Right Wing Unity

Thoughts around the Restore Britain offer of cooperation with Reform UK and exploration of the key points therein. 

Thank you for listening, feel free to contact me at flatcapnationalist@gmail.com, God bless you all.

Transcript

Copy Transcript Copied

SPEAKER_01 0:23

Good afternoon, welcome back to the Flat Cap Nationalist Podcast. My apologies for not being with you the last couple of weeks. I've been busy moving house and erupt just not had the opportunity, but back with you now. This is episode number twenty. Is right wing unity possible? So this is uh say episode twenty. I think every ten, twenty episodes or so I'm just gonna have a more generalised kind of rant, I suppose. I usually try and keep a bit of a theme going through the episodes to varying degrees of success, but every now and again I just want to talk about a few things that are bothering me or you know get me a bit jaded or whatever. So er first thing I think's worthy of addressing is about this time last week Rupert Lowe put out a video that was seen as somewhat of an olive branch towards reform, uh offering some kind of cooperation moving forward, uh first step towards unity on the right, which is something a lot of people have thought is just simply not possible. So, in the mainstream, at least nominally, there's three right wing parties being the Conservatives, Reform and Restore. Now I would make the case that of the three only Restore is actually a right wing party. Uh the Conservatives, I would argue, is left of centre these days, and they have been for quite some time. Just think about how far left everything went under their stewardship over a 14-year period, leading to basically the rise of Labour, you know, in a in a bid to fix leftism. We voted for more leftism. Uh reform then stepped into the three and they quickly hoovered up the ground previously occupied by the Tories, you know, which would place them at best sort of centre right. This is certainly how Farage describes himself, centre right. It's all about you know appeasing the centre, uh, which I believe is rapidly diminishing, but we can discuss that a little bit later. And then you've got Restore, of course, who of the major parties, and I I think it's fair to classify them as that, given that they are somewhere around 10% in some of the more left-wing areas of the country, like up north, and uh pulling you know close to 50% in more patriotic conservative areas like Great Yarmouth, you know. Uh I I would say they are sort of the vanguard party of the right, and certainly the one that we should be getting behind if we want to make meaningful changes. I don't want to go over too much old ground rehashing the sort of origins of Restore, but uh I certainly think it's worth going over once again, just because a lot of people seem to have this misconception about Restore's purpose, uh you know, uh their their reason for existing, how they came to be, and what they want to achieve going forward. So at the 2024 election, Rupert Lowe was one of the MPs elected for reform, and after a little bit of time goes by, yeah, it became clear reform were kind of aiming towards the centre the way most of the major parties have tended to do over the last few years, the last couple of decades really. And there was a bit of a falling out, and nobody was quite sure what had happened. There were different narratives going around, but essentially Rupert Lowe was turfed out of the party, and he established Restore, which was initially set up as a kind of pressure movement, you know, it wasn't a political party, and there was some bad blood going about between Rupert Lowe and Nigel Farage and the other top brassett reform. The prevailing narrative coming from reform being that uh Rupert Lowe had been making threats of you know violence and aggression against Zia Youssef, um, which resulted in them reporting him to the police and getting his guns seized from him and things like that. Now there was no credible evidence, you know, that that this had actually occurred, um according to the police themselves, but it started off a load of bad blood. As time went by, the Restored Pressure Movement was launched as a political party earlier this year in February, and they proceeded to rapidly gain a massive membership. So they've contested a couple of elections, and uh you know what one of them being the Manchester Mayor election, one of them being Gorton and Denton, um and they they're done pretty well considering the age of the party, now not as well as many of us would have predicted, of course, or hoped for, but certainly well enough to get them on the radar of the other parties. And subsequently to you know the claims made by reform about the reason that Rupert Lowe was kicked out of the party, Nigel Farage gave a conference in which he said effectively we knew we had to kick him out because he started talking about mass deportations, including people that were actually born here, you know, th this being in reference mainly to um you know family members of the Pakistani Muslim grooming gangs who knew about what was happening and did nothing. Yeah, these people I think have forfeited their right to stay in the country, but that was beyond the pale, beyond decency, beyond morality, according to Nigel Farage. Of course, we've had the narrative going around that we're just basically going to split the right-wing vote and open the way for another Labour, or even worse, the Greens to take victory in the you know next election. Now I've always hated this narrative, um, simply because it it smacks some entitlement, doesn't it? Reform, yeah, they've done a lot of work, they've got a lot of people on side, they gave a lot of people belief. You know, they were the uh they were the party that people flocked to once the Conservative betrayal became evident and impossible to ignore. So they they really did a good job in hammering down the Conservative Party, but they didn't press their attack, which is why you look at the polls now, the Conservatives have mounted one of the most unlikely comebacks you could have imagined. You know, this time, two years ago, it seemed like the Tories were done. Seemed like they would have been absolutely annihilated, nobody in their right mind would vote for them. But reform failed to you know hold the line uh and keep people invested. Because many reform voters are indeed right wing, but the party itself is not. You know, and I I want people to understand this. I get kind of jaded when I I speak to reform voters because the things that they are expecting reform to do, a lot of the time they're things that reform have already said they're not gonna do. You know, there were some interviews with uh I think the the most prominent ones were between Farage and Stephen Edgington and Winston Marshall. And in these interviews it became very, very clear that he doesn't want to do mass deportations. He doesn't want