Get all sides of every story and be better informed at ground.news/AlexOC. Subscribe for 40% off unlimited access. For early access to episodes, ad-free, go to www.patreon.com/alexoc
Dear Alex, You want rational proof, Fine. Here you go. Three things must be proven rationally. 1) Does God exist 2) Is that God an Abrahamic one. 3) Is Islam the only true religion among the Abrahamic religions. 1) God's existence? Rational proof for God's existence goes like this:- P1) Anything or being whose existence is not eternal, has a creator. (Quran 52:35,36) P2) The universe is not eternal (Quran 3:190) C) The universe has a creator. That creator is whom we call God. 2) Proof of Abrahamic God God is a conscious living being and humans are also conscious living beings. If any conscious beings have two characteristics then that being can't be God rationally, metaphysically and ontologically:- 1) If that being is mortal. 2) if that being is dependent upon causes to live. All Greek/Norwegian/Egyptian/Indian/Mesopotamian pagan deities like aron ras hanuman vishnu shiva thor zeus uzza and jesus etc. All had these two characteristics so they can't have divine attributes like omnipotence, omniscience, eternal, all wise etc. Only Abrahamic God is pure from these two characteristics. So that's why he has actual divine attributes. Now only 3 religions left behind, judaism christianity and islam. 3) Why Islam only:- Rational proof for islam goes like this, P1) God's word, statements can't be wrong because he's all knowing and all wise. P2) Both old and new testaments have scientific, mathematical, historical errors. false prophecies and contradictions. C) Old and new testaments are not the words of God Almighty. Only QURAN is pure from all errors and contradictions. That's why islam is really from the one true God Almighty. Here's your rational proof for islam. Any questions?
@muhammadfawad1879 bro you just posted cringe. You can call the thing in your car that makes it move "a hamster", that doesn't mean a rodent is powering your car. It just means you've named the mechanism a hamster. You've played a word trick to try and imbue the unknown with qualities that you prefer. It's useless and arbitrary. I could call it Gary. Doesn't mean anything about the ontology of the thing.
@@Joe_mammma We have rational deductive proof/evidence. If you say that a contingent thing or beings can come into existence without creator then God Almighty told us (in the **quran 52:35,36)* that you have only two choices left, 1) believing that a contingent thing can come into existence accidentally, this is like saying that 0+0=1 or nothing+nothing=something. 2) believing that a contingent beings or things can come into existence by themselves from nonexistence. This is like saying that 0=1 or nothing=something. If you believe in any of these two points then Allah Almighty said you are irrational and dumbest person ever. We know that creator of universe exist because the universe is contingent not eternal both rationally and scientifically.
@@Joe_mammma We have rational deductive proof/evidence. If you say that a contingent thing or beings can come into existence without creator then God Almighty told us (in the **quran 52:35,36)* that you have only two choices left, 1) believing that a contingent thing can come into existence accidentally, this is like saying that 0+0=1 or nothing+nothing=something. 2) believing that a contingent beings or things can come into existence by themselves from nonexistence. This is like saying that 0=1 or nothing=something. If you believe in any of these two points then Allah Almighty said you are irrational and dumbest person ever. We know that creator of universe exist because the universe is contingent not eternal both rationally and scientifically.
The funniest thing is that right beside this video's thumbnail saying "we are addicted to crisis" is your podcast with Chris Williamson with the thumbnail saying "This is a real crisis." Truly poetic.
You all laughing but youre not seeing what's really going on. There is too many people saying too many things and too many people listening to these things. Our brains aren't made to process and store all that info, especially if MANY times that info is contradictory. We crave more and more and yet we truly understand less and less. Imo, dangerous times are ahead.
@@Senorzilchnzero if a man as smart as Rory is at the same time so blind then we are screwed. We have been neutered and self-censoring so much we can't express fully the issues we face. Try this on for size. Notice how if ever issues are addressed we are met with the following refrains? Can we discuss the issues we are having in terms of migration. You are a xenophobe. Can we discuss issues relating to Islam in the West. You are Islamaphobic. Can we discuss issues in regards to LGBTQ and the approach we are taking to gender dysphoria? It seems like a lot of little girls are experiencing at concerning high rates. You are a homophobe/transphobic! Have I missed any? Who has the power in society? Who has control? It is the minorities. Compassion and empathy has been weaponised to the point where you cannot address issues head on and actually make improvements. There are straws on the camels back, many straws. We are getting close to that one that will break and it will be over. The good will train that has been trying desperately to placate and accomodate people who should be more grateful to live in such great societies is about to come to a halt. Never bite the hand that feeds you especially when that hand belongs to a British Lion.
@@Senorzilchnzero That's tempting to believe, but I remember once hearing about a Russian sociologist who went out to the fringes of the USSR to interview the peasants there. And the reality was, without a modern upbringing, those people just lacked a level of comprehension we consider fundamental. He'd ask them questions like "All bears north of the arctic circle are white. If you were in the arctic circle and saw a bear, what color would it be?" And they'd answer "Bears are brown." I don't think we even fully understand yet what people's brains are capable of. It's more of a problem that tech companies have designed profit models that exploit human emotion for gain. The system is designed deliberately to make us upset and angry because it's highly engaging.
Fascinating conversation, but I do wish you'd have pushed Rory a little more. You asked a brilliant question at 9:00 about some very specific incidents, specifically about threats to MPs and fear impacting legislation. Rory's response was to pivot to a different question that he made up himself, about whether or not the pro-Palestinian marches are antisemitic. Rory has a tendency to do this, and it was one of my biggest frustrations with his conversations with Sam Harris.
So far very frustrating, he’s a politician so it’s to be expected to some extent but this podcast usually is refreshingly honest and frank. Political interviews are tough at the best of times with the required adversarial nature but expected more from aoc (so far)
This was my exact thought too when I listened to this part. The specific incidents can be applied to many areas and it's a bit out of touch for a politician to say "okay you faced this, but is it really an existential threat to the country or just to you" as if it shouldn't still be discussed
Isn't the pivot to acknowledging that his colleagues as MPs receive myriad threats a valid answer? If someone is threatened one thousand times a day, but 70 of those threats come from Christian nationalists, does it make sense to consider Christian nationalists an existential threat? It's possible to say that these problems are real, dire and should be dealt with, but if your entire persona revolves around them then that's fundamentally about you, and not the life of the nation.
Alex is becoming a first rate interviewer, generous, welcoming and happy to give the guest free time. He answers them with knowledge and respect. More power to you in the art of developing discussion. ( please people remember he is very, very young)
He is great at calmly extracting the opinions of those he interviews and have them explain their beliefs. If Alex has a fault it is being too polite and not challenging his guests when they spout nonsense or obfuscate, but perhaps that is not his aim.
@@paulwellings-longmore1012 sometimes I think he is a truely good person. I know that is somewhat rare in this world but he really does try. I may be a fool but that is how he comes across.👍
@@jonathancrawford7106It is indeed a pleasure, but we do need to be be careful what we wish for. Soon enough UA-cam will be a realm of beautifully produced inane junk, like TV and Netflix before it
I have a surprising amount of respect for Rory Stewart. He comes off as a sincere and intelligent individual who is far more nuanced than your average political commentator.
Be careful. He sounds sincere but then you can see how insincere he actually is if you check out his comments about Sam Harris. And that's just one example, he does it all the time.
I still think, as an admirer of Rory, that he was very remiss in not mentioning the Islamist murder of David Amess when discussing the threats posed to parliament and British politics in general by extremist Islamists when speaking to Sam Harris.
I think the danger is when a discussion about Islamic extremists just becomes Muslims. I am concerned that those like Harris and Murray are either failing to make that distinction or not calling out their supporters for failing to make that distinction.
@@mike9512 The general consensus in the UK is that the majority of Muslims Look out for their own community. Do not care for British society and would like to continue to spread Islam across the world. This is problematic for British culture as Muslim communities are rapidly growing. Ask them where they are from and they will be first to tell you their heritage, rather than saying 'England'
Alex you are doing great work here we need discussions like this to realize our actual issues in the UK and come back together to really drive Britain into the future.
Each time I listen to Mr. Steward, I am reminded of the reason why I am a Conservative, although politically I find myself mostly supporting the Left. Conservative parties don't seem to understand what Conservatism is about, and instead have become revolutionary at their core.
@@laurentdrozin812 yep there is a slide on the right with conservatives disappearing to be replaced by an anti democratic post truth populists in conservative clothes.
@@veryfitting and in the Islamic case you can neither have the freedom to be an apostate, a homosexual, etc. nor be free from the threats and violence of Islamist radicals
24:33 anyone else listening thought they'd lost their internet connection there? Funny how in our noisy fast paced world we're no longer used to people taking the time to have a proper think before opening their mouth.
I really really really enjoy it these days when people do that. I respect it A LOT. Everyone needs to start speaking less and thinking more, except me, I'll keep talking the rest of you just think.
Rory Stewart is a strange one - at one level he's a very sincere and thoughtful individual, and obviously intelligent. At another level he's so embedded in a certain kind of Centre-left liberal world view that he's utterly blinkered to certain aspects of reality. For sure, there is a danger of extremism (at both ends of the spectrum), there are also dangers to "extreme centre-ism", if I can put it that way...and Rory very much demonstrates that. His view that the issues facing our country are all entirely mundane practical questions about things like housing etc, with absolutely no recognition that national ideology, identity and sense of purpose are fundamentals to what makes everything else "tick" is a classic example of that.
He's said statistically, Islam and identity were not the priority when speaking to people on their doorsteps. Of course people care about these issues, but there are more immediate issues that are also important like jobs, healthcare, policing, social care, etc...
Firstly, Stewart is really Centre Right - certainly NOT "Centre-left". He deals with empirical reality rather than media hysteria, bias and the echo chambers that most people (virtually all of us) live in. He specifically addresses the point that people focus on issues that they are interested in "what you are obsessed with" and decide that those are the most important issues facing society. He is simply saying stop to that way of thinking! It is not "Centre-ism" to think like a mature adult and address the real issues like food poverty, exorbitant rents, homelessness, a broken healthcare system, pot-holed roads, and dilapidated buildings. Secondly, at no point has Stewart said that the lack of identity, worklessness, loss of meaning, nationalism are not important. He is just pointing out that if commentators focus solely on reinforcing our confirmation bias, talking to their base and talking about emotive topics with sensationalist headlines the fundamentals e.g. the 20% rise in the cost of food get ignored. We all need to step out of the Echo chamber and admit to the influence of the algorithms..!! Stewart is asking people to really listen and be open to our minds being changed. "I have fundamentally reconsidered my position... You're right, I'm wrong."
Once again, Alex proves to be among the best at providing insightful interviews of interesting people. I prefer and learn from this type of informed and thoughtful discussion over most presernters debate format.
If you aren’t fluent in German and/or haven't been to Germany, you can’t really condemn and criticise Hitler and Nazism because you haven’t lived like a Nazi and especially not a German one. You also have to know the complete history of the rise of Nazism too, the thinkers and their ideas that the nazis claimed influenced them, and you have to know every single person involved. If the standard is “you’re not part of this community therefore you can’t really criticise it” then we’ve pretty much excused ourselves from criticising almost anything.
Your comparison doesnt work because it contains two concepts at different levels of concentration. If you were to compare Naziism to the ideology of ISIS youd have an easier time because they are both examples of extreme ideologies existing within larger, neutral frameworks. Islam could be compared to say western tradition, because it is equally an overarching, longwinded tradition which includes ideologies which are good and bad... like Naziism. It is easy to criticise Nazis or isis - we do it all the damn time. it is not easy to understand or criticise Islam or the west. Rorys problem is with people like sam harris reducing islam to a rigid ideology like naziism when it simply isnt comparable and not at all easy to truly understand.
