Speaker 1: Welcome back to a numbers game of podcast with Ryan Kurdsky.
Speaker 1: I am your host. Thanks for being here again this week.
Speaker 1: Lots of big news happening, especially in the podcasting world,
Speaker 1: and I just want to talk about something for a
Speaker 1: second that it not political, just made me laugh. The
Speaker 1: Golden Globes announced that they are going to give an
Speaker 1: award out now for best Podcasts starting next year. This
Speaker 1: is the first major award show to give an award
Speaker 1: out for podcasting, and it is a big bag of
Speaker 1: bs in my opinion, because you know, when you think
Speaker 1: of the biggest podcast hosts in the country. Obviously I'm
Speaker 1: not the biggest podcast host in the country, but if
Speaker 1: you think of the biggest podcast hosts in the countries,
Speaker 1: the Joe Rogan's, the Theo Bonds, Megan Kelly, Crime Junkie,
Speaker 1: Call Her Daddy, Ben Shapiro, you know, these massive, massive
Speaker 1: shows that have been on for years and I've basically
Speaker 1: built the platform. None of them, in my opinion, You're
Speaker 1: probably get nominated like none of them, because if you
Speaker 1: think about it, because Hollywood doesn't make a lot of
Speaker 1: movies anymore, and TV shows are like ten episodes long,
Speaker 1: and it's just not what it used to be even
Speaker 1: a couple of years ago, pre COVID. A lot of
Speaker 1: celebrities have moved to the podcasting world, so you have
Speaker 1: like Amy Poehler and Michelle Obama and Conan O'Brien and
Speaker 1: John Stewart. That's who's going to be nominated. Not actual
Speaker 1: podcasters who work really hard to make the platform and
Speaker 1: do really really good work with it. It will be
Speaker 1: people who are already famous and celebrities, and they'll just
Speaker 1: find another way to reward them. I don't know. May
Speaker 1: My I roll made me laugh. I thought it was
Speaker 1: very funny and I wanted to share with my audience. Anyway.
Speaker 1: Lots of news happening in America, with discussions over the
Speaker 1: tax bill, which I plan on covering hopefully later on
Speaker 1: in the week, and the Trump trip to Saudi Arabia,
Speaker 1: which I briefly covered last week. But something revolutionary is
Speaker 1: happening overseas, like truly revolutionary that really needs to be
Speaker 1: touched upon. And it's happening in the United Kingdom. Prime
Speaker 1: Minister Kerestarmer of the Labor Party that's the center left
Speaker 1: party like our Democratic Party, has announced he's doing a
Speaker 1: major crackdown immigration Okay. This is significant because as the
Speaker 1: Labor Party, like our Demo Democratic Party, has spent decades
Speaker 1: being peddled to the medal for mass migration. Immigration in
Speaker 1: the UK was fairly stagnant for most of the twentieth century.
Speaker 1: The form foreign born population from nineteen fifty one to
Speaker 1: nineteen ninety one double from one point eight million to
Speaker 1: three point six million over forty years. That's about forty
Speaker 1: five thousand a year. That's a lot, but it's not
Speaker 1: you know, it's not unsustainable migration. Then came former Labor
Speaker 1: Prime Minister Tony Blair, same party as Keir Starmer from
Speaker 1: nineteen ninety seven to two thousand and seven when he
Speaker 1: led the country. He was the prime minister during those years.
Speaker 1: He fundamentally changed it. Remember it took forty years to
Speaker 1: double a very small population of immigrants in the UK.
Speaker 1: He managed to double a larger population in just twenty years,
Speaker 1: from three point six million to seven point two million
Speaker 1: under his leadership. After decades of having no more than
Speaker 1: seventy five thousand immigrants in a single year a net
Speaker 1: immigration a single year, Blair increased into about a quarter
Speaker 1: of a million a year by his final year in office.
Speaker 1: And why he did that, Why did he make such
Speaker 1: a dramatic transformation in a relatively small country with long
Speaker 1: standing traditions longer than our countries even existed. Well, according
Speaker 1: to people close to him, he said he wanted to
Speaker 1: rub the rights noses and diversity. That's the entire reason
Speaker 1: behind mass immigration. It was nothing to do with the
Speaker 1: economy or labor shortages, or increasing the military or advancing technology. No, nothing,
Speaker 1: It was just to make conservative people feel uncomfortable. That
Speaker 1: was the entire plan. The Conservative Party often called the Tories.
Speaker 1: So if you're hearing me say tourism referring to the
Speaker 1: Conservative Party, they are the traditional center right part of
Speaker 1: the UK, our version of the Republicans, and they campaign
Speaker 1: on reducing immigration to historic levels. So after more than
Speaker 1: ten years of the labor leadership, they finally won control
Speaker 1: of Parliament in twenty ten under David Cameron. So what
Speaker 1: did David Cameron do well two years? For two years
Speaker 1: he kind of lowered them a little bit, immigration a
Speaker 1: little bit, and then he rapidly increased it, even surpassing
Speaker 1: Tony Blair numbers. And that doesn't even go to the
Speaker 1: increased level of illegal immigration that was coming to the country,
Speaker 1: which spiked because of the Hour of Spring, when Angela
Speaker 1: Merkel of Germany led the whole Third World into Germany.
Speaker 1: A lot of them made their way to the UK
Speaker 1: because they beautiful, generous welfare policies and it was a
Speaker 1: wonderful place to live. So they managed to sit there
Speaker 1: and get there, and the British public was fed up
Speaker 1: and a lot of them blamed the European Union on this.
Speaker 1: After all, Germany was the largest nation in the European
Speaker 1: Union on the continent. They Angela Merkel was the face
Speaker 1: of the European Union at the time, and there's a
Speaker 1: lot of European regulations around migration that forbade them from
Speaker 1: deporting people and accepting people. Cameron decided to try to
Speaker 1: appease the British public. Prime Minister David Cameron tried to
Speaker 1: appease the British public by offering a vote on the
Speaker 1: country's membership to the EU. And to the shock of
Speaker 1: David Cameron and most of the media and the British
Speaker 1: public at large, the British voters voted to leave the EU.
Speaker 1: They voted for Brexit and Breggs. It was about many things,
Speaker 1: but immigration, sovereignty, and the ability to control one's borders
Speaker 1: were the main reasons. That's why that happened. And once
Speaker 1: breggs it was successful. The Tory shuffle leadership because Cameron
Speaker 1: resigned because he campaigned to stay in the European Union
Speaker 1: and he lost. And then they got Teresa May and
Speaker 1: you don't really remember her much except she was an
Speaker 1: awkward dancer. She would dance for some reason in public.
Speaker 1: I kind of loved it, but it was it was
Speaker 1: awkward anyway, and then ultimately end up with Boris Johnson.
Speaker 1: Boris Johnson was oftentimes compared to Trump. He had a
Speaker 1: really messy personal life. He said crazy things a lot,
Speaker 1: and he had vibrant blonde hair that was always very unique.
Speaker 1: And people call him Bojo, so I'm gonna say Bojo.
Speaker 1: While Bojo campaigned on quote unquote getting bregsit done and
Speaker 1: finalizing the agreement with the European Union, he quite blacked
Speaker 1: away from his pledge to lower levels of immigration. And
Speaker 1: despite having one of the largest parliamentary majorities in modern
Speaker 1: British history, the largest for the Tories since Margaret Thatcher
Speaker 1: in the eighties, he did nothing to promote a conservative agenda. Seriously,
Speaker 1: if you want to feel good about the Republican Party,
Speaker 1: Look up the Tories while Bojo was in charge of them.
Speaker 1: Johnson increased legal immigration, passed anything that Tony Blair and
Speaker 1: the Labor Party could have ever dreamed of net migration.
Speaker 1: Remember it was historically forty five thousand, increased to over
Speaker 1: eight hundred and fifty thousand people per year. And remember
Speaker 1: this is the country that is a fifth of the
Speaker 1: population of the United States. It would be like the
Speaker 1: US quadrupling our legal immigration. And this happened under the
Speaker 1: Conservative Party, the center right party decades a promising reducing immigration,
Speaker 1: and he blew it out of the water. Boris Johnson
Speaker 1: ended up having to resign and his success was win
Speaker 1: named Liz trust I remember her. She lasted for less
Speaker 1: than I think it was ahead of Lettuce. I think
Speaker 1: she lasted for seven weeks. And then there was Richie
Speaker 1: Sunac who was the previous Prime minister Rishi Sunac as
Speaker 1: I call him Britain's modern day Lady Macbeth because he
Speaker 1: sabotage and backstepped everybody to get the position of power,
Speaker 1: only to lead the Tories to the largest defeat in
Speaker 1: modern history, where they lost two thirds of all their seats.
Speaker 1: But he's important and it's important to mention Sunak before
Speaker 1: I mentioned the current prime minister. Most important things Suonek
Speaker 1: did at the end of his time in office is
Speaker 1: once again, he also campaigned on reducing immigration and said
Speaker 1: he was going to do it right, unlike the other
Speaker 1: three Tory leaders and two Labor leaders. Was he was
Speaker 1: going to crack down on illegal immigration by making a
Speaker 1: deal with the nation of Rwanda to house illegal immigrants,
Speaker 1: kind of like how Trump is doing with El Salvador.
Speaker 1: Because there was a mass problem with illegomgration. They were
Speaker 1: a string of tax a string of crimes, some rooming gangs.
Speaker 1: He was going to solve this. Well, the courts struck
Speaker 1: him down almost immediately upon doing this, and they was
Speaker 1: because he was in violation something called the ECCHR. This
Speaker 1: is extremely important for anyone who likes to know about
Speaker 1: European politics. The ECHR is the European Convention on Human Rights.
Speaker 1: It was drafted back in the fifties, right after World
Speaker 1: War Two, and it was basically to prevent countries from
Speaker 1: refusing admission to you know, Jewish, prominently Jewish refugees, or
Speaker 1: send them back to what would be like Nazi Germany
Speaker 1: to a concentration camp. And basically it said if a migrant,
Speaker 1: if a refugee would be harmed in their native country,
Speaker 1: you cannot send them back. It's totally illegal to send
Speaker 1: someone back if they would be harmed in their country
Speaker 1: of origin. So let's say, let's say someone from Nigeria
Speaker 1: came to the UK, had a family there and they
Speaker 1: went on to rape a bunch of young girls. He
Speaker 1: cannot be sent back to Nigeria if he states he'll
Speaker 1: have a political persecution there. That's a real story that
Speaker 1: really did happen. A Nigerian pedophile was not allowed to
Speaker 1: be deported after raping young girls because he said he
Speaker 1: would life would be too hard for him in Nigeria,
Speaker 1: and the British courts agree with him. Now you could
Speaker 1: obviously see how that would upset the British public. It
Speaker 1: upsets me even talking about it. There's also thing called
Speaker 1: the Civil Rights Act. That's thing that Tony Blair put
Speaker 1: in that also has a series of different regulations and rules.
Speaker 1: But who you can deport when there's some thing called
Speaker 1: like people have a right to a family, So if
Speaker 1: you have a family, they are in Britain then that
Speaker 1: would mean you probably can't be deported unless you commit
Speaker 1: a very serious heinous act. Apparently rape is not one
Speaker 1: of them. But Sunak was adamant that the ECHR had
Speaker 1: to go. He's promised to sit there and campaign against
Speaker 1: it and never did. And that leads us to our
Speaker 1: current prime minister here, Starmer, the one is in office
Speaker 1: right now, the Labor Party who was announcing he's doing
Speaker 1: all these immigration policies. A lot of these immigration policies
Speaker 1: seem common sense to the average person. He's going to
Speaker 1: increase the wait time to declare citizenship. You have to
Speaker 1: wait ten years now instead of five. He has restrictions
Speaker 1: on visas. You have to know English fluently in order
Speaker 1: to live in England. Seems pretty obvious. And he announced
Speaker 1: he wants to start to do a Rwanda plan. He
Speaker 1: wants to do his own Rewanda plan, the same plan
Speaker 1: he campaigned against the same plan in the courts, sat
Speaker 1: there and said you can't do under the ECCHR, which
Speaker 1: he said he's going to reform. I will hold my
Speaker 1: breath for that. Why. I think that's the question that
Speaker 1: leads you to sit there and say why, why would
Speaker 1: the Labor Party, why would Cure Starmer of the Labor
Speaker 1: Party the far Left sit there and be co signing
Speaker 1: this now because on May first, a very important thing happened.
Speaker 1: The Labor part Party got obliterated in local elections, but
Speaker 1: they didn't lose to the Tories. They lost to Nigel Farage.
Speaker 1: I'm sure my audience know who Nigel Farage is. For
Speaker 1: those who don't, he's very closely aligned to Trump. He's
Speaker 1: been in America media a ton. He has a party
Speaker 1: call Reform UK Party. It is hated by the British
Speaker 1: establishment and the media, just like Trump was hated here,
Speaker 1: and he was in the political wilderness for decades. Nigel
Speaker 1: ran for Parliament seven times and lost all seven times.
Speaker 1: He was considered a joke until the last election when
Speaker 1: he finally won. He won along with four other Reform
Speaker 1: UK parties, and they've won another seat since then in
Speaker 1: a by election and a special election. Essentially, he is
Speaker 1: now polling in first place at over thirty percent in
Speaker 1: a country with seven political parties. He will be if
Speaker 1: this election were held tomorrow, he would be the prime minister,
Speaker 1: which was considered an impossibility just a few years ago.
Speaker 1: It would be like going back in a time machine
Speaker 1: to twenty thirteen and hearing Donald Trump will be your
Speaker 1: president in the next few years, and you laughing at
Speaker 1: the person anyone would have laughed at the person. I
Speaker 1: would have laughed at the person like that seems like
Speaker 1: it's impossible in twenty thirteen, and by twenty sixteen the
Speaker 1: situation had changed so dramatically and so badly that anyone
Speaker 1: with a compelling message like that obviously was going to win.
Speaker 1: And to you know, to take from a British term,
Speaker 1: Nigel Faraj is scaring the living piss out of Cure
Speaker 1: Starmer and the Labor Party. So that's why he's changing
Speaker 1: his tune on immigration. Why does it matter to an
Speaker 1: American audience? For the same reason that the transformational Labor
Speaker 1: Party could indicate the transformation of the Democratic Party. The
Speaker 1: Labor Party is so woke. England is so woke that
Speaker 1: they still on certain soccer games. This is true as
Speaker 1: like two weeks ago, at certain soccer games they still
Speaker 1: kneel for George Floyd. In the UK, this is a
Speaker 1: woke country, this is a woke elite, a woke established
Speaker 1: a woke political party. And if they are sitting there
Speaker 1: and saying we need to get right on immigration? Can
Speaker 1: the Democratic Party be next? My guest this week is
Speaker 1: a brilliant professor from the UK who's going to tell
Speaker 1: us what's happening there and what could happen here. Stay tuned.
Speaker 1: Matthew Goodwin is a British academic, a writer. He is
Speaker 1: a brilliant substect that I use to get all my
Speaker 1: insights on the UK, their politics, their culture, what's going
Speaker 1: on on our mother country. I cannot recommend a nothing
Speaker 1: can be found at Matt Goodwin dot org. Matt, thank
Speaker 1: you for being here.
Speaker 2: Thank you for having me. It's great to connect.
Speaker 1: Now, Matt, first question. Prime Minister Starmer has announced a
Speaker 1: series of new restrictions on migration, from increasing the wait
Speaker 1: time to apply for citizenship to closing loopholes in the
Speaker 1: AChR and talking about even reopening the Rwanda deportations unders.
Speaker 1: How much of this is sincere and how much is
Speaker 1: just fear of the Nigel Farage and what are the
Speaker 1: chance that the labor actually goes with it?
Speaker 2: So I think there are a couple of things going
Speaker 2: on here. That first is our political system has been
Speaker 2: completely transformed by the rise of as you say, Nigel
Speaker 2: Farage and the All Party, which is currently number one
Speaker 2: in the opinion poll. This is the most significant political
Speaker 2: insurgency since the rise of the Labor Party in the
Speaker 2: early twentieth century. It's really really big. Nigel Ferrage and
Speaker 2: this party just won the local elections local municipal council
Speaker 2: elections in the country. They became the first party in
Speaker 2: history to finish ahead of Labor and the Conservatives in
Speaker 2: those elections. So look, this is a very very significant moment.
