Category Archives: Nationhood

Americans No Longer Have The Money, But Brexiter Brits Still Have The Brains

Britain, English, EU, Europe, Free Markets, Ilana Mercer, Intelligence, Journalism, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Nationhood

The new book, “The Trump Revolution: The Donald’s Creative Destruction Deconstructed,” is available on Amazon. The new column, “Americans No Longer Have ‘the Money,’ But Brexiter Brits Still Have ‘the Brains,’” is excerpted below:

During the Bretton Woods Conference, in 1944, Lord Halifax is said to have “whispered to Lord Keynes: ‘It’s true: they have the money bags but we have all the brains.’” By “they,” Halifax meant the Americans.

His frustration with the American mind—often prosaic and anti-intellectual—during the critical Bretton-Woods negotiations seems as valid today. As odious as Britain’s elites are; boy, are they cleverer than ours. Take the impromptu interview, on June 28, which Richard Quest, CNN’s imported British broadcast journalist, conducted with Nigel Farage, leader of the UK Independence Party.

Farage had emerged exhilarated from the coven that is the European Parliament, where he had shared some home truths with the ponces leeching off Britain.

Other than to mouth formulaically about “small government, big military, balanced budgets and the penny plan”—America’s chattering class and ruling elites seem incapable of expressing the principles undergirding freedom. And members of this political Idiocracy dissolve into a puddle if their cue cards disappear.

Farage, however, spoke to some difficult ideas with ease, and without notes.

The act of secession, the quests for sovereignty, decentralization and regional autonomy from a second tier of tyrants—the first being the national, British government—involve comprehending complicated ideas.

About this, Milton Friedman forewarned in the introduction to F.A. Hayek’s “The Road to Serfdom.” Whereas “the argument for collectivism is simple if false; it is an immediate emotional argument.” “The argument for individualism” and freedom, on the other hand, “is subtle and sophisticated; it is an indirect rational argument.”

Put differently: If you can’t express the principles of liberty, can you properly pursue them? Will you not forgo them?

It’s difficult for dummies to understand liberty, let alone defend it, a problem the scintillating, cerebral Mr. Farage doesn’t have.

“You as a political project are in denial,” he told the grumbling laggards in the EU chamber. The EU had, “by stealth by deception, and without ever telling the truth to the British and European people, imposed political union upon them.”

Not to be trusted, EU advocate Segolene Royal, French environment minister and former socialist candidate for the French presidency, praised this coerced union, calling it a “family.” “The family is supposed to have a say in when a member leaves,” she griped to BBC’s tough talker, Stephen Sackur.

The sort of family Royal describes is known as La Familia, a crime family that knee caps you if you leave.

Heckling Eurocrats were reminded by Farage that when, in 2005, the people of the Netherlands and France said adieu to an enforced political union—the Eurocrats had “ignored them and brought in the Lisbon Treaty through the backdoor.” Indeed, the last refuge of a Brussels scoundrel is the bureaucracy. When voters scuttled the EU Constitution in that referenda; the rogues being upbraided by Farage dissolved one illegitimate political structure and constituted another.

“You’re in denial,” continued Farage, “about Mrs. Merkel’s invitation to any and all to cross the Mediterranean and enter the EU, all of which has led to massive divisions between and within countries.”

What the little people did, what the ordinary people did, what the people who’ve been oppressed have done is to reject the multinationals, reject the merchant banks, reject Big Politics, and demand their country back, their fishing waters back, their borders back. We want to be an independent self-governing nation. [If anything], we offer a beacon of hope. The UK will not be the last member state to leave the EU.

A series of similar watersheds would follow, predicted Farage.

Fleetingly, at least, Farage’s fluency with the ideas of freedom took effect. The blank faces flanking UKIP’s leader looked somewhat animated. Fewer jeered; some even clapped and cheered as Farage went on to submit that no stalling would be tolerated. The will of the British people would be heeded forthwith. Called for was “a grown-up and sensible attitude” toward executing popular—in this case, naturally licit—wishes.

