker 3: several months, that people on the right have been complaining
2:55
Speaker 3: and moaning and criticizing and so on the work Left.
3:02
Speaker 3: And what we find actually is when it suits them,
3:05
Speaker 3: they behave in exactly the same way, exactly the same
3:08
Speaker 3: way they deplatform people. They they do all the same
3:13
Speaker 3: kinds of things that the work Left does. But when
3:16
Speaker 3: it's done on the right that seems to be okay
3:18
Speaker 3: and acceptable. It's not acceptable. I don't agree with very
3:22
Speaker 3: much that stupidter says, but that's neither here or there.
3:25
Speaker 3: You know, you spoke to him, and I think it's
3:28
Speaker 3: important that people hear what he's saying and then people
3:30
Speaker 3: can make up their own minds.
3:32
Speaker 2: I think it's highly unlikely that even Stu Peter's agrees
3:35
Speaker 2: with everything that Stu Peter says.
3:36
Speaker 1: But I mean it's sensational, that's what it is. I
3:41
Speaker 1: meant all the bling, yeah, but.
3:44
Speaker 2: I think the great point is exactly that just set
3:49
Speaker 2: people thinking about certain ideas and if that points you
3:51
Speaker 2: in a direction that you find interesting. And I was
3:54
Speaker 2: just thinking this morning, how I can't remember, but I
4:01
Speaker 2: as I'm sure I've mentioned before, I haven't had a
4:02
Speaker 2: television for twenty five years, and so i'm i'm, you
4:05
Speaker 2: might say, somewhat out of touch. But when I come
4:08
Speaker 2: down to Plymouth, which I do on a fortnightly basis,
4:11
Speaker 2: I get to watch half an a about half an
4:13
Speaker 2: hour's worth of BBC Morning News and there are many
4:20
Speaker 2: features or factors that are common through every single program.
4:23
Speaker 2: But the one that seems so blatant now is the
4:27
Speaker 2: promotion of some sort of pharmaceutical product. And this morning
4:31
Speaker 2: it was an Alzheimer's drug that I can't you know,
4:35
Speaker 2: Institute for Clinical Excellence has just said yes it's good
4:38
Speaker 2: or something, you know. I mean, I did actually hear
4:40
Speaker 2: the word safe and effective from Alzheimer's Blake, so reassuring
4:44
Speaker 2: to see that people are sticking with these themes, but
4:46
Speaker 2: the idea that is so therefore I shouldn't watch the
4:51
Speaker 2: BBC that I want to watch it because I want
4:54
Speaker 2: to understand what is being put out and then to
4:56
Speaker 2: consider why and to better understand and why people believe
5:01
Speaker 2: what they believe, so you can you can treat anybody
5:05
Speaker 2: like I mean, Stu Peters obviously has an enormous audience
5:09
Speaker 2: and it is therefore of interest to look at the
5:12
Speaker 2: sorts of things that he's talking about. To bring that
5:15
Speaker 2: all the way back to right, well, that must mean
5:18
Speaker 2: that UK Column thinks X Y and Z and that
5:22
Speaker 2: we only have one way of looking at a particular
5:24
Speaker 2: subject is frankly really short sighted distillation, but also just
5:32
Speaker 2: a limiting one because it means that you're constantly having
5:35
Speaker 2: to act like a pinball going from UK Column where
5:38
Speaker 2: suddenly you find it's dead end because you think Stu
5:40
Speaker 2: Peters is X Y or Z and therefore you don't
5:43
Speaker 2: want to have anything to do with UK column on
5:44
Speaker 2: that basis, Well, where'd you go? It's a sort of
5:47
Speaker 2: you know, it's a game that doesn't really end up
5:51
Speaker 2: lasting very long.
5:52
Speaker 4: It's not very satisfactory.
5:55
Speaker 1: I actually did find one point of interest from something
6:00
Speaker 1: he said. He's opposed to immigration, legal or illegal, and
6:06
Speaker 1: I found that a fascinating idea. So perhaps we could
6:11
Speaker 1: just expand on that just a little bit, because I've
6:13
Speaker 1: never actually thought about the idea of immigration itself being
6:21
Speaker 1: a bad idea until perhaps you consider something like China
6:26
Speaker 1: or Japan that doesn't really allow immigration. You can be
6:30
Speaker 1: a resident, but you can't become Chinese unless you are Chinese,
6:35
Speaker 1: if that makes sense. What are your views on that?
6:37
Speaker 1: It's actually an interesting discussion.
6:40
Speaker 2: I'd be really interested to hear exactly how he articulates that.
6:43
Speaker 2: But as a matter of interest, did you get onto emigration?
6:47
Speaker 1: Well, so, for example, you know about the South Africans
6:51
Speaker 1: that have been given hilariously refugee status in the US right,
6:58
Speaker 1: which I think is fortunately because makes me, as a
7:02
Speaker 1: white South African, look ridiculous like I need to be
7:04
Speaker 1: a refugee and saved by Trump, which of course, and
7:07
Speaker 1: on the face of it, it's absurd he would be
7:12
Speaker 1: opposed to that because the white South Africans are not American.
7:19
Speaker 2: Okay, but sorry, what I meant was he because he
7:21
Speaker 2: I assume he's talking about the United States and he's
7:23
Speaker 2: saying that there should be no immigrant inward migration into
7:27
Speaker 2: the United States.
7:28
Speaker 1: Yes, immigration if you are there, yeah.
7:30
Speaker 4: Yeah, yeah.
7:31
Speaker 2: But if you are there, does he have a view
7:34
Speaker 2: on whether or not you should be able to leave?
7:36
Speaker 1: Well, he wants everybody who's not American to leave to
7:39
Speaker 1: be but.
7:40
Speaker 2: What if you are American and you think, well, I'd
7:43
Speaker 2: love to go and do something in Angola? Does he
7:46
Speaker 2: have a view on that. The reason I ask is
7:49
Speaker 2: because countries like New Zealand have a have a massively
7:53
Speaker 2: transient population, and one of their issues is a sort
7:57
Speaker 2: of skills deficit because people go abroad and practice all
8:01
Speaker 2: the things they've learned in New Zealand elsewhere, and the
8:04
Speaker 2: feeling is that therefore their services and their economy suffers
8:07
Speaker 2: as a result of it. And in the United Kingdom,
8:09
Speaker 2: the Shetland Islands have a sort of similar thing. Island
8:12
Speaker 2: population lots of people go away to have experience elsewhere,
8:16
Speaker 2: but of course, that they're therefore creating a void in Shetland.
