Carl Benjamin

In this interview, podcaster and political commentator Carl Benjamin joins John to explore the accelerating collapse of English identity and the political crisis that has followed.Carl argues that Britain has sleepwalked into a civilisational emergency: mass immigration without a vote, a bureaucratic state that has outgrown democratic accountability, and a native population that has been deliberately disconnected from the culture and heritage it was supposed to carry forward. Carl Benjamin is one of Britain's most followed independent commentators. Widely known online as Sargon of Akkad, Benjamin is the director of the conservative political podcast, Lotus Eaters . He is known for his outspoken criticism of modern feminism, identity politics, Islam, and political correctness.

👉 Subscribe to The Daily Heretic for long-form conversations that challenge political assumptions and ask the questions most debates avoid: https://www.youtube.com/@hereticsclips/videos What does political representation actually mean — and where should the line be drawn between citizenship, loyalty, and national interest? In this episode, Andrew Gold speaks with Carl Benjamin about a highly contentious question that sits at the heart of democratic legitimacy: who should be eligible to represent a nation in its own parliament. Framed through the lens of the ongoing “right’s civil war,” the conversation explores why this topic provokes such strong reactions — and why it’s so rarely examined on its merits. Carl argues that political representation is not just about legal status, but about alignment with national interest, shared history, and long-term accountability to the electorate. He questions whether modern liberal democracies have blurred the distinction between citizenship as a legal category and representation as a civic responsibility — and whether that confusion undermines trust in institutions. Rather than targeting individuals, the discussion focuses on systems and principles: how MPs are selected, what voters expect from their representatives, and why concerns about divided loyalties are often dismissed without serious engagement. Carl suggests that shutting down the debate entirely has only fuelled public frustration and suspicion. The episode also examines how this issue becomes weaponised through labels. Carl explains how questioning eligibility rules is quickly framed as hostility rather than a constitutional discussion, making it almost impossible to have a good-faith conversation. When disagreement is treated as moral failure, democratic deliberation breaks down. Andrew presses Carl on the risks of exclusion, the importance of equal treatment under the law, and whether reforming eligibility rules would strengthen or weaken democracy. The exchange stays grounded in theory, incentives, and historical precedent — not rhetoric. As with much of the conversation, this debate feeds into broader fractures on the right: disagreements over nationalism, liberalism, and how far institutions should bend in response to globalisation. Carl argues that avoiding these questions doesn’t make them disappear — it simply pushes them into more extreme corners of the internet. If you’re trying to understand why trust in politics keeps eroding, why representation feels increasingly abstract, or why constitutional questions are treated as taboo, this episode offers a framework for thinking through the issue calmly and critically. This isn’t about outrage. It’s about examining first principles — and whether modern democracies still take them seriously. 🎧 Watch the full podcast here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJPUZYNxsSM&t=1717s #CarlBenjamin #UKPolitics #Democracy #PoliticalRepresentation #ConstitutionalDebate #CultureWar #TheDailyHeretic Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

👉 Subscribe to The Daily Heretic for calm, long-form conversations that explore what’s really driving today’s political reactions: https://www.youtube.com/@hereticsclips/videos Why do certain policy positions provoke intense backlash from specific political groups — and what does that tell us about the state of modern politics? In this episode, Andrew Gold speaks with Carl Benjamin about why David Lammy has become a focal point of anger for some nationalist-leaning commentators, and why that reaction says as much about political psychology as it does about policy. Carl explains how Lammy’s positions on illegal immigration and his past comments about reforming or limiting jury trials have been interpreted by critics as symbols of a deeper shift in how authority, accountability, and national identity are being handled. Rather than focusing on personalities, Carl looks at why these issues feel existential to some people and abstract to others — and how that gap fuels conflict. The conversation explores how political frustration often concentrates on individuals, even when the underlying causes are institutional, structural, or long-term. Carl reflects on why figures like Lammy become lightning rods: not because they single-handedly create problems, but because they visibly represent a direction of travel people either strongly support or deeply distrust. They