ANALYSIS: Why Brexit, Waspies & Junior Doctors are the Front Line of our rescue from globalism


mefacebookBourse capitalism, the European Union, neoliberal austerity and fanatical privatisation will wreck Britain’s infrastructure unless the immediate opportunities the citizen has are seized, and the myth of the unstoppable bulldozer is thus shattered. It’s time to crawl from the wreckage and spike the guns of globalism, Brussels, Stephen Crabb and Jeremy Hunt.

There’s a growing feeling that the worst is over for platinum. The Aussie dollar surged after RBA minutes suggested the authorities would hold off on cutting rates. Bruce Kasman of JP Morgan thinks oil will stay in the $40-$50 range over next year. There was an OK sort of session across Asian equities, with soft Oil teasing 50 Sovereign yields mostly up. For clues as to how the US Presidential election could hit the dollar, investors should study what happened to Sterling during Brexit.

The above are, broadly, tips based on technicals and forthcoming events for those who still think anything in the markets is real, and have the money to invest in it. I picked them out from Twitter this morning, and they’re representative of what one sees every day.

This is the general idea of a bourse [‘stock market’] to raise capital for business, which in turn creates jobs and gives governments money to invest in social infrastructure:

Young companies offer the public a share in their business, in order to give the directors/owners more working capital to develop and market existing and new products. As they do so, investors’ share values grow, and they get paid a share of the profits called dividends.

Unfortunately, this is no longer what happens.

  1. Investors take advice and bets on platinum prices, currencies, energy forms, Sovereign debt bonds and elections and referendums. Not only is it just gambling, much of the subject matter is directionalised and manipulated to create a profit that hasn’t been earned on the ground. It has close to zero use in real global business, and a -56% relevance factor to smaller new IPO businesses.
  2. Most shareholders are remote, in the sense of having bought company shares on advice, while taking no real interest in the business. Worse than sleeping partners, their sole desire is to sweat capital: so they’re as likely to dump your shares in favour of platinum or the Aussie dollar as they are to increase their shaareholding.
  3. What they do want if they stick around – despite all the salutary lessons of 2008/9 – is a margin of at least 25% on the gross year in year out, and dividends. QE enabled companies to do that without any substantial sales growth at all. Across the world now, it is (with Zirp) becoming commonplace for large multinationals to borrow in order to pay a dividend the investor simply shouldn’t be getting. Short-termism still dominates most corporate strategy.
  4. The demands of bourses led to the rise and rise of the accountant. This is the bloke who knows zilch about the customer or the retail trade, but needs to find the quarterly 25% on the gross four times a year. His main strategies are firing people, screwing raw material producers, and diluting product quality. The larger and more widely quoted the company is, the lower down the list of priorities the end user comes.
  5. That should let in young competition to give those customer brand or service users a better value, better performing product. This constant refreshment of fat process by new creativity is about the best feature of capitalism….when it happens.
  6. But it is happening less and less. There are several factors involved. To retain market dominance, push up the share price and increase the value of their own holdings, public companies do everything in their power to squeeze out smaller competition: with massive price discounts, by stuffing the trade with huge stock inventories, or in the end by buying them.
  7.  When they buy – merge with or acquire – smaller competitors, merchant banks move in to “advise” on the process and, generally speaking, analysts like this M&A because they see it as maintaining the share as a safe bet with “economies of scale”. What the customer loses is the creative culture of the acquired company. Also, much of the time the shareholders do very badly out of it. As long as fourteen years ago (in 2002) The Economist audited M&A shareholder values following acquisition, and discovered that in 57% of cases, value had been destroyed. Not diluted – destroyed.

This is what I mean when writing about the current globalist bourse/banking model of capitalism as really multinational monopolism. As I write, Greece is being raped by global monopolism, and its assets flogged off to those who have too much of the world market already. It’s being raped (and its government neutered by the Troika) because bourses have made multinational globalist racketeers so powerful, they own the politicians and call the shots.

