Only Bitcoin Can Stop Government Corruption | Peter McCormack

I no longer consent. Individually it means nothing. Collectively it means everything. Do not give them anything to stop you. Ultimately, everything is downstream of central government. Whether it's ideology or incompetence, it doesn't really matter. The outcome is the same. That's why power centralises, debt increases, everyone else pays for it. And I don't think we can vote our way out of this. There'll be no opportunity. We will go into periods of high hyperinflation. Like, it's obvious. There's no point winning when everyone's losing. Like, if you win when everyone's losing, that sucks. And that's what it is. Asset inflation is you win by other people losing. As many people as possible have to win. The pie itself has to get bigger. Bitcoin is central to this. I just don't say Bitcoin. How you been? I've been good. How are you? Good, good. Good to see you. The boys are back. Boys are back in town. It's been a little while. Actually, it's not been that long. I saw you in Vegas. When were we in Vegas? That was only a couple months ago. When Connor won all the money. Yeah. Connor Scammer. How much did you win, Connor? 3K. 3K. That's pretty impressive. From like $300? Yeah. I did not. I went one hour too long. So I was down $2.5K, got up to $500 up, and because we thought we were on a magic machine, like, rub it, you win. I carried on and lost $1,500 in about an hour. That's how it gets you. I walked away from you that night and also did the same thing. Vegas always went. Oh, did you? Yeah. Fucking loser. I don't even remember how I lost my money, but I woke up without it. Man, it's good to see you. Hold on, I'm not interviewing you. It's your show now. Have you fixed Britain yet, Pete? No. I tell you what, though. I tell you, an interesting place to start this, because last time we spoke up in Manchester... And then again here. Here? Yeah. We didn't record it in Manchester. Oh, we... We did, didn't we? It was at this table. At this table. And we spoke about what's going on in Bedford, the private security trying to fix Bedford. So I gave up on Bedford. And the reason I gave up on Bedford is because everything I was trying was creating a political divide. And also, it doesn't... I realized it didn't matter what I did in Bedford. Ultimately, everything is downstream of central government. Yeah. And so I can go out there and try and help create businesses. I was about to open that pizza place, which I pulled out of. Did I tell you I pulled out of that? Yeah, I know you weren't doing that. Yeah. And because what's been happening is the country is being hollowed out by this Labour Party. Whether it's ideology or incompetence, it doesn't really matter. The outcome is the same. More businesses are closing in Bedford. And as I walk around and talk to people, I ask a very simple question. How are you doing? What do you think of this government? How's work? How's life? And it's very similar responses. Me and Connor were at a game recently and met two teachers that we know. They used to play for our women's side. Both of them are saying teaching is very hard at the moment. They are having to buy supplies themselves. What? Yeah, they have to buy supplies themselves because the schools do not have enough money to pay for everything they need. So they have to buy supplies themselves. Only small. It might be some prick sticks or some pens or whatever. So that's insane. No, it's totally, utterly insane that our government, with everything it borrows and everything it spends, it cannot support education. And it might be controversial, but for me, education is actually a priority over what the NHS does for adults. So health of the kids first, education of the kids second, adults third. And that comes back to a broader point whereby, you know, where HODL talks about money being a proxy for time. If we create debt, we're borrowing from the future. So we're borrowing from Connor's future and your kid's future, you know, my kid's future. And so if you're of the belief that we should stop that because our goal as parents to our own children, but to the children of the country is to create a better future for them than ours, what our parents certainly did for us, then we have to stop the debt. but if we also have to stop the debt, we have to give them the best education and the best start possible. So just talking to them, that was really interesting. But there are other problems. There are immigration problems now affecting certain state schools in that the class dynamic and the demographic split is very, very high. You've got a substantial number of children who don't even speak English, and they have to work out how to teach these kids in those lessons, which means maybe a bit more attention, which means a bit more neglect for other kids. You've got kids from different cultures who don't know how to behave in classrooms. So they said it's very hard. I met another teacher the other day. I was just in the pub. You know the one over the road from me? It's the guy who does the camera work for us at the football. He was there with his mate. And he came over to me and said, oh, I want to say thanks. We gave £500 to 50 schools in Bedford to buy football equipment. It's a large amount of money, but small for each school. He said it was really helpful because our budgets are difficult. And I said, tell me more. And he said, we're just under so much pressure. He said, I love the job. I love teaching, but we're under so much pressure. We do not have enough teachers in the school. So everybody is overworked. We don't have enough funding. And he said, they're about to lose their PE premium, which is the amount of money they get. I think it's about £10,000 to £15,000 a year to support PE. He said, that's probably going. And I was like, what's the impact of that? He said, well, we do sports matches. I take kids to football matches. And we have a minibus. It's old. It's falling apart. We need a new one. We just won't be able to even replace it, let alone fix it. P.E. will get cut. And this is basically a lens for the entire problem of the country, is that in every single direction, things are getting cut because the government doesn't have enough money to pay for public services. And then if you go into people's private lives, they're also having to make cuts because inflation is higher than wage growth and you're having choices to be made. Why are the cuts happening? Is this specifically a labor problem? No, this is a multi-party, multi-decade problem of the slow creep of socialism. Everything that the Bitcoiners tell you about, the ill-discipline around money and the ill-discipline around government budgets. I mean the best way I can put it is is that if you're a political party it doesn't matter who you are it doesn't matter if you're Nigel Farage and you sound mean because you want to do tough things like reduce welfare and reduce immigration or you can be super nice and be Zach Polanski and say we need to let everybody in the country and you know fart rainbows it doesn't really matter the one thing that unites every single political party and every single political operative is your goal is to win power and then defend power. That's how you think. You might say, I'm here to represent the country. I'm your MP. I'm here to represent you in parliament. But really, your goal is to win a seat and defend your seat. And that creates incentives. And so if you're a party who wants to defend your power, your position stay in government, you have a number of levers that you can pull based around like rights, regulation, and money. Let's keep it to those three. There's probably lots more. But let's say rights. So the Labour Party heavily criticised, wanting to stop riots during Southport, don't like people criticizing people online, go and arrest a few more people for the things they say. They create a Lucy Connolly chilling effect. That's an infringement on your rights. When they talk about getting rid of jury trials and moving decisions on cases to judges, that's the state now arbitrating decisions rather than you or I having the right to go to our peers to judge whether we're guilty or not. When they choose to raise taxes on wealthier people and give them to poorer people, all the decisions they're making are about the special interests they have or the special interests of the groups that will vote for them, unions. So we have new employment laws. They are catastrophic for business. Ultimately, they will cost jobs. but the unions are so tied to the Labour Party that they basically say if you want our block vote you need to do these things and so when Labour won the election they've put these employment rules in it's all about special interests of the groups that vote for you and so when you have control of those powers the incentives are that you do things which aren't in the best interest of the country that's why power centralizes debt increases and ultimately everyone else pays for it You pay for running a business and it becomes harder because you have more red tape, more regulation, more tax. Or you pay for it as an individual because the money creation through fractional reserve banking and Bank of England money creation means you get asset inflation, which always outpaces wages. And so in the last 30 years, I think house prices are up about 1,500%, whereas wages are up 500%. So it was harder for you to buy a house than your parents. and it's harder for Connor to buy a house than me. And so when my parents bought their first house, it was a four-bedroom detached house. And my mum probably wasn't working because she was raising my brother and sister, and my dad was a low-level aircraft engineer. But they bought a four-bedroom house. Connor's got a high-profile job now. He's on a podcast. He's a producer-slash-editor. If he wants to buy a house in Bedford, most likely the one he can afford on his salary now, which probably isn't far off what my dad would have had at a similar time, is a one-bedroom flat. That's inflation at its core. And so really we are in constant decay. It's just a constant decay of the country because the incentives are such that we live in an inflationary environment. I think the easiest thing to blame it on is the money, which is great because this is a Bitcoin show. And it truly is. The money is the problem. but the money drives other malign things. Do you wish you could access cash without selling your Bitcoin? Well, Ledin makes that possible. They're the global leader in Bitcoin-backed lending and since 2018, they've issued over $9 billion in loans with a perfect record of protecting client assets. With Ledin, you get full costly loans with no credit checks or monthly repayments, just easy access to dollars without selling a single sat. As of July 1st, Ledin is Bitcoin only, meaning they exclusively offer Bitcoin-backed loans with all collateral held by Ledin directly or their funding partners. Your Bitcoin is never lent out to generate interest. I recently took out a loan with Ledin. The whole process was super easy. The application took me less than 15 minutes and in a few hours I had the dollars in my account. It was really smooth. So if you need cash but you don't want to sell Bitcoin, head over to ledin.io forward slash wbd and you'll get 0.25% off your first loan. That's leden.io forward slash WBD. With fiat money constantly debasing, wealth preservation isn't optional. That's why I recommend Swan Bitcoin, a team of dedicated Bitcoiners who work with families and businesses to build and secure generational wealth with Bitcoin. Strong relationships with clients are at the center of everything Swan does. A dedicated Swan private wealth representative, which is a real person that you can text and call, will help you build a Bitcoin wealth strategy using Swan's comprehensive platform of Bitcoin services, including tax-advantaged retirement accounts, advanced Bitcoin cold storage using collaborative self-custody, inheritance planning with both trust and entity accounts, tax loss harvesting, asset-backed loans, and more. Swan have helped over 100,000 clients since 2020, and if you're serious about acquiring and securing Bitcoin, I recommend Swan. Meet the team at swan.com forward slash WBD, which is swan.com forward slash WBD. If you already self-custody of Bitcoin, you know the deal with hardware wallets. Complex setups, clumsy interfaces, and a seed phrase that can be lost, stolen, or forgotten. Well, BitKey fixes that. BitKey is a multi-sig hardware wallet built by the team behind Square and Cash App. It packs a cryptographic recovery system and built-in inheritance feature into an