Free Markets, Free People

Vote Properly, You Virulent Racist!

It’s been interesting watching the commentary about the British electorate’s choice to Leave the European Union. In many ways it reflects the pre-Brexit arguments of the Remain camp, which was essentially that all right-thinking people should vote remain and that those who didn’t were just racists and nationalists. That sort of analysis has even leaked into supposedly non-political outlets like Jalopnik, one of whose stories about Boris Johnson’s checkered career as an automotive journalist began with this:

Boris Johnson, the flop-haired ex-mayor of London, has been an outspoken supporter of Brexit, or however you call the thing where old scared racist people in the UK want to keep brown people out of their country and think that ditching the shitshow that is the EU is going to help them with that.

Well, there you go. A perfectly condescending dismissal of any idea that leaving the European Union had any intellectual support at all.

Less blunt was the New York Times, who began an article about the residents of Sunderland, a strongly Labour constituency in northern England that voted overwhelmingly for Leave, thusly:

Sunderland stunned the country when voters overwhelmingly opted to leave Europe in Thursday’s referendum, by 61 percent to 39 percent. It was a far higher vote for Britain’s exit than pollsters had predicted, and it was the first sign that Prime Minister David Cameron’s gamble on staying in the bloc had lost.

Sunderland’s citizens seem to have voted against their own interests. Not only has the city been a big recipient of European money, it is also the home of a Nissan car factory, Britain’s largest, and automobiles produced there are exported, duty free, to Europe.

The citizens of Sunderland seemed not to have been impressed by this or other advantages, such as:

They can swim at the Sunderland Aquatic Center, a £20 million project with an Olympic-size pool that the European Union helped finance. They can send their children to the sleek, modern Sunderland University campus, which also received union financing.

European Union money also helped establish Sunderland Software City, a business center that offers support and advice to aspiring software entrepreneurs.

Sounds great, except…

However splashy these projects may be, they remain largely inaccessible to Sunderland’s working class. Many cannot afford the £30 monthly fees at the Aquatic Center, and people in the nearby Washington neighborhood said they had never set foot inside.

As for Sunderland University, the tuition, which the government recently raised, is too much for many young people.

The article goes on to note that Sunderland has one of the highest unemployment rates in the UK.

So, how is voting Leave a vote against their interests? Well, let’s hand wave our way past that question, which, really, no right-thinking person would ask.

No, on second thought, let’s not, though to properly unpack this, we have to consider many things.

There’s a growing sense, not only in Great Britain, but in the US as well, that the elites, or the political class, or whatever you’d like to call them, are incompetent and have been leading us astray. And the response from elites is to call those criticisms illegitimate. Those doing the carping are assumed to be racists or nationalists, both of which, of course, are unpleasant, dirty types of people. Both the UK’s Leavers and the US’s Trumpers share some commonalities. Among them are skepticism over free trade and free immigration; concerns that elites dismiss as foolish and uneducated. And, of course racist.

But perhaps the Leavers weren’t so concerned with brown people because they were brown, but because they were concerned at seeing buses being blown up in London, British soldiers being beheaded in broad daylight in the High Street, and dozens of children being raped for years in Rotherham. Perhaps, the British people have come to wonder about immigration because many immigrants seem less interested in becoming British than they are in making Britain more like the Middle East. And, maybe, just maybe, the Leavers prefer to live in Britain, in the free and modern culture that has developed over the last 1,500 years, rather than go back to live in the year 692. Maybe they wouldn’t be any more interested in living in the 13th-century culture of Richard the Lion-Hearted any more than they are in living in the Dark Age culture of Middle Eastern immigrants.

When people come into your country from elsewhere, they don’t do so simply as fungible economic units, but as real people, who bring along cultural and political ideas that may conflict those that are traditional in your country. It is almost at the point where elites cannot even conceive of an argument that implies the superiority of one culture over another, so they dismiss this argument as nationalism and nativism. But, the thing is, a free society that continually imports immigrants who have no interest in individual liberty, religious freedom, and political pluralism, will eventually have none of those things. The problem isn’t race. It’s culture.

