Saturday, 7 December 2019

UK general Election 12Dec2019

So, after PM May’s departure, her replacement Boris Johnson has adopted her abominable withdrawal “deal” with the European Union, has somehow obtained a Parliamentary nod for its approval and now belatedly realises that he needs a majority of a disciplined party to rubber-stamp the deal.

So far, the story is just like that of May.

And it seems set to continue.  Johnson has called a General Erection – a vote in which the whole country gets stiffed – for 12Dec2019.  Will he, like May, get the majority that he wants?  Or will the people return another hung Parliament?

Answers to those questions are best left to future historians.  For now, first things first.

It is even worth voting?

Question 1: the people ordered Brexit on 23Jun2019.

Question 2: has UKGov delivered Brexit?  No.

Question 3: has UKParl delivered Brexit?  No.  Quite the reverse.  Prevarication to the maximum extent, and then some more.

Question 4: why has Brexit not happened?  Because the Remainiac elite seek to subvert Brexit at any cost.

Question 5: which of the candidates in my constituency are servants of the elite?  Four of them.

Five candidates stand.  One for each of the three main mafia (Con, Lab, Illib-AntiDems), plus two more suckers from two different parties: “Advance Together” and the “Christian Peoples Alliance”.

The AT Party was created by a former LibDem/IllibAnti-Dem, so I don’t need to waste time researching this wannbe-mafia troup.

The CPA says of itself, “We have developed a detailed manifesto seeking only to say things that are pleasing to God and are based on Biblical values,” so, again, I don’t need to waste time with this lot (although I couldn’t resist one second look: on a page entitled, “We believe in”, the first item on the list is... “Social Justice”, which now typically means the leftist-wokist ideology of social justice, which in turn means that the CPA believes in its own extermination.  Crazy.)

Question 6: which of the candidates are probably not servant of the elite?  One of them, the CPA.  And this party isn’t credible.  So, in reality, none of the candidates are servants of the people, all of the candidates are servants of the elite.

Interim conclusion

As a vote simply ratifies the cynical, mafia, elite state in which we live, there is no good reason to vote.

Democracy cannot function in a post-truthist, elite-driven society: the freedom of us plebs seems now to depend upon a French-style revolution.

Examining the details

Let’s have a quick look at the offerings from the three main mafia anyway.  It might be slightly entertaining.  This is based upon the headlines spoon-fed to us plebs by the fakestream media.

There is no point in reading the mafia’s manifestos.  No manifesto is worth the toilet paper it would be best printed on.  And you wouldn’t use such toilet paper, for fear of catching a nasty infection.

Besides, the IllibAntiDems have posted so many bloody leaflets through the front door’s letterbox that the sheer quantity of paper is an ecological disaster.

In the midst of mild entertainment, might there be a small hook on which us ordinary plebs could hang some faith?

The Yellow Mafia

The Illiberal Anti-Democrats (also known as the Liberal Democrats; even their party's name lies) have sworn to revoke the Article 50 letter of 29Mar2017, contrary to Parliament’s decision to issue the Article 50 letter, and the instruction from the people (for which Parliament asked) on 23Jun2016.

The LibDems are fiercely loyal to a meta-governmental technocracy that sucks the accountability out of public life and hands it to a corruptocracy.

Oh, and the LibDem’s leader’s husband’s income depends upon the UK being a member of that same technocracy.  And then they tell us that they believe in local democracy.  Which is the lie?

Remarkably, the LibDems don’t even feel the need for any referenda at all to revoke Article 50.  So much for liberal democracy.  But, to the credit of the LibDems, it makes it very easy to rule out voting for these cretins.

The Red Mafia

The Labour Party wants as many referenda as it takes to cancel Brexit.  Only slightly less subtle than the unsubtle IllibAnti-Dems, Labour wants confirmatory referenda, including a referendum on its own negotiation of its own deal with the European Union... as if the EU will re-open negotiations, as if the EU would negotiate any different outcome.  Having got an apparently new deal with the EU, The Red Mafia proposes to campaign against such deal, preferring to remain in the EU anyway.

Could.  Not.  Make.  It.  Up.

Jeremy Corbyn, a lifelong Euro-sceptic, has apparently gone native with his remainiac Parliamentary party.  Indeed, it might be that Corbyn has converted to Remainiacism if his colleagues have convinced him that the European Union is indeed the pathway to eugenic world communism via anti-democratic technocratic government.

Meanwhile, the party itself is keen to have us believe that America will colonise the UK and sell off the NHS to evil private capitalists.  The problem for the Red Mafia is that even if the scaremongering turns out to be an accurate prediction, the credibility of the Red Mafia is negative.

The Blue Mafia

Conservative: putting the Con back into Government.  So to speak.

Johnson is another embodiment of everything wrong about our despicable ruling elite, just like, say, Blair.  The underlying corruptocratic interests are fundamentally the same.  The difference is the choice of methods by which the corrupt, feudalist, corporate client-state applies to us ordinary plebs.  Different methods, same outcome.

Although Johnson has committed to ratifying the abominable deal with the European Union, there is, so far at least, no circumstantial evidence that Johnson seeks any deal with the EU.

If the Blue Mafia wins, what are the likely outcomes?

Johnson’s Mafia implies the UK’s pivot to America, effectively leaving the UK’s relationship with the EU to wither (to wither further than it already has!).  This indicates that a “no-deal” Brexit might still happen on 31Jan2020 or on 31Dec2020, if the European Council give up on keeping the UK in the EU.

It smells a lot like a quick-and-frankly-filthy trade UK-US deal during President Trump’s election year, after an expected failure in US-China trade talks on 15Dec2019.  From Trump’s point of view, an archaic UK-US Free Trade Agreement is a consolation for failing to have stopped the destruction of US-China relations (which Trump himself effectively started, but control over which Trump lost to the sociopathic, war-mongering neo-cons of America).  From Johnson’s point of view, a UK-US Free Trade Agreement provides a treaty basis to leave the EEA’s methods of “conformity assessment”, thus effectively locking the UK out of the orbit of the EU’s political economy (thus making it much harder to re-join the European Union).

But free, largely unregulated trade with the deep corruptocracy of American is a dangerous ploy for British consumers familiar with European-style protections.  Any sample of articles from explains how toxins are corruptly smuggled into the food-chain and drug-chain, how appalling hygiene practices are permitted (encouraged, even) and how the corrupt policy making process of America keeps the toxins safely in situ.  Unsurprisingly, the oligarchs who run fakestream media want Natural News silenced, banned, murdered, whatever it takes to keep making profits from their implementing Agenda 2030 etc.

So it’s a false choice, then?

The false choice presented by the three mafia is, of course, utter baloney.

The ultimate grievance of Brexit is the gulf between the governed and the governors, a lack of accountability of those in power to those paying for the elite’s expensive and corrupt misadventures, the construction of an encroaching, corrupt, oligarch-led feudalism.

Ultimately, all three mafia propose to keep us plebs locked into corporate-sponsored neo-feudalism.

What’s missing from public discourse?

Oligarchy and corruption.

“Let us control the money of a country and we care not who makes its laws,” reportedly said T. Cushing Daniel, a Washington-based lobbyist and lawyer, in his testimony before the U.S. Congress in 1911 in hearings on House Resolution 314 (whether financiers were restricting trade by domination of the money supply) (source).

Similarly, “Let us control the energy of a country and we care not who prints the money.”

And, “Let us control the public narrative and we care not what the riff-raff think.”

