Blog powered by Typepad

« Illinois is very, very ill! | Main | 'Let the trumpets sound!' »

Saturday, 07 July 2018


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Why did you bother to hold a vote on leaving the EU?

If the will of the people no longer applies in the UK then several hundred years of struggle have just been flushed down the gurgler.

AussieD, seems the 'will of the people' always runs headlong into the will of the political elite. As a result, the political elite will allow too much immigration as a way of distilling the uppity home folks. Often as a necessity for survival, the people will seize the governing elite and discipline them severely. The mind conjures up the degree.

BTW, what's up with that Aussie lady who quit going to the gym because of Trump's election? Her story showed up in the Guardian and then washed up here in our papers. Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) seems to be global? Those people are so emotional!

The "special relationship" is still intact, but now likely includes dupes of the Russian intelligence services:

"How the ‘Bad Boys of Brexit’ forged ties with Russia and the Trump campaign — and came under investigators’ scrutiny":

Have at it, SoD!

Please, can some extremely wealthy, intelligent, patriotic, person sponsor Nigel Garage, whether in UKIP or another, similarly oriented, party? After this latest farago (no pun intended), It is possible he could upset the Westminster status quo, with quite a few Brexiteers joining him.

"Farage" not "garage". Damn this auto correct, although if he provides us with a safe haven, he could always change his name.

Penseiveat, that was clever though.

G'day Whitewall,

You have me at a disadvantage re the woman not going to the gym because of "The Donald". Hadn't heard about it at all.

TDS is universally spread as far as I can see.

Baiting the precious things by recounting his promises pre-election and fulfillment after election is great fun. "Progressives" [choke] are such precious things.

We have our local "If [here insert name of a conservative] wins this election I shall leave [here insert name of country/State/Territory] immediately". Of course they seldom, if ever, do.

"but if she thinks that the Euro fanatics in Brussels will swallow it she is in for a nasty surprise."

70:30 in favour of that.

Apparently when May ran it past Merkel it was received "coolly", but not rejected out of hand, by the Kaiserin.

The Kaiserin is under pressure from all fronts, including the Jerry economy, to a degree not seen before.

She may want the uncertainty over Brexiteers to end, and seeing that neither hard Brexit, nor soft Brexit, nor remain are possible given UK politics, May's option will need to be considered.

The sticking point is the splitting of the single market so that Blighty's participation therein applies only to goods, not services.

These days goods are largely composed of services, and if Blighty were to be allowed to manufacture goods in the single market whose services component was under Blighty's deregulated regime rather than the EU's more stringent regime it would put the EU's manufacturers at an unfair disadvantage.

Merkel, therefore, might demand a tweak to the agreement: "Services, as they pertain to the manufacture of goods, shall be subject to the single market rules and regs".

For all intents and purposes that is Blighty staying in the single market, because services that don't pertain to the manufacture of goods are still unfinished business for the single market anyway. That's how Blighty has got away with murder in the non-manufacturing services industries, like finance, while in the EU.

But there's the problem for Blighty: non-manufacturing services, like finance, although EU rules and regs are thinner on the ground Blighty would still be outside the tariff wall on these in May's Brexit.

But that's not insurmountable if a 0% tariff FTA is in place on non-manufacturing services, of course.

There's still hope for May, but it's 70:30 against, imho.


OzD and WW,

You honestly have no idea how or why a functioning democracy works.

A functioning democracy has constitutional checks and balances to restrain the "will of the people" (dread words, as the Gaffer regularly appends thereto for just this very good reason).

Functioning democracy is NOT merely a series of five year dictatorships of the "will of the people", a la Putin's Russia.

As I keep pointing out, 52% shouldn't be able to put 48% in a gas chamber. Not even 99% should be able to do that to 1%.

But it is your "will of the people" crap that wishes to sweep away those constitutional checks and balances evolved over centuries.

And that leads you to make the completely twisted, wrong statement:

"If the will of the people no longer applies in the UK then several hundred years of struggle have just been flushed down the gurgler."


Here's the right statement: -

"If the will of the people is limited in the UK then several millenia's of struggle, including, but not limited to: Magna carta, habeus corpus, and the common law, have just been proven to do their job."

Democracy is Liberty's little bitch, not vice versa.


And in the US, one up on the UK: -

"If the will of the people is limited in the US then several millenia of struggle, via Magna carta, habeus corpus, and the common law to the US constitution, have just proven their worth".


It must be the heat but actually I find myself in agreement with 'SoD' - yes, I know, 'the horror, the horror'!

In a proper functioning democracy, this general rule applies: Some you win, some you lose! It may induce vomiting but, as the current popular jargon has it: suck it up!

