Debate: Does a woke aristocracy really run Britain? | Matt Goodwin vs Mic Wright
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 24 เม.ย. 2023
- Author Matthew Goodwin and media commentator Mic Wright went back and forth over Matt's new book, "Values, Voice and Virtue".
One challenged the other to a debate in the marketplace of ideas.
We gave them our marketplace, and they brought their ideas.
Camera: Joel Dunn-Wilson
Mix: Shawnee Linstead
Subscribe to our new podcast now, or you're a silly goose:
linktr.ee/pubcast
This is great. Everything about Mic Wright is 16 years old apart from his age.
His boyfriend?
LOL. His T-shirt.... and he is nearly 40!
Bizarre childish freak. Matt Goodwin's arguments, on the other hand, are very persuasive.
Mic: "don't interrupt me"
Also Mic: "I need to interrupt you"
Amen!
Childish Leftism.
He’s a rude, chippy slob. That’s holding him back more than his background.
Guy does this constantly to Matt, who in fairness to him let's him continue because ultimately when he interrupts he doesn't have anything rational to say back, aside from rambling and telling little anecdotes. Matt knows this and let's him away with it, his interruptions and rambling doesn't advance his cause.
"I didn't say that"
He just did !
Anectodes and me me me.
What a thoroughly annoying character.
The anger and moral projection of Mic speaks volumes
sighs again
This guy is a parody from Royston Vasey
He’s head of the new elite.
Ugly in Pink.Thick mincing Mic highlights by his manner exactly what Matt is criticising, he's emotional, well woke, light in the loafers, a son of Naval parents obviously been around a lot of Seamen,The Rum bum and botty, watch,that shivered his timbers arghh, arghh me 'arties
This is the perfect reflection of the society we live in. I was actually looking forward to someone challenging Matthew Goodwin with sound arguments, hoping to be convinced otherwise. But it's the same story: lots of emotions, lack of knowledge, personal experiences, not seeing the bigger picture, and an inability to debate an argument. Even if this man had a point, I get lost after ten minutes of him circling around an issue without answering it and ending up with a different point. This leads the opponent to respond to the new point that was made.
Coming from a very left-leaning background, I started questioning all the emotions and the drive to be good. Much of it is madness and has the intellectual horizon of a nine-year-old. As much as I like most of these people because they try hard to protect the vulnerable, I understand that they fail in this mission due to ideological thinking. And that's sad because they could do a lot of good things. They have the energy and the craziness to change a lot for the better, but they need to challenge their own thoughts, very often their behaviour, and a structure of thoughts and arguments.
You can't have a 'debate' with the kind of person exemplified by Mic Wright; Their mind is already locked, they can't create a cogent argument in defence of their opinions and unwilling (perhaps unable) to listen to anything that remotely challenges it. You're wasting your time talking to this person and, honestly, ours.
Bang on the money. It was pointless and an insult to our intelligence.
Cognitive dissonance in a nutshell.
I would find it hard to be sympathetic to someone who spent a significant amount of time looking at the floor, squealing, waving his arms and mostly ignoring what his opponent said.
A couple of things I noticed about this guy. Early on he disparaged populism, using the abandonment of the death penalty as an example of its nefarious nature. Essentially what he was saying is that, "My/our progressive values trump those of the populace". That's good enough for him.
Anyone wanting to understand this mindset in detail should read Thomas Sowell's, "The Vision of the Anointed". In Sowell's terms this guy sees himself as one of the "anointed". Sowell's evisceration of this mindset is revealing to say the least.
Next he describes a sudden collapse and medical emergency that he has suffered. Treated by a phlebotomist. He doesn't go into detail beyond that but this is becoming an increasingly common story these days.
This commonality is observably linked to the jab. Typically embolisms and myocarditis.
He denies the existence of an elite as described by Goodwin but it is almost certain he follows their edicts. This blindness to their existence, and the way they operate, may well have almost cost him his life.
The sheer number of times he uses the personal pronoun ‘I’.
Poor Mic. He's not very good at debating. But he's very, very good at hyperventilating and harrumphing.
@@williamlee3534 Mic also displays mastery of evading questions by saying "It's complicated."
@@MKUltra7I believe that's just his brain's very (very very) limited processing power
The squealing girl is pretty funny.
Impossible to take these people seriously
It's got a vote, it's not funny.
Why have you got curly watts on the panel 😂😂
How dare you assume their gender!?
There are so many important points that need to be made about Matthew Goodwin and his arguments. But, sadly, Mic Wright doesn’t make any of them and instead spent the time either huffing and puffing or incoherently making points that just bounce off Goodwin.
The host is more effective at putting Goodwin to the test.
I agree. Matthew clearly is well researched, well versed and well rehearsed on these points. Whereas Mic is not. Mic clearly disagrees with Matthews points (which for the record so do I), but doesn’t do the necessary part of concisely explaining why he disagrees without leaning on personal anecdotes. In my view Matthew uses multiple farcical arguments straw-manning the left. There is nuance here and both sides when they lack nuance lose the argument.
Could you not mispronounce the letter d instead of the letter t in spoken English. It is important to maintain proper standards! Good video though. Thank you 👍
Agreed. What this generation of socialists forget is that our socialist working class families that were trade union members were against going into the EU, Tony Benn was also against it because they knew the vast impact that free movement of people from other countries would have on our workforce and standard of living. Benn and the trade unionists were absolutely right in the 70s. They also knew that there wouldn't be jobs for everyone too. Hence, when we voted for BREXIT the working class were returning to what our socialist families taught us to defend and protect workers rights in the UK, our people, our country.
@@eliakimjosephsophia4542 Because socialism/communism are nationalistic in purpose, joining the EU is globalist.
That's the big problem behind the push of socialism/communism in the west, they fail to see that politics has is globalist now. There are 2 ways it works, Russian old school nationalism, Chinese new school where the nation is a commodity to be sold to globalist corporations for profit.
Yep, typical lefty...self-righteousness without any substance
Its like debating Kev the teenager.
Mic Wright is on something or other.... Matt Goodwin wiped the floor with him.
As a bi-sexual person he certainly doesn’t subscribe to the view that intersectional progressive politics is an actual thing… 🤦🏻♂️
I swear there are better and more theoretically sound lefties in this world… why aren’t they on these shows?
@@masonvanluven6523 Not everyone wants to pursue YT fame lmao? Or even, the overwhelming majority of grounded people.
No he didn't
Poor Matt trying to debate with a toddler having a tantrum!
Matt speaks so much sense in my veiw.
Mic provides a masterclass in how not to debate, what a 🤡
His argument about the NHS, windrush and his lovely story about his hospital visit said it all to me about this "Mic" guy.
He just dumb
@@jumblestiltskin1365when defended the NHS is only talked about in personal anecdote. Presumably because a rational point of view quickly reveals its numerous weaknesses.
Adult debating a child. Mic needs to grow up
I agree with Mic but I HATE the way he delivers his points. It's rash, crude and all his huffing and puffing just makes him insufferable.
Agreed. He's not really the spokesperson we need 🤣
Absolutely this. He seems to think it's great because it's "how you debate in pubs". Bizarre behaviour.
To be fair to him, the huffing and puffing sounds like more of an issue with the microphone setup. But agreed that he could be making his points a bit more clearly.
The far more insufferable thing is the way his debating opponent keeps Gish Galloping.
It's a method of debate where you drown your opponent out by talking about irrelevant things for six hours and rely on their politeness and the audience's perceptions in order to make them seem like a total arse.
compared to that the 'huffing and puffing' of audible frustration at the sheer idiocy of the points being made is bearable.
@@JulianThomas-ru9xo yeah I heard Mic make that point himself. I don't actually agree he's gish galloping, I think in the main he (MG) makes a number of points which hang together fairly sensibly. Maybe if he popped his dummy back in he'd be able to listen more. It's not like Goodwin interrupts him particularly so he has every opportunity to summarise what Goodwin's said and what he wants to focus on..?
Matt's correct. Upsetting all the right people judging by the tenor of the comment section.
One person disagrees with the other in a calm, concise and polite way. The other is rude, hand wavey and shouty.
Credibility in a debate is very important.
In summary: Matt Goodwin is bang on the money and is echoing exactly how 10s of millions of English people feel across the nation.
Mic comes across as a petulant baby
They all do. Speaking to someone on the left these days is like speaking to an angry teenager.
Your body language said it, says the guy who has been huffing and puffing the whole way through
Slouching, harroumphing, gesticulating. Being better than us.
As a leftist, I wish more people who represent the left POV conducted themselves in debates more like Matt as opposed to mic
Very unlikely to happen. Leftists are on average more neurotic.
Why don’t you just join the right instead? It’s easy.
Why? Because you swallow the bullshit that the terms of any debate should be defined by the establishment's rules? You do realise that locks out people of less privileged backgrounds from political discourse, don't you?
You meen "more boring When matt speaks it is like watching paint dry
'as a leftist '. I find that hard to believe. I think this is an example of concern trolling.. I'm on your side.. but. I'm calling bullshit on that
"The people who benefited most from opening universities (25 years ago) were the children of the New Elite, who already had privilege and advantage." So his new elite are currently in their 60s-70s? His old elite weren't usurped, they died from old age! And, shock horror, what a revelation that converting polys to unis didn't significantly help the working classes. How has no one thought this before?
I love the sarcasm dripping from that last sentence 😂😂
Exactly. It's not the new elite all. Its the old elite in different clothes.
Perfect example of how the slightest scrutiny makes the whole argument collapse.
Matt in this debate was literally just the socially conservative neoliberal elite complaining about the socially liberal neoliberal elite. Left wing people didn't come into it.
Haha yea perfect. Goodwin has a tendency to think to himself: wow I must have been the first to realise this! I am a genius!
55:36 Mic admits that the Labour party has, since Blair and Brown, stopped being representative of workers and instead represents the interests of a professional managerial class.
Which is EXACTLY Matt's argument. That a new graduate managerial professional class has overtaken all the institutions (eg The Labour Party) and no longer reflects ordinary (working) peoples values.
Wow. There it is.
Mic's behaviour is quite childish and impolite.
Whoever Mic is he could do with showing some manners because all the sighing, muttering and moaning is embarrassing.
‘People have become more relaxed about immigration since Brexit’. Hmmm, could that be something to do with the fact that the media had to tone down the scare stories to maintain the facade that we had ‘taken back control’? The immigration debate in this country is nothing more than Chomsky’s Manufacturing Consent in action
Could be, and probably is a major factor. It could also be because voters have finally realized that nothing they do will ever convince the established parties that immigration needs to be managed at a more manageable rate, and have simply downed tools. "None of the above" preference is reportedly rising in numerous polls, and voter turnout is predicted to fall this decade significantly - both signs that people are giving up. So "relaxed" isn't the word really, its more "depressed into a state of paralysis".
Spot on.
I can't keep watching. Mic has such anxious energy and can't finish a thought. He's bringing this really tetchy energy into it all. Expected to watch this and find brokenbottleboy nailing it from a left wing perspective. Actually just feel embarrassed.
Mic was still in distress even at the end of the discussion. LMAO
Matthew Goodwin comes across very well. Mic Wright not so much lol
Imagine the two of them in a job interview.... who would get the job?
‘The woke want everyone to think like them, but that’s bad because I want everyone to think like me’
It's odd they don't associate freedom of thought with freedom of speech.. I simply assume they have never read the udhr.
@@DJWESG1 I often doubt whether a lot of this old flannel is ever seriously meant, as it just seems to be appealing to some fairly basic and mercurial resentments and suspicions in a target audience. I mean, basically: the world is messed up because it's run by young people who insist on thinking about things. That's an ancient song and he's just found a new way to sing it...
@@petersvillage7447 Agreed, the same song was played about the youth in Ancient Greece millennia ago for having "radical" ideals
The right always goes on about how people should "live in the real world", but when it comes do grasping the reality that society is simply heading in a direction that doesn't align with their outdates beliefs, they throw a hissy fit and moan about how everything is unfair.
@@TBakerXD Yeah; the whole of his argument sounds to me like it could be summed up (very roughly) by the phrase 'we're being stabbed in the back', another ubuiqitous sentiment... and I have difficulty believing that this guy has just stumbled into that view with no awareness of its precedents or its simplistic appeal.
It's a shame that a debate like this would never happen on the BBC or LBC etc. They'd never allow Mic and Goodwin to share a platform and have a discussion.
