 If you're not aware of who David Starkey is, he is one of Britain's most prominent, most famous TV historians. Honorary, well, he was an honorary fellow at Cambridge College, we'll get on to that in one moment. But anyway, he spoke to Darren Grimes on the new right wing channel, which is supposed to, the argument they make is that you can speak freely on their channel. And boy, David Starkey did. Let's take a look at the moment which has rightly caused absolute outrage across the country. Slavery was not genocide. Otherwise, there wouldn't be so many damn blacks in Africa or in Britain, would there? You know, an awful lot of them survived. And what again, there's no point in arguing against globalization or Western civilization. They are all products of it. We are all products of it. The honest teaching of the British Empire is to say, quite simply, it is the first key stage of world globalization. It's probably the most important moment in human history, and it is still with us. Its consequences are still on. And generally speaking, in most ways, actually fruitful. There are downsides, again, as the Brexit vote demonstrated. So that's how you go about tackling it. And as for the idea, as I said, that slavery is this kind of terrible disease that dare not speak its name, it only dare not speak its name, Darren, because we settled it nearly 200 years ago. We don't normally go on about the fact that Roman Catholics, once upon a time, didn't have vote and weren't allowed to have their own churches because we had Catholic emancipation. And do you know what? We had Catholic emancipation at pretty much exactly the same time that we got rid of slavery in the 1830s. We don't go on about that. I mean, one, obviously, unbelievably racist. Slavery was not genocide. Otherwise, there wouldn't be so many damn blacks in Britain and Africa. Like, this is real neo-nuts like it's fucked up. People are saying, oh, slavery isn't genocide because genocide is a systematic effort to wipe out people. Europeans tried to do that in lots of parts of Africa. You know, if you Google the Herrero peoples, you know, this was basically a predecessor of what the Third Reich was trying to do. They explicitly say, we want to wipe out this whole nation of people, about 90,000 Herrero in the 1903. Imperial Germans in Mondana, Libya, basically, they explicitly say, we want to wipe them out and expel them from the country. They try. Europeans tried their best. I mean, they succeeded, by the way, in the Americas. About 100 million people died. But the idea that it's not a genocide because you don't succeed. I mean, OK, well, there's this thing called the Holocaust. There's this thing called the Armenian genocide. There's plenty of genocides, which were genocides. It's also kind of an irrelevant point, right? Because even if you were going to take the very... He's a historian. If you're going to take the strict definition of genocide, which is sort of an active intention to wipe out people of a particular ethnic background, often involved with settler colonialism or Nazi ideology in the case of the Second World War, then that's not necessarily what was going on. But what was going on was treating people like objects and causing mass suffering and mass death. So morally, whether you or not you call it a genocide, it doesn't seem to make much difference. The point was a crime against humanity. They did try. I mean, they genuinely tried. You know, in Kenya, even the British in Kenya in the 50s and 60s, they were saying, wow, the settlers here openly talk about eliminating the Kikui people, which was kind of the primary ethnic group in Kenya at the time. They said, we need to exterminate these people in the Brits. You guys are great. The white settlers had surprise, surprise, a settler ideology. And this is a Belgian Congo. We're looking at eight to 10 million people were killed there in the 19th century. So Europeans, David Starchy, if you're not familiar with this, they gave it a damn good shot again, you know, it's troubling that this guy, we've said he's a very successful, you know, he stole a living as somebody's rightly said in our comments at the BBC. But he also was until recently. You know, he was an honorary fellow at Fitzwilliam College. He was, you know, quite a steamed, steamed historian, a CBE. What does that count for? You know, Patrick Hennigan and Emily Oldnay, both suspended from the Labour Party because the Labour Leagues, they had OBEs, you know, maybe maybe you're more likely than not to actually be an asshole if you have one of these titles. But nevertheless, I mean, goodness. I mean, whether or not you're going to whether or not the intention was to wipe out people or just wipe them out in the course of exploiting them. 12.4 million people were stolen from their homes and sold into a life of slavery. 