The Decline in The UK is Extraordinary With Edward Dutton

Today, the Two Mikes sat down with evolutionary psychologist Edward Dutton to expose the insidious rise of wokeism as a weaponized ideological regime aiming to dismantle Western civilization. Dr. Dutton pulled no punches in tracing the origins of this anti-reality cult, warning that its spread throughout Britain and the U.S. signals nothing short of civilizational suicide. From the collapse of Christianity to the glorification of weakness, Dutton laid out how the woke agenda is ushering in societal collapse, lawlessness, and mass mental illness. Only a return to truth, tradition, and faith, he argues, can break the grip of this neo-pagan tyranny.

Follow Two Mikes on Pickax: https://pickax.com/twomikes

Get your FREE Gold & Silver Guide from My Gold Guy: https://mygoldguy.com/twomikes

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:02):
Hey, listen, we want to thank everybody. You know. We're
going on a fifth year now and five hundred and
fifty plus shows. How do you like that? Go to
the website Network Radio dot Us, Network Radio dot Us
or our website has it all. Toomikes dot Comtomikes dot
com you get everything rumbled Network Radio Freedom first, Maverick

(00:23):
wherever we are, and then you can go to the
America out Loud dot Newsamerica Outloud dot News website and
listen to our show we do every Monday night, Doctor
Mike and I. We do the National Security out We're
the first of five shows. Great host on that network.
By the way, Oh we're cranking man on listener notes
National Security.

Speaker 2 (00:43):
I was right up there.

Speaker 1 (00:43):
But let me tell you something. We want to thank
every one of your people, which is eighty percent in
America and the twenty other twenty percent is around the globe.
We are now one point two the top one point
two percent of podcasts in the world, inclusive America in
the world. Okay, we are now one point two percent

(01:06):
of three million, six hundred thousand podcasts. How's that? Thank
you very much, And on the score we're forty two
or forty five, so that goes from one to one hundred,
so we're halfway. But I mean we rarely kicked ass.
Thank you very very much. No matter where you are
around the globe, on Apple, Rumble, Bumblebee, what you whatever

(01:30):
app you have, We're on every app. Okay, iHeartRadio, We're
on all of them, tune in, you name it. So
we want to thank you, and please go to our
website and look at the archives. A lot of shows,
a lot of good people, great things going on, and
what else housekeeping again always tomikes dot Comtomikes dot com,

(01:52):
you can see our latest shows, and we want to
thank you again one more time. Go to the website
and make a comment on the blog whatever you want
to do, and we appreciate it, and we want to
thank Fiddy once again. Hey, welcome back, Welcome back to

(02:35):
the two mics by four three two one. Hey, I
forgot to do my countdown, but anyway, welcome back to
two mics. Nice rainy day outside the swamp today and
finally we got some good rain in the valley.

Speaker 2 (02:48):
Mike, did you get rained down the valley?

Speaker 3 (02:50):
Very little, colonel? About an hour?

Speaker 1 (02:51):
Oh hours and hours and hours? Well, it was long overdue.
We've been in the eighties and nineties and we had
a hot summer and we're now in September. Tomorrow is
Constitution Day. Nobody remembers that anyway, because it doesn't have
all the alphabet letters in there, and it doesn't work
for a lot of the younger generations. However, we're going

(03:12):
across the pond once more time and we're going to
visit with Ed Dutton, Professor Ed Dutton, who's been with us.
Oh gosh, he hasn't been with us since last November
when he had his book out, so we've been trying
to schedule him a couple of weeks and we got
him back. Ed Dutton, welcome back to two mics.

Speaker 2 (03:27):
Hello, Hello, thank you for having me.

Speaker 1 (03:30):
Yes, sir, it's great to have you the jolly. It's
always good to have the jolly. So Ed, what's new?
I know you went back to the UK for a bit,
and what's new out where you are? Oh?

Speaker 2 (03:41):
Well, I was in the UK a couple of weeks ago,
filming in Birmingham. And sorry, just a second the beginning,
so sorry, Governor live.

Speaker 1 (04:03):
Hell oh he's got an interruption there. Yeah, it's okay.
We'll take a station break and just say good afternoon
of the morning and good evening wherever you are, right?

(04:25):
Is it back with us? Live? Are we okay? There
you go? All right? Did you get an Amazon delivery? No?

Speaker 2 (04:32):
It was my It was my It was my my,
my wife thinking about something. So I don't want to live. Oh,
I sorry about that. No, I went, I went. I
went back to the UK for a week and a bit,
and I was I was filming a documentary or basically
a documentary of what I call the bitcheries of or
Britain's a bitcheries, the astonishing speed at which Britain is declining.
I left. I left the UK twenty years ago and

(04:57):
moved to Finland. And when I did so, the cost
of food in the UK was probably about sixty percent
less than it is here, and the cost of booze
was probably about double in the UK what it is here.
And now those prices in Finland and the UK are
the same to me. Now, there's not there's no, there's no.

(05:20):
It's not like the UK has suddenly become richer and
salaries have gone up or anything like that. No, if anything. Actually,
I was looking in my local supermarket and and comparing
it to what I've seen in the UK, and I
realized that it's probably cheaper in Finland. And Finland is
a country that has to import everything, or almost everything.
Finland is a very cold country. There's so many costs

(05:41):
that are imposed, heating in the winter, very sparse population,
all this kind of thing, and even so things are
essentially more expensive in the UK. And not only that,
but everywhere you see evidence of criminality. So you have
a bottle of wine and it'll have a special electric
tag on it so people don't steal it. Even cheese

(06:02):
in some shops has electric tags on it so people
don't steal it. You see people camping out in the street.
This is a very very new thing in the UK.
You don't see this at all. Infant them what they
wouldn't survive the winter here, but people just camping out
in the street. I last saw this level of homelessness.
In fact, it wasn't as bad as this in the
nineteen eighties when I was a kid, and then after

(06:25):
that it stopped. You didn't really see homeless people. It
is very much back and they have these tents now
that you don't need to pitch, so they just put
them in the street and weigh them down, and it
is all over the place. The country is just is collapsing.

Speaker 1 (06:39):
It sounds like Oakland, California, and what was in DC,
A lot of DC just up until recently when Trump
put the National Gardens in the streets.

Speaker 2 (06:49):
There are parts of the country I've not actually been there,
but there are parts of the country I'm told around Bristol,
near a park in Bristol that are literally like ok
from California. I was in Oakland, California a couple of
years ago, and all along the streets it's just caravans
and whatever and people living in them and so forth.

(07:10):
Scores and scores of these caravans, and I'm told there.
I didn't say it like that in London, but apparently
in other parts of the country you do have that
as well, is like Oakland, California. And it has happened
with such breathtaking speed. I mean really in the last
sort of five or six years, maybe the last ten years,

(07:31):
and I have never every time I go back there,
it's worse. And then you had also while I was there,
the flying of England flags all over the place. Now
that kind of thing happens that's kind of boundary recognition.
That kind of thing happens when you're on the verge

(07:51):
of something coming apart, when you're on the verge of well,
according to some theories, that's the first step into a
civil war. If you look at the work of a
sort of Charles Tilly and people like this, they boundary
activation between two groups and needing to assert that this
is Britain, this is England, and flying your flag, which
we don't do in the UK. We don't do that.