Speaker 2: But the reality is that I Steamer and the Labor
Speaker 2: Party are also responding to a very different public mood
Speaker 2: for the first time since the vote for Breakfit, which
Speaker 2: Americans will remember because it was only a few months
Speaker 2: before the election of Donald Trump, the first election of
Speaker 2: Trump in twenty sixteen. For the first time since then,
Speaker 2: migration is now the number one issue in British Southiety
Speaker 2: according to you gov, which is a reliable Polster. Immigration
Speaker 2: is now seen by voters as being more important than
Speaker 2: the economy, and that is reflecting these unprecedented historic levels
Speaker 2: of migration that we have had into the country, particularly
Speaker 2: since the COVID pandemic. We've had about two to three
Speaker 2: million people migrate into what is quite a small Island
Speaker 2: in just a few years, mainly low skill, low wage migration.
Speaker 2: So what Issimer and Labor are trying to do is
Speaker 2: not just fend off the threat of Nigel Projen a
Speaker 2: reform party who are doing particularly well in labor areas
Speaker 2: in what you guys would call, you know, flyover country,
Speaker 2: the roughs spelt, you know, all of that sort of
Speaker 2: similar here in working clocks areas. That's the core for
Speaker 2: this reform party. But I was also saying, well, we've
Speaker 2: got a country here that is increasingly concerned about the
Speaker 2: immigration Issho very anxious about the direction of the company,
Speaker 2: and he's also trying to get his arms around back wide.
Speaker 1: But I mean labor. Some Labor Party members have pushed
Speaker 1: back and say they don't want to go forward with it.
Speaker 1: They said, you can't out forage Farage. I mean, do
Speaker 1: will they have? Will they be successful in pushing out
Speaker 1: you know, Starmer or pushing Starmar away from us?
Speaker 2: Well, I see a lot of parallels with the U
Speaker 2: estimate to be frank right, Remember in the early days
Speaker 2: of Trump, a lot of people's dead. You know, this
Speaker 2: strategy isn't going to work. Going hard on border security,
Speaker 2: going hard on immigration, you know, there are all kinds
Speaker 2: of people polstered Democrats, even moderate Republicans who were staying
Speaker 2: you know, the times had moved on. This is you know,
Speaker 2: this is a strategy that will only win among angry, old,
Speaker 2: you know, white men and the past. Trump obviously outside
Speaker 2: the whole system through that strategy and he realized there
Speaker 2: was something else going on in the country. I see
Speaker 2: a parallel with Britain because if you look at the
Speaker 2: pro immigration attitude of the labor activists who are complaining
Speaker 2: about kids Darma, both attitudes are basically ten to fifteen
Speaker 2: percent of the country maximum if I'm being generous. You know,
Speaker 2: we had one opinion poll this week that showed eighty
Speaker 2: five percent of Brits eighty five percent want net migrate
Speaker 2: and reduce from where it is now, so seven hundred
Speaker 2: and thirty thousand people every year, meaning meaning nearly a
Speaker 2: million more people coming into the country than leading every year.
Speaker 2: The Brits want that reduced the low one hundred thousand
Speaker 2: and a nearly halfable Brick want net migration reduced to
Speaker 2: zero or net negative migration meaning more people leaving than
Speaker 2: coming in. So if you basically are a labor activist,
Speaker 2: thinking I'm comfortable with the state that's quote. In fact,
Speaker 2: I want more immigration. According to that pole, you are
Speaker 2: basically representing five percent of Britain. Just five percent of
Speaker 2: Brits are basically comfortable with wettings are the VARs majority
Speaker 2: one to dramatically reduced migration. So Farage is swimming in
Speaker 2: some very very favorable warp that I would argue he's
Speaker 2: got the biggest political market that he's had at any
Speaker 2: point in his career. But for the Labor Party, you
Speaker 2: can see the tensions because they're not really going to
Speaker 2: win back reform voters because reform voters see through Karstarma,
Speaker 2: they know that this is political rhetoric, it's not actually
Speaker 2: supported by robust policy. But they're also alienating those pro
Speaker 2: immigration fanatic who are going to start to go off
Speaker 2: to the Greens and to the Liberal Democrats and to
Speaker 2: parties on the left. So yeah, we're seeing real historic
Speaker 2: change here.
Speaker 1: Because while Starmer is made of this announcement, he also
Speaker 1: had a free was a free migration policy with India
Speaker 1: that he just announced to actually increase migration to India.
Speaker 1: All these things in a crackdown and it's very we
Speaker 1: see a lot of them in the States too. I
Speaker 1: want to ask about Nigel Farage because he's probably the
Speaker 1: most well known British politician in America. He's got a
Speaker 1: ton of American media who's very close Donald Trump for
Speaker 1: a while, and I don't think Americans understood he was
Speaker 1: considered a joke by the British media and by the
Speaker 1: British public. He ran I think for office seven times
Speaker 1: and losing before join member of Parliament with the Reform
Speaker 1: UK Party. Why has this moment launched him? A man
Speaker 1: who's been around for decades and what are Labor and
Speaker 1: Tories toys trying to do.
Speaker 2: To stop The first thing to say about Nigel Ferrage
Speaker 2: is that he is going to go down as one
Speaker 2: of the most consequential politicians in the modern era. Remember this.
Speaker 2: There is a guy who has already won two nationwide
Speaker 2: elections with two different political party. He won the twenty
Speaker 2: fourteen European elections with his first party, the UK and
Speaker 2: Debended Party. He maintained back after the Brexit referendum with
Speaker 2: the Brexit Party to make sure that Brexit was implemented.