It's the oligarchs' version of the game Rock, Paper and Scissors.  Sort of.  Who funds the public narrative and energy infrastructure?  Who powers the banking system?  Who builds confidence in the banking system?  Who pays the hacks who peddle the propaganda?

Of the real underlying issues – the framework in which any policy choice is feasible – there is no public discussion.  The media has censored discussion of the real issues, preferring instead to broadcast all manner of distractions.

Specifically, the deafening silence includes:

  • No re-statement of supremacy of Parliament and representative democracy.  Not even a whiff of anything like the Harrogate Agenda.
  • No comment, or even a hint, about the advantages/disadvantages of technocractic rule (the EU).
  • No comment about destablising monetary policy and central bank larceny.
  • No useful comment about about the issue-illiterate narrative of “man-made global warming” and its undisguised tones of a blatant eugenic agenda.  By contrast, there’s plenty of mainstream media exposure to those calling for everything to be taxed to buggery and back, apparently the magic bullet solution to the “climate emergency”.
  • No comment about how the climate change narrative favours hegemony of fossil fuel interests (by creating a fake scarcity in the by-product of fossil fuel energy generation, distribution and consumption: carbon dioxide).
  • No mainstream reporting of the apparent end of the solar maximum and the start of a solar minimum, ushering in a period of reduced solar energy reaching the Earth, thus leading to lower average global temperatures.  No doubt this will be credited to “carbon capture” and various other fake measures design to fill the theatre.  We’re on our way to a mini ice-age, and we are run by bozoes who think they’re gonna make it happen!!
  • No mainstream reporting of the apparent shift of the Earth’s magnetic poles.  Given our dependence on electronic stuff, a relatively quiet sun and a full-force magnetosphere to repeal the really bad stuff, you’d have thought the western world’s universities would be looking into the issue.  But no: grant funding depends upon promoting an issue-illiterate narrative of “man-made global warming”.  Oh well, if this choice kills millions of people, I guess it meets the eugenics agenda behind the narrative.
  • No mention of the European Defence Union.  Not a problem to mention this in European Union member states, but apparently, in the UK, the words “European Defence Union” trigger a wave of hate by the elite against the utterer of such words.
  • No comment about how to restore truth, completeness, accuracy and validity to mainstream media.
  • No comment about activists passing-off as journalists.
  • No substantial challenge to the bankster-sponsored failed Keynsianist command-and-control political economy.
  • No substantial challenge to the reverse-distribution of wealth, caused by bankster larceny (ZIRP, NIRP) from the modest, honest net savers to the ultra-indebted, crooked rich.
  • No challenge (not even exposure!) by campaigning politicians in mainstream media of globalist agencies, e.g. CIA, Open Society Foundation, Bilderberg Set, Davos Crowd, UN Agenda 21, UN Agenda 2030, the Green New Deal, Cultural Marxism, etc.  Money makes silence very loud, it seems.  Anybody who reads the published literature from the various groups subsidiary to the afore-named agencies are apparently cranky conspiracy theorists!
  • No challenge, or even advocacy, of a globalist, one-world government, based on anti-democratic, anti-accountable, non-recoursable technocratic government.
  • No mainstream exposure of the policy corruption in central banks, commercial banks, investment (“casino”) banks, technology, media, financial services, agriculture, food, fisheries, energy, fuel, pharmaceutical, healthcare, copyright and water industries.  And how public sector agencies, regulators and politicians corruptly develop policies to protect and promote that corruption.  And how the whole oligarchy of them continually develop policies to serve their own short-term interests, sod the externalities, therefore against the interests of us ordinary plebs.
  • No calling out the double-standards between food labelling and vaccine non-labelling.  Us ordinary plebs are supposed to understand an additive, say, E302 when it appears on a ingredients list of a jar of jam.  But, apparently, we’re not allowed – because we are too thick – to understand a mercurial compound that would appear on a list of ingredients list of a vaccine, hence why the list of ingredients of a vaccine is allowed to be self-censored.  We're not supposed to understand that vaccines need immuno-suppressants to work at all.  We're not supposed to understand that there are immuno-suppressants that are not toxic.  We're not supposed to know that the toxic immuno-supressants are much, much cheaper than the non-toxic alternatives, therefore better for corporate profitability.  But the state – at a corporation’s demand – expects to take such drugs without question.  And the elite wonder why the anti-vaxxers campaign for accountability in healthcare.
  • No rational analysis of a desirable foreign policy, or its strategy.
  • Still no mainstream media challenge to the fake narratives around the “terrorist attacks” against the World Trade Centre, New York, on 11Sep2001.
  • Still no mainstream media challenge to the fake narratives around the War(s) in Iraq.  Even today, when the issue arises, the fakestream still whitter on about “weapons of mass destruction” and remain silent about Saddam Hussein’s suggestion about trading oil for EUR, instead of USD.
  • No challenge to the blatant propaganda about the war against the Syrian regime, or the wider war on terror.  On the contrary, the mainstream media is still very keen on us ordinary plebs believing that Assad used chemical weapons, still re-publishing images that very clearly prove that the narrative is plainly fake, still hoping that we take everything at face value.
  • No apparent lessons to learn in the UK from the two attempts in the US by Democratic National Congress to hold a coup (Russiagate and Ukrainegate respectively).  On the contrary, on 06Dec2019, the fakestream media started reporting allegations that Russia was manipulating the UK election.  Here we go again.  The documents in question were blabbed by a Reddit thread, which Corbyn used as stage prop, and all of a sudden – with no apparent evidence – all of this was down to Russia.  Do our intelligence services get their evidence from daily horoscopes?
  • Other than a single videoed lecture by the late Hans Rosling, no mainstream attempt to understand why birth rates in western countries are typically below replacement rates, or how mass imports of people (”population replacement”) solves the underlying cause of the below-replacement birth rates.
  • No comparison of the Chinese social credit system and the “internet of things” lauded by the tech mafia.

There are plenty more issues to pick at.  These are just for starters.

Us ordinary plebs are the only ones paying tax to fund all of this unspoken corruption.  Taxation without representation.

Final conclusion

Same as the interim conclusion.

As a vote simply ratifies the cynical, mafia, elite state in which we live, there is no good reason to vote.

Democracy cannot function in a post-truthist, elite-driven society: the freedom of us plebs seems now to depend upon a French-style revolution.

End of post.

Monday, 26 August 2019

Just how smart are Europe's leaders? If energy policy is any guide, then they could be anywhere on a spectrum between stupidly thick to wilfully treacherous

Amidst the vacuous, diversionary theatre of Brexit, the real world carries on.  Time to put Brexit into context.

The continuing hegemony of so-called "liberal democracy" is demonstrably at stake.  Since the election of Donald Trump as President of the United States of America, the post-1945 political settlement between America and Europe is today under immense pressure from America's choice to change tack, specifically towards resurgent, nationalistic mercantilism.  America has chosen to be as mercantilism as the Germans have been since 1945.

America's change of task is an existential threat to the technocratic institutions of the eugenicist-based "liberal democracy" hegemony.  In Europe, chief amongst those institutions is the European Union and its various agencies.  The European Union does not know how to handle this existential threat.

Energy policy: a timely review from alternative media

A recent article by Wenyuan Wu ("Will Europe Ever Shake Its Dependence On Russian Energy?", 24Aug2019, analyses recent developments in the energy sector in Europe and, in so doing, illustrates the tears in the fabric of the hegemonic "liberal democrats".

The article pauses for thought about how Europe has reacted disjointedly to the Russian supply of gas via pipeline-under-construction Nord Stream 2.

In short:

  • Some EU Member Nations want to buy energy from Russia; other EU Member Nations don't; the EU itself appear incapable of arbitrage between the binary positions.
  • The EU has belatedly squawked an alarm about Europe's apparent dependence on energy from Russia, in spite of EU sanctions against Russia because of the American-led false-flag operation in Ukraine.  But the same EU has seemingly made no credible attempt to propose a means to plug the energy gap, instead preferring to jump on the "climate emergency" bandwagon (presumably as a smokescreen to conceal a distinct lack of competence in the Tough Policy Choice Proposal Department).
  • The EU having already correctly identified that the Chinese Belt & Road Initiative is a rival - an existential threat - to the European Economic Area ("EEA"), the EU watches on helplessly as Chinese interests buy strategic assets in the European energy industry, gaming the EEA towards further Chinese interests from within the EEA.  In so doing, the Chinese are also tearing holes into the European Energy Union and the European Single Energy Market.
  • American energy interests clearly want the Europeans to buy energy exclusively from American interests.  American interests gain significant advantage from America's sanctions on Russia and a tariff war on China.
  • Within Europe, vested interests within the energy sector are keen to support Nord Stream 2, contrary to the preferences of American vested interests or the European Union's ego.

In all of these points above, a once-united set of vested interests are now diverging, and doing so at an alarming rate (months rather than years).  I have written before about how game theory well defines Europe's approach to policy choices and "solidarity".

The wider world beyond the energy sector

Beyond Wu's article, we have also recently heard comments in Aug 2019 from the outgoing bankster of the Bank of England, Mark Carney, that the American Dollar is no longer viable as the world's reserve currency.

This follows propaganda from the Russian news agency TASS in May 2019 that Russia and China are preparing to dump the American Dollar as a medium for trade (it might yet move from propaganda to reality - let's wait and see what actually happens - but as an announcement of proposed strategy, it is crystal clear).

And yet, it wasn't that long ago that the Anglo-American Empire of Chaos (sometimes referred to as the "Round Table") arranged for the murder of Colonel Quaddafi when Quaddafi suggested a gold-based currency for all of Africa, thus undermining the monopoly of the American dollar as a trading medium, triggering France to intervene for France's own interests (presumably before the Americans got involved first).  Saddam Hussein did a similar thing, proposing the Euro instead of gold, and look what happened to him (meanwhile, we plebs are expected to fall for the pack of plausibly-deniable lies that Hussein had weapons of mass destruction that could be mobilised in 45 minutes).

In Sep 2018, Russia publicly mused trading oil with currencies other than the Euro or American Dollar.  A blog post in the same month collated some historic context and projected propaganda from RT and South China Morning Post that there now existed a genuine petro-yuan to replace the petro-dollar.

Meanwhile, corrupt monetary policy continues to debase Western fiat currencies.  The policy has facilitates a massive shift of wealth from honest, ordinary Western plebs with modest savers to über-reckless, elitist, global over-borrowers.  The middle classes are all but extinct in the West - the working classes are already extinct in the West, by eugenic design - yet if any pleb (of whatever class) dares so much as to complain, the "liberal democratic" elite are quick to smear the plebs as "a basket of deplorables" (what a great electioneering slogan by Clinton H).

Oh, and central banksters successfully engineered a reversal of the yield curve in Aug 2019.  Some say this is a leading indicator of a recession.  Perhaps.  More likely, it is a leading indicator of the next round of fleecing intangible, unrealised wealth from honest, ordinary Western plebs with modest savers to über-reckless, elitist, global over-borrowers.

Just where in the world are Europe's ruling elites in all of this mess?

The most obvious answer is that they are hiding in their dark, little holes, hoping the real world will just go away.

Even when these supine cowards pipe up, their words reveal a mindset still stuck in the 1950s, a realm of little, tin-pot nationalistic states, contrary to the "liberal democratic" globalist dogma that all of them - all of them - signed up to shortly after 1945.  Say one thing, do another, hope no-body notices, keep the public dumb (the public are paying for it anyway, so who cares?).  So much for European solidarity.  They continue to avoid the tough - and rough - policy choices that they need to take to secure their own elite families' energy future (and that of their general populations, too, but, hey, what member of any elite gives a damn about the riff-raff?).

And these are the very same people who reckon we should centralise power, law and authority in Brussels, so as to institutionalise on-going negligence of key policy matters to the benefit of corporations' short-term profitability.  Thus, instead of a viable and useful energy policy, the European elite instead give us virtue-signalling "climate emergencies".

It is as this point where we really need to ask whether the European elites are stupidly thick or wilfully treacherous.

It is abundantly clear to the small number of us plebs in this world with their heads out of their own backsides that the Anglo-American Empire of Chaos is now entering its last phase of life.  Every empire fails, partly because its victims eventually unify to by-pass the levers of oppression, partly because running an empire ultimately requires totalitarianism, whereby costs (especially opportunity costs) inevitably exceed benefits.  Of the Anglo-American Empire of Chaos - including its European wing, perhaps we should call it the Anglo-Dutch-American Empire of Chaos? - all of the major policy choices are now fine-tuned to cause maximum aggravation, be it energy policy, monetary policy, trade policy or fiscal policy (which the European Union member nations can't agree on).

Whether we in the West like it or not, the medium-term future is Sino-Russian.  This future rests upon an unstable relationship that will require key support from Iran and, less critically, India (assuming Pakistan hasn't nuked India off the map by then).  China will eventually program its numerous economic-only colonies around the world to obey the script when the time is right.  But the only thing that holds Russia and China together is antipathy towards America and Britain.  So, when America and Britain cease to be a credible threat to both Russia and China, Russia and China will slowly diverge (whether peacefully or violently is open to question).

The virtue-signalling policy choices of the EU in energy "policy" fail conspicuously to address this tectonic shift in geo-politics.  The inability of the EU to complete its own monetary union by complementing it with a fiscal union reveals more of the same divisions now visible in energy policy (or lack thereof).  The choice of the EU to reject the Chinese Belt & Road Initiative was Frankish, egotistical, megalomaniac, self-inflicted stupidity: had the EU taken advice from its infamous problem lobbyist Microsoft, the EU might have been told to "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish".  Having picked precisely the wrong policies to screw up, the EU itself is now liable to be asked by any member nation, "What is the point of the EU?"

As at today, the EU still serves a role as a useful, plausibly deniable alibi, but even this extends only to matters that are within the scope of the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union as EU competences.  In early days, the EU probably thought of itself as quite clever to have a mechanism whereby it could simply take power from its member nations without challenge, and the member nations were probably more than happy to have the policy responsibility taken from them ("All the pay, none of the work!  Wa-hay!  Cash it in!!").  Nowadays, the EU's inactivity sets the EU onto a collision course with a fast-changing American mercantilism; the EU simply cannot move so fast; the EU's position in America's eyes is precarious, to say the least.

So far, it looks as if the Europeans are probably more stupidly thick than wilfully treacherous.  But there is another aspect to consider.

The EU and its "liberal democrat" sycophants might have decided that today is too soon to act decisively.  Far better, they might reason, to delay any action, maximise frustration, maximise the wasting of opportunities, wait for the American sanctions with Russia to become visibly counter-productive, wait for the American trade war with China to become visibly counter-productive within the current president's core voter base, to park everything with the EU for the bureaucracy to snarl it all up in red tape and pretend that any solution is hopeless.

