None. It's been a while, Charles.
Mike, I was away in China. Charles, before that, you were
away. And here we are, finally
together. After what feels like months.
Finally we got back. Yeah, it is, isn't it?
Yeah. I still sound.
Yeah, I still sound a bit sick. So I'm going to talk as little
as possible. Yeah, we should probably make it
clear that's not why you've been away.
It hasn't been hasn't been an illness that's kept you from the
airwaves. But I think that chatting about
the trip to China is a is a very good sort of undercurrent
because Mike, you and I were chatting a little bit about how
people perceive not just China, I suppose, but you know,
countries that tend to get targeted by sort of Western sort
of Intel interests. MI 6 has had a very big interest
in in in creating a false narrative, particularly about
the Xinjiang province. And I'm trying to think where to
start. But basically my starting point
is the following. It doesn't matter that that
you've been to China, Mike. It doesn't matter that I've been
to China because I still have conversations with people saying
to me, it doesn't. It doesn't matter.
They just made you see what what they wanted you to see.
Yeah. What?
Right. Well, that's, that's just I'll
just start with my usual caveat and that was that I went there
as a tourist. So I'm sure I only saw certain
things Germ right. So now I'm going to say,
however, that I did speak to quite a lot of people that were
that are obviously local to the places that I was at.
I, I absolutely went out of my way to do that.
And OK, the cynics might say, well, these guys aren't going to
speak out because they're scared of their government or whatever
it is. Perhaps maybe we see a bit of
that in this country as well. And so maybe we shouldn't be so
smug about about any of that. I'm going to say that that I
think there was only one instance where I was really saw
something which was different, shall we say, to to the way that
that the average British person or American might behave in the
presence of the authorities. And that was that that at the
Shaolin Temple there was AI assume a police helicopter came
over the top. And I think it was only the
Western tourists and there were very few of us there that that
looked up everybody else looked down.
Now that that might give an indication about people's views
of of the authorities and so on. But that's on one side of the
discussion. On the other side of the
discussion is that everybody was very comfortable to be out and
about at any time of the day or night.
There was no St crime. It was absolutely a, a wonderful
environment to be in and and everybody was immensely friendly
and, and welcoming as well. So, so, you know, take that,
take that as it is. It's it, that is my impression
of the place you, on the other hand, were in, you know, really
the the Wilds is where you were in Xinjiang.
And my point about Xinjiang is, and again, having not been
there, but, but realising what what that situation has been, it
it does. I do find it ironic that the
average British person is prepared to accept the narrative
of the British government about Xinjiang, about the oppression
of Uyghur Muslims at the same time that they're all from the
same kind of people that they're all marching with Tommy Robinson
against the Muslim community in the United Kingdom.
I find this really ironic to say the least, because, you know,
the fact of the matter is that Xinjiang has been on the
receiving end of the same kind of tack.
Ferry thought that certain parts of the Middle East have been,
that certain mosques in the United Kingdom have been.
And this has been a, a very manipulative situation by
Western powers, by MI 6 and so on and CIA and so on.
Because because obviously there is the potential to stoke
contention on the border with neighbouring countries.
And, and this is, this is typical Western divide and
conquer tactics. So, so China has reacted to an
insurgency effectively in that part of the world and they've
reacted in a particular way. And they would argue that that
has been about giving people that might be in susceptible to
radicalization, give them the opportunity to to be part of
society and the opportunity to, to learn skills and to, to get
jobs and these kinds of things and actually be productive
members of society rather than getting involved with
radicalization and, and insurgency and so on.
The West portrays that as being concentration camps and re
education and all this kind of stuff.
And so, you know, you take your, you take your poison as well.
You decide which of those two narratives you're going to
accept. But, but I personally accept
that I'm more likely to accept the Chinese narrative on this
because the people that have been radicalised in that region,
many of them have then turned up, for example, in Syria to
fight on the side of the of the insurgents there that that
Britain and the United States has backed so hard since 2011,
right. So, so you can start to see
that, that, that there are, there are common features
between what was going on in Xinjiang and remember the, the,
the, the radicalised Uyghurs managed to pull off a, a, an act
of what the Chinese certainly would call terrorism in
Tiananmen Square. So, so you know, it wasn't that
this was just being restricted to the Xinjiang province
province itself. This is something that, that
they managed to, to spread across China.
So inevitably the Chinese authorities reacted to that, but
the people that complain about that then complain that the
British authorities aren't reacting here.
So you know which which way do you want it?
But that's the thing, Mike, people don't quite understand
historical context. I mean, what you just did now is
what you would expect the average person to at least know,
but they don't take the time just to figure out why.
You know, some of these things have been happening.
I think it was 2018 where there was an MI 6 backed insurgency in
the province of Xinjiang. Now listen, I've I've now
travelled Xinjiang fairly extensively.
I think I visited I think 7 cities right against the border.
I think Kashgar is one of the closest cities to, to the
Pakistan or Afghanistan border. And only when you there, when
you see the military and when you see how different the
cultures are and you realise that there's a long history here
of, of insurgency, of instability, only then do you
start understanding why the Chinese government is trying to
protect its sovereignty. And for the last few years, all
we've been hearing from people, unquote, unquote outsiders.
We've got to fight for sovereignty.
