US are using Brexit & Ireland to colonise Europe as they’d originally planned via TTIP.
First Baghdad then Athens then London
French Economist Patrick Artus predicted way back in 2002 that Britain would surely have adopted the Euro by now.
He clearly never read the Sun.
The likes of Buiter can claim the ‘Cave-In’ as a victory for the EU or his type of disaster capitalism, but he fundamentally misunderstands.
Brexit is an opportunity for far greater disruption via regulatory arbitrage. Collateral damage will be borne by those whose shoulders are least broad.
Amusing Ourselves to Death — Brexit Jihadi in Sheep’s Clothing Jacob Rees Mogg on Marr Show (3/12/17)
We need to deliver the benefits of leaving to the poorest in our nation because otherwise they will feel deeply let down. That includes dealing with freedom of movement and that includes getting free trade deals so that we can learn the cost of food clothing and footwear.
This from an Alt-Right man who consistently voted to cut disability benefit and whose father William edited the Times for several years and said of Murdoch in his memoirs: “Looking back, he has been an excellent proprietor for the Times, but also for Fleet Street.”
Lord William Rees-Mogg wrote the following book, quoting a famous Rothschild on when best to invest in the stock market.
Brits often sold secrets to Moscow during the Cold War. Redwood’s loyalty clearly lies elsewhere. He’s undermining Britain for his 30 pieces of silver. In days gone such behaviour could get you hanged.
Speaking in Codes – When you mean Deregulation, just say Ireland
Rees Mogg wants to maintain the integrity of Northern Ireland in UK and to have no hard border. This means he wants to recolonise the Irish by forcing them to accept the UK’s regulatory regime.
And if they don’t then Brexiteers can treat them just like they did the ‘Remoaners’.
Rees Mogg & Bannon Alliance
Marr should have asked Rees Mogg about Bannon’s stated aim to deconstruct the Administrative state.
This seems entirely consistent with Blood on The Streets and the Death of Britain.
Rees Mogg suggests speaking to Alt-Right Breitbart owner Steve Bannon is just like talking to Barrack Obama’s “left-wing” former UK ambassadors.
Presumably Jihadi Joseph views fellow Tory austerity architects David Cameron, George Osborne & Oliver Letwin as a bunch of wayward Crypto-Marxists.
Just as energy firms trade with ISIS, Jihadis like Rees-Mogg get on well with comrades like Bannon.
Sympathy for the Devil
On the other hand, here’s Bannon explaining his Economic Nationalism to a US Black Republican meeting last week — a captivating speech.
If you’re disappointed the BBC presenter didn’t do more to challenge Mogg, let’s not forget that till April this year, the Deputy Chair of the BBC Trust was Sir Roger Carr who, as well as Chairing BAE Systems, is a senior adviser at the world’s largest Private Equity firm aka Asset Strippers — KKR.
Toward the end of the interview when asked about Trump retweeting Britain First, Rees Mogg says that Twitter is a trivial medium.
Conveniently ignoring the fact that this was the main medium via which the Brexit and the US election campaigns were fought and is the main arena for Fake News which is how Rees Mogg now maintains power.
What was Mogg saying pre-cave-in on Tuesday when DUP had just scuppered the deal?
The US, UK & EU have always been run for the benefit of the same people — the Rich. Therefore the 2016 Trump & Brexit votes, though referred to as populism, are no different.
Under Brexit the US will export more to Europe by going through UK.
UK employment rights will take a hit and the Investor Protections that they tried to implement under TTIP will be granted under the US/UK trade agreement.
Europe’s regulatory system will be eroded despite the best wishes of their increasingly feeble politicians as the place doubles up as an old people’s home that markets itself as a gap year destination for the global middle class.
After WW2 Democrats and Republicans agreed on most issues.
Each party was a broad church — there was diversity on both sides.
But in the 50s they started to eye up each other’s voter base.
The Democrats were starting to get more votes in the north so they decided, on a national level, to become more ‘liberal’.
This alienated many of their southern voters. The Democrats had turned their back on them. By 1960 they had chosen to become a party of ‘principle’.
