{"id":256842,"date":"2016-07-20T01:36:00","date_gmt":"2016-07-20T01:36:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/?p=256842"},"modified":"2016-07-20T01:36:13","modified_gmt":"2016-07-20T01:36:13","slug":"britains-aristocracy-laying-brexit-thing","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/breaking-news\/britains-aristocracy-laying-brexit-thing\/","title":{"rendered":"How Britain’s Aristocracy Are Playing the Brexit Thing"},"content":{"rendered":"

Eric Zuesse, originally posted at strategic-culture.org<\/span><\/a> on July 6th; now updated in this version\u2019s closing paragraphs<\/span><\/p>\n

HISTORICAL PRELIMINARY<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

The European Union, and opposition to Brexit (or to any other exit from it), reflect the opposite of progressive values, but instead are an important part of the strategy owners of international corporations have for taking over governments in order to increase their own profits (and power). (Click here<\/span><\/a> and here<\/span><\/a> and for an accurate brief history of the U.S. CIA\u2019s involvement in financing, and then setting-up, the EU. This 2004 video documentary<\/span><\/a> supplements that, and focuses specifically on the popular movement in Britain to exit from the EU.)<\/span><\/p>\n

The \u201cEstablishment,\u201d or the aristocracy, favor the type of globalization (the EU itself, mega-\u2018trade\u2019 deals such as the TTIP, etc.) that\u2019s been occurring after World War II. Aristocrats control the international corporations and want them (want themselves) to rule the world \u2014 not democracy to rule the world, not the publics, in each country, to rule their countries.<\/span><\/p>\n

In any country, the aristocracy are the people who own controlling interests in international corporations, and they therefore possess real power in international affairs \u2014\u00a0such as they will have in the ultimate decision as to whether or not UK will exit EU<\/span><\/a>. <\/span><\/p>\n

To clarify: The aristocracy aren\u2019t necessarily descended from aristocrats, nor officially proclaimed (knighted, etc.) as \u2018aristocrats\u2019, but are instead the real holders of power, the people who make the decisions as to which politicians to fund, and as to which \u2018news\u2019 media the given aristocrat\u2019s corporations will fund by means of his or her corporation\u2019s advertising its products and services in that person\u2019s favored media (irrespective of whether the person happens also<\/i> to invest in or own those media<\/i>, not only own companies that advertise in them). Aristocrats shape the public opinion that, in a \u2018democracy\u2019, determines who rules, and who does not. Though some aristocrats have descended from aristocrats, others are first-generation aristocrats, but all of them hold the real power \u2014 both over the politicians, and over the media \u2014 unless the given country is an authentic democracy, which few countries actually are.<\/span><\/p>\n

Britain\u2019s aristocracy are unyielding that UK remain in EU; the reason they won\u2019t yield is that EU represents Europe\u2019s aristocracies<\/span><\/a>, including Britain\u2019s, and it holds\u00a0the power to override Britain\u2019s unwritten constitution in favor of Britain’s aristocracy<\/span><\/a>: EU is good to aristocrats \u2014 far better for them than any nation\u2019s Constitution is. They want it.<\/span><\/p>\n

Consequently, UK\u2019s aristocracy are determined that Britain will remain inside the European Union.<\/span><\/p>\n

Here is how they are carrying out this policy:<\/span><\/p>\n

I have previously explained the reasons\u00a0“Why There Will Probably Be A Second Referendum On\u00a0Brexit\u201d<\/span><\/a>, including the reasons why a second such referendum will almost certainly fail to meet the standard set for Brexit (British exit from the European Union) to move forward. In other words: Brexit will probably be reversed. The focus of the present article will instead be on the simultaneous operation by the Western \u2014 that\u2019s to say, by the U.S.-aristocracy-led \u2014 aristocracy (the aristocracies in America\u2019s vassal-nations), to tighten their control over UK politics so that such rebellions won\u2019t happen again; to do this by weakening, or getting rid of, UK politicians who resist the aristocracy, and by replacing those politicians with ones who have proven themselves loyal to the Western aristocracy. That\u2019s the aspect of the aristocracy\u2019s anti-Brexit operation, which will be discussed here \u2014 the replacement of Britain\u2019s pro-democracy leaders, by pro-aristocracy leaders: the aristocracy\u2019s using the current political turmoil in Britain so as to cement even more the power that international corporations have over the British government.<\/span><\/p>\n

THE CAMPAIGN TO GET RID OF JEREMY CORBYN<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

The populist anti-Tony-Blair leader of today\u2019s British Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn, calls himself a \u201cdemocratic socialist,\u201d like America\u2019s populist anti-Clinton U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders does; and Corbyn was expected to favor Brexit because on 17 September 2015 he strongly opposed U.S. President Barack Obama\u2019s proposed mega-\u2018trade\u2019 treaty with Europe, the TTIP<\/span><\/a> (which Sanders likewise opposes). However, instead, on 14 April 2016, Corbyn unexpectedly came out against<\/i> Brexit, by \u201cdeclaring himself to be in tune with the rest of his Party, which, as he put it, is \u2018overwhelmingly for staying in\u2019,\u201d as Britain\u2019s liberal Guardian<\/i> newspaper reported<\/span><\/a>, going on to note: \u201cThe relief [within the Labour Party] was intense because, without Labour voters, the referendum on 23 June is lost.\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n

Corbyn, in other words, reluctantly supported the EU \u2014 which wants to sign Obama\u2019s TTIP (which he hates) \u2014 because Corbyn didn\u2019t want to go against the majority of Labour Parliamentarians, many of whom are holdovers from the Tony Blair and Gordon Brown era, the era of \u201cGeorge W. Bush\u2019s lap dog\u201d Blair (and Brown). Today\u2019s Labour Parliamentarians are still beholden to the U.S. aristocracy, as much as Labour\u2019s nominal opponents the Tories are, and have been, beholden to them ever since World War II.<\/span><\/p>\n

In other words: the Western aristocracy know that Corbyn is against them. So: they want him out, and now they are using the Blair\/Brown Labourites in order to get rid of him by alleging that Corbyn has been a weak leader, one who wasn\u2019t \u201cgiving the leadership we need\u201d<\/span><\/a> in order to keep UK in EU. What the U.S. aristocracy (and their vassal UK aristocrats) want more than anything else is to ram through a passage-into-law of Obama\u2019s massive TTIP \u2018trade\u2019 treaty, which (like the original of the EU itself did<\/span><\/a>) describes itself as being about \u2018trade\u2019 but is instead a transfer of national sovereignty (regarding the environment, workers\u2019 rights, and product safety) to international corporations<\/span><\/a>. By eliminating Corbyn, the aristocrats would win a Britain both of whose major political Parties are, in effect, owned by them. <\/span><\/p>\n

Promptly when on June 24th the Brexit \u2018victory\u2019 was announced, the anti-Brexit Tory Prime Minister David Cameron quit (effective in October) because he had failed to achieve the demand of his masters, to keep Britain inside the EU. But now the supposedly more progressive Party, Labour, is likewise trying to force Corbyn out because he has been failing the very same masters, regarding Brexit. All of this despite the British public\u2019s having actually voted, by 52% to 48%, to exit the EU. A country like this calls itself a \u2018democracy\u2019? But Corbyn is a persistent democrat: he refuses to quit. He thinks that there might be enough of a democracy left in UK so that the real leadership of the country might reflect, at least to some extent, the country\u2019s public.<\/span><\/p>\n

Here is how much of a dictatorship<\/span><\/a> the EU actually is: John Hilary reported in Britain\u2019s Independent<\/i> on 12 October 2015<\/span><\/a>:\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

When I asked the<\/i> [EU\u2019s] trade commissioner <\/i>[Cecilia\u00a0Malmstr\u00f6m] how she could continue her persistent promotion of the <\/i>[TTIP] deal\u00a0in the face of such massive public opposition, her response came back icy cold:\u00a0<\/i><\/span>\u201cI do not take my mandate from the European people.\u201d<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

So who does Cecilia Malmstr\u00f6m take her mandate from? Officially, EU commissioners are supposed to follow the elected governments of Europe. Yet the European Commission is carrying on the TTIP negotiations\u00a0<\/i>behind closed doors<\/i><\/span><\/a>\u00a0without the proper involvement <\/i>[of] European governments, let alone MPs or members of the public. British civil servants have admitted to us that they have been kept in the dark throughout the TTIP talks, and that this makes their job impossible.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

In reality,\u00a0as a new report from War on Want has just revealed,\u00a0Malmstr\u00f6m receives her orders\u00a0<\/i>directly from the corporate lobbyists<\/i><\/span><\/a>\u00a0that swarm around Brussels.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

Those \u201ccorporate lobbyists\u201d are agents of the aristocracy; the EU represents them \u2014 not the European public<\/span><\/a>. There is no way that any<\/i> nation\u2019s staying inside the EU can be authentically democratic. To be in the EU is to be in a dictatorship<\/span><\/a>. Jeremy Corbyn was trying to square the circle in order to avoid his going to war against his own Party\u2019s senior leadership. But now this senior leadership are going to war against him and trying to remove him from the leadership \u2014 even though his tepid support of the EU turned out to reflect rather closely the British public\u2019s tepid opposition to the EU. Obviously, the senior leadership in the Labour Party are merely Tories in verbal disguise. Corbyn has a rebellion on his hands \u2014 a rebellion from Britain\u2019s \u2018Labour\u2019 aristocrats.<\/span><\/p>\n

In this context, one can understand also such things as the Guardian<\/i>\u2019s headline on June 21st, \u201cEU to extend sanctions against Russia<\/span><\/a>: Envoys from 28 member states in consensus over punishing Moscow further for annexation of Crimea and presence in Ukraine.\u201d It\u2019s what America\u2019s international corporations want. It\u2019s all part of the same package \u2014 and so too is NATO.<\/span><\/p>\n

On June 24th, the Financial Times<\/i> headlined \u201cFederal Reserve to provide dollar liquidity\u201d<\/span><\/a> and reported that, \u201cIn a statement\u00a0issued hours\u00a0after the UK\u00a0voted to leave\u00a0the EU, the Fed\u00a0said it was ready\u00a0to funnel dollars\u00a0to other central\u00a0banks via\u00a0existing swap\u00a0lines set up\u00a0during the 2008\u00a0financial crisis.\u201d In other words: the U.S. aristocracy were pledging assistance to UK aristocrats, to help them weather the storm of their temporary defeat.<\/span><\/p>\n

By June 26th, America\u2019s National Public Radio bannered, \u201cAfter Brexit Vote, Labour Leader Faces Open Revolt Inside His Party\u201d<\/span><\/a>, and reported that 12 members of Corbyn\u2019s own \u201cshadow cabinet\u201d (people who would become the Prime Minister\u2019s Cabinet if Corbyn were to oust the Conservative government) had resigned in protest at Corbyn\u2019s leadership. \u201cCorbyn is \u2018regarded as the most Eurosceptic Labour leader in years,\u2019 as the BBC reported.\u201d Neither the American government\u2019s nor the British government\u2019s radio network portrayed in any positive light a politician\u2019s being \u201cEurosceptic\u201d \u2014 only support of the EU dictatorship was favorably reported (but without mention that the EU is<\/i> a dictatorship \u2014 that fact is never<\/i> reported by Western propaganda).<\/span><\/p>\n

Among the mouthpieces of Britain\u2019s liberal aristocracy, all of populism \u2014 both left and right \u2014 got damned, so that senior leaders of the Labour Party could only have been smiling. Here is George Monbiot\u2019s commentary in the Guardian<\/i>, on June 28th, under the headline, \u201cBrexit is a disaster, but we can build on the ruins\u201d<\/span><\/a>: <\/span><\/p>\n

Yes, the Brexit vote has empowered the most gruesome collection of schemers, misfits, liars, extremists and puppets that British politics has produced in the modern era. It threatens to invoke a new age of demagoguery, a threat sharpened by the thought that if this can happen, so can Donald Trump.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

It has provoked a resurgence of racism and an economic crisis whose dimensions remain unknown. It jeopardises the living world, the NHS, peace in Ireland and the rest of the European Union. It promotes what the billionaire Peter Hargreaves gleefully anticipated as \u201cfantastic insecurity\u201d.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

On Thursday June 30th, Julie Hyland headlined at countercurrents.org, \u201cIn Right-Wing Putsch, UK Labour\u00a0MPs Deliver Overwhelming Anti-Corbyn Vote\u201d<\/span><\/a>, and reported:<\/span><\/p>\n

Fully 81 percent of the parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) supported Tuesday\u2019s motion of no-confidence in leader Jeremy Corbyn. Just 40 Labour MPs voted against the motion, with 172 in\u00a0favour. Thirteen did not vote at all and there were four spoilt ballots.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

The extraordinary scale of the right-wing coup, which had already seen Corbyn lose most of his\u00a0shadow cabinet in a series of timed resignations, was intended to force the Labour leader to\u00a0resign. But in a statement put out moments after the result, Corbyn said that he had been elected\u00a0\u201cby 60 percent of Labour members and supporters\u201d only last September, and \u201cI will not betray\u00a0them by resigning.\u201d<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

The no-confidence motion, he said, has \u201cno constitutional legitimacy.\u201d<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

Corbyn is correct in that the motion is non-binding.<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

The first person proposed as Labour\u2019s replacement for Corbyn was reported there to be a Labour Member of Parliament who had just quit from Corbyn\u2019s \u201cshadow cabinet,\u201d Angela Eagle. She had voted consistently for the hard-line, George W. Bush, Tony Blair, Barack Obama, David Cameron, Hillary Clinton, invade-everywhere, coup-everywhere, position, even to invade Iraq in 2003, and to block a proposal for the government to investigate the decision that had been made to invade Iraq. She \u201cGenerally voted for more EU integration.\u201d<\/span><\/a> She has been an angel for the aristocracy. Her record also provided to the public the symbolism they needed that she cared about oppressed peoples, such as gays. The idea here would be to replace a Bernie Sanders type by a Hillary Clinton type. But Corbyn wasn\u2019t quitting. And other possible candidates to replace him were also scrambling to win the support of Labour MPs. <\/span><\/p>\n

Then, on July 19th, the Guardian<\/i> bannered \u201cOwen Smith to Face Corbyn in Labour Leadership Challenge<\/span><\/a>: Angela Eagle steps aside to make way for single challenger in race to lead party after receiving fewer nominations than Smith.\u201d A Corbyn supporter was quoted there as saying about Smith, \u201cIn some respects, he\u2019s an easier beast to fight, as it\u2019s obvious now to voters that he\u2019s the Blair-lite candidate and he can\u2019t hide it any more.\u201d Smith was openly opposing Brexit, seeking \u201ca referendum on the Brexit deal.\u201d On 22 August, ballots will be sent to \u201celigible members\u201d of the Labour Party. The outcome of the vote is set to be announced at the Labour Party\u2019s Conference, on September 24th. Smith stated his pitch to the Party: \u201cI want to say to all members of the Labour party tonight, young and old, longstanding and new members: I can be your champion. I am just as radical as Jeremy Corbyn.\u201d Like Hillary Clinton who tried to steal the label \u201cprogressive\u201d from her primary opponent Bernie Sanders, and fooled enough people to win the Democratic Party\u2019s nomination, Smith would try to steal the \u201cradical\u201d label from Corbyn. The Guardian<\/i> article gave no information about Owen Smith, but even just a look at wikipedia<\/span><\/a> shows that he had been in Parliament only since 2010, after having been a lobbyist for Pfizer, and he was now the \u201cShadow Work and Pensions Secretary under Jeremy Corbyn from 2015 until he resigned in June 2016. On 13 July 2016, he announced his intention to stand for the leadership of the Labour Party.\u201d That was a fast rise (not that a reader would know anything about it from the Guardian\u2019s<\/i> article). So, now the \u201celigible members\u201d of the \u2018Labour\u2019 Party would choose between Corbyn and a now self-styled \u2018radical\u2019 who had only recently entered politics after having been a pharmaceutical industry lobbyist. What do political labels even mean anymore? Are they just bumper-stickers for bumpos and bimbos? Really?<\/span><\/p>\n

CONCLUSION<\/b><\/span><\/p>\n

On the Conservative Party side of things, the aristocracy\u2019s control was more ironclad. Boris Johnson, the (till-then) rising pro-Brexit star in that Party, who had widely been expected to lead his Party into the next elections, suddenly and unexplainedly quit on June 30th his Party\u2019s leadership-contest after he found that the Party\u2019s other leaders mysteriously abandoned him and were coalescing around anti-Brexit candidates, including especially one member of his own team.<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Then, on July 4th, Nigel Farage, the leader of the UK Independence Party, who had led the successful battle for Brexit, shocked everyone by resigning as his Party\u2019s leader<\/span><\/a>. There was speculation that this would allow his Party \u201can\u00a0opportunity to select a less polarising figure.\u201d The leaders of the successful Brexit movement were now gone.<\/span><\/p>\n

Such is British \u2018democracy\u2019 \u2014 namely: less and less, as the aristocracy\u2019s grip is becoming more and more.<\/span><\/p>\n

On July 15th, the Conservative Party\u2019s new leader, Theresa May, made clear right away that she\u2019s aiming to gut environmental regulation in the UK: the Independent<\/i> headlined \u201cClimate change department closed by Theresa May<\/span><\/a> in ‘plain stupid’ and ‘deeply worrying’ move: Campaigners called for ‘urgent reassurance from the new government’ that the fight against climate change and pollution will not be \u2018abandoned\u2019.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

The Brexit crisis was being used as an excuse to fascistify things, regardless what other outcome it might have.<\/span><\/p>\n

Even an essentially progressive vote of the public, to free their nation from the dictatorship in Brussels (the EU), was thus turned into an excuse for the nation to veer far to the right.<\/span><\/p>\n

And, of course, it\u2019s a global thing, not merely British. For example, on July 2nd, the top of the home page at Huffington Post bannered \u201cTHE WEEK BRITAIN CRASHED THE WORLD\u201d<\/span><\/a>, as if the \u201ccrash\u201d were likely to be permanent instead of overruled, and as if that \u201ccrash\u201d were a threat to the public, instead of to the aristocrats<\/span><\/a> themselves. The Brexit vote was thus being used on this side of the Atlantic to propagandize for adopting international dictatorship here, too \u2014 perhaps the TPP. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014\u2014<\/span><\/p>\n

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of\u00a0 They\u2019re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010<\/i><\/span><\/a>,<\/i> and of<\/span> \u00a0<\/i>CHRIST\u2019S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity<\/i><\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Eric Zuesse, originally posted at strategic-culture.org on July 6th; now updated in this version\u2019s closing paragraphs HISTORICAL PRELIMINARY The European Union, and opposition to Brexit (or to any other exit from it), reflect the opposite of progressive values, but instead are an important part of the strategy owners of international corporations have for taking over […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1254,"featured_media":256822,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[487],"tags":[30,2286,96,93,535,757,1023,55,40],"class_list":{"0":"post-256842","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-breaking-news","8":"tag-big-brother","9":"tag-brexit","10":"tag-cover-up","11":"tag-eu","12":"tag-global-news","13":"tag-nato","14":"tag-nuclear","15":"tag-uk-news","16":"tag-white-house"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/256842","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1254"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=256842"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/256842\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/256822"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=256842"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=256842"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=256842"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}