Nigel Farage, leader of the UK Brexit party, announced his party will
not field candidates against the 317 Conservative MPs standing for
re-election. "We will concentrate our total effort into all the seats
that are held by the Labour party," Farage said in a move designed not
to split the pro-Brexit vote at the 12 December election.
Read More at: Farage's Brexit Party will not stand in Tory-held seats
Showing posts with label Nigel Farage. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Nigel Farage. Show all posts
11/1/19
Britain - Doomsday Alliance: Brexit Party's Nigel Farage offers election alliance to Tories if they drop divorce deal with EU
Launching his Brexit Party’s general election campaign, the former
UKIP leader told the UK’s prime minister he must “drop the deal, because
it is not Brexit,” warning him his party would stand candidates in
every seat in the country if he didn’t do so.
The Conservative Party is aiming to win the December 12 election by campaigning for Boris Johnson’s new deal with the EU.
Farage said that currently the Brexit Party is the only party advocating for Brexit and warned Johnson not to underestimate the determination or organisation of his party.
Brexit Party's Nigel Farage offers election alliance to Tories if they drop divorce deal with EU | Euronews
The Conservative Party is aiming to win the December 12 election by campaigning for Boris Johnson’s new deal with the EU.
Farage said that currently the Brexit Party is the only party advocating for Brexit and warned Johnson not to underestimate the determination or organisation of his party.
Brexit Party's Nigel Farage offers election alliance to Tories if they drop divorce deal with EU | Euronews
6/3/19
Britain - Brexit : Donald Trump puts his nose in British Politics and says: "Nigel Farage should negotiate Brexit and walk away without a deal"
Trump: Farage should negotiate Brexit and 'walk away' without a deal
Read more at:
5/19/19
Britain - Rage, rapture and empty promises on the road with Nigel Farage
Rage, rapture and pure populism: on the road with Nigel Farage
Read more at :
4/12/19
Britain: Nigel Farage, Populist, friend of Donald Trump and proponent of Brexit, Britains historic political disaster launches new Brexit party
'No more Mr Nice Guy,' says Farage as he launches new Brexit party
Read more at:
2/8/19
Brexit: If Brexit gets delayed Nigel Farage will stand as a candidate for the newly formed Brexit Party- and "continued EURO salary" if he wins
Nigel Farage ‘will stand for’ newly-formed Brexit Party if UK’s EU departure is delayed
Read more at:
2/6/19
BRITAiN - BREXIT: EU PRESIDENT TUSK SPEAKS OUT AGAINST BREXIT
EU President Donald Tusk: "Special place in hell for Brexiteers without a plan"
Note EU-Digest: President Tusk is absolutely right. The British Government and
parliament went into this Brexit referendum without doing their
homework, cheered on by Nigel Farage, Boris Johnson and other political
lightweights. Unfortunately the British taxpayers will be paying the
price, while Farage, who is still a member of the EU parliament and
Johnson, a member of the British Parliament are still getting their big
salaries. Yes indeed they deserve their place in hell, together with
Donald Trump, who has been cheering them on.
Read more at:
11/16/18
"The Anglophile Drama": How the U.S. and U.K. are partners in chaos - by Ben White and Aubree Eliza Weaver
 |
| This happens when idiots like Farage and Trump call the shots |
Many are trying to figure out where America is headed with a growing schism between a metro-area dominated, more highly educated electorate trending toward the Democrats and smaller town and rural voters sticking with President Donald Trump and the GOP and embracing the president’s hardline trade and immigration policies and his culture war appeals.
Consensus among these executives (and frankly among anyone else) is that American politics is a directionless wreck with no path forward on anything from health care to education to retirement savings to climate change and gun violence and long-term fiscal deficits. One British banker mused about how he’s never seen the U.S. so screwed up or derelict on the world stage.
Then he stopped himself almost immediately to say how the U.K. really wasn’t any better with no consensus on how to deal with Brexit, a potential end to Prime Minister Theresa May’s tenure, a civil war inside the Conservative party and a plunging pound. It remains largely unclear in the U.K. whether May’s softer Brexit plan will somehow survive or no deal will emerge leading to a hard Brexit or a new referendum will take place to reverse Brexit entirely.
Tensions in the U.S. and U.K. are different in many ways but they share commonalities of fractured politics and deep divisions on fundamental identities as either insular and nationalistic or more globally integrated and diverse. We got no revelatory insight in these conversations beyond a morbid sense that only grave and immediate crisis that cannot be ignored will jolt either nation into clarity. And maybe not even then.
Happy thoughts for your Friday!
Read more: How the U.S. and U.K. are partners in chaos - POLITICO
11/14/18
Brexit: Britain's messy EU divorce faces new showdown - by Kim Hjelmgaard
British Prime Minister Theresa May will try to win the support of her
divided Cabinet on Wednesday for a draft deal to leave the European
Union after months of stalled talks, bickering and setbacks that have
threatened the messy divorce known as Brexit and May's leadership.
Britain is due to leave the bloc in March. On Tuesday, it broke a four-month-long logjam with EU negotiators over the terms of its withdrawal, including a plan to keep the border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland open after Brexit.
But pro-Brexit lawmakers in May’s divided Conservative Party are angry, saying the agreement will leave Britain tethered to the EU after it departs the bloc. Failure to secure Cabinet backing will leave May’s leadership in doubt and Brexit in chaos.
"Theresa May’s Brexit agreement is the worst deal in history," Nigel Farage, the British politician and broadcaster who helped engineer the June 2016 Brexit vote, tweeted. Farage represents Britain in the European Parliament in Brussels and is also under investigation by the US Mueller probe as to his involvement with the Russians and Donald Trump's "Hanky Panky" with the Russians during his Presidental election campaign, and after his election as President.
