Cookie Notice

However, this blog is a US service and this site uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and analyze traffic. Your IP address and user-agent are shared with Google along with performance and security metrics to ensure quality of service, generate usage statistics, and to detect and address abuse.

Thursday, 25 April 2019

Belgian Globalist sneers at Britain

Belgian globalist and MEP Phillipe Lamberts sneered at Britain today, saying
"Global Britain has already happened and it happened through the EU not through nuclear bombs and nuclear submarines .... Brexit is a lose-lose so you cannot make a success of it"
Well, it could be worse. We could be Belgian.

So, the Globalists think they've won. We'll see.

Globalists - Committed to global government, a world-wide constitution and harmonisation of laws and standards, open borders, the primacy of global economic activity, worldwide legal, judicial and justice systems, abrogation of personal freedoms to a class of unelected appointed experts who will act in the general good, the growth of the 'citizen of everywhere', the rule of benign technocracy over 'old fashioned' democracy, the supremacy of supranational State authorities – EU, UN, IMF.


Anonymous said...

"Well, it could be worse. We could be Belgian"

Followers of the World Cup might disagree.

RAC said...

The only individualist remainers are the few who have their nose in the trough in some form or another.
The rest are incredibly sad people who want their whole lives,speech, thought and action,to be controlled, who can only survive as part of the hive.
There's probably a word for that kind of perversion, but off hand I just can't think what it would be.

The J. Hoover's Witnesses said...

Consider, if you will, fair trials. In the criminal courts, in this country, the accused is quite rightly acquitted, if the case against him can’t be proven, and also beyond reasonable doubt. He is also held to be innocent until the accusation is proven.

Criminal cases often - maybe generally do - hinge on intent. That is, if, for example, it can be shown that someone threw a brick through a window, with the intention of terrorising the occupants, then that person is a criminal. If, on the other hand, they broke the window with the purpose of rescuing someone from a burning building, then they are not guilty of criminal damage. So it is frequently not what people do, but the reasons why they do it which determine whether their actions are criminal or not.

The law, operating in this way, does not just follow reason, but it also concurs with people’s moral sense. It would be unjust, unfair, that is, to convict people accused, on any other basis.

Now let’s compare that with what all-too-often happens in popular political debate, or in social settings for instance. The standard tactic of the cynical and the weak-minded is to take the disciplined methods of the courts, and to turn them upside-down. For example you’ll hear it said that “the traitorous Remain voters want to hand their country to vassalage under German dominance”, and that sort of thing.

So what is happening here? Well, they are making an accusation of quasi-criminal intent on the part of their targets, but without in any way proving their claim. Instead, they take the fact that the accused cannot disprove the claim - how could they - as proof that the accusers are right, and that the further fact, that any number of their cowardly mob agree, as making their case irrefutable. Instead of, as the courts do, giving the accused the benefit of the doubt, they inflict the burden of it upon them, and demand that they disprove the accusation beyond all doubt.

Well this is absolute, squalid, rubbish, and any such approach in a formal setting would quite correctly be laughed out of court.

RAC's attempt at a post illustrates this fallacy yet again.

Anonymous said...

"There's probably a word for that kind of perversion"

Termitism ?

Much of what makes human societies and history so interesting is that we are neither 100% social animals, nor 100% individuals, but constantly torn between one way and the other.

The benevolent dictatorship of expert technocrats was the solution favoured by H G Wells. Unfortunately history shows that these decent, honest experts are soon shouldered out of the way by ambitious and power-hungry types masquerading as technocrats. They may even be qualified engineers or scientists, but what they need is praise, status and power. Any university science department will have one or two megalomaniacs.

Don Cox

Quinten Quartermain said...

As Nigel Farage said, Belgium is not a real country.

John in Cheshire said...

Is what this Belgian's saying a kind of bigotry? Is it Hate Speech?
Trashing the citizens of a country isn't very nice, is it? Especially given the colonial legacy of Belgium.
People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

Mark said...

"Vassalage under German dominance"

That, J Hoover, is called the euro. I wouldn't entirely discount some sort of future legal action in one of the countries currently being crucified by it. The intent was pretty clear (as it was here but thankfully they were never able to con us into it). Given that European courts assume guilt, such legal proceeding would it be very interesting.

Another European sneer. Yawn. And how utterly predictable in tone and content.

The British empire was far larger and massively more influential than any of their attempts. That is a matter of historical fact. Are they EVER going to get over it? The fact that they manifestly can't is surely one of the strongest reasons for leaving.

Anonymous said...

Quinten, so England were beaten in the World Cup by a non-country then?

The ignominy of it!!!

RAC said...

@ The J. Hoover's Witnesses.
Oh my, a tad rattled are we. What is it? Seeing the end of your gravy train or envisioning the hive being destroyed.
You can prate high sounding woffle till the cows come home, but you can't change the fact that we, the majority, voted out.

Span Ows said...

Anon 11:50, Belgium isn't even in the World Cup.

The J. Hoover's Witnesses 15:19, psychobabble. Nobody is accusing anybody, Brexiteers are simply voicing what the Remainers are wanting and saying themselves in other words. If the Remainers do NOT want vassalage under German dominance I suggest they explain why they want to Remain in the EU. Do you know why?

Dave_G said...

Globalists are a threatened species these days - certainly a threatened movement. They only ever got as far as they did by subterfuge and obfuscation and once their intent was exposed the rise of populism was an inevitability. Subtle control is one thing - obvious control (piss-taking) became too much.

But with the joining of Russia and China in the creation of an Asiatic 'Empire' and the new Silk Road there will never be a globalist world as the East/West will always divide it.

Both Russia and China are also hoovering up the gold to pre-empt the collapse of the $US further undermining the possibility of a Globalist future - the only way to continue on that path is to 'remove the obstacles'.

But we now have Trump, Farage, Orban, Salvini, Le Penn etc all rising against Globalists/ism - the likes of Lambert are pissing against a hurricane.

Doonhamer said...

Does Belgium even have a government?

DeeDee99 said...

Global Britain started to be built back in the 16th century and continued, pretty much uninterrupted until our treacherous politicians dragged us into the EEC in 1972, when we retreated to our own continent.

The EU has done nothing to help and we're reversing the damage now.

J. Hoover's Witnesses. said...

Dee Dee:

Twaddle. The British lost their empire when the oppressed got guns too and learned how to shoot back, mainly directly after WWII.

That is why they went grovelling to the EEC.

The rest should have listened to de Gaulle.

My income source is all self-owned, incidentally. It is no institution, national or European. Your various silly posts display the fallacy that I identified earlier.

Mark said...

J Hoover,

You exposed no "fallacy" earlier, but you did expose the sheer paucity of remainer argument in a particularly entertaining way (that you doubtless think is some sort of intellectual slam dunk against your manifest inferiors).

Well the oppressed of the European "empire" are rising. Just hope they don't start shooting.

That you refer to "the British" in the third party is very revealing.

Anonymous said...

Unfortunately, as I've mentioned before, the only bulwark against the globalist mindset is communal solidarity - I hate the word 'localism' as it is prone to be hi-jacked by the EU's 'regionalisers'.

The biggest solidifier of communities - apart from family, friends, work, and location - is religion.

Those who believe that they can use the Tiananmen Square tactic to break up opposition - by bringing people in from outside - will know that the people they import may be as unruly as the people that they are trying to control.

Globalist homogenisers vs the world's numerous religions - it's not going to end well.

J. Hoover's Witnesses said...

I refer to the British before I was born, or influenced anything by voting as "they".

I'm not one of these deluded "we" won WWII clowns.

There you go again with your feeble-minded excuse for reasoning.

If you have any accusation to make, then PROVE IT, Einstein.

Mark said...

Hit a nerve there!

Fuck me, it's SO easy with these pseudo intellectual "europeans" isn't it.