A Turning Point

From The Spectator.

On Tuesday, MPs will face something rare: a Commons motion which really does deserve to be described as momentous. It will set Britain’s place in Europe and in the world for years to come. The vote will place an especially heavy burden on Conservative MPs, for they have the power to inflict a hefty defeat on their own government, an administration which has no majority and which governs thanks only to a confidence and supply agreement with the DUP. It is all too easy to see where defeat on Tuesday could lead: to the collapse of the government, a general election and the arrival of Jeremy Corbyn in Downing Street.

Theresa May’s deal has been rejected by MPs on the left and the right, by radicals and moderates. It promises to leave us in a Brexit purgatory, neither in nor out, obliged to accept EU regulations and rules on trade without having any say in the making of those rules. MPs might accept a temporary transition if a free-trade deal was guaranteed to follow. But the reason that her government was the first ever to be found in contempt of Parliament was its refusal to release legal advice that shows there are no guarantees, and no guaranteed exit from a backstop that is described as temporary.

So far, more than a hundred Conservative MPs have said they will vote against the deal. This number will almost certainly shrink by the time of the vote, but all opposition parties say they will oppose the deal — bookmakers are offering odds of four-to-one on the bill passing. Afterwards there will be huge pressure on her to resign, possibly as a price for the DUP agreeing not to bring down the government.

How the rebels behave following the expected defeat will be crucial to the future of the country. It is quite possible that her signature Brexit plan, into which she has vested what remains of her authority, suffers the largest defeat in parliamentary history. If so, she might resign. If a new leader is needed, the process will have to be very rapid — something which is hard, but not impossible, to achieve under the current rules covering Tory leadership elections. It would not be acceptable for the party to indulge in a two-month leadership election campaign while the clock ticks down to a no-deal Brexit on 29 March. The process would have to be condensed into a matter of days.

Mrs. May has got her country into one hell of a mess. There are at least two existential crises involved in the vote on Tuesday. One of them is whether the United Kingdom is an independent country or a colony of the EU. Because as the ratchet tightens, and it will, Britain will become Brittania to the new Rome in Brussels. There is a horrible bit of irony here. I know many Brexiteers, and uniformly their vote in the referendum was cast to regain British sovereignty, not primarily for economic reasons.

Still they, and I, recognize that Britain is by any measure the most dynamic, innovative force in Europe. It always has been. Britain is where the modern world was born, and dragged the rest of Europe out of medievalism. From where I sit, they are the prototype Americans. And do you know what cry echoes around England these days? “No taxation without representation!” Part of the reason we get along so well, they really are our cousins.

The other thing that is connected in here is this. When the Conservative Party (which is far more leftist than the GOPe) stabbed Margaret Thatcher in the back, causing her to resign, they were out of power for close to a quarter century. There are a lot of conservatives in Britain, and essentially they have no party. While we’ve been more or less able to stage a coup in the Republican party, the Tories are much more centrally controlled than any US party. But here is a prediction for you. If May’s plan passes, and it may well, the very fact of it will destroy the Tories. Which may actually be a good thing.

The other thing being voted on Tuesday is nothing less than the legitimacy of Parliament, itself. Like us, the British know that the people are sovereign, delegating the power to rule, in their case, to the executive in parliament. But in the case of Brexit, the people themselves told Parliament what they wanted, and Parliament and the executive are in the process of ignoring those instructions. The majority that voted to leave is not in a very forgiving mood.

In fact, I have heard something I never have before. Englishmen quoting an Englishman, who wrote a document that was adopted in 1776, especially this part:

 We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security

Those are radical words. When Jefferson wrote them they created America, essentially ended the First British Empire, and caused a world war. They are just as dangerous today. And now, like then, they are essential to freedom.

