BREXIT Discussion, v3.0: World Leaders' Reaction After The U.K Voted To Leave The European Union.

[in the]

I said the British Empire was mostly dismantled by the mid 60s, I just said that Hong Kong was the last territory they ceded. That's an accurate statement.

I don't deny that some good things came from the British Empire but those were byproducts. The empire was spread for the benefit of the British as evidenced by the mass feminine caused in India when millions of tons of wheat were hauled out for consumption by the British.

Maybe because this thread is about Brexit? When there's a thread about China we can talk about those atrocities.

The Bengal famine happened in 1943, decades after the Armenian genocide.

I mentioned Kim Kardashian, along with Pope Francis, to show how the Armenian genocide has some presence within the public conscience given its been mentioned by the patriarch of the single largest religious sect and one of the biggest pop stars in recent history. Its not exactly a forgotten tragedy thankfully.

Sure and I mentioned before that the Swiss self flagellating at the alter of white guilt is completely retarded. Not all Europeans have the same colonial track record and some of them have virtually no relevant one to speak of. And to be clear no single person should feel guilty for something they themselves did not do.

Or maybe people are more likely to discuss atrocities that are relevant to their own history. Americans don't exactly talk a lot of Brazilian slavery or vice versa. If we're talking about the UK than the relatively recent history of imperialism that country has is relevant.

And really I said before that guilt over this stuff shouldn't direct policy. I was just pointing out the irony of the country that pioneered economic integration, in a much more coercive fashion too, and laid the groundwork for the current global framework lashing out against all that. That's not a statement for or against Brexit really.

Nobody looks fondly upon the Japanese and the Turks for their denial of the their atrocities and it should be that way. The relevant parties there, like the Armenians and Koreans, still do talk about those atrocities though as evidence by one of the links I posted earlier concerning the reparations the Japanese government only recently decided to pay to the Koreans after decades of denial.

A lot of things came through the Brits - death and English common law. It's complicated. The reason I'm bringing this up is because when discussing immigration in European countries, it's typical for some people to talk about how the British colonized a good portion of the globe but now doesn't want immigrants, which is why I posted that video of Douglas Murray who destroyed that argument. Should the UK, most of whom alive today had nothing to do with colonialism, suffer to the point of negation for the sins of their fathers? That's what this entire discussion boils down to. How long do they have to suffer for something the vast majority of them had nothing to do with? Why just Britain? Why aren't those advocating for such a thing consistent and apply it across the board, to every group that has ever wronged or been wronged?

I personally think it's glib. I think the people involved should be punished, not the innocent who just happened to be born into that situation. That's the brass tacks of this whole discussion. Everything else is window dressing.

Maybe I haven't seen some people who want the Brits to suffer also do that in other threads with other nations, but color me skeptical that that's actually happened. It's usually just directed towards white nations, easier targets.

I don't want this to come off as me defending the atrocities of the British empire, but rather inconsistent logic by those who want to hold it over the heads of the offending nation even though the people are overwhelmingly innocent of such actions that happened in the past. Plus, the Brits have at least made an attempt to correct their wrongs, which is actually coming back to bite them in the ass right now via immigration. They have been punished. At least the Brits have recognized their wrongdoings. Turkey can't even be bothered to do that and have bribed no telling how many people in different governments to defeat votes that would give the "genocide" label to their actions done to the Armenians. I think the criticisms you and others have leveled are, for the most part, unfair, inconsistent, and too ambiguous.

I will say this, some other posters in this thread have correctly pointed out that many of the problems the UK is having with Muzzies have nothing to do with the current EU, as the Pakis causing trouble came through a different route than the EU. That is something that should be distinguished, but as I said before, from what I gather, Brexit was more about the fear that Merkel's open doors would unleash a wave of people into the UK who don't have much British culture or values, other than spoken language. I think that fear is not unfounded, and I think we should recognize that the Brits aren't so stupid as to think otherwise. That isn't directed at you, just in general. Didn't feel like making a new post.

 

[RockstarChris]

I would have been relieved for sure.

But I don't believe in direct democracy or the use of referenda for these types of matters. Democracy is flawed, but some form of accountability is needed to achieve legitimacy for the 'demos'. A team of technocrats can do a good job. A benevolent dictator can also do good. I think representative democracy is probably the best system that we have.

