Is Populism Really a Problem?

We’re supposed to think it is.

Just look at the havoc populism has wrought on our once stable, orderly and deeply contented Western societies. The seismic shock of Brexit, the Trumpocalypse, the rise of Front National and Germany’s current coalition woes are just a few examples of populism’s pernicious and harmful effects.

At every turn we see populism on the rise, more often than not defined as an entirely negative cultural and political force. We can be certain in our analysis because our moral, intellectual and social betters inside the commentariat bubble have declared it to be so. You know the people I’m talking about; those highly educated, highly paid and infallible analysts who told us Britain would sink into the ocean the day after a Brexit vote. The ones who were certain Donald Trump had a less than 2% chance of becoming president. The ones who wrote off Jeremy Corbyn as a joke.

Whilst it’s abundantly clear that the populist appeal of Corbyn’s Labour Party is very different from that of Germany’s AFD, the measureable rise of both groups is clear, present and tangible evidence that the populists are firmly in the ascendancy and the establishment doesn’t really know what to do. This lack of political, cultural and economic imagination shouldn’t really be a huge surprise when we consider how the Oxford English Dictionary defines populism as “a political approach that strives to appeal to ordinary people who feel that their concerns are disregarded by established elite groups.”

In other words, ordinary voters from across the political spectrum are united by an underlying belief that their societies have been usurped by a self-serving, narrow clique of political, media and business interests who actually despise the very people upon whom they rely for either money or votes…and often both at the same time. Whether the prescribed cure is civic nationalism or Soviet style socialism, the diagnosis of a self-serving and sneering elite is pretty much uniform across the Western world at this point.

Millions of elite media words have been expended in the examination of populism’s rise, offering both explanation and solution to this dangerous and unpredictable social force. Naturally most of them are completely wrong because they’re looking out from within the very same media bubble which has fuelled populism’s rebirth and inexorable rise. From their vantage point, they cannot see the simplest and neatest explanation for this mystifying and troubling trend.

The populists are right.

For more than three decades now, the ruling political, financial and media class has controlled Western societies very successfully through their complete domination of the Overton window. For those who don’t know, the Overton window is the range of views that any society considers to be within acceptable political discourse. Any idea outside the Overton window is considered extreme or fringe, and therefore not worthy of serious discussion.

Here in the UK, the most obvious example of Overton control has been a pathological reluctance to seriously question the benefits of continued EU membership. For decades, that subject was summarily declared off-limits by all mainstream political parties, and ruthlessly suppressed by their media enablers.

The result? Growing frustration, anger, and eventually Brexit.

Naturally this political, social, and cultural strategy of Overton control is dependent upon the policies inside the acceptable space being largely successful. However the Iraq war, terrorism, the banking crisis, growing inequality and borderless nations have exposed a con trick by a cynical cartel rather than ushering in the comfortable, centrist utopia we were implicitly promised. As the number and magnitude of problems has grown, the establishment’s response has been to shrink the Overton window still further, allowing fewer and fewer possible remedies to be discussed within polite society. This has naturally and inevitably led to an unsustainable tension between an increasingly embattled elite and an increasingly alienated population.

Something had to snap, and those once unthinkable ideas like enforcing immigration law and famous people paying the same tax as everyone else have poured into the public consciousness and gained significant mass appeal. After all, that’s all we ever really wanted in the first place. If only they’d asked us.

So, is populism really a problem? No…it’s the only civilised solution.

Image courtesy of Stuart Miles at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Nothing will satisfy the Eurocrats now

With Theresa May’s heavily trailed Europe speech rapidly approaching, the commentariat have gone into a kind of speculative overdrive as they feverishly try to second guess the shape and form of any revised Brexit offer the Prime Minister might make. Tales of a two year transition period and a £35 billion Brexit bill have been bandied about for the last week, and will no doubt become even more speculative as the big day draws closer.