Lyndon Johnson warned against such a move.
Perhaps he believed in more transactional politics. Do something because it is going to work. Not because it’s ‘the right thing to do’.
Meanwhile the Republicans went a step further and openly debated whether principles even belonged in politics.
Their decision to court Southern Democrats on the basis that they were opposed to civil rights alienated the liberal parts of the Republican party that backed equal treatment for all.
My own research into Conservatism has taught me that conservatives rarely believe in anything. They are hardly ever idealistic. Their views change over time. They are generally pragmatists. They opt for what is convenient.
Trump, like Reagan, managed to get a lot of Democrats to vote Republican.
So where does Jeremy Corbyn’s gentler type of politics fit into all this?
50s Republicans objected to the New Deal because it gave people the impression that the government would look after them.
Silicon Valley and the Labour Party are talking about Universal Basic Income.
Given that many of the tech firms park their profits in Ireland and the Caribbean their commitment to solidarity looks flexible to say the least.
A friend and I recently agreed that Naomi Klein’s latest book No is not Enough appeals less to Brits than North Americans.
We have other things going on like Corbyn and Brexit.
I like how the American media are so upfront. They openly discuss their administration’s white nationalism and deregulatory stance on health insurance, tax, guns, & net neutrality.
Here in the UK our deregulation is not so much spoon-fed as subliminal.
Just like with shadow banking, we know it’s naughty, we know it’s happening, but we act as though everything’s above board.
Too much Red Tape, Mate
The Brexit vote of June 2016 was sold as the perfect opportunity to take back control of our borders, recover sovereignty and cut Red Tape.
Click the image below for the original Sun article.
But exactly which regulations we’ll be cutting remains to be seen.
After all we’ll still need to retain the right to trade with Europe.
We’ll also need to keep our rights at work, protect our food, and look after the environment.
Countries will only trade with us if they trust our regulatory standards.
How will that happen if we become a totally unregulated space?
As Tax Justice Campaigner Richard Murphy puts it:
“We need rules. Try playing football without any rules. It doesn’t work.”
The lack of clarity from our journalists and politicians may be part of the problem.
Academics like Daniela Gabor, Prem Sikka, David Graeber, Vickie Cooper, David Whyte, Steve Tombs, and commentators like Frances Coppola, Ann Pettifor, Nicholas Wilson, and Ian Fraser are all reliable.
But few out and out hacks are prepared to rock the boat by asking difficult questions.
Even fewer politicians make meaningful commitments, give straight answers, or admit mistakes.
We don’t need no Education
In the midst of all this emerged Nigel Farage.
While the left and right were playing musical chairs in the centre, a gaping chasm opened up everywhere else.
All anyone had to do to occupy the space was point out the contradictions in the system.
Engineering of Consent
So in a strange social experiment the British public briefly entered an age of demagoguery. One that can’t be undone.
Where Thatcher, Blair and even Cameron got their voters mildly excited, unelected Mr Farage got the nation to say “No” to the Establishment and replace it with — the Establishment!
The only problem with all this was that nobody ever thought that the Brexiteers could win. The Brexiteers themselves had no idea what they’d do once they won their coup.
As Hannah Arendt said of the British Empire:
It has often been said that the British acquired their empire in a fit of absent-mindedness, as consequence of automatic trends, yielding to what seemed possible and what was tempting, rather than as a result of deliberate policy. If this is true, then the road to hell may just as well be paved with no intentions as with the proverbial good ones.
In the following clip Nigel Farage strategically attacks ‘diversity’ before claiming that English is no longer spoken in many parts of the UK.
He’s our very own Donald Trump. The influence he’s projected over global politics is staggering.
Earlier this year after asking if Trump’s an anarchist, I asked anthropologist David Graeber to distinguish between corporatists like Farage and fascists like Marine Le Pen.
It was Auntie wot won it
Before the referendum I asked the BBC how frequently Farage had appeared on Newsnight, Question Time, and The Today Programme — they refused.