intuitive, easy-to-use wallet with no seed phrase to sweat over. It's simple, secure self-custody without the stress. And Time named BitKey one of the best inventions of 2024. Get 20% off at bitkey.world when you use the code WBD. That's B-I-T-K-E-Y dot world and use the code WBD. See, I don't know if it is that... Do you think Labour truly are trying to defend their seat right now? Because they must be the most unpopular political party in the UK this quickly after an election in my lifetime. No one is happy with what they're doing. So are they actually trying to defend their seat? Well, put yourself in their position. If you're Keir Starmer and you wake up this morning, and you read the papers, you look on social media, and you have your advisors, they're all saying this is not going well. So what are his choices? I'm literally asking you as Keir Starmer, what are you thinking right now? Not as Danny Knowles as Keir Starmer. I can only think as me. I know what I'd do. What are his choices? I honestly don't know what he can do. He can't be fiscally responsible. No, no, but his actual choices are resign or carry on. Oh, yeah, and he's going to carry on until there's a vote of no confidence. Yes, but a vote of no confidence is not going to happen because they've got a parliamentary majority. And so a parliamentary... I'd resign. He can get pressure internally, but your choice is to resign. Or you say, look, there's an election in three and a half years. You know, maybe you perhaps convince yourself. A bit like if you're a manager of Manchester United, that's a great example. Amaran? Yeah. Yeah. How did last year go? Terribly. Terribly. Do you think he blamed himself or do you think he blamed the history, the infrastructure, the players? I know I can sort this out next season. And he's kind of turned it around a little bit, right? Well, Keir Starmer might go, well, Conservatives handed me a shit show. $22 billion black hole. I've got to turn this around and it can't be done in a year. But in three years, if we do this, this and this and the OBR is right, by the time the next election, we might turn this around. But the problem is, like, the brave choices he has to make are do something very, very serious with the NHS. Like, that is an absolute mess. I was speaking to a family member. I don't want to dox him, but he worked for the NHS for, like, 30 years. He's in, like, private industry now. But he was telling me just how bad the NHS is. And it's literally, it's over. Like, people haven't accepted it yet, but it's 100% over. Yeah, totally. Like, his, one of my elderly relatives went into A&E with, like, an emergency and was in there for three days sat in a chair waiting to get bed. Like, it's absolutely insane. That's some third world stuff. Interestingly, because that's an anecdotal point, I've also heard some good anecdotal points since Labour come in on accident and emergency. So somebody I know, daughter, a few days before Christmas, fell over, banged her head on a radiator, cut it open. She was seen within half an hour. And I've heard other anecdotal data around that. And I think that is one of the things that Labour have put money into. But that comes to a broader point, because you can say the NHS is screwed. This is a hard question for you to answer, so I can answer it for you if you can't, because you've been away in Australia. But name me something that has got better under government, because of government decisions, in the last 25 years. Something that's got better? I honestly don't know. From afar, well, you've just said the NHS hasn't. No, that's definitely not. I can tell you education. I've just told you education hasn't. Yep. Borders? Definitely worse. Roads? Probably worse. I don't know. I've not spent enough time here. They're worse. Yeah. Councils? I'm sure they're worse. Up and down the country, there are so many, I think Section 114 it's called, where they're going to, essentially into bankruptcy. They've got no money. Okay, what else does the government do? Do you know what's insane here? I was in rural northern Kenya before I came here, and the phone signal service was infinitely better than in the middle of the Cotswolds. What did you say last week? When we were driving along and couldn't get a reception. I think it was something like, how can we put rockets up in space and not get a reception? Yeah, and the internet here is dreadful. So you should listen to Tucker Carlson just in an interview with Matt Walsh. And it was really interesting because Matt Walsh said at one point, he's like reiterating what I'm saying. So just to finish off what I was saying is, nothing has got better. Matt Walsh was saying the same to Tucker Carlson. Everything has got worse. He said, just going out for dinner. You go out for dinner now, go to a pizza place. It doesn't matter which pizza place you go to. They all get their ingredients from the same place. It's not like they're importing, I mean, someplace. Like flour from Italy. Yeah, and mozzarella from Napoli. And, you know, I don't know where they get tomatoes from. Tomatoes going from America, you know. They were never in Italy. Is that true? Yeah. Huh. But there's a small number of suppliers of food. and so when you get your cheese now, you're getting pre-grated, frozen, big packs of cheese, goes in the freezer, you get it out, you spread it on the pizza. Like food is actually getting noticeably shit. Yeah, especially the chains. Yeah, and you get less and less of the, you know, our coffee shop is a locally run place where we've sourced the best coffee from Monmouth here in London and we get Jersey milk. We're not making any money because we're trying to make the best cup of coffee possible. But most people are going to Costa or Starbucks. Their product is worse than ours. But they can do it because they have regulatory capture. When you have strong employment laws and strong accounting laws and tax laws, they have large departments that handle and manage this, and they have the ability to move money offshore. It's very hard to compete. We've created an environment which is great for huge businesses, terrible for small businesses. So what we're actually doing is we're killing the middle class. It's just the homogenization of everything, though. It's like no one wants to make anything that's slightly out there in case it causes offense. Whether that's food or music or film, everything has just become homogenized, like hit the biggest audience possible, because that's the only way you make the economics of running a business work. So that's good, because we should have that conversation we've had before about film and music. I'll come back to that because that's a really important point. There's like the tyranny of algorithms, which is, I think, a really important point. But just on this, there are people who want to run local businesses. It's just really hard to make money because if you've got, say, a coffee shop, your first bill is your business rates, which is a tax you pay before you even do anything. When you buy your products, because it's food-based, you don't get to reclaim the vat. So I can't reclaim the VAT on the beans because it's a raw product. It's a raw food product. But I have to charge 20% VAT on the cup of coffee, which goes straight to the government. So 20% of everything we sell goes to the government. And then you have the business rates, which works at about 8%. So we're at about 28%. And then you've got minimum wage, which has increased. I mean, minimum wage is a bit of a joke for our kind of business because it goes back to Matt Walsh's point. He said, all these restaurants, they've just got a bit rubbish. He said, the people that work in them now is really interesting because it used to be someone like Connor's first job or my daughter's first job. But actually now we've had such a large influx of immigration that most of these jobs now are being done by immigrants. And so the experience has changed as well. And so that kind of localism has gone. All because the minimum wage has gone up. The difference between hiring a 16-year-old and a 30-year-old with experience is kind of worth that extra pound an hour. And the mad thing is, if you take on a young person, an 18-year-old, and I've got minimum wage I've got to pay them, I don't know what it is, say it's £10.50, I have to give them 12.3% of the days worked in holiday. Now, when I had my first job, when I worked in a shop, I didn't get holiday allowance. No, I don't have holiday pay. You didn't get holiday allowance. you know you've got to throw in sick pay you've got to throw in employment rights you've got to throw in maternity you've got to throw all this stuff in which it basically is a tax on the business now what's happened to energy prices we have the highest energy prices i think in the world put that all in together how many businesses could exist middle class businesses local businesses could exist that don't and so when you drive around a town center and everything's closed and board it up and shit, but you go to the edge of a town and you see one of these little pods of, like, there's a Pizza Express, a McDonald's, and a Starbucks, it kind of makes sense. And so going back to the broader point is that we have decayed our country by taking more and more. The government takes more and more. They take rights. They take money through taxation. They take money through inflation. and they take ability through red tape. So if that constantly gets worse, harder, more difficult, you have less of it being done. And so you are burning through the middle class. And when you burn through the middle class, what do you have left? You have a working class and an elite. And then what happens? In that scenario, the working classes depend upon the state and the elite wins whatever. Think about the elites. They win in every fucking environment. So I keep going back to, I've been hammering Zach Polanski and Gary Government, Gary Economics on, because neither of them will talk about inflation in the way it should be talked about. Because both of them support inflationary economics. Because both of them want a continuation of what we have, which is money creation. Because neither of them, ideologically, can come to the table with an idea where we must balance the, We must balance the books. Therefore, all their kind of speeches and YouTube videos and Twitter videos about tax the rich and we must look after the poor is all bollocks. Because the biggest tax you can put on the rich and the best tax relief you can put on the poor is getting rid of inflation. That's it. The rich make the majority of their money through asset inflation. And the poorest get crushed most through inflation of cost of living and stagnated wages. But neither of them will deal with it. So to get to the main point on this, where I've come to is that the problem of our country and the problem of Western liberal democracies, US, all of Europe, to an extent Australia, and maybe New Zealand, I don't know enough, is that the progressive project has failed. Okay, the progressive project has completely and utterly failed. And I don't think we can vote our way out of this easily. So what do you think has to happen? Well, I think the choices on the table are quite clear. I'll tell you what I think is going to happen, is we're going to keep having this kind of extreme swing from left to right, where each side treats each other as an existential crisis. In the US, Kamala Harris was an existential crisis because of the crazy left-wing woke stuff, so we get Trump. But Trump is now an existential crisis to the left. So their next election, if it's Gavin Newsom v. J.D. Vance, it will be treated as an existential crisis if you lose. You pick a side, and government still wins. In the end, government still wins. In the UK, we're heading to that through possibly and probably some kind of left-wing coalition between Greens and Lib Dems, and then a right-wing coalition between Reform and Conservative. Is that what you think will happen? Yeah, because Reform has started to slip a bit, and Conservatives are coming back a bit. And if you cannot get a parliamentary majority, you don't have the power to make changes. And you need that. You need your 350 seats. But what's happening is both sides are treating each other as an existential crisis. Whoever wins has the levers of power. And in that scenario, it's like, do I believe that Nigel Farage and reform can fix this country I believe they can talk about fixing this country to a point where people who vote for them think they will fix it and certainly will do some things And it the exact same argument on the left And so