Is The World Really Run By A 'Leftist Elite?' | Aaron Bastani Takes On Matthew Goodwin
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 22 เม.ย. 2023
- Everyone rails against the elite, but who are they? The left would say it's the billionaires, the media barons, the oil tycoons, and the 1% - those who control our economy, our housing, and basic necessities. However, the right increasingly insists on the existence of a "new elite" of woke corporations, SJW celebrities, and snowflake university graduates. From headlines and social media feeds to TV screens, whether it's some fringe TH-camr or the home secretary, you can't escape it.
In this interview, Aaron takes on one of the proponents of this theory, Matthew Goodwin, a professor of politics at the University of Kent whose book "Values, Voice, and Virtue" has been glowingly received by the British establishment.
_________________________________________________________
Support Novara Media for as little as £1 a month:
novaramedia.com/support
Buy Novara Media merch here:
shop.novaramedia.com/
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 63 | คู่เอก "ยอดภูผา vs โซเนอร์"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/RGVmBsegKEI/mqdefault.jpg)
Class NOT identity is still the most important thing in Britain today. We need to stop importing politics from the USA....
Well said
Yes but instead of class, I think you should simplify this and say wealth.
It is a class issue , but the working class has changed in the fact that layers of the lower middle/professional class that traditionally voted Tory in the past have been 'prolaterianised' in the recent period as their pay, pension and working conditions have been heavily attacked for the first time by employers and in the public sector, the government. .
I really believe debates such as these between people that disagree with each other is essential. Great work.
Love that you're getting people in that you disagree with!! More of this please!
Good choice Aaron! My criticism of Novara is that there is little to none of this type of conversation. The thought that some of the team would not want this interview is WORRYING! I would love to see more of these conversations on covid, climate, Ukraine etc.
what do you expect from a communist media lol
Echo chamber?
This guy is good ,he understands burnhams manegerialism ...which is true
100% agree.
It's the conflation of liberal and left wing that's obviously the problem.
And/or the obvious intent
And taking corporate PR as the actual and significant portion of corporate behaviour. Fucking nuts
This. 100% this.
@@sichambers9011 yup, it borders on naivety
Certainly part of the issue. The idea that Laura Kuenssberg is a left wing journalist is laughable (probably even to her).
I'm reminded of Liz Truss' "leftist banks". It's not just wrong, it's perilously close to being literally definitionally wrong - an oxymoron.
Lose the 'oxy', and you're spot on.
I stopped at 10miins.
His premise is absurd, so there's no value in hearing him expound upon it, nor Aaron trashing it.
It’s like saying “lefty lawyers” are the problem without realising the law is the law and judges apply the law. There is nothing left or right wing about it.
@@geroffmilan3328 First of, I agree but, I watched the whole thing and I think as Aaron has said and puts into practice here: "The best way to test your ideology and philosophy is by ruthlessly questioning it." I test my philosophy by questioning it by hearing him point to things and calling out a problem truthfully but, when comes to solutions, running of into the forest butt naked screaming about the witches are coming for him. Aaron is like a psychologist trying to keep a schizo on track here and I think he pointed out a bunch of inconsistentencies which this man refuses to answer. Which in turn shows, he has holes in his philosophy and ideology which he fills up with things like veiled eugenicism and transphobia for example. He's a thinktank, REFORM party ghoul, a U.K version of Jordan Peterson if you wish but then without the crippling benzadryl addiction and other clear mental issues. He also should come back to talk to Ash how the southeast-Asian community is doing in the U.K, I bet she'll gladly butcher his claims and show him up for the racist transphobe he is.
@@samdegoeij6576 when time is the only true premium, it is not worth spending on the disingenuous.
As I said, his premise is absurd, and as I've said elsewhere several times: assertions without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
There's nothing to learn from an opposing point of view when it is a vacuum.
A really fascinating discussion. Often I felt that two different things were being conflated - economic power and social/cultural power. Thanks for the interview and posting it here.
Ye he does.
I see people saying he's delusional although my brain translates much of what he's saying as recognising who truly has the power now. And it's right it is the masses, the people.
The old elite should feel threatened by this and it's one of the first visible expressions I've seen of it being recognised. & Now they're trying to pr and manipulate out of the hole they've dug themselves into, it shouldn't wash.
The lashing out and mislabelling should be fully expected around the time of a true turning point.
Agreed. I thought it was a really good debate. Two people able to draw on a lot of detail and engage on a similar intellectual level is key.
I could critique both of these guys, but I'm responding to your comment because one of the points I noted about Bastani was how he leaned on economic and financial issues when pushing back. He seems to believe that, ultimately, power only comes from money.
Where he did concede it may arise elsewhere also, he did so reluctantly.
Why is this? Well, my own explanation is that he is a Marxist. Marxism is fundamentally materialistic. It responds to cultural, social and environmental (I would add "spiritual" if there was any room in Marxism for spirituality, but there isn't) in a way that is quite clumsy and certainly lacks nuance. In other words Marxists really, "don't get it"
I also think this issue is the root of the growing cultural division in our society.
@@alexdavis1541 who creates our cultural, social, spiritual environment? What is the mechanism by which these things are decided?
@@clivechesterman6635 I do have a view on this and have tried to post it (three times) but it gets deleted immediately.
Censorship of incorrect views no doubt
@@alexdavis1541at the end of the day, we live under capitalism. the core concept is CAPITAL. capital is the main source of economic, political and social power and it can and will only be this way as long as we still live under capitalism
I love that you bring in voices from the other side of the argument. I don’t want to live in an echo chamber, I want to be challenged on my views so I can strengthen my knowledge and arguments. Thank you Novara, keep it up!!
He never had a good argument. He is unscientific and reductive.
@@AB-zl4nh *Accurate*
The people that run the world control both sides , the political left and the right … !
In the UK there are two parliamentary groups one is called ( CFI ) conservative friend s of Israel , the other is Labour friends of Israel ( LFI )
So wether the conservatives or labour control the government in the UK …“ friends of Israel “ are there !
… I think the elites of the world operate in a similar way … !
@@AB-zl4nh yeah, this guy just talks in such a disingenuous way! I can’t believe he’s educating students at Uni! That’s insane to me.
@@AB-zl4nh i agree, but its still good to hear what people from other sides are saying, even if its just the better to quash it
Imagine thinking the Blairite and neoliberal ghouls are a sign of the country drifting left...