Democracy is flawed?........I remember a guy who said that and he committed suicide in a bunker when Democracy rolled into his city.

 

[Arkain2K]

What do you think will change, if any, in the E.U?

Speaking in Brussels, Tusk said: “I have offered the leaders an informal meeting of the 27 in the margins of the European council summit. And I will also propose to the leaders that we start a wider reflection on the future of our union.

 

[nefti]

Again can somebody tell me who the voters were being racist towards? The UK has a long history of immigration from both Islamic and non-Islamic nations all throughout the world. UK has a long history of excepting people of different colors way before the European Union. So What group was targeted? Who are they being racist towards?

 

[nefti]

Also that the people who voted to leave the European Union Union State any plans that a long tradition of excepting immigrants from former colonies would change?

 

[Bald1]

What do you think will change, if any, in the E.U?

As usual, the comments section is pretty amazing. Such as being against mass migration is a human rights violation. Brilliant!

 

[IDL]

There used to be a time when you didn't have to get old and wise to know that. I can tell you that growing up in the U.S. when I did, there was none of this globalist agenda bullshit going on and we said our pledge of allegiance in the morning and we knew that freedom, and independence, and sovereignty was the cornerstone of our society. This idea of having a strong, and sovereign nation is like donkey porn to liberals. Its the worse fate they can think of. Its got bad in the U.S. too. Look how often you see a school try to make someone take down an American flag so nobody will be offended. Its insanity and it starts at the K-12 level.

Well if you want to create globalist citizens you have to start conditioning them when they are young.

 

[IDL]

How did the British leadership get so weak willed that they actually believe they can't be independent? Seriously, how many thousand years was England independent before the EU? Peter Sutherland, for example, is an Irish international businessman and former Attorney General of Ireland. He is no idiot so I have to assume he knows full well that the Brits can be independent and everything will be fine. Its just another example of extreme propaganda to push us down the road toward one world government. This vote was a dick punch to every globalist alive.

Peter Sutherland openly calls to undermine the homogeneity of the European nations and has been a globalist lackey for a very long time.

There was a thread on him
http://forums.sherdog.com/threads/p...ants-to-flood-europe-with-immigrants.3206229/

Here is a bit of his background

non-executive chairman of BP until 2009
Chairman of the Trilateral commission until 2010
non-executive chariman of Goldman Sachs International until 2015
served on the steering committee of the Bilderberg group until 2014
Vice chairman of the European Round Table of Industrialists until 2009

 

[in the]

What do you think will change, if any, in the E.U?

A little too late now, but I guess introspection and a willingness to adapt and be open to unpopular decisions (at least for the people in positions of power) is better late than never.

 

[in the]

One of my heroes, Peter Hitches, is delighted that Brexit won.

lol I find that video hilarious. Thanks for posting. Kudos to the patriotic Labour supporters.

 

[Concrete Whale]

Anti-intellectuals get salty as hell. They don't just hand out advanced degrees, that lowers the value. Poetry degrees and liberal arts degrees are definitely close to worthless. MBAs and grad degrees in finance, economics or policy from ranked institutions are the best way that we have to objectively say someone's opinion is more valued on that particular subject.

They don't tell you anything about the persons' character. If you are an evil malicious person having a degree will only make you more effective at doing damage.

 

[Devout Pessimist]

 

[carlos cadona]

 

[Concrete Whale]

Democracy is flawed?........I remember a guy who said that and he committed suicide in a bunker when Democracy rolled into his city.

I didn't know the Soviet Union was democratic lol.

 

[Deleted member 159002]

That's fully fledged Vulgar Libertarianism. Free movement for capital, but lock down the worker. It's the precise reason globalisation is responsible for economic polarisation.

What do you mean by locking down the worker? What kind of immigration policy do you think would have benefited the non-financiers?

 

[Concrete Whale]

Peter Sutherland openly calls to undermine the homogeneity of the European nations and has been a globalist lackey for a very long time.

There was a thread on him
http://forums.sherdog.com/threads/p...ants-to-flood-europe-with-immigrants.3206229/

Here is a bit of his background

non-executive chairman of BP until 2009
Chairman of the Trilateral commission until 2010
non-executive chariman of Goldman Sachs International until 2015
served on the steering committee of the Bilderberg group until 2014
Vice chairman of the European Round Table of Industrialists until 2009

Have you heard of Count Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi?

The man of the future will be of mixed race. The races and classes of today will gradually disappear due to the elimination of space, time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-negroid race of the future, similar in appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the current diversity of peoples and the diversity of individuals. Instead of destroying European Judaism, Europe, against her will, refined and educated this people, driving them to their future status as a leading nation through this artificial evolutionary process. It’s not surprising that the people that escaped from the Ghetto-Prison, became the spiritual nobility of Europe. Thus, the compassionate care given by Europe created a new breed of aristocrats. This happened when the European feudal aristocracy crashed because of the emancipation of the Jews

The EU gives out a Coudenhove-Kalergi prize every two years to whoever has done the most to bring us closer to this state of affairs. Merkel got it in 2010. They seem to be keeping it lower publicity these days though, much easier to murder people when they are asleep after all so I'm not sure who's got it since then.

 

[IDL]

Have you heard of Count Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi?

The EU gives out a Coudenhove-Kalergi prize every two years to whoever has done the most to bring us closer to this state of affairs. Merkel got it in 2010. They seem to be keeping it lower publicity these days though, much easier to murder people when they are asleep after all so I'm not sure who's got it since then.

Yup I'm familiar with Kalergi. Amazingly that was back in the 1920's

He was financed by the international banking cartel (via Paul Warburg)

There was a thread on him as well
http://forums.sherdog.com/threads/s...t-richard-nikolaus-kalergi-a-prophet.2995295/

 

[Monkadelic]

*than
*you're

I'd also argue *could.

 

[Devout Pessimist]

Ian Tuttle from The National Review had this to say:

Liberal Cosmopolitans Lash Out at the Shattering of Their Worldview

They are unable to believe they may be wrong, so their opponents must be irrational bigots.

In the wake of the U.K.’s decision to withdraw from the EU, the anti-Brexit crowd has leaped to explain the vote in stark terms. “The force that has been driving [‘Leave’ voters] is xenophobia,” wrote Vox’s Zack Beauchamp, and at Esquire Charles Pierce explained: “Some of the Oldest and Whitest people on the planet leapt at a chance to vote against the monsters in their heads....”
blogger Anil Dash managed to squeeze all of these dismissive opinions into a single tweet: “We must learn from brexit: Elderly xenophobes will lie to pollsters to hide their racist views, then vote for destructive policies anyway.”

There was, to be sure, no absence of toxic rhetoric over the course of the U.K.’s referendum campaign. Especially in the weeks before Election Day, the cynicism of both sides was on full display. Still, the impulse to accuse 17 million people of racism seems an unhealthy one.

Both sides of the Atlantic are dominated by liberal cosmopolitans who are no longer able to acknowledge the validity of any other worldview than their own. The anti-Brexit crowd cannot acknowledge that those who voted to leave may have done so out of legitimate concerns about sovereignty or economic opportunity or security — that is, that they may have drawn rational conclusions and voted accordingly. And President Obama seems incapable of recognizing that there are reasonable, non-bigoted grounds on which to oppose his executive actions — for example, to preserve the principle of separation of powers that is a pillar of the American constitutional order.

Liberal cosmopolitanism, regnant since the end of the Cold War, has bought completely into its own rightness. It is entirely devoted to an increasingly borderless political future carefully managed by technocrats and tempered by “compassion” and “tolerance” — all of which aims at the maximal amount of material prosperity. It sees no other alternative than that we will all, eventually, be “citizens of the world,” and assumes that everyone will be happier that way.

The inability of our political leaders to envision political futures other than the one to which they are wedded has facilitated the polarization, and the unresponsiveness, of our politics. That people are now looking for alternatives is, in fact, entirely reasonable.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/437142/brexit-vote-racism-xenophobia-were-not-cause

 

[Ruprecht]

What do you mean by locking down the worker? What kind of immigration policy do you think would have benefited the non-financiers?

If you've got free movement of capital and goods, but not free movement of workers (or effective provision for transnational labour organisation), that completely eviscerates organised labour. The balance of power swings entirely to the employer. Which is exactly what's happened globally. Just look at union membership rates...
Honestly, it's probably easier to place restrictions on goods, services and capital, but I think the free movement of labour within the EU is always going to benefit the EU's poorest workers.