David Starkey: Britain Wasn't 'Built by Diversity'. Woke is Subverting British Society & Confidence

[@NewCultureForum]

JOIN OUR MEMBERSHIP SCHEME from as little as £3 per month and receive a range of perks and benefits. Your support is vital to our cause and ensures we can continue to provide quality programming, events and publications. TO DONATE or JOIN OUR MEMBERSHIP SCHEME PLEASE CLICK HERE: www.newcultureforum.org.uk/membership

[@clarkramsey7280]

WELL SAID DAVID ,NOTHING BEATS THE TRUTH ,GOD BLESS YOU ,🇬🇧

[@hectorshouse7348]

David Starkey underestimates how much immigrants love the U.K..in fact 1.25 million immigrants came here last year!

[@davidcooks2379]

@hectorshouse7348 exactly, because it's 750K net, it must be in the region of 1.25milion gross.

[@catsamazing338]

Any Brit over the age of 60 can probably testify to a once homogenous society here. Diversity then being less than 1%. Good to listen to you David. 👍

[@Hc.krd1]

Your half Norman mate

[@catsamazing338]

@@Hc.krd1 then you’re half-Wit matey :)

[@Hc.krd1]

@@catsamazing338 use google ya bellend 🤦🏻‍♂️

[@wodens-hitman1552]

​@@Hc.krd1speak again oh great intelligent one

[@Hc.krd1]

@@wodens-hitman1552 yous literally have Norman blood. you can do all that bs all you want mate your dna speaks for it self

[@BN-hk6wf]

A wonderful discussion and superbly Led by Harrison. Credit to Peter Whittle for providing a platform for two such talented young contributors to the discussion. The NCF should be commended for this excellent series.

[@chadwickseronio9363]

Love Professor Starkey, a rare mix of knowledge insight and intellectual playfulness, absolute joy.

[@niguel4438]

We are fortunate to live in the same time as this man. Thankfully his sane knowledge is being captured for posterity.

[@seanmoran2743]

He’s not that clever ! He’s interesting but he’s been part of the Tory Elite that’s delusional about how great we actually are!

[@timwhittome9428]

Wow, I just love Deprogrammed! Even my leftwing wife was bowled over which shows we may be making good ground here in restoring ourselves to sanity. Harrison and Evan have just curated two heavyweight shows in a row and probably deserve a small holiday! Great job and so glad we have this intelligent programme to look forward to.

[@Happyheretic2308]

They’re really good guys.

[@justaguythaine]

I feel more culturally alienated as an Englishman than any of the foreigners living in their London foreign enclaves.

[@freneticness6927]

Its like these people hate their own countries but also want to make britain like their countries. Which are terrible.

[@tgentilcoremd]

As an American living in the United States, except when living in the smallest of towns, I feel all of the same things that you are referencing. My country found its origins in yours and your culture. I love us. I love and support Britain.

[@johnnyredpillseed]

This is true UK wide. My foreign born friends enjoy the communities of their countrymen, as well as the liberal lefties, who bend over backwards to kiss their backsides in the cause of their virtue signalling. Patriotic natives are left out in the cold.

[@robynmarler1951]

Thankyou friend, God bless America🎆🌄🌱🌿🕊

[@John-uh8kl]

​@@freneticness6927Caution not a l l Afr---s, are afflicted by 'wo----'. Another category, they're in a heaven, cf their own countries and want this one. Oops that's a 'w---' thing, surprisingly, a, hm, j--ad' thing, surprise, surprise, surprise.

[@RogueWJL]

Wonderful discussion. Those closing words.... Extraordinary

[@jl9205]

This is great discussion from a seasoned thinker. Like Starkey, I once had strong libertarian leanings but have become acutely aware of liberalism's weaknesses. Thus, I've been gradually embracing Conservatism. I admire Starkey's candor in admitting where he thinks he got things wrong, and lately I've been doing the same. As he says, it's a journey. He's a brilliant and confident speaker. This was an hour well spent.

[@paulwilson7622]

If Britain cannot assimilate the Christian Scots, Welsh, possibly Nth Irish who gave a basically similar culture into a 'Briton', what hope is there to amalgamate the various muslims sects from a variety of countries, the Sth Asians, Sub Sahran Africans, East or West Asians etc with vastly different cultures?

[@70AD-user45]

There is NO hope of amalgamating the various African, muslims, Asians cultures that come here. The end result is what we have just seen in France the other week. All cultures are different and are not equal, despite what the left tell us. Open borders in the US and western Europe is the extreme left trying to hammer in the final nail in the coffin of western culture and civilisation, unless a popularist comes along to try and stop the final nail in the coffin.

[@freneticness6927]

Its hard enough when you belong here.

[@dianedrewry32]

But look at the amazing way we all worked together during the wars.

[@boriss.861]

Professor Starkey what an individual. What ever he has done is just so engaging. Hence the BBC silencing him from 'The Moral Maze' when he would tie his adversaries up in knots. Brilliance in his fundamental knowledge of the chosen subject matter that week. His way of disarming the opposition could be equated to the King Arthur & the Black Knight in Monty Pythons 'The Holy Grail'

[@hectorshouse7348]

David Starkey underestimates how much immigrants love the U.K..in fact 1.25 million immigrants came here last year!

[@boriss.861]

@@hectorshouse7348 pmsl. Check the ONS statistical information on immigration since the 1940's skyrocketed in 1997 aided by K Starmer QC in 2003

[@70AD-user45]

​@@hectorshouse7348 Yes, and those 1 million immigrants is the extreme left trying to hammer in the final nail in the coffin of western civilisation and culture. The west is dying a tragic death due to multiculturalism and mass immigration. Soon the indigenous population will become a minority in their own nations, and don't tell me "there is no indigenous population" because that's left wing B/S.

[@philiphudgens4726]

@@hectorshouse7348 Have you just discovered copy & paste?

[@justinayton7556]

Starkey is as brilliantly insightful as ever!

