The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewJohn Derbyshire Archive
Rule Britannia! On Brexit, the Immigrant and Geezer Votes, and…Donald J. Trump
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll 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 three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

I always thought Rule Britannia should have been Britain’s national anthem. It’s way more fun to sing than God Save the Queen and I love that bumptious 18th-century nationalism:

The Muses, still with freedom found,

Shall to thy happy coast repair:

Blest isle with matchless beauty crowned,

And manly hearts to guard the fair.


Rule, Britannia, rule the Waves!

For Britons never will be slaves.

Here’s a linguistic oddity: to an Englishman’s ear, “For Britons never will be slaves” sounds wrong. Not the general sentiment, which of course is fine and sound, but the word “will.” An English person much more naturally says “shall” in that context.

In fact, when English people sing “Rule Britannia” (which they don’t do anything like often enough), they instinctively sing: “Britons never, never, never shall be slaves.” I venture to say, although I don’t have time to run the experiment, that if you go to YouTube and bring up several recorded versions of the song, some—possibly even a majority—of them will substitute “shall” for “will.”

What’s that all about? Just this: James Thomson, the chap who wrote the lyrics to Rule Britannia, was a Scot, not an Englishman. Scots usage prefers “will” over “shall” for a plain future tense. It’s just one of those things that the English and the Scots differ about.

Which is by way of introducing the amazing fact that Brexit won. This is a victory for the fundamental principles of nationalism: for national sovereignty, secure borders, rational immigration rules, and demographic stability. (More on the Scots later).

As a temperamental nationalist myself, I am of course delighted. As an ex-Brit, I’m double delighted. For the moment, as Winston Churchill said on V-E Day, “We may allow ourselves a brief period of rejoicing.”

pirroObviously, this is also a boost for the Trump campaign. It’s clear that some of the motives for Americans to go to the polls and vote for Trump in this primary season are the same as those that drove Brits to turn out and vote for Brexit in such numbers. As Trump supporter Judge Jeanine Pirro expressed it very pithily Friday morning on Fox and Friends: “People want a nation-state … they want borders.” [Judge Jeanine on Brexit: ‘People Want Borders, Identity as a Country’, oxNewsInsider, June 24, 2016]

Here at we’ve been telling you for years that the great ideological divide in today’s world is not capitalism versus socialism. That is so twentieth century.

The major ideological divide today is over the role of the nation-state. Who gets to live in Britain, or the U.S.A., or Europe? Should anybody be able to? Are national borders obsolete? There are powerful voices that say so: a big slice of the Economics profession, the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal, the German Chancellor

And then the complementary question: What is the proper scope and role of supranational organizations? For example, major decisions about the numbers and origins of people granted settlement rights in the U.S.A. are made by bureaucrats at the United Nations. Are Americans OK with that? Did anyone ever ask them?

That’s today’s ideological divide: nationalism versus globalism. Donald Trump has made it clear he’s on the nationalist side.

Nationalism got a bad rap in the twentieth century because of the rise of despoticnationalism in Germany, Japan, and Italy. Yes, despotic nationalism was a very bad thing, but not because nationalism is a bad thing, because despotism is a bad thing. Despotic monarchy is a bad thing, too: think of John Lackland or Ivan the Terrible. Constitutional monarchy, however, is just fine. It works very well in modern Scandinavia, Britain, Japan.

That people look askance at nationalism and feel embarrassed to describe themselves as nationalists is just the after-shadow of mid-20th-century despotic nationalism—“Hitler’s revenge,” Editor Peter Brimelow calls it.

But there is nothing wrong with constitutional nationalism, any more than with constitutional monarchy. The Brexit vote helps to reinstate nationalism as a reasonable and healthy attitude to politics and society. That can only be good, for the U.S.A. and elsewhere.

Donald Trump himself was in Scotland when the result of the Brexit referendum was announced. He was there for business reasons—to cut the ribbon at his new luxury resort and golf course at Turnberry in Ayrshire. But he was in good form at an open-air presser on Friday morning.


We’ve been hearing a lot of stuff about how Trump should resist the impulse to speak impromptu, how he should read his speeches off a teleprompter like a real politician, how much better he sounds when he does use a teleprompter, and so on. Well, I must say, I watched the whole thing, more than 40 minutes of Trump speaking impromptu and fielding provocative questions from the press. I thought he did well.

I’ll grant that he’s not a genius at this. I mean, it wasn’t the Gettysburg address. But he was clear and good-humored, said sensible things, and hit all the right notes on the main issue at hand. Sample:

They want to take their country back …you’re going to let people that you want into your country, and people that you don’t want, or people that you don’t think are going to be appropriate for your country, or good for your country, you’re not going to have to take.

To the listening ears of a committed Cultural Marxist, that is of course Hitler talk. Here’s one such: Chris Cillizza of the feverishly anti-Trump Washington Postposted a partial transcript with annotations by himself. This is his annotation for the clip I just quoted:

Can there be a collective “you” in a country as diverse as Britain or the U.S.? And who gets to be the person who claims to be the one who channels the collective sentiments of the country?

[ Donald Trump’s Brexit Press Conference Was Beyond Bizarre, Washington Post, June 24, 2016]

I’ve read that comment three or four times, and it still looks to me like an argument against representative government.

This, according to Cillizza, is the fruit of diversity: that there is no longer a collective “us” to express collective sentiments or arrive at collective decisions about anything.

The horrible thing is, he may be right.

There is the national model, where people of common ancestry, common culture, common language, and common understandings can arrive at collective decisions and implement them through elected representatives.

Then there is the imperial model, where an almighty executive power maintains itself by divide-and-rule over a population of diverse groups who have little in common and can’t agree on anything much.

I favor the national model, and so does Donald Trump. Chris Cillizza and his bosses at the Washington Post, along with all the rest of the cosmopolitan elites in the media, the academy, the churches, and the big corporations, prefer the imperial model.

Well, the imperialists just took it in the teeth, and I’m smiling.

The United Kingdom as a whole—England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland—voted 52 to 48 for Brexit. In Scotland, however, the vote went 62 to 38 for Remain.

There are a couple of things going on here. One of them is the resentment that small, weak nations naturally feel towards domination by bigger, more powerful neighbors.

Ireland is the poster child for this. Although the Brexit referendum of course wasn’t conducted in the Republic of Ireland, the Irish at large are much more Europhile than the English.

northernirelandNorthern Ireland as a whole voted against Brexit, 56 percent to 44. Since Protestants are still a majority in the province, that 56 percent means that this was at least not a vote on strictly sectarian lines, for which I guess we should be thankful. It is none the less the case that the most heavily Protestant areas, with the exception of the upper-income Protestant suburbs of Belfast, wanted Brexit.

walesYou see the same thing in Wales. The Principality as a whole went forBrexit, rather to my surprise: 52½ percent to 47½, only a bit less enthusiastically than England. However, the most distinctively Welsh parts of Wales—Cardigan, Caernarvon, and Merioneth—wanted to stay in the EU.

I did a lot of hiking in that region in my youth. Let me tell you, in the little mountain villages up there around Cader Idris, you sometimes couldn’t find one person willing to speak English to you.

But what happens now, when Britain has left the EU? Will the Scots and Northern Irish leave with them? Or will they declare their own independence from Britain and stay with the EU?

The Scots are making noises about independence. They actually had a referendum on it two years ago, but the independence faction lost, 45 percent to 55. Now Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s most powerful politician, is calling for another referendum.


Whether that will happen, and how Scotland will vote if it does, depends on how choppy the waters get as Britain takes her actual exit from the EU. My guess is that the exit will not be very painful, and that the Scots will swallow their frustrations and stay with Britain again. Scotland’s a small nation that doesn’t have much going for it. What it mainly has going for it, in fact, is North Sea oil, now trading at half the price it was at when the last independence referendum was held.

Some skillful diplomacy by the Brits, an appeal to economic interests, and perhaps a bribe or two, should keep Scotland in the Union.

Plus there are upsides even if Scotland does leave. The center of gravity of Scottish politics is well to the left of Britain’s as a whole. Nicola Sturgeon herself would, if she were American, be a staffer on Bernie Sanders’ campaign. A Scottish exit from the U.K.—a Scexit, I guess—would leave Britain more conservative. What’s not to like?

It certainly wouldn’t be a disaster. Norway left its union with Sweden in 1905, and the sky didn’t fall. Both have been solid, happy nations ever since.

So I don’t believe this is something we should lose sleep over, one way or another.

Ireland is trickier. Ireland always is. I’ve been watching the Irish Troubles for most of my life, and I’ve always thought that ethnic cleansing would be the best solution for the place. Let the Republic have the western three of Northern Ireland’s six counties, and establish the eastern three as a Unionist state, with an oath of loyalty to the Queen as a condition of citizenship.

Is that going to happen? Not soon. But we may have taken the first step to it on Thursday last.

Third World immigration has had an impact all over the U.K. and played a major role in the Brexit vote. If you add up Indians, Pakistanis, and Bangladeshis, that’s five percent of the population of the U.K. overall—much more in lower age groups. Five percent overall: the corresponding figure for Scotland is 1.6 percent.

It’s the same with blacks: three percent of the U.K. population overall: in Scotland, only 0.7 percent.

Some Alt-Right types—Richard Spencer, for example—have argued against Brexit on the grounds that should stick together and unite against the hordes from the south.

It’s true that mass Third World immigration into the U.K. has been happening independent of the country’s relations with Europe. It was already a big issue in 1968, when Enoch Powell made his “Rivers of Blood” speech—five years beforeBritain entered the European community. It only really got going big-time under the Blair government of the late 1990s. But that too was all under Britain’s control—or, to describe the process more accurately, lack of control—nothing to do with Europe.

So Britain’s immigration catastrophe was nobody’s fault but Britain’s. Post-imperial sentimentality; Hitler’s revenge as described previously; a feudal readiness to be told what’s good for them by their social betters; the softening effects of prosperity leading to a loss of native turbulence; and a tradition of easygoing Christian decency that too easily slopped over into pathological altruism; these have been the causes leading to a state of affairs in which, for example, the name “Mohammed” in its various spellings is now the most popular name for male babies in England and Wales.