to do you know the things that need to be done in order to save our country. He said he wasn't interested. It wasn't his political ambition to do mass deportations, and even if it was, it was politically impossible. So effectively, when Restore was just a pressure movement, it was established to keep reform's feet to the fire. And many of his supporters, you know, because I voted reform, I wanted them to do well, I wanted them to be what we all believe them to be. We wanted them, you know, we wanted to hold their feet to the fire and keep them on message. But unfortunately, they went the way of the Tories where they're thinking, yeah, but we don't want to appear too right wing. So what we want to do, we want to appeal to the centre. Well, if you if you're on the right, a move toward the centre means you're moving leftward. You know, and even when you speak to a lot of reform supporters now, they will, you know, contrary to what they were saying a few years ago when they wanted mass deportations, they've softened their own stance on it. Not all of them, but some of them, some of the reform supporters, they've softened their own stance on it and say, well, you know, we can't we can't deport people that were born here. We absolutely can, and we should. You know, but just simply by way of defending reform's point of view, they've managed to move a a huge chunk of their voter base leftward without ever acknowledging it. So I don't quite buy into the splitting the right wing vote. Yeah, plus I know a lot of Restore supporters are people that never would have voted for the Tories or for Reform because they just don't believe in them. Yeah, but this this message, this olive branch of unity coming from Restore towards reform, I thought was pretty refreshing. You know, I've seen many people dismiss it as an attempted stitch up, you know, uh an attempted you know frame job or a way to make reform look bad by asking the impossible of them. But I think it was actually a pretty shrewd move, you know, because i if the terms asked for by Rupert Lowe were accepted, great, we've gone a long way towards unity. And if they were not accepted, okay, we've now got a clear delineation between reform and restore because many people will say that there is no substantive difference. You know, they're effectively the same party, but Rupert Lowe is just trying to score points against Farage because he's got some kind of personal vendetta. Now I I do believe, yeah, Rupert Lowe's got a bit of a vendetta against Farage and Zia Youssef, and I think he has every right to. You know, these people tried to have him locked up on false accusations because he dared to, you know, advocate for things further to the right than where reform actually were. But I'm a right-wing guy, you know, I I'm gonna vote for restore, I'm gonna vote for the option that I see as actually aiming to save the country that I love. I think it's worth diving into what these conditions actually were. So there are five key points that were highlighted as uh red lines, you know, things that had to be promised by reform to ensure cooperation with Restore. So one of these being the restoration of borders. Now this is something that you know reform have been very strong on. You know, the the messaging they put out is that yeah, they're gonna be tough on the border. You know, they they've got this idea of putting the navy in the channel, which I I actually do agree with. Um but they would be putting the navy in the channel to return channel migrants to France, which I don't actually think they have the ability to do. You know, my idea for putting the navy in the channel would be as a deterrent, and you you come beyond a certain line, we're gonna open fire. And I know that sounds pretty harsh, that sounds pretty bad. You know, I I recently read Camp of the Saints, and throughout the book it it's one of the key issues is can we take action against these unarmed civilians, these unarmed people? You know, the Geneva Convention and every every human rights group will say you can't open fire on all unarmed people. But take a look at the scenes we saw a couple of weeks ago when the Moroccans, you know, 50,000, 60,000 of them, invaded the Spanish territory of shooter. The people themselves are the weapons. You know, they are meat bombs, they are the weapons. It doesn't matter that they don't have knives or guns, which to be honest, a lot of them do have knives, but they are themselves the weapons aimed at the destruction of our society. Yeah, so I I think reform are nowhere near as strong on the border as they need to be. But another part of that is they don't want to do mass immigration. You know, the the restore demand was a commitment to the reversal of mass immigration, including women and children, which is something that reform have been a little bit squeamish about. And again, I can understand it from a humanitarian point of view, the optics of it are not particularly good, are they? You don't want to be seen to be taking action against women and children. But what's the alternative? It absolutely has to be reversed. Okay, now the reform position, you'll probably have heard other people speaking about this, is effectively it's going to buy us a little bit more time before we're entirely replaced. So the the date that is bandied about is we will become a minority in our own country by 2063. With reform and their their commitment towards closing down the border, but without the reversal of mass migration, it buys an extra sort of five years or so. So five years later, we will be replaced. But bear in mind, you know, that that's not the date by which we will be politically unable to mount any opposition, because you know, there are there are huge, huge swathes of the population that will side with immigrants and you know Muslims and any anything that they see as a benefit to leftism, right? So in terms of voting, we will be outnumbered long before 2063, and by then all hope of saving our country peacefully will be gone. Because that's where my position's boiled down to. You know, I a lot of the positions I have, I didn't want to have these opinions, I didn't want to occupy these positions. But I've had no choice because I don't want my children, my grandchildren, growing up in a country where they are the minority. You know, we've we've already seen huge amounts of discrimination against native people, yeah, against the white British population. Already, you know, major institutions like the BBC, the police force, they are running schemes that you can only apply to be a part of if you are some kind of ethnic minority. This flies in the face of all the equality that we're supposed to espouse, yeah, equal opportunities and all this stuff. No, it's purely down to like if you are of some kind of ethnic background, we're gonna give you a leg up in the name of equality. I make that make sense if you can. But this discrimination is only