8:21
Speaker 2: So if you're saying that you don't want people coming in,
8:26
Speaker 2: and that presumably is based on some semblance of an
8:30
Speaker 2: idea that talks about the concentration of a of a
8:34
Speaker 2: particular pop population, is it consistent then that you should say, right, well,
8:38
Speaker 2: those people need to commit to acting in the service
8:44
Speaker 2: to the benefit of this country, and therefore they cannot
8:47
Speaker 2: leave either.
8:48
Speaker 3: Yeah. And look, I would add to this because how
8:51
Speaker 3: far do you take it? There are parts of southern Italy,
8:55
Speaker 3: there are parts of southern France where you know, basically
8:59
Speaker 3: there's nobody under the age of seventy living in towns,
9:02
Speaker 3: villages or whatever, because there's no economy and they've all
9:06
Speaker 3: migrated to the big cities to get jobs. And as
9:10
Speaker 3: a result, the local mayors are offering, you know, all
9:13
Speaker 3: kinds of incentives to try to encourage people to come back.
9:16
Speaker 3: Do you take that you may not leave your fifteen
9:21
Speaker 3: minute area? How far do you take this? I would
9:24
Speaker 3: so I would qualify this and say I would personally
9:29
Speaker 3: be certainly against the policy of weaponized migration, which is
9:35
Speaker 3: something that we are without that witnessing at the moment,
9:38
Speaker 3: this has been weaponized as being used as a tool
9:41
Speaker 3: of destruction for societies and for cultures, and that is
9:47
Speaker 3: absolutely something that should be resisted. But you know, I
9:51
Speaker 3: myself have moved to other countries for work and so
9:53
Speaker 3: on because I wanted to experience working in those countries.
9:57
Speaker 3: If you're going to tell me that I shouldn't be
9:59
Speaker 3: allowed to do that, that then I couldn't agree with
10:01
Speaker 3: that that position because that was something that I found
10:04
Speaker 3: personally an enriching part of my life. And so you know,
10:09
Speaker 3: it's it's the weaponization and the trafficking, and that the
10:13
Speaker 3: the you know what we would all considered to be.
10:16
Speaker 3: And I don't want to use the word illegal in
10:18
Speaker 3: the sense of illegal migration because actually in Britain, for example,
10:21
Speaker 3: and in Europe, the biggest part of the problem is
10:24
Speaker 3: is so called regular migration, where we are actively encouraging
10:29
Speaker 3: people to come and offering all kinds of channels for
10:32
Speaker 3: them to come so called legally, and that that while
10:36
Speaker 3: at the same time not increasing our population densities, but
10:41
Speaker 3: not providing the infrastructure to support these people. So so
10:45
Speaker 3: you know that that I would say absolutely needs to
10:48
Speaker 3: be resisted. But the idea of resisting all migration. Is
10:52
Speaker 3: it just seems nonsensical to me because, for example, we
10:55
Speaker 3: hear people complaining and whining, but Muslims taking over Christian
11:01
Speaker 3: churches and turning them into mosques. And I'm thinking to myself,
11:04
Speaker 3: behold on a second, that couldn't have happened if you
11:07
Speaker 3: were a Christian and you've been attending that church. The
11:10
Speaker 3: reason that has happened is because that church is closed,
11:12
Speaker 3: because you haven't bothered getting off your backside to go
11:15
Speaker 3: to that church and make that a viable operation. So
11:19
Speaker 3: you know, we're busy complaining about this isn't something I'm saying.
11:24
Speaker 3: This is something I hear others say. We're complaining about
11:27
Speaker 3: the reproduction rate of certain demographics in the UK while
11:32
Speaker 3: the white population isn't breeding. Why why are you complaining
11:36
Speaker 3: about that? What are you doing to resolve the fact
11:38
Speaker 3: that we are being outbred? If that is the case,
11:42
Speaker 3: what are you doing to resolve the fact that we
11:43
Speaker 3: are being outbred? Right? So, there are many economic reasons
11:47
Speaker 3: why people are not having babies from the so called
11:51
Speaker 3: indigenous population. There are many other reasons. Why aren't we
11:57
Speaker 3: Why aren't we actually supporting and.
12:02
Speaker 1: Having more sex?
12:03
Speaker 4: Well?
12:03
Speaker 3: Well, no, no, but it's it's just it's even beyond that.
12:06
Speaker 3: It's our entire culture. We have for the last fifty
12:10
Speaker 3: sixty years abandoned the idea of being British. We've abandoned that.
12:15
Speaker 3: And then when others come in and suddenly it's perceived
12:19
Speaker 3: as a threat and we're complaining about it. This problem
12:21
Speaker 3: didn't start ten years ago when the serious levels of
12:24
Speaker 3: migration started. This problem started sixty years ago, when we
12:27
Speaker 3: started walking away from and being embarrassed about our flag
12:31
Speaker 3: and turning the idea of national identity into something that
12:35
Speaker 3: was representative of right wing extremism. Right, this is something
12:38
Speaker 3: we did to ourselves and we cannot blame immigrants for that.
12:42
Speaker 3: That's our problem.
12:44
Speaker 1: And then if you saw my discussion with Simon Rush
12:46
Speaker 1: one hundred years ago, the year nineteen twenty five, you know,
12:49
Speaker 1: white people made up around twenty seventy to thirty percent
12:53
Speaker 1: of the world population. Now it's below ten percent.
12:56
Speaker 3: Whose fault is that it's economy? First of all, the
13:00
Speaker 3: fact that you know sixs fifty years ago, people could
13:04
Speaker 3: buy a home based on one person's salary, that it
13:09
Speaker 3: didn't cost fifty percent of your combined income in order
13:13
Speaker 3: to provide childcare for your children. It's the fact that
13:16
Speaker 3: we constantly move away from the older generation, so we
13:19
Speaker 3: have no support for childcare and these kinds of issues. So,
13:23
Speaker 3: you know, there's that there's a whole range of different
13:26
Speaker 3: reasons why we are not producing children at the moment. Lifestyle,
13:37
Speaker 3: the food that we eat, the air that we breathe,
13:39
Speaker 3: all these reasons are reducing fertility rates. But you know,
13:43
Speaker 3: the economic part of it has to be addressed first,
13:46
Speaker 3: because if people can't afford to have children, which is
13:49
Speaker 3: the main reason people aren't having children at the moment,
13:52
Speaker 3: then of course they're going to be discouraged from doing that.