[@mickeybee]

As a young man, I really wish I'd been able to see the days of a homogenous Britain. Not because I in anyway long for an exclusively, 'white' society, or because I'm some sort of sentimentalist, but simply because I would love to have lived-in and experienced true, 'British' culture. In literally, *exactly* the same way that when I travel to say, Tokyo, now, I experience true Japanese culture... If, for example, over the last 10 years, the population of Tokyo had gone from 99% of its' residents having been born in Japan, to just 40% of its' residents having been born in Japan - with the other 60% having been born in, say.....Scotland, I don't think anyone could possibly argue that Tokyo was still just as Japanese as it had been a decade before... And yet - when it comes to London, that is *literally* what is being claimed. It's an organised gaslighting of the native inhabitants of this country, and it hurts me deeply - particularly when I see that most other young people either don't understand, don't care or have genuinely been led to believe, 'Britain was always a country of immigrants' etc. I am not calling for - nor would I want - a Britain that rejected all immigrants on principle. That would, in my opinion, be both stupid and in certain circumstances, cruel. But I do want to see immigration that has the best interests of the host nation at its' heart..... or, at the very least, gives some consideration to the potential ramifications on the host nation. In the UK now, (especially since 1997 and 'rubbing the right's nose in diversity'), no government has actually questioned the viability of uncontrolled, mass-immigration, especially when it comes to the survival of 'British' culture and society. Despite multiple riots, despite racially motivated killings, (including of native white Britons), despite Muslim grooming gangs in many different towns and cities, despite innumerable 'home-grown' terrorist attacks, despite immigrants openly vandalising Britain's most revered heroes - no one has dared to suggest that maybe, all of these events are an inevitable result of no interest being given to immigration or integration, for several decades. Indeed, in the vast majority of cases, no one in positions of power have even dared to raise the link between immigration and these awful events. How on earth can any society solve a problem, when it both refuses to acknowledge it has the problem, and continues to wilfully add to it every day? Am I a sentimentalist? Am I perhaps even a racist? No. I'm British, and I'm tired.

[@linmal2242]

Your fourth para also speaks of AUS which has had an extreme immigration policy, but finally recognised as just too much! It has not abated, but has been modified to be less and with more selection !

[@davidcooks2379]

We should stop giving citizenship to immigrats and their progeny. And take away citizenship or at least the right to vote to all law breakers of foreign origin.

[@ALavin-en1kr]

As I mentioned in a previous comment; it is chickens coming home to roost, or as you sow you reap. Brits. went all over during the Empire days took resources, attempted to stamp out culture and religion, now they are under siege. Spare me. I am laughing too hard. Brit. culture becoming multi is awesome. Britain was built by Irish labor and others while the Aristocrats behaved badly at their Ivy Leagues and had an air of entitlement and superiority wherever they went. Now it is just little England, not even a part of Europe as Ireland is, latching on to the Continent to escape its awful neighbor. My advice stew in your own juice you might arrive at something that is palatable, eventually.

[@TracyKinnear-h2b]

For gods sake countries and their pasts weren't perfect and made mistakes Britain did in some ways make up for some of them and realise what they were doing was wrong only freedom in thinking g can do that .STOP BRINGING UP THE PAST AND USING IT AGAINST YOUR COUNTRY NOW ITS BLOODY SHAMFUL

[@LouisFriend-tk8gl]

Good ol Starkers. He's a real National Treasure.

[@washingtongarden4078]

He just chats shit 😂😂😂😂😂

[@hectorshouse7348]

David Starkey underestimates how much immigrants love the U.K..in fact 1.25 million immigrants came here last year!

[@jwadaow]

@@hectorshouse7348 Wow!

[@Anglo_Saxon1]

​@@washingtongarden4078Yeah the old puff can't half witter on 😂🤣😂

[@Anglo_Saxon1]

​@@hectorshouse7348OMG! 😮😮😮

[@burnamm7127]

It pains me to see the agony and self loathing endured by current and designated future elites. As one of the most oppressed and suppressed groups White working class) I came through tougher, wiser and more capable equally with some of my classmates I run a successful business largely based on a realisation that there is no help or safety blanket. I really admire educated people and often tap into their fine knowledge but it’s very evident that the faith in these people to be the custodians of art and culture has been seriously eroded by the unstable woke, a cult like psychotic hatred of working class white peoples. I wonder if the pressure to succeed and honour expectations from today’s privileged class has pushed them to find an excuse for failure by first latching on to perceived victim groups then diminishing and insulting any strong independent people and organisations or beliefs.

[@williambranch4283]

The Tower is available to solve this problem.

[@hectorshouse7348]

They don’t self loathe…they just loathe people like us

[@SmallWonda]

Ironically, when you see who is pushing these Agendas, you know they are just projecting their own fear & self-loathing. Sad & bitter times, but all self-inflicted.

[@Anglo_Saxon1]

​@@hectorshouse7348Jealousy?😉🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿

[@sbor2020]

@@hectorshouse7348 You see yourself as a victim?

[@roygardiner2229]

"There is no such thing as Truth.". David Starkey articulates and explains why I feel anger and confusion with the pervasive woke oppression we are having to endure. I like the valid point that Harrison Pitt made about ancestral connections. I also liked the simple definition of "the good immigrant". Also, the point he made about dictators "alienating the people from their history" was so pertinent to the current situation in the UK. These things make sense to me, they resonate with me.

[@simonquigley9054]

I had an arguement with a teacher claiming Bournemouth was built by immigrants. She even went as far as to claim that the founder Captain Tregonwell wasn't even english himself. Unbelievable that people just believed and agreed with her.

[@gbentley8176]

These people need taking down. Do not be afraid to answer back with facts and figures or ridicule.

[@simonquigley9054]

@@gbentley8176 oh yes! i absolutely hammered her with the local history. She deleted her comments in the end.

[@simonquigley9054]

@dominionphilosophy3698 well said! I find it astounding that despite Britains thousands of years of history, ingenuity, technological achievement, architecture, civil engineering etc. According to these leftwing zealots, somehow the inhabitants of Britain were entirely incapable of building any town or city without the help of immigrants.

[@freneticness6927]

Its like we didnt have the largest empire in existence before the boat people arrived.

[@rogerdodger1790]

​@simonquigley9054 well done mate. A LOT more of that needs to happen. I'd buy you a beer anytime

[@sidtemplar7500]

Do they belong or like the fact they can get everything for free, regardless of betterment. Passing through safe countries, that obviously don’t want them. This is a bigger question, that not many will dare to ask.

[@izzyplant8428]

Atttenbourough and Gretta called out. A delight to hear. They are religious zealots.

[@jumblestiltskin1365]

Zealots maybe, they are also village idiots who have found themselves useful to International Finace Capital.

