Do Conservatives Go Too Far In Demonizing Communism

As the UK General Election campaign starts to turn nasty, more and more people are trying to excuse the anti – Semitism and the authoritarianism of the Jew – hating communists who have hijacked the Labour Party. They play down the fact that party leader Jeremy Corbyn is a Trotskyite who in true Bolshevik tradition has abandoned his principles for the sake of power, (he has been a lifelong opponent of British membership of the European Union and was at least a supporter of a kind of democracy.) When it came to a choice between honouring the result of a democratic referendum or aligning himself with the advocates of global government, high taxation and uncontrolled immigration however, he chose to cling to power.

Corbyn’s de fact number 2, the Stalinist thug John McDonnell has never made any secret of the fact that he favours turning the EU into a kind of EUSSR, with Britain reduced to the status of a province.

In spite of this young (and some not so young but certifably insane,) lefties cling to the belief that life in the old Soviet Union, its satellite states in Europe and Asia, in Communist China, Viet Nam and North Korea, and in the outlying farmstead of communism, Cuba, was all beer and skittles.

In my almost 20 years as a blogger and web content creator I have corresponded with many people from Russia, the former Yugoslavian states, Romania, Poland and Hungary who experienced life under communism (or socialism as communist tyrants like to call it. And none have had a good word to say about it.

In fact most have been so vitriolic about communism / socialism that I believe conservatives and nationalists in Britain, the USA, the European Union, Canada and Australia are actually too moderate when talking about Communism. I don’t know if this is because they have not read enough about the history of Soviet Russia, Red China, Eastern Europe, Viet Nam, North Korea and the other nations that became slave states under socialist dictatorships or just trying to avoid hate attacks from the left-leaning university brainwashed millennials who fall for the ols “ah but none of those were proper socialism,” excuse but what they usually say is not even close to the whole truth.

Also, please don’t make the mistake of confusing communism with a welfare state: while there are states with a strong welfare component, high taxes, and more government control, most of these are social democracies, capitalistic economies ruled by democratic principles.

Communism was never about welfare: yes, people were getting food (though nowhere near enough as is abvious from the numbers who died of starvation or malnutrition related diseases,) and shelter, but they were forced to work until the state decreed age of retirement — which was constantly raised according to that good old National Socialist concept of “useless eaters.” If somebody refused to work on the job that the Party assigned to them, they would go to prison — where they would be put to hard labor, or if the prisons were full or the local kommisar did not like their face they would simply be shot.

Also, the free food and shelter were not subject to personal preferences: every person was given food stamps, stating what they were allowed to buy for the month — and it wasn’t a lot. “Hoarding” food was a major offense, punishable by prison time or death — and “hoarding” meant that you had a food closet at home, not freight containers. China’s communist government passed a law against hoarding food and enforced it so brutally that peasant farmers who laid aside a portion of their grain harvest for next years seed were deemed guilty of hoarding and summarily executed. But those farmers who obeyed the law and handed over all their crop faced long prison sentences in forced labour camps when they had no crop to hand over the following year.

Add to this the lack of any human or civil rights that we consider today a given: you could be arrested anytime, with or without reason, if somebody in the police felt like it. People would disappear without warning — sometimes on the way back from work, sometimes when taking the trash out. No due process was required for “enemies of the people,” there was no presumption of innocence or right to trial by jury of one’s peers; even when a trial was conducted, it was just the judge (always a ‘party’ member,) that hear the case, examine the evidence, question witnesses and pass sentence — no jury, no defense, no witnesses required because there was no “not guilty” verdict, to be accused by a party member was proof of guilt.

No significant private property was allowed: you could own your clothes, and possibly a car of you were a party member or in a protected profession such as a doctor, engineer or  senior police officer but even for those privileged people which there was a waiting list years long, but that was pretty much it. Owning a house was out of question, with minor exceptions; most people would live in government-owned apartments, which were subject to reassignment if considered necessary by the Party.