@@harrykitchener5597 The point is that if someone has to have certain criteria (He did the whole “they don’t know Islam because they don’t know Arabic and haven’t lived as a Muslim” schtick) in order to address or criticise something, then that should be applied to anything and exempt anyone from criticising almost anything. So in order to be consistent, this guy can’t criticise Hitler or Nazism at all because he can’t speak German fluently, doesn’t live in Germany or Austria, never lived in Nazi Germany, doesn’t personally know anyone who is a Nazi, has never lived as a Nazi and doesn’t have any kind of academic credentials that would justify discussing the subject with anyone. No one living can ever comment on Greek and Roman history before 1700 because none of us were there to experience it.
@@harrykitchener5597 nope. if the criticisms themselves are valid, they are valid, no matter who says it. By your and rory's logic, that should make Mosab Hassan Yousef's strong criticisms against islam 100% correct and valid only because he lived that life right?
@@ottz2506i think rorys point was tho that it was "a bit weird" that sam invited him to a podcast to defend islam when he could invite many other people who are more qualified. Not necessarily that its wrong to have an opinion about it in public. Rory continues to have a strong opinion about islam without having done all the stuff he mentions. Idk if he had a stronger argument on sams show about the issue but that is how its presented here as far as i can see. I think it is also a good point that sam has engaged in so much debate over islam without making more of an effort to understand the religion on a fundamental level. Rory isnt 100% clear on his position but as far as i can see his gripe is with the quality of critique not with whether the critique is allowed to exist at all. And if the conversation is about quality of critique then i would agree that its basically impossible to really critique such a massive network of complex and contradictory views, especialy as someone with such little background knowledge. The same applies to roman/ greek history. If someone started spontaneously ranting to me about the roman attitude towards god and society id have no clue what to think. Which romans? Which era? Where in the roman empire? Its not about whether we can critique but about whether there is someone else out there who is in a better position to critique it. Alex has read the bible. I have hardly read the bible. Im allowed to have opinions on the bible. Alex probably has better more informed opinions on the bible than i do. I would also trust a historian who speaks german a lot more to speak about naziism than any guy like myself who just doesnt like nazis. Once again, quality of critique not existence of critique. Sorry for the long ass response.
@@pseudonymousbeing987 Sam might argue that yeah. I think all religions devolve into barbarity when the people are poor. Think of the dark ages of Christianity. When people have no control over their lives, they fall to religion and superstition.
Acknowledging something can be extremely bad and still not a "big" threat is my key take away from Rory's view on Harris, JK, etc. It is also how populism grows, politicians not acknowledging what neighbourhoods feel. If Rory is keen on talking about what he regards as bigger issues, just say. "Yes, Islam is a shitty problem in our society, I agree with you, but I'd rather spend my time on housing because that's a much bigger issue and this is why"
Could it be he doesn’t feel “Islam” or “Muslims” at large are a problem? Example: I consider Christian Nationalism a continuing threat to U.S. democracy. I don’t hold that view towards Christians. There is some crossover but not necessarily a contradiction.
Perfectly said and observed. As Jacques Derrida said “All texts contradict”. He means if what each and every one of us says or writes was closely examined, it would be obvious that we constantly contradict ourselves. I notice this is the case with myself by the minute.
Is the difference in context that each incident occurs in a good enough excuse for this? Is it preconceived theories of claimed preferred behaviour which don't match what we do, and/or that contexts haven't been taken into account in the theory because they're new to us when they occur?
Very interesting insight into just how we are coloured by our emotional reaction to what we see….Rory makes such a case for the House of Lords, which I have for most of my life, I’m 76 years old, I’ve regarded as a total irrelevance to be got rid of as soon as possible. However I’ve been watching the Rwanda debates in the House of Lords and it’s struck me as this is the only place where reasoned and compassionate debate has occurred, in complete opposition to what’s happened in the Commons. It’s utterly changed my lifelong belief that the Lords need to be placed by another elected body. But it’s not through Rory’s emotive affection to the Royal Family and all the semi mystical wrap around of Ritual and Mystery :-). It’s that we need people who are prepared to speak truth to power; who can step back and analyse the wider eventualities of dealing with a particular problem typified by refugees arriving in little boats on the beaches of England. We are so subconsciously governed by instinct and emotion when we are young: age and a lifetime of stumbling around and making mistakes does, if we’re lucky enough, bring wisdom eventually and it’s no bad thing to listen to age and experience :-)
Excellent listening and this is Rory at his best. Alex’s charitable engagement with Rory’s ideas has given some interesting insight and thoughts to develop slowly and thoroughly
@@ljt3084 So do you believe in Rory's fairer, more egalitarian POV ...OR... do you believe his POV will better allow Sharia in UK?? Do you even understand the meaning/use of the word 'trope'?
I despise a lot of these non-Muslim moderate liberals who make excuses for Islam. They don't even understand how ex-Muslims are being threatened everyday by these people of a self-proclaimed religion of peace.
This discussion was truly wonderful to behold. Two intelligent English men who think critically about the world around them and about their own ideas. Both Alex and Rory have gone up in my already high estimation of them. I would only ask that Rory go back into politics full-time, because we need his brand of leadership; and by the same token, Alex never step into the political world full-time because we need his clarity of thinking in this space. Thank you gentlemen.
I'd never studied British government. Rory Stewart's book on how not to be a politician shattered my assumptions about how government works in the UK. It made me appreciate my American system a bit more. I wish American conservatives were as thoughtful as Stewart.
Rory Stewart would be a liberal in the US political system and not even within the "moderate" wing of the Democratic party. US politics is completely fucked.
@@timmanning5206 There are interesting and thoughtful British Conservative thinkers, they just aren’t politicians. Genuine question, why do you regard Stewart as so thoughtful?
Wonderful. What a pity Rory was not chosen as the Tory leader. He is the man we so sorely need--not only because he embodies the seiousness and integrity he speaks of, but also because he has genuine vision, is well-read, and wise. I know no other British public figure of his calibre. He's also a damn good writer. When I was a professor at an American university, I taught his book, The Places in Between. It's remarkable, as the man himself is. Thank you, Mr O'Connor. For me, this is one of your best interviews.
He’s one of the few right wing politicians I’ve found effective at selling their ideology across the aisle. Particularly now that so much of our politics is based on undermining your opponent rather than their ideas
No, look at statistics instead. Yes, certain muslims, such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali, have faced terrible oppression and such but we must also take statistic reality into account. Because that tells us the reality.
@bastiaanvanbeek Now a days everything is named a crisis. However, events of concern and trends should not be dismissed. David Amess MP Fusilier Lee Rigby Manchester Arena Bombing 7 July 2005 London bombings 2017 London Bridge attack How many dead does it take to be statistically significant? The Muslim Council of Britian says Muslims account for 4% of the population 15+years, but is, 15% of the prison population.
@@acerrubrum5749There's also disproportionate representation of African Americans in US prisons and violent crime. In the 1960s-90s, there was also a disproportionate number of terror attacks carried out by the Irish. Sometimes a single statistic isn't enough to tell a story
1.8b Muslims and you take 3 individuals to put fourth an argument? Really? And what Muslims have you personally asked? Islam has its issues like all major religions, but if travel to those Muslim lands and you'll quickly realise their religion isn't a threat to the West like some on the right will make you believe.
One of the causes of curruption in politics is the FPTP voting system where a significant proportion of the voters are voting for someone they don't want in order to keep out someone they dislike even more.
Of all the criticisms of FPTP, this is an odd one. People vote tactically in all voting systems. How many people will vote in the US presidential election more to see Trump or Biden out of the white house than the person they actually vote for in it?
@@dechasrisen4783 The problem isn’t that they vote to keep someone out on it’s own, it’s that in doing so they vote for someone they don’t like and against someone they probably do like. This can mean politicians can “game the system“ and still win even if most of the people don’t like them. Sure many other systems also have it but they are still much better, multiple voting for example allows them to vote both tactically and still vote for their favourite, ranked voting allows them to do the same but this time make sure their vote for the guy they want comes before the person their voting for to keep someone else out.
@@generaltom6850STV is just another form of FPTP, but it just gives you the illusion of choice. It still means the two party system is maintained and no positive change will happen.
@dechasrisen4783 I'm from Netherlands and a government has to be created based on a coalition representing over half of all the votes. It really works, no matter how unhappy I am about the political situation I've never felt I had to vote tactically. There's only more new political parties popping up We're in a situation right now where the political party with the most votes is struggling to form a government because they cannot come to agreements with others so they cannot create a coalition that would represent the majority of votes in the country.
@dechasrisen4783 Your example: "How many people will vote in the US presidential election more to see Trump or Biden out of the white house than the person they actually vote for in it?" IS an FPTP problem.
18:20 mark… I felt so called out 😂 But it’s good, it was a much needed reality check that I may be becoming a little too confident in my beliefs. It just means I need to start opening my mind again, specifically to the things I wouldn’t see based on my algorithm. Good interview with a very balanced, level-headed guest.
This was one of the most old-timey British things I've seen in a while, from the conversation to the people, and even the set. The guest was quoting Yeats off the top of his head, for God's sake. That said, I did watch the entire episode. Alex keeps it interesting.
i wish i were there to argue with Rory on the issue of islam and religion and his view on them as someone who was born muslim and lived in muslim country and seen all sorts of injustice, cruelty, and craziness of islam . don't know if i'm right but Alex looked as if he is trying to appease him by not challenging him by talking his mind the way we know him
That's Alex for you. He rarely, if ever, challenges those he debates. He is more interested in having them explain themselves. That can be frustrating.
Hi Alex, excellent choice of guest this time!, Rory has been quite a revelation to us this last few years. He seems to be that very rare thing these days in being a well educated open minded individual clearly capable of intense high grade observation. A person who is skilled in finding theories that fit his evidence rather than simplistically seeking evidence that supports his theories. He has also been able to travel to many interesting parts of the world and properly immerse himself in the culture of those places. This provides him with very good observations on the realities of other peoples and then make appropriate assessment of conditions here. There are always some minor points of judgement where we differ but that could be due to our differing background and experience, he also is not so well versed in the natural vagaries of human behaviour so that he does not clearly understand the effect of cognitive delusion and the way such things cause embedded ideological convictions that make it so difficult for many people to accept and embrace the minor differences between various cultures, differences that having triggered emotional reaction then obscure the common humanity we all share. In this context xenophobia is always irrational, fear is the product of human imagination and emotion never experience reason or reality. All hostility towards others is always the product of challenge to delusion, when challenged the deluded never have any rational foundation on which to negotiate resolution. Our culture and system of indoctrination does not teach us to suspend judgement and reaction until reason has had a chance to penetrate the emotions, instead it works to promote instant response which is always defective. This applies in particular to this topic and I do agree that there are very clear signs of addiction to fear and this is the entire foundation of the very lucrative horror film industry, the reality in which we actually live has very little real hazard to deal with and sheer boredom is all it takes to promote such excitement. Cheers, Richard.
I disagree with Rory on his naivety to the threat of extreme Islam and the fact that moderate Muslim are more comfortable with it then one would expect. But I have to say I admire his thoughts and discussions. He clearly thinks about things deeply and has a profound respect for his country, it’s people and it’s way of life. It’s such a shame Boris was chosen over him… what a turning point in history.
Sorry, but what do you want moderate muslims to do for them to be not "comfortable"? They tip off the authorities in Britain but get ignored, they're one of the first parties to condemn the attacks and raise money for the victims - what more can they do?
He has literally been mortared by islamists within Iraq for over 24hrs. Incredulous that you would call him naive to such things, perhaps his broader experiences with Muslims have informed a different view .
Wonderfully insightful podcast, thank you. The point about how to deal with lived experience and taking on board a particular problem and yet being proportionate in one's response was good to hear, it often seems like certain public intellectuals champion issues to a level that's far beyond the reality and I'm unsure if it is helpful, especially without caveat.
I don’t think he advocates being naive about anything and probably would say that same thing is true of people who disagree with him. That is, you’re being naive about Islam because you undervalue the degree to which there are genuinely peaceful Muslims who want nothing to do with the extremists. Ignoring that can lead you on the fast track to repression based on religion which is dangerous and therefore your naivety is dangerous. Saying “being naive is dangerous” doesn’t cut it for you being right.