The best or maybe least worst outcome? Defeat the bill, fire May, and come out on WTO terms. If the EU doesn’t like it (and they won’t) they can come and negotiate in Westminster. After all, we are talking about the fifth largest economy in the world here – it’s not prudent to treat them like a naughty child, especially when your house is falling apart, and the only people who might help are Britain’s friends.

Our friends in Britain are doing something unusual this weekend, they are protesting publically. Good on them. Something else I noticed in the video yesterday, a symbol that the Canadians have borrowed, and are using correctly, that the British might consider, as well. Even amongst American symbols, it is one that symbolizes the fight against tyranny well.

 

Advertisements

Video Thursday, Anglosphere Edition

Apropos of nothing much else I will say today, this is former Senator Bob Dole of Kansas, holder of the Bronze Star and the Purple Heart from his time as a Second Lieutenant in the 10th Mountain Division in the Second World War. Senator Dole was wounded badly by machine gun fire in Italy in April 1945 and now at 95 years old is unable to get out of his wheelchair, but he did, to salute his comrade, and his friend, President George H.W. Bush, in the Capitol Rotunda the other night. President Bush who was a Naval Lieutenant, and an aviator who flew 58 missions against the Japanese, and is a holder of the Distinguished Flying Cross, the Air Medal, and a Presidential Unit Citation.

https://www.mrctv.org/embed/535349

Whatever your politics, these men are great Americans, who need to be honored. Indeed it is men like Lieutenants Dole and Bush (and millions more) who earned their generation the title of ‘The Greatest Generation’.

And it also ends the presidents who served in that now distant war, George H.W. Bush, who was a Lieutenant, who enlisted on his 18th birthday will be the last of a line that started with General of the Army Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1953. All good men and true, whatever their politics. We are already missing them.


We damned well don’t do PC here, which you know, and so we will not be told what songs to listen to. From Neptune’s Daughter the original version of Baby, It’s Cold Out There. Enjoy

Then there is the UN Migrant Compact. The US and Australia, having a decent respect for their citizens have said that they will not sign it. The Canadian and British governments, who do not, say they will. Not much surprise, both are globalists nonentities, who apparently are merely in politics for themselves. In truth, my British patriot friends use much, much stronger language. I agree with them.

Sometimes we forget, the Canadians are some of the best and bravest people on earth. But they do elect the most detestable people sometimes.


Mark Levin, Heather MacDonald, do I really need to say more?

Well, I try to remember that the world has been going to hell in a handcart since the year 00, sometimes it doesn’t help much.

A New Old Ally?

This is interesting. From Pablo Kleinman writing in The Federalist.

Brazil, officially known until the late sixties as The United States of Brazil, was a close American ally before the start of the Cold War. In World War II, it contributed 25,000 troops to the Mediterranean theater, playing a very relevant role in the 1944-45 invasion of Italy. Its navy and air force participated in the Battle of the Atlantic from mid-1942 onwards.

At the end of the war in Europe, Brazilian troops had captured more than 20,000 Axis POWs and had almost 1,000 men killed in action. Brazil hosted at Natal the largest U.S. air base outside its own territory, and, at Recife, the U.S. Fourth Fleet. This while Argentina flirted with the Nazis and Mexico remained oblivious and even hostile to U.S. needs. Even though this was Brazil’s first foreign war, their contribution was so significant the United States offered the country the chance to take over an Occupation Zone in Austria.

The military governments that ruled Brazil in the ’60s and ’70s adopted nterventionist “developmentalist” domestic policies and a neutralist foreign policy that moved it away from its American alliance. The United States was partly to blame for this, as it sought to distance itself from Brazil’s military-led governments. After democracy was restored in 1985, the country’s foreign policy continued drifting further to the left, and even more so when it was governed by viscerally anti-American former Marxists between 2003 and 2016.