May herself told lawmakers on Tuesday that the draft deal "takes us significantly closer to delivering what the British people voted for" when they decided to leave the bloc. She said the deal means that Britain will "take back control" of its laws and borders "while protecting jobs, security and the integrity of our United Kingdom."
Note EU-Digest: a majority of the British population in the latest polls show they want a new Referendum on Britain's EU membership.
Read more: Brexit: Britain's messy EU divorce faces new showdown
Britain is due to leave the bloc in March. On Tuesday, it broke a four-month-long logjam with EU negotiators over the terms of its withdrawal, including a plan to keep the border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland open after Brexit.
But pro-Brexit lawmakers in May’s divided Conservative Party are angry, saying the agreement will leave Britain tethered to the EU after it departs the bloc. Failure to secure Cabinet backing will leave May’s leadership in doubt and Brexit in chaos.
"Theresa May’s Brexit agreement is the worst deal in history," Nigel Farage, the British politician and broadcaster who helped engineer the June 2016 Brexit vote, tweeted. Farage represents Britain in the European Parliament in Brussels and is also under investigation by the US Mueller probe as to his involvement with the Russians and Donald Trump's "Hanky Panky" with the Russians during his Presidental election campaign, and after his election as President.
May herself told lawmakers on Tuesday that the draft deal "takes us significantly closer to delivering what the British people voted for" when they decided to leave the bloc. She said the deal means that Britain will "take back control" of its laws and borders "while protecting jobs, security and the integrity of our United Kingdom."
Note EU-Digest: a majority of the British population in the latest polls show they want a new Referendum on Britain's EU membership.
Read more: Brexit: Britain's messy EU divorce faces new showdown
11/13/18
USA: The Mueller Probe: Mueller seeking more details on Nigel Farage, key Russia inquiry target says
Robert Mueller is seeking more information about Nigel Farage for his
investigation into Russian interference in US politics, according to a
target of the inquiry who expects to be criminally charged.
Jerome Corsi, a conservative author, said prosecutors working for Mueller questioned him about Farage, the key campaigner behind Britain’s vote to leave the European Union, two weeks ago in Washington.
Corsi said investigators for the special counsel also pressed him for information on Ted Malloch, a London-based American academic with ties to Farage, who informally advised Donald Trump and was interviewed by FBI agents earlier this year.
“They asked about both Nigel and Ted Malloch, I can affirm that they did,” Corsi told the Guardian on Tuesday. “But I’m really not going into detail because I respect the special counsel and the legal process.”
Mueller’s interest in Farage comes amid questions in the UK about whether Russia attempted to influence the June 2016 vote to leave the European Union, and Brexit’s most vocal political supporters.
Note EU-Digest: Nigel Farage - the King of the British Brexit drama is now also eyed by the Mueller investigation, in particular, as it relates to his connection with the Russians and Donald Trump.
Once again we see how dangerous populism is to basic human rights values, whether it comes from Donald Trump, Marian LePen, Nigel Farage, Geert Wilders, Jörg Haider ,Jair Bolsonaro, Victor Orban, Lech Kaczyński, and the list goes on and on.
Populism is a fast growing danger and must be stopped, before it destroys humanity..
Read more: Mueller seeking more details on Nigel Farage, key Russia inquiry target says
Jerome Corsi, a conservative author, said prosecutors working for Mueller questioned him about Farage, the key campaigner behind Britain’s vote to leave the European Union, two weeks ago in Washington.
Corsi said investigators for the special counsel also pressed him for information on Ted Malloch, a London-based American academic with ties to Farage, who informally advised Donald Trump and was interviewed by FBI agents earlier this year.
“They asked about both Nigel and Ted Malloch, I can affirm that they did,” Corsi told the Guardian on Tuesday. “But I’m really not going into detail because I respect the special counsel and the legal process.”
Mueller’s interest in Farage comes amid questions in the UK about whether Russia attempted to influence the June 2016 vote to leave the European Union, and Brexit’s most vocal political supporters.
Note EU-Digest: Nigel Farage - the King of the British Brexit drama is now also eyed by the Mueller investigation, in particular, as it relates to his connection with the Russians and Donald Trump.
Once again we see how dangerous populism is to basic human rights values, whether it comes from Donald Trump, Marian LePen, Nigel Farage, Geert Wilders, Jörg Haider ,Jair Bolsonaro, Victor Orban, Lech Kaczyński, and the list goes on and on.
Populism is a fast growing danger and must be stopped, before it destroys humanity..
Read more: Mueller seeking more details on Nigel Farage, key Russia inquiry target says
8/5/18
Britain: Ukip to team up in 'unholy alliance' with Steve Bannon's new far right European movement -
Ukip has pledged to work with Steve Bannon’s
new European alt-right movement, forging what critics have branded an
“unholy alliance” to bring down the EU and fuel populism across the
continent.
Mr Bannon, a former investment banker who founded the website Breitbart, has pledged to bolster the continent’s far right with a new foundation called The Movement that would dole out resources to eurosceptics and anti-EU populists.
The former chief strategist of Donald Trump
has rattled Brussels after stating his intention to create a
“supergroup” in the European parliament after next’s year’s EU
elections, with extreme right-wingers taking as many as a third of the
legislature’s seats.
Though Ukip MEPs will not be able to participate directly in the parliament because of Brexit, a spokesperson pledged that the party would share experience with Mr Bannon’s project to give it a leg up, stating they expected the group to have a “large impact” on European politics and hoped for “a new army of eurosceptic MEPs”.
Mr Bannon’s move into Europe also appears set to have an impact on the dynamics of Brexit talks, with one source close to Brexit negotiations telling The Independent that Brussels has been spooked by the alt-right project.
