The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewMichael Hudson Archive
How Western Military Interventions Shaped the Brexit Vote
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show 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

GREGORY WILPERT, TRNN: Welcome to the Real News Network. I’’m Gregory Wilpert, coming to you from Quito, Ecuador.

Britain’’s referendum in favor of leaving, or exiting, the European Union, the Brexit referendum, as the results are known, won with 52 percent of the vote on Thursday, June 23, stunning Europe’s political establishment. One of the issues that has raised concern for many is that what does the Brexit mean for Britain’’s and Europe’’s economy and politics. This was one of the main topics leading up to the referendum, but a lot of disinformation [reigned] in the discussion.

With us to discuss the economic and political context of the Brexit is Michael Hudson. He is a research professor of economics at the University of Missouri-Kansas City, and author of Killing the Host: How Financial Parasites and Debt Destroy the Global Economy. Also, he is an economics adviser to several governments, including Greece, Iceland, Latvia, and China. He joins us right now from New York City.

Thanks, Michael, for joining us.

MICHAEL HUDSON: Good to be here again.

WILPERT: So let’’s begin with the political context in which the Brexit vote took place. Aside from the right-wing arguments about immigrants, economic concerns, and about Britain’’s ability to control its own economy, what would you say–what do you see as being the main kind of political background in which this vote took place?

HUDSON: Well, almost all the Europeans know where the immigrants are coming from. And the ones that they’’re talking about are from the Near East. And they’’re aware of the fact that most of the immigrants are coming as a result of the NATO policies promoted by Hillary and by the Obama administration.

The problem began in Libya. Once Hillary pushed Obama to destroy Libya and wipe out the stable government there, she wiped out the arms–and Libya was a very heavily armed country. She turned over the arms to ISIS, to Al-Nusra, and Al-Qaeda. And Al-Qaeda used these arms under U.S. organization to attack Syria and Iraq. Now, the Syrian population, the Iraqi population, have no choice but to either emigrate or get killed.

So when people talk about the immigration to Europe, the Europeans, the French, the Dutch, the English, they’’re all aware of the fact that this is the fact that Brussels is really NATO, and NATO is really run by Washington, and that it’’s America’’s new Cold War against Russia that’’s been spurring all of this demographic dislocation that’’s spreading into England, spreading into Europe, and is destabilizing things.

So what you’’re seeing with the Brexit is the result of the Obama administration’s pro-war, new Cold War policy.

WILPERT: So are you saying that people voted for Brexit because they are really–that they were concerned about the influence of the U.S.? Or are you saying that it’s because of the backlash, because of the immigration that happened, and the fact that the right wing took advantage of that [crosstalk].

HUDSON: It’s a combination. The right wing was, indeed, pushing the immigrant issue, saying wait a minute, they’’re threatening our jobs. But the left wing was just as vocal, and the left wing was saying, why are these immigrants coming here? They’’re coming here because of Europe’’s support of NATO, and NATO’’s war that’’s bombing the Near East, that is destabilizing the whole Near East, and causing a flight of refugees not only from Syria but also from Ukraine. In England, many of the so-called Polish plumbers that came years ago have now gone back to Poland, because that country’’s recovered.

But now the worry is that a whole new wave of Ukrainians–and basically the U.S. policy is one of destabilization–so even the right-wing, while they have talked about immigrants, they have also denounced the [inaud.] fact that the European policy is run by the United States, and that you have both Marine Le Pen in France saying, we want to withdraw from NATO; we don’t want confrontation with Russia. You have the left wing in England saying, we don’’t want confrontation with Russia. And last week when I was in Germany you had the Social Democratic Party leaders saying that Russia should be invited back into the G8, that NATO was taking a warlike position and was hurting the European economy by breaking its ties with Russia and by forcing other sanctions against Russia.

So you have a convergence between the left and the right, and the question is, who is going to determine the terms on which Europe is broken up and put back together? Will it simply be the right wing that’’s anti-immigrants? Or will it simply be the left saying we want to restructure the economy in a way that essentially avoids the austerity that is coming from Brussels, on the one hand, and from the British Conservative Party on the other.