if they can't fix this, which I don't think any of them can, because I think once, say, reform get into power, they're like, fuck, look at this mess. We can't afford this, we can't afford that shit. We might have to raise taxes or just borrow them. Like, this is such a mess. we just get a continuation of the problem because the problem is constraints and power. That's it. But a coalition is a continuation of the problem. Like the only, so I don't pay any attention to politics. I don't really care for it. But, and I don't know exactly, I definitely don't know everything reform stands for. But as an outsider looking in, the idea of reform is exciting to me because it looks at least from the outside as meaningful change for the UK, where it's really, since in my entire lifetime, the parties have just been swinging like centre-left, centre-right. Nothing's ever actually changed. It's just government growing bigger. Whereas reforms seem like that kind of outside candidate that can be almost like when Trump was elected the first time in the US. And it's a signal that something meaningful is about to change. But if they get into a coalition with the conservatives, that is not interesting to me. It depends the balance of power in that coalition. It might mean they have full control, they elect the prime minister, conservatives get to put some things on the table. In that scenario, what you want is a conservative party that's more right-wing than reform. So it doesn't stop them doing what reform wants to do, rather than the more Lib Dem version of conservative, which will dilute what they want to do. But you're small-c conservative, right? Classic liberal. Classic liberal, okay. Same thing. Yeah. What you see as exciting about reform, a lefty sees about Zach Palancey and Green. because in their worldview, reform is an existential crisis. They believe in multiculturalism. They believe in immigration. They think diversity makes us stronger. And Zach Polanski is going to Calais and making videos of people coming over on the boats and why. And he's the good guy. He's the guy saying tax the rich. They see exactly what you see, but from their vantage point. And that's the existential crisis of government not party. This is why I'm not aligned to any party at the moment. I'm not going to vote in the next election as it is. I certainly won't vote for reform. I'm happy to criticize reform. I'll criticize the conservatives. I never will vote for left because I don't think the left, I think, oh, look, if you ask me for a version of the world I want to live in, I'm always going to choose conservatism over kind of progressive left ideas. but I'm not voting for anyone at the moment because I think whoever you vote for, you get decay. You might get slower decay under reform. You might get faster decay under a green Lib Dem coalition but I'm not voting for decay because nobody is dealing with what I personally see as the problem which is constraints on power. I mean, you know how much I love American history and how much I read American history and I must have read the US Constitution 30 times now. But I've been researching, I've been going a bit deeper in what happened after the Revolutionary War. What happened with the 13 colonies. So I don't know how much of this you know, but afterwards they had the Articles of Confederation, which was how the colonies would work together. By the way, if anyone listening is American who's studied this and I get anything wrong, please do correct them. But for the sake of the argument, they had the Articles of Confederation. They were seen as a bit weak. And there were issues between the colonies, essentially the 13 states, in that interstate commerce was a problem because people were putting tariffs on. Not everyone had a singular, everyone had different currencies. So you didn't kind of always want the other state's currency. And also there was a weakness whereby like a small state could be influenced by other countries. Say Britain came back over and went to Delaware and went, you know, like, you're a bit of a small state here, you're struggling, we'll lend you some money, we'll help you rebuild yourself, we just want to be part of this. So you could get that infiltration from other countries. And so the Federalists made the argument that you need a strong Federal Government to make the states work better and defend themselves. And so they argued for the Constitution, for a strong Federal Government. You also had the Anti-Federalists, which, by the way, when I first heard about the, I think it was HODL who said to me, you've got to go and read the anti-federalist papers. I assumed they were just people who were against the creation of federal government. But it was deeper than that. It was more about preserving liberty. They just fought out a tyrannical British government who wanted to tax them without representation. And they didn't want to return to that. And their views was that a strong federal government would always centralize, would always become tyrannical. So you had this tension between federal government of a strong federal government that could defend the country and make the country operate better, but with states' rights independent. And then you had the anti-federalists who were all about liberty. And you had this tension of the two. And that's where you ended up getting the constitution. But this is a really interesting thing. Name me one part of the... Can you name me a part of the constitution? I mean, yes. The right to bear arms. Okay, cool. So this is something I learned about it. It's not really the constitution. So the Constitution itself is how the federal government works, the separations of powers, the executive office, et cetera, et cetera. What happened was when these debates happened regarding the Constitution, the anti-federalists wanted a Bill of Rights, which was to say, okay, if we agree to this, we want individual rights for us. And so the First Amendment, Second Amendment, and so on, I think there were 10 amendments to begin with, were created as a Bill of Rights. It's actually not the Constitution, it's the Bill of Rights. Very interesting. But the Bill of Rights is appended into the Constitution, so it's one document. But it's actually a Bill of Rights. And they were created to create the protection of liberty of the individual. And so when you look back at that, it was that tension between having what you want from a strong federal government while at the same time protecting the liberty of the individuals. You could argue that the Federalists won because they wanted a central government and they got it. But if you look now, the Anti-Federalists were right because essentially... They did centralize power. Centralized power and you have now got this factionalism problem. whereby, you know, when I hear about the right to bear arms, it's there to protect against a tyrannical government. I mean, I think if Britain was tyrannical and deserved a revolutionary war, then the current government is even more tyrannical than what Britain was to the US. Yes, we govern from distance, from 3,000 miles away, and it'd take three months on a ship or whatever to get there. But actually, I think it's way more tyrannical now. But you're not going to get people raise their guns and fight a tyrannical, this form of tyrannical government, because it's their government, the people with the guns. And we're okay with our tyrannical government, right? They might raise their guns if they get a tyrannical left-wing government afterwards, which infringes too much, which really is civil war. So I've started to see, I don't see any scenario where the right to bear arms and leading to the country united to fight against the government. I see it as the only scenario is there's a civil war because the sides are so far apart. And you probably won't know where I'm going with this. The point is, is that if you don't have enough constraints on government, government will become tyrannical. I will argue that the US is tyrannical now, and I'll argue the UK is tyrannical, I'll argue that Europe is tyrannical, because we are now essentially serves. They don't serve the people, we serve government. We go to work to serve government, and we are constrained by the limited rights we have and the bureaucracy within, and the money they let us have at the end. That's not what government should be. And so, if you believe the anti-federalists were right, But the only solution for me personally is that we have to move to a place where we implement new constraints of power. So I believe in the UK we need a codified constitution. We have a constitution. It's not codified, which basically means I can't sue the government. They can do what the fuck they want, parliament sovereign. That's okay. Like a non-codified constitution is okay a century or two ago where we were good chaps and the aristocracy ran the place for the benefit of the people. We don't have good politicians anymore. I could probably name you three that I think are decent and have a backbone. But the point doesn't really matter whether you have good politicians, bad politicians. The incentives are there for power. And so without a codified constitution which limits what they can do, it's always going to be this way. This is the nature of man. So I'm only interested in a party that comes out and says, I'm an MP. I'm going to be your prime minister. The first thing you need to know is the incentives for me and my party are to damage you as a country, as every party has done in the past. We want to build a stronger country. So the only way we can do that is with having constraints on power and what we can do. So the incentives aren't for us to do short-term things that damage the country for the benefit of us as a party. We should be here to govern you within strict limitations. And by the way, we should have a Bill of Rights which protects you as individuals. You should have free speech. We shouldn't be able to surveil you. You should have the right to a jury trial. We should put everything in place to protect you. A government who comes out and says that, I'm like, you got my vote. Yeah, but that's never going to happen. Unless you run for MP, that's never going to happen. Or you create a popular movement, which I'm trying to do. Which is this, I do not consent. I no longer consent. I no longer consent. But, so I have some issues with this. Okay. because... Should we explain what it is? Yeah, yeah. You explain what it is. So I've come to that conclusion on my own. So let's talk about what consent is. There's explicit consent in... Yeah, there's a website. There's explicit consent. We have an election. We vote for Labour. They have the explicit consent of the country, and they have parliamentary majority. They can make decisions. I believe assuming consent is a mistake. I think consent is fluid, and I can withdraw my consent. Now, what does that actually mean? As an individual on my own, it means fuck all. I no longer consent to the government, so what? Fuck off, we're doing this anyway. If a million people say I no longer consent, well, we're a voting bloc like the unions are. If you want us to vote for you, you should play that Nick Fuentes video in a minute, Connor. But if you want us to vote for you, these are our demands and maybe we get something. It's a bit like if you look at the libertarian movement in America. They have no power, but they got Ross Ulbricht released. That's a start. The libertarians did something big and important there. They got Ross Ulbricht released. They said to Trump, you want the libertarian vote? You release Ross Ulbricht. They got the libertarian vote, they released Ross Ulbricht. Now we know there are, as Angela McArdle we had in, didn't she? she's a libertarian. She's now in there as part of the government, starting to influence with libertarian ideas. Okay, so I'm pro-liberty guy. If I can build a movement that has enough people and just say reform are winning, I can say you do not get this vote. This vote is not going to vote unless you do a bill of rights. One thing, give me one thing. I want a bill of rights that has protect speech in this country like it's protected America. Every single person that's currently in jail for a speech crime is released. Everybody who's been historically prosecuted for a speech crime, they all, I don't know what the term is where you revoke their, but they all get removed. And we have a codified, binded protection in the future for speech. If we win just that, we've done something big and important for the country. But can you do more? Like, if you make the country believe that we are in charge, not the