As a result, EU officials are increasingly resistant to calls for the Article 50 negotiating period to be extended, so as to avoid eurosceptic Britain participating in the European parliament elections scheduled for next May.
The EU is said to fear that such an outcome would see Ukip, which won the 2014 European elections in the UK, return to the parliament and bolster the numbers of Mr Bannon’s new anti-EU group.
Note EU-Digest: Democratic EU member states and the EU Commission better wake-up to this threat, which certainly is no laughing matter and must be taken very seriously.
Read more: Ukip to team up in 'unholy alliance' with Steve Bannon's new far right European movement | The Independent
Mr Bannon, a former investment banker who founded the website Breitbart, has pledged to bolster the continent’s far right with a new foundation called The Movement that would dole out resources to eurosceptics and anti-EU populists.
Though Ukip MEPs will not be able to participate directly in the parliament because of Brexit, a spokesperson pledged that the party would share experience with Mr Bannon’s project to give it a leg up, stating they expected the group to have a “large impact” on European politics and hoped for “a new army of eurosceptic MEPs”.
Mr Bannon’s move into Europe also appears set to have an impact on the dynamics of Brexit talks, with one source close to Brexit negotiations telling The Independent that Brussels has been spooked by the alt-right project.
As a result, EU officials are increasingly resistant to calls for the Article 50 negotiating period to be extended, so as to avoid eurosceptic Britain participating in the European parliament elections scheduled for next May.
The EU is said to fear that such an outcome would see Ukip, which won the 2014 European elections in the UK, return to the parliament and bolster the numbers of Mr Bannon’s new anti-EU group.
Note EU-Digest: Democratic EU member states and the EU Commission better wake-up to this threat, which certainly is no laughing matter and must be taken very seriously.
Read more: Ukip to team up in 'unholy alliance' with Steve Bannon's new far right European movement | The Independent
3/13/18
Brexit: Anti-EU and Trump admirer Nigel Farage criticised for saying he will keep EU pension-by Hannah Summers
The Guardian reported that Nigel Farage has sparked outrage by refusing to give up his taxpayer-funded EU pension after Brexit, asking: “Why should my family suffer?”
It is understood the 53-year-old former Ukip leader will be entitled to an annual pension of £73,000 when he reaches the age of 63.
The pension could be part-funded by Britain’s estimated £50bn Brexit “divorce bill”, which Farage has criticised as too large, leading to accusations that the MEP for South East England was a “shameless hypocrite”.
Farage defended the arrangement when challenged on BBC1’s Andrew Marr Show. Asked if he would accept the EU pension money, he replied: “Of course I would take it. I have said that right from day one. Why should my family and others suffer even more?”
Note EU-Digest: What a hypocrite !
EU-Digest
It is understood the 53-year-old former Ukip leader will be entitled to an annual pension of £73,000 when he reaches the age of 63.
The pension could be part-funded by Britain’s estimated £50bn Brexit “divorce bill”, which Farage has criticised as too large, leading to accusations that the MEP for South East England was a “shameless hypocrite”.
Farage defended the arrangement when challenged on BBC1’s Andrew Marr Show. Asked if he would accept the EU pension money, he replied: “Of course I would take it. I have said that right from day one. Why should my family and others suffer even more?”
Note EU-Digest: What a hypocrite !
EU-Digest
12/18/17
USA - Building a Wall Around America - the Isolationist Trump Doctrine and Strategy as unveiled by Donald Trump
 |
| A wall around America, instead of one between Mexico and US |
"Our leaders engaged in nation building abroad while they failed to build up and replenish our nation at home," he said, pointing to the economy's strong performance and predicting even better under his policies.
His security strategy envisions nations in constant competition, reverses Obama-era warnings on climate change and affirms that the United States will unilaterally defend its sovereignty, even if that means risking existing the agreements with other countries that have dominated the United States' foreign policy since the Cold War.
The strategy from the Republican president could sharply alter U.S. international relationships if fully implemented. It focuses on four main themes: protecting the homeland, promoting American prosperity, demonstrating peace through strength and advancing American influence in an ever-competitive world.
Trump's doctrine holds that nation-states are in perpetual competition and that the U.S. must fight on all fronts to protect and defend its sovereignty from friend and foe alike. While the administration often says that "America First" does not mean "America Alone," the national security strategy makes clear that the United States will stand up for itself even if that means acting unilaterally or alienating others on issues such as trade, climate change and immigration.
Despite the risk of potential isolation presented by Trump's strategy, its fundamentals are not a surprise. The strategy emphasizes that U.S. economic security is national security. And it stresses that the U.S. is interested only in relationships with other countries, including in alliances such as NATO, that are fair and reciprocal.
The strategy also details the threats of "rogue regimes," like North Korea. It says that China and Russia "challenge American power, influence, and interests, attempting to erode American security and prosperity."
Despite international challenges, the document cites emerging opportunities to advance American interests in the Middle East. "Some of our partners are working together to reject radical ideologies and key leaders are calling for a rejection of Islamist extremism and violence," it says. "Encouraging political stability and sustainable prosperity would contribute to dampening the conditions that fuel sectarian grievances."
Note EU-Digest: Obviously the President of the USA can and must do what in his eyes he believes is good for America. As to the EU, what is good for America, necessarily does not have to be good for the EU. Consequently, as has been written many times, the EU must stop being the "lapdog" of America, given its importance as a world class economy, with a population of close to half a billion people, and establish its own independent foreign policy based on EU principles and priorities, and include a review of its military objectives within this context.
