#136 - Carl Benjamin - The System That Creates Nick Fuentes

Summary

The Peter McCormack Show #136: Carl Benjamin – The System That Creates Nick Fuentes

Guest: Carl Benjamin (Sargon of Akkad)
Host: Peter McCormack (Pete)
Date: Dec 18, 2025
Main Theme:
A provocative exploration of the malaise affecting young men in the West, the generational divides in cultural narratives, the social and economic systems that drive the radicalization of youth (epitomized by figures like Nick Fuentes), and whether society can have an honest conversation about identity, belonging, and systemic change.

---

1. Episode Overview

The conversation focuses on understanding why controversial figures like Nick Fuentes resonate with today's youth, particularly young men, and how societal, political, and economic changes have created an environment ripe for disaffection and radicalization. McCormack and Benjamin, both Gen X fathers, reflect on generational contrasts, lost opportunities, and the emerging perception that the modern system actively stigmatizes and alienates young straight white men. The episode explores the limitations of liberal narratives and the risks of ignoring legitimate grievances—raising uncomfortable questions about identity, meritocracy, multiculturalism, and who the nation is "for."

---

2. Key Discussion Points & Insights

Generational Disconnect & The Search for Meaning

• Carl: Our generation enjoyed hope and opportunity; today’s young men see no frontier to conquer. There's a loss of heroism post-WWII (05:33).
• Pete: Watching the Nick Fuentes/Piers Morgan interview as a father and then a disaffected 19-year-old produced radically different reactions. This forced self-reflection about generational failure and the world inherited by youth (02:20-03:12).

Economic & Social Stagnation

• Hardships like rising unemployment due to AI, unaffordable housing, and inflation hit everyone but disproportionately affect the young and those without established capital (06:04–07:30).
• Not just an economic problem – there are profound social/moral issues. The youth feel alienated, and modern society lacks respect or opportunities for young men.

Cultural Shifts, Stigma, and Identity

• The stigmatization of young male identity, particularly straight white men, is viewed as both a cause and a consequence of current radicalization trends (13:20-15:00).
• Society has removed traditional heroes for this demographic; all that remains, culturally, is the "villain" (typically symbolized by Nazis/Hitler), making it an attractive symbol for the marginalized (12:00-13:20).
• Carl: “If they're all demonized, well, why don’t we just take the worst one as a ‘you’ then? … You are giving them power.” (13:07–13:34)

The Nick Fuentes Phenomenon

• Fuentes is framed as a reactionary symbol—his popularity a product of group psychology and unmet needs for meaning, belonging, and grievance (39:40–40:21).
• Piers Morgan’s outrage (about virginity, Hitler praise) reflects the brittle worldview of an older order that young people don’t relate to, making Morgan’s attacks appear out of touch.
• The liberal establishment’s focus on suppressing taboo discussions (race, sex, group interests) is contrasted with the lived experience of youth forced to confront group identities in daily life.

Media Incentives and Fear of Conversation

• Hosts and media figures often fear discussing these topics honestly due to concern about reputational risk, sponsors, or family reactions (17:47–18:28).
• The system incentivizes drama (Piers Morgan as a clickbaiter), and even negative attention is valuable (15:00–17:04).

The Problem of “Group Power” and Meritocracy

• Society lionizes group identities for other demographics but expects atomization and radical individualism from straight white men (34:26–34:54).
• Meritocracy is critiqued as a myth; group-based advancement is the norm elsewhere, and the erosion of opportunities for young men is considered both unjust and socially dangerous (32:46–33:44).
• Affirmative action and DEI programs are cited as formalizing discrimination against the native majority, fueling resentment and radicalization (69:31–71:41).

The Politics of Demographic Change & National Identity

• Carl argues British identity and rights to the nation are being diluted by rapid demographic changes that have removed the psychic assumption that “the country is for our children” (77:13–78:52).
• The subject of who truly belongs—and who should benefit from collective goods—is presented as the central question now facing society, which every other country answers with “for the children of the nation,” but the UK/West now refuses to (97:04–97:44).

Possible Futures: Reform or Revolution

• If a legitimate sense of belonging and meaning is not restored, younger generations, lacking the colorblind assumptions of Gen X/Boomers, will increasingly adopt harsher group identities, risking serious social conflict, even revolutionary outcomes (25:57–26:20, 85:07-86:44).
• Carl: “It could get so, so bad… the only way to solve this is to accept that the native people of the country have the primary claim to the country. If we’re not happy with this, then it has to just stop.” (106:23–107:57)

---

3. Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

On Youth Alienation and Systemic Failure

• Pete: “You realize… actually, they’re screwed. We this up. I say we – the collective.” (06:07)
• Carl: “It would be suicide to not reorient your worldview. When the boomer Piers Morgan is just like ‘I can’t believe you like Adolf Hitler’, it’s just like—okay, bro. You know, that’s a world that doesn’t exist anymore.” (00:50/79:08)

On the Cultural Vacuum

• Carl: "Who are the heroes of the straight white men? It used to be people like George Washington or Nelson, but we've been tearing their statues down... So, okay, who’s statue can’t you tear down? Hitler’s.” (12:00–13:07)
• Carl: “The reality is, okay, we don’t have a group power, so what do we do? … The only way to solve this is to accept that the native people of the country have the primary claim…” (106:23–107:57)

On Media and Framing

• Carl: “Piers Morgan is publicly humiliated every day and he knows he's publicly humiliated every day and he doesn't care.” (15:48)

On Institutional Failure and Revolution

• Pete: “I don’t want the country to have to collapse into absolute chaos and anarchy for us to go, ‘yeah, there’s a constitutional crisis.’ I want it now.” (57:47)

On Difference Between Conceptual and Procedural Belonging

• Carl: “If you ask Zach Polanski [Green Party], to whom does England belong? ‘Everyone’—which effectively means no one. … England is the collective property of the English.” (81:54–82:07)

---

4. Segmented Timeline & Highlights

| Time | Segment/Topic | |----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 00:12–01:16| Opening remarks: Stigmatizing young men; preview of Nick Fuentes discussion | | 01:17–05:54| Generational divide; interaction with Fuentes/Morgan interview | | 05:54–08:56| Economic/social challenges facing youth; generational empathy | | 08:56–13:34| Media narrative, Nazi label; lack of positive identity for white men | | 13:34–15:48| Media opportunism; popularity of “controversial” guests | | 15:48–18:28| Media incentives and honest conversations | | 18:28–20:17| Parental duty; failing to leave a better world | | 20:18–23:49| Collapse of progress narrative; history as monstrous | | 23:49–26:20| Demographic/identity politics; reaction to societal messages | | 26:20–29:04| Diffusing the issue; focusing on straight white young men | | 29:04–34:26| 90s nostalgia; hope and opportunity disappearing | | 34:26–39:49| Groupishness, meritocracy, societal obligations | | 39:49–42:01| Nick Fuentes’ appeal, group power, and identification of group influence | | 42:01–47:03| Racial violence, institutional failure, loss of faith in justice | | 47:03–54:19| Constitutional crisis: lack of accountability in UK's political system | | 54:19–62:36| On political parties, revolution, peaceful withdrawal of consent | | 62:36–66:38| Protesting, mass movements, comparisons to historical revolutions | | 66:38–69:31| System critique: left and right grievances mirroring each other | | 69:31–74:46| DEI, affirmative action, group disparities: critical analysis | | 74:46–77:13| Demographic change, group responsibility, generational transitions | | 77:13–83:20| English identity, group claims, who is the country for? | | 83:20–89:08| Historical expulsions, plausibility of future radical action | | 89:08–93:39| How to avert conflict: policy reversals, recognizing legitimate grievances | | 93:39–101:10| Difficult conversations, facing social discomfort, psychic map vs categories| | 101:10–107:57| Generational challenges; how to avoid hardline solutions |

---

5. Tone and Language

• Reasoned but urgent; both host and guest grapple openly with discomfort, sometimes using humor, historical analogy, or blunt realism.
• The episode does not shy from controversial or “uncomfortable” ideas. Carl Benjamin presents arguments in group-relational rather than strictly racial terms, but expresses clear skepticism toward liberal universalism and meritocracy.
• McCormack maintains a tone of critical engagement, sometimes acting as a foil — the “Piers Morgan” in the conversation (75:25).

---

6. Takeaways for Uninitiated Listeners

• The appeal of radical/controversial figures for young men is a symptom of systemic alienation, not simple bigotry.
• The podcast explores the collapse of a post-WWII consensus and the rise of group identity awareness among youth.
• Generational divides shape perceptions: Gen X/Boomers largely grew up “colorblind,” but today’s youth live in an environment defined by group competition and affirmative action.
• Both left and right are disillusioned with current systems, but fail to recognize their complaints are structurally similar.
• The solution, for Benjamin, is a clear reclamation of national identity and prioritizing the native majority—a route that risks further marginalizing others unless handled with great care, and which raises profound moral and practical dilemmas.

---

7. Final Thoughts

Carl Benjamin’s diagnosis is stark: without recognition and restoration of a sense of belonging and meaning for young (primarily white) men, the system will breed further radicalization and conflict. McCormack pushes back, searching for a more universalist resolution, but acknowledges the emotional power and growing urgency of the narrative. The episode, deeply uncomfortable by design, serves as a microcosm of Western grappling with multiculturalism, lost opportunity, and political legitimacy.

---

For further engagement, listeners are encouraged to reflect on these questions:

• Who should a country primarily serve, and on what basis?
• Can deeply group-based grievances be addressed within a liberal order?
• How can society foster a healthy identity for all without creating new underclasses or preparing the ground for future conflict?
• What conversations are worth having, even if they risk discomfort or backlash?

Transcript

[Carl]

It's what's coming down the line and the world we're leaving with them. And so it would make sense to kind of get ahead of that now and understand because what we're. What we're doing is essentially stigmatizing our young men.

[Connor]

Yeah.

[Carl]

Oh, you like Nick Fuentes? All of our young men are now bad. It's like, no, what they're doing is a rational response to the circumstances we don't live in, but they do live in. And it's because we've allowed this change to happen against our will and definitely against their will that they are just responding to where they are and so acting like they've done something wrong. It's like, no, man. It would be suicide to not feel like you have to reorient your worldview. And when the boomer Piers Morgan is just like, I can't believe you like Adolf Hitler, it's just like, okay, bro. You know, that's a world that doesn't exist anymore.

[Pete]

This show is brought to you by my lead sponsor, Iron the AI cloud for the next big thing. Iron builds and operates next generation data centers and delivers cutting edge GPU infrastructure all powered by renewable energy. Now, if you need access to scalable GPU clusters or are simply curious about who is powering the future of AI, check out iron.com to learn more, which is iren.com Right. Afternoon, Carl.

[Carl]

Hello.

[Pete]

How you doing? Really well, this week's been a inflection point for me this last week.

[Carl]

Yeah, I read your substack.

[Pete]

Yeah. I've probably realized some things that maybe you did a while ago, but also come to a couple of my own conclusions, which I will explain. Although you're uncool, do you know what it is? Is I still dressing like a teenager. I. I know, I know. I did actually put a shirt on. For what, didn't I? For one interview, I put a shirt.

[Carl]

On, but not for this one.

[Pete]

Well, who did I. Who did it? No, it's because you know what it is? I had a meeting in the morning where I went to a place where you had to wear a shirt. It's not a medium. I should probably dress up a bit smarter. But we're going to talk. We're going to talk about Nick Fuentes and talk about why and. And, you know, but just for the listeners who don't, I watched him with Piers Morgan. Not know much about him. Watched it like a dad, almost like my son was there and thought, who is this idiot and why does anyone care about his bullshit? Put a tweet out, woke up in the morning, I'd been skewered everywhere. Not just by unknown accounts, but actually people I know respect. So I was like, huh, Wherever I got this wrong. So I re watched it as a disenfranchised, pissed off 19 year old and I saw it entirely different. So that's forced me to have a whole week where I have read everything I can about him, everything about the youth and looked at the system we live in to the point, oh, yesterday I was reading about William of William of Orange and thinking, how do we have a second glorious revolution in this country?

[Carl]

We don't.

[Pete]

We don't. Don't say that. But that's.

[Carl]

I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but that zeitgeist is well and truly gone.

[Pete]

Well, that's how I got to this. And then you messaged me, I was like. And then I watched your video and I've been watching your interview with Brett Weinstein and he messaged me and I was like, this is, this is a civilizational inflection point.

[Carl]

Yeah. Notice how there are, there are multiple like layers of people who are having conversations and this is kind of forced people into the layer in which they're most like the other people around them. As in we're both 40 something dads. Brett Weinstein, I think he's 50 something, but you know, still Gen X dads who are like, right, okay, there's a real problem here. And you know, civilizationally we have dropped the ball somewhere and you've got the sort of Piers Morgan types. He's not quite a boomer, but he's nearly a boomer. And he may as well be a boomer representing the post World War II consensus narrative, which is we were the good guys of history, we defeated the Nazis, and therefore it's just clear sailing till the end of history, until the end of time. Whereas the Gen Xers, the media that the Gen Xers enjoyed in particular, was most revealing about the flaws in that narrative. As in, oh, right, we're living in a kind of false reality that actually drives us kind of mad. You know, this is the theme of Fight Club. This is the theme of the Matrix, this theme of Office space. It's the theme of like the Gen X1 young men was. I actually, I actually don't want to just be a corporate drone my whole life. I actually would like something heroic. And if you look at the offer that's being made in the Matrix, it's. You could live in a lovely, comfortable material world or you can live underground fighting robots, eating slop. And everyone's like, great, I can't wait to fight those robots. Yeah. It's like, well, hang on a second. What are we doing here? And it's literally the offer that's been made in the post World War II consensus from people like Piers Morgan. It lacks heroism.

