Media

Daniel Friberg vs. BBC

Being a public figure on the ‘real right’ often means spending hundreds of hours doing radio and television interviews where they ultimately end up reducing it down to 1% of the total length — that is unless you are a total retard who say stupid things which fit their stereotype of what a right-winger should say.

This has also been my experience for the past couple of years — wasting thousands of valuable work-hours on interviews with various mainstream media outlets only to see them include one or two out of 50+ questions in the edited version, and then inviting extreme far-left commentators to explain what we believe rather than broadcasting my own words.

A friend of mine, therefore, advised me to start recording all interviews and publish them in their entirety, making the time spent answering these media outlets, most often, stupid questions less of a waste of my time.

This is exactly what I did in my latest interview with BBC. (Their original broadcast is available here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3csvtpc.) As expected, out of the 40-minute interview — which quickly turned into a debate due to their polemical approach — they included about 2-3 minutes of our dialogue in their broadcast. Therefore I have the pleasure to present to you my unedited version of the BBC debate for your enjoyment.

Related links

Twitter: https://twitter.com/Daniel_Friberg
Author page at Arktos.com: https://arktos.com/people/daniel-friberg/
Author page at AltRight.com: https://altright.com/author/danielfriberg/
Metapedia biography: http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Friberg

Daniel Friberg
the authorDaniel Friberg
Daniel Friberg is a co-founder and editor of AltRight.com. He is furthermore an economist from the School of Business, Economics and Law at Gothenburg University who has conducted research into the Gothenburg Maritime Cluster, worked with mergers and acquisitions, business valuation, as a CFO, management consultant, business analyst and as a CEO within the Swedish mining industry. He is also co-founder and CEO of the British publishing house Arktos Media Ltd., which is one of the world-leading publishers of traditionalist and right-wing literature. He is also the author of The Real Right Returns: A Handbook for the True Opposition (Arktos, 2015). (Official Facebook page)

41 Comments

  • Daniel Friberg did a great job. Its a terrible idea to avoid the MSM. Most ppl dislike the media & can see the unfair treatment. Even if they are not ready to agree w/ 100% of our views, these interviews open their minds to new narratives.

  • Almost unlistenable, due to the horrible interviewer. What a clown.

    The way this was mic’d you hear the voice of the interviewer about twice as loud as Friberg, which adds insult to injury.

    Friberg is interesting, I hope we get an interview from someone other than a BBC idiot sometime soon.

  • It never ceases to amaze me how political figures complain about lying (((press))) and the next day they are again submitting themselves to get harassed by mainstream media hyenas.

    STOP TALKING TO JOURNALISTS!

    They are political activists and enemy combatants.

    • We have made significant gains precisely by talking to journalists. Many are so high on their own supply that they are convinced beyond the slightest doubt that the Alt-Right is completely without morality, and that no one could possibly disagree with their assessment. So they often print exactly what we have to say. This is one way in which their activity is helpful to us.

      • Sure, if you can play it to our benefit, then go ahead.

        But if you don’t have brains and a solid plan to use these hyenas, don’t talk to them. They will always spin it to make us look goofy and bad.

        Saying this in general, not directed to anyone.

    • The BBC interviewers were nearly as bad as that “Lobster Lady” trying to pull one over on Jordan Peterson. “Journalists” are nothing but glorified bloggers these days and the ones that do radio and TV are essentially just actors – at least in England they typically admit they are simply “readers” that read a script. In any sort of fact based discussion these people have nothing.

  • Mobs does not understand the simple things : extreme left+ extreme rights are the equal enemies of the freedom,capitalism,prosperity. Just some idiots call to sacrifice thir lives for socialist happeness, other idiots believe in socialist white race state,that will define their wages and aimes. The oppositions unite in common idiocy,friends!

  • lol, great job Daniel. not that those guys were much of a challenge. i could make better left wing arguments than those dumb-arses.

