Sunday Funnies; Brexibration, Shampeachment, and Still More

A busy but good week!

It’s Spreading


And, of course, but a special. She’s a Republican running for Congress in Florida.

And an updated bonus video (Language warning though)


They really should have listened, vindicated again.


Brexit Day

And so, today at 5 pm CST, the United Kingdom leaves the European Union. Nigel Farage said goodbye a couple days ago.

As we have said since at least 21 June 2016, Mummy has joined our revolution at last. and today marks a milestone on her journey back to freedom. It’s not over (in truth, it never is) but the day marks a milestone, now it is up to Britain to make good on the promise that Boris made to the people.

Sumantra Maitra in The Federalist reflects on this, using the vehicle of the Royal Mint’s commemorative 50p coin, which states on its reverse “Peace, prosperity and friendship with all nations.” There is a strong echo there of Thomas Jefferson’s words in his 1801 inaugural where he spoke of  “peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none.” As Sumantra notes, real life has intruded on Jefferson’s words, and they will on Britain’s hopes as well. As Britain’s Prime Minister MacMillian once observed, “Events, dear boy, events” always intrude on intentions and hopes. That doesn’t mean they don’t matter, only that things intrude. Here’s a bit more from the article:

While America has given up on the realism of no “entangling alliances,” and Britain is not going to turn from a parliamentary monarchy to a constitutional republic any time soon, these words somehow reflect a new direction, a closing of the gaps that have been haunting for the last 30 or so years. As the rest of Europe grows ever distant and even antagonistic to the United States, one country, tethered not just by politics but by language, culture, kinship, and common law, will remain close.

This island now feels the same nationalism and optimism as its former colony once felt, trying to forge a shaky but independent way ahead, coming out of an empire.

What Does Freedom Mean to the United Kingdom?

The culmination of Brexit has been interesting. The prime minister notified the nation with a short tweet, without much fanfare or boisterous triumphalism. House of Commons leader and Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg, quoting Edward Gibbon, reminded the country it is not economic prosperity but the true freedom — “the first of earthly blessings, independence” — which is the key.

True freedom is not just predicated on cheap, Chinese-made toasters and 40 different cuisines in the poshest corners of London. True freedom is the power to pull up the drawbridge and put a flag on the ramparts. If a country cannot make its own laws and guard its own borders, dictated instead by the rules of a foreign elite in a distant city, it is not truly free.

Or on their desk in Brussels, even if it means having your speech cut off.

Nevertheless, sometimes upheaval is necessary, and what an upheaval Brexit was. There’s a pearl of odd conventional wisdom among Anglo-American conservatives that the only reason for survival is to conserve the existing order. But what if the existing order is steadily progressive, or worse, not just progressive but actually revolutionary? Do you still conserve an order that is determined to transform the very existence of your society?

Everything is relative. To the earnest, late-’80s, Soviet Communist Party man, conserving the USSR empire would be important, but the people decided against it. To an American conservative, preserving the managerial ruling of the Obama years with its global climate accords and Title IX kangaroo courts at universities, not to mention encroaching transgender madness in all aspects of society, would be madness. Likewise, Brexit was a reaction — because sometimes conserving isn’t enough. A restructuring and overthrow of the ruling progressive edifice is needed.

And that is what we mean in Anglo-American history as completing the revolution. To understand it helps to see history as a wheel, sometimes, as in  1215, 1642, 1688, 1776, and 2016, the wheel gets stuck upside down, and then we need to give it a push – to complete the revolution, and continue our journey.

And so, Great Britain has reached a milestone. Herman Wouk in War and Remembrance had Pug Henry comment on New Years Eve 1942 that there was “Plenty of hell behind and plenty more in front.” So it is with Brexit (the age of Trump, too). But it is a milestone, perhaps analogous to the Battle of Saratoga. Although it is interesting to note that one of the American heroes of that battle was Benedict Arnold. One hopes there is not a counterpart in the part of Brexit yet to come.

And so to paraphrase Benjamin Franklin, A constitutional parliamentary monarchy, if they can keep it.

Brexit Week

So, what is the status of Brexit which will happen on 31 January? To be honest, I think it’s pretty foggy, but it is happening at last. It’s an interim arrangement, but Boris insists it will be finalized by the end of the year. Good, in my opinion, although it should have happened about 3 years ago. Best I’ve seen on it is from Alex Christoforou on The Duran, here’s some of it.

[…]The main significance is this: getting liberal/globalist elites to respect democratic outcomes even if they don’t like them. This is an important precedent.

That is indeed a critically important result.

Despite “Remoaner” hysteria, leaving the EU is not the end of the world either. I’m sure Britain will be able to get on fine outside the EU and indeed both the British and the Continentals have strong incentives to get along. Perhaps Britain will reinvent itself as a global tax haven. After all, Europe’s share of global GDP has been rapidly declining over the past decades.

