The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Patrick Cockburn ArchiveBlogview
Britain Feels More Unstable Now Than I've Ever Seen It Before
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

There is a famous scene in Shakespeare’s Henry V on the night before the battle of Agincourt, when the French lords speak of the inevitability of their coming victory. Puffed up with arrogance, they deride the English: “Do but behold yon poor and starved band.” Of course, all this is to be exposed as bombast when the over-confident lords get their comeuppance the following day.

I was thinking about this scene when Donald Trump was elected President last year, contrary to the predictions of almost every commentator in the US. I thought about it again when pundits in Britain had their own St Crispin’s Day on 8 June, as Theresa May lost her majority in Parliament, dumbfounding expectations that Jeremy Corbyn was leading the Labour Party to calamitous defeat. A comical outcome of the general election was the way in which the commentariat, who has by and large lauded May as a mix of Queen Elizabeth I, Judi Dench and Margaret Thatcher, switched at high speed to seeing clear similarities between her and Inspector Clouseau.

It is always satisfactory to see anybody in the prediction business tripping over their feet and getting egg on their faces. Most commentators admitted error, noted that everybody else had also got the election wrong, but still managed to sound as if they knew what made the nation tick. It was particularly easy to move on the agenda in the week after the election because of the Grenfell Tower disaster.

The American political establishment – at the core of which is TheNew York Times and CNN – have been busily counterattacking Trump and his election victory as the outcome of a Russian plot. Evidence for this is scant.

The anti-Trump forces may well be right in their strategy. Simple innocence is not going to do Trump a lot of good, and refuting vague and exaggerated charges can be difficult because of their very lack of substance. The Republicans should know this because they persecuted the Clintons for years by manufacturing scandals such as the Whitewater real estate deal, the murder of the US ambassador in Benghazi and Hillary’s supposed mishandling of her private emails.

Current political battles are so intense that they mask crucial long-term developments: Britain and America both look much more unstable today than they have done at any time since the Second World War. Some weakening of Anglo-Saxon dominance on the world stage had been expected in the wake of the Iraq war in 2003 and the financial crisis in 2008, but suddenly both powers feel as if they are starting to implode.

ORDER IT NOW

The pros and cons of Brexit are furiously debated in Britain, usually with the point at issue being the ultimate political and economic outcome of leaving the EU. But two important negative consequences are already with us: Britain is far more divided than it used to be and the Government is entirely preoccupied with Brexit to the exclusion of anything else. Brexit is like the tremors of an earthquake that shake apart weak and vulnerable points in British society, state and nation.

The British ruling class used to have a high international reputation for intelligence and realism in pursuit of its own interests. This may have been exaggerated, but latterly it seems to have lost its touch and to be happiest when sawing off the branch on which it is sitting. Privatisation and globalisation since Margaret Thatcher took power in 1979 were always going to weaken Britain because these exalted private gain over public and communal interests. The political selling point was the old saying that a rising tide raises all ships, but this turned out to depend on how big or small a ship you were sailing in and many of the latter were soon foundering. What the three political earthquakes in the Anglo-Saxon world – the Brexit referendum, the British general election and the US presidential election – have in common is that they showed that there are many more people unhappy with the status quo than anybody had suspected.

Loathing for Trump on the part of most of the US media is so intense as to make sensible commentary a rarity. They see Trump as a demonic conman who is ruining their country and they may well be right, but this makes it all the more necessary to ask what are the real grievances among voters that he was able to identify and exploit. Edward Luttwak, political scientist and historian, has a compelling article in the Times Literary Supplement pointing to an all-important but little regarded statistic for car “affordability” in the US which shows that almost half of American households have “been impoverished to the point that they can no longer afford a new car”. This is in a country where a car is a necessity to get to work or shop for food, but where wage stagnation and the rising price of vehicles makes it an increasing strain to buy one. Luttwak argues that Trump got “the political economy” right in a way that none of his opponents even tried to do and this made him invulnerable to attacks on his character that his opponents thought would destroy him.

The affordability of housing is to the British what the affordability of cars is to Americans: the prohibitive cost of buying and the extortionate cost of renting a place to live increasingly determines political choices. Ownership of property underpins the political chasm separating young from old voters, the dividing line being the advanced age of 47. Below this, the majority vote Labour and above it Conservative. Students are supposed to have been energised into voting Labour by the promise of abolishing tuition fees, but when I talked to them they were much more worried about paying high rents for miserable accommodation which, unlike tuition fees, they have to pay cash down.

The results of the Brexit vote, the US presidential election and the British general election were all so close that any factor can be highlighted as the one which made the difference. Conservatives tend to point to a poor and over-confident campaign on their part, emphasising marginal considerations such as Theresa May’s spectacular lack of the common touch. Less talked about by Conservatives was the surprising failure of the campaign of vilification directed against Jeremy Corbyn which not only failed to sink him but confirmed his status as the anti-establishment candidate.

Corbyn is a much better person than Trump, but both men benefit from the impossibility of putting somebody on permanent trial by the media without continually mentioning their name. Trump evidently calculates that it scarcely matters what he is accused of so long as he tops the media agenda. Corbyn likewise draws benefits from media hostility so unrelenting that it discredits itself and no longer inflicts real wounds. Political establishments are baffled by successful challenges from those they had dismissed and despised, unlike Shakespeare’s defeated French leader at Agincourt who says: “Let’s stab ourselves. Are these the wretches we played at dice for?”

(Republished from The Independent by permission of author or representative)
 
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: Brexit, Britain, Jeremy Corbyn 
    []
  1. I always laugh when a political faction plays the ‘disunity’ card. Its just a sneaky was of demanding ideological conformity to their outlook on the world.

    The solution, however, is clear. The instability is nothing that can’t be fixed by a fresh infusion of Somalians, Arabs, and South Asians.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /pcockburn/britain-feels-more-unstable-now-than-ive-ever-seen-it-before/#comment-1959001
    More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. Boudicca says:

    Re Corbyn: Antifa propaganda:

    “#WelcomeToCanada

    28 January 2017, Justin Trudeau tweeted: “To those fleeing persecution, terror & war, Canadians will welcome you, regardless of your faith. Diversity is our strength #WelcomeToCanada.” The boldest declaration of open borders. At first, it was dozens, then hundreds fleeing fascist and white supremacist America. August, Olympic Stadium in Montreal is requisitioned and converted into a refugee asylum centre.

    Jean-Pierre Fortin, president Canada Border Services Agency union: “500 people crossed the border on Tuesday alone…The numbers have exploded in the last week and a half. My colleagues at the border said it was a similar day today [Wednesday].” This dire situation will no doubt get worse: there are at least 20 million undocumented migrants in the United States who fear persecution. Canada must prepare for millions of refugees.

    [MORE]

    Jeremy Corbyn offers one solution: “It can’t be acceptable that in London we have luxury buildings and luxury flats left empty as land banking for the future while the homeless and the poor look for somewhere to live…properties must be found – requisitioned if necessary – to make sure those residents do get re-housed…” Likewise in Vancouver, a “New census counts 25,502 unoccupied homes in Vancouver, 15% jump over 2011.” Yes, over 25,000 homes just sitting empty. There are also 100s of 1000s of unoccupied apartments that sit vacant. Requisitioning these empty homes and assigning refugees to them would help.

    More housing will be needed to accommodate the African diaspora: “Ali, who came to Canada from Somalia in 1992 with five children, had six more kids with her husband after she arrived. But in 1999 her husband left and a year later a workplace injury forced her to quit her job as a cleaner.” (Toronto Star). The good news is under the new Canada Child Benefit, women like Ali now receive $64,400 per year, tax free. Despite the spectre of Islamophobia, Muslims are flourishing in Canada: “In fact, in 2011, the census showed 1,053,945 Muslims living in Canada – nearly double the 2001 figure of 579,640, which was in turn more than double the 1991 figure of 253,265.” (Anewlife.ca).

    Housing aside, New Canadians still face grievous hardships due to inequality. Doug Saunders: “There are two factors in particular that make Canada’s cycle of privilege a closed loop that excludes outsiders. The first is Canada’s lack of an inheritance tax. Estates (including houses) are taxed as income upon their owner’s death, then can be passed on to children – removing incentives to put that wealth to better and more productive use…[inheritance tax] expands privilege rather than keeping it cloistered.” (The other factor is private schools.) As Abi Wilkinson writes in the Guardian: “Why not fund the welfare state with a 100% inheritance tax?”

    Canada is still a long way from full diversity, that is, reflecting the globe – 23% Muslim, 16% African, 18% Indian… But as Canada becomes stronger through diversity, it will grow ever closer to 100% diverse welfare state, the needs of its diverse citizens entirely taken care of by the Dear Leader Justin Trudeau and the Party. Young Canadian women have the opportunity to marry and make babies with young men from Africa and Asia thus further reducing white privilege. (Recall the enlightened José Rodríguez de Francia who banned Europeans from marrying each other; they had to wed Indians, Africans or Mulattos.) The cycle of privilege will be broken as blood inheritance, “good breeding”, nativism, private schools and clubs, private property, and the apartheid system are swept away.

    #WelcomeToCanada”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thirdeye
    A large number of the unoccupied homes in Vancouver are owned as investments by wealthy mainland Chinese. That is encouraged by the "investor immigrant" policy which has resulted in some investment in business assets but largely land speculation. When such investor-immigrant homes are occupied it is often by the offspring of the wealthy investor. A similar thing is happening in the LA suburb of Arcadia, where upscale homes are being turned into love nests occupied by Chinese mistresses. IMO the entry of big Asian money underway on the west coast will bring changes to the economy and culture on the scale of the tech boom. It will be interesting.
  3. The instability in the West is not surprising to those of us on the Alt-Right. For decades our elites have regarded Western civilization and it’s “hideously White” populace with nothing but the deepest hatred and contempt. How such a poisonous and deadly situation came about is a long story. My deepest hope is that Trump’s great Warsaw speech represents a historic and stunning turning point that no one could have possibly predicted.

    Read More
  4. “manufacturing scandals”

    I suppose the Republicans manufactured the > 100 persons who crossed the Clintons’ paths and met their untimely demises.

    Read More
    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    "manufacturing scandals such as the Whitewater real estate deal, the murder of the US ambassador in Benghazi and Hillary’s supposed mishandling of her private emails."

    I don't know much about Whitewater (Brit here) but Benghazi shows at the very least poor judgement (how many male candidates would survive revelations that they turned down requests for more security, following which decision a US ambassador was murdered?), and the private email server shows dreadful, culpably negligent misjudgement - it's the sort of thing for which people in much less sensitive roles are routinely sacked. These are real scandals, not manufactured ones.

    "Corbyn is a much better person than Trump" - yes, if Trump hung out with terrorist militias as Corbyn has. You don't half write some nonsense.

    , @Thirdeye

    I suppose the Republicans manufactured the > 100 persons who crossed the Clintons’ paths and met their untimely demises.
     
    No fan of the Clintons here, but that is an example of a fabricated scandal and a distraction from their very real misdeeds.
  5. “Britain is far more divided than it used to be ….”

    I suppose you could lay a lot of the blame for this on the increase in the diversity of the population over the past couple of decades. I personally observe that the decline of Great Britain started with the Parliament Act of 1911, when the first great assault on the Hereditary Lords disturbed what had been a very successful social order, though I guess you could even go back to the Reform Acts in the 19th Century, which extended the franchise to landless commoners and those without a necessary stake in society other than collecting charity from it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Scotched earth
    @The Alarmist:

    I personally observe that the decline of Great Britain started with the Parliament Act of 1911, when the first great assault on the Hereditary Lords disturbed what had been a very successful social order.
     
    +1 for mentioning the Parliament Act 1911—if I could vote for you more than once, I w—wait, we don’t have votes here, so +100 then. (You’re not the chap I exchanged comments with on yt recently, I mentioned Mencius Moldbug to you?)
    Agree with you completely (although I thought it was the Representation of the People Act 1918 that removed the property qualification for men). As a good line goes (that I quoted to you last time, if you’re the yt guy):

    Tradition is a set of solutions for which we have forgotten the problems. Throw away the solution, and you get the problem back.
     
    (Donald Kingsbury, Courtship Rite (1982))
  6. jim jones says:

    Every child in my neighbourhood finished school, got a decent job and bought a house with no problems. The author makes a living from dystopian hysteria.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    Great for the kids around your area, then.

    You obviously don't live in the Los Angeles / Orange County area, nor NYC / Northern New Jersey, nor many other metro areas where kids coming out of college (or grad / professional school) are definitely NOT able to buy a house -- not even close, in most cases, and that's still true after they have been out working for five years.

    It may be dystopia, but it's not hysteria in many parts of "our" former country.

  7. Randal says:

    the prohibitive cost of buying and the extortionate cost of renting a place to live increasingly determines political choices…..they were much more worried about paying high rents for miserable accommodation

    The usual complete silence from Cockburn on one of the main drivers of excessive property and rental costs – increased demand due to mass immigration.

    Britain was heading for population stability, due to the welcome decline in the indigenous birth rate, at below 60 million in the 1980s and early 1990s. Now it has surged to a colossal 63 million, with more growth forecast – due almost entirely to mass immigration and the increased birth rate of foreigners. The change is wholly due to the dominance of the Blairite politicians, from Blair onwards, who opened the floodgates in 1997 and have not closed them yet.

    Prior to 1997, annual net immigration never exceeded 77 million, and was often much lower – frequently negative overall. From 1997 it climbed rapidly to a quarter of a million and never dropped below 177 million.

    https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/statistics-net-migration-statistics

    In other words since 1997 an additional 5 million or so people have immigrated to this crowded island, all boosting demand for accommodation (and many undercutting labour bargaining powers and hence wages for the working classes – another issue leftists like Cockburn refuse to confront). That pretty much accounts for the increase in population between 1997 and 2017, alone.

    The other factor driving increased accommodation prices is of course the destruction of the family and resulting increase in demand for separate housing, but no man of the left like Cockburn is ever going to admit to the costs of feminism and easy divorce, either.

    So, determined never to confront the politically awkward causes of the problems he decries, the old men of the left like Cockburn are left endlessly flogging the irrelevant dead corpse of Thatcher.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sunbeam

    Prior to 1997, annual net immigration never exceeded 77 million, and was often much lower – frequently negative overall. From 1997 it climbed rapidly to a quarter of a million and never dropped below 177 million.
     