1.8 million people died just on the journey between Africa and the Americas. So obviously surviving that journey doesn't, you know, it doesn't mean you're excluded from the crime against humanity. That was slavery, the other stupid thing, obviously, in that video was the idea that why don't we talk about Catholic emancipation as much as we talk about the slave trade, right? Catholics were, yeah, Catholics were oppressed in British history. But the the Emancipation Act meant Catholics could sit in parliament. Right. So it was about political exclusion. It wasn't about owning people as objects. And it wasn't about a system which killed millions and millions of Catholics. Right. It was it was political exclusion from the political system, partly because, you know, the government at that period in time wanted distance from from the Pope and the Catholic Church, et cetera, et cetera. Obviously, terrible discrimination, but it wasn't slavery. It was not another moment in that interview, which I mean, was arguably just as racist as that clip that went absolutely viral. Let's take a look and not decolonize the curriculum because you Black Lives Matter are holy and entirely a product of white colonization. You are not culturally Black Africans. You would die in seconds if you were dumped back in Black Africa because you wouldn't know how to do it. Now, I mean, that is insanely racist. I mean, also that I mean, obviously what you said before is insanely racist, but that's, you know, there's so much sort of like interpersonal contempt there. You know, he's sort of he's looking at Black activists in Britain right now or all Black people. He's saying you you you were not created by Black culture. You are not culturally Black Africans. Your culture, what was he saying? Everything you are was created by white colonialism. So how dare you have a criticism of it? It's so disgusting, but it's also just wrong. It's just so stupid. It's so, so stupid. I mean, look at American popular music, rhythm and blues, hip hop, like gospel, jazz. I mean, all the greatest genres are like, you know, they're infused by by people who were either slaves or the descendants of slaves. I mean, it's ridiculous. Is that is that an outgrowth of white colonial culture? I mean, you have this hybrid right of people who are displaced. They make something beautiful in this place where they're, you know, they're oppressed. I mean, he's fucking stupid. I mean, I was saying on the video, our numbers are Arabic numbers. Nobody thinks that, like, oh, my God, we're oppressed by, you know, the Arab peoples, because about 500 years ago, Europeans worked out that Arabic numerals are much better than Roman ones. Or the fact that our, you know, Jesus Christ was from, you know, who's born in Bethlehem. Is that, you know, is that white Western culture? But of course, it's not about what the actual facts are. It's a kind of retroactive rewriting of history, because, of course, the white man is so great that white people, you know, they did everything. There have been some consequences for David Starkey. Canterbury Christchurch University have sacked him as a visiting Professor Fitzwilliam College in Cambridge, have withdrawn his honorary fellowship. But Starkey's racism isn't new. This is not someone who hid their prejudice against black people. And before we go to this video, actually, which is from 2011, so it's Starkey speaking at the height of the UK riots. I just want to remind you of actually the important point that Aaron was making, which is to say it's completely ridiculous to say that everyone who currently lives in Britain, whatever race they are, whatever ethnic background, they're purely a result of white imperialism. And, you know, he seems to think that's connected to globalization because the elements of our culture, which, you know, undeniably derive from Black Africa, as it were. David Starkey does recognise, but he has absolute disdain for them. Let's take a look at David Starkey speaking at the height of the UK riots on Newsnight in 2011. I've just been rereading Enoch Powell, The Rivers of Blood Speech. His prophecy was absolutely right in one sense. The Tiber didn't foam with blood, but flames lambant, wrapped around Tottenham and wrapped around Clapham. But it wasn't intercommunal violence. This is where he was completely wrong. What's happened is that the substantial section of the chaffs that you wrote about have become black. The whites have become black, a particular sort of violent, destructive, nihilistic gangster culture has become the fashion. And black and white boy and girl operate in this language together. This language, which is holy false, which is a Jamaican patois that's been intruded in England. And this is why so many of us have this says of literally a foreign country. So I mean, he just he makes it up depending on who he wants to delegitimize. The rioters in 2011, culturally black, the Black Lives Matter protesters in 2020, culturally white, I mean, this guy's a crank. What what the hell is he talking about? What's he doing on the tell? They're all these people who are stealing and living because of the BBC. Look, I hope the BBC didn't exist that we'd have like Fox News. Honest to God, David Starchy is mad as a hatter. Like it's hard to imagine. Look at the people that elevating. Junior Harley