(08:11):
It's considered a bit pretentious and tratish to do that.
It's the kind of thing that America does flying the flag.
I mean even even in one of your sort of
images you have on your screen. Now you've got the
American flag, one of you, Colonel Mike has and then
and then and then also just small countries that fear
being swallowed up and need to assert themselves. It's not
what England does. But no England is doing that, which

(08:32):
implies it fears being destroyed, and so you have flags
being raised in this way you have. Another component of
civil war is brokerage. That's groups that weren't formally together
coming together or seeing that for example, transvatical exclusion of
feminists joining the basically what you might call the far
right and pursuit of the same goals. Clearly there's massive polarization.

(08:53):
So it's it's really it's shocking to go there because
I don't I live away from there. I go there
every few months. I don't tend to go much outside
of London when I do go there. To to go
to Birmingham, to go to the provinces really really opened
my eyes as to how bad things are getting that
you know ed.

Speaker 1 (09:11):
We have a show on public television here Michael Knows.
It's called Rick Steve's Europe, and they keep running these
recycled things that were filmed probably in the nineteen eighties
or early nineties, you know, when you went to Europe,
and he goes to all the countries in Europe, many
cities and so on, and the food and the culture
and the dance. You know, it's all the pomp and

(09:33):
the fluff of somebody wanting to go to Europe and
enjoy a vacation in Europe. And just what two nights ago,
I think he was in Seville, Spain, you know, and
this is a very old show. You could tell by
the haircuts, the shows and whatnot. But they keep running
these things as if it's the best place to go now,
you know, and he's in Scotland, he's in England, and

(09:54):
I'm like, wait a minute, you're not even showing what
the truth is. I mean, it's just a recycle because
PBS has lost a lot of federal funding that wasn't
supposed to be there forever, and now they have to
you know, they're pimping anything they'll sell, you know, they'll
sell seashells, you know, with the letters PBS on it,
just to raise money. Every other show they'll tell you

(10:15):
the federal government has cut funding. Well, the federal government
had no business there. It was in sixty seven with LBJ,
when you know, technology and media was much different than now.
You know, so and we know what's going on. Just
yesterday I saw another clip on YouTube where the Polish
leader was in England and there was I don't know

(10:37):
how many how many millions of people were marching and
he's saying, raise your flags, raise your flags because they
had the Polish flag and the UK flag. It's like,
you know, we want to take back Europe. But I
think it's beyond that. It's like America. I mean, for
it's got to be a total miracle, like an asteroid
from God in order to get this place back in order.
It probably has to hit in the middle of the country,

(10:58):
but I don't see one.

Speaker 2 (11:00):
I think it's very interesting at the moment is the
way that Trump and Vance they really get it with
regard to what's happening in Europe, and in particular what's
happening in the UK, because obviously they have a special
interest in the UKA, because America can be argued to
really be kind of a kind of you know, England
West or the Yeoman Republic or whatever. I mean that
used to be its self perception as the kind of

(11:21):
true pre Norman England preserved under Perma Frost, and people
like George Wallace would talk about his state being the
Anglo Saxon Southlands, things like this. So there's that both
of them. I mean, certainly Trump is a Scottish in
the anyway, so he has a personal interest. But it's
very interesting. And Trump's of course in the UK today,

(11:43):
and it's very interesting the way that he that they
have twice humiliated Starmer, and Starmer is anti free speech.
Starmer is a left wing authoritarian. Starmer is woke. Starmer
is usterly left wing partisan. Starmer has no interest in
the traditions and freedoms of Britain whatsoever. He is basically
a traitor. And they have twice publicly pulled him up

(12:06):
on free speech in Britain, and they have basically left
him saying, kind of squirming, saying we have a long
free speech in Britain. We're very proud of it. And
you know, he just has to say that, and of
course doesn't mean it, because he has. Although there were
vague laws there that basically criminalized free speeches that were
passed in eighty six, the culture was such that they

(12:26):
were never really enforced. But they've managed to change the
culture such that they now are inforced. And you jail
people like Lucy Connelly for mean silly tweets or whatever,
as he did, and he said, you will be found
and you will be jailed, and you will you know you,
I mean, he basically corrupted the legal system during the
riots in the summer of twenty twenty four by saying
that and pressure judges and pressured people to plead guilty

(12:48):
and all this sort of thing. But he has been
twice humiliated by them with regard to free speech, and
you can see that it is it's not even sending
a very subtle message that America is extremely unhappy with
the situation in the UK, or at least this raised.
This government in America is extremely unhappy with the situation
in the UK. This government is quite an ideological American

(13:11):
constitution government.

Speaker 1 (13:13):
I think that.

Speaker 2 (13:15):
You know, sanctifies, as it were, the Constitution and things
like free speech and gun rights to obviously a much
greater extent than Democrats or traditional Republican incumbents. And they're
basically and they have even written in their well, it's
not CIA report, what's the name of the report that
they do, that free speech is under threat in the UK.
So they're sending a clear message that they're not happy

(13:35):
about this, which is very interesting because America wanted to
completely destroy the British economy and the left are very
frightened of this, and they're basically accusing Trump and accusing
Elon Musk as well of interfering in British democracy and
not respecting British independence, as though the leftist is the
patriot that really cares about Britain and the person on

(13:55):
the right is a traitor that wants America to invade.
You know, frankly, I do wish, I really do that
Donald Trump would just say, look, we don't know what
the hell's happened to the fatherland, to our father. He's
going a bit SENI I was going a bit crazy,
and the already quite old side is going to have
to go back in there and sort it out. And
I wish they would. I wish America would just invade

(14:17):
the UK and impose upon it a First Amendment.

Speaker 1 (14:21):
I just think they're allowing Putent to just taunt them
to death.

Speaker 2 (14:31):
There are areas in which I imagine there is greater
freedom of expression in Russia than in the UK. I mean, okay,
Inshi basically can't criticize. You can't criticize the government, at
least not in much detail. But the government is not
going to come down on you, or the government's paid
mobs are not going to come down down you and
destroy your life for stating basic empirical facts like a

(14:52):
man is a man and a woman is a woman.
But in Britain there's a degree to which you can
still lose your job through indirect pressure that is perfectly
legal for saying things like that. So the state of Britain,
the absolute state of Britain in the year since all
the just under a year since we last spoke, it
really has tremendously declined. And now it's revealed that the

(15:16):
Prime Minister himself is clearly corrupt. We can speculate on why,
but that he was clearly told, and he would have
been told. He would have been told that Peter Mandelsson,
the person whom he appointed as American Ambassador and the
person who twice had to resign before for being seriously dodgy,
had remained friends with Epstein after Epstein was convicted for

(15:39):
child sex abuse, and he would have known that there's
the the vetting of somebody as important as the ambassador
to the United States would have been extremely thorough. So
Starmer would have known that this guy was consorting with
a convicted nons, a convicted pedophile, and would have don't matter,

(16:00):
We'll just appoint him anywhere. No, we'll find out, not
a problem. So himself is under a lot of pressure.
He is a quite extraordinary man, I think, rather broken man.
From what I understand it. He had a very very
ill mother all throughout his childhood who had very severe arthritis,
and this had to basically dominate his childhood and he
had to look after her, and this kind of parentified him,

(16:22):
kind of turned him into a parent. And that process
does havoc to people's mental health because it puts them
under pressures that they shouldn't be underwen their children, and
so they don't learn that the world is a comforting,
kind place upon which you can rely. And I think
that may be true with him. And so he's this
rigid person who claims not to have a favorite poem
or favorite novel or be creative in any way. And

(16:45):
I think he's in trouble and might go quite soon.
But yeah, that's the main change in the last year.
In regard to the UK, the decline is extraordinary. And
I've been to America many. I went to America in
twenty thirteen. I went there again in in twenty twenty three,

(17:05):
and if I compare, for example, in both cases, I
was in a place called Intercourse, Pennsylvania.

