Bloody shovel

Don't call it a spade

The Clam and the Sandpiper

There’s an old Chinese saying: when the Sandpiper and the Clam fight each other; it’s the fisherman who profits just by sitting there. While in English it doesn’t make much sense, in Chinese it’s exactly 10 characters, which roll beautifully off the tongue. 鷸蚌相爭,坐收漁翁之利.


Anyway, so Britain is now in turmoil after Brexit happened against all expectations; Cameron is out, and now they gotta look for a new leader to manage what is really a fairly complicated process.

So Boris Johnson left the race; ostensibly he was “backstabbed”. A commentator in Japan said that Boris never expected Brexit to happen, and the prospect of having to go himself to Brussels to negotiate is way more work than he’s willing to do; so he bailed. I don’t know.

So now there’s this Gove guy, who is Scottish, pretty ugly, a horrible public speaker and… well, see for yourselves.

I was going to call him a cuck after watching the first half of his speech, but after this part, I suspect that an interest for the sexual pleasure of his wife is not quite what’s wrong with him. His affliction is rather more commonplace.

So this is one choice, an ugly gay Scott. There’s another choice, apparently more popular. Theresa May. She has many things going on for her; but mostly it’s just that she looks and sounds a lot like Margaret Thatcher; and that’s a good thing in Britain. So the PM post is pretty much hers.

What about her, though, is she any good? I can’t say, but I was pleasantly surprised by this.


Referendums about the EU have been run in many countries in Europe for decades; they usually turn out negative, but the vote is routinely ignored. I, and I suspect most people in Europe were convinced that even in the event of a Brexit vote, that the EU and the UK elite would conspire to null the results and just go on with business as usual.

But no, the British government is actually committed to carrying this out. So this obviously is not some popular revolt of old evil racist white people. A big chunk of the elite, big enough to carry this out to the overwhelming dismay of the permanent bureaucracy, is very much committed to Brexit.

This is a good thing, of course, but it means we should reconsider many of our assumptions about the global elite of politicians, bureaucrats and big business, and how they’re hell-bent in creating a Global Brazil with brown pluralities in all Western nations, populist politics made impossible so the elite can keep feeding us degenerate entertainment and mass produced garbage in the name of Progress.

Now of course the most elite parts of the Brexit campaign have come out to say they have no intention of limiting immigration; and that’s their prerogative. If anything they should be lauded for admitting so at this timing. But at any rate, it appears that large parts of the elite have reached the conclusion that globalist institutions are not in their interest.

It follows that we should look at exactly how this elite in-fighting is occurring; who is fighting whom? Who will be the fisherman? I’m certainly just sitting here.


22 responses to “The Clam and the Sandpiper

  1. B July 3, 2016 at 13:02

    I thought homosexuality and pedophilia were basically standard for upper class Brits, from public school onwards? Not even joking here. I mean,,_1st_Viscount_Slim

    As for Brexit, eh, jury’s still out. What good is it exiting the EU if your country is still run by the Cathedral? OK, you don’t need to worry about the “Syrian” “refugees,” but the same people who imported all those wonderful Pakis, Arabs and Africans into your country for 50 years are still in charge! And their wards are reproducing like crazy. It’s not like you’re gonna have a referendum for ethnic cleansing next year.

    • spandrell July 3, 2016 at 13:15

      Any break to the trend is welcome.
      How’s Israel seeing this? Surely you’re no friends of the EU.

      • Jefferson July 4, 2016 at 17:03

        Most Orthodox Jews I’ve spoken to about it are in favor of brexit, but it’s hard to tell if that’s because they’re not on team progressive. Certainly the EU is viewed negatively by observant Jews, since it tends to be pretty anti-Israel, but Ashkenazim over a certain age are pretty universally anti Europe.

  2. Five Daarstens July 3, 2016 at 14:35

    I agree with the commenter about Boris Johnson, the official story in the press didn’t make much sense.

  3. Pingback: The Clam and the Sandpiper | Reaction Times

  4. Karl July 3, 2016 at 16:07

    Why do you think that the British goverment is commited to carry this out and leave the EU? Cameron resigned instead of carrying this out. He could have filed a request according to art. 50 last week. Now his successor might do it this fall (at the earliest – he or she could easliy delay a formal request until next year). So Cameran ensured that Brittain will be at least another 4 months in the EU.

    I’m sceptical that there is really a will of the British “elite” to leave the EU. Moreover, I’m not convinced there is serious infighting. Sure, Cameron resigned and there is a vacancy at the top. Some in-fighting is to be expected in this situation, but is it more than usual? Especially, is it about the direction of the future leadership? Whether to leave or merely pretend wanting to leave (for a while)?

    Blatantly ignoring the vote and explicitly saying so might be difficult in the present situation. So an “elite” that wants to stay in the EU might simply put on a show.

    That said, I’m a German living in Germany. I have no clue about British politics. Just wondering. Leaving isn’t that hard to do legally, just file the request and wait 2 years. That all really, legally there is no other mechanism.

    • spandrell July 3, 2016 at 16:48

      Well you tell me why Mrs. May has to go out of her way to “make it clear that Brexit means Brexit”. Surely if they wanted to remain there’s plenty of ways to muddle the water.

      Nothing like the Tory faction for Brexit exists in any major party in any other European country. Obviously these conservatives are as pozzed in all important areas as any others; but they sincerely seem to want out of the EU so there’s some sort of material interest that is pushing against further globalization.

      • Candide III July 4, 2016 at 09:08

        Maybe it’s like the decision by the top cadres of the Communist Party of UkrSSR to abandon ship and declare independence. They sensed that USSR was going under and it was their chance to strike out on their own and no longer be under the thumb of the Central Committee in Moscow.