Indeed but it does allow a shifting of the Overton Window, or at least a slowing of the creep ever rightwards.
They keep enough of the proles ignorant so such spin and lies can have the desired effect. It’s a sad indictment of British society that the working class have never been as politically and economically ignorant as they are now. Guess that’s the power of propaganda techniques over the past century.
Blairism was the country shifting radically to the left socially but to the right economically.
He doesn't actually say that though, does he. He actually aligns Blair and Thatcher in terms of a neoliberal direction of travel.
@@easytoassemble54321 I know, I'm just echoing Peter Hitchens's position. New Labour brought in the culture we have today: the progressive bubble of charities, corporations and pressure groups that express the same views on every issue; national self-hatred and of course mass third world immigration. This is now a consensus that can't be voted out. Sure, the Conservatives talk like they're against this stuff but they've never succeeded in doing anything about it.
So the new elites are £19 per hour junior doctors who are currently striking. Doesn’t sound very elite to me 😂
😂😂
Like the selective point , read his book , Matt made some great points
@@PoldarkGodzilla no he didn't , wouldn't even use it as toilet paper, too much respect for my arse.
@@PoldarkGodzilla think you would benefit from being more widely read. Assuming you’re genuine.
@@PoldarkGodzilla what great points?
Some people are too cavalier in dismissing Goodwin's thesis. His 'new elite' may not enjoy the economic power of the traditional elite, but they sure have become the gatekeepers for access to institutions across the board, and are increasingly playing the same role in determining career advancement.
Yes. He is hitting the symptom, missing what is happening. He and Hitchens do not get that there are two elites in the UK and US that are at war with each other. Each gets one side of the elites, because they come from two sides of the political social divide.
One on the rise, the other on its way out due to nature. One sides with humanity as a whole on the rise, the other spent 50 years gutting what was human on the way out.
It turns out globalisation had nothing to do with what is happening, it just made all things and everything possible.
no they're not, thanks
"i want to be racist and sexist at work, but now I can't"
doubleplus good, comrade!🤣@@snowbind
On point
It would be good to see a post-interview discussion where some of the Novara crew sit down, play a few clips of this, and breakdown some of the responses.
Notice Matthew Goodwin doesn't mention the investment into University expansion benefited the Working Class the most. Notice he doesn't mention Labour devolved powers to Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland & tried to do so in North East England. Notice he didn't mention Labour reduced child poverty to the lowest levels for decades & improved educational attainment yhamks to record levels of investment. He ignores key facts to continue his definition butbit does not work. He is vague and general on purpose.
This means you can’t counter Goodwin’s points yourself.
Agreed. You can still counter the points yourself of course but it allows due diligence and corroboration for the interviewer or interviewees points. Kinda like how we all want fact checkers to be present for politans making grossly inaccurate or misleading statements.
@@dingoes8mababy595 fact checkers should be present at all of these discussions, in my opinion. This guy talks about “the left” taking control of institutions, despite the entirety of economics being driven by ideological nonsense that’s pedalled as fact. So bizarre. I suppose this is how he tries to grant the victim position to the right wingers, though.
@@juanperon1301 Nah we can counter them - we're all part of the new elite (probably).
Conservative economics (neoliberal economics) has been what this country has followed for well over 40 years. The economic platform provided the basis for all social policies. This guy, along with all conservatives got EXACTLY what they wanted over this time period... And they're angry about how badly it turned out. So you get people like him, blaming it on anyone anyone they can think of. Somehow it's all the fault of "the left" that so many right wing policies have led to such failure and poor outcomes.
@@johnmckiernan2176 lol. Love how they pretend such outcomes and growing inequality are some freak accident unconnected to centuries of such economic polices and ideals. The actual elite and its shills rely on keeping people ignorant.
Yep! Nail on the head!
Well you see if it works its capitalist and right wing but if it fails its communist and far left. Basically they pull us right and basically the old right for being leftist.
Where does Matt Goodwin advocate neoliberal economics?
@@johnmckiernan2176 Could not have said it better! Love this community. Don't know how much more the British public can take.
I think he's referring to more of the "liberal" mentality where identity politics reflecting "race/gender/LGBT" issues are separated from the class argument, something that's neutralized left wing movements for decades.
"Liberal left" is an oxymoron.
Can you expand on this a little more? Do you mean in an purely economic sense?
So if academics wield such immense influence why have they resided over a collapse in their own pay and conditions? Compare this to bankers who effectively lobbied the Sunk Govt to remove caps on their bonuses. Surely this is what real power and influence looks like.
No, it's not always what real power looks like. The strength of broad political influence academic administrators, educational boards, alumini... etc have, doesn't depend on providing university professors decent pay and conditions.
No, don't believe your lying eyes, or facts, logic etc.
/s
I'm glad his supporters are out identifying themselves: my hacking students need some new digital footballs to kick.
@@jennywren118 😂😂😂😂 so let's get this straight: the "elite" aren't the people using their privilege to enrich themselves - it's the educated masses?
😂😂😂😂😂
Do you get regular mental health assessments?
Fair warning: if you ever apply for a job at my company you'll be laughed out of the door at the competency test phase - if not before.
@@geroffmilan3328 You don't have it straight at all unfortunately.
That's implicitly not what I said.
The existence of a left wing elitism and corruption doesn't automatically negate the existence of right wing elitism and corruption.
Why oh why do people on the left find this point so difficult to grasp and comprehend?
@@jennywren118 pure gaslighting is all Goodwin has to offer.
What an enjoyable discussion. I hope it is a lesson to certain Novara supporters on why one should platform and debate people you disagree with.
Yeah it's a lesson on how people who disagree with me are utterly incoherent, and deeply patronising about the general public.
@@mattiethemongoose3rd This comment right here pretty much sums up the Novara Media audience.
@@ineedmoreflavour1955 And your comment neatly encapsulated the youtube right wing circlejerk
@@mattiethemongoose3rd😅😅😅😅
Well this thread basically sums up are political narrative, if both sides were more open to debate and less into just calling each other names we might actually get somewhere instead of just shouting at people across a void with little to no effect
This debate really rammed home for me how useful the "left/right" distinction is for the real, hyper-liberal, globalised elites. Voters want to move left on economics and right on culture. But the political right (i.e. the Tories) can always be mobilised to defend the elite when it comes to economics. And the political left (including Novara media, sadly) can always be mobilised to defend the elite when it comes to culture (immigration, identity, history, gender etc.). The net result is that hyper liberalism on both fronts goes completely unchallenged.