I have to laugh some mornings – usually when watching Boombust TV – when I hear those up to their necks in this creeping monopolism talking about the “mismatch between what nervous markets see and what we know is a trend of rising wages and growing sales”. In reality, the mismatch is between what global interbank selling and bourses engage in, what daft ideas like QE, Nirp and Zirp destroy….and what creative business really needs: capital from supportive, long term and actively involved shareholders. They will not get that by IPOing onto a bourse. (But they will get rich doing that, which is why most entrepreneurs do it sooner or later)

If we stay in the EU, we will sign up to TTIP. This will squeeze out everyone from existing sectors, and ensure that separately genuine inventions and innovation get hoovered up by the Big Boys sooner rather than later. Although in the West, mutually based owner/staff/customer company forms are the fastest-growing type of set-up, most of the capital, the banking support and the political trading power resides within the Davos Club.

These businesses use that power to corrupt taxation systems, pay as little tax as they can get away with, and blatantly evade it with the nod-and-wink blessing of the authorities…whose sole desire is to get a quick and easy deal….which is a bad and dirty deal for the average citizen.

So to summarise, globalist bourses and monopolist capitalism

  • stagnate innovation
  • stifle competition
  • leave companies therein open to irrelevant investment whims
  • disengage for much of the time from real business needs
  • grow unemployment
  • dilute wage levels
  • often destroy shareholder value
  • control political Parties through cash, then
  • starve sovereign governments of tax cash
  • reduce consumer demand
  • cost Welfare Ministries billions in benefits
  • mess up time and time again & bring Sovereigns closer to insolvency
  • fail to provide enough genuine growth and proper tax levels to fund private or State pensions.

But this is the mechanism upon which the future of the United Kingdom is at present massively overdependent. By contrast, rejecting it is the basis upon which I campaign for more devolution to communal mutualism, reduction of our dependence on globalism, a greater variety of capital support models beyond bourses, justice for the Waspi Campaign and our secession from the European Union within two years of a Brexit vote on June 23rd.

Centrally controlled socialist command economies are not the answer. They have failed to avoid massive corruption or produce widespread wealth in society, be that in China, the USSR, North Korea, Vietnam, Venezuela, Zimbabwe or Cuba.

But there is such a thing as society: it trains, educates and provides health care for employees. Thatcher was wrong, and she’s dead…get over it and move on.

Above all, any Big Central State one-size-fits-all mentality intrinsically threatens the liberty of the Sovereign Citizen, and removes their sense of communal responsibility.

To get to this – once we’ve thrown off Brussels, Camerlot and Washington – we need a unique and new socio-economic movement that blends community bases with internet solidarity.

There is no point at all – in the medium term future – to a political movement. That power base is owned by global corporations.

The three big steps are these:

i. Vote Brexit

ii. Work for a united Opposition to Camerlot

iii. Create a watershed precedent of stopping the neoliberals’ destruction of our infrastructure. This has already happened in London & Bristol mayoral elections. It is thriving at Football Club United of Manchester (FCUM). It must now succeed in stopping Hunt at Health, Morgan at Education, and Crabb at the DWP.

The defeat of Irwin Rommel in the Western Desert during 1942 destroyed the myth of Nazi military invincibility. We are now at another Montgomery moment. If we can destabilise the EU, tear up TTIP, defend British infrastructure and reject Camerlot, the myth of the gloablist superState corporate future will start to crack. It won’t crumble, but it will mark the beginning of its end.

Yesterday at The Slog: Mad, stupid or wot?

48 thoughts on “ANALYSIS: Why Brexit, Waspies & Junior Doctors are the Front Line of our rescue from globalism

  1. We could try to build, facilitate and promote systems that put together investors and businesses that shared values — that would tend to link investors more closely with the business, and help them care more, as well as being a force to hold the business to its declared principles. Doing this would be challenging, but not rocket science / brain surgery. Anyone want to share having a go?

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Just a moment! I had to look carefully at what you said…

    neoliberal austerity and fanatical privatisation will wreck Britain’s infrastructure

    Britain’s infrastructure is in an apalling state on account of the way in which much of it was privatized. The railways are a prime example of this, and the whacky idea to privatize the electricity industry. What is important to note here is that the European Union had no hand in this whatsoever. This particular march towards TTIP was Britain’s idea entirely, and in isolation! Because it really puzzles me that John thinks this is a problem foist on Britain by the EU! Outside the EU, Britain can get up to this kind of nonsense without the scant amount of regulatory framework that the EU does impose on Britain…

    Britain wouldn’t need to woo Chinese investment in the British electricity sector if the British infrastructure was well planned… and the British went to the absurd – nay, alarming lengths to achieve this by vetoing the steel tariffs in Europe. You cannot invent this kind of blind political fumbling, it really has to be the result of blind corporate pressure to sell this, then sell that, and all so that blind corporate greed can feast on railways privatized… and stations merchandized. What’s more it cost the British government a stack… but that’s what TTIP is all about, and it’s what Britain does best.