National sovereignty means something. At the very least, it means that the people of a country have the absolute right to restrict immigration to the sort of people that will, in their judgement, benefit the country, and, once the immigrants arrive, to force them to assimilate to the country’s national culture more than the country accommodates the culture of the immigrant. No obligation exists, in any sense whatsoever, that requires the people of a country to allow entry to immigrants who desire to transform the country into something different. It is entirely legitimate to reject calls for sharia in the UK, just as it’s entirely legitimate to be upset by seeing political protestors in the US waving Mexican flags or wearing “Make America Mexico Again” hats, explicitly letting us know where their primary political allegiance lies. Nor is it illegitimate to wonder why such people are in this country, and not in the corrupt shithole of a country that they so obviously prefer, yet so oddly fled.

Even on an economic level, questions of culture and country aside, people know whether they are better off today than they were 20 years ago. That’s true whether you’re an unemployed shipbuilder in Sunderland, or a textile worker in North Carolina, where about 650 textile plants closed between 1997 and 2009. A carpenter in Norwalk, CA, where low wages due to nearly uncontrolled immigration from Mexico and points south have made it impossible to raise a family on a tradesman’s salary, can see it happening, just as a plumber in Lincolnshire can see his wages drop as an influx of Polish tradesmen pour in.

One of the interesting demographic results of the Brexit vote was that people over 50 years of age were overwhelmingly in favor of Leave, while people under 30 just as keenly supported Remain. The standard explanation, as Jalopnik presented it, is simply that older people are reflexively racist against “the brown people”. Conversely, I submit that the older people have a breadth of perspective that enables them to judge what the country was like prior to submitting to the EU, compare it to the country’s situation today, and determine whether the result is an improvement. They’ve seen industry leave the north of England and an influx of immigrants who either don’t seem all that interested in becoming British or whose arrival has depressed wages for working people. Apparently, they’ve decided that’s not the Britain they were promised in 1975 or the one they want to leave to their children. Perhaps their children disagree, but those children have never had the opportunity to learn that things could be different. Indeed, they’ve been constantly taught the opposite by an education system and popular culture that characterizes Euroskepticism, as well as skepticism about free trade and unrestricted immigration, as aberrant and racist.

Now, it may be true that free trade is a net benefit. But even in the best of circumstances, such as assuming that NAFTA and the WTO are actually free trade agreements—a dubious assumption1—the benefits of free trade are widespread and diffuse, while the closure of textile plants and steel mills leave highly visible victims and long-term job losses for certain communities. That’s a political problem, not an economic one, and it’s one that elites haven’t addressed well. As a result, it’s biting them in the ass, whether it’s an unexpected Leave win for Brexit or an unexpected presidential nomination for Donald Trump. Remember, the Leave vote won even in the traditionally Labour-voting constituencies of northern England. Either working people don’t understand what’s going on in their own lives, or the promises of the elites haven’t been born out by their actual experience. Which is more likely?

But let’s go even further. Even if you could prove that, on balance, free trade is an unquestionable economic benefit, people might still prefer to be measurably poorer if that’s the price that must be paid to maintain their traditional social and political cultures. (This has even more relevance in the case of the EU, because the EU actually has power. Imagine if NAFTA had an unelected Commission in Ottowa or Mexico City that could impose laws on the United States.) Perhaps people don’t regard their economic interests as important as their national or cultural interests. It doesn’t matter what elite opinion thinks the people’s most important interests are. In a democratic society, ultimately, it only matters what the people think they are. People get to determine their own priorities, and not have them dictated by elites. The people get to answer for themselves the question, “In what kind of country do I want to live?”

Of course, I would argue that we don’t have truly free trade or, increasingly, a free economy in the United States. The Progressives  always look at the rising income inequality and maintain that it’s the inevitable result of capitalism. That’s hogwash, of course, and Proggies believe it because they’re dolts. But the problem in this country isn’t free trade—we have precious little of it—or unrestricted capitalism, since we have precious little of that as well. The issue behind rising income inequality isn’t capitalism, it’s cronyism. Income isn’t being redirected to the 1% because capitalism has failed, it’s happening because we abandoned capitalism in favor of the regulatory crony state and its de facto collusion between big business/banking interests and a government that directs capital to favored political clients, who become “too big to fail”. It doesn’t matter, for instance, whether the president is a Democrat or Republican, because we know the Treasury Secretary will be a former—and future—Goldman Sachs executive.