As to the leaders of European Populists and Nationalist parties, like Geert Wilders, Jean Marie Lr Pen, Nigel Farage, and others, who apparently admire Trump's "America First Isolationist Doctrine", we recommend they pack their bags and request asylum in the US from their idol Donald Trump.
Read more: Trump unveils details of 'America First' security strategy
10/20/17
Britain: Survey shows: Over half of Britons (55%) see EU membership as a benefit - what now?
In Britain 55% consider membership to have been of benefit to the country. Conversely the number of Britons who believe the UK has not benefited from EU membership has dropped by 7 percentage points to 27%.
47% of EU citizens and 40% of Brits feel that their voice counts in the EU, the best result since the European elections 2009.
The Parlemeter survey confirms the citizens' increasingly favourable view of the EU, continuing a trend visible in surveys since 2016.
EP President Antonio Tajani welcomed the results, which showed that, "in general, people increasingly see the EU as a key player in tackling the big challenges and protecting them against common threats such as terrorism, unemployment or poverty and exclusion."
On Parliament's image, the share of citizens who have a neutral image of the European Parliament is 42%, while 33% have a positive image, up eight points within one year. In the UK, 27% of respondents have a positive image of the European Parliament - a growth of 4 percentage point in the last 12 months.
European citizens also clearly expect the EU to help protect them against certain threats. When asked which threats EU should focus on, both Britons and EU citizens cited terrorism (65% and 58% respectively) as a top priority. This was followed by poverty and exclusion (34% and 42%) and unemployment (29% and 43%). Interestingly less than a quarter of Britons listed uncontrolled migration as a top threat compared to 35% of all EU citizens.
When it comes to EU's objectives, Britons feel that the EU should protect the freedom to travel, work and study across the EU as a matter of priority (46%). This was closely followed by fundamental right and freedoms (43%), safety in terms of health standards (31%) and environment (28%). EU citizens expect the Union to safeguard fundamental rights (44%), freedom to travel, work and study across the EU (36%), labour rights (34%), adequate pensions (34%) and economic well-being (33%).
The 2017 Parlemeter survey is based on face-to-face interviews with 27,881 Europeans, aged 15 or more, in all EU 28 member states, between 23 September and 2 October 2017.
Read more: Over half of Britons see EU membership as a benefit: survey — EUbusiness.com | EU news, business and politics
4/20/17
Special Report: EU In Danger: Brexit’s Real Purpose: Killing the EU?- by Rupert Strachwitz
As the European Union and its members prepare for Brexit, it seems timely to reflect on who nudged the voters in the United Kingdom to vote by a slim majority in favor of exiting from the EU – and especially why they did so.
It has always been known that Rupert Murdoch has very strong negative views on Britain’s EU membership and has consistently used his media power to influence public opinion.
We now know that the campaign had other deep-pocketed backers, too. The American billionaire Robert Mercer, a close friend of Nigel Farage, provided ample funds for the Brexit campaign.
With the help of “Cambridge Analytica,” Mercer had been instrumental in providing Donald Trump (who wished to see Nigel Farage as Britain’s Ambassador to Washington) with tools to fine-tune his campaign that go well beyond traditional campaigning.
What is driving certain hedge fund, media and real estate tycoons — who all see themselves as masters of the universe — to support Brexit is pretty straightforward. They want to secure their very personal vision of unvarnished capitalism.
No big surprise then that we have witnessed the Trump administration boycotting a G-20 declaration on multilateral trade and stalling – if not marching back — on climate change. Trump has announced that there is more of the same to come.
It seems to me as if, so far at least, we have not even focused on the right lens or playing field.
Too many questions have been focused on the incongruities of the campaign inside the UK, such as why David Cameron’s government did not provide accurate and comprehensive information before the referendum.
The much more relevant set of questions concerns the wider lens of continental Europe, rather than just the group of islands off its shores:
Could it be that the whole Brexit issue was deliberately orchestrated not so much with regard to Britain, but in order to weaken Europe in the global arena?
If this is even remotely true, the British people should be seen as being mere pawns (or, as Russian revolutionaries might have said, useful idiots) in a power game that is way beyond their control.
Crass distortions by the Brexiteers, such as lying about certain facts (like the 350 million pounds sent to Brussels every week) would then represent the mere tip of a very much larger iceberg.
The attitude adopted by the May government — deriding the citizens of other countries, brushing aside Scottish and Irish sentiments, alienating Commonwealth countries, and attempting to dictate the timetable to the European Union – can easily be interpreted as supportive evidence.
If we look at the remaining 27 EU members post-Brexit, we can see that in the future the protectionist members of the EU will have a blocking minority.
Under the complicated EU voting regulations in the Council, the staunch advocates of free trade will no longer be able to override protectionist vetoing from France and Southern European member states.
There is as of yet no compelling evidence that Europe has become the victim of an orchestrated campaign that aims at destroying it.
But it is reasonable to assume there are vested political and economic interests around the world that would rather see Europe weakened than strengthened.
Certainly, this would explain a few things. U.S. conservatives and the billionaries that support them have long been irked by the existence of a Western “side” power.
They see the EU and the – in comparison to the United States often enlightened, if not progressive – interests it stands for as a real thorn in the side of the imperial nation.
It stands to reason that, with the help of the often clandestinely placed instruments at their disposal, they deliberately set forces in motion whose goal it is to strike a fatal blow against Europe. These forces may well have identified Brexit as an intelligent and feasible way to achieve their goal.
By stoking up existing popular sentiment, they have succeeded in nudging the British people towards actually voting for this option, while pressuring or even blackmailing the government into acting as they wish them to.
However, given the attitude adopted by the governments of all 27 remaining countries and, probably even more importantly, the steadily growing pro-European popular spirit with new civil society action groups starting up every week, this scenario now seems increasingly unlikely.