Well, this is precisely what the Chinese government has been
doing. Yeah, Look, I, I, I understand
that from you basically because I, I have no familiarity with
the region at all that, that it is quite a militarised place to
be. I of course grew up in a
militarised place. So, so, you know, it was normal
for for me to be mixing with people in black uniforms or in
green uniforms with machine guns.
This was just, this was just normal.
And so maybe, maybe it's had a bigger impact on, on use than it
might have had on, on me if, if I'd been there.
But the, you know, I think again, people, I mean, you're
right, people are not, well, let's let's deal with the issue
of people understanding the historical context.
Of course, the vast majority of people are only receiving any
information about this, any of these regions from the BBC or
other mainstream media. And most people aren't
interested enough to actually try to find out for themselves.
So, so that's part of the problem.
But but it's, it's for me, the, the real thing that I find
difficult about the whole situation is that is it whenever
there's a sort of a predisposition against a
pertinent particular ethnic group or national nationality or
whatever, there's a willingness to accept government narratives
without, without criticism or without any kind of scepticism.
And yet on so many other narratives, when it suits
people, they are completely sceptical.
And I think, I think this is this is the real thing that that
needs to be addressed amongst Westerners.
And the fact that Westerners don't ever assume or consider
that that anybody in the East or in the Middle East or in South
America or in Africa may have a completely different perspective
on the world than they do. And so they're always looking at
these three things through a Western lens.
And that, that, I think is really problematic and in fact
even a little bit arrogant perhaps.
Charles, I know that you've not been to China, but I mean, the
principle is the same, right? Like if you go to different
countries, people like to say things like, well, you should go
there. And then you say, OK, fine, I'm
going to do that. I'm going to go there.
Then you go there and they say no, no, no.
But you can't go there as a tourist.
It's not long enough. You've got to live there for one
year. OK, well, I can't live there for
one year. So the best I can do is talk to
somebody who lives there. No, but you can't talk to
somebody who lives there because because they're scared of the
government. And So what happens is you, you
have this perpetual loop of never actually doing anything
other than kicking the can down the road and and basically
maintaining the status quo. Well, if we just put China to
one side for a second, I would I would suggest that the majority
of people who live in the United Kingdom have absolutely no idea
what's going on in the United Kingdom.
So it can't really be such a great surprise that there's a
little bit of discrepancy as to what exactly is always been
going on in China. And let's not forget, as you've
pointed out that China is absolutely vast.
And so to imagine that you could rub up along alongside one
person in China and they would give you chapter and verse and
on what's really happening is frankly ludicrous history.
Again, there are multiple versions of absolutely every
single event, action and movement in history.
So how do we really draw much of A conclusion from that?
I don't mean to just cast doubt on on absolutely everything.
I mean, in fact, I have been to China, but but Benny very
briefly and only to Beijing. And I wouldn't at all imagine
that that would be a place that I would get to know over a
period of time. I think the other thing the the
words that come come to mind were written in fact about
Africa, but by Isaac Denison writing is Karen Blixen in Out
of Africa. OK.
She wrote it quite a lot, quite a lot of years after the event.
But I read it at a time when I was working in the very country
that she had been writing about, in fact, at exactly the place
where she was living. And she made a very interesting
remark about how as a OK, she was making the distinction
between Europeans and Africans. Nothing to do with the, the, you
know, there's no sort of racial connotation here.
But, but quite simply, people who inhabited a particular area
and did things in a particular way would never, ever yield the
absolute truth of everything to, in this instance, the European.
So and I, and I absolutely identified with this.
I remember I I worked in a headquarters where I was the
only non African and we all worked very well together and
stuff happened or didn't happen. And often I could never ever get
to the bottom of why something had happened or had not
happened. And there was, when I say the
truth, I don't mean there was any dishonesty.
I mean that there was a, there's a sort of shielding mechanism
and whether it's intentional, whether it's cultural, whatever
it is to come into somewhere, somewhere else in the world that
you're not familiar with that does have, you know, let's face
it, geography alone, I think does account for quite
substantial changes. I'm, I'm not really able to back
this up with anything other than anecdotal evidence, but I mean,
generally speaking, as you progress further away from a
place, the culture becomes more different roughly.
So I mean, bearing in mind China is quite far from the United
Kingdom, It's, it's an easy, you know, it's an easy one to use as
an example of, gosh, well, how different and how different
because. And I think really the main
point that that comes out of this is not really so much
whether whether you have been to China, whether you haven't,
whether you've been there as a tourist, whether you've been
there as you know, to work or to really explore.
Whatever it is, the fact of it is that it is used by the media,
by the politicians, by the security services, intelligence
agencies, all the rest of it as a tool with which to either
suggest this is good or this is bad or we don't want to do that
or we do want to do this. And it just, you know, exactly
like Mike says it is. It is funny the the terrific
inconsistencies that that that does bring in.
I mean, most notably the, the sort of Muslims are bad, except
when they're good contradiction. And and also this is now, you
know, China in some quarters is being presented as the well, we
don't want to do that with digital ID because look what's
happening in China without actually citing any evidence of
what is happening in China. So I again, I think we need to
be extremely careful of being presented with anywhere as being
either good or bad in, you know, and, and I find that as a, as a
Brit, you know, I mean, how ridiculous to, to on, let's say
digital ID. Oh, well, look, Estonia has done
it, made a real successful, Yeah, but fine, we're not
Estonian. And why do we need to or want to
be like Estonia? Can't we just be like ourselves
and decide and going back to the point about sovereignty, why
don't we decide what we want to do?
