A very interesting article. Too bad our president hates the UK
Too bad our president hates the UK.
I’m sure the feeling is mutual. When Obama leaves office (Jan 20, 2013 if all goes well), don’t be surprised if a lot of corks pop in embassies and foreign offices around the civilized world.
Time to restore the Anglosphere.
It’s never gone away, or alternatively it ended when your forebears rebelled against the Crown. 😉
I am very much disappointed by English speaking commentators who would gladly abandon their friends and allies in Europe to the forces of socialism. Here’s something I wrote a couple of weeks ago in response to an article about a silly plan by Jacques Delors:
Unsurprisingly Delors wants to solve the problems with a socialist solution. But socialism isn’t the only way to harmonise the EU economies, free market economic liberalism would be another one, and one that would be much more palatable to most readers of this newspaper.
Despite claims to the contrary northern EU politicians aren’t looking for a way to stop irresponsible lending to southern governments. They don’t need to do that, because the market has at long last solved that problem, they won’t lend to Greece anymore and it won’t be long before they’ll stop lending to Italy and Spain, unless they change course drastically. What northern politicians are doing is almost the opposite, they are looking for a way for the irresponsible lending to continue, just at a lower intensity. They are fighting market forces in order to force more irresponsible lending than the market – rigged as it is – would allow.
In the name of fiscal prudence we are now likely to see a renewed push for harmonisation of tax rates – especially corporation tax. This will take away competition among governments of member states, which will inevitably lead to higher taxes. I fear the EFSF and a push for eurobonds are a prelude to a push for an EU Ministry of Finance and perhaps even direct EU taxation.
Our friend David Cameron has shown disastrously weak leadership in this whole mess. Instead of pushing for a market-based solution he has actively promoted the cause of money printing and more socialist policies at a eurozone level, as long as Britain gets an opt-out and as long as he is able to claw back some powers from the EU. He is likely to get the former, but he has already given up on the latter. As a result he has given up much influence on the economic policies of his neighbours and main trading partners.
No doubt he has done this because he isn’t just a weak leader, but a weak leader who wants to appease the Little Englanders on his back benches. In this he has been egged on by the Euroskeptic Right’s favourite twit, Mr Daniel Hannan MEP, who has shamelessly betrayed his free market liberal friends inside the eurozone. If you want to damage the euro, then making the eurozone as socialist as possible is obviously a good policy. But in addition to harming his free market friends inside the eurozone he is contributing to something that will have negative effects on Britain too, and over which Britain will have very little influence having chosen to remain outside the eurozone and having acquiesced in its greater amount of integration.
It is understandable (but not necessarily ethical) that Cameron wants to see the PIGS bailed out, because the damage to the financial institutions in London caused by several sovereign defaults would be enormous. But the real solution would be to let the PIGS default and to bail out not the governments, not the banks, but depositors and pensioners. This could be done at an EU level, and may have to include money printing as we don’t want to end up in bankruptcy court together, all 500 million of us, to sort out who gets what. This still would not involve Britain being forced to join the eurozone as the money printing could be coordinated between the ECB and the Bank of England (and perhaps the US Federal Reserve).
Proceeding this way could be a good way to try and get rid of the protectionism shielding national financial institutions from foreign competition. A collective bail-out would wipe out shareholders, including sovereign shareholders, which would be replaced by a new EU stake in the financial institutions in both the eurozone and the rest of the EU. All this should be done under the condition that the EU will sell off its stake at the earliest opportunity and to the highest private bidder. If necessary individual countries could be given an opt-out, in which case they would have the freedom to bail out their own banks provided they stay within new stricter limits on deficit spending. Our French friends would likely want such an opt-out.
The result would be a eurozone that would be governed in a way that is much closer to what free market liberals would want and much closer to the way the UK economy is governed. I would hope that the UK would then in time decide it wanted to join this newly reformed eurozone, which would further strengthen the hand of free market liberals, but this would not be an automatic consequence.
In the past few weeks we have seen the forces of free market liberalism make major strides in Greece, Italy and especially in Spain and Poland. We should seize this opportunity, but David Cameron is squandering it.
So pretty soon we may be seeing Britain sitting alone next to a monolithic Europe. A Europe likely to be under the sway of its most powerful economic member. A Europe whose dominant economic power these days is Germany.
What could go wrong?
What could go wrong?
The cause of free market liberalism in Europe would be greatly harmed. Civil liberties would be fine, as would liberal democracy if that’s what you’re hinting at.
First, Rand, thank you for providing a link to a most thoughtful piece. I agree in the largest part with said analysis. We do need to get back to a society which is free and democratic at its most fundamental level.
MPM, I will make a few observations as a member of a family which has been in the Anglospere for centuries. On Mom’s side, my family is working class English. Mom was the first member of her family to attend even high school. What can I say about Dad’s side? I’m the third generation of Dad’s side to attend college (Rutgers — Dad was Rutgers 1935, Grandfather Rutgers 1890). My greatgrandfather was Anglo Irish, his English wife was a direct descendant of John Donne. OK, my great grandparents did become American citizens. Quite a few Americans, myself included, see us as at least significantly British.
One key difference between British socialists and the other, uglier kind is the commitment of said socialists to democracy and freedom — even for their opponents. When they were voted out, they left leadership positions relatively peacefully. I will also add that at least this Anglo American sees post war British democratic socialism as an effort in good part to help heal a top notch country that had been grievously damaged during the war against Hitler and his fellow criminals.
Now I must go off to a Rutgers party. I hope people understand.
I’m not sure I understand your points. You seem to be saying that US-UK links are real, which I don’t dispute, and that UK socialists aren’t as bad as their continental counterparts, which I do dispute. In any event that’s no reason to abandon free market allies to the forces of socialism.
MPM. I think you are seeing political differences as a one dimensional thing, from free enterprise to socialism. I, and quite a few people, don’t see things that way. Free enterprise is not some utopian perfection. There are real problems in free enterprise. It is better by far than totalitarian socialism (think former Soviet Union), but it is not perfect by a long shot. British socialism with, as far as I can tell, a strong commitment to democracy, does address real problems in society.
MPM. I think you are seeing political differences as a one dimensional thing, from free enterprise to socialism.
How would that be related to whether the UK stays inside the EU or not? It’s not as if it’s advocating a free market utopia, something euroskeptics would much prefer if it were true.
British socialism with, as far as I can tell, a strong commitment to democracy, does address real problems in society.
To the degree that is true it would be an argument in favour of staying inside the EU. And note that socialists in the rest of the EU have no less strong commitment to democracy than their counterparts in the EU.
I have a feeling most Americans, including well-educated ones, are as ignorant about EU politics as their EU counterparts are about US politics.
MPM, relax!
If Canada is in the Anglosphere, then the Netherlands should make the cut too.
According to the following chart, 85% of Canadians speak English, while 87% of people in the Netherlands do.
I am very sympathetic to the Anglosphere, indeed I believe that in a sense most intellectuals in the world are part of it, certainly among the younger generations. I’d be very disappointed if the UK left the EU, as it would be a great loss to the forces of liberty in the EU, but that’s a choice for the UK to make. On the other hand, I am strongly opposed to the UK advocating socialism in the EU as a pretext to leave it later. If you want to leave, fine, just don’t help mess it up before you leave.
All that said, I think leaving the EU would be a stupid move, since it is the UK’s biggest trading partner, and once outside it the UK would no longer have any influence over policies that will continue to strongly affect it.
A very interesting article. Too bad our president hates the UK
Too bad our president hates the UK.
I’m sure the feeling is mutual. When Obama leaves office (Jan 20, 2013 if all goes well), don’t be surprised if a lot of corks pop in embassies and foreign offices around the civilized world.
Time to restore the Anglosphere.
It’s never gone away, or alternatively it ended when your forebears rebelled against the Crown. 😉
I am very much disappointed by English speaking commentators who would gladly abandon their friends and allies in Europe to the forces of socialism. Here’s something I wrote a couple of weeks ago in response to an article about a silly plan by Jacques Delors:
Unsurprisingly Delors wants to solve the problems with a socialist solution. But socialism isn’t the only way to harmonise the EU economies, free market economic liberalism would be another one, and one that would be much more palatable to most readers of this newspaper.
Despite claims to the contrary northern EU politicians aren’t looking for a way to stop irresponsible lending to southern governments. They don’t need to do that, because the market has at long last solved that problem, they won’t lend to Greece anymore and it won’t be long before they’ll stop lending to Italy and Spain, unless they change course drastically. What northern politicians are doing is almost the opposite, they are looking for a way for the irresponsible lending to continue, just at a lower intensity. They are fighting market forces in order to force more irresponsible lending than the market – rigged as it is – would allow.
In the name of fiscal prudence we are now likely to see a renewed push for harmonisation of tax rates – especially corporation tax. This will take away competition among governments of member states, which will inevitably lead to higher taxes. I fear the EFSF and a push for eurobonds are a prelude to a push for an EU Ministry of Finance and perhaps even direct EU taxation.
Our friend David Cameron has shown disastrously weak leadership in this whole mess. Instead of pushing for a market-based solution he has actively promoted the cause of money printing and more socialist policies at a eurozone level, as long as Britain gets an opt-out and as long as he is able to claw back some powers from the EU. He is likely to get the former, but he has already given up on the latter. As a result he has given up much influence on the economic policies of his neighbours and main trading partners.
No doubt he has done this because he isn’t just a weak leader, but a weak leader who wants to appease the Little Englanders on his back benches. In this he has been egged on by the Euroskeptic Right’s favourite twit, Mr Daniel Hannan MEP, who has shamelessly betrayed his free market liberal friends inside the eurozone. If you want to damage the euro, then making the eurozone as socialist as possible is obviously a good policy. But in addition to harming his free market friends inside the eurozone he is contributing to something that will have negative effects on Britain too, and over which Britain will have very little influence having chosen to remain outside the eurozone and having acquiesced in its greater amount of integration.