I think some of the disconnect in this conversation came from the fact that "new elite" ideas about immigration / identity / history / gender are actually shared quite a long way down through the middle classes through to some working class people too. I sometimes wonder if these ideas are actually packaged for people in the middle. They're a great way for the middle class to share in a feeling of cultural and intellectual superiority ("we're better than these Gammons and Karens and Brexiteers!") while getting fucked over financially. See "Gary's Economics" videos about the middle classes slowly losing their property, for instance.
Having read his book, the argument he makes, to put it as simply as possible, is that there is a large gulf in the cultural views of the majority of the country and the dominate cultural views in media/arts/eduction/civil service/politics. Culturally, not necessarily economically. That the majority view is not represented, and is seen as racist, thick and held in contempt.
That's essentially it. This is backed up by endless statistics in the book. Make of that argument what you will. Trying to wrap it all up, and make it all fit into the nebulous term of the 'new elite' was a mistake IMO.
Lively, both Aaron and Matthew speaking and counter arguing with passion but also mutual respect. There is a dearth of interviews (broadcast/online/podcasts) where you have that kind of interchange, where two people clearly come at something differently but still exchange beyond sound bites.
I don't think we should put too much stock into 'respectability politics'
Yes, it's what I love about Novara. I remember decent debate in the 60s and 70s like this.
@@patcampton7163 Agree.
Though I think if this was Ash S we would not have this kind of debate. Aaron has a wider perspective on life and is not a boxed in lefty.
Don’t think there was a great deal of respect coming from Aaron, and Goodwin was just nebulous and evasive for the whole interview. Sounds like a racist who doesn’t want to be found out tbh, reminded me of listening to nick griffin.
@@samspade3203 Interesting. I get where you’re coming from. I don’t know too much about Matthew’s previous publications / output. However, still better to have discussions out in the open and in person rather than Twitter spats!
I did hear a lot of things Goodwin said a few years ago on brexit. This though is a mouthful of misdirection from him. "New elite" is just a new scapegoat for the politicians in hock with the real elite - they feel their grip on power slipping.
Yup. It seems 'new elite' as defined by him is just anyone who doesn't support the tory party.
My first thought was "this guy has been bought."
Can someone explain what fascism is
@@osmosisjones4912 Last time Fascism dominated the global political climate it meant compelled speech, guilt by association, broad censorship, book burning, silencing of scientists and academics, radical medical and surgical human experimentation (eugenics), including genital mutilation, sterilization and chemical castration. Persecution and social ostracism of dissidents by their peers, friends, family and neighbours for their disloyalty to the cause and insubordination.
All of those actions were sold to the public as nobel and righteous, under the banner of 'for your welfare/safety' and for the good of the Volksgemeinschaft. (the collective). The same as they are sold to us today.
@@osmosisjones4912 An authoritarian system whose central tenets are unity around nation and race, and the defence of private property (the bit people tend to forget about).
You should ask him if he feels the same about the Koch brothers and alike spending 100's of millions to influence culture and political outcomes. If he said yes you may have some genuine common ground.
Fantastic interview, well done Aaron! This is the kind of political discourse we need in this country.
Fair play for having this discussion. It makes a change from the usual echo chamber. I don't agree with him, but the left and right need to be exposed to the other side's arguments.
'eco' or 'echo'?
Lol right-winger talking about echo chambers 😂
But Goodwin is speaking nonsense. There is no leftist elite. Rich people still run things in all the capitalist democracies … and they are richer today by a factor of 1000 than they were back in 1985 when I first heard about all the philosophers the LGBTQ+ activists and BLM guys still quote today.
Give over Goodwin. Old whine. Not even new bottles really.
Certainly has proved to me that I'm.happy in a left wing echo chamber, if this confused narrative is the alternative.
Because his treating socio-economic problems as thoughtless gossip is not an ideological tool already perfected and peddled, one way or another, by the Murdoch and Rothermere sewers? And it is 'echo chamber', mate, the very chamber that is the 'natural' habitat of the right and the far right.
I’m glad you had this guy on Aaron. When someone is representing a view like this - an academic, who’s got this veneer of respectability- it’s important they’re challenged in public and held to account. If they’re not challenged, and there’s nowhere people can go to see their views being held to scrutiny, people will just take what they’re saying at face value. And, despite what a lot of the comments here might say, I think people generally agree with that approach. It’s a vocal minority that agree with no-platforming even people like Goodwin.
To be fair there are some people that should not be platformed, but I don't think Goodwin falls into that category, at least not yet maybe if he turns full Jordan Peterson at some point, but at the moment having him exposed as a disingenuous, answer dodging waffler is quite good.
Right. If he was just some twitter nobody it would be another thing, but this isn't that. When it's a credentialed and nominally respectable academic spouting this mostly hollow BS, it's important that they are held up to proper scrutiny.
This is an academic published by penguin, who has a professorship and all the right badges and gold stars to be taken seriously by the mainstream commentariat, political class, etc. In such cases, it's not the Oxygen of Publicity that an organisation like Novara has to be worried about, but the Sunlight of Scrutiny. And from what I've seen so far of this interview, Aaron has done a good job with it.
This guy , where is he coming from or who does he work for. Hes an odd one for sure.
Douglas Murray I at least partly understand
@@mrbeast85 yeah for sure there’s no point in platforming people who straight up won’t engage in any kind of facts (I’m thinking of like an Alex Jones maybe?) but even Jordan Peterson - I think it’s a shame that his public appearances have been either with sympathetic right wing hosts or ineffectual centrist newspeople; surely we’d be better off having him being challenged by someone like Aaron? The best in-person takedowns of JP I’ve seen have been from Sam Harris (whose politics I largely disagree with) and Zizek, who’s not really that accessible to most people (I include myself in that group!)
I was very surprised he was platformed. He speaks nonsense as an “academic”.
I can’t believe you started out defending why you did this interview. I found it really interesting! May you interview many more people with strongly contrasting points of view.
That was a fantastic debate. Well done gents. Regardless of views, of which I countered back and forth, it's bloody refreshing to see it can exist somewhere. Thank you.
It’s so disappointing that people like him truly don’t have a single leg to stand on and yet so so so many people are following them off a cliff.
Seriously ?? Matts spot on , you probably one of these new elites , with radical left wing views regarding identity , British history and gender i hazard to guess 🤣
He sounds like the REFORM clusterf**k that will fill the gap of the Tories. This man is an anti-trans, economically all over the place, racist, anti-feminist, racist and conspiracy loonatic. A-Class job by Aaron calling him out on his bs and inconsistentency.
If only it were literally true, I would back them wholeheartedly.
No one reads Matthews books, it’s like reading Tom Bower books. 😂👀🤣
that's not an argument
Really interesting and glad you got him on. Hope you have more interviews like this in the future.
Well done, Aaron, on holding this fruad to account by simply asking him to explain his meanings, from which he just falls apart every time.
it is irritating that he tries to stay in the realm of generalizations than actually say anything specific, even when pressed by Aaron
Nice obfuscating, he explains who the new elites , read the book
There's no such word as 'fruad.'
@@PoldarkGodzilla no-thanks. He’s just going to explain why he isn’t the Head of the BBC or Guardian or the The Times or the Daily Fail beciase he was born in Grimsby or wherever without realising Murdoch screwed the media in this country and America
Translation: I don’t agree with him so he’s a fraud. Snowflake.
The fact that Aaron has to make the case to the audience for even talking to Goodwin really shows that the left does have a platforming problem. Matthew Goodwin is a centre right conservative but somehow even he is too "problematic" for some?
If there were more discussions and debates like this within online left media we would be much more successful at spreading progressive politics
I would say there is far more problem with left wing TH-camrs who have failed to hold Starmer and Labour to account
@@skyblazeeterno whataboutery.
Thanks for doing this interview novara. Really important to hear and challenge all views, not just be in an echo chamber. You did that beautifully Aaron!
Interesting and wonderful interview. Thank you Aaron!
Excellent interview. Great job, Aaron.
Matt was awesome , vapid points
Matt was very reasonable
Absolutely excellent discussion. So refreshing to get a civilised discussion of these issues from intelligent sources. Getting both sides of the issues in an intelligent manner. Great job
Brilliant interview! I like that I perceived shared ground and that you both sought to be honest and were happy for agreement to emerge. And also happy to disagree or hold an amicable tension 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
I'm only halfway through and struggling with wave after wave of utter tripe from this guy. Good work Aaron in staying calm.
Utter tripe … seriously , what hard left planet are you on , Matt is spot ! Blind in your left eye as they say
I made it to 8 minutes in. 😅
@@PoldarkGodzilla mate your commenting on every comment are you his publicist or summut?
This lunatic has no self awareness and I wonder who is really bankrolling him.
@@PoldarkGodzilla hard left? Moi? Don't think so. You don't need to be hard left to smell this guy's bullshit.
@@PoldarkGodzilla Ok Matt
What I'm hearing out of this gentleman is right wing populism.
Right wing populism is the idea of convincing working class people that the main conflict in society is anything other than the very rich vs everyone else.
Coupled with the idea the far right represent interests against the rich. It’s laughable.
Yeah, just a distraction.
A good decision, I think, to go ahead with this interview, an enriching debate which brings us out of our comfort zones. It is a breath of fresh air to see viewpoints not sitting neatly into left-right dogma.
I can’t believe that you nearly didn’t have this conversation. More conversations like this are needed!
100%
Excellent discussion, glad you took the risk, worth the risk, like Aaron’s robust questioning and Mathew’s robust calm responses. More of this kind of discussion is important.
Fuck ING hell. Kudos to Aaron there. The last question about the poster from Farage. Farage is a racist. He was labelled that by his teacher. That was when farage was a boy. The reason Goodwin didn't want to damage farage in that way was because there would be an awkward moment at the dinner parties they frequent if he had.
Kids are always racist.
Great conversation. Would love to have more of those please.
Excellent conversation. Two people of different views comparing notes respectfully and intelligently. Thanks to Aaron I had a chance to learn about Matthew's views and make my own mind up. Thank you both.
I agree more or less, but did you spot the "required" convergence between the two?
Bastani knew full well he could seriously corner Goodwin, indeed have him cancelled and his career destroyed, with one slip-up in one particular area.
At least twice he pressed Goodwin on whether he thought there is a genetic element to educational outcomes across groups.
Goodwin knew he had to evade the question altogether and not even attempt to answer it. He managed this.
In this they were playing the same unspoken game.
This part of the exchange did not show either of them up well.
For Bastani it showed he was well aware of the power of the "elite" position of his group. Something he was denying throughout.
For Goodwin it showed he had limits to how much he was prepared to stand up against that power. Clearly he does know there is a strong inherited aspect to intelligence. He will never go there though, not for love nor money.
They both dance around the same maypole while pretending it's not there.
@@alexdavis1541 The correlation between IQ scores and shared genetics exists for siblings and parents, but quickly disappears as you start considering cousins. People begin with a reasonable premise: there is an inherited aspect to intelligence; but then progress to argue: there are correlations between intelligence and genetics on a group level, that just so happen to align with 19th-century concepts of phenotype.
@@davespiller684 That's not by essential point. Which is about the actual power relationship between the interviewer and interviewee, given what is acceptable discourse in our current social paradigm.
In terms of the subject in question the interviewee here is necessarily on the back-foot.
That aside, there is, of course, a strong relationship between genes and intelligence in individuals.
On a group level, valid or not, it is not surprising that this has been thought about in terms of 19th century concepts of phenotype (by which you mean 19th European concepts of phenotype) since it is Europeans who constructed the system of analysis and thought that arrived at the conclusion you point to.
But even having the ability to construct the system of thought suggests the conclusion is correct.
@@alexdavis1541 But in this case the interviewee is on the back foot precisely because he can't answer the direct question being put to him: does he believe that genetics account for group differences in intelligence? Either he thinks that it does, but can't state it openly because that would reveal that he disagrees with the scientific consensus and is probably a racist. Or he thinks it doesn't but doesn't want the audience to think that he doesn't. He could very easily turn the tables on Bastani by answering the question, but he doesn't.
The ability to construct a system of thought is no guarantee that the system of thought produces correct conclusions. In fact contemporary science has shown that 19th-century race-science often produced incorrect conclusions. And the available evidence continues to indicate that there is no correlation between genetics and inheritance on a group level.