In the past few decades, Brazil participated with troops in important peacekeeping missions in the region, especially as the leader of the stabilization force in Haiti between 2004 and 2017. As the most important American ally in Latin America and the second largest country in the hemisphere, Brazil would be expected to further engage in – and lead – peacekeeping military interventions in the region, and to have a more bold and assertive, American-friendly foreign policy. An updated and beefed up Brazilian Armed Forces would be an ideal partner for the American military and could serve as an effective (and perhaps be perceived as a more legitimate) stand-in for U.S. troops at deploying a stabilizing force in trouble spots around the region.

Interesting isn’t it? I knew Brazil was an ally in World War Two and did some anti-submarine work, but not much more than that. It would be indeed nice to have a full-fledged ally in South America. And so, some of the possibilities.

What’s not very well known about Brazil is that, despite its colorful Latin ways, it shares a lot of common cultural traits and values with the United States, more so than any other country in Latin America. Brazilians look up to America, and the United States ranks as the number one destination of Brazilian overseas tourists. Since 2013, more than 2 million Brazilians visit the United States as tourists every year, despite a cumbersome and demanding visa application process.

Like America, Brazil is a profoundly Christian country. It has the largest number of Catholics of any country in the world (130 million, or 65 percent of the population), one of the largest numbers of evangelical, Pentecostal, and Baptist adherents (estimated at 44 million), and the third-largest representation of Mormons in the world. In fact, the American-founded and based LDS Church named a Brazilian apostle, the first from Latin America, to its Quorum of Twelve Apostles this year, the highest body of leadership in the church.

Besides being religious like Americans, Brazilians also have an entrepreneurial mentality, and they like both country music – they have their own style – and rodeo. Brazil currently has a higher percentage of entrepreneurs and small business owners than the United States does. According to a 2017 Pew study, Brazil is one of the most pro-American countries in the hemisphere, more sympathetic to us than both Canada and Mexico. This despite decades of widespread anti-American sentiment and indoctrination in academia, the media, and in government.

For well more than the past decade as a tech entrepreneur active in Brazil and as an activist in Latin American conservative and libertarian political circles, I have become convinced that Brazilians are not just ready, but would be thrilled to become America’s best friend in the region, especially if this increased their international stature and prestige.

Hmmm. Well, I can’t say he quite convinced me, even with Bolsonaro coming in as President, known as the Trump of South America, with cause. But he makes the case well enough, that we should surely look at it. After all, he is correct that we have far more in common than most countries.

And if you take a look at the map, they are right in the middle of where many of our problems in the hemisphere come from.

Certainly no harm in talking with them, and then seeing where it can lead. Friends (and allies) are where you find them.

UK vs the Reich

James Lewis had an article on American Thinker yesterday. In it he does a remarkable thing, he tells the truth. Let’s have a look.

Europe has a neurotic compulsion to repeat the past.  This is bad news, because nobody wants to repeat five (count ’em!) East-West wars exploding out of Europe over the last two centuries.

But – the E.U. now has a better idea.

It wants European nations to surrender to the German-French axis without a shot being fired.”Countries must give up their sovereignty and join the one-world government,” German chancellor Angela Merkel remarked generously the other day.  The E.U. Times, of all places, remarked that “[n]o, this isn’t something Adolf Hitler said many years ago.”

Everybody in that part of the world knows who runs the E.U.: the Germans, fronted by the French.  So when the charming Frau Merkel said that, most of her listeners filled in the rest of the story.  But the Brits were not laughing.

Just to keep the historical record straight:

  1. Napoleon beat the German-speaking provinces around 1800, arousing a century of vendetta wars.
  2. Otto von Bismarck used Prussian robo-militarism to invade Paris in 1871.
  3. WWI started as an enormous German-French meat-grinder, finally ended by the United States entering the war.
  4. In the 1920s and ’30s, Hitler arose in revenge for WWI, leading to thirteen years of industrialized massacres of innocent human beings and ending with catastrophic Axis aggression in World War II, including the Japanese Rape of Nanking and all the rest.
  5. But…Europe’s world wars did not end in 1946.  They just moved to the Soviet Empire, which included East Germany.  Korea and Vietnam were proxies for the U.S.-Soviet struggle.