In fact, it is pretty much the only market in the world that is.

Britain’s departure is a major economic blow to the EU. Brexit will leave a €7.5-billion hole in the EU budget, Britain being the biggest contributors besides the Germans. Britain was one of the EU’s few dynamic major economies (along with Germany and, to a more limited extent, France) and the only one with a semi-serious tech sector. The bloc will be reduced to 450 million inhabitants and will become a distant third in terms of GDP behind China and the United States of America.

Britain is the 5th largest economy in the world, the EU will notice its absence.

Brexit happening seems a good time to recall a farsighted Frenchman who predicted that none of this would work: Charles de Gaulle. President de Gaulle twice vetoed Britain’s candidacy to join the then-European Economic Community (EEC), causing an uproar in Atlanticist circles.

De Gaulle had long thought that the so-called “Europeanists” were not sincere and/or coherent in their claim to be building a strong and independent federal Europe. He said in a May 1962 press conference:

France’s proposals [on Europe] have raised two objections, which incidentally are perfectly contradictory even though they are presented by the same people. . . . These critics tell us: “You want to create a Europe of nations, while we want to create supranational Europe.” As if a simple phrase were sufficient to confound these powerfully established entities that are the nations and the States. And then, these same critics simultaneously tell us: “England has submitted its candidacy to join the [European] Common Market. So long as they are not in, we won’t be able to do anything political.”

And yet, everyone knows that England, as a great State and a nation true to itself, will never consent to being dissolved in some utopian construct.

Prescient words!

Indeed they are, and yes, England has been the driver of Brexit.

Of course, Yes, Minister covered this.

Anyway, Britain’s departure from the European Union opens the way for the Continentals to try, a bit more earnestly, to create a truly sovereign and independent “European Europe.” This is not an absurd ambition. London was in some ways Europe’s only top-tier “global city.” Paris, Berlin, and Brussels really are secondary nodes. There’s a charmingly provincial quality to European politics which must be preserved. While in the Anglosphere Jews and Asians have massively displaced White Gentiles among their cultural and economic elites, the same is not really true in Continental Europe, certainly outside of France. Time will tell.

I think he’s using the British usage of Asians here, from South Asia, not eastern Asia as we usually do in the US. But I think he has a point, and the video at the link makes it stronger.

Anglo-American Duopoly

This is in large measure a follow on to yesterday’s post, Anglo Saxon Resurgence, although it can stand on its own, they should be taken together.

Fritz Pettyjohn writing in American Thinker notes that for at least 28 years the American people have allowed ourselves to be played for suckers. Few of us minded the self-sacrifice while the Soviet Union’s baleful gaze overlooked Europe, but why now.

Globalization was the path to world peace, according to deep thinkers like the Bushes, the Clintons, and Obama. The welfare of the American worker was sacrificed for this higher cause.

The election of Donald Trump changed all that. The global project was out, and America First was in. The world took notice, quickly.

Have you noticed what happened? Trade deals with South Korea, USMCA, Japan, and even talks with China making some progress, as China realizes that Russia is pretty much an NPC in this world.

This is what happens when America fights its corner. I’d posit that the only reason we haven’t left the middle east completely is that Israel is an ally under siege, and we will stand with them. Other than that, it is pretty irrelevant. Remember when Columbus started out back in 1492, he was looking for a route to China that didn’t go through the middle east. Now, thanks to the US Navy, with a little help from American innovation and railroads it exists.

But the changes aren’t over.

With the election of Boris Johnson in the U.K., the tight circle of America’s closest allies will soon be complete. The upcoming trade deal with the United States is Britain’s best, and only, hope for better economic times. The transition will be painful for some sectors of the British economy. But the Brits have no better alternative. They have a special relationship with us, and we’ll give them the best terms we can, consistent with our own interests. They bring things to the table that no one else can — like a navy with two powerful supercarriers.

Add in Australia and New Zealand, and all the maritime nations of the world are comfortably under the American umbrella. Central and South America are included as well, as junior partners. India is a friendly affiliate, along with most of southeast Asia. The Dutch and the Danes will partner up in due time.

This is hard for the British, and we should not belabor the point. Brandon J. Weichert in American Greatness notes that…

Once the British Empire was no more, London was faced with the prospect of being a shrimp among whales. Caught in the dicey interplay between their American allies and their Soviet rivals, London could only attach itself—begrudgingly—to American power. And as that exchange between the British and American admirals showed, there was great humiliation involved for the British, as they not only endured the loss of their hard-won global empire, but also the rise of their former American colonies.