And again, you have Geert Wilders, the leader of the Dutch nationalists, saying, we want Holland to have its own central bank. We want to be in charge of our own money. And under Brussels, we cannot be in charge of our own money. That means we cannot run a budget deficit and spend money into the economy, and recover with a Keynesian-type policy.


So the whole withdrawal from Europe means withdrawing from austerity. If you look at the voting pattern in London, in England, you had London to stay in. You had the university centers, Oxford and Cambridge, voting to stay in. You had the working class, the old industrial areas of the north and the south. You had the middle class and the industrial class saying, we’re getting a really bad deal from Europe. We want to oppose austerity. And we don’t want Brussels to give us not only the anti-labor, pro-bank policies, but also the trade policy that Brussels was trying to push onto Europe, the Obama trade agreement that essentially would take national economic policy out of the hands of government and put it into the hands of corporate bureaucracy, corporation courts. And the bureaucracy in Brussels, then, is largely pro-bank, pro-corporate, and anti-labor.

WILPERT: That actually brings up the issue of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, or the TTIP. It was one of the things that the Cameron government was really pushing for, this relationship between the European Union and the United States. Now that Britain is presumably going to be leaving the European Union, don’’t you think that this might open the possibility of just a TTIP between Britain and the United States? In other words, that it will–it has been one of the arguments, actually, of those who were opposed to Britain leaving the EU, that it will tie Britain even closer to the United States than it was before, and by virtue of the fact that it’’s leaving Europe.

HUDSON: I think just the opposite. I’’ve gotten phone calls today from Britain, and I’’ve been on radio with Britain. The whole feeling is that this makes the TTIP impossible, because you can’’t do a TTIP just with Britain. You have to do it with all of Europe. And this prevents Europe, and I think Britain, too, from making this kind of trade policy. The rejection of Eurozone austerity is, essentially, a rejection of the neoliberal plan that the TTIP is supposed to be the capstone of.

WILPERT: And what do you think this means, then, in general for Europe’’s future? One of the things that–one of the dangers that many perceive is precisely that Europe, as a European Union, is going to fall apart. Do you think that’’s the likely scenario here? Or–.

HUDSON: I watched Marine Le Pen today in France, and you could see from her face that she was overjoyed. She thinks all of a sudden, almost every European interview where the people–there was such unleashing of a feeling of freedom, a feeling of yes, we can do it. When Ireland voted not to join the European Union people just ignored the popular vote. But now it can’’t be ignored anymore.

And I think that the British vote is a catalyst for moves in Spain, Italy, the Five Star movement in Italy, the Podemos in Spain, to say, we are–we have an alternative to Europe. Europe is sort of like the Soviet Union in the ‘30s and ‘40s. There was an argument, is it reformable or not? There is a feeling, and I think it’s correct, that the European Union, the Eurozone, and the euro, is not reformable, as a result of the Lisbon treaties and the other treaties that have created the euro. Europe has to be taken apart in order to be put together not on a right-wing, neoliberal basis, but on a more social basis.

Now, ironically, the parties who call themselves socialists are now moved to the ultra-right, to the neoliberal. The French socialists, the German social democrats. But you’’re having real radical parties arise in Italy, Spain, Portugal, and potentially in Greece, again, that are going to say, well, the key of any government, of any national government, has to be the ability to issue our own money, to run a deficit, spending into the economy to make the economy recover. We cannot recover under the Lisbon agreements, under the Eurozone, where the central bank will only create money to give to banks, not money to spend into the economy, to actually finance new investment and new employment. And we cannot be part of a Eurozone that insists that pensions have to be cut back in order to make the banks whole and save the one percent losing money.

So for the first time you’re having the real left wing in Europe talking about financial issues, not about political philosophy, or the fact that countries are not going to go to war again. Nobody ever believes that France, Germany, and other countries in Europe are going to go to military war again. There is a fear that the countries in Europe may go to war against Russia, pushed by NATO, pushed by adventurism of the U.S. stance towards Russia.

And so all of a sudden the Eurozone that was supposed to be a bulwark of military peace has become belligerent, and even more so if Hillary would win in the United States. And there’’s a feeling we do want peace. That means we have to withdraw from the Eurozone. And essentially, withdrawing from Brussels means withdrawing from NATO and withdrawing from the United States.

So you could say that the vote to withdraw from Europe is, it’s really a vote of the British middle class, the working class, to withdraw from the U.S. neoliberalism that has been running Europe for the last ten years.

WILPERT: Okay. Unfortunately we’ve run out of time, but thanks so much, Michael, for your insight on this. I’m sure we’ll come back to you again, as we always do. So thanks again for joining us.

HUDSON: Good to be here.

WILPERT: And thank you for watching the Real News Network.

(Republished from TRNN by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Economics, Foreign Policy • Tags: Brexit, EU, NATO, Neoliberalism 
Hide 30 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says: • Website

    “So when people talk about the immigration to Europe, the Europeans, the French, the Dutch, the English, they’’re all aware of the fact that this is the fact that Brussels is really NATO, and NATO is really run by Washington…”

    And Washington is really run by Jews and their minion-allies the Homos(and even pedos).

  2. Sean says:

    Another very good one from Hudson, but some confusion on what the acceptable limits of anti immigration are, There is no freedom of speech on the issue. Brits are terrified of objecting to Non European immigrants as such, you get arrested for doing that. Also the competition from Muslims is less direct and has built up slowly.

    Brexit was much less to do with the middle east and more to do with East Europeans, which there are far more of in the UK than is officially admitted. There were already Ukrainians construction workers infiltrating Britain a decade ago. The Poles ect were too many and too fast, and no end in sight.

    • Replies: @Expletive Deleted
    , @helena
  3. @Sean

    Absolutely. It really was about the low-cost labour from NATO/EU’s last round of territorial conquests, from behind the former Iron Curtain, exacerbated by a new flood of less diligent and more criminal types from Romania and Bulgaria after 2007 (NB! before anybody starts, I realise these may not necessarily all have been ethnic Romanians or Bulgars).

    Blair’s people had promised us not more than 12,000 Poles would condescend to move to our scabby little islands, so subsequent promises of “only a few thousand” of the second sort provoked a kind of existential panic, even before the spectre of Turkey and its countless hordes was lobbed in, late in the Neverendum campaign.

    Of the first wave, citizens of the Baltic States, and Lithuanians in particular tended and still tend to appear in the court pages of local rural newspapers with depressing regularity for what, to the hobbit-like locals, were incomprehensibly, unnecessarily violent yet initially petty crimes, often involving alcohol.

    • Replies: @mtn cur
  4. edNels [AKA "geoshmoe"] says:

    I mean look, we were here before they came.. we have endoured to live with this peculiar strange thing… the industry in the SouthBay…. The monster that now devoursall ofSan Francisco… and sends the weirds upto Sonoma… with their gaddamed tattood bodies queer.

    OK, but the real point is: You might just consider.. the amount of money… the huge monstrous money machine, that kills all and they move into SF, and nobody who lived there can anymore

    Funny Money… from Zero intrest, It is no problem, money is funny… they print what they need.. we on the other hand work our gaddamned asses off to get a couple a bucks, theses cocksuckers … did i misspellthat? just get the mfr money.

    • Replies: @mtn cur
  5. Rehmat says:

    British-Pakistani intellectual, writer and journalist, Tariq Ali, in an interview on Friday said that the majority of British voters gave the EU “a big kick in its backside,” explaining that the majority of working class “leave” voters felt that overall the EU did not benefit them, was undemocratic and an organization for the rich and the banks.

    He also said that White and anti-Muslim “leave” supporters used xenophobia and racism to attack refugees and migrants.

    As for as Libya is concerned it was destroyed for the IMF and Israel.

    A March 27, 2011, intelligence brief, Sidney Stone Blumenthal, the Jewish aid to her husband, former president Bill Clinton of Monica Lewinsky fame, and long-time Hillary’s confident shows her dirty fingers behind the destruction of Africa’s most rich and liberal Muslim-majority Libyan nation and the brutal murder of its leader Muammar Qaddafi.

    During the world powers negotiations in Istanbul in 2012, according to Wikileaks, US secretary of state (2009-2013) Hillary Clinton sent an e-mail, saying: “The best way to help Israel deal with Iran’s growing nuclear capability is to help the people of Syria overthrow the regime of Bashar Assad.”

    The email makes it clear that it has been US policy from the very beginning to violently overthrow the Syrian government—and specifically to do this because it is in Israel’s interests.

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  6. Ivan K. says:

    Michael Hudson:

    almost all the Europeans know where the immigrants are coming from. And the ones that they’re talking about are from the Near East. And they’’re aware of the fact that most of the immigrants are coming as a result of the NATO policies ….

    Are they really?

    So you could say that the vote to withdraw from Europe is, it’s really a vote of the British middle class, the working class, to withdraw from the U.S. neoliberalism that has been running Europe for the last ten years.


  7. “…the majority of working class “leave” voters felt that overall the EU did not benefit them, was undemocratic and an organization for the rich and the banks.”

    And they would be correct. Why is that principle so hard for some folks to see? It’s a perennial problem; in fact, it may be THE perennial problem.

  8. RodW says:

    I agree with the geopolitical analysis here, but I see no evidence that the English public sees it in the same light at all. Which UK media frames the issue in terms of NATO’s depredations being responsible for the UK’s plight?

  9. mtn cur says:

    Too true I fear. I literally worked in human and industrial waste, thinking that I was protecting the health of my neighbors and the areas where they hunt and fish, which I was, but also, protecting the financial health of the vampire class so they can upgrade from a house boat with a hot tub to a yacht with a pool.

  10. mtn cur says:
    @Expletive Deleted

    The elites, both right and left don’t care to cherry pick immigrants, thinking they are safe in their gated communities and resorts, while “everyman,” woman and child on the streets, as well as the poor bloody cops serve as buffer zones between them and the pelting pots of disorder. If they don’t wake up and start helping to clean up the mess, they will find their islands of urbanity and yacht clubs are the same kind of trap as Guadacanal was for the Japanese.

  11. @Rehmat

    The Rehmat boss really needs to curb the unscrupulous young hotheads who peddle lies about Hillary Clinton sending that email. After all it is bound to be checked and it is easy to discover that it is merely an unclassified document that there is some suggestion was filched from HC’s email archive for Wikileaks. And that is probably a fraudulent concoction because the document is dated long after she ceased to be Secretary of State.

    Don’t you pay your boys enough to do a proper job for you or are they drunk or stupid – or perhaps think others are stupid?

    • Replies: @Rehmat
    , @KA
  12. helena says:

    There were a few strands to Brexit – Lincolnshire is particularly upset by EE agricultural workers being numerous and rowdy. Areas in proximity to Islam are upset by that. Industrial communities in northeast and wales are still upset since the days of thatcher and then on top of that there were many middle class, middle england, many in business, who weren’t going to give up sovereignty without a fight. The issue is sovereignty. The referendum rebels (petition) and Corbyn’s young enthusiasts are multi-background young adults who think governments operate the same way as social media and can’t understand why their voices go unheard even thought they didn’t go to a polling station.

    • Replies: @Sean
  13. How can Hudson not understand that countries that run persistent deficits fo no favours to the humble saving classes?

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

    Have the pro-EU Brits just move to EU… or Africa or the Middle East since that is what EU is turning into.

    They don’t have to stay in the UK if they prefer the EU or the World.

    Funny that those who voted ‘Leave’ want to remain in Britain, whereas those who voted ‘Remain’ would do better to leave Britain.

  15. Rehmat says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    You proves Rabbi Davod Weiss’ point – “What Israeli Habara needs is some dumb Jews to badmouth people who exposes Zionist lies.”