People shouldn’t get their hopes up. As I explained in my earlier article, it seems unlikely that any deal offered by Britain will be sufficient to satisfy the EU negotiators, regardless of what each member state might privately think.

If, and it’s a big if, the figure of £35 billion is even reasonably accurate, it cannot simply be forked over without expecting something in return. Such an offer will surely be conditional on the UK exiting both the Single Market and the Customs Union in March 2019. This would allow the UK to negotiate trade on its own while retaining tariff free access to the Single Market for a short period. It will also deliver on Britain’s commitment to the current EU budget period which ends in 2020. This all seems quite reasonable, generous even, but Michel Barnier et al have thus far proved completely unwilling to accept any offer which is not an exact continuation of the current status quo.

Britain is often accused of wanting to have its Brexit cake and eat it, yet it’s the European Union which has steadfastly sought to retain every advantage it currently enjoys and give nothing in return.

For reasons that have never been fully explained, the EU seems to believe it can easily extract tens of billions of pounds from a leaving member state in return for a vague promise of future trade talks, with no certain outcome. Nobody in their right mind would accept that kind of dodgy get rich scheme pitch, and the Prime Minister must know the political and financial folly of such a lopsided arrangement.

Instead of engaging in constructive discussions, Brussels has embarked on a counterproductive campaign of deliberate discourtesy every time the UK has offered a solution to any Brexit problem. This cannot be an accident, just look at their responses so far…

Theresa May is “living in another galaxy” when it comes to the colossal, nebulous and ever-changing “divorce bill.”

Proposed customs and border arrangements are “a fantasy.”

An offer regarding citizens’ rights is a “damp squib.”

The Irish border proposals are “magical thinking.”

Conclusion: the EU has no interest in reaching any kind of pragmatic, mutually beneficial accommodation with the first nation ever to cut ties with this increasingly authoritarian bloc. They can’t risk setting a dangerous political precedent as they know for sure that other nations will follow. It’s becoming increasingly clear that the no-deal Brexit scenario was probably decided within hours of the referendum result.

This will be the background behind the Prime Minister’s speech on Friday. She may be gracious and accommodating, or combative and confrontational. In fact it doesn’t really matter which approach she adopts because the response has already been decided. It’ll probably take under an hour for the inevitable hoots of laughter and derision to pour forth from the Brussels bureaucrats and their metropolitan media enablers.

We’re wasting our time.

Image courtesy of Michal Zacharzewski at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

North Korea’s A-Team H-Bomb

Where the hell did that come from?

North Korea’s alleged H-bomb test seems to have taken the world completely by surprise. Indeed, when it comes to constructing impossible devices with no resources, Big Kim and his boys would surely give the A-Team a run for their money.

There are two possibilities here. Firstly, that a nation instructing its soldiers to “steal corn from the fields” has somehow managed, in complete secrecy, to expedite such a rapid development in its nuclear program that the power of its weapons has increased fivefold in eighteen months.

The second possibility is that they’ve had outside help.

Given that Pyongyang’s gloating publicity pictures immediately made me think that Sean Connery was about to burst in and beat up the bad guys, I’m pretty confident that, as usual, China is the hidden director behind this latest international drama.

Let’s look at the evidence. China controls roughly 90% of North Korea’s trade and supplies aid directly to Pyongyang, thus bypassing the United Nations. To put it another way, North Korea is completely dependent on China for its continued existence. Despite it endless propagandising, the DPRK is in fact a Chinese franchise state, almost completely under Beijing’s control. The North Koreans literally do not eat without the continued support and goodwill of the Chinese Communist Party.

This inconvenient truth naturally raises another important question. Why is China giving material support to North Korea, and thus encouraging this dangerous escalation of tensions between (alleged) nuclear armed states? Surely China’s interests lie in keeping their impoverished neighbours on short rations. Business as usual has been very lucrative for the Chinese, as they circumvent UN sanctions by plundering North Korea’s mineral wealth and laundering it through their massive manufacturing sector. That rather grubby practice has given Western consumers cheap iPads, funded China’s continued military expansion and made a handful of merchant banks and global corporations rich beyond the dreams of avarice. Everybody’s happy, except the starved and brutalised peasantry of the North Korean gulag. Hey ho.