[Pete]

And, well, there's. There's a. There's a thing with that as well, is that my dad is. I don't know what 77 is. Is that boomer still?

[Carl]

Yeah.

[Pete]

Right. So my dad's a boomer.

[Carl]

Yeah.

[Pete]

His kids are all right, you know, I'm all right. I'm good. Worked hard.

[Carl]

Yep.

[Pete]

I own my house. Same, same.

[Carl]

Because of the time of life that we are in and the sort of period. Because, I mean, you know, you. You were. You were a teenager in the 90s.

[Pete]

Oh, it's the best.

[Carl]

It was incredible. Like, the world was our oyster, and everything was looking up. And through the 2000s, things were great, amazing. And so you could build yourself up. And now you're in your 40s, you've built up a great stock of capital. You've got skills, you've got resources, and it's completely rational for the young men to look around and go, well, okay, the world's not the same.

[Pete]

I think also. And look, it's not the same for everyone. There's outliers everywhere. But the age of your kids matter. I think Piers Morgan talked about this on his show, and I think his kids might be late 20s, early 30s.

[Carl]

Yeah, they're adults.

[Pete]

Yes. They've missed this bit.

[Carl]

Yeah.

[Pete]

Whereas Connor here, you know, he's okay, but I've got a teenage daughter. And you. You look at this and go, hold on. As a Gen Xer, if my kids are the ones who are trying to enter this workplace and want to buy a house, you realize. And actually, they're screwed. Yeah, they're screwed. And so for me, it wasn't. It wasn't so much about Nick Fuentes. It's more about the millions of kids of that age and the youth and what world they're going to inherit from us. And you realize, oh, we this up. I say we the collective. We the collective. We in that. But I also think we should be careful with this. It's not just, say, the youth, because there are millennials now still living with their parents. There are Gen Xers who are losing their jobs. I know of multiple people who've lost their jobs, and those careers are gone. Gone to AI, specifically in marketing, because that's My background. And you've had two middle class salaries and one's gone. And they've been hit with inflation and suddenly they can't afford schooling for their kids. They can't afford a holiday. They're having to downsize houses.

[Carl]

Bloody hell.

[Pete]

Yeah. And so I actually think, look, this problem we've created can hit everyone apart from. Unless you're.

[Carl]

Yeah.

[Pete]

You're over that hurdle rate of escape velocity with money.

[Carl]

Yeah.

[Pete]

But there is this specific issue with the youth.

[Carl]

Oh, yeah. I mean, if it. It's probably just that people of our age and older are better insulated against this, but it's probably still coming. And this. It's hard to describe it. You would have to have very little empathy to look at the world that the young generations are inheriting off of us and say, there's no here.

[Connor]

Right.

[Carl]

That, like it's. And we, we have only spoken about the economic side of it.

[Pete]

Yep.

[Carl]

There are lots of social and moral sides to this. There are a real problem. In one of the. One of the bits in the Piers Morgan, Nick Fuentes interview I found most remarkable is when Piers Morgan's like, are you a virgin?

[Pete]

I know.

[Carl]

And Nick Fuentes like, yeah, you haven't had sex with a woman. No. So you need to get laid. No.

[Pete]

Piers Morgan thought that was a gotcha.

[Carl]

I know. And it's.

[Pete]

You've not been laid. And. And you know what was so cool about what Nick Fuentes did there? He didn't defend himself.

[Carl]

He just said, no, because look at the world that Piers Morgan is advertising to young men. Bonnie Blue just endorsed the right wing party. She's like, I shag a thousand men in a day and I'm voting right wing. It's like, sorry, that's really liberal, actually. That's really. And that's. Piers Morgan has no particular objection to Bonnie Blue, but he has a particular objection to Nick Fuentes. Say, I have had sex with zero women.

[Pete]

Well, look, that bit, that's the bit that got me on the first. Because on the first watch I was like, I thought he was doing a good job. Are you holding this kid to account?

[Carl]

Yeah.

[Pete]

But even when he said that, I was like, I know he's a Catholic and. And I've watched quite a bit of, you know, the. Whatever podcast, Andrew Wilson.

[Carl]

I have seen clips of it.

[Pete]

Yeah, most people have seen clips, but a lot of that is OnlyFans girls. Right. Who. And it appears like OnlyFans is like us getting Facebook. And actually there's a lot of young people now debating this Sexual promiscuity and saying, actually a high body count is embarrassing. There's been kind of reverse trend on that. I've seen that cultural shift and I think, I think that's the area that I think Pier's really embarrassed himself.

[Carl]

I agree. And the fact that that was the only. He only really got worked up in two places, which is the Hitler love and the misogyny, which I found really interesting. Like that, you know, they cover a lot of topics, but it was only Nick Fuente saying, I think Hitler was cool and I don't want to have sex with women. That made Piers Morgan freak out. Right. So the, the two pillars of Piers Morgan's worldview hinge on. You have to be a desperate simp and you have to go, oh, Adolf Hitler is the worst person in history. I mean, don't get me wrong. Yeah, he's, he's bad. Obviously he's bad. Lots of people in history are bad and Adolf Hitler is one of them. And that's the perspective that the Zoomers are coming into this in. Because you've got to remember that for the sort of Piers Morgan generation, there were people who lived through World War II, who were literally their parents, everyone around them. It was a collective endeavor that everyone around them lived through World War II and therefore struggled through. I mean, I remember being really young and I'd wake whenever I went to visit my nan and my granddad. I'd wake up really early and she'd also wake up really early. So we'd spend an hour or two in the morning, just me and her, and she would tell me stories about what it was like during the blitz, during, you know, she had to be evacuated to the countryside. What it was like living out in the countryside. I found these stories endlessly fascinating. So at least I have some connection to someone who genuinely went through it. But Nick Fuentes is like 27. His parents are probably boomers. Boomers categorically all born after World War II. So they have no direct knowledge of this. And so it becomes this kind of hyperreal narrative where everything gets blown out of proportion into this giant caricature. Because if you think about it, the Nazis occupy a kind of very special position for historic figures. And that's what they are now. They are historic figures. And this, like, for example, oh, Nick Fuentes is a Nazi. It's like, no, he's a 27 year old skinny virgin. Like, I don't know whether you've noticed he hasn't got legions of stormtroopers goose stepping down. You Know Nuremberg, parade square or whatever. No, he. He's a. He's a skinny nerd who's good at talking and he has a microphone. You know, that's what a modern Nazi is. It's not very scary, frankly. I mean, I, I don't know anyone who couldn't out arm wrestle Nick Fuentes. You know what I mean? Like, the, the term Nazi is occupying this kind of conceptual category of just villain, right? It's just out and out villain. And it happens to also shame the. Share the same space in the current sort of modern social milieu of identities. It happens to share the same space as straight white men. And every other identity group has a hero. You know, we've got Rosa Parks, got Martin Luther King Jr. For each kind of identity group, you've got Nelson Mandela, you've got all of these heroes of the black community or women or. I'm sure the transgender ones have them. The gay community has them with the Stonewall rights and stuff like that. Okay, well, who are the heroes of the straight white men? Well, it used to be people like George Washington or Nelson, but we've been tearing their statues down. Every statue of the straight white man during the Black Lives Matter era was just being torn down relentlessly. So, okay, well, who statue can't you tear down? Well, you can't tear Adolf Hitler's statue down because he doesn't have any. And what you've done is say, right, okay, these are all. This is the. The pantheon of famous figures from recent history that we all venerate in our modern lives. Except for that one. That's the straight white male one. And you're not allowed to have that. We're not going to have anything in this pantheon. And so they're like, okay, well, I feel like I'm being demonized here. And it's like, yeah, you are. Suck it up. We intend for you to be essentially a serve labor class. And I think a lot of these young men are like, right, okay, so who do they hate the most?

[Pete]

This episode is brought to you by Ledger, the most trusted bitcoin hardware wallet. Now, if you're serious about protecting your bitcoin, Ledger has the solution you need. Their hardware wallet gives you complete control over your private keys, ensuring that your bitcoin stays safe from hacks, phishing and malware. And I've been a customer of that since 2017. Love the product. Use it for my bitcoin. I use it with my Castle multisig for protecting the football club's bitcoin too. Now With Ledgers, sleek, easy to use devices and the Ledger Live app, managing your bitcoin has never been more secure or convenient. And whether you are a longtime holder or new to the world of Bitcoin, Ledger makes it simple to keep your assets protected. So if you want to find out more, please do head over to Ledger.com and secure your Bitcoin today. That is Ledger.com, which is L E D G-E-R.com that is Ledger.com do you think peers cares in that when you get on a controversial character like a Nick Fuentes. We've had Tommy Robinson on here. Yeah, you have to defend yourself or you feel like you have to defend yourself before and after, but you also. They are popular shows and if your business model is viewers like he knows Nick Fuentes is going to drive a lot of viewers and everyone watched and talked about it. I watched it. It's first time I watched Nick Fuentes in detail.

[Carl]

And then this time I've watched Piers Morgan.

[Pete]

Ah, well, I'm trying. Have I watched him?

[Carl]

No, he's terrible. He's a, he's a clickbait slot merchant. You're exactly right.

[Pete]

But then there was two Cope follow up shows. There was the, the one where Andrew Wilson on and Glenn Greenwald and he had his therapy session with Dr. Phil where all he did was talk about it. And then he's had another show where he had Tim Paul and Steven Crowder and, and I was like, are the follow ups. Because he wants to rationalize it and have Cope shows and have people explain to him. No, you were right. Or is it Fuentes is a story. I'm gonna carry the story. A bit like Candace Owens at the moment. He's made her friend's assassination the high topic content for her. And I'm just trying to think, does he care or is he playing a game?

[Carl]

No. Piers Morgan is publicly humiliated every day and he knows he's publicly humiliated every day and he doesn't care. He doesn't really have an ego about what people think of him, just that they think of him. If Piers Morgan's numbers were cratering and they were, you know, in the tens of thousands, then he would be bothered. But you, you can't say anything to personally offend him because he doesn't. He just is doing this for attention and he always, basically, he's always done this for attention. And this has been his entire career. You know, he was in the mirror of the news of world or wherever he's been. He's just he likes to just get views, he likes to get attention.

[Pete]

But do you think what he says, he believes as well?

[Carl]

Yeah, yeah. I think he is the sort of rear guard of the post World War II order. And it's. It's easy for him to assume that that is just an unvarnished good and there's nothing to critique about it whatsoever. Because it's. It's easy, it's lazy. It's the. The milieu in which he's always been born and always existed. And everyone around him will agree with him. Like very few people. Like, well, you know, I'm not so sure about your take on Hitler there, Piers. You know, no one's gonna say that to him.

[Pete]

But not so with this one. It feels like he still has one foot in the regime.

[Carl]

Oh, he definitely is, yeah. Definitely a creature of the regime.

[Pete]

But I think he also thinks he's not. He hasn't fully escaped, but there were a couple of moments. There was the moment where Glenn Greenwald just. I mean, Glenn Greenwald was brilliant on it, but he gave him that kind of straight up facts about what we've put these kids through with Iraq, the economy, and Covid and said, no wonder they're telling us to go fuck yourself. And, and, and Pierce did actually change at that moment. And then he went and made the second Cope show. But, like, I just felt like, was there a moment.

[Carl]

I think you're giving it too much credit. I think that he's. I don't, I don't think he cares. I genuinely don't think he cares. I think he just cares about ratings.

[Pete]

Ratings, numbers, revenue. Yeah, See, that's the funny thing. Right now with this, you look, you've got a. An actual media company. This is just a podcast. But one of the things that's come out of this kind of inflection point is realizing there's some tough conversations you have to have, conversations maybe you want to avoid because you're like, if I have that conversation, someone in my family might watch it, get angry with me just for discussing it. Might piss off a sponsor, might lose some money. But you're like, I think I got to do this. I think. I think I've got to have these uncomfortable conversations because otherwise, what. What am I?

[Carl]

Well, you could always go back into the Matrix. There's lovely steak there. Yeah, I'm just gonna be fighting robots, eating slopping Zion underground. Otherwise.

[Pete]

I watched War of the Wilds last night. Do you remember the Tom Cruise War of the World?

[Carl]

Oh, years ago.

[Pete]

Do you remember the Bit where his son wants to. He says he has to see the fight. They're trying to run away from those kind of robot things. And his son's like, no, I've got to see this. And his son goes into the fight.

[Carl]

Oh, right, okay. I can't remember it.

[Pete]

And Tom Cruise assumes his son's off to die. Obviously it doesn't because it's a Tom Cruise movie, but I mean, he should have died, but the kid had to go and see the fight. And I just think we're at that moment now. It's. It's becoming more obvious than ever. I saw this tweet yesterday. This lady said, more of my friends are becoming radicalized. Even some of my lefty friends are becoming radicalized. But by the way, I don't actually think you're becoming radicalized. I think you become a normalized. Yeah, I think everything, all the weird shit is radical. But by the by, but I think there's like this duty now in that our job is. I don't know if you've talked about this, but do you have kids?