Can't believe people would have an issue with him, or any guest actually. We should debate anyone, especially the people we disagree with
Reminds me of a song by Robert Long: 'Tomorrow we'll be tolerant, we'll find even the biggest idiot interesting and shake hands with every arsehole'.
@@catscan2022 assertions without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
@@catscan2022 As G E Moore said, if you hold up your hand and say you have a proof that it is not your hand, then either the premises or the argument are wrong. Truly grown-up people don't waste their time debating views that are clearly wrong.
It's only by having these conversations that we can see how disingenuous they are.
@@catscan2022 I have an open mind but it's not so open that my brains fall out
The Elite can be culturally left-wing and economically right-wing.
Currently cultural left opens up new markets.
Thank You Guys for a good robust debate , so refreshing .
Excellent discussion. Aaron pushed Matthew hard on many points for which in the most part he answered well.
"The left could learn a lot from these discussions"
What? Like the lesson that cryptofascists couch their inherent racism in plausible deniability and bank on the idea that lots of people don't actually know what "left-wing" means or who comprises "the left".
Real eye-opener. I guess I also learnt that it's not worth debating people like this in good faith.
Exactly why I stopped watching at 10mins.
The guy is a Euclidean Point: he has position but no magnitude.
Nothing Aaron could do would make it bearable.
On a psychological level it’s interesting to see someone who lives in an alternative reality 😏
Elite?
Know your enemy
Go on then I’ll bite. What comprises the left wing these days?
I enjoyed this discussion. I especially like that you pulled someone who not only conflicts with your views, but who is conherent and articulate, rather than a frothing strawman.
Articulate,yes; coherent, not so much.
Hello from Australia. Excellent!!!!! Keep up the good work
Talking of biased towards minority and enthic groups, I worked at a large bank in the UK and was sent an invite as part of a program to potentially sit with the board of directors and experience the process. I couldn't apply because i am a white male.
A quick crash course in the objectives and outcomes of the advertising industry would really open this guy’s eyes
Totally agree. He imagines there is sincerity in the messaging. Even just a skim of Bernays would set him straight, let alone Lacan or Zizek.
@@Anabsurdsuggestion Does it matter, when the views are still being pushed.
Downstream of culture.
if he keeps saying 'the new elite' over and over eventually - it will become a real thing...like kevin costner in field of dreams 'if you build it, they will come'
It’s a classic Gramscian War of Position, much like the phrase “political correctness”
Are you one of these new elites that don’t like being called out ?🤣 is it a case of … can we just moan about the tories always 🤣
@@PoldarkGodzilla the tories that have been in power for the past 13 years and have decimated the country. You’d think if someone came into your house and took a sh*t in your living room, you’d probably be a little mad, dare I say moan. But not you, he told you the mysterious left wing new elite did it, and you believed him 😂
I really hope Novara keep taking on more interviews like this. Props to Aaron et al
This guy Matthew has thought deeply about these issues and I would have liked to hear more about what he had to say.
His argument disintegrated at every challenge. Aaron was excellent and well prepared for the interview. Justified Aaron's decision to interview him, as Goodwins' argument was shown up as totally baseless and superficial.
the thing that made me most upset about this interview was him fucking up the Michael Jordan thing lmfao
Goodwin's *entire* position seems to be found on "vibes". I found it all quite pointless. It reminded me of the Peterson v. Zizek debate, when it turned out Peterson was so hopelessly out of his depth that the whole thing was a waste of everybody's time.
Yes the central argument of the book fell apart, as did its author, at the first challenge. After that you’re only learning so much as it’s clear the ‘20 years of research’ was done with the most extreme confirmation bias.
That is not what happend. Aaron was constantly mischaracterising him. Goodwin then had to show how it was a mischaracterisation and only to have Aaron double down on his bulshit.
He's written a whole book about how big companies market to the consuming middle class city dwellers?
So glad you stuck to your guns and went ahead with this discussion. This is the kind of discussion we need more of for society to de-silo and progress
This guy holding on to this label "new elite" is astonishing. As an American, this is a conversation and argument we have CONSTANTLY in our daily conversation surrounding our politics. Only it's louder and more embarrassing with the right.
Matthew Goodwin is such a strange character. I remember back when he was just studying the far-right. At some point he began accepting their ideas.
There is just a 'right', you know... just as you think Tories are dumb for calling anyone advocating for better worker conditions is a communist, well...
Really?
When was this and what did he accept?
I’ve never heard of him.
@@GazB85 It was ages ago but I first heard about him shortly after the Breivik terror attacks when I became interested in studying the far-right. He was one of the academics whose work I would look at. He fell off my radar for a few years and the next thing I knew I spotted him expressing some of the same ideas he once documented. He has recently been talking positively about so called 'National Conservatism', a movement that sees mainstream Conservatism, like the Tories, as too liberal. They tend to be big on folks like Orban and, until recently, Putin.
@@coreyc1685 Goodwins next book title: "Smeared: the untold tale of an Austrian art student"...
@@lennoxbaumbach390 😂 😂😂
Good interview. Interesting to hear Goodwin's arguments, interesting to hear Bastani challenge them. Depressing that Bastani had to justify interviewing someone he at many points disagrees with, just because of all the book-burners and no-platformers.
Totally agree.
@@northleedspoppa first 2 minutes of this interview.
@@northleedspoppa well that’s different than what you first asked. I think Bastanis point which Goodwin is referencing throughout this discussion is that the “new elite” class deplatforms or doesn’t spotlight the opinions of people outside of the urban college educated core. So the idea that he has low iq and therefore shouldn’t be allowed to speak kinda gives credence to his initial argument.
@@northleedspoppa there are millions of Brits who don’t think his argument to be nonsense. Which is why there should be opportunity for left based media platforms to combat the sentiment of this thought rather than ignore it and say it’s low iq ideology. That only strengthens Goodwins argument. Only point to be made.
"the book burner and no-platformers" erm two rather disparate groups there. Mainly, I would argue, people who didn't want Goodwin on Novara media would have recognised the waste of time it was, however interesting. Interacting with madness is interesting... Doesn't mean it isn't wasteful.