discuss how immigration debates become emotionally charged not only because of numbers or laws, but because of what those changes feel like at a community level. Carl explains why people respond less to statistics and more to perceived loss of stability, continuity, and predictability — and why politicians often underestimate that emotional dimension. They also examine why proposals around legal reform, such as changes to jury trials, trigger suspicion even among people who don’t fully understand the technical details. Carl explains how trust is fragile in modern politics, and how any suggestion of reducing public participation in institutions can feel like power being quietly pulled upward. If you’ve ever wondered why some reactions seem disproportionate, why anger attaches to specific figures, or why certain topics repeatedly ignite the same conflicts, this episode offers a measured attempt to unpack that pattern. This is not about defending or attacking anyone. It’s about understanding how political symbols form, why resentment concentrates where it does, and how emotional responses often reveal deeper anxieties about change, control, and belonging. 🎧 Watch the full podcast here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJPUZYNxsSM #CarlBenjamin #LotusEaters #AndrewGold #UKPolitics #PublicDebate #TheDailyHeretic #PoliticalPsychology #BritishPolitics Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

👉 Subscribe to The Daily Heretic for long-form conversations that question fashionable ideas and unpack the psychology driving today’s culture wars: https://www.youtube.com/@hereticsclips/videos When does activism turn into entitlement — and why does disagreement now feel like a personal attack? In this episode, Andrew Gold speaks with Carl Benjamin about what he sees as the psychology behind modern “woke entitlement” and how it shapes political behaviour on both the left and the right. Rather than trading insults or slogans, the conversation examines why certain ideas gain moral authority, how that authority is enforced, and what happens when entitlement replaces persuasion. Carl argues that entitlement politics is less about justice and more about status — a belief that one’s moral position should automatically command compliance. He explores how language becomes a tool of leverage, where offence is used to shut down debate rather than resolve it. The result, he suggests, is a culture in which disagreement is framed as harm and dissent as hostility. A central theme is identity and power. Carl explains how movements can drift from advocating reform to demanding deference, creating internal hierarchies that reward outrage and punish nuance. When moral certainty hardens, empathy thins — and politics becomes performative rather than practical. The discussion also connects these dynamics to what’s often called “the right’s civil war.” Carl examines why entitlement isn’t confined to one side of the spectrum, and how similar patterns of grievance, gatekeeping, and purity tests emerge wherever identity becomes the organising principle. In those conditions, movements turn inward, policing their own rather than addressing external problems. Andrew challenges Carl on whether strong rhetoric clarifies or inflames, and whether calling out entitlement risks alienating people who feel genuinely unheard. The exchange stays focused on incentives: what behaviours are rewarded online, how algorithms amplify conflict, and why moderation often loses to moral spectacle. If you’re confused by why debates feel increasingly brittle, why compromise is treated as weakness, or why politics now resembles a competition for moral authority, this episode offers a framework for understanding the forces at play. This isn’t about dismissing concerns or mocking belief. It’s about asking whether entitlement politics solves problems — or simply creates new ones. 🎧 Watch the full podcast here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJPUZYNxsSM&t=1717s #CarlBenjamin #CultureWar #PoliticalPsychology #FreeSpeech #UKPolitics #WokeCulture #TheDailyHeretic Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

👉 Subscribe to The Daily Heretic for long-form conversations that tackle the hardest political questions without slogans or tribal spin: https://www.youtube.com/@hereticsclips/videos What happens when immigration policy is driven by optics instead of outcomes — and who pays the price? In this episode, Andrew Gold speaks with Carl Benjamin about one of the most volatile issues in British politics: mass immigration and the long-term consequences of decisions made at the top. The discussion centres on what Carl describes as the “Boris wave” of immigration — a period of rapid inflows that he argues was poorly planned, weakly enforced, and politically insulated from honest scrutiny. Rather than framing the issue through emotion or blame, Carl focuses on policy mechanics: how large-scale intake without integration capacity places pressure on housing, welfare systems, local services, and social cohesion. He argues that when governments prioritise moral signalling over measurable outcomes, difficult conversations are delayed — and the costs compound. A key theme is