Latest / UK Column Radio / Jerm Warfare - Embrace inconvenience and stories about ducks - Banter 18

Transcript

Jerm Warfare - Embrace inconvenience and stories about ducks - Banter 18 · UK Column Radio

0:38
I wish I was in the UK over this past weekend but I missed the
0:41
event. How did it go?
0:45
Well, we've had a, a little bit of a debrief and my personal
0:50
view, I think reflected by everybody else is that it, it,
0:53
it, it we've, we've sort of stepped up another gear and I
0:56
think that's been a, a really wonderful process.
0:59
And it's the third event we've run over the course of the year.
1:03
We started in Bristol last year, which was which was fantastic.
1:07
I completely admit that the structure of the day wasn't
1:11
quite right. I think in our enthusiasm to get
1:13
going with events, we crammed rather too much in and we
1:16
definitely corrected that when we went to Cheltenham in April,
1:18
which was terrific. But I think for a whole host of
1:22
reasons, York just seemed to work even better.
1:26
And I think that's that, that sort of first of all, the way in
1:30
which we run the event that the speakers, which we'll get into
1:34
in a minute. Obviously we're absolutely first
1:36
class as they have been at all of our events.
1:39
But I think the way in which the the audience respond.
1:43
And I think that's been a really interesting progression because
1:46
by and large there is, you know, there's a core, you know, we're,
1:53
we're very pleased to have a core of people who have been to
1:57
probably all three events. But what was really nice for for
2:00
us in terms of sort of feedback of, you know, how UK column does
2:08
have a relationship with various parts of the country, it was
2:11
really nice to go north. You know York, I know, I know
2:14
you haven't been over here, but York is well, I suppose from
2:18
Cheltenham, it's maybe nearly 300 miles north.
2:21
No, sorry, that's the geography checks.
2:23
Not quite 200. OK, whatever significant
2:27
difference and, and in, in British terms that is quite
2:30
significant in many countries in between very sort of culturally
2:32
different and everything else. And it seemed to me from the
2:35
people that I did meet, there was there were a lot of people
2:38
from that area. And that was that was fantastic
2:40
to find that by, by going to somewhere else, we were we
2:44
really were bringing in a different crowd.
2:45
And, and I think the having the having the core of people who
2:50
had been to events previously, the yeah, I mean, the atmosphere
2:54
was phenomenal throughout. Yeah.
2:57
It was really, really terrific. That's my that's my view.
2:59
It might sound like I'm being a bit over the top, but I really,
3:04
I really can't think of any negatives, Mike.
3:09
No, I mean, I couldn't disagree with that.
3:11
As you've said there, the other thing that I, you know, the
3:14
other difference that, that I think was really interesting was
3:19
how many people came to me and said, I only found you 4-5, six
3:23
months ago. And that is, is pretty
3:26
encouraging. Bearing in mind that so many
3:29
people are disengaging from news content completely at the
3:33
moment. The fact that there's, there are
3:36
new people starting to ask questions is, is, really, is
3:40
really good. And it's, it's absolutely
3:41
something we've got to take into account because of course, a lot
3:45
of those people have no real, no, no appreciation of the
3:52
history of, of UK column or what we've been doing.
3:55
So, so that's going to be, that's going to be an
3:57
interesting, it's going to be interesting to see how that
3:59
those those people react as we come into our 20th anniversary
4:04
and start talking about what's been happening for the last 20
4:08
years. You said people have been
4:11
disengaging. This is, I think, something
4:13
we've touched on before, but I'd like to touch on it again
4:16
because it it's, it's a very worrying trend.
4:21
It is a worrying trend because I mean, to some degree I, I
4:25
understand it. I think that, you know, although
4:30
people had some understanding of what, what was going to come
4:34
post COVID with the use of the, the widespread use of terms like
4:40
Poly crisis and, and documentation from World
4:43
Economic Forum and other places. You know, we should, we should
4:47
really have expected what has happened in the last 3-4 years
4:52
to, to develop as they have because they told us that that
4:54
was what was going to do, what was going to happen.
4:58
Nonetheless, I do, I do to some degree understand why it is too
5:04
much for for many people. I think the, the danger here is
5:09
that there is a, an urge from media, whether that's mainstream
5:16
media or alternative media, to, to somehow try to soften the
5:21
blow of what's actually going on around us.
5:23
And I think that would be a mistake.
5:26
I'm starting to see, you know, organizations that consider
5:31
themselves to be serious news organizations talking about cats
5:34
and ducks and stuff like this as if that's going to bring, you
5:37
know, that might soften, soften the, the, the totality of the
5:41
information that they're putting out.
5:44
But it's not going to attract back people that have disengaged
5:47
from, from the news. And all you end up doing in
5:49
fact, is dumbing down the, the, the totality of what you're
5:53
putting out. So, so I think it's a, it's a
5:55
bad direction to go in. We, we, we can't shield people
6:00
from what's going on. We've got to, as we did with
6:03
COVID, we've got to, I think, try to present it in a way which
6:07
is level headed and, and as seen as we possibly can and try to
6:12
help people understand what's going on.
6:14
But of course, for those that, that do disengage, the reality
6:21
hasn't changed. They may be pretending that it
6:23
isn't there or ignoring it, but but the, the, the Tornadoes
6:27
still coming, as the saying goes.
6:29
And you know, remember the old cartoon?
6:31
I can't remember who produced it of, of the, the people burying
6:35
their heads in the sand while the Tornadoes coming up behind
6:37
them. It that that isn't going to
6:39
change. And, and if those people that
6:42
that that do disengage are of course removing themselves from
6:46
any opportunity to resist or any opportunity to say this is not
6:51
some, this is not the direction of travel that I want to be
6:53
going in and not in my name or what, however you want to
6:55
present that. So, so yeah, it is, it is
6:59
understandable in a sense, but also really something that that
7:05
we need to sort of we need to encourage people to not
7:09
disengage in that way for sure. I think I was chatting to, I
7:13
think it was Zubi a few months ago when I was in Dubai and, and
7:20
he said to, to me that he thinks that we as humans are not
7:25
designed to take in as much information as what we currently
7:30
do. And I wonder if, I wonder if
7:34
there's actually a lot of truth to that.
7:36
And I, I wonder if that's if there's a correlation between
7:39
the amount that we absorb versus the, the ease of disengaging as
7:47
a result. I think the big, sorry, I'll
7:50
just answer this this way. I think the biggest problem here
7:53
is not is not that we that there's too much information.
7:58
The problem is there's no discernment about which
8:00
information is relevant and which isn't.
8:04
And I think part of the problem is that people are not able to
8:11
ignore a lot of the really hyped up rubbish on social media and
8:18
so on that that really should be getting a good ignoring.