[@70AD-user45]

You mean SELF-righteous zealots. They remind me of the Pharisees during the time of Christ, and look at what they did to Jesus. Gretta is just a puppet of the WEF, a figure head of the WEF, nothing more than that.

[@freneticness6927]

Wonder why climate change is being pushed at the exact same time as mass migration. Its like a red flag and a bull.

[@EyeByBrian]

And figures such as Jordan Peterson are not?

[@sbor2020]

Are your paymasters the fossil fuel industries or support the charlatans who are?

[@finnzy2315]

Thank you for this excellent discussion

[@manusha1349]

Adore a bit of Starkey ❤

[@Gruntphuttock]

Err! Which bit would that be? 😲😉

[@LouisFriend-tk8gl]

​@@Gruntphuttockooooh Matron!!

[@manusha1349]

@MikeHallett-jc2by lol 😆 his brain!

[@hectorshouse7348]

David Starkey underestimates how much immigrants love the U.K..in fact 1.25 million immigrants came here last year!

[@nathanbraidman5372]

David Starkey correctly states that a homogenous society is necessary for political stability and good relationship between all citizens. Aristotle said that the essential attribute of a nation is philia, the sense of fellow citizenship that binds a society together in a common sense of identity and patriotism. Without philia a state can only be held together by force or it will ultimately disintegrate. The whole concept of "multiculturalism" or "diversity" is merely a process of transition from one dominant cultural milieu to another facilitated, in the case of the West, by self loathing liberalism that will inevitably be replaced by some form of authoritarianism.

[@welshhibby]

Love David Starkey !

[@tgentilcoremd]

Thank you for the clarity of your thought! You are appreciated more than you might ever know. I am shocked that KZbin has not pulled you down. Yours is a conservative message that they fear and endlessly try to shut down.

[@rongablue]

They should sort their own country out…and grow where they were planted.

[@ricksantilli4637]

Starkey and Hitchens are stellar

[@EyeByBrian]

Peter Hitchens has become a bloviating bore. Utterly useless to any potentially workable form of conservatism.

[@philiphudgens4726]

No one has replaced Hitch...Douglas Murray is giving it a good go but he doesn't have the necessary charisma.

[@genuinearticle33]

The Barbarians have long since scaled the walls of the Citadel, an External Enemy can be resisted, but an internal Enemy is much more deadly. This sacking of Rome will see a dark side of Humanity that is going to undo all prior progress made in terms of peaceful civilisation.

[@courtilz1012]

That was worth listening to.

[@laughingachilles]

Starkey uses the word religion when I believe the term 'doomsday cult' is more appropriate for the climate change lot.

[@judithcressey1682]

Charles iii is WEF, a devotee of the cult of climate 'crisis'. Manoeuvring against 'his' people.

[@jamesespinosa690]

Eco Fascist is much more appropriate in my opinion. Sure the lunatic footsoldiers blocking the streets are in the doomsday cult part of this alliance. But the people at the top are out and out eco fascists.

[@NealeTurner]

There are parallels in climate change and net zero to totalitarian states in history, who believed if millions had to die for a utopian future then so be it.

[@FazeParticles]

Doomsday Cult is correct

[@bartoszlubczonok2941]

There is a today an equivalent of the Medieval Catholic Church: the therapeutic state (driven through the appendages of the managerial state). We've been living in a secular theocracy for a while. The current time is merely the ultimate development of it.

[@jamesespinosa690]

I totally agree!!

[@Horizon344]

Ethnicity matters - IMMIGRATION REFERENDUM required.

[@FirstLast-rb5zj]

The thing that gets me about this is when people say we were Normal, Anglo Saxon, Viking, Roman, etc there are obvious questions to raise with people promoting this that no one appears to bother to ask. Is something what it is or what is was? Is a Roman or any of the others identical to for example a Zulu? Where Britain does have an imported culture or population it's not just any old immigrant. All of these are highly specific and not interchangeable with any other source population or culture.

[@pincermovement72]

I was against PR but I see it now as the only way to reverse this madness . Otherwise I cannot see myself ever voting again.

[@jumblestiltskin1365]

I'm less sure of what PR would bring, the "frankenstein" monster way of bits of this, of thar, the other, all with differing , often openly hostile to each other strikes me a nasty recipe to swallow. Having said that the Conservative Party have managed to achieve nothing whatsoever of any value with their 80+ seats.

[@jamesespinosa690]

I think we would be better off moving towards a direct democracy model. The referendum shows us that the people are better in control than the politicians. More importantly, we need to make taxation entirely optional and itemised. The flaw in our system is that politicians have figured out that since we only have 1 vote every 5 years. And since we are forced at gun point to "pay" our taxes. We actually have no mechanism of control over the system.

[@vincekerrigan8300]

pincermove. FPTP can only be justified if you have a viable and robust opposition. What we have today, and have had for decades, with no differences in policy between the only two electable parties, is, in practice, one party Government. The democratic process is stultified.

[@61sven]

It is so good to listen to those who have views at odds with the over powering message being pushed by almost all of our institutions and the MSM. Dr Starkey is thought provoking and interesting. He is also courageous for voicing views that I have no doubt has isolated him our intellectual elites and establishment. Freedom of speech a thought is paramount in these dangerous times.

[@debbielangton8371]

Well said sir 🙏🙏🇬🇧

[@ianelliott8224]

Fascinating insights as ever from David.

[@NickHewlettTHATCHIT]

Absolutely ,,,,,,,Brilliant,,!!!!

[@onlymeloni]

What an exceptional gift Harrison has and is.

[@frankdillon7958]

It’s disengenuine not to acknowledge the role played by the Irish in the construction of the Uk over hundreds of years and the contribution to being the majority in the British army for hundreds of years Bet you didn’t know that !

[@gbentley8176]

In many ways the people of Ireland are being drawn more towards us in Britain culturally, than has happened for a century or more. The existential threat of immigration and political change, woke and the rest are the drivers.