Messrs. Putin and Trump, with help from Mr. Erdogan and others, and indeed Brexit itself, seem to have brought Europeans closer to one another than they have been for a long time.
Determination to make it a success has grown rather than waned. The Dutch have been the first to show that anti-European feelings will not necessarily help win an election in a European member state. Chances that Marine Le Pen will be the next President of France are slimmer now than even a few months ago.
So, possibly, what we are seeing at the moment is a backlash. Of course, dissatisfaction with the European Union has not just gone away, although the Commission seems to be on its best behavior by cutting down on the number of rules and regulations it had got accustomed to issue.
Of course, we still need to tackle fundamental reforms. And of course, people with very different ideas are still around.
But it looks as if a growing number of citizens know very well what the real issues are and have woken up to the fact they have to do something about it.
If any of this is true and proves to be sustainable, the United Kingdom will end up a loser. Not only might the UK split up as such and might the government be landed with more problems on their hands than they can manage (with a price to be paid by the Tories in future elections).
England in the end could find herself in a position exactly opposite to the one the Brexiteers said she would, and will not be better off for it.
It may well be that some of the Brexiteers really do hope they can take England into a glorious future of its very own in a global world, once the ties with Europe have been severed. But judging from the reactions to Brexit from all potential allies anywhere around the globe, this does not seem at all likely.
Foreseeably, not one of the global players who used the British people for their very own ends, will want to come to their rescue.
At the end of the day, England, by her insistence on being on her own, might be exactly that, struggling to live up to the responsibilities that come with a permament seat on the UN Security Council, a nuclear power (albeit minor), and sovereignty over a very mixed bunch of fourteen little territories, ranging from bits of Cyprus to the Falkland Islands, all costly remainders of what was once the British Empire.
World history will move on, but Great Britain, once the largest global empire ever assembled, will have reduced itself to an historical footnote, instead of extending its potentially considerable leverage through a Europe that has managed to reinvent itself.
Can the UK still come to its senses?
Can Britain still avert this fate? I believe it can. Over the next two years, the government can still revise its policy and withdraw its application to leave.
Or parliament can choose a new government. Or indeed the people can, by voting in a new parliament. It is just possible that one of these options might still be feasible. Let us hope somebody will draw one of them. Britain would certainly be greater for it.
Special Report:: Brexit’s Real Purpose: Killing the EU?
It has always been known that Rupert Murdoch has very strong negative views on Britain’s EU membership and has consistently used his media power to influence public opinion.
We now know that the campaign had other deep-pocketed backers, too. The American billionaire Robert Mercer, a close friend of Nigel Farage, provided ample funds for the Brexit campaign.
With the help of “Cambridge Analytica,” Mercer had been instrumental in providing Donald Trump (who wished to see Nigel Farage as Britain’s Ambassador to Washington) with tools to fine-tune his campaign that go well beyond traditional campaigning.
What is driving certain hedge fund, media and real estate tycoons — who all see themselves as masters of the universe — to support Brexit is pretty straightforward. They want to secure their very personal vision of unvarnished capitalism.
No big surprise then that we have witnessed the Trump administration boycotting a G-20 declaration on multilateral trade and stalling – if not marching back — on climate change. Trump has announced that there is more of the same to come.
It seems to me as if, so far at least, we have not even focused on the right lens or playing field.
Too many questions have been focused on the incongruities of the campaign inside the UK, such as why David Cameron’s government did not provide accurate and comprehensive information before the referendum.
The much more relevant set of questions concerns the wider lens of continental Europe, rather than just the group of islands off its shores:
Could it be that the whole Brexit issue was deliberately orchestrated not so much with regard to Britain, but in order to weaken Europe in the global arena?
If this is even remotely true, the British people should be seen as being mere pawns (or, as Russian revolutionaries might have said, useful idiots) in a power game that is way beyond their control.
Crass distortions by the Brexiteers, such as lying about certain facts (like the 350 million pounds sent to Brussels every week) would then represent the mere tip of a very much larger iceberg.
The attitude adopted by the May government — deriding the citizens of other countries, brushing aside Scottish and Irish sentiments, alienating Commonwealth countries, and attempting to dictate the timetable to the European Union – can easily be interpreted as supportive evidence.
If we look at the remaining 27 EU members post-Brexit, we can see that in the future the protectionist members of the EU will have a blocking minority.
Under the complicated EU voting regulations in the Council, the staunch advocates of free trade will no longer be able to override protectionist vetoing from France and Southern European member states.
There is as of yet no compelling evidence that Europe has become the victim of an orchestrated campaign that aims at destroying it.
But it is reasonable to assume there are vested political and economic interests around the world that would rather see Europe weakened than strengthened.
Certainly, this would explain a few things. U.S. conservatives and the billionaries that support them have long been irked by the existence of a Western “side” power.
They see the EU and the – in comparison to the United States often enlightened, if not progressive – interests it stands for as a real thorn in the side of the imperial nation.
It stands to reason that, with the help of the often clandestinely placed instruments at their disposal, they deliberately set forces in motion whose goal it is to strike a fatal blow against Europe. These forces may well have identified Brexit as an intelligent and feasible way to achieve their goal.
By stoking up existing popular sentiment, they have succeeded in nudging the British people towards actually voting for this option, while pressuring or even blackmailing the government into acting as they wish them to.
However, given the attitude adopted by the governments of all 27 remaining countries and, probably even more importantly, the steadily growing pro-European popular spirit with new civil society action groups starting up every week, this scenario now seems increasingly unlikely.
Messrs. Putin and Trump, with help from Mr. Erdogan and others, and indeed Brexit itself, seem to have brought Europeans closer to one another than they have been for a long time.