Speaker 1 (17:11):
Oh I heard of that. Yes, there's shirts with that. Yes,
it's near Lancaster, that's.

Speaker 2 (17:15):
Right, that's right. And the next town, the next town
on up the here is called paradise if you have intercourse. Yeah,
but that hadn't changed. Now, okay, Armish don't really change that.
But wellthough they had changed a little bit. So in
the ten years they'd started wearing sunglasses and they started
using scooters. So you have these little girls in seventeenth

(17:37):
century dresses, but they have sunglasses on and they're on scooters.
But otherwise among the English, among the English of Intercourse Pennsylvania,
there was no dramatic change. And there certainly weren't people
living in the bloody street, and there certainly weren't migrant
hotels full of young rape men. That's another change that's
happened in the last couple of years in the UK,

(17:58):
which is that you have all these fake bake asylum
seekers coming in on small boats and of course are
woke infested, woke biased judiciary does absolutely nothing about it
and just lets them in, even though they come from France,
which is a safe country, and they had nowhere to
put them, and so they put them up in hotels.
And this has had.

Speaker 1 (18:18):
The interesting isn't that amazing? We did it in America
here with Biden uh Mariorcus, the Secretary of Homeland Security,
which was really insecurity. They flew in these people and
they put them in you know, three four five star
hotels New York City, paying enormous you know, maximum fees,
no discounts, you know, and they direct these hotels. And

(18:40):
why wouldn't you do that for your own homeless people.
Both of our countries did the same thing.

Speaker 2 (18:44):
Why, oh, well, that makes a great deal of sense
if you're a leftist. Well, there's a number of reasons
for that. I mean, in terms of the evolutionary psychology. Firstly,
the leftist conception of its moral circle is not people
that are close to you. It is a genetically it's
people that are more distant from you, and you collaborate
with those more distant people and in order to gain

(19:06):
power over your own people. But it's a subtle, it's
a covert means of gaining power. What you do is
you go on not about how much you care about
the marginalized, how much you care about the dispossessed, and
that's what you're motivated by. But actually what's going on
is a treasonous desire to collaborate with a foreign group
against your own group, to get power over your own

(19:28):
group and not get caught doing it. And that's the
brilliance of identifying with people that you can say are marginalized,
are generically distant from you, are a bit other, because
then you can't be accused of being selfish, because look,
you're just being terribly, terribly nice. These people are marginalized.
These people are the poor foreigners in your own land,
or if you're upper class and you're like this, these
people are the working class in your own land. That's

(19:49):
the first reason. The second reason is that if someone
is something is distant from you other, you kind of
romanticize it more. You can romanticize it, you can imbue
it with positive things in a way that you can't
something that is close to you. And the third reason
is that our own poor, unless we can, unless there's
some reason to obviate this, such as that we can

(20:11):
collaborate with them to dominate our own social class or whatever,
will fill us with disgust. And there's evidence that we
we perceive more harshly our own poor than we do
foreign poor. We romanticize foreign poor, even down to things
like judging how diseased or not diseased a face is,

(20:38):
or how ugly or not ugly a faces. Objectively speaking,
symmetrical that kind of thing. We will adjudge something from
our in group more harshly than someone from our outgroup.
There have been studies on this, and this is probably
partly that you romanticize an outgroup, maybe partly a kind

(20:58):
of self correction that we're imbued with anti racism, and
so we are automatically nicer to the foreign group unconsciously,
but partly because we can just perceive more detail and
more nuanced in a member of our in group. We
can read the signs better. We can probably read the
signs of let's say, poor genetic health in a white
face as white people than we can in a black face.

(21:22):
And so for all of these reasons, we will judge
a poor member of our in group more harshly. You
can't romanticize that person and say, oh, they're a struggling foreigner.
You will say to yourself, this person has at every opportunity,
particularly in a meritocracy, and they're poor, and therefore they
fill us with a sense of disgust, which is quite

(21:43):
difficult to overcome. And if you're a leftist, remember then
you are more attracted to someone that's sharely distant from
you than someone that's similar. And so in that sense,
a person who is poor, a white poor person, will
fill you with even more disgust than would be the
if you were if you were if you were right wing.
And also they will highlight in many ways the problems

(22:06):
with your ideology and how it doesn't work. And this
will cause cognitive dissonance, and this will make you hate
them and be disgusted by them and want to get
out of the way. And so they will fill you
with with with with even more disgust. And also perhaps
you you associate them with tradition and something old fashioned
because they're not foreign and so and and so you're

(22:28):
disgusted by them. So that makes perfect sense to me
that that the left want to treat foreigners better than
the poor of their own people. I think there's a
degree to which leftists, because the poor, the white paw
tends towards having views that are very different from those
of leftists, tend to having towards having traditional, old fashioned
kind of views on many kinds of things, then they

(22:50):
fill them with you with a great deal of disgust.
They are they are morally repellent to them. They're also
more prone to violence and than most other members of society.
And if you think that, if you are left wing
on average, you're mentally unstable, you're paranoid, you are physically short,
you are physically weak, you are low in genetic health,

(23:11):
you can't really defend yourself. Then these people are gonna
be particularly frightening and that's particularly disgusting to you in
a way that would be less the case with foreigners,
whom you can romanticize.

Speaker 1 (23:23):
Oh my gosh, that's it. I'm telling you, that is great.
I'm gonna I'm gonna take a sound about it. So
is that how they come to the to the point
where they elect this guy the mayor of London. They
look at this and say, well, we need one of these.
You see, we're having that same problem right now in
New York City. They're trying to get this guy of
Madani or whatever his name is, who's like a social leftist,

(23:46):
a liar of every caliber, you know, every every every
caliber you could be a liar of, and money is
pouring in from around the globe to organizations to get
him elected because he's going to give you everything you
ever wanted and you're not gonna have to pay for it.
How many times we heard that in our lifetime right.

Speaker 2 (24:04):
Well, as Margaret Perapser said, the problem the socialism is
eventually you run out of.

Speaker 1 (24:07):
Money before not people's money. Okay, listen, since we met Mike,
Mike knows this. I watched every and I didn't even
know this movie was made, this series was made because
it was replayed on Netflix. Originally, I think it was
probably filmed I guess twenty sixteen or something like that. However,
I was at a friend's house and they had it on.

(24:28):
I said, oh, this looks interesting. I actually got to
watch The Crown. Did you ever see The Crown years?
And have? Oh my gosh, I mean that is it
was an addiction for me. And I'm not a big
guy on you know, I don't watch a lot of movies.
I watched certain movies, but anyway, it was great. I
just thought these actresses were great, everyone at every stage

(24:48):
of Elizabeth Queen Elizabeth's life, and I think my favorite
really was the second one until the third one came
in and really smashed it out of the park. As
we say, but that series was just unbelievab. And then
you look at today and you say, well, you know,
she spoke about tradition and tradition, establishment, tradition. You know,
Charlie was in a flux all the time about you know, modernization.

(25:10):
Now he's the king and he doesn't see anything. What
does he got morse blinders on what's the deal? You know?

Speaker 2 (25:16):
Even with that series, you notice that they make everything
about twenty years ahead of it of how it was
in terms of multiculturalism, in terms of multism. So you
have a London of the nineteen sixties that would have
been overwhelmingly white, and they make it look like a
London of the nineteen eighties, and the London of the
nineteen eighties they make it look like basically about now

(25:40):
and then the London of you know, and so on.
It's absolutely preposterous the way they do that. Yeah. I
had two friends of mine when I was at university
were in that actually were in the crowd Tom Parker
Bowls in the second series that has an affair with
Princess Anne was played by a chap called Andy Buckham

(26:03):
Andy Bookham, who was Northern and with with with whom
I was at university. And then the Queen's head servant
was Private Secretary Martin Charts.

Speaker 1 (26:18):
Yeah, he was he was a great actor.

Speaker 2 (26:20):
He's played by a chap called Harry Hayden Payden who
was my who I was in. I used to write
comedy sketches for a thing called the Durham Review and
he was in the Darren Review. But it's a it's
a it's a very interesting series. It takes enormous liberties
with the truth, absolutely enormous liberties with bells hanging off them.

(26:40):
I mean, it's it's absolutely ludicrous. I think I think
that you should be able to watch that and it
should be roughly consistent with kind of what happened. But no,
it takes incredible liberties with the truth. But yeah, you're, you're, you're.
I do think it's portrayal of Charles is quite reasonable.

Speaker 1 (26:56):
Yes, as this quite it's quite That's a great actor,
both of them. But I think the the last Charles
was a great actor. He did I think the Victor
Hugo on Leibs. He was that actor. And they're a
great actor and he also did like a nineteen forties
BBC kind of production. And just the actors, I mean,

(27:17):
they're just tremendous actors and actresses in here. The one
who played Margaret Thatcher she's a treumendous You would dig
its stature, would lighter hair, you would know the dishes.
That's fantastic, you know.

Speaker 2 (27:28):
You mean you mean the woman out of the X Files.

Speaker 1 (27:30):
Yes, yes, the X Files.

Speaker 2 (27:32):
Yes, yes, I mean that was. That was a Yes,
that was. It was certainly quite a quite a difficult
role to go and play, and a lot of a
lot to request. But that's I mean, that's the I mean,
going back to Margaret Thatcher, I mean, if you go
back to the nineteen eighties, the disbelief that this could
ever have happened in the UK, but it did happen
in the UK. It's almost like there was this build

(27:54):
up of left wing resentment because of the Thatcher major era,
when in some respect things there was a sort of
movement back against runaway individualism, a movement back against the
leftism and the insanity of the seventies, because it had
got us to this incredible place where nothing worked, where
everything was dominated by the unions, where the country was
the poor sick man of Europe, where there was total

(28:15):
sexual libertinism, and attempts to sort of normalize pedophilia on
the part by the way of a group in which
Harriet Harmon, who was Deputy Prime Minister, was involved, and
then there was this strong reaction against it, and then
under the bubbling under the surface was this leftist fury
that was kind of gradually released from the second of

(28:37):
May nineteen ninety seven onwards, and they engaged in a
march to the institutions all the time with this smiling
Tony Blair at the head of it, so that it
wasn't very He had some very nasty, bitter, resentful ex
communists such as Peter Manerlson he was a member of
the Communist Party when he was younger behind him, and

(28:57):
they managed to engage in a cultural revolution and take
just as the labor did in the forties, such that
when the Conservatives got back into power in the fifties
and sixties, there was nothing they could do, really that
their hands were tied. And it was the same with
the Conservative Party when they got back into power in
twenty ten. There was nothing they could do. Their hands
were tied by basically a woke state, by a Blairite state,

(29:18):
where in order to be a judge you had to
swear fealty to wocism, where in order to do any
kind of profession successfully you had to swear fealty to Wocism,
where the whole system was set up almost like England
under the penal laws, where you had to be Anglican
in order to be engaged in any kind of profession.

(29:39):
They'd taken over everything, the universities, the Union, absolutely everything,
and that is still the case. And what that's brought about,
and I guess you have it in America as well,
but you have slightly more protection of freedom of speech
at least in law, even if they can destroy you
in terms of public organizations or whatever happens to be

(29:59):
is a parallel well, the rise of almost of a
parallel state, like a parallel academia and anti what are
you going to call it? An anti academia of counciled academics,
A bit like the dissenting academies that you had when
Oxford and Cambridge and Durham were dominated by the Church
of England into eighteen seventy one and just dissenting groups

(30:20):
and then just polarization. And once those groups start meeting up,
once people start realizing that people have got their back
other people agree with them, then this emboldens them and
you and they can protect each other, and you end
up with really kind of parallel societies, which the Internet
has made even worse. It's made into echo chambers. And

(30:42):
that's why I think that there is a case, if
no more than that, for this idea that they are
constantly talking about at the moment in the British press,
which is that we are on the on the edge
of some kind of civil war.

Speaker 1 (30:55):
That is true? And is it true with some of
these cities we see on the internet where there's gigantic
populations of Muslims from let's say Bangladesh, Packlstein that they
could actually overrun let's say a city like Birmingham or something.
Who could overrun it the Muslims? I don't.

Speaker 2 (31:15):
I mean, it's not really whether they overrun it. By
which you mean that, I don't know what that means
that they control the town hall or the organs of
the I think is yeah, they didn't need to do that.
What they what they can do, and they have them.
I went to one I went to an area called
Spabrook and there it called spark Ill. It's almost completely Muslim.

(31:38):
I walked around there wearing Muslim clothes, which they seem
to like, and that they were sort of coming up
to me in saying respects and keeping their car horns
at me and thumbs up and all this. And they
liked it because the white man walking around wearing their clothes,
you know. But but but of course in the way
it was conceding that this is your area, and I'm
wearing your clothes. And I think that that was what

(31:58):
they liked. And that's what broke the tenttrum because I
had a friend, a female friend, that walked around that
whole area a few days earlier, and people were very
hostile to her, and it was kind of made tacitly
stared at her, you know, and it was kind of
made tacitly clear that you shouldn't, particularly as a woman,
you should not be here. Get out, whereas when I
was there as a man, and as a man with

(32:20):
these clothes on and filming, they were very very friendly
to me. But you know, that was on certain provisers.
What it doesn't really matter what the law says. Towards
the winter of civilization. What you will get is a
breakdown in the ability and even the desire to enforce
the law. And what you get is de facto separate

(32:43):
entities to facto enclaves where English law is not in
charge of things. That's what you start to get break up.
And this is definitely already happening, and then and has happened. Okay,
there there are there's always been, I mean the East
End of London in the fifties or whatever. The police
didn't control this. Now these areas are all Muslim, but

(33:04):
back when they were white, there was intense distrust of
the police on the part of the Cockneys. You did
not go to the police if there was a problem,
that you were a grass and you were bad. And
so the people that ran, really seriously ran certain parts
of London would be protection rackets, like the Craze and
the Richardsons, and you've obviously got that now in parts
of the UK these people. All the shops are Indian

(33:27):
or Pakistani. They're all selling Pakistani things. There's no chain
stores in these places. It's like the subcontinent. They're all
independent little shops. Everybody is basically from everybody. In certain
areas like this with Berbinger is from Pakistan. There's a
number of mosques and they just ruled themselves and I