politics, not the 650 people in Whitehall or the thousands working in the civil service who are destroying the country. If you make the country believe we are in charge, and they'll ask, how are we in charge? It's like, well, government only operates and gets to exist because millions of us go about our daily business every day. But if we stop doing that, maybe the starting point, let's go in fantasy world. Say 10 million people sign up to I no longer consent. Okay, we want a bill of rights for the country. On the 1st of February, it's a national strike. None of us are going to work. Does anything happen? Maybe, maybe not. Okay, two-day strike, three-day strike. The country has to believe, and enough people have to believe, that they can force government to make change, because government goes with the wind. I could never have imagined as a scenario where a Labour Party became so anti-immigration, but it became such a hot topic in the country, they had to be. And so if you can express the will of the nation to the politicians, they will have to go with the will of the nation. And look, I know this is all a big fantasy, but what else? What are your other options? Well, so this is the two things that I have an issue with are, what does not consenting actually mean? Because you're not asking people to take action here, as in stop paying their taxes or stop paying road tax or whatever it might be. This is just signing up to be part of this group. I am saying right now, all you have to do is say two things. This country doesn't work anymore. I no longer consent. And you have to understand one thing, is that individually it means nothing, collectively it means everything. If we can build a collective, we can build a movement. This episode is brought to you by AnchorWatch. The thing that keeps me up at night is the idea of a critical error with my Bitcoin cold storage. And this is where AnchorWatch comes in. With AnchorWatch, your Bitcoin is insured with your own A-plus rated Lloyds of London insurance policy and all Bitcoin is held in their time-locked multi-sig vaults. So you have the peace of mind knowing your Bitcoin is insured while not giving up custody. So whether you're worried about inheritance planning, wrench attacks, natural disasters or just your own silly mistakes, you're protected by AnchorWatch. Rates for fully insured custody start as low as 0.55% and are available for individual and commercial customers located in the US. Speak to AnchorWatch for a quote and for more details about your security options and coverage. Visit anchorwatch.com today. That is anchorwatch.com. What if you could lower your tax bill and stack Bitcoin at the same time? Well, by mining Bitcoin with Blockware, you can. New tax guidelines from the Big Beautiful Bill allow American miners to write off 100% of the cost of their mining hardware in a single tax year. That's right, 100% write off. So if you have $100,000 in capital gains or income, you can purchase $100,000 of miners and offset it entirely. Blockware's mining as a service enables you to start mining Bitcoin right now without lifting a finger. Blockware handles everything from securing the miners to sourcing low-cost power to configuring the pool, they do it all. You get to stack Bitcoin at a discount every single day while also saving big come tax season. Get started today by going to mining.blockwaresolutions.com forward slash WBD. Of course, none of this is tax advice. Speak to your accountant or tax advisor to understand how these rules apply to you and then head over to mining.blockwaresolutions.com forward slash WBD and you'll get one week of free hosting and electricity with each hosted miner purchased. How many people voted in the last election? Is it about 60% or something like that? 60%, yeah. So there's essentially 40 people that don't consent to this government. But like the big issue I have is why you haven't brought Bitcoin into this as Pete the Bitcoiner. I got a really easy answer. But I think I'm not going to like your answer because I think you're going to say it's going to put people off. No, I have brought Bitcoin into this. Okay, how? Bitcoin is central to this. I just don't say Bitcoin. Why? Because it distracts from, let's call it an A-B test. Every time I talk to somebody who doesn't understand Bitcoin and I explain to them the problems with the money, they get it. When I get to Bitcoin, I lose more than half of them. But my problem is, like, Bitcoin can be the action. Like, you're not asking for people to stop paying taxes or whatever, but Bitcoin is actually, like Nick Carter's article, Most Peaceful Revolution, like, this is how you take power from the government. And it fits so well with this movement that I don't know why Bitcoin's not a part of it. But it is. I just don't bring it up. But if you don't bring it up, then no one knows it's part of the movement. And if you get a million people, 10 million people sign up to this thing, and they start saving in Bitcoin, then they're essentially starving the government from that income. Well, they're not starving it. They're just not spending it. But Bitcoin is still integrated with the tax system, the spend system. So you're talking about saving. But- No, it's not even that. It's that you're taking that out of the fiat system that they control. Sure. They kind of control the Bitcoin system through regulation anyway. Let's just be real about that. But it's not fueling the debt-based fiat system for them. Sure. But it might be- Essentially, is that the accelerationist argument? In that if we take it out, they have to print more fiat, it accelerates the- Yeah, sure. Let me come at this a different direction. Why are you sat that side of the table right now? because this is what Bitcoin did. Okay, and so what am I? The guest. Okay, and so what do I do now? You tell me stuff. No, no, no, but what's my job? What do you mean? Like, you're the host of What Bitcoin Did. What am I? You're the host of the Pete McCormack Show. And you were there through everything. Why did I choose to do it? Well, I mean, a few reasons. You got sick of talking about Bitcoin. You wanted to make a change in Bedford. You want to make a change in the UK. Yes. I personally went as far as I could with Bitcoin. I got to, like, your podcast is the most important podcast in Bitcoin. You've absolutely crushed it. You do the necessary important job in Bitcoin, which is when people come in and they want to learn, they're there, but you keep the crowd in. Like you manage the Bitcoin crowd and accumulate people in. Okay, I'm for the pre-Bitcoin crowd. And in not doing the podcast, I came out of the bubble. So my life isn't now going to Nashville with you and having dinner with Harry Sudark or going to Vegas and shooting guns with HODL and just talking about Bitcoin. By leaving the bubble, I'm now in the real world where hardly anyone is talking about Bitcoin. And the time it will take to educate and get them into Bitcoin will slow what I need to do, which is educate them why the financial system doesn't work. I put up a post yesterday criticizing Zach Polanski and Gary Government about this exact thing. The minute I go buy Bitcoin, I lose a bunch of people that go, oh, you're just promoting that fucking scam. Bitcoin's a scam. It's a Ponzi. Like, just lose people. I don't need to convince them of Bitcoin. They will get there. I need to get a coalition of people who realize the country doesn't work, realize the financial system doesn't work, realizes, you know, you can temporarily vote your way out of this. You can get a Bukele, you know, that tough CEO, strong man who comes in, looks authoritarian, a little bit scary. A bunch of people are like, great, he's doing what I want. Other people are shit scared. But in a country like the UK, if that person swings too far to the right, you're just going to get a swing back to the left. What we need is to bind government to limitations. What was it Safedean said? The biggest threat to Bitcoin is a government that has a responsible monetary policy. Okay? In some ways, what I'm doing is kind of operating the threat to Bitcoin in that what I'm saying is we need to bind government to certain constraints. One of those constraints would be, for example, let's spitball some ideas here. the government cannot grow faster than GDP so set it as a percentage say say we look which I don't know say we're 40% now we know that's terrible the you know we were great when it's 28% okay it has to be 28% a bit like your home budget it's 28% that's what it has to be let's say like one of the things that people really hate about the Labour Party is their manifesto explicitly said we will not raise taxes on working people. They got into power, realized financially they're the fuck, couldn't pay for all the things they wanted to do. And so the first budget they did, they raised national insurance, employers' national insurance. Now anyone with half a brain knows that there are no corporate taxes. Do you know the argument? There are no corporate taxes. So this is what Reagan said. Colin, if you can find that interview, it's brilliant. There are no corporate taxes because companies have to make a profit. The minute you put a new tax on them, that goes into the cost of the product to the people. So the end consumer always pays for that tax. So a tax, a employer's national insurance on my coffee shop means I have to raise the price of the coffee. So it's a tax on consumers. So they lied and they put a tax on working people. They made sure all products were more expensive and more companies closed down. We get to the second budget. Bear in mind they've already said they're not going to raise taxes on working people. Get to the second budget. What were the taxes they did? I'm trying to fucking remember. Schools? Increased national insurance. Yeah, that was the first budget. The second budget, they... Why can I not remember this? Because I should know this recently. Look it up. But they raised taxes again in the last election. Oh, no, that's what they did. They froze the thresholds. So the thresholds are based on knowing there's inflation. You raise the thresholds for the different tax rates. If you freeze those, it's essentially a tax because life's got more expensive, but the thresholds haven't moved with inflation. They froze them for another five years or three years or whatever. It's another tax on working people. And so they lied. They did a manifesto, they made a promise, and then they lied. Well, why don't we bind governments to their manifestos or debt? If we know debt is stealing for the future, if a government cannot balance if every government should come in with a budget and a mandate okay so say reform come in and say we're going to balance the books Labour are not going to win an election if they come in and say we're going to borrow I don't know 150 billion because everyone's going to go we'll go with the money who balances the books okay but what if reform come in and they get to their first budget and they say we can't balance the books we need to borrow 100 billion Okay, so you failed on your manifesto. That immediately triggers a referendum. And the referendum says, do they continue a new election? Once you change the incentives that the public gets to vote on whether it wants more debt or not, a government cannot get more debt. But this is why I think Bitcoin needs to be a part of this. Because if you get people taking money out of the banking sector, it limits the amount of debt that these governments can take. You're not going to sell. You can sell revolution to the country. you cannot sell Bitcoin to 70 million people like that. Danny, we've been trying for years. No, I know, but you stepped outside of Bitcoin to try and talk to a broader audience. And the idea was always that Bitcoin was going to be a part of the conversation. And this is where it fits perfectly into the conversation. You're trying to do a peaceful disempowerment of the state. And that is exactly what Bitcoin is. Don't get me wrong. I want it to be. I'm just telling you my lived experience is I can't get people to make the leap from inflation is bad, government is bad, Bitcoin is a solution. Some people do. But you've been with me for seven, eight years on a journey. You know it's hard. Some people just have that moment and they don't. Usually it's their moment. They're like, I've heard about Bitcoin. You get rich price and I buy some. I got rich score. I'm in. A lot of people, also a lot of people just don't have spare capital for Bitcoin. Yeah. And that's true. And they've got nothing they can do with that. But like when you're trying to educate people on why they can withdraw consent from the government. It just seems like a perfect moment to bring this in as an idea. And it's not to say Bitcoin won't be part of it. One of my posts recently, I wrote an article. What was the article? I think I called MMT Marxist Monetary Theory, right? Why MMT is Marxist. And my footnote was buy Bitcoin. So I do include it. I'm just not making it central because if I make it central, I will lose people and I can't win. I think you're deemed as a grifter. Yeah because they know I got Bitcoin as well Plus the other thing is one of the other things I been trying to do is trying to say this isn even a left or right issue If you look at the complaints from the Marxists versus the complaints from the, say, free market capitalists, they're both, it's horseshoe, they're both saying the same thing. The rich are getting richer because of the institutions and the way the system works. They both diagnose the problem. Yeah, the problem is the richer getting richer and the poorer getting poorer. We all know this is unfair. We know that asset inflation is unfair. It's great for people with assets, but it's unfair because it only happens because of fractional reserve banking and money creation and fiscal policy. Those three things drive inflation. If you're poor and you're not near the spigot, you're fucked. So we know it's unfair, but they're choices. They're choices that exist. And so if the Marxists are saying it's a problem, they're absolutely right. It's totally unfair. But they're saying the solution is tax the rich. It's not. The free market guys are saying this is a problem. But their solution is right. Their solution is deregulate, government smaller. The libertarians are right. The libertarians are 100% right. But they're both diagnosing the same problem. So I'm going, this isn't a left or right issue. You're both saying what the problem is. I don't even need to say whether we should have a Marxist solution or a free market solution. My opinion is free market. But we both agree that the problem is this. Well, then we both can agree that constraints on power is the solution. It's not to allow people to wield power for the benefit of an elite against everyone else. and that is a collective thing that I believe the left and the right can get behind. It's like, do you want... But do you think the left are going to get behind the I do not consent movement? I think some will. Not the far left wonky weirdos, because they're Marxists. They want government to have more power. I'm talking about the old school traditional left. So the classic liberals. Classic liberals, old working class, Labour, SDP. the Labour voters who have gone to reform. The Labour voters, like... Has that happened? Are people moving from Labour to reform? Yes. That's wild. Well, think about it like this. If you're, like, what radicalises most people is being broke. Yeah. And if you're broke because of decisions that weren't yours, you know if you've gone to if you've got up every day at six o'clock and gone to work built walls plumbed houses built buildings you know whatever job it is you've gone out and then you're doing things and suddenly you're like you know i have no fucking money left like there's a week to go and i've got no money left i've got no savings i can't go on holiday all the things my dad could afford to do on a working class wage you can't do it's like well why is this happening and then you've got another party, you know, and this has happened at a time where you've had mass immigration. And we should talk about immigration. And we should talk about British identity because the Overton window has shifted on that. But if you've seen that, and then you're seeing every single day that people are coming to the country illegally and they're being put up in hotels. If you are seeing the shape of your town center change, the culture of your town change, and you've got a a political leader saying, look, we need to get a grip on this immigration. This is causing problems. And also we need to get a grip on welfare because that's what's taking money. Why would you not vote for that? I mean, it's interesting. We should talk about immigration because this has been a really hot topic. I've been in Siren Sester. I'm in a bubble. Like there is not that much diversity there. How, tell me what the like state of the country is. Like what's the temperature of the country on immigration right now? I mean, the temperature of the country itself, I think, the valve is like starting to pop. Well, last time we spoke, you thought we were going to go into a civil war. Well, I think we were already in a civil war. It's like a cold civil war now, but we're in a civil war at the moment because a number of debates which you couldn't even have five years ago and now front and center. Okay, so immigration. Immigration isn't even controversial now. To say we want zero immigration, that is not even a controversial position. The more controversial conversations that are going mainstream are... It's what you do about the immigrants that are here. Yes. So this is where you get into the new ones. Okay, immigration is a problem, go to zero, great. Okay. I think a lot of people can get behind that. It's the discussions of re-immigration, you know, essentially expelling people from the country. And where people are comfortable on that spectrum. Because we did the interview with Carl Benjamin, I said, look, these are going to be uncomfortable conversations for people. You go on the YouTube comments, they're like, you're a pussy, you're the reason the country's going to shit. I'm just trying to say, realistically, if you think immigration is a problem, there's questions you need to answer. What policies do you want to enact the change that you would like to see? How do you accumulate enough power to make that happen? How do you execute it? And how do you bind it so it's not undone when a different party comes in power maybe five or 10 years later. They're really important questions to have. And so if you go to the very extreme right of this, there are people here in this country who basically just want it to be a white country. And then no argument, you know, this needs to be a white country, it's for white people, that's what Englishness is. And they'll debate things like... I disagree that that's what Englishness is. Like, I think it's what Englishness was. So they'll say things like, yeah, like, Rishi Sunak is in English and David Lammy is in English because Rishi's like of Indian descent and David Lammy's black, right? But I was talking about my experience. I went into Bedford Town Centre yesterday. I went to the coffee shop and I was sat there and outside the bank, there's a mentally disabled guy who comes into our coffee shop. He was outside the bank and there was a black lady that he was whacking with a crutch and then started grabbing by the hair. No one did anything. So I ran out, put my cape on, got him off her. And the lady from the bank said, oh, that's his carer. She said, I'm not his carer. I don't know him. And she sculls off. He then, I get him to calm down. But before he calms down, he's grabbing at my neck and grabbing at me. He's quite strong for a little guy. Calm him down and he goes off. But as he gets about 50 meters up the road, he starts whacking a window with his crush. I'm like, fuck. So I run up to get him. There's two other guys who come into my coffee shop. I think they're Indian guys. One's a boxer and his brother. I was like, come and help me. So they run up and they help me. We sort them out. We calm down. Eventually the antisocial behavior officers in the town come. I think both of those were Muslim. We get them sorted. Then the police come up and take him away. After that, I go and get my hair cut by a gay Indian. I think he's Indian. Is he Indian? He's a whole max. Yeah. But I'm pretty sure his parents, his grandparents are Sikh or Hindu. And then I go back to my, go back to the coffee shop. And I look back at that at the moment, I was like, there's two Indian guys who helped me. And they're very assimilated. Come to the coffee shop. We have different color skin, but we're very similar people. The antisocial behavior guys, they come and help. And then the gay Sikh of heritage. I'll have to check with Shane. Sorry, I've got this wrong. But I'm like, well, this is an English experience. You know, when I watch videos outside Arsenal, and you've got black and white guys arguing about Arsenal, and they've been shitting, that's just English to me. And so I refuse to get into this discussion about Englishness being a white thing. I just refuse to have it, because I think it may be what it was, it may be what you want it to be, but to me that is verging on kind of racism. And I can't see Connor, as a third generation immigrant, different from like a lad he went to school with who's third generation, I don't know, Jamaican descent. They think the same, they operate the same, they might have some different cultural things, but they're pretty much the same. I refuse to do that. But if you want to have a conversation about when I go into my town center, and as I walk through, you've got Albanian guys, Eastern European guys, Polish guys, Muslims and Sikhs, and you go into quite a diluted experience. And that creates cul-de-sacs of groups of people. I'm willing to have the conversation and say, well, this experience is... When you have too many cultures, you have no culture. I'm open to having that conversation, what it means. And I'm open to saying, okay, well, what can you do about it? Because Bedford itself has a strong, diverse cultural experience in that. And even any of those pure ethnats, they've definitely gone to down Tavisock Street and eat those Indian restaurants because they're fucking great. Chathouse is one of the best restaurants I've ever eaten in. And so, and people will mock and make memes and things like, like they did it with Piers Morgan, but I've had a nice curry mean. But the truth is, it's like, okay, let's not have a discussion about what it means to be English, because I think it's a dumb discussion. Let's say, what is the outcome you want, and how are you going to get there? I think there is a strong argument that too much immigration is damaging for the country. I have no doubt about that. Because if you have no restrictions on really who comes in, most people are coming, what for, a better life? So they're probably coming from a poor start. So they're possibly, probably coming in the country in a financial position, even if they want to work, that they're going to bring GDP per capita down, they might be a net taker. So what we're saying is every hardworking person gets up and goes to work, they have to pay more tax for other people to come into the country. If you dilute the education of the country, you're basically saying to parents, look, to have high levels of immigration, your kids are going to get a worse education. They're going to have worse outcomes in healthcare. I just think democratically, we deserve a right to vote for this. And if we deserve a right to vote for this, then we have to debate it. And it's on the table. And so I think this will define the next election. I think, as it was in America, the main debate will be around immigration. What do you want to come out of that? What do you think the right policy is on immigration? I want constraints on power. This is all I care about. I want constraints on power. And so how does that affect immigration? Well, you don't have unelected, unaccountable government offices or quangos making these decisions. If a party wins, look, if the Greens win the election, they want uncontrolled immigration. That's what the country said. I don't want it. I might leave, but I don't think they will get it. But say if reform come in, then the decisions regarding immigration policy cannot be defected or cannot be directed by an unelected government quango. It can't be like a department within the government. It has to be done and controlled by the party itself. They have to have authority over that and be accountable for it. And if the country says, we do not want immigration, then they have to go solve that. And constraints from power will do that, because it directs the constraints to the government themselves. Ultimately, I think we should go not to zero immigration. Immigration should be a function of a growing country. I don't care where somebody's come from. I don't care what their background is. If they have a skill that we don't have here that we need it, that makes us more productive and grows the country, great. And I'm open to, like, genuine asylum claims because they do exist. But