But cast your mind back a couple of years to the first great surges of African and Middle Eastern flash mobs across the Mediterranean into Greece and Italy; and then to Angela Merkel’s throwing the door wide open to the mobs last summer. It was suddenly and dramatically clear that for all its grand buildings, its innumerable bureaucrats, and its pompous ukases, the European Union would not lift a finger to protect Europe’s borders against an invasion from the Third World.

At that point, or shortly after, Third World immigration and European membership merged into a single issue in British minds.

To frame it as a question: Would the Brits have voted for Brexit if this referendum had been held before the trans-Mediterranean flash mobs started up?

I seriously doubt it.

But when Britain is at last out of the EU, will her leaders finally get control over Third World immigration? It’s by no means certain.

Following the announcement by Prime Minister David Cameron that he will resign, there is speculation that he’ll be replaced by Boris Johnson, the former Mayor of London, who campaigned for Brexit.

Well, it’s nice that Johnson helped to make Brexit happen. But on immigration in general, he apparently favors open borders. When Mayor of London he made gushing speeches about what a gorgeous ethnic tapestry the city has become. [Boris Johnson’s acceptance speech after being declared mayor of London, The Guardian, May 3, 2008]

And the factors I listed above, that brought Britain to her present multicultural state, are all still in play—fortified now by the coming to age of the great immigration surge of the Tony Blair and Gordon Brown years.

In this respect, the most depressing figures to come out of the Brexit exit polling so far: from the website of veteran British pollster Lord Ashcroft. His Lordship surveyed more than 12,000 people after they’d voted. Sample result:

White voters voted to leave the EU by 53 percent to 47. Two thirds of those describing themselves as Asian voted to remain, as did three quarters of black voters. Nearly six in ten of those describing themselves as Christian voted to leave; seven out of ten Muslims voted to remain.

Thus it’s possible things have gone too far already: that the sheer numbers have reached some kind of tipping point, and that those numbers, together with the squealing terror that white British people feel at the thought that anyone might call them racist, will together work to destroy traditional Britain over the next generation or two.

Arguably this already is the case in London, where you can walk through entire districts without seeing a white British face, or a woman’s face at all, and where the police know that to tackle nonwhite crime is to risk wrecking their careers on the reefs of racism.


The Brexit vote was also a Geezer Vote. Well, that’s somewhat of an exaggeration; but according to exit polls there was a big difference of opinion between different age groups. [Britain’s youth voted Remain | Three quarters of British voters aged 24 and under voted against Brexit. By Hortense Goulard,, June 24, 2016]

The youngest cohort of voters, ages 18 to 24, voted 75 percent against Brexit. The oldest cohort, 65 plus, went 61 percent for Brexit. Intermediate age groups followed the trend, with 50 percent support at around age 50.

Pessimistic interpretation, to which I am naturally inclined: this shows how thorough the indoctrination into Cultural Marxism now is over there, in schools and colleges.

But it may continue to be the case that human beings learn from experience as they grow older—learn to have more respect for reality. As the old quip goes: If you’re not liberal at twenty, you have no heart. If you’re still liberal at fifty, you have no brain. I myself was left-liberal when I was in that 18-to-24 cohort.

As Tim Stanley noted in the Daily Telegraph, referring to Britain’s previous referendum on continuing EU membership 41 years ago:

The young may have overwhelmingly voted Remain … but, hey, they will grow older someday. The young who voted Remain in 1975 overwhelmingly voted Leave in 2016.This was the day the British people defied their jailers, June 24, 2016

It’s a good working principle of political commentary that you can never be cynical enough. I believe still that the Euro elites, which include most of the British political class, all parties, might do an Andy Jackson on their people: “The voters have made their decision, now let them enforce it.” I wouldn’t put anything past these people.

So my advice to the Brits at this juncture would be: Eternal vigilance!

And for heavens’ sake do something about your borders.

John Derbyshire [email him] writes an incredible amount on all sorts of subjectsfor all kinds of outlets. (This no longer includes National Review, whose editors had some kind of tantrum and fired him. ) He is the author of We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism and several other books. He’s had two books published by FROM THE DISSIDENT RIGHT (also available in Kindle) and From the Dissident Right II: Essays 2013. His writings are archived

(Republished from VDare by permission of author or representative)
Hide 99 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. 5371 says:

    [ If you add up Indians, Pakistanis, and Bangladeshis, that’s five percent of the population of the U.K. overall—much more in lower age groups. Five percent overall: the corresponding figure for Scotland is 1.6 percent.

    It’s the same with blacks: three percent of the U.K. population overall: in Scotland, only 0.7 percent.]

    Alas, these figures were way too low for the UK – not much more than half of the actual proportion – already at the time of the last census in 2011. Things have got worse since.

  2. tbraton says:

    Sorry, Mr. Derbyshire, but “Rule Britannia” is a bit of a hard sell to anyone who watched the movie “Tom Jones” (1963), based on the once-famous Henry Fielding novel, with its rag-tag band of hung-over soldiers heading north and singing a very off-key version of the song.

  3. El Dato says:

    Nice writing. Still:

    Nationalism got a bad rap in the twentieth century because of the rise of despotic nationalism in Germany, Japan, and Italy.

    Well, upper-crusties in Germany and Japan sure got delusions of being The Chosen Race With A Blank Cheque To Be Beastly and infected the whole national porcelain shop with it (the people seemed to be psychologically primed for such excursions) but Italy was not much into that. Mussolini’s fascism was more like a New Deal with more uniforms and thuggery, and commie bashing. It should not be grouped readily with the other two.

    For example, major decisions about the numbers and origins of people granted settlement rights in the U.S.A. are made by bureaucrats at the United Nations.

    I don’t believe this for a second. The UN can only work together with the State Department, and the latter sure has to give its okay first. State Department is USA (allegedly, as some are currently advocating bombing Syria’s government to stop ISIS and stem refugee fluxes – the mind boggles; Kerry is on board, expectedly…)

    • Replies: @YT Wurlitzer
    , @anon
    , @SFG
    , @dahoit
  4. Which is by way of introducing the amazing fact that Brexit won. This is a victory for the fundamental principles of nationalism: for national sovereignty, secure borders, rational immigration rules, and demographic stability.

    Amazing to me is the fact that Brexit was allowed to win. Why was this election not stolen?

    That’s today’s ideological divide: nationalism versus globalism. Donald Trump has made it clear he’s on the nationalist side.

    Globalism is better termed Corporatism. The neo-liberal agenda calls for transfer of sovereignty from nation states to stateless corporate entities. Hence free trade, open borders and the privatization of everything. Open borders is the sore point for voters. Nationalism vs. Feudalism is the fundamental conflict. Immigration brings voters to the side of Nationalism.

    To the listening ears of a committed Cultural Marxist, that is of course Hitler talk.

    Diversity is our strength is a propaganda slogan prompted by the globalists to persuade the people to accept open borders. The people who actually believe it are useful idiots. Hopefully the people who know it is a lie also know it has nothing to do with Marxism.

    Well, the imperialists just took it in the teeth, and I’m smiling.

    YES. A rare and welcome victory for anti-imperialists.

    Congratulations Derb on this most excellent piece. When you are good you are oh so good.

    • Replies: @Realist
    , @utu
  5. Acilius says: • Website

    I believe still that the Euro elites, which include most of the British political class, all parties, might do an Andy Jackson on their people: “The voters have made their decision, now let them enforce it.” I wouldn’t put anything past these people.

    Well, let’s review: a slim majority of voters in a non-binding referendum have advised members of parliament to adopt a policy which over 80% of those members oppose. Among those opponents are the leading parliamentary supporters of the Leave campaign, Mr Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson and Mr Michael Gove, who spent the weeks leading up to the referendum saying that a Leave vote would give Britain’s prime minister an opportunity to go to Brussels and demand a better deal for Britain’s continued membership in the EU. Nothing about actually leaving, just a promise of yet another reenactment of the old handbag routine that British premiers have been playing regularly for over a quarter century, this time with a somewhat gaudier bluff behind it.

    So how likely is it that Britain will actually exit the EU as a direct consequence of this vote? I’d say the probability approaches zero. Granted, the fact that Messrs Johnson and Gove have openly declared that they are bluffing, and that Mr Johnson is very likely to be the prime minister who makes that trip to the continent, has led the EU’s official spokesmen to preemptively call his bluff, talking about speeding up British departure from the Union. That makes it clear that whatever game Mr Johnson finds himself playing, he will have to play by the rules Dr Merkel and her associates make. Perhaps that game will prove so uncongenial to British interests that the new prime minister will have no choice but to follow through with Brexit. That’s why I say the likelihood approaches zero, rather than that it has arrived at that figure.

    • Replies: @5371
  6. res says:

    The youngest cohort of voters, ages 18 to 24, voted 75 percent against Brexit. The oldest cohort, 65 plus, went 61 percent for Brexit. Intermediate age groups followed the trend, with 50 percent support at around age 50.

    Has anyone tried to evaluate how much this just reflected other demographics? For example, immigration status or religion. Isn’t there a significant variation in the composition of the UK population by age group?

  7. Anonym says:

    I really wanted to see results broken down by age and race, as the high percentage of the youth vote for remain likely represents the high number of non-white youth as well as white youth inexperience.

  8. David says:

    I’m very interested in the difference between will and shall so thanks for the comment about Scottish usage. If anyone knows better, do tell, but my understanding is that will used to have the connotation of desire vs shall which was just straight forward future. So ordering someone with “will” would not have made sense. But, “I will” something was to intend with both the head and heart. “I shall” was more forceful as indicating one’s desires were irrelevant.

    It makes sense that a subtle distinction would be lost on Scots learning English.

    The very first representation of Briton in history is as a woman being vanquished by a Roman soldier, so it makes sense that the song is forward looking with respect to slavery. And maybe Briton shall be slaves again, but never willingly.

  9. @El Dato

    I believe it. Following the link he provided I learn of the “Framework for Cooperation” between the rogue government at State and the UN High Commission for Refugees. It began in 2000 under Clinton’s Madeline Albright. The treasonous ratbastards at State work through the Bureau of Population Refugees and Migration.

    Their top contractor, one of nine, is Church Worldwide Services, which has received at least $290mil in contracts and $45mil in grants since 2008, aka as Your Tax Dollars at Work.

    It was all over the news… oh, that’s right, it wasn’t.

  10. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @El Dato

    The couldn’t accept that Anglos are the chosen race and that getting beastly is their divine prerogative.