Thats why all the free thinkers are on youtube and all the morons are still paying their tv licenses
He’s a regular on BBC’s politics live,
Mic would destroy all the sound equipment with his constant huffing and puffing,
He would be a good voice actor for the big bad wolf in the story of the 3 little pigs if his voice wasn't so whiney.
No point, only the left would see it!
@@NPC-st7zvIf Matt had thumped him I wouldn’t have had a blind bit of sympathy for him.
"Let me just be clear about what I mean by radical progressivism and why I'm worried about it" is a sentence for the ages.
The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.
I'm a white working class 50 year old from Durham- a skinhead, no less - who has lived in six "red wall" constituencies in my lifetime and the only time I've ever been outnumbered by Tories was when I attended the Universities of Durham (2003), Sunderland (2006) and Hull (2012-15) and when I worked for Newcastle college (1998-2002).
yeah but the important thing to realise is it is not a left wing elite it is a neoliberal elite. the kind that are currently controlling labour. for the past 44 years we have either had the socially left neoliberals or the socially right neoliberals. No-one (besides Corbyn) has actually challenged our current economic system.
No you are not. You are bourgeois liberal masquerading as working class.
Matt: "Traditional values means respecting the authority of institutions. The woke want to destroy that."
Also Matt: "I want to break up the institutions"
😅
"Not MY institutions!"
Because thos einstitutions have been infested with left wing political cancer ? You're not very bright are you
You know he means:
"Respecting traditional institutions"
"Break up the woke-dominated institutions"
So there's no contradiction there. Is this what passes for mega pwnage in this comment section?
@@tomemery7890 See above comment. You proved their point. I'd love a list of which institutions are woke and which are not. Pretty much all of them have been declared "the enemy of the people" by the right wing rags and Tory pundets.
The family, traditional local religion, local communities & cultural norms & practices - it's not esoteric deconstructionist rocket science.
Matthew should run for parliament and one day Prime Minister, he gets the British issues entirely!!!!
When Matt talks about the left, he just means people with socially progressive/liberal viewpoints. When Mic talks about the left, he means people with economically left wing viewpoints e.g. rail nationalisation. This lead to a lot of confusion in this debate as they both used the word ‘left’ to mean different things. I think Matt’s argument that the new elite is socially very liberal is persuasive, but I do not think this elite is economically left or socialist, which is where Mic is right.
Matt is a socially conservative neoliberal complaining about socially liberal neoliberals. Then says everything wrong with neoliberalism is the fault of social liberalism.
@@Jay_Johnson This, I think, when you cut through the shit, is 100% spot on. I kind of wish it had been summarised in the debate in exactly this way.
@@Jay_Johnson that is a good summary! nicely distilled! ;)
Matt doesn't have a coherent argument
Goodwin says that this elite is economically right wing, but culturally left wing (in a performative sense).
I think he is right. I see these type of people every day. . .and I fucking despise them.
TUBBY GLASSES GUY NEEDS TO OPEN HIS HOUSE UP TO LOVELY MIGRANTS
He doesn't own one yet according to what he said, despite having a degree from Cambridge 😂. What a clown.
Mic is very immature isn't he? The huffing and puffing, its like dealing with a child?
‘I’m a classical liberal, which means I believe in individuals having their own views, but I also think they should all have the same views I do.’
I mean...that IS the definition 😂😂
Getting heavy Sargon of Akkad vibes 😂
You think a classical liberal should never argue their opinion? Sorry, but that's asinine.
Yet again I see the one arguing the Left position struggling to control their emotions. This says a great deal, none of it good.
Just look at the body language; the intolerance; the barely concealed agression; the desire to denigrate; the boastful bluster; then perhaps the reason Matthew Goodwin wrote his book and the force of the arguments expressed within it become more, and not less, relevant. I do not know anything about Mic Wright and I would certainly not try to make the claim that he had nothing interesting or relevant to say in this debate. Far from it. But I feel that his approach to the issues was based solely upon a desire to deny completely that there has been any shift whatsoever in the cultural agenda of those who control British institutions over the last couple of decades which is, quite obviously, nonsense. Whether it a left/right issue or not I have some doubts personally because it seems to me that the new agenda is not necessarily based upon any particular political alignment but is, rather, all about a radically progressive idealism which seeks not to unite but to divide; and, when required, to demonise, and silence, those who dare to dissent.
Interesting debate, good to see such vastly different opinions shown in one place for once
Tories: Ok ChatGPT Give me vague centre right arguments in a UK debate with a leftist.
ChatGPT: This guy
The left wing guy couldn’t even make an argument. Lad could barely hold more than one thought in his head at a time.
@@mrcuddlebuns1000 I think you might have just struggled to keep up with him.
@@mrcuddlebuns1000 Matt Goodwin is the one who bounced between a dozen points each time and repeated himself multiple times in each of his turns..
Unfortunately, the brilliant Matt Goodwin is debating on another level. Enough said.
Great that you had a long debate on this, its so refreshing not to see an echo chamber of opinions
Dressing like a teenager when your nearly forty speaks volumes . Petulance and self loathing personified . Congratulations to Mr Goodwin for his calm and measured delivery . Couldn’t watch after 18mins following the “ don’t interrupt me , because I never interrupted you “ then the man child went on to interrupt upon more than one occasion. Don’t waste your time Matt .
These 2 magic words, woke and elite, allow me to not engage in any way and make me feel better about myself.
Said like a true wokie: your opinion is not your opinion, it's an undebatable moral truth that no sane person could ever conceivably fail to share.
Give me strength!!, left vs right!!!
@@fergalcussen hah as if you engage in DeBaTe.
@@jerrywinder7249 Both wings of the same WEF bird!
@@brennadickinson2920- no, but it seems that way cos Liberals are what you think of as "Left"
I’m a white, cis male, heterosexual, person who didn’t go to university. I’m working class. I’ve got a small mortgage on a house in the East Midlands with my wife and young child. I’m technically one of the millions of “left-behind people” who don’t see representation in their world and are ignored. Wrong. I’m a socialist. I voted remain. I HATE conservatism. I’m pro-immigration, worried deeply about climate breakdown. You cannot invent a vapid slogan and expect people to pat you on the back for your analysis. Not least because you’re so wide of the mark it’s laughable.
Me too but a single dad!
Are we.....elite?
@@geeman.8081 Single dads (at least good, loving ones) are certainly elite, and deserve all the kudos 👍
What does cis male mean?
Cis= designated at birth as you are now
Dfab= designated female at birth
Ayup miduck
Novara media probably a better more challenging interview of Matt Goodwin
Aaron failed dismally
"that's the problem with the new elite, they just want to put people into categories" spectacular self own there
We all belong to categories - the difference is the modern elite want to shove society into categories along identity lines, which is a problem.
@@ineedmoreflavour1955 you would beat me for being gay though
There's an important difference between documenting a particular group and their tendencies (what Matt is doing - and what all scientific sociology does) and ascribing to an ideology that seeks to interpret the world through the lens of immutable characteristics and their power relations and all of the theoretical baggage that comes with that.
Matt isn't saying that all people in this economic or social group think like that, or only the new elite thinks like that. He's simply documenting evidence-based trends in attitudes and values - and pointing out how out of step these views are with the majority of people.
@@johntowler4928 this was the conclusion he arrived at via the strawman construction that people who believe in structural racism don't believe in intersectionalism. this is a total fabrication and has nothing to do with "evidence-based trends"
@@johntowler4928 simply implying while not quite saying is a familiar methodology of maintaining plausible deniability but still getting a message across to a subsection of the audience who will read the implication loud and clear.
I can't take anyone seriously who uses the word 'woke' in a derogatory way, or even blames the various ills of umpteen years of neoliberalism on the 'woke'.
I mean the term radical sounds like you're addressing people from the 19th Century, "the left" includes a significant portion of the people both parties despise. What precisely do you suggest they be called, because I'd like an alternative because I hate the word but want one which speaks to the attitudes and assumptions of the rough group identified by "woke".
@@sirhumphreyappleby8399 Define, in your own words, if you will, what you mean by 'woke'?
We need a word to describe these people, sorry if you don't like it, I didn't choose it.
I'm not sure how wokeness and the woke are perceived in Britiain. But here in Canada, it's quite clear that wokeness EXISTS to serve and deepen neoliberalism. There's a very good reason why the woke agenda is strongly embraced by corporate and managerial culture.
@@aituk Woke should have been kept with its original meaning - any person that's aware of modern society's system of biases and privileges - and the right should have been creative enough to make up their own words, not to steal and bastardise existing ones
Good to see some very opposing views argue it out rather than safe echo chamber. Worthwhile session.
Alright mate?!❤
Politics Joe is the most leftist bias ecochamber channel I have seen.
Agree.
Although I really wish neither could say what way they leaned politically and just let the strength of their argument hold weight, the whole world seems to have been polarised that a person will decide on that premise alone rather than reason.
Not when one of them is a head banger spouting nonsense. I don't mind a debate when each side has a view based on facts and evidence but things like this are a complete waste of time. Views and money are even starting to become more important to these channels that I mistakenly thought valued truth and evidence, as opposed to some nut jobs personal opinion. They'll be having Nadine Dorries on next ffs
Famously, Oxbridge students didn’t dominate positions of power before this ‘new elite’ appeared 🤡 8:40
His argument at 46 minutes really gets to the heart of it. We’re dealing with the fallout of 45 years of neoliberal economics and the ‘new elite’ is simply a made up fifth column that everyone can throw their anger towards. The whole premise of his argument stinks
I thought so too. He's basically identifying false targets to rally opposition around. It stinks of Fascism.
It's basically the same old "White Genocide" snowflake argument wrapped up with vague and misleading labels. "Experts" rather than Laymen should be a part of an Enlightened Democracy. Not put up as targets of abuse because they are deemed "Woke" - if they're Woke then you must be Asleep. "Elites" are not necessarily "Experts" as we have seen recently.
There are deliberate conflations and false attributions at play in this book.
Probably better to go straight to Mein Kampf and be honest about the real Agenda.
The irony of the critiques made of the likes of Goodwin, and Goodheart, Lindt, Lilla, Kotkin etc etc - is that it is these authors who have argued that IT IS NEOLIBERALISM and the current economic order which has failed. The half wits ignore the common refrain on the need to better attend to issues arising from CLASS. It's only the class privileged identitarians and conspiracy wackos who talk of fifth columns.
According to George galloway (speaking to Neil oliver), the new elite are neither left nor right. They're an amalgamation of both parties which is why it's now difficult to differentiate a labour mp from a tory. It's all about self self self
Love the idea that new grads move to London to benefit from its definitely-not-insane housing market
Would you rather live in a house that costs £800,000 while earning £120,000 a year or a £150,000 house while earning £21,000?
@@GangdangleOfficialChannel That's not the choice. The £800k house imposes a deposit requirement so high that most grads moving to London will not be able to buy, and chances are that rent will be as expensive, so saving will take years. And only a few grad jobs will pay £120k in early years. The London housing market benefits those who bought there decades ago, and the rich.
@@agbuckley Yes, wont be a problem if mommy and daddy have a few bob lying around for a deposit. From my experience at university (Russel Group) this is probably the situation for at least 60% of the students. Moreso, for that lot a high paying job isn't necessary.
The costs in London are most expensive yes, but they will more then pay themselves off in terms of social connection and opportunity. The perfect place for those with a proclivity for nepotism. Once you're firmly in such circles you're laughing. Like all groups they look after their own. Its a natural thing. The idea of the graduate class isn't a new thing. In my mind its just a modern twist on the idea of the intelligentsia. No lefty would deny the existence of this class. Unless of course it suits you, as it does them, to portray them selves on the side of the proletariat. No, it is industrialists and scientists who invent, create and employ are who shall be blamed for the woes the working man faces as he tries to scrabble up the social ladder.
For more may i suggest these excellent lectures;
th-cam.com/video/n9e0g5s_LCk/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/4MKSPk5AL-A/w-d-xo.html
Regardless, if you do live in London, even for ten or so years you will be far better off then not living there - if, or rather when, you decide to leave. I know a fella who rents out a tiny flat there, he uses this to pay for his mortgage on his recently brought 6 bedroom house. Anecdote I know, but I think this is illustrative of many such cases.
@@agbuckley of course saving a deposit will take years. Very few expect to be in a position to buy immediately after graduating, wherever they live.
I personally know multiple couples where both are higher earners who bought houses for £800k+ before turning 30. They're not exceptional, in terms of ability, they just work in tech and finance.