8:21
And, and so I think it's more about the we don't have, a lot
8:28
of us don't have the skills for deciding what is irrelevant.
8:32
I think that's the key problem here.
8:36
What the cats and ducks? Well, not just the cats and
8:40
ducks, but, but actually just a lot of the people.
8:43
People get caught up in a lot of the vitriol and a lot of the
8:46
arguments and a lot of the and it's really diversionary in in
8:50
many ways and totally irrelevant and.
8:54
Yes, that's true. I'm sorry for, for jumping in,
8:56
but I saw a, a, a post made by Vanessa Beatty addressing
9:02
exactly this, saying that it's exhausting.
9:06
You know, when you, you go through a lot of effort to, to
9:09
put out a thoughtful comment and then you just get these sort of
9:14
troll like rubbish, low resolution responses that just,
9:21
it just, it pollutes the comment thread and it makes you want to
9:25
turn off the comments, which is what she was suggesting or just
9:29
luck or whatever. And then the counter responses
9:32
are, but now you're you're cancelling and and censoring
9:35
etcetera. I actually agree with Vanessa.
9:43
It's such a, it's such an odd area because it's artificial and
9:47
I don't think we've really settled down yet with it.
9:50
I mean, basically the interactions you're talking
9:52
about would would just never take place in a in real life,
9:55
yeah, in real life in a face to face context.
9:57
So, so therefore, you know, the the entire situation is
10:02
different. And yes, so I don't know, people
10:09
are out to waste time, cause trouble, all the rest of it are
10:13
very boring. I mean, I don't really see that
10:16
there's a massive issue with, if you don't necessarily want to
10:21
read comments from people who are just there to waste time and
10:25
therefore you have the ability to be able to switch that off.
10:29
I don't see that's a massive drama.
10:30
And I think to to sort of conflate that with because,
10:33
yeah, because like you're saying, it's all, you know, what
10:35
about free speech, you know, you're just censoring, you're
10:37
just, you know, whatever. Well, yeah, it's not really
10:39
quite the same thing. It's it's not, no, it's not at
10:42
all. And, and, and sorry, just to go
10:44
back to, to what you quoted Zubi as saying, I can understand
10:50
exactly why he would say that. And therefore, I don't mean to
10:53
disagree necessarily with him, but I think the way in which I
10:56
would look at it is that there are, there are a few different
10:59
things going on. And the, the, yes, the sheer
11:05
volume of, of information that's presented is very difficult to
11:09
make sense of because to, to, you know, for example, with cats
11:14
and ducks, how are you to, how are you to make that judgement
11:18
that a story about a duck is more or less important than a
11:22
story about Sudan, for example? And I know that might sound like
11:26
a ridiculous point to make. No, it's it's a good point.
11:29
But but it this, this stuff is just spewed out.
11:34
Ukraine is such a good example of this because if anybody had
11:37
been paying attention and had looked at Ukraine in the way
11:40
that they might look at a duck story now, they'd have known in
11:45
2022 what had happened in not just 2014 and thereafter, but
11:51
what happened to Ukraine after the Second World War or even
11:54
before the Second World War, because it's all there.
11:56
All this stuff does get put out, but people are by and large
12:00
unable to remember it. So you're thinking that in the
12:03
mainstream media slash sort of government communications
12:06
sphere, the the way in which information is put out is very
12:11
deliberately so that people who who are not paying absolutely
12:17
not just sort of their full attention, but also making these
12:22
points of discernment, but also connection.
12:25
So they'll see something, you know, reference to this, that
12:27
and the other and think, hang on a minute that that connects back
12:30
to either a period of time earlier or a different place or
12:33
whatever. And basically making sense of
12:34
the whole thing. And, and as I say, I think this
12:36
is this is evidenced in, in the way in which people have, you
12:40
know, considered that what happened in Ukraine slash Russia
12:44
in 2022 just came out of nowhere, which it, it just
12:49
didn't. And Grikey by suggesting that
12:51
going back to the first Second World War is, is far enough is
12:54
absurd. I mean, it's sort of at least
12:56
1000 years to, to try to make any sort of sense of it.
13:00
But then the other, the other side of it, I would say in terms
13:03
of the ability to absorb information that well, goes back
13:09
to what Vanessa's talking about and, and the way people use
13:14
technology, whatever it is. But the fact that we've allowed
13:18
systems to replace our brains and I, Mike will be amused to
13:24
remember MM and I took Mark Anderson out for supper on his
13:27
last night in in the UK. And I started what I thought was
13:32
going to be a really good story. And I got halfway through it and
13:35
I could not remember why I'd started it.
13:36
But it was about a, it was about a, what we call a speed
13:40
awareness course in the United Kingdom, which is sort of a re
13:43
education thing that you can opt for if you, if you get caught
13:46
speeding, the, you either the police will take take points off
13:51
or put points on your driving license, or you can go on a, a
13:54
course which tells you about the, you know, I mean, to be
13:57
honest, some of it's fascinating, some of it's not
14:00
very well presented. The, the reason I started
14:02
telling the story, I'm pleased to remember was because everyone
14:07
on that course, I think there were, there were 10 people on
14:10
the course I did at the start of this week.
14:14
Every single one of them used SAT NAV absolutely all the time.
14:21
So they, they have no idea where they're going at any point.
14:25
So, you know, we talk, I, I've just, we started this program by
14:27
talking about our event in York. I know where York is.
14:31
I know how to get there because, OK, first of all, I have been
14:34
there before, but I absolutely know which compass direction
14:37
it's in. I know which roads you need to
14:38
take to get there. And I know what landmarks and
14:42
what not I'm passing when I do go, I got the sense.
14:46
And these are not young people, by the way.
14:49
These are people who are probably my age or, you know,
14:53
older. And they all use a sat NAV the
14:57
whole time in that they just, they do not trust themselves to,
15:02
I don't know, look at a map, find the way, remember, or any
15:05
of that sort of thing. So going back to Zoby's point, I
15:09
think we have, well, I'll say we a lot of people have, you know,
15:15
side by side had this onslaught of, of information where you
15:20
can't, you can't differentiate between a dark story or a
15:24
humanitarian crisis and as well as making your brain pretty much
15:30
useless. So I think in actual fact, we
15:34
are, we are perfectly well capable of absorbing enormous
15:38
amounts of information. And if you think back to times
15:41
where people, you know, either remembered stuff or wrote it
15:46
down, I think in terms of recall and, and, and an understanding
15:52
of a complex issue, I think we were as a, OK, it's, it's, this
15:58
is going to be specific by country and by grouping.
16:01
But I would say in the, in the Western world now, particularly
16:05
in the younger generations, and I know it's sort of they're a
16:07
soft target because it, it's very easy.
16:09
So we'll look at the, you know, they're just on their tech
16:11
stuff. Felt I didn't know anything.
