Kippers for Brexit

113550697_farage_trump-large_trans_nvbqzqnjv4bqeo_i_u9apj8ruoebjoaht0k9u7hhrjvuo-zlengruma

Could we have Kippers for Brexit, Mommy dear, Mommy dear?  So what is the point of the United Kingdom Independence Party?  To preserve one political union to the exclusion of another; and it appears in the case of Farage, the ‘Brexit Leader’ according to Fox News, to be the Donald’s favourite pet Limey, whilst Nige revels in the flattery.  Farage is UKIP and UKIP is Farage, a man who would be happy to jump ship and bugger off to the USA for good.  Trump’s aide Wilbur Ross has at least come clean that for the USA, its own interests come before the so-called ‘special relationship’.  So far, there has been no comment from the Trumpkin Alt-Right gobshites in Twitterland about this.  I am not in the least surprised by Ross’ comments or the Alt-Right’s silence.  As for UKIP, I have no time for them, I am British, not ‘UK-ish’; the sooner Britain becomes a republic the better.  I am no doubt in a minority in the latter view, but the assumption that voting ‘Leave’ makes one a lover of the monarchy or the rest of the British establishment needs to be put to rest.

It should be clear by now that ‘Leave’ voters have been played and betrayed by the political establishment, which includes the former commodities broker from ‘The City’ pictured above; and what is worse is that the vast majority of us are old enough to have sensed all along that this would happen.  The stereotypical ‘Leaver’ is working-class, in the true working sense of the word, politically Labour-inclined but socially conservative; white, middle-aged (forty-something or fifty-something) and male; heteronormative, cis-gender, to use the language of the diversity brigade.  We are the people whose work and taxes are the mainstay of the economy, whilst we are held in contempt by pundits and luvvies in the mainstream media, who caricature us as ‘xenophobes’ when most of us are nothing of the sort, being well-travelled within our own country – for employment as well as leisure – and abroad.  Amongst this peer group, irrespective of profession or vocation, whether employed or self-employed, it is clear that we have all been fools.

So what now?  I am annoyed at myself, less for having voted ‘Leave’ than for having bothered to vote at all and having deluded myself that for the first time in my life my vote actually mattered.  I was foolish enough to fall for groupthink laced with hope and belief.  I am not going to rebel and I doubt that any of my peer group will either.  Angry white middle-aged men don’t, do they?  What exactly could they (we) do?  Nothing, except disengage completely from the political process knowing as we have always known, that most politicians are liars, thieves, charlatans or worse.  We’ll carry on working, paying our taxes, trying to save for a pension; and for those with children, trying to secure their future.  And that really will be it.  Politicians will continue to play platitudes, the wheels will carry on turning and nothing will change.  Except that we are now heading for a long period of economic uncertainty, with a clueless and divided government running, or not as is more appropriate, the country, which is drifting on the currents like a rudderless ship.

New Dawn Fades

theresa-may

Theresa may but she may not.  Her penchant for wearing heels is appropriate given how good she is at dragging them.  Since the referendum we have now had Six Months and Sweet FA.  Theresa desperately wants to be Maggie, but doesn’t have the electoral mandate; and she can’t be Maggie, because Maggie only stayed in power by convincing just enough people in the constituencies where it mattered, to vote Tory and share the spoils of purchasing the stolen goods that constituted our national infrastructure.  The family silver has been sold and now the cupboard is bare, our ‘sterling’ currency being anything but that, its market value based only on what investment return can be gained from it (next to bugger all with interest rates so pitifully low).  Under Tory then Labour then Tory we have had a ‘brick’ standard for our economy over the past few decades.  Little wonder then that for a large minority of voters in Britain, the EU is either better or no worse; and as the EU has ruled against Theresa’s Snoopers’ Charter, they have a valid point.

Many of these ‘Remainers’ believe that the EU needs to be reformed and that this is still achievable.  Their intentions may be sincere, but not a single one of them can elaborate how this reform can come about, given the EU’s track record of ignoring any attempts to do so and its contempt for any referendum result which goes against the deterministic European Project to create a continental superstate.  Theresa is, like Maggie was, a ‘Remainer’ at heart.  A true Tory, a whore to big business and its desires for anything that will reduce the costs of labour.  (It was Maggie after all who signed the Single European Act to encourage mass migration to drive down labour costs).  Theresa talks a lot of tough guff about immigration but without any sincerity.  Her track record as Home Secretary, by making cuts to the UK Border Agency, shows that she is anything but sincere on the matter.  Theresa realises that ‘Brexit’ is the only chance that she will ever have to make her mark on the world as a Leader.  With Hillary out of the way and Angela on the skids, Theresa could become the most powerful female Head of Government in the world; and a genuine ‘Brexit’, a clean break, would mean no more subordination to the EU.  But she won’t go that far, she is still trying for a fudge which will please no-one.

I made my departure, my ‘Leave’ vote, as I recognise that the EU has got beyond the point where it can be reformed, not something which I would have thought a decade and a half ago.  But to me, ‘Brexit’ is only worth having if it leads to greater reforms of the United Kingdom, such as it is, possibly away from being a Kingdom or Queendom.  An unelected Head of State, an unelected Upper Chamber (Lords rather than Commissioners) and the lack of a written constitution are issues which genuine progressives should be addressing, instead of clinging to the EU.  We Britons cannot change the EU, we are outsiders and always have been.  The EU will not adopt the common sense solution to its lack of moral authority, of a demerger into a Common Market for the trade in goods and services and nothing more than that.  So we must Leave the EU and build a better Britain, better than the Tories can ever offer us and take back the infrastructure which they plundered from us.  All this sounds very Old Labour, but that is what I am deep down.  The Tories’ procrastination over ‘Brexit’ is because only a minority of them genuinely support it, so the majority are hoping that the longer they can drag it out (with the backing of fraudulent ‘progressives’), the more fed up ‘Leave’ voters will become and say fuck it, why bother?

Finally, one should try to be optimistic and wish good tidings at this time of year; and in keeping with that, the journalist whom I mentioned in an earlier post on this blog must be expecting a single malt from Santa, so merry is he.  However, I cannot share his merriment.  The contrived ‘migrant crisis’ and the terrorist attacks that have come in its wake do not bode well for a peaceful New Year, as both will continue indefinitely.  The globalist enterprise known as the so-called British Broadcasting Corporation, the voice of the political establishment, will accuse those who voted ‘Leave’ of turning their backs on Europe, hence being on the same side as the so-called Islamic State.  Just wait.

From Darien to Gogarburn

fred-goodwin-2

To kick off this blog properly I thought I’d try a review of sorts of Iain Martin’s superb book Making It Happen: Fred Goodwin, RBS and the Men Who Blew up the British Economy.  The author, the bank and the principal villains in the story are all Scottish, including former Labour MP and Chancellor of the Exchequer Alistair Darling, who agreed, eight years ago, that all UK taxpayers should have to bail out the huge amount of debt accrued by Fred The Shred and his pals at Gogarburn.  Martin sets the scene by recounting the Darien scheme, which led directly the Act of Union and the creation of Royal Bank of Scotland, as an example of how the Scottish reputation for fiscal prudence has always been tempered by recklessness.  Scotland’s First Minister and former RBS employee Alex Salmond urged Goodwin that RBS should take over Dutch bank ABN Amro – an event that was to lead to RBS’ collapse – ‘for Scotland’.  If only it had been, then the rest of us wouldn’t have been left picking up the tab.  It was Salmond, without any reference to the bail out of RBS, who suggested that an ‘independent’ Scotland should walk away from the UK’s national debt.  But I shan’t ruin a good story for you; if you don’t wish to purchase the book I’d recommend doing an RBS: borrow it or let someone else pay.

Related to the above, another book recommendation is an older one: Britons: Forging the Nation 1707 – 1837, by Linda Colley; originally published by Yale University Press in 1992, with the first British edition by Pimlico Press in 1994.  In her Conclusions, pp 374-5, Colley states: The Scots, in particular, who became British after 1707 in part because it paid such enormous commercial and imperial dividends, are now increasingly inclined to see partial or complete independence plus membership of a federal Europe as the most profitable strategy for the future.  ‘Federal Europe’ propaganda was quite commonplace in 1992 and based on the assumption that small nations such as Scotland could have some influence in how it was run; but what we have had for the past 24 years is an increasingly centralised superstate in which small nations have had diminishing levels of influence.  Britishness, as Colley tells it, pp 117-132, ‘A Scottish Empire’, was formed by the intermarriage of the Scottish and English landed gentries (our recently departed Prime Minister David Cameron being an English offspring of one such family); as well as the partnership of the English and Scottish political and mercantile classes, with these Scots enjoying a disproportionately high level of influence in running both the United Kingdom and the British Empire.  Some Scots – those of SNP inclinations – are suffering delusions of grandeur if they think that they will ever have that level of influence in running the European Union.

The above all has a bearing on Scotland’s status within the UK, hence the future of the UK itself.  The electorate of Scotland need to decide between the UK, EU or genuine independence and if the last of these options, how they could afford it.  As it is, in the context of the limited sovereignty that the UK has within the EU, the electorate of Scotland have a greater degree of devolved home rule than those of Wales, Northern Ireland and suffice to say England, which has none.  Scottish separation from the UK could and should mean that the subsidy which Scotland receives via the Barnett Formula be redirected towards the economically depressed post-industrial areas of the North and Midlands of England; the ‘Brexit’ heartlands, whose electorates are subject to the condescension of the worse-than-useless Labour Party.  With Nicola Sturgeon ‘threatening’ another ‘indyref’, the electorate of the rest of the UK must insist that Scotland inherit all of the debt bequeathed by Royal Bank of Scotland, if Scotland is to separate from the rest of the UK.  Whilst the SNP’s oxymoronic policy of ‘independence within the EU’, ie subservience to a centralised authoritarian superstate based in Brussels, looks ludicrous on the surface, perhaps the SNP’s tactic is that Royal Bank of Scotland’s debt should be socialised onto hundreds of millions of taxpayers in continental Europe, to let the Greeks, Spanish, Italians and Portuguese amongst others inherit the debt from one of the world’s biggest banking failures.