Indeed, what we call “free trade” nowadays isn’t the Theory of Comparative Advantage in action. It’s corporations being allowed to ship jobs to low wage countries overseas to offset the cost of regulatory burdens in the US that restrict competition from new entrants to the market. That works great for large corporations.  Not only do they get to offset the regulatory costs by overseas production, but slower job growth in the US flattens domestic wages, too, and sends millions out of the labor force altogether. For working people, the biggest financial rewards from the current “free trade” regime seem mainly reaped by large business and banking interests. Again, people know if their own lives are better or worse than they used to be, and if the promises of elites have been born out by their own experience.

The game is increasingly stacked against small business. We’ve made it harder and harder for working people to start or stay in business, restricted their access to finance and capital, and forced them to knuckle under to onerous regulatory burdens. Even with flat middle class wages keeping labor costs in check, the regulatory burden restricts small business formation. As a result, working people have begun begin to feel trapped. They see no way to improve their lives and they can see their own incomes stagnating—as middle class incomes have, in fact, been stagnating for at least 20 years.

Add to that the additional downward wage pressure that everyone agrees is the inevitable result of increasing the supply of labor through large-scale immigration. Then top it off with immigrants refusing to assimilate to culture of the host country in seemingly greater numbers. Now you have all of the necessary elements for a political revolt by the people the elite see as the rubes and hayseeds in flyover country. Rather than foreseeing and trying to ameliorate the results of these trends, the elite have chosen to ignore them at very least, or dismiss them with contempt at worst.

Most people, most of the time, are perfectly happy to let elites run the country. After all, it seems to make the elites happy to run run things, and as long as they’re reasonably competent at it, and do it reasonably unobtrusively, no one much seems to care. But when elite competence is compromised by faulty ideology and cronyism, people become unhappy. And when the elite response to complaints is dismissal or insult, political problems begin to bloom. People begin to think about politics. They begin to do things. It is no coincidence, as our Soviet friends used to say, that the last decade has seen the rise of the TEA Party, the Occupy Movement, and the Trump phenomenon. People of all political stripes are becoming unhappy.

I think we’re about to watch the elites start paying a price for their incompetence, inattention and contempt. Euroskepticism is on the rise elsewhere in Europe. If EU membership were put to a popular vote in the Netherlands, Spain, or Sweden, there is a good chance that Leave would win there, too. Indeed, it’s possible that a vote to leave the EU might even win in France, the nation for whom creating and strengthening the EU has been the primary policy goal for 60 years.

Perhaps the “Vote Remain, you virulent racist!” PR campaign for staying in the EU needs a bit more thought.

So, too, does the idea that Donald Trump supporters are all rubes and hayseeds. However much we might dislike the messenger, and Trump is certainly dislikable, and however slim his personal characteristics make his chance of winning the current election, the fact is that his message has gained much more ground than most thought possible a year ago. The key elements of that message are the same ones that resulted in a Leave vote in the UK. In the hands of a more astute politician, how much more effective would that message be?

I leave it to you to ponder the answer to that question.


1 By the way, free trade doesn’t require agreements and treaties. It just requires that government not interfere with trade. If there’s a treaty involved, you can be virtually certain that some industry is being protected.

Dale’s social media profiles:
Twitter | Facebook | Google+

58 Responses to Vote Properly, You Virulent Racist!

  • An interesting upshot is the response of the foreign elite, ‘elected’ leaders to Brexit. From Londonistan, Paris and Brussels to Berlin the elite class has started to demonstrate the Leave group was right about being run by ‘foreigners’ as they go about declaring they will stop other countries from leaving the EU, punish the English (over half of whom think they’re already being punished), and in what obviously is an ass flash of their view on democratic government and the choice of a people, going to ignore and undo the choice of the British majority to exit the EU.

