TRIGGERnometry - Remi Adekoya on Black Identity Politics, Racism, White Privilege & Populism

Episode Date: September 10, 2018

Journalist and researcher Remi Adekoya (@remiadekoya1) discusses his Quillette article (https://quillette.com/2018/07/08/the-fear-of-white-power/), black identity politics, identitarianism, race and racism, reparations, white privilege, right wing populism and a lot more with the guys at TRIGGERnometry. Find us on Social Media: https://twitter.com/triggerpod https://www.facebook.com/triggerpod https://www.instagram.com/triggerpod About TRIGGERnometry: Stand-up comedians Konstantin Kisin (@konstantinkisin) and Francis Foster (@failinghuman) make sense of politics, economics, free speech, AI, drug policy and WW3 with the help of presidential advisors, renowned economists, award-winning journalists, controversial writers, leading scientists and notorious comedians. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

And welcome to Trigonometry. I'm Francis Foster. I'm Constantine Kishin. And this is the show for you. If you're bored of people arguing on the internet over subjects, they know nothing about. At Trigonometry, we don't pretend to be the experts. We ask the experts. Our fantastic expert guest this week is a journalist and a researcher at Sheffield University. Remy Adikoyer, welcome to Trigonometry. Thanks for having me. Thanks for coming on. We really look forward to talking to you.

And before we get into the meat and the substance of what we talk about, tell us a little bit about how you're here, what's been your background, just a little bit about that for our viewers so they know who you are. Well, I was born in Nigeria to a Nigerian father and a Polish mother. I grew up in Nigeria, went to a primary secondary school in Nigeria. And then after that, in the late 90s, I moved to Poland, which was where my mom was from, went to university in Poland, first studied law. but couldn't find myself as a lawyer. And then later on moved into journalism, became a political journalist in Poland. I really enjoyed that.

But I decided to move to the UK about three years ago and do a PhD here in politics, in political science. So that's about it. And we talked a little bit about what you're researching. You talked about group identity, which is something we'll touch on, I'm sure. But tell us a little bit about your political, kind of evolution, how you came to have the views that we'll be talking about a little bit

as well. Which views exactly do you know? Well, why don't we just get into the views then? That'll be a lot easier. For anyone who hasn't discovered Remian until this point, you wrote an article for, you write for The Guardian as well, but you wrote an article for Quillette, which I think got a lot of people's attention, including ours. And for anyone who hasn't read it, we'll put it in the YouTube below. But tell us a little bit about what was the kind of the gist, the crux of your article for anyone who hasn't seen it? Well, the crux of the article was based on a conversation, essentially, I had with a friend of mine, a black friend of mine, and it was about how we discuss race, when I say we, I mean

black people, in public and in private, and how there's a big difference, usually. And there are calculations which are made regarding what we should say in public and what we shouldn't say in public. These calculations are essentially based on how many black people view our interests. So essentially, I'd say maybe on self-preservation instincts. Like I wrote in the article about how, okay, I was talking to this friend of mine, and he was complaining about a black friend of his at the workplace who sort of, you know, plays the race card anytime there's a there's a difficult situation with a white person. The friend is like, friend of my friend, is like, oh, you know, bring out the race card, and most likely 99% of the time, a white person will back down.

So my friend told me, oh, he finds this disgusting, doesn't like it, this is completely wrong, et cetera. And in this conversation we're having, I said, yeah, exactly. So that's why we have to start criticizing this, you know, black identitarians and people sort of, you know, trying to essentially leverage some of the horrors which our ancestors went through for some. some form of advantage today. Okay? And then my friend said, well, actually, I don't agree with you on that, you know? And I'm like, you know, why?

But you just said now that you don't like people leveraging race like this. And he says, yeah, but actually if you look at the big picture, you'll find out that, look, he says, look, let's think about it. How many of us black people are there here in the UK, okay? About 5% of the population. Do we have a lot of economic and political power? No, we don't. Okay? That's the reality. Now, what is actually preventing the white population about 87%

who control almost all the political and economic power from actually dominating us overtly? My friend asks me, the only thing that's stopping them from doing that is the fear of being called racist, yeah, is political correctness, is the restraint which had been placed on them by society regarding how they should talk to minorities, yeah? And he says that's the only saving grace we actually have. And he says, take that away, and what do we have? Take that away, and we could have a situation like we had in the 70s and the 80s, okay? Where people on the road are, you know, using the N-word freely. And don't feel afraid to do that, because there's, you know, no social ostracism, no social consequences from doing that. So they're going to be, people are going to be doing it.

And he's like, what was interesting here, my friend, who is a very intelligent guy, very successful banker in city in London, and I said, it's not because, you know, white people are evil or something like that. But he said that's simply human nature. If you put people in a position of dominance over another group of people and they're not checks, okay, they are going to abuse that position. So his argument is essentially that you need white guilt to protect minorities. Yes, that without white guilt, we'd be in a much more difficult situation here. And essentially, you know, white people sort of wouldn't have any restraints towards, you know, talking to us anyhow or using, exploiting that advantage which they do have over us in numbers, in political power,

in economic power, et cetera. He's like, you know, that's the only restraint. So he sees that as a sort of necessary evil. He's like, I don't like it. Aesthetically, morally, I don't really like it. But I think we need it, you know, in order to protect ourselves, because it's all we've got. If we let go of that, if we black people start criticizing identity politics, black identitarians, says, well, you know, since it seems that even black people don't agree with these identitarians, then, you know, maybe why bother with this whole, you know, political correctness thing? And he's like looking at that in the long term, it's actually going to be bad for us.

And what do you make of that argument, sorry, Francis? Look, that argument, I'd be lying if I told you at that argument, I was like, oh, that's rubbish. It's an argument which made me think. I actually, you know, started imagining certain scenarios. I started actually thinking, okay, fine. What if tomorrow now, you know, political correctness was simply, you know, dubbed unnecessary by mainstream white society, because there's obviously already a segment of society which

says it's rubbish. But I'm talking of mainstream, majority, 70% of the people. What if they actually said political correctness is rubbish? Actually, we should be able to say anything we like, more or less, two black people, etc. Would that be a more pleasant environment for me to live in, being a minority here in numbers? I can't imagine it being, yeah, if that were to be the case, if it were to go in that direction that people would want to exploit that advantage. So like I said, I definitely didn't, you know, think what my friend was saying was rubbish,

but I thought about it and the thing is, you know, maybe it's, I don't know, maybe it's naive or something, but based on my experiences with, especially people here in the UK, because I've had different experiences also in Poland, that's different kettle of fish. Based on my experience with people here in the UK, I do believe fundamentally that a majority of the white population here does not have racist instincts and would not exploit to their advantage if, you know, the whole race thing and the numbers advantage they have and the political advantage they have if, say, political correctness theoretically was to disappear. That's what I believe.

That there's a fundamental decency in most people who live here. I believe that two, three hundred percent, based on experiences which I've had, based on experiences, I married to a Nigerian wife, my wife is 100% Nigerian. She's actually lived in the UK a bit longer than me, counting and the intervals and all that. And based on her experience also, you know, based on things we talk about, based on experiences of some other people when we actually sit down and talk. Because, you know, sometimes black people may complain about racism here. But, you know, when we sit down, when I say we, when we black people sit down in the room,

And I'm like, yeah, but guys, come on, you know, these people really, they're not that bad. They're actually pretty tolerant. They're actually pretty tolerant. They're like, yeah, yeah, of course we know, you know. But, you know, we can't, we shouldn't sort of say that out. We sort of have to keep up that moral pressure, yeah, just to make sure they don't one day taken into their heads to start exploiting those advantages of us and treating us the way they used to treat us 20, 30 years ago.

