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, 20 December 2018

Globalism is dead - the future is Local

Belgium faces a snap general election in January as the country's Prime Minister, Charles Michel, was forced to resign for signing up to the UN's Migration Pact. The UK's signing-up to the pact has been lost in the noise of Brexit, but the US, Italy, Hungary, Austria, Poland, Bulgaria, Slovakia and Australia have rejected it which means it has now become just an empty gesture, a crumbling pillar barely sustaining the globalist entablature. Peter Sutherland, the Godfather of Globalisation, died earlier this year having already seen his dream of a world without borders, in which benign global corporates reduced the world (except for the elite 1%, natch) to an equality of semi-poverty, shattered. Sutherland happily accepted that the price for raising billions out of absolute poverty would be the pauperisation of Europe, the US and the old Commonwealth, the hollowing out of the old middle classes. When he appeared before a House of Lords select committee in 2014 he was quite explicit - the EU had a mission to undermine the cultural identity, the congruence, of nation states, and millions of migrants was the way to achieve it.*

My loathing, resentment and anger is reserved for Peter Sutherland and those of his kind, and so should yours be. Sutherland, ex-Chairman of Goldman Sachs, ex-EU Commissioner, ex-Irish government minister, typified the symbiotic links of a corporatist-governmental complex working to impose globalism on unwilling peoples.  

It's important to understand that the antonym of globalist isn't nationalist but internationalist. 

Macron and his fellow globalists make silly speeches in which they denounce nationalism as an impractical sole alternative to globalism. It's a false comparison. The practical alternative to globalism is internationalism - independent, sovereign nations trading with eachother, exchanging knowledge and skills, agreeing common standards where these offer common advantage, maintaining flows between universities and research institutes, and above all acting in restraint of sovereign or territorial aggrandisement of a sort that causes war. 

Churchill was aware that neither France nor Germany were capable in the long term of being responsible internationalists. Both had cursed Europe with war for two hundred years, and neither can still be trusted alone to act in the common interest. Tying them together in a political-economic compact is a very effective way of protecting the world from their malign tendencies - even it it means for them a sclerotic economy, reduced growth and potential. For seventy years this has largely worked - bar a few war-fomenting behavioural lapses in the Balkans and Ukraine. The mistake, the error that should never have been allowed, was to tie the UK into this harness. 

Macron is terrified that a France and a Germany independent of eachother will revert to their old ways. His fears are justified. This is why he's so terrified of nationalism - and so uncertain about the EU's ability to be an internationalist player. For Macron it's globalism or chaos. 

So let us be aware that just as we are at last rectifying the mistake and resuming our place in the world as an international player, we must work equally hard to preserve an EU that keeps France and Germany shackled to eachother - for Britain's long term national security lies in keeping these beasts chained. 

The Elephant - Peter Sutherland's godchild
* Page 263


DeeDee99 said...

"Working equally hard to preserve an EU that keeps France and Germany shackled together" seems, according to Treason May, to require us to become their vassal state; accept their dictatorial governance across swathes of policy areas and to bung them £39 billion (and the rest) for NOTHING in return. I'm sick to death of this country being bullied by them. The EU is not a benign construct that should be preserved in order to keep the peace.

The creation of EU Aristos, governing without democratic consent and the policies they are determined to pursue in order to create the Empire they crave, are wrecking the economies and societies of southern Europe. Just what benefit do these Kommissars bestow that justifies a salary of £20,000 a month. They really are just a new manifestation of the Ancien Regime with their equivalent of the Versailles Palace in Brussels, paid for by the little people who are almost completely shut out from the decision-making process. They are creating the conditions for revolution; if they're lucky they'll just get a series of nationalist terrorist groups (ETA/IRA style) fighting for their freedom, rather than a real revolution.

It's the EU which allows the likes of Sutherland and before him Coudenhove-Kalergi, to impose their "vision" of a Europe destroyed by mass immigration. Without the EU, Merkel would not have opened Germany's borders to millions of African/middle eastern economic migrants and invited them to tramp all over southern and eastern Europe in order to get there. Without the EU, she would not have had the power or authority to order other Sovereign nations to "take their fair share."

I'd rather see France and Germany shackled together, along with the Benelux, but the rest of the EU nations breaking free.

Stephen J said...

Yes Sutherland joins Soros, incidentally Financial Times man of the year 2018...