    You might want to clean up that paragraph. I'm sure your numbers are correct, but you said "million" instead of thousand or something. Guess it gets late anywhere at some time.

    What's scary is I was thinking is he talking about the world as a whole? Those numbers still seem too large for a world closing in on 7 billion people (unless we already crossed that rubicon). But if these libertarian/open border types get their wish we might see that one day. And I'm not using hyperbole. Totally open borders, I could see 177 million people changing their address in a blue moon year.
    , @Verymuchalive
    Very well put. Left-leaning establishment types like Cockburn totally avoid the obvious explanations of these problems.
    In Scotland, where I live, it is said that if Independence is attained, Scottish Labour will still be blaming Margaret Thatcher. In the event, The Daily Record, the Mirror's Scottish sister paper, would probably have the headline: " Thatcher blamed for Yes Vote"
    Truly, these are the politics of the rotting corpse.
    , @YetAnotherAnon
    The dead corpse of Thatcher is not completely irrelevant - it was under her administrations that personal and corporate debt increased massively (the former at least the result of policy decisions), and household incomes only increased because more women went out to work. In comparison to Thatcher, the Labour administrations of the 60s were sound-money conservatives.

    This meant a double whammy for house prices as more money chased the existing stock, and started the decline of the stay-at-home mum raising children.
  8. Sunbeam says:
    @Randal

    the prohibitive cost of buying and the extortionate cost of renting a place to live increasingly determines political choices.....they were much more worried about paying high rents for miserable accommodation
     
    The usual complete silence from Cockburn on one of the main drivers of excessive property and rental costs - increased demand due to mass immigration.

    Britain was heading for population stability, due to the welcome decline in the indigenous birth rate, at below 60 million in the 1980s and early 1990s. Now it has surged to a colossal 63 million, with more growth forecast - due almost entirely to mass immigration and the increased birth rate of foreigners. The change is wholly due to the dominance of the Blairite politicians, from Blair onwards, who opened the floodgates in 1997 and have not closed them yet.

    Prior to 1997, annual net immigration never exceeded 77 million, and was often much lower - frequently negative overall. From 1997 it climbed rapidly to a quarter of a million and never dropped below 177 million.

    https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/statistics-net-migration-statistics

    In other words since 1997 an additional 5 million or so people have immigrated to this crowded island, all boosting demand for accommodation (and many undercutting labour bargaining powers and hence wages for the working classes - another issue leftists like Cockburn refuse to confront). That pretty much accounts for the increase in population between 1997 and 2017, alone.

    The other factor driving increased accommodation prices is of course the destruction of the family and resulting increase in demand for separate housing, but no man of the left like Cockburn is ever going to admit to the costs of feminism and easy divorce, either.

    So, determined never to confront the politically awkward causes of the problems he decries, the old men of the left like Cockburn are left endlessly flogging the irrelevant dead corpse of Thatcher.

    Prior to 1997, annual net immigration never exceeded 77 million, and was often much lower – frequently negative overall. From 1997 it climbed rapidly to a quarter of a million and never dropped below 177 million.

    You might want to clean up that paragraph. I’m sure your numbers are correct, but you said “million” instead of thousand or something. Guess it gets late anywhere at some time.

    What’s scary is I was thinking is he talking about the world as a whole? Those numbers still seem too large for a world closing in on 7 billion people (unless we already crossed that rubicon). But if these libertarian/open border types get their wish we might see that one day. And I’m not using hyperbole. Totally open borders, I could see 177 million people changing their address in a blue moon year.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    I’m sure your numbers are correct, but you said “million” instead of thousand or something
     
    Yes, a careless mis-write (twice!) that proofreading ought to have caught.

    Paragraph should read:

    Prior to 1997, annual net immigration never exceeded 77 thousand, and was often much lower – frequently negative overall. From 1997 it climbed rapidly to a quarter of a million and never dropped below 177 thousand.

  9. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    The uncircumventable problem is that, to use Marxian terms, labor is at a colossal disadvantage vis-à-vis capital–Chindia and all that. The global East still has a few hundred million people to put online in the global economy, so it’s going to get worse before it doesn’t get better.

    Right-wing populists will ride the popular anger spawned by these shifts, but they don’t seem to be dying to implement more than cosmetic changes. I find it ironic that The Donald’s huge, great, amazing, terrific buildings must have taken a lot of undocumented labor to erect.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lawrence Fitton
    labor & capital produce an excess. the excess goes to capital.
    , @RadicalCenter
    Do we have any evidence that President Trump employed illegal aliens to build his hotels and resorts? Not that I've seen.

    And you can bet if there were any such evidence, it would be news 24/7 until Trump resigned or was impeached for it.
  10. @Randal

    the prohibitive cost of buying and the extortionate cost of renting a place to live increasingly determines political choices.....they were much more worried about paying high rents for miserable accommodation
     
    The usual complete silence from Cockburn on one of the main drivers of excessive property and rental costs - increased demand due to mass immigration.

    Britain was heading for population stability, due to the welcome decline in the indigenous birth rate, at below 60 million in the 1980s and early 1990s. Now it has surged to a colossal 63 million, with more growth forecast - due almost entirely to mass immigration and the increased birth rate of foreigners. The change is wholly due to the dominance of the Blairite politicians, from Blair onwards, who opened the floodgates in 1997 and have not closed them yet.

    Prior to 1997, annual net immigration never exceeded 77 million, and was often much lower - frequently negative overall. From 1997 it climbed rapidly to a quarter of a million and never dropped below 177 million.

    https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/statistics-net-migration-statistics

    In other words since 1997 an additional 5 million or so people have immigrated to this crowded island, all boosting demand for accommodation (and many undercutting labour bargaining powers and hence wages for the working classes - another issue leftists like Cockburn refuse to confront). That pretty much accounts for the increase in population between 1997 and 2017, alone.

    The other factor driving increased accommodation prices is of course the destruction of the family and resulting increase in demand for separate housing, but no man of the left like Cockburn is ever going to admit to the costs of feminism and easy divorce, either.

    So, determined never to confront the politically awkward causes of the problems he decries, the old men of the left like Cockburn are left endlessly flogging the irrelevant dead corpse of Thatcher.

    Very well put. Left-leaning establishment types like Cockburn totally avoid the obvious explanations of these problems.
    In Scotland, where I live, it is said that if Independence is attained, Scottish Labour will still be blaming Margaret Thatcher. In the event, The Daily Record, the Mirror’s Scottish sister paper, would probably have the headline: ” Thatcher blamed for Yes Vote”
    Truly, these are the politics of the rotting corpse.

    Read More
  11. Randal says:
    @Sunbeam

    Prior to 1997, annual net immigration never exceeded 77 million, and was often much lower – frequently negative overall. From 1997 it climbed rapidly to a quarter of a million and never dropped below 177 million.
     
    You might want to clean up that paragraph. I'm sure your numbers are correct, but you said "million" instead of thousand or something. Guess it gets late anywhere at some time.

    What's scary is I was thinking is he talking about the world as a whole? Those numbers still seem too large for a world closing in on 7 billion people (unless we already crossed that rubicon). But if these libertarian/open border types get their wish we might see that one day. And I'm not using hyperbole. Totally open borders, I could see 177 million people changing their address in a blue moon year.

    I’m sure your numbers are correct, but you said “million” instead of thousand or something

    Yes, a careless mis-write (twice!) that proofreading ought to have caught.