Two guys chasing each other around a bonfire, unable to work out why they're getting a sweat on 🙄
I started reading Chomsky in 1978. Dropped out of business school as a result as I recognized our corptocracy was a literal death machine. I switched to Phil and PoliSci. Years later I founded Post Csrbon Toronto. Wrote for Counterpunch and Countercurrents. Aka. So far left, not on the spectrum. Today, to get accurate news on Ukraine i have to listen to Judge Napolitano and The Duran
We need to see these people to know who we are listening to
💯🎯👀
I find the argument that “health outcomes being different will be explained away by genetics” really stupid. Yeah, maybe some groups are more predisposed to have certain conditions because of genetics but a health system is supposed to treat its citizens for the conditions that they have. Maybe genetics explains the predisposition to certain conditions but it cannot explain why a health system isn’t responding to the needs of certain groups.
Also mad disingenuous of Goodwin to say in that podcast clip that as genetic understanding develops, more kids will rebel against notions of progressivism because the basis of that progressivism will be undermined by gene science, and then refuse to be drawn on any questions about intelligence and its relationship to race/genetics when pressed on the matter. Pretty slimy guy all in all.
This is very shady of Goodwin as he knows exactly what he means, Arron knows what he means and we know what he means but he refuses to be honest about it, blathering on about how he never mentioned intelligence or education etc etc.
He's FULLY aware that when people talk about institutional racism they are not predominantly talking about health, and he knows full well the dogwhistles he's sounding when he makes these points about genetics.
I don't buy that he was talking about hereditary illness in the original podcast clip for a second.
It's like page one of the far right playbook.
Genuinely laughing out loud at some of Goodwin's responses. Throwing out definitions all over place and then when Aaron asks, what do you mean by that, he's like, well... and then changes the original wording, completely distinguishing the orginal argument... Well done Aaron...
Notice Matthew Goodwin doesn't mention the investment into University expansion benefited the Working Class the most. Notice he doesn't mention Labour devolved powers to Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland & tried to do so in North East England. Notice he didn't mention Labour reduced child poverty to the lowest levels for decades & improved educational attainment thanks to record levels of investment. He ignores key facts to continue his definition butbit does not work. He is vague and general on purpose.
An excellent interview. Thank you. I think Matt tends to conflate 'liberal' and 'left' owing to his being in a university. I was astonished by the self-satisfied dogmatism of many of the academics I came across whilst doing my doctorate (completed 2009). I didn't belong to any academic faction and I read widely across several different disciplines. The fact that I was interested in the imagination as a semiotic resource that operated in tandem with linguistic and other 'observable' semiotic activity and, for the purposes of the thesis, its role in particular in 'reading events' in the classroom seemed to offend against some sort of orthodoxy that privileged language and insisted on its social nature. I was pretty astonished on reading the ubiquitous Vygotsky to find that he provided almost no specific evidence (such as case studies, for example) of any kind to give flesh to his main theoretical concepts, such as the zone of proximal development, or substantiate his descriptions of certain meaning-making phenomena (inner speech, for example). Ditto Bakhtin. There was an overwhelming 'left-wing' bias in the education department in which I worked for my thesis that it was difficult to dissent from, and an awful lot of unquestioned assumptions that went with that. I got some very sharp and unreflective responses when my work challenged one or other of these. I ended p doing my thesis in almost total isolation, apart from occasional meetings with my supervisors. Matt may be 'wrong' about some things, but at least he is not being tendentious, something which is unavoidable if you start from a pre-packaged, let's say, ideological position. Everything is made to fit 'the' narrative(s). I think this is what Matt meant when he drew attention to the way in which 'institutional racism' is used to explain phenomena that, on closer examination, may involve quite complex and context-dependent factors. Racism itself is perhaps best viewed as arising from 'fear of the other' or whatever. As a Northerner from a small industrial town, and with a very strong accent, I was treated a bit like someone from a different element when I went to Cambridge. In that case, it was my accent mainly, but also my place of origin, that gave rise to a somewhat prejudiced and discriminatory response. This was nothing compared to anti-semitism or colour prejudice; but it was quite real and had consequences for my ability to integrate into Cambridge society - I certainly never felt I belonged there. I think both you and Matt need to think a little more about the way Thatcher attacked almost any other collectivity than Tory approved ones or corporate enterprises. The university operates more and more on corporate lines. Matt has a good point about how the people at the top of such corporations, in whatever sphere, use their position to impose certain expectations on employees. The old collegiality which thrived on dialogue and shades of opinion has long gone. I found the same in schools by the time I left. Well-meant critiques of policies handed down from above led eventually to your being squeezed out. Lazy and incompetent people were tolerated much more than someone who was 'not one of us'. That phrase was evidence of an important strand of Thatcherism. Unfortunately, it's not only the right-wing that are guilty of such 'tribalism'. Indeed, the same'fear of the other' evident in racism is probably also evident in people's responses to Matt. I certainly felt that at Cambridge, in my post-grad university and in the various schools I worked in. There is a continuum between acceptance and rejection that depends on the degree of your conformity to such things as a particular mindset, 'identity, or orthodoxy. Conform enough and you're accepted. Dissent too much and you're ejected.
It's not an accidental conflation.
It a dishonest tactic
Conflating liberal and left has nothing to do with being in a university. It's an Americanism. Godwin is just importing American far right toxicity into Britain. If you Brits can't see that, you're screwed.
I studied at Cambridge too (for undergrad), and had similar feelings to you on this matter. I also didn't feel I fit in (due to race and class background). My A-level background was in further maths and literature, and was particularly interested in philosophical topics about how meaning is conveyed through symbols. I studied in the English department but really wanted to write a thesis that drew on lots of philosophy and mathematical concepts, but was met with disapproval and slight hostility from my department. I was surprised because surely it is more interesting than writing ANOTHER repetitive essay about Shakespearean tragedy, and I had years of my own personal research and reading to draw upon, but they didn't accept it and were instantly disapproving at the idea of a cross-departmental topic for the thesis. I had to water it down do much and change the whole idea to centre it around literary texts, instead of symbols and meaning primarily, which ended up making it a much less interesting essay. Another annoying thing was that I wanted to take Old Norse classes alongside Old English and even though there were the hours for me to do it and classes running, they wouldn't let me join. It was a little frustrating. At times I felt like I was going thousands of pounds into debt for a glorified library membership, seeing as there were relatively few contact hours (compared to science degrees, for example, which have the same fees).