So it's not like people don't know this. It's not like a lot of people who might even retweet a black identitarians, for lack of a better term, post on Twitter saying maybe not the most radical ones, but let's just say something sort of insinuating that is a lot of racism in the UK. It's not like every black person who retweets that actually really believes it's that bad. But it's just part of keeping up this pressure and part of trying to sort of protect ourselves from this white power, which a lot of people. people actually fear, you know. And as I argued in the peace, there's historical reasons, of course, for that fear. But doesn't the rise of someone like Trump in the US

mean that their fears are actually well-founded? Because although, obviously, I'm not black, I'm half Latin American. And when Trump came out and did the speech and talked about Mexicans and said, you know, illegal immigrants, some of them are racist. Some are, sorry, some of them are rapists. Immediately, I had a single.

sensation inside and if I went to the US in certain areas I wouldn't feel comfortable speaking Spanish which is my second language. Of course and that you know there's no pretending I know we'd be silly to pretend here that there's you know no such thing as racism oh it's a very you know marginal thing which you know only 5% of the white population you know and subscribe to and all that no that's not the way it is something which is very real and exists among more than five or or 10% of the white population in standard, let's say, Western society. So, of course, that exists.

And Trump, paradoxically, has only strengthened, you know, identity politics among minority, minority, sort of intellectuals, because they're like, see, we told you guys. You guys were saying these white people, you know, that they're not that racist, they're not that bad, et cetera, et cetera. Now, do you see? Look who they voted for. They voted for a guy who said all the things he said. So even the black people before, I focus here on black people, that's the community I know, obviously the other minority groups, even the black people before who were sort of neutral

or didn't buy into those narratives that, oh, essentially every second white person is racist, you know, sort of now feel sometimes a little bit silly thinking, ah, actually I was naive, yeah. It seems this white folk, ah, actually pretty racist. I mean, they did vote for this Trump guy who said all those things. So, you know, maybe I was the one who was naive. are not these identity politics guys, yeah? Maybe they were the ones who were right, yeah. And there's some others who say, yeah, well, of course, you know,

Trump doesn't represent all white people, et cetera, et cetera. But since there is such a political force right now, we definitely need to stand on the side of our people, okay, and defend our people who are being attacked by this kind of politics. So even if we don't agree 90 or much less 100% with the black identitarians, we definitely need to hold the line with them because, you know, these are the guys fighting for us. Definitely Trump is not fighting for us.

And the people who support Trump are definitely not fighting for us, okay? So it's sort of a, it's bad for people like me. Bad is a strong word. It's difficult for people like me because now there's a line drawn, yeah? So it's a, you know, are you with them or are you with us? Yeah.

Okay? Are you with the Trump folk who are saying the things they're saying? Or are you with us who are trying to, you know, sort of resist the Trump folk, you know. So it's tricky right now. Well, it's a polarizing effect of Trump. It pushes everyone into their corner, doesn't it? But I mean, in terms of, it's interesting because Donald,

one thing Donald Trump always talks about is that black unemployment is the lowest that it's been for decades or whatever, I think. And, you know, Donald Trump got more of the ethnic minority vote than any of the previous Republican candidates for decades as well. Not necessarily. he got 29% of the Hispanic vote, which is roughly the percentage any Republican candidate gets, is roughly what McCain got. McCain even got more, I think, if I remember correctly.

So he didn't get a larger percentage of the Hispanic vote. He didn't get a larger percentage of the black vote. What happened was that much fewer minority voters, especially black voters, came out to vote in 2016 for Hillary Clinton. they simply stayed at home. Right. Okay? So when Obama was there, and even when Clinton was there, okay, Bill Clinton, I mean,

sort of minority voters, black voters were more mobilized to come out and vote. But Hillary Clinton was not able to mobilize ethnic minority voters, especially black voters. So it's not necessarily the case that Trump got a higher percentage of those, you know, that minority vote than a regular Republican candidate would get. But Hillary Clinton got less than definitely what Obama got in 2008. and 2012. And do you think the rise of identity politics is a positive thing? Do you think it's helped us, it's become made us more aware, or do you think it's ultimately quite divisive? What do you mean by us? Sorry, as in all of us, society. Okay, so that is, it's important

to know what you're talking about. Definitely, if you say all of us society has identity politics helped us, I would say, you know, first of all, it depends, you know, how we define this identity politics. Now, if we define, for instance, what Martin Luther King was doing in the late 60s as identity politics, and there are definitions of identity politics by which we could describe that as identity politics, in the sense of focusing on the interest of a specific ethnic group, okay, and articulating those interests in political fashion, but these were interests of a specific ethnic group, okay, which he was focused on, yeah? Later on, he actually started talking about a lot about poverty and all that, which encompass

all ethnic groups. But let's just say most of his work, and definitely what he's associated with, is on defending black interests, yeah? That's the way it is. if we describe that as identity politics, then I would definitely say it has helped because it brought a larger degree of fairness in US society for a specific group of people.

No one would criticise a civil rights moment of today. I mean, some would. France is mine. We'll have a talk about it. Anyway, guys, it's been nice knowing you. I'm off. Okay. Francis' career is over now, which makes me incredibly happy.

You know. So, yeah. So, yeah. So, again, if we look at that or something, if we look at, but obviously when we talk about identity politics today, we are not thinking about that, yeah? We're thinking about identitarian politics. I don't start naming names and, you know, people basically coming out and, you know,

bringing up terms like, you know, white privilege and white fragility. And essentially, you know, if a white person doesn't, agree with as let's say me a black person's definition of racism that means that black that white person is racist

yeah which is absolute rubbish in my own opinion so that kind of identity politics or focusing sort of solely because even when Martin Luther King was articulating his arguments for why black people should be treated fair

in America these his arguments were based on a broad understanding of universal human rights in America. He was essentially saying, look, the American Constitution said all men are created equal. So how come it seems now that that doesn't apply to black men?

Yeah. Okay? So he was essentially sort of appealing to a universal human rights, universal sense of decency. Let's just call it that what it is. Right now we don't have that. There's no appeal that, oh, well, actually, we just want, you know, black,

people to be treated, how everybody else is treated and all that. It's more essentially like, oh, well, you know, there's this loads of bad things which have happened, slavery, colonialism, racism, institutionalized racism in the 60s, 70s, 80s, etc. Black people have, you know, suffered from this. White people, it seems, don't want to recognize this. And, you know, sometimes I wonder, you know, when they say sort of like white people don't want to recognize, which white people are you talking about? Is it onto every single white person on this planet Earth? acknowledges the evils of racism, slavery, etc., that we will finally say, oh, yeah, aha, okay, now it's okay.

Because I mean what? How many white people have to acknowledge these things for it to be accepted that, oh, white people have acknowledged these things? I don't know if you're following the argument I'm making. Yes, absolutely. So it's like, what do you need? You need 99%, 95, or it's 92 okay? Yeah.

Yeah? Because, you know, I would definitely argue that a majority, definitely in Western societies, have acknowledged this, okay? And there have been books written about this. There have been films made about this. Even laws which are created, for instance, in the country. I mean, governments speak about this.

That's what I mean. Well, Tony Blair, I apologize for racism many years ago. Tony Blair. Not for racism, for slavery. For slavery. Theresa May, there was a government report which came out last, I think it was 2017, talking about, you know, disparities in socio-economic outcomes. Yeah.

Yeah. And the report very clearly stated, that, look, there is a link here between race and huge disparities in socioeconomic outcomes, okay, in the UK, regarding employment, regarding housing, etc. And we need to tackle this, okay? This is a Tory government, for God's sake. And they've acknowledged that. So what else do you want, sort of?

How many people have to say, oh, yes, this is a problem, we acknowledge it. But it's a clever argument from their point of view, because they can actually, push the argument until the last white man acknowledges that slavery was bad, which they know it's never going to happen. Okay? Which they know it's never going to happen. There are always going to be white people who are going to try and, oh, well, you know, well, you know, maybe not exactly or maybe it wasn't that bad and all that.

There are people who hold such views, yeah. So it's an argument which they can essentially push for eternity. So it's a very clever tactic in order to essentially advance their idea. agenda, whatever that agenda. Definitely, because you can always point, you can always find racists. Yeah, always. You can always say, oh, well, they say that racism doesn't exist in the West anymore, but look at what politician A said, and look at what Minister X said, is that not racism?

Which shows you there is still a problem, okay? So it's then magnified and portrayed as a problem, as in something which affects or that these are views shared by a large group of people, whereas it's one in a different, individual, for instance, who made a statement. Yeah. I think part of the problem for me is that how we don't discuss it. Like your article I loved. I thought it was brilliant and I said to Constantine, this is great.

We need to get you on the show. And I shared it with one of my friends who's mixed race. Yeah. We have never spoken about it. And he has never mentioned it or any shape or form. And did you feel a pushback from that article? To be honest, there are a lot of people who really know what's going on and see the BS of the identitarians. So the answer to your question is that the overwhelming majority of, let's say, the people on my social media feed, et cetera, black people, et cetera, didn't, you know, criticize me for that or say, oh, that's wrong, we disagree with that.

Okay? Some openly said, this is exactly what I thought all this while. Some kept quiet, but definitely didn't unfollow me or something like that. I mean, continue the engagement with me. But there were definitely a few who one term which I'd remember, which, you know, I'd be pretty, you know, we all try to act as if, you know, we're tough and we don't care

what other people say and all that and all that. Which is generally the way it should be, but it's not the way, you know, emotionally we are as people, yeah? So when, for instance, someone who had been a good friend of mine, at least social media and all that, told me all they were disappointed in me for writing that, I'd be lying if I said, you know, that didn't make me sort of like, hmm. Look, I spend a lot of time telling you what's wrong with the world,

so let me tell you about something that's actually right. Sleep, specifically getting more of it, better quality, the kind where you wake up and feel like a human being rather than someone who's been thrown down a staircase. Most mattresses are just layers of synthetic foam and crossed fingers. You're spending a third of your life on the thing, and most people have no idea what's actually in it. Avocado green mattress is different.

Their mattresses are certified organic, built from natural materials, designed to actually support your body properly rather than just hold you in one position until morning. The craftsmanship is real. These aren't mass-produced objects. Someone has put thought into them. I'll be honest. I'm not the person who thinks carefully about where he sleeps.

My dating history will tell you that. I'm the person who's been on the same mattress for eight years and called it fine. But the older I get, the more I notice that fine isn't actually fine. Your body tells you, if you're going to invest in anything for your home, your bed is the one that pays you back every single night. Avocado products are made, not manufactured, and thoughtfully crafted with real materials to deliver lasting comfort and support. Go to avocado greenmatress.com slash trigger to check out their mattress and furniture sale.

That's avocado green mattress.com slash trigger. Avocado green mattress.com slash trigger. Like, wow. Let me rethink actually what I just said and what might be the effects for people. Because, you know, it's easy to write something. But there are consequences for what you write, especially if let's say the article, you know, is read by more than a few people. there are real consequences for people in real life, or at least they may perceive,

those people may perceive that there may be consequences. So what I'm essentially saying is that there were only a few people who sort of, you know, pushed back and said, you know, this is wrong, which of which I said the most sort of, the one that, you know, really sort of, you know, maybe stop and, you know, I think to everyone, I said, oh, I'm disappointed in you, in the sense I expected more from you. But then I sat down and thought about it and said, okay, what does. this actually mean? What does this person actually mean? What they actually mean is that I know what they mean. As a black person, I know how, I know the conversations that go on, you know, when

there are no white people in the room. I know, I know what they essentially mean is that, look, we know, okay, what you wrote is the way it is. But at the end of the day, we can't trust these people. Okay? We know what they've done to us in the past. We know what some of them are saying about us today. So how can you sort of reveal outside some of the strategies and tactics which we use in order to defend ourselves against them? Okay. So it's essentially based on a fundamental, emotional very often mistrust, okay? That look, at the end of the day, this is why people don't really like us too much. Okay?

They might pretend, they might smile, they might even because of certain laws, you act as if they do, maybe even give us a couple of jobs, et cetera, et cetera. But fundamentally in their deepest heart of hearts, these white people don't really like us too much for some reason. That's a strong belief which is held among many, many, again I'm speaking, black people who some super-intelligent with huge degrees and all that and all that, even very successful. It's a fundamental belief which is deep down. It's something which is emotional.

You can try to, you can't intellectualize it. You can't argue with it on an intellectual level, you know. It's something which is based on emotion. Let me say, for instance, this might probably a flawed analogy, hugely flawed analogy, But it's the way, for instance, people in Israel, Jews, might react to, you know, talk of, you know, surrounding, you know, the Holocaust or people sort of, you know, anti-Semitic remarks, etc. You know, there is definitely, I would argue, a feeling there among many Israeli Jews that, look, generally the group is under some kind of threat. We have a lot of enemies, okay? They are people who hate us.

They are people who want to see us exterminated, in fact, from this earth. And we have to be wary of them, okay? We have to always be conscious of that, that these enemies exist. A lot of people don't like us. It's a feeling which exists. I think you guys would agree with me. Even sometimes among intellectuals also, you know, Jewish intellectuals, etc.,

who theoretically we would say should know that, oh, you can't generalize like that or not. But, you know, these are emotions. I think people feel it in the labor part. here. The prime. I'm not. The problem. So, you see.

So that's, you know. So people, so, so these things exist. So these feelings among black, very often, it's emotional, yeah? It's based from that something, you know, we've read those books about slavery, we've read those books about colonialism and all those things which happened, you know. And of course, another point which is not usually raised today, which I know exists is that a lot of, let's see, what's the word I would use for it now, not. suspicion in this case, but... Awareness, you say. Warriness, we could say.

Or, and let's even say bringing in some resentment into it, is because of the fact that, you know, we haven't been able to, as black people, build many, or some might even argue, any, successful black nations, powerful black nations, okay? I guarantee you that if there were, say, five or six African economies, you know, two, three trillion dollar M.GDP economies with powerful armies, with nuclear weapons. Believe me, black people wouldn't be half as sensitive to some of these debates and some of these, let's say, insults which flow around as they are today. Okay? So that, those, that aggressive reaction also often stems from essentially a sense of fundamental weakness, group weakness, okay?

There are obviously some hugely successful individual black people. There's the Obama, there's the Oprah Winfries, the African billionaires, popular African musicians, etc. Okay? There's no doubt about that, professionals, lawyers, etc. But as a group, if you're thinking in group terms, there is a sense of fundamental weakness there. And that is what also sometimes make these reactions over sensitive, yeah. Because it's like, you know, if there's a classroom and, you know, a guy who is one of the schoolboys who is, you know, really big, he's got muscles, etc.

If, let's say, one of the smaller boys, you know, tons him, you know, he essentially laughs it off. He doesn't take it serious, you know. But if it goes the other way around and it's the muscular jock, let's say, who taunts the smaller skinny boy, the smaller skinny boy feels it much more and he will react much more emotionally to it because he's in that position of disadvantage and he doesn't feel strong. Yeah, you know. Yeah, I see it quite a lot with Venezuelan people because of what's happening in Venezuela

and the fact that the country has been so chronically mismanaged. And as a result, there is that sense of, you know, frustration and also a sense of inferiority. And also when you talk with Venezuelan people, there's a sense of sometimes a sense of almost hopelessness of like we can't make it work for whatever reason. I don't know if that's been your experience of what you've just discussed,

that's just been mine when I talked to Venezuelan people because of everything that's happening in Latin America and the fact that the vast majority of countries simply aren't functioning. But that's, I find that surprising. I mean, Venezuela, obviously, we know the case,

but I'm surprised you say that might be happening in Latin America because there are countries there are doing very well. I mean, Brazil is generally doing not badly. I mean, you know, corruption and all that, but economically and all that, I mean, they've made huge strides. I mean, Chile, socioeconomic, is not doing bad at all.

And there are a couple of other examples like that, too. So I'm surprised you would say, do you think it's a regional thing or it's just a country? It may be just a country, maybe it's just a regional thing, but certainly the issue with corruption and mismanagement, and mainly because I talk about it from a Venezuelan point of view and the fact that it's so wealthy, like, a lot of African countries. All rich, of course.

But because of corruption and mismanagement, it's imploding in sense. Yeah. Marami, you know what I was thinking as you were talking? I mean, it makes a lot of sense what you're saying, and I couldn't blame a black person for feeling the resentment and given everything that's happened. But it is tragic when you describe it in that way

because I feel like fundamentally, I don't see a way out of that of what you're talking about it. If essentially what you're saying is black people get together and they know that what you're saying in your article is true, but they don't want to admit it because they're afraid and resentful. Even though I guess we would, would be in agreement that society is improving in terms of its treatment of minorities and so on.

I don't see a way out of that. I do. Yeah? The way out of that is in black group success, not just individual success, in group success. As I told you, look, at the end of the day, the key to all of this is Africa, okay? Because Africa is the black continent. That is the only continent where essentially black people are the ones running the show. Yeah.

Now, and these, you know, black thinkers, going back to Marcus Garvey, fella Nicola Kocchi, a personal, I'm a hero of mine, it was a Nigerian, I'm a musician and political activist, said this 50 years ago. They said, look, as long as Africa is not successful, the black person will not be respected anywhere in the world. Okay? This is the prerequisite for blacks to be respected anywhere in the world.

There must be at least a couple of indisputably successful, not, well, you know, if we compared to where it was 20 years ago and that kind of relative kind of success. We're talking about indisputable success, okay? A France success, a Germany success, or a Japan success or a China success, where nobody can argue and say it is anything other than a success. That's what we're talking about here. Now, that must happen.

At least a couple of countries, yeah? There's over 50 countries there. even if it's just four, five, six countries, okay? That people can look at and say, look, these countries, good health care, good economies, strong, strong armies, etc. Success, like I said, the way we understand it, I'm here. Number one, what that will do, the people there on the ground, let's say, in Africa, obviously, will have much better lives. Two, there will be a much stronger sense of pride. You know, if you really have an innate sense of pride, nobody, an innate sense of dignity and self-worth.

nobody can take that away from you. Okay? No names you are called can take that away from you. It can only be taken away from you if you don't actually really have it. If you are pretending to have it, but deep inside you don't really feel that way. Then if somebody calls you a name, you know, it affects you. You might not even say it out in public, but it affects you because you're thinking, oh, maybe that person is right, maybe I'm really worthless or not worth that more.

That much. that much. So one, it will give people a sense of self-worth there within Africa, okay? So then Africans, let's say, coming to the UK or to America or to the West, we'll discuss from a completely different psychological position, okay? It will be from a psychological position that, look, you guys, white people have your successful countries here in Europe. Obviously there are some much less successful countries here in Europe. We, black people in Africa, We also have our successful countries in Africa, and of course there's some much less successful countries there, just like you guys also have here in Europe.

So that will be a completely different psychological approach, a much more relaxed psychological approach, you see. So that's one. Two, if we talk about, let's say black, because a lot of this is actually pushed not even by people who were born in Africa and then moved to the West like me, but very often by black people who were actually born in the West. Right. Born in America or born here.

So they also, I know, are affected by this fact that they know that these successful black nations don't really exist, okay? And they too, if they were to see that, oh, well, I don't know, Nigeria, which is one of the, let's say, becomes one of the biggest economies in the world. World leaders go there to pay homage to the Nigerian leader, et cetera.

These visuals appear, OK? When there's some big global event, you know, people consult, oh, well, What does the Nigerian leader think? What does the South African leader think? What does the Kenyan leader think? After years of seeing this kind of images, you know, in TV and all that, and seeing that, look, this power balance, which they speak of,

is becoming definitely more equal. Okay? We do see that they're black nations which are strong and powerful. The black identitarians in the West here will also be sort of more relaxed psychologically also, okay? They'll be more sure of themselves. And there'll be less of this sort of desperate need, you know, to sort of prove by bluster, empty bluster, essentially,

that, oh, yes, we are something, and we're going to show them that we're something. Because showing that you're something is not based on bluster. The way the world is, is based on results which you have behind you and the results of your group behind you. Perhaps it shouldn't be like that. In fact, I think it shouldn't be like that. I believe people should be respected

and groups should be respected for simply being. But that's not how the world works. Chinese people 30 years ago. I remember the jokes about the Chinese people 30 years ago. You guys, I mean, you would have definitely read about them also. 30 years ago, you know, China was the butt of, you know, world jokes, yeah? There was the joke of the poor China man and all that, yeah? Nobody treated them seriously.

They were dismissed. Today, nobody would dare do that. Well, they own us. You know? Nobody would dare do that. It didn't take a Chinese identitarian movement to come out and say, oh, you must respect them, Chinese people, because we demand it. That's not the way it works.

Okay? The results came, the strengths came, and people automatically respected. Nobody had to be asked. Today nobody has to be asked to respect China. Do you think the West's idea of Africa as a whole doesn't help the fact that, you know, you ask the average person on the street

what they think about Africa and they would say, you know, it's poverty, it's corruption, it's, you know, it's divisions of wealth. Do you think that is really quite damaging when it's... It's a country, sorry, it's a continent company. Well done, mate. Thank you.

There you go. Africa's a country, guys. You're doing well. Yeah, yeah, yeah. You can, what you can hear is me sweating. You know, a continent of, you know, 50 countries, like you said. And, you know, some are more successful than others. And it's quite simply a crude two-dimensional portrait.

Definitely. But that is still not the core of the problem. The core of the problem is not what white people think about Africa. The core of the problem is what are the realities of Africa. I don't care what white people think about Africa. Of course, I have to care because white people are influential and all that and all that. And of course, you know, what's shown on the news, on CNN, et cetera, is important. But what really matters are the realities on the ground there.

If the socioeconomic realities on the ground there improve, life becomes better for people. The countries become stronger economically, et cetera. This narrative, which you are talking about, will also change. Because one thing which I can't stand, which black identitarians do, is focus on the narrative, of things. And they say, oh, yeah, well, Africa is portrayed MSO negatively, and that's why things are so bad. No, it's portrayed negatively because things are so bad.

It's not that it's portrayed negatively, and that's why things are so bad. These pictures which are shown, sometimes of children, hungry, etc., they exist, okay? They exist. Now, the African intellectual or the black intellectual would like to sort of downplay that side and focus not on the 70, 80% who are having terribly difficult lives, but focus on the 10, 20% who are doing well. And say, oh, well, why are you guys talking so much about slums and all that and all that? Look, there's this African businessman who built a business worth $2 billion.