accountability. Carl questions why political leaders rarely revisit past decisions when evidence mounts that outcomes are not matching promises. He explores how immigration debates are often shut down through labels rather than answered with data, and why raising concerns is treated as taboo even when they’re shared privately across the political spectrum. The episode also digs into the psychological dynamics behind the “right’s civil war.” Carl explains how internal divisions form when movements can’t agree on where responsibility lies — the system, the incentives, or the people enforcing them. He argues that without honest diagnosis, political energy gets misdirected into infighting rather than reform. Andrew presses Carl on solutions: what realistic policy change would look like, how enforcement and compassion can coexist, and why clear rules matter for everyone involved — migrants included. The exchange avoids slogans, focusing instead on trade-offs, incentives, and consequences. If you’re frustrated by how immigration is discussed — either reduced to moral absolutes or dismissed entirely — this episode offers a framework for understanding why the debate feels frozen, and what might be required to move it forward. This isn’t about provocation for its own sake. It’s about confronting uncomfortable facts, questioning failed assumptions, and asking whether policy should be judged by intention — or by results. 🎧 Watch the full podcast here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJPUZYNxsSM&t=1717s #CarlBenjamin #UKImmigration #ImmigrationPolicy #BritishPolitics #CultureWar #PoliticalDebate #TheDailyHeretic Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

👉 Subscribe to The Daily Heretic for long-form conversations that tackle difficult policy questions with clarity rather than slogans: https://www.youtube.com/@hereticsclips/videos What happens when welfare policy, migration, and long-term outcomes are discussed honestly — without collapsing into accusation or taboo? In this episode, Andrew Gold speaks with Carl Benjamin about the realities of immigration, welfare dependence, and social mobility in parts of the UK, using Birmingham as a case study. Rather than focusing on individuals, the conversation examines systems: incentives, expectations, and the unintended consequences of policies that are rarely evaluated after they’re implemented. Carl argues that short-term welfare support can become a long-term trap when pathways into work, integration, and upward mobility are weak or inconsistently enforced. He explores why some communities experience prolonged deprivation, and why policymakers often struggle to address the problem without being accused of bad faith. The discussion centres on outcomes — employment, housing conditions, public services, and social cohesion — rather than identity. A key theme is temporality. Carl suggests that some migration patterns are shaped by economic calculation: people move to maximise opportunity, support families, or secure stability — and may later return elsewhere when circumstances change. He argues that governments should be honest about this reality, designing policy around contribution, integration, and clear expectations, rather than moral narratives that obscure practical results. The episode also touches on the “right’s civil war,” examining why disagreements over welfare and migration fracture political movements. Carl explains how loyalty tests and labels often replace data, pushing serious policy debate to the margins. When questions are treated as accusations, solutions become impossible. Andrew presses Carl on compassion and responsibility: how to balance support for vulnerable people with accountability, and how to discuss community outcomes without dehumanising anyone involved. The exchange stays focused on policy design — what works, what doesn’t, and why avoiding measurement ultimately harms the very people policies claim to help. If you’re frustrated by immigration debates that swing between silence and outrage, this episode offers a framework for thinking about welfare, integration, and long-term outcomes without resorting to caricature. This isn’t about blaming communities. It’s about asking whether current policies genuinely create opportunity — or quietly entrench deprivation. 🎧 Watch the full podcast here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJPUZYNxsSM&t=1717s #CarlBenjamin #UKWelfare #ImmigrationPolicy #SocialMobility #BritishPolitics #CultureWar #TheDailyHeretic Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