Brut, Isabella Oaksha, David Starchy. These these kind of real mad cranks. By the way, the worst one, Melanie Phillips. She's I'm waiting for Melanie Phillips to be canceled because Melanie Phillips. She's quoted at length. She's quoted at length by Anders Brevik in his manifesto. This is the guy that slaughtered 60, 70 kids on the island of Atua. It was these are social Democrats. They were white Norwegian kids, right? This is guys worried about Muslims and, you know, you know, white genocide. He's killing white people. Why is he killing white people? Because they were members of a reformist social democratic party. You get there. What? You get the language of anti-communism and so on. And actually, Anders Brevik quoting Melanie, Melanie, Melanie Phillips is not an accident, you know, the gap between what Brevik thinks and actually what quite serious people in British politics think is that there's not that big a gap anymore, you know, and a lot of them appear on the BBC. Douglas Murray, who's got a huge following on YouTube. And there's a question here, which, you know, the BBC is a public service broadcaster. It has to make that assessment of we need people who adequately, you know, adequately reflect public opinion and so on. People need to be challenged. We need to arrange a range of views. I get that. Douglas Murray at least has the capacity to make his arguments articulately, which is dangerous, by the way, because it means he can seal some really horrific arguments, I think, the content of those arguments. But with Melanie Phillips and David Starkey, you're dealing with complete, you know, maniacs. You're dealing with complete manies. And like you say, they just change their argument for whatever day of the week is. I mean, this Jamaican Patois, if we hadn't, if Britain hadn't taken people from West Africa and put them in the West Indies, it would never have happened, David. So stop being an apologist for empire because it did this thing you don't like. Get used to it. It's their country, too. He says Jamaican Patois has intruded in England. I mean, it's a legacy of colonialism that Jamaican Patois exists. And then we invited lots of people from Jamaica to fill a labor shortage in this country. And thank God we did because it gave us a rich culture, et cetera, et cetera, something that he will not recognize. We're going to go on to sort of like lighter stuff, which is the Darren Grimes element of this whole shit show, really. So Darren Grimes, he's often a sort of comedy figure that we bring up on this show every now and again. He's a bit of a, I mean, he's kind of the dumbest guy on Twitter in a way, although he still gets platform quite a lot. News, he obviously gave that interview. Now there's been this backlash. Everyone's sort of universally saying what David Starkey said was completely racist. It's one of the first interviews they've done on this new platform, Reasoned, which is supposed to be a space for people where, in Darren Grimes' word, are you sick of getting accused of being a racist? Then come and speak on this channel. What happened? You get someone on. They're incredibly racist. He doesn't know to see it. Everyone else does. He's very embarrassed. Let's take a look at his apology. Hand on heart, I wasn't engaged enough in this interview as I should have been. It goes about saying that Reasoned UK does not support or condone David Starkey's words. I'm very new to being the interviewer rather than the interviewee, and I should have robustly questioned Dr. Starkey about his comments. However, whether it's on BBC, ITV, Sky News, or on YouTube, no interviewer is responsible for the views expressed by their guests. As Reasoned UK, you'll always find unfiltered opinions, allowing the audience to make up their own minds. That said, in future, I can promise that there will be a host who is much more willing to challenge those opinions. Now, that's sort of Darren Grimes saying, I just wasn't concentrating in that particular period. I mean, it's a live interview. These things happen. What could I have done? I should have challenged him in that moment. Now, I mean, one problem with this is if you want to be an interviewer, like, you know, fix up to, you know, if you're creating a space, which is for people who've been accused of racism, I mean, it's not a surprise when some of them are spout racist, nonsense. But also, let's look at this tweet that he sent 24 hours before that apology, slightly at odds with what he says afterwards. So he says, they say, never meet your heroes. Well, I virtually met one of mine and it was bloody fantastic. Dr. David Starkey and I discussed the scholarship behind the laudable slogan of Black Lives Matter compared to the movement seeking to delegitimize British history. Have a watch. We can also get up his tweet from Parler, the sort of right wing version of Twitter that we talked about on a previous show. It's so good. I'm watching it back again. This is not a guy who disagrees with anything David Starkey said. He was nodding along as he was saying it all. I mean, obviously, I can't confirm he