13:56
Speaker 1: An extension of that talking point is what does it
13:59
Speaker 1: mean to be British or what does it mean to
14:00
Speaker 1: be South African? So my country is a complete miss
14:03
Speaker 1: as you know, right, So if you had to ask
14:04
Speaker 1: me what is a South African? I can't answer that question.
14:07
Speaker 1: I don't know.
14:08
Speaker 2: I was thinking about this last night. In fact, certainly,
14:12
Speaker 2: the idea of white British being one distinct culture I
14:18
Speaker 2: think is long gone, if really it ever existed. I
14:21
Speaker 2: think there's the other issue with this is and I
14:23
Speaker 2: know we have touched on this before, but exactly how
14:27
Speaker 2: far back you're going to talk about Simon's statistic of
14:30
Speaker 2: ten percent of the world population being white. It's just
14:34
Speaker 2: fascinating that we would look at it in those terms.
14:37
Speaker 2: The United Kingdom, and indeed South Africa, but the United Kingdom,
14:42
Speaker 2: let's say, which has had, as far as we're aware,
14:44
Speaker 2: throughout history, a white population has been a constant battleground
14:50
Speaker 2: between rival groups of white people who have had very,
14:55
Speaker 2: very bloody conflicts. And yet from that we're trying to
14:59
Speaker 2: suggest that we are are a unified race, as it were,
15:04
Speaker 2: which we're not, and we can't possibly be. So the
15:07
Speaker 2: whole migration inward migration issue is a massive intellectual fudge anyway,
15:14
Speaker 2: because in actual fact, if you examine your bloodline, if
15:17
Speaker 2: that's what this is about, then you will either find
15:19
Speaker 2: that you have come from say the western Ailes or Ireland,
15:25
Speaker 2: or indeed northern Europe, Scandinavia, or slightly further east, you know,
15:30
Speaker 2: somewhere in what would now be Germany. I mean that
15:32
Speaker 2: I'm speaking broadly, but we can trace that part of
15:37
Speaker 2: history relatively accurately. And so the idea that if you
15:40
Speaker 2: have Pictish or Celtic heritage or Saxon or angle or
15:45
Speaker 2: whatever that that now doesn't matter because the common factor
15:50
Speaker 2: is that we're white and therefore we are a nation.
15:54
Speaker 2: Well when did that happen? Why did that get Decidemariam?
15:57
Speaker 2: Sorry to get to the point, I was talking last
16:00
Speaker 2: night and I saw a white British girl who had
16:06
Speaker 2: tattooed on her sort of upper back three crescent moons
16:13
Speaker 2: with a star, and it basically Islamic symbolism, and it
16:19
Speaker 2: just made me think about the way that cultures express themselves.
16:23
Speaker 2: And to answer your question, in so far as you know,
16:26
Speaker 2: is there a British culture, Look at the body art
16:30
Speaker 2: that people wear and find me people who are decorated
16:36
Speaker 2: with symbols that are British. Every Okay, I'm speaking generally,
16:41
Speaker 2: but tattoos, by and large sported by Brits are either
16:49
Speaker 2: sort of bits of arcane or obscure language, don't actually
16:52
Speaker 2: really make any sense to anyone.
16:53
Speaker 4: Except for them.
16:54
Speaker 2: But often they're in a non British script, or they
16:58
Speaker 2: are images or symbols from other parts the world. So
17:00
Speaker 2: don't tell me that there are people in Japan who
17:03
Speaker 2: are wearing tattoos with I mean, I can't even think
17:09
Speaker 2: what like a stick of rock or a I don't
17:12
Speaker 2: know what sunburn or something on them. So we haven't
17:18
Speaker 2: managed to export any cultural significance to anyone else that
17:25
Speaker 2: has made them think, yeah, okay, I am Japanese or
17:28
Speaker 2: I'm in New Zealand or whatever. But actually, what I
17:31
Speaker 2: want to have inked onto me for the rest of
17:33
Speaker 2: my life is a symbol that doesn't reflects the culture
17:36
Speaker 2: I belong to. It's going to be from somewhere else,
17:39
Speaker 2: and okay, it might be mine point, although of course,
17:43
Speaker 2: as we know, tattoos are on the up and up
17:45
Speaker 2: and up, so it is kind of significant. And if
17:49
Speaker 2: you stop an arseundry in the street, I don't think
17:50
Speaker 2: they would ever have given it a second thought that that.
17:52
Speaker 2: You know, do you consider yourself British area? Absolutely, because
17:54
Speaker 2: I drink ten pounds of Stellar every night and you
17:56
Speaker 2: know that that's yeah, absolutely pure pure bread. And yet
18:00
Speaker 2: I'm decorated with icons that I have no idea about
18:05
Speaker 2: their origins, genesis meaning anything, but they look good and
18:09
Speaker 2: there we go.
18:10
Speaker 4: So no, I don't think that there really is.
18:13
Speaker 2: And also, as I say this, this relates to the
18:17
Speaker 2: to the wider issue of the sort of line drawing thing.
18:20
Speaker 2: So to go back to Stuti Peater's and Okay, I
18:22
Speaker 2: don't want to concentrate on necessarily him, but it's not
18:24
Speaker 2: an uncommon message to say, Okay, we have a nation,
18:27
Speaker 2: and he's talking about the United States, but like the UK,
18:31
Speaker 2: it is a massive melting pot. And I'm talking about
18:34
Speaker 2: the white people. White people have come from all av
18:37
Speaker 2: to form that Society's that's.
18:40
Speaker 4: The of what he's saying. Yeah, is a country of migration.
18:46
Speaker 5: That's you know, the indigenous population is setting in small
18:51
Speaker 5: packs of land around the countryside. In the meantime, the
18:55
Speaker 5: vast majority of the population are all immigrants and I
18:59
Speaker 5: want to start creation.
19:00
Speaker 3: Well, that's the whole basis of your country. And that's something.
19:07
Speaker 4: Or as.
19:10
Speaker 2: In this composition, and also the slightly less palatable truth
19:14
Speaker 2: or issue is you know, the undertone to all of this.
19:17
Speaker 2: I'm certainly not accusing him of what anyone else who
19:20
Speaker 2: holds these views I'll say racism, say.
19:23
Speaker 4: Idle and unfounded. That's not what I mean.
19:27
Speaker 2: But you know, even if like like Simon Roch does,
19:30
Speaker 2: which I think he artic collects really well, you're making
19:32
Speaker 2: a distinction between people have say, different colors, because it's
19:35
Speaker 2: so obvious you can see it at first glance, and
19:37
Speaker 2: he's absolutely right in that people do when when the
19:41
Speaker 2: chips are down, they gravitate back towards people who are
19:44
Speaker 2: most like them. And that doesn't matter really whether that's
19:46
Speaker 2: on family or you know, a business, or whether you're
19:51
Speaker 2: in the army or whatever it is, but you do.
19:53
Speaker 2: You do gravitate back towards those that you feel safest around.
19:56
Speaker 2: It's entirely natural and there's no getting away from it.
19:59
Speaker 2: But the point I think of all of this bit
20:07
Speaker 2: is slightly losing my thread, as I say, which is
20:10
Speaker 2: annoying because it was so much in the front of
20:11
Speaker 2: my mind when I started that sentence. But it's yes
20:18
Speaker 2: for it to come down to cut. Yes, that's what
20:21
Speaker 2: it is. Sorry, it's the inference that there is something
20:25
Speaker 2: about colored immigrants into a white country like say the UK,
20:30
Speaker 2: all the United States. There's a sort of lazy inference
20:34
Speaker 2: that these people are somehow useless, drawing off the state,
20:37
Speaker 2: taking all the money, nearly blah blah blah, generally bringing
20:40
Speaker 2: society down. Of course, the unpalatable bit is to say, okay, well,
20:44
Speaker 2: let's just look at society as a whole and consider
20:47
Speaker 2: who is useless and who is useful because that's ultimately
20:50
Speaker 2: sort of where this is going. And if you look
20:53
Speaker 2: at the white population of the United Kingdom, there are
20:56
Speaker 2: a lot of very useless people who are not contributing
20:59
Speaker 2: to societies.
21:00
Speaker 4: So what do we do? Do we get rid of them?
21:02
Speaker 4: What do we say?
21:03
Speaker 2: No, we'll keep them because they're white and they're British,
21:06
Speaker 2: even though they're totally useless. So, in a way, where
21:11
Speaker 2: does this debate, if that's what one wants to call it,
21:14
Speaker 2: Where does it go? What's the ultimate aim? Because just
21:18
Speaker 2: penning people of the same color or nation into the
21:21
Speaker 2: same place, how sure are we that guarantees good outcome?
21:26
Speaker 3: I think that if we look at what the biggest
21:30
Speaker 3: immigration related problems are in Britain over the last period
21:34
Speaker 3: of time, I would say that at least as important,
21:38
Speaker 3: and something which is never discussed, is the immigration of
21:42
Speaker 3: so called culture from other countries. I'm thinking about Hollywood,
21:45
Speaker 3: for example, and the complete destruction of people's minds that
21:50
Speaker 3: have come from that part of the United States, From
21:53
Speaker 3: the US gimming industry, from social media, it's all come
21:58
Speaker 3: from California. We have imported this stuff into our countries
22:02
Speaker 3: and it has destroyed our countries. And this isn't something
22:06
Speaker 3: that was done by a Pakistani or an Indian or
22:10
Speaker 3: an African. This is something that was done by other
22:13
Speaker 3: white people in a part of the United States. We've
22:16
Speaker 3: got to we can't ignore that from the conversation.
22:19
Speaker 1: I mean, I've seen that also, for example in the
22:22
Speaker 1: COVID year or the people here at least in South
22:24
Speaker 1: Africa who got themselves jabbed like cattle lining up to
22:29
Speaker 1: be branded in the main were the white middle class
22:34
Speaker 1: and upper class by far.
22:37
Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean this is okay.
22:39
Speaker 2: The percentage waitings obviously South Africa versus UK very different
22:46
Speaker 2: in terms of black white, but the parallels amazing and
22:51
Speaker 2: in fact we'll be putting it out fairly shortly. But
22:54
Speaker 2: Monty Toms, who does some excellent out and about sort
22:59
Speaker 2: of street into views for UK column, has just dealt
23:02
Speaker 2: with the issue of digital ID, which I would say
23:09
Speaker 2: is so very obviously a terrible idea on absolutely whichever
23:12
Speaker 2: whichever level you want to examine it. And he went
23:18
Speaker 2: out onto street in London and okay, with all these things,
23:21
Speaker 2: you can always say, well, you know, it's just sort
23:22
Speaker 2: of pot lucked ben So you get on the day,
23:24
Speaker 2: very small sample.
23:25
Speaker 4: Size blah, blah blah.
23:27
Speaker 2: But what was really indicative or illustrative or informative instructive
23:32
Speaker 2: from his most recent one was that there were two
23:38
Speaker 2: a young white man and a young white woman, not
23:41
Speaker 2: not with each other, not not related, but interviewed separately
23:45
Speaker 2: about digital id who both said exactly the same thing,
23:48
Speaker 2: which was, yeah, it's just a great idea, you know,
23:51
Speaker 2: having everything in one place. I mean, how incredibly convenient.
23:54
Speaker 2: And they were so obviously a product of the UK's
24:01
Speaker 2: education system, having gone through school and critically university where
24:06
Speaker 2: they were effectively indoctrinated, brainwash, whatever, and everybody else that
24:12
Speaker 2: he spoke to who were not of the let's say,
24:18
Speaker 2: sort of modern progressive educated class took it at face value,
24:22
Speaker 2: and even if they hadn't heard about it, just their
24:26
Speaker 2: snap judgment on is it a good idea to have
24:30
Speaker 2: all your data in one place and have it controlled
24:33
Speaker 2: by somebody else, they said, no, that sounds like a
24:37
Speaker 2: terrible idea. And then that question was subseded by do
24:42
Speaker 2: you trust the government, the answer to which was no,
24:45
Speaker 2: And then it was right, so what do you think
24:47
Speaker 2: about the government having all of your data in the
24:50
Speaker 2: same place, by which they're actually running off down the street,
24:55
Speaker 2: and yet these two white people and yes, okay, there's
24:59
Speaker 2: only two people in the head of London and blah blah,
25:02
Speaker 2: but they absolutely do speak for a class of people
25:06
Speaker 2: who have the sort of almost unthinking arrogance to consider
25:12
Speaker 2: that they're a product of a system that they trust implicitly,
25:17
Speaker 2: that it is looking after their best interests and that
25:20
Speaker 2: everybody should just sign up.
25:21
Speaker 4: And this is of course, you know, we go.
25:22
Speaker 2: Back to the safe and effective and all the other
25:24
Speaker 2: massive pitfalls that people have just walked headlong into. But
25:28
Speaker 2: it was so interesting and the number of people that
25:32
Speaker 2: Monty spoke to were.
25:36
Speaker 4: Black.
25:36
Speaker 2: I'm trying to think something perhaps one or two Asian
25:39
Speaker 2: people as well, but all of whom saw through this
25:44
Speaker 2: And I'm not trying to make some sort of racial
25:47
Speaker 2: ethnic profiling thing, but it was just very interesting that
25:51
Speaker 2: this idea of whiteness, culture, national thing whatever, you know,
25:57
Speaker 2: going back to the what is the benefit? You know,
26:01
Speaker 2: do I really want to be stuck in a country
26:03
Speaker 2: with a bunch of people who say, yeah, did just
26:05
Speaker 2: like to do such good idea because it's all your
26:08
Speaker 2: stuff in one place, How terribly convenient, let's all be
26:10
Speaker 2: white together.
26:12
Speaker 4: It's just crazy isn't it okay?
26:15
Speaker 1: So let's look good South Africa, for example, the Zudu
26:17
Speaker 1: nation doesn't include white people. However, and I've thought about this,
26:22
Speaker 1: how important is that.
26:25
Speaker 3: We are for the last thirty forty years being told
26:28
Speaker 3: all about diversity. We've got to have diversity, and as
26:31
Speaker 3: a result, we've ended up with people being given diversity
26:35
Speaker 3: training for example. Now, what is the purpose of diversity training.
26:39
Speaker 3: The purpose of diversity training is to actually break down
26:45
Speaker 3: any sense of pride in your niahtionhood, in your history
26:49
Speaker 3: and where you've come from, right, and to say that
26:52
Speaker 3: you the black man, are the same as you the
26:54
Speaker 3: white man, or the same as you the Asian. What
26:57
Speaker 3: that does is that actually removes diversity, right, because we've
27:03
Speaker 3: all grown up in cultures. We have a language which
27:06
Speaker 3: expresses things in particular. There's other we all know this.
27:09
Speaker 3: There are other parts of the world with other languages
27:12
Speaker 3: where the concepts that are expressed by those languages aren't
27:15
Speaker 3: even translatable because the concepts and the words don't exist
27:20
Speaker 3: in the other language that you're wanting to translate into.
27:23
Speaker 3: That's true diversity, having a diversity of cultures, being proud
27:27
Speaker 3: of the culture that you're part of that brings strength
27:31
Speaker 3: to the human race because it brings a diversity of
27:34
Speaker 3: ideas and concepts and so on. Now, of course the
27:37
Speaker 3: converse of that is there's potential for conflict, but we
27:41
Speaker 3: it's you know, we could choose to grow up and
27:44
Speaker 3: abandon the conflict and actually appreciate.
27:47
Speaker 4: Right.
27:47
Speaker 3: But diversity, the idea, the modern idea of diversity, breaks
27:51
Speaker 3: down the differences, and actually what they're attempting to do
27:54
Speaker 3: is turn everybody culturally into the same thing. And that's
27:58
Speaker 3: something we absolutely should But of course we can only
28:02
Speaker 3: do that if we understand. What comes back to your
28:04
Speaker 3: earlier point, We can only do that if we understand
28:07
Speaker 3: what our culture is supposed to be. And I'm not
28:09
Speaker 3: sure that I do. I'm not sure that there are
28:11
Speaker 3: very many people actually do understand, and certainly from the
28:14
Speaker 3: idea of I mean, what does British actually mean with
28:17
Speaker 3: Britain is a nation of three supposedly a nation of
28:21
Speaker 3: three separate countries, is actually quite a bit of diversity
28:24
Speaker 3: even within the UK, between the various people that are here.
28:29
Speaker 3: So I'm not sure that there's even a there's even
28:33
Speaker 3: such a thing as British. So but nonetheless, getting back
28:39
Speaker 3: to the main point. The main point is that this
28:41
Speaker 3: idea of diversity is actually something which is undernedy degrees
28:49
Speaker 3: from what diversity actually means, and actually it's turning us
28:52
Speaker 3: all into the same thing. I've said this many times,
28:55
Speaker 3: but you know, when I was growing up, we had
28:58
Speaker 3: Patty Englishman, Patty r Man, Patty Scotsman jokes and and
29:03
Speaker 3: we took the mickey out of each other's cultures with
29:06
Speaker 3: the Scottish or tight fisted money wise, the Irish are
29:09
Speaker 3: all drunks, kind of I'm noted. The English are so insignificant.
29:12
Speaker 3: I'm not even sure what they were supposed to be.
29:14
Speaker 3: But well, anyway, anyway, the point is we we we
29:21
Speaker 3: recognized our own feelings. We were happy to make a
29:24
Speaker 3: joke of them. We were happy to laugh at ourselves
29:26
Speaker 3: as much as But we're so scared to laugh of
29:28
Speaker 3: ourselves at ourselves anymore. We're so scared because we take
29:31
Speaker 3: offense at the slightest thing that anybody says. We've all
29:34
Speaker 3: just got to grow up, I think is basically where
29:37
Speaker 3: we need to start.
29:38
Speaker 1: When I was in Paris, it's beautiful and citraa and
29:42
Speaker 1: there's obviously history and buildings and all that sort of stuff.
29:44
Speaker 1: That's that's that's wonderful to look at. But I remember
29:47
Speaker 1: saying to my wife, I want to see France. I
29:52
Speaker 1: don't feel like I'm experiencing French culture. There's McDonald's and
29:57
Speaker 1: the Burger King and everything is international, which we have
30:01
Speaker 1: back home.