Apologists for socialist authoritarianism claim it worked for mant decades and still does in China, Cuba, North Korea and a few other outposts. After the Russian Revolution it did work for a while, because nobody dared oppose the state. Anyone who even complained about the chronic shortages or lack of freedom would go to prison or worse. There were people who tried to fight against it in the beginning — they were caught and shot without wasting time on trials or debate.

The system “worked” so well that, in about 50 years of communism, Eastern Europe became a poverty zone that everybody was desperate to get out of. The power outages were so common that everybody were lighting their homes with candles; hot water was only provided a few times a week, by a strict schedule; during winter, it was not uncommon to hear about a family found dead because they tried to use the cooking stove to heat themselves.

So it seems people in the liberal democracies who have taken the trouble to discover the truth about socialism and communism (Karl Marx used the terms interchangably,) do not go too far in demonizing a system that killed millions of people directly, enslaved hundreds of millions, and caused poverty that indirectly killed so many more than we can even estimate.

I like to remind people that in 1870 the Russian anarchist Mikhail Bakunin warned Karl Marx, after reading “The Communist Manifesto,” that a communist government would quickly become more authoritarian and oppressive than Russia’s Czarist regime which was notorious for its brutality. Events have proved hundreds of times, that Bakunin was right.

RELATED POSTS:
Authoritarian tide of the left
The left and anti – Semitism
Left;s culture wars
Left wing hate and hypocrisy
Labour party go Stalinist
Turn Left for Wigan Pier
Liberal bigots
Question: Why Can’t Conservatives Accept Socialism Is The Way Forward
(National?) Socialists Call For Legal Limit On Fat And Sugar
It’s a triumph of the radical Left that only the Dalai Lama is now allowed to speak “the truth”

Obama and The End Of Utopia

 

Chloinated Corbyn & Co Are Shafting The Electorate

Boris Johnson and Jeremy corbyn

Boris Johnson calls Jeremy Corbyn a chlorinated chicken after the Labour leader ducks an election. (Picture: Metro )

Let’s face facts; Corbyn and the rest of the Remain crew in Parliament, Labour, SNP and Lib Dem MPs, are trying to shaft the electorate by overturning the result of a democratic vote and preventing us leaving the European Union as it careers towards the long term goal of the bureaucratic dictatorship that runs the organisation, by turning itself into a pan – European empire, effectively a Fourth Reich.

What triggered Johnson’s insult was Corbyn and his party of cowards after voting down the government’s  propsals to prepare for leaving the EU “without a deal,” the Labour leaders then instructed his party to abstain on a vote to dissolve parliament and hold a General Election. Thus Corbyn became the first opposition leader in the history of British politics to refuse the chance to beat the government in an election. Labour also chickened out of calling for a vote of no confidence to force the government to resign.  The far left party’s positions on Brexit and immigration and their decades long flirtation with anti – Semitism and support for Islamic extremist groups has made the party highly unpopular with working class voters in the core constituencies of the industrial areas. While ducking an election which Labour would almost certainly lose is understandable, Boris has actually painted Corbyn into a corner.

Ducking a fight will almost certainly backfire on Labour when the inevitable election is held.

The people of the UK voted in a democratic process to leave the EU (what is known now as No Deal). We have been told ad nauseum by politicians who wanted to keep us in the corrupt, failing organisation known as the European Union, that we did not know what we were voting for. That is blatantly untrue, nobody I have ever heard or seen speaking or writing in support of the EU referred to “only leaving with a deal,” staying in a customs union (and thus continuing to accept EU law as superior to UK law,) or delaying our leaving indefinitely until a solution to the (entirely imaginary,) Irish border question is resolved. Neither did any of those Leave supporters claim leaving would not cause significant economic and social upheaval. But faced with the prospect of leaving or seeing our nation surrender more and more sovereignty to an authoritarian committee of unelected bureaucrats, we felt the possible difficulties were worth enduring.