    I can understand your love for Clinton family due to one of your tribal sister Monica Lewinsky performing oral sex on Bill Clinton in the White House.

    On October 14, 2014 Professor Susannah Haschel (Jewish Studies, Dartmouth College) again defended Bill Clinton-Monica Lewinsky sex affair based on Jewish law at The Jewish Week.

    One of 10,000 documents released from the Clinton Presidential Library on Friday last week, one belongs to Haschel, then senior aide to Sen. Hillary Clinton who submitted to the White House: a Talmudic interpretation proving president Bill Clinton was not guilty of adultery.

    “From the perspective of Jewish history, we have to ask how can Jews condemn President Clinton’s behavior as immoral, when we exalt King David? King David had Batsheva’s husband, Uriah, murdered. While David was condemned and punished, he was never thrown off the throne of Israel. On the contrary, he is exalted in our Jewish memory as the unifier of Israel,” Haschel wrote in 1999.

    “According to classical Jewish law, President Clinton did not commit adultery; adultery is defined as a married man having intercourse with a married woman, and Monica Lewinsky is single. At worst, President Clinton is guilty of the common sin of onanism (masturbation), a sin that probably afflicts the consciences of most Jewish men at one time or another,” said the Jan. 27, 1999, e­mail that ended up with White House adviser and political fixer Sidney Blumenthal (father of the ‘self-hating’ US journalist Max Blumenthal).

    Haschel’s interpretation of Jewish law, later helped several American lawmakers, such as, Sen. John Ensign of Nevada who confessed to an extramarital affair with a female campaign staffer married to one of his top Senate staffers……

    • Replies: @Wizard of Oz
  16. Priss Factor [AKA "Anonymny"] says: • Website

    Amazingly, the super-financial capitalist class and the so-called Left are agreed on Bremain.

    I guess Open Borders serves the interests of both the super-rich and super-PC.

  17. Outwest says:

    Yankee, come home! I think we have caused more than enough trouble for the world (and ourselves).

  18. @Rehmat

    Hey boss do try and stop the mad and the seriously stupid boys replying to WoOz: it makes Canadian Muslims look bad. Start by explaining what it means to be responsive and relevant.

    • Replies: @Rehmat
  19. “… you have Geert Wilders, the leader of the Dutch nationalists, saying, we want Holland to have its own central bank. We want to be in charge of our own money. ”

    The average native Dutch person nowadays would more likely have the fate of Theo van Gogh on the eve of what might have been his election in mind (shot, stabbed, and left dead in the street with a note saying who would be next). Brexit represents the people saying, “Enough!” Shame that pols like BoJo aren’t willing to dare to utter the truth.

  20. Sean says:

    If it was a mix of factors Bradford with the scandal there would have had a higher anti remain vote. The correlation is quite clearly with the presence of East Europeans, who have substantially displaced the English working class in industries such as construction and agriculture that cannot be outsourced. The outsourcable such as manufactiring are long gon.

    The Muslims in Britain are not the focus of articulated anti-immigration feeling, people don’t dare. You get arrested in Britain for objecting to Muslims as such (including many ones from Turkey). A UK Trump would be put in jail. Bradford has thousands of Roma children in it’s schools. East European immigrants were Christian and white so people were not scared of discussing them.

    Corbyn’s predecessors Brown and Blair, the PMs of Labour governments, had everything to do with the Brexit vote through the rolling tsunami of East European workers they unleashed.The Conservatives put known property bubble specialist Mark Carney in charge of the bank of England, and not long ago the gov was forced to o ban contractors from recruiting en mass from East Europe ect for British construction jobs thet were not even being advertised in Britain. It was too much, far too quickly, and showed signs of gathering pace with the inexorable enlargement of the EU into the east. Even a decade ago, Ukrainians were not unheard of on British building sites.

    I have a feeling that getting out of the EU, which as Hudson pertinently mentions is the military wing of Nato, will prevent this. The EU’s search for ultimate security is diving itEast, where sooner of later it will end up in a war with Russia.

    • Replies: @helena
  21. Rehmat says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Hey moron, don’t you know there are four million who hate Jews while Canada’s total Muslim population is only one million.

    In July 2014, B’nai B’rith put a pull-page advertisement in Sir Conrad Black (Canada-UK Jewish dual citizen) owned Canada’s top anti-Muslim newspaper National Post, claiming that 4 million Canadians are afflicted with anti-Semite disease…..

  22. When and where did Black convert to Judaism?

    More evidence of Rehmat as troll – the real hasbara jokester.

  23. jfr says:

    Immigration is a result of criminal western powers that steal riches from other countries by installing puppet regimes in these countries. Immigration is payback from God for crimes committed by these so called civilized nations.

  24. KA says:
    @Wizard of Oz

    Actually it is much worse than it looks It was not Clinton’s idea It was from Rubin.

    ] It is rare for a succinct foreign policy platform paper to so fully encapsulate a candidate’s thinking process. A policy paper sent to Hillary Clinton, available on WikiLeaks, lays out the Democratic front-runner’s strategy as an architect of US intervention in Syria, shows the flawed reasoning that beget the scheme. Perhaps most importantly, the document shows utter blindness to the huge problems that the war ultimately led to.

    Clinton Email Shows US Sought Syria Regime Change for Israel’s Sake
    Insisted Russia Wouldn’t Dare Interfere
    by Jason Ditz, March 21, 2016

    As with so many US wars in the Middle East, it all starts with Israel, and saw the US imposing regime change in Syria as primarily about benefiting Israel and spiting Iran, a position that closely mirrors that of several Israeli officials.

    The paper’s ideal was that the US would impose regime change by supplying arms, but without US troops, and that Russia wouldn’t dare oppose America (noting Russia did nothing during Kosovo), that the new US-backed Syrian government would abandon ties with Iran, turn against Hezbollah, and potentially negotiate a peace settlement with Israel, while the rest of the Arab world cheers America “as fighting for their people.”

    There are myriad flaws in this reasoning, and in hindsight very few of the paper’s predictions came to pass, from her declaration that the Iran nuclear talks wouldn’t lead to a deal, that Russia wouldn’t defend the Assad government from US-backed rebels, that US pledges of arms would lead to more defections from the Syrian military, etc.

    Perhaps the most glaring mistakes was the failure to acknowledge even to the prospect of Islamist groups getting involved. Five years into the civil war, US-backed rebels are still comparatively ineffectual, despite huge weapons shipments, and ISIS and other Islamist groups control more than half of the country.

    The position seems to be wrong at nearly every turn, with one correct analysis being the fairly trite observation that Israel wants to retain a nuclear monopoly in the Middle East, without offering any plausible reason for why the US should commit forces to supporting of this objective

    While the paper reveals Clinton’s State Department’s interventionist leanings, it may also be elucidative regarding interventionist mentality in general, showing how quickly the notion of a “low cost” war becomes official policy, and that policymakers are ultimately blind not just to the reality on the ground, but also to the bigger risks of their schemes.

    Correction: A previous version of this story falsely attributed the authorship of the paper to then-Secretary Clinton, because the email was an attachment sent by her to a State Department employee. The original author, however, appears to be James Rubin, and Clinton was forwarding the attachment. ]

  25. KA says:

    “With his own eyes on history, Robert Gates said that he was about to resign over this NATO intervention and war in Libya.—-

    This was clear double talk because it was the Central Intelligence Agency under General Petraeus as we learnt from the biography by Paula Broadwell who had been recruiting Islamists from Eastern Libya to fight in Syria.”

    Horace G. Campbell, a veteran Pan Africanist is a Professor of African American Studies and Political Science at Syracuse University.

  26. helena says:

    East Europeans are not everywhere in Engl+Wales.

    “East European immigrants were Christian and white so people were not scared of discussing them. ”

    Yes but the ballot is private.

    “The correlation is quite clearly with the presence of East Europeans”

    The strongest correlation maybe but not the only correlation. Could the anti-EE vote have swung Brexit? With such a small margin it’s unlikely.

    Plus, in areas of [industrial decline + EE] e.g. northeast, a Brexit vote ‘because of EE’ masks the reality that those areas were sold out wholesale by previous governments, but the people in those areas are not PPE majors and so used whatever lever they had to hand.

    • Replies: @Sean
  27. Sean says:

    I don’t know if that is true, but the point is that you cannot tell people about their own town where they live. The East Europeans are everywhere I can assure you, I live in Scotland, near where Trump opening a resort, and you encounter them in any construction crew and every hotel. The wives and children are on every main street. They are edging out the British working class and being used to hold down wages in the already not very high wage service, construction and agriculture jobs of deindustrialised Britain (it really has been deindustrialised). The English Scots Irish and Welsh.are not protesting about Muslims, that may be cognitive dissonance, with the real motive being simple fear of the authorities as happened in Bradford (and elsewhere) for decades, but the results of this referendum make it pretty obvious that East Europeans made people think a change in immigration policy was necessary, but the anti racism machinery was not working to keep everyone quiet about it.

    • Replies: @helena
  28. helena says:

    “but the anti racism machinery was not working to keep everyone quiet about it.”

    Opposing immigration from East Europe isn’t racist.

    Watching Wimbledon (and meeting lots of EEs in e-day life) it is striking just how fit they are. They are on the rise no doubt. They are a fit healthy population with stable supportive extended family backgrounds and inheritance laws that mean they don’t have to fret over the future – they can relax into low paid work in the UK knowing that they can retire to reasonably large plots of stunning rural land – the most recent ‘noir’ series is set in Poland – man, they have got some land over there, beautiful forests. and I know it’s the same in Romania and other EE countries. Good luck to them. But it seems to show, the loss in fitness and beauty that comes from mixing n.euros/indo-euros with other ethnic groups, even other ‘white’ groups.

  29. But it seems to show, the loss in fitness and beauty that comes from mixing n.euros/indo-euros with other ethnic groups, even other ‘white’ groups.

    Bit of a non-sequitur, but I’ll put it down to the apparently illimitable ignorance and nervous psychological projection that the rest of the world seems to have about the Islands of Britain.

    Carrick and Kyle, where Sean seems to be, is probably the yogurty-whitest, least-immigrant-intruded area in Europe, outside of Donegal or Deepest Herefordshire. The land is glorious (although still under the heavy post-feudal, tax-havened hand of Buccleuch, the Montgomeries and the like, and a bit damp).

    The crucial bit is welfare and wage and currency arbitrage. Why can nobody understand this?

    No-one will be happier than us working-class Brexiters if GPB goes in the toilet.
    Hardly going to affect the price of our Dordogne gîtes and Tuscan villae is it? Can’t even afford a weekend in a caravan with a slab of Stellas, at Scunthorpe, us. Food prices are about 8% cheaper outside the EU’s anti-African, anti-American, anti-Antipodean C.A.P. tariff fortress.

    Unfortunately it doesn’t look that way, if treasury gilts since June 24th are any guide. Sodding thing is relentlessly refusing to be reduced to toilet paper, therefore the tsunami of “Dreamers” is only set to increase, as the Eurozone progressively (see what I did there?) collapses. Why oh why aren’t our “lazy” British unemployed fleeing for the bountiful, fully-employed, incorruptible shores and limitless fully-funded welfare possibilities of say, Greece, Andalucia, Silesia or Romania?
    Hint: you can’t get a quart into a pint (0.568 litres, plus VAT) pot.

    Like the ancient Roman (technically, the Sibyl of Cumae, and therefore not necessarily a Latian at that assumed (mythical) date; this end of the Bay of Naples, with all the weird tunnels, caves and fumaroles etc.), I see the River Tiber foaming …

    yrs. humbly,
    an Uneducated Racist Northern Prole &c. &c.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Personal attacks and gratuitous insults are not acceptable and this author will ban such commenters.

 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
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Michael Hudson Comments via RSS