30:01
Speaker 2: You go to most cities in what we describe as
30:05
Speaker 2: the western post industrial sort of modern world, and they
30:10
Speaker 2: are bar and large in the way that they run, homogeneous.
30:13
Speaker 2: They exactly like you say. They've all got the same
30:16
Speaker 2: multinationals with the horrific outlets selling junk or junk media
30:20
Speaker 2: or you know, clunk clothes or fake this and.
30:23
Speaker 4: That and the other.
30:24
Speaker 2: So in sometimes Scribby anywhere, of course, you have this
30:28
Speaker 2: phenomenal historical, architectural or visual backdrop like Paris, you know,
30:34
Speaker 2: being very good example, of course, very beautiful. But when
30:37
Speaker 2: you look now at all the other bits that are
30:40
Speaker 2: sort of overlain, they are pretty dreadful and dull because
30:45
Speaker 2: you get them everywhere. So yes, I think to go
30:47
Speaker 2: out further away from that where those influences can't manifest,
30:51
Speaker 2: then you see a society which is trying to preserve
30:54
Speaker 2: its way of life, and that is what culture comes
30:57
Speaker 2: back to. I mean, I think France is very distinct
30:59
Speaker 2: from the Kingdom in that respect, and that you go
31:01
Speaker 2: to the majority of Okay, I'm being particular with the
31:06
Speaker 2: folks on England, but a lot of English villages now
31:10
Speaker 2: will have no way of life that could be described
31:14
Speaker 2: as distinctly British in the way that they might have
31:16
Speaker 2: done fifty or more years ago, in that the vast
31:19
Speaker 2: majority will have a church that is largely dormant because
31:23
Speaker 2: people don't attend it anymore. They will not have a
31:26
Speaker 2: post office or a village shop because they will have
31:29
Speaker 2: decided that the convenience and cheap a lure of supermarkets
31:36
Speaker 2: was what they wanted to go for, and now they well,
31:39
Speaker 2: they probably don't even rude the day. But obviously that's
31:41
Speaker 2: meant that any sense of local service, community, blah blah
31:46
Speaker 2: blah has all disappeared. So the idea of a preservation
31:52
Speaker 2: of a way of life in many parts of the
31:55
Speaker 2: United Kingdom, particularly in England, I think has all been
31:59
Speaker 2: all but creted. France less so, and I think to
32:03
Speaker 2: go back to what you were saying about, say the
32:06
Speaker 2: Zulu nation, we see that there is a much more
32:13
Speaker 2: concerted effort to preserve a way of life, and if
32:17
Speaker 2: that involves making sure that the people that make up
32:21
Speaker 2: that nation are from the same genetic ethnic heritage and
32:25
Speaker 2: that that makes sense to them at that time, then
32:28
Speaker 2: so be it. And let's not forget that, particularly with Zulus,
32:31
Speaker 2: that we don't go terribly far back to remember what
32:36
Speaker 2: this is or was all about, which was conflict. It
32:41
Speaker 2: was it was asserting your identity on a particular way
32:46
Speaker 2: of life or a particular territory by either the use
32:51
Speaker 2: of force or the resistance of force. But as time
32:55
Speaker 2: has gone by, that has by and large fallen away.
32:59
Speaker 2: And so therefore, in order to preserve the way of
33:01
Speaker 2: life that we consider important to us, we are looking
33:04
Speaker 2: for other capabilities, and so the trying to progress traits
33:13
Speaker 2: such as strength and athleticism and war fighting, which would
33:17
Speaker 2: make sense on say a sort of ethnological basis, that's
33:22
Speaker 2: no longer valid. And so going back, you know, in
33:25
Speaker 2: the UK, go back to twenty twenty, when it really
33:30
Speaker 2: did feel like the walls were closing in and the
33:33
Speaker 2: tyranny was absolute because people were really having their way
33:36
Speaker 2: of life compromised. The important thing then was to find
33:41
Speaker 2: people who shared that belief. It didn't or shouldn't have
33:46
Speaker 2: mattered what their background, color, ethnicity, age or anything was.
33:52
Speaker 2: And that was because we weren't in a situation of
33:56
Speaker 2: needing to physically fight. That's long gone. So I think
33:59
Speaker 2: we're in this odd age in this part of the world,
34:02
Speaker 2: you know, in what we call develop part of the world,
34:06
Speaker 2: where we're we're wanting to form as groups, but not
34:11
Speaker 2: for the same reasons, and therefore we're still sort of
34:14
Speaker 2: casting about in the wind to work out exactly how
34:17
Speaker 2: best to do that. The thing people sort of fall
34:19
Speaker 2: back to is this idea of nation through a visible
34:26
Speaker 2: connection to other people, exactly like Zulu. But I think,
34:29
Speaker 2: unless I got it wrong, Zulu linguistically and sort of
34:33
Speaker 2: ethnically a close to causer. Isn't that right? Yes, exactly,
34:39
Speaker 2: But that's the point. They are very distinct. Whereas here
34:43
Speaker 2: in the United Kingdom, Angles and Saxon's and Normans and
34:47
Speaker 2: Celts and Picts all live alongside each other, largely oblivious
34:53
Speaker 2: to the incredible conflicts of the past, and they consider
34:57
Speaker 2: that they're all now British, which of course is a nonsense.
35:02
Speaker 2: If you went to if you went into Natatazili, no
35:07
Speaker 2: and said to Zuli, by the way. You know, in
35:09
Speaker 2: how many years time, somebody in the cape or in
35:12
Speaker 2: the trans guy will be the same as you.
35:15
Speaker 4: They dismiss it out of hand.
35:18
Speaker 1: You need to differentiate. I think on a micro level,
35:21
Speaker 1: multiculturalism is fine. You can have neighbors who look and
35:24
Speaker 1: are different to you in every way. I mean, there's
35:27
Speaker 1: no problem. I have black friends and Indian friends and
35:30
Speaker 1: whatever else, right, But I think as you see what's
35:33
Speaker 1: happening in Europe, you have on a macro level a
35:37
Speaker 1: situation that is not really cohesive. A part deet was
35:41
Speaker 1: an interesting example, and that's a discussion for a different
35:44
Speaker 1: day because it's highly complex. But the the original intention
35:48
Speaker 1: of a partet was not based on white hatred for blacks.