The only possible area of dispute here is whether or not the people knew that they were voting for no-deal. And they did. Of course they did. We had a leaflet campaign. This adressed what “leave” meant. The leaflet even took the liberty of advising us how to vote. Vote “remain” is what it advised.

On top of that we had the political campaigns. We had the USA’s cocksucker president Barack Obama lecture us on our duty to advance the causees of globalism and neoliberalism. The BBC ensured that we knew what a Leave vote meant: disaster, catastrophe, death , destruction, economic collapse, mass unemployment, a apate of biblical placgues and more television shows fronted by Prof. Brian Cox. And even the prospective horror of the latter did not put us off voting Leave.

Some time ago last year, I predicted that Parliament would attempt to outlaw a no-deal Brexit (known as Hard Brexit at that stage). I predicted that they would hold try to force another referendum offering the choices Remain, leave with a deal or leave with a customs union. and hope voters were too stupid to notice the absence of their original choice of simply voting to leave, from the first referendum. And as has happened so many times when I have forecast a course of events or an outcome only to be called a conspiracy theorist or a crazy right wing extremist I have been proved broadly correct again.

The result of the 2016 referendum was to Leave The European Union This was rebranded as Brexit which was then split into hard and soft. Hard Brexit was rebranded as No Deal. And now an unholy alliance of Socialist, Liberals, Nationalists and Save-the-two-toed-toad cranks have conspired to ensure that what we voted for, simply to LEAVE, no strings attached, is off the menu.

Well the political, academic and media classes couldn’t let that stand could they, after all, as they have never tired of pointing out, the Leave campaign lied to us (they did, so did the Remain campaign, that is the nature of political campaigns. But while the main lie Remainers have fussed about has now been shown in a court of law to have been not a lie but merely a statement that while true lacked clarity, there also seems some confusion on the facts among Remainers. Nobody ever said that all the £350 million (approx) the UK sends to Brussels would go to the National Health Service, merely that some of it would be available to fund the NHS.

In fact the £350 million is a gross amount, so while Remain supporters tried to claim citing that amount was a lie, it was technically true. A significant amounto of that money comes back to us to pay for EU funded projects, but it has more strings attached than a puppet show. Most people who voted Leave were aware of that, most Remain supporters apparently were not.

As evidence that “the people don’t know what they voted for” media commentators like to cite alleged assurances made by the leave campaign that a deal would be easy. I’d like to remind those people that a Withdrawal Agreement and any future “deal” are two separate things. The Withdrawal Agreement should have been easy and would have been had the EU not insisted on imposing many unacceptable conditions on UK negotiators before they would allow negotiations to begin

EU policy is that on a nation triggering Article 50, negotiations would begin. But it also defied its policy in a very subtle but effective manner by demanding first a “divorce” settlement before negotiations could begin.

But again, the withdrawal agreement is not a trade deal. The trade deal cannot be negotiated whilst the UK is an EU member.

Another point which a surprising number of Remainers do not seem aware of: We cannot negotiate a trade deal with the EU until we have left. That’s the policy of the EU. The UK cannot negotiate a trade deal whilst a member of the EU. Seperate thing. The links you’ve sent are about trade deals.

The withdrawal agreement is a whole other topic. The default is No Deal. Very simple. Those who voted, voted for No Deal. This is the default. We cannot negotiate a deal until we’ve left.

The withdrawal agreement is an attempt to smooth over the No Deal process. It’s a bonus. Something the soft – handed pen pushers and back room deal makers have had three years to sort out. In the withdrawal terms and conditions forced on the negotiating team of Theresa May’s government, and which that government did little to resist, the EU inserted a non – negotiable clause that would tie the UK to the Customs Union. unless te UK was prepared to cede Northern Ireland to The Republic. In doing that, the EU would tie the UK to the law that states that it can’t negotiate trade deals whilst a member of the EU.”

So the so – called Withdrawal Agreement is not a Withdrawal Agreement, it is a surrender document and the traitors who signed it were prepared to turn the UK from an equal member of the EU, along with 27 other participating nations, into a vassal state, subject to EU law and political policies but with not input into shaping those laws or policies.

