Twisted Pair 2 – UK


Home Forums The Automatic Earth Forum Twisted Pair 2 – UK

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
  • Author
  • #50300

    Salvador Dali Bather 1924   The US and UK are both at risk of severe legal challenges and hence “barrelling down towards great troubles” as I wro
    [See the full post at: Twisted Pair 2 – UK]


    In both, (Twisted Pair), the wishes of the rif-raf, ( the popular movement), will be ignored.
    The elites are fighting among themselves to preserve their income and lifestyle.
    Discovering what income and from where the elites get their income is the only way of being able to effectively combat an elite. (Ask Trump)


    re.: Twisted pair
    Where will the money come from (MMT) (Trump know)

    US set to impose tariffs on $7.5bn of EU exports in Airbus row

    “But if the US decides to impose WTO authorised countermeasures, it will be pushing the EU into a situation where we will have no other option than do the same,” the commission said.


    With Dali, my sentiments are rather the opposite of mine toward Gaugin: I prefer his earlier stuff to his signature style for which he is famous. Bather, 1924, does far more me than, say, The Persistence of Memory, which I perceive as Dali determining to make art that would sell. Not selling out, but trying to make ends meet while continuing to appease his muse and create original work.

    This is not a criticism of Dali. It is my perception that Dali was deeply torn inside. He was, after all, exiled by his family and village. Ouch.

    In his final years, his art regained some of the warmth and inner illumination I associate with his youthful work.


    Sometimes I wonder if the EU itself won’t disintegrate before Britain decides on Brexit. 😉

    Dr. D

    Bah. The British Supreme Court has only been around in this form since 2009. Somehow they got along without it lo these thousand years. So if they vanished, would anyone notice? No one knows where they fit. It would be different if they’d been integral to the founding, like here.

    Not that the other questions aren’t relevant. So the Court says they’re Primary and rule everything, including the Queen. Boris says he’s primary, and as head of Parliament, rules executive and legislative, while the court has no jurisdiction over a tradition that existed 500-years before they showed up. And the only one that actually HAS a credible case for pre-eminence, and unlimited precedent, where she merely lends her power voluntarily to the state is the Queen, and she’s abdicating all. I’m alright Jack.

    Any of them, including the EU, could solve this in a week if they wanted. The Queen can throw against the court and say, “Oi! Like it or not, I’M the one who said Prorogue was legal. I predate you.” Parliament is essentially required to call and election, and should, and won’t, because they would “lose” and the people would “win” over Westminster. The EU has to see this is no-win and shouldn’t try feverishly to be the villain every time. The court should disband themselves before somebody gets cross with their Henry VIII impersonation. Oh and the people should gilet jaune them all with cricket bats ‘til they fold. But clearly a nation of abdicators and surrenders. And they say that WE’RE the ones who always do the right thing after exhausting every other option. Human nature, I suppose.

    Leave But With A Deal may well be the largest group out there.

    That’s true but the EU will EBD before they allow the UK and their $11B to leave and set a precedent for leaving that Italy will follow behind. So: there IS no deal. There never will be a deal. The deal is kaput, it is no more, it has joined the choir invisible. If the EU had an army they would nuke the UK and invade before they would agree to a deal. So the majority of Britons can take the highly-advisible view that they should leave with a deal. They should. But that can and will never, ever, EVER, E / V / E / R happen, so they must needs make other plans. …Which I and like 500 other bloggers said as far back as 1999. Here we are, screwed as predicted, and still waiting as predicted, while Britain darkens each day.

    This is why the Leave with a Deal is being ignored. If they all want peace they can have it. If they all want a deal they can have it. It hardly takes an afternoon to say, “look this is happening, let’s make the best”. They don’t want peace and they don’t want a deal. They don’t even want a democracy.

    So what do you do?


    I suppose that if the UK still used the Law Lords concept that was in place before the Supreme Court was conceived in the 2005 Constitutional Reform Act, that would somehow be better? Not that I think it matters much to the steady demise of Great Britain via the usual factors that bury all empires, but still, the idea that it is somehow illegitimate to a) be relatively new, and b) independent of the snakepit known as Parliament, seems a matter of personal whimsy more than anything.

    Of course the Queen won’t do anything. She rules the tabloids, not Britain. If she were to exert genuine power openly, we’d have a Monarch Yes!/Monarchy No! tussle on top of the existing mess.

    I for one, would enjoy the spectacle but that hardly counts. As for now, no one gives a shit what the Queen thinks or wants, and everyone knows that BoJo was just using her as political cover. She proved her ineptitude in that act and is now toast as a comeback monarch.

    I agree with Raul:

    “The UK Supreme Court is in for the by far busiest time of its existence. And by the way, you can criticize the court, but only really by criticizing the way the judges on it are appointed, and then take action to change that way. If you try to question its credibility, however, you destroy the credibility of the entire judicial system, all of it.”

    There’s really only one true problem in all of this: democracy. Democracy is so popular with the people that they can barely muster a 50% voter turnout in most elections, unless its forced like in Australia (amazing what a chintzy $20 fine will do, raising participation from 47% and 78% to 91% and 96%). If there were a referendum tomorrow on democracy, democracy would lose by default, since less than half the people would bother to vote yea or nay. (The one benefit of the Queen inspiring a monarchy resurgent concern is that they might get a decent voter turnout. Brexit got a 72% because it was a Big Important Issue, and because players like Bojo are adept at whipping up plebiscite foam. Queen Redux might get a 90%. After which, people would soon resume their usual half-hearted dalliance on and off with this thing called voting, most of them deciding on the basis of as little proactive research and inquiry as possible.)

    Democratic nation-states have been the bane of humanity and the planet it lives on since Thomas Carlyle was in diapers. Democracy requires people give a shit beyond their private little horizons, and only sociopaths want such power.

    We simply aren’t designed to function in groups larger than tribes of 100-200. There’s some wisdom in that old Tower of Babel myth.

    Methinks that Brexit will end up a wet firecracker rather like Y2K. Come time, a zillion clerks will niggle the details and Parliament will sign because they have to sign something. It will be uncomfortable, maybe very uncomfortable, for awhile, but so it was after WWII.

    The UK doesn’t have any oil left to speak of, and little else to offer. I doubt the EU gives a shit. Their problem is the USA/NATO ruining their ability to get affordable reliable energy from Russia. As for $currency issues: everyone’s fucked in that regard, although Russia seems to have taken enough action to survive the inevitable collapse reasonably well — if they can keep the USA from going nuclear nutso.

    And after all, the EU was voted into existence by popular votes.


    Correction: mostly sociopaths want such power, not only sociopaths.

    John Day

    I forwarded personal communication from John Ward, of The Slog (fame), who keeps up, being a Limey, and author of this piece about the UK Supreme Court.
    This is his communication of 9/26/19:
    “Trust me, Ocean’s Eleven had nothing on this shower.
    Overnight, it has emerged that 9 of the 11 each receive a “stipend” of €175,000 per annum from the EU for their ‘European harmonisation duties’…..and the Chair of the Court Lady Hale ACTIVELY campaigned to Remain, as well as being in favour of revoking Article 50…..which, as it happens, was drafted originally by another member of the Supine Court, Lord Nunn.
    They’re bought….every last useless, arrogant, élitist international blocist one of them.
    A sad Englishman”

Viewing 9 posts - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.