[@the18patentsofjosephbramah91]

I think you are referring to the Napoleonic wars but i am not too show your argument stands up with what proportion were Irish ect. It's a typical bias reaction. But whether soldiers or labourers in construction it is typical for any government of the day not to sacrifice/use their own soldiers or workers. It makes sense not to. For example, India was maintained using Indian soldiers and governed using Indian administrators. Millions of Indians volunteered to create the worlds biggest volunteer army to fight for Britain in the World Wars. British rule would have been totally impossible without Indian support there. Did you know the English 39th Dorsets is what won Plassey and thus began the gateway to India, particularly the Dorset grenadiers in the lead? See: Dorsets military museum: The 39th 'was given the proud motto 'Primus in Indis' (First in India) and the battle honour 'Plassey' for its colours.' - The Keep Military Museum Did you know in the famous battle against the Zulus, that: "Of the 122 soldiers of the 24th Regiment present at the Battle of Rorke's Drift, 49 are known to have been of English nationality, 32 were Welsh, 16 were Irish, 1 was a Scot, and 3 were born overseas. The nationalities of the remaining 21 are unknown." Source: Norman Holme (1999) The Noble 24th p. 383 You can also find extra info from Rorkesdriftvc website. A quote: “And no-one, I'm sorry to say, sang Men of Harlech; the regimental march in 1879 was The Warwickshire Lads."

[@fred8780]

The Prince is a 16th-century political treatise (book) written by Machiavelli (as an instructional guide for new princes and royals) says that the less diverse is better. One religion, one race or ethnic group, one whatever is better than anything diverse.

[@MiniatureMiss]

David Starkey 🙌🏼 Britain is indeed an extremely good place to live, as David Starkey said, and I agree. On immigration, having an ethnic lineage directly apart of the early post-war immigration, our elders settled and integrated. We are the British grandchildren, many of us mixed ethnicity as a result, patriotic and brexit supporters; and many of us do not agree or support the high quantities of low quality immigration to our island. The problem is endemic, and I'm in despair every time I hear the numbers... David: telling a story about being man handled by a police constable Harrison: I noticed your annunciation with the first syllable on constable 😂😂

[@hectorshouse7348]

David Starkey underestimates how much immigrants love the U.K..in fact 1.25 million immigrants came here last year!

[@judithcressey1682]

​@@hectorshouse7348 Good grief!

[@MiniatureMiss]

@hectorshouse7348 Good grief! it's eye wateringly worrying that our isles are accepting such poor quality immigration. It's no wonder that the infrastructure can not accommodate it. Alas, it's the communities that harbour the burden that I worry about. As Matt Goodwin says, it's a managed decline. Instead of investing in our own nations' people and encouraging people to have (and support) them having families, we import cheap masses to compensate. It is infuriating.

[@clivewinbow2150]

An interesting, if rather rambling, discussion. I would have liked a more focussed discussion on the topic of 'diversity'. What does it mean? What did it use to mean? Also, I was a little put off by the virtual silence by the person on the right!

[@colindant3410]

Of course "It isn't true." Mobility a few generations ago was far less than it is today, just as there were far fewer cars on the road 60 years ago. "This is my street, and I'm never gonna leave it, and I'm always gonna stay, even if I live to be ni-i-inety-nine, 'cos all the people I meet, seem to come from my street, and I can't get away..." Autumn Almanac (Ray Davies) 1967

[@aaronward6466]

While you have race grifters in power you will have race grifting policy.

[@NJBeltCimmerian89]

In regards to Defoe's famous quote on Britain being a "bastard nation", how is any other nation in the world different? Certainly in Europe every country has been exposed to a greater influx of different peoples than that of Britain. There's no such thing as a pure race of people, its a question of culture and identity. French identity emerged in France, British identity emerged in Britain etc etc. Defoe may have been a great thinker of his day but he didn't make a valid point with that quote.

[@victoriahigman6802]

Mr Starkey. You excel in rhetoric

[@rosalindfitch-mayo6908]

THANK YOU THANK YOU EXCELLENT PLEASE KEEP GOING BEST WISHES TO YOU ALL

[@thadtuiol1717]

@10:30 - Thank you Dr. Starkey for finally calling out the Emperor's new clothes that is Tom Holland.

[@charlesd4572]

The Roman Empire did not collapse - the Western Empire did. If it was Christianity to blame why did the Eastern Empire persist for 100s of years after. Starky is doing what he accuses others of doing - narrativising history.

[@bekytwining2522]

My Hero!!!!

[@sauermaischeyahoo7834]

The solution to the electoral problem is to alternate between first past the post general elections and proportional representation ones. That would force the MPs to build up a personal following, which would improve the connection between the politicians and the public.

[@baldevrajsharma6753]

I think he is talking sensibly.Many western leaders have not yet realized the danger of too much liberalism .

[@aneta.d1]

Thank you

[@rogerdodger1790]

Starkey is always right on the money

[@ubergeraldine]

Britain was built by people like my father who was a steel worker.

[@tendies9248]

My motherb never saw a black person until she came to london in the 70s, she was from durham

[@RogueWJL]

Huw Edwards gets a 'shout out'. (Applause, Applause, Applause)

[@shelleyphilcox4743]

Francis Foster, without whom Triggernometry would not exist. Foster as well as Kisin put everything on the line to establish it and gave Starkey a platform on his show, and the opportunity when noone else would touch him with a barge pole, after his disastrous appearance on Reasoned. Just say thanks Starkey and have just the tiniest bit of grace for once!

[@shelleyphilcox4743]

@dominionphilosophy3698 Yes I do, and too many people don't call him out on bad manners and indulge it...which is how he got so rude and arrogant in the first place! Starkey can be entertaining and his take on current affairs in the context of history is very interesting. He is clever and vain. I can find him interesting without pandering to rude behaviour and I am not in thrall to him just because of his knowledge and intellect. Foster took a risk to his own livelihood by giving him a platform on Triggernometry, because it was pretty catastrophic, and its arrogant and unappreciative of Starkey to put him down. Starkey has quite a few bob behind him, hard earned without a doubt, but Foster and Kisin are at the early part of their lives and have a long time to go in a time when banks can close your account for speaking out in a democracy. In that context, Starkey can at least have the decency to treat Foster with a bit of respect.

[@NewCultureForum]

In the interests of accuracy: it was the New Culture Forum that was the first platform to interview David Starkey after his appearance on Reasoned.