gonna get worse and worse and worse. The more you know the the more the percentage of native people in these islands goes down, the worse this discrimination is gonna get. Do you think for one minute, once we are the minority, that they're gonna treat us with the same, you know, the the same approach that they are demanding for themselves? Do you think they're gonna go out of their way and bend over backwards to sacrifice their own electoral political power to appease us when we are the minority, or do you think they will use it as a cudgel to establish their dominance and take, take, take until we have nothing left to give? I know what my money is on, on that one. So this is why I agree with Rupert Lowe and Restore that it is very important to not only stop mass immigration, but reverse it. So in line with this, there was a demand for a commitment to the restoration of demographic security, which would include the reversal of the Islamification of Britain. Yeah, it includes a proposal for bans on halal and kosher slaughter, causing marriage, burkers, mass you know, public Islamic prayers, which we've been seeing more and more recently as signs of dominance over us. Yeah, the removal of Sharia courts, and uh also the implementation of rape gang inquiry recommendations. I've seen in the media, this one's caused a bit of a stir. I've seen a lot of the talking heads, sort of lefty talking heads, playing dumb, playing obtuse on this one. Oh, what do you mean the Islamification of Britain? Where's your evidence for that? Well, look around. Look around you everywhere you go. You know, there's more and more and more Muslims and they're making more and more demands. They are you know solidifying into voting blocks, they are electing independent MPs into parliament based solely on their stance on Gaza and the plight of Muslims around the world. And you know, we are despite having a massive budget deficit and falling further and further into debt as a nation, sending hundreds of millions of pounds to Islamic countries, sending money to Pakistan to build an airport to make it easier for Muslims to return home, even if they've actually come here on an asylum claim from that country. We need to make it easier for them to go home and visit their families. It's very strange. Yeah. But this idea that oh no no no, you you can't you can't ban halal and kosher slaughter, I saw one guy, I can't remember who it was, but he said you will start an i uh a civil war if you do that, if you implement those things. Hold on, so if we apply British law equally to Jews and Muslims, we will kick start a civil war. Well that says to me that we have been Islamified, we've been balkanized into different groups where you have to apply different laws to different groups to keep the peace. So if we are to bend and change our laws and grant exceptions and exemptions on you know on the basis that this will prevent a civil war, well that is that not kind of a threat of implied violence? Is that not saying give us special treatment or we will be violent, we will kick start a civil war? You know, and a lot of the positions I hold are aimed at avoiding that. I want to avoid a civil war. I don't I don't want death and destruction on a massive scale across our country to establish who should be in charge. Particularly as an ethnic Brit, no, I'm an Englishman, as far back as I can trace. Why why should we give special concessions to members of different global communities, different religions, different ethnic backgrounds to prevent violence in our own country? No, better to just get us get rid of these people. They don't need to be here, many of them have got dual citizenship. So send them back there. Yeah, send them to this other country that they clearly love so much. And one of the things I find particularly annoying with a lot of Islamic groups and influences is that they want to live under Islamic law. Well, there are many, many countries around the world where they can do that, but no. They want to change our law to suit them. This is a form of conquest. Yeah, this is a form of conquest, and if we try to take steps against it, we are gonna provoke a civil war, according to the lefty talking heads. So it's as always, our fault. And I thought this was kind of you know a little bit off topic, but this was reminiscent of the Muslim man that rammed into the Berlin Gay Pride Parade. Now I'm no fan of these parades, I think they're a public show of degeneracy that should be stopped, yeah, or at least clamped down on heavily to make sure that obscenity is not being thrust in the face of children, which it so often is. But equally, I don't want to see I don't want to see these people dying. I don't want to see people ramming vehicles into gay pride offence. Yeah. Now fortunately, I don't think anybody died, which is good. There were some injuries, which is bad. You know, sad that I have to you know openly state that, lest I be accused of wishing harm upon the gay community. But I saw this German activist afterwards, and she was saying, Once it happened, I was praying, you know, please let it be a white Christian man, please let it be a white Christian. And I I spoke about this in a previous podcast. You know, when when you get the notification through saying a car has been driven into a crowd. You know, people on my side of the fence tend to think, I really hope it's not fatal. People on the opposite side of the fence think, please let it be a white man, please let it be a Christian man. This woman went off on some diatribe saying effectively, even though it was a Muslim man that had done it, it was still you know the fault of white Christians because we hold the same opinion on gay people as Muslims do. And I think it's a very ignorant statement because a lot of Muslims think that gay people should be killed. I don't think they should be killed, I just don't think they should go ahead with the gay lifestyle. And I don't think it's natural, I don't think it's normal, despite you know, decades of attempts now to normalise it and make it seem like, yeah, this is the way people are supposed to be. No, I I don't agree with it. But equally, I don't wish violence or harm on these people. A lot of Muslims do. Yeah, but this this whole idea Muslim misbehaves, gotta blame the white man. Yeah, you can't apply the law equally because the Muslims will kick off and start a civil war. Therefore it's the white man's fault. I I just don't understand this. I think the restoration of demographic security is crucial, you know, for the survival of our country. I've seen even some of the so-called right-wing talking heads that seem to have a real, real problem with this, you know, because they they cannot separate the concepts of immigration and you know ethnicity. So ethnically, you know, there are ethnic groups native to these islands. Yeah, there are ethnic Brits, ethnic English people, Scottish people, Welsh