patrickscott
Banned
Because most human don't even understand freedom, let alone know how to properly use it.
Congratulations UK
- Thread starter Ciao
- Start date
Pat Buchanan is as discerning an observer of the currents of history as ever:
"Some of us have long predicted the breakup of the European Union. The Cousins appear to have just delivered the coup de grace.
While Scotland and Northern Ireland voted to remain in the EU, England voted for independence. These people, with their unique history, language and culture, want to write their own laws and rule themselves.
The English wish to remain who they are, and they do not want their country to become, in Theodore Roosevelt’s phrase, “a polyglot boarding house” for the world.
From patriots of all nations, congratulations are in order.
It will all begin to unravel now, over there, and soon over here.
Across Europe, tribalism, of all strains, is resurgent. Not only does the EU appear to be breaking up, countries appear about to break up.
Scotland will seek a second referendum to leave the U.K. The French National Front of Marine Le Pen and the Dutch Party for Freedom both want out of the EU. As Scots seek to secede from the U.K., Catalonia seeks to secede from Spain, Veneto from Italy, and Flemish nationalists from Belgium.
Ethnonationalism seems everywhere ascendant. Yet, looking back in history, is this not the way the world has been going for some centuries now?
The disintegration of the EU into its component nations would follow, as Vladimir Putin helpfully points out, the dissolution of the USSR into 15 nations, and the breakup of Yugoslavia into seven.
Czechoslovakia lately split in two. The Donbass seeks to secede from Ukraine. Is that so different from Transnistria splitting off from Romania, Abkhazia and South Ossetia seceding from Georgia, and Chechnya seeking separation from Russia?
After World War II came the disintegration of the French and British empires and birth of dozens of new nations in Africa, Asia and the Middle East. America returned the Philippine islands to their people.
The previous century saw the collapse of the Spanish Empire and birth of a score of new nations in our own hemisphere.
In Xi Jinping’s China and Putin’s Russia, nationalism is rising, even as China seeks to repress Uighur and Tibetan separatists.
People want to rule themselves, and be themselves, separate from all others. Palestinians want their own nation. Israelis want “a Jewish state.”
On Cyprus, Turks and Greeks seem happier apart.
Kurds are fighting to secede from Turkey and Iraq, and perhaps soon from Syria and Iran. Afghanistan appears to be splintering into regions dominated by Pashtuns, Hazaras, Uzbeks and Tajiks.
Eritrea has left Ethiopia. South Sudan has seceded from Khartoum.
Nor is America immune to the populist sentiments surging in Europe.
In Bernie Sanders’ fulminations against corporate and financial elites one hears echoes of the radical leftist rhetoric in Greece and Italy against EU banking elites.
And as “Brexit” swept the native-born English outside of multiracial, multiethnic, multicultural, multilingual London, populist-nationalist Donald Trump and antiestablishment Ted Cruz swept the native-born white working and middle classes in the primaries.
In Britain, all the mainstream parties — Labor, Tory, Liberal Democrat, Scottish National — supported “Remain.” All lost.
Nigel Farage’s UK Independence Party alone won.
In the past six months, millions of Democrats voted for a 74-year-old socialist against the establishment choice, Hillary Clinton, as Bush-Romney-Ryan Republicanism was massively repudiated in the Republican primaries.
As Trump said last week, “We got here because we switched from a policy of Americanism — focusing on what’s good for America’s middle class — to a policy of globalism, focusing on how to make money for large corporations who can move their wealth and workers to foreign countries all to the detriment of the American worker and the American economy.”
Yesterday, news arrived that in May alone, the U.S. had run a trade deficit in goods of $60 billion. This translates into an annual deficit of $720 billion in goods, or near 4 percent of our GDP wiped out by purchases of foreign-made rather than U.S.-made goods.
In 40 years, we have not run a trade surplus. The most self-sufficient republic in all of history now relies for its necessities upon other nations.
What might a Trumpian policy of Americanism over globalism entail?
A 10 to 20 percent tariff on manufactured goods to wipe out the trade deficit in goods, with the hundreds of billions in revenue used to slash or eliminate corporate taxes in the USA.
Every U.S. business would benefit. Every global company would have an incentive not only to move production here, but its headquarters here.
An “America first” immigration policy would secure the border, cut legal immigration to tighten U.S. labor markets, strictly enforce U.S. laws against those breaking into our country, and get tough with businesses that make a practice of hiring people here illegally.
In Europe and America, corporate, financial and political elites are increasingly disrespected and transnationalism is receding. An anti-establishment, nationalist, populist wave is surging across Europe and the USA.