And we can still, we can look at other places, of course, but,
but to suggest that we should do it because somebody else's, or
in China's case, we shouldn't do it because China's doing it,
That's the, I think that's the, that's the trap.
And, and so, you know, the more, the more confusion and
contradiction that exists surrounding China in a way, the
better because it, it, it plays into the hands of those who are
trying to manipulate the, the, the stories about the country to
their advantage and, and critically to our disadvantage.
Yeah. But I mean, that's the point
though. It's, it's, it's about thinking
critically about all of these countries, particularly
countries that get targeted constantly like China, Russia,
Iran. I mean, they they are a list of
countries that that we could name that that are most likely
not what we think they are. And, and something as simple as
visiting, as Mike pointed out, is not going to give you a full,
a full spectrum, you know, of, of analysis, but it's going to
give you a keyhole and it's going to give you a keyhole that
you previously didn't have. It's something like, yeah,
sorry, Mike. Sorry, Joe, I was just going to,
I was just going to say there, you know, that's true.
But but what it can do if you're, if you're honest, is it
can at least present people with some semblance of the truth or
getting closer to the truth. I mean, just one example, in
Poland, the Polish people are being told at the moment that
the sanctions on Russia are unbelievably successful, that
people are starving on the streets and so on.
And, and a particular Polish Blogger, can't remember his name
off the top of my head, said I'm, I'm not buying this at all.
And so he took himself off to Moscow and he had to fly through
Istanbul because there's no direct flight, of course,
because of sanctions. And he arrived in Moscow and he
discovered a city that is absolutely cosmopolitan, that
has a, an underground system that functions, it runs on time
that people that he thought, my goodness, what kind of reception
am I going to get as a Polish man in, in Moscow?
And he, he just was treated unbelievably welcome,
unbelievable welcome. He any help he needed, he got,
he even got people. I mean, people were even paying
for stuff for him, for, you know, for something to eat at
one point. But just because they were,
they, they didn't want him. You know, they wouldn't accept
his payment for, because they invited him to, to come for, for
a meal. It was, he had a fantastic time.
And he, he started presenting this information on Polish
alternative media and he got absolutely lambasted for it by
all kinds of people for, for pursuing a Russian narrative and
so on. And, and so, you know, this,
this is the type of thing we've got such, we're so propagandised
that, that when anybody that's in any way independent says to
themselves, right, let's go and find out exactly what's going
on. They go to the country, they go
to the place, they talk to the people, they experience what
it's like and they come back and they bring that story back.
Even then, when the evidence is presented, you, you know, large
numbers of, of people on social media are prepared to accept
what they're being shown and, and you know, the attacks begin
and whether. Those are.
That is though, Mike. I think because of course people
are are can't be very ideological and they they can
they can have sucked in narratives from from.
Well funded sources. And so whether whether it's a
whether it's the, the, the just Poland is as divided as as other
countries are. I'm quite sure it it is that's I
haven't been there in many, many years now.
And so I don't know exactly what the lie of the land is there.
I certainly remember back in well, early 2000s, two, 1005 or
whatever it was, whenever they were planning to, to get into
the European Union and there was the the whole discussion about
whether they should join or not. There was some division, but it
was very much majority pro EU. And I suspect that's still the
case to some degree. I mean, I think the farming
industry in particular has become a bit more anti but but I
think in general Polish people are still quite pro the West and
pro EU. And so I think that's probably
the main reason. When I was in China, I had a
similar conversation, but in reverse where I asked this one
Chinese, we are you going to visit South Africa at some
point? You know, we've got beautiful
safaris and wildlife and all that kind of thing.
And the response was, well, I don't know, it looks a bit
scary, you know, Will I be safe now?
That's the same thing. It's precisely the same thing in
reverse because yes, there is a crime problem here, but when you
land, are there people just shooting guns like it's a Wild
West? No, of course not.
And, and, and you can only figure that out if you just take
the time to come and visit. I've not been to the UK, so my
entire perception of the UK is based on everything that I've
ever been told and read. And I do intend to change that.
But I'm pretty certain that a lot of what I think is also
false and, and as you, you know, agreed earlier, Mike, just going
somewhere is certainly superior to not going somewhere.
It's a good it's a start and and more people should do it rather
than simply watching videos on YouTube.
I would absolutely encourage everybody to go as as many
places they as they can, because that's the only way to to to get
a feel for the place. But it, but, you know, it's
still, it still sort of comes back to the, to the issue of, of
is, is what you're seeing real? And, and I think that if, if all
we ever do is, is the sort of tourist centres that then
probably it's, it's probably a Hollywood or a, a Disney version
of, of, of reality. Certainly living there for a
little while will give a better impression, but.
So what you're saying? But I think, I think what you
did, I think what what I'm saying is I think what you did
was, was a cut above what most people get the opportunity to
do. Because because you were really,
you know, you were really in the, in the, the real
Backcountry, as it were. And, and, and getting to see a
bit of the real, certainly more of the real China than than, or
at least that part of China than most people get to see.
What was what you're saying is if I go to the UKI must go and
stay with Charles because he's more in the countryside and he's
outside of the of the of the city centre, no.
But Charles, Charles and or in fact anybody in the UK column is
probably going to give you a better, a more accurate
impression of the UK than than than if you go and get to the
average tour guide. Let's put that.
One. Yes, yes.
Yeah, could be a one way trip coming here, Jeremy, You never
know. Yeah, I mean, I think what I was
going to say, OK, it might sound a bit bit trite, but you know,
if you're pushed for time, just a tour of the world's airports
because I think they give you an incredible insight into how a
country projects compared with how it is.
And the say the three obvious examples would be the UK, the
United States and Hong Kong. OK, actually I extend that a
little bit. The the airport and its
surrounding area, the United Kingdom and the United States
project that they are countries where every little detail is
taken care of and progress is is core to, to everything.
We are very civilised. We are very technologically
sound, organised, welcoming, whatever.
Right. Well, see what you think after
spending 10 minutes inside Heathrow Airport.
I know I've talked about this before and, and, and people who
have travelled through the airport, my apologies because
you will be bored of hearing it again.
But Heathrow is held together with string.
It is, it is a dreadful, dreadful experience.
So I mean, Germ, I forewarn you for when you do come here, be,
be prepared. But but what I mean is, is that
it's absolutely contrary to the way in which this country
projects itself. But also it is very, very
concerned with what they describe as security, which is
in actual fact not anything to do with security.
Because if they really did legitimately think that people
were trying to anyway, we wouldn't get distracted by that.
But I mean, the, the sort of security architecture in
Heathrow Airport is, is extraordinary, but it is also
terribly inefficient. They are very, very impersonal.
The people that are working in those jobs, it's not a pleasant
experience. the United States, I would say it is the same, but
sort of on steroids. You know, you are, you are
treated or at least I haven't been there for a few years, but
but last time I went, I was delighted to find that I was
also treated like a terrorist again.
And you know, that persists and then you go outside the airport
and and the whole place is is a ruin.
I mean, going in. So this might exist elsewhere,
but certainly travelling in on the on the train into New York
is an extraordinary experience. The the the level of vagrancy
of, you know, looking out from the train when you're on the
sort of elevated bit down into the the residential areas there.
It is amazing. It is not in any way like the
image that America projects to the rest of the world going to
Hong Kong, where we are told that, you know, now under
Chinese control. It's a sort of autocratic
surveillance state. Everything works.
You are treated with a great deal of respect and humility.
You are welcomed. You whistle straight through the
airport. The doesn't matter what you
choose to do next in terms of on the journey, it all works.
So I think there is, you know, there, there is absolutely like,
I mean, like Mike says, I would, I would always encourage people
to go and and this is not an area.
Let's let's look at what UK column does, for example, it may
not be feasible for us as a small team to go to the place
that we are reporting about. But the point is we will go to
the source document for whatever, whatever it is that
people are talking about, that's in the ether, that's being
discussed, We will go and look at it.
We will not simply regurgitate what other people have told us.
And I think that should what you know, one should apply that to
absolutely everything in life. I mean, why would you, if
somebody tells you such and such a bicycle is great, Well, why
would you accept that you surely you would want to go and try it
out for yourself. And I think other parts of the
world are no different. But I mean, you know, I just go
back to what I was saying earlier, which is that there is,
you know, there's an obvious way in which narratives about other
countries can yield particular effects on the people that are
being told that. But no, that I mean, the, the,
the story about, you know, the chap going to Moscow and
reporting on it and not being believed that that's in effect,
that's a daily experience probably for anyone who's
listening to this particular podcast.
This is what happens when you try to talk to people about
things that are not being reinforced by the mainstream
paradigm. That's the reaction you get.
You know, even if you've actually been there and you've
actually done it on AI, don't think that can be right because
that's not what it says in the Telegraph or on the on the BBC.
So I don't think I'm going to believe you.
I mean, it is. It is perfectly astonishing.
But I think this is psychology that fascinates me, an
underlying psychology. And that is, and I think you
kind of alluded to it earlier, Mike, is some, some talking
points or ideas people are susceptible to rethinking, to
challenging, you know, themselves to hold up a mirror
and others are just completely impossible.
So I've noticed over the last few years, people have generally
been actually a very open to the idea of discussing vaccination,
right? And whether or not growing up
thinking that vaccines were great, whether or not they were
great. And you know, and so people are
I've, I've had a number of conversations over the last few
years about vaccines. Then you bring a talking point
like China, since I was just there, or perhaps the Muslims or
whatever it might be. And suddenly there's a, there's
a different kind of psychology that, that, that gets played
out. And I don't really know what I'm
asking. I think what I'm, what I'm
getting at is, is, is why perhaps some of these talking
points seem to get this, this brick wall around them and
others, you know, they're, they're, they're, they're,
they're more susceptible to being, you know, to being broken
down and, and, and rethinking. It's just so strange to me how
people get so caught up in particular talking points that
it becomes impossible to to to to crack that nut.
I'm going to say none of us is, is immune from this.
I'm I'm not, you know, there are things, there are things that
that people will say that people have said to me in the past
where where it absolutely puts a brick wall up.
I and I feel it going up and it and that's that actually for me,
that raises alarm bells because I'm saying that I'm then saying
to myself, why is that happened? And I want to actually then look
into that issue a bit more. I think the problem is that that
most people when the brick wall goes up, they're not interested
in trying to smash through it and see what's on the other
side. And I think that's where the
problem is. And I'm going to say actually
that that the truth, the so called truth movement or
whatever you want to call it, is absolutely as bad, if not worse
than just about every other section of society in this area.
There is, there is, there are some very, very strong
ideologies that run through the truth movement.
And I find it very difficult. And I've heard this, I've heard
this many, many Times Now where people since COVID have said we
are the future of humanity. And I'm thinking, no, you're not
sorry because you are even more, in some cases even more
ideologically driven than than than the worst of the, of what
they would perceive to be the other side of the argument.
And you know that. So there, there is no, there are
no solutions in on either path. If that's the way you've got to
think, if that's the way you think about it.
So as far as I'm concerned, if somebody says something to me or
I read something, or there's a piece of information comes in
front of me, which which causes that feeling of, of the brick
wall going up that that is, that is alarm bells.
And you've got to, you've got to start challenging your own
perceptions and your own precepts at that at that point.
And, and the result of that challenge may be that you, you
end up actually agreeing with your original position.
But the point is you've at least made the effort and you've,
you've, you've, you've dug into to, to the topic a little bit
more and, and hopefully made a bit more progress on on, but
you've got a bit. But we've always got to be
careful about our confirmation bias because it does exist.
It is there and we've got to absolutely be challenging it
every, every time. That's what Nick Hudson
constantly refers to as as complex systems, which I think
is very similar to things that you've said in the past about
trying not to buy into the idea of absolutes, because that's
the, that's the sort of false dichotomy that so many people
fall into. It's that, that fake binary,
it's either one or zero. That's it.
There's nothing in between. There's no nuance, there's no
complexity. But the moment you accept that
there is complexity, that there is nuance, perhaps your own
position becomes weaker. Yes, I think that's true.
I think the other thing I was going to add is that I think we
have been pushed very, very deliberately into failing to
examine things philosophically and considering them personally.
And that has been the the way in which all of these matters have
been. Therefore, weaponized vaccines
are a very, very good example. I think they are.
But you know, any debate about vaccines is, I think almost
immediately not at all objective.
It's it's not dealt with in an academic sense.
There is a there is a personal investment in it.
Either you believe that you know, you are doing the right
thing because you're protecting yourself and your family or
whatever and you're and you're and you're protecting those
around you. I mean, that was the sort of the
way in which the the COVID thing was sold, but that's actually
been in the in the sales package for a long time or you do it the
other way around where you again, for sort of similar
reasons, you think that you're protecting yourself by not doing
whatever it is. So the yeah, I mean, like I say,
I think think the the issue itself and, and what it is
actually about is taken away. But people have already so
conditioned and so prejudice to take A to take a personal view
of it rather than an objective one.
It it's absolutely hopeless. And that, and you know, that we
go back to this whole idea that that is entirely because it will
create sufficient division and antagonism for anybody to
consider that you've both been lied to.
And that should be the bit that drops out of any of these sorts
of discussions. I mean, you know, the fact that
if you do enter into a dialogue with somebody, it should really,
if you're dealing with the matter correctly, I think it
should, it should come out that there's a, there's a discrepancy
between what you each think, you know, and there's only really
one way that, that can have come about, which is that some lies
have been told. Because otherwise, how, how do
you, you know, how, how are you forming that opinion?
Why would you look what's being done with climate change?
Look what's being done with, you know, to children.
This is all, absolutely all being presented as something
that is a, a really, really deeply personal part of your
life. It is not abstract anymore.
And, and, and all of this should be, it should be abstract.
We should be able to talk about it without there being any sense
that there's a sort of personal investment in it.
But I think that's what's that's what's being done.
And look at, you know, look at where we are with other
nationalities and and migration. I mean, it's done with, it's
done with absolutely everything. And I think people have are
terribly susceptible to that. Of course they are because it is
personal. It's become personal.
But I think also it's about security.
I mean, my mother said to me the other day, you know, I can't
believe that this is going on. And my whole life I thought
something else, you know, what can we believe anymore?
And it's it's that that I do understand because when you ask
that question, well, what can we believe anymore?
It feels like the rug has been pulled out from under you and
you don't have any stability. And I think that.
What you've, you've absolutely hit the nail on the head.
This has, this is something which has been done to people,
right? And people that this is
something that is, is absolutely destabilising.
And of course, the way the reason it has been done is
because if people are looking at the world with what can I
possibly believe anymore, they either completely switch off
from everything. And we, we are absolutely seeing
that at the moment, people are switching off from everything.
They're not watching the news, they're not watching alternative
media, they're not watching anything.
And, and the point then is that they're completely disengaged
from events and therefore in no position to resist what's going
on so that they they can be put in a box over there because
they're safe. Now, as far as the government's
concerned, they've been demobilised or you've got the
people who are then totally susceptible to the lies because,
because they don't have anything to, to, to as a foundation for
what they, for what they understand.
And so they can, they will believe anything.