16:12
They can't do anything. That's unfair.
16:14
Of course they do know stuff and they can do stuff, but I think
16:17
by and large they have had such a such a battering with the
16:22
memory losing devices that that they, they I think are far less
16:29
able to recall in the way that I would hope we can, but also to
16:37
connect things that might at face value seem to be
16:41
disconnected. But I still think, Charles, that
16:53
when you have so much stuff coming at you, Ukraine and
16:59
climate change and famine and everything is negative and, and
17:05
there's so much of it. And the human condition also
17:10
desires a story about ducks because we want also just to
17:17
feel better about our day. Because we can't change what's
17:20
happening in Ukraine. We can't change what's happening
17:22
in Gaza. These are.
17:24
Sorry, sorry. I'm going to stop you there
17:26
because I completely disagree with that statement.
17:28
We can change what's going on in Ukraine.
17:30
We can change what's going on in Gaza because it's our
17:33
governments. No, I'm saying that's the way
17:35
we're, that's the way we are wired to think.
17:38
Yes, but but how did that happen, Jeremy?
17:42
How did it get to the point where we are wired to think that
17:45
we can't change these things? Because that that I think is,
17:49
is, is really getting to the nub of the problem.
17:53
We have been so disenfranchised. We have lost any sense of
17:58
agency. We've lost any sense of personal
18:01
responsibility or personal power.
18:04
How did that happen? I think that that is a question
18:07
we've got to consider. Now, I don't necessarily know
18:11
the answers to that. I think it's certainly the
18:13
result of a, a sustained psychological attack on the
18:18
minds of which comes back to in some degree what what Charles
18:23
was saying a minute ago. There's there's no question
18:26
about the, the fact that, that the more technology comes into
18:31
our lives, the more we switch our brains off and, and the more
18:34
we rely and we give up our own capability and, and tell the
18:41
technology to look after us or tell the government to look
18:43
after us or whatever it happens to be.
18:45
But, but also in the on the other side, we have been told
18:48
systematically that the role of government is to keep us safe,
18:52
that the role of government is to do this.
18:54
We, we have become reliant through the Social Security
18:59
mechanisms on, on having this, the safety net there.
19:04
That's, that's, and some, some people in the country are not
19:07
only reliant on a safety net that they, they are dependent on
19:11
it for everything that they consume their, their food, their
19:16
electricity, their gas, their housing and so on.
19:20
You know, this, this is something which has been for
19:24
quite a long time now systematically has been
19:28
encouraged this type of thinking.
19:30
And of course, when you do that, you, you, you give up any sense
19:34
that you're able to change anything or able to do anything.
19:37
And this this is really problematic.
19:40
Yeah, but that feeds into that, that desire to lie in bed and
19:44
have a look at a duck story or a cap.
19:47
Yeah, that doesn't mean you should ponder to that.
19:49
That doesn't mean that you should encourage that by by just
19:52
laying it in front of people that because doing that even
19:55
takes people further down this road.
19:58
And this is, this is, you know, and I appreciate what you're
20:00
saying. Everything looks dark and
20:02
negative and, and horrible at the moment.
20:04
And to a large degree it is. But you know, if, if, if it as
20:11
dark and horrible as it is, if that isn't, you know, motivating
20:16
people to want to to want to change something, then I'm not
20:19
quite sure what does. Yes, but there's a weird,
20:23
there's a weird contradiction because on the one hand, you
20:27
know, people with people disengaging and wanting duck
20:30
stories. If you look at, as we've spoken
20:34
in the past about doing uplifting conversations, people
20:40
don't care. They they just don't click on
20:41
it. They still want that sensation.
20:43
They want that doom scrolling. I think.
20:46
I think I think it's a mistake to to assume that or to suggest
20:51
that everyone is the same here because of course only some
20:54
people are disengaging, other people's are other people are
20:57
engaging. Only some people want the duck
20:59
stories, others actually want something more serious.
21:03
So it, it's, it's very easy in this, in this social media
21:06
world, when, when you know, you people react in particular ways
21:11
to look at that and say, well, that's how it is.
21:13
Because, because actually, even even in this world of social
21:17
media and, and engagement on comments and so on, it's still a
21:24
relatively small proportion of people are doing.
21:26
And the other thing that we haven't mentioned, of course, is
21:28
and, and you know, I understand Vanessa's reaction to a lot of
21:35
this, of course, but but we've got to appreciate that, that
21:39
there are professionals out there who are there to
21:41
specifically 'cause this kind of, you know, somebody posts a
21:46
really insightful comment. There are people that are
21:49
employed to make sure that that that is somehow the rug is
21:52
pulled on out from under that insightful comment.
21:55
It's, it's disparaged and made to appear less important, not
21:59
only through people being employed as so-called
22:04
influencers to do this 24 hours a day, but actually, you know,
22:08
increasingly bots are being deployed to, to, to do this as
22:13
well. So, you know, frankly, the, the,
22:15
the comments on social media are 80% should be just discarded
22:21
because they're, they're an irrelevance.
22:24
And, and this, I think, you know, this comes back to the
22:27
original point. We we've got to learn which of
22:31
which of what we see on social media.
22:33
We should just throw in the bed straight away, yeah.
22:35
But you can't hold on, Mike. You can't just ignore, though,
22:38
because it completely pollutes any type of sane thread that
22:43
might exist that might actually have value.
22:46
It's like kind of it's like having a large amount of dog
22:50
turd on your on your lawn and just leaving it and you know, it
22:55
it, it invites nothing exciting. It's just a mess.
23:01
That that's absolutely true, absolutely true.
23:03
And and of course, you know, I, I completely get the the dilemma
23:08
here of block someone be accused of cancel culture culture or, or
23:13
censorship or whatever. I think we've, I think we've
23:16
increasingly, as John said earlier, got to ignore that it's
23:19
not censorship. It's, it's, it's about having a,
23:23
an adult conversation. And if, if somebody isn't coming
23:26
to you with an adult conversation, they have, no, you
23:29
know, that there are other places they can go.
23:32
But yeah, it, it is, it is tricky.
23:36
I'm not, I'm not trying to, to underestimate how tricky it is.
23:42
Everybody's got their own decisions to make on, on who
23:45
they allow to, as you say, pollute their particular channel
23:51
on social media. And, you know, it's, it's I can
23:57
I, I absolutely see there's a certain irony to what I've just
24:01
said because of course, it could be argued that being kicked off
24:05
YouTube was simply YouTube taking this decision on, on in
24:08
the case of the UK column. So, you know, I'm not suggesting
24:11
that this is a a simple or or that that there's even
24:16
necessarily a right way to deal with the problem.
24:19
Well, I think if, if we're going to split that particular hair, I
24:21
think I, I don't think that does stack up for YouTube because
24:26
they're not, they are not running the conversation.
24:28
They're not, they're not putting the subject out there and in any
24:31
particular way and then inviting people to comment.
24:34
They're just deciding from, you know, once they see what's gone
24:38
out there, whether or not they, they think it should be
24:42
permissible at all. I think that, I think, I think
24:44
that really is a a totally different thing and that they
24:47
shouldn't be given any quarter there.
24:49
But yeah, I mean, I would agree. I would absolutely agree with
24:52
that. I just, I just mentioned that
24:53
because I know somebody else will.
24:55
Yeah, but but also the the other thing I think the other point to
24:58
make and we, you know, I I know this, I've come to learn this
25:02
sort of personally, which I find I do find fascinating is that
25:06
yes, I I knew and going back to Vanessa sort of specific
25:10
frustration. I do appreciate that if you're
25:12
the way in which stuff is set out because it's it sort of
25:16
remains there forever. You know, you one intelligent
25:18
comment followed by five stupid ones, let's say, or, you know,
25:23
maybe stupid is not the right word, but but 5 just
25:25
antagonistic or, you know, pointless detrimental comments
25:30
doesn't look good. But then again, I think we do
25:32
people a disservice to think that they will be swayed by
25:36
seeing something that looks like like your how in the way that
25:41
you're sort of describing a lawn.
25:43
I think people are perfectly capable of seeing who's trying
25:48
to cause trouble and what's a you know what what comment is
25:52
worth consideration. So I think, I think that's,
25:56
that's one of the things and also, I mean as part of the same
25:59
point there are, I mean, let's face it, the absolutely
26:03
overwhelming majority of people that engage with any of this
26:06
stuff don't comment. They only ever look.
26:10
And so it's always, and it doesn't matter what the forum is
26:14
really, but it is always disproportionately skewed in
26:18
favour of those who want to comment.
26:22
And, and that psyche, let's say, has a, has a tendency to attract
26:28
people who just want to cause trouble.
26:30
That's why they do it. So it's the, the whole thing is,
26:35
is, you know, it, it looks very different from how it actually
26:39
is. And the, and the, the reason I
26:40
say that I can qualify that personally is because I put
26:45
stuff out on LinkedIn in particular because, you know,
26:50
OK, for whatever it's worth, LinkedIn describes itself.
26:53
And I think a lot of people who do use it think it is a
26:56
professional network. And therefore it's sort of, you
26:58
know, it's a bit more serious than this, that and the other.
27:01
I mean, yeah, OK, I'm not sure how far one can really go with
27:05
that. It's basically people trying to
27:06
flog stuff is what it really is. But the point is that because
27:11
I've had the advantage or disadvantage of, of doing a
27:15
number of different things in life, I've got a sort of network
27:17
of people from, from, you know, lots of different places, let's
27:21
say. And what I found fascinating
27:24
over the time that I've been involved with UK column is that
27:26
having put stuff out into what seems like a vacuum because
27:28
people are. So there's actually, there
27:31
isn't, there's a serious point that comes out of this, but
27:33
basically it goes into a vacuum. People don't comment really.
27:37
They don't respond. That's changed slightly recently
27:40
with posts about digital identity, which seems to be less
27:44
controversial. And yet when I go out and about
27:50
and see people that I haven't seen for years, or you know,
27:53
that I've known from this, that and the other, they all know
27:57
what it is that I've been doing and what it is that I've been
27:59
pushing out. And by and large, they approve.
28:02
And, and yet I wouldn't, you'd never know that because they
28:05
don't respond. And, and this goes right back to
28:07
the sort of disengagement thing, which is that it's very easy, I
28:11
think, for us to be in the position that we're in where we
28:14
are doing basically as a job. We are sort of discussing this
28:20
stuff, researching it, putting it out and, and, you know,
28:22
trying to help people do the same.
28:25
But if you're not doing that, it's a very, very, it's a, it's
28:29
a hard battle base, both personally and professionally
28:33
to, to be out of kilter with society as it's, as it's sort of
28:39
pushed or directed. And what I mean by that is
28:42
specifically on the professional side of it, you know, in the
28:47
United Kingdom, I, I, I don't like to use the phrase cost of
28:52
living crisis because it's, it's obviously an engineered crisis.
28:56
But the fact is that food, which is an easy one to observe, the
29:01
price of food has gone up a huge amount in the last couple of
29:05
years. So just to the whole thing of
29:08
making ends meet and therefore right, well, how do you actually
29:11
make that work if you're trying to follow a, a course of
29:16
resistance or something that's ideologically driven, when
29:19
actually what it comes down to is can you still eat and pay the
29:23
bills if you're doing the thing that you're doing and that thing
29:26
happens to be supporting a system that you're trying to
29:29
react against? So, you know, a, a, a large,
29:34
large number of people who want to resist are find themselves in
29:38
a situation where they're sort of constrained by the fact that
29:41
they are perhaps in a profession that doesn't actually accord
29:45
with their, with their values. Now when they really think about
29:47
it. But they are in a position where
29:50
where they're struggling to be able to do anything about it.
29:53
And I think that's a problem that can't be dismissed at all.
29:56
Or should, you know, should should be given quite a bit of
29:59
attention. Whereas when we went back to say
30:02
2020-2021, it was kind of universal.
30:04
The idea that liberty had been taken away was universal.
30:07
It happened to everyone. And therefore you didn't, I
30:09
don't think you did risk sort of professional suicide as it were,
30:13
by speaking out against that. And the same thing with, with
30:16
the, with the idea that there was to be a mandatory vaccine.
30:19
Whereas now a lot of the things are, you know, they're a bit
30:22
more oblique and, and therefore I think it's, it's much harder
30:26
going both professionally, as I say, but also personally, you
30:30
know, sort of groups of friends or families and whatnot.
30:32
And I think that that also explains the disengagement.
30:37
Isn't it how we, how we hear about the dangers of, of the
30:42
so-called Chinese social credit system and, and government
30:46
control of behaviours and, and being able to survive in society
30:50
depending on how you behave? When in fact we live in a
30:53
society where we absolutely have to behave in a particular way
30:58
or, or we lose our livelihoods and and so on.
31:01
It's, it's we, we have absolutely 0 awareness of the
31:05
system we actually live in. Yeah.
31:07
Well, well, that this goes absolutely to the heart of it.
31:10
It's both things because that because I would say in our in
31:15
the sphere within which we operate, China has become sort
31:19
of the latest proxy of sort of right.
31:21
Well, you know, if you say anything, if you say anything
31:23
positive about China or anything about China that isn't sort of
31:27
calling out the social credit system.
31:29
And this certainly other than, you know, your controlled
31:30
opposition or your, your sort of somehow, I mean, I don't know
31:34
what you're supposed to be, but but the point is it's getting a
31:36
lot more attention now. And, and it's classic, isn't it?
31:40
Because it, it is absolutely shying away from exactly what
31:44
you describe. It's people who are completely
31:46
ignoring what's happening in this country, or at least maybe
31:50
not ignoring, but not conceding at all that that this is the
31:55
case. And OK, how can I say this with
31:58
any degree of authority, but those sorts of people who are
32:00
saying that and pointing towards, you know, Chinese
32:03
social credit system and this and the other, how many of those
32:05
people are shopping on Amazon and buying all their food in
32:10
supermarkets and, and therefore absolutely perpetuating the
32:15
system that they say they don't want to enter into?
32:18
I mean, it's, you know, it is very, very straightforward.
32:21
OK, I know that slightly goes back to the, the personal
32:24
professional difficulty thing, but not really, you know, and,
32:27
and we, we, this does come up a lot, but, and I appreciate it's,
32:31
it's difficult if you're in a large metropolitan area, but if
32:33
you're not getting hold of proper food from somebody who
32:38
isn't a corporate beer moth is, is not actually that difficult.
32:44
And, and, and is a massive gesture of resistance.
32:50
It really, really is because it cuts out the government and it
32:52
cuts out the corporations. And I, I will continue to bang
32:55
on about this because it is so important and the the effect
32:59
that that can have by by increment is massive.
33:06
Do you think there's a formula or we just constantly going to
33:10
bumble and fumble our way through this?
33:17
That's not a question. Yeah, that's a good one.
33:20
I don't know. I think I would shy away from
33:24
suggesting that there is a formula on the basis that I
33:30
don't believe that. Well, again, we, I know we've
33:33
talked about this before, but I don't believe that a country of
33:37
this size 68 million people and OK, devolution accepted, but but
33:44
I don't believe we should be considered to be sort of 1
33:47
homogeneous body of people that can be run by 1 system.
33:51
And therefore, I don't think sort of by the same token,
33:58
there's really particularly a formula that would work.
34:02
I don't know, that might be a pedantic or maybe I'm not
34:04
exactly understanding what you might mean by formula, but I
34:08
think I think in being prescriptive, sort of saying,
34:10
oh, well, you know, this is how you do it.
34:12
This is this is how you beat the system.
34:14
I think, I think trouble sort of lies there.
34:16
I think people have to absolutely find their own way
34:18
and and because also you that you're sort of straying into
34:22
white knight Donald Trump territory of, you know, someones
34:26
going to save us because, you know, he said, he said, if, if
34:29
you do this, it will all work out well.
34:31
Well, I, I, I don't like the way that that could end really.
34:35
And, and also the other thing is that I think the danger with
34:39
say, a formula is actually it, it, it's sort of it, it
34:43
disempowers to a certain extent because you haven't come up with
34:46
it yourself. You're, you're sort of following
34:48
somebody else's scheme. Are you really invested in it?
34:51
And then if it goes wrong, guess what?
34:52
Somebody else gets the blame. It wasn't your fault.
34:55
You know, you did what you could, but it was someone else's
34:57
fault. And actually, I think we need to
34:58
own everything that goes right, but also everything that goes
35:01
wrong. So yeah, I think, I think
35:04
probably not, but I don't know what.
35:07
What do you have in mind when you say formula?
35:11
I mean, well, I mean, are we going to be having the same
35:13
conversation 25 years from now, you know, with exactly the same
35:18
issues, with exactly the same. Probably not because because a
35:22
number of things, the number of possibilities lie in front of
35:25
us. Nuclear annihilation is
35:27
certainly one of them. So we may not be here in 25
35:30
years, but you know, we, we, we might be living in an absolute
35:36
technocracy with every aspect of our lives controlled, in which
35:41
case we won't be having this conversation either.
35:44
Or we might have decided that actually this is not, neither of
35:47
these options for the future is, is one that we want to pursue
35:51
and, and that we decide actually we want to live the good life or
35:56
however you want to describe it. And, and, and that, that's,
35:59
that. I think, you know, we've said
36:01
this many times on this program, but this is where it begins.
36:05
I don't think there's a formula for it as as as Charles just
36:08
said, I think that this is something that we all have to
36:12
work out for ourselves, but it it simply begins with us.
36:17
You know, we're all we're so many of us are totally caught up
36:20
in the so-called rat race on a hamster wheel, however you want
36:24
to describe it, just trying to keep our heads above water, keep
36:27
food on the table, keep ourselves with a roof over our
36:29
heads. And at some point we've got to,
36:32
instead of coming home from work after a long day and sitting
36:37
down and watching EastEnders or whatever it is, we've got to
36:40
just switch the television off and say, right, what kind of
36:45
life do I actually want? And could I be spending whatever
36:50
free time I have finding the farmer who's prepared to sell me
36:54
sell direct to me or finding somebody else or four or five
36:59
other people that think similarly to the way I do and
37:02
see if we can, we can build some kind of self help group on a
37:07
number of different issues. And it, it begins there at the,
37:10
the, the, the diversions for what are going on are, are
37:15
plenty. We just need to switch the
37:17
television on and sit down in front of it and we can switch
37:19
our brains off again for another than pretend it's not happening.
37:23
So, you know, I, I, I don't say any of this with any
37:27
underestimation of how hard that that is to do, but but it begins
37:31
with a decision. And, and that that's I think the
37:36
only option that people have because, you know, I don't see
37:40
any, any of the futures that are being offered by the so-called
37:44
establishment at the moment are I don't see that any of them
37:47
are, are a future that we want to embrace.
37:51
There's a very interesting sort of byline conversation happening
37:55
there. You mentioned, you know,
37:58
networking with people with whom you have common interests.
38:01
This is something that we've been talking about for years
38:04
now. I think the vaccine, for
38:07
example, brought a lot of people together.
38:10
And I think this feeds into this sort of disengagement thing
38:14
because when you don't have something that's common, then
38:20
you start feeling isolated and then you want to pull back.
38:23
And I think that's why so many people felt like they had found
38:26
a tribe, you know, when the vaccines were being rolled out
38:29
and they suddenly all came together and there was this
38:32
unified cause. And it was a great, it was a
38:35
great moment, you know, in history for a short, for a very
38:39
short while. But then a friend of mine made
38:42
such an interesting comment. He said, Have you noticed that
38:44
though we we all agree on this one talking point, but bring up
38:52
another eight talking points and see if you agree and suddenly
38:56
you agree or nothing. And there's an interesting
39:00
psychology there. I don't know where I'm going
39:01
with this, but but it did it did strike chord with me.
39:06
That made me realize that finding common ground is
39:10
actually quite difficult. Yes, I absolutely agree.