It is an anti-insider, anti-Clinton wave, and Trump could ride it to victory.”
You must be registered for see links
"Some of us have long predicted the breakup of the European Union. The Cousins appear to have just delivered the coup de grace.
While Scotland and Northern Ireland voted to remain in the EU, England voted for independence. These people, with their unique history, language and culture, want to write their own laws and rule themselves.
The English wish to remain who they are, and they do not want their country to become, in Theodore Roosevelt’s phrase, “a polyglot boarding house” for the world.
From patriots of all nations, congratulations are in order.
It will all begin to unravel now, over there, and soon over here.
Across Europe, tribalism, of all strains, is resurgent. Not only does the EU appear to be breaking up, countries appear about to break up.
Scotland will seek a second referendum to leave the U.K. The French National Front of Marine Le Pen and the Dutch Party for Freedom both want out of the EU. As Scots seek to secede from the U.K., Catalonia seeks to secede from Spain, Veneto from Italy, and Flemish nationalists from Belgium.
Ethnonationalism seems everywhere ascendant. Yet, looking back in history, is this not the way the world has been going for some centuries now?
The disintegration of the EU into its component nations would follow, as Vladimir Putin helpfully points out, the dissolution of the USSR into 15 nations, and the breakup of Yugoslavia into seven.
Czechoslovakia lately split in two. The Donbass seeks to secede from Ukraine. Is that so different from Transnistria splitting off from Romania, Abkhazia and South Ossetia seceding from Georgia, and Chechnya seeking separation from Russia?
After World War II came the disintegration of the French and British empires and birth of dozens of new nations in Africa, Asia and the Middle East. America returned the Philippine islands to their people.
The previous century saw the collapse of the Spanish Empire and birth of a score of new nations in our own hemisphere.
In Xi Jinping’s China and Putin’s Russia, nationalism is rising, even as China seeks to repress Uighur and Tibetan separatists.
People want to rule themselves, and be themselves, separate from all others. Palestinians want their own nation. Israelis want “a Jewish state.”
On Cyprus, Turks and Greeks seem happier apart.
Kurds are fighting to secede from Turkey and Iraq, and perhaps soon from Syria and Iran. Afghanistan appears to be splintering into regions dominated by Pashtuns, Hazaras, Uzbeks and Tajiks.
Eritrea has left Ethiopia. South Sudan has seceded from Khartoum.
Nor is America immune to the populist sentiments surging in Europe.
In Bernie Sanders’ fulminations against corporate and financial elites one hears echoes of the radical leftist rhetoric in Greece and Italy against EU banking elites.
And as “Brexit” swept the native-born English outside of multiracial, multiethnic, multicultural, multilingual London, populist-nationalist Donald Trump and antiestablishment Ted Cruz swept the native-born white working and middle classes in the primaries.
In Britain, all the mainstream parties — Labor, Tory, Liberal Democrat, Scottish National — supported “Remain.” All lost.
Nigel Farage’s UK Independence Party alone won.
In the past six months, millions of Democrats voted for a 74-year-old socialist against the establishment choice, Hillary Clinton, as Bush-Romney-Ryan Republicanism was massively repudiated in the Republican primaries.
As Trump said last week, “We got here because we switched from a policy of Americanism — focusing on what’s good for America’s middle class — to a policy of globalism, focusing on how to make money for large corporations who can move their wealth and workers to foreign countries all to the detriment of the American worker and the American economy.”
Yesterday, news arrived that in May alone, the U.S. had run a trade deficit in goods of $60 billion. This translates into an annual deficit of $720 billion in goods, or near 4 percent of our GDP wiped out by purchases of foreign-made rather than U.S.-made goods.
In 40 years, we have not run a trade surplus. The most self-sufficient republic in all of history now relies for its necessities upon other nations.
What might a Trumpian policy of Americanism over globalism entail?
A 10 to 20 percent tariff on manufactured goods to wipe out the trade deficit in goods, with the hundreds of billions in revenue used to slash or eliminate corporate taxes in the USA.
Every U.S. business would benefit. Every global company would have an incentive not only to move production here, but its headquarters here.
An “America first” immigration policy would secure the border, cut legal immigration to tighten U.S. labor markets, strictly enforce U.S. laws against those breaking into our country, and get tough with businesses that make a practice of hiring people here illegally.
In Europe and America, corporate, financial and political elites are increasingly disrespected and transnationalism is receding. An anti-establishment, nationalist, populist wave is surging across Europe and the USA.
It is an anti-insider, anti-Clinton wave, and Trump could ride it to victory.”