agrees it, but the evidence is pointing in one direction, isn't it? The dumbest take, I think, was from Julia Hartley Brewer. Let's get this up. So she was defending Darren Grimes. Remember when everyone attacked Emily Maitlis about what Prince Andrew said in that interview she did with him on News Night? No, me neither. The point there she's making is, look, it's not the responsibility of the interviewer or what the interviewer says. Now, I think if Emily Maitlis, straight after doing that interview, had tweeted, they say, never meet your heroes. Well, I virtually met one of mine and it was bloody fantastic. I think people would have had something to say if after that interview, she called Prince Andrew one of her heroes. But also, Prince Andrew was lying through his teeth through the interview. The equivalent is actually Prince Andrew going, yeah, you know, I do love spending time with teenage girls. I really enjoy it. And she's nodding her head going, yeah. And then afterwards, and then sharing the interview, after he's going, you know, had to watch it again, brilliant. What an amazing man. That's the equivalent. I mean, she, Julia Hartley Brewer knows what she's doing. Fine. You know, again, she's another one stealing and living. Fine. Let her do it. Again, the thing is, when you look at a free country, you can spout all the bullshit you like. The thing that I don't like is the BBC kind of giving it a veneer of legitimacy. It's ridiculous. And it's not just a one-off, you know, people from Navarro, gone to BBC, whatever. She's one of the mainstays, right? There's four or five people who basically every week are on BBC Question Time. And they say really batshit crazy things. And all I want to say is, okay, if you're going to have one of those from the right, have one of them from the left, right? And actually, there's not many batshit crazy people on the left. But there's not really an analog because, guess what? The market doesn't really pay for that stuff. So it tends to be like the spectator or Rupert Murdoch that pays for these people because their role is primarily political to take the country's conversation in a particular direction. And it's the same with Darren Grimes, by the way. This Reason channel, it's really professionally done. It's come out of nowhere. They're using Twitter advertising, right? I've seen some of their, for instance, when you go on the Darren Grimes' Twitter, he's posting from Instagram from YouTube and they get like a preview card and it says, like, you know, Twitter advertisers, they're spending big money on this. Where's that coming from? Right? They're spending big money on this. And at the same time, they get it kind of, they get the foot up from the BBC, which the rest of us are paying for. For what? For this kind of crap, for this garbage. You asked where they're getting their money from. I think there is some probably, you know, some sponsorship going on. I wonder if the Koch brothers are involved. Obviously, complete speculation. I don't know. But let's take a look at an Ian Dale tweet because he was direct for people to fund this channel only days ago. So this has now been deleted, but let's get it up. If you're on the right and want to help counter left-wing propaganda on the internet, here's how you can do it. Help grow reasoned. Again, it's sort of saying this is for reasonable people to counter the sort of hostile left-wing agenda which is encroaching on our right to talk honestly about things. But now let's look at his, you know, his follow-up tweet to this. It's a tale between his legs. Just to clarify, I tweeted a link to a GoFundMe page for reasoned. I have not seen the interview but now have. The views expressed in it should have been taken apart in no way do I associate myself with them. But if you look at their crowd funder, it seems like he has associated with them in another way. So there is a £100 donation from someone called Ian Dale. It could be, obviously, I don't know. Maybe this is someone who's wasted £100 to try and pretend to be Ian Dale and give them some money. But ultimately, what does this whole sorry, a fair show? It's that when people say, you know, it's not a coincidence that this platform was started for people who get accused of racism and when they're allowed to talk openly, they do a big racism, right? It's people who say that people call people racists too often. I mean, often what they want to do is be completely racist. And I feel like Ian Dale, someone who's been in, you know, the mainstream media for decades, should understand what people like Darren Grimes are about. It's not, this is not someone who's trying to say, oh, we should be able to speak freely about things. Council culture's got too extreme. This is someone who will nod along while a guest who he has sort of said, you know, you can speak freely on this platform. A guest is saying there are too many damn blacks or why are there so many implying there are too many damn blacks in Africa and Europe because the slave trade wasn't quite violent enough, right? It's kind of the logical conclusion.