I'm very... Have you followed this case of this... I can't say his name. Alla. This came up recently. A-L-A-A. This is wild, right? Get up the... The first we all became aware of this, really, was this Keir Starmer tweet, where he put... This whole story is just wild, but I think... If you go onto Keir Starmer's profile, this is, to me, a lens for the country. I'm delighted that Allah Abdel Fattah is back in the UK and has been reunited with his loved ones. You must be feeling profound relief. I want to pay tribute to Allah's family and to those who have worked and campaigned for this movement. Allah's case has been a top priority for my government since we came to office. I'm grateful to President Sisi for his decision to grant the pardon. So he's been in prison in Egypt for, I don't know, 10, 15 years for protesting against the government. I don't know the full exact details, so I won't explain them. But what happened is people just started searching his Twitter. All right, what's this? Dear international PhD students, by the way, I'm a racist. I don't like white people, so piss off. This is from the guy that's... Yeah. Fuck that. Sounds like you need more fear. Random shooting of white males should convince them racism costs lives. I'll switch to something else. Advocating killing police, hate white people, assassination plot against Salel, Diyah, Abraham. But there's so many of these. They've all come out. And people are saying, why are you welcoming me back? Now, there was a change to the law in the UK, which... Yeah, look at this. Don't worry. we were only discussing how we'll take over your town and rape your women. Us terrorists tend to do that. I mean, that sounds like he's joking. Yeah, but there's a lot of these. And he talks a lot about hating white people. Okay. That's his choice. Fine. The reason he is able, when he was pardoned or whatever in Egypt, to come here, he has a citizenship right because his mother is British. He's never lived here. Actually, he's never been to the country before. He's never worked here. He's never paid tax. Him coming back, he's instantly a burden on the state. Because of his tweets, he now has to be investigated by the security services. He might have to be monitored. So he's instantly a burden on the state. So I think there is a fair discussion to have around dual citizenship. Like, he's lived in Egypt his whole life. Yes, he's been pardoned. Well, I know his mother is British. but should we automatically grant citizenship rights based on that? Because I understand why these exist. Like, if both your parents are British, this is really unfortunate for us, but he has dual citizenship. Like, he has an Egyptian passport, he can now have a British one. But for him to get his British passport is an administrative process. There is no moral judgment on him. There's no judgment on his previous tweets or whatever. But why shouldn't there be? You know, if he's been out there calling for the murder of white people and Jews, if he is a citizen of Egypt, can we not say, no, we don't want this person in our country? Whether he's a citizen or not, I agree with that. Yeah, but that to me, this is almost like an inflection point. I think I tweeted this, an inflection point for the country because it touches so many of the issues of what it means to be British, immigration, culture, identity. And, I mean, there has been uproar over this. But what it means to be British, I think that's the most interesting part of this conversation. Because there's been all the people trying to fly Union Jacks and English flags outside the houses, getting loads of shit. I've seen loads of them in the Cotswolds. And I hate the idea that, for some reason, waving your country's flag is a racist thing, which is genuinely what I think people on the left think. Well, I mean, look, again, people seem to be afraid of nuance. It isn't racist to raise your flag, and there will be some racists who've raised their flag. Yeah, but raising the flag is not a racist flag. No, it's not a racist flag, yeah. And, like, that's been a huge controversy, which I think is very strange. But I do think... But you know why? Well, I mean, I guess that it's signalling something, but I don't know why. I don't understand why. It's because everything's political. Yeah, but... So those raising the flags are more likely to be reform voters, more likely to be working class, more likely to be people who agree with Tommy Robinson. They're less likely to be libtards. You're not getting a... But people aren't going ripping out Green Party banners out of people's gardens. Of course, they aren't. But that's a different thing, because that's a political identity. One is a national identity. But the point is, you don't have Green Party voters going around putting up flags. It's like my security. Private security in Bedford was non-political by me, was judged politically by the public. So the raising the flags was not a political idea directly. It was like a national identity, defence of national identity. But it became political, like everything. Pick what you want. Abortion, education, borders, immigration. There is always a political split. Always. Name me anything. The country has consensus on at the moment. It has large consensus on immigration, but not full consensus. Is there anything we have consensus on? But I think you could probably say that about most countries. Like, everything has become left or right. But the problem is... Yeah, but that's key. Can I say why that's key? Everything is left and right. So if everything is left and right, and there are no constraints on government, what will they do? They will direct rights, bureaucracy, financial resources to the special interests of their voting bloc. So we will swing left to right, more extreme, more existential, the less constraints that government have. The more we constrain government, the less they can do that. But how do you constrain government? Codified constitution, Bill of Rights. You just limit what they can do. What is the actual role? I think I put out a tweet the other day where I said, if tomorrow government collapsed and all you had was border security with a job of protecting the border, the police are protecting safety and the courts protecting contracts, would we live in a better or worse country? Clearly better. Better, because you would have more money to direct to those powers that protect the rights, the laws, and the sovereignty of the individual, and less bureaucracy and waste. And look, we get into an argument, well, what about poor people? Well, the incentives change. If there's no welfare state, you've got a choice. You get up and go to work. Well, you don't. But if you don't, you don't eat. Or people have more money in their pockets because they're not paying endless taxes for bureaucracy and bullshit, so they can be a bit more generous. They can help their fellow man. You're not going to have inflation because you don't have a Bank of England, like you probably need one, but essentially speaking, you're going to have a lot less inflation. So that means you're not going to be scaring kids away from being able to afford a home, but you're going to have more money to invest. You're going to create more jobs. Like naturally it would be a better place. Well, that's the ultimate constraint on power if all government can do is those three things. But I want to do that. I'm not finished on the national identity thing. Because my issue with it is, like, I think it's great that people are raising the Union Jack and the English flag, like, cool. But I think if you asked any of those people doing that, what is British identity? I don't know if there's, like, something everyone agrees with. Like, if you look back at classic English identity, it was, like, gentry and serfs and Christianity. And more than that, though, it was kind of, like, exploring adventurism. And literature and all these things. Inventing things. But that isn't Britain today. No, because... So I think people need to, find what the British identity is, to have something to actually go after. Sure. Or decide what we want it to be. Yeah. Dominic Cummings wrote a great two-part article called Hollow Men. Like, absolutely eviscerated what government has become and like so impotent. And he said we should target a large amount of this education. We should become the best place to learn and teach and develop people in the world. Let's focus on education. You should want to be educated in this country because we have deep, you know, we deeply think about engineering and technology and philosophy. And I think that's great. I think that's great. And like, obviously, there's Cambridge and Oxford, really good schools. But like, when you think of things that the UK excels at, there's not many. And I think British people- Premier League football. Well, football, yeah. But there's, I think British people have this like hangover from being, you know- White gill. the colonial empire of thinking we're really important. Whereas the rest of the world looks at us like- They're laughing at us. Completely. We're being humiliated on the world stage. And so I think the need to find something that Britain's great at again. It needs to be, maybe it is philosophy, maybe it's education, whatever, but there needs to be something that the UK actually excels at because we don't have one at the moment. London was the financial capital of the world for a very long time. Yeah. And now it's just fading away into nothingness. I mean, in the short term, what we can do is show strong leadership that doesn't descend into authoritarianism. I mean, the problems we have aren't as similar to the US, but it's a different dynamic. They're much more similar in Europe. Like, what huge companies have been built in Europe? OnlyFans. Spotify? Yeah. Look at the US. Like, look what they've built. look at every large ai company yeah look at look at every large social media company look at all the plumbing to the the you know look at look at uber look at spacex look at tesla it's all built out in america right we haven't done that we haven't done it in europe why because we're bureaucratic hellholes well and the culture is success but we just demonize it we used to have it, though. But the bureaucracy gets in the way. If we had 0% corporation tax, people would invest in this country. I'm not saying we should have that. When Ireland reduced their corporation tax, what happened to all this? Apple moved there. Everyone moved there. And so we can create, these are all choices. We can create this. But I think what we can do is show strong leadership in a world of crumbling bureaucracy, which is destroying Europe. We can show strong leadership. We can show a strong and fair immigration policy. We can have a strong identity around leadership, education, excellence. I think we can do that. I really think we can. But it's not going to happen when government has levers of power, which means they have to look after special interest groups. It never is. But you must be so much more optimistic than me because I don't see that future. It's not optimism, it's just realism. What I'm saying is you're here trying to fight to get that. No, I'm just saying I think that's the answer. There's two ways. But you are trying, with your movement, you are trying to get to that goal. I don't know why you've not just left. Because I love this country and fight for it. Do my bit. Look, I may be completely wrong. I may be embarrassed myself. I did that when I bought a football club and I said I was going to get them in the Premier League. They're 40 fans. I'm still trying. I started a podcast. You put yourself in the arena and you get embarrassed. Maybe I'm embarrassing myself, Danny, right now. That's every possibility. By the way, have you seen this little mark here? It looks like a penis. I can't stop looking at it. You ever seen this when you've been sat here? Maybe I'm wrong. But the options on the table are, is a left-wing coalition wins. We go more socialist, more Marxist. and the country collapses and i will leave i will not stay as this country becomes a i'll argue we're already socialist by the way um okay i think you did realize on the town level yeah i didn't realize yeah i did and you packed it in yeah i gave up i think eventually he will stop it's just a matter of there are scenarios where i stop so i stopped in the town because i realized the council's broke there's no money to do anything. Central government sucks everything out. So I gave up because the only answer is through central government. And what role can you play in that owning a smallish media property? So gave up at the town