Fine, but so what? How does that help the millions of people who are there suffering? Okay? I understand why they're doing it. They're doing it from a dignity perspective, from a perspective that, look, if the world sees us as simply, like you are suggesting, simply poor, we have nothing to offer, et cetera. No one will ever respect us,

and perhaps even this economic growth will not come because investors won't come since they'll think, oh, well, we're so poor, we have nothing to offer anyway. That's their argument, that's their perspective. I get that perspective. But at the end of the day, if you're talking, for instance, investors, investors are not going to, you know, watch CNN to decide whether to go invest in a country or not.

They're going to look at facts and figures. What's the average wage? What's the average income? What kind of disposable income do people have? Are they going to be able to buy my products? Okay? That's what they're going to look at. So that argument that, oh, sort of talking about the realities of Africa

is going to scare away investors, and thus we won't get the economic growth, and thus we're perpetuating the poverty. I don't buy that logical sequence, you know. It's the other way around. It's the other way around. So it is mostly, I know, on their perspective, a dignity. It's a dignity, it's a dignity perspective.

It's a dignity argument, yeah? That, oh, we have to sort of speak well of ourselves. And what they will say, I know, to people like me is, look, other people speak well of themselves. They don't speak of their disadvantages or their bad sides, yeah. When the Americans are talking about themselves abroad, they speak about the good things about America. When the British are talking about themselves abroad, they speak about the good things. Well, that's not sure about it. Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's not.

Yeah, it's not. But that's the way they will present something. So why shouldn't we focus on the good things? sides. You see? So why should it? Because everybody else does it. But it's actually not like that. Some of the most critical books you can find in the world about America were written by Americans. Yeah. And the Americans who come out every day and say this is a rubbish country, oppressive, racist, etc., etc., just like the way about Britain. So that, but I understand, you know, the problem they face is that problem of, you know, where's the balance between soft criticism, which happens when we are within ourselves. Okay? So if you

go read average Nigerian newspaper today, you will find articles slaying Nigerian government policy and often even slaying Nigerian society. But those are articles for domestic consumption. Yeah. The idea is that they're not meant to be read by white people, because this will make them even more look down on us. So as long as we know the audience is within our circle, we say the truth. But if we know white people are going to read this, we need to sort of spin it a bit. Because if not, we are just giving them more opportunities to look down on us

the way you and I know is the way the discussion would go between me and a black person or the way, like they would say to me, the way you and I know, they've always looked down on us. And now you want to give them even more opportunity to do that? Remy, the other thing I want to ask in terms of a possible solution is one thing that's always occurred to me

is there's almost this original sin of slavery that's never been addressed not really like you know you talk about the fact that you know obviously the vast vast majority of people of all colours would say that slavery was wrong specifically the African slave trade

because there's slavery of all kinds that's been happening for millennia but people would accept that that's wrong now but that's never been properly addressed in the sense of yes there's been apologies but there's never been so an economic aspect to that right do you think that

something like targeted reparations towards people who are the descendants of slaves, maybe educational vouchers or something, would help to kind of address that unaddressed original sin and kind of help us as a society to move beyond that. Do you think that's possible? That's an interesting point you raise, and there is definitely an analogy that could be drawn on to justify such a demand, which would be the analogy of the compensation given to Holocaust survival.

and their families, yeah? Sometimes by Swiss banks, for instance, and some of the banks who profited off the Holocaust directly. And there have been compensation agreements and negotiated for the direct descendants of those Holocaust, not for all Jewish people, exactly. So, yeah, I mean, that's, there's definitely an analogy there, and I definitely think there's an argument to be made for that.

There's an argument to be made for that. If you can, like I said, identify going to direct descendants. There's definitely a legal argument probably could come up for that, and there's definitely a moral argument you could come up for that. So it's definitely, that's an idea, definitely. Because I feel like that would be a big part of a potential solution because otherwise the resentments and the wariness that you've talked about is always going to be there.

You know, it's like if you've been offended by a person, an individual in your life, and you're really upset about it, and you have every right to be upset about it. And they've never apologized, or maybe they've kind of half-heartedly apologize, they've never compensated you, they've never offered to make amends, then it's going to be very difficult

to have a constructive relationship with that person. And that's why, whenever these issues are brought up, I always feel like, I mean, the descendants of slaves have not been given the rightful compensation for what's happened. And if that could be taken care of, I feel like we could move on as a society in a way that we haven't been able to at this point.

You know, like I said again, that's definitely a hugely interesting idea, and there is definitely a movement in the US, trying to demand that, of course, would go into Holocaust survivors, I guess, is easier to identify because it wasn't that long ago, so there's still some people even still alive, and their children definitely, or grandchildren definitely still alive. A bit more difficult, I mean, with slavery, you'd have to go back, you know, trace records, et cetera, so who would actually get the composition?

Would it be the African-Americans, or would it also extend to some of their African-descendants in Africa? Right. Okay. So practically, obviously, it would be much more. difficult, it would be much more difficult to do, but I definitely agree with you that from a symbolic point of view of sort of an olive branch, let's say, in this case cash. That's the best kind of olive branch. A cash branch, you know, would go a long way towards

definitely addressing some of these emotions and most importantly would remove some of the emotional impact or some of the psychological advantages which the identitarians have who are trying to drive that permanent wedge. They'd have one less argument, okay? They'd have one less argument. So people would be able to say, okay, fine, but you say these white people are so bad.

Okay, we know what they've done in the past and all that, but at least, you know, they've now trying to address this by ABC. Yeah? So, you know, that's so, you know, some people listening would be like, oh, yeah, maybe this, you know, know, identity guys are taking it too far, because after all these people have given some compensation. Now, what else do you want them to do, you know?

So, yeah, so from that point of view, as in one, addressing some of the issues and weakening the position of those who want to simply, whose careers are built, essentially, on driving that wedge and saying, look, we black people are victims, this is white people are bad, et cetera, et cetera. Even though, funny enough, all these identities, I've never seen any of them who go to a black publisher to publish their books. They always go to white publishers. Why? Because the white publishers are, white publishing companies are the biggest ones who can make you famous and make you sell loads of books. But if you're talking about strengthening, you're talking

about black power and strengthening, you know, black economic something, why not go to a black publishing company? Such exist. It's not like there are no black owned publishing companies that, you know, there are some which function on the market. They are definitely in Africa, and I would I'm almost 100% sure that there are some black-owned publishing companies in America. So why don't these black identitarians go to black publishing communists to publish their books? Of course not,

because those ones, one, can't pay them as much for their books, and two can't make them as famous as the, you know, let me not mention names. Hey, why not? This is not part of the show. As you're laying into some people, that's the best thing. As the huge, as the huge American-wide publishing company can.

So you see here some of the, you know, irony and some of the hypocrisy of the whole thing, I'm here complaining about how terrible white people are, but at the end of the day, you know, I'm going to a white publishing complaint because I know they're the ones who can make me famous and eventually, you know, rich or semi-rich. Besides, that's a side issue maybe.

If I ever want to start an argument on the internet or if anybody starts an argument on the internet, all they need to do is put two words together, white and privilege, and all of a sudden it explodes and you know you've got people from different sides of the argument, and it normally gets in great incredibly heated. I mean, what is your opinion of this? Do you think, A, is it exist? Is it a thing? And how big a problem is it in our society?

So Britain you're talking about? Yes, Britain, actually. Or the US as well, if you want to delve into that. Let's say the West. Yeah, I'll definitely say that white skin color is a strong negotiating currency in global interactions. Okay? For instance, if a white man goes into, walks into a Nigerian police station and complains about a crime being committed against them, that crime will be taking much more seriously, that report will be taking much more seriously than if a Nigerian was to go into that police station and complain about the same crime. Okay? So, why is that? It's because there definitely is, and now I'm starting with an example.

like I said, in Nigeria, it's because the Nigerian policeman definitely instinctively believes that, you know, white people are important. I'm going to interrupt you there just one second, because in Russia, where I'm from, right, if a Nigerian or a British man walked into a police station to report crime, a foreigner, that would also be taken more seriously. We need to depend what type of foreigner. Is it not that the westerner would be taking more seriously?