And then you've got the people who will only therefore or they
even become more radicalised towards the, the mainstream
official narrative. And because, because everything
else that's going on is, is a pack of Russian disinformation
or whatever, not, you know, category you want to put it in.
OK, so, So what that what that does very systematically is
remove people's ability to make a rational objective assessment
or analysis of what's going on around them and it takes away
any ability to resist. And this is, This is why it, it,
this absolutely has to be fought.
We have to fight it within ourselves.
We and we do that by, you know, being absolutely careful about
what conclusions we reach. That is not something which is
effort free. But unfortunately, that's not
that amount of effort is not something that most people are
prepared to to make. And you know, what's coming is
coming. Whether we you know, whether we
hide from it or or pretend that it isn't or not.
So you know it, it's the usual thing.
It's always better to the prevention is always better than
cure. And it's better to be trying to
get involved in resisting what's going on earlier and trying to
see if we can slow it down or stop it completely or diverted
in a different direction is much more likely outcome if if we win
this. Well, no, I mean, it's, it's a
very good question, but I was just going to bring back the the
point about things being binary. I think the, you know, in terms
of what what one may or may not believe.
It does then present the trap, which can of course create
further division, which is to to let's say it is on new sources
to draw a distinction and say, well, all of may everything that
mainstream puts out is corrupted and untrue and driven by some
sort of agenda. And conversely, that anything
that comes out in the alternative media is true.
I mean that that again is a gigantic mistake.
So I'm not, I'm not suggesting that that simplifies things, but
it but it is just a sort of it's one of those things that people
do need to be very aware of. But I think that that is a.
An absolutely identifiable sort of knee jerk reaction to when
the when the scales do fall from people's eyes and they and they
realise that on what you know, whether it's one particular
issue that then unlocks a number of other things, it doesn't
really matter. But the point is, once people
realise that there have been some absolutely extraordinary
lies or untruths told, it's easy to see how a reaction against
that is to think right. Well, in which case absolutely
everything I've been told is, is not true.
And that again, is, you know, is a problem.
So it's, it's really difficult to be, to, to continue to be
able to keep a, a sort of critical mind and to be able to
discern. But I think that the most
important thing with all of this is to keep talking to people.
And yet the, the, the great push, of course, is not for
people to talk to each other. It is instead for them to get
completely absorbed into in particular, mobile telephones
and, and, and for younger people.
I think I quoted this the other day.
I mean, OK, it's a statistic and notwithstanding what I just
said, it came from the BBC, but but it was about use of mobile
telephones in schools. And the premise for this was a
survey that had established how much time teenagers do use their
telephones. And even during the school term
time, the, the average figure in some schools was, was up to 40
hours a week. And that's, you know, a working
week spent on a mobile telephone.
I, I might sound old fashioned, but I really did wonder how they
found the time. I, I don't understand it, but
the point is, but OK, I'm not sure that it was necessary.
We've added up to 40 hours but but to think, you know, as a
teenager you're missing out on 40 hours worth of talking to
other people is quite astonishing and very damaging.
Yeah, but that's the problem. People don't want to talk.
I didn't. I couldn't hear you.
Oh, can you hear me now? I was just, I was just saying
that the problem with people don't want to talk.
It's easier to do scroll. And that's the thing actually,
that is part of the psychology is there.
There does seem to be a desire to doom scroll.
There does seem to be a desire to always look for the worst.
This is why I think nuance and complexity are beautiful things
because they do reduce the, the hysterical nature of what you
might think to be true. Digital idea is not a good
thing. Obviously not.
But you know, I was chatting to somebody, I think yesterday they
were going on about this is the end of the world.
No, can't have any more kids. And this is just, it's the end.
It's this is the end. And it's just too dramatic for
me to accept that. I think that it makes me want to
go hold on, hold on, hold on. Let's let's unpack this a little
bit. Is it as, is it as binary as
what you're making it out to be? And I think the truth always is,
no, it's not as binary. It's a little bit more nuanced.
Does that make sense? I think, I think that, OK,
let's, let's, I'm going to try not to be pessimistic here, but
it is difficult. I, I think, I actually think it
is, I think we're pretty close to, to the end of this, if you
want to call it a civilization. And, and the reason I say that
is because we have, if we just take the United Kingdom, let's
just say United Kingdom was sixty 70 million people,
whatever it is, none of those people has any kind of sense of
community or nationality really anymore.
There's no agreement about what being British is.
There's no agreement on what kind of country they want to
see. There's no agreement on whether
they want to have children or not.
There's there's no agreement on anything actually.
And so we are in a reality of collapse.
We've got collapsing infrastructure, we've got
collapsing services, we've got collapsing economy.
Everything is instead of collapse.
There's nobody qualified to reverse that or change that.
That is the direction that we're heading in and we're heading in
the direction of technocracy, as as you've pointed out.
And so as a result of all these things that which are physical
realities and the fact that as we've already discussed, the,
the fact that that it's impossible to without massive
effort get to any kind of sense of the truth, then I think that
people are becoming, as you've just expressed, absolutely
pessimistic about the future and they're making bad decisions.
And once we start seeing that kind of ever escalating
negativity and collapse, then there is no way back for, I
mean, just to just to take something really, really simple
there in any city in the UK at the moment, there is no side
street or even Main Street which is not full of potholes.