[@shelleyphilcox4743]

@@NewCultureForum Thank you for putting the record straight regarding being the first after the Reasoned interview, but it's still fair to say that Foster and Kisin also gave Starkey the opportunity and took the risk. Certainly Darren Grimes got it with both barrels from both sides afterwards. I stand by my point that Starkey was just incredibly rude and I'd be saying the same if he was similarly rude about anyone at The New Culture Forum after giving him an opportunity and the risk to the channel and those that might be dependent on it. It's not so that I think he should be overtly grateful, not at all, just not rude and dismissive. Basic courtesy.

[@DillyDolittle]

Agree. I think Francis Foster deserves more credit than “sidekick”. The only fault I could pick out of David’s performance in this discussion.

[@georgehetty7857]

@@shelleyphilcox4743I wonder if there’s any particular reason why Kissin seems to be everywhere these days and Foster , well quite the opposite? Have you ever come across the “facts don’t care about your feeling” saying? Starkey is successful partly due to his opinionated style which I find very entertaining considering the dross of the vast majority of commenters recently , least he has a personality.I enjoy Kissin, Murray, Owens, Farage, Tousi, and many others who coincidentally seem to deal in facts and are…..generally right of centre…..funny that!

[@twogermanys]

English independence would put the elite class of 'UK plc' seriously on the back foot. I think America would intervene by any means available to it to prevent such a thing ever happening.

[@alexmelli8253]

Starkey is great as ever, but the 2 other guys are excellent also. And fantastic postures, they’re having some kind of straight back contest .

[@anonymousAJ]

Progressivism has been wearing liberalism as a skin-suit for a century in the US, half a century in UK/Europe Your enemy is progressivism, not liberalism

[@adamslarke5483]

Starkey is British institution. He should be compulsory listening for all school children as well as Generataion Z+

[@sauermaischeyahoo7834]

After that comment about Francis Foster, what're the odds on Starkey ever appearing on Triggernometry again?

[@John-uh8kl]

European Conservatives. The European Freedom Alliance I trusted we would get there.

[@vincew8609]

600000 is the net figure. Over a million arrived.

[@rogeralsop3479]

David Starkey hombre.

[@hectorshouse7348]

David Starkey underestimates how much immigrants love the U.K..in fact 1.25 million immigrants came here last year!

[@deirdrefleming9935]

I would love to see Starkey discuss British history with Eamonn Duffy or Sebastian Morello. It might take the edge off his protestant-atheist interpretation

[@EyeByBrian]

Indeed, the Starkey-at-the-lectern dynamic gets a bit tiresome. Much better would be conversation or dialogue between or among fellow historians. I have wondered if Starkey prefers not (or refuses?) to share the stage with other historians. Surely there are segment producers who propose the notion to him routinely? The only one of such I have seen was Starkey with Simon Schama on, I think, BBC Newsnight a few years ago. Though the pair were quite civil in that appearance, Starkey has made offhand comments about Schama a few times. Perhaps more surprising is that Starkey and the highly accomplished Tudor historian Diarmaid MacCulloch (both students of Geoffrey Elton at Cambridge) have not been presented jointly. Perhaps there is a private spat (warring queens?😉) that keeps them apart.

[@PuggiTheGreat]

I could agree more with the title of this video.

[@harveyyoung3423]

At 15:00 mins Dr David Starkey claims that conservativism is an empiricism, and then by contrast Social Justice is a religion. On Conservative Empiricism we have to be carful that there is an understanding of empiricism from the British tradition that roots this as within ordinary human experience, where claims on cases are tied to adverbial context of reference or acquaintance and conventions and norms and semantic rules in language use. This notion of a kind of first person rootedness of experience of objects who's reference is constrained from within linguistic social norms then has ancestral claim to be an empiricism. But what people tend to mean by Empiricism now is the reference to an object not primarily governed by linguistic conventions and norms, but a reference governed and mediated by categories posits structured by the various versions of logic and semantics of modern science. That is for example reference to objects are determined through general concepts or as members of a set extension (Quine), as opposed to being mediated by Platonic forms abstract ideas and so on. This later scientific notion of the structure of general terms and their formation, is not the same, or not isomorphic with the classical empiricist who like Hume have the object in experience governed by linguistic norms. Wilfred Sellars for example contrasts these two views as the Manifest Image and the Scientific image of man. For Sellars science begins within the Manifest image, but scientifically structured concepts and categories have privilege and are trumps over the manifest image. In this science gets to continually revise and transform our common sense norms of description into terms determined by axiomatic structure for sets and so on. Science gets to replace talk of Gods and Witches with terms who's legitimacy is logical structure and use like neuron electron alternative religion. Now the woke left draw on boundary shifting and movements between these different Spaces of Reasons. They will give a certain absolute warrant to first person's inner experience in the MI, but support it by drawing on those references as mediated though mass data formed Sets. Thus experience here means a certain equivocation or ambiguity of reference oscillating between the first person MI and the "objective" SI. This object of experience here has a foot in both MI and SI. Now the early mid century Woke left, were all taught Hegel (via Kojevie Koyre and Hypolite), but they claim to have sought to move against this, but one can say that, while they Critiqued Hegel's absolute idea and the universal as hegemonic and teleological, they took up Hegel's master slave as self and other, struggle, here individual other person though either and both via MI and SI. To keep the master slave but to temporarily deflate the Absolute Platonism in Hegel they seemed to turn to Heidegger. It is this, between Hegel and Heidegger, that the notion of the universal as necessary is Bracketed, and Critical notions of difference that is metaphysically prior to subject/property, essence/accident etc and this means there is no need non ironic non strategic role for the Universal. In the context of criticising then predominant French structuralism then the notions of a given nature or absolute transcendent norms (signifiers) are redundant the job they did is no longer required, and as foundations really functioned to try to make objects not susceptible to scientific translations and eliminations, that is, traditions and cultural norms not revisable by science. For post modern Hegelians then the foundational link between ordinary talk and its object is severed as the epistemic myth of the given, and are Platonic forms mythical abstract givens. The so called Woke attack on biology and nature is a correct depiction but because Normees attempt to use scientific notions of nature as both absolute givens and then absolute necessary norms follow as functions. So this is the Critical process but more recently the anti Hegelian anti Platonism has been embraced as social justice and the radical reconstructions and eliminations of much of our ordinary talk for legalistic meaning, science meaning and vocabulary and conventions in science and institutions. So the Critical stance to justice and law was "bracketed" until the anti foundational anti naturalism and anti structuralism strategy had been won. The left now have no problem crossing over the boards of different semantic spaces of reasons here the objects enjoy a Janus faced existence of being in both a first person ordinary vocabulary of experience and as under the institutional and definitional structure and semantics of law etc. Non philosophers would not notice this trick, but its easy to evidence and expose. Just get a few Woke down the pub and after a few beers ask who's round is it now. Now this woke anti-foundationalism then is like Hegelian and German Romanticism Critique of pure Empiricism. But analytic philosophers in the know by 1930's knew that the hope of a non Hegelian unmediated empiricism like Carnap could not work. Its seems he didn't even believe it in the end. So from Wittgenstein Austin Quine and Sellers the old empiricism of the given (logical positivism) was abandoned and by 1990's many people (Bob Brandon John McDowell) coming from Sellars were returning to Hegel or Kant/Hegel or Aristotle/Hegel. So really Roger Scruton was ahead of this neo-Hegelian analytical turn back to German Romanticism, following the collapse of the logical positivism version of empiricism. But the question remains about the relationship between the Manifest Image and the Scientific Image. In one area of debate is Aristotle here because as a model of human action towards ends it could afford a legitimate place for a religious intervention. For me the move would bring in St Augustine's Critique for the very idea of law and its relation to man. This can require much moving around between SI Mi and others. The obvious problem with say immigration then is not relations between different values and different MI vocabularies(though this can be of course), rather the project is driven by the Legal and scientific image of man. Thus we are expected to leave our ordinary language private at the door and discourse in public though the scientism and legal semantics vocabulary. That is in public the folk language must adapt to the latest science derived terms. What kind of community is this , one continually deferring to the latest contested science of utility and justice and equality. This is not enough to mediate over actual objects in our common space and is too much in flux and change in scientific logic to act a guide from within common sense human norms. This debate has parallels in history between materialism or Marxist economic materialism as science and the idea of the subjective value of things as within convention tradition and norms. For Marx the later is a super-structural ideological lie a semblance and appearance of value as fancy value, whereas the price difference in a whole economic science is a difference between price under illusion of free property owning conventional exchange is a deception of phenomenal immediacy of foundation (in individual rights and free exchange ideology), where as the whole system scientific law determined price is the true value the noumena. Thank you for the great discussion up to t, Harrison Pitt, Evan Riggs and Dr. David Starkey.