Determination to make it a success has grown rather than waned. The Dutch have been the first to show that anti-European feelings will not necessarily help win an election in a European member state. Chances that Marine Le Pen will be the next President of France are slimmer now than even a few months ago.
So, possibly, what we are seeing at the moment is a backlash. Of course, dissatisfaction with the European Union has not just gone away, although the Commission seems to be on its best behavior by cutting down on the number of rules and regulations it had got accustomed to issue.
Of course, we still need to tackle fundamental reforms. And of course, people with very different ideas are still around.
But it looks as if a growing number of citizens know very well what the real issues are and have woken up to the fact they have to do something about it.
If any of this is true and proves to be sustainable, the United Kingdom will end up a loser. Not only might the UK split up as such and might the government be landed with more problems on their hands than they can manage (with a price to be paid by the Tories in future elections).
England in the end could find herself in a position exactly opposite to the one the Brexiteers said she would, and will not be better off for it.
It may well be that some of the Brexiteers really do hope they can take England into a glorious future of its very own in a global world, once the ties with Europe have been severed. But judging from the reactions to Brexit from all potential allies anywhere around the globe, this does not seem at all likely.
Foreseeably, not one of the global players who used the British people for their very own ends, will want to come to their rescue.
At the end of the day, England, by her insistence on being on her own, might be exactly that, struggling to live up to the responsibilities that come with a permament seat on the UN Security Council, a nuclear power (albeit minor), and sovereignty over a very mixed bunch of fourteen little territories, ranging from bits of Cyprus to the Falkland Islands, all costly remainders of what was once the British Empire.
World history will move on, but Great Britain, once the largest global empire ever assembled, will have reduced itself to an historical footnote, instead of extending its potentially considerable leverage through a Europe that has managed to reinvent itself.
Can the UK still come to its senses?
Can Britain still avert this fate? I believe it can. Over the next two years, the government can still revise its policy and withdraw its application to leave.
Or parliament can choose a new government. Or indeed the people can, by voting in a new parliament. It is just possible that one of these options might still be feasible. Let us hope somebody will draw one of them. Britain would certainly be greater for it.
Special Report:: Brexit’s Real Purpose: Killing the EU?
4/5/17
Brexit: EU has strong Brexit negotiating position, says German Foreign Minister
In his official statement after British Prime Minister Theresa May officially triggered the UK's application to leave the European Union, German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel said that Berlin was glad the waiting was finally over.
"The EU-27 made good use of the run-up to the formal British application," Gabriel said. "We know what we want. We have a clear differentiated negotiating position and will give the EU Commission a strong mandate."
The EU, and not Germany, will negotiate the specifics of Brexit with London, but the views of Germany - the bloc's biggest member - will carry considerable weight. Now that the process is officially underway, the next step is for the other 27 EU countries to agree a mandate on the principles according to which the bloc will attempt to hammer out a favorable agreement. That should take place by late April.
Gabriel said negotiations would be carried out without acrimony.
"The sentence 'Let's stay friends,' which often rings hollow in personal relationships, is the right one here," Gabriel said. "We need one another. We should do everything to continue to maintain good, friendly relations with London in the future."
But just as in a romantic relationship between individuals, there are limits to how far the post-Brexit friendship between the EU and the UK will go."
First the divorce, then further talks
Read more: EU has strong Brexit negotiating position, says German Foreign Minister | TOP STORIES | DW.COM | 29.03.2017
"The EU-27 made good use of the run-up to the formal British application," Gabriel said. "We know what we want. We have a clear differentiated negotiating position and will give the EU Commission a strong mandate."
The EU, and not Germany, will negotiate the specifics of Brexit with London, but the views of Germany - the bloc's biggest member - will carry considerable weight. Now that the process is officially underway, the next step is for the other 27 EU countries to agree a mandate on the principles according to which the bloc will attempt to hammer out a favorable agreement. That should take place by late April.
Gabriel said negotiations would be carried out without acrimony.
"The sentence 'Let's stay friends,' which often rings hollow in personal relationships, is the right one here," Gabriel said. "We need one another. We should do everything to continue to maintain good, friendly relations with London in the future."
But just as in a romantic relationship between individuals, there are limits to how far the post-Brexit friendship between the EU and the UK will go."
First the divorce, then further talks
Read more: EU has strong Brexit negotiating position, says German Foreign Minister | TOP STORIES | DW.COM | 29.03.2017
1/13/17
EU: Trump staff asked EU officials which countries will leave the EU next – by Catherine Stupp
Aides to US President-elect Donald Trump recently asked EU officials
over the phone which countries will be next to leave the bloc after
Britain, outgoing US ambassador to the EU Anthony Gardner said. Gardner
was told about the conversations by EU institution staff members, but
was not in on the calls.
Trump has expressed support for the UK’s vote to leave the EU and suggested that former UKIP leader Nigel Farage should be made the UK’s new ambassador to the United States. Farage, one of the most outspoken supporters of Brexit, was photographed smiling with Trump in his New York flagship hotel days after he won the US election.
It would be the “height of folly” for the US to express support for Brexit, Gardner told reporters today (13 January), one week before he leaves his post in Brussels.
Despite their differences on Brexit, Farage recently requested to meet with Gardner, who became US ambassador to the EU in 2014.
“I take huge exception to some of the things he’s done,” Gardner said. The US diplomat said he has never met Farage, who he called “off the political reservation”, and has responded to his request but not yet arranged a meeting.
Read more: Trump staff asked EU officials which countries will leave the EU next – EurActiv.com
Trump has expressed support for the UK’s vote to leave the EU and suggested that former UKIP leader Nigel Farage should be made the UK’s new ambassador to the United States. Farage, one of the most outspoken supporters of Brexit, was photographed smiling with Trump in his New York flagship hotel days after he won the US election.