Instead of continuing to grow ever wealthier and more powerful, China suddenly seems willing to risk all that by pushing its most closely controlled vassal state into a game of nuclear brinkmanship with unknowable outcomes. For some reason, Beijing now believes this is the right path to follow.

What has changed? What could possibly be at stake to risk such a hazardous and uncertain course of action?

I believe the answer lies here, in plain sight.

With little fanfare and even less mainstream publicity, a press release recently appeared on the official White House website. In part it says that “President Trump is signing a Presidential Memorandum to direct the United States Trade Representative (USTR) to examine whether China should be investigated for unreasonable or discriminatory policies that may harm American [intellectual property] rights, innovation, or technological development.”

The memorandum itself specifically states that China has “implemented laws, policies, and practices and has taken actions related to intellectual property, innovation, and technology that may encourage or require the transfer of American technology and intellectual property to enterprises in China or that may otherwise negatively affect American economic interests.”

In other words, China stands accused of wholesale appropriation and outright theft of huge amounts of intellectual property from Western companies, developers and agencies. Unsurprisingly, Beijing has bristled at the mooted enquiry, denouncing it as a “unilateral and protectionist practice.” However, an Associated Press article claims that “more than 20 percent of 100 American companies that responded to a survey by the U.S.-China Business Council, an industry group, said they were asked to transfer technology within the past three years as a condition of market access.” The article goes on to say that “foreign business groups complain companies are being squeezed out of promising Chinese markets or pressured to hand over technology for electric cars and other emerging industries.”

No wonder the Chinese have released their snarling attack dog to threaten the current cosy world order, the very foundations of their suspiciously swift economic and military growth are under real threat, perhaps for the very first time.

The information war has finally arrived in the real world, and it could get bloody.

Image courtesy of Idea go at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Labour’s Back to the Future Brexit

Roll up, roll up! Get your new and improved Labour Brexit right here! Much softer than brand Tory and guaranteed to preserve the status quo by remaining inside the customs union and the single market. It’s kinder and more moral too, with extra freedom of movement and ECJ oversight baked in for another two years…or maybe that’s four, or maybe, perhaps, possibly even longer than that. But don’t you worry, Britain absolutely will be leaving the European Union in 2019. Oh sure, there are some details to sort out, but apart from the continued jurisdiction of the ECJ, freedom of movement, membership fees and EU trade supremacy, Britain will be completely independent. We are absolutely committed to delivering Brexit.

Seriously, is anyone still buying this snake oil b******t? If they are, then I have a very nice bridge…

If Sir Keir Starmer’s new Brexit formula feels oddly familiar, it’s because we’ve been here before, several times. The Labour Party is taking a well-trodden path to a certain dead end, and it clearly believes its voter base is either too dim or too blindly tribal to notice or care. Labour’s newly unveiled Brexit policy is exactly the kind of cherry picking fantasy the EU has firmly rejected from day one, and with good cause. If the whole Brexit process has proven one indisputable fact, it’s that you’re either in the EU or you’re not. There are no half measures, yet the Labour Party seems to think it can somehow leave and remain at the same time. Good luck with that.

Why should the EU even consider the concept of such an unprecedented and awkward arrangement, especially for a member state that’s going to be leaving anyway? Unless it’s a ruse to keep Britain shackled to Brussels indefinitely, they have no incentive to even discuss such a ridiculous idea.

Back in June, millions of Labour Leave voters cast their ballots in good faith, safe in the knowledge that the party they backed were not attempting to remain in the EU via the back door, just as their arch enemy Theresa May had previously warned. Then…abracadabra…poof! Overnight the Labour Party has press-ganged their votes into serving a mendacious attempt to remain in the EU in all but name. At least Tory and Lib Dem backers knew what they were signing up for.