[@harveyyoung3423]

32:00 mins. The problem with absolutism is it begins with the abstract, the universal. This is what Sellars is attacking when he attacks Plato's forms. This can perhaps go proxy for Cicero too but not sure about St. Thomas Moore. Sellars contrasts this mythical idea with its role in modern science as Quine's Set extension that is a Sellers argues this as an implicit a kind of temporal Platonism (modality as necessity over time)(like St Augustine perhaps moving image of eternity) that reference for ever is the same as adverbial contextual reference here and now (McDowell's rules as rails in Mind and World). But Sellars in contrasting this set theory semantic structure, with ordinary occasional use (also called observation statements or eternal propositions/thoughts) has to explain the "Apparent" use of the myth of Platonism. If it is wrong how come its seems to work. His answer is these abstractions are used within ordinary language so they have a foot in both camps. Now before we abandon Platonism entirely, first it is regarded by many as Heidegger's philosophical error. Second that any Platonism of concepts as infinite functions has to see the abstraction error as one that abstracts the concepts form their place in an instituional architecture. This instituional context of multiple institutions in some kind of harmony in judgement and that brings in a whole new analysis. Category of public and private duty and organic unity to the rules and cases before the split into separate functions. Then the old onto-theological problem of an exceptional God origin of virtue and morality is now a very different kind of question, situated in the architecture of the State. Sellars i think missed this possibility, taken up by Russell and then peter Suber. The error results in paradoxes like Set theory paradox but the solution is to deny infinity and zero since in demythologising Platonic abstraction we have multiple institutions in play together and all at once. In this i push the Critique coming from Wittgenstein and between Dummett and Crispin Wright that the rules as rails and series is a version of realism. the realism is have is rather the reverse. that all the institutions are running in the one space at once, this is a realism that denies anti realism as the abstraction of one rule where in multiple rules we are in direct relation to objects. like Kant's refutation of idealism then i do not answer the single rule critique as a realism rather i deny it as a single institution abstraction on its own. eg say GDP measures are not metric jsut in terms of the rues of the GDP department but its sense requires all the others to be in paly as well. We see then a "zero" GDP is bellow the event horizon of possibility, that department workers left long before to chop down trees and hunt rabbits. We also see any possible infinity in one metric would have to annihilate all the other institutions or treat them as stable natural or instituional and passive ly given over time which is not possible. so no single or multiple infinities.

[@harveyyoung3423]

So at 40:00 mins my claim is there must always be a parliament a division and synthesis of instituional action. Now the transcendent soverignty has to be viewed in a new non abstract non external way as internal to parliament but not an object a referent or name. Schimitt and Agamben miss this semantic space that both presupposes it and denies it. it is intentionality the parliament is a kind of form but also is concrete with real people doing stuff somewhere. the problem of the myth of the exception then is like rule anti realism or single rule realism, it misses the architecture and so thinks its a problem like Plato or a Platonic paradox, the form of the good as the form of all forms, and so on. in set theory it is the set of all sets not members of themselves and so on. these are not problem then to solve but to diagnose as based in an error from the start and proper view the problem is not their. Wittgensteinian approach to philosophical problems and paradox of various representations of reason. Economic liberalism is quit profoundly a different picture to Platonism with dynamic equilibrium and so on. just as Platonism tries to go down and make the world in its false mythical image so liberalism tries to go up and make government redundant. For liberalisms the structure of all institutional form also. Behavioural theory of laws application and now from 1990 an AI theory of legal judgement and jurisprudence is on the way. maybe Schelling very different notion of nature to Hegel, as the equilibrium of forces can help. (it fits with strong and weak nuclear forces too as well as perhaps equilibrium economics see also Nelson Goodman.)

[@harveyyoung3423]

Interesting conclusion to a rooted transcendence at the end. That was a great discussion, and I'm privileged to have listened. Thank you Harrison Pitt, Evan Riggs and Dr. David Starkey.