My God.... there are certainly legitimate criticisms of Goodwin's book but how old this is Mic guy? He just comes across like someone who can't focus, think rationally, or even speak in a respectful, adult way. Aaron Bastani's interview with Goodwin on Novara was a much better discussion of these issues imo.
the attire and temperament of both of them perfectly sums up the left vs the right
Credit to both Matthew and Mic for at least agreeing to the debate and keeping it fairly civil.
Mic didn't really do that.
@@odhrangallagher5738yep, he demanded to not be interrupted and then interrupted Matthew every single time he opened his mouth.
It should have been easy to dismantle Goodwin's arguments, but instead Mic acted like a petulant, self-absorbed child throughout the debate.
That’s because Mic IS a petulant, self-absorbed child.
@@hiromiw649 even the expression on Mic’s face in the thumbnail is petulant and arrogant… kind of sums the man up really.
The guy on the left is too emotional and inarticulate. He never responds directly to any points and just rants with no structure at all. I think he was arguing against a caricature of someone who is “right wing” and not engaging or understanding the person in front of him. This could have been an interesting debate but next time someone more intelligent and less emotional should be used to represent the left. Missed opportunity.
Matt Goodwin nailed it 100% correct. You only have to see how Matt Wright expresses a hard left view how he deals with race and capitalism which he wants to control. Rotherham is an example of how the authorities view race.
Matt, drinks a cup of tea, dresses his age. Mic, drinks pop, dresses like a 20 year old.
Debates like a 16 year old
14:05 What is wrong with the 3 things he mentioned? Their antithesis is literally an impersonal global corporation.
Mic was obnoxious and didn't make his case - his constant sighing was pretty pathetic as well
I find it very funny that Matt called "the woke" anti-science, despite the fact that everyone I've ever seen that calls people "woke" uses science that they learned in primary school and refuses to accept that understanding has moved on.
If you consider everything about the Covid pandemic, your point is basically refuted. The woke are pretty clueless about science. As clueless as many rightwingers.
Yes, when he said that early on I was pretty confused. Most of the most woke people I know did science or technical degrees at decent univesities and are clearly the sort of people who embrace science.
Yeah I did wonder about that. If I had to guess, he is almost certainly making a veiled gender critical reference. I hope a further interviewer at some point will call him out on it and get him to stop hiding behind vagaries.
I agree with Matt on the issue of science. For example how did we come to the idea that people can be non-binary? That sounds like a part of Gnostic heresies rather than true religion and science.
@@bdenbhurrito I think it was more an attack on post-modernism, and maybe things like CRT.
Mic Wright was the wrong person to have on this debate. He seems like a perfectly decent guy, but he's not calm and focused and he's not refuting points in a direct and logical way.
It's almost as if he were cast on here to represent everything that's wrong progressives.
If you're going to make a show like this, bring in somebody who is experienced and focused and ready to refute Goodwin's points.
What Goodwin is hawking here is right wing populism. Right wing populism says to working class people that the main conflict in society is ANYTHING OTHER than the rich versus everyone else.
Hey look over there, trans people. Hey look over there, immigrants. Etc.
That should be an easy thing to call out and refute, and that's not what's happening on this show.
He's not hawking anything, he's summarizing his own and other's research and drawing an aggregated conclusion (and prepared to debate that interpretation by attending interviews and debates wherever its offered). Have a different conclusion? Then aggregate the same research and tell a different and more compelling story.
@@MrXaphus We don't have to, Marx already wrote about it all.
@@pseudonayme7717 Ah yes, why bother. They say that Caliph Omar, when consulted about what had to be done with the library of Alexandria, answered as follows: 'If the books of this library contain matters opposed to the Koran, they are bad and must be burned. If they contain only the doctrine of the Koran, burn them anyway, for they are superfluous.' Nice to see thinking has changed...
So much I could say here, but here’s a couple of points. I’m 61; I’ve moved more to the left as I’ve got older because I’ve seen how grossly inequitable the world is. In my younger days it felt like society was making progress (FYI that’s a GOOD thing, Matthew!) but in the last 13 years I’ve seen political discourse move to right, not just in this country but around the world. The concept of a “new elite” is nonsense and seems to have been cooked up to take the heat off the real elite who hold power as they always have. Matthew thinks that disliking progress is a given for the majority, which is completely untrue. Mic is spot on that media owned by the real elite has been totally ignored in Matthew’s vision of society. The idea that progressive left-wing ideals are being taken onboard by the elite is laughable. The few progressive gains that have been made (like BLM and Me Too) have been hard won and even harder to consolidate. The elite will do anything to maintain the status quo which has ever been true. The fact that Matthew thinks Emily Maitlis is on the left sums up how nonsensical his theory sounds.
Spot on
Fully agree. I am 62 and my political progression has mirrored yours.
Excellent summary of Matts utter drivel.
That's factually incorrect. This is NOT about disliking progress, because arguably Matthew's thesis is that the 'elite' he talks about is not in fact progressive. And, it is NOT, actually. There's nothing progressive in undermining women's rights - by MEN - by, among other things, re-defining womanhood and denying its biological determinism. Neither is there anything progressive in enabling the de facto physiological, if not anatomical, mutilation of children, incl. teenagers. There is very little progress in a) denying and fabricating history to suit paritcular political perspectives that have next to ZERO effect on the human subjects claimed to be potential beneficiaries (slave trade, black 'history', etc.; b) treating a race of people in a blatantly racist way in the spirit of 'anti-racism' - the absurdity of 'white privilege' and 'unconscious bias' (debunked concept AND methodology) are just two examples of politically motivated race-based denigration that you would likely be the first to bemoan had it been aimed at the 'righteous' races; c) ostracising, and in fact determinedly and proactively undermining the livelihood of anyone considered politically inconvenient, or indeed an 'enemy'. Yes, there is a 'new elite' that behave just like the elite in former (and extant) communist states did / does. I should know some about that having been raised under one of those regimes, with those elites. The 'new' old elite in question is not only undeniably real, it is also pernicious and authocratic, and it relies on the quasi-religious, cultist type of group-think beautifully displayed on here.
@@AA-yc8yr It seems that you have been successfully brainwashed by Mathews horseshit. He spouts the same anti left propaganda.