[Carl]

Yeah, I've got four.

[Pete]

Okay, so you, you know, your job is to leave a better world for your kids, right?

[Carl]

Yeah, you.

[Pete]

You need to leave them with wisdom, hopefully a little nest egg, but also the ambition and, you know, the desire to go and build something.

[Carl]

A country that's in good condition would be nice.

[Pete]

Well, that's the second point. That's the thing. For every kid, there's two groups. There's your kids and everyone else's. And if we carry on down this path that we're on now, we are accepting a situation where we're choosing a worse country for them to be in. And so we're totally failing as parents and therefore anyone. It's almost like a call out for any journalist, judge, mp. You are all saying, right now, I want a worse world for our kids.

[Carl]

Correct.

[Pete]

That's bullshit.

[Carl]

Correct. All of it. Where to begin? I mean, there's no, there's no metric that I can think of in which things are getting better in any way, shape or form. And what this does is it completely destroys the post World War II narrative because it's the narrative of progress, that there is always improvement on the horizon. And for the last, I don't know, 10, 15 years, I think that narrative has died on its ass. There's no progress. Things are getting worse. So whatever it is we're doing and what we're doing is perfectly in line with the hyper liberal view of the world. The sort of John Lennon imagined view of the world. Well, that's making everything worse. And it's because there are actual, there are aspects of reality that we're just not prepared to talk about. And what we do is we embody those in Adolf Hitler. We say, this guy is all of those evil things, and they're not true. And we know because we won World War II. And therefore you are never allowed to even begin to have an intellectual investigation into it. What, What I wanted to say a minute ago was I. I'm a big lover of history. I. I love reading about history. And everyone who's great from history is also some kind of monster, right? Like Alexander the Great destroyed Thebes, right? Thebes is a famous, powerful Greek city. He killed everyone in it and sold whoever survived into slavery. And he did that multiple times on his conquest of the Persian Empire, right? The Romans destroyed entire civilizations. Like when they wiped out Carthage, that was 800,000 people. An ancient civilization that had an empire of its own spanning across the western Mediterranean. And they wiped them out. And it took two weeks for them to do it. Took two weeks to erase this city from existence because it was so vast, it was so strong, it was so powerful and rich in its own day. I mean, it took them three wars to do it. And Napoleon, yeah, Napoleon killed Genghis Khan. Four or five million people, something like that. Like Europe was destroyed from this Genghis Khan. Like the Mongols are just the worst, in fact. And it goes back all through history, right? You've got so many people dead and it's. And don't get me wrong, Adolf Hitler was bad, obviously, but he just joins a pantheon of bad people when it passes out of living memory and it passes into what I'm reading in a history book. And so for the Zoomers, Adolf Hitler could have been a thousand years ago because it's not anyone around them that they know who went through the events. So the time sort of enters into a kind of dream time where everything in the past did happen over there, miles away from where we are, because no one alive now remembers it. And so you can say, well, you're not allowed to think Adolf Hitler's cool. It's like, look, man, he had his suits done by Hugo Boss. You know, he had all of these, you know, really good looking suits and he had all these guys marching in formation. They were very proud of their strength and of their collectivity and proud of themselves as. As the Fuentes crowd would characterize them, straight white men. And in no way are we allowed to take Our own heroes who could have embodied that? I mean, like Nelson, Washington, whoever. We're not allowed to take our own heroes and say, yeah, no, these are a great embodiment of straight white men. You've pathologized this. Straight white men are not allowed to have a collective icon that they can rally behind and say, that's what we want to be represented by. And so if they're all demonized, well, why don't we just take the worst one as a you then? You know, because at the end of the day, they had great Hugo Boss suits.

[Pete]

Yeah, I'm not there yet.

[Carl]

Oh, no, I'm not there either, but.

[Pete]

But you're talking about Fuentes.

[Carl]

Yeah, yeah. I'm not saying I think this, obviously. I think the British were the good guys in World War II, because I'm British. But the point is, they have been systematically deracinated. They're being removed from the context of their own civilization. They are not being treated as the inheritors of a tradition that they are morally obligated to uphold. And so they're being thrown into this atomized world where everyone else has an identity group but them and everyone else has some kind of privileges or some kind of special dispensation for being a part of the identity group. And they're like, you know, you're radical individuals. Get on with it. Good luck, lads. And they're like, well, actually, we could just coalesce into an SS unit and start goose stepping down the street. And actually, that'll make us feel secure. That'll make us feel powerful. And your reaction to it validates this. Why is Nick Fuentes on tv? Why are, like, Chuck Schumer was getting up in the Senate going, oh, we must disavow Nick Fuentes. Like Danny Finkelstein going on TV going, oh, we have to disavow Nick Fuentes. So he's a pleb with a podcast, mate. You know, they're not actually forming the SS units, but just conceptually that they're thinking, actually, we will club together and be the straight white man club. That's got you freaking out. That's power. You are giving them power. You're revealing that there is power in that position. And for these powerless men who have been at the bottom of the totem pole of society for their entire lives, why do you think they wouldn't take that? You know, they don't care about the signs and symbols, all Nazi, Hitler. They don't care about any of that, really. What they care about is vibe and momentum and A way of getting out from under the heel of this feminized society that's going to treat them like the problem. I saw the other day that apparently kids are going to be taught in school. Andrew Tate is bad. It's like, oh, yeah, I'm sure that's not going to do anything but raise Andrew Tate's profile. So I'm like, oh, my God, I'm going to laugh. You hate Andrew Tate, do you? Brilliant. Do you know what Andrew Tate. Yeah, what a loser. Look at this muscular MMA millionaire champion. Like, oh, yeah, what a loser. What an absolute loser. No, he. Okay, great. That's. That's where the straight white men go, is it? They're going to the Andrew Tate fan club, dude. They. Brilliant.

[Pete]

That's that.

[Carl]

Because we hate this system. This system clearly hates us. It's got no appropriate place for us where we are honored. And so you. We are just in revolt. And that's what. That's what the gropers are with Hitler. That's what young men are with Andrew Tate. That's what's going to keep happening. And either we find a place for these young men in our civilization or they're going to turn it over.

[Pete]

How do we mainstream that to a point where it becomes something enough people accept? Because the difficult. The challenge is, is getting people to accept this. Because, look, you're. You're smart, you're clever. You can see it took. Took me. Took me 24 hours ago and revisited and kind of have a realized people.

[Carl]

Didn'T go through that process.

[Pete]

Well, they didn't. And you know, some people could go through that and still. Still come out. I mean, there's one person I know who's read both. Both my articles. They've watched it. They're still so focused on what Nick said and has said, and they're saying, yes, but it's dangerous. And by the way, I do think they have a point.

[Carl]

Oh, it is dangerous.

[Pete]

There can be a. I don't know. You don't know who is misinterpreting that as a young person or what they might do off the back of that. They've totally got a point. But my question back was, what are you going to do about it?

[Carl]

Yeah, yeah, exactly. That is the question. And the thing is, right, like, they're not wrong to be worried.

[Pete]

Yes.

[Carl]

Because historically, if you just think, okay, well, when this group of people starts organizing, what happens? Well, when bands of young, straight white men start organizing, empires are formed. That's literally what happened from like the 16th century onwards is Vast empires across the world started being formed because of radical. In this case, Christian. But like, radical young men who are prepared to stand shoulder to shoulder with one another and fire rifles at people, muskets at people, like, yeah, that is dangerous. It is absolutely dangerous. These are the fighting men of our civilization. And we're telling them, look, you've got no place here, okay? I think they'll figure out their own solution if you keep leaving this problem like an open wound. I mean, why are we telling our young men that they don't have a place in our civilization? That's a horrific thing to do, isn't it? No wonder they feel so aggrieved. Like, I would feel deeply wounded as well. I'd be like, well, hang on a second. You know, why can my dad have this? Why can my granddad have this? Why can all of them going back, you know, shouldering the burden of civilization all the way through history, but I get told I have to have a queer, trans, brown, feminist, HR lady is my boss. Why do I have to be the guy under the thumb? And that's a really great question.

[Pete]

You got your mic on. Is it fair?

[Connor]

It's fair.

[Pete]

Do you feel like that sometimes? Like, I.

[Connor]

Like, I can. I can have sympathy and understanding for the. For the past, the history, but it feels like we've come so far the other way. We're creating new history in the exact opposite direction.

[Pete]

We.

[Carl]

That's in the exact plan as well.

[Pete]

Well, we watched mid-90s as a bit of a repetitive thing to bring up in the show, but I do, because I brought up with Connor and he said it looked really cool when you grew up. And it was.

[Carl]

It was amazing.

[Pete]

It was Friday. Finished school.

[Carl]

That was it.

[Pete]

Grab our skateboards.

[Carl]

Yep.

[Pete]

Went to Lurch street car park. We would skateboard for two hours. Greendale, something. Playing in the car. Would go to this club called Esquires.

[Connor]

Yeah.

[Pete]

And it would have, like, a punk skateboard night. We'd all hang out and it would, you know, get drunk and whatever and go home. And then you get up on Saturday, what time you're meeting up. You had to be on time because nobody had a mobile phone. And you skateboard all day and then same again. And it was great. And also, we all knew a year later, we're going to university. University actually still kind of meant something, although it was losing steam.

[Carl]

Yeah. But Tony Blair opened the gates to university, so it became far less cool and important.

[Pete]

Yeah. I was in the last year that got it free.

[Carl]

I was in the year that didn't get it.

[Pete]

Oh, I didn't finish. I quit in my third year.

[Carl]

I quit my second, actually.

[Pete]

Yeah, that's bullshit.

[Carl]

It's only when I was an adult.

[Pete]

That went back to do, because you know what you actually want to study.

[Carl]

I knew what I actually wanted. I did computer science and I hated it. I was the only person I knew that passed the first year with no problems at all. All my friends had to take retakes, but I was just like, this is boring.

[Pete]

See, I did. I did one of those Mickey Mouse courses. Music. I wanted to work in the music industry. I had a fanzine, used to go to concerts, interview bands, and I was like. There was a. I remember at school, in the library, there was this computer. You filled in this form, it told you what course to do and it brought up this Music industry management. So I went to High Wycombe, studied that. It was absolute nonsense. You should just get a job. Just go to a record company.

[Carl]

Do it.

[Pete]

Yeah, go to a record company. Say, I will work for you for free. Like, I'll turn up every day, I'll work for free.

[Connor]

You. You will.

[Pete]

You will get less debt and you'll have. You'll have more experience.

[Carl]

It's probably been outlawed.

[Pete]

Probably.

[Carl]

It's probably illegal to do that actually work.

[Pete]

I think it is illegal to do work. Unpaid work experience now, is it? I think so.

[Carl]

I wouldn't be shocked.

[Pete]

Like, I think so, over a certain period of time. But anyway, yeah, you could offer yourself for free for a year and you'll be highly employable.

[Carl]

Yeah. And that would literally be better than going to university.

[Pete]

Infinitely better. But, you know, I. I quit. But we. But I was under that. And the only main reason I quit, I started building websites and I got offered a contract in my third year, getting paid 1,000 pound a week. I mean, Carl, this is.

[Carl]

Why wouldn't you say that?

[Pete]

It's 29 years ago.

[Carl]

Yeah. I didn't get a thousand pound a week. 29.

[Pete]

No, not 29 years ago. I was. Hold on, 27 years ago. A thousand pound a week? That's amazing. Some people never. And I was. Of course I'm not going back to. I mean, I told my dad and I was like, dad, I'm not going back. He was. But the point is, it's like I did that with the birth of the Internet. I knew I could get a job.

[Carl]

What are you describing here?

[Pete]

I'm just. I'm describing hope and opportunity.

[Carl]

But you're describing a frontier.

[Pete]

Yeah, right.

[Carl]

There's a Frontier that you can go and explore and conquer as a young man, and you can make money off, that you can get experience out of it. You could. You've got somewhere that you've, you know, you can carve a furrow. But are young men being given the opportunity now? No, absolutely not. They're being told, stop doing things. You're causing. You're upsetting the apple cup. Because we've got this all set out for other people who get to explore their own frontier now, and it's at your expense. And so the question is, and this really is the question that underpins all of this that we're not prepared to ask. It's like, why should any group in society come before our straight white men? Why should women have CEO jobs? Why should trans people have special.

[Pete]

Well, nobody should. Everything should be a meritocracy.

[Carl]

Well, hang. Should it?

[Pete]

Yeah, think about it.

[Carl]

Hang on. We have held that line since World War II, and now we're looking at what is basically an incel. Revolution.

[Pete]

No, but you talking about reverse dei.

[Carl]

No, what I'm talking about is what is the appropriate position for straight white young men in a society full of white people? And the answer is for them to be hired into good jobs so they become responsible citizens, so they take the weight of the world on their shoulders, and so they end up getting married and having children so there can be another generation. That's actually what they are entitled to. They have an entitlement to this in the way you had an entitlement to it in the way your father had an entitlement to it. Going back into the mists of prehistory. That's what we are telling them through the myth of meritocracy. They are not allowed. And what we have done is privileged all of these other identity groups and said, but these people can have it. And it's like, okay, sure. Hang on.

[Pete]

Sure.