[@harveyyoung3423]

Normally when people talk of transcendence it is the idea that we can at once have an intention to an object of thought, but that such intentionality has no actual or sensory judgable content. An example might be a unicorn or me at the supermarket down the road later this afternoon. Here transcendence mean a stepping beyond immediate intentional objects of sense, to something beyond. In trying to fit these two capacities together philosophers have conceived at least two ways or accounts: the unicorn is drawing on conceptual capacities and using imagination to construct a kind of composite cryptid; the thought of being at the supermarket later also draws on the same faculties. Here the conceptual continuity and imagined object are connected in conceptual thought, the unicorn though we cannot see, or what to do to bring it to immediacy, no practical possibility can help us to fulfil the imaginative freedom. There is more Platonic sense too the thought or imagining of a Celestial City, like St Augustine or Thomas Moore entertained. Here is an imagined object constructed as an image in thought with apparent conceptual objective intentionality, along with the hope of a practical root to connect the hear and now to this possible future world. Indeed this is the context that, from McDowell, Sellars goes on to argue for intentionality at in a Kantian sense. Cleary there seems to be conceptual inferences in play in these imaginings, the object can only be as images and concepts, inference here can mean a connection of judgements and possible judgements between the "immediate" as source and the imagined as a gap bridging root to the "imagined" perhaps only by analogy with inference as a practical method to get their or maybe its the other way round too, our practical action is modelled on inference as mealy as cognitive imagined possibility. There is a question here about what might be involved Critically if we are to model the cognitive on the practical or the practical on the cognitive. Indeed a political difference emerges here constraining the cognitive to the practical can be a certain aspect of conservatism, while progressives would claim this as a lack of imagination too much repetition and that as the practical advances though its policy the scope of what is practically possible changes over time. we might say at one extreme is a deficiency of imagination and the later too much imagination. In the above the notion of transcendence is "from" the mundane here and now immediate sensory perception, to some imagined object of intention. There is a recent debate from McDowell on Sellars and Rorty, that questions this restricted use. So Rorty saw in immediate sense perception the objectivity has been justified "sideways on" that is by bridging a gap between inner states and the object using various sciences to causally (material efficient) link the two as if the inner were on one side and the object, the outer, on the other and they connect by a law of nature from science. This picture of two pace casual relation has the problem that: if either if it is thought of as in another third observer then it begs the question or lead to infinite regress, if not it is a kind of inflated version as Gods eye view or view from nowhere. McDowell originally took this as the place for a transcendence in the immediate which he then rejects in Mind and World. But more recently he argues that Rorty's capture of transcendence here mixes up Kant's distinction between transcendent and transcendental or transcendence. That is there is a sense that the immediacy of experience of an object here now is immediate in the sense of non inferential, but that there now open up the different distinction between the immediacy of what is perceived and what is the object in itself. This is the Kant Hegel context of German Idealism that begins with the idea that we are in in experience in a kind of hermetically sealed solipsism and idealism, we cannot get out of the conceptual and imaginative limits of thought to experience anything that is "not thought", ie other to thought. In this context then we can talk about transcendence as a relation perhaps that goes beyond experience and to reality the objective from the subjective. here transcended might mean a kind of gap between two things the sense data or image and the real, but this is wrong. Rather in experience we encounter multiply conceptually presented features of things. As if we have a kind of repatware of concepts sitting in the mind ready to engage with the world around us. it might be model here on the idea of concepts as stored and used by institutions ready for action. This analogy of mine seems to follow Sellar's view that ordinary thought and common sense especially in relation to others works like a theory like an institutional use of concepts. Its called the Theory Theory of mind and many people involved in politic seem to think the opponents think in terms of theories, we have a theory of the other and the transcendental object. this is an example of Sellars's scientism creeping in. Rather the transcendence of experience now, just means more manifold detail more possible conceptual application than passive non judging does. it can be seen as the reverse of the transcendence of the now to a future imagined state, in the sense that cognitive judgement of immediacy of transcendence is not jsut a matter of involving more concepts in the experience but of involving less in terms that we see it as transcendent as it in itself not "it" for some future towards a future imagined it. Transcendence ten can be seen as the suspension of the old model of transcendence to a future and be seen as just to look. The passivity is w.r.t. use and for acquaintance with details not the need to abandon judgement in experience, as here it is judgement of the now object "is" that pulls us away from use for some future state of affaires or imaginings. In this we have to contrast then the image of thought as a quasi instituional scientific policy setting of complexity with separate rules and sets and thought as it is in the intertwined roots of ordinary usage of Language. It may be correct to say following Quine that the instituional setting for concepts is actually a disquotationalism, it certainly is anonimious without a real author the institution apologies means little except money may be. In our experience we oscillate between ordinary usage in which we are raised within a language and images, and some of the same words understood instructionally as functions. Rationalism focuses on the latter and even thinks the former as version of it a theory theory. but i'm not sure how we could teach the instituional language without the ordinary language already in play with actual experience. The langue of representation generates an apparent problem of idealism say metric axiomatic formal modal whatever no anomaly. at the level of ordinary thought and intentionality the question of trasncendence in immediate experience is not open of stepping outside representation, representation is derivative and structured. At the level of ordinary language this kind of escape is not needed. instead of a image of transcendence as escape then we have transcendence as openness to the infinite richness of what is present and what is possible but not only in terms of instituional uptake and use. This view can also be founding the "field of representation" but at the level of intention to a person thought the whole architectural instituional structures. This lead on to aesthetic judgement for Kant. I can contrast here phenomena with noumena as comparing a row of dolls, or rows of dolls, to a set of Russian Dolls perhaps. On intuition then we see injustice as a feature of object relations, which must involve a mixture of the two views one of institutionalised concepts as rule and function in complex unities to be made the other of language intertwined with forms of life. McDowell take this up in long exchange with Robert Pippin on unity of the object unity of judgement unity of experience unity of the subject. In this I have drawn on John McDowell's 1997 Woodbridge Lectures (Columbia University) called "Having the World in View" They are published in the McDowell collection of essays as the first three, in "Having the World in View: Essays on Kant, Hegel and Sellars." (2009)

[@debbielangton8371]

We all learn something new everyday 😊😊 if people communicate 🌻

[@TracyKinnear-h2b]

Yes in in aussie land and I can't believe this bloke what a gem for history learning a lot be safe in britain

[@juancampbell5399]

Brilliant, to pin down Montesquieu’s error

[@binarymalehim]

Without Mr Starky I would be lessened.