This position would make sense if one believed in a multi-polar world.  But that isn't part of the "liberal democrat" globalist dogma.  To accept a multi-polar world means accepting the end of globalism in the medium-term.  It would mean people like Nick Clegg suddenly arguing against everything - everything - they've ever said they stand for.  Even with the European Right to be Forgotten (aka the Right to Hide Corruption), enough of the riff-raff will irritatingly find out how the rhetoric changes with the wind, and announce to anybody listening that the "globalists are lying again".  Google/YouTube, Facebook, Twitter etc are likely to need to scale up their industrial-sized censorship algorithms to cope with the public fallout: who is going to "nudge" the tech giants to do so?

And this aspect re-introduces the possibility that the EU's "liberal democrat" globalist elite are still likely wilfully treacherous.  As at Aug 2019, it is far too early to call whereabouts on the spectrum the EU and its sycophants actually sit.

The next opportunity for the EU's "liberal democrat" globalist elite to screw up shall be when (if?) China and America revert to hot war to resolve their differences.  Although banksters saw profit in bankrolling wars during 20th century, it now thought that America's military-industrial complex cannot afford total war in Iran.  This suggests that American strategy is more likely to be focused on containing China in oceans around the Chinese coast.  This will put the EU in an impossible position.  The only certainty one can predict now is that the EU will do whatever it takes to fudge the issue... and in so doing will lose support from within (the member nations), from America, from Russia, from China.  The EU will have parked itself in the ultimate no-win situation.  Schmart.

So what does this mean for Brexit?

To live in Britain, and to follow only the fakestream media, you'd never understand the assumed precepts of the above comment and analysis.

In Britain, in Aug 2019, we still have people who think that the EU is the best thing since sliced bread: those verminous bloody Remainiacs.  For more than 40 years, the UK government has disembowelled itself, giving power away to its great alibi, the EU.  But the EU has failed to be anything as useful as a government, and now seems to be failing as a suitable centrepoint for corporate lobbyists.  Just as Russia and China seek to by-pass the Anglo-American Empire of Chaos, corporate lobbyists probably now see the maximum use of the EU is to have a unilateral law of corporate-based feudalism, then lock the EU down to ensure that it can never revoke such law.  That would be a de facto fascist state.  It's not much of a future for the EU, even less is it a future for the citizens of the EU's member nations (especially for those in the east who lived through communism: for them, plus ça change, plus ça ne change plus).

One has to wonder: are Remainiacs the type of people who would have campaigned amongst Africans to keep the trans-Atlantic slave trade going, "because it would be an economic disaster for us all if you didn't get sold to the American colonies"?

The Brexiteers are no better.  Having conspired with the Remainaics to sabotage the only viable way of starting the multi-decade Brexit process (the EFTA/EEA method), the Brexiteers - specifically, the European Research Group of the British Conservative Party - are now campaigning for closer orbit to America's political economy, necessarily at the expense of any trading relationship with Europe.  This makes no sense.  No investor would rationally put all of their eggs into one basket, they'd diversify.  But, to extend the metaphor, Brexiteers want to us to burn one of our two chicken farms for the sake of it, and unnecessary replace all of the healthy chickens in the remaining chicken farm with somebody else's genetically-modified-buy-a-new-batch-every-season chickens.  And then pretend that nothing bad is going to happen.

One has to wonder: are Brexiteers the type of people who believe that the Round Table is worth fighting for?  In spite of the inconvenient fact that President Trump has clearly rumbled something when Trump sanctioned the then UK ambassador Darroch?  In spite of the other inconvenient fact that the Remainiac British elite successfully drafted in Obama to tell the Brits that Brexit put Britain "at the end of the queue"? (i.e. the American political establishment is not as friendly as the Brexiteers expect it to be.)

Whether it's Brexit or no-Brexit, whether it's a deal-Brexit or a no-deal-Brexit, the Brexit issue is now no more than arranging the deckchairs on the Titanic.

Sunday, 26 May 2019

The bits missing from Theresa May's resignation speech Fri 24May2019

Theresa May, British Prime Minster and leader of the British Conservative and Unionist Party announced on 24May2019 her resignation of these two offices on 07Jun2019.

I thought it might benefit historians of the future to know what might have been missing from the delivered speech.  So, here goes.

May said: "It is and will always remain a matter of deep regret to me that I have not been able to deliver Brexit."

Missing from this: "... to (and for) my handler, the European Commission.  The Withdrawal Agreement is the best chance globalists have ever had to accelerate Britain's deepening integration with the European Union, taking Britain deeper into a technocratic regime of power without accountability, to the extent that the Withdrawal Agreement undermines the integrity of Britain's defence and security policies, converting Britain and its miserable ordinary plebs into a cash cow - a form of modern slavery - to the benefit of the Davos Crowd, effectively erasing the British state off the map of the world.  We even had Parliamentary support for the strategy, at least in the early days, but now the Parliamentary fools have cold feet, as if somehow they have suddenly, belatedly, twigged the end-game.  Thankfully, I have left in situ Messrs Sidwell and Robbins to railroad my successors to the same policy destination."

May said: "We have completed the work that David Cameron and George Osborne started. The deficit is almost eliminated, our national debt is falling and we are bringing an end to austerity."

Missing from this: "We have continued to promote the myths that our welfare state is sustainable and affordable.  We have successfully maintained the pretence of austerity, even though we never actually implemented it!  We have continued to extend Cultural Marxism, to bring ideological requirements into every level of government in the UK, to continue to destablise the state and wider society, to flip the country over, to lay the first foundations of a Chinese-style system of social credit.  We have continued our drive to, and by, our Common Purpose.  We regret that our achievements are slower than those of our predecessors in Czechoslovakia between 1945-1948, but our desire to impose totalitarian communism onto the masses is as strong as ever."

May said: "My focus has been on ensuring that the good jobs of the future will be created in communities across the whole country - not just in London and the south-east - through our modern industrial strategy."

Missing from this: "Our modern industrial strategy remains to de-industrialise wherever possible: to exterminate all opportunities to improve our standards of living, irrespective of the efficiency of so doing, or the efficiency resulting from such improvements."

May said: "We have helped more people than ever enjoy the security of a job."

Missing from this: "We achieved this by ensuring, as part of our de-industrialisation policy, that the lucky few with a job are protected from the consequences of their own bad and corrupt decisions.  We have opened our borders to ensure that many more non-Britons have a better chance at finding employment than Britons, with the latter being properly locked out of the job market, especially straight white males, in the interests of social justice. "

May said: "And we are protecting the environment: eliminating plastic waste, tackling climate change and improving air quality."

Missing from this: "We continue to create an extensive unaccountable monopoly in the energy supply, akin to the same unaccountable monopoly we gifted decades ago to the banking sector regarding monetary policy.  To save the planet, we have continued our policy of Malthusian de-population.  We continue to create an extensive unaccountable oligopoly in the supply of agricultural seeds, for which we intend to replace chemical pesticides by genetically-modified plants whereby the plants themselves are their own pesticides, whose pesticidal effect remains active in the human gut.  We are grateful to the social media companies for censoring, de-monetising, de-platforming and de-employing numerous empiricists who refuse to kow-tow to our policy agenda."

"I do so [leaving office] with no ill will, but with enormous and enduring gratitude to have had the opportunity to serve the country I love."

Missing from this: "... to denigrade, to destroy and to sabotage."

The full text of May's speech is available from various media sources.

Tuesday, 7 May 2019

May regrets Britain will hold European elections: yeah, right!