39:15
And I think that has that that has been the undoing of quite a
39:20
lot of sort of initiatives, particularly community based
39:24
initiatives where, you know, in the exactly like you say, the
39:28
sort of the vaccine kind of apogee of that intense vaccine
39:33
pressure and whatnot. There was sort of, you know
39:35
what, we all think the same. We can all go and do the same.
39:38
We all want the same thing. Let's just go to wherever and do
39:42
do that thing and it'll all be fine.
39:44
And actually, the truth of it is it probably won't be, which is
39:50
which is, you know, one level disappointing.
39:52
I think also it's a bit of a reflection into how how we are
39:59
not any good at agreeing to disagree anymore and just
40:03
holding different views, but being able to, you know, sort of
40:06
rub alongside each other. And and actually just to go
40:10
back, going back to the formula, I was thinking what you know on
40:14
the 25 year question, where would we be I think.
40:19
I mean, my sort of what you know, where you were going with
40:22
that? I think I would one would hope
40:25
that there would be small communities sort of dotted
40:29
around all over the place, because human nature is such
40:32
that that the majority are never going to stray too far off
40:36
course. But but small and determined
40:40
minorities might absolutely and should change the course of of
40:44
history, maybe not for everybody, but certainly for
40:46
themselves. And I think the examples, I, I
40:50
suppose this is in a way sort of a formula, but look at the, the
40:54
Amish or the Mennonite communities in particular.
40:58
I think they're such good examples because you could say,
41:00
well, what about the Inuit or something?
41:02
You know, there are lots of populations in parts of the
41:04
world who are effectively doing it completely differently.
41:08
You know, they're self-sufficient.
41:09
They're independent of government corporations that
41:11
have any of the influences on their lives that we are talking
41:15
about now. But I think what's interesting
41:17
about the Amish and, and the Mennonites is that they're in,
41:20
they're in countries where they are absolutely going against the
41:23
prevailing wind. And yet, as far as I'm aware,
41:27
they thrive and they have no requirement for government or
41:33
corporate intervention and, and they still manage to live
41:38
exactly the lives they want to live.
41:40
So I don't mean to suggest that we that is therefore what one
41:45
does in, you know, prescriptive sense, you do exactly those
41:48
things. But but I think the point is
41:51
that you can look to quite significant chunks of society
41:57
and see how they can do it in, in a totally different way that
42:01
does work. So I don't think there should be
42:03
any cause for defeatism at all. And, and, and at a stroke, you
42:08
know, the idea that technocracy is, you know, is, is imminent
42:13
and there's nothing we can do about it.
42:15
I think is, is not the case. It's just, it's a choice.
42:18
And OK, people might react against that.
42:21
Well, I mean, there you are that, that that's your choice,
42:24
you know, So if, if you accept, as I think I'm afraid I do,
42:29
that, that you're, that you're not going to overturn the entire
42:33
system because I don't think there's going to be a, a
42:36
significant growing swell that will make that happen.
42:39
I think that the answer lies in just being able to having the
42:43
wherewithal to operate completely outside it and then
42:47
you cannot be interfered with. And so these sorts of
42:49
discussions in 25 years time would be held in person in
42:53
meeting halls dotted around the around the country.
42:57
Just just to add to that, you know, we're, we're also
43:00
forgetting our history. I mean, you know, Second World
43:02
War, French Resistance, there was no French resistance.
43:05
There was no organization at a national level called the French
43:09
Resistance, right? This is, this is really
43:12
important. Everybody's looking for the big
43:15
hero to come along, whether it be Trump or however, on one
43:18
hand, on the other hand, they're looking for national campaigns.
43:22
And this is not ever, this is not going to work.
43:24
We've got to, we've got to be getting organized at a local
43:27
level. The, the great example is in, in
43:29
recent times that I think it was the work of, of VNR Crane in the
43:35
UK. Many people in other countries
43:37
won't necessarily know who he was, but he was an oil man.
43:42
He, he was, I think one of the first civilians into Iraq after
43:48
Desert Storm and, and it completely changed his view of
43:52
the world because he because of what he saw.
43:55
And there, there are videos online where he talks about
43:58
this. But in later years, because of
44:01
his, his experience in the oil industry, he began when when
44:07
fracking was being discussed as an option for gas generation in
44:13
the UK or gas mining in the UK, he absolutely came out against
44:18
that. And he was undoubtedly a leader
44:23
of the resistance to that particular agenda, corporate
44:27
agenda, but he refused from the beginning to be a leader in the
44:34
sense of a national organization.
44:36
He was absolutely determined that if the fracking companies
44:41
were going into a community, that the community should lead
44:44
the opposition to it. The community should be the
44:46
basis of the resistance. And yes, there were people
44:49
within the anti fracking community who went from site to
44:52
site and campaigned in in each of the places.
44:56
But actually the resistance was local, it was community LED.
45:01
And there was there was never any opportunity for a national
45:05
anti fracking organization to really develop.
45:08
And, and I think that was one of the most successful campaigns
45:12
and it was largely because of his efforts to, to convince
45:15
people to do things in small groups at a local level, not and
45:20
they could cooperate and so on. But, but basically, if we think
45:23
back to the French resistance, each individual resistance cell
45:27
didn't know anything about any other resistance cell.
45:30
And so the, the resistance was able to happen in an autonomous
45:34
way without asking anybody for permission, without any
45:37
opportunity really for the, the Nazis to, to, to infiltrate in,
45:42
in a, in a significant way. I mean, of course, the word
45:45
disasters, but but not, not to the degree that, that, that the
45:50
resistance could not continue to operate.
45:52
And, and this is the way we need to be thinking, we need to
45:54
actually be thinking local and we need to be thinking in tight
45:59
knit groups, small communities. And that then becomes the basis
46:02
for for bigger and better things.
46:04
There's the formula. That that is a formula.
46:06
I'm not saying it's the formula. And, and I mean, you know,
46:09
another great example of that is is Hope Sussex, which was
46:15
established by two or three people to because they were
46:19
unhappy with mainstream education and they have created
46:23
a local, a local organization, which is really a, a, a light
46:31
for anybody that wants to, to, to do something similar.
46:34
It's a great example of of, you know, local organization and and
46:38
producing something that's really valuable.
46:41
Yeah, it absolutely is. And, and, and, you know, it's
46:43
the, it's the asymmetric nature of of any of these things to you
46:47
know, we have, we have one system, you know, a national
46:51
system. Therefore, if you set up a
46:54
national sort of reaction to that or resistance to it, it's
47:00
very, very easy to dismantle because the architecture to
47:03
oppose it is absolutely right there to to match it.
47:06
Doing stuff locally that is at least only loosely connected is
47:10
far, far more difficult for, you know, the authorities or whoever
47:15
it is that wants to try and dismantle that to actually deal
47:17
with so. I just want.
