Le Pen’s Triumph had the Liberal Press reaching for the Vitriol

By Tim Heydon

Nationalist Economic Solutions are ‘Snake Oil’.  Oh Yes? With Hyperinflation around the Corner?

 

Nationalist solutions are ‘Snake – Oil Solutions’ according to Ian Birrell in the Daily Mail (April 24th).  As this country and the West in general tries to struggle out of the rubble left by the collapse of the liberal dream of an ever–closer globalised world economy, this remark would be comic were it not so stupidly biased.

In its reliance on imaginary money, the present government is a bit like Adolph Hitler in the last stages of WW11, shifting imaginary tank divisions around to defend Berlin.  Could a Nationalist Government do anything economically, however inept, which would be worse than what has befallen this country at hands of its present political class?

What could be more of a snake-oil solution, after all, than Blair’s and Brown’s  bubble economics which have left this country with an Everest of debt which will still be saddling our descendants generations from now.  Not to mention of course, their mad and secret opening up of this country to mass immigration in pursuit of the globalist dream of the ‘free flow of capital and labour’ and (unmentioned) the destruction of Britain.  This is increasingly dividing our society in a manner not seen since the Dark Ages.

George Osborne - Failure

Is not George Osborne’s remedy for this cataclysmic disaster: printing mountains of money whilst clocking up more long-term debts with an economy still in annual deficit, proving to be a further disaster?  It is a recipe for robbing the savers, on whom the country must ultimately rely for the provision of reliable capital - capital that can be made not to flood out of Britain at the first hint of trouble - whilst rewarding the spenders, those who got us into this disaster in the first place.  It is storing up jobs-and savings-destroying inflation, ready to burst out if and when the economy, pumped up by all this printed money, ever gets going.  Or even before if the depressing effect on it of unemployment begins to fade. 

Osborne is Kicking the Problem down the Road

Meantime, this government continues to allow hundreds of thousands of foreigners into the country who batten on our benefits system as well as taking jobs which should be going to our own people.  In 2010, 87 per cent of new jobs went to immigrants.

www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefingPaper/document/51  

www.migrationwatch.org/briefingPaper/document/236f

Osborne’s solution is merely kicking the problem down the road.  Sooner or later, all this extra money is going to explode in Hyperinflation.  As Ludwig von Mises remarked:-

‘There is no means of avoiding a final collapse of a boom brought about by credit expansion. The alternative is only whether the crisis should come sooner as a result of a voluntary abandonment of further credit expansion or later as a final and total catastrophe of the currency system involved’.

If ever there was a recipe for social unrest, this is it

Ed Balls - Idiot.

‘What sickens me about left-wing people, especially the intellectuals, is their utter ignorance of the way things actually happen’ – George Orwell

It is truly astonishing that a colossal failure like Balls, whose government was instrumental in favouring the conditions which brought what remains of our economy crashing down around our ears, could have the chutzpah to give any economic advice whatsoever.  That he does is testimony to the arrogance, stupidity and rhinoceros hide of this man.  Such is the wreckage that  Thatcherism and the policies of New Labour have left that Vince Cable was moved to remark in a leaked document (one of his few sensible observations) that ‘it is not at all obvious how (this country) is going to earn its living.’

No ‘New Deal’ is a Good Deal

And is not the idiot Balls’ solution; the further expansion of public spending, even worse than that of of the Coalition?  Public spending would certainly favour New Labour’s client state, the public services, whose jobs in the fake ‘boom’ years were overwhelmingly filled by immigrants.  But as the experience of Roosevelt’s New Deal in Depression – era USA shows, notwithstanding uncritical praise from – who else - the BBC, ever in favour of socialist Big-State spending, there is no substitute for hard work and increasing productivity, as the Germans and the West’s creditors, the Chinese, have shown.

www.bbc.co.uk/scotland/learning/bitesize/higher/history/usa/newdeal_rev3.shtml

The New Deal actually hindered economic revival in the USA.  (For an accessible, easily readable demolition job on the BBC-backed left fascism of FDR’s New Deal, read:

‘The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Great Depression and the New Deal’ (The Politically Incorrect Guides).

Nationalist Economic Solutions

There must be incentivisation through the cutting of taxes linked to the de–incentivisation of idleness, ie immediate cuts in the blubber of overgenerous social security benefits and useless make-work jobs in the public sector.  When work is available, ‘if a man will not work, he shall not eat’.  It must mean an immediate withdrawal on negotiated terms from the anti-democratic totalitarian straightjacket which is the EU.  These terms must include the re-assertion of our 200-mile fishing rights and a refocusing on export markets in the BRIC countries and elsewhere.

Educating our People to World, not Third World Standards

It must mean an end to the content-free nature of courses and the all–must–have–prizes syndrome in the education system which is a recipe for mediocrity and decline into third-world status.  Egypt and other moslem countries churn out hundreds of thousands of graduates annually, but their degrees are worth little because they are not up to high standards.  The only middle eastern country with some institutions that are competitive is Turkey.

There must be a return to unabashed elitism which rewards competitiveness, talent and hard work.  Only this will ensure that our youth can take on the Germans and the fiercely competitive Orientals in a world where only the best take the prizes.  The talents of our people are our only real resource.

Protecting our People

It means exchange controls to ensure that the accumulated capital of this country is kept here to benefit our people with the setting up of new industries and processes - an end to the shipping overseas of our manufacturing and other industries.  That fool Gordon Brown allowed the sale of our nuclear power industry to the French at the very moment when we will have to depend on nuclear power.  Tariffs on selected imported goods (The World Trade Organisation maximum is 5% on certain goods and services) should be in place but kept to a minimum to ensure maximum competition commensurate with protecting  industries vulnerable to imports from cheap labour countries with dire employment conditions.

If all this damages the City, then so be it.  It is the ordinary worker in this country who should benefit, not banking fat cats and the greed of globalising capitalism. 

A country is more than a rich standard of living, especially for the relative few.

Mary Riddell:  Smearing for a Living

Over at the Daily Telegraph, the collapse of the globalisers’ economic model and the rise of Le Pen and others like her is causing palpitations amongst the Cameroons.  ‘The rise of Marie Le Pen fits an emerging pattern of Hard Right resurgence that should chill all who inhabit the tolerant centre ground,’  Mary Riddell tells us in a prominent piece.  (24th April) Well, one would hope so, given that the ‘tolerant centre‘ ie (in world terms) left of centre in Britain has ‘tolerantly’ acquiesced in the destruction of this country by the social hard leftists of left-liberalism. Thanks in part to people like her, this country is likely to be majority Moslem in the lifetimes of our grandchildren.  How tolerant or indeed British does Riddell think Britain is going to be for them?

Plundering the Dictionary of Insult

Riddell, a quintessential member of the deracinated and cocooned metropolitan chatteratti plunders her armoury of insult to describe those who do not agree with the agenda of treachery to our forebears who struggled in WW11 to protect the homeland of their ancestors as their inheritance and hand it down to their children and their children.

Le Pen, she asserts, is a ’proto fascist peddling a glossy rebrand of hatred’.  It’s the same old intellectually third-rate non-sequitur; pure smear.  If you prefer to live amongst your own people in your own way as you and your forefathers always have done and object to the deliberate transformation of your country by its ideological enemies, you are peddling ‘hate’.

Likewise, the claim that the EDL are ’Neo Nazis’ is pure smear.  This is an organisation which ideologically is scarcely distinguishable from UKIP.  But for Riddell, UKIP is merely the more 'acceptable face of xenophobia'.

Again, Breivik who she bitchily and for no good reason describes as a ’puffy–faced computer nerd’ (One could make extremely unflattering remarks about her personal appearance) has a ‘white supremacist world view’.  However repulsive his crimes, does being opposed to the islamisation of Europe mean that you are a ‘white supremacist’?

‘Sooner Whites in Charge in their own Country than Blacks or Browns’.  Sorry, is that ‘Nazi’?

Does wanting the cradle of your ancestors to stay as it was mean that you are a ’white supremacist’?  In Riddell’s lexicon of abuse it apparently does.  In which case just about every Briton since Boudicca has been a ’white supremacist’ since it is the most natural thing in the world to want to preserve your homeland for your own people.

So the Chinese and the Japanese, who do not welcome immigration, are ‘yellow supremacists’?

The Saudis who do not like European Christians in their country are ‘Arab Supremacists?

Mugabe who hates whites; the South Africans who are dispossessing white South Africans; all the African countries which have turfed out their whites – they are black supremacist?  And so on and on and on.

But not being ‘racist’ or ‘white supremacist’ no doubt makes the ‘tolerant’ Riddell feel very good about herself.  And that’s all that really matters and never mind the logic or the lack of human feeling.

Obama is to be re-elected by Non-Whites at least partly because he is Non-White.  But that’s OK.

Riddell actually mentions the views of the American immigration ‘expert’ Frank Sharry, who suggested that the huge rise in the immigrant vote in the USA will likely ensure the re- election of Obama.

That is, although Riddell doesn’t seem to notice, much of the non-white population there, imported for globalising reasons, will vote for another non-white as many of them did when Obama was first elected.  (96% of blacks voted for him on that occasion).  It's OK if Blacks and Browns are 'supremacist' but not Whites.  Why?

Again, she mentions Galloway’s victory but stupidly puts this down to ‘the rage’ vote against Labour rather than to the success of someone who deliberately went out for the moslem vote and got it.  Once more, it isn't racial supremacy when blacks or browns do it, or if it is, it is somehow acceptable when white 'supremacy' is not.  What a fool this woman is.

Riddell and her ‘tolerant’ ilk are so far above petty, human concerns, such as feeling more at home amongst one’s own ethnic kind than otherwise, that she entirely fails to see what’s going on.  Which makes her a pretty useless journalist as well as an unjustifiably self-satisfied one.  How much does she get paid for the malevolent, intellectually third rate tripe she writes?

_____________

Please share this post