  • Statistics ?
    But you and the state try to supress these statistics, although you don’t quite have full control of the internet (yet)
    Your listeners don’t have to take my word for anything, they can do some research
    just Youtube ‘taharrush Europe’
    or the ‘Coudenhove Kalergi plan’
    or ‘White girl bleed a lot’
    or Black on White crime.
    or muslim grooming uk.

    See how quickly the BBC edits that bit out.
    Then, make your own recording so you can prove they’ve censored this information.

  • The best answer to the question “Do you advocate genocide?” is to simply say “Do we not already have genocide?”

  • One lesson that hits me as I listen to this interview: either be straight up racist, own it, be clear, be proud, be definitive, or don’t take any questions.

    Be ready to defend moral absolutes or don’t take questions.

    Be ready to defend superiority of race. Up and down. Or do not take any questions.

    They are so ready to catch you up in the jewish net of relativity. You cannot play in that net. You will die. They are not playing to lose.

    • Your 3rd paragraph is something I struggle with as a member of the Alt Right. I don’t care if a race is superior or not as much as I care that the races live separately. Each race has a nation state, and if all people belonging to a nation/race of people were in the appropriate state, then the world would be much better off. So, here’s my question: is it really even appropriate for a member of the Alt Right to think whites are superior? For me, I just don’t think it matters if we’re superior by one measurement or another, so long as whites live in the nation states to which they belong and non-whites do not live in those states. This is the Ethno State, in dream form, that we hope to make reality, our ultimate goal, right?

      • You ask a really good question. And here’s what I will say: Acknowledging the superiority of whites is paramount to acknowledging our responsibility toward governing the earth. And I don’t mean globalism. I mean acknowledging without shame our role as protectors of all peoples. The Athenians understood this, the Macedonians, the Romans, the British, the real native Americans all understood this responsibility, until lately. They took no shame in it.

        I don’t think it is possible to have a white nation without assuming our superiority and the position we have as protectors. A responsibility for governing over all other races. And I don’t mean direct governance through colonialism. Although I will say that colonialism seems to have failed because of shame and not because of some inherent defect in colonialism itself. Governance can be implied by one’s immediate absence and indirect intimidation. The father is always at home, even when he is at work.

        It is a good question. A profound question. The answer that one takes on this question really establishes one’s strong defense of principles against jewish relativism. Which is why I mentioned it in the same series of paragraphs. It has been in myexperience the only solid answer to accusations of hate crimes. What I always say to those who accuse me of hatred is: how could I hate those whom I love enough to protect. Those whom I want to see live well in their own places on earth where they most belong?

        • Thanks for the response. I have no disagreement with you, per se. I think that’s a perfectly acceptable view, but this is an area where I have a slightly different view and hopefully, this is a sign that actual diversity can exist between Alt Right members – that we are expanding our ideas, testing new theories.

          My thought is that while everything you said makes sense and I find nothing “wrong” with any of it, it’s irrelevant if we’re superior or not to other races. We still get our homeland. However, sometimes thinking you’re superior allows you to do things in a way that actually can make you superior, so it can’t hurt all to feel confident in being white, but it’s not really necessary to be a productive member of the AR. The eyes are on the prize… the Ethno State. Of course, we are concerned really only with our own Ethno State, but I do think wherever possible, we should strive to create conditions that permit all races to finally be home, where they will no doubt be happier, free from the left wing scheming, the race baiting, etc. Every Ethno State, regardless of the race, would be conservative. They would always look out for themselves – and the left cannot get a foothold in any of that. The Ethno State as a CONCEPT, is the solution to most of that which plagues the world.

          We’re growing and expanding, intellectually, I believe – yet able to find that both our philosophies on the subject are useful to the AR. That’s so important, I think – to maintain freedom of thought. We don’t want to be ideologues shunning thought, unless of course it’s absurd thought and we just need to correct our fellow AR brothers and sisters if they’re mistaken. Great conversation, right!? Thanks. Have a good week.