47:19
I just want to add one more point on that because because
47:23
just to just to give you an idea of, of what the anti fracking
47:26
campaigns were up up against, you know what the the man who
47:30
was really one of the the major corporate leaders that was
47:34
attempting to bring fracking to the UK was Jim Ratcliffe.
47:38
Who owns any else? He's certainly, correct me if
47:42
I'm wrong, Charles. He's certainly the richest man
47:44
in this it's corporate head in this country.
47:48
You know that so this was not small scale stuff that that
47:53
these guys were campaigning against and they won.
47:55
And there is no fracking in this country because because they the
47:59
companies gave up. It was too hard for them.
48:00
They couldn't make any progress. So, you know, it is possible to,
48:05
to beat the system of, you know, in that case and, and that can
48:11
be done at a local level with, with, with people of a certain
48:15
age even and, and they can't win.
48:18
So, so you know, we should be taking inspiration from that.
48:24
Yeah, yeah. But so I, I still like that,
48:31
that idea that you were discussing, Mike, the looking
48:36
inward family community, this is something we speak about all the
48:44
time. But I do think it, it is a
48:48
formula. And I think it is a great
48:50
formula because it does lead to, I mean, if you looked at like an
48:55
equation, it does lead to a better, a better result because
49:01
it, it, it feeds into the idea that you start with yourself.
49:08
And as Catherine Fitz, you know, often argues, you change people
49:13
1 by 1. You can't change masses of
49:15
people. It's very difficult to do that.
49:17
But it's easier to change people 1 by 1.
49:20
And you do that when you are in close proximity to yourself and
49:26
the person around you, if that makes sense.
49:28
And, and, and that, that change gradually spreads outwards.
49:34
And I think a lot of people have flipped and they think that they
49:41
want to create this massive change from far away 1st and
49:45
somehow bring it back closer to them.
49:47
I think that's the wrong way around.
49:53
Yeah. Not sure what to say say to
49:57
that. I mean, I absolutely agree.
49:59
I was going to agree, Yeah, Yeah, sorry.
50:01
I was agreeing silently. I was thinking.
50:02
I was thinking of ducks, but agreeing with that, yeah.
50:04
OK, No, no, look. Yeah, but that also, sorry, but
50:08
that also is why people want duck stories because because
50:15
they get so overwhelmed by all the big stuff that they feel
50:19
like they can't change. And so they suddenly disengage
50:23
and, and become reclusive and, and just want to laugh at at, at
50:26
a cat falling off a windowsill. And I think that is, like I said
50:31
in the beginning, I think that is part of the human condition,
50:33
which is why I asked the question about the amount of
50:36
information we can absorb. You believe that we we are able
50:41
to absorb large amounts of information.
50:43
And I think that's a compelling argument.
50:46
But then it comes down to how we filter through that information.
50:50
Yeah, it does. I, I, I would also say, I mean,
50:52
let's not get too hung up on cats falling off window sills.
50:55
But I, I would say that you should be able to do both.
50:57
I think, I think, you know, if you're, if you're going to have
51:00
a rounded existence, then you've got to have the capacity for
51:05
enjoying life. I think a lot of what we talk
51:09
about is really pretty serious. It's, it's profound life choices
51:16
and things that are, you know, are we reckon at least are going
51:21
to determine not just our future, but that of our children
51:24
and grandchildren. That is big stuff and it does
51:28
need to be balanced in that life has got to be fun.
51:33
And if it's not, then that really is something that needs
51:36
to be addressed. If that means the pendulum
51:39
swings further and further towards the cat on or off window
51:44
sill thing, then then yeah, that that's I would say that's a
51:48
that's a concern. But but you know, all of this
51:51
should be with a view to having fun.
51:55
Our event in York was a was a really good example of that.
51:58
We had five talks and auk column panel discussion and the
52:03
subjects raised were incredibly serious and at times grim in so
52:09
far as they they concerned medical ethics and the way in
52:14
which people are systematically destroyed in effect by the
52:18
National Health Service and vaccinations and, you know, all
52:21
sorts of grim stuff. But the but the mood of the day
52:24
was really, really positive. It was, it was a really great
52:29
atmosphere and people had fun. Now, I don't mean that people
52:33
were just there, you know, laughing at the misfortune of
52:36
others. That is absolutely not what I
52:37
mean at all. Just to just to clarify that,
52:40
but but we are, I think, you know, part of our condition is
52:44
to enjoy ourselves and I think we need to concentrate quite a
52:48
lot on doing that. And if that means, you know,
52:52
enjoying a frivolous story about this, that and the other, well,
52:55
I mean, you know, so be it. That's that is I mean, it's
52:57
something we we need to be better at actually.
52:59
But on the on the UK column news, you know, we will when
53:04
time affords get in the last bit will be a, you know, kind of an
53:07
finally story, which is usually funny.
53:11
And and then you know that that is that is an important part of
53:14
it because a lot of what we talk about is very serious and can
53:18
give people the impression that that life is universally sort of
53:22
dismal and we're all going in the wrong direction.
53:24
Well, I didn't believe that for a minute.
53:25
I think we are, I think we need to be aware of all this stuff.
53:28
But there is there is absolutely a way with which we deal with
53:31
it. And, and as we do that part of
53:33
that process, part of any process has to be enjoy, to
53:35
enjoy the, the things that 11 enjoys.
53:39
I mean, you know, life has hilarious moments in it all the
53:42
time. We need to, we need to make sure
53:43
that we're, we're making the most of those as well.
53:45
Because I do think that, you know, one very good way of
53:49
preventing yourself from getting stuff done is to be trapped in a
53:53
sort of negative paradigm. And then absolutely you won't
53:58
achieve stuff if you, you know, really does sort of lift the
54:01
spirits and lift the soul to have that dimension of enjoyment
54:05
and humor and whatnot. And it, you know, it opens your
54:07
mind to all sorts of things and it makes you feel that stuff can
54:09
be can be done and is possible, which is, you know, the the
54:12
going to be the start point for anything.
54:14
So you're recommending speed awareness courses out of?
54:17
France, yeah, I mean actually at top tip they I, I, I, I, you
54:22
know, I may or may not know this via personal experience, but but
54:26
they do offer them by county. So for the sake of argument.
54:30
If you want to do how many caddies are in Britain?
54:32
Yeah. Well, yeah, in terms of the sort
54:35
of 25 year thing, I'm spreading the word.
54:37
I mean, I, I had limited opportunity to to put these
54:40
sorts of views across during the course.
54:41
But but though, you know, we did, we did have a little bit of
54:44
sort of chat. But yeah, so, you know, and this
54:48
should this should come through in any interaction we have with
54:50
people. It's it's a great way to for
54:53
minds to meet, you know, you think when things are sort of
54:56
humorous and lighthearted and whatnot.