And this, this is a road infrastructure which has
developed over decades. And suddenly that entire Rd
network needs to be resurfaced. There is no possibility of that
being done because there's no possibility of unless we
completely restructure how we do things, there's no possibility
of there being ever the money to do that And to, to restore those
roads back to, to back to the state where they, where they
actually function properly. And, and so I, I don't see a, a,
a, a good way out of this that that is going to be pleasant for
people. I think that we're going to,
we're going to have a fairly unpleasant time of adjustment
until we, until we discover some new way forward or else we're
going to end up inevitably in this, in this really restrictive
technocracy that we all imagine. But the problem is we are
imagining it and therefore we're effectively making it reality.
We're, we're, we're doing the things which are, which are
bringing it on as it were. And, and so, you know, this
comes back to the conversation we've had actually several times
on this, on this the, in the programmes that we've recorded
so far, this, the future that we, that we bring about is, is
something that we have to first of all, imagine in our own
minds, we've got to absolutely resist the future that, that
other people are talking about. But, but the problem is that
there, that, that we aren't imagining a future that we want
to see. And therefore we're not taking
the actions that we, that we need to take in order to make
that a reality. And so, so yeah, I'm, I'm have
to admit I am slightly pessimistic about about where
this is going to end. I think, I think we absolutely
have the opportunity to, to, to make, to, to, to have a
different outcome. But that requires people to
actually, you know, as we said before, take a step back and
consider. Do something.
Well, no, it's not, it's, it's not do something.
It's, it begins with with ourselves and, and, and
imagining where we actually want to get to and considering what
actions we, we we need to take as individuals to get to that
point and, and actually taking them.
And that that's, you know, whether that's a lack of
leadership or whether that's just just a lack of, of moral
compass. I, I'm not sure.
I'd be interested to see what Charles reaction to that is what
I've just said. I think I can see exactly why
you, you, you would say what you say and, and in general terms,
of course, I can't disagree with you, but it's slightly going
back to the beginning with where we started in China and whatnot.
You know, if you, if you went to one place, you'd come away with
a different view from if you went to another and all that
sort of thing. I don't mean to be a pedant, but
I think it's an important point to make that certainly I don't
regard the United Kingdom or indeed, well, I mean, obviously
not the British ass because there are separate sort of
political entities involved. But but, but it's not one
homogeneous landscape or area. And I think that the way
societies work best is when the connections are the the, the
connections, the sort of change of connections, logistic chains,
all the rest of it are shorter and not longer.
And therefore society where I would say it has it has a better
chance of thriving when things are done on a smaller scale.
So let's say potholes, a really good example, they there could
be, you know, a national programme to deal with potholes
or could be done individually and locally.
And I'm just, I'll tell you why saying it like this because I
think I mentioned it the other day.
I went to the Groundswell Agricultural event back in July,
which is interesting actually, as a side note, because of
course Groundswell is a perfect example of people being
presented with something that sounds great.
Obviously, you know Angus McIntosh well and you know what
he's doing, and he describes what he's doing as being
regenerative. Regenerative therefore becomes a
buzzword and a marketing word and something with which you can
convince and then corrupt people.
And what's happened here is that there's now a big event that
describes itself as being for regenerative farming, which of
course should have virtually no inputs because it's all about
harnessing nature. And yet lo and behold, there are
umpteen machines, soil additives, programmes,
technological solutions that apparently are to the benefit of
regenerative farm. Basically the whole thing has
been captured. Very obviously going to happen.
It's happened with everything else.
Why would this be any different? And I'm not in any way
suggesting that people who are calling themselves regenerative
and are doing it properly are captured.
They're not. But the the point is that the
language has been stolen and that's a danger.
So that was one thing that just the other side of the motorway
is the what's described as the Garden City of Letchworth.
And this was this goes back to the early 1900s where there were
well, sort of series of new towns built from scratch.
I think something existed there already.
But but anyway, Letchworth today, I must say.
And yes, OK, going back to the China thing, I only spent a bit
of the day there. I haven't lived there all the
rest of it. But it has a feel to it that is
completely and utterly different, I would say from any
other town of its size. It has, it is beautifully
designed, has lovely sort of, you know, traditional red brick
arts and crafts buildings, really wide streets, a lot of
very well kept vegetation. To my memory, there are no
potholes there whatsoever. Now, I can't explain exactly why
this is the case, but the point is that it, it looks and feels
totally different. And walking around that place
and seeing the people that were there, you know, going about
their sort of daily business, it, it had a different feel to
it. And whatever it is that has made
that happen can easily happen in other places.
And OK, yes, I take the point that was made, which was about
finances and OK, that is not sort of an immediate thing to
be, to be solved. But the point I'm trying to make
is that it doesn't take much for a situation to be changed, even
at the, the lowest level. I mean, the one the, the, the
obvious 1 is, is food. And you know, if you're like, I
am surrounded by farmland and you know that the minute
everything is going off to supermarkets, to big food
corporations, therefore it's being sprayed to death.
And you know, any livestock is being injected with what all the
time. But, but to begin to change that
and to take some of that land out of that method of production
and just start with a small local market to do, to do the
direct sales farm shop, whatever it is that the, the, the effect
that that in fact has is really, really significant.
