Hi folks, welcome to another one of Carl and Dan's political chats. Still no name for this series,

but I'm happy with just political chats. Today we're going to be talking about how the Blairite

paradigm itself is quaking. It has become apparent that actually there are things outside of that

paradigm and those things are popular and are taking over. And so frankly, they're coming out on the

attack, but it's not working.

Yes. I mean, it's tough. We really do need to name this. We have given you... Political chats is fine. Dozens of names at this point. The thing is, when you name something, you put it in a box, and I don't want to be put in a box. But anyway, it's like the old demon thing. If it knows your name, it can control. Exactly. Is that what you're worried about. Yeah, no, I mean, what I've been thinking about lately is that, well, actually, Rupert put out a tweet and it was, I'm now giving the country a democratic route out. And I've been pondering that. I mean, a lot of people picked up on it, you retweeted that. The thing that I've been thinking about is, well, look, This country has only really ever had two ways of settling the issue of who rules, one of which is do what I say, oh, I'm going to kill you, and the other is civil war.

Now, what happened in the 1800s is we basically civilized civil war, and we decided to use a proxy, We decided to use democracy. And it's ballots instead

of bullets, but it's basically the same thing. The larger side wins. And that makes a lot of sense

because it's a lot cheaper to do democracy than it is to do civil war. And you don't push people

into that situation. It's also more bearable for the people themselves. It is. It is. You have casualties. And it stretches the time period because, you know, losing an election is not losing a war. Losing elections, losing a battle. And you always think, okay, well, I can come back from this. I can reverse it. And so that kind of system is stable because even if you don't win, there's always the hope

the next generation will.

And so it's a kind of stable situation.

And what politicians starting in the late 90s decided to do is they decided to cheat on

democracy.

They're going to use the institutions and law and demographic change to demographically

skew the country so that their side never loses.

And that takes away the core premise of making democracy work, which is the idea that it's reversible.

Because you can afford to lose an election, but you can't afford to lose your country.

And in doing this this in getting to the

point of and and they're also rolling back on on the other underlying metric which is moving from

democracy to okay now it's not do what I say or I kill you now it's do what I say or Joe you

or censor you or or you know to bank you or whatever it is.

...