Speaker 2: He won the twenty nineteen European elections with the Brexit
Speaker 2: Party and now He's just won the local municipal elections
Speaker 2: with the Reform Party, so look, you know, and by
Speaker 2: the way, he helped deliver the Brekdit vote, so he
Speaker 2: is rans down the most consequential politician of I would
Speaker 2: argue our generation. He's a sort of modern day wat Pilo,
Speaker 2: the man who led peasants revolt against London many centuries
Speaker 2: to go. And he is a very charismatic politician. The
Speaker 2: reason he's back, let's be clear about this, is because
Speaker 2: I know Nigel very well and he once told me
Speaker 2: that he looked at politics like he used to look
Speaker 2: at the stock market. Okay, he buys the stock when
Speaker 2: they're cheap, and he tends to cash out when the
Speaker 2: stock is thurging, you know. And I think what happened
Speaker 2: a year ago, he looked around at the liberal landscape.
Speaker 2: He looked at this big debate over immigration, the small
Speaker 2: boat crisis, a legal migrating crisis on the border, which
Speaker 2: is quite similar to your migration crisis on the southern border.
Speaker 2: I think he looked at the Labor Party. I think
Speaker 2: he looked at Kemmy bad Knock, the new leader of
Speaker 2: the Tories, and I think he just thought, you know
Speaker 2: this whole thing is wide open. I'm going to come back.
Speaker 2: I'm going to lead the perform Party and I'm going
Speaker 2: to pull together a coalition that's bigger and better than
Speaker 2: anything I've had previously. And everyone in Westminster always brutinely
Speaker 2: they laugh at Nigel ay Mock, They insult, their dismissive.
Speaker 2: But is he once said in the European Parliament. They're
Speaker 2: not laughing now because he's number one in the Indian polls.
Speaker 2: He has effectively rhy and replaced the Conservatives. Already, you
Speaker 2: arouse me. They're scared the piss out of it speaking now?
Speaker 2: Is you and I speaking now? In the national polls,
Speaker 2: the former on thirty one percent, the Conservatives under Kemy
Speaker 2: Badnock are on sixteen tense. So this is really an
Speaker 2: important point. What we're witnessing is the depth of one
Speaker 2: of the most successful and older political party than the
Speaker 2: history of democracy. And Americans really should they'll know what's
Speaker 2: going on here because what the Conservatives represent is that
Speaker 2: kind of Romney old Republican coalictum that never moved with
Speaker 2: the times, and what Nigel represents is that Trumpian manga
Speaker 2: more only givety just you know, UNTI establishment and ti
Speaker 2: immigration alternative. The Toys have refused to lean into or
Speaker 2: deal with this realignment in the way that Trump did,
Speaker 2: and now Nigel's the big beneficiary of that. So with
Speaker 2: see English remarkable coalition coming together.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and it's so odd from an American who reads
Speaker 1: and follows British politics, Boris Johnson in twenty twenty one
Speaker 1: had a gigantic majority or twenty nineteen whenever the year
Speaker 1: of the election was a majority Surgery support Biggish since
Speaker 1: Margaret Thatcher and had the wherewithal, had the ability to
Speaker 1: really do whatever he wanted. Britain is not like the
Speaker 1: America or we have a Senate in sixty votes. If
Speaker 1: you have a majority of the Parliament, you can basically
Speaker 1: do almost anything you want. And from two tier policing
Speaker 1: to immigration to I mean, he didn't have even a
Speaker 1: coherent policy where he demanded to be Singapore in the
Speaker 1: teams of the idea of having like London be like Singapore,
Speaker 1: have mass migration. He kind of had no central plan
Speaker 1: and the Conservative Party withered in real time from almost
Speaker 1: the apax of their political power since the eighties to
Speaker 1: well to nothing in a matter of five years, six years.
Speaker 2: Well, absolutely I mean Boris Johnson, it's not quite fair
Speaker 2: to say you didn't do anything. What he did do
Speaker 2: with them a liberal agenda on the Conservative Party. That's
Speaker 2: basically what Boris Johnson did. He liberally likely im the
Speaker 2: Great Francisco. He opened the floodgate. I remember in twenty
Speaker 2: nineteen he was very clear. He said, I will lower
Speaker 2: overall numbers and now we gain control of the border.
Speaker 2: He put the numbers to the highest level that we've
Speaker 2: ever seen. We call it the Boris wave in the country,
Speaker 2: a wave of loth skill and no wave migrating from
Speaker 2: outside of Europe. But he also lost control of the borders.
Speaker 2: At the same time, Boris Johnson basically reinvented Nigel faraja career.
Speaker 2: Nigel Faraja is really representing the revenge of voters on
Speaker 2: the Conservative Party that told them down the river. In fact,
Speaker 2: many Americans don't know this, but if you think Boris
Speaker 2: Johnson is like a Winston Churchill figure, you know, you're
Speaker 2: you know, smoking something very strong. Let me put it
Speaker 2: like that, because what Boris Johnson did, you know what
Speaker 2: he did? He even removed the requirement for British company
Speaker 2: to advertise jobs in Britain before they advertise for those jobs. Oversee, now,
Speaker 2: Winston Churchill would have been a pool by Boris Johnson's
Speaker 2: they've inclected Winston Churchill would around today a bit like
Speaker 2: Margaret Thatcher. I suspect that they would be voting for
Speaker 2: the Reform Party, not for the Tories. I mean, this
Speaker 2: is the party that has really fundamentally lost touch with
Speaker 2: the country because it's so far left on these culturally.