(33:48):
doubt they would have anything to do with the police
or anything to do with the broader authorities. And there's
also seek areas that are basically quite like this, although
the seeks are less hostile to the native population. I
went to a number of Sikh areas. You know, if
you go to a goodwara, which is a Sikh temple,
they give you free meals. They'll just give you a
free meal. Don't if you go to a cheap hotel

(34:09):
in Birmingham where breakfast is extra on top of the room,
don't pay for breakfast. Just go to a goodwara and
get a free breakfast, oh wow, and free tea. So
and Hindus to some extent perhaps the same that there
weren't so many of those in Birmingham, but in Leicester,
where I was a few months ago, there were. So

(34:30):
it doesn't really matter if they take power. The question
is who has real power on the ground, Who has
de facto power to get to jura power? Who has
de facto power in everyday life in a crisis, if
you've got an area where there's a problem, do you
go to the police or do you go to the
local you know, the local chap, the local gangland leader

(34:52):
or what or the Imam or whatever whoever's hold sway.
And that's definitely what's happening in parts of the UK.
So there can be as it's like in America, the parallel. Yeah,
there can be as much of a central state as
you like. I mean in theory under you know, until
the mid sixties, these Southern states were under the rule

(35:13):
of the central United States government. These Southern states like
Mississippi and whatever, they had Jim Crow laws that were
completely unconstitutional that nobody did anything about it. They were
just sort of left alone. They were just left alone
to be, in a sense, their own de facto separate
countries with their own system of doing things and their

(35:35):
own laws, and for economic reasons or just not to
lock the boat, or for political reasons, that they were
just left alone until the sixty they just left them
alone to do what they wanted. And that's it's like that,
that's that's what happens when the central civilizational node of
control loses control.

Speaker 1 (35:56):
Go ahead, Mike, let me hear from you.

Speaker 3 (35:57):
I don't hear from you, And I just like to
ask her, are you surprised or is it just part
of the process that's going on in the UK that
the fierceness of the Irish in Spanish over the course
of history against that kind of rule from Britain was extraordinary,

(36:19):
and now they seem to be kind of the pets
of the walk.

Speaker 2 (36:24):
I don't that doesn't that doesn't surprise me at all.
It's it's exactly what it's exactly what I would predict.
So I don't know if you're familiar with AA Phillips
and this concept of cultural cringe. So he looks, he
looks Australia in relation to the UK and their their
kind of relationship. But you might equally look at Ireland

(36:48):
in relation to England, or Scotland in relation to England,
which is that you can fiercely object to being ruled
by a foreign power like that, but is generically availably
close to you. And in the case of the Irish,
who partly because they had a different denomination of Christianity

(37:08):
partly and they were therefore very heavily discriminated against them whatever,
and they weren't independent, whereas the Scottish effectively kind of
much more kind of independent. Then yeah, you have this
big fight for for Irish independence, and they get Irish independence,
and they create a and nationalism in that context is
a left wing thing. The two kinds of Irish nationalist

(37:30):
One is basically the traitors i Anglo Irish people, left
wing Anglo Irish people, English people, essentially people like W. B.
Yates who identify with the genetically distant group and the
supposedly marginalized group and collaborate with that group in order

(37:52):
to get power for themselves. There's that kind of person
that's that's the left wing person, the left wing person
of their day. That's the equivalent of the upper class
member of the activist in the Labor Party. And then
there's just left wing people, you know, where it's just
in their interests to be left wing because they really
are oppressed the native Irish of the day, and they

(38:13):
collaborate to overthrow the British and then the British. The
Irishness then becomes the state ideology. Irishness is then the
conservatism really of their nation. But there's still this sense
of inferiority. There's still this sense of being lesser to England,

(38:33):
of looking up to England, of admiring England, of feeling
inferior to England, of the England's the big boy next
door that really matters, and you find that psychologically, how
do people deal with that? And it's also actually how
middle class people seem to deal with being middle class
as opposed to being upper class. How do you deal

(38:53):
with the fact that you're neck to someone that's more
important to you, is basically better than you and more
successful than you. What is your cope? And there tends
to be two kinds of cope in my experience. One
is to say, well, I may not be rich and
important and whatever, but at least I'm moral. At least
I'm moral, at least I'm morally good. And the other

(39:16):
I may not be rich and important or whatever, but
at least I'm tough. I'm physically tough and can win
one on one fights. Those are the two copes, and
that seems to me the working class people their cope
is at least I'm tough and whatever, and middle class
people or at least I'm moral and whatever in relation

(39:37):
to the upper class. And you get this at the
level of nations again and again and again. The Finish
sense of national self in comparison to Sweden It's former
ruler is we Fins are more moral and more and
more manly than our Swedes, and they actually have this

(39:57):
saying Alice FENSKOI a whole missex you, which is the
all Swedish boys are gay. And another one it's kind
of an ironic thing. It's again said in Swedish by
Finns said fulk batter folk. Swedish folk better folk. And
they go on and on about how moral they are
and how sort of educated they are, whereas upper class

(40:19):
people they don't care about being educated. Particularly they don't
go to post universities to get a degree. They go
to post universities for the social life. And they don't
care about the kind of morality the middle class will
care about, you know, they'll go hunting and kill God's
creatures and whatever. And it's the middle class that will
campaign against this and say are terribly cruel atters, So

(40:40):
you could it. Therefore, doesn't surprise me that the way
that the Irish or the Scottish sense of national self
works is to try to outdo the English in terms
of morality and religion. So they were always more religious
than us, they were always whatever. And then when the
morality change, the broader changed from being a conservative morality

(41:03):
which prizes religiosity, the traditional religiosity. When it's flipped over
in the sixties to being this new morality which prize
is basically being woke, then they of course will want
to outdo the English in being as woke as we
are more woke than you, and that's that is, and

(41:23):
of course they can afford to be as well, because
certainly in the case of scotland's about ninety five percent white.
So it's just hollow virtue signaling about how anti racist
you are. You're some scott that lives in the town
that's ninety nine percent or whatever Scottish you you never
you experienced all the good sides of it.

Speaker 3 (41:39):
I e.

Speaker 2 (41:39):
Curry and none of the bad sides of it. I
eat everything else. And so of course you can engage
in this pathetic, hollow virtue signaling to try to deal
with your low self esteem up being from a small
nation that's done nothing important in the last couple of
hundred years. So that's why it doesn't surprise me at all,
and it doesn't surprise me at all the Ireland has
done the same thing, which it has done for exactly

(42:01):
the same reasons.

Speaker 3 (42:04):
What do you think, you know, those we call globalists,
do you think it's surprises to them that they hit
such an easy pushover of the UK, of the United States,
of Canada, of Australia, New Zealand. It looks like they
wanted to put the troublemakers out of business first.