Yes, the westerner. The Westerner. But that westerner could be black. That western it could be Latino. I know. But it's a westerner. I'll get to what you're saying. It's a good point.

I know where you're going to. So essentially, the Nigerian producer, the white color are important. Now, why? Is it just because of the skin color? Just because the skin color looks like that? No. It's because of the perception

that white people are generally rich and generally powerful. Okay? That's why they're important. not because they're white, but because of the resources that I imagine to be behind them. Right. Okay?

So the Nigerian policeman there would assume that, well, first of all, we should take this guy's case seriously, because, you know, he might know some important people here, for instance, there might be some consequences if we don't take the case seriously, et cetera. It's not because of the white-skinned color. It's because of the resources they imagine behind that white person who walked into the police station.

Whereas if it was a Nigerian person who, if they don't identify that, oh, this is a rich guy here, they'll just you know, dismissed that, you know, well, we don't have to take this serious and there'll be no consequences. And this leads to what you were talking about, as in why, for instance, in Russia, if a Western person, a Western citizen walks in, they will be taking more seriously. For instance, a black American. They will be taking a hundred times, I'm sure, more seriously than if a Nigerian walks into a Russian police station. Because the black American is an American citizen. Right. Okay. So because there's that perception that, you know, behind this guy, their resources

there's political power, there's economic power. So we have to take this person seriously. It's the same thing exactly, for instance, in Poland. Western people, you know, walk somewhere, et cetera. It's taking very seriously because this is a British person. Oh, my God. Polish police would also take probably more seriously the case of a British person than the case even of a Polish person, you know.

So these are dynamics which come into play, like I said, based on resources, et cetera. And it so happens that it's white people who control a lot of the resources. sources, et cetera. That's why this preferential treatment comes in, because that preferential treatment definitely exists. Okay? So that's in the, let's say, a Nigerian setting. So if we come, let's say, to the setting here in the UK, clearly a group which constitutes 87% of, like, UK's population, will have advantages, okay? We'll find it easier to, you know, get jobs, et cetera. And why might that be? Let's say, for instance, you go apply for a job.

Recently, I was on Skanez a couple of weeks ago talking about there was a shortage of, or there is a shortage, sorry, of senior minority managers in the NHS. So I spoke to a couple of people I know in the NHS who are in high executive positions, both black and white, on why they think this is the case. And what was interesting what some of the black people told me, they said, look, you know, You come, obviously, to be even called for an interview on such a level, you know, senior management position in NHS. This means there's already an assumption that you are qualified to do the job. Because if not, you wouldn't even be called in for the interview anyway.

Okay? So based on your CV, they've seen this guy is qualified to do the job. Then you come in, then they make a short list, etc. Now, the whole crux of the matter comes in who in that short list is going to be chosen. So let's say you have four, five people. Let's say one is black, one is Asian, three are white. What are the thoughts that are going to be going through the head of the mostly white panelists or all white panelists in making that final decision? We know all these five guys can do the job.

They're all qualified. Now, thoughts will start to enter of, okay, who do we think will have the smoothest working relationship with? Okay. In answering that question, we'll start to come now imaginations of cultural affinity. Okay? Am I going to be able to get along with this guy, you know, almost without words? Because that's the kind of person I want to work with. Yeah?

I don't want to work with somebody who, you know, I'll be worried whether I can say this or I can't say that or should I say this way or shouldn't I say it that way? Every culture has its code. Like, you know, for instance, in Russia, there's a way Russians can communicate with each other without words that a foreigner will never understand if just reading the words. You'd be like, what was communicated here, yeah? But the Russian knows exactly what was communicated. And here now come in questions of, ah, okay, so, you know, most probably will get along better with the white guy, because I mean, he's white like us.

He probably, you know, grew up in a similar culture, probably has similar world views to us, similar attitudes towards, you know, I don't know, work, different kind of things, and it will simply probably be easier for us to get along with that white person. And on that basis, a decision can be made to a decision can be made to employ a white guy instead of, let's say, for instance, someone who came to Britain from Nigeria 20 years ago and has exactly the same qualifications.

Now, that decision is not, I'm not saying sometimes it's not based on racism. Probably it is. But sometimes it's not based on the fact that, oh, I think this black guy is a worse person or will not be able to do the job. But it's based on the fact that I simply think I'll get along better with the white guy. And now these are not thoughts that only go through the heads of white people. In Nigeria, for instance, you know, where there's ethnic divisions and regions of the country have vastly different cultures in Nigeria, for instance.

It's a huge country, four times the size of the UK, four times the size of the UK, not of England, of the entire UK, almost 200 million people. So in the northern region, there's a different culture, for instance, than in the southern region. And very often also, when decisions are made, for instance, in Nigeria, based on who to employ, etc., these kinds of considerations are taken into account. My father was an architect. He ran his own architectural firm in Nigeria. He only employed people from within his own ethnic group, not because he hated the people from other ethnic groups. But he simply made an automatic assumption that, you know, he'd have a smoother working relationship with people from zone ethnic group.

Same culture, we understand each other. I don't need to say much. Okay? I say one, two words, they know what I mean. That's why it is. I can't remember anybody, I'm talking about a few dozen people who were not from his ethnic group. And it's not because others from other ethnic groups did not apply, or because my dad hated

those people from those ethnic groups, you know. So these are the kinds of mechanisms that could happen like in a setting here that the word they'll go for the, you know, and then it will be identified as, oh, it's racism. It's because they think the black person is worse or they don't want to work to the black person. No, it's a preferential choice. Now, of course, this disadvantages people like me, or could disadvantage people like me or other black people. So I'm not surprised that, you know, nobody's going to just say, ah, well, okay, fine, since it's just about cultural affinity, then we understand, then it's okay.

Obviously, you can't expect minorities to adopt that position because this disadvantage is them, yeah? But I'm just trying to show how some of the mechanisms behind such decisions are not based on, oh, I think black people are worse, or I don't want to work with black people, yeah, or other minorities. But on these, you know, cultural preferential treatments I'm talking about, of course, the question would be, you know, what's the solution? Because it's unfair, obviously, if qualified black people or Asian people are disadvantaged because the white person making the decision, you know, assumes they will work better with a fellow white person. person. So do that?

Well, the thing is with that is what you're talking about. I mean, it doesn't sound to me like it's actually got anything to do with race whatsoever. That same thing... Sometimes it might, definitely. I'm not saying it might. But what I'm saying is that same thing would apply to class. So a group of middle class people seeing a working class person. Or the BBC, as they like to be known.

Yeah, they would then go... This person, we can't get on with him, he's working class. Of course. What does he know about, you know? Of course. Definitely. And a Russian would be in the same position because they'd be like, well, you know, Like he didn't grow up here, he didn't understand.

Of course, of course. And I mean, they're Poles. Look, if they say this thing is, okay, white, aha, another point, if they say, okay, this thing is old, a white privilege, white, etc. I know Polish people here who came to this country with master's degrees in economics and were washing plates for five years.

Okay? Why? Because, one, their English wasn't that good. And during job interviews for their, you know, specialization, economics, et cetera, They weren't able to convince the usually British employer that, you know, I can do this job and I'll understand instructions immediately, you know.