[Carl]

And it's like, okay, well, okay. What happens when these people have that. Well, actually, they haven't done what men used to do, which is actually earn a load of resources and then redistribute them to everyone around them. Because I don't know about you, but I spend way more on my wife and family than I spend on myself. Way more. And I know every husband and father I know, and I know quite a few is exactly the same. It's not that you go without, you know, you get the little toys that you want, you know, your car or whatever it is, you get your things. But, you know, the vast bulk of your spending is on other people. Well, is that true of feminist CEOs? Is that true of all of these other communities? Not really.

[Pete]

You're saying every restaurant I get, you go into, you get the bill.

[Carl]

Of course.

[Pete]

That's it.

[Carl]

Yeah, of course I do. It's everything. Right, yeah. And this, this was the, the telos. The, the trajectory of the life of the straight white man is to be, is to work hard and provide for others. And with it came the position of honor, of being the head of your household. And we are saying to young men, you are not having that. And they're like, okay, well look, we would like that. And we've, we've told them no, we've told them that's misogynist. We've told them they're racist, we've told them they're all bad things under the sun. And suddenly they're coming back and saying, right, we're Hitler now. It's like, okay, yeah, I think we may have done that to them.

[Pete]

But, but the, the, I'm with you all the way. But the challenge of the workplace now, the college coming out in the workplace, it isn't just young white lads now. It's any young lad.

[Carl]

It is, yeah.

[Pete]

And I think, I think we're going to see that across the whole generation.

[Carl]

We are. But notice how now you've tried to diffuse the issue.

[Pete]

No, because the reason I'm saying that is, is that I, I think both can be true.

[Carl]

I'm not saying they're not.

[Pete]

Yeah, both can be true.

[Carl]

Hang on. Many, many things are true, but actually those non white lads have their own communities. Non white communities, that's not our community. Right. We have to focus on our ones. We haven't actually got a claim to these lads. We do have a claim to our own lads. And so we have to focus on this. And the more we try and equivocate and say, well, it's these people as well as these people, the more they hear, oh, not me then. Because what this is really about is recognizing the legitimacy that they have a claim. And while we try and diffuse this, what we're saying to them is not really, though, right? We have to accept them as they are, as our sons.

[Pete]

Sure, but, but I struggle to differentiate there with young black lads as well. Because when I went to school, there was no racism. We were all the same. We're all in the same boat. We all went out, we got jobs and careers. And I just think there are.

[Carl]

I'm not saying you have to, you know, ignore them, that they can't have any opportunities or anything like that. But what I'm saying is when you change this focus, you are sending a message. And the reason that they are saying I think Hitler is cool is because of the focus.

[Connor]

Right.

[Carl]

The it.

[Pete]

Like we're answering for your age group here, Connor.

[Carl]

Well, I speak to a lot of them.

[Pete]

Yeah.

[Connor]

I'm wondering what you think Makes a lot of sense. And. But then part of me is still like, I must be civilized. I must, I must toe that line. Right.

[Carl]

I like that a part of me says I must be civilized.

[Connor]

It's like, it's like an inbuilt mechanism which is like holding you back. Right. But I can understand why a lot of boys follow down this path, especially when we talk about it's not what you say, it's what you think. Right?

[Carl]

Yeah.

[Connor]

When you're sat in your bedroom on Rumble and you're like, who do I want to listen to? He's speaking a lot of what's going on up here.

[Carl]

Yeah.

[Pete]

So what, what do we do then? Like what is.

[Carl]

We have to accept that actually our responsibility are straight white men. Young straight white men. That's what we have to accept. And that's a difficult thing.

[Connor]

Who's our.

[Carl]

Older white straight white men.

[Connor]

Okay, okay. But the, the powers of Britain, what's their responsibility?

[Carl]

Well, that's a great question. It's a bit beyond the scope of what I was going to discuss here, but.

[Pete]

Well, just, just on that point though. So when you say it's our responsibility, what do you mean by that? What are we, what are we meant to do?

[Carl]

Okay, well, I think the first thing that we have to do is make sure that we don't cast the young men out into the cold.

[Pete]

Right.

[Carl]

Because that's the first instinct everyone has with Nick Fuentes and his fans. Right. Oh God, no. X. I hate X. Get them out. You know, we can't. And it's like, okay, well that's how this problem has begun in the first place. So more of the same isn't helpful. And I think the, the genuinely what we have to do is recognize that they have a legitimate grievance and that we have thrown them into. Like for example, in this country, nearly 40% of children are non white children. Right. I don't want to racialize it, but unfortunately that is the category the government uses. Not, not white British. So I've seen it in my own children that they understand the world in terms of groups. Right. Because we've introduced the concept of groups into their society. Like when you in school, you probably had a few non white kids around, but the other one majority would have been not. Would have been white. Yes. British, obviously. Same here. Right. And so there's this unspoken assumption of demographic might that you. Everyone will act like us because this is just. You don't have a choice. Well, when. I mean, there are a huge number of schools where white British kids are in the minority. So they don't have the luxury that we had to assume that everyone is going to think like us. And those people who are not like us, but we're living with us will not have a choice but to become inured into the civilization that we are. They don't have that right. And so I've noticed that in my own kids they deal with identity groups in the conceptual framing. And I think about it, how did Nick Fuentes become famous? What did he do to become famous?

[Pete]

Well, I don't know. I know the various moments from his interviews. But you're talking about one specific moment.

[Carl]

Just generally there's this one particular trajectory that he used to become famous. What was it?

[Pete]

I mean, shock.

[Carl]

No, I mean it is shocking. But that's not the. That that's a consequence, not the essential.

[Pete]

Do you know con, I walked around.

[Connor]

School in a maga hat?

[Carl]

No, it's not that. He identifies the power of groups. Nick Fuentes identifies group influence.

[Pete]

Okay?

[Carl]

And this is anathema to the liberal order that hates talking about groups. It hates talking about blacks, it hates talking about Jews, it hates talking about, you know, these things in affirmative terms, as in. In terms of power. He was happy to talk about them in terms of oppression and why the homogenous liberal over society of individuals needs to cater to said group. But Nick Fuentes went completely against the grain and essentially became a heretic by saying, okay, but these groups have power, these groups have influence. These groups are doing things. And merely me calling them out has turned me into a pariah. Right. So whether the right or wrong of what he's saying is irrelevant. That was his crime. But young people are forced to think this way because they know that there are groups in society and these groups do act in certain ways and actually they have to live cheek by jowl with them. Like there was an example in the local paper in Swindon of a school called St. James's School where a group of black boys had ganged up on some white kid and beat him unconscious and sent him to the hospital. They didn't have a problem with him. They were trying to get someone else. But that kid had escaped. So they just rounded on this other kid who's much younger than them, and just kicked the shit out of him. That's a race war. Do you understand? That's a race war. These black kids looked at the white kid and said, he's white. We can just kick the shit out of him. The police said that there was no crime. The police said, school matter. We're not going to touch it. So what did these black kids get? Well, they got a week off school, so they got rewarded for doing this.

[Pete]

But we. We've seen that happen the other way. We saw it with Stephen Lawrence.

[Carl]

So what?

[Pete]

Well, I'm just saying.

[Carl]

So what, do you think that's persuasive to our young people?

[Pete]

No, but what I'm saying is this.

[Carl]

Has happened the other way. So you're gonna have to take a kicking from the black.

[Pete]

No, absolutely not. What I'm saying is it's like we have to recognize both. It's all wrong.

[Carl]

Sure.

[Connor]

I think it's more so. So what, are we just going to keep going back and forth?

[Carl]

Exactly.

[Connor]

Years and years. How do we get to a point where there is this comfortability?

[Carl]

Exactly. And the thing is, when you say, what about the other side? Well, you're equivocating that.

[Connor]

Right.

[Carl]

What you're saying is actually the people we are responsible for as older, straight, white men are the same as the people who are actually victimizing them. We're concerned equally about both groups. It's like. Well, in the ideal liberal world, where we are the overwhelming demographic power of the country, sure. I'm more than happy for us to do that, obviously, but that's not the reality for a lot of these young kids. That's not the reality in their schools. They are not the overwhelming demographic power. The. The institutions are not even sympathetic to them when they are victimized. Like, in this particular case, the police are like, not our problem. We'll kick it back to the school. It's like, are you insane? How can that not be a crime? How can it not be a crime that, like, nine kids can gather around one kid, kick him unconscious, put him in the hospital, and nothing happens?

[Pete]

Yeah, I'm not. I'm not arguing against.

[Carl]

No, no, I know, I know. But just think of the numerous, manifold failures at every level of society.

[Connor]

Right.

[Carl]

Like a just society. I mean, if that happened 100 years ago, every one of those boys would have been publicly flogged. They would have been flogged. Their backs would have been bloodied, and their parents and them would probably been deported from the country. It would have been unthinkable 100 years ago for that to have happened. And if it did happen, there'd be hell to pay. And yet now we are telling our young people, nothing will happen to these people. You're just going to take the beating and then you shut up. Oh, yeah. Why are they becoming Hitler? Yeah, I wonder.

[Pete]

Sure. But it doesn't happen in every scenario. How do we, how do we do this in a way that doesn't.

[Carl]

But it does happen though.

[Pete]

Look, it does happen. But how do we do it in a way that doesn't spark some kind of internal race war? Or you saying we have to face that anyway?

[Carl]

It's already happening.

[Pete]

Okay.

[Carl]

Like if nine black kids can beat the shit out, like these are like 15, 16, and this kid was like 13, and they just mercilessly beat him into the hospital because they couldn't get the kid they wanted. How is that not a race war?

[Pete]

We know, right?

[Carl]

It's the same with Pakistani communities doing other things elsewhere. Like we, we are just abandoning our children to the wolves here. And it's like, that's not fair. And I'm not surprised that they. I think that Hitler is a product of vulnerability. Right? I think the Germans felt vulnerable. They felt humiliated. And that's why Adolf Hitler gained purchase in the German mine. And I think that's the reason why Adolf Hitler is gaining purchase in the minds of young, straight white men in the west now. I think they feel vulnerable. I think that they are not secure. I think they're genuinely worried that when they go to school they might get their fucking teeth knocked out.

[Pete]

And Nick Fuentes represents somebody who understands.

[Carl]

That he's calling out the realities of group power because group power is a reality they have to live with.

[Pete]

Saying the quiet bit out loud.

[Carl]

Yes. And the older folks who grew up in a homogenous country where group power actually wasn't the issue. Like, you know, I'm sure you had bullies at school, you know, everyone did. And you'd have a fight with your bully. You didn't have 10 kids jumping on you because you were the wrong skin color. You had a one on one with that guy. And maybe you won, maybe you lost, who knows? But it's a completely different world.

[Pete]

But did it happen the other way? I'm not excusing it. But when?

[Carl]

I don't doubt that it did back in the 1970s.

[Pete]

I'm pretty sure it happened when I was a kid.

[Carl]

Well, I never saw it when I was a kid.

[Pete]

Is like how do we get to.

[Connor]

Balance is the truth that we just cannot live as one?

[Carl]

Well, this is the great question, right? Because what, what the appropriate thing to do is when any of these things happen would be extreme corporal punishment. Right. On either side. That would be the fair thing to do. Like if a gang of 10 white kids beat up a Pakistani boy or something. Corporal punishment, gang of Pakistani kids beat up a white boy. Corporal punishment like that would be genuine fear and pain has to be in the minds of these boys, but they don't have that. What they've got is an incredibly soft touch system that doesn't even punish them. Like, these kids spent their week sat at home playing on their PlayStations. Like, this is not an acceptable state of affairs. What lesson did they learn? You know, this is, I mean, it's genuinely a horror. Can you imagine being that kid where you're getting your head kicked in, your face stamped on, and then you wake up in the hospital and you're like, okay, what happens? Like, well, nothing. They're gonna, they're gonna get a week off school. The police said no crime.

[Pete]

Well, you're not gonna want to go back to school.

[Carl]

No, exactly. And the thing is this kid, like if there was some connection between these kids, maybe you can understand it, but this was a random kid. And this is just one example which just happened near me.

[Pete]

But we're not, we're not going to become a country that removes all what are considered minority groups from the country. Yeah. So but then how do we get the balance right?

[Carl]

Well, again, this, it comes down to regard, it comes down to recognition. Right. At the moment it's all the minority groups that get the recognition from the state. Like all the hate crime legislation. Have you ever heard of someone who isn't white skinned or going against a minority group being arrested for hate crimes? When, you know, you see people being anti white all the time and yet none of them are ever arrested by the police. And the police barely even patrol these communities anyway. So they don't really feel like they have the moral authority to police these communities. And so what do you think this does? Like, this is, this is a shattering of what's, of the country itself and we're starting to go right, okay, well, we'd just like to go back and say, I don't know, man, it might be too late in many of these cases and it's certainly unfair to have done to the people who were not responsible for it and have to live with the consequences of it.

[Pete]

So on this podcast, you are Definitely hearing me talk about bitcoin a lot. Well, why? We live in a really strange time with governments driving inflation, with their reckless spending and endless money printing. There is a way out of this. There is a way to protect your money, and that is by stacking bitcoin. I've made loads of shows about bitcoin. You can go and research this, you can go and read the books, but the truth is, it is the hardest money ever created. If you are interested in protecting your financial future, it's time for you to get on the bitcoin train. I have. I've been stacking bitcoin personally and through my businesses since 2017. It's protected me, it's secured my family's future, and it also strengthens all of my businesses. So if you want to start stacking bitcoin, where do you do it? Well, for me, it's with Gemini. They're a fully licensed, full reserve exchange and custodian. So they give you a secure way for you to buy and own your bitcoin. There's no risks and no funny business. So if you're serious about stacking bitcoin the right way, head over to gemini.com, which is g-e m I n I dot com. So I think you're actually saying there should be balance. That's the point.