@@parkerlincoln49 Nobody needs to have this "there are genuinely peaceful X members of this group" attitude about Christians or Mormons and that's for a very good reason.
@@Hooga89Yes, and that reason is the bias against Islam that has formed over the last 100 years. If the boot was on the other foot and the Middle East had carved up Europe into ethnically inconsistent "states" and then engaged in regime changes to suit their oil monopoly ... I wonder what would people be saying about Christianity? Yes, there is still a practical question about the violence in the here and now... But let's not pretend that Islam is the only monotheistic religion that is obsessed with political power - they all are!
@Hooga89 Holy shit just say what you think. "We don't have this conversation about Christans and Mormons for a very good reason." You say this because you're too much of a coward to say what you think the reason actually is. I'll tell you what I think the reason is though, because I'm not a coward. I think we talk about Islam so much because right wing media and politicians fearmonger about it so much. It's really that simple. And they fearmonger about it because nationalists and wannabe authoritarians will always need scapegoats and "degenerates" to point to. They always need to paint an outgroup in order to establish an ingroup. I wonder what you think the reason is?
@@parkerlincoln49 the old excuse of #NotAll I am concerned with the ones that do, not the ones who don’t. I do not want to participate in their religion or learn their ancient wisdom. I want them to assimilate while in the West or leave. This used to be understood. This isn’t as complicated as you’re trying to make it.
it's funny to me the fact that people think the thing stopping a rape from happening in a bathroom is the picture on the sign on the outside of the bathroom
Oh Rory, the politician you didn’t want to become in order to be the leader we needed. Such a missed opportunity to set the bar to a much needed standard, if he only had the patience to weather the storm.
I'm not a nazi. I haven't read Mein Khampf in English let alone German. That said if Nazis were being given preferential treatment by our government and police and had a nazi heading our Parliament I'd be more than happy to criticise them.
Exactly - this idea that you have no right to criticise positions you haven't personally engaged with is bollocks. Some ideas are just wrong, and we can analyse them abstractly with these brains that we have and determine that they are wrong.
@@Scarletpimpanel73 I'm half an hour in and the guy seems likeable and intellectually honest but I disagree with him on so many points. But then I agree with Alex on very little as well and Im subscribed to his channel.
This was one of my favourite people ever have been in your show Alex, but what amuses me most is your attitude and respect towards everyone you come across in the debates, even those who are so difficult, you’re so mature and knowledgeable, thanks for the podcast on iTunes, so many!!!👍🏻
@@Narcissistic_Penguin No, "you're" is a contraction of "you are", so actually the original reply was correct. "Yes you are punctuation is lethal" is not correct. Moron.
Rory is truly the most confronting absurdist yet. The juxtaposition of his love of tradition and his sombre acceptance of a modern reality feels, not like crashing waves against rock, but like a calm beach where the differences of ideas is the very source of its beauty.
Prizing the ineffable values of beauty, or tradition, or landscape, is all fine and dandy when we’re talking about your choice of curtains. It’s a different kettle of fish entirely when it comes to choosing how to order a society, to distribute power and resources - which political philosophy to adopt, or which political party to fall in behind. How much should we tax the wealthy? How much do we owe to asylum seekers? The values which Rory champions seem to me woefully inadequate when it comes to addressing these questions. Here we should surely side with what (our best attempt at) argument, reason, ethics tells us - or at least not simply trust what our ‘saintly/drunkard’ sensibilities tell us. The fact that Rory considers his attachment to his curtains to be a fitting analogy is telling. His impulses are chiefly aesthetic, even in the political realm - morals don’t seem to get much of a look in. (And I don’t buy the idea that it’s a hopeless to try to disentangle the sentimental from the principled. This just smacks of refusing to subject your emotional and aesthetic attachments to critical scrutiny - to investigate their moral standing. I thought Alex might have pressed him a bit here). I find it difficult not to be dubious when those who espouse the importance of preserving traditions and customs happen to have themselves done very well out of those very traditions and been positioned to enjoy its frills and ornaments. (This was certainly the case with Burke, and Rory too. Where are the oppressed people championing the value of continuity?). Appeal to beauty, tradition, landscape as our guiding values quickly starts to look like window-dressing, disguising the one sacred value which defines and unites the conservative mindset: self-interest.
Interesting comment and I do think there is truth in much of what you say. I will say think you could find many oppressed people championing the value of continuity. Oppressed Christians, Muslims, Jews, Rastafarians, S&M enthusiasts, you name it, they will champion their community's continuity and what they get from it. I suppose you mean 'where will you find a people championing the continuity of a system they do not benefit the most from, suffer because of?'. Really you pose a self answering question because by definition, unless you are a masochist, or very unintelligent, you will not champion the continuity of your oppressor. It was rhetorical I suppose.
A very thoughtful and thought provoking interview - thanks to all involved. I am halfway through Rory's book which is made more interesting for me since he was the Member of Parliament for my part of the UK, and seems to have genuine love for this little part of northern England, as do I. I am surprised to find that I agree with Rory on much, although I have never voted Tory and never will. However I cannot agree with him on the role of the monarchy in today's UK. Whatever their past merits, I feel that this institution now holds us back instead of inspiring us. The sight of King Charles in his robes at the coronation simply looked absurd to me, and what Rory sees as a deeply symbolic ceremony seems to me a pointless charade. I have never swallowed the argument for the monarchy that they bring in a lot of business from tourists and I was glad that Rory did not try this one. The tourism argument is the sort of thing an accountant might use, whereas he claims his support is connected to the beauty he sees in the monarchy and its ceremonies. Frankly I do not, and the argument that if we were to abolish them we would have to ask priests or similar religious figures to open our supermarkets and sports centres is much too simplistic. I do however see beauty in the ancient castles that housed our kings and queens through the ages, although some are horrible (the Castle of Mey for example). We would not have to give any of this up if we became a republic, but we would say goodbye to the idea that our figurehead is there simply due to accident of birth. Likewise, I do not feel we need to abolish the House of Lords, but we should definitely abolish hereditary peerages and the right of representatives of only certain religions to sit in the Lords. I am a religious person and found it interesting to hear Alex and Rory discuss the merits of Latin in the Catholic church. I agree that there is much mystery in religious ceremonies (which is not the same as hocus pocus...) and this is to be celebrated and embraced. I cannot explain why certain hymns make the hairs on the back of my neck stand up, why the sound of a well-played church organ in an old cathedral makes me feel uplifted or why good people have been motivated by their faith to do acts of great courage and self-sacrifice. These are mysteries to me, and of course their value cannot be quantified. Lastly, I must pick up Rory on what seems like a criticism of engineers and technologists in general for an outlook on life that ignores beauty in a quest to measure and analyse everything. I can assure him that this is not the case for a great many engineers, mathematicians and physicists that I have known. I am sure he will be familiar with the quote from Kepler that 'the undevout astronomer is mad', but I have personally met many with a technical bent who see great beauty in equations, strong and light steel structures and other designed artefacts as well as in the natural world. This after all is the idea of the renaissance man (and woman) and they are still among us today!
@@drinkwater9891 You should find it alarming at the very least. And things as they are, the panic is much much less than the panic written about "Gentrification" of "inner-city" neighbourhoods, where the same arguments, such as "too rapid of a change to the identity of a place" are taken seriously. One wonders if consistency of principles would ever be applied.
@@Ψυχήμίασμα yeah i watched that scene in boyz n da hood movie with his dad preaching, and i also watched gb news and some rubber dinghies, life goes on for me, but its good someone is panicicking and thinking of the childrins or something
I would simply add that people seem to get away with failure to critique religious dogma to a degree they'd never get away with if the same dogma was purely political.
Here's the thing to remember about Rory Stewart when he tries to tell you everything is hunky dory in good old Blighty... He lives a life of priviledge 99% of people in Britain couldnt fathom. He lectures part time at an Ivy League US college. He's a published author. He travels the globe more often than an orbiting satellite giving talks for vast sums of money. He has the most popular podcast in the UK from which he collects shedloads of cash.... Rory has never and will never understand or experience life in modern Britain for someone on an average wage, a miniumun wage or anyone in receipt of benefits. His life is a walk on a fluffy cloud as it has always been since he was born. Yes, hes a smart guy. Yes, by Tory standards he's not the worst. But he's not living in the same reality as the rest of us.
He did walk across Asia. This is a wholly humbling experience, and he has seen poverty far worse than you get here in England. I take your point that he's grown up in a very privileged position, but just saying because he's rich he has no sense of modern struggle I think is a bit flippant. Have you read his books? Dismissing someone's views for their economic situation is very naive.
@@zacharypeach4217 I refer you to his voting record as an MP where he consistently voted to make poorer people's lives harder. It wasnt on principle that he left his seat or the party. It was because he was frozen out by Johnson's brand of even more cynical politics. Don't be fooled by the story of walking across the Middle East. That's an old 19th century romantic tale of British adventurers wandering the globe. A tradition that someone like Stewart would have been steeped in and sought to emulate. Of course, its better than a Jacob Rees Mogg, who's only flirtation with poverty was meeting his postman one morning at the front door when his butler wasn't available, but it doesn't necessarily equate with the idea that Stewart is now a compassionate man of the people. He is an aristocratic Tory and always will be.
@@hughjass8430 Ok Hugh Jass, agree to disagree. Governments work by politicians voting along party lines. A lot of the time it’s complicated, but this is the whip system we have and I wouldn’t judge a politician solely on voting records. You’re making pretty scathing assumptions based on class hatred. Not all tories are awful people, they just have a different vision on what’s best for the country. A vision I don’t agree with, but that doesn’t discredit his good intentions. Your cynicism is unbearable, and to see the world through your eyes must be exhausting.
@@zacharypeach4217 Believe me I get no joy out of it. I can just see through people like Stewart. Case in point his views on NI and IRA. Much harder stance on Irish Republican 'terrorists'. No excuse for their actions during the troubles. Murderers all...... Yet when it comes to Islamic terrorists....its more complicated. Why? Because a) there are votes to be gotten in Muslim Britain and b) he's under no personal threat by disparaging other white Europeans who he may disagree with. None of this surprises me. In his elite circles its wrong and distasteful to target ethic minorities who have suffered under colonial rule. We must now come together and sing combayya. White Europeans who were equally squashed under the British imperial boot? Fair game.
@@hughjass8430 A bit of a sweeping statement giving the complexities surrounding why this country had suffered over the last several years. He voted with the conservative whip, as he was required to as a Tory MP. He’s discussed this before with Ash Sarkar. It’s a good point. Perhaps discrediting his integrity. But I don’t think your point carries the weight you think it does.
Fascinating discussion, great work as always. A welcome voice for humanising politics. I enjoyed listening to his experience of conservatism and meaning.
I'm not sure that's true. When I heard Alastair Campbell announce he was doing a pod cast with Rory Stewart I was incredulous. But he did us all a massive favour. I've grown to like Rory to my surprise. His upbringing and party affiliations are polar opposite to what I considered acceptable. But I am a richer person for listening to someone from a different mindset to mine. It turns out we are more alike than I would have dared admit. I'm all the richer for it. I think Alastair Campbell would probably say the same. It looks like they are best buddies these days.
I'm a British lawyer in the US (and an exmuslim). I find Rory's main theme at the start about proportionality and salience is very much the heart of the disagreement. I think a lot of this comes down to a key difference between US and UK ways about thinking of rights and justice. I won't go into too much detail, but the US has a categorical approach to rights (Ronald Dworkin, or 'rights as trumps'). In that mode of thinking rights never conflict, there are only interpretations that are wrong or right. That's a product/cause of a particularly theoretical way of thinking about issues, and leads to conflicts of rights that are extremely high stakes. i.e. holding the river to sea placard either, is or is not, free speech vs anti-semitic, religious symbols are/are not allowed. Whereas british thought and rights adjudication, (although slowly being americanized in the media discourse), is a about proportionality, which recognizes that perspectives and rights will always conflict, but to resolve this you look extremely hard at the particular facts and context of a given situation, and see if, in that context/use it is justified or not, like holding the placard in front of a synagogue, or wearing a religious bracelet as an air steward vs a surgeon in an operating theater. Pragmatism, understanding the facts/context/reality/proportionality, and dispute resolution is much more important than theoretical purity.
