Afternoon music
A few thoughts about Trump, tariffs etc
Trump is promulgating tariffs on imports from a range of countries and blocs presently major trading partners with the USA. Canada and the EU, to name but two. China, too.
As many are pointing out, tariffs reduce trade, because they make imported goods (and/or services) more expensive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariff.
That view, however, though the majority one, is not universally held by economists, at least in specific historical cases: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariff#Tariffs_and_the_Great_Depression.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariff#Arguments_against_tariffs.
Looked at from a different point of view, there are reasons why Trump’s tariff barriers might be positive for the USA, mainly because they might allow American industry, in decline for half a century, to revive.
American tariffs go back a long way— to 1789, in fact: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tariff#Political_analysis.
“The tariff has been used as a political tool to establish an independent nation; for example, the United States Tariff Act of 1789, signed specifically on July 4, was called the “Second Declaration of Independence” by newspapers because it was intended to be the economic means to achieve the political goal of a sovereign and independent United States.[93]“
[Wikipedia].
In the short-term, Trump’s tariff’s may well cause domestic prices (within the USA) to inflate. In the longer-term, however, those tariffs may also create American jobs, and also increase America’s long-term security.
The USA is one of the few economies capable of being an autarky [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autarky]. Others would be Russia and mainland Europe (the EU, presently).
There is little doubt, though, that in those countries that produce items exported to the USA, the Trump tariffs will cause economic damage, possibly severe damage. That in turn will cause political fallout.
The USA is a huge and vibrant economy. If turned inward, that may be able to create the prosperity and job security so lacking at present in many American communities. The USA should have been isolationist in the 1940s and afterwards, as it had been in the 1930s. It seems to me that that would be a good policy now for the USA. Economic isolationism allied to political isolationism.
The USA should build up purely defensive military and naval power, but avoid doing what it has done, particularly, since 1941, i.e. interfere all over the world. If that is done, American security will thereby be increased.
Tweets seen
I agree. It may not be the whole picture, but it is a large part of it.
That second tweet by “@InFearOfKeir” is also very true.
Yvette Cooper, the Labour Friends of Israel expenses cheat, has been wanting to be a dictator for many years. May she suffer the fate of so many dictators.
That really is alarming. I have commented previously on the blog about Chinese and other androids and also other types of robot etc.
Keywords might be “genocide”, Lebensraum, and Greater Israel. They plan to settle the Gaza Strip with Jews. The same is true of the West Bank, southern Lebanon, parts of Syria etc.
Late music
Ian Robert Millard 
In my opinion, tariffs are great! They protect domestic industry from foreign competition, they stimulate domestic technological and economic innovation, and also have the added benefit of increasing a country’s national self-sufficiency, by limiting dependence on foreign countries.
Additionally, as you point out, tariffs are conducive to autarky, by increasing isolation and limiting the movement of goods and people into the country.
This helps a country to keep their population homogenous and pure.
It is no surprise that the (((establishment economists))) hate tariffs.
In Britain, the repeal of the protective Corn Laws by Chancellor of the Exchequer (((David Ricardo))) left the British economy defenseless against (((foreign takeover))).
Additionally, the repeal of the Corn Laws resulted in free trade which destroyed the wealth and influence of the traditional British aristocracy and gentry, since their wealth was heavily derived from the land and agriculture (as well as rents from tenants, many of whom were tenant farmers who were also devastated by free trade).
Foreign food suppliers were able to undercut British domestic agriculture with cheaper prices, so most British people starting purchasing food that had been imported from other countries.
This was one of the major factors in the financial crises faced by the big British landowners, which caused some to go bankrupt, others to go deep into debt by taking large loans from (((banksters))), and others to marry (((REDACTED))) women like Lord Grantham did in Downton Abbey.
The Corn Laws were repealed in the 1840s. The full effects of the repeal were not apparent for many years, but it was the repeal of the Corn Laws that was a major (perhaps the decisive) factor in destroying the dominance of the traditional land-owning elite, and replacing the traditional rural elite with a new urban elite consisting of bankers, financiers, merchants, industrialists, career politicians, most of whom were lackeys and allies of the (((REDACTEDS))), or in the case of bankers/financiers (((REDACTEDS))) themselves.