This is as you say, crooked thinking. Gene Roddenberry based a whole concept on the basis of a one world (globalist) government that promised not to interfere with alien cultures... The prime directive.

Every single episode and film was about how the Earth's politicians and troops broke their promise and then wriggled out of it, or justified it.

We cannot be trusted with other people's freedom, so we should not get ourselves into such positions? We should avoid it, rather than move towards it, since we know the outcome, before we start. Some folk say that repeating the same failed exercise and expecting it to turn out differently is the definition of madness.

Alternatively we put our thinking caps on to see if there might be a better way. It's not one thing or nothing at all as May is suggesting. Everyone can see that, except for the dumb folk that call themselves our government. A simple enquiry on wikipedia will tell them that we existed as nations and traded with each other… goods, knowledge and services. The only time that there was a problem was between dictatorships, empires or situations where a democracy has trouble with a neighbouring dictatorship.

I always come back to Switzerland here. they were fighting each other for centuries as one region or the other tried to establish control. Eventually they collectively realised that co-operation was more profitable and peaceful and that democracy was the best way to allow individuals to express themselves. Democracies must co-operate in order to avoid total chaos.

...As you call it Raedwald... Internationalism.

It is so bloody obvious, why do we tolerate these thick arseholes that call themselves our representatives?

Why don't we, all of us... including police, armed forces, civil servants, media presenters, journalists... anyone with influence, not see these people for what they are?

It is all, after all a pretty modern phenomenon, Hogarth was probably one of the first to talk about it... How did we reach this nadir?

Let us have a new year Rumania moment… I always fondly remember the look on Ceausescu’s fizzog, even though few of us speak their language, the expression is universal.

DiscoveredJoys said...


"It is all, after all a pretty modern phenomenon, Hogarth was probably one of the first to talk about it... How did we reach this nadir? "

I rather think that what we see is just the modern twist of the elites vs the common man. Previous elites included religious leaders using the common man to progress their elitist authority. The aristocratic elites using the common man to progress their elitist authority. The merchant elites... The political elites... The socialist/union/revolutionary elites...

All you need to know about the current situation:

"The EU - it's a plot"

Dave_G said...

I'm surprised you credit Macron with such patriotism in his concern for France when his actions seem to be considerably at odds with his motives. He's working for an agenda that doesn't include his country or his people as the recipients of the benefits he SHOULD be trying to attain - and the same goes for many countries with the notable exception of the USA where Trump has re-energised people to think more as a nation than as a part of a Global agenda.

There's Orban in Hungary and increasingly more support for leadership that brings control back to the country and the people - Italy are getting a backbone, Poland aren't a walk over, Austria are squeaking etc etc. If this movement continues and we rid ourselves of the likes of Merkel, May and Macron we might just have a chance of averting a global conflict.

Brexit is a huge step in the right direction.

Stephen J said...

@Discovered Joys:

Those old kings and queens didn't care about the hoi-polloi, they just used the biggest boy in the playground tactics to protect their position.

In earlier times we had the rather more sophisticated feudal system, which was not fair in terms of the more familiar democracy that has replaced it, but did somewhat address the reality that not all men are equal.

The joy of sex...

The fault in my view is something more general than globalism or the EU... I reckon that socialism, is the real problem. No matter how many times they try it, it causes mayhem and its proponents tell us...

"Of course it didn't work, it wasn't the right kind."

The ONLY way to cure socialism is to supplant representative democracy where irresponsible politicians who push it, hide... A controlling dose of citizen triggered, local and national binding direct democracy, would ensure that socialism is never allowed to fester, anywhere.

As discussed the other day, it is reasonable to elect representatives to represent us for certain things, as long as they can be removed through recall. Ditto, civil servants. If they take our money they should be ready to stop taking it.

Dadad said...

It was either Bliar or Brown who instigated plenty of immigration to the UK, 'to rub our noses in diversity'.

I hate them both.

Rossa said...

Doesn’t matter how many countries don’t sign the UN Migration Pact. If a majority of countries vote for it at the UN it will be binding on ALL countries even if they vote against it. Merkel has admitted as much when challenged by the AfD.

Domo said...

"Doesn’t matter how many countries don’t sign the UN Migration Pact. If a majority of countries vote for it at the UN it will be binding on ALL countries even if they vote against it."

How many divisions does the UN have? I forget.

People are only bound by the laws they choose to be bound by and the laws they are made to be bound by.