I guess a lot of younger Labour voters are now starting to understand why their elders voted Leave in such huge numbers. They’ve now had a direct taste of the utter contempt in which the party the many holds both them and their views.

Feeling angry and duped? You bloody well should be!

Image courtesy of artur84 at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Is “Rudderless” Trump Preparing to Outflank the Establishment?

At first glance, that seems like an outrageous question with a self-evident answer, but the last two years should caution us all against taking anything for granted. Received wisdom just ain’t what it used to be.

As I’ve watched the US media establishment abandon any pretence of objectivity to declare war on their elected head of state, it’s been tempting to buy into the narrative that President Trump is indeed an overgrown man-baby who is morally and intellectually incapable of holding high office.

Tune into CNN,
MSNBC or ABC; visit the New York Times, the Washington Post or any other mainstream media outlet and we basically hear the same story. This week has been Trump’s worst. It’s a disaster. His White House is ineffective and chaotic. Staff are fighting each other and the leaks just won’t stop. He’s bound to fall at any moment. Stay tuned…here it comes…

Sure, on the face of it that seems like a pretty reasonable assessment, but the normal rules no longer apply and this president is following a different playbook.

Does anyone else think it strange that Trump continually goes out of his way to pick fights with an unashamedly partisan media class?

Why?

Why would anyone deliberately antagonise such a powerful and influential group? Either this president is too stupid to understand the damage he’s doing to himself, or perhaps he’s deliberately goading the commentariat to ensure they stay good and mad at him for the foreseeable future.

Something’s been bothering me about Trump for a long time now. It’s been at the back of my mind and on the tip of my tongue ever since he took office. He reminded me of someone, but I couldn’t quite figure out who it was. Then at last the answer came to me, and his actions during the last month or so have solidified that idea.

I’ll ask those readers who are old enough to cast their minds back to Gulf War one, and what was arguably the world’s first live-streamed media conflict. Enter one General Norman Schwarzkopf, or stormin’ Norman as he was colloquially known. Bull-necked and large of stature, Schwarzkopf was almost a walking stereotype. A loud, brash, rootin’ tootin’ hip shootin’ American that we oh so cultured Europeans look down our noses at. A cab driver with stars on his collar. How ridiculous, and how embarrassing for the civilised world

History has since disproven that undeservedly condescending assessment. In fact that loud, brash and caricature-ish facade disguised a razor-sharp intellect and a superb tactical mind. Schwarzkopf used the media saturation of that conflict to hoodwink the entire world and pulled off a brilliant flanking manoeuvre. By swinging up through the empty desert of western Iraq, Schwarzkopf ensured the destruction of Iraqi forces fleeing Kuwait and the successful encirclement of the elite Republican Guard. Only politics saved them.

The political events of the last fortnight have led me to wonder if we aren’t seeing a similar manoeuvre unfolding on the media and cultural battlefield.

Let’s look at the facts. Bannon is back at Breitbart where he belongs, and now Gorka is suddenly gone. Despite previous statements to the contrary, more troops are heading to Afghanistan and Donald Trump has spoken at length about healing and togetherness. This has coincided with a significant uptick in antagonism towards entrenched political and media interests, just to keep them boiling with rage at the very idea of President Trump even existing.

Instead of analysing every tweet and condemning every word not spoken as they believe it should be, what remains of the credible media might want to take a look at that dust cloud forming on the horizon. There may be nothing to it, but they’d best send some scouts out to check. It just might be evidence of Trump’s considerable cultural forces advancing to occupy the centre ground they’ve so recklessly abandoned in their obsessive pursuit of him. If that is the case, and if the mainstream media don’t change course fast, then they can expect to find themselves stranded on America’s lunatic fringe just in time for the midterm elections.

If that really is Trump’s strategy and the establishment refuses to adapt to a changing reality, there will be a cultural and political bloodbath the likes of which any nation seldom sees. The war will be over. For good.

Image courtesy of czoborraul at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Why this statue’s fall should concern us all

Following the bloody events in Charlottesville over the weekend, the Durham (North Carolina) branch of the Workers World Party (WWP) held a rally of solidarity in support of those “anti-fascist” protesters who clashed with Unite the Right marchers on that tragic day.

The WWP website reports that there were over 100 protesters present at this solidarity rally, during which a statue dedicated to the Confederate soldiers of the Civil War was pulled off its plinth and onto the ground. Video of the incident was uploaded to the internet and has since become worldwide news, clocking up well in excess of 100,000 views.

To the credit of local law enforcement, one of the main instigators of this illegal act has since been arrested and charged with various offences such as incitement to riot and damage to property.

Regardless of anyone’s opinion on the merits of Confederacy monuments, the County Sheriff’s office were absolutely right to take action against the main instigator of this event, WWP member Takiya Fatima Thompson. She remains predictably unrepentant, and she has amassed an army of online cheerleaders to help fight her cause. This glaring example of highly selective and conditional support for the rule of law is indicative of a growing and disturbing trend within Western civilisation generally and the US in particular.

I’m going to spell it out here, because it’s so fundamentally important. Simply not liking the guy who sits in the Oval Office is no justification for activists to thumb their noses at the law because they feel strongly about a particular issue; and it makes no difference even if they really, really can’t stand the current President. The strength of someone’s feelings is not magically connected to their obligation to behave legally.

Supporters of Takiya Thompson are predictably falling back on the argument that citizens have a moral duty to resist tyrannical and oppressive regimes, and they might have a point if we were discussing arbitrary arrests or the suspension of habeas corpus; but we’re not anywhere near that. We are in fact talking about a bronze statue that’s been standing quietly in North Carolina since the 1920s. Whatever its faults, that statue has never harmed anyone, abused their rights, selectively enforced the law or ended someone’s career for daring to express an opinion which does not conform to some inflexible and yet ever-changing criteria.

The Durham statue incident perfectly illustrates the rise of a new and pernicious tyranny which comes, as always, dressed in the disguise of justice and progress. Whether it’s hounding law abiding citizens out of their jobs, protesting the results of legitimate plebiscites or tearing down legally erected statues, the same hollow arguments ring out from megaphones across the civilised world as an increasingly self-righteous and self-regarding minority seek to impose their will through brute force and social intimidation.

If the North Carolina legislators have any regard for their own authority then the Boy in Gray must rise again. In time he may fall, but let him fall lawfully and with honour. Let him not be spirited away to some undisclosed warehouse, hidden from polite society as an inconvenience to be avoided rather than a sacred principle to be defended.

According to CNN, the assembled crowd chanted “we are the revolution” as the statue fell. If, as I suspect, that plinth remains empty, then a legitimately selected legislature will have allowed the Workers World Party to decide which images the good people of North Carolina may and may not look upon as they go about their lawful business.

With results like that, who needs elections?

Image courtesy of Sira Anamwong at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Revealed: The World’s Biggest Blowhard (and it’s not Donald Trump)

Either large swathes of the media class have lost their ability to reason clearly, or they are deliberately choosing to ignore the wealth of evidence that suggests North Korea is nowhere near as combat ready as it would have the world believe.

Now I’ll admit that’s a pretty bold statement, but that insular country’s latest missile launch is a perfect example of rhetoric leaving reality far behind. Let’s abandon the spin and consider the known facts for a moment.

We know that on Tuesday morning, North Korea launched what appears to be some kind of intercontinental ballistic missile. Given that country’s pathological propensity for pretentious self-aggrandisement, does anyone think it a little odd that the only record of that momentous, paradigm shifting event is a single series of still photographs? I do.

Let’s not forget that we’re talking about a country whose biggest export appears to be video footage of its seemingly endless parades celebrating this or that glorious revolutionary whatever. We’ve all seen those terrifying looking trucks trundling past the camera dozens of times now…trundling past mind, not actually performing in the field anywhere. For a nation that defines itself by its military might, its air force seems painfully shy at these bombastic occasions…funny that.

North Korea reminds me of the blotch-faced blowhard at the end of the bar. He always has a lot to say about this or that conflict somewhere in the world, based on his own extensive experience in Iraq, or was it Afghanistan; you know, while he was in the Army, or was that the Navy? The details are always just vague enough to be unverifiable.

Whatever you may think of his North Korea policy, President Trump has now sent two (or maybe three) US carrier groups to that part of the world, and they are bringing a clear message with them. That message is clear because US carrier groups have seen action in the past, their activities and capabilities are known and have been recorded countless times. In other words, the existence of US carrier groups has been proven beyond any doubt. The same cannot be said of North Korea’s alleged conventional forces, let alone its alleged nuclear capabilities.

Does anyone think, for one second, that if big Kim possessed anything like a US carrier group that there would be any doubt as to its real-world existence? It would be steaming across the globe and causing a nuisance everywhere it goes; and as for the accompanying propaganda, my God, we’d never hear the end of it. Even microscopic life outside this galaxy would be aware that chubby Kim junior has a got great big boat and he’s not afraid to use it.

However, recorded and verified history tells a very different story of North Korea, revealing a country that simply cannot continue to exist without outside help. That lack of self-reliance was tragically demonstrated after the Soviet Union collapsed, leading to a famine in which hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions perished. Today it continues to rely on foreign aid from its avowed enemies, and still can’t manage to pour concrete in a straight line. Here’s a link to some footage of them apparently building a massive apartment complex in Pyongyang, but look closely, what’s wrong this picture?

There are hardly any machines! Where are the diggers, the earth movers and the core drillers? The official State news channel is probably the only place you’re likely to see any technology of that kind hard at work. Are we really expected to believe that a nation unable to muster a modest amount of construction equipment is capable of producing a miniaturised atomic device, and fitting it to a missile that can break orbit and then descend to a pre-designated point? In other words, real rocket science. That’s without even mentioning all the sprawling secondary industries required to support such a technically demanding endeavour. I’m calling bull**** on this whole Potemkin pretence right now!

Don’t get me wrong, I firmly believe that North Korea has indeed launched some kind of missile, but I’ll bet real, folding money that they didn’t build it themselves. It’s worth noting that the top secret, uber secure launch site is less than forty miles from the Chinese border. That can’t be a coincidence.

For all China’s public protestations about North Korea’s belligerent behaviour, nobody in that insular and impoverished nation so much as puts food in their own mouths without Beijing’s blessing. It is a terrible indictment of our current world order that a permanent member of the UN Security Council has knowingly kept the North Koreans on starvation rations for nearly a quarter of a century, all in the name of keeping US troops far away from its own borders. In reality, North Korea is just one huge Chinese buffer zone, and always has been.

This latest missile launch is not a show of strength, it’s a sign of desperation. There is no way that either Pyongyang or Beijing would risk the ire of the most powerful military the world has ever known, unless they believed their decades long bluff was about to be called.

The Soft 48

So the unofficial Brexit election is officially on, and already there’s talk in the mainstream press about a possible Lib-Dem resurgence. Given that they’re currently languishing at about 11% in the polls along with UKIP and others, that seems like wishful thinking.

There can be little doubt that the newly crowned party of the diehard Remainer will wrestle a few trendy metropolitan seats from the Conservatives. The kind of constituencies that boast expensive coffee served up by migrants who sleep four to a room. However, the Remainers’ resurgence will be much smaller than Mr Farron might hope, and his dream of a sizeable Parliamentary presence is nothing more than a pleasant fantasy. Wishing doesn’t make it so, and the 48% is much softer and more diverse than the hardcore Remainers have talked themselves into believing.

Throughout the ensuing blizzard of post-referendum dialogue in the mainstream press and on the internet, the single biggest complaint among Brexiteers seems to be the fact that their opponents continually characterise them as poorly educated, bigoted and probably racist little Englanders.

Unfortunately for the committed Remain camp, just a few seconds of sustained rational thought will reveal the ridiculous implausibility of 17.4 million people voting to leave the European Union through an irrational xenophobic hatred of those people in this world who are most like themselves. With that especially spiteful and deluded label rightly consigned to the dustbin of discourse, it’s equally important not to blithely write off the 16.1 million who voted to remain as soulless, humourless, identikit authoritarians, hell bent on stealing political power from a European demographic they despise as an intransigent blot on their blueprint for a supreme European superstate.

Such a mischaracterisation of remain voters is insulting to their intelligence, motives and aspirations for the UK, and within that easy demolition of such a crude caricature lies the truth that will soon expose the shallowness of Remain’s support pool.

The one thing that has not yet been spoken about through all of the pre-and post-referendum autopsy are the forces that really drove intelligent, articulate individual voters to align themselves with the increasingly authoritarian, remote and unpopular bureaucratic class embodied by the EU. It’s highly unlikely that the vast majority of those 16.1 million citizens were guided by snobbery or elitism, and it’s much more likely that Project Fear had persuaded them to rationally cast their votes in favour of the lesser evil. After all, why take the risk?

Ten months on from that momentous day, we are a good deal further down the road and we all have a little more perspective on the landscape through which we travel. Many Remain leaning publications are still shivering on their widow’s walks, fervently scanning a distant horizon for even the slightest signs of Bregret, from anyone, anywhere. This has led them into the unfortunate habit of making themselves look foolish when they smugly declare that the malaise has taken hold among the leave supporting troglodyte class. When it clearly hasn’t.

Whilst they are busily searching for signs of weakness in their enemy’s defences, they’ve remained blissfully unaware of the mutinous mutterings much closer to home.

If anyone cares to stop shouting and listen carefully, they may hear the distant approach of a growing insurgent army of Remain deserters who feel they’ve been thoroughly hoodwinked by a dishonest establishment. An increasing number of these reluctant Remainers are actually glad that Britain is leaving an EU that they never really loved, now that the Project Fear hoax has been exposed as a cynical campaign of coercion and misinformation.

Some commentators are already touting Theresa May’s snap election as Brexit referendum 2.0 and are dutifully preparing to reboot Project Fear as the spectre of a “disastrous hard Brexit” is predictably conjured up. They seem to be wilfully ignorant of the unknown but growing number of recanting Remainers who are just waiting to throw their weight behind our now certain exit from the EU. The scales have fallen from their eyes and they now see that the emperor wears no clothes.

They won’t get fooled again, and come June 8th, they will have their revenge.

Show me the Money!!

So, the pint guzzling, tab smoking scourge of civilised society has been hard at it again. Sensitive and enlightened souls are still picking themselves up from their carbon neutral reclaimed hardwood floors across a huge swathe of North London and the Cotswolds following this latest cultural and political mugging by the emboldened hoody of European populism.

While the Daily Mail characterises the former UKIP leader’s deliberately and unnecessarily provocative language as an act of defiance, the Guardian predictably paints Wednesday morning’s fiery exchanges as proof positive that the EU is attempting to reach a reasonable accommodation in the face of ongoing nationalist hostility. Business as usual.

Leaving the screeching hyperbole of frothing Brexiteers and finger wagging Remainers aside for a moment, if that’s even possible, we actually find ourselves on wearyingly familiar territory once again. All the noise emanating from Strasbourg this week boils down to the fact that Brexit means Brexit, and the UK cannot cherry pick the benefits of EU membership.