I'm not gonna lie seeing mic wright getting his anger out on all this gaslighting from the Right was very satisfying.
Gas lighting how , please elaborate
@@PoldarkGodzilla That there is this LGBTQ agenda or plan that we are all part of. That at we apparently know about and are trying to implement but ask any LGBTQ+ person or ally and they will respond in the exact same way; "I wish I had a copy of this LGBTQ agenda". It doesn't exist.
That the left is apparently the elite with all the power. If that were the case why have we had neoliberals in government for 44 years. Neoliberalism which is the exact form of economic liberalism Matt Goodwin himself subscribes to.
That the left completely supports free movement of people maintaining an imperialistic brain drain on the rest of the world. We don't. We do need to invest in education and our health system but what matt leaves out is why people from the UK don't want to become doctors and that is because they are not payed enough to be worth 7-8 years of student debt.
As Wright says there are more straw men in this debate than in the wicker man. repeatedly assigning these strawman beliefs onto people who are continually saying they do not believe them is gaslighting.
@@PoldarkGodzilla the notion that the left has any power in the last 30 years
The jobless, angry, sexually frustrated left.
utter nonsense..if one looked at this exchange with genuine neutral eyes one guy constantly figits, huffs and puffs and acts childish the other does not
If you define the quality of debate on childish postures i feel sorry for you
Real talk, is there something wrong with Mik? He’s dressed like a 14 year old and he’s huffing and puffing like a 4 year old on a shopping trip? The audio guy needs to be better with the volume control of the guest who isn’t speaking.
OMFG Mic is insufferable. He’s like a little child not getting his way. 😂😂😂
"There's a new elite" *Proceeds to describe the established elite
Matt is arguing (I think) that the new elite are those uni-educated, well-off professionals who hold disproportionate CULTURAL power, rather than merely economic.
The “old” elite (which Matt still argues exists, and which are clearly evidenced in the universities, I know because I see them every day) are economically powerful, but have never had disproportionate cultural power. The new elite imposes itself on culture and, when combined with its economic power and media influence, can actually impact culture.
If that is accepted, that is clearly a major issue, as it is a minority of posh wankers imposing their cultural beliefs on a lower class and less educated majority.
How do you think it got so that most uni students are impartial or in support of mass immigration, when it has historically been opposed by the vast majority of Britons? (And still is today).
Because the new elite have influence in the institutions. That does NOT mean the old elite do not - they do, trust me.
But the new elite have the influence to enforce new cultural norms and attitudes on naive uni kids.
Both types of elite exist - the “old money” and the “new (cultural) elite”.
You didn't watch the whole debate, did you?
He's not suggesting they sprang out of the ground is he?
As he says elsewhere, elites adopted a lot of this as a ploy to maintain power.
Are you too dumb to understand what he said or just pretending
The 'new elite' is a straw man if I ever saw one
It's worse than that - it's a desperate rehashing of ancient divide and conquer tactics. Since "the youth" aren't falling for "the other" being foreigners and minorities anymore, the right is making the new targets anyone that embodies or teaches them about inclusivity- sorry, "wokeness"
It sounds like it's a "straw 10+ million people"! I get that many working class provincial towns have been left behind economically and many of those living there sometimes feel socially like this "isn't their country any more", but to blame a "woke university class" for this seems to confuse cause and effect and to ignore groups within groups. As Mic points out, there are lots of people who identify as working class who will be earning far more than the "new elite" Matt describes. Then on the social side there are probably huge differences between age groups within those same towns, with older groups less likely to embrace newer and more progressive attitudes.
So, what's Matt up to in crafting this blunt weapon? Well, surely his days as a small time Politics Prof will soon be over and he'll become one of the new generation of National Conservative politicians...
The idea that you can join an elite just by getting an arts degree is about the lowest bar to enter into an "elite" ever.
You're confusing "straw man" with "uncomfortable fact that I want to reject".
@@mattjolly8060 Paul Calf.
The "woke" are the problem...by the fact that I'm redefining woke to mean something that it doesn't mean.
Reminds me of a cartoon I recently saw:
- Everybody knows that the biggest threat this country faces is wokeness!
- Uh huh, and what does 'woke' actually mean?
- ... Listen, I think it's a little unfair to expect me to know the meaning of a word I only use 150 times a day.
Woke doesn't mean anything anymore (not in the way that it's banded around on the likes of GBNews, etc.). He goes on to define the Liberal Elite (which was pretty fucking ridiculous) but never defines woke. Probably because it doesn't mean anything.
Here we go , woke means what it now means … a class of people who ignore nuance , context and facts if it goes their ideology which could be in regards to race , gender or history , they are happy to engage in cancel culture
@@stpirate89 Woke meant the same thing in the 70s as it does today - nothing's changed. Right-wingers trying to use it as an insult all of a sudden are just telling on themselves.
Sorry but since when does the left have a clear understanding of the definition of woke? I thought your favourite question was asking what it means.
It’s super simple, woke = hyper progressive left
Mathew is a very informative person,he calmly puts his views across,the other chap in my humble opinion is an excitable person an not credible.
'Weak men create bad times' is summed up by this boy's impotent rage.
Mic nailed the problem early on. Matt totally fails to consider the structural reasons for some of the behaviour he hates. This "new elite" isn't deliberately trying to consolidate cultural and economic power, they're just responding to the market and societal incentives
Who participates in that market? Who is getting those social and monetary benefits? And in turn perpetuating it socially in media and college? Hint; it's not the majority of the working class.
@@hermitpermit2553 yes, but that's always been the case. My point is that there is no "new elite". The wealthy university graduate children of rich people exerting their cultural and economic power is jus the regular old elite
@@hermitpermit2553 Oh Hermit not even Matt believes the drivel he spouts..
@@pd1323 lets face it, he probably does. Its hard to write an entire book about something you don't even believe in
@@51gan788 These shills are paid big money offshore to make this stuff look credible.
Matt's just annoyed he gets called out for being a bigot.
Same story as ever.
Yawn
@@evolassunglasses4673 hi Matt 👋
@@evolassunglasses4673 another pointless comment from you...trolling as usual. Don't you have any friends?
It is indeed the same boring old story: don't address the argument at all, just call the person making it a name like "bigot", like any overgrown 12-year-old would.
@@fergalcussen- you! You're Woke!
Everything I Don't Like Is Woke!