A slightly ranty piece, this one.

May regrets Britain will hold European elections (Reuters).  Yeah, right.

When Britain voted to leave the European Union, ultimately it voted in favour of an accountable political system, the opposite of the European Union's carefully-cultivated authoritarian, protectionist, lobbyist-driven, corporate communism.

May's Remainiac triumph has been to bring to the Remainiac UK Parliament a Withdrawal Agreement that is so toxic, that even the most zombie-like of Britain's democratically-elected quarter-wits could spot political suicide without even bothering to read the Withdrawal Agreement.

But May has form prior to her current position as Prime Minister.  As Home Secretary, she signed-off on the under-funding of the police force, while at the same time maintaining (or increasing?) the numbers of criminal acts the police were obliged to police.  A "skinny police state" it might be, but still an authoritarian police state Britain has become under May's watch.  May's watch extended the foundations of the Blair government of the early 2000s.  Post-May, the Home Office is still extending those foundations.  Case in point: as at May 2019, the government is seriously considering the hard-wiring Leftist thought police into the foundations of regulation to counter freedom of speech on the internet (see UKGov's white paper Online Harms).

So why does May regret European elections?  To my mind, there is only one reasonable basis for her regret: May cannot like elections at all.  May's Withdrawal Agreement is crystal clear: whether in the joint committee phase, or in the backstop phase, the Withdrawal Agreement enables the European Union to call the shots, without the encumbrance of choreographed elections to the tin-pot European Parliament.  It would result in a cheaper way to achieve a deeper level of political integration with the European Project, without the democratic bits, a level far deeper than would have been possible had Britain voted to remain in the European Union.  In essence, it seems that May's regret is triggered by the possibility that her dream of an authoritarian, statist autocracy looks like it might slip through her fingers.

Saturday, 30 March 2019

It's Brexit betrayal, Jim, but not as we knew it...

It's 30Mar2019.  We were supposed to have Brexitted today.

But it hasn't happened.  The UK is still in the European Union.

Other commentators have written more than enough detail about how the UK political establishment ("UKPE") has sought to thwart Brexit.  Here's my take, from a higher altitude, looking down.

Blairite Remainiacs are still fighting the referendum, by hook and by crook

Some members of the UKPE have undertaken a specific crusade to do undermine Brexit and therefore also the will of the people.

I refer to them as "Blairite Remainiacs" ("BRs"), whose representatives include the UK Government (the Civil Service, the Prime Minister's office and the Treasury), The Independent Group ("TIG") and the mainstream media (online, print and broadcast, especially the BBC, the Financial Times and the Grauniad).

Other BRs are more covert: they act as sleeping agents within other political parties, contaminating both Labour and Conservative Parties accordingly.

The TIG and their sleeping agents in other political parties account for the sole elected element of this mafia: that they represent themselves more than they represent their constituents is rather one of two overarching points to vote to leave the EU in the first place.

From BRs, there is absolute silence about why the European Union is a good thing, but lots of disinformation about why freedom from the EU is absolutely impossible in every way, so should be abandoned.

Accompanying BRs' disinformation is the tangible snobbery from PRs against us ordinary plebs - we are "thick gammons", "poorly educated" (as if education is the sole path to enlightenment, contrary to >2,000 years of world history), "deceived in the campaign, but only by the Leave side", "mis-sold the myth that life can exist at all outside the European Union" (again, contrary to >2,000 years of world history), "trashing our childrens' futures"  - demonstrating a nasty, sociopathic, narcissistic, virtue-signalling superiority of PRs themselves.

The BRs aim to socialise us into succumbing to the corporate and social communist coffin that the EU is selflessly building for us.  Us ordinary taxpaying plebs should just shut up and keep on paying for it, both with our taxes and, more importantly, the future freedom of our grand-children.

Why Blairite?  Because these agents appear at a distance to be working with some "Common Purpose" (wiki).  The cat is out of the bag.

The Ultra Brexiteers are still ignorant about how the real world actually works

Other members of the UKPE have unwittingly sought to undermine Brexit as a predictable consequence of their deep ignorance and general stupidity.  Predictable, that is, to those of us with brains, not predictable to the members of the UKPE so afflicted.

I refer to them as the "Ultras", whose representatives include the European Research Group ("ERG"), the now-blatantly corrupt corporatist lobby group the Institute of Economic Affairs ("IEA") and BrexitCentral.  The ERG is the sole elected element, and, like its BR antidote, that they represent themselves more than they represent their constituents is rather one of two overarching points to vote to leave the EU in the first place.

From the Ultras, there is absolute silence about how the real world trades.  Where Ultras have dared to comment publicly, they say/imply that the real world still trades with the same legal infrastructure as it did in the 1980s.  Their knowledge is highly selective; the ignorance even more so.  Every time they open their mouths, Ultras prove their total ignorance about how non-tariff barriers to trade have comprehensively negated the otherwise-beneficial purposes of the Free Trade Agreements of the 1980s.  I can't tell whether the Ultras are genuinely ignorant, or wilfully ignorant: either way, it takes a lot of effort to remain so blissfully, selectively ignorant about the real world.

The Ultras also offer us a deafening silence about how the European Union is actually a problem.  For those of us with brains, we did our own research and quickly concluded that the EU is fundamentally a technocratic project whose primary mission is anti-democratic, to centralise power for anti-democratic forces (including corporatists, a.k.a. "corporate communism", or more properly "fascism" (which leftists still wrongly think is only about ethnic cleansing)).

We also concluded that we could not rely upon the UKPE or its sinister propagandist machine - the mainstream media - to tell us the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.  Looking back at this blog's historic entries, I've marched down the same path that many other brainful people have marched.  We've all recognised the lies-by-omission.

Yet, there is a special place in hell - Tusk, take note - for the toxicity of public policy choices that the European Union has taken, all of which Ultras should have been screaming from every rooftop in the land.  Examples:

  • The Notification Procedure of the Services Directive 2006 is a direct over-ruling of democratic choice by unaccountable regulatory arrogance.
  • The European Parliament recently agreed to the Copyright Directive, which deliberately seeks to use copyright law to censor the internet (in particular, to replace the truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth with leftist, woke, fake-truth).
  • The European Union's members had a consorted role in the development of the Paris Accord on Climate Change, the outcome of which has been policies which:
    • remove the greatest threat to the fossil fuel industry (nuclear power);
    • entrench the greatest aid to the fossil fuel industry (unreliable wind & solar power);
    • extend the fossil fuel monopoly to profit from other wasteful uses of irreplaceable ores & elements; and
    • entrench a self-serving groupthink by justifying the whole policy set on the false theory of man-made global warming (i.e. that man - straight white men in particular - is the sole source of all forms of climate change).

But the Ultras speak nothing of this deliberately dysfunctional governance.  Even less do the Ultras recognise cultural Marxism as the means by which such nasty, sociopathic, narcissistic, virtue-signalling policies and frameworks come about.

The middling establishmentists refuse to surrender their lazy little sweet spot

The remainder of the UKPE sees no benefit to Brexit.

Whether civil servant or elected Parliamentarian, being paid a full-time salary for having zero accountability for anything smells like a nice, easy life.  To them, it's worth surrendering all influence over policy choices taken at the European Union.

Better still, they no longer have to fend off the continuous flow of corrupt, corporatist lobbyists who seek entrenched monopolistic protections in law in favour of their corporate clients.  That European law tends towards favouring such lobby groups at the expense of democratic accountability is another one of two overarching points to vote to leave the EU in the first place.

The outside world now sees why the UKPE was never a safe pair of hands

Outside of the UK, foreign political establishments wonder how on earth this has come about.

The EU has known for years that the British delegation is the most amateur, unprepared, issue-illiterate and missing the point about just about everything.  Yet, the very public performance of the UKPE's stupidity has had the most extraordinary international consequences.

The United States of America is soooooo looking forward to negotiating future deals with the UK (an Open Skies Agreement is allegedly already in place, contrary to European law).

The European Free Trade Association might once have considered the UK to be an ally to overcome the onerous dominance of the European Union, but which probably ought to consider the UKPE as toxic as the EU itself.

The United Nations, and its members, are almost certainly asking serious questions about the mental health of the UKPE given the UKPE's obsessive Russiaphobia.  (Note: Russiaphobia seems to be a unholy alliance between those who think that Russia is about to nuke the world and those leftists who recognise that Russia is too savvy to become "woke" any time soon).

Which leaves us where?

On 23Jun2016, the UK electoral voted to take back control, with a long list of grievances to support their desire to take back control (ranging from trade, to immigration to sovereignty, and everything else in between).

We knew at the time that our political system was substantially crippled by a supra-national organisation that severely limited what our political system could achieve.  This is why it was so important to see whether UKGov had a strategy within the EU.  It spent months leading up to the referendum proving that it had none.  Since the referendum, it has proven why it had none.

Today, we realise that our political system wasn't just crippled by an external agency, but that it is equally crippled by its own internal agents.

Taking back control, it seems, is going to be a much, much harder objective to achieve.  Whether it is worth taking back control for a British electorate known for its laziness, complacency, denial and ubiquitous selective ignorance is another blog post for another day.

Sunday, 3 March 2019

Fewer than 29 days to go: state of the nation

With fewer than 29 days to go before Brexit Day, here's a brief list of current developments, in no particular order and no particular completeness.

Toxic Debt: 2006 all over again

Toxic debt on the rise again, and it feels about ready to go pop (sources: Strategian, the MoneyGPS, Epic Economist, background from the Corbett Report; note the absence of mainstream media sources).  In particular, the Chinese people appear to have gone into the buy-to-let market... in a market where renting properties isn't mainstream.  So, this means buy-to-leave-empty-and-have-no-income.  Yet the muppets buying these flats - to hoard empty properties! -  are doing so by borrowing.  Debt without income to service it!  In other words, bad debt.  Really?!  Really???!!!!

Worse, the properties being built are con-jobs: knocked up so quickly that they fall down of their own accord (source: ADV China).

The sources above have all the relevant numbers, so I won't repeat them here, suffice it to say that the unmeasured growth of unmeasured bad debt in China is likely to be as large - if not larger - than the sub-prime debt crisis of America in 2006.  The impact on the non-Chinese world is likely to be significant, because although Chinese financial instruments might not be as embedded in Western banks like American sub-prime securitised debt was in the 2000s, virtually every aspect of Western economic life depends upon Chinese economic activity in some way shape or form.  Cut the funding from those activities - very few of them are truly autonomous from the Chinese Communist State - and they will collapse.  This shall include even Vietnam, to which a number of Chinese industrialists are sub-contracting... because China has become too expensive!

Meanwhile, a growing number of Americans cannot service the loans on their cars.  The lower-end of the American income scale is borrowing simply to feed the kids.  Even without securitisation, the incestuous nature of cross-borrowing between financial institutions makes for a very uncomfortable process of contagion when the truth about bad debt is "officially" recognised.

All governments have, to varying degrees opted to drown in debt, to make themselves beholden to the globalist banksters, encouraged by the corruption of Davos Man.

The end-game ain't looking pretty.  Although there is clearly air hissing from the debt bubble, the slow-motion burst will gather pace quickly as contagion kicks in.  Epic Economist reckons that we'll see the big bang in "summer or autumn this year [2019]", which I interpret to be 2019Q3.

Italy and France: a marriage of debt

As Bernard Connolly predicted in 1997 (source: Moneyweek), ignoring the demos is the sure-fire way to populism, a point which Nick Clegg inadvertently re-prove to Merryn Somerset Webb in 2015.

A common trigger point is recession, especially one that feel's self-induced (even though it's probably down to banksters fleecing the system to enrich themselves at everybody else's expense).  One country in which financialisation has ripened beautifully for the banksters to shake the tree is Italy.  And the Italian economy makes itself very close to that point (sources: Wolf Street, ZeroHedge).

Debt is a major part of the Italian problem, compounded by the tradition of retail investors being investors of their banks.  The banks are, in reality, bankrupt, but officially can continue to report that everything is lovely (this scam is common throughout the Eurozone: the truth must be suppressed at all costs).

And guess who piled into Italian debt?  Like they piled into Greek debt?  Yes, that's right, the masters of interpreting every toxic opportunity as a "buy" signal: French banks.

This is thus evidence that either Italian & French banks won't learn, or that the French government still hasn't realised how banksters have played the French state.

Italy doesn't seem to be as encumbered as France, although its current leaders have a lot to learn about powerless they really are.  While Macron is proposing the measures of the Ceaușescu state to brutalise the gilets jaunes, Italy voted for a populist government which seems set to roll back the excesses of globalism (co-ordinating its efforts with Austria and the Visegrad Four).

But how?  To take a small example, there was a suggestion - exaggerated into an international coprophagous media feeding frenzy - that the Italian government reminded the Italian central bank (what's left of it) that Italian gold belongs to the sovereign state of Italy, not the banksters.  Problem is, this might not be factually correct: some reports from the industry state that the bank does indeed own the gold, not the state (source: Bullionstar).  Ouch.  Whether this makes Salvini a target for bankster-sponsored assassination remains to be seen.

At the point where somebody in Italy suffers a loss of confidence, Italy and France are likely to descend quickly into a financial death spiral.  As they are both members of the Eurozone with Germany, that leaves Germany taxpayers on the hook to fund it, or to fund loans from banksters to bail out Italy and France.  Either way: banksters 3-0 taxpayers.

The Germans have banned short-selling of one particular company

Never willing to miss any opportunity to be as cretinously stupid as possible, the German financial regulator BaFin has banned short-selling of Wirecard (source: Moneyweek).

BaFin reckons it's protecting a new entrant from the harshness of the market.  But this, of course, is garbage.  What BaFin is actually protecting is a dodgy, opaque business model.  Typically European, BaFin addresses the symptoms, not the root cause, and provides relief for the people running Wirecard to keep on being as opaque as possible with their use (waste?) of investors' money.  The stench of corruption is overpowering.

This is thus evidence that BaFin won't learn.  Ever.  How very European.

Contraction of the car market, especially for diesel-fuelled engines

With the dieselgate scandal continuing its erosion of diesel-flavoured vested interests, demand for car has collapsed.  The two events are unlikely to be directly linked, but the co-incidence is more than merely a surprise.  Car manufacturers are retrenching, reducing production as marginal costs exceed marginal revenue, in part because of the increase of marginal costs imposed by the state(s) for emission controls.  In the American market, there even appears to be a shift by consumers away from cars and towards plush trucks (SUVs, 4x4, "Chelsea Tractors") (source: WolfStreet 1, WolfStreet 2).  Not so in Europe (at least, there's no evidence so far); if so, one has to question what economies of scale in manufacture could be possible at all.