[@senamy424]

When one fell , another will rise . Who is " the one " , who is " the another " ?

[@sbor2020]

Sum-zero thinking for sum-zero thinking people to continue sum-zero culture wars.

[@dileenijayatileke5712]

Thank God for educated ppl Mr Starkey.

[@linmal2242]

There you go; first-past-the-post is a disatrous electoral system ; proportional representation is one which 'includes' everyone to an extent! They, the voters, may not get their first choice up, but maybe their second or third etc.!

[@nono7105]

Why the dichotomy between proportional representation and first past the post? Why not use the Australian system of 2 party preferred? Seems a much better system on the whole to me.

[@grimmlight4541]

And boy are we seeing it now.

[@johnschuh8616]

The Fall of Rome came in 476. But Constantinople, new Rome not until almost a thousand years later, It is interesting to speculate what might have happened were it not for the natural disasters of 535 and 545 which effectively ended Justinian’s efforts to restore the Empire, leaving it weakened to to the Rise of Persian power. Rome and Persian then fought to exhaustion, paving the way to the Islamic invasions, that over the next century deprived Christian Rome of the Levant, Egypt, north Africa snd Spain, nearly taking Constantinope itself. Unlike the German barbarians the Arab barbarians were hostile to Christianity. Gibbon does not seem to concede that differences that this made, As to Dr, Starkey’s take on Augustine, the City of God was in the fist stance an apology defending Christians from the charges that the sacking of Rome was caused by the abandonment if the city Gods, Who, however, had not been able to defend the city at the time of the last Sacking hundreds of years before,

[@voranartsirisubsoontorn]

❤❤❤

[@trvaron]

First past the post is a much better system, but like every system, it only works if there are good men in power. The problem in both the US and UK is that the system has become thoroughly corrupted. We call that corruption the Uni-party and the Deep State. But the "first past the post" system creates a 2-party system, and forces both parties towards the middle in order to gain the majority. And by forcing the parties toward the middle it forces moderation. Radicalism has always emerged from the fringe, and having proportional representation gives the radical fringe a seat and the table and legitimacy. Again, for either system to work, you need good men. And each system can become corrupted. And the "first past the post" system is much more difficult to redeem after being corrupted, but it doesn't mean that it's not a good system. But, again, everything comes down to culture. Once Christianity is torn away from society's fabric, you'll end up with countless amounts of corruption. The real battle is preserving a Christian civilization.

[@shelleyphilcox4743]

There is also International Men's Day. Its on 19th November.

[@philiphudgens4726]

It's been renamed 'International White Misogynist & Transphobic Heteronormative Patriarchy Day' at the behest of The Guardian.

[@kramrollin69]

I'd like to know what his cousin Ringo thinks too.

[@philiphudgens4726]

Coming soon: Starkey reading the telephone directory? Sign me up!

[@sbor2020]

I love it that a free speech channel blocks blow back. Fundamentalist ideologues.

[@joshualifetree5398]

Finally sense.

[@robstokes7778]

I'm sure that there was tension between roman Britain and anglo saxon and likewise between anglo saxon and Norman, the real problem here is american cultural imperialism

[@BadMotivator66]

OOFT the huw Edwards comment aged well

[@wolfwind1]

I laughed to hear Starkey say "Please, let me finish!" Poor Harrison and Evan; so patient and respectful to this thoughtful, smart and extremely tedious guest.

[@georgehetty7857]

Really….tedious? Perhaps love island is more your thing?

[@wolfwind1]

@@georgehetty7857 Goodness, what a bracing retort. Yes, droning on; not allowing oneself to be interviewed as a guest; monopolizing; and then getting prickly; all bad form; especially if one is guest on a show that is attempting to appeal to a younger audience and expose and persuade them regarding conservative ideas. So I'll reply in the same spirit you did to me: sod off.

[@georgehetty7857]

@@wolfwind1 Well you’re certainly no stranger to being “disrespectful “ or “prickly” to me are you? When Starkey speaks , his breadth of knowledge and intelligence should be considered a gift. I’m not sure that this video is an interview, more a lesson, that was my impression regarding the two other chaps who seemed to respect and appreciate the great historians, which evidently is rather lost on you, eh old chap?

[@sterlinggill5278]

Slavery was and IS (because it still exists, most notably in Africa) an horrific and deplorable institution. However, the “high-minded” assertion that Britain abolished slavery long before the U.S. government did so requires one to view the history naively and/or untruthfully. Yes, in 1833 British government outlawed slavery in its remaining colonies. 32 years before the former British subjects did so in the United States. Slavery was economically important (or so the slave owners foolishly believed) whereas it no longer was in the Caribbean colonies Britain still possessed. England was responsible for, condoned and profited greatly from slavery by English subjects for 150 years in the Colonies that would become (part of) the United States. There is little indication that Britain would have abolished slavery in 1833 (only 32 years before a tragic civil war ended it in the United States) had there remained any economic interest and control of the former colonies governance. Further, though slavery was “technically” abolished, forced labour continued in British colonies over the next century and a half. British courts in Kenya routinely provided labour at harvesting with indigenous people convicted unfairly for petty offenses. British government abolished a horrific practice but, not long before it was abolished in the United States and Britain did so only when it no longer had economic benefits.

[@neil5872]

DS good to talk about Covid measures

[@billykotsos4642]

Yes. It is true….. how many british bricklayers are in LONDON? Do you have those numbers?????

[@exebit9366]

Scruton rocks.

[@genuinearticle33]

"Aeneas did the aged Anchises bear" ....Aenied By Virgil (The Trojans)

[@jackominty3633]

I love Starkey, but the Trigonometry "sidekick" remark was unnecessary and detrimental to his reappearance on the podcast.

[@cian_dali]

The one thing these new conservative groups have in common is a sense of high camp. David is such a flirt.

[@andrewmakin8151]

is david starkey the british version of aleksandr dugin?

[@sandrabrowne2350]

Who believes a historian with monarchist/ fascist tendencies reminiscent of Midfords Lord Admiralty in the 30's until Churchill cleared them out! Leave comments no censorship.

[@debbielangton8371]

🙏🙏🇬🇧

[@JayJones-bp4xl]

If history says a person was white, then that person should be white. If a person is black then that is what that person should be. As for Joan of Ark she was a female.