And Remain supporters think that is an acceptable state of affairs, the snivelling little shit – eaters.

MORE ON BREXIT:
Index of Brexit Posts

Macron nightmare as production plummets in France in threat to euro
British MEP Reveals Undemocratic EU Stitch Up Of Top Jobs

The Tory Collaborators Working With EU To Stop Brexit Exposed

Boris Johnson was ridiculed by the predominantly leftist mainstream media when he talked of collaborators in the Conservative Party working with the EU to prevent the UK leaving the bloc on October 31. People who though he was right and were brave enough to say so were predictably called conspiracy theorists.

While Remain supporters in the UK still scream that a ‘tiny’ country like Britain (tiny in the sens of having the fifth largest economy and being in the top twenty five out of 200 by population,) cannot survive outside the smothering embrace of the European Union bureaucracy.

The case is that the EU is failing economically. Around half the remaining twenty seven member states after Brexit will be economic basket cases, and even the mighty German economy is struggling. The EU cannot afford to lose Britain’s economic contribution. But self interested British politicians and bureaucrats, with their eyes on a lucrative EU job, (former Labour leader Neil Kinnock was modestly well off before he and his wife landed sinecures in the European Commission, now they are multi millionaires,) have now been exposed as having worked with top EU officials to block both a no deal brexit and the negotiation of an acceptable deal.

READ MORE about this betrayal by blogger Raedwald

MORE ON BREXIT

Just When you Thought Brexit Could Not Possibly Be A Bigger Cock Up

And They Call Brexit A Farce? EU Chaos As Leaders Fail To Agree Choices For Top Jobs …

 


The Council of Europe – posing for pictures was about the only thing they could agree to do yesterday. (Picture via Politicalite)

The Council Of Europe, which consists of the political leaders of all EU member states (including the UK as Britain is still a member,) gathered for a summit meeting on Thursday to decide which candidates should be appointed to fill several top jobs when European Commission president Jean – Claude Juncker and several other senior figures step down at the end of their terms of office.  They were locked in debate for the whole day and late into the night but were unable to reach agreement on who will fill even one of the positions within the EU.

The current President of the EU Council and one of the people who will retire later this year, Donald Tusk, a former Prime Minister of Poland, said he will organise another summit on the 30th of June to readdress the matter. Tusk, who has been touted as a possible presidential candidate in Poland for the centre-right and pro-EU Civic Platform, is one of the politicians still pushing for political integration of member states, a position which has been shown by the rise of nationalism both in his own country and throughout the EU to be as popular as a plague of boils with EU citizens .

Choosing a replacement for Commission President Juncker was always going to be difficult as the position has previously gone to the candidate favoured by the German government but growing resentment among other member states of the way Germany has manipulated EU policy to its own benefit, added to the huge influx of Eurosceptic European Parliament members following the success of both left and right leaning nationalist movements in the EU election last month. All previous elections have led to the centre – right Christian Democrats of the European People’s Party (EPP) and the centre – left Socialists and Democrats (S&D) groups dominating the assembly. This grand coalition of establishment parties previously divided the leadership positions based on how the two groups performed in the EU elections.

In this year’s elections voters were more polarised in their voting intentions, with a big surge in support for the Greens, the far left, and for nationalist parties.  For many reasons, including the immigration crisis, economic stagnation, an EU expansionist agenda and the increasing awareness that the EU elite is completely out of touch with the problems that beset ordinary people in EU member states, the mood has swung against the consensus politics of the traditional parties. And then there are the minor local difficulties of Brexit and Italy’s launch of a parallel currency which must lead to it leaving the Eurozone. All of this severely weakens the long standing hegemony of the leading German and French parties, all of which have adhered to the neo – liberal consensus.