Because, you know, nobody has time to start explaining things to you because you're an immigrant or I'll take an hour to explain things to you. Unfortunately, it's a brutal world capitalism. Nobody has time for that. People want, I want somebody who I say A and they understand the rest of the sentence. So I know Polish people like that.

So how has their white skin helped them here in Britain? In no way has it helped them? them. OK? The British employer is not interested that, oh, Polish guy, you are white, so I'll employ you. Of course not, you know, if you don't speak the language. A black Britain who's finished a good university here in Britain is advantaged over the white pole if they both have economics degrees, yeah?

The black Britain, who, you know, grew up here, knows the cultural courts, went to a good university, will be hugely advantaged over a white pole who came here, has the same economics degree, you know, doesn't maybe speak English that well and Kant doesn't know, you know, those British cultural codes and all that that well. Yeah. So, you know, what would we call that then? Yeah. No, I totally agree.

Do you think we've gone too far in entertaining the black identitarians that you talk about and identity politics in general? What do you mean by that too far? I mean that we're starting to see, like I saw on my Facebook feed, someone sent me this morning that the government has an initiative to change the ethnic makeup of the firefighting service okay because it doesn't reflect some whatever it is diversity quarters that they have and in that kind of situation you know most people I suspect will think well hey I don't care what color my fireman is I just

want him to drag me out of the bloody fire sure sure sure look these are and tricky issues I've had such an experience and my wife recently had a surgical procedure. And I remember when we were in the hospital in Sheffield there, you know, the last thing on my mind was what's the skin color of the people running this hospital or the doctors or the people who are turning to it? That was the last thing on my mind. All I cared about was that, you know, these are people who are competent and good at their job. Okay. So that's one side of it. The other side of it, and I definitely think is a legitimate argument, is if there are, let's say, specific organizations or institutions, okay?

Where after really going in and doing research, not just something we read in newspapers, but after going in and doing research and studying, you know, recruitment processes and all that, how people are employed, what kind of people applied, how many were something, there seems to be a clear tendency to sort of dismiss minority applicants.

Then, of course, I believe that should be looked into, You know, how do we, okay, why is this happening? How do we redress this, et cetera, of course. So I can't say much regarding the fire brigade of my team, because I don't know, you know, what made the government come up with that kind of, come up with that kind of something, you know. I would assume that they, you know, did some kind of studies and did some kind of research before they came up with that, you know, proposal, yeah?

Yeah. I was going to lead on to the question, because this is something that I've tossed and turned over in my head many, many times. Do you believe in quotas? Do you think we should impose on employers? You should employ this percentage of women. You should employ this percentage of ethnic minorities. Or do you think that the market should be allowed to sort itself out?

To be honest with you, I don't have a clear, I'm an agnostic on that position, on that issue. I don't really have a clear opinion on that issue in the sense that my opinion has shifted over the years. So there have been moments I might wake up on a Monday and think quotas are a terrible idea. It's ridiculous. Come on. Why should the company be forced to, et cetera, et cetera? But then I read an article on a Wednesday which makes a persuasive argument for why, let's say,

in institution A, there were no possibilities for, let's say, women, to get jobs. but after the imposition of quotas, those women have, you know, there's been a greater and a participation of women and the results of the institution have improved. You know, and then I read that and I'm like, it seems this quota thing is such a bad idea after all. So, yeah, so honestly speaking,

I don't have a clear-court idea. I would say probably it should go on a case-by-case basis, on a case-by-case basis. I definitely probably wouldn't support a, you know, blanket, quota, you know, everywhere, you know, 50% of the women in Parliament must be women, 50% of the people in Parliament, or the MPs must be women, or 21.2% should be black, et cetera. I definitely wouldn't support something like that. But on a case-by-case basis, looking at specific institutions, organizations,

looking at the history, how things have worked there, then I think definitely, I mean, it's not something I would dismiss and say a rubbish idea. So moving on, you're obviously a political journalist and you're, were based in Poland and Eastern Europe. And we've seen the rise of populism happen more and more on those countries, whether it's Hungary, it's Poland and all the rest of it. Why do you think this is happening?

Is it to do with the EU? Is it to do with, you know, the situation in the Middle East or Syria? Why do you think it's happening? Is it something we should be worried about? I'd say definitely yes. In Poland, currently there's a hard-core. or right-wing, right-wing, synophobic, I'd call them. I tried to use that word sparingly.

But definitely, it applies in this case, government. So, okay, I'll just tell you briefly how they came into power. So day one election, they've been in power since 2015. And that was, of course, the year of the migrant crisis. Okay? Now, this party, before, for reasons completely unconnected with migrants or immigration, etc., were already in a good position to work. win the elections. Okay? Because Poland had had a ruling party, a liberal ruling party for

eight years. People were tired of it. There had been some corruption scandals, etc. So there was already fertile ground for this opposition party to win those elections. Okay. So during the summer of 2015, the elections were in October, if I recall, I may correctly of 2015. During the summer, they were ahead of the liberal party, but by a few points. Then the migrant crisis erupted. And And they, you know, went into that hardcore, as in the leader of the party came out and said, we shouldn't be accepting any refugees or migrants into Poland. They could be carrying here. I mean, terrible things saying like, oh, they could even be carrying diseases and all that,

which are terrible allusions, you know, what is to be said about the Jews in Nazi, Germany, etc. You know, basically, that's playing on the most fundamental fear of people, you know, that these guys could come and give you a disease, which could make you die, you know. What's more scary than that? So they played into this tropes very strongly. Immediately they do that. I knew they won the elections. I knew they won the elections, unfortunately. And as it happened in October, it came that they did win the elections.

So I'd say that definitely added a few points to them, even though most probably they might have even won the elections even without that. So what happened is when they saw that, wow, people are really responding to this stuff, yeah, that they might be in. Because, you know, they were talking then. The previous government, then the liberal government who they ran against, had agreed to accept 7,000 refugees. Just 7,000.

No, none of that. Just 7,000. And this government said, oh, and these guys who are ruling now during the campaign said, oh, yeah, but that's how they start. They say 7,000, and then, you know, people come in, and they bring in their brothers and sisters and cousins, and before you know it is 100,000. And then before you know it is a million.

So that's how they played on that. And they said, so we are accepting zero. That's our policy. So they won the elections. And then when they say, wow, people really like this stuff, they're really responding to it. Then they even started going further. And then they were, you know, when they were attacks.

You remember 2016, there was, you know, the attacks in France and all that, you know. And then, you know, their ministers would come out and say, well, you know, we've said all along this multiculturalism is a ridiculous idea, you know. You know, you guys see now how right we were not to allow these Muslim folks to come, you know, into Poland and all that, because probably, you know, Poland now would be like France now, you know, where, you know, there's people running around with AK-47 shooting people in cafes. And, you know, obviously, you know, that fear, et cetera, and those attacks sort of reinforced their message. And people were like, oh, they probably had a point, actually, you know. And they've been riding on that since then. And definitely they've sort of unleashed, you know, at the end of the day,

Bertrand Russell, I think it was who wrote in the history of Western philosophy that the history of humanity has been one of the battle between reason and passion within the individual human. And that for some people, the victory of reason over passion comes without much pain. For some people, it comes with a lot of pain. And restraining those passions, they find inhibitive and even psychologically difficult to accept. They want to be able to release themselves and vent in public and not have to pretend and act all polite and civilized and all that.

And I do believe very strongly, there's a lot to that. And so I think when this rhetoric started in Poland, it simply allowed a lot of people who had been dissatisfied with various aspects of liberalism from its attitude to immigration to its attitude to gay rights and things like that. Because Poland is a very conservative society compared to a country like Britain, incomparably so. I'll give you an example. I hope I'm not varying off too much.