Excellent conversation both Alex and Rory. I would love to see Alex bringing in Stephen Fry on this podcast and have monarchy discussed there too. Someday :) Would love to see the views
Thanks, both. Really enjoyable conversation. Would be great to hear you talk with Brian Klaas on power/corruptibility and contingency. He has a couple of great books on the subjects and I’d love to hear your discussion
I was backpacking across Asia about 20 years ago and I met some Chinese students in Beijing who offered me a cigarette. When I asked them what brand they were smoking they were astonished that I didn’t recognise it because they thought it was the official brand of the British Royal family. I could not believe that a Chinese tobacco company would use a foreign monarchy to market their cigarettes. I think it was a very good example of how uniquely popular the British Monarchy was at the time but recent events involving princes Andrew and Harry have had a significantly negative impact on their global image.
Great video! I'd love more of these in depth discussion with recent or current working UK politicians (keeping the politics to a minimum though!) although I could understand why they'd be advised against it. But I think these insightful discussions where we really drill down into a politician's passions, intellect, vision and experience so important and useful. Prior to elections you only really see them talking about their party policies using wide general strokes, never really getting a sense of how wise, honest, intellectual or human they are. You really get a sense here of how Rory's focus is or was very much on local issues, central politics and the day to day inner workings of Great Britain and so can understand why he may find Sam Harris's bigger picture view of Islam as a higher level threat as slightly confounding. Rory's focus and interest is simply elsewhere.
49:11 "Are you enjoying this conversation?" I kind of wish Alex had asked Rory that. I feel like I've heard it dozens of times yet it still catches me out, ha.
I totally agree we are addicted to crisis, but here's the thing. Rory Stewart, Alex O'Connor, Sam Harris, Jordan Peterson, and the whole lot make a living out of this very phenomenon.
I am not sure you can throw Rory and Alex into this category. They don't claim to be experts nor try to influence policies. Sam and Jordan - 100%. They'll sell their children to make money if they have to.
Yeah, cause when I think about Sam Harris, I think about frantic fear mongering lol. "Hello..... this is sam harris.... if you're listening to this.... it means you're... not... on our member's only feed......... " AHHHHHH IM SO SCARED!
I appreciated how Alex talked about giving his audience differing views on occasion so everyone isn't entirely in agreement with what he thinks. That's a healthy way to take on new ideas or hear conversations, IMHO.
To think that there isn't an existential threat to Britain right now is frankly absurd. There are very clearly at least some. Wasn't Russia threatening to glass the whole island just last year? To mention one?
not to mention that you are litterally being invaded by muslim immigrants. Maybe it wont seem so bad until you actually have to cover up your woman in public.
Tbf, I think they've been threatening to glass Britain every year from 1949-1991. In the same way North Korea has threatened every year to glass South Korea
@@canismajoris6733 There were a number of pundits appearing on their state TV shows advocating nuking the UK. Their argument was that when it comes down to it the US won't step in.
Thoroughly enjoyed this. I disagree with Rory on quite a lot, and that’s ok. It doesn’t make him evil, it means he’s had a different experience which has led him to different conclusions, but I can recognise and appreciate the integrity with which he arrived at them, and the skill with which Alex brought them out.
Thanks Alex - I have enjoyed all your podcasts but this is so far my favourite. It spent a lot of time in skilfully sketched nuances and attempts to define and explain the ineffable. I have an unexpected respect for Rory Stewart and the charming way he edges towards an explication of a felt mystery and as alwaays I am enchanted by your barbed humility. You have a respectful style that always challenges. Please keep going!
It is always important and interesting that we do have conversations about the world as it is. Particularly not primitive demagogues, as too many are; and Rory, is absolutely not. Ideas often completely antithetical to my usual views, but compelling, enjoyable. Oh - I AM a devotee of Sam Harris...! And also think Rory/Alex are treasures. As a northern Labour activist/voter, I have had many dealings, contacts with locals, many Muslims. To a man (few dealings with women) including some Imams, they are charming, lovely humans, who I would welcome as friends, colleagues (I have them as good neighbours) The problem, is, as nearly always, the small minority of any cohesive group. Often for good - and this is rarely mentioned. However, now, there is a force that is very intolerant, in a way not open to rational argument. The whole world is populated by these groups, between 10/50% supporting violent, murderous attacks on those writing; talking, drawing, ANY ideas critical to a credulous primitive, medieval theory of explaining - or living. And you don't have to be an actual victim, but have the real fear that it could happen; your life is diminished... Alistair/Rory - 26 minutes, I feel a huge sympathy for Rory's view of British/English history and politics. Even Anglicism - even as a life-long (since 20) Labour/Atheist/Humanist.🙂
1:00:00 It's funny Rory should mention this. As an American, I don't think very many younger Americans actually think that way anymore. It's part of the cultural gap that exists between younger Americans and older Americans. My father believes that. I am conflicted, in the sense that in one sense I know this country did an awful lot more than many others to try to bring public discourse, a free press, free and fair elections, and a whole load of other things to people around the world, and inspired many others to bring those things to their respective societies. But I also don't necessarily hold the hardline interpretation of the view that many elders in society hold, and I certainly recognize that we have never really fully lived up to that idea, either.
I wish we could access this level of depth of conversation more frequently elsewhere. Two great minds. Particularly enjoyed the section on 'the ineffable', and wonder whether this mysterious and quasi-sacred quality is something that can be humanised and projected for one's own gain, especially in the realm of politics. I can think of a number of populist figures who seek to embody this sense of mystery and ineffability, inducing in their fans a state of cult-like worship. Nice one Alex.
I doubt it - London has the same sprawl if not more, it just has the royal parks and green land which offers relief. I also think Chicago has some of the best early and mid-century international style high-rise architecture on the planet, and think it’s aesthetically beautiful. Doesn’t surprise me RS is not a fan. Just a small-c point from a British point of view espoused by Rory.. and a daft comparison to make. Parts of London, the City particularly, are a thousand years old.. no American city comes close to the historic sites.
@@michaelmccomb2594 The problem with the suburbs and urban sprawl is NOT a result of American oversight-free capitalist growth as is implied by Rory. Its actually the opposite. Its state and federal government oversight, city councils, and planning committees that are to blame. They're the ones that create the single-use and exclusionary zoning, minimum lot size requirements, building height limits, parking minimums, building setback requirements, and basic city and road design (e.g. wide roads and "stroads"). Rory suggestion to keep Britain beautiful is to lean into the hyper-controlled local governance that is found is most of urban America.
I am sorry Rory, but for a person not even living in the UK, the problems related to Islam are obvious. It would be fine for you to acknowledge the problwms and then say that you think they are not the biggest threats. However, you failed to acknowledge the problems and frankly it looks pretty absurd.
I'd like to see you dig into the "why" of why we are addicted to crisis, and the nature of the news media - it's goals, what its choices of what to report, the tone, what it chooses to omitt, the nature of different kinds of reporting (political / environmental / local), the behind the scenes funding and its associatins. News media has a LOT to answer for, and I'd love to know / for you to expose its MO in critical detail
If the Christians brought back the burning of heretics, Sam Harris would focus on criticizing those Christians. It isn't accurate for Rory to say that Islam is Sam's over-obsessive issue of the times. He isn't focusing on criticizing Islam, but Jihadism, the Islamic equivalent of burning heretics.
Get all sides of every story and be better informed at ground.news/AlexOC. Subscribe for 40% off unlimited access.
For early access to episodes, ad-free, go to www.patreon.com/alexoc
Dear Alex, You want rational proof, Fine. Here you go.
Three things must be proven rationally.
1) Does God exist
2) Is that God an Abrahamic one.
3) Is Islam the only true religion among the Abrahamic religions.
1) God's existence?
Rational proof for God's existence goes like this:-
P1) Anything or being whose existence is not eternal, has a creator. (Quran 52:35,36)
P2) The universe is not eternal (Quran 3:190)
C) The universe has a creator.
That creator is whom we call God.
2) Proof of Abrahamic God
God is a conscious living being and humans are also conscious living beings. If any conscious beings have two characteristics then that being can't be God rationally, metaphysically and ontologically:-
1) If that being is mortal.
2) if that being is dependent upon causes to live.
All Greek/Norwegian/Egyptian/Indian/Mesopotamian pagan deities like aron ras hanuman vishnu shiva thor zeus uzza and jesus etc.
All had these two characteristics so they can't have divine attributes like omnipotence, omniscience, eternal, all wise etc. Only Abrahamic God is pure from these two characteristics. So that's why he has actual divine attributes.
Now only 3 religions left behind, judaism christianity and islam.
3) Why Islam only:-
Rational proof for islam goes like this,
P1) God's word, statements can't be wrong because he's all knowing and all wise.
P2) Both old and new testaments have scientific, mathematical, historical errors. false prophecies and contradictions.
C) Old and new testaments are not the words of God Almighty.
Only QURAN is pure from all errors and contradictions. That's why islam is really from the one true God Almighty.
Here's your rational proof for islam.
Any questions?
@muhammadfawad1879 bro you just posted cringe.
You can call the thing in your car that makes it move "a hamster", that doesn't mean a rodent is powering your car. It just means you've named the mechanism a hamster. You've played a word trick to try and imbue the unknown with qualities that you prefer. It's useless and arbitrary. I could call it Gary. Doesn't mean anything about the ontology of the thing.
@@Joe_mammma We have rational deductive proof/evidence. If you say that a contingent thing or beings can come into existence without creator then God Almighty told us (in the **quran 52:35,36)* that you have only two choices left,
1) believing that a contingent thing can come into existence accidentally, this is like saying that 0+0=1 or nothing+nothing=something.
2) believing that a contingent beings or things can come into existence by themselves from nonexistence. This is like saying that 0=1 or nothing=something.
If you believe in any of these two points then Allah Almighty said you are irrational and dumbest person ever.
We know that creator of universe exist because the universe is contingent not eternal both rationally and scientifically.
@@Joe_mammma We have rational deductive proof/evidence. If you say that a contingent thing or beings can come into existence without creator then God Almighty told us (in the **quran 52:35,36)* that you have only two choices left,
1) believing that a contingent thing can come into existence accidentally, this is like saying that 0+0=1 or nothing+nothing=something.
2) believing that a contingent beings or things can come into existence by themselves from nonexistence. This is like saying that 0=1 or nothing=something.
If you believe in any of these two points then Allah Almighty said you are irrational and dumbest person ever.
We know that creator of universe exist because the universe is contingent not eternal both rationally and scientifically.
@@muhammadfawad1879 that is not call evidence.its just a claim .U shld really do research on the definition of the word evidence.
The funniest thing is that right beside this video's thumbnail saying "we are addicted to crisis" is your podcast with Chris Williamson with the thumbnail saying "This is a real crisis." Truly poetic.
Lmao 😂
You all laughing but youre not seeing what's really going on. There is too many people saying too many things and too many people listening to these things. Our brains aren't made to process and store all that info, especially if MANY times that info is contradictory. We crave more and more and yet we truly understand less and less. Imo, dangerous times are ahead.
@@Senorzilchnzero if a man as smart as Rory is at the same time so blind then we are screwed. We have been neutered and self-censoring so much we can't express fully the issues we face.
Try this on for size. Notice how if ever issues are addressed we are met with the following refrains? Can we discuss the issues we are having in terms of migration.
You are a xenophobe.
Can we discuss issues relating to Islam in the West.
You are Islamaphobic.
Can we discuss issues in regards to LGBTQ and the approach we are taking to gender dysphoria? It seems like a lot of little girls are experiencing at concerning high rates.
You are a homophobe/transphobic!
Have I missed any?
Who has the power in society? Who has control? It is the minorities. Compassion and empathy has been weaponised to the point where you cannot address issues head on and actually make improvements.
There are straws on the camels back, many straws. We are getting close to that one that will break and it will be over. The good will train that has been trying desperately to placate and accomodate people who should be more grateful to live in such great societies is about to come to a halt. Never bite the hand that feeds you especially when that hand belongs to a British Lion.