    Only later would the idea of rail privatization be seeded in Europe, having seen the profits to be made from the passing trade in the station concourses… and the rail industries effectively torn apart with the track maintenance and operations sides being divided, cut through with the blunt knife of dull bureaucratic thinking. For “track maintenance” please realize that this actually means “station franchises”. Track maintenance in Britain was scandalously bad… and probably still is.

    However, this does show TTIP to be the result of American corporate thinking – which as explained, is already in full swing in Britain. American corporate thinking does not understand how Europeans work. SNCF, Deutsche Bahn – along with their so-called ‘track maintenance’ other halves – are fully privatized companies under the kind of law the US sought to bring into Europe… the problem is that they never dreamed of them being anything else than privatized companies.

    It was beyond them to think of the privatized company that is wholly owned by the government. Thus they made no provision for it.

    The result is that Captrain and Schenker have mopped up the lucrative rail freight markets across Europe – including Britain. In Britain there is the odd glimmer of truly privatized rail lines, with Virgin and First (although I need to check facts here, and find out how much investment in these companies has been made by the governmental vultures SNCF and DB). Most of the smaller companies are now owned by the governments of France of Germany… just like the energy sector in Britain.

    Precisely what TTIP was introduced to avoid!!! Oh, sorry, it’s not been formally introduced in the UK yet, has it? My apologies to all, but the difference between the British economy and one ruled over by TTIP is hard to distinguish these days.

    Liked by 3 people

  3. We have the option to vote in the UK every five years, to either continue with the Govt in power, or throw them out, and install a different Party with a different ideology.
    This is called democracy and helps to reset any damaging policies carried out previously.
    What is not obvious to a dilatory UK population, is that the BREXIT VOTE is a once in a lifetime opportunity to reclaim our freedom from a corrupt ,autocratic,anti-democratic,unaccountable bureaucracy that is the EU.
    If we do not exit the EU we tie ourselves to a union that has brought austerity,with its accompanying poverty and chaos to many countries in Europe.
    Contrary to what PM Cameron states regarding the possibility of war outside the EU. Remaining within the EU,increases the likelihood of UK involvement in war..
    Membership of the EU has been extended to the countries of the old Soviet Union Eastern bloc. This was not an economic decision or a concern for the welfare of the peoples of these Eastern bloc countries. Rather it was a hidden political one with far reaching ramifications.
    Membership of the EU,brings with it almost mandatory membership of NATO.
    NATO has instigated wars in Yugoslavia in 1989, Libya and Syria,
    In Ukraine it was involved in the coup which installed a neo-Nazi regime
    All of these countries are now failed states and the European refugee problems are the visible result.
    GW Bush unilaterally exited the ABM nuclear treaty in 2002. NATO troops are now building up on the borders of the Baltic states. Nuclear missiles are now installed in Romania and soon Poland ,to be zeroed on Russia.
    This is a new Wall to cut-off trade between East and West. Disruption of the New Silk Road trade routes from China to Europe are caused by the war in Syria and the Washington domination of Ukraine.
    The EU is a patsy for Washington policies against the rising powers of BRIC countries.
    It is not in the UK’s political or economic interests to be part of the EU.

    Liked by 5 people

  4. John
    I’m afraid that Westminster will go for TTIP whether the UK remains in the EU or not. In fact, I’m beginning to think that the UK stands a better chance of avoiding beign sucked-up by Washington’s cunning plan, if she remains in the EU.

    France for one is not happy about TTIP as you know, and may actually prevent its implementation, at least in its current format.