The failure of the EPP and the S&D to win enough seats for a combined majority in the European Parliament has forced them to look for deals with other groups, most of which seek to overturn the status quo. President Emmanuel Macron, and the new Renew Europe group of centre to centre-right liberal parties that he leads are determined to alter the balance of power in their favour.

Manfred Weber, Chancellor Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU) nominee is the EPP group choice to be the Commission President. Macron and his allies have refused to support Weber, and have called on Merkel to anoint another figure. Macron has suggested Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier or Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager as alternative option, but reports suggest neither name figured in the actual discussions yesterday.

The inability to agree on who will assume the presidency of the Commission will in turn, result in delays to the appointment of the new head of the European Central Bank (ECB). The first act of the European Parliament on returning from its summer recess  will be to elect its president from candidates suggested by the European Council, but as the current council, which has not progressed as far as considering that question yet, is unlikely to be able to agree on the candidates that position too is in limbo. Furthermore new European Commission President must be chosen prior to the first sitting of the ninth European Parliament, which takes place on the 1st of July.

Taking all of this into account puts into perspective the words spoken by Jean – Claude Juncker a few weeks ago: “Democracy is a fundamental problem.” For a group of elitists trying to merge 500 million people spread across twenty – seven different nations with widely differing cultural and economic needs into a single political entity, one can see that it is.

It was an understanding of the problems inherent in that which prompted many of us in Britain  to vote to leave the EU.

RELATED POSTS:
Dark origins of The European Project<br
Europe: the democray deficit
Europe Unglues
France: Macron leads nation into chaos
Brexit: Deal or No Deal
The Daily Stirrer – June 2019

 

Belgian Yellow Vests Clash With Riot Police On EU Parliament Election Day

Belgian Yellow Vest protesters and other groups protesting EU mass immigration and Federalisation policies clashed with police and left wing activists protesting against the protestors in Brussels on Sunday, the final day of voting in the Europe wide elections to the EU Parliament.

Videos taken by protestors and onlookers show multiple fights between protesters and riot police, prompting the deployment of riot squads aremed with tear gas and batons. Protesters at Brussels Nord Station chanted “everyone hates the police,” as a helicopter hovered overhead. The protestors also clashed with police outside the headquarters of the European Union in the heart of the city.

The rioters then moved on to the headquarters of Belgium’s domestic Socialist Party (PS), where they were reported to have attacked the building with paint bombs.

Police continued to hit back at rioters with tear gas and water cannons as they struggled to keep up with them.” –Express

Though results for the election cannot be released until after voting is completein all member states, and at the time of writing it is still going on in some EU nations, a leak from the Netherlands, which like the UK and Ireland voted on Thursday, suggests that the party of Prime Minister and leading Europhile Mark Rutte, the People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD) have been beaten into second place by the right-wing Forum for Democracy alliance (FvD).

Forum for Democracy – a relatively new conservative party, which is known for its Euroscepticism and sympathy for a grass roots Nexit (Netherlands exit) movement built around the idea of Holland leaving the EU, was formed in 2016 and has become a big winner in the Netherlands during the provincial elections two months ago, securing 86 seats spread across the country’s 12 provinces. In three provinces, including the capital region of South Holland it became the largest party.

Matteo Salvini, the deputy prime minister of Italy and leader of the nationalist League Movement, which is expected to strengthen its position as largest party in Italy called for a “Trump-style” revolution in his cash-strapped country and across Europe to halt the growth of the EU’s bureaucratic empire.

Salvini has clashed many times with Brussels over Italy’s budget proposals and has also enraged European Union bosses with his hardline stance on immigration. He has even talked of Italy leaving the EU (Quitaly,) and has stood up to EU bullying since the unelected bureaucrats in brussels tried to overturn the result of the democratic election that voted his party into power by refusing to accept a Eurosceptic leader of an EU member state. And his proposals for tax reforms inspired by those passed introduced in the US by Mr Trump’s White House administration are sure to ruffle more feathers in Europe.

“I want a Trump-style revolution for Italy. The only way to reduce public debt is by growing and cutting taxes. That’s why a Trump-like revolution is dear to my heart.I won’t compromise on taxes. The whole government team must believe in this, he is reported to have said.”

Salvini while officially the internal affairs minister in the Italian government is the de facto leader and is set on a course of confrontation with the Brussels bureaucracy, which he feels serves German interests to the dfetriment of other EU members.

The deputy Italian PM increased his popularity at home and infuriated globalist leaders like France’s boy presodent Emmanuel Macron and Germany’s Hausfrau – Volksfuhrer Angela Merkel by implementing a clampdown on migrants trying to enter Italy illegally via the Mediterranean.

“I reduced the landings by 90 percent. There were 11,000 last year, today they are 1,100. I don’t need to do anything else, the landings have been reduced and the expulsions are twice the amount of arrivals. I don’t need new ideas and what I’m doing I’m doing it without Europe, alone and with this government.”

Salvini’s move to close Italian ports to ships operated by ‘refugee’ support charities which cruise the Mediterranean picking up undocumented migrants abandoned at sea by African human trafficking gangs.

Italy goes to the polls on Sunday in the European elections with League expected to win easily, but Mr Salvini would not be drawn on predictions.

Other EU member states which are likely to provide interesting results are Germany where the Eurosceptic opponents of mass migration the AfD are expected to make significant gains at the expense of ruling coalition partners the Social Democrats and Christian Democrats whose leader, Chancellor Angela Merkel kicked off the immigration crisis by declaring Germany’s doors open to all comers and then tried to force other EU members to take the flood of uneducated, unskilled, illiterate, unemployable third world religious fanatics who flooded Germany’s cities.

RELATED POSTS:


Little Donny Tusk The Polish Has-Been Tells Britain How To Vote.

Donald Tusk, who is the President of the European Council and was the centre-right Europhile Prime Minister of Poland from 2007 to 2014 made the remarks in support of his former Deputy Prime Minister, Anglo-Pole Jan-Vincent Rostowski who is standing as a Change UK candidate in London for Thursday’s election.

EU Dictatorship: German MEP says process of choosing Juncker successor a hoax as European elections near
The process of selecting the person who will succeed Jean-Cluade Juncker as European Commission President is a deeply flawed “hoax” dreamed up by “Eurofanatics” who want to create a United States of Europe, a German MEP said today. Hans-Olaf Henkel made his remarks as the prospective candidates – known as Spitzenkandidaten, in Germany, jockeyed for position.

Europe’s Nationalists Unite Behind Salvini Ahead Of EU Elections

With the EU elections due in May this year expected to deliver another body blow to the dream of a Federal European superstate, Europe’s more conservative nationalist parties have today announced an alliance that is aiming to become the strongest group in the European Parliament, with a view to forcing to radical reform on the EU bureaucracy in Brussels, which dictates policy on security, migration, family and the environment, according to Euro News.

Harold MacMillan’s EU warning revealed
Harold MacMillan, British Prime Minister from 1957 to 1963 gave us a chilling warning about the EEC – (European Economic Community) – before Britain joined the bloc, claiming that Germany had planned on using the trading bloc, as an instrument to assert its supremacy across the continent once more. On Wednesday, 3 April, 2019 The House of Commons voted in favour of legislation which forces the Government to request another extension for ‘Brexit’, giving our current Prime Minister Theresa May more time to show us the comtempt the ruling elite have for the principles of democracy.

Leaked Document Reveals Unacceptable Demands Made By EU Ahead Of Final Talks Before Brexit Deadline
A Secret document has revealed concession the EU is demanding before beginning fresh talks on Brexit ahead of the 12 april dealine. According to a memo seen by the Sunday Times, Brussels is demanding the UK must continue to pay its share of the EU budget, must implement new measures on citizens’ rights, and sign a legally binding agreement to arrangements to avoid a hard border between Northern Ireland and The Republic.