Mr. Farage was not done, …

… Read the complete column, “Americans No Longer Have ‘the Money,’ But Brexiter Brits Still Have ‘the Brains,’” on the Unz Review. The book, “The Trump Revolution: The Donald’s Creative Destruction Deconstructed,” you’ll need to purchase.

How is Shedding One Tier of Tyrants—The EU—Bad For Britons?

Barack Obama, Britain, EU, Europe, libertarianism, Nationhood, The State

Liberty is associated with a dispersion of political power, never its concentration and centralization. Adding an overarching tier of tyrants—the EU—to the British government benefits Britons as a second hangman enhances the health of a condemned man. (From “Adieu to the Evil EU.”)

I fail to understand the convoluted logic of the libertarian article, “Why this anarchist will be voting Remain on Thursday.”

Meanwhile, idiot Hillary Clinton is haranguing Donald Trump because he extolled the virtues of shedding the aforementioned tier of tyrants. That’s dangerous she hollered just today. (These days, Hillary is like a woman possessed.) But not when Barack Obama issued threats to Britain to stay in the EU while visiting with David Cameron—that was fine.

Said Obama (Apr. 22, 2016):

President Obama’s warning to those championing Britain’s exit from the EU was stark: Leave, he said, and the “U.K. is going to be in the back of the queue” on trade deals with the U.S.

The Statist Mindset Of ‘Libertarians’ Garry Johnson & William Weld

Donald Trump, Law, libertarianism, Nationhood, Rights, The State, War

Gary Johnson and his sidekick William Weld, Libertarian Party goofballs, are running for president and VP, respectively. The two fulminated to CNN’s Victor Blackwell against Donald Trump. From the libertarian perspective, though, their mindset was much more statist and deferential to state structures than Trump’s.

Weld, in particular, went over the various policies Trump was proposing, voicing objections to each that were thoroughly statist.

WELD: Some of the stuff that he’s running on I think is absolutely chaotic. I’m going to do this to Mexico. OK, that’s a violation of the North American Free Trade agreement, which is the supreme law of the land. It is a treaty. We signed it. I’ll do this to China. No questions asked. OK, that’s a violation of the World Trade Organization rules [which good libertarians despise], exposing us, the United States, to sanctions. And we would be the rogue nation. I don’t think we want to be the rogue nation. You know? Let’s let North Korea be the rogue nation, not us.

Trump can’t do what he proposes because he’ll be in violation of this or the other agreement between states, national and international, which Weld treats as holy writ.

Not to real libertarians. The idea of radical freedom is to dissolve the chains with which others have bound us. Smashing or refashioning these agreements and reclaiming national, state and individual sovereignty, as Trump proposes, is more libertarian than the queasiness these two evince at such actions.

Johnson and Weld objected to Trump’s proposals on the statist grounds that renegotiating agreements or optimizing them for Americans would violate agreements that by their nature sideline the American people.

You don’t get more un-libertarian than that. Then there’s the viva Hiroshima attitude:

Now That He Won, Loser Neocons Have An Ultimatum For TRUMP

Donald Trump, Foreign Policy, Media, Nationhood, Neoconservatism, Propaganda, Republicans

In Indiana, Donald Trump effectively clinched the Republican nomination based on his America First platform. Naturally, the OUTGOING neoconservative establishmentarians have an ultimatum for him.

Well, of course.

To exulting whoops from Foxette Gretchen Carlson, the foxy war-for-the-world Pete Hegseth said it was time for Trump to stop his nonsense, quit denouncing Bush II and his Good War on Iraq, and start blaming ONLY Barack Obama for its failure.

Have the losers forgotten that “Trump Called Bush A Liar & Won South Carolina (Nevada, too)”?

The rest of the gang, Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, Megyn Kelly, etc., have been fulminating—suggesting Kumbaya moments and VP candidates to Trump; candidates and a unity the base has rejected for a reason.

Apparently, now that Donald Trump has won the nomination, it’s time for him to capitulate to the neoconservatives.

It’s so obvious.

So that’s what the above characters mean when they mumble about bringing the putrefied Republican Party together again.

WARNING: If Trump heeds his hosts at Fox News, he’ll lose The Country, a country he can capture.