    • Replies: @dahoit
  11. dearieme says:

    It’s not a case of “It makes sense that a subtle distinction would be lost on Scots learning English.”

    It’s that the use of ‘will’ and ‘shall’ in Scots English and English English just happen to be the other way round: perhaps the difference goes back to different tribes of Angles or Danes.

  12. 5371 says:

    Unmitigated nonsense, starting with the stupid talking point about a “non-binding” referendum, as though someone didn’t print “Simon says” on the ballot paper. No MP has even suggested welshing save a blubber-lipped and hysterical negro from the Labour left. Oh, and Boris made that idiotic comment alone, and was ridiculed, and did not repeat it.

    • Agree: Sam Shama
  13. @res

    The best grin I’ve had this w/e was sanctimonious young college age snowflakes sneering that “people with degrees voted in, only old thick workies (*cough* I say boy I resemble that remaahhk) from Oop North voted out”.
    Implied “so there!” and a soupcon of “that sort of person shouldn’t be allowed a vote on anything” (UK keyboard; no longer supplies silly foreign diacriticals).

    Much snarling, and possibly some delicious rage-tears when I observed that not one of them would have been allowed anywhere near a university in 1973 (Heath’s treachery), 1974 (Wislon re-election) or even 1975. Personally not all that overawed by their 2.2s in Cat Grooming or Feminist Film Critique, or whatever it is they signed up to a lifetime’s unexpiated debt for.
    Cheated a bit (by a few years, not that they’d ever know), and asked how many of them actually knew any Latin, for a start. And anyway their parents couldn’t have afforded it unless they were both actually on the dole, as the “parental contribution” was pretty steep.

    I’m OK , just a bit of dull throbbing behind the eyes now. Totally worth it. I was wrong, thought the Innies would votefraud it successfully, as Farage assumed early on in the night too, due to the barrage of last-ditch morale-sapping, in particular by the Beeb. Disgusting outfit. Seems the Bremainers/bright young things intel was duff, they live in a low-information social bubble or silo of correct thoughts and nice feelz even more intense than I had assumed.

    Now for the onslaught. Hannan and Carswell have already predictably doublecrossed the Faragists, and therefore the unspeakable plebs, over immigration. The Blairite putsch against wibbly-wobbly Jezza is in full swing as of this a.m., blood all over the floor.
    As commenters have mentioned, the losers are not about to take this “will of the people” crap lying down. Democracy’s wasted on the likes of me, shouldn’t be allowed, we should just know our place. I just hope we don’t end up all Former Yugoslavia over it.

    I wonder if the Co-op has any of that very reasonably priced Prosecco or Cava left on the chill shelf? I’ll try not to be caught grinning openly in there. It’s very popular with students, even though they should all be at home with Mummy right now. Or looking for a job, perish the thought.

  14. Rehmat says:

    I hate to burst your White racist balloon John Derbyshire, once again. Brexit had nothing to do with immigration especially the Muslims, otherwise Londoner who voted “stay” over 75% – wouldn’t had elected a Pakistani Muslim immigrant as City’s Mayor.

    It was all about economy and David Cameron’s stupid Middle East policies.

    “To everything there is a season. A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, a time to reap – A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance… (Bible, Ecclesiastes)”. But, “Now is the time to hate Muslims,” sermon by an Israeli Rabbi in the US.

    On August 5, 2010, British Prime Minister David Cameron, who is proud to have Jewish family roots – said that “Iran is in possession of nuclear weapons”. The Opposition made fun of his ignorance. The Labour party blasted Cameron as a “foreign policy klutz” with his feet “firmly planted in his mouth”. …..

  15. @Rehmat

    London voted to Remain because it is an Islamic city

  16. Philip Neal says: • Website

    I never read the Guardian opinion section with more pleasure than I did on Friday. Polly Toynbee in a state of utter disbelief, Jonathan Freedland waking up in a different country, Timothy Garton Ash having the worst day of his life: that’s what I like. But the enemy didn’t take long to bounce back. The Right to Remain has been violated. The referendum was only advisory. Scotland has an alleged power of veto. The electorate must be given a chance to reconsider its decision. Second referendum, early general election (this from the Lib Dems who demanded fixed term parliaments as the price of coalition). They are down but not out.

    • Replies: @David
  17. Thank you for, on the whole, a very well-written piece, especially coming from one who has lived in America for so many years. However, you are far too pessimistic.
    The first-past-the-post election system used at UK elections has preserved the Conservative-Labour Duopoly since the 1920s. It is now coming to an end.
    The vast majority of MPs of both parties are Europhiles. They will attempt to hinder, delay and even prevent Britain’s exit. If they do so, the level of grievance in England and Wales will reach breaking point. Already, the UKIP is second to Labour in 150 constituencies in the North of England.
    If Britain is not out by the end of the parliamentary term, expect a UKIP landslide at the next election.

  18. anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Doesn’t “Rule Brittania” glorify the British Empire via which so many of the darker people Mr. Derbyshire would wish away came to his native country?

    I guess you can have it both ways when you’re a columnist.

    • Replies: @random observer
  19. Realist says:

    “Which is by way of introducing the amazing fact that Brexit won. ”

    You are getting way ahead of reality. There is a long way to go before anything changes. And the power elite do not like this one bit.

  20. Realist says:

    “Amazing to me is the fact that Brexit was allowed to win. Why was this election not stolen?”

    The fight has only just begun.

  21. Vera Lynn singing “There’ll Always Be An England”:

    It’s long been my understanding, drummed into my then young skull by assiduous parochial school nuns, that “will” and “would” connote, if not denote, volition, or preference, while “shall” and “should” connote, if not denote, obligation, or duty.

    “I will never be a slave” means that enslavement is against my volition, against my will.

    “I shall never be a slave” means that I have, and that there is, no obligation upon me to become a slave.

    American English almost always deploys “will/would” when, in a fair proportion of instances, “shall/should” better express contextual meaning.

  22. G Pinfold says:

    Cheers Derb (lifts pint of real ale).
    I am interested in the polling failure.
    My conjecture is that ‘Don’t Know’ has become a polite way of saying: ‘Sod off. I know who I’m voting for but it’s none of your business.’
    Polling companies, with their media ties, fancy globalist names and no-doubt diverse front-line staff, are just another arm of the establishment.
    This is relevant for Donald the Untouchable.

  23. SFG says:
    @El Dato

    Well, upper-crusties in Germany and Japan sure got delusions of being The Chosen Race With A Blank Cheque To Be Beastly and infected the whole national porcelain shop with it (the people seemed to be psychologically primed for such excursions) but Italy was not much into that. Mussolini’s fascism was more like a New Deal with more uniforms and thuggery, and commie bashing. It should not be grouped readily with the other two.

    I think Italians in general just aren’t organized enough to really do major-league atrocities. They don’t follow orders well enough. Every national trait has its pluses and minuses.

    • Replies: @Dissident
  24. SFG says:

    It was all about economy and David Cameron’s stupid Middle East policies.

    No, it was about Englishmen not wanting more Middle Easterners in their country.

    • Replies: @Fredrik
    , @woodNfish
  25. Svigor says:

    Muslims castrated hundreds of thousands of black slaves. It’s a fact. Look it up.

  26. Svigor says:

    It’s easy when you’re a Konspiracy Kook: “they” didn’t steal the vote because “they” wanted Brexit! It’s all part of “their” master plan.

    This works for everything: “they” made it happen. Definitely not circular.

  27. Fredrik says:

    it was about Englishmen not wanting more East Europeans in their country.

    • Replies: @5371
  28. David says:
    @Philip Neal

    Hard to accept that Scotland and the Scots have become so unprincipled. After coming close to tripping an escaping England by the heal, they now say that the Leave outcome is not legitimate. See, Scotland would accept the legitimacy of a win but not a loss. That is a sissy stance.

    Hey, Scotland, look up “estoppel.” Scotland saw this vote coming when it voted to remain in the UK, it participated in the Brexit campaign, it should live with the result. If they can’t, it’s pretty obvious that the Southron man doesn’t need them around anyhow.

  29. 5371 says:

    It was about both. The excellent “Breaking Point” placard didn’t show a huge crowd of Poles.

    • Replies: @dahoit
  30. Marcus says:

    Arguably this already is the case in London, where you can walk through entire districts without seeing a white British face

    No need for “white,” Britain isn’t the US. English, Scots, etc. are long-established ethnic groups. I’ve read several articles about how English identity is frequently downplayed in favor of British, since that was already a multicultural state in some ways, maybe it would be better to break up the UK.

  31. @res

    Well, it looks like ~35% of births in UK are to non-British whites with ~10% of birth from other European whites, so let’s say ~25% of births in UK are to nonwhites.

    Around 10% (though that number could be low) of births are to Muslims. Of course, since Scotland, Wales and N. Ireland have very few minorities, those figures for England are correspondingly higher.

    Basically, in another ten years or so, the Brexit vote would have gone the other way. Like the U.S., the British elite are importing a new electorate.

    Of course, the British elite are doing so by importing about the most dangerous group (Muslims) imaginable. (Well, blacks might be worse. It’s sort of a dysfunctional photo finish.) If immigration continues at anywhere near its current rate, Britain will have an under-40 population that’s 15% Muslim and 1/3 nonwhite (possibly quite higher on both counts) in another generation or so. Something tells me that won’t work out so well.

    • Replies: @dahoit
  32. @anonymous

    Arguably, but only alluded to in the little heard 5th verse of the original text:

    When Britain first, at Heaven’s commandArose from out the azure main;This was the charter of the land,And guardian angels sang this strain:”Rule, Britannia! rule the waves:”Britons never will be slaves.”
    The nations, not so blest as thee,Must, in their turns, to tyrants fall;While thou shalt flourish great and free,The dread and envy of them all.”Rule, Britannia! rule the waves:”Britons never will be slaves.”
    Still more majestic shalt thou rise,More dreadful, from each foreign stroke;As the loud blast that tears the skies,Serves but to root thy native oak.”Rule, Britannia! rule the waves:”Britons never will be slaves.”
    Thee haughty tyrants ne’er shall tame:All their attempts to bend thee down,Will but arouse thy generous flame;But work their woe, and thy renown.”Rule, Britannia! rule the waves:”Britons never will be slaves.”
    To thee belongs the rural reign;Thy cities shall with commerce shine:All thine shall be the subject main,And every shore it circles thine.”Rule, Britannia! rule the waves:”Britons never will be slaves.”
    The Muses, still with freedom found,Shall to thy happy coast repair;Blest Isle! With matchless beauty crown’d,And manly hearts to guard the fair.”Rule, Britannia! rule the waves:”Britons never will be slaves.”