Merkel: EU Members Must Cede control Of Their Border To Brussels

German Chanellor Angela Merkel sparked outrage today and pushed the EU cloers to its final disintegration when she stated that EU Member states would be forced to surrender on of their most important sovereign powers, control of their borders, to Brussels in order that the unelected bureaucrats of the European commission could ‘manage’ immigration (i.e. open the border crossings and let any criminally inclined bunch of fanatics enter Europe.

Spanish Socialist Budget Fails As Budget Rejected; New Elections Expected


We predicted last year when the socialist leader Pedto Sancjez usurped the Spanish government after the collapse of the minority government led by Mariano Rajoy collapsed, could not last. In a widely expected but destabilizing development, Spanish conservatives and pro-independence Catalonians voted to back a slate of amendments to a government budget on Wednesday by a wide margin of 191 votes out of 350,


EU Stitch Up To Promote Euronazi Selmayr’s Is Typical Of The EU’s Contempt For Democracy

#
The former Prime Minister of little Luxembourg Jean-Claude Juncker to ensure his chief of staff was installed as the new Secretary-General of the European Commission, in what one senior Eurocrat has called “an impeccably prepared and audacious power-grab” at the top of the European Union.

EU “Sounds Alarm” Over New US Sanctions On Russia; Germany Threatens Retaliation
Late on Friday (21/07/17), Congressional negotiators agreed to advance a cross – party bill that would punish Russia for its (alleged) interference in the 2016 election according to the Wall Street Journal. And while it seems improbable that President Trump would sign the bill if it reaches his desk, the loudest complaint about the bill to date has emerged not from the Oval Office, but from US allies in NATO and the European Union …

Fears Over Threat To Sovereignty Could Wreck EU European Army Plan
No they’re not Star Wars Imperial Stormtroopers, they are German soldiers assigned to an international peacekeeping force, showing how like Imperial Stormtroopers a pan European army might look (Image source)

Germany Threatens Sanctions Against Poland Over ‘Lack of Western Values’ (for Western read German)
Last year, Poland’s conservative nationalist Law and Justice party (PiS), led by former Prime Minister Jaroslaw Kaczynski, captured both the presidency and parliament at elections in May and November. Since taking office, the party’s lawmakers have used their parliamentary majority to initiate a series of controversial legal reforms, causing concerns both at home and abroad, specifically in Brussels and in Berlin.

Some Questions And Answers On Brexit From Quora

David Reardon
David Reardon, Political Activst
Edward Browning
Edward Browning, former Retired Local Government Manager

 

 

London’s Future?

This article, by Theodore Dalrymple, first published in Law and Liberty is reproduced by this Not For Profit site under fair use terms in the public interest, as the chaotic failure of our government to deliver the democratic decision to leave the European Union (Brexit) has revealed the chasm that has opened between the ruling elite and the nation they govern is now insurmountable.

I Have Seen London’s Future and It Is Caracas

 

Important (for good or evil) as Brexit may be to the future of Britain, it is not without its importance for the European Union. Indeed, it was always essential for the Union that Britain’s departure should be an economic disaster for Britain: for if it were not, why have a union at all?

It was therefore entirely predictable that the Union should drive a hard bargain with Britain, even a bargain economically harmful to itself, provided only that it was worse for Britain: for the self-preservation of the European political class is at stake. In the European Union politics always trumps economics.

In Britain too, political considerations were uppermost in the minds of those who voted for Brexit. They saw in the European Union a Yugoslavia in the making, led by a megalomaniac class without effective checks or balances. But now they are increasingly apprehensive of the economic costs of Brexit.

And the economic auguries for Britain are indeed poor, though not only, or even principally, because of the European Union’s hostility. The fact is that Britain is unlikely to be able to take any advantage of life outside the European straitjacket because its own political class is itself in favour of straitjackets that are no better, and quite possibly worse than, the European ones. The present Prime Minister, Theresa May, is very much a statist, indistinguishable from European social democrats, and the leader of the opposition, Mr Corbyn, who might well be the next Prime Minister, is an unapologetic admirer of Hugo Chavez. It is hardly to be expected that foreign investors will place much trust or confidence in an isolated country whose next government might very well weaken property rights, impose capital controls and increase corporate taxation in favour of supposed social justice. It would not take very long to turn Britain into a northern Venezuela: a Venezuela without the oil or the tropical climate.