Britain's mainstream media created its own feeding-frenzy fake-news fodder out of the story when Honda announced the closure of its factory in Swindon (I would link to a sample, but for the Corporate Communist Copyright Directive, see below).  In reality, with the Japanese very nearly in the the European Union's as-yet uncodefied equivalent of the European Economic Area, Honda probably finds it cheaper to manufacture in Japan and ship directly to the European continent, rather than to have production facilities in the European Union (especially the relatively-expensive and under-skilled UK).

Of course, the retards in the mainstream media whitter on about this being a consequence of Brexit and blah blah blah.  Issue-illiterate nonsense.  As one would expect.  The mainstream media is there only to lie to us.

Corporate Communist Copyright Directive

The European Parliament is still progressing with making the proposed Copyright Directive a de facto method of censoring the internet, using copyright law as the means to abolish-by-stealth freedom of expression.

The root issue, as explained by Billboard, is that the music/artist industries remain as deeply issue-illiterate as they always have been.  Essentially rent-seekers by nature, the artistic industries believe that if they have a right to intellectual property, then they can use it to print money just like a central bank can.  So anybody else who uses the alleged intellectual property is, in their minds, guilty-without-defence of theft.  So when social media platforms provide the tools by which ordinary plebs can do so without recourse, this is systemic theft.  On an industrial scale.

This, of course, is the same stupidity of the industry that had the industry wanting ban video recorders and cassette recorders.  They lost those two battles and to their "surprise", demand rose: the economic catastrophe they wrongly foresaw never happened.  But, having refused to learn the right lessons from those two battles, they are back at the table demanding money-making censorship... and this time the European Union is more than ready to listen to them.  (Offers of well-paid consultancies presumably help to open the appropriate ears.)

So much for the parasitic rent-takers of the artist industries.

But what Billboard judiciously omits is the impact of Article 11, the "link tax" (opinion from pressure group: Electronic Frontier Foundation).  Some artistry is written.  All written material has some sort of copyright behind it, including output from artists.  This blog, for example, links to copyrighted sources that the rights holders have chosen to publish for free on the internet.  Nevertheless, Article 11 requires the platform of the blog to pay the rights holders a fee for having linked to the copyrighted material (with fatuous exemptions).

This is state-sponsored parasitism.  This is crony, corporate communism at its most disgusting.  (Technically, it is a fascist state, but we can't say fascist state because loads of ignorant, issue-illiterate, snowflake Lefists think fascism is something to do with a man adorning a pencil moustache sending people to gas chambers).

The Copyright Directive is law that remain voters ultimately want to see happen, hence why they voted to remain.  They voted for it.  Bear that in mind, if the UK ever undergoes a truth and reconciliation process.

Man-made global warming

I read Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth (no link, it'll be taxed).  I'll admit, I was ready to be taken in by it, and I was.  For years, I believed that I understood how man-made "carbon emissions" cooked the planet.

But when I started to question the honesty of the mainstream media, I challenged just about everything I thought I know about politics, philosophy and economics.  And the sinister dogma of man-made global warming was one of the major causalities.

It's amazing what a little bit of learning can achieve.

  • We now know that the "97% of scientist agree" is a fiction invented by a cartoonist.
  • We continue to know that we have no means of measuring: i) what percentage of climate change is caused by mankind; and ii) what percentage of climate change is caused by natural forces.
  • We now know that peaks of carbon dioxide levels in the relevant layers of the atmosphere follow peaks of temperature, not the other way around.
  • We continue to know that there is a very strong co-relation between sunspot activity and the "average" measurements of temperature around the world.
  • We know that carbon dioxide is the 5th least-significant greenhouse gas (the most significant is water vapour).
  • We also know that humankind's carbon dioxide emissions are very, very small compared to natural sources of carbon dioxide emissions (e.g. volcanoes) (yet we still can't link human activity to a percentage of climate change).
  • We know that only one of the many models for climate change are consistently wrong, with no attempt to make the models relevant (the one that works is a Russian model, but, apparently, anything Russian is fake news, so we're not allowed to believe it).
  • We know that just about any study promoting or advocating or trying to measure the human contribution/cause of climate change typically rests upon very selective/cherry-picked interpretations of comparable "baseline" data.
  • We know that any graph looking like a hockey stick is normally a falsehood, because statistically it cannot stack up.  Yet, the infamous hockey stick graph has become a touchstone for the alarmists because it says what they desperately want to believe.  But the graph's co-author, Michael Mann, was held in contempt of a Canadian court in 2017 when the court demanded Mann's workings to prove that the graph was not fraudulent, but Mann refused.  What has Mann got to hide?  It demonstrates just how without credibility, honesty and integrity the alarmist crusade is.

And this is just the stuff I can grasp.

Yet there's more.  The next thing for me to get my head around is the possibility that the models used by climate alarmists are so demonstrably fake that only an utter moron would believe anything a climate alarmist would say.  Publicised by The Red Elephant's Vincent James and Newsblaze, astrophysicist Joseph Postma (who made it onto the Denier's List, which thus enhances Postma's credibility in my eyes), Postma's idea is that alarmists' models assume a flat earth.  Yes, a flat earth!  They also assume that the heat from the sun hits the surface of the flat earth at the temperate of -18°C (yet, negative eighteen degrees Celsius, below the freezing point of water).  Somehow, this "heat" "radiates" into the single-layered atmosphere and gets trapped by something causing a greenhouse effect which eventually boils the planet and kills everything.

Interestingly, this means that every time a climate alarmist whitters on about the "ozone layer", they are talking off-script from the models that they use to prop up their superstitious propaganda.

What is the obsession with carbon dioxide anyway?  The answer turns out to be very simple: carbon dioxide emissions happen when humans generate energy and when humans consume energy.  With the right "regulation" in place, it thus becomes possible to tax both sides of the energy transaction.  And if it's possible to tax it, then it's also possible to charge a price for each event.  All that is required is the same raft of "financialisation" law to be imported into the energy sector.

And this is what it's really all about.  To control the carbon dioxide "supply" is to control the entire energy sector.  And as energy is as fundamental to human life as you can get, the control of the energy sector is control of everything.  It is perfect corporate communism.

And, of course, the European Union is fully on board with the mission to save the planet from carbon dioxide.

The vast legions of journalists, Leftist, pseudo-scientists, taxpayer-funded non-governmental organisations/lobby groups who support the underlying Malthusian theories of man-made global warming are just really useful idiots to help to prop up a narrative that the idiots themselves don't understand.  By the time they'll figure it out, it'll be too late: they'll be stitched up, like the rest of us.  An Inconvenient Lie, indeed.

A shift in empire: from America, but to where?

The demise of the British empire in favour of the American empire took a long time coming, but it was ultimately the Suez Crisis of 1956 which was the final nail in the coffin for any chance of Britain reprising its imperial ambitions.

A similar story appears to be panning out for America.  The runes are reading in a similar way.  America, under President Trump, is probably less social-justice-warriory than at any time in the past 30 years, yet the neo-liberal and neo-conservative agenda continue to push out bile which undermines America's domestic agenda and, when involved in foreign wars, undermines America's international agenda.

The Cuban Missile Crisis, Vietnam, the Iraq Wars, Afghanistan, responses to Russia's re-annexation of the Crimea (contrary to American demands that Crimea be part of the sovereign state of Ukraine), America's ruthless fleecing of Russia in President Yeltsin's era, America's bombastic economic sanctions against Russia in President Putin's era, America's dogmatic economic sanctions against anybody who trades with Iran, America's destabilising presence in the Middle East, the Foreign Account and Tax Compliance Act (which led to some American ex-pats to renounce their citizenship just to get hold of a bank account in their host country, just to feed the kids) and, just to cap it all, America's forceful fake choice to Europe regarding NATO, "America or Russia: choose now."  Coming up soon: a fake-flag "war" in Venezuela.