    The rest of that better expresses the mid-18th century British self-image as defenders of freedom [their own, to be sure] against continental tyrants [in their memory, first Spain, then France] and anyone perceived as a hireling of same. And the command of the sea that prevents such tyrants from winning. All of it expressing 18th century sentiments through the medium of a play about Alfred.

    • Replies: @random observer
  33. @random observer

    Not sure why the edit engine now lets me edit, only to tell me with minutes remaining and new text in place that I can no longer edit the comment.

    Also worth stressing that the lyric is “Britannia, rule the waves!”, a commandment and warning to Britons about what they must do, not “Britannia rules the waves!”, a bombastic claim to already do so. The latter would not quite have been accurate when the song was first sung. There was still the French naval rival to clear off, a task not completed until 1805.

    • Replies: @anonymous
    , @tbraton
  34. anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @random observer

    Thank you for taking the time to respond. I wonder, though, whether Mr. Derbyshire draws the distinction. Even taking into account that he’s provocative for a living (e.g., “ethnic cleansing,” albeit in the context of Ireland), he often comes across as racially obsessed.

    • Replies: @Dissident
  35. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says: • Website

    Immigrants are ‘racist’ against their own kind.

    Immigration to the West is defacto white supremacist. Non-white immigrants prefer white people as superior fellow nationals over their own kind in their native countries.

    Non-white would-be-immigrants bitch about some whites not accepting/welcoming them, but why do they REJECT their own kind & try to come to live with whites?

    Why should whites accept non-whites when non-whites so often reject their own kind?

    Non-whites say to whites, “Accept us who reject our own kind and left our own homelands to live with whites whom we deem as superior.”

  36. Rehmat says:

    John Derbyshire, don’t you know Sadiq Khan, the Pakistan-born Zionist Mayor of London is also very upset at the Brexit vote? The dude told his supporters at a synagogue on Sunday that the vote was no good for the 300,000-strong British Jewish community because it would increase the so-called ‘antisemitism’.

    On Sunday, speaking at an Iftar (end of daily fasting) event at the Finchley Reform Synagogue (FRS) in north-west London, Pakistan-born London Mayor Sadiq Khan said that he was ‘concerned’ about the rise of antisemitism in the city as result of Brexit victory. This was Sadiq Khan’s third Iftar at the synagogue that was attending by 200 people mostly Jews and Muslim immigrants from Somalia including some MPs belonging to ‘Labour Friends of Israel’.

    Responding to Sandy Rashty, a reporter with Jewish Chronicle about the safety of Jewish community in London after UK’s withdrawal from European Union, Khan said: “One of the things I have said to the government – because London is unique to the rest of the country, we are the capital city and we are the only region in England who voted to “remain” – it is really important when it comes to negotiating the new deal with the EU, (Mayor) London has a seat around the table.”

    Khan also said he is aware of the concerns raised by Rabbi Menachem Margolin, of the European Jewish Congress, who warned that Britain’s exit from the EU could lead to a spike in antisemitism, a move that was deeply worrying for Jews across Europe.

    “When it comes to the new deal we negotiate with the EU, whatever that may be, to see if we can negotiate things that keep us safe. So for example, if we are out of the EU, we will no longer be a member of the European Arrest Warrant treaty. So we have to negotiate with the other 27 countries a treaty. It’s really important,” Sadiq Khan said.

    How ironic – most of European nations are controlled by the powerful Jewish lobby groups while 15 of those nations have passed laws against denial of the ‘six million died’ myth.

    • Replies: @dahoit
    , @Clyde
  37. helena says:

    There are some interesting stats at hbd*chick twitter.

    e.g. Sikh’s and Jews voted slightly more for Leave, Muslims 70% Remain. 80% voting Leave identify as English not British

    – and many more interesting stats.

  38. @David

    About _shall_ and _will_, British and American usage differs; see
    Wikipedia has an article on this that is worth reading:
    An illustration of the supposed contrast between shall and will (when the prescriptive rule is adhered to):
    I shall drown; no one will save me! (expresses the expectation of drowning, simple expression of future occurrence)
    I will drown; no one shall save me! (expresses suicidal intent: first-person will for desire, third-person shall for “command”)

    • Replies: @Auntie Analogue
  39. Che Guava says:

    Well, upper-crusties in Germany and Japan sure got delusions of being The Chosen Race With A Blank Cheque To Be Beastly and infected the whole national porcelain shop

    You have a point that flows into many others. The Italian Fascists were quite different from the German National Socialists, whom they inspired.

    Post-war Japan has, or perhaps more correctly had, a polity that closely resembles that of pre-war Italy. Except that there is no Duce figure, instead an oligarchy. The trains run on time, except for suicides and random drunks wandering onto the tracks, or the less common signal failures or fires.

    However, I still respect the Wehrmacht and many sections of the Waffen SS. Our Yamamoto (Pearl Harbour), and the two generals Yamashita. Yamashita was blamed and executed for war crimes, but one of the crazier members of the Imperial family, who had a wild life in Paris in the 1920s, had a car crash at the time, very bitter after, was really responsible for the orders in the rape of Nanking. Gen. Yamashita in China, not the one in the southern campaign, but Yamashita in the north also had orders from above.
    Not the same person.

    The latter was just a soldier, unfairly executed. Also, much of a military genius. Sure, the Imperial Army behaved badly at times, anyone thinking U.S.A. forces never did?

    Often lazy, ill disciplined, etc. We often hear of the rape of Berlin from Soviet troops. Strange that we never hear of the U.S. Army using then-segregated black units in the same way.

    It is recorded in history, but we must be silent on it, and pretend that it never happened.

    • Replies: @Outwest
  40. @Rehmat

    Brexit supporters were clearly alarmed over Islamic immigration and the inevitable sharia-no-whites-no-Christians-allowed zones developing here and there in Moslem-dominated neighborhoods.

    You must be the last guy on the planet to understand this.

    • Replies: @Avery
  41. Sam Shama says:

    Scots are ready, it appears, to sing the Auld Lang Syne, and all said and done, Boris and Nigel had better stiffen their backs [and upper lips], prepare an economic plan that hearkens to the message of John Maynard Keynes, and England’s golden age shall be yet.

    • Replies: @helena
  42. tbraton says:
    @random observer

    “Not sure why the edit engine now lets me edit, only to tell me with minutes remaining and new text in place that I can no longer edit the comment.”

    I have had the same experience both on Derbyshire’s blog and others as well.

  43. woodNfish says:

    I believe still that the Euro elites, which include most of the British political class, all parties, might do an Andy Jackson on their people: “The voters have made their decision, now let them enforce it.” I wouldn’t put anything past these people.

    Derbyshire is almost always a pleasure to read. Unfortunately, the cowardly British citizens have allowed the State to disarm them. They people have no teeth if the State decides to ignore the voters will.

    • Replies: @Jacques Sheete
    , @Dissident
  44. woodNfish says:

    No one in their right mind wants any ME camel humpers in their country.

    • Agree: Jeff77450
    • Replies: @Jacques Sheete
  45. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says: • Website

    Cameron the ‘conservative’ pushed for ‘gay marriage’, the cause celebre of the globalist ‘left’ funded by the big banks.

    Since homosexuality is said to be biologically just as legit as real sexuality, should ENEMA be designated as ‘fecal abortion’?

    Fetal abortion for women, fecal abortion for homo men.

    Thanks to homomania, the fecal is equal to the fetal.

  46. utu says:

    “Why was this election not stolen?” – Answer this question and you will know what is the ultimate aim of the NWO elites.

    The Anglo-American contingent among the NWO elites still do not trust their German counterparts as they could not subjugate them. In other words it is still all about Germany, the last western power that did not succumb to the neoliberal economics but instead used it to subjugate others.

    It is about money and power and has nothing to do with immigration.

    “A panel discussion with the heads of the Bank of England and the Federal Reserve, scheduled for Wednesday in Sintra, has since been canceled.”

    Immigration to the UK? Nothing will change. The immigrants are a necessary tool to rule over Britannia by divide et impera method. And white Brits by the presence of immigrants working lowly wages may keep deluding/consoling themselves that THEY will never be slaves. Keep dreaming JD.

  47. Outwest says:
    @Che Guava

    Maybe the GI rape of Berlin is skewed a bit because the American troops stopped at the Elbe River and weren’t in Berlin.

    • Replies: @Che Guava
    , @dahoit
  48. Avery says:
    @The Grate Deign

    {You must be the last guy on the planet to understand this.}

    No: he is an Islamist Supremacist living comfortably in Christian Canada, spreading anti-Western, anti-Christian, pro-Islamist propaganda and disinformation. comment pages are filled with his IslamoFascist disinformation.

    These people escaped the misery of their own Muslim countries to the West, yet are diligently working to Islamize Europe. To them their religion is above everything and everyone else.

  49. @Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY)

    My dear Mark Spahn, thank your confirming my earlier comment (No. 22 above) on “shall/should” and “will/would”, which included the “obligation” but omitted only the “necessity” sense of “shall/should.”

    From the Wikipedia entry to which your comment linked:

    “The verb shall…representing either simple futurity, or necessity or obligation….The verb will derives from Old English willan, meaning to want or wish.”

    It’s far from seldom that I thank God for my having learned well under the tutelage of erudite parochial school Sisters Benedict, Angelica, Raymond, Sylvia, Sylvester, and Ladislaus!

  50. @woodNfish

    “They people have no teeth if the State decides to ignore the voters will.”


    • Replies: @woodNfish
  51. @woodNfish

    “No one in their right mind wants any ME camel humpers in their country.”

    Oh, so THAT’s why the Zios are so eager to get back to the ME…!

    • Replies: @dahoit
  52. Sean says:

    This referendum was about BRITAIN IN OR BRITAIN OUT and was held in Britain (AKA the UK) which Scotland already voted to accept the overall verdict of by voting in 2014 against being an independent country.

    Over two million Scots comprised the majority who voted against independence in the 2014 independence referendum, and that is hundreds of thousands more than voted against Brixit last week, so the percentage of no in Scotland for the relatively low turn out UK Brexit referendum is deceptive.

    The SNP would be trounced again in any independence referendum, because it would have a high turn out. The Scottish nationalists simply don’t have the majority of Scots behind them and those 2 million would again vote to remain in the UK , especially oil revenue is tiny compared to 2014. Apart from the oil industry, which is collapsing (oil generated only £7 million per month in tax revenues last year) with no sign of any better in the future, the only advanced technology is Scotland is UK defence related, and that would go in an independent Scotland.

    Scotland as such is not currently a member of the EU of course. The EU is the SNP’s last hope but unfortunately the EU has members such as Belgium and Spain with their own separatist movements, and they will never allow an example like Scotland breaking away to have its cake and eat it by leaving the the UK and joining the EU.

  53. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says: • Website

    The next big ideological-spiritual or ideo-spiritual struggle of the coming decade will be the Homo-Tug-of-War.

    The Zio-Glob has elevated homomania as the new religion of the West. Jews tried it with Holocaustianity, and it is indeed very big, especially in the EU(where every city has a holocaust memorial and every year yields its crop of save-the-Jews movies), but it had problems. Holocaust is too Jewish, and most nations have no Jews. In contrast, all nations have their share of homos.
    Also, Holocaust is a glum affair. You can’t have fun with it. You can’t celebrate it with fanfare. It only guilt-baits and depresses. It’s a form of self-flagellation for whites. It doesn’t appeal to people in a fun way.

    The thing about Christianity is it had its glummy but also happy side. Jesus got killed real bad, but He was resurrected and triumphed and people could sing songs about it and even dance(esp if one is a Negro).

    But the Holocaust is a downer. To be sure, there is the triumph of the Jews in post-war era in the US and there is the rise of Israel. But celebrating the rise of Jewish power is something Jews are nervous about. It will only reveal to the world that JEWS GOT THE POWER and JEWS DO CONTROL THE WORLD. Jews want to hide their power and make everyone believe that privilege is just a ‘white gentile’ thing.
    So, Jews celebrate Jewish power by using the PROXY of homo power(or Homoxy) because homomania is essentially the financial and legal creation of Jewish Power.
    When Jews see so many American gentiles go gaga about homos, they wink-and-smile at one another and mutter to themselves, “WE got the power.”

    As for Israel, its rise is truly amazing. But it is also a matter of great controversy around the world because (1) Third World sees white Jews crushing Palestinian darkies as repeat of Western Imperialism (2) Post WWII Europeans are upset to see the poor darling Jews(associated with Holocaust and Anne Frank) riding tanks and flying jets and ‘acting like nazis’ and treating helpless Palestinians so badly. Many Europeans, esp on the Left, see the Pallies are the ‘new Jews’ living in ‘ghetto-like’ conditions.

    Unlike Holocaust, homomania has both the sad and happy(or gay) side. There is the homocaust of the AIDS epidemic in the homo community that has conveniently been blamed on ‘Reagan’s indifference’ than on the massive fecal penetration orgies in the bathhouses that took place in the 70s and 80s.


    But as homos and trannies are vain, insipid, whoopsy-doo, tutti-fruity, tinkerbelly-poo, prancy pansy, and etc. they love to make dazzling colorful spectacles of themselves. (To me, it’s tasteless, vulgar, kitschy, and trashy, but mass spectacles have always been cheesy. When homos were on the fringe and in the closet, they were keen critics of mass culture of kitschy normality. Since homos felt alienated from official normality, they presented insights and penetrating commentary. Those without power make the best critics of power. But as homos gained prominence, they began to ‘camp’ it up, and homo culture went from something like Wilde, Proust, and Gide to tasteless celebration of vulgarity and exhibitionism. And now that homos have the power thanks to Jews, their cultural agenda has become rather like that of Americana kitsch, religious kitsch[of Catholics and Hindus], and communist kitsch of the kind one sees in North Korea. Homos no longer prize irony, irreverence, and skepticism. There was a time when homos had no choice but to be rational and critical forces in society since religion and political dogma were against them. But with homomania as the new cult and religion, homos demand worship, obedience, submission. Homos are like like Muslims, and the whole Homomania vs Islam thing is really a religious war. Irony, skepticism, and rationality would call into question the ridiculous notion of a homo-man’s bunghole being a sex organ. If feces same as fetus then? Is an enema a fecal abortion instead of fetal abortion? Is a man with penis and balls really a ‘woman’ because his head goes funny and he says so? Really? Homos and trannies demand to be admired and worshiped, so there no longer prize irony, irreverence, and rationality. Homos used to be at the forefront of mocking the powers-that-be. Now, they are part of the powers-that-be along with homos, and they use the cudgel of ‘homophobia'(a term that defies any fact or sense even people who hate homosexuality are not ‘phobic’ about it) to silence anyone who dares to challenge the holy dogma of homo-and-tranny-faith. Homomania will not tolerate heretics possessed by deviltry of ‘homophobia’ that finds fecal penetration to be gross and men cutting off dicks to get fake vaginas to be ludicrous.

    Homos and trannies indulge in depraved ‘sexual’ behavior but romp around kiddie style in Barney the Dinosaur or Teletubbies. (There is something childlike about homos, and this may explain the close connection between homo community and pedophile community. It’s like Michael Jackson, a homo-pedo, never grew up and preferred the company of kibblers. The effete side of homos have a Peter Pan complex and never wanna grow up. They wanna play with dolls all their lives. When you look at homo parades, it’s like childplay. It’s no wonder that so many kid’s movies are now splattered with homo crap. FINDING DORY even has a tranny character from what I hear.) No wonder homos are so eager to work with Boy’s Scouts. (If homo men should work with young boys in Boys Scouts, should tranny men work with girls in Girl Scouts? Indeed, if gender is ‘fluid’, why not allow straight men to work in Girl Scouts as well?

    Anyway, if the Holocaust is too tribal(all about Jews) and too much of a bummer, homo stuff has universal relevance since every society has its share of homos and because homo celebration can be ‘fun and colorful’, like the Mardi Gras in New Orleans or Carnival in Brazil.
    Now, if one were to think honestly and clearly of homo and tranny stuff, there isn’t much to celebrate, especially if you’re not homo or tranny. Homo-ness is about penises up the fecal holes of men. Tranny stuff is about cutting off penis and balls to get fake pooters(or cooters). Just search google-image for ‘transsexual operation’ and the images are sickening and gross. Using scalpels to cut off perfectly healthy organs to get fake appendages is about as sick as medicine can get. It’s frankenstein medical practice.

    But human minds are associative, like those of dogs. If you associate ‘gay’ and ‘trans’ with rainbow colors, balloons, music, dance, colorful displays, and furthermore, if you get all the ‘respectable’ organizations to join, then people’s mind associate homo-ness and trannyness with things that are fun, colorful, respectable, cool, and popular.

    It’s like the Pavlov experiment. A bell has NOTHING to do with food, but if you ring a bell when you give dog some food, the dog associates bell with food.
    That’s how the mind works. Associatively.

    Jews understand this, and they use cool-by-association, correct-by-association, holy-by-association, and etc. This is how media work mostly. Media are not so much about offering facts as about associating certain facts/issues/matters with positive images, sounds, and symbols while associating certain other facts/issues/matters with negative images, sounds, and symbols.
    It’s like the Jew-run media will associate ANY white racial consciousness with Nazism and the KKK. And even though Jewish spies in America served Stalin, they are not associated with the Gulag and Stalin’s mass killings. They are associated with ‘free speech’ and ‘freedom of association’, the very things Jews are trying to take away from white people today via Political Correctness. In contrast, Joe McCarthy is associated only with paranoia and madness. McCarthy did over-reach, but history proves he was more right than wrong. Also, many of those accused by McCarthy did spy for the USSR, but the Jew-run media associate them only with noble suffering and victimhood than with working for mass-killer Stalin. If McCarthy had been a leftist who smoked out pro-Nazi sympathizers during WWII, you bet the Jew-run media would associate McCarthy with heroic struggle against evil while associating the pro-Nazi spies and fellow-travelers with Hitler’s crimes.

    Anyway, Jews have always hated Traditional Christianity. They tried to replace it with Holocaustianity, but Holocaust themes were too tribal and too glum. It has tremendous power to guilt-bait whites and make them kneel before Jews, but people don’t want to be depressed all the time.
    If Jews want to hook whites onto a new faith, it has to offer fun and uplift. And Jews found it in homomania. Homos sure love to have fun like an MTV video.

    Catholics had colorful processions like the scene in GODFATHER II.
    Jews have replaced them with the homo ‘pride’ parades, the biggest celebrations in the West.

    Homomania is now bigger than Christianity. Indeed, even Christianity is bending over to homomania, as if to suggest Jesus and Disciples died so that one day homos could ‘marry’ other homos and play at ‘two daddies’ or ‘two mommies’.

    Look at his ASSOCIATION of Jesus with homomania:

    Jews hate Christianity, but they are warming up to a neo-cucked-Christianity that serves homomania because homomania, like Bolshevism, is a Jewish creation. When neo-Christians serve homomania, they are serving the Zio-Glob.
    In Jew-run America, your career will hardly be touched if you badmouth God and Jesus. But if you dare say anything even slightly critical of homos or trannies, forget about moving up the corporate capitalist ladder or big government ladder.
    Homomania is the new holy faith of the West. Heretics will be destroyed. Even if you believe homos deserve full equal rights, it doesn’t matter. You will be destroyed for simply saying you find homo-‘sex’ to be gross and ewwww. You will be destroyed for saying it is crazy to cut off dicks and balls to get fake pussies.

    In the USSR, Jews tried to destroy Christianity by smashing churches(50,000 were destroyed) and killing priests. But that didn’t work in the long run. If anything, it made people hate Jews even more.
    So, the new Jewish way is to alter the churches from the inside. Don’t smash churches, and don’t kill Christians. Just infiltrate the church and fundamentally change it from the inside. Corrupt it with homomania. Say that homos are the chosen of god and jesus. Pretend that current fashions override anything in the Bible.