TL;DL Oxbridge grads who agree with Matt are common sense, salt of the earth people, while Oxbridge grads who disagree are woke elites.
Pathetic isn't it
But the Right hasn't been in power, not truly. We've had pretty much the same government since 1997, two parties doing the same thing: importing cheap labour, focusing on a London-centric economy, and showing no concern for British culture and values. The Conservative Party, with the exception of a few backbenchers, aren't conservative.
Mic is the elite, mathew is talking about lmao
Quite so
😩 Always known that Goodwin is unspeakable but Mic is just all over the place. His histrionics are over the top and not professional.
I don't know who this Mic Wright dude is but don't book him again. Don't agree with Goodwin whatsoever but this Mic guy is just nuts. Wouldn't stay on topic or speak coherently. .
Don't agree with him whatsoever? What don't you agree with exactly the statistics? Or the reality of the situation? I am confused as to how you can't see the problem we face. You are part of the problem.
Cudos to PoliticsJOE for hosting a civilised debate between people with different view points. What I don't get is why a lot of people can't accept that both of them have something valid to say. I have left-leaning views regarding economic policy. That doesn't prevent me from having conservative views on cultural issues. I think discussing economic policy, in particular the tax system, is a topic much more important than the "culture war" but some people view the culture issues as equally or even more important. Sounds like Matt is one such person and he makes some good points. Mic's overly emotional style of debating doesn't do him any favours, too much ranting, too little substance, undermines his argument and just loses me, especially when he says stuff like "you didn't say it but your body language blah blah blah"... Especially comparing modern Britain to the Soviet Union...even as a joke the comparison is ridiculous to anyone who knows anything about the Soviet Union.
btw, I am a Bulgarian and I don't mind a Bulgarian rapist being reported as such. I immigrated because I believe that the UK is a country with a much stronger rule of law and if other immigrants break the law in any way, shape or form I feel very strongly about this being highlighted as a problem and punished. In countries where the rule of law is ... less than satisfactory you can get away with a lot. This should never become the norm here and scrutiny by society and the media can only help.
Matt will have something valuable to say when he starts collecting valid data and stops misrepresenting statistics.
@@johnmorris3894 Any examples of misrepresented statistics?
@@DeyanKanov Loads. Google is friend. Your comment about the media playing a positive role in Britain, and the rule of law are naive at best.
@@johnmorris3894 I was pretty sure I would get a reply with no examples and something like "do your own research", how typical. So you can't give a single example of "misrepresenting statistics" and want me to do a search to validate your opinion? And then you try to deflect by calling me naive(which I may be, but that's beside the point). And we didn't even discuss what you mean by "collecting valid data", does Mic Wright going to a pub in Rotherham count as "collecting valid data"?
Mic Wright's methods are about as rigorous as the 'surveys' that Goodwin designs and circulates. Wouldn't get higher than 58 at undergrad level. Wright doesn't cosplay as a professional researcher though.
Matt managed to say nothing whilst saying lots. Typical classic elite I'd say
Typical Right-winger tbh
He just spouted a load of untrue and lazy rhetoric that people like him are parroting without really providing any facts to prove what he says has any merit and truth. This so-called 'woke elite' don't actually exist and is just a construct for people to blame rather than actually form any arguments and substance into the debate of their own.
in what way did he say nothing?..disagree if you wish but his points are not nothing
So yeah he is a typical elite wannabe. He might be the first of his family to go into uni- but he has taken the accent, posture and dress of the upper classes.
What bollocks you speak , and that’s why his book is doing as you are proving his point and not being objective
39:30 - It's very straight forward.
1. Those who have gone to university are more likely, at some point to have been taught critical analysis. So they know media BS when they see it.
2. Those who have gone to university are more likely to interact with those of different cultural backgrounds. Which means they know these people and don't see them as the enemy within, and thus are more likely to dismiss media BS about them
3. Those who have gone to university are more likely to be younger, and so more likely to have grown up around those of different cultural backgrounds. Thus seeing and knowing a multicultural society as normal, and again more able to withstand media BS
The media in the country is run by a bunch of far right plutocrats. Each and every day, they pump in more and more hateful divisive BS. What drives voting patterns is how capable you are as a person to stand up to it. Everything else is noise.
Well said. Nailed it.
Correct, if youve been educated to think critically and understand how to research properly, while also being exposed to a range of cultures you are bound to have different views to those who have been fed a diet of shite from the right wing press. They frame this as being elitist but its not - its just those that dont have the time or desire to study these things only have the ideas theyve picked up from the background noise of right wing media in this country. ITs a failure of our eductation system and to me it seems very deliberate.
@@jessery475 '... it is ...' or at least '... it's ...'. '... its ..'. is possessive, so who does it (whatever it is) belong to? I would prefer more precision on the it, but I will accept it as a lazy token.
Also, a lot of smart people have never been to university for whatever reason. The Guardian and its writers are not correct about everything.
Classic. You and Jessery prove Matthew Goodwin's point.
@@jessery475 it is very deliberate. Educated people are much harder to control.
This ‘woke elite’ that Goodwin hates so much are sure platforming him a lot recently
Genuine question - is Mic related to Tom Nichols? I thought it was Tom looking a bit older off-camera 😂
Mic’s sighing was not only perfectly timed and hilarious but on a par for the amount of sighing that I was doing 😂
The first sigh was at 3:00 through Matt's intro.... it seems to go downhill from there 😂😂
Mic comes across as a naive infantile student.
whilst i agree with Mics views i think this debating style and mics behaviour and approach illustrates what Matt is talking about. Mic says he listens, engages and respects but then doesn’t enable a debate, he likes to speak uninterrupted but then interrupts Matt when he’s speaking in the name of debate and to that end isn’t really engaging with the issue and disrespects through words and behaviour Matts views. Matt views and book. All valid points but not a great debating style
I noticed this as well, for me it's really a catch 22 here. I've done these sorts of debates myself. When people interrupt it is infuriating, when its just back and forth with no interruptions i think the debate becomes quite anodyne. Very difficult to moderate.
@@DAN13LS70NE yeah totally get that! it is difficult especially when your trying to get your point across. I do agree with Mic though, i could feel his frustration at times 🤣
What specific views of his do you agree with?
I think George Orwell was broadly correct when he said that the left is primarily defined by bitterness towards the right. It seems that there is no left side to this arguement, only why the right is so wrong, which ultimately will always devolve into a conversation where nobody will find common ground.
I probably share more beliefs with Mic, but his attitude, body language and general demeanour makes him very unlikeable
If I'm 20 minutes in and there hasn't been a single piece of data, or a proper working definition, provided for the majority of what is being discussed, I don't really have much to grasp onto. I can't listen to the rest. I can feel my brain rotting.
It's the standard level of discourse. One side trying to impose (or bully) their ideology/subjectivity onto another because it suits them. Only when objectivity and practicality becomes the international form of communication between people and subjectivity is cast in the back seat will progress begin.
My thoughts exactly … anecdotes and emotionality are tedious at this point.
Subscribing the this channel is probably the best thing I’ve done in a long time. Super interesting thank you
“At last”, I thought, “a proper debate on these issues.” Matt Goodwin makes an awful lot of sense to me but I want his views to be properly tested. I want to hear the counter arguments before I make up my mind.
I didn’t hear any counter arguments. I watched a ‘performance’ as Mic held his head in his hands and threw books on the table etc. Maybe his microphone was too close to his mouth, but his constant sighing only added an air of petulance to the debate.
Mic’s line of argument largely consisted of “I don’t agree / it’s not true”. Mic, I don’t care if you don’t agree. That’s merely your view, which of course you are entitled to, but I want to know why you don’t agree. What evidence? What line of reasoning? Aside from your opinion, why is Matt wrong to come to the conclusions he does?
Has anyone been able to give Matt a hard time ?
Has Mic ever actually had a conversation? Or does he expect Matt to present his case in easily-digestible snippets? He literally has pen and paper in front of him. He could easily jot down Matt's salient points and respond to them once he's finished.
His performance was just pathetic. He totally failed to focus on what was actually being said, and constantly drifted off into talking about himself, mixed in with random ramblings about politics generally.
@1:12:01 "its just a shame that when we cut the king's head off we didn't get it right that time" bravo
" Im very left wing, and i don't see my opinions on the BBC." . Couldn't agree more with Mic .
Doesn’t mean the bbc doesn’t have a cultural bias. The bbc isn’t communist but it’s still left wing.
@Hughie Marks being lefty isn't bias. It's the proper human position against rw loons and power.
@@DJWESG1 I couldn’t decide if this comment was a joke at first Wes, but I think you might be serious, scary stuff pal.
@@mrcuddlebuns1000 it's been run by a committee to which government appointed members control all recruitment since David Cameron dissolved the independent BBC trust in 2016.
Their political content is not left wing at all, it's editorial direction is literally dictated by people rubber stamped into their jobs by the Tories.
Can only assume the complaints of left wing bias arise from their cultural content and the few left wing comedians they employ.
How's that relevant to the points Matthew is making? Matthew is not criticising the Left. He's criticising the woke elite.
Mic referring to his 90yr old Gran was his was the most impressive contribution We have lived under a rightwing government for 42 years (I havent I am 82) and the participants have never lived under any other. I agree with Mic in every point of the debate. "New" elite (If there is one) is just an update of the "Old" one
Reminds me of those people who study cults before getting taken in and joining them.
Hahahaha, fully agree! I was watching this and thought...you have become what you have studied! 🤣🤣🤣
We're all born into the Globe cult and most are then indoctrinated in.
Nietzsche and gazing into the abyss
@PoliticsJOE
The whole rest of the world of foreign peoples could come to the UK & it wouldn't have to be a problem; it could be great in fact.
The problem is that they stay in mass numbers & techno-cultural imports, (private motoring dependency/ mass pornographic media/ untempered consumption/ dispirate multiculturalism etc) are not subject to a priority for sustainable native deference.
This has been undemocratic from the start, it changes life for native peoples in their homeland in ways they can't control & often aren't good for them; dilutes their voice in culture (inc the economy) & their vote in politics.
It hobbles & corrodes family formation & cultural continuity that is hard enough with mere technological change but has combined to a point where the cultural implosion & demographic minoritisation of at least the English nation in England is mere decades away.
Indifference or malice addresses on motive not causes or outcome; ignoring or downplaying the Existential aspect is total foolishness given the increasing likeliness of bad results that will increase in severity the longer it continues & the later the realisation breaks out.
So why continue it?
Great comment.
@@georgehetty7857 Thanks, give it a like?
@@GodsOwnPrototype No problem 🥳
Ash Sarkar was on a programme with Angela Smith who spoke about people of a funny tinge! And MG is sceptical, that she is badly treated by the media.
12:08 That's exactly what I want from a debate. Civil discourse where one is given time and that time is respected is lacking in alot of modern media.
"Woke" itself has become a strawman because it means whatever the person using it (normally as an insult) wants it to mean. Asking them to define it usually demonstrates this as you can easily find someone else using it with a very different definition.
The term was originally popularised by progressives.
Usually they use it as a substitute for the N word.
I wonder if the people that have a problem understanding what the word "woke" is taken to mean, is that their knowledge of numerous happenings of different/ various groups in this country, in europe, in the world is narrow. If it was wider they would see the ideology that is running through all the groups, like the Police, Education, NHS, Immigration etc etc. is the same. Pushing info that is not factual, policing thoughts that are not crimes, medical terms that are false, teaching children untruths......... all of which the public are not allowed to criticise without being called insulting names...
😂@@johnmorris3894
Woke is an American concept, completely misunderstood in Britain. And it has quite belligerent divisive roots...as Matt points out its not liberalism, quite the opposite.
I would love to see Mic on Question Time, but based on this performance they'd be too scared to book him.
On it? They should sack Fiona Bruce and let him run it.
@@marktaylor6491 The problem is the moderator has to be impartial - although I'd love to see him verbally shut down Tory ministers when they start spitting lies
@@TBakerXD That seems to be the issue, impartial now means if you call out right wing bullshit, you also have to criticise the left when they point it out.
@@keithpanton7486 It's the same as how the media think for some reason that they should give conspiracy theorists with no credentials as much clout as the actual experts - "We've heard from the lifetime NASA astrophysicist, but now let's hear from Tony, who built his own telescope and says he can prove the Earth is pyramid-shaped" -_-
@@TBakerXD impartial towards what or to whom? If someone lies, they need to be challenged.