    Paragraph should read:

    Prior to 1997, annual net immigration never exceeded 77 thousand, and was often much lower – frequently negative overall. From 1997 it climbed rapidly to a quarter of a million and never dropped below 177 thousand.

    Read More
  12. peterike says:

    Any article on current instability in UK or US that doesn’t even include the word “immigration” is fundamentally not a serious commentary. It’s just empty noise.

    Read More
  13. @The Alarmist
    "manufacturing scandals"

    I suppose the Republicans manufactured the > 100 persons who crossed the Clintons' paths and met their untimely demises.

    “manufacturing scandals such as the Whitewater real estate deal, the murder of the US ambassador in Benghazi and Hillary’s supposed mishandling of her private emails.”

    I don’t know much about Whitewater (Brit here) but Benghazi shows at the very least poor judgement (how many male candidates would survive revelations that they turned down requests for more security, following which decision a US ambassador was murdered?), and the private email server shows dreadful, culpably negligent misjudgement – it’s the sort of thing for which people in much less sensitive roles are routinely sacked. These are real scandals, not manufactured ones.

    “Corbyn is a much better person than Trump” – yes, if Trump hung out with terrorist militias as Corbyn has. You don’t half write some nonsense.

    Read More
    • Agree: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @chris moffatt
    Just to add (non-Brit here) it wasn't how Clinton handled her private eMails, we don't actually give much of a rip about that; it was, and still is, how she handled classified State Dept eMail. What she did is a felony under the law and many of us would like to see her punished. And Comey too for his refusal to refer an open and shut case for prosecution.
    , @Stephen Paul Foster
    “Corbyn is a much better person than Trump” ? Evidence of insanity.
  14. @Randal

    the prohibitive cost of buying and the extortionate cost of renting a place to live increasingly determines political choices.....they were much more worried about paying high rents for miserable accommodation
     
    The usual complete silence from Cockburn on one of the main drivers of excessive property and rental costs - increased demand due to mass immigration.

    Britain was heading for population stability, due to the welcome decline in the indigenous birth rate, at below 60 million in the 1980s and early 1990s. Now it has surged to a colossal 63 million, with more growth forecast - due almost entirely to mass immigration and the increased birth rate of foreigners. The change is wholly due to the dominance of the Blairite politicians, from Blair onwards, who opened the floodgates in 1997 and have not closed them yet.

    Prior to 1997, annual net immigration never exceeded 77 million, and was often much lower - frequently negative overall. From 1997 it climbed rapidly to a quarter of a million and never dropped below 177 million.

    https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/statistics-net-migration-statistics

    In other words since 1997 an additional 5 million or so people have immigrated to this crowded island, all boosting demand for accommodation (and many undercutting labour bargaining powers and hence wages for the working classes - another issue leftists like Cockburn refuse to confront). That pretty much accounts for the increase in population between 1997 and 2017, alone.

    The other factor driving increased accommodation prices is of course the destruction of the family and resulting increase in demand for separate housing, but no man of the left like Cockburn is ever going to admit to the costs of feminism and easy divorce, either.

    So, determined never to confront the politically awkward causes of the problems he decries, the old men of the left like Cockburn are left endlessly flogging the irrelevant dead corpse of Thatcher.

    The dead corpse of Thatcher is not completely irrelevant – it was under her administrations that personal and corporate debt increased massively (the former at least the result of policy decisions), and household incomes only increased because more women went out to work. In comparison to Thatcher, the Labour administrations of the 60s were sound-money conservatives.

    This meant a double whammy for house prices as more money chased the existing stock, and started the decline of the stay-at-home mum raising children.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Verymuchalive
    Actually, it was the Wilson Government's tax and welfare changes of the mid-1960s which spelled the end of the stay-at-home mum. See James Bartholomew's excellent " The Welfare State We're In"
    House prices have been going up at a higher rate than general inflation since at least the early 1960s. So the question of house affordability has been around for a long time before the Thatcher Government.
    Likewise, the Wilson Government agreed to the Kennedy Round of Gatt in 1968, which effectively ushered in Free Trade. Large swathes of British Industry was uncompetitive by world standards, so by the early 1970s massive import penetration was closing British factories wholesale. Many industries have never recovered.
    With a complete lack of irony, Anthony Wedgewood Benn, one of Wilson's ministers at the time, would later call Thatcher " an Edwardian Liberal" She may have been, but what was he ?
    The Labour Governments of the 1960s were probably the biggest single cause of our present problems. The welfare system should not have been altered, and tariff and quota barriers should have been retained while British industry was modernised.
    And it was during the Wilson Government that Enoch Powell made his famous speech on non-white immigration.
    Granted, Margaret Thatcher was an opportunity lost, but blame must be placed on those who actually devised these policies.
    , @Bill Jones
    No mention I see of the Labour administrations of the 70's whose destruction Thatcher was elelected to correct.
  15. Brexit hasn’t done crap to address the real problem.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Fredrik
    It's because Brexit was never intended to do that. This was always an internal Tory power struggle. The resistance to ECJ isn't so much principle as what ECJ actually ruled(i.e. against Tories on workers rights and similar). Additionally the UK seems very confused about the negotiations about how to leave the EU. An example is that Article 50 has nothing to do with trade agreements. Article 50 is about leaving the EU.

    Either Davis, May and the others are really stupid/ignorant or they have from the beginning decided they don't want a deal with the EU because they think they will be better off without it. I generally don't think politicians at that level are stupid even when I disagree with their ideas.

    Immigration is obviously Britain's major problem but if anyone thinks the major parties(including UKIP) really wants to change anything then I've got a bridge to sell. They're all in agreement that when the Poles leave then they will be replaced by Commonwealthers. And those people aren't White Australians. A point I've made countless times....

  16. 22pp22 says:

    Corbyn is not a better person than Trump. If the world had turned out a little differently and his side had one forty years ago, he would not have hesitated to unleash a real reign of terror.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    It is true that Trump is an opportunistic lout.

    In contrast, Corbyn does have core convictions and tries to stick by them(unlike Clintonite Blair the opportunist weasel), but his beliefs are for national racial suicide to feed an addiction to Delusions of Progressive Ecstasy or DOPE.

    Corbyn is a better person with worse positions.
    Trump is a worse person with better positions.

  17. Corbyn is a much better person than Trump,

    He may be a’nicer guy’ and ideologically consistent by rules of self-righteous chauvinism, but he openly invites invasion of UK by foreign hordes.

    Politically, he’s worse than Hitler.

    Read More
  18. @22pp22
    Corbyn is not a better person than Trump. If the world had turned out a little differently and his side had one forty years ago, he would not have hesitated to unleash a real reign of terror.

    It is true that Trump is an opportunistic lout.

    In contrast, Corbyn does have core convictions and tries to stick by them(unlike Clintonite Blair the opportunist weasel), but his beliefs are for national racial suicide to feed an addiction to Delusions of Progressive Ecstasy or DOPE.

    Corbyn is a better person with worse positions.
    Trump is a worse person with better positions.

    Read More
  19. @YetAnotherAnon
    The dead corpse of Thatcher is not completely irrelevant - it was under her administrations that personal and corporate debt increased massively (the former at least the result of policy decisions), and household incomes only increased because more women went out to work. In comparison to Thatcher, the Labour administrations of the 60s were sound-money conservatives.