    Also, Jews have used pop culture to cut people off from their own heritage, identity, history, values, roots, and etc. (Of course, Jewish children are reminded of their heritage, identity, roots, history, etc.) Make the masses identify mainly with celebrities and fashion. Since Jews control media and promote homos and pro-homo celebrities, homo-ness has become ‘cool’. And since homos are not blamed for AIDS epidemic(which was spread by massive out-of-control fecal penetration among homo men) but merely presented as poor victims, homo-ness has been turned tragic and holy. Also, the tranny’s wish to be made from man into woman is like a decadent narrative variation of resurrection: dying as one ‘gender’ and being reborn as another, all in the service of narcissism, the core mentality of the culture of celebrity and fashion.

    So, homomania has become the main faith of the West. And since Jews own it, they figure they can manipulate it in myriad ways to serve their own interest.
    One way is to associate homomania with Israel. With Israel coming under more scrutiny from the Left and the non-Western world, Jews associate Israel with ‘gay rights’ and point out that Muslim World, in contrast, hate and even kill homos.
    This assures Western Liberal support for Israel since there is nothing more dear to Western Liberals than the holy faith of homomania.
    It’s like Hillary Clinton justifying the Nakba and the Occupation by saying the Poo-Ride parade in Tel Aviv is one of the biggest in the world. (But then, the problem with this is that US is very cozy with some of the most anti-homo Muslim nations in the Middle East, esp Saudi Arabia. Also, Jewish-controlled US has been most hostile and aggressive toward secular Arab/Muslim nations that, while criminalizing homosexuality, are still far more tolerant than nations like Saudi Arabia that is the closet Muslim ally of the US. You were better off as a homo in secular-ruled Syria or Libya than in Saudi Arabia or Kuwait. Also, even though Tel Aviv may have homo parades, much of religious Israel is zealously hostile to homo culture.)

    The danger for Jews is this: Even though Jews created and control homomania, it might slip out of their hands. After all, Jews created communism but it slipped out of their hands and, in time, became an anti-Jewish force. Stalin and later gentile rulers of Russia became increasingly distrustful of Jews. Eastern European communist nations were initially largely controlled by Jews, but Jews were pushed out by national communists. (And of course, Christianity was initially a Jewish anti-imperialist struggle but became the religion of the Gentile Empire against Jews.)

    To the extent that the West now worships homomania and to the extent that homomania is associated with Israel and elite globo-privilege(of Wall Street, Las Vegas, and Hollywood), Jews can make a killing off homomania.

    And homomania is more useful to Jews than something like communism.
    Jewish power is bound to be elite minority power because Jews are a small minority in most nations and because Ashkenazi Jews are smarter than goyim.

    So, communism was bound to work against Jews in the long run. Communism is about the workers, the masses. It is anti-elite. Of course, the communist nations developed their own elites, but as meritocracy, individualism, and minority interests were stifled under communism(that favored the majority mass of workers and their ethnic representatives), amassing power had more to do with connections and machine politics like the kind mastered by the Irish in cities like Boston and Chicago.
    Stalin gained power like Richard Daley of Chicago.

    In contrast, Jewish power depends on cleverness, brilliance, sneakery, individuality, and etc. It’s harder for Jews to work against an ethnic-machines that developed in communist nations.

    Consider the case of Browder:

    (Interesting that he has communist ancestors but turned super-capitalist as capitalism is the surer way to Jewish power and supremacism.)

    Unlike communism, homomania is intrinsically elitist and minoritarian since homos, like Jews in the US, are only 2% of the population. Also, homos hate ‘drabby’ and ‘ordinary’ things and love fancy-pants and precious things. A tranny doesn’t want to dress like an ordinary woman. He wants to be a diva-like woman. Look at Bruce ‘Caitnlyn’ Jenner who competes with Kim Kartrashian.

    A homo has neo-aristocratic flair and whoopity-doo manners. They prance around like French aristos before the Revolution.
    Communism is mass-majoritarian and ‘drab’. Eventually, this kind of austere and severe leftism works against Jews and homos who depend on elite power and privilege.

    So, Jews and homos worked together to remake ‘leftism’ into a Las Vegas show.
    There was a time when Jewish leftists rooted for the Cuban revolutionaries and Viet Cong warriors. Those fighters seemed puritanical, noble, sacrificing, selfless, and neo-spiritual opposed to decadent and crass materialism of American capitalism.
    Jews denounced America’s role in Saigon as promoting wanton decadence, corruption, prostitution, degeneracy, and etc. In contrast, the Viet Cong were admired as men and women committed to a great noble cause.

    Similarly, the Batista regime in Cuba was mocked as a decadent stooge of capitalist America. It’s like in THE GODFATHER PART II. Michael notes that the revolutionaries might win because they are pure of heart. They believe in something whereas the government only cares about money and privilege. And government troops are mere mercenaries who must be paid to fight. In contrast, the rebels will fight for nothing. They will even give their lives for the cause.

    Michael sort of admires the rebels even though he is a mafia boss involved in big money. It’s because the Corleones themselves are not only about money. They believe in clan, family, honor, and etc. And members of the Corleones will put their lives on the line for the Family. Indeed, Michael himself chose to join the Family out of fealty to his father.

    But of course, in the end, gangterism is all about money. It’s about ‘business’. Michael also remembers that when his father got killed, Tom Hagen put ‘business’ before the ‘personal’. And as Michael explains to Tom after the assassination attempt, he says all the men work for money and as such could be bought off by other men. Michael trusts Tom at that moment because Tom was kept out of the loop in other dealings. Paradoxically, Michael can trust Tom right then & there precisely because he couldn’t trust Tom in other times.

    Anyway, Jews have become very very rich. Jews are 2% of US population but something like 43% of the top 1% are Jewish. So, Jews are no longer romanticizing the spartan communist warrior or some such. Jews now fear majoritarian themes of the workers with pitchforks.
    So, Jews worked with homos to remake Leftism into a celebration of elite urban minority privilege and decadence. Indeed, homo parades look very like the kind of capitalist debauchery that was so common in Batista’s Cuba. The flamboyance, narcissism, vanity, excess, piggishness, raunchiness, degeneracy, and etc.
    What we have now is Hyman-Roth-Leftism. Notice even the Republican big-shots Sheldon Adelson and Koch brothers are enthusiastic about ‘gay marriage’.

    Jews figure that the new ‘leftism’ that favors urban decadent privilege will smash the Classic Leftism of the Workers and Majority Power forever. All the top talents in elite institutions of media and academia and government will all bow down to the holy homo. And since Jews control homomania, the worship of the homo will essentially be worship of the Jew.

    But… there is a problem. If indeed homomania is the new religion of the West, what happens if homomania were to be taken out of Jewish hands? What if homomania becomes associated with the Palestinian cause?
    What if homomania becomes more like European ‘leftism’ that is far more hostile toward Israel?

    In Europe, homos and Muslims don’t see eye to eye, but both are mostly on the ‘left’.
    As such, Muslims will work with homos, and homos will work with Muslims.
    The difference between homos in EU and homos in US is that the former are far less reliably pro-Israel. Indeed, part of the appeal of homomania in the EU(especially before ‘gay marriage’ made its way in the US) was that many EU leftists saw it as a form of anti-Americanism. Europeans have this idea of Americans as religious zealots and pro-Zionist nutjobs. Therefore, many on the EU left defined themselves by anti-Zionism and pro-homo-ism. In their minds, US Empire = Israel-worship and anti-homo Christianity.
    It must have been a bummer for EU leftards to see US become homomanical too. What EU fools failed to understand was that homomania had always been part of the Jewish-American power game to spreads minority-elite-supremacism around the world.

    But the fact remains that there are many homos in EU who are hostile to Israel because EU ‘leftism’ is different from American ‘leftism’. Also, there is a chance that even American homos may want to distance themselves from Zionism and Israel.
    As BDS movement grows in the US and as Mainline churches side with Palestinians, Israel is becoming less and less popular and ‘cool’.

    The ‘left’ is always hungry for a new cause, and there are no more ‘great causes’ left. There is only Israel and Palestinians.
    So, if the political mood darkens against Israel, will the homo community just stick with the Jews… or will they join with the Diversity Gang that supports BDS?

    Since homomania is the religion of the West, the homo-blessing counts for a lot.
    Many Americans will simply go with whatever has the endorsement of the holy homos. To be blessed by holy homos is better than being blessed by God in the new West.
    Jews groomed homo power to stick with Israel and Zionism, but what if there is a schism in the homo community? So far, Jewish Homos have dominated as they have the money and control of homo-organizations.
    But what if non-Jewish homos don’t want homomania to be associated with ‘evil imperialist racist Zionism’?
    What if a new sect of homomania join with BDS and turn against the Jews?

    So, the homo-tug-of-war with BDS and Jews tugging at homomania to own the new religion of the West.

    • Replies: @Wally
    , @Dissident
  54. Che Guava says:

    Respected Derb, you may be quoting the original lyrics correctly,

    but other than the the others,

    you seem to miss many of the repetitions in the song.

    Rule Brittania, Brittania rules the waves, etc.

    You may well be right on the original form. Interesting that the lyricist was a Scot, that is also a big part of my ancestry. Never knew that before. Ironic given the so-called ‘Scottish National Party’ of now.

  55. Che Guava says:

    Germany, not Berlin, which I did not say. It did happen.
    Continues in Japan, Okinawa, and Korea, almost all (100%, it seems) of the major crimes that really upset people (apart from the eco-crime of the new base in Okinawa) are by black U.S. military personnel.

  56. woodNfish says:
    @Jacques Sheete

    Yeah, “if”, because it hasn’t happened yet. Cameron resigned, that is a positive step toward the fullfillment of Brexit.

  57. dahoit says:
    @El Dato

    Well,both the Germans and Japanese are very proud of themselves,but only one people say they were chosen,the Israelis,to be accurate.
    And the person who chose them can’t be verified.

  58. dahoit says:

    Mr.Derbyshire,these hordes,you do know their source,Zionism and globalization?And good old British imperialism was certainly a source also,although an unintended one by those British conservatives.
    WO all we’d be in a much better place.

  59. dahoit says:

    As an American from afar,the flotilla episode where Goldup?(Irish?) tried drowning our Farrage ?was the revealing moment,like the rioters at Trump rallies,a bunch of real nazi scum.
    But these people will never look in the mirror of reality.
    And Farrage is another shady character,btw,with his anti German ww2 crap.

