On the Nature of Things | Forum

The US warnings on British exit from the EU are boilerplate American diplomacy. Washington has been saying these things ever since I started following the matters closely almost 25 years ago. The Americans are correct in a narrow sense. British withdrawal would be a major blow to US strategic interests. (...) But at the end of the day, the British people cannot let America’s taste for tidy structures in Europe determine policy on matters that go to the heart of our democracy and sovereign self-government.
(...)
So yes, the Americans want us to do their lobbying for them inside the EU. If you read the WikiLeaks Cables from London to Washington, this is made crystal clear. There is nothing wrong with this. (...) But at the end of the day, the British people cannot let America’s taste for tidy structures in Europe determine policy on matters that go to the heart of our democracy and sovereign self-government.

For me the snapping point was the disgraceful saga of the European Constitution, which I covered in minute detail as it wended its way through the Convention.

It was supposed to return power to the nation states under Laeken Declaration, but in reality was exploited by Project insiders to push for a quantum leap in EU integration – most crucially by turning the European Court into a supreme court with jurisdiction over all "Pillars" of EU affairs, the killer twist.

When this was rejected by French voters, and then by Dutch voters by an even bigger margin, EU elites ignored the verdict. Chancellor Angela Merkel brought it back as the Lisbon Treaty with the collusion of France’s Nicolas Sarkozy (who by then had an absolute majority in parliament), and together they rammed it through without referendums. It was an executive Putsch by EU leaders.

The Irish supreme court ordered a vote in Ireland, the only country where people were given a chance to express a view. When the Irish then voted `No’, they were made to vote again. Britain should not remain a member of an organisation that behaves in this way. It is as simple as that, and I think a great number of readers concur.

Azrael wrote:British Taxpayers spend £32,500 per year on renting 12 fig trees.

1. I wasn't aware that trees could be rented. Why would someone rent rather than buy trees on one's property?
2. This is costing British taxpayers about $4500 per tree per year. One would imagine that one could buy a fig tree for less than $4500.

Here you can get a fig tree for $65. The rented trees are probably bigger, but still . . .

Is the desire to rent rather than buy the trees ideological: "the government shouldn't own fig trees", "the fig trees should be privatized", "fig trees owned by the private sector are more efficient", "having the fig trees owned by the private sector would generate more jobs -- the government doesn't create jobs", etc.

Alexis wrote:We cannot let America's tactical interests dictate Britain's sovereign destiny

The US warnings on British exit from the EU are boilerplate American diplomacy. Washington has been saying these things ever since I started following the matters closely almost 25 years ago. The Americans are correct in a narrow sense. British withdrawal would be a major blow to US strategic interests. (...) But at the end of the day, the British people cannot let America’s taste for tidy structures in Europe determine policy on matters that go to the heart of our democracy and sovereign self-government.
(...)
So yes, the Americans want us to do their lobbying for them inside the EU. If you read the WikiLeaks Cables from London to Washington, this is made crystal clear. There is nothing wrong with this. (...) But at the end of the day, the British people cannot let America’s taste for tidy structures in Europe determine policy on matters that go to the heart of our democracy and sovereign self-government.

Well said!

For me the snapping point was the disgraceful saga of the European Constitution, which I covered in minute detail as it wended its way through the Convention.

It was supposed to return power to the nation states under Laeken Declaration, but in reality was exploited by Project insiders to push for a quantum leap in EU integration – most crucially by turning the European Court into a supreme court with jurisdiction over all "Pillars" of EU affairs, the killer twist.

When this was rejected by French voters, and then by Dutch voters by an even bigger margin, EU elites ignored the verdict. Chancellor Angela Merkel brought it back as the Lisbon Treaty with the collusion of France’s Nicolas Sarkozy (who by then had an absolute majority in parliament), and together they rammed it through without referendums. It was an executive Putsch by EU leaders.

The Irish supreme court ordered a vote in Ireland, the only country where people were given a chance to express a view. When the Irish then voted `No’, they were made to vote again. Britain should not remain a member of an organisation that behaves in this way. It is as simple as that, and I think a great number of readers concur.

Bravo!

Only a minority of French people concur, for the time being.
But our time will come too.

If the British do the right thing and exit the EU, Ambrose-Pritchard is right this will be a huge blow to the "EU" project.
And Britain will have showed the way.

Last month I stopped briefly in London for business, and found myself hoping that I never would return; it reminds me too much of what might become of us. It is the great capital city of a great nation where the British are entirely marginalized. At the top, Arab and Russian money has turned Knightsbridge and Belgravia and South Kensington into an impossibly priced theme park for absentee owners. At the bottom, what used to be the Cockney London–within earshot of the bells of the Bow Church–has become Little Bengal.

Ibrahim wrote:Spengler: "Imagine, if you can stomach it, a city with many different cultures living together, and Anglo-Saxons are not the obvious majority. I hope I never return." *flies home to NYC*

Typhoon wrote:The result of the conversion of the British economy into the FIRE economy, a result of the late Maggie T's policies, which Spenglerman has in his own small way, aided and abetted.