@@Senorzilchnzero That's tempting to believe, but I remember once hearing about a Russian sociologist who went out to the fringes of the USSR to interview the peasants there. And the reality was, without a modern upbringing, those people just lacked a level of comprehension we consider fundamental. He'd ask them questions like "All bears north of the arctic circle are white. If you were in the arctic circle and saw a bear, what color would it be?" And they'd answer "Bears are brown."
I don't think we even fully understand yet what people's brains are capable of. It's more of a problem that tech companies have designed profit models that exploit human emotion for gain. The system is designed deliberately to make us upset and angry because it's highly engaging.
@@twelvecatsinatrenchcoat50% of any population has a below-average IQ.
Fascinating conversation, but I do wish you'd have pushed Rory a little more. You asked a brilliant question at 9:00 about some very specific incidents, specifically about threats to MPs and fear impacting legislation. Rory's response was to pivot to a different question that he made up himself, about whether or not the pro-Palestinian marches are antisemitic. Rory has a tendency to do this, and it was one of my biggest frustrations with his conversations with Sam Harris.
So far very frustrating, he’s a politician so it’s to be expected to some extent but this podcast usually is refreshingly honest and frank. Political interviews are tough at the best of times with the required adversarial nature but expected more from aoc (so far)
This was my exact thought too when I listened to this part. The specific incidents can be applied to many areas and it's a bit out of touch for a politician to say "okay you faced this, but is it really an existential threat to the country or just to you" as if it shouldn't still be discussed
He's a politician. What do you expect? I should also note he was a Conservative (if admittedly a very moderate one).
Isn't the pivot to acknowledging that his colleagues as MPs receive myriad threats a valid answer?
If someone is threatened one thousand times a day, but 70 of those threats come from Christian nationalists, does it make sense to consider Christian nationalists an existential threat?
It's possible to say that these problems are real, dire and should be dealt with, but if your entire persona revolves around them then that's fundamentally about you, and not the life of the nation.
That's the Alastair technique.
What a fascinating convo, can’t wait until I get more than 2 minutes into it.
Alex is becoming a first rate interviewer, generous, welcoming and happy to give the guest free time. He answers them with knowledge and respect. More power to you in the art of developing discussion. ( please people remember he is very, very young)
Once he gets past his angry-atheist phase I'll imagine he'll be one of the great interviewers of our age.
He is great at calmly extracting the opinions of those he interviews and have them explain their beliefs.
If Alex has a fault it is being too polite and not challenging his guests when they spout nonsense or obfuscate, but perhaps that is not his aim.
@@paulwellings-longmore1012 sometimes I think he is a truely good person. I know that is somewhat rare in this world but he really does try. I may be a fool but that is how he comes across.👍
Just to note, the production quality of this episode is incredible.
completely agree!
I came to the comments to say this but you were way ahead of me, totally agree keep up this level of production Alex it pays off 💪
Yes! And that's so important. I find I'm irritated and distracted when a video is badly produced regardless of what's being said.
@@jonathancrawford7106It is indeed a pleasure, but we do need to be be careful what we wish for. Soon enough UA-cam will be a realm of beautifully produced inane junk, like TV and Netflix before it
When your guest literally stops the interview to be like "I love this room" lol.
I have a surprising amount of respect for Rory Stewart. He comes off as a sincere and intelligent individual who is far more nuanced than your average political commentator.
Thanks for that comment Rory.... run along now, there's a good boy.
Surprising indeed!
Be careful. He sounds sincere but then you can see how insincere he actually is if you check out his comments about Sam Harris. And that's just one example, he does it all the time.
That is the art of being a politician
He is also very weak and liberal
And not willing to engage on facts that run contrary to his politics
I still think, as an admirer of Rory, that he was very remiss in not mentioning the Islamist murder of David Amess when discussing the threats posed to parliament and British politics in general by extremist Islamists when speaking to Sam Harris.
Islam is dangerous.
THE David Amess? It's so over. Britannia has fallen😔
I think the danger is when a discussion about Islamic extremists just becomes Muslims. I am concerned that those like Harris and Murray are either failing to make that distinction or not calling out their supporters for failing to make that distinction.
@@mike9512 The general consensus in the UK is that the majority of Muslims Look out for their own community. Do not care for British society and would like to continue to spread Islam across the world. This is problematic for British culture as Muslim communities are rapidly growing. Ask them where they are from and they will be first to tell you their heritage, rather than saying 'England'
Yea that's the real issue not the stabbing or the bombings @@mike9512
One of the best podcast episode I have had the pleasure to listen to in the last 12 Months.
Alex you are doing great work here we need discussions like this to realize our actual issues in the UK and come back together to really drive Britain into the future.
I really loved this interview. Thank you!
Each time I listen to Mr. Steward, I am reminded of the reason why I am a Conservative, although politically I find myself mostly supporting the Left. Conservative parties don't seem to understand what Conservatism is about, and instead have become revolutionary at their core.
@@laurentdrozin812 yep there is a slide on the right with conservatives disappearing to be replaced by an anti democratic post truth populists in conservative clothes.
How many people have to live under police protection for speaking their mind on Islam publically?
countless
Parliamentary process was subverted by it just over a month ago 😂
Speaking freely comes with consequences. You can't have freedom to without freedom from.
@@veryfitting and in the Islamic case you can neither have the freedom to be an apostate, a homosexual, etc. nor be free from the threats and violence of Islamist radicals
Genuinely how many people is it? Like a 1000? Are you thinking 40 million?
49:12 When Alex asked "Are you enjoying this conversation?" I thought it was to Rory haha
😂
Me too lmao
lmao same, I wasn’t watching at the time 😂
Seamless segway
😂😂😂
24:33 anyone else listening thought they'd lost their internet connection there? Funny how in our noisy fast paced world we're no longer used to people taking the time to have a proper think before opening their mouth.
Isn't that amazing, a breath of fresh air to see someone just think for ten seconds before speaking...why is it so uncommon 😢
Yeh it caught me off guard, thought it was a joke about self censoring
I really really really enjoy it these days when people do that. I respect it A LOT. Everyone needs to start speaking less and thinking more, except me, I'll keep talking the rest of you just think.
@@BenedictPye thought the same
That really caught me off guard. It was strangely long.
I would just like to tell you, that after all of these years, this is the first podcast I have sat and listened to the whole way through. Thank you.
Beautiful conversation, thank you.
Rory Stewart is a strange one - at one level he's a very sincere and thoughtful individual, and obviously intelligent. At another level he's so embedded in a certain kind of Centre-left liberal world view that he's utterly blinkered to certain aspects of reality. For sure, there is a danger of extremism (at both ends of the spectrum), there are also dangers to "extreme centre-ism", if I can put it that way...and Rory very much demonstrates that. His view that the issues facing our country are all entirely mundane practical questions about things like housing etc, with absolutely no recognition that national ideology, identity and sense of purpose are fundamentals to what makes everything else "tick" is a classic example of that.
He's said statistically, Islam and identity were not the priority when speaking to people on their doorsteps. Of course people care about these issues, but there are more immediate issues that are also important like jobs, healthcare, policing, social care, etc...
Firstly, Stewart is really Centre Right - certainly NOT "Centre-left". He deals with empirical reality rather than media hysteria, bias and the echo chambers that most people (virtually all of us) live in. He specifically addresses the point that people focus on issues that they are interested in "what you are obsessed with" and decide that those are the most important issues facing society. He is simply saying stop to that way of thinking! It is not "Centre-ism" to think like a mature adult and address the real issues like food poverty, exorbitant rents, homelessness, a broken healthcare system, pot-holed roads, and dilapidated buildings. Secondly, at no point has Stewart said that the lack of identity, worklessness, loss of meaning, nationalism are not important. He is just pointing out that if commentators focus solely on reinforcing our confirmation bias, talking to their base and talking about emotive topics with sensationalist headlines the fundamentals e.g. the 20% rise in the cost of food get ignored. We all need to step out of the Echo chamber and admit to the influence of the algorithms..!! Stewart is asking people to really listen and be open to our minds being changed. "I have fundamentally reconsidered my position... You're right, I'm wrong."
Once again, Alex proves to be among the best at providing insightful interviews of interesting people. I prefer and learn from this type of informed and thoughtful discussion over most presernters debate format.
Prefer trigganometry, much more fun and interesting
@@JohnnyRingo-c5v I can't stand Konstantin's whole approach and demeanor. Different strokes.
@@JohnnyRingo-c5v bore.
@@shortyragsas opposed to this smarmy arrogant little brat? 🤣🤣🤣
@@JohnnyRingo-c5v They came across pretty condescending and close-minded in their podcast with Alex.
If you aren’t fluent in German and/or haven't been to Germany, you can’t really condemn and criticise Hitler and Nazism because you haven’t lived like a Nazi and especially not a German one. You also have to know the complete history of the rise of Nazism too, the thinkers and their ideas that the nazis claimed influenced them, and you have to know every single person involved.
If the standard is “you’re not part of this community therefore you can’t really criticise it” then we’ve pretty much excused ourselves from criticising almost anything.
I think it's especially because we're not muslims that we are anle to criticize islam, their faith. We see things they don't see.
Your comparison doesnt work because it contains two concepts at different levels of concentration. If you were to compare Naziism to the ideology of ISIS youd have an easier time because they are both examples of extreme ideologies existing within larger, neutral frameworks. Islam could be compared to say western tradition, because it is equally an overarching, longwinded tradition which includes ideologies which are good and bad... like Naziism. It is easy to criticise Nazis or isis - we do it all the damn time. it is not easy to understand or criticise Islam or the west. Rorys problem is with people like sam harris reducing islam to a rigid ideology like naziism when it simply isnt comparable and not at all easy to truly understand.
@@harrykitchener5597 The point is that if someone has to have certain criteria (He did the whole “they don’t know Islam because they don’t know Arabic and haven’t lived as a Muslim” schtick) in order to address or criticise something, then that should be applied to anything and exempt anyone from criticising almost anything.
So in order to be consistent, this guy can’t criticise Hitler or Nazism at all because he can’t speak German fluently, doesn’t live in Germany or Austria, never lived in Nazi Germany, doesn’t personally know anyone who is a Nazi, has never lived as a Nazi and doesn’t have any kind of academic credentials that would justify discussing the subject with anyone.
No one living can ever comment on Greek and Roman history before 1700 because none of us were there to experience it.
@@harrykitchener5597 nope. if the criticisms themselves are valid, they are valid, no matter who says it. By your and rory's logic, that should make Mosab Hassan Yousef's strong criticisms against islam 100% correct and valid only because he lived that life right?
@@ottz2506i think rorys point was tho that it was "a bit weird" that sam invited him to a podcast to defend islam when he could invite many other people who are more qualified. Not necessarily that its wrong to have an opinion about it in public. Rory continues to have a strong opinion about islam without having done all the stuff he mentions. Idk if he had a stronger argument on sams show about the issue but that is how its presented here as far as i can see. I think it is also a good point that sam has engaged in so much debate over islam without making more of an effort to understand the religion on a fundamental level. Rory isnt 100% clear on his position but as far as i can see his gripe is with the quality of critique not with whether the critique is allowed to exist at all. And if the conversation is about quality of critique then i would agree that its basically impossible to really critique such a massive network of complex and contradictory views, especialy as someone with such little background knowledge. The same applies to roman/ greek history. If someone started spontaneously ranting to me about the roman attitude towards god and society id have no clue what to think. Which romans? Which era? Where in the roman empire? Its not about whether we can critique but about whether there is someone else out there who is in a better position to critique it. Alex has read the bible. I have hardly read the bible. Im allowed to have opinions on the bible. Alex probably has better more informed opinions on the bible than i do. I would also trust a historian who speaks german a lot more to speak about naziism than any guy like myself who just doesnt like nazis. Once again, quality of critique not existence of critique. Sorry for the long ass response.
"It's the motherlode of bad ideas" - Sam was spot-on a decade ago.