Speaker 2 (42:22):
Well, when you say it's a pushover, this implies a
certain model, almost a conspiratorial model, whereby there are certain
sort of very evil elites, almost like Sabbatian Francists or something,
very evil elites that are trying to do evil things
for their own selfish reasons. I think that there may

(42:45):
be a part of that. I do agree with elite
theory to some extent, pereto and whatever. I do agree
that a lot of what we see as social change
is not bottom up, and it does a lot of
it does come from the top and is pushed by
the top. And I think there is a degree to
which culture is downstream of law, and that is evidenced
by the way in the fact that the Public Order

(43:06):
Act ninet eighty six is being used again and again
now in England, now that the culture has changed and
culturally because of the rise of the power of women.
I suspect in part and also the presence of ethnic minorities.
We are less in favor of free speech than we
used to be. But for a long time there was

(43:27):
the possibility to prosecute people for things like Lucy Comedy
was prosecuted for under the Public Order Act eighty six,
but that did not happen because the culture was just
so against it. The culture was so pro free speech.
But I also think these are partly changes that come
from the bottom as well. There's been a shift in

(43:47):
the nature of the population, a genetic shift partly that's
been going on since the indust Revolution, whereby under dush Revolution,
we were selecting for a fitness factor that was composed
of essentially conservatism being group oriented, religiosity which basically from
being group oriented, mental health which is associated with conservatism,

(44:08):
and veigiosity, physical health likewise, and these things were and intelligence,
but that's quite a slightly separate issue, and these things
were all being selected for. Chardbortality is fifty percent a
we are basically under harsh conditions. If you're rich and
therefore intelligent and therefore mentally and physically healthy, etcetera. Of
things that predict so too with cook status, then you're

(44:28):
more likely to survive. And so we know that we
were bootstrapping the population every generation that the rich of
fifty percent of the population had double the complete to fertility.
The poor of fifty percent of population in the sixteen
hundreds were that the population was being self genocided by
its ruling class every generation. Now this this reverses for
various reasons with industrial revolution, chard moortality collapses. So the

(44:52):
low intelligence the unhealthy are no longer being selected out
to the same extent, and then people that are more
intelligent and more healthy they come dysphoric because intelligence is
associated with being low in instincts and thus needing to
be in your evolutionary match for your instincts to hit
in and so you don't want children. And so we
are selecting therefore against health, against intelligence, against conservatism, against

(45:14):
all this and this, and so this is a build
up from beneath which is going to make people more
left wing, essentially less group oriented, less religious, less mentally stable,
all these things clustered together into being more left wing.
And the heritability of being left wing is about sixty
percent genetic. And so this then we and then this change.

(45:34):
Then then they they then take hold of the culture,
and we get from a situation where even though in
the fifties we were high in mutational load, those people
were being pushed by a conservative culture along an adaptive
road map and a group oriented roadmap, and a conservative
road map of life. Suddenly it shifts over and we're
they're being pushed down a maladaptive left wing road map

(45:56):
of life, and which basically they're encouraged not to breed,
encouraged to do maladaptive things. And so then then you
go really get it's going to go mad. And that's
when we start to get things like transsexuality and all
this kind of stuff.

Speaker 3 (46:11):
And at that point though, and that when we're being
pushed along, what happens to you know, one of the
basic British, English, American, Canadian, what happens to the people's
concern with self defense?

Speaker 2 (46:26):
Well, this is very interesting. So first of all, I
would say that the first, at one point you ask
me specifically about the Britannic peoples. The first point to
remember is that we industrialized first, we the British, and
thus the Americans and the Canadians and whatever, the Australians
the descendant peoples of the British, and that means we've
been under this genics for the longest. So whatever maladaptive

(46:49):
insanity there's going to be, you would expect it to
really start to hit in first with us and to
be noticed first, you know, with with us. And when
there is a shift towards as it were, supero super wokeness,
a shift towards the left in the culture itself, which
I think happened in sixty three or thereabouts, you're going

(47:10):
to notice it first with us and it will come
later to other peoples. In many ways, you could argue
that the nineteen eighties was Ireland's nineteen fifties in a
lot of respect. That was when they were super conservative.
That's when they put up That's when they banned abortion
constitutionally in the eighties, So it would it would happen
first with us. Secondly, it may be that there is

(47:32):
something uniquely arn ethnocentric about us, about the Britannic peoples.
So I called this I did. I call this the
genius strategy. I've got a book that's just come out,
by the way, called Genius under House Arrest the Cancelation
of James Watson, in which I look at this genius strategy,

(47:53):
and this is the idea what who is it that
wins in the battle of group selection, all else being equal.
Normally it's people that are high in positive their centrism
and high negative e assension, cording to computer models. But
another way of winning is to be not really quite
low in these things, like not completely too low, but
quite low in these traits of positive assentrism, but particularly

(48:14):
negative ethnic as centrism. Negative that you hate foreigners, essentially,
that you repel foreigners. To be low in this, and
if you are low in this, then this allows you
to trade, and this allows you to pick up knowledge
from other peoples, and this expands your gene pool. And
this diversity means that you can have a wide range
of intelligence and the wide range of personality, and then

(48:39):
by genetic chants, by random unlikely combinations, you can throw
up genius. And genius is that you have outlier high
intelligence combined with moderately anti social personality. And this means
that you don't care if you offend people, so you
can't you express new ideas. You don't you can think
outside the box, so you can think the unthinkable new ideas.

(49:00):
You're a bit mentally unstable, so you're constantly worrying and
generating thoughts new ideas, and you come up with these
things that are good for the group at mass, brilliant
new weapons or innovations or whatever that allow you to
dominate other groups, to win battles, to kill, to win
in the battle of the group selection, and to dominate
even groups that are more ethnocentric than you, such as

(49:23):
the Japanese or or whatever it happens to be, and
therefore ultimately just dominate the world. And I suggest that
is our strategy, and that strategy works absolutely fine as
long as ethnocentrism does not drop too low. But if
you place us negative ethnocentrum in extreme evolutionary mismatch, then

(49:45):
our instincts, our instincts such as ethnocentrism, are induced at
times of stress, types of mortality, salients or whatever. That's
when that's what induces them. Our evolutionary match being fift
central mortality take us away from that, they won't be induced.
So then we have very very low ethnocentrism, and then
we uniquely are open to really bizarre, crazy stuff, including

(50:09):
multiculturalism and being invaded to an even greater extent than
the French or the Germans or other people's But that
is a side effect of an evolutionary strategy, the genius strategy,
which was extremely effective under normal, relatively harsh Darwinian conditions.

Speaker 1 (50:27):
Is Finland? I want to ask a question ed. I
know Sweden is invaded. What's the issue in Finland right now?

Speaker 2 (50:35):
Yeah? Well, what Finland is like? It's like Ireland in
relation to England, doesn't it. It looks up to Sweden
and copes by being more moral than it. But it's
also very conservative, just like Ireland in comparison to England.
So it was very very late in becoming multicultural. But
then when it did, when it shifted, which is probably

(50:55):
about ten years ago, then because people are so socially
conformist here, they're so high agreeableness and conscientiousness, that it
shifted very quickly, very quickly, and so I think than
it's probably about about ten percent non wide, and that's
happened with extreme rapidity, and it's become a very you know,

(51:18):
uber left wing woke society very very quickly. That I
literally was barred from my local pub for expressing right
wing opinions to people. And that is that is a
pub where ten years ago there was a boxing match
with a Russian guy, a white guy versus a black
English guy, and they were shouting at the screen lord

(51:40):
and nair cudy lord and nir culdy, which means hit
the nigger, hit the nigger. And that was absolutely fine
ten years ago in that same pub. So so you
know the shift, the shift is extremely rapid. Yeah, but
they But it's the thing is that the horrors of