  60. dahoit says:

    One can’t choose itself.If the Anglos?consider themselves better than anyone else,its just tribal pride.
    The only alleged chosen people are again,the Jews or Israelis,who say an outside arbitrator chose them,which of course,is debatable.

  61. dahoit says:
    @Citizen of a Silly Country

    The importation of Muslims is because of the WOT and the result of long ago British imperialism,and its Empire.
    They are dangerous because they have been f*cked with,and alone of any people on this earth(or almost)will kill themselves to kill us.
    Before 1948 we gave two shites for their religion,what they did,how they treated their women etc etc,but since the beginning of this whole shebang,the creation of Israel out of others misery,this festering bleeding wound has spread exponentially,and until we have everyone enjoying the same levels of security we will have no security.
    It isn’t rocket science,its basic logic,but no one in charge possesses it.

    • Replies: @utu
    , @Grandpa Jack
  62. dahoit says:
    @Jacques Sheete

    Why,no more room for the sheep dippers?
    Nothing more pathetic and unproductive are stupid racist memes, devised by Zionists most likely, as everything else is also.
    If we weren’t there for the last 70? years,they wouldn’t be here.
    And why the f*ck are we the Israeli foreign Legion?
    Because our nation has been had by Zion.

  63. dahoit says:

    US troops policed the US sector of W Berlin after the war.

  64. bearspaw says:

    The secret for referendae is to allow only tax payers to vote. It seems that people who do not contribute to the commin weal or those not old enough to contribute should have no influence other than their opinions on any matter of national importance.

    • Replies: @helena
  65. dahoit says:

    GB has only been in the EU 15? years or so,I’m sure Britain can govern itself and its people quite well.
    The power of Zion is immense.The man who has the gold rules.
    But their mask is definitely slipping,stay tuned.

  66. Wally says: • Website
    @Tiny Duck

    And American Indians were xenophobic for resisting European migrants.

  67. Wally [AKA "BobbyBeGood"] says: • Website
    @Priss Factor

    The ‘6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’ are scientifically impossible frauds.
    see the ‘holocaust’ scam debunked here:
    No name calling, level playing field debate here:

    “Alone the fact that one may not question the Jewish “holocaust” and that Jewish pressure has inflicted laws on democratic societies to prevent questions—while incessant promotion and indoctrination of the same averredly incontestable ‘holocaust’ occur—gives the game away. It proves that it must be a lie. Why else would one not be allowed to question it? Because it might offend the “survivors”? Because it “dishonors the dead”? Hardly sufficient reason to outlaw discussion. No, because the exposure of this leading lie might precipitate questions about so many other lies and cause the whole ramshackle fabrication to crumble.”
    – Gerard Menuhin / Revisionist Jew, son of famous violinist

    We’re talking about an alleged ‘6M Jews & 5M others’ … 11,000,000
    But note that there is not a single verifiable excavated mass grave that can actually be SHOWN, not just claimed, (recall the claim of 900,000 buried at Treblinka) even though Jews claim to know exactly where these allegedly enormous mass graves are.

    The massive numbers of so called “eyewitne$$es” are living testimony to fraudulence of the impossible ‘6M Jews, 5M others, & gas chambers’.

    The ‘holocaust’ storyline is one of the most easily debunked narratives ever contrived. That is why those who question it are arrested and persecuted. That is why violent, racist, & privileged Jewish supremacists demand censorship. What sort of truth is it that denies free speech and the freedom to seek the truth? Truth needs no protection from scrutiny.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  68. utu says:

    #65 “The importation of Muslims is because of the WOT and the result of long ago British imperialism,and its Empire.” – No really. The justification of importation of immigrants was easier in former colonial powers like UK and France but their imperialism was not the real cause of it. It was a large scale social engineering. The Owners discovered in the US that having ethnic minorities particularly troublesome like African Americans is an excellent tool for social change and control. Divide et impera is the rule Owners always use. Furthermore, the presence of troublesome minorities greatly improves effectiveness of mimicry exercised by Jews in every society they reside. Diversity is a strength – for the Owners.

  69. “If you add up Indians, Pakistanis, and Bangladeshis…”

    The smell of curry would be overwhelming

  70. @dahoit

    The Muzzies gave Europeans hell for quite a few centuries there prior to the British Empire. Frankly, what they’ve gotten back from Europeans and the US pales in comparison. I could care less for what they think of European and US encroachment into their lives.

  71. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    When it became immoral among elites to go out and take over some third world country for their own benefit (liberals used to use the excuse of bringing advanced society to the heathens), the next best thing was to mass-import all those third world people into your own country, where they become lax and apathetic voters who rubber-stamp whatever the elites want.

    Elites have never been happy about the fact that European societies have gradually expanded the voting franchise and become more democratic ever since the Victorian era. In the 1960s and 70s, the last of a very docile and servile remnant of Europeans began to die out. These were the people whose mindset was formed in the Victorian and Edwardian eras, and they were good for being sent off to die by the millions in trench warfare, or for suffering the economic depression of the 1930s without protesting their lot, and they saluted their hereditary monarchs with great respect. Once these people were gone, the elites were forced to look farther afield for docile people to rule over once their own citizens started thinking for themselves and making demands. The purpose of immigration is to use immigrants to nullify the votes of the native whites and thus return all societal control to the elites.

    I’ve been struck by the whole disgracefully childish freakout on the part of the EU officials. They’re throwing tantrums and wetting their pants. Of course, anyone with a grasp of psychology understands that when you reject the control of a power-hungry control freak, they’ll have a horrendous fit. You’ve hit their psychological toe with a hammer.

  72. “For Britons never will be slaves” sounds wrong. Not the general sentiment, which of course is fine and sound, but the word “will.” An English person much more naturally says “shall” in that context.”

    “Will” is related to an act of volition: never want to be slaves.

    “Shall” is an absolute fact.

    Englishmen instinctively understand that.

    Will is the act of strongly desiring something to happen, trying to make something happen by hoping, or describing something you intend to happen in the future.

    • Replies: @helena
  73. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says:

    What is worst about ‘virtue-signaling’ is that it’s not real virtue that’s being signaled.
    It is vice-as-virtue.
    Homo-worship is no virtue. It is rank decadence and degeneracy that reveres sexual deviancy of fecal penetration and genital mutilation(of trans-gender surgery).

    It should be called vice-as-virtue-signaling. Or vicetue-signaling.

  74. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says:

    People put down Muslims, but I think it’s somewhat unfair.

    I say ‘somewhat’ cuz Muslims are not my favorite people. I mean they go around in pajamies, grow ugly beards, and scream too much. That’s no good.

    But I think we should try to understand why so many are angry.


    What is ‘diversity’ in America?

    To white rightist types, ‘diversity’ is white folks losing to tide of color. There is a lot of truth to that.

    But ‘diversity’ also means people-of-color being made to fight and kill their own kind in their homelands in the service of US imperialism.

    After all, ‘diversity’ doesn’t mean every group in the US has equal share of power. Some groups are MUCH MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS. Which group has the most power in America? It sure aint Eskimos, Hawaiians, Polacks, Jappers, Scandies, Scotch-Irish, etc.
    It is Jews.

    So, ‘diversity’ means a diverse population of various groups being compelled to serve the Jewish-globalist agenda(that may be against the interests of their own people).

    It just so happens that Jews have their homeland in the Middle East next to many Arab and/or Muslim nations. And to serve their own interests, Jews have been using wars, sanctions, subversion, and various means to destabilize the whole region. Millions of Arabs/Muslims have been killed or displaced.

    In 2003 when Iraq was being invaded, a Iraqi-American working next door came over to my workplace and said sadly, “they are destroying my country.” He wasn’t a terrorist, but we can understand the bitterness such people feel. He felt angry but helpless. ‘Diversity’ meant Jews got to override the interests of other kinds of Americans. Not just white-Americans but Arab-

    If you were an Iraqi-American serving in the US military, you would be ordered to drop bombs on your own kinfolks back home. Indeed, all Muslims in the US military must go and kill fellow Muslims if US government orders them to.
    The main reason why Bush II and Obama(and Hillary) say nice things about Islam & Muslims is to use that as cover to keep waging Wars for Israel in Muslim lands.

    So, ‘diversity’ doesn’t mean equal power for all groups. It means all groups coming under the control of the ruling elite in the US that is Jewish(and Homo). And especially for Muslim-Americans and Arab-Americans, ‘diversity’ means serving Zio-American Power to destroy their kinfolks back in the Middle East. It is all the more frustrating since Muslims have not been aggressors against the US except as acts of blowback and revenge for Zio-American aggression.
    9/11, as terrible as it was, was a retaliation after so much of Zio-US intervention in the Middle East.

    Indeed, how would Polish-Americans feel IF Jewish-controlled America decided to invade Poland and reduce that nation to rubble? Or suppose US used air power to destabilize Poland and then armed terrorist groups to rip that nation apart. A lot of Polish-Americans would be angry as hell.

    Or suppose the ruling elite of the US were Muslim or Arab. Suppose Muslims/Arabs controlled the banks, courts, politicians, media, academia, and etc. And suppose these elites used US foreign policy to attack and destroy and kill hordes of Jews in Israel.
    How would Jewish-Americans feel? Wouldn’t some of them be driven to terrorism in way of Irgun?

    So, while I agree that Muslims are a nutty bunch(and shouldn’t be invited to the West), we need to address the real problem of ‘diversity’. In America, ‘diversity’ means all groups must serve Jewish interests.

    This is especially painful to Arabs and Muslims since Jewish agenda is Zionist and anti-Arab and anti-Muslim. Sure, Jewish power seeks out Muslim collaborators(esp in Saudi Arabia) so as to maintain the facade that the Jewish-American foreign policy is not a Clash of Civilizations between America and the Arab/Muslim world.

    But in fact, American ‘diversity’ is essentially about Jewish power overriding the interests of all other groups. It means Arab-Americans and Muslim-Americans must watch helplessly as the power of the US banks and military is used to destroy nations hated by Israel. And these nations are mostly Arab or Muslim(or Russian).

    And it gets especially jarring when Arab-Americans or Muslim-Americans serving in the US military are ordered to ship out to the Middle East and join with white & black soldiers in the killing of ‘muzzies’ and ‘ragheads'(or ‘raggers’ as I call them).