          • In the sense that Whites are your people, then in your idealogy whites should be supreme. Your family should be above those of other races…or below? Above. The top. Supremacy; if it means ruling over others, I would say yes; because it’s rule or be ruled. Being #2 is not the goal. Pretending we’re alone in the world is not the truth.

            The goal is to win, to be number one. We want that for ourselves and our progeny…a and therefore our people above other people’s.

            How can I not therefore consider my race supreme in my heart. In my choices. In my soul.

            If it’s a question among the races, my answer is ours shall be there supreme race.

            There is no room at the top. We can be diplomatic, but to say the goal is not to be in top is a lie.

  • Refuse to give interviews with fake news unless they agree to do it live for obvious reasons. If they refuse to agree to the terms, just say no comments and walk away. Everybody knows by now that their only intent is to nail the victim by guilt by association. It’s waste of time giving them a finger, well knowing they will take the whole arm. They are dirty bastards!

    • The recording is actually pretty good way to go. The Press have always had the advantage of being able to edit then memory hole things they don’t like, turn around is long over due.

  • They follow the script: damning by association. You are a neo-Nazi, are you not? IAre you denying the Nazis? You were arrested, were you not?

    The David Duke script. They are following the same script. Why do we even talk with jewish media?

  • The interviewers are locking him up in the constructive fallacy.

    They are purposely confusing the individual and the general. You make a general statement: Foreigners cannot assimilate. They confuse it with the particular: Can you back that up with specifics? All foreigners? It’s all or nothing?

    Of course, why would anyone try to prove a general statement with specifics? It’s tantamount to proving a negative.

  • Another reason that they ask for specifics: they know how difficult it is for someone being interview to pull up details in the spur of the moment. I love the summer we spent in Florence. Can you give speciifcs? What was the date? What year was it? And so they tend to ask for specifics only when it is most inconvenient. The best answer to the question about specifics: refer the interviewer to a book or an article, or to your previous writings or interviews. And just say it quickly and move on.

  • The question about specifics is the most strategically important to the left right now. They use it in a rude and insulting way, attempting to throw off and discredit the interviewee. The sky is blue. Can you give specifics, though? What are we talking about here.

    It is an effective way of throwing the game. When Frieberg said he was just about to get to the specifics, he sounded as though he had not thought of them. This is why as a question it is a very effective way of throwing the game in favor of the interviewer. When Frieberg gasped slowly, I felt for him.

  • Whites wanting the US to stay white is ultimately about power. They know that continuing to let mystery meat minorities from all over the world move in and have as many damn kids as they want will undermine their power. We don’t need to let the “Native Americans” have this land because the alt-right is ultimately concerned with the solidification and expansion of white power.

    • Uncanny humor, well done! I don’t laugh enough, but that was good. You know what’s interesting George, is that you constantly incite conflicts that produce enormous amounts of death in poor countries that are fairly easily disrupted by the militants to which you draw sympathy, such as ISIS in Syria, calling them “brave rebels fighting for change.” This of course prompted Bashar al Assad to mobilize the Syrian Army to wipe out ISIS, excuse me (((the brave rebels))), who then had to run for their lives to Europe, where millions of mystery meat minorities did indeed populate white European countries. You played that really well.

      But, what’s your plan for the future, George? What are you going to do about all these European countries that are turning totally right wing and getting uncucked? Austria has a new Chancellor, Sebastian Kurz, who is definitely in that category. Italy may well have a new Prime Minister in Matteo Salvini, who also falls into that category. Brexit is starting to get really tense, too. Now, I see that 3,800 Libyan migrants came to Europe in January 2018. They are of course, thugs (((brave rebel fighters))) that are losing to Khalifa Haftar’s men just like ISIS was losing to Assad’s men. I don’t think you can pump in the migrants fast enough to stop the wave of right wing (((white))) nationalism in Europe. So, what’s the plan now? Thanks, looking forward to your response.

    • Hello fellow Plus Member. You are a good person. These other fuckers need to pry open their wallets just a bit.

Leave a Reply