(52:01):
multiculturalism and the horrors of allowing the left to be
in charge are now are coming to light. Rape gangs
or whatever. They had those in Finland, by the way,
in twenty eighteen, and so the second by a whisker,
almost the first biggest party in the Finnish parliament is
the as it were, far right anti immigrant party True Finns,
and they went very quickly from almost nothing to being

(52:24):
a huge political party. So there is actually then a
movement against it here and they are able to look
across to Sweden and see what hell there is in
Sweden and even more so in the UK. I understand
that they don't want it here, so I think they
can kind of just about be rescued. And I do

(52:45):
think a turning point that we haven't mentioned yet. We
have been manipulated as a society by these left wing
people that pretend they're kind when they're not really kind
at all. We have data on this, a number of papers.
They replicate that left wing people are high in narcissism,
are high in machiavelianism, they are high in psychopathy, they
are high in mental instability, they are low in agreeableness

(53:06):
their loone congens or compared to conservatives. They are extremely
nasty and frightened and paranoid people. And they deal with
this by telling themselves that they are morally superior, that
they are better than everybody else, and that's why they
woke and they get kind of a narcissistic supply from this.
And if you question wokeness, you question the thing that

(53:27):
protects them from their feelings of despair, and therefore you
push them to suicide, and therefore they go completely mad
and crazy at you. That is the nature of these people.
And I've been saying this for years, these mutants and
just various Machiavelian, nasty, healthy types that are a part
of it for power reasons.

Speaker 1 (53:47):
And what is the composition of these people coming to Finland?
Are they sub Saharan, Are they South Asian. Where are
they coming from.

Speaker 2 (53:55):
It's mostly from the Middle East, Okay, that's why we've
had you know where I live. In twenty eighteen, it
was revealed that there have been these grooming gangs. There
was this one girl of fourteen that was so ashamed
of what happened to her she committed suicide. And they
tried to cover this up. They tried to cover this
up in the newspapers. They just reported, as you know,
a man of twenty six that put on trial for

(54:18):
rape of a minor or having sex with a minor.
And then, but fortunately a friend of mine was getting
the press releases from the courts, which the newspapers censor,
and those press releases give you the names of the
people that are up on trial, and of course every
single one of them was Middle Eastern and so this

(54:38):
made it absolutely clear that this was a grooming gang situation,
that grooming gangs had come to Oulu in northern Finland.
But yeah, I mean there's been great rapes in parks.
That was happening ten fifteen years ago. Already in two
thousand and five, a woman was stupid enough to go
back to the house of some of these immigrants where

(54:59):
they cut off a fiddles with a pair of scissors
and inserted the scissors into her vagina. At the time,
the chief of police here said like, we've never had
crimes like this in Finland before. We don't have laws
for this. So the change has been so quick. And
I said to the were saying to them when I
came here twenty years ago, look, I'm from the future. Merton,

(55:19):
where I'm from in London was ten percent non white
in nineteen eighty It's now fifty percent. Wow, you know,
I'm from the future, and no nobody will want to
come here. Finland is so cold, it's so obscure, it
so far away. And of course they were they were
totally totally wrong. But obviously there is a backlash that's
happened against this now and we're seeing it, and that

(55:41):
the level of polarization is such that the right wing
side feel emboldened. And as I said, as I was
saying a minute ago, I think what's happened to Charlie
Kirk may well be a significant turning point because they
they left were unable to do anything other than to
display very clearly, conspiculously what they are really about, which

(56:02):
is just pure hatred which they project onto other people.
And this has been seen all around the world, this
response to Charlie clerk assassination, them just glorying in it
and saying it's a good thing or justify.

Speaker 1 (56:17):
Oh, there's big marches in England, in Australia, I mean
all around the globe. Everybody's marching for this Charlie Globe,
Charlie Kirkuy And it's just you know, I didn't follow him.
I knew about him. I watched a few things. I
was never a follower of Turning Point, but obviously he
had a big young following. And now they're looking to
put chapters in almost every high school in America. They're

(56:40):
getting requests from high schools everywhere in America to put
chapters a Turning Point. Because you know, he was a
family value guy. He believed in God. And I just
saw something yesterday. It was a YouTube short Mike and
Ed where he said the Sabbath of Services and the
Sabbath Saturday. Observing on the Sabbath changed his life. There's

(57:04):
a short YouTube on and I didn't even know he
was Sabbath keeper. Most the only ones that are outside
of the Jews are really the Baptist and some fringe
a church of Guide.

Speaker 2 (57:17):
Yeah, yeah, I mean yeah. I did a book. One
of the books I had out since we last spoke
was a biography of a guy called Jonathan Bowden who
was a leading kind of orator and inspire of people
on the British whatever you want to call it, all
right or whatever it is. And he died at forty nine,

(57:37):
very suddenly of a heart attack. And this is very significant.
There's been a lot of research on this. A significant
component to charisma is that, yeah, you know, charisma is
this Max Webor idea that you certain people have this
capacity to inspire people and to make a cold world
feel warm again, and this sort of thing. This is,

(57:59):
this is charisma. But there are other elements of charisma
that are not intrinsic qualities of the person, that make
them sort of more easily embody the community and cause
a person's sense of self to be merged with theirs.
And one of these is dying suddenly and dying young.

(58:22):
And there's evidence that that really does do it. If
you die suddenly, and if you die young, then this
almost heightens your charisma. It makes you more likely to
gain a huge following if you die suddenly and die young,
and of course if you are perceived to die as
a martyr, then even more so, then you really do

(58:43):
go down in history. And so the fact that I
didn't I didn't know much about him either. I'd heard
of him, I'd heard of Charlie Kirk, I'd heard of
Turning One, but I hadn't ever seen ever, for example,
watched him speak or anything like that. I just heard
of him, and then suddenly he's been shot and he dies,
and I just knew in the fevered and polarized environment

(59:07):
that we are in, in which there is less and
less center ground, in which you're either woke or you're
far right the inquotation marks, and in which the people
on the far right are organizing, are reacting, are bonding
with each other, getting to know each other real life,
emboldened by each other, and that there is a counter

(59:27):
reaction to the extremes of wokeness, as you'd expect simply
on the grounds that young people are going to rebel,
that's the first reason, as they're brought up with this
craziness among generations Z. But secondly, also because there are
changes in the nature of the intelligent portion of the population.
The big predictor of fertility among the more intelligent is

(59:47):
that you are conservative and that you are religious, and
these are highly heritable. So this implies there will be
a shift in the culture towards the right. Basically, the
white left are just dying off and becoming stupid are
very quickly as well. But he died. He died, and
he died in this most dramatic way, and this kind
of sacrificial way as well. He's sitting there asking to

(01:00:08):
debate with people that disagree with him and doing so
in a very polite manner and without the concern for
his safety that you might think he might consider having,
at least in hindsight. And so yeah, I thought, this
is really going to make him into a kind of
a massa figure, into a kind of almost a a totem.

(01:00:30):
And yeah, this is a current.

Speaker 3 (01:00:32):
There's Yeah, there was a just a I don't want
to keep you any longer. There was a video this
morning showing a lady walking into a coffee shap the
big one, the heck is the name of it Bucks,
And she ordered a coffee and she said, and they

(01:00:53):
asked what her name was, and she said, Charlie Kirk
and they said, oh, I can't, I can't write that,
and I can put Charlie on there if you want.
But it turned out that the story was that the
head of the coffee giant ordered than anybody.