👉 Subscribe to The Daily Heretic for long-form conversations that interrogate power, policy, and uncomfortable questions without slogans or spin: https://www.youtube.com/@hereticsclips/videos What happens when immigration policy is judged by intention rather than outcomes — and who is allowed to ask whether it’s actually working? In this episode, Andrew Gold sits down with Carl Benjamin to unpack the political fallout of Boris Johnson’s immigration legacy and the growing backlash it has triggered across the UK. Rather than focusing on personalities, this conversation drills into policy decisions, incentives, and the long-term consequences that are rarely examined once the headlines move on. Carl argues that rapid immigration during the Johnson era was pursued without adequate planning for employment pathways, integration, or local capacity. He questions whether government policy sufficiently distinguished between humanitarian obligation and economic sustainability — and why concerns about welfare dependency, public services, and social cohesion are so often dismissed rather than addressed. A central theme is taboo. Carl explains how raising questions about welfare usage or labour participation can instantly shut down debate, even when those questions are about systems rather than individuals. He suggests that political actors avoid honest assessment because it risks moral discomfort, leaving communities to absorb the consequences without meaningful reform. The episode also explores how this issue feeds into what’s been labelled “the right’s civil war.” Carl examines how movements fracture when people disagree over diagnosis: is the problem enforcement, incentives, messaging, or political cowardice? When disagreement is treated as betrayal, debate collapses — and policy stagnates. Andrew challenges Carl to clarify where criticism of policy ends and rhetoric begins, and whether language hardens positions rather than persuading. The exchange stays focused on outcomes: employment, contribution, integration, and the role of the state in setting clear expectations that apply equally to everyone. If you’re frustrated by immigration debates that swing between moral absolutes and total silence, this episode offers a framework for thinking about incentives, accountability, and why difficult conversations keep being postponed. This isn’t about blaming communities. It’s about questioning whether government policy is fair, effective, and honest — and whether refusing to measure outcomes ultimately helps anyone. 🎧 Watch the full podcast here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJPUZYNxsSM&t=1717s #CarlBenjamin #UKImmigration #ImmigrationPolicy #BritishPolitics #CultureWar #WelfareDebate #TheDailyHeretic Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

👉 Subscribe to The Daily Heretic for long-form conversations that cut through noise and explore what’s really happening beneath the headlines: https://www.youtube.com/@hereticsclips/videos Is the so-called “woke right” actually a new movement — or just a label being used to control, exclude, and reshape who is allowed to speak? In this episode, Andrew Gold speaks with Carl Benjamin about the internal debate that many are calling “the right’s civil war,” and why Carl believes that framing itself is part of the problem. Rather than treating politics as a battle between fixed sides, Carl explains how movements often turn inward once they grow large enough — shifting from arguing about ideas to policing behaviour, loyalty, and identity. He describes how terms like “woke right” emerge not as neutral descriptions, but as tools that sort people into acceptable and unacceptable categories. Carl reflects on how quickly ideological spaces can develop informal rules about what can be said, who can be questioned, and which views suddenly become risky to express — even when those views were mainstream only a short time before. A key part of the conversation looks at how public figures like Konstantin Kisin have been vocal in warning that some on the right are now repeating patterns once associated with the far left: social punishment, moral gatekeeping, and attempts to push dissenters out of the conversation rather than argue with them. Carl explores why this pattern seems to repeat across movements regardless of ideology — and why people who resist being absorbed into a single “tribe” often find themselves targeted from multiple directions at once. They also discuss why the internet accelerates these dynamics: how platforms reward outrage, how conflict attracts attention, and how complexity gets flattened into slogans that travel faster than understanding. If you’ve ever felt confused about what these labels really mean, why people are suddenly being recategorised as enemies or allies, or why movements that start as rebellions against control often recreate it — this episode offers a calm, thoughtful attempt to understand that process from the inside. This is not about choosing a side. It’s about examining how sides are formed, how they harden, and what gets lost when loyalty replaces curiosity. 🎧 Watch the full podcast here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJPUZYNxsSM #CarlBenjamin #LotusEaters #AndrewGold #WokeRight #OnlineDebate #TheDailyHeretic #PoliticsPodcast #InternetCulture Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