I tend to do this. In Poland, no leftist party has dared to postulate for gay marriage. in the UK, the conservative supported it. So you see there the difference. So this, when they started their rhetoric, it allowed a lot of people who'd been hiding feelings which they had on various topics regarded to liberalism and freedom and all that,

to be able to come out and say, oh, yes, finally now I can say this. You know, I've never really like this. Muslims can stand gays and think, you know, the West has basically gone crazy, you know. And these are really emotions which people feel that. They're not manufactured, Because very often people try to sort of act as if, oh, is this elites who manufacture, you know, they tell people things

and then people like robots say, ah, okay, immigrants bad, aha, immigrants bad, you know, gay's bad, ah, gay's bad. It doesn't work that way. There has to be a feeling inside you, yeah, that is already leaning towards that direction. And then when the politician comes out and says, you know, Constantin, it's okay to think immigrants are bad. I like the way he's picked me for this.

You're the Russian, man. You see, you know, it's okay to see him with God's bad because they really are. Don't be afraid of saying that. Come on. Be yourself. Be free. You know. Come on.

You know. So, so that's what. So that's what they played on, you know. And it's working. So. So your question was, is it a problem? I think definitely it's a problem because there's a lot of nastiness there. I mean, there are, of course, Poles who are opposed to this.

But, you know, it gives a lot of people's sort of satisfaction. You know, there's a human satisfaction in feeling that I am better than somebody else. Okay. So if you are a broke guy who hasn't, and I'm not saying this disparagingly, I'm just as a fact, If you're somebody who, let's say, let's call it economically frustrated, things haven't gone well for you in life. You don't have such a high level of self-esteem and all that. And then a politician comes to you and says, look, forget about your individual status.

You are a superior being simply for the fact that you were born a pole. That alone makes you better than all those Muslims and all those brown people and all those Africans and all those people. That alone should give you pride. You know. And you're like, yeah, you know, I am something at the end of the day. Yeah? And, you know, it works very strongly, especially on people like that who have that low sense of self-esteem.

And then you tell him that, oh, actually, you don't have to have any achievements in life individually. All you have to do is have been born Polish. That alone makes you a somebody, you know. It's automatic. No effort on your part. And it goes back to, I presume, to what you're studying, which is group identity. Which is, yeah, yeah. Yeah, definitely.

Yeah. And it gives him an identity and therefore a sense of self-worth. No, of course. No, there's various social identity theories which persuasively I would say I may argue that, you know, a lot of our individual self-esteem often in many people, if not most, is derived from the group they belong to and the group esteem, you know. There are some people who are able to sort of derive that sense of self-esteem and in a, it depends on also the dynamics, political dynamics, from their individual.

individual achievements, yeah? I did this, I did that, I did this. Okay? But a lot of people really, actually, especially if you don't have those individual achievements. If you can't say, oh, I have this, or I've done that, or I've done this, or I've done that, then you are looking for something to give you that esteem.

And then somebody gives it to you on a platter of gold. Dude, you don't have to have done anything in your life. The fact that you were born British or Polish makes you a superior person already. That's all you need. Come on, who wouldn't want that? It's easy, man. See, this is what I think the traditional kind of classical liberalism is such a powerful antidote to identity politics.

Because if you teach people that your value and your status and everything about your life depends on your individual behavior, on how you conduct yourself, on what you yourself achieve, then people who are in that position who understand the work through that lens, they're never going to be drawn to the racism of the far right or to this identitarianism of the far left. because they understand that fundamentally it's your job as a human being to take the circumstances in which you're born and to do the best possible that you can in those circumstances. And I think that's why we talk about these issues with a lot of people because I think that message of individual responsibility

has to be spread as far and wide as possible, in my opinion. Because the identity politics on the right and left, I think, is very dangerous. It's dangerous from both sides. I agree. The problem with that, with that, with what you propose is that it's difficult. Oh, yeah. It's difficult. It's what is easier.

For me to say, okay, my life depends on my individual effort and what I have done, okay. And if, let's say, I haven't reached a stage in life or I don't have the kind of esteem within society that I thought I would have, then probably this is my fault. Is that easier to do? or is it easier for me to believe that if there is something going on in my life, which, if I'm not where I wanted to be, then it's because of somebody else. Of course, that second option is much easier. It's much more attractive.

It's much more seductive. Telling people, look, it depends on you. You're pushing the responsibility on people. That's difficult, okay? Because then there's no excuses. There's no one to blame. You know, people don't want that very often. People don't want that.

They want to be able to say, look, it's not my fault. Come on something. Somebody must have caused these problems, you know. And that's why writing populism and stuff, you know, is so seductive. Because you take, you sort of lift the burden of responsibility from the individual, you know, and say, oh, it's not your fault. It's because of these people. Right. You're not unemployed because you haven't studied well.

Oh, you're lazy. Yeah. Yeah. You're unemployed because of immigrants. You understand. And then you're like, oh, wow. Oh, so I'm not that crap after all. You know.

seductive. Yes. Well, listen, it's been an absolutely eye-opening to be. It's been fantastic to have you on. You're probably one of the most intelligent and kind of nuanced guests. We tried to get you to take some extreme positions, but you always had a bit of nuance and you always had a bit of balance. So it's been really great.

I'm incredibly sweaty at the moment. But it's been fantastic. The question we always like to end on is, is the one thing that you think we as a society aren't talking about that we ought to be talking about? Not really, honestly speaking. I mean, the big issue, which I think there's two issues which are going to sort of shape political discussion in the next five, ten years.

And that's identity and inequality. We talked about the identity issue today, and there's a lot of talk about identity politics. The second issue is inequality. And I can't say, I mean, whatever you may think of him right now, et cetera, but, you know, Corby and Labor, et cetera, they've been attacking that. issue very strongly, and they've been talking about it very strongly, which I think is one issue which Labour is winning on right now, the inequality issue. The Conservatives are winning on the identity issue. Labor is winning on the inequality issue. Wait, hold on, sorry,

how are the Conservatives winning on the identity issue? They're winning on the identity issue because the Conservatives, you know, won, have sort of, at least, you know, in official rhetoric, said, look, we respect the Brexit decision of the British people to leave the European Union. So basically, we accept that British people, I don't know, want to stay British or are more British than European. However, you may choose to portray that. So we accept that, definitely, okay. Two, clearly, I would argue, the Conservative Party have always placed more emphasis on things like patriotism, you know, loving Britain, etc., yeah, than, for instance, the left, which is usually very critical, yeah.

So on these issues, I would say I'm probably, I don't know if there's been such a survey, but I would assume that if Brits were asked for instance, which is the more patriotic party, I'm pretty much sure they would say the conservatives are the more patriotic party, the Tories are the more patriotic party. Whereas if they were asked which is the party which is addressing inequalities more or talking about inequalities more, they would probably say it's labor talking about inequalities more. Sure. So the political movement, which is able to provide an adequate response to these two issues,

owns the political future in Britain and in Europe and in the West. Fascinating. Thank you so much for coming on. Before we let you go, your Twitter handle is... At Remy Adikoya 1. Perfect. So we'll send everybody your way. And thank you very much for tuning in this week. We've got more fantastic interviews coming up. We hope you enjoyed it. and we'll see you soon. Yeah, and there'll probably be a new presenter because I'll be fired.

See you later. I'll fire you right, live on camera. As always, remember to subscribe to our channel if you enjoy it, and if you already subscribe, remember to click that bell button next to subscribe button so that you get notified whenever we release a fantastic interview like this. We're on Twitter and other social media at TriggerPod.

Follow us, comment, suggest new guests for us to talk to and have a good week.