35:53
Speaker 1: It was based on the fact that the two simply
35:58
Speaker 1: cannot work together under the same roof because number one,
36:03
Speaker 1: they had different languages and different different ways of operating.
36:07
Speaker 1: So it would have been best to have divided the
36:09
Speaker 1: country with a border, and as the saying goes, borders
36:12
Speaker 1: make the best neighbors. Now, of course the system became
36:14
Speaker 1: highly crafted, et ceterat cetera, et cetera. But the idea
36:19
Speaker 1: that on a macro level this can work, I think
36:23
Speaker 1: is fairly clear internationally that it doesn't. But on a
36:26
Speaker 1: micro level, it's absolutely fine. If you just leave people alone,
36:28
Speaker 1: they get on fine.
36:32
Speaker 4: They do.
36:33
Speaker 2: But it does go back to the you know, the
36:38
Speaker 2: motivation of threat and exactly what it is, going back
36:42
Speaker 2: to this preservation of a way of life, what it
36:45
Speaker 2: is that is the foremost pressure on that, and therefore
36:51
Speaker 2: what recourse you're going to take in order to preserve
36:56
Speaker 2: that life. And you know, it's so common for there
37:00
Speaker 2: to come points where factions develop because people that sense
37:06
Speaker 2: of integrity does actually dissolve at some point because whatever
37:10
Speaker 2: it is, I mean, it's I know it seems ridiculous now,
37:12
Speaker 2: but because you're not the same color, or you're not
37:16
Speaker 2: from the same part of that country, or not from
37:19
Speaker 2: the same family or whatever. But this is when the
37:24
Speaker 2: pressure is on. These are the things that turn out
37:27
Speaker 2: to matter.
37:28
Speaker 1: If I had a neighbor who was ethnically and culturally
37:32
Speaker 1: very different to me, no issue. But if I had
37:35
Speaker 1: a neighbor who decided to slaughter a cow in the
37:38
Speaker 1: back garden in a way that that just I don't appreciate.
37:42
Speaker 1: It doesn't work with my own slaughtering of cars, for example,
37:47
Speaker 1: right I haven't done at a butcher, not in a
37:49
Speaker 1: back garden where it's noisy and the more screaming and
37:52
Speaker 1: the whole thing is blood everywhere. But they could argue, yeah,
37:55
Speaker 1: but that's our custom. Now we have an issue because
38:00
Speaker 1: what happens now, this is.
38:01
Speaker 2: Exactly what I go back to in terms of preserving
38:03
Speaker 2: a way of life. So it's kind of academic as
38:06
Speaker 2: to whether your neighbor doing that is black, white or green.
38:12
Speaker 2: It's rather more to do the fact that they, like
38:15
Speaker 2: you say, they've come from a social grouping that does
38:18
Speaker 2: that thing in that particular way. And to go back
38:22
Speaker 2: to the Zulus, let's say, because there is a discernible
38:26
Speaker 2: way in which Zulu people do continue to live, then
38:30
Speaker 2: that would be there'd be no barrier. I mean, they
38:33
Speaker 2: would all do it in the same way. That is
38:36
Speaker 2: part of what belonging to that society is about. And
38:38
Speaker 2: that's what I think, That's what I mean in terms
38:41
Speaker 2: of what we have lost. So the idea, you know
38:46
Speaker 2: in Britain that we do do things in one particular
38:48
Speaker 2: way is absolute rubbish. We completely do not do it.
38:53
Speaker 2: And so it's complete pot luck. Now, I mean, I
38:56
Speaker 2: might find that I had a neighbor who was a
38:58
Speaker 2: different color from me, but shared a view of how
39:03
Speaker 2: a certain thing would be done. And I would say
39:05
Speaker 2: that if somebody's slaughtering a car in their backgarden and
39:08
Speaker 2: it's making any noise, they have got something very wrong,
39:11
Speaker 2: because I would advocate for anything to happen outside of
39:15
Speaker 2: an abati. But that's perhaps a discussion for next week.
39:19
Speaker 2: But the point is that, as I say, because this conflict,
39:26
Speaker 2: we hope doesn't exist anymore. The basis of culture, ideology,
39:32
Speaker 2: belief is on these sorts of practices, and therefore we
39:36
Speaker 2: seem to have moved beyond, at least in the UK,
39:40
Speaker 2: a time where you can look at somebody and discern
39:45
Speaker 2: whether or not they're going to want to behave in
39:48
Speaker 2: a particular way over a particular issue, and whether or
39:51
Speaker 2: not that's going to be similar to you or different. Previously,
39:55
Speaker 2: we would have been able to do that. You would
39:56
Speaker 2: have been able to distinguish between white groups. You can
39:59
Speaker 2: look at people and take a take a fairly educated
40:02
Speaker 2: guess as to what their ancestry is just by the
40:06
Speaker 2: shape of their face and their body. It's more difficult
40:09
Speaker 2: to do now because we are much more of a
40:12
Speaker 2: mixture let's be honest.
40:13
Speaker 1: We can all agree that that nobody wants gingers around.
40:25
Speaker 4: Tough crowd, really tough crowd. I mean, that's the thing.
40:30
Speaker 2: I mean, things like that I have never ever understood,
40:38
Speaker 2: you know, the sort of characteristic. It is a joke,
40:43
Speaker 2: but it's such an extraordinary one because the that the
40:47
Speaker 2: archetypal image of a Claymore wielding Scott with his kilt
40:52
Speaker 2: flying behind him is always a flaming redhead who he's
40:57
Speaker 2: like the bravest of the brave. I I can't think
41:00
Speaker 2: of a similar joke where the sort of apex of
41:08
Speaker 2: whether it's masculinity or strength or agility or whatever, is
41:11
Speaker 2: lampooned in that way.
41:12
Speaker 4: It's so bizarre.
41:13
Speaker 2: But yeah, I do appreciate that it is a joke,
41:16
Speaker 2: but thanks very much for pointing it out. But in fact,
41:19
Speaker 2: part of that, of course, is the fact that even
41:22
Speaker 2: talking about this kind of thing might be regarded as
41:25
Speaker 2: being sensitive. I mean, why on earth would it be
41:27
Speaker 2: if we're talking about people who had big hands or
41:30
Speaker 2: big feet as though that was in some way defining
41:34
Speaker 2: national characteristic. And that's how people here or read, you know,
41:40
Speaker 2: and that's how people decided which group they would belong to.