    Merkel and friends rush to create the superstate of Europe with no local government, no national military and rule from afar for most of the countries that aren’t Germany and France. When Adolf Angela said she would use all her strength to prevent other countries from leaving the EU my first response was to mumble that perhaps she was going to be forced to unleash the panzers again. Maybe she’s dusting off some moldy copy of Unternehmen Seelöwe even now. Having a guy from Luxembourg named Juncker involved just makes it all the more entertaining and historic. If only we could get someone named Habsburg or Hohenzollern to sign up.

    It strikes me the Germans will allow the EU to be headquartered in Brussels until such time as it is appropriate to move overall control to Berlin, where it obviously belongs.

    • Actually, I would find it more reassuring if Merkel was so nakedly ambitious. However by letting her country be overrun by millions of ill-educated barbarians who have no interest in becoming good, industrious Germans, I have to conclude that she is insane.

      • re: the barbarian influx – What I’m trying to sort out is along your line of thinking.
        How does this work to Germany’s advantage?
        Failing that, how does it work to her view of what she will receive from doing it?

        At some point millions of workers who are second class citizens are going to be a problem. I would have thought they’d have grasped that in past decades when dealing with the Turkish immigrant workers.

        Unless the goal is to foment a crisis that will require the SuperState to address. Right now they clearly have a hodgepodge of border attitudes, obviously the SuperState would determine one policy.
        Perhaps that’s the goal to accomplish the SuperState and then they’ll find some mechanism to re-populate the countries that are currently sending their huddled masses to Europe.

  • “National sovereignty means something.”


    It means that those using the term have convinced themselves that the turf lines set by the area’s most powerful street gang are special, unlike all the other gangs’ turf lines.

    • And it goes without saying all “street gangs” are equal.

      Isn’t it fortunate you live with one that doesn’t cut off your head for saying so.

    • Do you lock your door when you leave your house? Why, if you don’t like turf lines?

      • Because that’s, like, my property, maaaaaan!

        • No doubt he is concerned that your gang will make off with his dapper chapeau and mine will take unfair liberties with the comestibles in the larder.

          I’m fairly sure we don’t grasp true freedom and therefore can’t be trusted.

    • And weed should be legal and all the roads should be private, maaaaaaaaan!

    • No. It means nothing of the sort.

      It means, in very large measure, that people who ELECT to live in a sovereign place have ALSO elected to live according to certain shared cultural, legal, and political norms.

      That is extremely small-d democratic. It allows us to CHOSE to associate with like-minded people who share the same values, and it allows us to differentiate from other people who DO NOT share those values.

      Nobody is compelling you, for instance, to remain in the United States. You really SHOULD go somewhere that allows you NOT to feel you are part of a “street gang”. Good luck.

      • “Nobody is compelling you, for instance, to remain in the United States. You really SHOULD go somewhere that allows you NOT to feel you are part of a ‘street gang.’ Good luck.”

        I don’t “feel” that I’m “part” of a street gang. I notice that street gangs exist. For about a decade I lived within about a hundred feet of the line dividing the territory of the St. Louis Crips affiliate (south of Martin Luther King Drive) and the territory of the Horseshoe Posse, the former St. Louis Bloods affiliate (north of said street), while also living within the turf of the “County of St. Louis” and “State of Missouri” and “United States of America” gangs. I wasn’t “part” of any of those gangs at the time (I was one of that last gang’s members, in fact one of its enforcers, for quite a while in my youth, though).

        As far as compulsion to remain in the United States, I am forbidden (the gang refers to it as a “felony”) to do so without paying a substantial bribe to the gang and asking for the gang’s permission, which may be refused.

        • Urrrmmm….BULLSHIT, Thom. You don’t need no STEEEEENKIN’ permission.

          Just get thee hence. You can apply for political asylum in Freedonia, or wherever. OR you can apply for being freaking nuts under a compassionate visa.

          You don’t even need to renounce your previous membership in our street gang. Just go.

          And, again, good luck.