I assume someone like Rupert Murdoch was supporting him.
In the wake of the phone hacking scandal and the Leveson Inquiry James Harding moved to manage BBC News after having edited Murdoch’s Times for six years.
Maybe he was leaned on by Murdoch to include Farage on the BBC’s radio and televised debates.
Despite being a fully paid up member of the Metropolitan Elite and presumably a Remainer, Harding knows which way his bread’s buttered.
Amusing ourselves to death
Though humouring his old boss would have been logical, what started out as a joke led to a constitutional crisis.
By attacking the EU and political correctness in the way that he has, Farage has managed to overturn forty years of food, employment, financial and environmental standards.
Farage is currently employed by Rupert Murdoch in the US and by LBC talk radio in the UK.
Neo-liberal economics was underpinned by a belief in the idea of infinite growth. But the rapid growth of the ‘left behinds’ who under Thatcher had been written off as the acceptable rate of unemployment led to a growing divide.
They had no way out of a life of austerity.
At the same time came the rise of the Metropolitan Elite with their skinny lattés and Polish plumbers
Plenty of newspapers also told their readers to vote for Brexit.
They weren’t all convinced by Jacob Rees-Mogg, Boris Johnson, Liam Fox and Michael Gove.
The Sun, the Mail, the Express, the Sunday Times, and the Telegraph are all still fervent Brexiteers.
But according to those Brexiteers who aren’t in the Cabinet, the Government are making a hash of Brexit.
The potential benefits of a Brexit deal are fast disappearing as the Government commits to paying more and more money to the EU.
Who is going to stand up for UK regulation?
How will a balance be struck between protecting UK business, UK citizens and non-citizens?
The reader claims although he and his wife love each other, she’s been very ill and has said he can have affairs.
He’s agonising over whether to be honest about his situation with future sexual partners.
He disclosed his circumstances on a dating site and ended up being called an adulterer and a ‘dirty old man’.
Here is the Ethicist’s reply:
Marital vows should not, in ordinary circumstances, be subject to renegotiation. But you have taken your wife’s declaration to mark a departure from ordinary circumstances. What now? Sex requires the consent of all parties involved, and real consent rules out substantial misrepresentation. So you’ll have to find a partner who’s O.K. with your situation. This, as you’ve discovered, may be difficult, given the attitudes of the women on your dating site, most of whom will want at least the prospect of a romantic relationship. (You refer to having your wife’s permission; some of your respondents may have wondered whether she really felt she had a choice. But presumably you’ve decided that her consent was in fact full-hearted and freely given.)
So what is Consent anyway?
Sex requires the consent of all parties involved, and real consent rules out substantial misrepresentation.
Ok, so this is interesting. We’re now talking about full consent and partial consent. Where partial consent would be based on incomplete or unreliable information.
a.k.a. Alternative Facts / Unknown Unknowns.
How many of Weinstein, Spacey or Savile’s alleged victims could be argued to have consented?
On the grounds they were free to reject their alleged assailant’s advances?
It wouldn’t require a particularly skilled lawyer to make such an argument.
Not if the courts put the onus on victims to prove, without evidence, that they refused to consent.
November 2017 marks the 500th anniversary of Martin Luther kickstarting the Reformation by nailing his demands to a Wittenberg church door.
They likened the media frenzy about sexual abuse in Westminster to a witch hunt and painted it as positively Puritan.
Even the Conservative Woman decided to get in on the act and attack the left’s feminism for depriving men of sex.
Yes that’s right – The Conservative Woman!
In fact this has become very relevant such harassment scandal. The Laura Perrins Interview: Feminism has starved men of sex, says Dr Catherine Hakim | The Conservative Woman https://t.co/IO1EjZuXZI via @TheConWom
In the British Spycops case several law-abiding UK campaigners ‘consented’ to sex with undercover police who had infiltrated their activist groups by using false identities and lying about the state-funded nature of their motives.
In one case a policeman fathered a child with an activist — before going missing.
One victim has referred to this as Institutional Rape.