    I mean how would a Jewish-American soldier feel in a hypothetical Arab-Muslim-dominated America if the new war policy is for US military to invade Israel and help the Palestinians in the killing and bombing of countless Jews? How would Jews feel if the US regime funded and armed ‘moderate rebels’ to attack and destroy Israel with terror?
    How would it feel to a Jewish-American soldier to be ordered to drop bombs and shoot bullets at fellow Jews? Many Jews would grow angry, some would go crazy and strike out at the US military and Americans. Some might turn to terrorism against Americans not unlike Jewish anarchists of old.

    While we should keep the raggers out of the West, we need to understand their rage in the wider context. This is something Buchanan and Ron Paul tried to do in their discussion of blowback.

    ‘Diversity’ is not only a Zio-globalist crime against whites. It is also a crime against all victim-nations of Zio-US imperialism. ‘Diversity’ invites peoples from all over the world and then uses them against their own countrymen. If Jewish-controlled US declares war on China, all the Chinese-immigrants in business, government, and US military must support US destruction of China. If Jewish-controlled US declares war on Iran, all the Iranian-Americans in government, business, and military must support US destruction of Iran.
    As for Arabs, they’ve seen so much of US destruction of the Arab world. So, ‘diversity’ has been a double-edged sword for them. In America, they found a better material life. But directly or indirectly, they’ve been party to the Zionist-American destruction of the ancient lands of their origin.

    Jews use US power to destroy the homelands of both Arabs and Europeans. Jewish-American policy in the Middle East and North Africa displaced so many Muslims who are now ‘refugees’, and now, Jews are saying Europe MUST take in these ‘refugees’ or else they are ‘nazis’.

    ‘Diversity’ means both whites and Arabs must serve the Zio-Globo policy of destruction of Arabia and Europa.

  75. helena says:

    That wouldn’t work in UK because a lot of people pay tax and claim state benefits (tax credits) and 16-17 yr olds were nearly allowed to vote. The gang demonstrating outside Westminster at the moment think politics should run like social media – like/dislike. It’s a form of mob rule but they don’t understand that because education for decades has been geared towards creating this outcome of an entire population of people unable to think for themselves for fear of social ostracism. The idea that people can have political disagreements but still be ‘friends’, or at least respect each other, has been phased out. It’s Devolution not Revolution.

  76. helena says:
    @Bill Jones

    “An English person much more naturally says “shall” in that context.””

    An educated English over 40y maybe but young people don’t understand the subtley of shall/will.
    Shall implies intent and also recognition that, the best laid plans…

    Anyway, Junker is a complete t*sser – comparisons to marriage, ‘we thought you have a plan. go, go now’. what a tw*t

  77. helena says:
    @Sam Shama

    Hey, Sam. (How did the wager go?) Are you saying you stand with the English? Larry Kudlow called it Magna Carta II! Do you see economic benefits? Can we get through the doom and gloom being put about; it’s that that will cause the actual poor prospects isn’t it? It’s all about ‘confidence’ but confidence seems to be easily faked/manipulated. Or maybe I’m just a conspiracy theorist!

    • Replies: @Sam Shama
  78. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says: • Website

    Compassion shouldn’t be wasted on heartless savages who destroyed their own countries.

  79. Sam Shama says:

    Hello Helena

    I stand with the English. I stand with the U.K.; for I should greatly prefer England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, having taken this historic step together, to not surrender all too readily to the wiles of Project Fear and the blighters of Brussels. That an escape from their clutches has immediate economic costs, benefits accruing over a longer term and indirectly first as a reclamation the Kingdom’s true identity and freedom to navigate, were well in the reckoning. It is in the hour of trial and adversity that the British, and indeed the English character, rises above the rest.

    On a practical level, HM Treasury estimates the following:

    [The analysis in the long-term document sets out a range for each alternative, with a central estimate that gross domestic product (GDP) would be £4,300 lower in 2015 terms for each household after 15 years and every year thereafter.]

    Which reduces approximately to a 3.6% decline in GDP [I personally think that this is exaggerated]. There are steps that Johnson must absolutely undertake to counter it.

    First, given the worldwide excess supply of savings, the U.K. despite a possible temporary spike in inflation can issue a combination of sterling bonds and USD denominated bonds [with a special protection against exchange rate fluctuations] to the tune of 2% of GDP and put it directly in public works: re-training British youth to do the jobs that Poles [and others] have filled, de-emphasise the late proclivity to engage in “brokering” vocations, re-capitalise the NHS and actively bolster industries [including services geared towards exports and in-tourism] . Should this be enabled, the reduction in GDP will surely not even be realised. This, the first order of business, is wholly a question of political will.

    Second, do not immediately invoke Article 50 while engaged in making these arrangements with the U.S. [and other Anglosphere and Commonwealth nations], leave Europeans stewing in their own juices, marginalise that tosser Juncker and seed peripheral EU countries with ideas of freedom, thus entailing Merkel’s greater direct participation in the negotiations to come [Merkel in the final analysis is rational, and an appeaser, public persona notwithstanding] ; for there is little valid reason why a single market ought to come ineluctably with an unrestricted movement of labour.

    Lastly buy British.

    P.S. : [Brexit wager paid off delightfully 🙂 ; football not so much]

    • Replies: @helena
    , @Bill Jones
  80. Clyde says:

    Where do you find the time to type all that demented drivel?

  81. helena says:
    @Sam Shama

    I’m sure you understand. My worry is that there are no MPs who want to stand, who understand and can negotiate. Boris may not get on the ballot and even if he did, he could end up either following his own agenda or mis-reading the effectiveness of his approach. Continentals can be pretty inflexible.

    “wager paid off delightfully”

    Hoorah! more trips to Disneyland!

    • Replies: @Sam Shama
  82. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says: • Website

    Will you cut your holocaust denial crap? It is a mental sickness.

    Besides, homomania(or sodomania) is now bigger than holocaustianity.

    It will come down to the Homo-Tug-of-War.

    Perversely enough, the future of mankind hangs in the balance of which side has the blessing of the assboys.

    All sides will try to tug at the holy homos. Homos will feel the pull from various directions. They will be like Stretch Ass-strong.

  83. Sam Shama says:

    [trips to Disneyland!]

    Blimey no! I shall be visiting London [dearly missing barm and Battenberg with jam]

    • Replies: @helena
  84. @Sam Shama

    “On a practical level, HM Treasury estimates the following:”

    Why do you believe that what a bunch of wholly owned globalist tools say what they “estimate” is actually what they estimate?

    When was the last time they failed to lie?

  85. helena says:
    @Sam Shama

    Forget your stomach – Gove or May? 🙂

    • Replies: @Sam Shama
  86. Sam Shama says:

    Its rather turning into “Jim Hacker moves to 10 Downing” isn’t it ?

    Gove might be the better man to negotiate with the Iron-born frau. After all what Britain really needs is a somewhat better deal than Norway. This is bound to be a set of negotiations fraught with tension; free movement of goods and capital services, but only restricted movement of people. Juncker will likely suffer a stroke; Merkel likely agree under the table.

    On the personality front, May and Gove are equally matched and gray, I am afraid. Boris is an intelligent man but apparently miscalculated Brussels [and Gove, tbh], will likely throw his lot behind TM, wait the two years during which negotiations are to be completed and then make a leadership run.

    So Gove. For now I think.

    • Replies: @5371
  87. helena says:

    Yes, I’d be OK with Gove. When you say ‘Boris miscalculated Brussels’, do you mean, word got back to the UK that Brussels wouldn’t negotiate with ‘that clown’ or, just metaphorically?

    • Replies: @Sam Shama
  88. Sam Shama says:

    Gove and Brussels likely have an understanding, and yes, the wankers in Brussels detest both Boris and Nigel [reciprocated, one expects].

  89. 5371 says:
    @Sam Shama

    Gove is a neocon pipsqueak and Murdoch handpuppet who reportedly convinced Cameron to attack Libya. Fortunately he looks unlikely even to be one of the two candidates put before Tory party members in the country.

    • Replies: @Sam Shama
  90. Sam Shama says:

    Certainly one should be happy to see Boris back in the saddle – hopefully the stirrups are secure, as I see Sir Nicholas Soames join the hunt wearing green as well.

    Not a fan of Gove, to be sure, [and happily the Party appears to have listened to Cato the Elder’s dictum regarding taking a man for his word when he had plainly disqualified himself].

    My initial thought on Gove was that he was truly going to come around to Boris’ POV, and was perhaps better liked in the Continent.

    Regardless, great vigilance is called for at the moment since the bugles for reversals/2nd referendums are filling the air rather disquietingly.

  91. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    Katherine Jenkins, I’m so glad we discovered her talented voice, she can sing. Bring Me To Life song love at first listen.

  92. Dissident says:

    I think Italians in general just aren’t organized enough to really do major-league atrocities. They don’t follow orders well enough.

    You don’t think it could be that Italians, by nature, just don’t have it in them to be that cruel?

  93. Dissident says:

    he [Derbyshire] often comes across as racially obsessed.

    Would you consider those who propagate the incessant stream of “anti-racist”, anti-white cant and propaganda to be “racially obsessed” as well?

  94. Dissident says:

    Derbyshire is almost always a pleasure to read.

    Even more of a pleasure to listen-to

  95. Dissident says:
    @Priss Factor

    I am a Jew. I am not a Zionist. I abhor, condemn and oppose all of the following:

    -Cultural Marxism, including and esp. the pernicious degeneracy that you have labeled “homomania” (which, it should be noted, is actually antithetical to Judaism)
    – White ethnomasochism
    – Interventionist foreign policy
    – Open borders

  96. Anglo says: • Website

    John, I just read this fine article after posting on my blog something I entitled “Dissent Will Not Be Tolerated!” It may amuse you to know that I am a Scot (with 35 years in the USA) and that I dithered for some time over the “Will” or “Shall” in the blog title. Didn’t know that was in my DNA!

  97. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    I believe still that the Euro elites, which include most of the British political class, all parties, might do an Andy Jackson on their people: “The voters have made their decision, now let them enforce it.”

    This would have ol’ Andy rolling over in his grave. He said this about the Supreme Court – the elite of his day. Andy Jackson was the Trump of his day, representing the will of the voters AGAINST the elite. He would say “The voters have made their decision, and I intend to enforce it!”

Current Commenter

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 have been licensed to 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 John Derbyshire Comments via RSS