          • “You don’t need no STEEEEENKIN’ permission.”

            The gang says differently:

            “Except as otherwise provided by the President and subject to such limitations and exceptions as the President may authorize and prescribe, it shall be unlawful for any citizen of the United States to depart from or enter, or attempt to depart from or enter, the United States unless he bears a valid United States passport.” — 8 U.S. Code § 1185

            The basic bribe attached to this “passport” scheme isn’t too large. But if it’s discovered that you’ve been remiss in paying your annual protection bribes (as a percentage of your income) or have otherwise not paid this or that section of gang as much as it has demanded over the years, those bribes have to be caught up or you’ll be forbidden to leave.

            Of course, the gang turf subdivision I live in has 1,350 miles of coastline, so I suspect I can get out without paying the gang off, with some basic preparations and tricks, should I so choose. But those preparations would likely involve choosing another gang to seek protection from and so forth, so I’m not sure it would be a giant improvement.

          • You DO have the choices, and you’re just being disingenuous. As per normal when you’re pushed.

            Go, dude! Be Mr. Big Balls Sovereign Citizen! Don’t mewl about being in a street gang! Show your independence!

          • When did I ever say I don’t have choices.

            No, I’m not one of those “Sovereign Citizen” guys who think that if they recite some kind of magical formula they become special (that’s just the flip side of the “national sovereignty means something” mumbo jumbo). Sorry if it bugs you that I choose to live in the real world instead of trying to prettify it by pretending that thugs aren’t thugs.

          • Awww shoot man, there’s this place I heard of south of Texas! People from all around the world, they wander out of there all day long into Texas.
            Some of them come to have their kids in our gang’s area. I guess because our gang protection is better or something.

            You don’t need no permission to wander in and out though. In fact, you might try leaving, then coming back in, and claiming you’re from, Syria or something and collecting whatever benefits are available.
            If you have family members on our gangs turf, you could explain that you want transportation to visit them while you wait for the gang hearing on whether or not we’re going to send you back to where ever you came from.

            If you don’t have a passport, seems like there’s not a big deal these days.

        • There’s always Alaska. Or Canada. There is plenty of room up there to “Live Free Or Die” without the thugs even noticing you. They can’t oppress you if they can’t find you.

    • How dismissive. You didn’t catch the whole thing about culture, did you. Goodness gracious the skull it thick on this one.

    • The fact countries and national defense grew out of gangs/protection rackets doesn’t diminish the fact people fundamentally gang up to take other people shit and unless you belong to a gang to make them take pause, you will be quick eats.

  • At some point in the past several years I stopped denying accusations of racism and even indirectly invite them. “Racist” is the all-purpose, go-to conversation-ender of the left. To waste breath refuting it is to dignify it.

    • Very good read!

    • Excellent comment!

    • Yep, that’s where I am as well.

      I no longer worry about the sting of being considered a “racist” by people who don’t know me, have never met me, and whom I will never actually meet.


    I thought that was a suburb piece of work, and many of you would enjoy it. Start it from the beginning.

    Brexit doesn’t mean that the Brits will chose the right stuff, just that they have taken their choices back. I hope they will chose what this production suggests, however.

  • Then, there is this “gem” from the once respected Foreign Policy

    The schism we see opening before us is not just about policies, but about reality. The Brexit forces won because cynical leaders were prepared to cater to voters’ paranoia, lying to them about the dangers of immigration and the costs of membership in the EU. Some of those leaders have already begun to admit that they were lying. Donald Trump has, of course, set a new standard for disingenuousness and catering to voters’ fears, whether over immigration or foreign trade or anything else he can think of. The Republican Party, already rife with science-deniers and economic reality-deniers, has thrown itself into the embrace of a man who fabricates realities that ignorant people like to inhabit.

    Did I say “ignorant”? Yes, I did. It is necessary to say that people are deluded and that the task of leadership is to un-delude them. Is that “elitist”? Maybe it is; maybe we have become so inclined to celebrate the authenticity of all personal conviction that it is now elitist to believe in reason, expertise, and the lessons of history. If so, the party of accepting reality must be prepared to take on the party of denying reality, and its enablers among those who know better. If that is the coming realignment, we should embrace it.