Speaker 2: It refused to do whatever is necessary to regain control
Speaker 2: of our boarder that Nigel frag has got this enormous
Speaker 2: amount of space to move and operate in. And I
Speaker 2: would predict that if you and I were to have
Speaker 2: another conversation like this at the end of this year,
Speaker 2: at the end of twenty twenty five, I would predict
Speaker 2: with some confidence that not only will Reform be even
Speaker 2: stronger in the national polls, but they will have a
Speaker 2: number of prominent Conservative Party defectors.
Speaker 1: I was going to ke you about that, because I've
Speaker 1: heard rumors that Reese magg is considering and that other
Speaker 1: people are considering joining the Reform Party from my friends overseas.
Speaker 1: I I had that I've heard the same thing. I
Speaker 1: know Suella Braverman's had many conversations, but that's been public anyway.
Speaker 1: But I've heard private conversations existed as well, so I wouldn't.
Speaker 2: There was a fantastic British show back in the day
Speaker 2: before Kevin Spacey looked involved called House of Calm, and
Speaker 2: as you know, one of the lines in that show
Speaker 2: filmed down the road from where I'm speaking to you now,
Speaker 2: and Weminster is you might think that I couldn't possibly comment.
Speaker 1: Okay, it's very good you track you have tried. I
Speaker 1: have your book actually right here. You've tracked national populism
Speaker 1: throughout the globe. You wrote the first book before I
Speaker 1: even wrote my book, and it was a big inspiration
Speaker 1: for me. We have seen this narrative against of centrist
Speaker 1: parties and politicians. They're paying lip service against mass migration.
Speaker 1: Before Angelo Miracle said multiculturalis was a failure. Before showpen
Speaker 1: with the floodgates David Cameron so they would reduce the ration.
Speaker 1: Kranton said that he was not Macroan before It's our
Speaker 1: Cozy said he was the inst immigration. None of it
Speaker 1: ever happened, none of it ever did anything. And now
Speaker 1: we're seeing Mertz in Germany, we're seeing Macron and France.
Speaker 1: We're seeing Starmer in the UK sit there and say
Speaker 1: they're going to finally do something on immigration and multiculturalism.
Speaker 1: Is this is this exactly ten years ago or is
Speaker 1: it has the center of the portable dynamics change such
Speaker 1: because the rise of national pop isn't that they will
Speaker 1: do something.
Speaker 2: So my broad view of this is in twenty fifteen
Speaker 2: twenty fifteen, the rise of Populace party was essentially an
Speaker 2: invitation to the establishment to make the compromise on thee
Speaker 2: around my great then they refused to do that. Past
Speaker 2: forward ten years to where we are now, and those
Speaker 2: parties have only become stronger everywhere Netherlands, Sweden, Germany, Italy,
Speaker 2: UK would reform Trumps back in the White House. I mean, basically,
Speaker 2: if you look at the map of West and politics,
Speaker 2: national populism is really it's turn of a jery and
Speaker 2: I would suspect that that will continue so long as
Speaker 2: we are dealing with the record rates of migration and
Speaker 2: in the refusal of the liberal political class to make
Speaker 2: a compromise with the party. I mean, if you look,
Speaker 2: for example, at what's happening in Germany, it's nothing short
Speaker 2: of remarkable the alternative for Germany at number one in
Speaker 2: the opinion polls recently, and the establishment has basically done
Speaker 2: whatever it can to refuse to allow the AfD into power.
Speaker 2: It's already done a u turn on the promises to
Speaker 2: clim down on migration, and again you see this refusal
Speaker 2: to compromise with the voters who were saying, I'm not
Speaker 2: going to.
Speaker 1: Live by this.
Speaker 2: You know, I mean I've gone on a political journey
Speaker 2: over the last nive years because I've been I guess,
Speaker 2: like many voters out there, absolutely pulled the refusal of
Speaker 2: people in the establishment just to do very simple things
Speaker 2: like control who comes in and out of the country,
Speaker 2: lower the overall rate of migration, clamp down on radical Islamism.
Speaker 2: You know, Germany is now having almost weekly the tax
Speaker 2: cars driving through market the neighborhood. You know, nobody wants
Speaker 2: to live this way. And the public debate, I think
Speaker 2: ryan is also shifting in that now. If you spend
Speaker 2: any time online around the European political theme, there are
Speaker 2: very many people now just calling for deportation or policies
Speaker 2: like remigrate them. You know, I was speaking to the
Speaker 2: Austrian freedom to yesterday. They canpaign openly on see of returning.
Speaker 2: Like so, the public mood here is really changing quite
Speaker 2: rapidly as well. And again that's a reflection. This is
Speaker 2: all a reflection of the very deliberate political choices that
Speaker 2: were taken by politician during the twentys and the twenty tens.
Speaker 1: A couple of years ago in the UK, it would
Speaker 1: have seemed been thought of as you would have been
Speaker 1: laughed at if you would have said, Nigel have Farage
Speaker 1: was a real chance of ever being Prime minister. That
Speaker 1: seems like it's a real, a real possibility in our
Speaker 1: near future in the UK if things continue as they
Speaker 1: are right now. Is there a world truly where we
Speaker 1: wake up in five years from now? In twenty thirty,
Speaker 1: Jordan Bardella is the president of France. Farage is the
Speaker 1: premise of the UK. The EFTY is the largest party
Speaker 1: in Germany and Georgia. Maloney has the most stable government
Speaker 1: in all of Europe and Italy.