people. These exist. And just because we've had wave upon wave upon wave of immigration doesn't mean that there are other ethnic groups with a claim to these islands. Yeah, we built them, we fought for them, we defended them, we invested in them. Yeah, and and some bloke that turned up five years ago and has learnt to speak a rudimentary form of English, he's just as entitled as we are. No, don't buy that. I don't buy that. And I I've said before, I've said again, what makes places unique are the people. You know, I go to Spain, I love talking to Spanish people. They've got uh their own peculiarities, their own way of doing things. Now you go with France, the French people, the Germans, they they're these are all particular groups of people, and they're all responsible for the culture that you see around you. Now, over the last few decades, you know, many of the great European cities have become basically a a mix of all these other ethnic groups that have come there, all these other cultures that have imposed themselves upon the European mainland. And were it not for the buildings, the architecture in the background, many of the times, you know, many, many, many times, you would not be able to distinguish between London and Barcelona unless you're looking at you know the a photo and in the background there's some kind of landmark. You know, you see Sagrada Familia in the background, you know it's Barcelona, but you look at the crowd of people, and it could be pretty much anywhere in Europe, because we've all been forced to accept so many different ethnic groups that have come here to lay claim to our lands, you know, under the guise of integration. It's this kind of Trojan horse attitude, you know, and I'm very tired of that. You know, I think uh some people on the right have been deceived and misled by the perception given off by people like Shabana Mahmood, you know, the home secretary. I think she's a massive Trojan horse. You know, she came in. I mentioned this one before as well, with this uh you know, they they had this idea that you had to take into account people's ethnic background and skin colour and gender and all these different things um when when considering judicial sentences, and it boiled down to effectively if you're a uh straight white person, you're gonna get a worse sentence. This never had any any chance whatsoever of being passed into law, but she came down and slapped it down. A lot of people thought, hey, she's pretty based, you know, she's uh she's not gonna do anything drastic, you know. She's probably more right wing than a lot of uh a lot of the Tories or a lot of reform members. I just don't buy it. You know, I saw she put this video out on social media addressing the uh small boat crossings, and and she's talking about she's patting herself on the back, you know, the actions we've taken, meaning that uh we foil 40 something thousand attempts to cross the channel. So, okay, it sounds pretty impressive, but equally, you know, these people are still getting here, they're just having to try, you know, two or three times to get here. And the numbers crossing in in each boat is getting worse and worse and worse. You know, the boats are getting bigger, they're cramming more and more people onto them. And it's an invasion. Now at any other time in history, 50,000 people per year, you know, from a different country that have no right to be here, turning up, you know, military-aged men, you know, it would be classified as an invasion. And this is why, you know, I I'd be in favour of putting the navy in the channel. I don't want to see death, I don't want to see the loss of life. But you know, these people at best are here to rob us. Yeah, they're here to loot the treasury, live at our expense, at best. At worst, they're here to rape and kill us. And the and the government wants to scatter these people throughout the country so that every town, every city, every village will have a little army of imported what? Imported soldiers ready to turn on the native population. In many cases, they're being put in places where they will outnumber the local population. You know, but she's put this video out and saying, Oh, it distresses me when I see these boat crossings and you know, four people drowned, and I don't want that. No, no, no, no. What you want is more safe and legal routes. And then we get back into the you know spreadsheet managerialism that I mentioned a few episodes ago, where now these illegal immigrants are still coming here and they still have no right to be here, but they came here legally, so and I get pretty jaded speaking to people, and they think that illegal immigration is the biggest issue facing us because it's not, it's legal. Legal immigration is the biggest thing. Legal immigration is the thing that's costing us jobs, is pushing up housing prices, is making everything more and more unaffordable, it's taking up resources that we don't have. Yeah, the the strain on a water supply, a food supply, everything. Yeah, we don't have enough to sustain all these people, but they keep coming and coming and coming. And people like Shabana Mahmood want to just say, yeah, but it's okay for them to come because we gave them a different piece of paper, so they're not illegal anymore. And then within a few years they'll be able to pedal that up into a citizenship claim and they'll be able to get more money, more housing. Yeah, things that are not given to us the native population. And it begins to look a lot like replacement. Yeah, you get things like these deals done with India, where Indian companies that employ Indians in the UK don't have to pay national insurance, so it's now actually cheaper for them to employ Indians than it is the native people, and they can't offer a lower wage, you know, so they they can't offer, for example, well, it's £15 an hour for a British person, but £13 an hour for an Indian because we don't have to pay national insurance. They can't do that. So basically they have to offer the same wage to an Englishman and an Indian, but it's costing the business less to employ the Indian. Now, one of the safeguards against this was the fact that you know there's still visa fees. Indian workers would have to pay visa fees, but the government will reimburse those now. So they have actually made it much more beneficial for businesses to only employ Indians at the expense of British people. And when you see this happening in say the kind of jobs that historically were done by teenagers and young people just leaving university or supporting themselves while studying, you know, retail jobs, that kind of thing, waiters, etc. Well, then you suddenly understand why you've got so many young people unemployed, and of course, they've got different measures, you know, different ways of hiding the amount of people that are actually out of work to make it look better than it actually is. But all they're doing is solidifying the replacement of the native British people in the workforce. Yeah, they've made it cheaper not to employ British people. This is another reason why demographic security is so important. Yeah, and so once we get to that tipping point where we are the minority, we're lost. As a people, we are lost. Because the the global majority, you know, all these Africans and Indians that are streaming over here, they will not treat us with the same courtesy that we've treated them. And I know we're constantly bombarded with messages about how oppressive we are towards them and how racist we are as a country. My beg to differ. I think we've been far more tolerant than virtually any other society would be. Yeah, and now that we are getting a little bit sick of it, a little bit pissed off, well, but apparently we're the problem. We've been warning for decades that tensions would rise and we would get to a critical point where we either take peaceful political action or things erupt into violence, and I want to avoid that. So political restoration of demographic security is vital. Now the third key point was to give the British people a legally binding referendum on the death penalty. This is something I think a lot of reform supporters would be fully on board with. I think the majority of people would like to see the death penalty reinstated. Of course, there's arguments against it. You know, you don't want to put an innocent person to death, which has happened in the past. But I would say, you know, let's reserve the death penalty for the ones where we know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that this guy's guilty. So somebody like an actual Rudic Obana, you know, or the anybody that participated in the grooming gangs, yeah, where we know beyond a shadow of a doubt that you did this. Yeah. Death penalty. Because the alternative is we pay for them for the rest of their lives. You know, Rudika Bana, he was in prison for a little while, 50, 60 grand a year to keep him. He then gets moved to your specialist hospital where they'll try and you know reform him. And he's costing us now 300 grand a year to keep him. And the the parents of the murdered children and anybody that was upset at the horrific actions that he carried out, well they're now working to pay taxes into a system that goes out of its way to keep him as comfortable as possible. That's not right. That's not right. I think you forfeit your right to life the moment you murder a child, let alone three, and attempting to murder many more. You know, an absolute savage who should be put down like a dog by the state, viciously, brutally, yeah, publicly. That's my opinion on that. But you know, some people probably be okay, executing behind closed doors in the most humane way possible. I'm beyond that with animals like Rudicabana. Yeah, I I'd also extend the option for the death penalty to his parents because they knew that he was planning to do something like this. And they said and did nothing. They stood by him, they didn't alert the authorities to the fact that he had attempted to take a knife to a school and was clearly planning to murder children, and they did nothing. Absolutely nothing. So they've got blood on their hands too. You know, I I'd be open for the death penalty being reinstated for politicians that have clearly betrayed us. Yeah, now we spoke about it before. When you remove penalties for treason, you're effectively encouraging more treason. Yeah, I I think we need to have a brutal, horrible deterrent for people that want to hurt children in any any way, shape or form. You know? Sexual crimes against children, death penalty. Murder the child, death penalty. Yeah, and then for things like uh neglect and things like that, let's bring back some public shaming, yeah, public floggings. Or let's put them in the stocks and throw rotten fruit and vegetables at them, let's bring back a sense of pride and a sense of shame. These are two things that are missing, massively missing. Yeah, I think it comes down to the the balance between rights and responsibilities. Yeah, you have the uh you have the right to have a family, you have the responsibility to bring them up right. You know, you uh you have the right to life, but you have the responsibility to do good with that life, or at the very least, and I think this is a very low bar to clear, don't do evil with that life. If you perpetrate actions that are, you know, whatever shade of uh of the spectrum you're on, evil. Like murdering a child, nobody's gonna defend that practice, or at least I would hope not. And yeah, you forfeited your right to life. Yeah, and many, many people in this country want to see the death penalty reinstated, and we aren't given the option to even discuss it because the establishment is incredibly squeamish about this kind of thing. I'd be all for using it in limited cases, you know, very limited circumstances where guilt is provable beyond a shadow of a doubt. So that's one of the conditions. Another one, which uh economically speaking is pretty right wing, is restoring self-sufficiency to Britain, you know, and this will be done by spending controls, you know, austerity, that fearsome word. And this is one that's not popular. You know, the left's always got a very good sales pitch because it advocates for more public spending and you know, just making life easier for many, many more people, and kicking the can down the road, don't think about where the money's coming from. You wouldn't run your household like this, uh, but they run the country this way because it's easier to get votes if you're saying, Look, I'll give you more money. Yeah. Now, the biggest expenses in the country, the NHS, pensions, the benefits, and any one of these, you know, they're so stitched into the fabric of the nation that you try and touch any of these and you are immediately beyond the pale. But they need to be addressed because the way we're heading, it's absolutely going to collapse. The entire rotten system will collapse if we don't take some kind of action. Yeah, and I would prioritise streamlining the NHS. I think there are far too many bureaucrats in the NHS. You know, there are more desk jockeys than there are frontline medical staff. A lot of these are claiming exceptionally high wages, and they will be entitled to exceptionally high pensions as a result of that. And all of these are things that you know we'll have to pay in perpetuity. Pensions will roll on and roll on and roll on for desk jockeys that never really contributed anything of value their entire career. You know, it's wrong. It is absolutely wrong. And the amount of money that goes into the NHS is absolutely obscene. You know, it is genuinely frightening. When you look at take a look at the NHS budget, break it down by the day. You know, it's hundreds of millions every single day. And the service just gets worse and worse and worse as the service, you know, the system gets overburdened, overloaded, and is expected to cater to more and more and more people without adequate facilities. This is why you can go to AE and sit there for 14 hours and still not be seen. This is why you know you end up with doctors, you cannot understand a word that you say, and this is a real issue. You know, the the the fact that you know many, for example, customer service roles have been outsourced to call centres in India and Africa where you really struggle to understand the people speaking. Well, it's cheaper for them. It's cheaper for them to for them to to base their call centres there. And this is mildly annoying when it's something like, you know, I need to speak to the customer service department for my car insurance or a washing machine or something like that. But when you go into a hospital and you're getting important medical information with somebody that has a you know either a poor grasp of the English language or an accent so thick that you cannot understand it, and important medical information is somehow supposed to be transmitted between the doctor and me. And we can't understand each other. That's a real issue. A lot of these people they get very, very aggressive when you can't understand them, as if it's somehow my fault that his English is appalling. No, it's it's anyway. Uh I'm getting I'm getting off topic with this one. There needs to be enormous cuts to public spending, or massive, massive spending controls. And the welfare system, I'm sorry, but it needs to be completely re-jigged. You know, this data came out recently, and it was showing that for a lot of young people they are actually financially better off on benefits with anxiety rather than taking a job that works minimum wage, you know, an entry-level job that we all started with. Well, if they're going to be financially worse off by doing that, why shouldn't they stay at home? You know, and again, rights and responsibilities. We live in a country where you have the right, you know, if if you're completely incapable of working, you will be looked after by the state. Yeah, and and many of us would not begrudge this because hey, you never know when you're going to end up in that situation, too. Right? But you also have the responsibility to contribute. You have the responsibility to work if you can work. Yeah, I've I've always tried to work hard. Always tried to work, you know, it's good for the soul. It's good for the soul. Yeah, I I met a young lad this week on a site that I'm working on, and he he does the same. He's 24 years old, and he's gone out of his way to learn skills, to get tickets for different kinds of machinery. Yeah, because he wants to contribute and provide, you know, provide for himself, support himself, better himself. And this is the responsibility that we have. You know, you have a family, it's your responsibility to look after them. And if something really, really bad happens, you have the right to be looked after by, you know, the National Health Service, we all pay for. And in, you know, worst case scenario, and you can't work, yeah, you have the right to be looked after. Of course you do. I don't I don't want to see anybody suffer. But I think it's also it's morally wrong, it's repugnant that people that have never worked, never contributed, can have a better lifestyle than people that work 40, 50, 60 hours a week. You know, I always think back to my old neighbours. Nobody in their house ever worked, but they had, you know, they ate a lot better than I could afford to eat. They had four, five, six dogs that I couldn't afford to feed. They all had season tickets to the football. They got taxis everywhere, which I couldn't afford to do. You know, they had constant takeaways, which I wouldn't want to do, but also if I wanted to, I couldn't afford. Yeah, and then the council, because they got so fat by taking taxis everywhere and not working and eating all these takeaways, the council spent a hundred grand of our money to extend their house. Yeah, which they don't pay for. And these people never worked in a day in their lives, their children will never work a day in their lives, and their grandchildren will probably never work a day in their lives because they've never been shown that that is their responsibility, and they'll have grown up with the expectation that everything will be paid for by the state, by the council, by their fellow taxpayers. You know, but if you if you were to run on a platform of cutting benefits, you'd have a huge section of the population up in arms about it, saying how unfair it is. You know, I I just I'm sorry, but I don't think you if you don't work, you shouldn't have a better standard of life than a hard working family. I don't even think you should have an equal standard of life. Now, granted, it's a lot of people it's not their fault that they can't work, they've got some kind of major, major disability or whatever. I don't think anybody in the country begrudges these people not working. But we're at a point now where say you can get signed off with no expectation to work because you're a little bit anxious. Well, I hate to break it to you, we're all a bit anxious, aren't we? You know, but we just have to get on with it. We're all a bit depressed. You know, it's kind of part and parcel of living in the UK, is it not? We're all a bit depressed, we're all a bit anxious. Yeah, we've all got aches and pains and struggles and yeah, but you you can get signed off with digestive issues, you can get the the amount of things you can get by making, you know, exaggerated claims is is unbelievable. You can go to you know motability schemes and get a brand new car because your grandma's death or something like that, you know. And I I used to see it, I used to work in a car dealership, and you'd see people that they couldn't have been in the country for very long because their grasp of English was so poor. But they'd come in with their elderly granddad who's you know struggling to walk, and they'd come along and they'd look at the Most expensive fast car that you've got, and they they just say free car, free car. Well, some of them you've got to put a deposit down on, yeah, two grand for a brand new car. That all you've got to do is pay the fuel. And these people, you know, three, four, five months ago, probably sat in the back waters of some Indian village, yeah, and and somehow they can come over here and get you and me, taxpayers, to pay for their car. Make it make sense. Yeah, and and these these things are all enormous drains on our society. Yeah, and they're this at a time as well where farmland is being given over to housing developers and data centres are consuming enormous amounts of water that we don't have. Yeah, huge parts of the country are in drought at the moment, host pipe bans got low. Yeah, farmers struggling to irrigate the crops. So the demand for food and water is going up and up and up, or the supply is going down and down and down. You know, this is causing enormous amounts of strain. Energy. We need more energy. We are closing power stations and relying on wind turbines. They don't function when it's not windy or when it's too windy, and even when they do function, they don't produce enough electric. Solar panels, great at this time of year, I suppose. We're getting a lot of sun. Brilliant. But there are few places in the world that get less sunlight than the UK. It doesn't seem the wisest strategy to be relying on solar panels. Here we need to be opening power stations, going down the nuclear route if need be. Here we need to be providing abundant cheap energy so that we can manufacture. We can build our industries back up, we can have cheap domestic energy, lower the bills there, gives us more money to spend in the rest of the economy. These are the kind of things we need to be doing and building up our own capability to provide ourselves with food, water, power, you know, steel, all the things that are necessary for living in the 21st century. We need to be providing for ourselves because as the you know the the Iran war has proven, there's a stranglehold on oil, the oil supply. If we don't have our own, we're at the mercy of everybody else. The Ukraine war, you know, it it's affected food production across Europe, so we need to be trying to make ourselves as self-sufficient as we can. Yeah, the quality of our life, and in fact, quite possibly the very survival of our country depends on this. I'm ranting a bit today, aren't I? I do apologize. And the last point of Rupert Lowe's demands was restoring faith in politics, which he wanted to achieve by obtaining a guarantee that there will be no failed Tory ministers in a future reform cabinet. You know, and I I think this is fair because reform, against the advice and wishes of many of their supporters, insisted on taking in more and more and more ex-Tories. And by ex-Tories, I don't mean in the sense that Rupert Lowe is, you know, Rupert Lowe left the Tory party in the early 90s. Reform took people that were in the previous Conservative cabinet, the people that failed so spectacularly that reform were able to really hammer them down. Yeah, cause the collapse of that party. But then took in the very same people responsible for that collapse, and some of them were incredibly instrumental in the Boris Wave. The Home Secretary and the Immigration Minister, for when the Boris wave were implemented, are currently sitting in high positions within the Reform Party. And Nigel Farage couldn't even rule out putting them in the cabinet were he to win. That's a massive red flag for me. That says to me that reform really are the second iteration of the Conservative Party, you know, the Conservatives 2.0. It does make me laugh because reform, their members, their representatives will insist that you know Restore Britain is some kind of containment project, and that they've got this kind of secret pact with the Tories, which is why Rupert Lowe was put on the uh this committee, I forget what it's called now. There's a committee that holds you know the government to account on their spending. And initially this this post was offered to Rupert Lowe as a sweetener for getting him into the Tory party. Well he took the post and he didn't join the Tory party, so nice little move there. And it's given us access to a lot of you know, we've got a lot of footage now of him grilling people about wasteful spending. It's great to see. We need more of it. I think he played a great move on that one. But there's this idea bandied about by you know reform adjacent people saying that there's some kind of deal between Restore and the Conservatives, and then this is being used to smear Restore. But the ranks, the ranks of reform are filled with ex-Tories, you know, and and it's a red line for Rupert Lowe and Restore that those people cannot be allowed into the cabinet, cannot be allowed into power again. So who is it that's the containment project there? Is it is it the the party that took in the ex-Tories and expelled Rupert Lowe because he was too far right for them? He was he was too heavy on the mass deportations and the reversal of Conservative treachery, or is it restore? You you tell me, you come to your own conclusions on that one. But uh needless to say, it doesn't look like the deal's gonna go ahead. There won't be any real cooperation. You know, Farage is not accepted, and there's different reasons coming out for why. You know, I've seen some people saying it's the uh well Farage himself has said things that imply he will not rule out putting Robert Genrick and Swell of Bratman into a future cabinet, yeah, because according to Farage, he doesn't abandon his friends, he doesn't backstab his friends. Well, look back over his career and you'll see that this is not the case. He's got a long list of people that he's betrayed and backstabbed to maintain his position as the right-wing guy in the country. Um Rupert Lowe himself is an example of this. So um yeah, I don't uh really believe through odds when he says that he he won't backstab his friends, but um yeah, he he doesn't want to rule out putting them in the cabinet. I've seen other people saying it's the kosher element that he will not go ahead with banning kosher slaughter, he'd be okay with banning halal slaughter, but not kosher, you know, so maybe some kind of appeasement attempt towards the Jewish community, but I don't know. I've seen people connected with him, you know, some of his spokespeople, saying that Rupert Lowe himself is the issue. And this would probably be quite fitting because uh Fruard, you know, he's able to bully most people. Most people he's come across in his political career, he's been the bigger name, he's been the stronger personality, he's been able to bully them, you know, and get his own way. And he can't do that with Rupert Lowe, who will insist on keeping his feet firmly in the fire. So I could fully believe that Froudge won't work with Rupert Lowe, and that is the obstruction to the deal, which tells me that he would accept this deal if he believed he'd be able to bully his way out of it again. You know, I I've seen precious little from reform that gives me any hope that they will do the things that we want them to do and most of their supporters want them to do. That's a real shame, because you know they are they are considerably bigger than Restore, they are bigger than the Tories, they are the big right wing party, but I cannot vote for them. You know that they they will not commit to demographic security. This seems to be a big sticking point for them, they cannot bring themselves to say it. And I've seen a lot of reform supporters saying, Oh well, Rupert Lowe doesn't like ethno nationalists. No, I think this is a definitional difference. You know, Farage has made it clear that he doesn't want people with my opinion to support him. So guess what? I don't support him. Rupert Lowe has said he despises ethno-nationalism. Now I I would consider myself an ethno nationalist, but I believe in a small government, and insofar as there is a government, I believe that it should be aimed at the betterment of the people of the nation, hence nationalist. I believe that the people, the ethnic native people of this nation, yeah, are the people that make up the nation. So their priorities, you know, their their survival, their flourishment, should be the priority of a national government, hence ethnonationalist. Yeah. And you listen to the things that Rupert Lowe says, demographic security, and you know he speaks about the preservation of white British and doesn't want to see the white British become a minority in their own ancestral homeland. Well, I'd say he's also on ethno-nationalist terms then. Just I believe people of his generation are more likely to equate ethnonationalism with you know Nazism or white supremacy. I'm not a white supremacist. You know, I think uh Congo for the Congolese, you know, Mexico for the Mexicans, Australia for the Australians, and Britain for the British, England for the English. So I'm not a white supremacist, I'm an ethno-nationalist, and I believe there is a a difference there that um maybe doesn't quite resonate across the different generations. Yeah, terms evolve and change and their their perception and interpretation also changes over time. You know, there was a time when being called an ethno-nationalist would have sent people running. Because I embraced the term. I say I'm a nationalist for my own people. You know, I want to see the betterment, the flourishment, and the preservation of the English people. Yeah, and I will not make any apologies for that. And that what I like is that Rupert Lowe and Restore don't expect me to make an apology for that. Whereas reform would be grovelling on their knees trying to disprove the suggestion that they are some kind of ethno-nationalist, that they are somehow more invested in the survival of their own people than anybody else. Because you know what? That's how it should be. Every government should be aimed at the survival and betterment of its own people, and this is something that's been sorely lacking. You know, this effort to appease everybody and this attempt to, you know, to instill relativism where everybody is just as British as you or me, as long as they're here and they're contributing, they are British. Well, I'm sorry, this is not how the world works, it's not how it's ever worked before, and it never will work that way. Yeah, if we embrace that kind of ideology, we will fail. Yeah, I mean take a look around. Since we adopted this ideal, you know, whereby anybody can be British. Anybody can be English, as long as they have a job and they speak English, and when the football's on they support England. Well, has anything gotten better for British people? I would say no, not a single thing. All the services, you know, that we pay for with our taxes downhill. The quality of homes, the affordability of homes downhill. The safety and security of our communities and neighbourhoods has gone downhill. Policies pursued by the people that espouse these ideals of anybody can be British. Well they've exponentially increased the danger faced by ordinary people commuting to work or you know going down the pub or just returning home after a long week. Yeah. They they've made our communities more and more dangerous, and they haven't given us, you know, a commensurate way of defending ourselves, of protecting ourselves. This is unsustainable, and particularly with you know the high levels of taxation and the stagnation of wages due to mass immigration and the insistence of the government in sending billions upon billions of pounds out of the country, as well as the remittances sent home by people that we never wanted here, it's simply unsustainable. You know, and for these reasons, I believe that the the points raised by Rupert Lowe, the points you know offered as as red lines in the olive branch to uh reform, very reasonable, and reform would be stupid not to embrace them because many of their supporters already assume that those are reform policies, and they simply aren't. So they would be foolish not to seize them and run with them because the attitude, you know, the the enthusiasm the demand for such policies is absolutely there. We just need people with the balls to say it, to get people used to hearing these things, to make them mainstream, yeah, and before you know it, it's a snowball effect, and we can really, really restore things. That's why I support Restore Britain, and I hope you will too. I'll say it more often than I would like to, but that's that's who I'm voting for. I think it's the only chance we've got at really saving our country and preserving it for future generations. We had a great country handed down to us by those that came before us. It's our responsibility to maintain that legacy and pass down something equally great, if not greater, to those that come after us. Yeah, we we can't do this just for ourselves because if we if we look at this through a selfish lens, yeah, we'll massively increase public spending. We'll say everything is free, free energy, free food, free healthcare, free this, that, and the other, and we'll make future generations pay for it. You know, we we spend hundreds of billions of pounds a year more than what we actually have. Yeah, the the the deficit is enormous. The national debt is insane, it's more than three trillion now. Which means that you know, for every public service that people of our generation demand, well, we are spending the taxes earned by our great-great great grandchildren. Their money is already gone. You know, this is not about just us. This is our children and future generations, yeah, and we owe it to them, but also to the generations that came before us. We owe it to them to preserve things and to not let it collapse. Yeah, so there might be difficult times ahead, difficult decisions to be made with public spending, huge cuts and things like that. You know, nobody likes austerity. But if we don't do it, everything everything will collapse. Yeah, there won't be a health service, there won't be a welfare service, there won't there won't be benefits for those that need them, there won't be a pension for the elderly unless we get a handle on it. And quickly, we're running out of time. We've had successive generations of politicians that have abandoned these issues, kicking the can further down the road and assuming somebody else will have to deal with it. Well, that's us. That's us. It will fall on us to do that, and if we don't, we can kiss goodbye to everything we know and love. So sorry to be uh so depressive on this one, sorry for moaning so much, but as always I appreciate you listening. And uh God bless you all. Catch you on the next one. Goodbye.