Moreover, Britain already has many weaknesses and few strengths. It has a huge and persistent trade imbalance, because it does not produce enough of what the world wants and cannot easily be made to do so; it has a large national debt, about the same size as that of France, but without a highly functioning infrastructure such as France’s to show for it; its household debt is among the highest in the world. For many years, its economic policy might as well have been presided over by Mr Madoff; its social policy has been to smash up all forms of social solidarity or support for the vulnerable that do not pass through the state. The destruction of the little platoons has been very thorough: most large ‘charities’ in Britain are now dependent on government rather than on private funding, and hence are in effect departments of state.

As if this were not enough, Britain has enormous cultural problems, perhaps only to be expected in a country in which more than fifty per cent of children are born out of wedlock and twenty per cent do not eat a meal with another member of their household more than once every two weeks. A dangerously high and perhaps unsustainable proportion of the population is unfitted for productive life in a modern economy, having attained an abysmally low educational level despite (or because of?) considerable state expenditure. This section of the population is not merely indifferent to refinement of any kind – intellectual, aesthetic or of manners – but actively hostile to it. Similarly, it is not merely not anxious to learn, it is anxious not to learn.

This explains why Britain has persistently imported labour from Eastern Europe to perform tasks in its service industries that ordinarily one might have expected its large fund of indigenous non-employed people to perform. The fact is, however, that though these tasks require no special skills, they did require certain personal qualities such as reliability, politeness, and willingness to adapt: and these the eligible local population lack entirely. No hotel-keeper, for example, would consider using British labour if he could get foreign.

Perhaps nothing captures the levels of personal incompetence and lack of self-respect in Britain than the fact that young men of the lowest social class are about half as likely to die in prison as they are if left at liberty. In prison, though adult, they are looked after, at least in a basic way, and told what to do. They are no longer free to pursue their dangerous and crudely self-indulgent lifestyle, in which distraction is the main occupation. In prison they receive the health care that, though it is free to them under the National Health Service, they are not responsible enough to seek when at liberty. In short, they do not know, because they have never been taught, how to live in a minimally constructive fashion, though they were certainly not born ineducable.

No doubt other comparable countries have similar problems, but none (at least, none known to me) has them to anything like the same extent. These problems do not originate from Britain’s membership of the European Union, nor will they be solved by exit from the Union. They can be solved only by something more resembling a religious revival than by any likely government action. But expecting a population to bethink itself while simultaneously being offered political solutions that require no effortful cultural change is unreasonably optimistic. And politicians are unlikely to be frank about the problem for two reasons: first because alluding to the deficiencies of their electorate is probably not the best way to get elected, and second because it downgrades the providential role of politics, which politicians are understandable reluctant to do.

As if this were not quite enough, the hold on the country’s intelligentsia of statist solutions to practically all problems is still immensely strong. Nowhere is this more evident than in its attitude to the National Health Service, the establishment of which it almost universally regards as having been a great achievement, perhaps Britain’s only great achievement of the twentieth century. This is despite all the evidence that it has not been egalitarian in its effect, as it was originally supposed to be, or that almost all Western European health systems are superior to it. The fact that all Western Europeans regard it with at least disdain, and more usually with absolute horror, does nothing to shake the British intelligentsia’s faith in the essential goodness of the National Health Service. The only perceived problem with it is that it underfunded: the same problem as with all other government services. In the struggle between rhetoric and reality, rhetoric always wins.

The population by and large follows the intelligentsia, and the politicians follow the population; but the only economic advantages to Brexit would be the possibility of a nimbler, less regulated and bureaucratic economy. There is now no prospect of this. Therefore, I have seen the future of London, and it is Caracas – or very might be.