    O/T: It looks like the truckers are about to start flexing their muscles here in France, stand by for action, and stock up on essentials…quickly…very quickly…

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Gosh I learn so much from you John! Love reading your articles plus you must have the best commenters on the web! ☺


  6. Simon

    There is already an outfit doing this called Regis: I have a good senior contact there, Paul Koronka.
    They raise ethical money and offer exhaustive help in how to set up & protect a mutual.

    Liked by 1 person

  7. John change of subject, look at reporting why the conservatives will be protected from their election fraud.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Gemma a good piece once again,although i think you misunderstand John! privatisation has been mainly British policy! and he says that,if am wrong am sure John will correct me!
    actually breaking from the EU creates to fundamentals i Europe will lose British influence and may reject the move to globalism!(hence why so many corps demand we stop in) ii if out Britain undertakes TTIP etc and doesn’t prosper then the EU will probably reject it outright,TTIP will not bring prosperity for the very good reasons John lays out so well before us! and therefore the likelihood that the EU without British influence will seek alternatives and Globalism/US interest could not continue with the EU/China /Russia alternative,because with half the worlds population doing better than flat earth economics many other states would/could see a better future and switch because flat earth economics couldn’t support them for long!! the brexit vote is more about who influences the EU the most and losing British influence over our European partners is what and why they’re so keen for Britain to stay!
    We can’t be allowed to fail if we leave contrary to what the media says because to do so! would show flat earth economics in all its follious glory! and therefore hasten the move away from corporate interest!

    Liked by 2 people

  9. @boncourage

    Yes, it is a dilemma is it not? With several misgivings I was beginning to be convinced by the case for Brexit, based mainly on the idea that it would be easier to oppose the corporate tyrants and their bought enablers on the local U.K. level, rather than at the more remote level of the Brussels bureaucracy. Ironically it was the film ‘Brexit the Movie’ posted on yesterday’s thread that made me question this. To see a succession of those disgusting characters most responsible for enabling the Neoliberal ideas of Thatcher and her ilk in the 80s – Kelvin McKenzie, Nigel Lawson, Peter Lilley, Melanie Phillips – showed that the choice is really between two extremely unattractive options. I could barely contain my laughter listening to the very people who had virtually destroyed British parliamentary democracy during the Thatcher years lecture the audience on ‘transparency’ and ‘representative democracy’. These very creatures who, with the cheerleading of the Murdoch Times and tabloids supported the use of the police as a political tool against the miners, cooperated fully with the agenda of secrecy and deception practiced by the Tory governments of Thatcher and Major and allowed the machinations of bullying figures like Bernard Ingham to completely undermine the checks and balances of Parliamentary government. My touchstone on whether British governments are accountable to the U.K. public was Thatcher’s secret use of the S.A.S. to support Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge during their terrorist war against the Vietnamese government. This was done as a favour for Reagan because the U.S. would have been unable to do it without the scrutiny of Congress. To hear these figures advocate for Brexit makes me extremely wary.

    As a sidenote, the idea that democracy just consists of having a vote in a first past the post contest every 5 years or so as stated in the video is a pernicious lie that should be confronted every time it is raised. It gives the illusion of democracy, but nothing more. Such a vote is meaningless without an educated and informed electorate who can legally express their displeasure with their representatives on the streets, free of government surveillance. If a country has a MSM owned and suborned by oligarchs, bankers and intelligence mandarins, voting every 5 years simply ‘legitimises’ elite control. The U.K. is not, (and perhaps has never been), a democracy in the true sense of the word.

    Liked by 4 people

  10. Anonymous on May 17, 2016 at 9:53 am
    Fabulous! See what I mean about John’s commenters? Honest to God, I’ve read more sense on this site than I’ve heard from *any* political party the last 13 years. We need to #Brexit, pitchfork the Tories out of Westminster and install a whole new way of doing things in Britain and I’d vote for any of you any day of the week before any of them. Waste of space the whole darn lot if they can’t run Britain without the EU calling the shots and if so, what have we been paying their hefty expenses for all these years?!

    Liked by 2 people

  11. I do not believe that we will win the Stay/Leave argument unless there appears some very strong Brexit leadership with gravity, which concentrates on ramming home the “FACTS” as opposed to the mindless and useless speculations about the:- value of the pound/unemployment/loss of export market/security/Britain’s place in the world etc. about which there will always be two sides to the arguments.The undecided need to know of and understand the full FACTS and implications of the Treaty of Rome, TTIP, proposed European Army, US influence of the EU and other facts that those more knowledgeable than me will be familiar with.
    Where are they??

    Liked by 1 person

  12. One has to wonder what effect Brexit and being PM would actually have on BoJo, we already know he is a duplicitous underhanded devious scoundrel from old, with a new found impetus and hubris to match it all could go to his head in a big way, no, corection IT WILL go to his head in a big way, I don’t believe the NHS would be safe in his hands (assuming no TTIP), but he is as likely to sign up for it as anybody else, nothing will be sacred, he’s in bed with Murdoch already, bang goes the BBC, no, we could be jumping out of the fire directly into the incinerator, looking at this logically, BoJo is reason itself for voting stay, Brussels does by its own admission ‘meddle’ but, can you imagine a newly formed Govt. with BoJo at helm? Unfortunately also, I don’t believe for a minute control will ever be wrestled from Washington.
    Nothing is ever going to be the same again, as has been said before, we are in a period of great change, the real changes are still yet to come.
    But the direction is, forever downward.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. Myth of Nazi ( military) invincibility?

    They re still playing everybody off tbe stage to this day. Not perhaps with Panzers but commetcially, industrially and soon even financially if the euro doesn t collapse. The only hope others have is that Merkel continues for another term , goes completely gaa gaa whilst in harness having implemented so many socially lunatic policies as to cause sicietal implosion beforeshe is sectioned.

    Liked by 2 people

  14. John Ward

    But how do you imagine the Germans can/shall evade TTIP?

    Well this is the point of TTIP, isn’t it? That nobody can get around it. But I would like to take a look at a slightly different issue, and that is what the people creating TTIP wanted to achieve. The point here is that it has nothing to do with Germany and it has nothing to do with undermining governments. Corporations have no interest in such weak institutions, corporations want the money.

    You will remember when the Bundesverfassungsgericht in Karlsruhe made it legal to pay Greece money, something that was clearly against German law. This was the banks making it clear that legal niceties would not stop them from draining a government’s coffers for their own private use, in this case by taking the repayments of Greek loans, paid for out of the German treasury.

    Which is the point, really. The German government can do as it pleases, just as long as the needy greedy people of this world are paid their unfair due. The problem is, as has been demonstrated by the fact that America’s industry is now ‘elsewhere’ – along with much of Germany’s too, I’ll add – and the ruin of the middle classes in America. These were the very people who made America strong, and to a degree, still make Germany strong, what with their Mittelstand.

    America has a government deficit of 4%; the UK has a(n alarming) government of 7,5%; Germany – even with its much reduced corporation tax of 15% (it used to be 35% in the 90s) – has a government surplus of around 6%.

    That 15% corporation tax is in the cross-hairs of the TTIP blunderbuss.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. Winston Churchill 1899

    “Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world.”

    This is amazing. Even more amazing is that this hasn’t been published long before now.

    CHURCHILL ON ISLAM Unbelievable, but the speech below was written in 1899. (Check Wikipedia – The River War). The attached short speech from Winston Churchill, was delivered by him in 1899 when he was a young soldier and journalist. It probably sets out the current views of many, but expresses in the wonderful Churchillian turn of phrase and use of the English language, of which he was a past master. Sir Winston Churchill was, without doubt, one of the great men of the late 19th and 20th centuries. He was a brave young soldier, a brilliant journalist, an extraordinary politician and statesman, a great war leader and British Prime Minister, to whom the Western world must be forever in debt.
    He was a prophet in his own time. He died on 24th January 1965, at the grand old age of 90 and, after a lifetime of service to his country, was accorded a State funeral. HERE IS THE SPEECH:

    “How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy.
    The effects are apparent in many countries, improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the
    Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement, the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Muslims may
    show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it.
    No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step;
    and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.”
    Sir Winston Churchill; (Source: The River War, first edition, Vol II, pages 248-250 London).
    Churchill saw it coming.


    Liked by 3 people

  16. I expect a railroad of legislation from the EU through the UK economy of benefit to vested interests that small or medium size companies can never compete with to put them out of business. So I expect the UK employment to be seriously undermined with profit taking by outsourcing the order of the day although Osborne will not admit that neither.

    23rd June 2016 … The last ever democratic action by the UK population, talk about 300 spartans and the Persian empire and the epic battle. 300 sloggers and the unholy neocon empire we got … not a chance.

    Say no more then and those demanding we stay are either fools or thieves.

    JW write the soundtrack for the EU movie titled “the day democracy died”. Will be a hity in not time.

    Liked by 2 people

  17. JW

    The 2 year length of time to leave the EU? Lisbon Treaty? Pondered this walking the dog…

    The sum of all the other treaties put under one treaty with the NEWLY added clause of 2 years to leave that the population never had a democratic vote on? I think we can put parliament on trial for agreeing something that nobody signed up too like an “odious treaty” and can promptly bin it if we were to leave.

    Thing is the dumb UK population don’t realise they never got to vote on these kind of things so you have not agreed to anything yet but you will on the final democratic choice you will ever get.

    Liked by 1 person

  18. @Gemma – “without the scant amount of regulatory framework that the EU does impose on Britain… .”

    I hardly think that describing some 60% of Britain’s laws imposed since 1993 by EU regulations “a scant amount”. Since 1993, EU regulations amount to 50,000 +. This figure excludes the period before 1993. By 1980, it had reached 14,000. A number of sources suggest the total amount since membership is well over 100,000. Some EU commissioners themselves have referred to a figure of 75-80% of all national laws.
    Although some of these laws are clearly beneficial – and one could argue would not have been instituted by certain British govts. if left to their own devices – others are notoriously trivial, unnecessary and even damaging. Many small businesses have to employ someone simply to deal with EU regs. Apart from its insatiable pursuit of power, there’s an impression that part of the EU’s raison d’être is to regurgitate laws that restrict choices, reduce competition and increasingly complicate life.

    Liked by 3 people

  19. Now that Cameron, being an arrogant fool , has called the referendum as a short term fix to a non existing problem he has given us a chance to kick the ruling class into the long grass for a goodly while. The first time this happen in 1381 with the peasants revolt , the king slipped of the hook , and things returned with a vengeance because Wat Tyler did not take his chance and kill the king. If we do not take our chance and vote NO things will carry on as before with the added joy of TTIP to render even more of our populace unemployed and our low wage slavery even more precarious. It’s that important.

    Liked by 4 people

  20. @Canexpat – “those disgusting characters – Kelvin McKenzie, Nigel Lawson, Peter Lilley, Melanie Phillips”.

    As opposed to that incredibly delightful and fragrant bunch on the other side (some of whom we know to actually be guilty of treachery) – Blair, Brown, Mandelson, Cameron, Osborne, Kinnock, Clegg, Milliband, Major, Heseltine, Gummer, Hunt, May, not to mention Juncker, Schultz and Djisselboem over there. Do they really seem a more salubrious choice to you?

    I agree that the choice of spokespeople interviewed in the film left much to be desired, particularly regarding views from the Left. Apart from Labour Brexiters such as Kate Hoey and John Mill,s, where were Austin Mitchell, Frank Field, Graham Stringer, Gisela Stuart? It could have featured extracts from the late Tony Benn and Peter Shore ……

    Perhaps you could explain what exactly you find “disgusting” about Melanie Phillips ?

    Liked by 2 people

  21. @ghost – I have no idea, as I suspect do you, as to how many of these thousands of laws were proposed or influenced by Britain. Of COURSE Britain was involved, as most of her governments since membership have either been colluding or submitting to the EU with little backbone in protecting Britain’s interests. That is a large part of the British problem – the calibre of our governments and political representatives. As much as I’m in favour of Brexit, it would be far from enough to make the sort of political improvements that are necessary. I have no idea where to start, except that I’d like to get rid of 95% of all those currently in situ.

    Liked by 2 people

  22. Oh REEEEAAALLLEEEE, Mr Reimer.

    Did you really think I’d fallen for it?

    You need to leave now, as people are using long words here.


    Liked by 1 person

  23. Alexei

    the great thing about EU laws is that they have to be translated into the local language. A legal friend of mine saw some legislation that had been translated into French… it barely resembled the wording in Dutch or German…

    the only problem being is that the overseers do speak English, and thus are able to ensure it’s effective enforcement. Which they can’t do if someone slips in a few legal innuendos in a language they can’t read.

    JW If the Conservatives are let off their frauds, there will still be sufficient evidence left behind for certain people to tap the Conservatives on the shoulder and remind them that a prison warder’s keys are rattling. In short, it only means that the Conservatives will be even more inclined to do as they’re told in future.

    Hoist by their own petard.

    Liked by 2 people

  24. Alexei just pointing out that in that 60% of laws imposed on Britain a fair percentage were British lead and British designed laws,taken through the the EU,rather than through parliament and that those the Britain have had vetoed or vetoed themselves other nations proposals,that 60% isn’t just since British designed and proposed laws are included in that figure,so laws that parliament want foistering on other nations,whilst implementing them on Britain not through parliament but through Brussels! which conveniently then leaves them free to blame it on others when it is themselves passing such laws in truth!

    Liked by 1 person

  25. Sorry JW but didn’t really get into the meat of the post tonight, too down after a casual meeting today.
    Reason.. Today I bumped into two OAPs I know, probably middle class but labour leaning.
    On the referendum their views were, 1) stay in as the current shower were useless so stick with the Europeans who at least know what they are doing. 2) I don’t like changes … Voting stay in.

    Paddy power amd Betfair have it right, god help us all.
    Only positive is that they are unlikely to vote, too indifferent and thick.

    Liked by 2 people

  26. @alexei

    There are odious individuals on both sides of the debate – I have been clear about that. What I found difficult to take in the Brexit movie was being lectured on the meaning of democracy by many who had actively undermined it during the Thatcher years. Those that you cite from the Remain camp may well be duplicitous venal and amoral specimens, but they are not expecting me to forget their role in the sabotage of Britain’s public weald while they pontificate about the undoubtedly undemocratic nature of the EU.

    As to Melanie Phillips, she has described Neoconservatism as “the only truly moral response to the times in which we live.”, and her unstinting defence of the criminal behaviour of the supremicist Likud regime have not left me an admirer. :-)

    Liked by 2 people

  27. Gemma
    “the great thing about EU laws is that they have to be translated into the local language. A legal friend of mine saw some legislation that had been translated into French… it barely resembled the wording in Dutch or German…”

    Absolutely. I’m qualified in simultaneous and/or consecutive interpretation in four European languages, which frankly earned me very little. When I moved into the freight industry, I began to read legislation for haulage in various EU countries wherein restrictive practices applied to foreign owned/operated that did not apply to indigenous hauliers.

    I and two others turned our skills into a consultancy to pick holes in Euro regulation via inaccurate legislative translation. Sadly, my two partners were lawyers and after 18 months were paid enough by a multinational to go from poacher to gamekeeper

    Liked by 3 people

  28. Reimer, what is it about guys that they have to say such idiotic things in public?

    It wouldn’t be so bad if you actually added something to the conversation, rather than sitting in the corner and quietly babbling to yourself. It’s not as if I don’t know the frustrations of being banned – and that in itself was the result of the frustrations of being trolled by backslapping guys with little more intelligence than you have.

    So get a life and say something useful!

    Liked by 2 people

  29. JW, I know that this is YOUR blog, and it is YOUR decision to ban people.

    Now, if you were the only reader, you would be the only person who had the right to express their view.

    I could go on…


  30. Another good post, John, followed by some equally good commenting. Thank you, Sloggers all – you’re a welcome change from the mess of corruption and apathy out there.

    Liked by 2 people

  31. The problem the Brexiters have is that just at the time when they need people to be nationalistic, most people are thoroughly disillusioned with British democracy and don’t see it as delivering any kind of salvation. The idea we can get rid of Cameron’s ilk post-Brexit is pure fantasy. The whole system is bent so that the establishment stay in power, which is why they made sure Boris Johnson led the Leave campaign.
    Perhaps the balance would have been different on 1997. But as it is we’ve had 20 years of British prime ministers fighting wars for the Americans and Israelis. And not surprisingly powerful elements within both countries want Britain out of the EU so they can seize yet more power. No thanks.

    Liked by 3 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s