The repeal of the Corn Laws by (((David Ricardo))) was a carefully planned, intentional act designed to financially ruin the traditional landowning British elite, and supplant them with a new urban cosmopolitan commercial elite.
The commercial interests, merchants, industrialists and (((bankers))) already controlled the Liberal Party even back in the 1800s.
And with the decline of the rural landowning aristocracy, the Tory Party needed new backers to remain relevant, so the Tories became the obedient tool of the new urban cosmopolitan commercial elite and the (((bankers))).
In the 1930s, there was a struggle within the Tory Party, which pitted the lackeys of the (((bankers))) and urban industry, against the remnants of the traditional landowning aristocracy.
Churchill and his pro-war faction of course were the obedient lackeys of cosmopolitan (((international finance))) and (((big business))).
The anti-war faction largely consisted of traditional rural “High Tories” from the shires.
The anti-war faction backed Chamberlain’s efforts to avoid war (though Chamberlain himself was from the same neoliberal, pro-business faction as Churchill. He and Churchill just disagreed on the war issue).
The anti-war faction knew that a war between Britain and Germany would only benefit the (((REDACTEDS))), so they tried to stop war from breaking out.
In many ways, the efforts of the “appeasers” to avert war was the last stand of the traditional rural “High Tories”. It was the last significant attempt by the remnants of the old landowning aristocracy to prevent the Conservative Party from being totally conquered and subsumed by (((big business))) and (((capital))) and (((international finance))).
It was an honorable and valiant attempt to save the Conservative Party and Britain, but it failed and the traditional “High Tories” were out-maneuvered by Churchill and his fellow neoliberal warmongering cosmopolitan globalists.
Part of the reason Churchill’s faction won was due to (((REDACTED))) influence over the media which gaslighted, manipulated and goaded the British public into supporting war.
Another reason Churchill’s faction won is the (((REDACTED))) influence over Neville Chamberlain. He did resist the (((demands))) to declare war for a while, but eventually he caved and gave in.
The (((REDACTEDS))) controlled a lot of the Tory MPs, due to bribes, owning their debt, blackmail, etc.
Another reason that Churchill’s pro-war faction succeeded in goading Britain into war, is that the vast majority of the old elites (nobility, aristocracy, gentry, landowners, military officer class) were too complacent, too cowardly, too lazy, and too apathetic to get involved and join the side of the anti-war faction.
Patriots within the Conservative Party such as Captain Archibald Maule-Ramsay, Sir Barry Domvile, and various others did their best to organize resistance against Churchill’s warmongering faction.
And while some of the old landowning elite did join the anti-war cause and do what they could to avert war, the majority of the aristocrats and landowners and other traditional elites simply couldn’t be bothered. They were too lazy, cowardly, feckless, and apathetic. Instead of trying to save their country and the empire from destruction, they complacently remained aloof and chose to remain silent and not to get involved. They didn’t side with the (((REDACTEDS))); they simply remained neutral, detached, and disengaged. Speaking up to save their country was too much effort for them, and they simply couldn’t be bothered. Instead they chose to sit in their mansions and castles listlessly doing nothing, while Churchill goaded Britain into war.
It’s very frustrating, exasperating and depressing: the anti-war faction was the majority in both the Conservative party and the British public as a whole. If the traditional landowning aristocratic elite had cared enough to get involved and defeat Churchill’s warmongers, the war would have been averted and the Western Civilization would have been saved.
But most of the traditional aristocrats and gentry and squirearchy were too lazy and cowardly and complacent and apathetic to stand up for their country, and they chose to do nothing.
Indeed, that is what happened throughout the (((REDACTED))) infiltration, subversion, and takeover of Britain, even before the 1930s. Even back in the 1800s, when the (((REDACTEDS))) had very little political power or influence, the old aristocratic elite were simply too apathetic and complacent to do anything to stop the (((REDACTEDS))) from taking over Britain.
If the old aristocratic elite had cared enough, they could have spoken up and prevented the (((REDACTEDS))) from taking over. But most of the aristocrats simply couldn’t be bothered to take a stand. They were too busy playing polo and baccarat and enjoying the high life. Many of them were heavily in debt to the (((bankers))), in order to maintain their lavish lifestyles. Some of them even married the daughters of wealthy (((REDACTEDS))).
Ironically, the old aristocratic elite who could be bothered to lift a finger to stop the (((REDACTEDS))) from taking over, ended up being supplanted by the (((REDACTEDS))).
The (((REDACTEDS))) implemented a land tax, and then heavy income taxes and inheritance taxes, to destroy the remaining wealth and power of the aristocratic class.
Many of the aristocrats lost their wealth and had to sell their castles, manors and estates.
And during the war, most of the landed estates that remained were taken over by the military. Hundreds of English country houses were turned into military barracks, and were heavily damaged through wear and tear and neglect. After the war, many of these once-grand homes were demolished.
Today, the British nobles and aristocrats pathetically grovel to the (((REDACTEDS))) and beg the (((REDACTEDS))) for finance/banking jobs in the City of London.
Even the king is an obedient pawn of the (((REDACTEDS))).
That is how far the once-mighty British nobility, aristocracy, and gentry have fallen. Most of them couldn’t be bothered to lift a finger to stand up for their country even in the 1800s and early-mid 1900s, when they could have defeated the (((REDACTEDS))) and saved Britain.
The story of (most of) the British aristocracy over the past 150 years is a story of collective cowardice, fecklessness, disloyalty, complacency, laziness, and apathy.
It’s all very regrettable. Britain could have been saved so easily if the old aristocracy had collectively taken a stand to defeat the (((REDACTEDS))). But most of the aristocrats simply couldn’t be bothered.
Of course, there are some honorable and gallant exceptions. As I mentioned above, quite a few of the traditional aristocratic elite did join organizations such as Maule-Ramsay’s Right Club, in an effort to avert war. Unfortunately, they were unsuccessful, but their names should be remembered with honor. It was the last stand of the old British landowning aristocracy.
But unfortunately, those who took a stand were a small minority, and the vast majority of the old aristocracy and nobility were simply too complacent, lazy, cowardly and apathetic to do anything to save their country.
It’s all very depressing to think about how easily Britain could have been saved if the old aristocracy and nobility had done their duty in the 1800s or even the early 1900s. So many wasted opportunities.
But we must look to the future now. They didn’t do their duty, but WE WILL do ours to save the White race.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Friend of Britain:
I can only agree, though Ricardo was not, I think, Chancellor of the Exchequer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ricardo#Parliamentary_record
LikeLiked by 1 person
Man’s amazing bond with dinner chicken
Every life is precious and worth saving.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7wlS976Jmw
LikeLike
Wonderful story. Very moving. There are lots of decent, wonderful people out there. Thank you very much for posting this video.
Here is another beautiful story: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dAJYUKVjwo&list=PLhIBp272dp9BkAlMK3LPsLCNEtw5o3l5H&index=45&t=331s
LikeLike
Yvette Cooper is just plain bloody evil. What is it going to take to make Labour people like her realise that not everyone in this country has the same profoundly anti-British and liberal globalist opinions as she has? Freedom of speech and thought is the lifeblood of a democracy and needs to be protected not undermined then abolished.
Not that we are a genuine democracy in the first place since our archaic and clearly unfit for purpose electoral system of stand alone ‘pure’ First Past The Post effectively treats a person’s vote differently depending upon who they vote for and where they live:
https://www.makevotesmatter.org.uk
https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk
Votes in general elections and local elections should be EQUAL not unequal as they are at present. If equal votes were good enough for a referendum on EU membership in 2016 then they are also for normal elections.
LikeLike
I see that the latest mad tweet from the loony globalist Nick Reeves 9876 from Brighton, East Sussex, is ranting about Elon Musk helping the ‘fascist’, ‘pro-Russian’ AfD party in Germany to come to power. Apparently, according to him and a Labour Party MP they are near to gaining office and a new ‘utterly terrifying’ poll in Germany indicates this is going to happen soon.
This is NONSENSE. ONE poll reported that the AfD’s candidate for the Chancellorship, Alice Weidel, is the most popular with a rating of 33%. However, Germans do NOT vote directly for their Chancellor but for parties instead and individual candidates in the 298 FPTP constituencies. The AfD’s highest poll ratings are around 22%.
Because of their history, their ‘Basic Law’ ie the constitution was carefully designed by the Allies to try and ensure there would be no repetition of National Socialism/Nazism. This is the reason Germany’s President, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, is elected by the PARLIAMENT sitting in a joint session of the Bundestag and Bundesrat (the upper house) and NOT directly by the people. Hitler misused referendums and that is why referendums on a national scale as we had in 2016 are banned from taking place.
The AfD ARE popular but they are nowhere near taking office on their own since, unlike in this undemocratic ‘elected dictatorship’, you need to have either 50% or very near that of the national vote share to gain enough MPs to form a single-party government.
The AfD has also become increasingly Eurosceptic which will put a natural ceiling on their support levels since around 80% of Germans want Germany to be an EU member.
At any rate, the AfD is NOT the real ‘fascist’ party in Germany. Those two parties are Die Heimat (The Homeland) and Der Dritte Weg (The Third Way)
It would be interesting to know what Elon Musk’s real agenda is with regard to his meddling in European politics. He seems to want the EU to break-up as does Trump. It is not likely to happen whilst its biggest member, Germany, is still very pro-EU.
LikeLike
As Hermann Goering no less rather sarcastically but truefully remarked at the Nuremburg war crimes trials if Germany had used Britain’s electoral system Der Fuhrer and his party would have ‘won’ a landslide majority on less than 50% of the national vote. Britain is in no position at all to lecture Germany or any other country in Europe about democracy apart from Belarus (Putin’s only real friend on the Continent ) when it is only us and that country which uses FPTP on its own for an electoral system for our respective lower houses of parliament.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Because of their history, their ‘Basic Law’ ie the constitution was carefully designed by the Allies”
The “basic law” is an evil, anti-German, oppressive monstrosity imposed on the German people by the victorious (((Allies))).
When the German nationalist movement comes to power, they should abolish the “basic law” and replace it with a volkisch Germanic constitution which serves the racial interests of the indigenous German people.
Most importantly, the new Germanic volkisch constitution should specify that Germany belongs ONLY to the indigenous German race (volk), and that the (((REDACTEDS))) are the eternal enemies of the German people and have no place in Germany.
The citizenship of the (((REDACTEDS))) and all other non-Germans should be permanently revoked, and they should be deported forthwith.
Furthermore, the new Germanic constitution should criminalize race-mixing and define it as an act of treason.
LikeLike
The highest poll rating the AfD has achieved was a solitary one of 24.5% at the beginning of last year. Now, the highest they get up to is 22%. They want to pull Germany out of the Euro. Needless to say, having such a policy will lose many potential votes as bringing back a previous national currency would be a difficult thing to do with many complications eg the value of people’s savings. The Euro is designed to lock countries into EU membership with only an extremely hard exit being possible.
LikeLike
Trump and Elon are not likely to break the EU apart. If anything, the EU will strengthen and could finally find such a sense of unity that it becomes effectively the ‘United States of Europe’.
LikeLike
In solidarity with our Canadian cousins in their trade war with ‘The Orange One’/’Mr Tango Man’/’Mr Permatan’ let us all buy one of Canada’s finest products ie genuine, good quality maple syrup:
https://www.puremaple.co.uk
Lovely stuff!👍🤣😀👍👍
LikeLike
Ha, ha, Zelensky as Topol in one of my favourite films Fiddler On The Roof!😀🤣😃 I thought Gene Wilder was quite an accomplished actor. Some of his films I like as well.
Matt Goodwin, Reform UK may well be second in many Labour seats but just as the Liberal Democrats were second in many Conservative constituencies in the 1990’s to 2015 that doesn’t help much if the winning Labour MP has or Tory MP then had a sizable majority. So long as the Labour MP has a majority of 1 vote they will retain the seat and have 100% representation of it. In our electoral system you only have to have one more vote than your nearest opponent and do not need to have 50% plus of the share of the vote within the seat to win which is why MILLIONS of votes are ‘wasted’ at every general ‘election’
LikeLike