Endovelico wrote:I have just been a few days in London with my youngest daughter and what surprised me most was realizing that - as far as the service sector is concerned - people are there less efficient than in Portugal. Service in shops and restaurants is very inefficient, and I even had to put up with an airport identity control officer who would not keep his job very long if he was working in Portugal. And he was a Brit, not a Bengali... Which reinforced my feeling that what makes Portugal a less productive country than Britain - and probably most northern European countries - is not the human factor, but the lack of adequate investment. In the service sector, where the human factor is paramount, we immediately see that the competitiveness of northern Europe is less evident. The fact that the CEO of Lloyd's Bank is a Portuguese citizen seems to reinforce this idea.

As to Spengler, he is, obviously, a moron...

Endovelico wrote:I have just been a few days in London with my youngest daughter and what surprised me most was realizing that - as far as the service sector is concerned - people are there less efficient than in Portugal. Service in shops and restaurants is very inefficient, and I even had to put up with an airport identity control officer who would not keep his job very long if he was working in Portugal. And he was a Brit, not a Bengali... Which reinforced my feeling that what makes Portugal a less productive country than Britain - and probably most northern European countries - is not the human factor, but the lack of adequate investment. In the service sector, where the human factor is paramount, we immediately see that the competitiveness of northern Europe is less evident. The fact that the CEO of Lloyd's Bank is a Portuguese citizen seems to reinforce this idea.

As to Spengler, he is, obviously, a moron..

.

Simple Minded wrote:Now Endo's post has self corrected and moron no longer appears as durian on my screen......

unruly electrons?

Endovelico wrote:

Simple Minded wrote:Now Endo's post has self corrected and moron no longer appears as durian on my screen......

unruly electrons?

I had used idi*ot instead of moron, and had to edit my post...

Endovelico wrote:I have just been a few days in London with my youngest daughter and what surprised me most was realizing that - as far as the service sector is concerned - people are there less efficient than in Portugal. Service in shops and restaurants is very inefficient, and I even had to put up with an airport identity control officer who would not keep his job very long if he was working in Portugal. And he was a Brit, not a Bengali... Which reinforced my feeling that what makes Portugal a less productive country than Britain - and probably most northern European countries - is not the human factor, but the lack of adequate investment. In the service sector, where the human factor is paramount, we immediately see that the competitiveness of northern Europe is less evident. The fact that the CEO of Lloyd's Bank is a Portuguese citizen seems to reinforce this idea.

As to Spengler, he is, obviously, a moron...

.

.. 10% of children in Britain's schools are Muslim ..

. . fail to acknowledge "the preservation and enhancement of ancient Greek and Roman learning by classical Muslim civilisation, which percolated into Europe via Spain and Italy, leading to the European Renaissance".

.

Endovelico wrote:I have just been a few days in London with my youngest daughter and what surprised me most was realizing that - as far as the service sector is concerned - people are there less efficient than in Portugal. Service in shops and restaurants is very inefficient, and I even had to put up with an airport identity control officer who would not keep his job very long if he was working in Portugal. And he was a Brit, not a Bengali... Which reinforced my feeling that what makes Portugal a less productive country than Britain - and probably most northern European countries - is not the human factor, but the lack of adequate investment. In the service sector, where the human factor is paramount, we immediately see that the competitiveness of northern Europe is less evident. The fact that the CEO of Lloyd's Bank is a Portuguese citizen seems to reinforce this idea.

As to Spengler, he is, obviously, a moron...

As to Spengler, he is, obviously, a moron...

Typhoon wrote:Economist | Send in the clowns!

Apparently a small upstart party, the UKIP - the UK Independence Party, has given the Establishment a bit of a shock with it's successful showing in local UK elections.

Any comments from our British forum members?

Ibrahim wrote:

Typhoon wrote:Economist | Send in the clowns!

Apparently a small upstart party, the UKIP - the UK Independence Party, has given the Establishment a bit of a shock with it's successful showing in local UK elections.

Any comments from our British forum members?

I'd love to hear from more UK residents on this. I've seen some unflattering tweets, basically calling these guys neo-nazis (I thought that's what the BNP was for?) but twitter may skew a little left of center.

Ibrahim wrote:Its an interesting feature of parliamentary systems that you can have extremist parties (left or right wing) with regional appeal entrenched in your legislature. No hope of government or passing legislation, but a disruptive presence.

Endovelico wrote:UKIP could be a British version of Beppe Grillo's 5 star movement in Italy, with fewer intelectuals and more lower middle class supporters. But the anti-establishment factor is very much present. But of course this is an outsider's vision...

Typhoon wrote:

Ibrahim wrote:

Typhoon wrote:Economist | Send in the clowns!

Apparently a small upstart party, the UKIP - the UK Independence Party, has given the Establishment a bit of a shock with it's successful showing in local UK elections.

Any comments from our British forum members?

I'd love to hear from more UK residents on this. I've seen some unflattering tweets, basically calling these guys neo-nazis (I thought that's what the BNP was for?) but twitter may skew a little left of center.

About those tweets . . .

Ibrahim wrote:Its an interesting feature of parliamentary systems that you can have extremist parties (left or right wing) with regional appeal entrenched in your legislature. No hope of government or passing legislation, but a disruptive presence.

Another way of looking at this is that in some parliamentary democracies there is hope for protests to effect real change.