Speaker 2 (01:01:13):
That was.

Speaker 3 (01:01:15):
Talking about Charlie would be asked to leave the place,
and that their communications system had been fixed so no
one could talk to somebody else via email if the
words Charlie Kirk were in it.

Speaker 1 (01:01:29):
So you see, I don't know if I don't know
if Ed understands that in Starbucks, when they serve your
coffee here, Ed and I don't drink their coffee because
it's pretty much over burnt. But anyway, they have to
put a name on the cup when you order, so yeah,
you could have one or two names, you know, you
could have Woke, LBGT, anything you want. But apparently Charlie
Kirk was too much. You had to get either Kirk

(01:01:51):
or Charlie, you know, So they made a fuss about it.
This is typical of Starbucks. You know, it's a younger group.
It's a lot of I would say fifth percent walk
people there. Mike too, you know, oh, I bet more
than that.

Speaker 2 (01:02:03):
They're usually under.

Speaker 1 (01:02:05):
Yeah, and they and you know, they got the horns
coming out of the nose and the ear rings come
out of the eye. You know, they have all the
the accoutrements, and they have all the tattoos you can want,
you aboriginal. Look, you know this is Starbucks. You know
when you go in there, you got to just smile
your ass off. If you're an old white guy with
gray hair, say hey, how are you Heidi. You know,
I'd like to have a glass of water. You know,

(01:02:28):
please don't poison me.

Speaker 2 (01:02:31):
That's you know, that's extraordinary. Sicularly about the fact that
they would take it so far as to block people
from communicating with other people using their network using that word.

Speaker 1 (01:02:41):
Well, look what they did in the print shops. In
the print shops just last week, people went out to
make posters of Charlie picture of him sitting on a chair,
and I guess they were going to use them for
whatever reason. And the major print shop here in America's Staples,
the employees, not the not the companies. The employees were like, no,
we're not going to do that. We're not. We're making
you know, because these are woke people working there, right.

(01:03:03):
And immediately these companies came out with the you know
they made the statement is they fired them. They said, no,
you can't do this because remember when people go in
there to do the walk stuff, they don't turn you down.
You know, you could have any walk posts you want.

Speaker 2 (01:03:15):
You know that's interesting as well, that that's another change
that what these people, these I mean basically woke people
are as far as I can see, they are spoilt children.
They are nasty, yes, they to some extent, it's it's genetic.
I do think that there's probably a core that are
just mutants, but to some extent it's it's it's genetics
interacting with being brought up, but in a woke way

(01:03:40):
where there is overconcern with equality and harm avoidance such
that you because those are the two values they're into
with the individually oriented values and as such that nothing
bad can ever be allowed to happen to you in childhood,
nothing that is even sort of character building, nothing that
just teaches you how you should behave nothing thing, and

(01:04:00):
you get schools that mainly frankly, it's it's women's kinds
of ideas. Women as ideas running things strict no bullying
policies to the extent that they can't even be unstructured
play at some schools. I looked at this in woke eugenics.
At some schools because they might be bullying. Therefore, you
can't leave the children alone to play with each other.

(01:04:22):
Therefore they don't They don't learn how to deal with conflict.
They don't learn how to deal with people who disagree
with them. They don't learn about coping mechanisms, but not
getting your way. They don't learn any of this which
childs ad is supposed to teach you. And by the
time they don't learn independence, they are decreasingly learning to drive.

(01:04:45):
They have menu anxiety because they're not this is true.
They're they're not used to making decisions for themselves. They
want to be told what's on the menu beforehand so
they can make a decision before they go to the restaurant.
They can't cope with that. They can't cope with just
talking to strangers in the part of it all has
been online. They can't cope with real life. And the

(01:05:08):
result is just. And of course they have been taught
that what it is to be moral is to be
left wing. And they are highly anxious people because they
haven't been taught how to deal with their anxiety and
coding mechanisms to deal with it. So they're high in anxiety,
high in social anxiety, therefore highly conformist and therefore highly
left wing in this context, therefore likely to see people

(01:05:31):
that question anything as just evil because how can you
do that? And it will induce anxiety that a person's
robbing the boat because they might be dangerous and they
don't know how to cope with it, and so you
just get these these tantrums, particularly among women, these these
adults having tantrums and just being utterly entitled. And you

(01:05:51):
can see how this plays out in things like what
you're saying, or in jd Vance that he was meant
to go and have dinner lunch at some pub in
the Cotswolds, a hollow there, and the and the sort
of woke staff essentially went on strike and so we
won't serve.

Speaker 1 (01:06:07):
Well, you're talking about the females. You're talking about the
females right now when you stay in the anxiety, the
females of the Democratic Party, like Elizabeth Warren, you know,
she has tantrums on everything she talks about.

Speaker 2 (01:06:19):
But that's that's just big, that's different. I mean, she's
that's just being a woke mutant older woman. But I'm
talking about younger people that aren't necessarily aren't necessarily mutants,
even they're probably genetically normal, but they've been brought up
in this totally maladaptive society that just turns them into narcissists,
into spoiled children, which is really the essence of what

(01:06:40):
a narcisist kind of is really to some.

Speaker 1 (01:06:42):
Extended Anyway, what is your latest book? Let us get
the title of the late So I've.

Speaker 2 (01:06:47):
Got two books that I've published since you since we
last chatted. The first is Shamar of the Radical Ride,
the Life and Mind of Jonathan Bowden. And this guy
has a significant figure on the Radical Ride in the
UK and he's kind of inspired many people. He died
at forty nine and he has all these speeches on
YouTube and they are incredibly charismatic and interesting. He was

(01:07:09):
kind of breaking through into America when he suddenly died
in twenty twelve. And the second, which is just I mean,
I think the paperback which is a reasonable price, has
now come out and that is genius under house Arrest,
the cancelation of James Watson, and that looks how the
cancelation of Jim Watson in two thousand and seven. That's
the co discover of the structure of DNA Nobel Prize winner,

(01:07:31):
was a turning point from a society that was basically
pro genius to a society that was woken awful and
anti genius. And what destruction this turning point has wrought,
and how we need to start being pro genius again.

Speaker 1 (01:07:45):
So we'll put them in the notes. And I'm going
to make a special introduction for this show because we
went for an hour and I think, you know, there's
so much that people can get out of this show.
It's always great having you on. It's just a great conversation.
I mean, we just let you run with it because
you have so many good points in these things that
you research, right, Mike, do you think so? I think so.

Speaker 3 (01:08:07):
I think we were kind of superfluous in this one.

Speaker 1 (01:08:11):
Yeah, that's hard.

Speaker 3 (01:08:12):
I always that's always learned a lot from you, sir,
So thank you.

Speaker 1 (01:08:16):
So here's the deal. We can't wait another year. We'll
have to book you in advance. We'll have to have
you back again.

Speaker 2 (01:08:23):
So as long as as long as we don't as
long as we don't balls up the time zones.

Speaker 1 (01:08:27):
Yes, all this Eastern.

Speaker 2 (01:08:31):
Time and Western time and Central time and all this bollocks.
I just I just I just want what time it
is in New York. That's why, that's why I can
calculate New York is seven hours back from Helsinki.

Speaker 1 (01:08:42):
I can tell you.

Speaker 2 (01:08:45):
Thank you so much, sir, thank you, bye bye bye
bye answer.

Speaker 1 (01:08:49):
Thank you