The Bewilderness

People's Pledge

Camerons done so many U-turns. What is one more giving us a referendum over the vote for prisoners? Make it in-out...UK out EU in

Philip Stephens of the Financial Times is one of the misguided Europhiles on the pink organ. Quite the chronicler of Tory failure, his tome from the nineties: "Politics and the Pound", is a timely reminder, if read today, of the mistakes and misguidance that has afflicted this country. The concluding remarks in his book sum up the erroneous assumptions underlying Europhilia and the ideological compass that underpins their reasoning:

Sterling is a useful indicator and an instrument of economic management but the currency markets can be as destructive as they are powerful. For now there seems only the slightest prospect that Britain will join EMU in 1999. A re-elected Conservative government would not survive such a decision. Tony Blair would almost certainly have more pressing priorities. But if the rest of Europe does create a single currency, sterling's future will look bleak. Once again Britain is likely to follow Monnet's advice.  It will watch from the sidelines to see if the venture works and, if it does, will join. Until then politics and the pound are destined to remain dangerously entangled.

The emphasis is upon British reticence, hesitation and cowardice, not upon the pros and cons of a currency union. When your magnetic north is inverted to Brussels, your reasoning does not look ahead but back, from out of your arse. The 'guilty men', who supported this disastrous venture have found any number of excuses for not amending their opinions.

This does not prevent our pygmies from another failure at the G7 (no Putin, so no G8). Strong leadership would demand the orderly dismantling of the currency union into convergent groups. Instead, isolating Angela Merkel, the Anglo-Saxons called for further integration, the mutualisation of debt and the monetary debasement of the Euro. The only response they can give is their own pisspoor stealth inflation and austerity spin. (The UK government is not on the austerity treadmill).

Why should the Germans pay for the debts of others? Their political elite may subscribe to a 'European Germany' and wish to avoid causing the gimps who gave all of their deposits in bad loans from facing the consequences of their actions. The German government have tried to stop bailing out their own banks. Merkel may have forced this poison on Ireland, Portugal, Greece, Spain and the periphery. Now that poison is being thrust upon her.

From Grexnix to Grexit

In 2000AD lore, a grexnix is a churlish person or an ignoramus. It is not clear if they are lower or higher on the list than nonscrots (redefined as nonscrotes, if drunk): nonreaders of 2000AD. For our purposes, the European political classes, as individuals, can be insulted as grexnixes. Why? Because, through their political decisions, they have ruined the lives of Greek nonscrots and forced them into an inevitable Grexit from the Euro. Their status as Grexnix leads inevitably to Grexit.

The backwash from this event is incalculable. Not in the exaggerated drama of overwhelming damage but a practical observation concerning the vast number of overlapping and contradictory warnings handed out about the Eurozone. Believe the best and prepare for the worst?

A Greek exit will cause economic damage. It will destroy confidence in the currency union and a deep recession in the UK. The greater the contagion and subsequent disruption, the more that we should fear the consequences on these islands.

One can muse at the irony. Greece was a latecomer to the welfare state and, like its peers, used debt to fuel its payments. Now, the crisis of late social democracy has been accelerated by the Greater Depression and the downfall of sovereign debt. Welfare liabilities are no longer possible. It is not possible to discern the new forms of government as yet. We can only chart the downfall of the old. 

They did not even mention the FTT...

On Francois Hollande's first day as French President, his goal was to meet with Chancellor Angela Merkel, reaffirming the relationship between France and Germany underpinning the European Union and the Eurozone. One should emphasize relationship, rather than partnership. The latter is fruitful, the former can be abusive.

The two leaders met for talks and a dinner, holding a press conference on their discussions. It is clear that neither was willing to give ground, politely stating their differences. Hollande made the case for Eurobonds, a lender of last resort and renegotiation of the fiscal treaty. Merkel stood her ground on the figleaf of austerity, already clear that the liabilities will overwhelm Germany if the Eurozone falls.

On the day that economic news highlighted the widening divisions within the currency union, both leaders noted that they would agree to disagree. Their sole point of unity was a plea for Greece to remain within the Eurozone and a plea to provide further support; perhaps this formed the majority of their discussion. Growth and austerity become minor points in the maelstrom that would result if contagion flowed through the markets.

To sum up, the discussions confirmed that Hollande and Markel are now bystanders like the rest of us. They have no solutions and the future of their currency union resides in the Greek electorate. They didn't even mention the financial transactions tax (don't want to piss UK and US off?). 

It is now a matter of faith

Under the treaties governing the European Union, I am not aware of the clause that states "In a dire emergency, Germany may force a country out of the single currency area or out of the European Union". Such a clause does not exist. So why are the Christian Democrats in Germany pretending that one exists?  

This would be your impression if you read the Eurosceptic Torygraph headline: "Merkel tells Greece to back cuts or face euro exit". Except really, she did not. Just another example of lazy reporting. The German government can opine until it is blue in the face, but it is the decision of a Greek government (as long as one exists) whether to stay in the € or not.

The country is now moving towards a new political situation: new elections for an extremist government that rejects debt repayments, 'barbaric bail-outs' and austerity. Yet they wish to remain in the €: Margaret Thatcher's description of the single currency cloud-cuckoo land is alive and well in Greece.

But British and European politicians have failed yet again in truly understanding their situation. Their problems cannot be resolved by government action, although politicians can certainly make matters worse. Resolution will be achieved by the actions of people. When they lack confidence, a credit cruch follows. If this worsens, they lose faith in their economy, their currency, their banks. The signal is clear. When the Greeks lose faith, then the edifice will finally fall. It is in the hands of the people, or as we sometimes call them, the market.

Disarmed by their own critique

The Eurozone is in crisis. It is a crisis that will last several years, unless you are a blind decrepit Europhile. Stating the obvious should be commended in a politician, even it if it is Cameron. This description, seen in most British newspapers, has been condemned by Lords Ashdown and Oakeshott, with lurid images of diplomatic arson, sabotage and distraction. 

But the good Lords did not proffer their own description of events: a deflating balloon perhaps, a mere bagatelle, or sensible policies of unemployment and immiserisation, undermined by pesky democrats. Alas, they are silent.... 

A strategy for growth in Greece: parachute in the tax inspectors

Next month, we will be able to read the results of a new strategy for growth in Greece. This is from the same set of countries that has decided to send a flood of experts to aid the Greek government. Would this be a charitable donation of professionals to plug the gap left by an unendng stream of migrants seeking better lives and lower taxes elsewhere? When one sees the rise in poverty and hardship, one sees the disconnect between the creditors and those suffering.

Europe is helping Greece out by sending tax collectors. This currently counts as the only growth industry in the entire country. If the bloodletting of recession is not sufficient, European vampires wish to siphon what demand is left by "identifying" tax evaders and seizing their assets. 

This is part of Greece's permanent subordination; from Member State to paralysis. More revolting is the lack of pride by the citizenry in their own country. Their abject servitude before unelected appointees who have effectively disenfranchised their voice and tax them without representation.

We see the limits of the model. Soon, Europe will have to narrow the choice of political parties, since Member States may vote in a way unhelpful to the Project. Thank God we are travelling towards the exit.

A Niagara of gush in a loveless relationship

Whatever the occasion, we can expect the same gushing PR on the 'special relationship' that usually suspends any thoughtful analysis on the occasions that the British Prime Minister visits their most important ex-colony.Hillary Clinton explained that "No matter what the issue, we stand together", except when we stand apart. The faux niceties do disguise genuine rifts between Obama's administration and the Coalition.

Even more ludicrous was Obama's assertion that the relationship is the strongest that it has ever been: that it would be, British diplomats are bending over backwards even more than they used to. But on litmus tests that attract popular attention, America fails:

Bruce Bagley, a Latin America scholar at the University of Miami, says the administration’s stance on the Falklands is not surprising as the United States tries to bolster its relationships in South America.

“The U.S. sees no benefit in taking a stance at this point,” he says. “There are claims on both sides, and (the U.S.) would like to see a diplomatic resolution rather than it to heat up and revert to the bad old days.”

I suspect that we should take the same stance over the next issue that arises with regard to the USA. A seasoned analysis based on our national interests leading to whatever stance is appropriate, not unthinking acceptance (even if it means misleading Parliament like the last Labour government).

No secrets in Europe

Der Spiegel is running rampant with its report of a secret pact between Germany, Britain, Spain and Italy to snub Hollande, the socialist candidate for French President. This is the pact that was so secret everyone knew that Merkel was supporting Sarkozy. And their path to success: avoid meeting the candidate.

What leaves this reportage rather lean is the inclusion of Cameron. Some German reporter leapt on the studied neutrality of the British government and misread this as support. Not sure this can be seen as co-ordinated though  some have viewed this as a "hostile and reactionary" coalition.

If Cameron has joined such a short-sighted and idiotic campaign, then he deserves as much of a kicking as Sarkozy will receive from the irritated French electorate. Unless Cameron hinted, reverse psychology, to obtain revenge against the short-arse Napoleon.

Russia's Napoleonic phase

Various articles over the past months have drawn the conclusion that a Putin victory would provide clear evidence that his days were numbered. One heard similar voices in support of the Green movement in Iran. Protests are not necessarily evidence of the end of a regime. Popular discontent must go hand-in-hand with division in the elites and an unwillingness to rule without legitimacy.

Putin has quickly moved to defend his rule through unfair elections and ballot rigging. By the end of a vote which Putin won with 60%, avoiding a run-off, there were 3,500 reported instances of fraud, from subtle manipulation of voters to blatant bribery and ballot stuffing. Most of this actiivty was undertaken at a local level by municipal officials eager to keep their positions and influence by meeting the Kremlin's requirements for a winning vote.

A protest is planned for Monday in Moscow. With such outbursts and Putin's obvious move towards authoritarianism, are his current supporters happy with a backward move away from modernisation? Putin may have won the vote but his peers must be unhappy with his strategy. Wrapping himself in Russia's glory is not a substitute for stability.

Like Napoleon of the Second Empire, votes are there for the master, not the people.