Given the seriousness of these crimes and the fact that they were carried out by law enforcement officers following orders, it is staggering that there hasn’t been a full Inquiry launched so as to ensure complete transparency about this chapter of our history and to be able to learn lessons and move on.
Instead we face more cover-ups as our cowardly leaders close ranks once again and teach us that they literally rape with impunity.
Sex requires the consent of all parties involved, and real consent rules out substantial misrepresentation.
PM Theresa May and current Home Secretary Amber Rudd will both be fully aware of these cases.
But there’s a culture war being played out.
Both have presided over failed Child Sexual Abuse Inquiries again involving Westminster Paedophiles.
The stakes are high and until May or Rudd chooses to end the culture of abuse, the reign of terror will have no end.
I watched some of the proceedings yesterday — Dominic Grieve did a great job.
As far as Britain’s business interests are concerned these ‘mutineers’ are actually the only trustworthy Tories.
The Telegraph quote the pathetic Sir Bernard Jenkin whose contorted logic and uncharismatic speech made him look desperate.
John Redwood contributed in the same way.
Read this excellent Frances Coppola thread on Redwood and make up your own mind:
1/ Here is Redwood’s FT profile. Describes himself as “Chief Global Strategist for Charles Stanley”. Fact he is a senior Conservative MP and former Cabinet Minister is completely omitted. https://t.co/QptijFWDQW
The FT should be ashamed of themselves for giving Redwood a platform.
Sat next to Redwood during the debate was Oliver Letwin with a rather pained look on his face. He admitted in his new book Hearts and Minds that his 1988 book Drift to Union converted Bernard Jenkin into a Eurosceptic.
How must he have felt in the knowledge that this retard has taken the country hostage?
Jenkin also said it’s ok to leave the EU because most countries are outside the EU and are perfectly fine. Hardly the best defence of the Brexit cause.
Maybe he should spend a bit more time in Albania or Puerto Rico?
But former Telegraph Editor Max Hastings summed things up in August:
Hastings of course employed the bumbling oaf Boris Johnson at the Telegraph. He sent him to Brussels and even promoted him to assistant editor so, just like Letwin, this Tory Remainer ought to feel much remorse.
And who am I to presume what you’re (not) thinking?
There is meaning.
Perhaps more meaning.
But the pre-meditated, agenda-pushing, social engineering nature of this message may not be as clear as a Chanel or a Tory Saatchi ad.
What would Barthes say?
And what of Jung?
Is my shadow bursting out of the shadows?
Are my deepest most repressed desires all simply masquerading themselves via randomness?
Or has an experiment in image generation let me colonise semiotic space by repurposing otherwise dormant media so as to to operationalise my own bit of harm reduction?
such undertakings leave little to the imagination.
Di(c)e-Sect a.k.a. Random De’ath Cult
Speaking of Rednecks / Bannonites:
Ezra Pound starts his defence of totalitarianism known as the Guide to Kulchur with a reference to a conversation involving a Chinese Philosopher on the topic of government, law & language.
The first thing is to agree the terms. He prints Chinese ideograms. Some repeat.
So Pound is against the Clouding, the Vagueness, the Shadow.
The double standards.
The lack of a go to point where meaning is meaning and not Machiavellian semantic gymnastics.
We have this today with Shadow Banking which is an activity in which all major banks are players — and with the use of this word Regulation.
Once we go into the regulatory space then it becomes a civil matter.
No such thing as a Corporate Criminal!
And the Police will tell you to call your lawyer.
Brexit means Brexit.
Q: What do you like about Pepsi?
A: It is the Taste of a New Generation.
When marketing bleeds into news you have a world full of shadows.
From the flickering light of the Sun as viewed indirectly from inside the Cave to the Electric Flicker of the Mobile Smart Phone competing for your attention with actual traffic and real world goings on.
Have we become fully Cyborg? Part Man Part Machine.
Of course there would be no advertising per se in a truly totalitarian society. Advertising is driven by tapping into people’s free desires. So what is the difference between today’s China and ‘the West’? Or Russia for that matter?
We are amusing ourselves to death.