    This meant a double whammy for house prices as more money chased the existing stock, and started the decline of the stay-at-home mum raising children.

    Actually, it was the Wilson Government’s tax and welfare changes of the mid-1960s which spelled the end of the stay-at-home mum. See James Bartholomew’s excellent ” The Welfare State We’re In”
    House prices have been going up at a higher rate than general inflation since at least the early 1960s. So the question of house affordability has been around for a long time before the Thatcher Government.
    Likewise, the Wilson Government agreed to the Kennedy Round of Gatt in 1968, which effectively ushered in Free Trade. Large swathes of British Industry was uncompetitive by world standards, so by the early 1970s massive import penetration was closing British factories wholesale. Many industries have never recovered.
    With a complete lack of irony, Anthony Wedgewood Benn, one of Wilson’s ministers at the time, would later call Thatcher ” an Edwardian Liberal” She may have been, but what was he ?
    The Labour Governments of the 1960s were probably the biggest single cause of our present problems. The welfare system should not have been altered, and tariff and quota barriers should have been retained while British industry was modernised.
    And it was during the Wilson Government that Enoch Powell made his famous speech on non-white immigration.
    Granted, Margaret Thatcher was an opportunity lost, but blame must be placed on those who actually devised these policies.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Philip Owen
    Not just Wilson. Changes in mortgage policy also drove women away from the family. Once two incomes were taken into account, first the greedy, then the rest took out loans based on two incomes. Now two incomes are needed for what one could buy before. Higher household incomes than ever deliver a lower quality of life. Finance is the beneficiary. The US was ahead of the UK in this. Continental Europe, where many rent, was behind. Germany, of all places, was a laggard in the exit of women from the home.
    , @unseated
    Look at the graph here:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/business-16545898

    Now when was Thatcher first elected?

  20. @Anonymous
    The uncircumventable problem is that, to use Marxian terms, labor is at a colossal disadvantage vis-à-vis capital--Chindia and all that. The global East still has a few hundred million people to put online in the global economy, so it's going to get worse before it doesn't get better.

    Right-wing populists will ride the popular anger spawned by these shifts, but they don't seem to be dying to implement more than cosmetic changes. I find it ironic that The Donald's huge, great, amazing, terrific buildings must have taken a lot of undocumented labor to erect.

    labor & capital produce an excess. the excess goes to capital.

    Read More
  21. Thirdeye says:
    @Boudicca
    Re Corbyn: Antifa propaganda:

    "#WelcomeToCanada

    28 January 2017, Justin Trudeau tweeted: “To those fleeing persecution, terror & war, Canadians will welcome you, regardless of your faith. Diversity is our strength #WelcomeToCanada.” The boldest declaration of open borders. At first, it was dozens, then hundreds fleeing fascist and white supremacist America. August, Olympic Stadium in Montreal is requisitioned and converted into a refugee asylum centre.

    Jean-Pierre Fortin, president Canada Border Services Agency union: “500 people crossed the border on Tuesday alone…The numbers have exploded in the last week and a half. My colleagues at the border said it was a similar day today [Wednesday].” This dire situation will no doubt get worse: there are at least 20 million undocumented migrants in the United States who fear persecution. Canada must prepare for millions of refugees.

    Jeremy Corbyn offers one solution: “It can’t be acceptable that in London we have luxury buildings and luxury flats left empty as land banking for the future while the homeless and the poor look for somewhere to live…properties must be found - requisitioned if necessary - to make sure those residents do get re-housed…” Likewise in Vancouver, a “New census counts 25,502 unoccupied homes in Vancouver, 15% jump over 2011.” Yes, over 25,000 homes just sitting empty. There are also 100s of 1000s of unoccupied apartments that sit vacant. Requisitioning these empty homes and assigning refugees to them would help.

    More housing will be needed to accommodate the African diaspora: “Ali, who came to Canada from Somalia in 1992 with five children, had six more kids with her husband after she arrived. But in 1999 her husband left and a year later a workplace injury forced her to quit her job as a cleaner.” (Toronto Star). The good news is under the new Canada Child Benefit, women like Ali now receive $64,400 per year, tax free. Despite the spectre of Islamophobia, Muslims are flourishing in Canada: “In fact, in 2011, the census showed 1,053,945 Muslims living in Canada - nearly double the 2001 figure of 579,640, which was in turn more than double the 1991 figure of 253,265.” (Anewlife.ca).

    Housing aside, New Canadians still face grievous hardships due to inequality. Doug Saunders: “There are two factors in particular that make Canada’s cycle of privilege a closed loop that excludes outsiders. The first is Canada’s lack of an inheritance tax. Estates (including houses) are taxed as income upon their owner’s death, then can be passed on to children – removing incentives to put that wealth to better and more productive use…[inheritance tax] expands privilege rather than keeping it cloistered.” (The other factor is private schools.) As Abi Wilkinson writes in the Guardian: “Why not fund the welfare state with a 100% inheritance tax?”

    Canada is still a long way from full diversity, that is, reflecting the globe - 23% Muslim, 16% African, 18% Indian… But as Canada becomes stronger through diversity, it will grow ever closer to 100% diverse welfare state, the needs of its diverse citizens entirely taken care of by the Dear Leader Justin Trudeau and the Party. Young Canadian women have the opportunity to marry and make babies with young men from Africa and Asia thus further reducing white privilege. (Recall the enlightened José Rodríguez de Francia who banned Europeans from marrying each other; they had to wed Indians, Africans or Mulattos.) The cycle of privilege will be broken as blood inheritance, “good breeding”, nativism, private schools and clubs, private property, and the apartheid system are swept away.

    #WelcomeToCanada"

    A large number of the unoccupied homes in Vancouver are owned as investments by wealthy mainland Chinese. That is encouraged by the “investor immigrant” policy which has resulted in some investment in business assets but largely land speculation. When such investor-immigrant homes are occupied it is often by the offspring of the wealthy investor. A similar thing is happening in the LA suburb of Arcadia, where upscale homes are being turned into love nests occupied by Chinese mistresses. IMO the entry of big Asian money underway on the west coast will bring changes to the economy and culture on the scale of the tech boom. It will be interesting.

    Read More
  22. Thirdeye says:
    @The Alarmist
    "manufacturing scandals"

    I suppose the Republicans manufactured the > 100 persons who crossed the Clintons' paths and met their untimely demises.

    I suppose the Republicans manufactured the > 100 persons who crossed the Clintons’ paths and met their untimely demises.

    No fan of the Clintons here, but that is an example of a fabricated scandal and a distraction from their very real misdeeds.

    Read More
  23. @Verymuchalive
    Actually, it was the Wilson Government's tax and welfare changes of the mid-1960s which spelled the end of the stay-at-home mum. See James Bartholomew's excellent " The Welfare State We're In"
    House prices have been going up at a higher rate than general inflation since at least the early 1960s. So the question of house affordability has been around for a long time before the Thatcher Government.
    Likewise, the Wilson Government agreed to the Kennedy Round of Gatt in 1968, which effectively ushered in Free Trade. Large swathes of British Industry was uncompetitive by world standards, so by the early 1970s massive import penetration was closing British factories wholesale. Many industries have never recovered.
    With a complete lack of irony, Anthony Wedgewood Benn, one of Wilson's ministers at the time, would later call Thatcher " an Edwardian Liberal" She may have been, but what was he ?
    The Labour Governments of the 1960s were probably the biggest single cause of our present problems. The welfare system should not have been altered, and tariff and quota barriers should have been retained while British industry was modernised.
    And it was during the Wilson Government that Enoch Powell made his famous speech on non-white immigration.
    Granted, Margaret Thatcher was an opportunity lost, but blame must be placed on those who actually devised these policies.