    • “we have become so inclined to celebrate the authenticity of all personal conviction”

      Wow. “We” have become so inclined because Traub and the rest of the “elite” are doing their best to force that garbage on us.

      “The Republican Party, already rife with science-deniers and economic reality-deniers,”

      As opposed to the other party, whose reality is that gov’t. (the “elite”) has, ex officio(?), infinite economic resources and competence in every area, without experience or education in any of those areas.

  • “people have come to wonder about immigration because many immigrants seem less interested in becoming British than they are in making Britain more like the Middle East.”

    That is the principal issue regarding immigration. Previous waves of immigrants left their country for another to become part of the second country. That is no longer true; it is no longer safe to believe it is still true, and it is a policy failure for government to act as though it were still true.

  • How stupid the residents of Sunderland are, to prize sovereignty over a public pool and a university!

    • Well, it turns out that the public pool costs 30 pounds/month, and university fees are a bit steep. But If the peasants want to be peasants, that’s their problem.

  • Jalopnik–really? Really? Why give any creedence to any part of Gawker Media?

  • I find the screeching liberal media harridan’s amusing, for some reason they see themselves as part of the elites and in reality all they do is shine the elites’ shoes and clean their soiled linen. The media honestly believe they are part of the governing elite, perhaps it’s time we the peasants put those thugs back into their progressive closets and tell them to STFU and learn to knit. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.

  • I think this pretty much nails it.
    However, it may have also left out the influence of the globalists and the socialists/progressives and their seemingly never ending thirst to rule over the people instead of governing for the people.

  • Even Charles Krauthammer seems to get it though. The youth voted 3-1 to remain, as did people in more prosperous Scotland and London. Throughout Europe, Euroskeptics are now on the defensive given the reaction to this vote. Australia and other Commonwealth countries are moving towards closer ties to the EU (not the UK!), the US is moving closer to Germany in response, and Scotland is likely to choose independence and even join the Eurozone. The “leave” vote is a reaction to globalization – the fact that economies are interlinked and technology has made borders unimportant. The youth aren’t voting “remain” because they’re young, but because they know it’s the way the world is. The 80’s are never coming back. The longer this drags out and the more it becomes clear false promises and misleading formation caused people to vote leave (with large numbers expressing regret for that – “bregret”), it’s quite possible that the non-binding referendum will never become reality.

    • it’s quite possible that the non-binding referendum will never become reality

      >>>> In that case, get ready for comes next. Will make UKIP look like hippies.

    • The youth are voting to remain because they’re terminally stupid, as most of us were as youth.

      You never out grew it and you’re childishly still living it by passing the bullshit on to the next deluded generation.

      “borders unimportant”
      Well skippy, we’ll see how that all works out here fairly shortly won’t we. That game is a critical mass game, and perhaps it’s not quite there yet, but it’s getting close.

      As for the youth you’re so proud you’re filling with your dreamy delusions, those who follow your moon pony advice, assuming any actually do, won’t thank you later.
      Mexico and Canada still have borders, and they enforce them, Mexico violently so.
      I don’t suppose you’d care to explain why such enlightened nations as they would do that, because having to do so would make your pointy head explode like a cherry bomb.

    • And chew on this

      Eventually Fritz is going to want to really understand why Fareed should get a free ride from him.
      But I’m sure you think technology will make that wealth transfer magically appear from the ether, and old Fritz will just sit back and happily watch as his culture is annihilated by one imported from the 10th century.

      • Psshaw! Culture is so 20th century. Economics and technology are the important things. Materialism is the new spirituality, and you know how spiritual Erp is.

    • Nobody is suggesting the 80s are coming back or are even desired. That is just one more BS straw man concocted by BS Progressives like yourself to deflect the real issue, freedom. Unelected bureaucrats are calling the shots and the shots they are calling trump British law. It is also interesting to note the markets in France and Germany both fell by over 6% the day after the Brexit vote – and they weren’t the ones leaving. But it does tell the tale for how the EU economy may continue to develop without the UK and also how the EU can continue to stand up to the economic pressures Putin can bring to bear without the steadying hand of the UK.