level to work at a national level, realizing everything's downstream. If it's another left-wing government, I leave the country. There's no choice. There's no option. There's an option for my children. Like, we're heading to... We will become South Africa. We will become pre-Malay Argentina. There'll be no opportunity. We will go into periods of high hyperinflation Like it obvious We might get something more right that can steady the ship improve certain things on certain measures maybe stick around for that The real risk there is that they get in, reform get in, and nothing really changes. Populist dilemma, and Neymar Parvini's book talks about that, because they can't. They physically can't. Not that they physically can't. They haven't got the stomach to deliver it, or if they try and deliver it, the country hasn't got the stomach for it. Because it might mean immigration policies that people don't like, or it might mean budget constraints that people don't like. It's a bit like, I don't know, if you're getting loads of debt, and you want to pay off your debt and get your life back, you have to go back to work, maybe have a second job, maybe go back and live with your parents. You have to downgrade your life to rebuild. I think the UK has to downgrade its life to rebuild. It has to reset a lot of these debt issues. Country might not have the stomach for it. Yeah, reform could come in and go, right, look, our MPs, we're all going to take a 20% pay cut. We're all in this together. We're going to reduce taxation. We're going to reduce borrowing, but we're going to reduce welfare. We're going to privatize half the NHS. We're going to do all these things because they have to be done to get us to a place where we're paying off our debt. And that's painful. The country might prefer this slow erosion of standards rather than like a hard reset. That's a reality. The reason I'm so keen on constraints of power is if you can implement the right set of constraints and power, you bind it to future governments. So you fix the problem of incentives within government, and you ensure that we must run a budget that the country can afford. And we must pay off our debt, and we must rebuild, and we must make the right decisions for our country regarding education, health, welfare, so we don't continue to decay. And if you bind that, it doesn't matter who gets in power because they're bound by those constraints. And I could be entirely wrong. I may be entirely wrong, but I am... This is what I believe, and so my entire focus is I no longer consent. I would like to build a movement in this country around that, a voting bloc. I'm speaking to various people of influence, various lawyers, various MPs, and saying, this is all I care about. And if we can have some influence, which forces government to make change, which puts the country first, the rights of the individuals first, that creates a real bill of rights, which constrains the creation of money, which leads this country to a place where it can rebuild itself, then that's worth it for me. And if that fails, well, at least I tried and I did what I think is right. Because you only have to look at history. You only have to look at what happened, the tension between the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists, which was between liberty and central government. You look at that tension and you look at the outcomes. They told us what would happen and it's happened. And it will continue to happen until we constrain government to operate for the people. The government made up for the people by the people, is that what it is? And to me, that is rooted in liberty. like this is how we get out of this it is a like the libertarians are right directionally they are 100% right we have to root this in liberty because the people build this country not the politicians they extract from it they extract from it for special interests for power the people build this country and the way they can rebuild this country is through liberty which is lower taxes no infringement on their rights the freedom the freedom to just do shit I mean everything you say is clearly right like I agree with everything you're saying I don't know I could be wrong Danny Well, I think you're right. I'm a moron. Yeah, well, me too. But I think you're right. The problem I have with it is like, can you actually change like the government behemoth without something very catastrophic happening first? Who knows? I mean, could, when the colonies wrote their Declaration of Independence, could they really get rid of the Brits? When Gandhi wanted to expel the British or restore, I don't know what his actual, but when the Indians wanted to expel the British, could they really? Now, when the solidarity movement in Czechoslovakia, when they wanted to bring down the Czech government, could they really do it? Could Malcolm X and Martin Luther King really create a civil rights movement that would see blacks equal in America? It only starts with someone going, can this be done? And then trying. This could, in a month or two, just not have worked, and dribble out and I'm just some irrelevant half-wit podcaster who tried something and nobody cared. Or it could be something. You've got to shoot your shot. You've got to say, this is what I believe. I firmly believe that prosperity comes from liberty. What is the constraints on liberty? It's government. So we need to constrain government to allow for liberty. And if we allow for liberty, we allow people, giving them freedom to think, to speak, to act, to create business, to trade with each other, we may create a more prosperous environment. If we create a more prosperous environment, we create a better country to live in. I'm so stuck in this, I can't see any other solution. I see temporary fixes, and I see people argue against me, but when they argue against me, they're just arguing for more government. And I just think they're wrong. Well, I think they're wrong as well. We haven't really talked about Bitcoin. But I think it needs to be like, you need civil unrest, I think. I think just removing consent is maybe not enough. Maybe if it gets to a big enough scale where you can make everyone strike, things like that, that might get you a seat at the table to actually try and make some changes. But without civil unrest, they'll just ignore you. Sure, and that may happen anyway. I'm trying to do something before civil unrest. I can't advocate for civil unrest. I've become a domestic terrorist. I'm immediately on a watch list. I'm immediately followed. And I'm not talking, I'm not trying to advocate for it. I'm just saying, I think to have change, it probably needs that. But people keep saying that. People are just going, oh, you're too late, you're too much of a pussy, oh yeah, you withdraw consent, what now? You know, you need a violent uprising. To every one of those, I was like, well, where are you doing your violence? I'm not seeing you doing it. Okay. It's very easy to get on a keyboard and tap, you know, we need to, you know, But it doesn't have to be violent. Like, you can be striking or whatever. Yeah, but that is, like, my starting point, it has to be mass, non-compliance, non-violent, and legal. The minute you cross that line, you give the state the reason to close you down, arrest you. I mean, they'll arrest you for words at the moment. Don't give them that. Stay within the bounds of the law, but force their hand. The minute you start advocating for the civil unrest, which becomes violent, you're fucked. Now, you might get explosions of civil unrest, like we got with the Southport riots. that might happen and probably will happen. I just don't advocate for it. I would condemn it every time I see it. It's a bit like Tommy Robinson. When he had his Unite the Kingdom march in London, he said, be peaceful. Do not drink. Do not wear face masks. Okay? We were there. I saw two things that didn't help. A bunch of guys taking a piss up on the street. Doesn't help you because people take photos. They look, they're just louts pissing on the street. And I saw one violent moment where they basically corralled a group down to a dead end who couldn't get to where the speeches were. And there were some pissed people at the front. They sat in a lot of bottles. Who's they? The police? No, the people at the demonstration. The people at the scaffolding. But they weren't too bad. I mean, it's dangerous. It was dangerous, right? I don't think it's their work site. Yeah. But in terms of that violent bit, how long did that last? 10 minutes? Yeah. Would you say it was less than 1% of the people at the protest? I would say it was less than that. I think you're talking like, if there were 300,000 people there, maybe 150 people got all worked up. Which is always going to happen. Yeah, but what happened? You go to the Daily Mail, what's on the front? What's on the, like, literally the homepage? Videos of bottles being launched, a policeman walking off with blood on his face. Immediately, everyone goes, it's a bunch of racist thugs. Yeah. And it wasn't. It just wasn't a bunch of racist thugs. The same happened with BLM. They're more violent. Way more violent. They didn't lead with the violence. And if they did, they would always show the kind of like the anti-BLM crowd, the right-wing agitators say they've come to schools. And so do not give them anything to stop you. Do not give them a reason to arrest you, imprison you, and shut you down. Mass, non-violent, lawful, non-compliance. the shape that takes to be decided all right now is people have to say this country doesn't work anymore we cannot vote our way out of this um uh and i no longer consent and once the country realizes they are in charge if they can collectively come together they can force the hand of the government i mean it's it's a big task you know buying a buying a football team with 40 fans and saying i'm going to get you in the premier league is fucking ridiculous a halfwit from bedford with the podcast saying, we can bring down the government, we can force a hand. It's ridiculous. But every revolutionary moment started with someone with a ridiculous idea, and they went through with it. And the thing that's on our side is we are capturing the imagination of the public. 3,000 people, eight days after I created the Twitter account, I had 1,000 followers. Last two days, I've got 1,000 followers each day. Nearly 1,000 have signed the declaration. And most of those, the people are saying, no, no, no, consent. This country doesn't work anymore. Or giving me, like they're writing a whole passage on what they're fed up about. People aren't happy in this country in all different directions. You can't do this, if this is a period of time where Labour are doing an OK, like under a Blair era, You can't do this because Blair's going to get re-elected. What we have now is a government that no one likes, that is fucking terrible, that's come after a previously terrible government. And so we have a moment in time where the country is not happy, almost collectively. If you at the moment still support Labour, you're either ideologically Labour, you somehow benefit from it, or you're in cope. You're just in pure cope. And so we have a moment where collectively the country is against the government. They're just not united behind an idea. They're united either behind different parties. I'm saying I don't think a party can fix this. I don't think you can vote your way out of it because the incentives are wrong. So does that mean you're not going to... I know you're not going to do the mayor thing anymore. No, I'm not going to run for government in any way. Not in any way at all. I don't want to be part of government. I could. I'd have to pass vetting, and maybe I won't. You know my pass. But I don't want to be. I don't want to be an MP because I'm suddenly stuck in the incentive structure. Even if you went in and you could just speak your truth? Because you're not stuck in the incentive structure of, like, you don't need the wage. No, no, no, but you are bound by... You have to toe the party line. Toe the party line, and that exists for a reason. I get it. You know, the loyalty, you need loyalty to the leader so they can execute the will of the party and the will of the nation. and you have the whip which says what you have to vote on and every day, and once you see it, it's mad, but you get your talking points down from, if it's Conservative, CCHQ, whoever, whatever party is, and you just become part of the machine. I personally think I could be an independent. You could be a Thomas Massey type character. Yeah, or you could be a Rupert Lowe, but I think I genuinely care about the collective of this country. in the future of this country. I believe in conservative economics. I absolutely do. I am socially liberal. I think there are some good hearts within the left of this country. And I think there's some good brains within the right of this country. But I collectively want the country to get better. It's funny, me and Connor were driving down today. And I'm in a financially good position. And Connor, what was the question you asked me? I said, oh, God. Do you worry about your financial future? Are you worried in this current position? And what was my answer? I always think I could go broke. And carry on, just so I'm not making this up. What did I say would be the scenario if I went broke? What would I maybe do? You would go in a cafe on a beach somewhere and chill. Like, if I got to a scenario where my financial position was all I could do is I could maybe buy a house, a little small house on the coast, and a cafe, and I could still be happy. I could. Yeah, the thing about making money is it never gives you a happiness that you think it does. Because once you get the house and the car, you're like, I still got to be happy every day. What am I happy doing? I'm not happy looking at my bank balance. I'm not happy thinking about what I can buy. I'm happy about this time I spend with my friends and family. And like, if anything, I'll tell you something really honest, I've been pretty down for the last six months. And I've been in the best financial position of my life. and the reason I've been down is the country's down you know so have you watched this plebius that series on Apple TV I'll tell you a little bit about it but not so it gives it away there's essentially a virus that comes to the planet and everyone infected with it all becomes the same existence so everything I know I know the entirety and knowledge of every person that exists, and you do too. And so you become one being. And I kind of feel like the country's depressed because nothing works, everyone's getting poorer, we're all fighting over what the answers are. And I think I've absorbed that like a sponge. You know, it's not... There's nothing enjoyable about doing well in life when nobody else is. you buy a nice car and you know somebody else can't afford a holiday it fucking sucks so like money money for me money having money is lost meaning because other because i want the country to do well and so if i want the country to do well then i don't care if i go broke i don't care if i lose my sponsors i don't care if i care about my kids future part of a bit of money for them, but I genuinely don't care anymore because there's no point winning when everyone's losing. Like, if you win when everyone's losing, that sucks. And that's what it is. Asset inflation is you win by other people losing. I fucking hate that. It's funny. It's like Connor said once, I can't say it's funny. Connor said once about the juicing of the market and that was good for us. He's like, but as a Bitcoiner, like, government's fucking up inflation. It's like, it's good for us. And I was like, yeah, do you know what it is? And then he was like, well, why do Bitcoiners argue against it? And I think it's Bitcoiners know what's happening and they know how to protect themselves, but ultimately they don't want it to happen. And I think it comes from a good heart. It comes from a good moral foundation about how a country should operate. And so for me now, I don't care if I lose my reputation, my money, I don't care what I lose, I want this country to win, and that means as many people as possible have to win. The pie itself has to get bigger, and everybody... It's not equity. It's not everybody has to win. Everybody has the chance of winning. And right now, they just don't, Danny. Like, you go into schools now. Somebody showed me a photo of a school where they had a big board up, and it was all about the Labour Party. There was another school where they were teaching the reform of fascists. There was a professor recently... They had Nigel Farage next to Adolf Hitler. There was another, I think it was a professor, who was referred to counter-terrorism, correct me if I'm wrong on this, for playing Trump videos. That's insane. We are not building... Our goal, there are two groups that our lives should be dedicated for, our own children and everyone's children. And I say that because you have the things you can do for your children. You can give them wisdom and advice and set them up financially, maybe help them buy a house. But there is a collective responsibility for all children for the same reason I'm not happy now. There's no point Connor and Scarlett winning if their friends lose. And so, if we continue to increase the debt, our children will lose. If we continue to make it harder to create jobs, our children will lose. If we continue to infringe on rights, our children will lose. Everything we're doing now is making a worse world for our children because we're trying to make a better world for us right now. And that's bullshit. We have to make the sacrifices now for our children to have a better future. And so, if I lose, but Connor and Scarlett win and their friends win. I'm cool with that because that's our duty as a parent. Is that not what we should be doing? But adults aren't doing that. They're stealing from their children instead. Yeah, adults right now are saying, I want a better future now even if it means my children's is shit. They won't admit it, but that's literally what we're doing. We are going, I want a better future now. and the children the kids always it's all about the kids man but the kids are paying and I just cannot like morally ethically I cannot be that person it's fucking disgusting it's disgusting that we're doing this and so I can't be part of a party because that means I'm part of a government infrastructure and a set of incentives which is stealing from the future of our kids I refuse to be part of that and I refuse to leave the country because what I'm doing is I'm I'm allowing my children to win in another jurisdiction and just saying fuck it to all the other kids. I just cannot be that person. I refuse to be that person. What a way to end it, man. Yeah. No Bitcoin. We don't need to talk about Bitcoin. You've done plenty of shows talking about Bitcoin. Yeah. How have you been? Good, man. Are you enjoying the show? Yeah. The last trip I did, I wish you were on it. Inkenually with the gridless guys. It was incredible. Let me tell you something. One of the reasons I stopped doing the show is it was so demanding to travel and make the show. Making a show in London is more demanding. Because we used to, every six weeks I went on holiday. Yeah. I went on holiday. It's like, Daddy, where are we going on holiday? We're going to Austin. Where are we going on holiday? We're going to Nashville. Where are we going on holiday? We're going to Ghana. We just went on holidays, got a nice Airbnb like we do on holidays. I would always be so excited. That first moment where we'd get there and we'd go down the pub, we'd have like eight beers or whatever we'd do. We'd talk about Man U being shit and whatever. And then our friends would come around and we'd talk to them and then we're going to have dinner with our friends, and then I'd go home. And we would do that for 10 days, and then for like five, six weeks, I'd have to have a conversation in the morning about a title three days a week. By the way, you just talked to Connor about me and him arguing on titles. But that was life, and it was really easy. I thought it'd be easier having a studio in London. It's not, actually, because we come here two, three times a week, and so we lose two, three days every single week. and so it's uh yeah so i it's harder there's i don't have a holiday every six weeks anymore i see you less i don't see our friends and uh yeah so it's different but now you're like well how for how long have you been doing nearly 18 months now uh 15 months are you missing the trouble yet because i know that was the big reason you wanted to stop missing no i genuinely the biggest thing i miss is you. I swear. No. But it comes in two ways. Like there's a drift. No, but there's a, like even the, we used to speak every day. Now it's every three, four days. But we were on a mission together. But we were on a mission together. There's a fog in the road. You're on yours and you're on mine. We're doing our own thing. And I miss that. I miss that. But But then I also miss the... I would always get excited the day before traveling. It's like, yeah, we're going to go away. We're going on holiday and get to the airport, get on the plane, land, see you, have the beers. And then I'd miss seeing like Matt or Harry or Hoddle getting together. So that's why Vegas was great. Are you going to come to Vegas next year? Yes, I am. So I miss that. I don't miss... I don't even get to think about missing Bitcoin as a topic because this has become so central. But no, I miss, without being condescending, I'm very proud of what you've done. Thank you, man. I wish you nothing but success. There's no one in the world who could have taken it and made it better, which I think you're doing. I think so, too. I mean, does anyone miss me? I get a lot of comments, especially I used to get a lot of comments asking where you've gone and stuff. I got one that I don't know if I told you. Who's Pete? Yeah. Who's Pete comment? Who's Pete? yeah listen look you'll hand it over maybe one day and that's a cool thing but yeah look I miss you I miss yeah I miss a lot of things but I'm tired these days you're on an important mission man and doing what I'm doing I'm doing what I'm doing but how is the football club doing I've not really I've honestly struggled to follow it this year this is our toughest year we are we were up to a position where if we won our games on hand we would go joint second and then we went on a run where we won 10 out of 11. We were brilliant. And then we just had a little bit of a sticky patch where we've lost a couple and drawn a couple. Yeah, we lost on Saturday. Again, we should have won. We just didn't finish our chances. It's the fine lines. You get less chances, so you must take your chances. And equally, you have to be much more disciplined in defense. So, yeah. And so it's just harder. So is automatic promotion out of the question now? No, but it would be very hard. We need to go on an epic run. We've got to beat the team at the top twice. I'd take playoffs now. I'd be over the moon with playoffs. But to go 6, 5, 4, 3 and get playoffs in three would be epic. What I do know is I know how to win it next year. If we want to go and win it next year, I know how to win it next year. Just more money. Not just more money. It isn't always just more money. Some of it is time, and some of it is... Like this year, Spaldinger-Harbor have been trying to get the promotion for two or three years each now, and they've just gone for it. If they both go up next year, that doesn't exist in the league. We're kind of one of them, and Kettering will kind of be one of them. And then the other teams around it don't have the access to budget that those two do. So it's not necessarily more budget. It maybe is just more consistency, more training time with the players, more contact time. You know, a couple of players maybe change. Not necessarily money, it's just more getting the pieces together. But yeah, like, with the football, I always used to go and watch like the league above and two leagues above, and I'd always be scared of two leagues above. I'm not scared of this division in the slightest, but a couple of years ago I was like, fucking step three is hard. I'm not even scared of step two now. Step one is the one that scares me. and so we've got the best manager in non-league football he knows how to win this league and he will win us this league and then when we get to step two we'll do the same again I think we will I think the project of Football League in 10 years is still on because we've got six years now seven including this season it's seven to do three and I think we'll do each one will take at least two years we should do it in nine so I think it's on so when we have cheat code it won't be playing for the that'll be basically before playoffs it'll be fighting to get playoff places maybe maybe secured maybe still fighting for the league we won't win the league that day because it's earlier in the year buy your tickets for cheat code cheat code.co.uk we need to do a lot of talking about cheat codes yeah we do we do but yeah no no I'm very confident very cool yeah so keep doing your thing man love you thank you Pete this is awesome cheers 4