In the EU’s Totalitarian Vice-Grip

Recognizing the truth that a Britain without its empire would forever be consigned to a second-tier status, London hitched its political wagon to the European Union. British policymakers hoped that their involvement in the EU would give Britain the sort of expanded geopolitical influence that it had long enjoyed during its imperial heyday (without relying too much on their American cousins).

By 2015, it was clear that the theory was not working in practice. London had not enhanced its own power or status by joining the EU. Instead, it had hastened its relative decline by subordinating British national sovereignty to the supranational government in Brussels (and to the real power behind the EU, located in Berlin). […]

During the Cold War, British leaders feared that they would witness their nation go from being the head of a globe-spanning empire to being merely an American vassal state (a sort of reverse colony). That wound to pride was nothing, however, compared to the alternative they embraced. Because, unlike Brussels or Berlin, Washington did not and does not desire to override the sovereignty of Britain or the British people.

In short, they chose wrong, but I think we can all understand. The Monroe Doctrine, the very first American foreign policy statement, back in 1823 came about as we know it because the American government did want to appear “as a cock boat in the wake of the British Man-of-War.” Throughout the 19th century, it was enforced by the Royal Navy. Pride matters.

The creation of an Anglo-American duopoly not only would preserve the balance of international power in America’s favor, but it would save British power from being permanently marginalized.

Already, the Royal Navy is in the midst of a massive revitalization campaign. They’ve built two new aircraft supercarriers. More importantly, they’ve designed these behemoths to be integrated in the U.S. Navy’s fleet of supercarrier battle groups. In fact, Britain’s first supercarrier is leading the charge and securing the newly contested Arctic battleground from the Russians.

Meanwhile, the Trump Administration stands ready to enact a new free trade agreement with London that would secure relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom—while ensuring that London’s break with Brussels would be meaningful and real and not at all damaging to Britain.

The EU senses the inherent threat that such an Anglo-American marriage poses to the longevity of its sclerotic superstate. This is why the Eurocrats have refused to negotiate in good faith with the British government over an orderly exit.

Unless I miss my guess, once again the Anglo Saxons, for the third time in a century (roughly), are going to free Europe from German domination, this time without a shot fired.

Sir Walter Raliegh, back at the dawn of the British Empire, only a few years after the original Brexit by Henry VIII, and the modern world it created said it all really:

“Whoever commands the sea, commands the trade; whosoever commands the trade of the world commands the riches of the world, and consequently the world itself.”

The nineteenth century was mostly peaceful because of the Pax Britannica.

The last half of the twentieth century was mostly peaceful because of the Pax Americana.

The twenty-first century may well be the Anglo American Century, and even more peaceful, as we reset the Westphalian system.

Anglo Saxon Resurgence

Conrad Black wrote in American Greatness last Monday about how after the British elections, we, working together, have a great opportunity to make the Anglosphere great again. Let’s look at it.

The greatest significance in last week’s decisive and seminal British election is the victory it contains for the solidarity of the English-speaking peoples and the strength, coherence, and legitimacy of what Europeans frequently refer to as the Anglo-Saxons. […]

But the substantial detachment of the United Kingdom from an integrated Europe so it may retain the primacy of the political institutions and the legal system it has developed over many centuries, and align itself, implicitly, more closely to its senior Commonwealth associates, Canada and Australia, as well as to its sometime senior partner in the modern world’s greatest crises, the United States, is a geostrategic development of the first importance.

He goes on to compare it with Bismarck’s unification of Germany after the Franco-Prussian War into the most powerful land power in Europe. It’s an apt comparison, and it is also the last time Germany acted in a responsible manner, falling under the spells of Wilhelm II and then Hitler. It had a resurgence as West Germany but essentially has booted it since reunification. Leading to the ramshackle, crumbling EU.

It’s true enough that the US has often encouraged a somewhat loose trade union in Europe, but I don’t think any of us (other than perhaps the left) had the totalitarian empire that we see rising in Europe in mind. In fact, Nixon, Reagan, and Trump have all had (or have) reservations.

The United States, the UK, Canada, and Australia together have a GDP twice as great as China’s and 150 percent of the ramshackle post-British Europe. They are no longer losing economic ground to China. None of the Anglo-Saxon countries has to unwind absurd socialist overindulgence amidst endless strikes and minor mob violence as France is trying to do. As a bloc, it has good economic growth rates and thanks to the Americans, (but the British are pulling their weight), it is armed to the teeth.

In a word, the hackneyed nonsense of recent decades about the post-Reagan-Thatcher decline of the Anglo-Saxons—beloved of the Chinese, French, Russians, Arabs, and Iranians—is shown, yet again in modern history to be bunk. Three of the G-7 are now floating together and the EU has suffered a loss as great as the loss of all the Pacific Coast states would be to America.