But man you do not see the point, how about those nasty Polea and Romanians and swarthy folk not coming there again i mean isn't it all worth it live that white Anglo fantasy!
You must be registered for see images
Last edited:
It was a very tight decision, believe 2% difference which caused the split. It also seems people were confused at the consequences or results of leaving the EU. I thought they should have stayed but I'm not sure why they did leave or what grievances they had with the EU.
What makes me upset is that everyone in Europe is complaining about the "catastrophic" consequences their decision will have on both EU and UK, but they happily agreed with the sanctions against Russia, without giving a **** about all the European companies that failed because of those.
Ansatsuken
Active member
Awards
I suggest UK merge with USA. They have something in common.
Or all Anglo related countries combine to make it own economic union.
Or all Anglo related countries combine to make it own economic union.
Conspirator.
Active member
Awards
The EU is a hypocritical, anti-democratic and authoritarian state that honestly needs to be disbanded for the long-term benefit of the world. That's one of the positives of the Brexit. I don't think the UK will benefit in the short-term(I do think it'll benefit in the long-term, however), but I'm a 100% certain of the fact that the EU as a whole is cancer. The positive of this result is that it will have an inevitable "domino effect" whereby other European countries such as France, the Netherlands etc will probably look to leave the EU, and if that happens it will collapse.
Last edited:
There is a cultural/territorial connection formed between EU states in addition to economical ones. A financial bond between Russia and EU would feel much less connecting and does not reach much to everyday people. I am not saying it is right/wrong to not have reaction to sanctions against Russia, just saying there is less *Naruto voice* bonds with them.
But, if EU starts dispatching the territorial disputes (ex. Gibraltar) and seperatist movements (ex. Catalonia, Northern Italy, Bretagne etc...) will most likely resurface or escalate. Not to mention people who live in EU states other than their own countries, losing economic ties and shift in currencies as people won't be using Euros anymore. That is why it seems catastrophic along with other reasons.
Well, current alpha rulers of EU such as François Hollande or Merkel seems pro-EU, then again there is democracy and rulers can/will change...
Though i am curious how this would effect less alpha-ish and poor-ish EU states in Southern and Eastern Europe.
I was merely talking about economy, and I agree with you that separatist movements all over Europe can get turned on by this act of the UK (I live in a semi-separatist region as well, I couldn't deny people are thinking about getting serious with it).
Said that, while it's true that Englishmen are seen as neighbors after all, unlike Russians, this doesn't mean that Russia was the fourth economic partner of Italy before the sanctions (thing that our medias don't say). Plus, we shouldn't forget that Russia set some contro sanctions against NATO, and since USA aren't affected that much (they don't need to buy gas and oil from Russia) Europe is the one who gets its butt kicked.
Was your question about Brexit or sanctions?
It would be hypocrite to say that Italy got "ruined" by those sanctions, but they definitely damaged us. Little businesses especially got in trouble, as we had a strong economic relation with Russia about import/export of aliments. I know other EU nations got damaged as well (besides maybe those without a big relationship with Russia like Belgium).
However, it seems that some days ago Russia and Turkey sorta made peace. What could you tell me about that?
Power Bottom
Active member
Awards
Ooh i got it. Mediterranean EU states do not develop much technology or businness like Germany or Belgium but they have warm climate to produce stuff cold countries can not have or attract tourists. Big country like Russia was probably a very big deal as money source to many people. I do not want to create conspiracy theories but i think the dependence and submission of less alpha-ish EU states is not undesirable for the alpha-ish ones. Maybe.
As for Russia and Turkey tbh our tourism sector pretty much doomed for this season as Russians liked here as holiday destination; though terror attacks were primary reason why this year tourism tanked. Even if a peaceful atmosphere with a new government starts off at this moment (which won't happen) it would take several years to repair the int'l relations and rep. damage.
Afaik Erdogan wrote a letter apologizing to Putin, there were still some trade deals going between Russia and Turkey even after plane crisis (only for certain goods though) so there can be a way to solution.
He was barking to everyone now he is pulling his cards back because he is losing everything. I am not really worried about Russia and Turkey's relations. Why?.. Because there are a lot worse things happened between Russo-Turkish relations for like centuries. There are over a dozen wars a plane crisis can be fixed through simple diplomacy and these rulers won't be around forever. After airport attacks Russian people left flowers in Turkish embassy in Moscow there is no large scale animosity between people (save for idiots who share Turkroach memes from their basements) like there are between say; Turks and Armenians or Bosniaks and Serbs or Chinese and Japanese.
Last edited: