00:06:26.000But if I had to put it in a nutshell why I saw, by the way, I think that's part of the reason why I was brought on when Restore Britain was launched first as a movement in, I think, June of 2025 is because I think that Rupert Lowe and his team admired the fact that even though it wasn't in perhaps my professional interests to be so supportive of him as I was during that whole debacle, and in the same way that Charlie Downs was, in the same way that Lewis Bratwell was, in the same way that Conor Tomlinson was, and others,
00:06:52.980because it wasn't advantageous for us to speak out as indeed we did then and alienate reform
00:06:58.600as we did irreparably during those early months of 2025. We did so anyway because we didn't think
00:07:05.620that this could be defended on principle. And so I like that Rupert is, contrary to more or less
00:07:10.500everyone else on the right, a principled man who crucially, and this is the main reason why I feel
00:07:15.860restore, I believe restore to be such a vital vehicle for the restoration of Britain. He is
00:07:21.500not committed, he being Rupert, is not committed to playing politics obediently within the
00:07:26.260progressive framework that we've had served up to us and which has functioned as this sort of
00:07:30.320de facto over the window. It's remarkably refreshing. It's incredibly refreshing. So for
00:07:33.780instance, he has never said that, you know, Britain isn't, immigrants are the lifeblood
00:07:38.860of this nation. He has never said as Farage did that mass deportations would be politically
00:07:45.640impossible. Rupert is on record saying that he is concerned about the demographic expansion of
00:07:51.000Islam. Across the British Isles, Faraj, as we all know from that Winston Marshall interview,
00:07:55.160is more fearful of alienating the Muslim community than he is of standing up for the
00:07:59.380interests of a host population that has nowhere else to go if it becomes stateless. So on all of0.92
00:08:03.680these sort of crucial points, these sort of pillars that underpin in many ways the very
00:08:10.000progressive framework that is smothering us as a nation and euthanizing us as a people,
00:08:14.120Rupert is willing to take all sorts of slings and arrows to dissent from that in a way. And
00:08:18.900Whereas Farage tries to play a slightly more tactical and strategic game.
00:08:22.720Well, there's a distinction I always get with Osir is that when I'm hearing Farage speak,
00:08:27.020what I'm hearing is a timescale that goes up to the next election.
00:08:30.360Or if he ever goes beyond that, if somebody pushes him to say,
00:08:35.160OK, well, what about 2050 when we're a minority in his own country?
00:08:38.720His mind goes to, and how do we win elections in 2050?
00:11:56.400have been handed down to you more or less intact,
00:11:59.120if not enlarged, but which we have been sort of like spitefully or due to cowardice on the part
00:12:08.240of our leaders cheated out of. And so across a whole range of dimensions, I mean, it sounds a
00:12:14.240little bit trite in a way, but the major thread that runs through all of these reports is that
00:12:19.800We used to have not a perfect country, but a very good one that ran with, you know, relative to the, you know, other nations around the world ran with a kind of relative Rolls Royce like per.
00:12:34.060We had a very blessed demographic inheritance, for instance.
00:12:37.320We didn't need to depend too much on statute law.
00:12:40.920Statute law is the classic Anglo-American conservative critique of statute law.
00:12:44.620That is to say laws passed rationalistically by parliament.
00:12:47.540the major critique made of this by conservatives stretching from Fortescue to Roger Scruton,
00:12:53.820is that statute law, the kind that prevails on the continent, anticipates problems in advance,
00:13:00.580tries to construct general principles for dealing with them, and then those general principles stoop
00:13:05.500down in order to meet the particulars. The great virtue of common law, which is a completely
00:13:10.120different form of law, spearheaded and trialled by the English.
00:13:14.340Which emerges from the judgment of juries.
00:13:15.180It emerges from the judgment. Yes, it is sometimes called in the literature, sometimes called judge made law. But as Cruton argues, it's probably better described as judge discovered law, because we're talking here about judges and juries working on the basis of moral intuitions that address the particulars, and then the general principles are then built out of the particulars.
00:13:35.380So with statute law, what you do is the general tries to enfame the particular,
00:13:40.400or the universal tries to enfame the particular,
00:13:42.280whereas the distinct virtue of common law is that it is out of particulars
00:13:47.060and out of genuine cases, practical circumstances,
00:13:49.780that general principles grow, and then they can be applied to future cases
00:13:53.280insofar as they resemble the previous ones.
00:13:55.540So we had that whole body of common law, which in the last hundred years,
00:13:59.800to get back to your point, it sounds a bit pompous in a way,
00:14:01.740but has been eroded by consistent passages of statute law,
00:14:09.240which have, in fact, scrambled this whole very pleasant arrangement.
00:14:12.560So on everything from Britain's legal system to our ancient constitution
00:19:21.840But what that did is it replaced something that in English common law is called the breach of the peace principle with more sort of overt sort of anti-discrimination legislation, which was later updated in the form of the 1986 Public Order Act, which saw Lucy Connolly sent to prison.