[Carl]

Yes.

[Pete]

But a restoring of the balance.

[Carl]

There should be a restoration of a righteous order. Right now.

[Pete]

Well, I could expand that, by the way. Do you know when I went to get that cup of tea?

[Carl]

Yeah.

[Pete]

Occasionally I do these little videos for Twitter, the bar I own. This weekend, someone kicked in the toilet, right? They've just gone in there, they've put their foot through it. It'll cost £1,000 to repair our coffee shop. We've had cutlery stolen. We've got nice cutlery. Someone hit my car this year. Drove off. No camera. Thousand pound repair. Someone broke in through the trees on our front yard, broke into Connor's car, Nick's sunglasses, wallet. What else am I missing? Headphones, headphones. What else am I missing? Things that have happened. The guy drove into the back of my car and I had a photo. All the evidence. The police would investigate it. I can give you endless examples of shit we've had to deal with that other people have done, that we have to pay for that costs us. Because, one, they don't care and two, they can get away with it.

[Carl]

Yeah.

[Pete]

Now I'm never gonna go and live in Dubai. It's not my thing. No, culturally, it's not my thing, but when somebody says to me that, I know, oh, I leave my keys, it's weird. I just leave my keys in my car. Like, no, you know, you can park outside a shop. Just leave your keys in a car. Your car is not getting stolen. There's almost no crime. I'm like, why can't we have a bit of that?

[Carl]

Well, hang on a second. What was it like when you were a teenager?

[Pete]

Well, it wasn't like. Well, but I'm. As an adult, I'm the one paying.

[Carl]

Sure. But what I mean is, did your parents leave the keys in the car? Like.

[Pete]

No.

[Carl]

In a lot of places they do. My parents. My parents live in Newquay, and my. They're so lax about locking their door because, of course, you know, they live in a nice cul de sac in Nikki, and nothing ever happens there. So there are lots of areas of the country in which that doesn't happen and didn't ever happen.

[Pete]

Sure. But it's. This is. I think.

[Carl]

I mean, don't get me wrong, If I was in London or Coventry or something.

[Pete]

Yeah.

[Carl]

Okay. Yeah. I'm gonna lock my door.

[Pete]

But it's part of the decay, right?

[Carl]

Yeah.

[Pete]

And I was just like, I'm over this. I've had enough. I'm. I don't want this anymore.

[Carl]

No. And yet this is the world that our kids are growing up in.

[Pete]

Yeah.

[Carl]

And we wonder why they're being aggressive with their own selves, you know, their own sense of self. They want to assert it, and that's. I don't blame them for wanting to assert it. And I don't see what option they have.

[Pete]

I was. I think I'm kind of done with the politics side of this. You'll appreciate this because you love history. I was reading about the Glorious Revolution. I was reading about William the Orange, or William of Orange Will Live because he's Dutch. I was reading all about this. And. Yeah. And my main issue at the moment is that we have a structural issue within Whitehall. And I think the movement. The fast, rapid move of conservatives to reform. Although I think people have come from other parties, but generally speaking. And now this very rapid.

[Carl]

Lots of labor, they have.

[Pete]

Yeah. Old school labor as well. Yeah. But a lot of lefties have gone from labor now to Greens. Greens are growing really quickly. But I. I don't think. I have no faith that either of those parties can actually stop this structural decay because I think we. I think we actually kind of have a constitutional crisis in that our system is set up to fail. I think if we've had three decades of politicians coming in and failing and failing and failing. I don't think these people start out as bad people. I think the incentive structure of parliament sets us up to fail. Because there's no limits on power. There's no limit on the purse, there's no limit on the laws they can create. There's no accountability. So why wouldn't they just do what the fuck they want? Because they can.

[Carl]

It's ironic that the more democratized that the country becomes, the more diffuse power becomes, the less accountable it becomes.

[Pete]

Yes.

[Carl]

Because I mean, if we had just a single autocrat making commandments every day, okay, you might not have political freedom, you might not be able to vote for the party that you like, but at least you know who is responsible for the things that are happening.

[Pete]

You could cromwell them.

[Carl]

Exactly. You can hold them to accounts. Right. But as you rightly point out, the. The problem with our political system is who is on what committee that has made this decision. I don't know. You don't know? How can we ever contact them? We can't. How can we get them out of their position? We can't. And so we're sat with the Kabuki theater of partisan parliamentary politics and it not changing a damn thing. And so again, you can see why a lot of them are like, yeah, I think I'd rather the dictator.

[Pete]

Actually we. If you go on Grok, I did it this morning. I didn't actually check chat gpd, but I said, what is the one thing? Give me the one thing that all politicians have in common, only give me one based. Based on their goals. And they said to ensure they are voted in at the next election.

[Carl]

Yeah.

[Pete]

They retain their seat.

[Carl]

Yeah.

[Pete]

And so like if you walk down that, you go, okay, if that is their goal and that's their only goal, do any of them care about. Because really you wanted to say their one goal is to make the country better. Their one goal.

[Carl]

You would think, you would think you.

[Pete]

Would say if you were, if you wrote an ideal single goal of a politician is you make the country better. That would mean occasionally at the dispatch box, Kemi would go, do you know what, Kier? That's actually a good idea. I quite like that. Let's meet up next week. How can I help you?

[Carl]

That's ideal, isn't it?

[Pete]

Yeah. But every single thing that one party says, the other objects and vice versa because they want to retain power. Now, if you have control of the public purse and you want to be re elected, where do I spend that money to secure votes. So if I'm labor, it suits me to have a dependent class. It suits me to have authoritarian control over your speech. All this suits me. All this in my deranged brain makes me think I can retain my seat. Obviously, labor have completely screwed up.

[Carl]

Yeah, they're not going to.

[Pete]

But if that is the case, then we have given way too much power. Look, if you go back in history, if, if you, you know, if you, if you look back hundreds of years ago, when we established our own constitution, I understood why we didn't codify. I understood why we perhaps trusted these aristocrats to run our country. Have the best interests at heart. Even with a little bit of corruption, probably. But, yeah, generally speaking, yeah, a little bit. But, like, they did a good job. Kings are corrupt. Occasionally they get to live the good life. I get it. Right, I get it. But right now, our current political class is so unintelligent or incompetent or perhaps even evil that.

[Carl]

Sorry, I've had this terrible cost for weeks.

[Pete]

We have no way of holding this account. We can't. The judges can't hold them to count. We can't sue them like you can.

[Carl]

In the U.S. but even then, what could you do about the judges if they go off the rails? Well, what can we do about the lefty judges who are constantly like, oh, we're going to interpret Article 8 of the European Court human rights legislation. As you know, the right to a family life means this guy doesn't get deported because of the chicken nuggets his son doesn't. Like, like, sorry, how do I hold that person?

[Pete]

I don't know that. I don't know that level of detail. But we have no way of constraining power in our country.

[Carl]

No.

[Pete]

And so we give all power. I say 650. But really, if it's a parliamentary majority, you're giving it to the 350 to 400 who have that parliamentary majority. We're saying you can create pretty much any laws, you can change any laws, you can do anything you pretty much want with tax. Yes, I know.

[Carl]

I hope the zoomers are listening.

[Pete]

Well, and I know with that, like, I think Bill of Rights is. I think taxation is covered in the Bill of Rights. Like, it has to be approved by parties, Parliament. But generally speaking, you get four to five years to do whatever the you want. You put out a manifesto, here are our promises. Yeah, we're not going to do any of that. We're going to do this for five years and we've just got to suck it up and put up with it. There's no way of holding them accountable at all. So that, to me, is a constitutional crisis. What, what I don't want to do, Carl, is I don't want to have the country to have to collapse into absolute chaos and anarchy for us to go, yeah, there's a constitutional crisis. I want it now. I want people. I'm not going to vote in the next election unless a party says, we have a constitutional crisis. You can't trust us. You know what, In a way, Thatcher.

[Carl]

Used to say, but doesn't this seem a bit, like, strange? So, yeah, I'm going to trust the politicians to rein the politicians in.

[Pete]

Well, I trust.

[Carl]

What incentive do they have to do it?

[Pete]

Oh, they have none. Apart from if enough people withdraw consent, I withdraw consent on my own. It does nothing. If millions withdraw consent and stand on the streets like they do in Europe. You go across Europe, Eastern Europe, millions will come out on the streets and say, we're not having this anymore.

[Carl]

But we've got that problem in the west generally. I mean, Macron is the only politician in the world that's less popular than Keir Starmer, and yet he's still the President of France. Keir Starmer won on, like, a third of the votes that were actually cast, a fifth of the votes that could have been cast. And he's got an approval rating of like, 11%. And he's still the Prime Minister. Like, the, the system is illegitimate by. If. If the standard is the popular will and consent. Right. The system, everyone can tell. And yet look at the radical things they're doing. We're gonna suspend jury trials and certain things. Sorry, why are we not sorry? Is that not revolutionary territory? Yeah, suspending our. That goes back to the Magna Carta. Yeah. You know, Sorry. As Englishman, are we not like, sorry, David Lammy, what are you doing? You know, and like, for some reason, we're not doing anything about it. We're just like, okay, well, I guess we'll just have to try and wait it out. And hopefully Nigel Farage restores jury trials. What's next, Habeas corpus? Like, where are we going with this? Free speech is already gone.

[Pete]

If he's only got 11 approval rating, how many, what percent do you think genuinely hate the Labour Party most?

[Carl]

Most, like, two thirds.

[Pete]

I think if enough people understood that if we went out on the streets and we protested and we refused to work, we just refused to work day in, day out until they left, they will have a crisis just like In Bulgaria, Although I know it's a little bit fake. Fake coup. But they would have to quit. They would have to resign.

[Carl]

So, like, where, where compels them to.

[Pete]

Resign that the country is collapsing around them.

[Carl]

Does that bother Keir Starmer?

[Pete]

I think eventually, yes. I think. I think you get to a point.

[Carl]

You would think it would have to, but I mean, Keir Starmer is currently leading a zombie party. Like the, the projections, you know, the labor hit, like, was it 14 in the polls the other day, and when projected out, they lose 400 seats. It's like there's never been a collapse that big. This, this is a genuinely zombie party where every front bencher loses their seat, almost all of their backbenchers lose their seats. And yet he still sat there as if he is the leader of the country.

[Pete]

But what do you think his best case scenario is in his head?

[Carl]

I have no idea.

[Pete]

Well, I think there's two.

[Carl]

He seems to be completely unresponsive to the fact that he's about to destroy the Labour Party, which I'm in favor of, by the way.

[Pete]

Yeah, I agree. I think he's got two scenarios. He thinks about one every day. I'm still Prime Minister, I get to go into number 10, I get to retain my power. And there is a scenario. Maybe I can do a coalition with the Lib Dems and us and the Lib Dems go.

[Carl]

But why would the Lib Dems want the stench of Labour on them?

[Pete]

It's a bit like I'm shit at football. Right? I'm shit.

[Carl]

Yeah.

[Pete]

If Arnie. If Arnie Slot calls me up and says, you're on the bench this weekend for Liverpool, I'm turning up. And if he puts me on, I'm playing and I'm getting booed, I'm gonna do it.

[Carl]

But you're not the current top footballer in the world, are you?

[Pete]

No, but what I'm saying is they are the government. Yeah. I don't think there's enough of a reason for him to resign. But I. I think you can. I think you can velvet a revolution. This. I think you can. Solidarity movement, this.

[Carl]

Sure.

[Pete]

I think, I think you can do it in a. Like all the amer. You know what it's like. You've got Americans who follow you.

[Carl]

Right. Yeah.

[Pete]

This is why you should never have given up your guns. There's no world where we're going to pull our guns out and, like, take back over our country because you're not doing it in America.

[Carl]

Yeah.

[Pete]

And so shut up with that. And also too many people will die and you'll give them too much of a reason to end it. I think you can peaceful. I think it's more effective to have a peaceful revolution. But I do, I. Am I just being hopeful. I think if we hate this government enough, we should all withdraw our consent.

[Carl]

But it's not predicated on our consent.

[Connor]

So what's the option?

[Pete]

But I think it's predicated on the.

[Carl]

Bureaucratic structures that run the country.

[Pete]

Sure. But I think you can pressure it.

[Carl]

Enough if you get the only thing. I mean, what is the only thing they actually respond to?

[Connor]

Right.

[Carl]

They don't care about the polls, they don't care about your votes because the machinery is going to keep going no matter who's in the cockpit. Right. They don't care about any of that. What they care about is physical non compliance. Right. You remember when Tommy Robinson did the big United Kingdom rally and they were like, oh my God. Keir Starmer said that was the scariest thing he'd ever seen.

[Pete]

Because, dude, I was there. It was not scary.

[Carl]

Yeah, dude, come on. I was there. It's not physically scary for us, but it's very scary for them. Because if Keir Starmer was like, right, I'm gonna get as many people out into the streets as I possibly can. Parliament is going to raise men. How many people do you think he could raise?