Shirley Robin Letwin in her On the Idea of Law references Plato’s idea that if a law is wrong, it must stay wrong until it is updated. In some systems this would have been every five years.
Better there be injustice for all till the bad law is updated – or instead everyone will turn a blind eye to the bad law – and the good law as well!
They say the best way to get rid of a stupid law is to apply it fully — to the letter.
As Mencken said :
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.
Does this make Shirley Letwin, Ezra Pound and Ayn Rand Crypto-Fascist Proto-Platonists?
Who wants the Law updated every five minutes?
Now that we have access to real-time updates and big data, continuous consultation could be an imminent reality.
Nothing describes the pitfalls of modern British politics better than the closing scene of The Rise of Michael Rimmer.
Discrete vs Continuous
A bit of continuity might help. Walter Lippmann, in Public Opinion, refers to those people who lived in peace after war had been declared simply because they hadn’t yet heard the war had started.
In the same way there are those for whom there will never be peace.
Permanently living in the subjunctive.
The role of fiction & theatre for the anti-truthers.
The rapidity with which truth subverts itself to reveal yet more truth at a scale so granular as to elude reasonable immediate inspection yet somehow capable of permeating through to all.
One has to either be very clever or try very hard not to feel it. Our society excels at both. From the outstanding declarative to the merely procedural.
From neoteny to phylogeny. The Master and his Emissary. Left Brain / Right Brain. Iain McGilchrist.
The recreation of the journey of human consciousness from zygote to foetus to birth – thousands of generations of evolution in just nine months.
Jonathan Swift’s mysterious flying island of Laputa features in two places of significance for me.
At the beginning of Nicholas Dunbar’s Inventing Money – on the downfall of the Long Term Capital Management Hedge Fund staffed by Economics Nobel Prizewinners who perhaps should have known better. LTCM’s collapse was a notable pre-cursor to our post 2008 too big to fail bailout culture.
And in Alfred Korzybski’s Science and Sanity as recommended by the wonderful Robert Anton Wilson.
Science and Sanity was published in 1933 and opens with a quote about the mysterious flying island of Laputa in Gulliver’s Travels.
The Laputans’ collective consciousness enabled the island to fly.
Was Swift satirising scientists? Full of knowledge but lacking basic wisdom?
The island was a place where they were very good at music and mathematics and interested in little else.
not unlike our current love of sharing songs on social media to help marketing firms target us with the data we generate:
If you look at the bottom of the image above, I like how the guy who came up with the term self fulfilling prophesy also wrote a book called Mass Persuasion.
And spawned a mathematician, Robert C Merton, who, with Fisher Black and Myron Scholes, created a derivative pricing mathematical model which in non financial engineering terms could legitimately be described as a money machine.
But as Donald Mackenzie of the University of Edinburgh points out in – It’s an Engine Not a Camera – the point of these mathematical models which are based on imperfect economic and psychological assumptions is not to be correct.
They are simply designed to make money!
And if they go wrong – we shouldn’t be surprised because truth was never their purpose.
A source of confusion when marketing rubs shoulders with fact.
When the Calculus was invented many scientists went around saying that what they had discovered was wonderful but they didn’t know why it worked.
In the case of financial engineering, the bottom line is the bottom line.
The Map is not the Territory – The Menu is not the Meal.
Bit like Magritte:
And his pipe:
Took me forever to realise that it’s not a pipe – but an image of a pipe.
Korzybski speaks of abstraction:
There are no illusions. Only what we abstract.
Neil Postman, follower of Marshall McLuhan fused his Medium is the Message argument with George Lakoff’s Metaphors we Live By to produce: The Medium is the Metaphor in the first chapter of his 1985 work: Amusing Ourselves to Death.
McCluhan was a Catholic and heavily influenced by GK Chesterton who also influenced Jorge Luis Borges.
Borges is himself referenced in Dunbar’s Inventing Money.
The Garden of Forking Paths is quoted in reference to option pricing. So many possible futures. We happen to be friends in this world – doesn’t mean we would in any other.