Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
The comments to this entry are closed.
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
The comments to this entry are closed.
Yes, pretty much agree with all of that. A number of points:
1. Yes the US financial assistance was on commercial terms (why shouldn't it be?). However it was offered to us and not the other side-naturally this was a cynical move to extract as much from us as possible-but then thats business. It also had the helpful effect for the US of ending the Empire. This was also a benefit to us but the US didn't do for that reason. The Empire was unprofitable and the investment should have been put into Britain.
2.Agreed,WW2 was a disaster and should not have been fought. Nazi Germany was essentially bankrupt and would have collapsed, just as the Soviet Union did-it was only a matter of time-probably a short time.
3. Yes the Commonwealth is a total waste of time-but we should trade with them and anyone else we can.
4. The single market isn't brilliant and certainly not as beneficial as global trade-but we can do both-and should.
Great site btw.
Posted by: MickC | Tuesday, December 13, 2011 at 03:52 PM
I was being fairly sarcastic. You are right about the Empire, but US financial "assistance" was on commercial terms and took us until Tony Blair's term in office to pay off.
Personally, I don't think we should have fought WWII. We went to war under our treaty with Poland and ended up handing the Poles to Stalin. We didn't save the Jews from the Holocaust. We crippled ourselves financially; essentially for the benefit of the French (who didn't fire a shot in their own defence) and other mainland European nations, most of whom are not remotely friendly.
Our weakened post-war state meant that we couldn't manage the - inevitable and desirable - end of Empire as well as we could have done otherwise. Various Commonwealth despots owe their chances of plunder to that, sadly. All in all it was a disaster for us and not remotely comparable (except humourously) to the EU.
Certainly political union was a bridge too far, but personally I don't see the single market as beneficial either. Parochial Euro-centric nations might see it as good but for a global trader like Britain, the tariff barrier outside matters more than abolishing the barriers inside. We are constantly told how much of our trade is with the EU, but that's after decades of living within that barrier. It's a miracle the proportion is so low (and don't forget it's in deficit anyway).
Posted by: Tom | Tuesday, December 13, 2011 at 12:40 PM
We were alone apart from the Empire and US financial assistance! The Axis powers never had any real prospect of "winning" and probably never wanted the widespread war which ensued. Still, if you want your citizens to go and fight (and die), it is always best to paint the opposition as an all powerful Goliath-it certainly worked after 9/11.
The EU situation is entirely different. Our "partners" have galloped off down the wrong track and there will be an almighty crash when they reach the end. Many of us thought that would be the case when the trade association became an attempt at political union. But the single market is a good thing and will probably survive. The EU as political union is an answer to yesterdays problem.
Posted by: MickC | Tuesday, December 13, 2011 at 10:55 AM
Do you really think Europe will decide to go it alone? ^_^
Posted by: Moggsy | Monday, December 12, 2011 at 08:04 AM
Brilliant.
I see Daniel Hannan has just gone with the same picture.
If only we were more alone!
Posted by: Suboptimal Planet | Saturday, December 10, 2011 at 10:35 AM