[Pete]

Not as many as us, but we.

[Carl]

Know that Tommy can get a million people out in the streets. Do you think you could storm a parliament with a million people? I think you might be able to.

[Pete]

We might get arrested for this.

[Carl]

I think that if you have sufficient numbers, there's no arresting you. And that's what Keir Starmer thinks.

[Pete]

I mean, it is a risk to them. You see it, you see it across the world where people attack their. I mean, it happened recently in Sri Lanka.

[Carl]

Oh, Sri Lanka, yeah, it was Nepal. Nepal got couped C. I think Sri.

[Pete]

Lanka got C as well.

[Carl]

Really? Yeah, I think got coed via Discord.

[Pete]

Yeah. Bangladesh got C. I'm not even, not even joking.

[Carl]

It was a bunch of 14 year olds. Nepalese zoomers. They all set up a parliament in Discord, voted for the presidency and the military was like, well, it was a vote and accepted it.

[Pete]

But. But if we. I guess we need some kind of leadership on this. Somebody who can. You need somewhat.

[Carl]

On the revolution or not the revolution.

[Pete]

The revolution. Well, you need like a Jon Snow, right?

[Carl]

Oh, yeah.

[Pete]

You need somebody who isn't like out like complete right wing or complete left Wing. It just says, look, there's an institutional problem. Which by the way, we, I've been reading a lot of the blogs of the, the domestic Marxists and observing what they've been saying. The majority of their complaints are actually the same.

[Carl]

Yeah.

[Pete]

Institutional rotation. And we were, we were going through a Grace Blakely article earlier. I don't know if you saw Garrett. No, not Gary. Zach Kolansky's interview with Rory Stewart and the war criminal where he asked him about his economics.

[Carl]

I haven't watched it all. I watched a part of it.

[Pete]

Do you see the bit where they said, who's your economic inspiration? And you listed Gary Government. And this is Grace Blakely and she said, she tweeted recently. I'm not an economist, I'm a Marxist.

[Carl]

I agree.

[Pete]

Yeah. But I went and read one of her articles and I was like, I agree with anything, which is not policy, which is symptom. I completely agree with. She. Ah, can you get it up? Let's. Let me just show you this because basically I think she's kind of like Nick Fuentes.

[Carl]

Can I, can I pause on this?

[Pete]

Yes.

[Carl]

Because I feel that we are getting away from the heart of the problem.

[Pete]

Let me finish this one point and then we'll go back to the heart. Just because I think this is a really important point, is that I don't think we solve this without solving the mechanism. And I think the left and the right have to realize their complaints are the same.

[Carl]

Yes.

[Pete]

And I don't think they do.

[Carl]

Well, I think you can actually see that. For example, the other day was Zach Polinski said he wanted to ban landlords. Right. It's like. Well, yeah, I mean, I don't like, I'm not in favor of banning landlords, but what he's saying there is he wants to, he wants to end rent seeking behavior so that people can purchase their own properties. Yeah. Because he mistakenly thinks that actually like BlackRock owns like 90% of housing stock in this country or something, it's 2%, something like that. It's really, really small. It's a much bigger problem in America actually. But he's, he's identifying the same problem and is trying to get to a solution to it, which is I want young people to buy houses. Yeah, I want that too.

[Pete]

Same.

[Carl]

The problem is he doesn't, he's. He's completely wedded to the system that is causing the problem.

[Pete]

Yes.

[Carl]

You know, he wants, he wants more immigration, he wants more of this, he wants more of that. Which has led us to the place we're in. And then he just wants to use executive government fiat to just sand off the rough corners.

[Pete]

This. Have you found it? So I think this is, this will take us back to part of the heart of the problem.

[Carl]

Yeah.

[Pete]

So she's a Marxist and it's generation despair. Work doesn't pay, housing is out of reach and life has been in shit ified. Why should young people. People keep propping up a system rigged against them.

[Carl]

Okay, pause that great Grace. How much do we cut taxes by? None. Because the NHS will suffer. How much do we reduce immigration by? None, because that's racist.

[Pete]

Oh, no, don't get me wrong.

[Carl]

She's wrong on everything.

[Pete]

She's wrong on solutions. Yeah, but, but that could be an article about Nick Fuentes.

[Carl]

Oh, yeah.

[Pete]

Generation despair. And this is the point, I think this is why I called Zach Polanski, the British Nick Fuentes. Not because I think they've got the same ideas and solutions, because young people everywhere are looking for an answer. If you're, if you're a bit of a young lefty, Zach Polanski is saying to you, the system doesn't work. If you're, you know, right. Liberal youngster, Nick Fuentes saying, the system doesn't work for you. They're both saying the same thing.

[Carl]

They're both correct.

[Pete]

Yeah. Zach Polanski and Reform are saying, vote for us in the next election, we'll fix it. Without fixing any of the plumbing.

[Carl]

Yeah. Literally with the, the, the, the, the, the, the sinks overflowing and Zach Polanski's like, look, we're not going to turn off the tap. We're going to get a bucket, put.

[Pete]

The bucket underneath it.

[Carl]

It's like, okay, exactly. Turning off the tap is surely more effective. Yeah, no, that's racist.

[Pete]

We could do a whole show on Zach Polanski. All right, back to the heart.

[Carl]

But back to the heart of it. Okay, let's assume we tinker with the political system and we decide somehow the political system is to blame. That doesn't change the conceptual makeup of young people's experience in the country. Right. Okay. They might be able to afford a house. Great. But they've still got a groupish world around them rather than an individualistic world that we grew up in. What can be done about that? And the answer is, well, not much, actually. And so the liberal consensus will find itself falling away because it's irrelevant. It doesn't address the groupishness of this group and that group and that group and that group. And even if we were to solve A bunch of these high level problems. Well, how is it that young men get ahead in the world? That's still the question that actually needs to be asked. And so the question that underpins all of it is why should these other groups have advantages over our young men? And the answer is really they shouldn't. Right.

[Pete]

I'm sorry to do this again, but what advantages are you saying they have?

[Carl]

Well, there are loads. Like for example, there are loads of affirmative action programs. If you look at the BBC website.

[Pete]

That'S all the DI shit needs to go.

[Carl]

Sure, sure. But it's not just the di, right? The DI is the formalization of a mindset that implicitly discriminates against straight white young men. Right. And so like on the BBC where you've got all these apprenticeships that are literally, they literally say from people of bame backgrounds or trans women, whatever it is. Right. I'm not saying we should, we have to wait. You have to be a straight white man for a thing. But, but like this is indicative of a system that is trying to accomplish something. And the system is trying to accomplish a kind of equality where there is no equality right now. It's just a fact of life that straight white young men work harder and more than other groups. They will put in more hours, they will just be more industrious, they just work more. And it is literally just more, more hours in worse conditions for less pay for future prospects. Right. You can look at just the, the numbers are all in on this. Like something like the average man works something like 45 hours a week and the average woman works like 36 hours a week. Something like that. Oh, why is there a gender pay gap? You know, why do you think? You know. And so all of these initiatives are designed to retard the advance of these straight white men that they have justly earned and advance other groups that haven't just landed, rather than allowing a natural equilibrium to form. And a natural equilibrium would mean that the straight white men had more resources than these other groups. And with those resources they could attract women and buy houses and start families and all of these things. And until we accept that that is the correct way that society ought to be. I'm not saying we need to take anything off anyone, but until we accept that that's normal and natural and how things ought to be, then we're always going to have this problem of the straight white men wondering why the civilization they live in is holding them back.

[Pete]

So we have to collapse the liberal order.

[Carl]

Yes.

[Pete]

How do you do that? I Mean like, I feel like it's kind of collapsing itself. I agree, not fast enough. Yeah, but it is collapsing itself and I think we all have a responsibility to call it out where it exists. Yeah, but I also think there's other things we, we could do and could think about doing in the tax code. We could do something for young people.

[Carl]

Absolutely. But the, I mean, it comes down to our own prejudices really. For example, if, if you've got a, a woman with a certain qualification and a exact, you know, five year history doing a job, they have a man with exactly the same qualification, you know that the institution is going to be biased in favor of hiring the woman.

[Pete]

The institution is. The private company probably does the opposite, quite possibly.

[Carl]

But it, I mean it depends how big the company is, you know, if it's.

[Pete]

And also it depends who's interviewing them because it could be a man for a man.

[Carl]

But if it's like a, you know, a giant corporation or a government agency or something like that, if there's the police, you know, she's getting picked. But the thing is, there are actually really good reasons not to pick her. Even though she's identical to the man. Right. You know, for a start that the man's going to work more hours, you know, that she could become pregnant and therefore not work for you and things like that. But that's, that's all kind of second order effects. Why do we want women out earning men? Why do we want that? Like who wants that? What good does that do for society? We know that actually it's good when men are the highest earners of society because we spend our wealth on everyone else. Like if you want families to be formed, young men have to out earn women. Well, so that's just the way things are. And so if we want a civilization that goes into the future, that has to be a part of our calculation. Now our young men have to earn more than the young women or than men of other communities. You know, otherwise we're advancing non white men over the straight white men. Right. And the thing is, as well people say, oh, that seems mean. They have countries of their own in which they are privileged in exactly the way I'm speaking of over you. If you went to India or something, Indians would get a privilege over you in hiring in all of these things because they understand, no, these are our men that we need for our civilization's future. And so it's, it's one of those things where we're going to have to start thinking in this way because of the world we have created, as uncomfortable as it might be.

[Pete]

Well, the low birth rate is an issue. We looked it up, so it's catastrophic. So if we want young, any young person, by the way, who wants to have a kid. I know, I know what you're saying. No, no, but I'm saying my son here. Yeah, but I can't, I, I, I grew up in a privileged upbringing. I grew up with black kids around me who also privileged and are facing some of the same.

[Carl]

I'm not saying they're not.

[Pete]

Yeah, Challenges. And when I talk about housing affordability, and I know what you're saying, but I still think in that way. I'm not, I'm not there yet, Carl. I'm not there.

[Carl]

Just to be clear, I'm not saying you have to be prejudicial against them or anything like that. Right. But what it is, it's about the recognition. It's about recognizing that these ones are ours. We have a direct linkage to these ones. They also have people caring about them. They have older men. They have their families around them caring about them. When we diffuse, it makes it seem like we don't care about our own enough.

[Pete]

Yeah, but so what about Sebi in that situation?

[Connor]

Well, you're asking a different question. You don't.

[Pete]

It's the same thing, though.

[Connor]

Specific scenarios. Yeah, but you're talking about a society where we are grouped and we only care for our own.

[Carl]

But I'm not saying we only care for it.

[Pete]

But this is a priority. We as a priority. The comments are going to say you're based and I'm Piers Morgan.

[Carl]

Sure.

[Pete]

But no, I said what you're saying. I get what you said.

[Carl]

And I realized that when you lay out like this, it can sound like only, you know, And I'm not, I'm not trying to say that, but the, the problem is when we start diffusing, then what we're saying is we're not, you know, what we're saying is actually the priority is removed from our own. And the young people are living in this groupish world already. Right.

[Pete]

No, I get it.

[Carl]

I get it when they, you know, when.

[Connor]

I don't think you've been pissed off enough. I saw an inkling this morning.

[Pete]

Yeah, no, but I get it. But I guess what it is, is I'm just not entirely there. I don't see it the same way entirely. But, Carl, if I'm, and I'm, I.

[Carl]

Don'T have any of these problems that these young people have. Right. You know, obviously you Know, you know, people of our age and success, we don't have these problems. But I see my kids knowing not to associate with these groups, knowing not to associate with those groups because they have people looking out for them already, and they don't look out for my kids.

[Pete]

Yeah. You know, but if I'm struggling to see it exactly the same, how do you get a whole country to see it or enough of a country?

[Carl]

Well, I mean, I think honestly, like, the older generations will die out and the younger generations will be left with the mess and they'll have no choice because they've grown up in this.

[Pete]

There's a huge responsibility on the millennials here. If, when you think about it, God.

[Carl]

If you imagine putting responsibility on the shoulders of.

[Pete]

But it kind of is.

[Carl]

Yeah, it's.

[Pete]

It's like the tail end Gen X's like us and the millennials.

[Carl]

Yeah.

[Pete]

Because the boomers and the Piers Morgans.

[Connor]

Yeah.

[Carl]

They're no hopers.

[Pete]

No hopers. Okay.

[Carl]

But this is, this is the difficult thing conceptually for us to get around. Right. Because we were, we were raised in societies like when, when you were. How old are you now?

[Pete]

Sorry, 47.

[Carl]

Right. I'm 46. Right. So when, when we, when we were 10 years old, England was 95% English. What. What percentage do you think it is now?

[Pete]

I have no idea, but a lot lower.

[Carl]

A lot lower. Right. Official government statistics would have you believe it's about 70 to 75%, but it's not. It's lower than that and certainly isn't in cities overall, though. And you're absolutely right. In, in the cities, it's 30% in London, isn't it? 37% of the last census, but again, probably lower. Lucent, 33, Birmingham, 42. Right. That, like these, these areas are like we. When, when my dad was born, London was 97 English. He wasn't born in London, but you know what I mean? This is sort of the scale of the demographic change. And so these communities. There are more Muslims in England than in Britain than Welsh people. Twice as many. If all of the Muslims in Britain chose to move to Wales, that would become a caliphate. Right. Like, that's how crazy the scale of the change has been in this country. And we who grew up in 95% English England, like, yeah, but I don't want to be groupish and judged by groups. It's like, okay, but your children are living it. And when you totter off the mortal coil, they're going to be left with very large form non English groups in Their country. Yeah. That recognize the difference. Right. There is a. There is a boundary between these communities. They recognize the difference. They might be nice to you. I'm not saying they can't be nice. I'm not saying there can't be good community relations or anything like that. But they're not going to be looking out for you in the same way that you are trying to look out for them.