It is understandable (but not necessarily ethical) that Cameron wants to see the PIGS bailed out, because the damage to the financial institutions in London caused by several sovereign defaults would be enormous. But the real solution would be to let the PIGS default and to bail out not the governments, not the banks, but depositors and pensioners. This could be done at an EU level, and may have to include money printing as we don’t want to end up in bankruptcy court together, all 500 million of us, to sort out who gets what. This still would not involve Britain being forced to join the eurozone as the money printing could be coordinated between the ECB and the Bank of England (and perhaps the US Federal Reserve).
Proceeding this way could be a good way to try and get rid of the protectionism shielding national financial institutions from foreign competition. A collective bail-out would wipe out shareholders, including sovereign shareholders, which would be replaced by a new EU stake in the financial institutions in both the eurozone and the rest of the EU. All this should be done under the condition that the EU will sell off its stake at the earliest opportunity and to the highest private bidder. If necessary individual countries could be given an opt-out, in which case they would have the freedom to bail out their own banks provided they stay within new stricter limits on deficit spending. Our French friends would likely want such an opt-out.
The result would be a eurozone that would be governed in a way that is much closer to what free market liberals would want and much closer to the way the UK economy is governed. I would hope that the UK would then in time decide it wanted to join this newly reformed eurozone, which would further strengthen the hand of free market liberals, but this would not be an automatic consequence.
In the past few weeks we have seen the forces of free market liberalism make major strides in Greece, Italy and especially in Spain and Poland. We should seize this opportunity, but David Cameron is squandering it.
So pretty soon we may be seeing Britain sitting alone next to a monolithic Europe. A Europe likely to be under the sway of its most powerful economic member. A Europe whose dominant economic power these days is Germany.
What could go wrong?
What could go wrong?
The cause of free market liberalism in Europe would be greatly harmed. Civil liberties would be fine, as would liberal democracy if that’s what you’re hinting at.
First, Rand, thank you for providing a link to a most thoughtful piece. I agree in the largest part with said analysis. We do need to get back to a society which is free and democratic at its most fundamental level.
MPM, I will make a few observations as a member of a family which has been in the Anglospere for centuries. On Mom’s side, my family is working class English. Mom was the first member of her family to attend even high school. What can I say about Dad’s side? I’m the third generation of Dad’s side to attend college (Rutgers — Dad was Rutgers 1935, Grandfather Rutgers 1890). My greatgrandfather was Anglo Irish, his English wife was a direct descendant of John Donne. OK, my great grandparents did become American citizens. Quite a few Americans, myself included, see us as at least significantly British.
One key difference between British socialists and the other, uglier kind is the commitment of said socialists to democracy and freedom — even for their opponents. When they were voted out, they left leadership positions relatively peacefully. I will also add that at least this Anglo American sees post war British democratic socialism as an effort in good part to help heal a top notch country that had been grievously damaged during the war against Hitler and his fellow criminals.
Now I must go off to a Rutgers party. I hope people understand.
I’m not sure I understand your points. You seem to be saying that US-UK links are real, which I don’t dispute, and that UK socialists aren’t as bad as their continental counterparts, which I do dispute. In any event that’s no reason to abandon free market allies to the forces of socialism.
MPM. I think you are seeing political differences as a one dimensional thing, from free enterprise to socialism. I, and quite a few people, don’t see things that way. Free enterprise is not some utopian perfection. There are real problems in free enterprise. It is better by far than totalitarian socialism (think former Soviet Union), but it is not perfect by a long shot. British socialism with, as far as I can tell, a strong commitment to democracy, does address real problems in society.
MPM. I think you are seeing political differences as a one dimensional thing, from free enterprise to socialism.
Not at all, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_compass.
Free enterprise is not some utopian perfection.
How would that be related to whether the UK stays inside the EU or not? It’s not as if it’s advocating a free market utopia, something euroskeptics would much prefer if it were true.
British socialism with, as far as I can tell, a strong commitment to democracy, does address real problems in society.
To the degree that is true it would be an argument in favour of staying inside the EU. And note that socialists in the rest of the EU have no less strong commitment to democracy than their counterparts in the EU.
I have a feeling most Americans, including well-educated ones, are as ignorant about EU politics as their EU counterparts are about US politics.
MPM, relax!
If Canada is in the Anglosphere, then the Netherlands should make the cut too.
According to the following chart, 85% of Canadians speak English, while 87% of people in the Netherlands do.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_English-speaking_population
I am very sympathetic to the Anglosphere, indeed I believe that in a sense most intellectuals in the world are part of it, certainly among the younger generations. I’d be very disappointed if the UK left the EU, as it would be a great loss to the forces of liberty in the EU, but that’s a choice for the UK to make. On the other hand, I am strongly opposed to the UK advocating socialism in the EU as a pretext to leave it later. If you want to leave, fine, just don’t help mess it up before you leave.
All that said, I think leaving the EU would be a stupid move, since it is the UK’s biggest trading partner, and once outside it the UK would no longer have any influence over policies that will continue to strongly affect it.