This is the World’s best and finest podcast. Bar none. There is no podcast producible, even in the Victorian Era, which would hold a candle to this, the highest-pinnacle of podcasts man will ever have the honour of listening to.
There is nothing close to the God-like perspicacity demonstrated by Mr. Rees-Mogg in this podcast anywhere else in the World. In brief, this podcast is a beacon of hope for humanity. The shining light on the hill.
It’s more of a Godcast than a podcast because were God on Earth, here with us, he would be podcasting in much the same way as Mr. Rees-Mogg. Helping the World see the light (but equally asking that God is put in his rightful place at the centre of the light).
Huge fan of Mr. Jacob Rees-Mogg. He is simply one of my favourite, if not my most favourite, people to listen to on Earth. If he is a person. He strikes me, and please excuse my sycophantism, as Apostolic or a Demi-God sent here by God to lift the spirits of everyone who ever loved the Commonwealth and/or cricket.
What are my favourite things about this podcast?
The frequency of episodes. High frequency. 5/5.
The erudition. Rees-Mogg does not take his listeners for fools. There is a very high density of very important political insights that JRM bulldozes through in each and every podcast. This is highly unusual. Even BBC’s Question Time is mostly fat. JRM doesn’t do fat. He get’s straight to the point and addresses the issue in a very clear and erudite manner. 5/5
The Latin usage. JRM is a man of the people, vox populi, vox dei! 5/5
The Victorian-era references. One gets the sense that Jacob’s thoughts are more steeped in history than the water in his teapot is steeped in Twinings Tea. 5/5
The genial like-ability of Mr. Reed-Mogg. Mogg has a natural fire-place warmth. The Sun was always humanity’s original God. Which is further why I say that this is a Godcast. JRM has the natural warmth of the Sun, expressed in a very Somerset manner, of course. 5/5
“Ah ha!” I hear Mr. Mogg say.
“You have waxed lyrical and sycophantic, and congratulations for that, but do you have any productive tips to send to me on how I can actually improve things?”
I do!
“Do tell.”
Please excuse the fragmentary nature of my musings. I’ve typed this quickly, and the medium rather wrangles and renders disconnected, the message.
I would like to hear more about the following, with your erudite, skeptical mind applied to the topics herein:
- Non-Parliamentary Institutions of Government, such as Bank it England (& Carney’s method of charlatanism), the Treasury, the Civil Service, etc...
- If we can increase Parliamentary control over these institutions, and whether that is a good idea or not.
- Is hyper-parliamentarisation something to be weary of? Or is an anti-disestablishmentarianist outlook with respect to the status-quo the way to go?
- Constitutional questions about the big ideas of how Government is run and whether we are thinking about it correctly. Think: how Silicon Valley rethinks and “productively disrupts” the World, but applied to Government.
- Should we be allowed to directly elect the PM like in the US Presidential Elections where it appears, more or less, to work?
- How to combat the Left and enable low-tax, small Government policies to win, while not hampering the UK’s ability to protect core industries where absolutely necessary.
- Whether Social Conservatism (Think Peter Hitchens; Penalizing infanticide, and punishing rude language with fines or something of the sort, a system of moral standards assessment which doesn’t cost much but confers some respect to the well behaved and some social penalties to the violent, etc...) can or should win, or if it is a dead ideology.
- A fully fleshed take on why higher taxes are a bad idea.
- Is international law the imposition of a rules based tyranny by a small group of like minded centralizers, or is it actually a good idea and not just positive-sounding left- wing rhetoric?
- Further ideas for devolution or decentralization and whether that is as good an idea as most Conservatives think it is, or whether you have a different take on that.
- Venice, a haven for merchants, was destroyed by the takers in Government when they got jealous of the makers and went for the Golden Goose. How do we prevent this from happening in the UK?
- How free-marketeers built up economies abroad in the Victorian era, but the takers (left wing malcontents) in the Government appear to have gradually undone the policies abroad, and eventually nationalized administrations abroad and sadly destroyed them, more than the Conservatives had the capacity to revitalize foreign administration, which resulted in a Venice-like fall. And how to avoid this again.
- Is it a good idea to allow the Government to lend money at interest to itself?
- Why Nationalizing British Rail didn’t work. (If you look at the chart of rail usage during Nationalization you’ll see that it was terrible. But why? Why couldn’t the Government turn a profit off of Nationalizing an industry as easy as rail? Would be interesting to know. I’m instinctually against Nationalization anyway, but would love your thoughts on why the Left couldn’t even succeed after stealing the founding railroad companies that became the failed Government monopoly of British Rail).
- Should Nationalization be illegalized? Can it?
- Can Britain shift to a Monarchical Constitutional Republic? Or will this be impossible? Is it a good idea?
- Is a multi-party democracy with more than two major parties and a proportional representation system something Conservative voters should go for in a bid to win more frequently? Or FPTP?
- Can’tConservatives just have jurisdictions within a Democracy that are permanently right-leaning with guarantees? Think: Free-Enterprise Zones, but for Conservatives. To balance it out we could give the left their own regions (which they would invariably, and quite sadly, ruin). Or is this not a good idea?