Okay, we get it, we heard you. No really, we did…ages ago, before we even voted in the referendum.

You know, as somebody who voted to leave the EU, I can say for sure that both my leave and remain voting friends are sick to the back teeth of hearing these increasingly clichéd and hackneyed phrases. It’s almost as though the big guns on either side believe that their opposite numbers are so monumentally dense that they cannot grasp these simple ideas, even though Theresa May has repeatedly stated that the UK will not seek to remain within the European single market or the customs union. Therefore, it is not clear to me where all this talk of cherry picking is coming from. Nobody’s asking for cherries.

One thing that has become increasingly clear is that Mr Farage is a man who thrives on controversy and confrontation, so we shouldn’t be surprised that he’s taking this opportunity to stick it to the European establishment while he still can. After all, he’ll have to find another platform after 2019, but I don’t think that will be too much of a problem for him.

The difficulty with someone like Farage is that he is most definitely a Marmite character, which leads people to either cheer ecstatically the moment he appears on screen or simply switch off. While these are admittedly heartfelt responses, neither lends itself to actually hearing the position he is espousing on any given topic.

One can always tell when Farage is in the chamber, as there’s a knot of expectant reporters and cameramen gathered whenever he is about to deliver one of his historically bruising and deliberately insensitive monologues. Whether you love him or loathe him, Farage has succeeded in making himself the single most famous MEP in the history of the European Parliament.

Wednesday morning’s verbal assault began with Nigel Farage’s entirely predictable condemnation of the European Union as bullying, dictatorial and undemocratic. This shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone as such attacks are both his trademark and how he makes his living, which leads me to suspect that even an EU offer of a free gold bar to every child of woman born would be viewed with suspicion, and characterised as a form of bribery or financial coercion.

That said, the former UKIP leader did raise a couple important points that actually are worthy of serious discussion.

First was the vexed and increasingly malleable “divorce bill” which ranges from a straightforward payment of €60 billion, through various permutations of assets and liabilities and ends up the EU owing us an unspecified number of billions. Behind all the bluster and grandstanding, Mr Farage did make the very valid point that, at the moment, all of these figures appear to have been just plucked from the air. Maybe the EU is right and we do actually owe them a couple of well stacked pallets of clingfilmed currency, but the conspicuous absence of any supporting calculations is making this writer increasingly sceptical. The quicker we all put some meat on these bones the better, then at least we’ll have something solid to argue about. At the moment we’re all just shouting at smoke.

The other point which is well worth remembering was that Farage was quite correct when he pointed out that the UK did not in fact join the European Union in 1973, for the simple reason that the European Union did not come into existence until 1992 when the Maastricht Treaty was signed by the member states of the then European Community. Bearing this in mind, it’s quite revealing that the demographic who voted most strongly in favour of leaving the European Union is the same group who would’ve been old enough to vote in the 1975 plebiscite. Can this possibly be a coincidence? Naturally there is an army of bloggers and wailing commentators who see this as a vindication of their unfounded view that the grammar school generation is inherently xenophobic, probably a bit racist and certainly less well educated than their younger, intellectual superiors. The more likely explanation is that the older generation is the one that feels most abused and betrayed by the EU. When speaking to my father’s friends, I’ve found that they are almost of one voice in expressing their desire to leave because they feel they’ve been duped and deceived. The European Union of today doesn’t remotely resemble any trading bloc they voted to join…and we all know it.

In fact, the 2016 referendum has been the first and only time that the UK population has been offered any kind of meaningful choice as to whether they wished to be a part of “the ever closer union” of the European project. Their answer was clear enough.

If the European Project’s democratic deficit had been honestly confronted back in the nineties and not swept under the carpet, then smothered by an increasingly authoritarian EU and aided by a sycophantic, out of touch media class then history might’ve been very different.

Alas we’ll never know, as the EU is too far gone to be saved in its present form. It’s just a matter of time.