    Not just Wilson. Changes in mortgage policy also drove women away from the family. Once two incomes were taken into account, first the greedy, then the rest took out loans based on two incomes. Now two incomes are needed for what one could buy before. Higher household incomes than ever deliver a lower quality of life. Finance is the beneficiary. The US was ahead of the UK in this. Continental Europe, where many rent, was behind. Germany, of all places, was a laggard in the exit of women from the home.

    Read More
  24. unseated says:
    @Verymuchalive
    Actually, it was the Wilson Government's tax and welfare changes of the mid-1960s which spelled the end of the stay-at-home mum. See James Bartholomew's excellent " The Welfare State We're In"
    House prices have been going up at a higher rate than general inflation since at least the early 1960s. So the question of house affordability has been around for a long time before the Thatcher Government.
    Likewise, the Wilson Government agreed to the Kennedy Round of Gatt in 1968, which effectively ushered in Free Trade. Large swathes of British Industry was uncompetitive by world standards, so by the early 1970s massive import penetration was closing British factories wholesale. Many industries have never recovered.
    With a complete lack of irony, Anthony Wedgewood Benn, one of Wilson's ministers at the time, would later call Thatcher " an Edwardian Liberal" She may have been, but what was he ?
    The Labour Governments of the 1960s were probably the biggest single cause of our present problems. The welfare system should not have been altered, and tariff and quota barriers should have been retained while British industry was modernised.
    And it was during the Wilson Government that Enoch Powell made his famous speech on non-white immigration.
    Granted, Margaret Thatcher was an opportunity lost, but blame must be placed on those who actually devised these policies.

    Look at the graph here:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/business-16545898

    Now when was Thatcher first elected?

    Read More
  25. @jim jones
    Every child in my neighbourhood finished school, got a decent job and bought a house with no problems. The author makes a living from dystopian hysteria.

    Great for the kids around your area, then.

    You obviously don’t live in the Los Angeles / Orange County area, nor NYC / Northern New Jersey, nor many other metro areas where kids coming out of college (or grad / professional school) are definitely NOT able to buy a house — not even close, in most cases, and that’s still true after they have been out working for five years.

    It may be dystopia, but it’s not hysteria in many parts of “our” former country.

    Read More
  26. @Anonymous
    The uncircumventable problem is that, to use Marxian terms, labor is at a colossal disadvantage vis-à-vis capital--Chindia and all that. The global East still has a few hundred million people to put online in the global economy, so it's going to get worse before it doesn't get better.

    Right-wing populists will ride the popular anger spawned by these shifts, but they don't seem to be dying to implement more than cosmetic changes. I find it ironic that The Donald's huge, great, amazing, terrific buildings must have taken a lot of undocumented labor to erect.

    Do we have any evidence that President Trump employed illegal aliens to build his hotels and resorts? Not that I’ve seen.

    And you can bet if there were any such evidence, it would be news 24/7 until Trump resigned or was impeached for it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Do we have any evidence that President Trump employed illegal aliens to build his hotels and resorts? Not that I’ve seen."

    You don't look very hard. To be fair, Trump is not alone with other corporate big-wigs.

    http://time.com/4465744/donald-trump-undocumented-workers/
  27. Meanwhile, British police are powerless to prevent the operation of Russian agents in Britain. Numerous enemies of the Russian state have died in suspicious circumstances.

    https://www.buzzfeed.com/heidiblake/poison-in-the-system

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    The Russians need to up their game. I won't be applauding until they knock off Jeremy Corbyn.
    , @Scotched earth
    @James N. Kennett: did you know Russians have killed at least 43 Brits since the end of WW2? Oh, wait, that wasn’t the Russians, that was the Americans: at least 43 dead British servicemen due to U.S. friendly fire since 1945.
    Ah, but there was Russian support for the IRA that led to—oh, no, that was the Americans as well. 2,115 murdered by Irish republican terrorists in the last stage—men, women, pregnant women, children, infants, elderly, dogs, horses, Catholics, Protestants, Australian, Dutch, Spanish, German, Irish—you name it, an Irish republican’s killed it…

    Some Irish-Americans have long provided financial and material support for violent efforts to compel the United Kingdom to relinquish control of Northern Ireland. In the 1880s, Irish-American members of Clan na Gael dynamited Britain’s Scotland Yard, Parliament, and the Tower of London, and detonated bombs at several stations in the London underground. In the twentieth century, Irish-Americans provided most of the financial support sent to the Irish Republican Army (IRA). The US-based Irish Northern Aid Committee (NORAID), founded in the late 1960s, provided the Provisional Irish Republican Army (PIRA) with money that was frequently used for arms purchases. Only after repeated high-level British requests and then London’s support for our bombing of Libya in the 1980s did the US Government crack down on Irish-American support for the IRA.
     
    (CIA Red Cell special memorandum on ”What If Foreigners See the United States as an ’Exporter of Terrorism’”. WikiLeaks release: August 25, 2010. Available at: http://wikileaks.org/file/us-cia-redcell-exporter-of-terrorism-2010.pdf)

    That note doesn’t take into account the IRA terrorists given asylum by USG. Still, USG did crack down, and to measure the success of that, we might consult the grieving relatives of Stephen Restorick, a British soldier killed by a round from an American Barrett .50 sniper rifle in 1997.
    Have the Russians killed any Brits at all since shooting our Sidney Reilly in 1925?
    Even if the claims of Big Bad Putin killing his enemies are true—and that is a huge ‘if’, given the anti-Russian propaganda routinely churned out by the liberal media—why, as a Brit, should I care if Russians are killing other Russians? On the whole, Russia is less dangerous to us than the Americans. And with promoting Christianity, opposing degeneracy, fighting Islam, it is Holy Russia that is the shining city on the hill now.
  28. Cannot believe what I read here — Cllinton scandals manufactured? Mishandling of emails made up? I have no idea where such ideas come from, but anyone with even cursory knowledge knows that HRC refused to give up her emails, stonewalled, then turned in some with 33,000 missing because SHE decided the FBI didn’t need them. C’mon! And with classified information involved? Kinda hurts the credibility of the rest of the article.

    Read More
  29. Anon says: • Disclaimer
    @James N. Kennett
    Meanwhile, British police are powerless to prevent the operation of Russian agents in Britain. Numerous enemies of the Russian state have died in suspicious circumstances.

    https://www.buzzfeed.com/heidiblake/poison-in-the-system

    The Russians need to up their game. I won’t be applauding until they knock off Jeremy Corbyn.

    Read More
  30. Corvinus says:
    @RadicalCenter
    Do we have any evidence that President Trump employed illegal aliens to build his hotels and resorts? Not that I've seen.

    And you can bet if there were any such evidence, it would be news 24/7 until Trump resigned or was impeached for it.

    “Do we have any evidence that President Trump employed illegal aliens to build his hotels and resorts? Not that I’ve seen.”