It would be the “height of folly” for the US to express support for Brexit, Gardner told reporters today (13 January), one week before he leaves his post in Brussels.
Despite their differences on Brexit, Farage recently requested to meet with Gardner, who became US ambassador to the EU in 2014.
“I take huge exception to some of the things he’s done,” Gardner said. The US diplomat said he has never met Farage, who he called “off the political reservation”, and has responded to his request but not yet arranged a meeting.
Read more: Trump staff asked EU officials which countries will leave the EU next – EurActiv.com
11/19/16
Britain: Brexit: They can't have their cake and eat it too: Europe’s leaders must force Britain into hard Brexit
European leaders have come to a 27-nation consensus that a “hard Brexit” is likely to be the only way to see off future populist insurgencies, which could lead to the break-up of the European Union.
The hardening line in EU capitals comes as Nigel Farage warns European leaders that Marine Le Pen, leader of the Front National, could deliver a political sensation bigger than Brexit and win France’s presidential election next spring – a result that would mean it was “game over” for 60 years of EU integration.
According to senior officials at the highest levels of European governments, allowing Britain favourable terms of exit could represent an existential danger to the EU, since it would encourage similar demands from other countries with significant Eurosceptic movements.
One top EU diplomat told the Observer: “If you British are not prepared to compromise on free movement, the only way to deal with Brexit is hard Brexit. Otherwise we would be seen to be giving in to a country that is leaving. That would be fatal.”
The latest intervention by Farage will only serve to fuel fears in Europe that anti-EU movements have acquired a dangerous momentum in countries such as France and the Netherlands, following the precedent set by the Brexit vote. Ukip’s interim leader, who predicted both the vote for Brexit and Donald Trump’s US victory, told the Observer that while Le Pen was still more likely to be runner-up to an establishment candidate next May, she now had to be taken seriously as a potential head of state.
“She will clearly win through to the second round. And after what has happened elsewhere, only a fool would say she would have no chance of winning overall. France is a deeply, deeply unhappy country. If she were to win, it would be game over for the EU.”
Le Pen has made clear she wants to take France out of the euro and the EU. The prospective hardline approach has been agreed by the 27 member states as a bloc. Acting in concert, the remaining EU states will refuse to grant the UK access to the single market unless London agrees to sign up to its rules, including free movement of people, capital, services and labour.
Norbert Röttgen, chairman of the foreign affairs committee in the German Bundestag, told the Observer that he wanted to help the UK but, if there were no willingness to accept EU rules, there was no hope. “I am really ready to come to a result but if [the British position is] no, no, no, then even I would have to say that there is no common ground.”
Note EU-Digest: If the EU Commission does not play hard ball with Britain it will be game over for the EU. No concessions at all. Britain can't have it's cake and eat it too.
Read more: Europe’s leaders to force Britain into hard Brexit | Politics | The Guardian
The hardening line in EU capitals comes as Nigel Farage warns European leaders that Marine Le Pen, leader of the Front National, could deliver a political sensation bigger than Brexit and win France’s presidential election next spring – a result that would mean it was “game over” for 60 years of EU integration.
According to senior officials at the highest levels of European governments, allowing Britain favourable terms of exit could represent an existential danger to the EU, since it would encourage similar demands from other countries with significant Eurosceptic movements.
One top EU diplomat told the Observer: “If you British are not prepared to compromise on free movement, the only way to deal with Brexit is hard Brexit. Otherwise we would be seen to be giving in to a country that is leaving. That would be fatal.”
The latest intervention by Farage will only serve to fuel fears in Europe that anti-EU movements have acquired a dangerous momentum in countries such as France and the Netherlands, following the precedent set by the Brexit vote. Ukip’s interim leader, who predicted both the vote for Brexit and Donald Trump’s US victory, told the Observer that while Le Pen was still more likely to be runner-up to an establishment candidate next May, she now had to be taken seriously as a potential head of state.
“She will clearly win through to the second round. And after what has happened elsewhere, only a fool would say she would have no chance of winning overall. France is a deeply, deeply unhappy country. If she were to win, it would be game over for the EU.”
Le Pen has made clear she wants to take France out of the euro and the EU. The prospective hardline approach has been agreed by the 27 member states as a bloc. Acting in concert, the remaining EU states will refuse to grant the UK access to the single market unless London agrees to sign up to its rules, including free movement of people, capital, services and labour.
Norbert Röttgen, chairman of the foreign affairs committee in the German Bundestag, told the Observer that he wanted to help the UK but, if there were no willingness to accept EU rules, there was no hope. “I am really ready to come to a result but if [the British position is] no, no, no, then even I would have to say that there is no common ground.”
Note EU-Digest: If the EU Commission does not play hard ball with Britain it will be game over for the EU. No concessions at all. Britain can't have it's cake and eat it too.
Read more: Europe’s leaders to force Britain into hard Brexit | Politics | The Guardian
11/4/16
People Power: People are fed up: "Populism against the Establishment - a Global Revolution in the making?"-by RM
Most people are fed up with their corrupt governments and the power of corporations over the political environment, media, etc, except, obviously, the "1% have all" global elite..
A Harvard University working paper explains this development as follows:"Rising support for populist parties has disrupted the politics of many Western societies. Perhaps the most widely-held view of mass support for populism -- the economic insecurity perspective--emphasizes the consequences of profound changes transforming the workforce and society in post-industrial economies. Alternatively, the cultural backlash thesis suggests that support can be explained as a retro reaction by once-predominant sectors" of the population to progressive value change.
Alternatively, the cultural backlash thesis suggests that support can be explained as a retro reaction by once-predominant sectors of the population to progressive value change. cultural backlash thesis.