America and Europe have both allowed the rule of law to become the law of rules.  This is perversion of what should exist to support a democratic state, but it is a necessary step for the increasing control freakery of the Leftist, globalist super-state (of which the European Union is the first major prototype).  Yet, if the European Union moves away from the United States of America, then it's likely that the whole house of cards collapses (not least because the banksters who rig the system will spot an opportunity to fleece the underlying taxpayers and private savers to the advantage of the banksters, literally taking any potential gains of control freakery from under the noses of the globalist Left).

And yet, America defies its own the rule of law at will.  It now smells very likely that the "private server" run by Hilary Clinton was necessary to protect the sources of funding for the Clinton Foundation from investigation under money laundering rules.  The benefit of hindsight makes it quite clear that the second Iraq war (George W Bush, Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney) was most likely a marketing campaign for the arms industry (and who cares about the consequences?).

Some argue that the Chinese empire is the next one to watch.  Perhaps.  Although China has many strategic interests around the world, so strategic that it would embarrass the feckless idiots of the Western ruling classes, The President of the People's Republic of China was converted in 2018 to a job-for-life.  This is the classic measure of the imperialist dream.  The incumbent is President Xi Jinping; it is too early to say what his longer-term plan might be, but we know from Chinese history that crap policy choices are equally likely in China than anywhere in the Western world.

Mao Tse Tung starved a chunk of his own population to death based on the false belief that sparrows ate grain.  He ordered peasants to rattle cans in fields all day, killing sparrows.  Without sparrow to eat insects, insects ate the grain unimpeded.  China starved.  It's a classic example of why centrally planned economies never work.  Jinping must know this, and yet there is no clear evidence of how he is going to approach the debt bubble that smothers his country's embryonic middle classes.  Jinping's only effective "solution" is the usual shortcut: to allow the Western bankster mentality to take over, wipe out the middle classes, revert the whole population to peasantry and penury, under usury, a form of neo-feudalism (or, perhaps in China, "back to normal", "恢復正常", translated via Google Translate).

China clearly has military ambitions and is ready to test America's military resolve.  China has deployed its military to play stupid little games in the South China Sea, illegitimately claiming rights over the Spratly Islands (amongst others).  America is also there, playing its role in the same stupid game.  And China, like Russia and Iran (allegedly), support the incumbent socialist President of Venezuela, standing opposite the view of America.  Moreover, there look to be a number of parallels between China's policy deployments today and those of Japan in the 1930s.

I'm not convinced yet that China is going to be the next empire.  As at today, the next empire feels likely to be an unstable coalition of Russia, China and India against a fragmented, bankrupted disarray of Europe and America.  The root cause of the instability of the coalition empire shall be who carves up the spoils of Old Europe and the Disunited States of America.  Through this transition, I suspect that both old and new empires are going to have to deal with the irritant of Islamic Fundamentalism, although all parties need Islamic Fundamentalism to ensure the Middle East remains paralysed by its own factions (and thus keep the oil flowing!).

The next few decades are going to be extremely messy.


And somewhere in this quagmire of international tectonic political plate-shifting, there is this Brexit thing.  Oh yeah, that's what this blog was supposed to be about, wasn't it?

All of a sudden, Brexit seems quite trivially academic.

Breaking out of the European Union offers the UK a great deal of freedom... supposedly.  In all probability, the maximum freedom in the foreseeable future is to cherrypick bits of globalist stupidity that i) the European Union has been implementing for years; and ii) still benefit the UK.

Yet, hope is vision on the horizon.  Although globalisation shall likely continue - and for good reasons - globalism is looking very ill.  Globalism is the Leftist campaign for One World Socialist Government.  Many of us ordinary plebs are waking up.  We are "woke", but not in the way that Leftists want us to be.

In another whisper of hope, America has appointed David Malpass as the President of the World Bank, which some pundits reckon is potentially a game-changer (opinion: American Thinker, note the contrast between expectations on Malpass and the issue-illiterate social justice eco warrior mentality of Obama's choice Kim.  Note also some choice quotes attributed to Malpass, offered by ZeroHedge).

A Brexited Britain will need to be patient while the rest of the world's democracies catch up, and make their own opportunities to destroy their globalist overlords, the self-serving monopolists and banksters who seek to impose neo-feudalism.  In reality, a Brexited Britain will need to be equally patient with its own idiotic ruling classes.

Since the referendum, us ordinary plebs have little to do but watch the stupidity of the British Prime Minster Theresa May see Brexit as "damage limitation" exercise that results in a Withdrawal Agreement far more abominable than membership of the EU.  We've watched the stupidity of a self-serving Parliament, which desperately wants to turn the clock back to the pre-referendum days, so it can continue to juice the gravy train to which it had become overly accustomed.  We've learnt not to watch the deceitful mainstream media that has so disserved its customers/readers in all policy areas for decades.

The overwhelming and fundamental change that British society needs is one that most British are genetically pre-disposed to ignore.  The mindset of the typical British voter is all about solving challenges with the most breathtaking of issue-illiterate complacency, denial and arrogance, in particular a pathetic faith in the "reasonableness" of others, with not a jot of political literacy to accept just how sick in the head Leftist control freaks really are.  In this mindset, change is incremental, honest, reasonable and never, ever radical.  Unsurprisingly, this is the mindset that allowed the ruling elite (howsoever branded) to cause the UK to drift into the evil grip of the European Economic Community, wilfully deceiving the population along the way.  Membership of the EEC was very radical, and the ruling elite got away with it by lying to a population who was happy to be lied to, because the lies sounded comforting.

While the world is undergoing further significant, if incremental, changes in the next 50 years, the British population is probably best served by riding the waves of these changes.  To do this, we require issue-literate leaders and implementors to keep a hawk's eye on developments, being ready to deploy the right policies to protect our interests.  None of our current ruling elite meets this requirement.  Yet, to change the ruling elite requires overturning the mindset of the typical British voter.  It means the typical British voter getting off his lazy, fat arse, and getting involved, even to the extent of fighting hard against deeply entrenched, bullying, threatening, potentially violent vested interests who's much prefer to impose neo-feudalism, thank you very much.  The fight of the French state against its own gilets jaunes is instructive.

Brexit on its own does not solve this, but it is a necessary step to building the solution.  Brexit is the last throw of the dice for freedom of the British people from the tyranny of Britain's own state and other supra-national "regulators" that conspire to move us towards the socialist, globalist, neo-feudalism beloved of the military industrial complex.  It sounds all very conspiratorial and, sure, there are some forces which attempt to fight the tyranny.  But it will all amount to nowt if ordinary plebs continue to sit on their arses and watch mainstream telly, pretending that the fight above their heads about who owns the plebs' resources doesn't really matter to the plebs.

After all, the 48% who voted remain voted in favour the Copyright Directive and the Single European Army, whether they like to admit it or not.  How many of these 48% will come to their senses is an open question.  But, just as they voted in favour of their democratic, political and economic suicide within a neo-feudalist European Union, they shall likely continue to vote for the same moronic objectives whenever the opportunity arises.  And all of them will wrongly reckon that it'll do them good and give them lots of future opportunities.  Tell that to the long-term unemployed youth of France, preferably because the French police beat the long-term unemployed youth to death for wearing a gilet jaune.