One of the things that have fascinated me, as I’ve spoken with Americans and our cousins over the last few years is how we have motivated each other. We cheered on Brexit, seeing in it much the same conflict as led to our revolution. Then we took heart from that victory, and that has something to do with Trump’s victory. And then Trump had some influence last week on Johnson’s victory. Yes, the urban elites hate Trump in England just as they do here, but talk to the British equivalent of the Deplorables and you’ll hear a different story.

The reason goes back to something that David Starkey covers in the video below. The corporatist elite, including the civil servants, are definitionally the anywheres, as are the clients, on benefits, while the workers are somewheres, proud of our countries and our history. And yes, I used the singular history, American history is after all English history until   1776 and right on down to the present they have almost always been intertwined.

Like the dire threats of economic calamity with a Trump victory, Project Fear, a farrago of blood-curdling Jeremiads from treasury and central bank officials about post-Brexit gloom, will prove to be just hot air. As in Elizabethan times (16th-17th centuries), under Walpole and Pitt (18th century) and under Palmerston and Disraeli (19th century), Britain has again chosen immersion in blue water rather than Europe. They are right again and the United States will benefit from it.

Yep. And here is David Starkey giving a very clear explanation

And here is the question and answer session after his lecture, which is outstanding

On his first meeting with a British leader, Theresa May, President Trump said, “a strong and independent Britain is a treasure to the world.” The times and personalities are vastly different but the geopolitical realities are not so much changed: Trump and Johnson should get on as well and benignly as did Roosevelt and Churchill and Reagan and Thatcher.

England Turns Blue and That’s a Good Thing

Britain voted yesterday, and I’d say the people know what they want. They want a rational government and they want Brexit. Like our cities, there are a lot of people who always vote Labour, just as their grandfather did, but there were a lot fewer of them yesterday.

This is the map from the Brexit referendum. You might notice how closely it tracks with the Tory’s victories yesterday. There were other issues, of course, including the full-on communist-terrorist bent of Jeremy Corbyn (who I read has resigned from the chairmanship) at the head of the Labour party. They were just as self-destructive as our Democrats look to be, which probably provided an excuse for some of those traditional Labourites. That doesn’t mean that Brexit is clear sailing now. The Tories have been sending (at best) mixed signals since before the referendum. You may remember that the Scottish Conservative Party workers were pulled down to northern England by Westminster to work against the referendum. Without much effect, it turned out. Still, Boris has talked a good game throughout, and working through a hung Parliament was never likely to go well. So we’ll see what he says with a ~90 seat majority. Yes, that is pretty much by definition a landslide, and he thoroughly demolished Labour’s red wall. It reminded me of our 2016 election, in fact, so here’s that map.

Do you see the same thing I do? In both cases, there are urban enclaves and some traditional union strongholds scattered across the face of basically conservative countries. Boris made inroads on them yesterday, and I think Trump will as well.

The list of recognizable names (even to a Yank) that lost yesterday is long. Amongst them (according to the Spectator AU)

  • Laura Pidcock (Lab, Shadow Secretary of State for Employment Rights)
  • Chuka Umunna (LD after changing parties a couple times) In fact, all the MPs who loudly changed parties lost.
  • Zac Goldsmith (Con in a strongly Remain constituency)
  • Dennis Skinner (Lab, had been in his seat since 1970)
  • Dominic Grieve (Con, and the arch remainer in the party)
  • Chris Williamson ( I former Labour who got suspended for playing down Labour’s anti-Semitism)

The other big losers yesterday include the “Party of Davos” (pretty much what we call globalism) and once again the media, especially the BBC, Sky, and almost all of the papers. I gather the comedic value was right up there with Election Night 2016 in the US. Good, their demise is long overdue. And by the way, the polls were wildly wrong, again.

So, perhaps a sea change, also perhaps an acceptable Brexit, or maybe not, we’ll have to see. I’m not completely convinced that Boris (or his party) want a full Brexit, but the difficulties he had with the old   Parliament do make it hard to tell. Now it is time for him to fish or cut bait. 96 is a plenty large enough majority (and much larger than anyone expected) to carry the policy through.

I haven’t seen the numbers of spoiled ballots, if some of the people I know are any indication, it may have been high. Given party politics, a good result. It’s a mistake to think the Conservative Party is conservative, it hasn’t been since they mutinied against Margaret Thatcher, they tend to be socialist lite but that should be better than a guy who thinks Maduro had the right idea.

I also think that it’s a good omen for us here, I still think the referendum was one cause of Trump’s victory, especially the nomination, and it won’t hurt here either.

Now if Boris will Get a clean Brexit Done!


%d bloggers like this: