Plenty of cults exist - every cult has its 'religious dogma', its idols, its 'prophets', its 'science', its 'proof' and its intolerant liturgy of demands. Cults everywhere: Corona, 'The Science' or Scientism, Islam, the State, the cult of Gender Fascism, Marxism, Darwin and Evolution, Globaloneywarming, Changing Climate, Abortion...
Tempus Fugit Memento Mori - Time Flies Remember Death
John Robson wrote an excellent article in the Western Standard’s last issue on Britain and Tony Blair. Calling Blair a stalwart in the war on terror, and a far sighted statesman who understands the threat of fascist Islam abroad, Robson states that paradoxically, Blair is weak on terror at home; has increased taxation by 25 %; and presided over a huge ramp up in public spending whilst service levels have declined. Blair and Britain truly are paradoxes but the British ‘bridge’ between the New and Old worlds is vital to maintain. It remains to be seen as Robson states, if the British have the will to keep their place amongst the beacons of the civilised world, or will convert their island into a multi-cult base of terror cells and sensitive socialists.
A key to the transatlantic partnership that supposedly binds together the ‘West’ is of course Britain. Britain is unique in that it is both European but decidedly Anglo Saxon. It is the bridge between the US and the Continent. Importantly Britain is central to US international policy. It is in American foreign policy interests that the British remain firmly in the Anglo-Saxon camp, even as they integrate their economy further with that of the European Union. Rebuilding Post War Iraq and Afghanistan will aid in furthering such cross Atlantic ties. The coalition of the willing was proven correct morally and militarily on invading Iraq and disposing of an odious threat to Western security and economic interests. The British proved that by moving 40.000 troops and plenty of military hardware quickly to the Gulf to help depose Hussein it possesses an impressive military projection. Its prestige stands high in the world, but in the future pressing issues may cause a rift or at least disagreements with its US ally.
There are two pressing issues in Britain. The first is the multi-cult socialist-soup of a society that spawns relativism, hatred of British history and institutions and encourages radical Islam. Sectors of Britain want the country to remain British and are away that its history, institutions and commitment to freedom are essential in a world beset by fascist and national militarist states and groups. There is sadly however, according to Melanie Philips in her great book ‘Londonistan’, [and in other works by knowledgeable analysts], a majority of Brits that hate their own history; despise Israel and America and want to move Britain further to the left to mimic the so-called European progressive socialism that is afflicting a Continent of under-achievers and appeasers. Blair and the Labour party have done nothing to counter or reduce this group’s grip on society.
The second most pressing issue facing the Brits is whether or not Britain should join the Euro. Though the British have for the time being rejected joining the Euro club for sound economic reasons many British politicians still make the claim that at some point it would be in British interests to join the European Currency Union if certain economic criteria are met. Joining the Euro has deep economic and political consequences and should not be considered solely in relation to Britain’s growing trade integration within an enlarged EU. Foreign policy, military policy, sovereignty, tax and immigration issues and domestic security would be handed over in part if not in whole to Brussels.
In the short term, Britain must try to balance the supposed interest of its ruling Labour Party in a European Defence Force, with the demands of NATO. An EDF might be the first step in the EU’s march to military maturity, but it is not clear if it would aid, supplant or work alongside NATO and the Americans, nor are funding, troop deployments and military objectives of such a force clear. Third the British also have important international relations objectives to contemplate. How should they mediate between the vastly different European and American positions on foreign policy affairs? How can Britain persuade America that the United Nations still has some significance and should be apart not only of rebuilding Iraq but also in future efforts to stabilise nations and regions of trouble?
For instance many in Britain descry Blair’s support of the US in the war on terror and in Gulf War II, likening Blair to a trained American poodle. Nationalists deride British support for the Americans as a symptom of post-imperialist nostalgia and conceit. Many in the UK were against the war in Iraq and are fearful that Britain might eschew the UNO and further integration with the EU. Given these pressures it appears probable that the British will maintain a middle ground between the US and the UNO and Europe. The British will support internationalism to a point, but when national interests are threatened it would be expected that given British military capability, it would choose to side with the Americans in order to defuse international threats such as terrorism.
The debate over joining the Euro is potentially the most difficult and vexing and would be the most far reaching impacting not only domestic economics but also foreign affairs. In principle, Britain should benefit from being part of a single-currency area in which exchange-rate risk for 50 % of the country's trade is removed. In general terms more open trade should entail more competition, which should conspire to drive up productivity. Companies would also have secure access to the Euro area's 300m people without exchange rate risk. Importantly in the recent past it appears that the British economy is starting to converge with that of the euro-zone’s. Short-term interest rates are only one percentage point higher in Britain than in the Euro zone [vs. 4 % in 1998]. As well the two economies have roughly the same margin of spare capacity.
But there are risks in joining the Euro. First, monetary union will necessarily and logically be extended into some sort of fiscal centralisation. In this scenario fiscal transfer’s between have and have not countries might become entrenched. Britain as a ‘have’ country could find itself transferring funds to support French and German social security, health and pension schemes that are facing financial bankruptcy due to their pyramidal structure. Being locked into the Euro would force the British to bail out have not countries – the logic being that if they don’t the currency will tumble and its value will be eroded leading to an erratic external exchange rate with the U$ and Yen. This would slow down FDI, disrupt trade, rattle investor confidence, and engender economic stagnation and damage British finances.
Such a scenario is not that fantastic especially if the EU fails to make the economic reforms that are sorely needed. Further, even if Britain’s economy appears in the short term to be converging in some sense with the Continent’s, Britain would not necessarily benefit from having its interest rates set by the ECB. If housing prices, which have been rising far faster than those in the rest of Europe, were to crash, Britain would then need lower interest rates than in the euro area to stimulate domestic demand and shore up its economy. Such flexibility would be impossible under a Euro regime.
As well Britain is growing faster than mainland Europe. The ECB has been slower to cut interest rates than the Bank of England and has pursued an excessively tight monetary policy the opposite of what many experts feel is needed to stimulate the economy. Many analysts feel that the stability pact, under which countries are supposed to try to balance their budgets and can face fines if deficits exceed 3% of GDP, forces countries to tighten fiscal policy instead of easing it to help their economies. Britain, which has low public debts but needs to borrow to rebuild its infrastructure, could find its freedom to do so constrained by this fiscal straitjacket. Thus the stability pact could force Britain to raise taxes further if Britain joined the euro, not a politically palatable alternative for politicians seeking votes.
On balance given the ties of the British economy to the US economy and given the dangers inherent in the onwards march of Brussels and its program of ‘centralisation’ Britain should eschew the Euro. However if they do join then integration with the Continent will not only change the financial independence of Britain, it will verily constrain its foreign policy and military choice as well forcing the British to heed the political wishes of the Continent. Such a decision would affect its relationship with the USA and arrest Britain’s more liberal economic agenda and more militant military projection.
Let’s then hope that the Brits forget about Europe and joining the Euro – even though Blair is pushing hard behind the scenes to further integrate Britain into Europe. What then about domestic reforms; limiting the welfare state; and coming to grips with the failure of the multi-cult club and the rise of fascist British based Islam? No politician in Britain, including Blair, has seriously proposed any set of measures to recalibrate domestic politics. Until this happens the Brits appear headed towards oblivion. Their society will be rendered weak and divided, with Islam still receiving state funding for schools and mosques, and the multi-cult club loudly proclaiming its hatred of all things Anglo-Saxon. Britain will then no longer be a bridge between the New and Old worlds, but just another tired and failed socialist experiment.
It would be a disaster for civilisation if this happened. Where the hell is the next Churchill?