[Pete]

I'm the Piers Morgan in this interview.

[Carl]

It's not that you're Pierce Morgan, because you're not Piers Morgan. Piers Morgan is just a twat. Right. But it's what's coming down the line and the world we're leaving with them. And so it would make sense to kind of get ahead of that now and understand because what we're. What we're doing is essentially stigmatizing our young men.

[Connor]

Yeah.

[Carl]

Oh, you like Nick Fuentes? All of our young men are now bad. It's like, no, what they're doing is a rational response to the circumstances we don't live in, but they do live in. And it's because we've allowed this change to happen against our will and definitely against their will that they are just responding to where they are and so acting like they've done something wrong. It's like, no, man. It would be suicide to. To not feel like you have to reorient your worldview. And when the boomer Piers Morgan is just like, I can't believe you, like Adolf Hitler, it's just like, okay, bro, you know, that's. That's a world that doesn't exist anymore. You know, you're thinking of when you were a teenager and everyone around you was exactly the same as you.

[Pete]

Probably where he is now.

[Carl]

Well, yeah. Well, I mean, even then, he's a multimillionaire, so even if he's got a lot of servants underneath him, they're not dangerous to him. You know, it's not going to bother him. But it's a totally different world and we have completely fucked it up.

[Pete]

So again, specifically, we talked about, you know, collapsing this kind of woke di agenda. That's part of it, but what else? What I mean, well, because it would be great to have. It'd be great to have a role model that. Isn't it Fuentes?

[Carl]

I don't know, man. I mean, be careful what you wish for, because the role model who comes after Nick Fuentes could be ten times worse.

[Pete]

Yeah.

[Carl]

Like, he could be serious, right? He could be genuinely a serious person. Because at least with Nick Fuentes, he's A bit of a troll, but he.

[Pete]

But he could also be serious.

[Carl]

Nah, probably not. Look at him, right? He's. I, I like groupers. What?

[Pete]

40 of MAGA is now groupers.

[Carl]

Is it that much?

[Pete]

I think I heard that they've been infiltrating.

[Carl]

I wouldn't be surprised.

[Pete]

But they've been infiltrating the party.

[Carl]

Well.

[Pete]

And Nick wants to become a politician.

[Carl]

You say infiltrating, but there is no infiltrating. These are the young conservative men.

[Pete]

No, but it was strategic. Like, like they would send people to debates and.

[Carl]

Sure, sure, sure. And I, and I think there's a.

[Pete]

Strategic element to it.

[Carl]

But even if they were trying to make sure, we're going to make sure we don't get any groper. Infiltration. The constituency you're recruiting from is the gropers.

[Pete]

Yeah.

[Carl]

Where else are you going to get them from, you know, if you want young men coming to your party. So I don't even know if, like, they're, they're just what we've made of them. But, like, the thing that underpins all of this is, is questions of right and claim. Right. And it's, it's going to be very difficult because if you were to, if you were to ask Zach Polanski, to whom does England belong?

[Pete]

Everyone.

[Carl]

But he would effectively means no one.

[Pete]

But, but he will also have questions he can't answer. Like if you said to him, you want open borders, do you have a maximum number of people who can come in?

[Carl]

He doesn't.

[Pete]

So if 50 million wanted to come in, is that the right number? And then I think you can dismantle him to the point where he goes, okay, 50 million, of course we can't. There's not enough.

[Carl]

He would, he would argue procedurally, not.

[Pete]

Conceptually, but Nick Fuentes actually said the other day, he said, I'm not against immigration at all. I'm against the pace of change. I'm okay with 300,000 a year. He could, he could name a number, he could give you a half.

[Carl]

Said the guy who comes after Nick Fuentes is going to be way worse.

[Pete]

Sure. But he can give you a hard limit.

[Carl]

Sure.

[Pete]

And that is a difference.

[Carl]

Sure. But that's, again, that's, that's procedural or not conceptual. Zach Polanski says, all England's for everyone. And I don't think that's true. I think England is the collective property of the English. And if you don't think that, then how has that been taken away from me? How's that been taken away from My children, why don't they stand to inherit England from us, the older generations? And so the question is, how do they get it back? And if they don't get it back, yeah, I'm not surprised. They're angry and they're thinking about goose stepping their way down to Whitehall with whoever wants to lead them.

[Pete]

This is right. Do you think, do people think like that?

[Carl]

Not expressly, like in terms I'm laying.

[Connor]

Out, no, but I think they sense it. If there's many kids that could listen to that and nod their head, they wouldn't articulate it themselves, they wouldn't know where to even draw it from, but they would nod their head.

[Carl]

If you had some guy who was just waving an England flag and said, right, lads, this is it, I think a lot of them would join it. And it's really about ownership, it's about possession, it's about who has the primary right to the thing. And if the answer is, well, the Indians, the Pakistanis, the Africans, they all have just as much of a right as you do, well, how is that not colonization? How is it they have their own countries to which they already have a primary right? And how do they also come by this right to my country? I don't have a right to Pakistan, I don't have a right to Nigeria or India, but they have a right to England. Do they? How did that come about?

[Connor]

And the answer will be treachery, is it not? Again, it's like the reversal. We had the empire, we had India at one point and now it's like, oh, we have to, we have to be kind. Because of our past and our history, we're gonna let you all in.

[Carl]

How long are you going to tolerate that for?

[Connor]

No, sure, I agree.

[Carl]

No, no, I, I, but how long will you tolerate that for?

[Connor]

It's at a fine edge and I don't think we have much time left. That's the issue. Because when you talk about when you were 10 years old, it was 97%.

[Carl]

Yeah.

[Connor]

In this short amount of time, we've already got down to 70. What's 30% gonna do in the next 20 years? Where will we be?

[Carl]

And that. So the question of, well, what about the empire? How, how does that influence your.

[Connor]

Eventually gets taken down, doesn't it?

[Carl]

Sure. No, no, but the point is like say, oh, well, bad things happened to these people in the past, therefore we have to give up England to them. But this is my, how long does.

[Connor]

That, this is my point is like, how for how long are we going to go tit for tat. You did this to me, so I'm going to do this to you. You did this to me somewhere like until brings us to this.

[Carl]

That's, that's the question that the zoomers are going to answer.

[Pete]

Because it might be, it might be unstoppable. There is that reality. You've probably faced and looked at that reality. It might be unstoppable.

[Carl]

Oh, what, the current trajectory of England.

[Pete]

Yeah. Unless you did some pretty uncomfortable things that I don't think people would have the stomach for. Well, unless it becomes, do you think civil war?

[Carl]

Do you? Well, I mean.

[Pete]

That'S uncomfortable for people.

[Carl]

So when decolonization happened, there was mass movements of people because it was basically in the case of Morocco, for example, the French were given the option the suitcase or the coffin. And so the French saw the writing on the wall and were like, right, good wards going. When the British left India, every British person was just expelled. Right. Many of them were just born and raised in India. Like Rudyard Kipling, born and raised in India, expelled. Why? Because he was British. Right. And it was understood that they were a group and the Indians had had enough of that group and they were to go. Right. That has happened a lot within living memory.

[Pete]

I mean, ICE is trying it to.

[Carl]

Some extent in the US but within living memory. Like there are people alive now who were born in Rhodesia, who are living in this country because they were expelled. Born in India, living in the. John Lumley I think is a great example of this actually. She was born in India, expelled, currently living in this country. Right. In living memory. We have had these kinds of mass expulsions. Why? Because the Indians wanted their country back. And are you going to tell them they're wrong to want that?

[Pete]

It's still uncomfortable. But you.

[Carl]

I agree. I'm not, I'm, I'm not. I just want to be clear. I'm not advocating for anything. I'm just saying if you, if you take.

[Pete]

Might just happen.

[Carl]

Exactly. If you drain out your own personal inclinations and ask, is it plausible that in 20 years time you get a radical and very serious looking young man who decides, no, I've, we've all had enough of this and we, we're not even bothered about the democratic process anymore because nobody is going to fight for this democracy like we've seen it now, in fact. Oh, we need to make sure that young people are going to fight for Britain. It's like, why would you fight for this country against Russia or whoever, you know, how are they the enemy when the Government is letting in. I mean, like, it's been a giant success. The government only let in 850,000 people last year. Oh, that's a giant success, is it? That sounds like a mortal wound. Are you mad? That's the city the size of Birmingham, whatever, coming in every year. Like, I, Are you, like, in 20 years time, are you actually going to be like, oh, I can't believe these radicalized young men are just going to expel all of these foreigners that were allowed in against our will. Like, they're not going to think they're doing anything wrong. And I don't know how we're going to be able to be like, oh, yeah, how dare you, sir? It's like, sorry, why, why are we giving up our country to people from other, other countries who have sovereign nations of their own? Why don't our kids deserve a sovereign nation of their own? Like, why? What is the argument? And the best they'll come up with is, well, but what about the British Empire? What ancient history? Like, I'm sorry, they won't care. You know, the people, the people who, like in India, they're not wracked with guilt because they kick the British out, like, and that's how our kids are going to be. They're not going to feel racked with guilt when they kick out, you know, various other foreign communities. It's like, no. And I'm, I'm not saying.

[Pete]

I know what you're saying.

[Carl]

You know what I mean?

[Pete]

It's just wild to think about.

[Carl]

But it's, it's the future we're creating for them, you know, it's the future we are, we're laying the foundations of it right now. And it's, it's mad to watch.

[Pete]

But so, so what? Is, is there any way of stopping that in the short term by doing something different now?

[Carl]

Yeah, yeah, we, we. I mean, all of this could be reversed by policy tomorrow. Right? It's just there are so many entrenched interests that are addicted to the benefits of it. So, for example, like, the, the, the markets, the business community will freak out if they don't get their cheap labor.

[Pete]

Cheap labor?

[Carl]

Yeah, they will freak out and they'll be like, oh, well, Britain's going to go through an economic shock. And we would go through a massive economic shock if, if we would say, right, no more people coming in.

[Pete]

We might have to make our own dinners rather than go to delivery.

[Carl]

I'm afraid you might have to walk down to the chippy to pick up your chippies. So I Mean, it's what my parents did is what we did when we were young. Yeah. You'd have to go down to the chip shop, actually pick it up, you know, and it'd be cold. You didn't want to. But it's either that or fascist revolution. So, you know, I think we should walk down. But there. There are other things. Like, we spend a huge amount of money on foreigners. I mean, it's just literally there are more than a million people born overseas who are claiming benefits in this country. How is that possible? How. What country do you think you could go to and claim benefits?

[Pete]

But we're kind.

[Carl]

We're fucking stupid. You know, we are. We are creating the conditions for revolution. And, like, your son's just like, wow. Yeah, he is right. I don't want to be right about all this. Like. But. And I'm. I don't even blame the young guys for feeling this way, because why wouldn't I? There but for the grace of God, if that were me, why wouldn't I think that? I don't think that. Because I was lucky enough to be born when we were born, and I have the advantages that we had when we were growing up, but that's been taken away from our kids. So it's like, okay, you've got to be sympathetic to this. I mean, like, obviously, benefits is insane. The housing is insane. But there are other questions. Like, we have lots of politicians in this country. I think there's about 35 politicians who are born overseas, right? Not. Not English born overseas. It's like, sorry, that shouldn't be allowed. I mean, that's not allowed in the countries that they come from. And yet we allow it because we never had to have a rule against it. Because when the country was 95% white British, why would you need a rule that the politicians all have to be white British? You wouldn't think about it because, of course, that's the only constituency you have to recruit from. But now, I mean, Shabana Mahmood, right? Can you imagine what Winston Churchill's response to hearing that there was a politician called Shabana Mahmood would be? It would be the most racist thing you've ever heard in your life. Yet he's the hero of World War II, right. Winston Churchill wanted to campaign on the slogan Keep Britain White. And Rishi Sunak was the Prime Minister of the Conservative Party. Like, he would flip the fuck out. Why should there be foreign politicians?

[Connor]

Why?

[Carl]

There's no answer to it. I mean, you've got in Tower Hamlets, their MP Was campaigning in this country for the Aspire Party. It's very diverse, very progressive, very inclusive. Literally, in the Bangladeshi National Party campaigning in Bangladesh, the BNP of Bangladesh, she campaigns for to get a position in their parliament. It's like, sorry, this is fucking ridiculous, right? And, you know, it just doesn't make any sense. And you can't make an affirmative case for it.

[Pete]

No, you can't. But the. The liberal world order we've built, reversing that just does feel uncomfortable, even though people can agree with everything you said is do. What do people have the stomach for?

[Carl]

I'm afraid it's either that or fascist revolution. So I think we might have to be a little bit uncomfortable or we get the Zuma Waffen and the Zuma Reich. And I actually don't want a Reich. I actually don't. I actually. I mean, spiritually, I'm in exactly the same place as you, right. You know, oh, I love the idea of the glorious revolution, the Bill of Rights and, you know, parliamentary democracy and the rule of law, going back to the Magna Carta. This. This is my blood as an Englishman, right? This is what I believe is the right ordering of the world. But these young guys, I mean, can you imagine being 20 years old and hearing that David Lammy, who himself has got a book called Tribe saying, oh, I'm a Turing man from Africa has suspended your right to a jury trial, Your ancient right as an Englishman. This African man has suspended a fucking jury trial. If I'm.

[Pete]

He's African.

[Carl]

Of course he is.

[Pete]

You know what I mean?

[Carl]

No, but is he British born? Sure, but he wrote a book where he was like, oh, I'm from these different tribes in Africa, right? Now, I'm not saying. I mean, I think it would actually be the funniest reality TV show in the world to drop David Lammy in Africa, because you can imagine how he would not fit in. He's obviously a creature of Britain, right? He doesn't know anything about Africa, but he did write a book called Tribes in which he explains he's from these tribes in Africa. Right? So it's not that I'm trying to be racist towards David Lammy. I don't think he should be kicked out or anything like that. Right? But you can see how if you're someone who's not really invested in the narratives we're invested in, they'd be like, that is an African man. He says he's from Africa. He's literally got his DNA test and says, oh, I'm from the Turing Tribe, I'm from this tribe, I'm from that tribe. And then he goes and suspends an ancient English liberty. Like, you can see why people are like, hang on a second, why is that happening? Oh, Shabana Mahmood is going to start telling me about who gets to come into the country, Is she? How is this happening?

[Connor]

But then this just doesn't. This just. This begs a bigger question. Can we have society which is diverse? And I've been thinking about this quite.

[Pete]

A lot recently, so can I just.

[Carl]

Pause you on that? Do you. Did you think about, can we have a diverse society when you were his age? I mean, I certainly didn't.

[Pete]

I mean, I'm in Bedford. It's always. I'm telling you, my whole childhood, it was diverse.

[Carl]

And I've grown up there as well.

[Connor]

And it.

[Pete]

But it's.

[Connor]

What you've grown up with is different to some degree.

[Carl]

But I think the average English person of our age, when we were his age, was not thinking, can we have a diverse society?

[Pete]

Because they've seen diversity isn't a strength, it's a weakness.

[Carl]

Exactly. For us, the diversity was like 10% of the country or something.

[Pete]

But also, whilst people have been told diversity is a strength, they're also hearing voices now saying, diversity is a weakness. They're getting both messages. I didn't have to question it because it never came up.

[Carl]

But you didn't have to question it because of the overwhelming demographic strength that the English had in England. Right. Even if. Okay, yeah, we've got like an Indian community in Bedford. Yeah. But that's still, what, 10, 15 of the population? Something like that. Yeah, yeah. 85 of the people in Bedford are still white English and you're just normal everywhere. Right. And it's. It's fine to have those sort of small communities and it's totally fine, especially when it's like Indians or something. So they're not a predatory community. They're not. They don't do anything hostile and there's only a small number of them anyway, so they've. They've got to maintain good relations with the wider community around them. But if you look at, say, Lucent or something like that, where it's like 40% Muslim and 33% English, do they worry about maintaining good relations with the English minority there? Not really. Do you think it might be different? I think it might be different.

[Connor]

But that community didn't start at 40%.

[Carl]

No, it didn't.

[Connor]

It started at 5, probably to 10.

[Carl]

Yeah, absolutely.

[Pete]

Yeah.

[Connor]

Should we have ever had 5% and.

[Carl]

These are the sorts of questions the Zoomers are asking.

[Pete]

Yeah, yeah. And not just here. Like this started with Fuentes in America, that our conversation. We know the conversations happen in France, in Germany, across Europe.

[Carl]

The French are way more radical than our youth. Yeah.

[Pete]

And it's happening everywhere for. For a reason. Because something is broken and it's not working for a group of people.

[Carl]

Yes.

[Pete]

Like, if it had worked, we wouldn't be having this conversation. It's. It's not like an inbuilt racism. It's what have I got here?

[Carl]

I think it genuinely comes down to the question of who is the country for? And what we're saying is it's not for our children.

[Pete]

We're saying for everyone, anyone who wants. But.

[Carl]

But it's not exclusive. Right. Because any other country, in any other place in the world, if you would say who is Nigeria for? They would say the children of Nigeria. Yeah. It. Who is Paraguay for? The children of Paraguay.

[Pete]

Well, if you said Nigeria is for. For anyone, there'd be the claim, well, we're going back to imperialism. You're going to go and take it.

[Carl]

Because that is imperialism. Yeah. And that's literally what the principle that imperialism was built on. We have as much right to take your country as you do.

[Pete]

Yeah.

[Carl]

And so the question is, okay, well, who is England for, who's France for, who is Germany for? So it's got to be the children of these countries, the native born children in these countries, because the people outside of that category have countries of their own.

[Pete]

Did you have to go through a period where you felt uncomfortable? Can you say it now?

[Carl]

Actually, very, like, I mean, good God, man. Like, so I was a liberal right up until about 2019, and I believed all of the standard liberal things. And it was a sort of proto movement that was gaining ground online called the alt right, that was trying to mainstream these questions and these conversations. But they were doing it in a way that wasn't really resonating with wider liberal society because they were using categories, Right. They would say white, black, blah, blah, blah. But you'll notice that I don't think that's actually the case. What I'm using is relationships. I'm. What I'm saying is what the country, who possesses it, who has a claim to it, who has a relationship to it, it's like, okay, well, the Zoomers, they're not, they're not white. You know, they are, you know, straight white men. But what's our relationship to them? That our young people, that our children, that our sons and actually, when you look at it in these sort of relational terms, you realize that this is correct. There is a groupishness here, and it's our group that has this claim to this country and the like, liberal keywords, you know, that they. Oh, you know, if you're racist, you're sexist. And the. The categories that these connect to, because, I mean, it's not about being white. You know, like, Polish people do not have the claim to England. French people, like, do not have the claim to French overrunning London at the moment. It's crazy how the French have basically edged out the Cockneys in the East End and stuff like this, right? It's like, no, off back to France. You have a country of your own, right? This was. Do you know, the first mention of Cockney goes back to something like 12th century. Where are they now? Right. We've allowed them to be ethnically cleansed from their ancestral home. I'm sorry, this is. So it's about, like, people, a genuine group of a bundle of relationships and a claim to a place in which these people come from. And that's the thing that actually is what is at stake here and has been taken away from young people. And so, like I said, it took me a long time to get to the point where I understood past the categories, because I'm with you. Like you said, oh, white men this, you know, brown people that, black people this way. And it is to a person raised in the sort of liberal environment and the colorblind 90s that we were raised. And this is weird and alien, Right.

[Pete]

Because it was colorblind in the 90s.

[Carl]

Absolutely. Because we could afford to be.

[Pete]

Yeah. Have you faced any consequences? You must have faced consequences.

[Carl]

I don't think I'm actually saying anything prejudicial.

[Pete]

No. But have you faced consequences if other people around you struggled to accept you hold this view?

[Carl]

Because I don't think it's controversial, though.

[Pete]

But it. But it is to, I think, a large.

[Connor]

It's not mainstream.

[Pete]

It's not mainstream. It's not controversial to you, but it's not mainstream. And there's a lot of people that will struggle with this. So people who watch this. So they will struggle with what you're saying.

[Carl]

I suppose they probably are, but I think that if they actually listen to the content rather than approach it with a prejudice, they'll probably realize that I am saying something true here, because what I'm saying is a kind of psychic map of the world rather than the abstract categories of race, gender, creed, whatever. It's about groups of people just having claims to things. Like your family has the primary claim to your house. Right. And literally we have on the title deed. Well, we don't have anything like that for the wider group of our ethnic group and our own country. Even though other people have that, like Palestine belongs to the Palestinians, every leftist will attest. But for some reason England doesn't belong to you. So. Well, how is that the case? Yeah, how do we, how do we lose this? You know, and so I, I don't think I'm actually. And what, that's what that means. Like, I'm not saying there can never be a non white person living in England or anything of the sort, but what I am saying is it's legitimate for the English to be like, okay, we are losing our grip on our country here. And so preventing further inflow or encouraging some outflow of people who arrived during the Boris wave, for example, people who are just, you know, here claiming benefits is a great start. They could just go home. Right. We don't actually have to pay like 72% of Somalians in this country are on housing benefit. No, go and be on housing benefit in Somalia.

[Pete]

I don't think there's housing benefit in Somalia.

[Carl]

Well, that's not our problem, is it? No, you know, we don't need to be battery farming Somalia. Like that's, that's not our job and that's us and you being taken advantage of. Right, that's very clearly being taken advantage. And it's the same with any of these foreigners on benefits. Right, Sorry, no, we, that, you know, and the reason that we argue that is because of our claim to a country that works for us. Because otherwise what we're looking at is a country that works for them. We literally are working hard. Every day your taxes are going up and it's being funneled into the pockets of these foreigners. It's like, I'm sorry, no, that's a country that's working for someone who's not us. I'm not, I'm not down with that. And I think that that's not prejudicial. Like, you know, I'm not saying that that's, you know, I'm not saying they're bad people or anything like that.

[Pete]

I'm just saying you don't care if that's a guy from Hungary or it's a guy from France or whatever it is?

[Carl]

No, it doesn't matter. The fact that they're not native born British is in part of the group that we're talking about and that they don't have a rights. And so why are we giving them the right? You know, why are we handing this out? And they wouldn't. This would never happen the other way, you know, they would never be so stupid as the Somalians are there laboring away and there are a bunch of British chavs on a council estate in Somalia, that would never happen, and rightfully so, because you'd be a idiot for that to be the case. And so we're idiots. We are idiots. And. But you saw me. I'm not, I'm not. I don't think I'm being prejudicial and I haven't really had much pushback, frankly, because I'm not trying to frame it in prejudicial terms. I'm just trying to frame it in real terms, you know, what's really happening.

[Pete]

No, no, no, I get it. Again, I just go back to the point. You understand it's uncomfortable for people to address these. Which I put in my article.

[Carl]

Absolutely.

[Pete]

We have got to address and have some uncomfortable conversations that people are not going to, like.

[Carl]

Yeah.

[Pete]

You know, even doing it on this show. And I know we're going to go into the. The comments after this. There's going to be a bunch of people are going to be like, carl, listen to Carl, Pete. You're a pussy. You are Piers Morgan. And then there's going to be other people who are going, fucking hell, Carl's fucking nuts. Pete, Pete, well done. Like, you're going to get that. And it's because there isn't consensus on this yet.

[Carl]

Correct.

[Pete]

But there is a shift in consensus for sure.

[Carl]

I think what I'm proposing is the softest variant of where this is inevitably going to go.

[Connor]

Yeah. You're.

[Pete]

You're basically trying to say, let's do this in the. Let's do the easy way rather than the hard. Oh, yeah, yeah.

[Carl]

Because I mean, like, it could get so, so bad. It genuinely could get so bad. I mean, like, you know, the zoomers are like, should there be any of them in this country? It's like, okay, calm down. Yeah. You know, I'm not saying that, but I am saying that there is a. I'm not trying to stigmatize you, by the way, but the point is, those sort of questions never came up in my mind when I was young.

[Pete]

Connor is a groper.

[Carl]

I can tell.

[Connor]

I'm not.

[Pete]

So the first show, the first show we mentioned, Nick Fuentes, they. Someone put on YouTube, Connor's a grouper.

[Carl]

No, no, Listen, all of them are. They're all groupers.

[Connor]

Well, my only point on that is this will sound wild, this will sound like something that would come out, but let me just say it. Red is not starting with a few what got us into this place in the first place.

[Carl]

That is correct.

[Connor]

So then the question's valid?

[Carl]

It is valid. It's absolutely valid. It's just this is outside of the consensus by a long way, and it's the question itself kind of carries an implication which is a bit more hardline than I think even I am trying to get across here.

[Connor]

Oh, and it is more than I am.

[Carl]

Yeah, no, I know.

[Pete]

And interestingly, Connor's further down the road than I am. He is nearer the groiper, really.

[Carl]

But the thing is, when we say the grouper like this, this is just a genuine understanding that his generation have. It's for them, it's not like points on a political map. It is what is reality. And reality is group powers, right? And so the reality is, okay, we don't have a group power, so what do we do? Right? And that's the questions they're actually wrangling with that we're not wrangling with. And so honestly, the only way to solve this is to accept that the native people of the country have the primary claim to the country. So if we say we're not happy with this, then it has to just stop, right? It just has to stop. Because otherwise what you have is an underclass with a foreign aristocracy ruling over it. And I don't think anyone actually wants that. That's the stuff of revolutions. And if that carries on the privileges of foreigners, the privileges of women, the privileges of everyone else above the people who genuinely feel in their hearts, no, this is my country. I don't have another passport to another country. If the country completely collapses, the economy goes down, we're in hyperinflation, millions of them will flee back somewhere else. Well, where are you going to flee? I haven't got another country I can flee to. Have you got another country, Connor? You know, where are you fleeing? You know, we're stuck, right? So that. That tells you who has the primary claim, and that means that the country should be wrong for us and not others, man.

[Pete]

There's a lot to think about here. All right, thanks, Carl. Appreciate it, man. Thank you, everyone, for listening. I'm gonna be intrigued to see the comments. See you later, Ra.