For over 100 years, under Pax Britannica (British Peace), the world flourished and was primarily peaceful. The global economy grew and spawned the Industrial Revolution. At the time, London was hub of the world, with the largest population, strongest economic growth, inspirational ideas and the birth of what is now known as fair and free-trade markets.
Just after the Industrial Boom, with the American development (and later use) of WMD's and Germany's nationalism ignited two consecutive world wars, in an attempt to strip England of its sovereignty, cause for the later creation of the EU and forced Russia, Brazil and China into communist states. What followed has been nearly 100 years of unprecedented global chaos, ranging from economics to social upheavals to near environment collapse.
Yesterday, the world saw just how strong and still influential Britain is. The people stood up against overwhelming odds of 27 other nations plus Western influence and reclaimed their sovereignty. The ripples in the pond are now many and growing stronger.
I believe that this event was both necessary and timely. In cooperation with the BRICS and other nations, England can once again bring order and stability to the planet.
In the last 24 hours alone we have seen many countries rally in support of England and her people's decision. And while the pains of change hurt, we can only hope the two who are resistant to this amazing event - America and Germany- will change their position and allow the next 100 years, at least, to see a better, safer, cleaner, more prosperous, dignified and peaceful world.
Today is a new day. A new era has begun - Pax Britannica 2.0
I hope you are right. Although by bringing 'peace' as you put it Britain subjugated entire populations to second class citizen status.
I'm afraid I see this as foreboding. Others will follow suit and soon, Europe will be what it once was. Will they pull us all into yet another World War? Time will tell.
Economists and geo-political types from all over the world are saying that what the EU is and is becoming is a giant threat to Russia. The EU being in existence just the way it is now is going to lead to a giant war with Russia, so they think breaking up the EU is going to lead to less wars. Of course, the bureaucrats are fear mongering as they have for the past ten years. They want that super state lording over everyone. The EU owns the media so much of what the public is hearing is a false negative narrative, and they just do not report about many things that happen.
Britain and Germany were the two pillars that held the EU. Cameron is stepping down. Merkel hasn't made a statement yet, but I'm sure she will in the days to come.
Russia may well see the EU as a threat but it is European countries who plunged us into 2 world wars. Not Russia.
I know. My point was that even though they may think Russia sees the EU as a threat doesn't mean Russia will act on that fear. Europe has historically been over bearing, imperialistic and has shown, if not a disdain for other cultures; a tendency to look down on other cultures as inferior to their own. A United Europe has never struck me as a threat. Divided? I hope they don't fall back into old behavior patterns.
Excellent points all ! AND , it goes to show everyone the agenda of America's leadership right now !
Obama advised against it , Hillary did the same , the great" moron " Trump is the only one to predict and promote the exit ! What's that tell you all?
When nearly 50% of a population are forced to suffer the consequences of a decision made by the other 50%, I think that is a sign of bad things to come. Scotland has already said it intends to remain in the EU, either with or without England. Northern Ireland is talking about separation too. It was the United part of the UK that made it strong. Anger and disillusionment has caused the English to commit an act of self-harm, and in doing so the union that was once the hallmark of British strength is now on the brink of falling apart. It's the equivalent of someone cutting off their hand to teach their arm a lesson. Very sad to see.
If one makes a decision, and the results of that decision is disillusionment, wasn't it a bad decision to make?
I don't know or understand what went "wrong" in the EU/UK connection, but apparently a great many Brits were unhappy with the results. Ending it may well have been the proper thing to do. That nearly half the country doesn't agree doesn't make it wrong Tirelesstraveler said it best - the EU has been in a decline, propped up by the UK and a handful of others.
Labor is the socialist collectivest party. Remain didn't work because basically all the working class white people voted to leave. In the labor areas is where there are poor working class white people, who's lives have been eviscerated by things like immigration. They have been completely ignored by Westminister, and cute off from having a steak in the country, and they massively voted for Leave. It was almost like an act of God.
Brexit is the act of self-harm. The breaking up of the UK is just another sad consequence of that. People were disillusioned with politics and politicians, and concerned about various social issues like immigration. Some opportunists with an anti-EU agenda blamed everything on membership of the EU, misinforming, and misleading people in the process. The result was that a referendum about EU membership became a referendum on immigration etc. and evidently people voted on the basis of that false narrative. It's become clear the people leading the leave campaign were trying to further their own careers. They are all wealthy members of the upper class establishment, who are unlikely to be affected by the economic consequences of Brexit. Unlike the people who voted for Brexit who are mostly working class and will suffer the brunt of the economic downturn it will inevitably lead to. In short: people were mislead and misinformed on a subject of massive political importance, for the personal gain of a few people in the establishment who wanted to wrestle political power from another part of the establishment.
The upper middle class voted to Remain, they are snobs. They were all celebrating prematurely on social media. The VOTE didn't take a sharp upward turn until the working class poor people all got off work and went to vote. Come hell or high water they were going to go vote.
But the people leading the leave campaign were mostly upper-class members of the establishment (the former mayor of London Boris Johnson went to Eton for example). Many of the campaign leaders are also multimillionaires who are unlikely to be affected by the economic fallout of leaving the EU. So this was a power struggle between two different parts of the establishment who used ordinary people as pawns, for their own political ends. That's why it's misleading to say it is a triumph for ordinary working people over the establishment. It wasn't. Regardless of which side won the referendum, the establishment remains firmly in control. In the same way that regardless of which side wins the election, Wall St. remains firmly in control. Same thing.
Of the 120B lost in the market [FTSE] Friday, 80% was from British Millionaires & Billionaires - nearly all of whom voted Leave. Why would they vote so, knowing they had much to lose, that their businesses - and those employed by said businesses - could face catastrophe? The answer is plain and simple, they see a better future. And they're correct. The world is reeling from this event, yet to the dismay of all Britain is atop the pile and in a very short time will be, if the term fits, the new Switzerland. We have the mind, means, money and members (citizens) to do it. And the support of BRICS, EEU, nearly half of Africa, Australia, Asia, South America - even Canada. Where is -if any- the real downside? The UK government is about to change dramatically for the better. The people can once again decide what their country will do, versus the EU/American style of democracy or rather bureaucracy.
If the worst of this is needing a travel or work visa or new passport, I'll take it with eyes wide open.
So, they are not just playing FTSE (footsie). They know the market.
That's interesting, I read that at least 1200 business leaders backed the 'remain' campaign, and at least 50 leaders of FTSE 100 companies*. Do you have a reliable source?
There is a difference between what people want their country to do, and what a country can afford to do. The UK cannot afford to be excluded from the single EU market, which accounts for 48% of its export revenue. While such an exclusion would hurt the EU too (because the UK imports more from the EU than it exports to it), it would hurt the UK much more because of the difference in scale of the economies involved, i.e. the economies of 27 EU countries, compared to the UK (minus Scotland).
The EU simply does not need trade with the UK as much as the UK needs trade with the EU. It's almost certain that the cost of access to the single market for the UK will be the acceptance of the free movement of goods and labor, compliance with EU rules, and a percentage of EU trade profits, as is the case with non EU countries like Norway. The former foreign minister of Norway said:
"Those campaigning for Britain to leave the EU and choose the Norwegian way can hence correctly claim that a country can retain access to the single market from outside the EU. What is normally not said, however, is that this also means retaining all the EU’s product standards, financial regulations, employment regulations, and substantial contributions to the EU budget. A Britain choosing this track would, in other words, keep paying, it would be “run by Brussels”, and it would remain committed to the four freedoms, including free movement."**
It's a pipe dream to expect the EU to give the UK more favorable terms than they have Norway or any other non-EU country. That would be political suicide for the EU.
If the UK can replace the EU as a market for half its exports, then all power to them. But it's more likely they will have to compromise on the "control" they believe they have won back, for the sake of being able to keep the lights on. When that happens, I think a lot of the people who voted to leave will be left wondering exactly what they voted for.
*http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 … endum-vote
**https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr … gian-model
Britain will not be the sole nation asserting its right to political self determination, independent of the European Parliament and the "super state" emerging in Brussels. Italy, Denmark and Netherlands have all expressed a desire to exit the EU. I expect talk to commence in the Vilnius Eleven countries about the direction EU immigration policies are taking the continent and openly resisting them. If countries like Estonia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and Poland rebuff the foolish policies espoused by Merkel, I expect a dissolution of the EU in short order.
The agents of doom and gloom are more like agents of a Hegemonic European government in Brussels but dancing to a tune played by Germany. Britain's economy has been growing faster than the rest of the EU and is second only to Germany's in size - and that gap is shrinking. I expect that the end of the EU will mean a return to individual country currencies, that will benefit Italy, and a return of the European/Common Market free trade zone - without the constant meddling of Brussels.
I also suspect that the military power of Europe is likely to shift eastward as Poland continues to assert itself as the defender of Europe against the Muslim invasion from the collapsing Middle East - a role they have played before.
Globalist Hillary Clinton is heavily donated to by Wall Street corporations, they and foreign interests own her. Wall Street reform will only happen if Trump becomes president, he will begin by replacing Janet Yellen the Chair of the Board of the Federal Reserve, which also donated to Clinton. They are scared of Trump because he is a nationalist, a reformer and he will start at the top.
Much of the northern hemisphere is going into a adepression/recession Global Tyranny world order anyways.
We can all be slaves to the Globalist order or have power for the people for individual freedom at last. BREXIT is the best thing by far since US gay marriage. Also, let my pot plant grower go.
Do you find that competition between political states to be valuable then, rather than cooperation inside one state?
For instance, California has diverted nearly all of the Colorado River, leaving Southern Arizona and Mexico without that valuable resource. While Arizona and California have cooperated in sharing the resource, Mexico is just out of luck. Were California and Arizona different countries, California would be wasteland, without it's millions of people. The oil cartels of the middle east come to mind as well - the oil shortages of the 70's were not pretty as one country held another hostage over the price of it's resources.
Do not large, even global, political entities have some pluses?
The economic bubble is going to pop and when it does, the left is going to blame it on Brexit, if anything happens they will wrongly put the blame on Brexit. The EU is completely anti-democratic, they are snakes, and they will pull any kind of dirty trick imaginable. When there is another terrorist attack in Europe, they will blame Brexit, not Islam. Kind of like Obama blaming guns or climate change, not Islam, when a terrorist attack happens.
The banksters told Iceland they would collaspe. Now they are one of the happiest countries in the World.
Hope UK can handle the wrath of.Zionist
George Carlin says that Iceland has the happiest people on earth, (lol) I love that guy. Its because Iceland broke free of their owners / corrupt corporate banksters. Millionaires are moving to places like Iceland, they are doing great. Its a free and independent nation.
I would move there before I would move to South America.
I see it as the opposite. I think the more we cling to narrow-minded nationalist ideals, the less progress we'll make as a species. Why should someone born in France care less about a homeless person born in Germany, than a homeless person born in France? Why should a person born in Europe care less about a homeless person born in Syria, than a homeless person born in Europe? Why should someone born in the US care less about a homeless person born in Mexico, than a homeless person born in the US? The idea that we should care less/more about people based on the set of imaginary lines they were born within on a map, is nonsensical to me.
For me, the EU represents an acknowledgment of essential common nature. It represents the idea that even though people call themselves French, Italian, Spanish etc. and wave different pieces of multicolored cloth they call flags, they are essentially the same in nature, and they are unified by that similarity. To me, organisations like the EU and the UN represent our species' first imperfect, faltering steps towards unity. That's important because I think recognition of human similarity, is a prerequisite for recognition of human equality, which in turn is a prerequisite for greater social harmony. I don't believe that can be achieved as long as we see people as qualitatively different, based on what lines they were born within on a map.