        • spandrell July 4, 2016 at 09:46

          So, a good thing? Or not?

          • Candide III July 4, 2016 at 10:14

            Difficult to say. Good or bad for whom and in what respect? In our case, it had worked out well enough for the ex-Commies in the material and power sense, but the ideological structure that had originally brought them to power crumbled completely. The next generation had no use for them, and they were able to retire in comfort if they wished to, or stay in power and defend their business interests. E.g. one of our recent Communist Party leaders owns a large chain of supermarkets.

            • spandrell July 4, 2016 at 10:18

              Well we’re doing something wrong if we can’t agree whether the collapse of the USSR was a good thing. We’re not Zhou Enlai here. If Brexit is similar to the USSR collapse, will Brexit be good for the English and for the wider world? Of course we can distinguish short term from long term, it’s certainly a useful way to look at how ex-Soviet countries have turned out.

              • Candide III July 5, 2016 at 13:40

                The Soviet collapse was good overall, because it cleared away the dead wood and permitted new things to grow. Rather like a forest fire. Not all of the new things were nice, there was much suffering for a time and for quite a lot of people life went pear-shaped and never recovered, but that’s forest fire for you. I believe Brexit will be good for the English, though they may have to dump Scotland (hopefully for a time), Northern Ireland (probably for good) and London (painful but duh). Somebody, I forget who, wrote that, historically, unity has never served Europe well. Europe works best when its peoples jostle for supremacy, though the religious wars that are an occasional side-effect of this arrangement are no fun. One problem with it in the modern setting is that European countries may not be large enough to compete with China, India and the U.S. and/or to resist outside divide-and-conquer tactics.

            • spandrell July 5, 2016 at 14:07

              Unity hasn’t existed in Europe for a very long time, but when it happened (Rome) it was pretty good. Not that stretching the argument that far back makes any sense.

              The proper historical analogy might be Greece. Constant squabbling got them conquered by Macedon; after they got rid of those, eventually Rome came and conquered them with ease.

              India surely is a joke; but Chinese and US (and Russian) meddling is of course an issue. But anyway; I’d rather Europe be a petty but white slave of a foreign empire than be proud and united with Brazil’s demographics.

          • Mackus July 4, 2016 at 10:18

            Probably good thing. Collapse of USSR disgraced Marxism in Russia. It eventually allowed for new people to get in power and fix post-USSR states to some extent. Even Belarus, with its cosplay-stalinism, is saner than what USSR ever was. Even Ukraine was doing okay-ish before Maidan.
            Collapse of EU will disgrace European project, so there is a chance of UK politicians wanting to signal they don’t belong to such a fallen ideology, and doing some anti-progressive things. It will also raise status of people who always hated EU or were sceptical of it, allowing them to come to power.
            Its opportunity, but there is always chance they’ll do even worse job.

            All slopes are slippery. The heart of Brexit is nationalism. If nationalism is incompatible with EU today, who knows, maybe in ten years it will be incompatible with “british” who are already there..

  5. VKR July 4, 2016 at 02:57

    I was wondering the same thing. I expected the standard procedure of ignoring voters, or repeating the vote until they vote ‘correctly’. There must be some fairly powerful faction resisting this and pushing for Brexit, but I can’t figure out who exactly and what is their angle. Knowing how things typically work them just being honest democrats and patriots is not really believable.

    • Howard J. Harrison July 4, 2016 at 14:38

      @VKR: So far, the dynamic you note is opaque to me, as well. I am temperamentally skeptical of conspiracy theories, but you are not peddling a conspiracy theory, are you?

      Regarding honest democrats and patriots, may one add that the three words—honest, democrat, patriot—do not necessarily go together? (Admittedly, you never said that they did.)

      As an aside: From 1924 to 1933, Hitler ran in democratic elections as an antidemocrat, and sort of won. Does anyone in the West do that any more?

      • VKR July 4, 2016 at 17:21

        Conspiracy theory is a rather meaningless phrase. There are groups of humans with aligned interests promoting those interests by various means. I just can’t identify the group behind Brexit and what their calculation is.

  6. Jefferson July 4, 2016 at 17:09

    This whole ordeal has been very interesting, but seems unlikely to matter in the long run. Unless there’s a huge rebound in fertility amongst westerners, the West is toast in 1-2 generations. I do not forsee an American Belisarius rescuing Europe anytime soon.

    • VKR July 4, 2016 at 17:23

      Unless immigration and fertility trends change drastically, America will need rescuing too.

    • spandrell July 4, 2016 at 17:25

      Belisarius didn’t save much; all of his conquests were fleeting and actually made the whole thing worse. So please, please, don’t send us Belisarius.

      I’d rather see more babies too, but if Europeans suddenly find that they’re willing to fight the whole thing might have a solution.

  7. Rhetocrates July 4, 2016 at 22:08

    Hopeful, pie-in-the-sky answer: Brexit’s seriousness is caused by the Deep State (run by a bunch of old white guys with aristocratic titles who remember what life was like before the EU) deciding they want to try their hand at ‘the sun never sets on the British Empire’ again, because they’re in touch with their histories and are finally tired of how the UK is consistently shafted ever since the end of the Charge of the Light Brigade.

    Cynical, I-really-think-this answer: Brexit is taken seriously not because the elite want to repudiate the progressive ideal that it embodies, but because they’re taking a gamble for greater world pre-eminence via closer ties with the US. The EU has been blocking UK/US trade, economic, and political alliances for a while now, and enough people have done the calculus to realize that, with the trajectory Merkel has set for the EU, it’s best to get off the train now, before things are too unmanageable. They’re still going for New Brazil, but they want to be the ones in charge of the keys.

Please comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s