👉 Subscribe to The Daily Heretic for long-form conversations that interrogate ideology, power, and the psychology behind modern politics: https://www.youtube.com/@hereticsclips/videos How does a political commentator become a cultural symbol — and what happens when symbolism replaces argument? In this episode, Andrew Gold is joined by Carl Benjamin to examine the role Owen Jones plays in today’s political landscape and why he has become such a lightning rod in debates around “wokeness,” media influence, and ideological conformity. Rather than focusing on personalities for their own sake, this conversation uses Jones as a case study in how modern political identities are built, rewarded, and defended. Carl argues that Jones represents more than an individual commentator — he embodies a broader cultural posture: moral certainty, ideological confidence, and a belief that dissent is not merely wrong, but illegitimate. The discussion explores how this style of politics thrives in an environment where attention is currency and outrage is amplified, often blurring the line between persuasion and performance. A central theme is iconography. Carl explains how movements elevate certain figures into symbols of virtue, making criticism feel like sacrilege rather than debate. Once someone becomes an icon, questioning their arguments can be reframed as attacking values themselves — which shuts down discussion and hardens divisions. The episode also connects this phenomenon to what’s often described as “the right’s civil war.” Carl suggests that the same dynamics seen on the progressive left — purity tests, loyalty enforcement, and moral hierarchy — increasingly appear across the political spectrum. When politics becomes identity-first, nuance becomes a liability and disagreement a threat. Andrew challenges Carl on tone, responsibility, and whether sharp critique risks reinforcing the very dynamics it condemns. The exchange stays focused on psychology and incentives: how media ecosystems reward absolutism, why moderation struggles to compete, and how audiences are trained to treat politics as a moral battleground rather than a problem-solving exercise. If you’re trying to understand why political debate feels so polarised, why certain figures attract intense devotion and hostility, or how “woke” culture became such a powerful organising force, this episode offers a framework for making sense of it — without demanding agreement. This isn’t about name-calling. It’s about examining how modern political culture works, why it escalates, and what gets lost when ideology becomes identity. 🎧 Watch the full podcast here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJPUZYNxsSM&t=1717s #CarlBenjamin #AndrewGold #OwenJones #CultureWar #UKPolitics #PoliticalPsychology #TheDailyHeretic Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Today I’m talking to Carl Benjamin about what people are calling “the right’s civil war” — and why the story most of us are being told might be missing the point. SPONSORS: Earn up to 4 per cent on gold, paid in gold: https://www.monetary-metals.com/heretics/ Use my code Andrew25 on MyHeritage: https://bit.ly/AndrewGoldDNA Grab your free seat to the 2-Day AI Mastermind: https://link.outskill.com/GOLDNOV4 Start fresh at tryfum.com/products/zero-crisp-mint . Over 500,000 people have already made the switch — no nicotine, no vapor, no batteries. Just flavor, fidget, and a fresh start. Get up to 45% off Ekster with my code ANDREWGOLDHERETICS: https://partner.ekster.com/andrewgoldheretics Plaud links! Official Website: Uk: https://bit.ly/3K7jDGm US: https://bit.ly/4a0tUie Amazon: https://amzn.to/4hQVyAm Get an automatic 20% discount at checkout until December 1st. Cut your wireless bill to 15 bucks a month at https://mintmobile.com/heretics A lot of this conversation is about labels, loyalty tests, and what happens when movements turn inward: who gets cast out, who gets listened to, and how ordinary people end up pushed into tribes they don’t fully recognise. I’m not here to do propaganda for anyone - I’m here to understand what’s actually going on. We cover: - What “civil war on the right” even means (and what it doesn’t) - Why factions form, escalate, and start purging allies - How online incentives warp political identity and belonging - The difference between “protecting a culture” and playing tribal status games - What Carl thinks people get wrong about this moment - If you disagree with either of us, I still want you here - but argue the point, not the person. #carlbenjamin #culturewar #politics Join the 30k heretics on my mailing list: https://andrewgoldheretics.com Check out my new documentary channel: https://youtube.com/@andrewgoldinvestigates Andrew on X: https://twitter.com/andrewgold_ok Insta: https://www.instagram.com/andrewgold_ok Heretics YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@andrewgoldheretics Chapters: 0:00 Carl Benjamin Highlights 4:00 What “woke right” is (and why it’s used as gatekeeping) 8:00 Group claims: Israel as the analogy + demographic security 12:00 Representation, leadership, and why “who governs” matters 16:00 Civic vs ethnic Englishness (and why this gets slippery) 20:00 Grievances beyond immigration: economy, state intrusion, taxes 24:00 Tradition vs bureaucracy: jury trials, “24-hour courts” talk 28:00 Scapegoating minorities vs blaming English political elites 32:00 Categories vs “bundles of relations” (community as the unit) 36:00 When relations break down: resentment, “colonies,” dual loyalties 40:00 What counts as “authoritarian”? Quotas vs visa reversal 44:00 The “Boris wave” argument + welfare resentment example 48:00 “How do you get people to assimilate?” (and is it too late?