Small caveat that Sam himself has since admitted to, it’s A motherlode of bad ideas, not THE.
@@huxleybennett4732
Has he specified the replacement?
@@pseudonymousbeing987 All religion.
@@CreatureColossus
Sounds like Islam could still be put at the top of that.
@@pseudonymousbeing987 Sam might argue that yeah. I think all religions devolve into barbarity when the people are poor. Think of the dark ages of Christianity. When people have no control over their lives, they fall to religion and superstition.
Acknowledging something can be extremely bad and still not a "big" threat is my key take away from Rory's view on Harris, JK, etc. It is also how populism grows, politicians not acknowledging what neighbourhoods feel. If Rory is keen on talking about what he regards as bigger issues, just say. "Yes, Islam is a shitty problem in our society, I agree with you, but I'd rather spend my time on housing because that's a much bigger issue and this is why"
Could it be he doesn’t feel “Islam” or “Muslims” at large are a problem?
Example: I consider Christian Nationalism a continuing threat to U.S. democracy. I don’t hold that view towards Christians. There is some crossover but not necessarily a contradiction.
@@pilsung26depends, some people against islam think that islam and islamism always come in one package
Precisely.
My guess is Sam Harris wouldn't say Islamism is the biggest threat certainly in the US. He'd probably say the top two are Trumpism and Wokism
@@rp-hr1qs They often do, just like nationalism and Christianity
Perfectly said and observed. As Jacques Derrida said “All texts contradict”. He means if what each and every one of us says or writes was closely examined, it would be obvious that we constantly contradict ourselves. I notice this is the case with myself by the minute.
Is the difference in context that each incident occurs in a good enough excuse for this?
Is it preconceived theories of claimed preferred behaviour which don't match what we do, and/or that contexts haven't been taken into account in the theory because they're new to us when they occur?
Very interesting insight into just how we are coloured by our emotional reaction to what we see….Rory makes such a case for the House of Lords, which I have for most of my life, I’m 76 years old, I’ve regarded as a total irrelevance to be got rid of as soon as possible. However I’ve been watching the Rwanda debates in the House of Lords and it’s struck me as this is the only place where reasoned and compassionate debate has occurred, in complete opposition to what’s happened in the Commons. It’s utterly changed my lifelong belief that the Lords need to be placed by another elected body. But it’s not through Rory’s emotive affection to the Royal Family and all the semi mystical wrap around of Ritual and Mystery :-). It’s that we need people who are prepared to speak truth to power; who can step back and analyse the wider eventualities of dealing with a particular problem typified by refugees arriving in little boats on the beaches of England.
We are so subconsciously governed by instinct and emotion when we are young: age and a lifetime of stumbling around and making mistakes does, if we’re lucky enough, bring wisdom eventually and it’s no bad thing to listen to age and experience :-)
Excellent listening and this is Rory at his best.
Alex’s charitable engagement with Rory’s ideas has given some interesting insight and thoughts to develop slowly and thoroughly
I love the radical honesty and thank you both for the insights
The Islamic observation facet that Rory is missing is a talk with Ex-Muslims...would like to see that.
Ahh the old silent majority trope.
Who are neither silent nor a majority.
@@ljt3084where was it suggested that they were a minority or silent?
Did you just create your own grievance?
@@ljt3084 So do you believe in Rory's fairer, more egalitarian POV ...OR... do you believe his POV will better allow Sharia in UK??
Do you even understand the meaning/use of the word 'trope'?
@@ljt3084 exactly no one would refer to ex-muslims as a silent majority. least of all, ex muslims themselves
I despise a lot of these non-Muslim moderate liberals who make excuses for Islam. They don't even understand how ex-Muslims are being threatened everyday by these people of a self-proclaimed religion of peace.
This discussion was truly wonderful to behold. Two intelligent English men who think critically about the world around them and about their own ideas. Both Alex and Rory have gone up in my already high estimation of them. I would only ask that Rory go back into politics full-time, because we need his brand of leadership; and by the same token, Alex never step into the political world full-time because we need his clarity of thinking in this space. Thank you gentlemen.
I'd never studied British government. Rory Stewart's book on how not to be a politician shattered my assumptions about how government works in the UK. It made me appreciate my American system a bit more. I wish American conservatives were as thoughtful as Stewart.
Rory Stewart would be a liberal in the US political system and not even within the "moderate" wing of the Democratic party. US politics is completely fucked.
I wish British conservatives were as thoughtful as Stewart
@@timmanning5206 There are interesting and thoughtful British Conservative thinkers, they just aren’t politicians.
Genuine question, why do you regard Stewart as so thoughtful?
@@joek360 yeah that's more what I meant. He just seems to give a shit and says his mind rather than spouting constant pre written lines
Rory Stewart is NOT a conservative! He's centre left, if not outright left. There has been a worrying leftwards swing in the UK's Overton window.
Rory's smiles whenever Alex says something insightful or poignant are very much that of a proud dad
Wonderful. What a pity Rory was not chosen as the Tory leader. He is the man we so sorely need--not only because he embodies the seiousness and integrity he speaks of, but also because he has genuine vision, is well-read, and wise. I know no other British public figure of his calibre. He's also a damn good writer. When I was a professor at an American university, I taught his book, The Places in Between. It's remarkable, as the man himself is. Thank you, Mr O'Connor. For me, this is one of your best interviews.
He’s one of the few right wing politicians I’ve found effective at selling their ideology across the aisle. Particularly now that so much of our politics is based on undermining your opponent rather than their ideas
Wonderful conversation. Fan of you both.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali
Yasmine Mohammed
Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib
Ask Muslims, current and former what the mindset and agenda is.
No, look at statistics instead. Yes, certain muslims, such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali, have faced terrible oppression and such but we must also take statistic reality into account. Because that tells us the reality.
@bastiaanvanbeek
Now a days everything is named a crisis.
However, events of concern and trends should not be dismissed.
David Amess MP
Fusilier Lee Rigby
Manchester Arena Bombing
7 July 2005 London bombings
2017 London Bridge attack
How many dead does it take to be statistically significant?
The Muslim Council of Britian says Muslims account for 4% of the population 15+years, but is, 15% of the prison population.
@@acerrubrum5749There's also disproportionate representation of African Americans in US prisons and violent crime. In the 1960s-90s, there was also a disproportionate number of terror attacks carried out by the Irish. Sometimes a single statistic isn't enough to tell a story
1.8b Muslims and you take 3 individuals to put fourth an argument? Really? And what Muslims have you personally asked? Islam has its issues like all major religions, but if travel to those Muslim lands and you'll quickly realise their religion isn't a threat to the West like some on the right will make you believe.
@@FBUKhow many are liberal democracies?
Great interview. First I’ve heard of Rory. Love him.
One of the causes of curruption in politics is the FPTP voting system where a significant proportion of the voters are voting for someone they don't want in order to keep out someone they dislike even more.
Of all the criticisms of FPTP, this is an odd one. People vote tactically in all voting systems. How many people will vote in the US presidential election more to see Trump or Biden out of the white house than the person they actually vote for in it?
@@dechasrisen4783 The problem isn’t that they vote to keep someone out on it’s own, it’s that in doing so they vote for someone they don’t like and against someone they probably do like. This can mean politicians can “game the system“ and still win even if most of the people don’t like them. Sure many other systems also have it but they are still much better, multiple voting for example allows them to vote both tactically and still vote for their favourite, ranked voting allows them to do the same but this time make sure their vote for the guy they want comes before the person their voting for to keep someone else out.
@@generaltom6850STV is just another form of FPTP, but it just gives you the illusion of choice. It still means the two party system is maintained and no positive change will happen.
@dechasrisen4783
I'm from Netherlands and a government has to be created based on a coalition representing over half of all the votes.
It really works, no matter how unhappy I am about the political situation I've never felt I had to vote tactically. There's only more new political parties popping up
We're in a situation right now where the political party with the most votes is struggling to form a government because they cannot come to agreements with others so they cannot create a coalition that would represent the majority of votes in the country.
@dechasrisen4783
Your example:
"How many people will vote in the US presidential election more to see Trump or Biden out of the white house than the person they actually vote for in it?"
IS an FPTP problem.
I've been looking forward to this one. Thanks for having Rory on, he's a great guy.
Yeah he's great! He can't say if crucifying gays is wrong because he hasn't read the quran in the original arabic. Idiot!
never thought you'd watch alex o'connor's videos haha
18:20 mark… I felt so called out 😂 But it’s good, it was a much needed reality check that I may be becoming a little too confident in my beliefs. It just means I need to start opening my mind again, specifically to the things I wouldn’t see based on my algorithm.
Good interview with a very balanced, level-headed guest.
Beautiful videography and and color grading!
Now Rory have a debate with Douglas Murray 😂👌
That would be worth watching
Great idea. DM is probably as intelligent as Rory.
@@colinstewart1432 DM is leagues above him
@@colinstewart1432I doubt that
@@specialized500 Don't confuse educated with intelligent, they're not the same thing.
This was one of the most old-timey British things I've seen in a while, from the conversation to the people, and even the set. The guest was quoting Yeats off the top of his head, for God's sake. That said, I did watch the entire episode. Alex keeps it interesting.
i wish i were there to argue with Rory on the issue of islam and religion and his view on them as someone who was born muslim and lived in muslim country and seen all sorts of injustice, cruelty, and craziness of islam .
don't know if i'm right but Alex looked as if he is trying to appease him by not challenging him by talking his mind the way we know him
That's Alex for you. He rarely, if ever, challenges those he debates. He is more interested in having them explain themselves. That can be frustrating.
Alex doesn’t challenge him cause he doesn’t want to offend ppl, and can probably sense that Rory is sensitive and has a weak personality
In terms of people who I diametrically disagree with, Rory Stewart is by far the most agreeable. We need more dialogue like this. We need more Rory's!
We are in crisis from the moment we are born! We make adjustments to attenuate pain.
Hi Alex, excellent choice of guest this time!, Rory has been quite a revelation to us this last few years. He seems to be that very rare thing these days in being a well educated open minded individual clearly capable of intense high grade observation. A person who is skilled in finding theories that fit his evidence rather than simplistically seeking evidence that supports his theories.
He has also been able to travel to many interesting parts of the world and properly immerse himself in the culture of those places. This provides him with very good observations on the realities of other peoples and then make appropriate assessment of conditions here.
There are always some minor points of judgement where we differ but that could be due to our differing background and experience, he also is not so well versed in the natural vagaries of human behaviour so that he does not clearly understand the effect of cognitive delusion and the way such things cause embedded ideological convictions that make it so difficult for many people to accept and embrace the minor differences between various cultures, differences that having triggered emotional reaction then obscure the common humanity we all share.
In this context xenophobia is always irrational, fear is the product of human imagination and emotion never experience reason or reality. All hostility towards others is always the product of challenge to delusion, when challenged the deluded never have any rational foundation on which to negotiate resolution.
Our culture and system of indoctrination does not teach us to suspend judgement and reaction until reason has had a chance to penetrate the emotions, instead it works to promote instant response which is always defective.
This applies in particular to this topic and I do agree that there are very clear signs of addiction to fear and this is the entire foundation of the very lucrative horror film industry, the reality in which we actually live has very little real hazard to deal with and sheer boredom is all it takes to promote such excitement.
Cheers, Richard.
I disagree with Rory on his naivety to the threat of extreme Islam and the fact that moderate Muslim are more comfortable with it then one would expect. But I have to say I admire his thoughts and discussions. He clearly thinks about things deeply and has a profound respect for his country, it’s people and it’s way of life. It’s such a shame Boris was chosen over him… what a turning point in history.
True no nation have ever recovered from Islam. Once it reach 40 % it's already too late.
Sorry, but what do you want moderate muslims to do for them to be not "comfortable"? They tip off the authorities in Britain but get ignored, they're one of the first parties to condemn the attacks and raise money for the victims - what more can they do?
He has literally been mortared by islamists within Iraq for over 24hrs. Incredulous that you would call him naive to such things, perhaps his broader experiences with Muslims have informed a different view .
Rory seems like a really nice upper-class Brit, but sadly clueless what is going on in the country outside central London.
Seen the polls on attitudes recently?
Wonderfully insightful podcast, thank you. The point about how to deal with lived experience and taking on board a particular problem and yet being proportionate in one's response was good to hear, it often seems like certain public intellectuals champion issues to a level that's far beyond the reality and I'm unsure if it is helpful, especially without caveat.
Results matter. We keep track of the incidents. Being naive about Islam is dangerous.
I don’t think he advocates being naive about anything and probably would say that same thing is true of people who disagree with him. That is, you’re being naive about Islam because you undervalue the degree to which there are genuinely peaceful Muslims who want nothing to do with the extremists. Ignoring that can lead you on the fast track to repression based on religion which is dangerous and therefore your naivety is dangerous. Saying “being naive is dangerous” doesn’t cut it for you being right.
@@parkerlincoln49 Nobody needs to have this "there are genuinely peaceful X members of this group" attitude about Christians or Mormons and that's for a very good reason.
@@Hooga89Yes, and that reason is the bias against Islam that has formed over the last 100 years. If the boot was on the other foot and the Middle East had carved up Europe into ethnically inconsistent "states" and then engaged in regime changes to suit their oil monopoly ... I wonder what would people be saying about Christianity?
Yes, there is still a practical question about the violence in the here and now... But let's not pretend that Islam is the only monotheistic religion that is obsessed with political power - they all are!
@Hooga89 Holy shit just say what you think. "We don't have this conversation about Christans and Mormons for a very good reason." You say this because you're too much of a coward to say what you think the reason actually is.
I'll tell you what I think the reason is though, because I'm not a coward. I think we talk about Islam so much because right wing media and politicians fearmonger about it so much. It's really that simple. And they fearmonger about it because nationalists and wannabe authoritarians will always need scapegoats and "degenerates" to point to. They always need to paint an outgroup in order to establish an ingroup.
I wonder what you think the reason is?
@@parkerlincoln49 the old excuse of #NotAll
I am concerned with the ones that do, not the ones who don’t. I do not want to participate in their religion or learn their ancient wisdom. I want them to assimilate while in the West or leave. This used to be understood. This isn’t as complicated as you’re trying to make it.
Brilliant discussion.
it's funny to me the fact that people think the thing stopping a rape from happening in a bathroom is the picture on the sign on the outside of the bathroom
Oh Rory, the politician you didn’t want to become in order to be the leader we needed. Such a missed opportunity to set the bar to a much needed standard, if he only had the patience to weather the storm.
I'm not a nazi. I haven't read Mein Khampf in English let alone German. That said if Nazis were being given preferential treatment by our government and police and had a nazi heading our Parliament I'd be more than happy to criticise them.
Exactly - this idea that you have no right to criticise positions you haven't personally engaged with is bollocks. Some ideas are just wrong, and we can analyse them abstractly with these brains that we have and determine that they are wrong.
@@Scarletpimpanel73 I'm half an hour in and the guy seems likeable and intellectually honest but I disagree with him on so many points. But then I agree with Alex on very little as well and Im subscribed to his channel.
idk if nazism is an allegory for religion my dude
@@rose-bk3zh Well. It is. Now you do know.
Look up allegory and metaphor mate.
This was one of my favourite people ever have been in your show Alex, but what amuses me most is your attitude and respect towards everyone you come across in the debates, even those who are so difficult, you’re so mature and knowledgeable, thanks for the podcast on iTunes, so many!!!👍🏻
I'm something of an existential threat to Britain, my self
Yes, your punctuation is lethal!
@@b-dogswings8019 you're*
Oh dear! You’re confusing your use of yours!
@@b-dogswings8019 deer*
Your*
off*
you're's*
@@Narcissistic_Penguin No, "you're" is a contraction of "you are", so actually the original reply was correct. "Yes you are punctuation is lethal" is not correct. Moron.
Much respect Rory and Alex.
Alex please have someone on who thinks there is an existential threat to Britain now
j’zargo! how did you get a google account?
Douglas Murray is next?
Thank you guys you’re absolutely great
Rory is truly the most confronting absurdist yet. The juxtaposition of his love of tradition and his sombre acceptance of a modern reality feels, not like crashing waves against rock, but like a calm beach where the differences of ideas is the very source of its beauty.
Wonderful conversation between two clear thinkers.
Prizing the ineffable values of beauty, or tradition, or landscape, is all fine and dandy when we’re talking about your choice of curtains. It’s a different kettle of fish entirely when it comes to choosing how to order a society, to distribute power and resources - which political philosophy to adopt, or which political party to fall in behind. How much should we tax the wealthy? How much do we owe to asylum seekers? The values which Rory champions seem to me woefully inadequate when it comes to addressing these questions. Here we should surely side with what (our best attempt at) argument, reason, ethics tells us - or at least not simply trust what our ‘saintly/drunkard’ sensibilities tell us.
The fact that Rory considers his attachment to his curtains to be a fitting analogy is telling. His impulses are chiefly aesthetic, even in the political realm - morals don’t seem to get much of a look in. (And I don’t buy the idea that it’s a hopeless to try to disentangle the sentimental from the principled. This just smacks of refusing to subject your emotional and aesthetic attachments to critical scrutiny - to investigate their moral standing. I thought Alex might have pressed him a bit here).
I find it difficult not to be dubious when those who espouse the importance of preserving traditions and customs happen to have themselves done very well out of those very traditions and been positioned to enjoy its frills and ornaments. (This was certainly the case with Burke, and Rory too. Where are the oppressed people championing the value of continuity?). Appeal to beauty, tradition, landscape as our guiding values quickly starts to look like window-dressing, disguising the one sacred value which defines and unites the conservative mindset: self-interest.
Interesting comment and I do think there is truth in much of what you say. I will say think you could find many oppressed people championing the value of continuity. Oppressed Christians, Muslims, Jews, Rastafarians, S&M enthusiasts, you name it, they will champion their community's continuity and what they get from it. I suppose you mean 'where will you find a people championing the continuity of a system they do not benefit the most from, suffer because of?'. Really you pose a self answering question because by definition, unless you are a masochist, or very unintelligent, you will not champion the continuity of your oppressor. It was rhetorical I suppose.
Great comment, I have quibbles of course.
I do love to see another one keeping up standards in thinking and writing.
@@nagatomwhat on earth are you on about?
Please collect your thoughts before you write.
A very thoughtful and thought provoking interview - thanks to all involved. I am halfway through Rory's book which is made more interesting for me since he was the Member of Parliament for my part of the UK, and seems to have genuine love for this little part of northern England, as do I. I am surprised to find that I agree with Rory on much, although I have never voted Tory and never will. However I cannot agree with him on the role of the monarchy in today's UK. Whatever their past merits, I feel that this institution now holds us back instead of inspiring us. The sight of King Charles in his robes at the coronation simply looked absurd to me, and what Rory sees as a deeply symbolic ceremony seems to me a pointless charade. I have never swallowed the argument for the monarchy that they bring in a lot of business from tourists and I was glad that Rory did not try this one. The tourism argument is the sort of thing an accountant might use, whereas he claims his support is connected to the beauty he sees in the monarchy and its ceremonies. Frankly I do not, and the argument that if we were to abolish them we would have to ask priests or similar religious figures to open our supermarkets and sports centres is much too simplistic. I do however see beauty in the ancient castles that housed our kings and queens through the ages, although some are horrible (the Castle of Mey for example). We would not have to give any of this up if we became a republic, but we would say goodbye to the idea that our figurehead is there simply due to accident of birth. Likewise, I do not feel we need to abolish the House of Lords, but we should definitely abolish hereditary peerages and the right of representatives of only certain religions to sit in the Lords. I am a religious person and found it interesting to hear Alex and Rory discuss the merits of Latin in the Catholic church. I agree that there is much mystery in religious ceremonies (which is not the same as hocus pocus...) and this is to be celebrated and embraced. I cannot explain why certain hymns make the hairs on the back of my neck stand up, why the sound of a well-played church organ in an old cathedral makes me feel uplifted or why good people have been motivated by their faith to do acts of great courage and self-sacrifice. These are mysteries to me, and of course their value cannot be quantified. Lastly, I must pick up Rory on what seems like a criticism of engineers and technologists in general for an outlook on life that ignores beauty in a quest to measure and analyse everything. I can assure him that this is not the case for a great many engineers, mathematicians and physicists that I have known. I am sure he will be familiar with the quote from Kepler that 'the undevout astronomer is mad', but I have personally met many with a technical bent who see great beauty in equations, strong and light steel structures and other designed artefacts as well as in the natural world. This after all is the idea of the renaissance man (and woman) and they are still among us today!
Correction - it was Herschel who said 'an undevout astronomer is mad'
He is doing the meme. He is sitting in a burning building, sipping tea and thinking "this is fine".
if you say the sky is falling it must be so chicken little
@@drinkwater9891 Immigrants are real, Chicken Little is not.
@@KissSlowlyLoveDeeply-pm2je scary, you better panic or whatever
@@drinkwater9891 You should find it alarming at the very least. And things as they are, the panic is much much less than the panic written about "Gentrification" of "inner-city" neighbourhoods, where the same arguments, such as "too rapid of a change to the identity of a place" are taken seriously. One wonders if consistency of principles would ever be applied.
@@Ψυχήμίασμα yeah i watched that scene in boyz n da hood movie with his dad preaching, and i also watched gb news and some rubber dinghies, life goes on for me, but its good someone is panicicking and thinking of the childrins or something
Refreshingly thoughtful conversation - thanks.
I am sure before watching this video that is brilliant!!!
Prepare for disappointment
Prepare for disappointment
Were you prepared to be so disappointed?
I would simply add that people seem to get away with failure to critique religious dogma to a degree they'd never get away with if the same dogma was purely political.
Yes. "To make a good person do evil things..." comes to mind.
I really enjoyed the conversation thank you. Lots of questions raised, lots of thinking to be done. Wonderful.
How refreshing to see a young man with an intelligent interest in the world and a good interviewer. 👍
Here's the thing to remember about Rory Stewart when he tries to tell you everything is hunky dory in good old Blighty...
He lives a life of priviledge 99% of people in Britain couldnt fathom. He lectures part time at an Ivy League US college. He's a published author. He travels the globe more often than an orbiting satellite giving talks for vast sums of money. He has the most popular podcast in the UK from which he collects shedloads of cash....
Rory has never and will never understand or experience life in modern Britain for someone on an average wage, a miniumun wage or anyone in receipt of benefits. His life is a walk on a fluffy cloud as it has always been since he was born.
Yes, hes a smart guy. Yes, by Tory standards he's not the worst. But he's not living in the same reality as the rest of us.
He did walk across Asia. This is a wholly humbling experience, and he has seen poverty far worse than you get here in England. I take your point that he's grown up in a very privileged position, but just saying because he's rich he has no sense of modern struggle I think is a bit flippant.
Have you read his books? Dismissing someone's views for their economic situation is very naive.
@@zacharypeach4217 I refer you to his voting record as an MP where he consistently voted to make poorer people's lives harder. It wasnt on principle that he left his seat or the party. It was because he was frozen out by Johnson's brand of even more cynical politics.
Don't be fooled by the story of walking across the Middle East. That's an old 19th century romantic tale of British adventurers wandering the globe. A tradition that someone like Stewart would have been steeped in and sought to emulate. Of course, its better than a Jacob Rees Mogg, who's only flirtation with poverty was meeting his postman one morning at the front door when his butler wasn't available, but it doesn't necessarily equate with the idea that Stewart is now a compassionate man of the people. He is an aristocratic Tory and always will be.
@@hughjass8430 Ok Hugh Jass, agree to disagree. Governments work by politicians voting along party lines. A lot of the time it’s complicated, but this is the whip system we have and I wouldn’t judge a politician solely on voting records. You’re making pretty scathing assumptions based on class hatred. Not all tories are awful people, they just have a different vision on what’s best for the country. A vision I don’t agree with, but that doesn’t discredit his good intentions. Your cynicism is unbearable, and to see the world through your eyes must be exhausting.
@@zacharypeach4217 Believe me I get no joy out of it. I can just see through people like Stewart. Case in point his views on NI and IRA. Much harder stance on Irish Republican 'terrorists'. No excuse for their actions during the troubles. Murderers all......
Yet when it comes to Islamic terrorists....its more complicated. Why? Because a) there are votes to be gotten in Muslim Britain and b) he's under no personal threat by disparaging other white Europeans who he may disagree with.
None of this surprises me. In his elite circles its wrong and distasteful to target ethic minorities who have suffered under colonial rule. We must now come together and sing combayya. White Europeans who were equally squashed under the British imperial boot? Fair game.
@@hughjass8430
A bit of a sweeping statement giving the complexities surrounding why this country had suffered over the last several years. He voted with the conservative whip, as he was required to as a Tory MP. He’s discussed this before with Ash Sarkar.
It’s a good point. Perhaps discrediting his integrity. But I don’t think your point carries the weight you think it does.
Fascinating discussion, great work as always. A welcome voice for humanising politics. I enjoyed listening to his experience of conservatism and meaning.
Rory Stewart: The most eloquently wrong person in the UK
Utterly wrapped up in his own self-image.
It's better than being just regular wrong like the rest of us.
I'm not sure that's true. When I heard Alastair Campbell announce he was doing a pod cast with Rory Stewart I was incredulous. But he did us all a massive favour. I've grown to like Rory to my surprise. His upbringing and party affiliations are polar opposite to what I considered acceptable. But I am a richer person for listening to someone from a different mindset to mine. It turns out we are more alike than I would have dared admit. I'm all the richer for it. I think Alastair Campbell would probably say the same. It looks like they are best buddies these days.
What do you want him to say ?
@@SimonPass230267 Not far from how I'd describe it myself.
Great discussion!
Rory's jumper is an existential threat to his neckline.
Looks like the jumper might swallow him up at any moment.
I'm a British lawyer in the US (and an exmuslim). I find Rory's main theme at the start about proportionality and salience is very much the heart of the disagreement. I think a lot of this comes down to a key difference between US and UK ways about thinking of rights and justice. I won't go into too much detail, but the US has a categorical approach to rights (Ronald Dworkin, or 'rights as trumps'). In that mode of thinking rights never conflict, there are only interpretations that are wrong or right. That's a product/cause of a particularly theoretical way of thinking about issues, and leads to conflicts of rights that are extremely high stakes. i.e. holding the river to sea placard either, is or is not, free speech vs anti-semitic, religious symbols are/are not allowed. Whereas british thought and rights adjudication, (although slowly being americanized in the media discourse), is a about proportionality, which recognizes that perspectives and rights will always conflict, but to resolve this you look extremely hard at the particular facts and context of a given situation, and see if, in that context/use it is justified or not, like holding the placard in front of a synagogue, or wearing a religious bracelet as an air steward vs a surgeon in an operating theater. Pragmatism, understanding the facts/context/reality/proportionality, and dispute resolution is much more important than theoretical purity.
Two of the brightest minds of our time in the UK. Love you both.
Excellent conversation both Alex and Rory. I would love to see Alex bringing in Stephen Fry on this podcast and have monarchy discussed there too. Someday :) Would love to see the views
didnt expect this super exciting
Thanks, both. Really enjoyable conversation. Would be great to hear you talk with Brian Klaas on power/corruptibility and contingency. He has a couple of great books on the subjects and I’d love to hear your discussion
I was backpacking across Asia about 20 years ago and I met some Chinese students in Beijing who offered me a cigarette. When I asked them what brand they were smoking they were astonished that I didn’t recognise it because they thought it was the official brand of the British Royal family. I could not believe that a Chinese tobacco company would use a foreign monarchy to market their cigarettes. I think it was a very good example of how uniquely popular the British Monarchy was at the time but recent events involving princes Andrew and Harry have had a significantly negative impact on their global image.
In all fairness I'm not sure how loved Harry and Meghan are themselves but the Prince Andrew situation has been an utter disaster!
Yeah.. Prince Andrew...that's what it was..
These days China is full of fake Korean products
Great video! I'd love more of these in depth discussion with recent or current working UK politicians (keeping the politics to a minimum though!) although I could understand why they'd be advised against it. But I think these insightful discussions where we really drill down into a politician's passions, intellect, vision and experience so important and useful. Prior to elections you only really see them talking about their party policies using wide general strokes, never really getting a sense of how wise, honest, intellectual or human they are. You really get a sense here of how Rory's focus is or was very much on local issues, central politics and the day to day inner workings of Great Britain and so can understand why he may find Sam Harris's bigger picture view of Islam as a higher level threat as slightly confounding. Rory's focus and interest is simply elsewhere.
He looks exactly like his voice
Ugly?
@@calgoulden8223weak, overly sensitive, and slightly self-righteous
49:11 "Are you enjoying this conversation?" I kind of wish Alex had asked Rory that.
I feel like I've heard it dozens of times yet it still catches me out, ha.
I totally agree we are addicted to crisis, but here's the thing. Rory Stewart, Alex O'Connor, Sam Harris, Jordan Peterson, and the whole lot make a living out of this very phenomenon.
I am not sure you can throw Rory and Alex into this category. They don't claim to be experts nor try to influence policies. Sam and Jordan - 100%. They'll sell their children to make money if they have to.
Alex deals in crises of meaning of life?
Well someone's got to do it. Should they be unpaid ?
Bullshit. Must be a Sam Harris troll. dime a dozen.
Yeah, cause when I think about Sam Harris, I think about frantic fear mongering lol.
"Hello..... this is sam harris.... if you're listening to this.... it means you're... not... on our member's only feed......... " AHHHHHH IM SO SCARED!
I appreciated how Alex talked about giving his audience differing views on occasion so everyone isn't entirely in agreement with what he thinks. That's a healthy way to take on new ideas or hear conversations, IMHO.
To think that there isn't an existential threat to Britain right now is frankly absurd.
There are very clearly at least some.
Wasn't Russia threatening to glass the whole island just last year? To mention one?
not to mention that you are litterally being invaded by muslim immigrants. Maybe it wont seem so bad until you actually have to cover up your woman in public.
Outside the TV show Halo, this is the first time I'm seeing the word "glass" used as a verb for total destruction.
Tbf, I think they've been threatening to glass Britain every year from 1949-1991. In the same way North Korea has threatened every year to glass South Korea
No, they weren't threatening that at all
@@canismajoris6733 There were a number of pundits appearing on their state TV shows advocating nuking the UK. Their argument was that when it comes down to it the US won't step in.
Thoroughly enjoyed this. I disagree with Rory on quite a lot, and that’s ok. It doesn’t make him evil, it means he’s had a different experience which has led him to different conclusions, but I can recognise and appreciate the integrity with which he arrived at them, and the skill with which Alex brought them out.
Thanks Alex - I have enjoyed all your podcasts but this is so far my favourite. It spent a lot of time in skilfully sketched nuances and attempts to define and explain the ineffable. I have an unexpected respect for Rory Stewart and the charming way he edges towards an explication of a felt mystery and as alwaays I am enchanted by your barbed humility. You have a respectful style that always challenges. Please keep going!
"barbed humility" what a great way to put it!
Woaah the sound and picture quality are fantastic. And Rory is a fantastic guest!
Rory is an interesting guy. A geat guest.
"A great guest".... who can't condemn child rape in Saudi because he hasn't read the quran in the original arabic
Great lighting and production quality in this podcast, very ‘Chris Williamson’
My two favourite podcasts combine! Brilliant
It is always important and interesting that we do have conversations about the world as it is. Particularly not primitive demagogues, as too many are; and Rory, is absolutely not.
Ideas often completely antithetical to my usual views, but compelling, enjoyable.
Oh - I AM a devotee of Sam Harris...! And also think Rory/Alex are treasures.
As a northern Labour activist/voter, I have had many dealings, contacts with locals, many Muslims. To a man (few dealings with women) including some Imams, they are charming, lovely humans, who I would welcome as friends, colleagues (I have them as good neighbours)
The problem, is, as nearly always, the small minority of any cohesive group. Often for good - and this is rarely mentioned. However, now, there is a force that is very intolerant, in a way not open to rational argument.
The whole world is populated by these groups, between 10/50% supporting violent, murderous attacks on those writing; talking, drawing, ANY ideas critical to a credulous primitive, medieval theory of explaining - or living. And you don't have to be an actual victim, but have the real fear that it could happen; your life is diminished...
Alistair/Rory - 26 minutes, I feel a huge sympathy for Rory's view of British/English history and politics. Even Anglicism - even as a life-long (since 20) Labour/Atheist/Humanist.🙂
I would like a sweater like that.
1:00:00 It's funny Rory should mention this. As an American, I don't think very many younger Americans actually think that way anymore. It's part of the cultural gap that exists between younger Americans and older Americans. My father believes that. I am conflicted, in the sense that in one sense I know this country did an awful lot more than many others to try to bring public discourse, a free press, free and fair elections, and a whole load of other things to people around the world, and inspired many others to bring those things to their respective societies. But I also don't necessarily hold the hardline interpretation of the view that many elders in society hold, and I certainly recognize that we have never really fully lived up to that idea, either.
I specifically asked for Rory in a community post and here he is!! Alex really do be out here pulling the strings.
I wish we could access this level of depth of conversation more frequently elsewhere. Two great minds. Particularly enjoyed the section on 'the ineffable', and wonder whether this mysterious and quasi-sacred quality is something that can be humanised and projected for one's own gain, especially in the realm of politics. I can think of a number of populist figures who seek to embody this sense of mystery and ineffability, inducing in their fans a state of cult-like worship. Nice one Alex.
Chicago has some of the best architecture in the world. Quite frustrating to hear it described as “a catastrophe”.
I assume he is referring to its
Suburbs and urban sprawl
I doubt it - London has the same sprawl if not more, it just has the royal parks and green land which offers relief.
I also think Chicago has some of the best early and mid-century international style high-rise architecture on the planet, and think it’s aesthetically beautiful. Doesn’t surprise me RS is not a fan.
Just a small-c point from a British point of view espoused by Rory.. and a daft comparison to make. Parts of London, the City particularly, are a thousand years old.. no American city comes close to the historic sites.
@@Alex-mj5dv as you could imagine there is a natural conservative disguise at high rise buildings
@@michaelmccomb2594 The problem with the suburbs and urban sprawl is NOT a result of American oversight-free capitalist growth as is implied by Rory. Its actually the opposite. Its state and federal government oversight, city councils, and planning committees that are to blame. They're the ones that create the single-use and exclusionary zoning, minimum lot size requirements, building height limits, parking minimums, building setback requirements, and basic city and road design (e.g. wide roads and "stroads"). Rory suggestion to keep Britain beautiful is to lean into the hyper-controlled local governance that is found is most of urban America.
I think my favorite way to think about the British monarchy is that at it's actually their executive branch of celebrity.
I am sorry Rory, but for a person not even living in the UK, the problems related to Islam are obvious. It would be fine for you to acknowledge the problwms and then say that you think they are not the biggest threats. However, you failed to acknowledge the problems and frankly it looks pretty absurd.
Thank you Rory
Thanks for getting a good guest Alex.
More air time for the intellectuals and public figures of genuine merit.
Sam Harris is a charlatan and it’s a waste of Rory’s time to begin to engage with him. Will defend point if any fan boy wants smoke.
I'd like to see you dig into the "why" of why we are addicted to crisis, and the nature of the news media - it's goals, what its choices of what to report, the tone, what it chooses to omitt, the nature of different kinds of reporting (political / environmental / local), the behind the scenes funding and its associatins. News media has a LOT to answer for, and I'd love to know / for you to expose its MO in critical detail
If the Christians brought back the burning of heretics, Sam Harris would focus on criticizing those Christians. It isn't accurate for Rory to say that Islam is Sam's over-obsessive issue of the times. He isn't focusing on criticizing Islam, but Jihadism, the Islamic equivalent of burning heretics.