41:44
Speaker 2: I mean, okay, there would therefore be a media propaganda
41:48
Speaker 2: campaign in order to make that sensitive issue. But the
41:50
Speaker 2: point is that we are we are cow taoing to
41:54
Speaker 2: the narrative in the first place by even considering that
41:57
Speaker 2: it should be sensitive. Why what color you turn out
42:01
Speaker 2: to be? Why on earth would it be sensitive. It's
42:03
Speaker 2: only sensitive if you fall into the massive trap of saying, oh, yeah,
42:07
Speaker 2: actually there are sort of I don't know, intellectual differences
42:13
Speaker 2: between people, and therefore, you know, we have to be
42:16
Speaker 2: really sensitivele because you can't possibly say that white people
42:19
Speaker 2: are this and somebody else. That we are all different.
42:22
Speaker 2: That should absolutely be acknowledged. But but the to draw
42:25
Speaker 2: the inference from that that therefore when it's too sensitive
42:27
Speaker 2: to talk about because we're different, is absolutely absurd and pathetic.
42:32
Speaker 3: Well, you know, I think I think actually, you know,
42:37
Speaker 3: intelligence is something that we should absolutely be looking into it,
42:40
Speaker 3: and for example, the intelligence of the average MP. Now
42:46
Speaker 3: there's a there's a grouping that that I think we
42:48
Speaker 3: can universally and blankets say are thick as too short planks?
42:54
Speaker 3: But they seem to come from all kinds of different
42:56
Speaker 3: backgrounds these days, So you know, I don't think it
42:59
Speaker 3: matters what what color, religion, whatever these people are. Let's
43:05
Speaker 3: put them in a box and just put them over
43:06
Speaker 3: there and say stupid. That would be a good a
43:09
Speaker 3: good start, I think, and maybe then the rest of
43:11
Speaker 3: us can get on with building our lives. Look, the
43:15
Speaker 3: bottom line here is the whole notion of protected characteristics
43:20
Speaker 3: is something that has been created in order to First
43:24
Speaker 3: of all, it does. It does a couple of things
43:26
Speaker 3: that are really detrimental to the conversation. And if we're
43:30
Speaker 3: getting worried about even having a conversation like the one
43:33
Speaker 3: that we've had, then then that just demonstrates how far,
43:38
Speaker 3: how far we've fallen. The fact of the matter is
43:41
Speaker 3: that as soon as you say to someone you have
43:44
Speaker 3: a protected characteristic, first of all, that is telling them
43:47
Speaker 3: very very sternly that they are somehow inferior, and that
43:53
Speaker 3: therefore that that characteristic needs to be protected because it's
43:56
Speaker 3: it's an inferior thing. And to the person who wants
44:00
Speaker 3: to criticize that characteristic for some reason, you're saying to them, no,
44:04
Speaker 3: you can't do that, so you just shut up. Well,
44:07
Speaker 3: this first of all, stops the conversation, it increases the frustration,
44:13
Speaker 3: It's part of the mechanism by which racial tensions, religious tensions,
44:19
Speaker 3: skin color tensions, sexuality tensions are built. And it is
44:24
Speaker 3: a psychological operation. It's something which is being done to
44:28
Speaker 3: us all, and it is there to divide. Because when
44:31
Speaker 3: we're divided, we're weak. It's time that we, as as
44:37
Speaker 3: ordinary people from whatever religion, culture, background, whatever, recognize that
44:42
Speaker 3: our enemy isn't each other, and our enemy is something else,
44:46
Speaker 3: and we need to start having conversations about what that
44:48
Speaker 3: enemy actually is.
44:50
Speaker 1: Exactly so, I said to a fenomone last week that
44:54
Speaker 1: my enemies are not those to the left and right
44:56
Speaker 1: of me, but those probably above me.
44:59
Speaker 2: Again, going back to this idea of nation heard and
45:02
Speaker 2: peoples and all the rest of it, and what it
45:06
Speaker 2: is to be part of that, it is interesting that
45:09
Speaker 2: the I think what never gets talked about is that
45:13
Speaker 2: if we are to have this idea that we have
45:18
Speaker 2: come from somewhere, is it appropriate that we should have
45:24
Speaker 2: just one sort of leadership body as it were. You know,
45:29
Speaker 2: the United States has one president for all those people,
45:34
Speaker 2: for all those white people who are as stut Peters
45:39
Speaker 2: would put it, sort of part of the American nation,
45:42
Speaker 2: But of course they're not. They've all come from all
45:44
Speaker 2: over the place, So it is really the expansion of
45:47
Speaker 2: the colonial project in that you're managing everybody by creating
45:54
Speaker 2: leaders a little bit further down the pecking order and
45:57
Speaker 2: therefore homogenizing groups in order that you end up with
46:00
Speaker 2: this pyramid with one person at the top of it
46:03
Speaker 2: and everybody sort of falling into line. So it is
46:06
Speaker 2: interesting that that it does conform to that way of
46:11
Speaker 2: of ruling people.
46:14
Speaker 1: Okay, final thought, Mike.
46:18
Speaker 3: Yeah, I don't really have any final thoughts on that.
46:20
Speaker 3: I think this conversation is one that's going to rumble on.
46:23
Speaker 3: I hope that this what we've discussed today is highly controversial.
46:28
Speaker 3: I hope it causes at least as a determined response
46:35
Speaker 3: as the Stupiters interview did. And I hope that it
46:40
Speaker 3: causes people to think. You know, I'm not going to
46:44
Speaker 3: say that that everything that my views are the only
46:47
Speaker 3: there are the right views, and everybody's got to believe
46:49
Speaker 3: what I believe. In fact, I would say quite the opposite.
46:53
Speaker 3: You've got to people have got to challenge conceptions, and
46:57
Speaker 3: that applies to ourselves as well as those might hear
47:00
Speaker 3: from others. So, uh so, bring the challenges is what
47:04
Speaker 3: I would.
47:04
Speaker 4: Say, m m m m okay mmmm