And now we have Reich Number Six, called the “European Union.”  But the only “union” in the E.U. is the unelected ruling caste, which rules with an iron hand, while the left-out voters are getting sick and tired of the scam.

This may be why Emmanuel Macron, the German vassal in Paris, just called for an E.U. army – to use against NATO, of course.  These little voters can’t be allowed to resist Das Sechtse Reich (the sixth! in 200 years!), so we gotta get an army, now.  Because both the U.K. and France have nuclear weapons, the E.U. army is bound to inherit nukes.

Spot on, although many of us refer to it as Das Vierte Reich, because we for whatever reason do not count the proxy wars. He may be correct.

So once again as always, it comes down to that small fog-shrouded island off the coast. Can they once again, prevail? As the did against Napoleon, against the Kaiser, and against Hitler. All of those struggles have hurt them, and the Reich’s fifth column has as well, as it has America. But once again the British people have lined up on freedom’s side, as they always have. This time (as has sometimes happened before) Her Majesty’s Government is not on side. That is a problem, but it is not a new one, the British have solved that before, perhaps they will again.

Because as Britain goes, Europe goes.  Mr. Lewis finishes this way, he is correct.

Or, as Victor Davis Hanson warned about Monsieur Macron:

The French president suffers from the usual dreams of some sort of European “empire” – Caesar, Napoleon, Hitler … Brussels? He probably envisions a new Rome steered by French cultural elites whose wisdom, style, and sophistication would substitute for polluting tanks and bombers, and who would play Greece’s robed philosophers to Europe’s Roman legions: “It’s about Europe having to become a kind of empire, as China is. And how the U.S. is.”

Two years ago, more than 17 million Brits voted to leave the E.U., but the last two years have been an imperialistic E.U. campaign to stop an independent Britain from ever rising again.

The biggest embarrassment is that Britain has allowed its own swamp to be penetrated and bought off by the Franco-German Axis.

In that process, the voters of the U.K. have been lied to and betrayed many times. The allegedly conservative prime minister, Theresa May, is now seen as the biggest back-stabber in the land, and it looks as though Labor will repeat her betrayal as soon as they get a chance.

I know you did not want to hear this. Neither did I. Welcome to the real world.

Tories; Then and Now

Maggie Thatcher left office 28 years ago yesterday, after being stabbed in the back by her own party. It put them out of power for a generation. But what is her legacy? Well, CNS had a look at that.

After tending her resignation to the Queen and heading home to south London, many expected her to fade from the political stage.

More than five years after her death, however, she remains a towering and controversial figure, and some of her policies are shared by young voters – in some cases, perhaps without them even realizing it.

According to research released this month, young voters showed more support for some positions held by the former prime minister than older ones.

As part of a larger research project being finalized in 2019, the Economic and Social Research Council last September commissioned polling of 600 British citizens between 16 and 79, with questions on how they viewed Thatcher.

Sixty percent of those aged between 25 and 34 said they were in favor of what the survey called Thatcher’s “economic tenets of low regulation, less tax and reduced trade union power,” compared to between 40 and 50 percent of older respondents.

Forty-seven percent of young adults shared “Thatcherite values on law, order and authority,” lagging only slightly behind those aged over 35, where between 54 and 61 percent shared those views.

Looks pretty good to me, like the British have their heads on fairly straight.

A YouGov poll of British adults earlier this year found that 49 percent of respondents aged between 25 and 39 said they would never consider voting Conservative in the next general election.

However, that poll, which was commissioned by the Center of Policy Studies – a think-tank co-founded by Thatcher in the 1970s – also found that the largest section of this group, 27 percent, also thought the government taxes too much and spends too much on services.

By a margin of 44 to 36 percent, more younger voters thought the government should aim for equal opportunities for everyone, rather than equal outcomes.