    • Thanks for providing a great illustration of the attitude the article discusses.

      You’re perfect.

    • Poor Scott. Blindsided by a result he never expected he desperately rolls out as many antidemocratic talking points he can find. Nonbinding! False promises! Regret! Yoof! Scotland! Nevermind that democracy is one man one vote regardless of age, creed, color or abode. Poor Scott, caught pants down again with no clue as to why the majority of voters voted as they did.

      This is a pretty good explanation.

      • I’m relatively sure he’d have assured us in 1937 that the yutes of Europe were dumping the old ways of their parents and the war to end all wars marked the turning point to enlightenment peace and prosperity, and that Herr Hitler was pragmatic and rational, and he was optimistic about the future because youth and new technology!

        • Lucky for you, I found some rare footage of Scottie from that era.

          Concluding quote: “You have the best centralized government in the world today.”

          • Jets, rockets, analytical computing machines, radar,awesome pesticides, highway systems, nuclear power!
            And on a global scale!
            What wasn’t to love!
            Yes indeed, they cast aside their old 19th century thinking and ushered the world into a new age!

          • All that work, making borders unimportant and linking economies for the prosperity of the Reich.
            And who is screwing it up, AGAIN! those “f*ing British!”

          • Indeed. Scottie has long been telling us how he understands German foreign policy (“I wrote a book on it!”), and how we ought to be more like them. Perhaps his admiration for the Germans and their foreign policy goes back further than we realized.

          • Perfidious Albion!


      There you go, Erp.

      We all know that markets have made trading global, but its the EU pukes who want to resist that.

      Watch the whole thing. Get back when you have a flucking clue.

    • ” The youth voted 3-”

      Really? The ’60s are over, you know. It is now generally accepted among intelligent people that “yoots” are not the font of all wisdom, virtue, and knowledge.

      • Anyhow, the youth that voted were 3 – 1. The rest, meh, didn’t care and they were more numerous. Scott’s strong point has never been, like yknow, thinking.

      • Among the many comical portions of this is the idea that people wanting to protect their culture, as is, from cultural invasion, well of course they’re racist and wrong.

        Unless you’re an Islamic culture of course, then whatever barbarity you use to preserve the 10th century purity of your native land is quite all right.
        Remember how accepting the Iranian Revolutionaries were of creeping western culture in 1979?

        Ah, good times.

        But Scott loves to tell us what a forward thinking country Islamic Iran is! By his definition of course, racist, and backward and clinging to old ideas since they keep squashing cultural infringements from the west…
        but forward thinkingly backward and racist, not at all like the old foggeys and last century bitter clingers from the hinterlands of the UK with their crazy ideas about home rule.

    • Once again, Erb adds 2 and 2 and gets purple.

      Yes, the youth voted to remain. That’s because the EU is all they’ve ever known. But the older folks, the ones who remember what true autonomy is like, voted to exit.

      And the vote wasn’t a reaction to globalism: the UK is still going to trade with countries around the globe, and has known for centuries that it must do so. The vote was an assertion of national sovereignty.

      • Erbbie’s lack of grasp on history would include not grasping that the sun literally never set on the British Empire for about 2 hundred years, not counting the years in decades they were merely trading with the world.

        That implies a great deal of interaction, and trade, with foreign countries.

  • Sarc on
    I don’t understand why anyone wouldn’t want immigration from countries where you can still find people who do things like this.
    Seems like it would be a valuable addition to any culture that has stopped randomly, or even systematically killing non-believers in the streets in the name of God.
    Sarc off

  • Truly, Multiculturalism was a method, invented by the elites, to promote self-segregation.
    Invented after those awful school desegregation scenes from Boston.
    Only those who accept the cultural traditions of the ruling class will ever make it big in America.
    Those who hang on too tightly to the traditions of the “old world” are doomed to be poor.

    And those outliers in Silicon Valley aren’t outliers at all, it’s mostly white and male.