    You don’t look very hard. To be fair, Trump is not alone with other corporate big-wigs.

    http://time.com/4465744/donald-trump-undocumented-workers/

    Read More
  31. @YetAnotherAnon
    "manufacturing scandals such as the Whitewater real estate deal, the murder of the US ambassador in Benghazi and Hillary’s supposed mishandling of her private emails."

    I don't know much about Whitewater (Brit here) but Benghazi shows at the very least poor judgement (how many male candidates would survive revelations that they turned down requests for more security, following which decision a US ambassador was murdered?), and the private email server shows dreadful, culpably negligent misjudgement - it's the sort of thing for which people in much less sensitive roles are routinely sacked. These are real scandals, not manufactured ones.

    "Corbyn is a much better person than Trump" - yes, if Trump hung out with terrorist militias as Corbyn has. You don't half write some nonsense.

    Just to add (non-Brit here) it wasn’t how Clinton handled her private eMails, we don’t actually give much of a rip about that; it was, and still is, how she handled classified State Dept eMail. What she did is a felony under the law and many of us would like to see her punished. And Comey too for his refusal to refer an open and shut case for prosecution.

    Read More
  32. @YetAnotherAnon
    The dead corpse of Thatcher is not completely irrelevant - it was under her administrations that personal and corporate debt increased massively (the former at least the result of policy decisions), and household incomes only increased because more women went out to work. In comparison to Thatcher, the Labour administrations of the 60s were sound-money conservatives.

    This meant a double whammy for house prices as more money chased the existing stock, and started the decline of the stay-at-home mum raising children.

    No mention I see of the Labour administrations of the 70′s whose destruction Thatcher was elelected to correct.

    Read More
    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    OK, compared to Thatcher, the Callaghan administration was also sound-money conservative. And under the Wilson administration a man on median wages could buy a house on a single wage, and support a stay at home wife raising the kids.

    Labour politicians then actually worried about things like the balance of payments, and disapproved of working people incurring excessive debt. The 'destruction' of the 1970s is as naught compared with the destruction of both the Thatcher and Blair eras.
  33. Fredrik says:
    @Priss Factor
    Brexit hasn't done crap to address the real problem.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8nwBlo7OzI

    It’s because Brexit was never intended to do that. This was always an internal Tory power struggle. The resistance to ECJ isn’t so much principle as what ECJ actually ruled(i.e. against Tories on workers rights and similar). Additionally the UK seems very confused about the negotiations about how to leave the EU. An example is that Article 50 has nothing to do with trade agreements. Article 50 is about leaving the EU.

    Either Davis, May and the others are really stupid/ignorant or they have from the beginning decided they don’t want a deal with the EU because they think they will be better off without it. I generally don’t think politicians at that level are stupid even when I disagree with their ideas.

    Immigration is obviously Britain’s major problem but if anyone thinks the major parties(including UKIP) really wants to change anything then I’ve got a bridge to sell. They’re all in agreement that when the Poles leave then they will be replaced by Commonwealthers. And those people aren’t White Australians. A point I’ve made countless times….

    Read More
  34. @James N. Kennett
    Meanwhile, British police are powerless to prevent the operation of Russian agents in Britain. Numerous enemies of the Russian state have died in suspicious circumstances.

    https://www.buzzfeed.com/heidiblake/poison-in-the-system

    : did you know Russians have killed at least 43 Brits since the end of WW2? Oh, wait, that wasn’t the Russians, that was the Americans: at least 43 dead British servicemen due to U.S. friendly fire since 1945.
    Ah, but there was Russian support for the IRA that led to—oh, no, that was the Americans as well. 2,115 murdered by Irish republican terrorists in the last stage—men, women, pregnant women, children, infants, elderly, dogs, horses, Catholics, Protestants, Australian, Dutch, Spanish, German, Irish—you name it, an Irish republican’s killed it…

    Some Irish-Americans have long provided financial and material support for violent efforts to compel the United Kingdom to relinquish control of Northern Ireland. In the 1880s, Irish-American members of Clan na Gael dynamited Britain’s Scotland Yard, Parliament, and the Tower of London, and detonated bombs at several stations in the London underground. In the twentieth century, Irish-Americans provided most of the financial support sent to the Irish Republican Army (IRA). The US-based Irish Northern Aid Committee (NORAID), founded in the late 1960s, provided the Provisional Irish Republican Army (PIRA) with money that was frequently used for arms purchases. Only after repeated high-level British requests and then London’s support for our bombing of Libya in the 1980s did the US Government crack down on Irish-American support for the IRA.

    (CIA Red Cell special memorandum on ”What If Foreigners See the United States as an ’Exporter of Terrorism’”. WikiLeaks release: August 25, 2010. Available at: http://wikileaks.org/file/us-cia-redcell-exporter-of-terrorism-2010.pdf)

    That note doesn’t take into account the IRA terrorists given asylum by USG. Still, USG did crack down, and to measure the success of that, we might consult the grieving relatives of Stephen Restorick, a British soldier killed by a round from an American Barrett .50 sniper rifle in 1997.
    Have the Russians killed any Brits at all since shooting our Sidney Reilly in 1925?
    Even if the claims of Big Bad Putin killing his enemies are true—and that is a huge ‘if’, given the anti-Russian propaganda routinely churned out by the liberal media—why, as a Brit, should I care if Russians are killing other Russians? On the whole, Russia is less dangerous to us than the Americans. And with promoting Christianity, opposing degeneracy, fighting Islam, it is Holy Russia that is the shining city on the hill now.

    Read More
  35. @The Alarmist

    "Britain is far more divided than it used to be ...."
     
    I suppose you could lay a lot of the blame for this on the increase in the diversity of the population over the past couple of decades. I personally observe that the decline of Great Britain started with the Parliament Act of 1911, when the first great assault on the Hereditary Lords disturbed what had been a very successful social order, though I guess you could even go back to the Reform Acts in the 19th Century, which extended the franchise to landless commoners and those without a necessary stake in society other than collecting charity from it.

    I personally observe that the decline of Great Britain started with the Parliament Act of 1911, when the first great assault on the Hereditary Lords disturbed what had been a very successful social order.

    +1 for mentioning the Parliament Act 1911—if I could vote for you more than once, I w—wait, we don’t have votes here, so +100 then. (You’re not the chap I exchanged comments with on yt recently, I mentioned Mencius Moldbug to you?)
    Agree with you completely (although I thought it was the Representation of the People Act 1918 that removed the property qualification for men). As a good line goes (that I quoted to you last time, if you’re the yt guy):

    Tradition is a set of solutions for which we have forgotten the problems. Throw away the solution, and you get the problem back.

    (Donald Kingsbury, Courtship Rite (1982))

    Read More
  36. anon says: • Disclaimer

    Wouldn’t Britain’s housing crisis have been greatly eased had not the Labour party allowed millions of foreigners to move to Britain, enormously exacerbating the demand for housing?

    Read More
  37. @YetAnotherAnon
    "manufacturing scandals such as the Whitewater real estate deal, the murder of the US ambassador in Benghazi and Hillary’s supposed mishandling of her private emails."