I am not surprised by a British exit from the EU. They were never fully committed for the reasons you have explained. Through out the history of England(and later the UK) it has acted as a check on the power of continental Europe. It often acted to keep Germany/Prussia/Holy Roman Empire or France from hegemonic power. Britain has a very different and more independent political history than most of Europe. After all Magna Carta would never have been tolerated anywhere in "Divine Right of Kings" Europe. It is this history of political liberty that gave rise to the American Revolution and the deeply rooted rights that Britons so valued throughout their history.
I am not so sure that an independent Britain equals a return of imperial ambition, but it certainly means a stronger Britain and, inevitably, a return to something resembling the more stable and prosperous Common Market.
The EU has been in decline for years. They have Greece, Spain, and Portugal that are economic wrecks. I returned last month after 4 weeks in Spain, France and England. I am convinced if the Camino de Santigo did not go through northern Spain and if not for the other touristy beach cities , Spain would be in far worse condition.
When we got to London, we stepped into another world. It is thriving and exciting. The pound only lost value last week because of the establishment bewilderment.
If I may,
Russia does not see the EU as a threat, but rather a deterrent. An American and German sympathizer. Had it not been for sanctions against a now Federation of Russia, their economy would be stronger than the States and much of Europe combined. Furthermore, the Russian Federation has sought out relations with Britain, despite her oppression, seeing excellent potential. And rightly so.
The West and it's NATO cohorts, under guise of the EU, have sought to continue suppression of Russian sovereignty as equally British sovereignty. It was their force that pushed both into economic and social discord. Given the chance, both nations would gladly cooperate to the benefit of both - and others beyond their shores. The real question is: why are America and Germany so afraid of both. The answer is quite clear.
If it helps, this video explains so well why the exit makes sense. Democracy, sovereignty, industry and more. PS, the part about the toaster nearly made me pee: Brexit, The Movie - published 21 May 2016
Are liberals so intent on sharing in the wealth of all others to them that they are willing to forfeit sovereignty for self ? Read the American constitution , it dictates , for one , that our federal government and president has the duty to protect the nation from foreign influences .
That's why I say Obama should be impeached.
Another word for "Pax Britannica" was Colonial Subjugation. I tend to side more with Gandhi than Queen Victoria as to how "peaceful" things were.
by My Esoteric 21 months ago
In both the Federalist Papers AND the Constitutional Convention, it is extremely clear the distaste most of those involved in creating today's America had for democracy, which they saw as mob rule which allows "emotion" rather than "reason" to drive important decisions.Friday's...
by rhamson 2 years ago
With a huge turnout and in the wake of a controversial killing of a MP the UK people voted to leave the EU. Many cited the control of its' borders as the main reason. A handful of other members are also considering a similar direction. Can the US learn anything from this or are we just terminally...
by days leaper 2 years ago
Just wondered what You think of o Barmy poking his nose in.Does it change anything? Do we have a coal or steel industry left anyway?Who is the biggest beneficary of this so called block. (Reminds me of the communist block of old russia. I wonder what those countries would prefer?)And what do we get...
by Bentley Life 8 years ago
in case of war what side would china take?
by alexandriaruthk 5 years ago
Is Russia still a threat to the US? Why or why not?After the cold war and the downfall of Russia, can we consider Russia as a force to contend with in this present time? What country poses a bigger threat? You can answer in terms of economic or military force?
by Missing Link 5 years ago
Do you believe the sovereignty of the United States is being eroded - diminished?I see my beloved country, the United States, eroding and being diminished. What disgusts me the most is that some of our own people are deeply involved in doing this. Can we come back from this? I'm not so sure. Why is...
|HubPages Device ID|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Google Analytics|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel|
|Google Hosted Libraries|
|Google AdSense Host API|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels|
|Author Google Analytics|
|Amazon Tracking Pixel|