Top products from r/brexit

The first theories on this appeared in the states after Bush II got elected:

What's the Matter with Kansas?: How Conservatives Won the Heart of America

https://www.amazon.com/dp/080507774X/

But it’s basically identity politics. The world has gotten to complex for many to understand so they’ve retreated back to a single strategy

If they are like me they will care about what I care about and handle things the way I would handle them if I was in charge

So BJs and trumps primary strategy is looking and sounding like the people whose votes they want. Trump even watches Fox News (Murdoch) as research to better know what that is.

Oh but they do. They buy the stuff that's going cheap, from desperate people willing to sell. They then hold on to it, and sell it back when it's worth more, use it as a write-off, or a thousand other things rich people not in the messed-up economy can afford to do. You can read about it in Jacob Rees Mogg's father's book entitled "Blood in the Streets: Investment Profits in a World Gone Mad". Yes, JRM's father literally wrote the book on how to make money from events such as Brexit.

And you didn't comment on the rest of EthiczGradient's post, so can we assume you agree with it?

https://i.imgur.com/xHf81tx.jpg

• Cannibalism A perfectly Natural History - Bill Schute
  
  
  
  
  https://i.imgur.com/KYksUCR.jpg
  
  
• 
  Contingency Cannibalism: Superhardcore Survivalism's Dirty Little Secret - Shiguro Takada
  

There's a book listing all the place that GB invaded. https://www.amazon.co.uk/All-Countries-Weve-Ever-Invaded/dp/0752479695/ref=sr_1_2?keywords=we+have+invaded&qid=1567781762&s=gateway&sr=8-2 Conversely the list of places that invaded GB in the past is everyone with good enough ships.

There's a similar book for the USA it's 110 pages longer.

Jacob Rees Mogg's father wrote a book on how to do exactly this - invest then cripple the economy and reap the profits for yourself.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Blood-Streets-Investment-Profits-World/dp/067162735X

We don’t either...

But that’s because there isn’t any logic. It’s a bunch of extremists on one side followed by a bunch of ver gullible people. In the case of the latter rather than admit they were wrong they double down and move the goal posts, currently the excuse is ‘it would be good to go without for a bit’ (makes people grateful). In the case of the former they are disaster capitalism who want carnage (look at this book called ‘blood on the streets’ by Rees Moggs dad) they know they can protect their money (by moving there main source of income to Ireland In the case of Rees Mogg or by becoming a french resident like Lawson) but want our assets.

His brother's work "In the time of of Winston Churchill", Haffner's the "meaning" and Klemperer's LTI are worth a read, as welll. Führer means leader.

And never forget Bracher: The Origins, Structure, and Effects of National Socialism

https://www.amazon.de/Meaning-Hitler-Sebastian-Haffner/dp/0297792555

https://www.amazon.de/Language-Third-Reich-Imperii-Continuum/dp/0826491308

https://www.amazon.com/German-Dictatorship-Structure-National-Socialism/dp/1125634790

Brexit story is on sale on amazon https://www.amazon.co.uk/NeverEnding-Story-DVD-Noah-Hathaway/dp/B0017U09JE

If we leave without a deal, then everything will be up for grabs. We will have no chips to bargain with. To stop the UK haemorrhaging jobs and money, we'll be desperate to accept anything that is offered. The NHS will simply not survive.

You might call this project fear, but I don't see how no-deal could turn out much different. Leave campaigners predicted long queues of countries competing for trade deals with the UK the day after the referendum, but nothing of the sort ever happened. The reality will be much worse. This is from Ian Dunt's 2016 book:

>Ahead of talks, the UK prime minister and the US president hold a joint press conference. Theresa May says it shows countries are still keen to trade with the UK, while her American counterpart confirms the US commitment to the special relationship. Then the doors of the negotiating room close and the two leaders are replaced by grim-faced trade experts.
>
>Britain had a chronic shortage of negotiators during the EU talks and the situation has not improved. The ones facing the American team are those who are not required to fight the fires at the WTO. Many are civil servants who have had to read up on trade in the years since Brexit. They face highly specialised trade experts who have been doing this their entire careers.
>
>The public rhetoric disappears. It is replaced by hard-headed demands. US trade officials inform their British counterparts of the reality of the situation. The UK is in a position of unique and historic vulnerability. Investor confidence has dissolved. Its economy is facing its most significant shock since the Second World War. It has no time. It has no negotiating capacity. But Washington wants to help. It is prepared to rush a trade deal through Congress. It could take less than two years. But for this to be achievable, the UK needs to accept all of its demands. The Americans slide a piece of paper across the desk. The British team read the demands: they are horrendous. Consumer protections are reduced across the board, along with environmental regulations and safeguards for the NHS.
>
>UK civil servants have little option but to capitulate. The only way to protect what remains of the British economy is to sell off British sovereignty. The control wrestled from Brussels is now sold off to the highest bidder, behind closed doors, in a conference room in Washington.

I'd start by reading [Kicking Away the Ladder] (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Kicking-Away-Ladder-Development-Institutions/dp/1843310279), by the Cambridge economist Ha Joon Chang.

Then you might look at [The Globalisation Paradox] (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Globalization-Paradox-Dani-Rodrik/dp/019965252X) by the Harvard economist Dani Rodrik - in fact, I would start with that one, as Rodrik's a much easier read than Chang.

Or you might check out the new book by these two Nobel-winning economists. Unlike the others, I've not read it yet, but it [notes] (http://news.mit.edu/2019/good-economics-hard-times-1112) that:

> “On trade it is the opposite,” Duflo says. “The evidence shows that people’s instinctive view of trade, that it does hurt them, has a lot that is true about it, and economists’ instinctive view on trade, that it should be good for everyone, is not correct.”

Or you could just let u/SideburnsOfDoom gaslight you into thinking that Dunt's argument has nothing to do with trade economics. Your call, I suppose. Remainers generally don't like learning anything, I've noticed.

His new book just came out last week, I imagine he is a bit busy with it right now.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/March-Lemmings-Brexit-Performance-2016-2019/dp/0571357024

Not what you had in mind, but: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Victorians-Twelve-Titans-Forged-Britain/dp/0753548526

Now a book about about Boris is showing in the sponsored products section https://www.amazon.co.uk/basic-laws-human-stupidity/dp/8815233814

>These are programmed responses

Have you read this book?

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Prometheus-Rising-Robert-Anton-Wilson/dp/1561840564

Read Blood In The Streets by Walter Softy Senior, it explains the whole plan there.

I think that this book should be read publicly. In every city in Europe.

The Road to Unfreedom: Russia, Europe, America (Timothy Snyder)

https://www.amazon.com/Road-Unfreedom-Russia-Europe-America-ebook/dp/B074YM8W91/ref=sr_1_2?__mk_de_DE=%C3%85M%C3%85%C5%BD%C3%95%C3%91&crid=3LAJ9YPXC6FHN&keywords=timothy+snyder&qid=1567754959&s=gateway&sprefix=timothy+sn%2Caps%2C237&sr=8-2

I read this one a few years ago - it tells you how the EU works, if you know enough about how the UK government functions then you can draw parallels and come to a judgement about how different the EU is: https://www.amazon.co.uk/EU-Nutshell-Everything-wanted-European/dp/0857192310/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1511037242&sr=1-1&keywords=eu+in+a+nutshell

Thanks for this, ByGollie. Fascinating and informed article, which confirmed many of my thoughts on Brexit and the other current european political developments. It is worth noting that at a time when most of europe refused to have anything to do with Hitler prior to the second world war it was primarily wealthy american businessmen who were investing in Germany.

And to anybody who wants to prattle on about Godwin's law, my advice would be to shut-up and spend some time reading a history book.

https://www.amazon.com/Hitlers-American-Friends-Reichs-Supporters/dp/1250148952

https://www.globalresearch.ca/profits-ber-alles-american-corporations-and-hitler/4607

Nope... these are treaties with third countries. This is the sole problem of the UK.

>when the USSR broke up, some agreements fell, new ones were put in place.

That is actually a good comparison. I thought a bit about it. I'm not sure, you are aware how the deep the transformation was there. It was worse than the IMF crisis in the 70'ies and probably only comparable to the Great depression. That is how the demand for unfettered sovereignty plays out today.

https://www.amazon.de/Secondhand-Time-Soviets-Svetlana-Alexievich/dp/0399588825

>And when did democracy of any kind become a meme?

Brexiters made it a meme. Referenda are not necessarily the best way to exert democracy. They are more a phenomenon of a decadent state. You can take Napoleon III.'s rise to power, the rise of the Nazis, women's suffrage in Switzerland (not before the 90'ies), or the Gracchians who were the last nail into the coffin of the antique Roman Republic before it fell into a civil war.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ochlocracy


>The UK and EU are parting ways, because they have different wants, aims and aspirations.

Yes. The problem is that the means of a sole nation state aren't sufficient to support the aspirations of the Brexiters. And still after two damn years, they aren't even able to formulate the problems, tradeoffs and hardships which lay down the road.

Brexit = Death of the Technocrats
Michael Krieger | Jun 24, 2016

My political opinions lean more and more to Anarchy (philosophically understood, meaning abolition of control not whiskered men with bombs) … the most improper job of any man, even saints (who at any rate were at least unwilling to take it on), is bossing other men. Not one in a million is fit for it, and least of all those who seek the opportunity.– J. R. R. Tolkien

What transpired last night in the United Kingdom represented one of the most extraordinarily expressions of democracy of my lifetime.

When faced with an event of such monumental significance, it’s difficult to pick any particular direction for a post like this.

I have so many thoughts running through my mind and so many angles I could potentially address, it is simply impossible to do them all justice.

As such, I’ve decided to focus on one very meaningful implication of Brexit: death of the technocrats.

To start, I want to dive into one of the more interesting controversies from the weeks leading up to the vote.

What I’m referring to is the statement made by Vote Leave’s Michael Grove regarding “experts.”

From the Telegraph(http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/06/eu-referendum-who-needs-experts-when-weve-got-michael-gove/):

On Friday night, during an interview on Sky News about the EU, Faisal Islam challenged the Justice Secretary to name a single independent economic authority that thought Brexit was a good idea. Mr Gove’s response was defiant.

[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/03/how-did-michael-gove-cope-with-the-sky-news-audience-and-faisal/]

“I’m glad these organizations aren’t on my side,” he said.

“I think people in this country have had enough of experts.”

Mr Islam spluttered incredulously.

People in this country, he repeated, “have had enough of experts?”

Mr Gove stood his ground.

Yes, he said, people in this country had had enough of experts “saying that they know what is best”.

Mr Gove had “faith in the British people”.

The so-called experts, clearly, did not.

For his words, Mr. Gove was attacked relentlessly.

He was lectured about his dangerous language and scolded for its supposed anti-intellectualism.

The “very smart people” issuing these condemnations did so in their typical self-satisfied, smug manner.

Nonetheless, Michael Gove was absolutely correct in his assessment, and in this post I will detail precisely why.

First of all, what is an “expert?”

From what I can gather this term is bestows upon someone with an advanced degree who has successfully maneuvered him or herself into a position of prominence within government, a think tank or academia.

As someone who worked on Wall Street for a decade, I was constantly surrounded by people with advanced degrees from the most prestigious institutions.

I also know that your degree means absolutely nothing the moment you walk in that door for the first day of work.

You enter a place filled with people who have battling it out for years if not decades in their profession of choice, and the only thing that matters now is performance.

If you don’t perform you’re gone, and nobody’s gonna care about the long string of letters next to your name.

The world of politics, government and central banking famously and problematically does not work this way.

Look around you at all the discredited “thought leaders” who continue to be paraded around on television, and who still advise Presidents and Prime Ministers the world over.

In the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis no changing of the guard was permitted.

Sure we were given a fresh face with Barack Obama, but his advisers didn’t change.

He immediately hired both Larry Summers and Timothy Geithner, and that’s the moment I knew he was a gigantic fraud.

To summarize, the exact same people who ruined the world bailed themselves out, avoided all accountability and continue to call the shots.

These are the men and women we know as “the experts.”

The point isn’t to say that having an advanced degree in a particular field of study doesn’t make an individual especially useful to society. It does.

The issue here is accountability.

If you want to go around calling yourself an expert and demanding that your views be implemented across a given civilization, you had better do a good job.

If you do a poor job, you should be immediately replaced with someone who has a different perspective.

After all, there are plenty of experts out there to choose from.

Unfortunately, our societies tend to get stuck with egomaniacal, incompetent, but politically savvy experts who never go away.

They can blow up the world a million times over and still somehow survive to call the shots.

This is the main reason the world is in the state it’s in, and it’s the reason reactionary forces are rising across the globe.

The Brexit vote in itself proves the point.

Sure, David Cameron has announced his intention to resign, but where are the the resignations of EU technocrats?

If anyone was discredited by this vote it’s the leadership of the EU, but they aren’t going anywhere.

Why?

Because they’re experts, and experts stay around forever.

Like Larry Summers, bank executives and neocon war mongers, these people never suffer the consequences of their actions and thus remain free to run around endlessly destroying the world from their unassailable perches of power.

That’s the point.

Being an expert does not make you infallible.

Your credentials should certainly offer you a seat at the policy making table, but from that moment on you had better demonstrate performance.

It’s the same way with a corporate job.

The resume gets you in the door, but your production day in and day out keeps you in the seat.

The status quo doesn’t see things this way.

To the status quo technocrat, this is a lifelong position.

They consider themselves to be the wise indispensable elders required to steer the world in the right direction irrespective of any and all calamities they cause along the way.

Unfortunately for us, history shows us that the biggest disasters happen precisely when you combine such expert arrogance with unbridled power.

One of the best modern examples of this relates to the tale of the 1990’s mega hedge fund Long Term Capital Management (LTCM).

A story that was perfectly captured in the excellent book by Roger Lowenstein, When Genius Failed.(https://www.amazon.com/When-Genius-Failed-Long-Term-Management/dp/0375758259)

The leadership of LTCM was hailed as the best of the best from the beginning and expectations were high.

It’s principals consisted of not only Wall Street veterans but also several former university professors, including two Nobel Prize-winning economists.

Yet, what transpired after only five years in operation was one of the most spectacular failures of modern times.

A train wreck so large and so completely out of control, it required a Federal Reserve led bailout.

What happened with LTCM is happening right now across the political and economic spheres in virtually all nations.

You have a collection of self-assured, arrogant “experts” running the world into the ground with their policies.

As I said earlier, I have no problem with experts.

I have a problem when experts are permitted to operate with zero accountability.

The EU represents such technocratic immunity better than any other in the Western world.

The British people recognized that they couldn’t remove these technocrats from power from within (something proven once and for all by the fact no EU leaders have resigned), so they decided to leave.

I commend that choice and I think the sooner the status quo is disposed of, the greater the likelihood for a positive long-term outcome.

As I warned last year in my post, A Message to Europe – Prepare for Nationalism(https://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2015/11/14/a-message-to-europe-prepare-for-nationalism/):

Actions have consequences, and people can only be pushed so far before they snap.

I believe the Paris terror attacks will be a major catalyst that will ultimately usher in nationalist type governments in many parts of Europe, culminating in an end of the EU as we know it and a return to true nation-states.

Although I think a return to regional government and democracy is what Europeans need and deserve, the way in which it will come about, and the types of governments we could see emerge, are unlikely to be particularly enlightened or democratic after the dust has settled.

My thoughts and prayers go out to all the victims of these horrific events, but the Paris attacks didn’t happen in a vacuum.

The people of Europe have already become increasingly resentful against the EU, something which is not debatable at this point.

This accurate perception of an undemocratic, technocratic Brussels-led EU dictatorship was further solidified earlier this year after the Greek people went to the polls and voted for one thing, only to be instructed that their vote doesn’t actually matter.

Actions have consequences, and we’ve now witnessed the first of these consequences.

The “experts” have warned us of the disaster to befall Great Britain should it Brexit.

Well we now have front row seats from which to observe the outcome of the UK versus large economies that remain in the euro such as France, Spain and Italy in the years ahead.

As usual, I suspect the experts will be wrong.

More: http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2016/06/24/brexit-death-of-the-technocrats/