Speaker 2: Well cool, it's entirely wallsible, you just look at the
Speaker 2: opinion poll at the moment. For Nigel Farage to get there,
Speaker 2: he basically needs to maintain his current jactory. He needs
Speaker 2: to follow Donald Trump and getting a team of people
Speaker 2: around him. Trump was very collabor I think with the
Speaker 2: light of art k Tossa, gad and jo Rebo Pelsa,
Speaker 2: Gabbadiela must just to sort of project a coalftin of people.
Speaker 2: I think Nigel needs to do that and I think
Speaker 2: that will happen. You know, there are a frank right,
Speaker 2: you know, there are question marks over you know, how
Speaker 2: easy there for an insurgent outside a party to transition
Speaker 2: to an insider party of government. There are some very
Speaker 2: real challenges there that will need to behind out. But
Speaker 2: everything you just pointed to is entirely possible. Look, if
Speaker 2: you said for me that would essentially be controlling the
Speaker 2: Netherlands or the Sweden, Democrats would essentially be controlling Sweden.
Speaker 2: You know, ten years ago I would have laughed at you,
Speaker 2: would have said that it's just not going to happen.
Speaker 2: But such as the pace of demographic change in Europe,
Speaker 2: And that's what it's about. It's not really the economy,
Speaker 2: the pate of demographic change. It's the fact that you know,
Speaker 2: sixty percent of young people in schools in the Austria
Speaker 2: don't speak German. You know, it's the fact that one
Speaker 2: in four kids in Britain's primary schools don't speak English
Speaker 2: at their main language. You know, these kinds of things
Speaker 2: that are making people sit up and say, rightly or wrongly,
Speaker 2: I'm losing my country. I feel as though, actually the
Speaker 2: civilizational it's not even about it's not about the detail
Speaker 2: of policy anymore. It's this sense of, well, I'm losing
Speaker 2: the thing that I recognize. I'm losing my identity, my community,
Speaker 2: my sense of history. And I think obviously, you know,
Speaker 2: we've had multiculturalism in Europe for twenty thirty years, but
Speaker 2: already now fifteen years on from David Cameron say multiculturalism failed,
Speaker 2: Nicola Farco, Angela Merkel, they've all come out and said
Speaker 2: to play fifteen years on, no frontline politician has articulated
Speaker 2: what is the successor what is the next policy framework
Speaker 2: to multiculturalism. All they've given people is more migration with
Speaker 2: no integration. And I don't think that's the same thing.
Speaker 1: And at the same time you've had this immense demographic change,
Speaker 1: you've had very prominent people on the left saying very
Speaker 1: having very genocidal language about waits and saying that waits
Speaker 1: don't bull basically anywhere. I mean, you have the conversation
Speaker 1: right now on South Africans that they have no historical
Speaker 1: representation the Afrikaners in South Africa. It's just it's it's insane.
Speaker 1: I have one last question for you is are we
Speaker 1: ever going to see a Matt Goodwin stand up for
Speaker 1: a parliamentary seat.
Speaker 2: You might think that I couldn't possibly comment, well, I'll say,
Speaker 2: let me, let me, let me just say one thing.
Speaker 2: It is quite an important point I did say recently
Speaker 2: on X I said, you know, my, my my reaction
Speaker 2: as I've pivoted away from academia into the public debate.
Speaker 2: I think we probably have two national elections to save
Speaker 2: the UK, to genuinely turn it around. And Elon Musk
Speaker 2: actually was one of the people that popped up in
Speaker 2: the replies and he'd said, no, you have one election
Speaker 2: web to save the UK. And I think it's that
Speaker 2: sort of sense of if we really don't tackle the
Speaker 2: fundamental suit, leave the European Convention on Human Rights reformed
Speaker 2: and you Blair legislative legacy, have an immediate freeze on
Speaker 2: mass of controlled IMMI grape and our sense of identity agreement.
Speaker 2: If we don't really get a government that it's going
Speaker 2: to do a kind of Trump style, you know, shock
Speaker 2: and all kind of political campaign. It's very, very difficult
Speaker 2: to see how the country gets out of what we're
Speaker 2: living in, which is it's fine. I mean I always
Speaker 2: run into Americans in London always say the same thing, which, well,
Speaker 2: I haven't been to the UK in many years, and
Speaker 2: to be honest with you, I'm shocked by what I see.
Speaker 1: I can't lave that the UK lost their last steal manufacturer.
Speaker 1: I can't believe it. I don't know. I asked one
Speaker 1: of my British friends the other day, James Johnson. I
Speaker 1: asked him what does the UK produce? And he said,
Speaker 1: we have really good universities. And I said, oh, that's
Speaker 1: not a good sign.
Speaker 2: That's not well. Absolutely, we've not only closed our own
Speaker 2: field factory, but we're now importing and we've closed our
Speaker 2: cold factories. We're now importing coal and else and other resources.
Speaker 2: That twice surprised some other countrying that zero infanity in
Speaker 2: the industrializing much of our working class community. Then often
Speaker 2: that's happening under a labor government. I mean, that's what's
Speaker 2: so absolutely outrageous about this, the labor government of smashing
Speaker 2: the working clouds depart. I mean, that's why Nigel Barrage
Speaker 2: is the most popular politician among the working class. It's
Speaker 2: why many counterparts across the Europe are doing very well
Speaker 2: among blue collar workers. So look, you and I both
Speaker 2: know if we step back, we know that the political
Speaker 2: RELI the political realignment that you and I talked about,
Speaker 2: you know years ago, I remember that conversation while talking
Speaker 2: about the ongoing reshaping of Wettern politics. This is now
Speaker 2: really seeing that realignment going to televot. It's now fatally
Speaker 2: moving in Parsley. There are of that. There are beneficiaries
Speaker 2: of that, like Nigel Barrage, and there are losers of that,
Speaker 2: like the British story.
Speaker 1: Well, I sure the media will handle it.
Speaker 2: It will accelerate.
Speaker 1: I'm sure the media will handle this change X with
Speaker 1: the most care and responsibility and not be hyperbolic at all. Matthew,
Speaker 1: Where can people go to read your stuff? Aside your
Speaker 1: backopn dot org, which is great, I highly recommend your substack.
Speaker 2: Where else does reach your tough Yeah, that's that's the
Speaker 2: main outlet we're obviously we're on all the social media
Speaker 2: platform too, and likewise we learn a lot from your pizza.
Speaker 2: So great to touch base with you, and I wish
Speaker 2: you and all of your readers and listeners are really great,
Speaker 2: a really great time. And you know, please open up
Speaker 2: in the sylum of Brits fleeing kir Starmer's Britain. Do please.
Speaker 2: I will be the first from the key.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much for being here. I really appreciate it.
Speaker 2: Thank Scott.
Speaker 1: Hey, we'll be right back after this and now for
Speaker 1: the Ask Me Anything segment of the show. If you
Speaker 1: want to be part of the Ask Me Anything seg
Speaker 1: when you could email me ryanat numbers Game dot com. Sorry,
Speaker 1: that's wrong, you could email me I'm not even gonna
Speaker 1: edit that. Just leave that in Ryan at numbers Game
Speaker 1: podcast dot com. Email me at ryanat numbers Game podcast
Speaker 1: dot com. I'd love to get your questions. I'd love
Speaker 1: to sit there and answer them. This one actually came
Speaker 1: a guy and Fred, who said, Hey, would you think
Speaker 1: that the Democratic Party would ever nominate a Jew, specifically
Speaker 1: Governor Shapiro from Pennsylvania. That is a great question there
Speaker 1: is especially Governor Shapiro is a very strong support of
Speaker 1: the Nation of Israel. He's a Zionist. As far as
Speaker 1: I could tell he's a Zionist. Don't if he's said
Speaker 1: that word explicitly, but he is a big supporter of Israel,
Speaker 1: and I think that he doesn't stand a chance hardly
Speaker 1: because of it. I think there's a deep, deep seated
Speaker 1: belief of anti Semitism, a deep trait of anti Semitism
Speaker 1: going on the Democratic Party right now. I think it's
Speaker 1: very real. I think it comes from the fact that
Speaker 1: Democrats have been trained that whiteness is the enemy, and
Speaker 1: they equate Jews with being white and Palasans with being brown,
Speaker 1: and they understand only the oppress or oppressy complex. That's
Speaker 1: the only thing that they truly understand. I don't have
Speaker 1: a lot of strong feelings about the personal politics of
Speaker 1: what goes on in Israel. I'm not extremely well read,
Speaker 1: and I know a little bit, but I don't know
Speaker 1: enough to sit there and speak on it publicly. That
Speaker 1: being said October seventh was a terrorist attack and however
Speaker 1: Israel wants to respond to massacre like that is essentially
Speaker 1: pretty okay with me. I mean, within limits, but essentially
Speaker 1: okay with me. And I think with most people follow
Speaker 1: October seventh in the Democratic Party, they look at you know,
Speaker 1: the retaliation October seventh as a war crime, and they
Speaker 1: think of Benjamin now Who as a war criminal. And
Speaker 1: I think that anyone who takes too fervent up stand
Speaker 1: two on him will be a problem. And also, this
Speaker 1: is the last point I want to make. I've talked
Speaker 1: about this a number of times on television and on
Speaker 1: this podcast we told Immigrations podcast. We bring in so
Speaker 1: many Muslim immigrants into this country every year, and their
Speaker 1: birth rate is high enough that we are probably within
Speaker 1: the decade, maybe a decade and a half, will have
Speaker 1: more Muslims living in this country than Jews, and their
Speaker 1: political weight will matter more. They will be in states
Speaker 1: like Georgia, Michigan, Minnesota, swing states, swing states that matter,
Speaker 1: and in order to win those votes, you will need
Speaker 1: to appeal more to Palestine than to Israel. And I
Speaker 1: think that it's a calculation in the minds of many
Speaker 1: many Democrats. So I don't think that that's going to happen.
Speaker 1: I don't think this support Josh Bureau for that reason,
Speaker 1: and I think going in the long term, in the
Speaker 1: long term future, I think that progressive Jewish Democrats who
Speaker 1: have spent their entire career bashing Christians and whites and
Speaker 1: everything else.
Speaker 2: Will.
Speaker 1: Will look back at our mass migration that they have
Speaker 1: supported endlessly and realize it is the undoing on a
Speaker 1: lot of things that on the undoing of the strongest
Speaker 1: support of Israel ever had. So but that's sad, but
Speaker 1: that's what I believe will happen. It's a little bit
Speaker 1: down earth to end the podcast, but it is what
Speaker 1: I feel and what I believe, and I just give
Speaker 1: you the truth as it is. So please be part
Speaker 1: of the Numbers Game Podcast questionnaire. Email me on Ryan
Speaker 1: at Numbers gamepodcast dot com, Ryan at Numbers gamepodcast dot com,
Speaker 1: or tweet me and I will try to answer your
Speaker 1: questions next week. Please like and subscribe on this podcast
Speaker 1: and the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 1: If you're feeling generous, give me a five star review.
Speaker 1: I appreciate you all. Talk to you on Thursday.