And it's those sorts of things, those sorts of changes that are
driven not by central government, not by local
government Even. So, you know, even if it came to
it potholes that there is, there is actually no reason that there
couldn't be some way in which a community could go about fixing
a road. I mean, it's not that flipping
difficult. It's not like the council
themselves are actually doing the work.
So all of these things are achievable.
I think we just need to look at them in in a different way and
and get out of this, you know, talking about sovereignty.
I mean, yeah, OK. But but at at what level?
At what? At what degree?
You know, why on earth would I be looking to Keir Starmer of
all people to make any sort of a positive difference or indeed to
affect any influence over my life?
He he, he's, he should be, to me a complete irrelevance.
And if it were not for the fact that working for UK column
involves reporting on the sorts of things that he is doing or
supposed to be doing, he would be a complete irrelevance.
I mean, he is. Let's face it, even Donald Trump
couldn't remember who he was. But.
But Charles, do you think, sorry, Charles, do you think
the, the, the time that you were talking about, do you think
that, that the, the size of the community counts here?
Yes, I do. Yeah, yeah, absolutely I do.
So, so I'm not, I'm not suggesting that there is a, a
sort of one size fits all And I, I have no idea what the
population of Lexworth is. It's not very big.
So yes, I, I, I do think there is a, a scale beyond which a lot
of this, it is problematic, but but not impossible.
I mean, if, if we consider in, in the United Kingdom, London or
Birmingham, OK, I'll just put the Rose tinted spectacles on.
But I mean that both of those places have been made to work in
terms of the transport, logistics, communications,
water, sewage, every, everything else there.
There was a point in time where, as far as I understand it,
everything really, really did work.
So whether it's just that they've got too big or there are
a host of other reasons, it's, it's, you know, that that's sort
of open to debate. I think it's because they've
become too authoritarian. I mean, you know, the number of
cases in cities that we hear of of and we do hear these stories
from time to time of people who've tried to, to take some
kind of local Community Action and make a, a piece piece of
waste ground look, look pleasant and turn it into a flower garden
or even a vegetable patch. And they end up in the court,
being brought into the courts by the, the local authority and so
on. I, I think that's, that's
absolutely part of the problem and needs to be, that type of
behaviour needs to be fought, absolutely.
But yes, I take your, I take your point it, it, but it does
worry me that, that so much of the population is, is based in
cities and that where there is first of all, there is no sense
of community at all. And, and so it becomes difficult
to, to organise on a community basis, but also just the, the,
the, the draconian hand of the, of the local authority and even
even at the, at the very local level in cities is, is also
problematic. So, so, you know, there's lots,
I absolutely take your point and there's lots that people could
do, but but for people to do those things, they've got to
start with with, you know, building community again, and
that's not easy these days. No, I, I totally agree.
But I think I and I think we are between, I think we have, you
know, it's been a sort of steady decline, but the post war period
has seen the collapse of almost every sort of meaningful and
positive and productive, you know, fraternisation,
organisation, community, whatever.
And, and I think although the results might not yet be sort of
visible or tangible, I think there are enough people out
there who have realised. And, and I think this is an
interesting one actually, because I think there are, you
know, it doesn't matter, for example, what you think about
climate change or vaccines, a pothole is still a pothole.
And no one wants to have to, you know, bump up and down in
potholes. And I think, I think it'll be
the I'm hoping it will be these sorts of things that that do
allow people to, you know, for, for minds to meet and for there
just to be a practical delivery rather than an ideological one
or practical, you know, drive for this rather than
ideological. But but yeah, there's a heck of
a lot of ground to be made up. I was just going to, I was just
going to bring in an anecdote because I know we're we're
nearly on the stops, but just thinking, you know, going back
to China, it just, it made me laugh so much.
For anyone who does think, you know, China is this rigidly
controlled country where there's, you know, people
absolutely gone dance to the government's tune.
They're surveilled and and this, that and the other and no one
sort of steps out of line even for a second.
The very first thing that I suppose quite a lot of people do
when they arrive, coming out of the airport, Beijing, hail a
taxi, drive down the sort of airport concourse and then out
into, as far as I recall, what should be I guess the equivalent
of a of a motorway in the Uki think it was it had three sort
of painted lanes. But immediately it was obvious
that in the direction we were trying to go, there were already
5 lanes of traffic because the what would be the sort of hard
shoulder and the central reservation people had squeezed
out round the thing. It was absolute gridlock.
So our taxi driver thought, OK, well, I don't think we'll do it
this way. And we just went through the gap
in the barrier into the oncoming traffic and we drove into
Beijing on the wrong side of the road with with four lanes of
traffic coming the other way. That I don't see people doing
that in the United Kingdom. I'm not advocating for it
either, but the point is, if people were controlled within an
inch of their lives, that would not and could not happen.
So just it made me laugh and it's silly and it's an anecdote,
but it is indicative. And I think those are the sorts
of things that we have to bear in mind.
How realistic is it that a society that behaves like that
is actually under the thumb to the degree to which Richard
Dearlove and so forth are are presenting it?
All right. I know that your schedule is
quite tight today, Mike, so let's come in for the landing.
Gentlemen, thank you so much. It's great to be back ready.
Really enjoyed chatting. Looking forward to catching up
with you next week.