Populist leaders like Donald Trump, Marine Le Pen, Norbert Hoffer, Nigel Farage, and Geert Wilders are prominent today in many countries, altering established patterns of party competition in contemporary Western societies. Cas Mudde argues that the impact of populist parties has been exaggerated.
But, nevertheless these parties have gained votes and seats in many countries, and entered government coalitions in eleven Western democracies, including in Austria, Italy and Switzerland.2 Across Europe, as is demonstrated, their average share of the vote in national and European parliamentary elections has more than doubled since the 1960s, from around 5.1% to 13.2%, at the expense of center parties.3 During the same era, their share of seats has tripled, from 3.8% to 12.8%.
Even in countries without many elected populist representatives, these parties can still exert tremendous ‘blackmail’ pressure on mainstream parties, public discourse, and the policy agenda, as is illustrated by the UKIP’s role in catalyzing the British exit from the European Union, with massive consequences.
The electoral fortunes of populist parties are open to multiple explanations which can be groupedi nto accounts focused upon (1) the demand-side of public opinion, (2) the supply-side of party strategies, and (3) constitutional arrangements governing the rules of the electoral game."'';
But unhappiness with their situation and the rise of populism does not only limit itself to Western and Industrial societies.
Why? Behind the increasing interconnectedness promised by globalization are global decisions, policies, and practices. These are typically influenced, driven, or formulated by the rich and powerful. These can be leaders of rich countries or other global actors such as multinational corporations, institutions, and influential people.
- Almost half the world — over 3 billion people — live on less than € 2.30 a day.
- The GDP (Gross Domestic Product) of the 41 Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (567 million people) is less than the wealth of the world’s 7 richest people combined.
- Nearly a billion people entered the 21st century unable to read a book or sign their names.
- Less than one per cent of what the world spent every year on weapons was needed to put every child into school by the year 2000 and yet it didn’t happen.
- 1 billion children live in poverty (1 in 2 children in the world). 640 million live without adequate shelter, 400 million have no access to safe water, 270 million have no access to health services. 10.6 million died in 2003 before they reached the age of 5 (or roughly 29,000 children per day).
In the face of such enormous external influence, the governments of poor nations and their people are often powerless. As a result, in the global context, a few get wealthy while the majority struggle.
And now, here we have the US Presidential elections, with two candidates who in all reality are products of the Establishment, but both courting the populist movement.
Though Clinton has suffered from her perceived coziness with Wall Street, she took a hard line against “those who get rich by cheating everybody else.”
And she warned:“I want to send a clear message to every boardroom and executive suite across our country,” Clinton said. “If you scam your customers, exploit your employees, pollute our environment or rip off the taxpayers, we will hold you accountable.”
Billionaire Donald Trump is even more blunt and probably also slightly more honest when it comes to showing he is standing up for the "have-nots" But while doing this, he is also demolishing the US Republican party as we know it. Nevertheless, his most lasting impact may be more substantive — he has pushed the GOP into a much more populist corner on policy, challenging the party’s platform on everything from free trade to entitlements. The Republican party will never be the same again.
And last but not least - Donald Trump boasts he can’t be bought by the special interests and advocacy groups that normally fund political campaigns. Yes indeed he can now safely label himself the "billionaire populist".
Whatever the result will be of this totally unorthodox US Presidential election, one thing is clear - a political revolution is in the making around the world, and if we think this is as bad or dangerous as it can get - think again.
©
EU-Digest
6/25/16
Donald Trump's Presidential Campaign Has A Lot In Common With Brexit And Other Nationalist Movements - by Scot Detrow
When Donald Trump arrived in Scotland Friday morning, hours after the
United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union, the presumptive
Republican presidential nominee was quick to draw parallels between the
U.K.'s political earthquake, and his own campaign for president.
"People want to take their country back," Trump said, "They want to have independence, in a sense. And you see it in Europe, all over Europe."
And while Scotland itself voted overwhelmingly to remain in the European Union, Trump is right. Right-wing nationalist movements, fueled by anger toward political elites and mistrust of immigration — and primarily backed by white voters — are gaining more and more momentum on the continent.
"This is not a unique phenomenon to the United States, and 2016 is not a short moment that will pass," says Yascha Mounk, who teaches political theory at Harvard University and has studied the rise of nationalist movements. "This is a real populist turn that has been happening for the last 15 or 20 years."
In recent decades, nationalist movements have shifted from vocal minorities to powerful parties that gained control of governments in places like Hungary, have lost national elections by the slimmest of margins in countries like Austria, and, this week, forced the United Kingdom out of the European Union.
Read more: Donald Trump's Presidential Campaign Has A Lot In Common With Brexit And Other Nationalist Movements : NPR
"People want to take their country back," Trump said, "They want to have independence, in a sense. And you see it in Europe, all over Europe."
And while Scotland itself voted overwhelmingly to remain in the European Union, Trump is right. Right-wing nationalist movements, fueled by anger toward political elites and mistrust of immigration — and primarily backed by white voters — are gaining more and more momentum on the continent.
"This is not a unique phenomenon to the United States, and 2016 is not a short moment that will pass," says Yascha Mounk, who teaches political theory at Harvard University and has studied the rise of nationalist movements. "This is a real populist turn that has been happening for the last 15 or 20 years."
In recent decades, nationalist movements have shifted from vocal minorities to powerful parties that gained control of governments in places like Hungary, have lost national elections by the slimmest of margins in countries like Austria, and, this week, forced the United Kingdom out of the European Union.
Read more: Donald Trump's Presidential Campaign Has A Lot In Common With Brexit And Other Nationalist Movements : NPR
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)