Is equality always a good thing? Or could it actually be tearing society apart? In this thought-provoking interview, Carl Benjamin — better known online as Sargon of Akkad — argues why the pursuit of equality has dangerous consequences for liberty, culture, and civilisation itself. For more fearless, unfiltered discussions that challenge political dogma, subscribe here: https://www.youtube.com/@hereticsclips/videos Carl Benjamin doesn’t shy away from controversy. He describes himself as “as far-right as it gets,” but what does that really mean? Is it just a label, or does it represent a deeper philosophy about human nature, freedom, and responsibility? In this conversation, he dismantles the simplistic Left vs. Right framing and asks the harder questions: What is liberty, really? Is the obsession with equality eroding merit and excellence? And is the modern “woke” movement pushing us toward authoritarianism disguised as compassion? Benjamin takes us into the nuts and bolts of political philosophy, exploring ideas that most mainstream outlets refuse to touch. He challenges the dominant narrative by examining the foundations of liberalism, conservatism, and the dangers of unchecked egalitarianism. Whether you see him as a provocateur, philosopher, or political dissenter, there’s no denying Carl Benjamin has shaped online debates for over a decade. Known globally under his moniker Sargon of Akkad, he built a reputation as a sharp critic of progressive ideology and a defender of free speech. Love him or hate him, his perspective forces you to confront uncomfortable truths about the direction Western societies are heading. This conversation isn’t about soundbites or slogans. It’s about asking whether equality, as it’s currently understood, is sustainable — or whether it risks destroying the very freedoms it claims to protect. Benjamin’s bold claim that “equality is bad” is not just a provocation; it’s an invitation to rethink one of the most sacred modern ideals. 👉 Watch the full podcast here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPXkjNAQj20 👉 Subscribe to Heretics Clips for more interviews that go beyond the surface and dive into the philosophies shaping our world. #CarlBenjamin #Equality #SargonOfAkkad #Woke #Liberalism #HereticsClips Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Carl Benjamin is a political commentator and cultural critic. This discussion focuses on diagnosis — not slogans — and on understanding consequences before they arrive. Young men aren't radicalising because of ideology, they're reacting to a world that no longer works for them. In this conversation with Carl Benjamin, we break down why the post-war consensus has collapsed, why politics feels illegitimate and why a generation feels pushed to the edge. In this episode we discuss: – Why young men feel shut out of the system – The collapse of the post-WWII consensus – Piers Morgan, Nick Fuentes, and generational revolt – Identity politics vs material reality – Legitimacy, consent, and non-compliance – Why politics no longer fixes anything – What happens when power has no limits – Why discomfort is unavoidable - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - TIMESTAMPS: 00:04:18 – Why Young Men Feel Politically Homeless 00:11:42 – Moral Outrage vs Material Reality 00:19:27 – Why Figures Like Nick Fuentes Resonate 00:27:53 – Identity Politics and Manufactured Resentment 00:36:41 – Media Incentives and the Outrage Economy 00:48:12 – Piers Morgan, Debate Culture, and Spectacle 01:01:08 – Loss of Legitimacy in Institutions 01:15:18 – What Happens if Nothing Changes 01:32:44 – Generational Breaking Point 01:35:21 – Final Warnings and Consequences - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CONTACT PETE › Website – http://petermccormack.com › Feedback – https://www.petermccormack.com/contact › Email – me@petermccormack.com › Instagram – /mccormack555 › X/Twitter – https://x.com/petermccormack/ CONNECT WITH CARL BENJAMIN › Website – https://lotuseaters.com/ › Twitter – https://x.com/Sargon_of_Akkad SPONSORS › IREN - https://www.iren.com/ › Ledger - https://www.ledger.com/ › Gemini - https://gemini.com/ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - LISTEN / SUBSCRIBE › Apple Podcasts: https://apple.co/40ruY9K › Spotify: https://spoti.fi/3Wc94Vu › Fountain: https://bit.ly/FountainPM › YouTube: https://bit.ly/YouTube_PM › Rumble: https://bit.ly/RumblePM FILMED BY CURTIS TAYLOR › https://www.curttaylor.co.uk/ › https://x.com/curttayloruk/ EDITED BY CONOR MCCORMACK › https://x.com/ConorM04 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.