Thank you Arron 😊 for challenging this person who is an apologist for elitist thinking
@Greg B You read the comments in this thread and t's exactly what he's talking about, even Aaron tried to use an out of context clip to paint him as a fucking eugenicist. Now I completely disagree with most of what this man has to say but it is true that the left are guilty of this shit and it's exactly what has driven many centrists to right-wing populism
@Greg B Finally a comment with sense. I'm also left, at least I've always thought so, I've voted Labour forever. But these days the left has got so extreme, especially when around identity politics. Matt is definitely right imo about a dominant middle class, seeped in these views. I mean, it's not hard to notice when the BBC and the media, as well as the health service and education seem to prioritise these views
@@benfisher1376 cool "i voted labour forever" story bro 😂
@jangomoonstomp Are you American? Otherwise that language is sad lol
@jangomoonstomp Not to mention cultural appropriation lol 😆
OMG - how can Aaron stay calm
He is an intelligent progressive journalist
It's good to hear people like this and hear intelligent reasoning debunking their ideas.
Brilliant interviewing Aaron
Aaron never strikes me as being particularly patient so it's slightly surprising he managed to get through 90 minutes with Goodwin without exploding. Goodwin is all over the place and words and phrases seem to mean whatever he wants them to mean to make his point at the time. But still, an interesting exchange nonetheless and hope Novara will interview more oppositional characters in the future, so their idiocy can be exposed.
How nimble would you be using words of phrases pertaining to cultural aspects of politics which are constantly being policed and tainted and then booby trapped for fun (of course, by ´the liberals´:) I respect Aaron for talking to people with different views and his professional ring-craft. In this type of interview, he has a superior pedigree and it showed.
@@martinholland7957 Agree. I think he's probably taking a leaf out of Mehdi Hassan's book in trying to be patient but very firm and direct. I just would like to see that actual Mehdi Hassan have his way with Goodwin, because I think he wouldn't have been able to as effectively weasel out of some of these criticisms haha.
Mehdi Hassan is not to be trusted at all.
@@janguvpes7518 Mehdi Hassan vs Goodwin isn't going to happen, it would be interesting though. IMO people like Goodwin are already beating before they attempt to put their case in light of the current zeitgeist. I´ll provide an example. Does anyone other than those making money from it or using it as a shut others down, truly believe that Intersectionality is a bright idea in the hands of the masses!? It remains a mainstream idea and that is absolutely hilarious, it doesn't provide any solutions, only creates division and even factors in being ugly (I am not against usage of CRT in the hands a legal pros´s). On the flip, why is Goodwin defending the good people of Brexit, he´s either a) a saint b) paid to do so by? c) making money d) he secretly believes that race determines iq (no smoking gun yet found) or a mix of some or all, but we all know a) isn't a real option. My aim is to make people commit to agreeing with the current Zeitgeist, especially the dubious aspects, because I am totally convinced that much of it is merely a passing fashion and the funniest part is, the left blames all the dodgy stuff on ´The Liberals´ haha . Do you hold Intersectionality close to your bosom? :)
@@russell6877 What makes you say that?
I very much enjoy conversations like this and agree with what Aaron says when he mentioned at the beginning that confronting those that we disagree with makes our own arguments stronger. I personally think Aaron should do more interviews with people on the right.
Good faith arguments on the right. Which narrows it considerably.
This is interesting. How do you class Matthew as right-wing? He comes from a single parents working-class background and is the first person in his family to attend university.
@@LocalHistoryUK Why would anything like that disqualify him from being right wing? Politics aren’t something that’s intrinsically tied to your background. Sure, your background can inform your politics, but saying “he can’t be right wing, he has a working class background” is plainly ridiculous.
@@LocalHistoryUK Madsen Pirie was also from a working class background and was a rabid right winger economically. Look him up. Owen Jones wrote about him in his establishment book.
Agree with this open dialogue helps us grow echo chambers cause hate.
Interesting in clarifying what we once knew as 'Champagne Socialists' have now become: a force to be reckoned with, and how, ironically, even unwittingly, they have 'teamed up' with corporate power seemingly not realising just how dangerous and disconnected from 'the people' this direction has become. Great discussion!
This was a fantastic interview. Occasionally heated, but always civil. They gave each other space to talk, and got into the detail of ideas. Aaron did a fantastic job of asking difficult questions, and challenged Matt. Matt on the other hand was excellent at giving examples, provided robust arguements. A really interesting interview. Keep them coming please.
It seems like Goodwin's argument is, I was okay with neoliberalism as long as it favored social conservativism. Which is just an intellectually dishonest argument. At least Peter Hitchens argument was far more politically and intellectually honest.
@@martinholland7957 maybe, but I actually just think Hitchens is just far smarter than Goodwin and has a far more vast bank of cultural knowledge.
@@nmk5003 just saw your reply now, I cannot find the comment I made to which you replied to doh. However, I´ll gladly concur that Hitchens conveys his points within any debate in a smarter fashion than Goodwin and he knows his onions in terms of the correct political/cultural sources of many of todays happenings. I also believe that Hitchens is surprised to find himself of relevance, given that he went into ´i told you this would happen mode many yrs ago ´. Goodwin seemed out of his depth against Bastani in terms of ring-craft. In his defence, it must be challenging to bring academic findings onto the street and sounds fluid and convincing.
No. Mischaracterised.
@@dolphin069 lmao 🤣, I love how you haven't offered an argument as to where I mischaracterized Goodwin.
@@nmk5003 dude, he talks about thatchers policies trashing the working class at lest twice. There’s nothing In neoliberalism that supports social conservatives it’s all about capital.
very courageous and great debate........thanks Aaron
Absorbing interview agreed a lot of what Goodwin said
Fantastic discussion, if we had more debates and discussions like this, people from both sides would understand each other much better. Some people on the left prefer to cancel ideas they do not agree with, this is the way forward peeps, more communication and more discussion of ideas
You can sum up his book in one sentence. He doesn't like that power is moving from GenX and Boomers to millennials and zoomers and they don't know what to do with themselves after they screwed us so hard for the last 20 years
A fair sumup Matt- although personally, I would move the 'Gen X' from the 'Boomer' side of the equation to the 'millennials and zoomers' side. Indeed - the "New Elite" which he describes - ie people who went to uni from the 90s - that IS Gen X
@@mattwhorlow9900 💯
@@mattwhorlow9900 I'd say there is a split of ideology with Gen X'ers. I think that half of Gen X'ers definitely have inherited traits from the Boomers. They are sort of a weird transitional generation from Boomers to Millennials, I find them a lot more difficult to characterise.
its almost a tacit admission that (at best) they contribute zero to society. Because if they were useful contributers they wouldnt be so easily disposed of. No one is looking rid of genX or boomer surgeons, for example.
@@mattwhorlow9900 Most of Gen-X did considerably better materially than most millennials and while they may be more aligned with millennials on cultural issues, have far more in common financially with boomers.
20 minutes in and it would seem Matthew is just butt hurt about social progress which companies are following along with.
He actually stated the new 'elite' is 25% of the country. that's not very elite.
Is that seriously your immature take 🤣 I suppose you also think a woman can have a penis 🤣🤣
Exactly a complete oxymoron!
Elite = can afford food. I mean maybe thats what Britain has genuinely come to
💯
I feel sad that you spent double the time I did to get there - and no hate intended by that comment, it's just time you'll never get back.
He's just an angry consrvative right wing gammon who's in a bit of a grump that the world is progressing. And that it's not social-acceptable anymore to be intolerant of marginalised people e.g, gender non-conforming, non-whites, LGBT etc.
Very interesting interview and well done for having done it. It's only when opinions and ideas are challenged properly and carefully that a picture of the person holding them can be gleaned. The regular jumping around from theme to theme evasively by Mr Goodwin and then clearly not wanting to be pinned down from vague utterances, for instance on intelligence and race, is very revealing.
How can he laugh at the number 900 million ? People are leaving from China, Vietnam, Bangladesh, Eritrea, Albania every day. Some of those are not even countries in any serious trouble compared to Afghanistan, huge parts of India and all of sub-saharan Africa. You don't think a quarter of Africa and Asia would leave if they could? Europe needs to be thinking about some very big walls if it wants anything left.
Novara Media should be applauded for doing this interview, it's about time intellectuals from the left and right had proper debate, and this is what this was - it was absolutely the correct decision to interview Matthew, as it was Peter Hitchens. The debate was robust, but civil, I thoroughly enjoyed it.
I completely disagree with everything that Goodwin said, the idea that society is run by an elite group of left-wing university graduates while the Tufton Street Mafia rule the roost is absurd, he's clearly got a beef with left-wing students and corporations that espouse any sort of left-wing cause, Aaron really held him to account on these points, the main thrust of his argument is totally flawed. He had very little evidence for any of it, in fact this interview was a masterclass in changing the subject and whataboutery, he rarely addressed Aaron's questions directly.
That said, his assertion that white working class children are a forgotten class and are being left behind is absolutely spot on, this is what's happening, and we are storing up huge problems for our society in the future that will manifest themselves in very ugly ways. I don't believe we should be engaged pitting different races against each other, working class people are the same, whether they are black, white, asian or any other race, our economic struggles are shared. We are allies, not adversaries, and some of the current race industry seeks to turn us into the latter, rather than stressing why we are the former.
It is so important that debates like this happen, it's probably the first civil debate I've seen between UK intellectuals from the left and right, if we talked more we'd understand a lot more - even though I disagreed with Matthew on his analysis, I'm glad I heard it, and I'm glad he was challenged on it robustly. No Platforming is absolute nonsense, it's advocated by people too lazy to debate or to think, it's vital to our democracy that people are free to speak, especially those with whom you disagree. Bravo to Novara Media, Aaron and Matthew, that was outstanding journalism.
Name a Uni that has prevented someone on the left from attending a debate
Labour have a huge problem with white working class men . The party is seen as an irrelevance - the perception is that the party & the progressive left are more interested in gender and ID politics - that perception has begun to stick to the point where Starmer & co are detested by huge numbers of the working class...
Incredible how Goodwin outargues himself within a couple of minutes of speaking
Does he? Any examples?
I agree with Aaron we should debate people with 'problematic' views. In 2017, when Jordan Peterson was galvanizing his grift, he claimed, "No Marxist will debate me". Truth is he avoided all debates until he was famous enough to brush off the humiliation he suffered at the hands of Žižek.
Really good interview. Thanks!
I grew up in a mining community in the 60s and 70s. I left and moved to London so under Goodwin's definition I am the new elite. I had no choice because the Tories shut down my local industries and at the time they told me to "get on my bike" to get a job. Goodwin is a clueless ignoramus.
All the political parties that have a chance of winning. Are anti conservative. As are most academics this guy being one of them.
Okay well, they said you need to retrain, you would also be completely lynched by the leftist mob for continuing to advocate burning coal (at our expense financially btw) because of the progressive climate agenda. Either way you end up jobless.
I dont think you understand his argument
@@benfisher1376 I do, he's trying to denounce Goodwin's assertion that there is a new elite by using a fringe case as an example. He's quite clear on who's generating public opinion and OP ain't one of them.
@BrianT Yes, the same communities who voted for brexit out of desperation because instead of just the right ignoring their voices, the left do too, as well as denouncing them as bigots etc
Matthew Goodwin saying the UK isn't institutionally racist. even when given the facts. Walk in my shoes as for his eugenics comments and tried rolling them back he's pathetic. Right wingers never own their comments when confronted with their absurdity. He avoided a lot of question
I was gripped by this!
More of this please, good to hear proper debate!
There's so much he doesn't say as he knows it is unpalatable.
Good interview. Crazy how people went mad by having a debate with people who disagree on different things.
Fantastic debate, great watch!
He doesn't understand that Liberal and Left wing are two different things
They are closer than they used to be
TBF Liberal and Liberal are two different things
@@simonclare100Nah. The opposite. It is just that the left has become more marginalized and the right has gained more power in their former institutions.
@@ragulperinteresting, I don't see any evidence of that , wouldn't give any of them the time of day currently, our politicians are very low quality currently, that and cowardice makes for dangerously poor results as we are now seeing
Yes he does. You don't understand what he's saying.
he really tried to wriggle out of that education question aye 😂
Goodwin still keeps talking even while he is breathing in. He clearly had a point he wanted to make and then searched for data to back it up whilst ignoring or diminishing everything else.
Top notch interview Aaron, it's important to have these difficult discussions. I do have to say though, this guy was grasping at straws for extended stretches. Couldn't help but noticed he literally shushed you at one point.
The claim that the presences of wealthy oxbridge educated children of managers is a new and challenging shift in the status quo of power though... and that it inherently sits on the left. Pretty impressive mental gymnastics.
Bring on more of this, you held your ground well without getting argumentative.
Love Matt G.