54:58
And then you can, you know, of course you can engage with
55:00
serious topics. But I don't think we should be,
55:03
we should not be serious all the time.
55:05
That would be that. That would be, in my view, a
55:08
pity. So what's the moral of the
55:12
story? What's the moral of the story?
55:18
Yeah, Mike. Mike's good on those.
55:19
Go on, Mike. What is the moral of the story?
55:24
The moral of OK? Let me, let me ask.
55:26
Let me ask her differently. My wife's a great example of
55:30
disengaging. You know, she knows what I do.
55:33
And for years and years and years, what I do has almost
55:38
always been negative. Yeah, if you look at what I draw
55:42
or what I speak about, it's always not necessarily negative,
55:47
I suppose, but dark might be a better description, you know?
55:51
And she'll. Yeah.
55:51
A bit, yes, but hold on a second chair for a second.
55:54
For for example, what you just said there was what you draw.
55:58
Well, there is a great example of you dealing with what you see
56:03
around you through the creative process and, and you are in
56:08
effect, you are easing whatever pressure you feel by by actually
56:16
putting out there's something which represents what you're
56:19
seeing in the world that that that in itself is therapeutic.
56:24
Yes, but what I'm saying to you is my wife's a great example of
56:28
looking at a duck story or a cat video.
56:30
You know, she's like, no, no, I'm I'm out this, this, this is
56:35
just too much and not always. But what I mean is that that
56:41
right there is precisely what we've sort of been speaking
56:44
about. And I don't know how you turn
56:46
that around. I can't say no, no, no.
56:48
I think you need to read more about what's happening in
56:51
Ukraine. That doesn't work.
56:54
And also the response would be why?
56:59
Because I know what's going on. What more must I know?
57:02
Do you know what I mean? So that's why I was asking about
57:06
a formula or moral of the story, or if there's some sort of.
57:09
Life story in that case, it's not enough to just know the
57:13
moral of the story is we've got to you know we've we've got to
57:17
use what we know as as a driver for something different.
57:20
And, and we've, we've discussed during some examples during this
57:24
course of this conversation, what, what those, those might be
57:28
the driver of. But, you know, I, I, you, you
57:33
express yourself creatively using, you know, using your
57:38
artwork. Lots of other people have
57:41
creative skills that could be used in this way and use our
57:44
creativity to, to as part of the, as part of the package of
57:48
resistance. But, you know, the moral of the
57:52
story is actually, you know, as I said earlier, and and this is
57:56
by no means a criticism of anybody that has disengaged, but
58:00
they've disengaged from something which is coming
58:02
whether they like it or not. And, and, and now would be the
58:06
time to be resisting, not not after it's too late.
58:09
I. Just want to point out
58:12
something, Charles, I've been quite enjoying the sound of
58:16
your, your chickens in the background and it reminded me
58:20
that I, I had unpasteurized milk this week.
58:23
It's very difficult to get, I think in pretty much every
58:25
country the, you know, the, the government's really, really
58:29
don't want you having unpasteurized milk.
58:32
And, you know, you have to find creative ways to get it.
58:36
And I just, I was just reminded now this team to your chickens
58:38
that we've got unpasteurized milk and I'm alive and so is my
58:43
son and my wife. Isn't it amazing?
58:46
It's a it's a miracle, yes. I mean, that is yeah.
58:51
It that is insane that that absolutely gets to the heart of
58:57
how for, you know, how far wrong things can go and, and indeed
59:03
how gullible people can be. You know, the majority of people
59:08
who've never given the matter any thought would think that you
59:10
would die if you drank raw milk. It's completely absurd.
59:12
But of course, if you do want to and the law says you can't,
59:18
there are ways around it, like having a cow.
59:21
So, you know, all of this can be, can be done.
59:26
It really can. And you know, Scotland,
59:29
bizarrely, raw milk is illegal to sell in Scotland, but doesn't
59:33
mean you can't produce it and it doesn't mean there aren't ways
59:35
in which people can get their hands on it.
59:37
And I think people need to care slightly less about the
59:41
extraordinarily trivial sort of regulations that that say one
59:47
thing and and in a way try to prohibit people from living a
59:52
way of life that they want to live.
59:54
Now, I'm not inciting widespread breaking of laws, but but one
1:00:01
has to read, you know, read into the detail and, and, and find a
1:00:05
way to work around these things. And also it, it doesn't take a
1:00:09
huge amount for the for the system to be overwhelmed.
1:00:13
It really doesn't in, in, in those sorts of instances.
1:00:15
But yeah, no, I mean Royal Mail that that it's a great one as a,
1:00:18
as a sort of as a symbol of. Resistance, I mean, how
1:00:22
ridiculous it sounds, but raw milk is a, is a, has become sort
1:00:25
of emblematic. It really has.
1:00:27
And, and that's fantastic because, you know, just look at
1:00:30
how how the backfire effect works.
1:00:33
OK, it can work for us if we're trying to convince somebody of
1:00:36
something we know. But actually equally it works
1:00:38
exactly the other way around, which is if the, if the
1:00:41
government are heavy-handed with legislation or regulations or
1:00:45
whatever concerning something like raw milk, well, what does
1:00:47
that do? It makes everybody interested in
1:00:49
raw milk. That's brilliant.
1:00:51
Well, that's why I brought it up now because we're coming in for
1:00:54
the landing and I thought it would be a nice uplifting
1:01:00
reminder that you, as Mike, you said earlier, you can make a
1:01:06
difference and and you can make a big difference by making lots
1:01:10
of little differences. One of them would be pushing
1:01:13
back and resisting stupid regulations like milk.
1:01:17
Yeah. That absolutely word you're,
1:01:19
you're, you're so right. But if we want to end with a
1:01:23
with a sort of mantra that we might want to consider living
1:01:26
by, it is embrace inconvenience, because everything is.
1:01:30
Embracing inconvenience I like. Everything that's being thrown
1:01:33
at us is in the name of convenience.
1:01:35
Get your digital ID and make your life very easy.
1:01:37
Have your have your mobile phone with your backing app on it
1:01:41
because that makes life easy. Don't go into a bank branch.
1:01:44
Don't go to a standard till at A at a supermarket.
1:01:48
These are what we're told all the time.
1:01:49
Make sure you use the automated systems.
1:01:51
Don't pick up the phone. If you need to speak to the tax
1:01:53
man, use the automated system. Don't pick up the phone.
1:01:56
If you want to speak to a doctor, use the automated
1:01:59
system. That's that's what's being sold
1:02:01
to us and that's what we need to reject.
1:02:03
And that means embracing inconvenience.
1:02:06
That is such a great tagline, embracing convenience.
1:02:11
Mike, you're quite creative. OK.
1:02:18
On that note, catch up with you guys next week.