I'm sure AussieD and I will work on a better understanding of a functioning democracy. The key question for Britain vis-a vis the EU Referendum and the exit vote that resulted, is simply, Who Governs Britain? A foreign capitol or Britain herself. The same question any of us democracies would ask in the same situation.

And now the "Concentration Camp Blighty" commandants start to tighten their grip ...

I told you curtailing freedom of movement was as much to keep Brits in as it was keeping Johnny Foreigner out.

May backed it up with words ...

"If you're a citizen of the world, you're a citizen of nowhere"

... And now actions.

Too awful to behold.


PM May did not create that expression, but it is basically true. There is no such thing as a 'citizen of the world'. It is junk verbiage. Just like the world is a 'family of nations'. Feel good junk verbiage. The kind of tripe that leads to 'all cultures are equal'. There is a goal to all this stuff and it isn't pretty. It just smiles.

I justed started a contract with Reckitt and Benckiser, a great British company (Reckitt and Coleman bought Benckiser, a Dutch company), a month ago.

My team is one Chinese, two Indians, one Dane, one black Brit and one white Brit, plus me. I'm old enough to have fathered them all.

We're kicking arse in every continent in the world precisely because we were selected from every continent in the world.

Without teams of these "citizens of the world" selected from the optimal human resources the world can offer, Blighty won't be able to compete in free trade with other states who operate freedom of movement. Anything and everything your xenophobia does to restrict freedom of movement will hobble the great British businesses you purport to admire and support. And there'll be no-one to wipe your dribbly arse come the time.

YOU are the enemy of great British businesses, the enemy of aspiring young British people and people of all nationalities, and the enemy of yourself.

Your reactionary backlash is time limited of course. All the young have to do is wait for the reaper to do his international job, carrying off conservative terrorists of all continents and stabilizing the various equations that trouble them.

And then tomorrow will belong to them again, as it should be.


And btw, May's exact words ...


SoD, that you put together a first rate team surprises me not! The Dane I'll bet, considers himself Danish, the Indians I'll bet say they are Indian and the lone Chinese will consider himself from China. The two Brits working in their home country might very well call themselves British. Fine. The whole of Great Britain could not produce the other four slots? The rest of the Commonwealth could not be counted on to fill these four slots?

All around me in the furniture, transportation, agriculture and jet aircraft industries there are foreign people from South Africa, Great Britain, Canada, Oz and Sweden that I know of. I meet these people at our sports club (gym). None of them spout that 'citizens of the world' jibberish. Slough, England is probably a fine location to work as is right here.

One of my best pals in college was a Libertarian activist. This guy would go to local union meetings and stand up to explain to the unenlightened workers how a union was not to their advantage. He would stoically bear their laughter and snide remarks, for he was pure of heart. The same good heart took him far out of his way to educate the steel and auto workers, for he was not naturally of their social circle. He grew up in a mansion on the Lake Michigan shore with an indoor pool. His father was an investment banker and his mother a doctor. There was born his expertise in the plight of the working man.

I saw his version of the silly, 2-dimensional Nolan chart. The version that gets linked here from Wikipedia lacks the hammer-and-sickle, swastika, and other assorted symbols that American Libertarians conveniently place near the bottom point of the chart to indicate they are the exact opposite of every nasty "ism" that ever existed. After many interesting discussions and debates with my friend I heard an American comedian aptly summarize his politics:

"One of the more pretentious political self-descriptions is “Libertarian.” People think it puts them above the fray. It sounds fashionable, and to the uninitiated, faintly dangerous. Actually, it’s just one more bullshit political philosophy." - George Carlin

Now I must admit I'm not as familiar with Brit Libertarians, and there seem to be some important differences. But, all that aside, I am in 100% agreement with SoD's comment above.

The worst snowflakes in every western nation are the ethno-nationalists. They are terrified that, no matter how mediocre they are, they will no longer be on the top of the social heap because they're the right color, gender, religion, ethnicity, or what have you. They clench their tiny fists and stamp their little feet and collude with enemies and break whatever laws and customs they think expedient to return to the 20th century - in America the days before voting rights and many other civil rights. SoD's solution is the one that will prevail.

"SoD, that you put together a first rate team surprises me not!"

I inadvertently misled you there - I'm bottom of the pile, btw! But I am rather chuffed they picked me. Or maybe I'm the modern equivalent of that old phrase: "The token Brit"?

What self-respecting Libertarian would take a leadership role? I couldn't bring myself to give someone a bollocking for being late in the morning with a hangover if you, err, forced me.


Just as a general question for me to ponder, there may be some differences in the definition of 'Libertarian' over there vs over here? You strike me as a natural leader though maybe unwilling. I am conservative but have no problem with leading when needed. For most of my adult life I have told people what to do. I learned a ton about human nature and management.

The comments to this entry are closed.