    I don't know much about Whitewater (Brit here) but Benghazi shows at the very least poor judgement (how many male candidates would survive revelations that they turned down requests for more security, following which decision a US ambassador was murdered?), and the private email server shows dreadful, culpably negligent misjudgement - it's the sort of thing for which people in much less sensitive roles are routinely sacked. These are real scandals, not manufactured ones.

    "Corbyn is a much better person than Trump" - yes, if Trump hung out with terrorist militias as Corbyn has. You don't half write some nonsense.

    “Corbyn is a much better person than Trump” ? Evidence of insanity.

    Read More
  38. saxongirl says:

    The British ruling class used to have a high international reputation for intelligence and realism in pursuit of its own interests. This may have been exaggerated, but latterly it seems to have lost its touch…

    You put your finger on the quick of it, Mr Cockburn, but then missed something sizeable: You cannot reference the

    British ruling class

    with your

    it

    in

    it seems to have lost….

    You see, the British ruling class is gone without a trace from public life. Our present puppet-masters are not even British — they are Zionists run by international bankers and arms manufacturers, and their most trusted lieutenants are non-white non-Christians.

    Yes, Britain is unstable. You in the US, however (and I have no idea how this has come about), have patriotism and patriots, or least your national vocabulary celebrates it and them. You can, and you have, drawn on it and them. Not so in Britain. Here, the patriot is the despised fascist. It is the antifa, a motley crowd of all sorts from the sadly deluded and timid to the foul-mouthed and violent, who are the media-declared creatures of enlightenment whose mission is the subduing and eventual elimination of the arrogant indigenous British White Man. (The same goes for Germany.)

    But wait. All is not lost. The national spirit can be awakened. And then beware:

    THE WRATH OF THE AWAKENED SAXON
    by Rudyard Kipling

    [MORE]

    It was not part of their blood,
    It came to them very late,
    With long arrears to make good,
    When the Saxon began to hate.

    They were not easily moved,
    They were icy — willing to wait
    Till every count should be proved,
    Ere the Saxon began to hate.

    Their voices were even and low.
    Their eyes were level and straight.
    There was neither sign nor show
    When the Saxon began to hate.

    It was not preached to the crowd.
    It was not taught by the state.
    No man spoke it aloud
    When the Saxon began to hate.

    It was not suddenly bred.
    It will not swiftly abate.
    Through the chilled years ahead,
    When Time shall count from the date
    That the Saxon began to hate.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill
    The "patriotism" which Americans celebrate is entirely of the "America the Idea" and the "thank our mercenaries for their service" varieties. Whether it is better to have that sort of patriotism or none at all is a question without a clear answer, but it is also a question of little interest.
  39. TG says:

    Is Britain unstable? Hard to say.

    But don’t worry. In a couple of generations or so, it won’t be Britain any more. Problem solved!

    Read More
  40. @Bill Jones
    No mention I see of the Labour administrations of the 70's whose destruction Thatcher was elelected to correct.

    OK, compared to Thatcher, the Callaghan administration was also sound-money conservative. And under the Wilson administration a man on median wages could buy a house on a single wage, and support a stay at home wife raising the kids.

    Labour politicians then actually worried about things like the balance of payments, and disapproved of working people incurring excessive debt. The ‘destruction’ of the 1970s is as naught compared with the destruction of both the Thatcher and Blair eras.

    Read More
  41. More unstable than in 1984, when Arthur Scargill started the NUM on the path to eventual extinction?

    Read More
  42. Bill says:
    @saxongirl

    The British ruling class used to have a high international reputation for intelligence and realism in pursuit of its own interests. This may have been exaggerated, but latterly it seems to have lost its touch...
     
    You put your finger on the quick of it, Mr Cockburn, but then missed something sizeable: You cannot reference the

    British ruling class
     
    with your

    it
     
    in

    it seems to have lost....
     
    You see, the British ruling class is gone without a trace from public life. Our present puppet-masters are not even British -- they are Zionists run by international bankers and arms manufacturers, and their most trusted lieutenants are non-white non-Christians.

    Yes, Britain is unstable. You in the US, however (and I have no idea how this has come about), have patriotism and patriots, or least your national vocabulary celebrates it and them. You can, and you have, drawn on it and them. Not so in Britain. Here, the patriot is the despised fascist. It is the antifa, a motley crowd of all sorts from the sadly deluded and timid to the foul-mouthed and violent, who are the media-declared creatures of enlightenment whose mission is the subduing and eventual elimination of the arrogant indigenous British White Man. (The same goes for Germany.)

    But wait. All is not lost. The national spirit can be awakened. And then beware:

    THE WRATH OF THE AWAKENED SAXON
    by Rudyard Kipling

    It was not part of their blood,
    It came to them very late,
    With long arrears to make good,
    When the Saxon began to hate.

    They were not easily moved,
    They were icy -- willing to wait
    Till every count should be proved,
    Ere the Saxon began to hate.

    Their voices were even and low.
    Their eyes were level and straight.
    There was neither sign nor show
    When the Saxon began to hate.

    It was not preached to the crowd.
    It was not taught by the state.
    No man spoke it aloud
    When the Saxon began to hate.

    It was not suddenly bred.
    It will not swiftly abate.
    Through the chilled years ahead,
    When Time shall count from the date
    That the Saxon began to hate.

    The “patriotism” which Americans celebrate is entirely of the “America the Idea” and the “thank our mercenaries for their service” varieties. Whether it is better to have that sort of patriotism or none at all is a question without a clear answer, but it is also a question of little interest.

    Read More
    • Replies: @saxongirl
    Bill, have you just dismissed the significance of patriotism or of your question? I should certainly agree that your question is of little interest, or better still, of no interest.
  43. saxongirl says:
    @Bill
    The "patriotism" which Americans celebrate is entirely of the "America the Idea" and the "thank our mercenaries for their service" varieties. Whether it is better to have that sort of patriotism or none at all is a question without a clear answer, but it is also a question of little interest.

    Bill, have you just dismissed the significance of patriotism or of your question? I should certainly agree that your question is of little interest, or better still, of no interest.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Bill
    The question. Since the patriotism doesn't exist . . .
  44. Sean says:

    Service jobs and construction ect are going to the immigrants that hypercapitalist logic shorn of any national feeling required bringing in. The manufacturing jobs are gone or going (manufacturing may come back, but with robots) and the clerical jobs will soon begin vanishing too. The only truly productive workers left will be computer programmers, yet the mass of the population expect to be able to have a middle class lifestyle. They won’t and there are a lot of them.

    The majority of the soon-to-be-obsolescent people still have enough in common for discontent to coalesce them into a formidable political (and perhaps paramilitary) force against the hypercapitalst system that destroyed their future. The mass revolt against Assad broke out immediately after he made the mistake of raising the price of commodities. You bet the UK is unstable. The only solution for the system is to amp up immigration and destroy the ethnic majority too fast for them to do anything about it.

    Read More
  45. Bill says:
    @saxongirl
    Bill, have you just dismissed the significance of patriotism or of your question? I should certainly agree that your question is of little interest, or better still, of no interest.

    The question. Since the patriotism doesn’t exist . . .

    Read More
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Patrick Cockburn Comments via RSS
Personal Classics
Full Story of the Taliban's Amazing Jailbreak
"They Can't Even Protect Themselves, So What Can They Do For Me?"
"All Hell is Breaking Loose with Muqtada" Warlord: the Rise of Muqtada al-Sadr