Well, that’s as may be. I know quite a few British conservatives, most over 39, who say adamantly that they will never again vote for the Conservative Party, even though they’ve voted for it all their lives. Why? Because they are convinced that Theresa May’s government with the connivance of the Conservative Party are thwarting the will of the people (as shown in the referendum). And thereby selling Britain’s sovereignty to the EU in a deal that is actually worse than either leaving with a clean break or staying.

I’ve read most of the paperwork over the last few weeks, and those people that say that are entirely correct. It’s a horrendously bad deal. And the worst part of all is that there is no escape clause, once in force, it’s Hotel California time. You can check in, but you can never leave. Essentially a colony of the EU, with less control of anything than we had in 1775.

So there you have it, a political party that was led by the greatest post-war Prime minister and stabbed her in the back and now seeks to stab Britain itself in the back.

I’m convinced if this deal that this dreadful Prime Minister has allowed the ‘deep state’, known in Britain as the Civil Service, goes through, the members will kill, without regret, the Conservative Party.

There are some honorable Tories in the Parliament, but whether there are enough to stave off this catastrophe, is the question of the decade.

Too bad Britain doesn’t have a conservative party.

Occupied England

Sometimes I suspect I confuse my American readers with references to England in the present day which have little relevance to them. I won’t say I’m sorry, because I’m not.

Britain, actually England if you’re one of the people that knows the difference, is the foundation stone of America. We built our country on English common law, traditions, and much else. Now it has the same problems we do, but more so, and without a leader like Trump to attempt to drain their swamp.

That’s unfortunate, but if we proved anything in the 20th century, it’s that America can’t make you free. You have to do that yourself. We can, maybe, prevent outside interference, but if you sell your sovereignty (for a mess of pottage) we can’t even do that, at least legally. And that is where the (not so) United Kingdom finds itself.

You know that I speak, everyday, with like-minded Britons. I do so at The Conservative Woman, which is the best conservative British blog that I’ve found. It’s actually one of the 5 best blogs I’ve seen.

We all remember how it felt here during the reign of error. That’s how it is now in Britain, only more so. Brexit gave them great hope, in many ways they saw it as their independence day, which is true. It is. But their swamp is dragging them back through false negotiations, and reluctance to take responsibility.

So, how are they coping? They’re angry frustrated, depressed, just as we were, only more so, not least because their government is infringing the rights that they (and we) won across the centuries. The important ones, like free speech, are under attack, not by a foreign occupier, but by the British government itself.

Nor do they any longer have the ultimate answer. Long ago they gave up their right to armed resistance. It’s understandable, Great Britain was a real-life peaceable kingdom, where for decades before that happened, no one carried a weapon, because there was no reason at all to. Sadly, now there is, but the right is gone. There is a lesson for America there. A right you give up is gone, forever.

In any case, here’s an article from ConWom as we refer to it. It shows very well the state of freedom in the original home of freedom. I won’t say enjoy, because you won’t. But do take warning, this is the path we will go if we don’t get control of Leviathan.

The only way I can make sense of England today is by understanding it as an occupied country. This, increasingly, is what it feels like – the public ruled over by a vast civil administration which, virtuous in its own rectitude, holds us in contempt. Governments come and go, but they all operate on a similar premise: the public are there to brass up and shut up, and that is that.

Metaphorically speaking, throw a stone in any direction and you will hit an institution run by the occupiers, be it public services, education, police, the legal profession, even the armed forces.

Newspapers publish official figures about crime, sentencing and prosecution rates, sexual abuse, drug abuse, official incompetence in the fields of health and social policy and so on which are shocking and embarrassing in a so-called advanced and prosperous country, but these are soon forgotten. Questions that should be asked are avoided and the army of occupation resumes its work of sedulously acting against the wishes and interests of the people who pay it.

Keep reading England today feels like it’s under an occupying force. It’s powerful, horrifying stuff. Sadly, it is also true.

%d bloggers like this: