Tuesday, June 28, 2016

Jean-Claude Juncker sums up all that's rotten about the EU


No doubt this is a very biased article, but you never see this sort of thing reported on BBC. Over the last two weeks you can hear absolutely nothing on the BBC about criticisms against Juncker, yet every hostile word he said towards Britain they reported all of it.

The Brexit aftermath

Some more random commentaries...

(1) Parallels to the HK localism/independence movement.

When HKUSU quit the HKFS, the left plastics were furious, said the Chinese Communist Party would be the happiest, etc. I don't know whether the CCP is happy, but the fact is that, all other university student unions have now turned to the localism/independence side. HKFS have since been torn apart, and whether these SUs remain part of HKFS is simply no longer relevant. HKUSU may even rejoin HKFS to be part of a union that now takes a completely opposite stance - one that is against the Chinese rule of HK. Of course, if HKUSU did not leave HKFS in the first place, none of all this would have happened. A bit like time-travelling paradoxes...

I hope the same would apply to the EU: successive countries try to leave, and the EU either changes so drastically that it supports control of immigration, so we would want to stay, or it simply disintegrates or becomes politically irrelevant. In the case of UK, we may not even need to bother with re-joining since it takes two years to leave, by which time the EU may have disintegrated... one can always dream, right?

Actually I have an even wilder dream: we should form a "new EU", with only free trade and nothing else, first with countries like Switzerland and Norway, and progressively entice more countries to join...

(2) EU politicians vs European government politicians

Brexit reveals the rift between the two. European governments are elected by their citizens and need to be accountable to them; so for example they would want to keep free trade with Britain to protect the country's economic interests, and would need to bow to pressure to tighten border control. EU politicians, however, are unaccountable to anyone, and naturally there is no reason for them to care about European citizens. They certainly would like to make the Brexit process as painful as possible, no matter how much suffering it would also cost to EU member states and citizens, just for their own political agenda.

Jean-Claude Juncker. Look at the amount of contempt and disdain on his face. He probably always wanted us out.

(3) If you follow the real hard-left logic (not that I believe in those), free movement of labour is simply a way to allow further exploitation of working people by big companies. The hard-left oppose the idea of nations itself, believing that national governments and "the establishment" are here to protect the interests of the rich and to secure continued exploitation of the poor. But there is no bigger establishment in the world than the EU. So the hard left should really be against the EU: they "protect workers' rights" in name but actually sacrifice the working class, with the working class wholly oblivious to all this and thought the world has gone more liberal (the whole point of neo-liberalism).

So, applying their logic to the extreme, the EU is the world's biggest human trafficking organization!

Friday, June 24, 2016

The Brexit surprise

So, a minor miracle just happened. I should say that my pockets have been hit very, very hard - I simply never thought it could actually happen, just like everyone else - but I am still pleased to see it happen.

Some further unorganized thoughts.

(1) Why were all polls wrong (again)?

Once again all opinion polls, betting markets, financial institutions have got it all wrong. Why? We can only conclude that because people were not answering truthfully to polls. And there can only be one reason to this: talking about migration etc have become so politically incorrect these days (thanks to the leftists) that people have to lie. Anyone who dares to mention [insert religious/ethnic group name here] in any argument will automatically be labelled racist, ******phobic, etc. (Yes, I don't dare to name them here as well, but you know who they are.) And people are fed up with this madness, and this is one reason for the vote going the Leave way.

And since the polls were wrong, politicians judged the mood wrongly. Otherwise a lot more carrots, or sticks, would have been given out before the vote to ensure the result is what they wanted.

(2) Why did no one listen to the experts?

Economic downturn is inevitable and to me it is a price worth paying. But a lot of people wouldn't have thought so, and if they have seen the kind of financial meltdown today they perhaps would have voted differently. Those financial alarms have been repeatedly raised, yet they were dismissed with ease by the Leave camp as "Project Fear" etc. So why did no one believe the experts?

Because no one wanted to believe those numbers. And the reason that people didn't want to believe, is because deep down they wanted to leave; they knew it is more about national identity etc than money. It is a deep-rooted animal instinct to defend your territory, to differentiate between "tribe members" and outsiders. Their hearts told them to leave, only that the brains told them to consider the money on the table. In this case, hearts won.

(3) About the "the old have screwed the young" argument. 

We should be thankful that the country's fate is not decided just by young hippies and the like. Seriously, does anyone want the country to be run by this lot?

It is well known that young people are much more susceptible to left-wing ideologies and fantasies; they have never got a proper job and don't know how the real world operates. They believe in utopian ideas like "imagine there's no countries", "refugees welcome", "no borders", "no one is illegal" etc. Those may be very honourable ideas, but they won't work in a thousand years. So the old have saved the country from becoming another failed far-left socialist experiment.

They should realise that the public overwhemingly do not support those fantasy ideas, and instead (for example) want stronger immigration control.

(4) Two things that should never be bundled together in the first place, and I refuse to accept it.

If the referendum question was about whether we should severe the trade deals, then obviously most people would have voted not to (except hard leftists like Corbyn); and if the referendum question was about whether we should tighten immigration, then obviously most people would have voted yes (again, except hard leftists like Corbyn and the young hippies). Yet the EU is an institution that religiously binds the two things together, and you cannot have one but not the other. The original motivation was that "labour" is just like any other goods and services and capital, so they must be allowed to move around. Which is why leftists really should be against it, but now it has found a new socialist meaning - that the world should have no borders (!)

Most people do not question this rule of the game and are only weighing which of the two is more important. People like me however simply do not accept this rule of the game and would rather quit. Had we voted remain, we were forced to continue to have no control over immigrants and this would only fuel far-right extremists, which no one want to see, including a migrant like me.

Wednesday, June 15, 2016

Yet more about EU...

Sorry, I thought I was done...

EU referendum: Osborne warns of Brexit budget cuts  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36534192

George Osborne says he will have to slash public spending and increase taxes in an emergency Budget to tackle a £30bn "black hole" if the UK votes to leave the European Union. 

I think in the unlikely case that Leave wins, we would need an Emergency Chancellor. You won't still be the one in charge by then.

Donald Tusk: Brexit could destroy Western political civilisation http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36515680

European Council president Donald Tusk has warned that a UK vote to leave the EU could threaten "Western political civilisation". 

You do know your EU, with the uncontrolled migrants, is the one destroying Western civilisation right?

Saturday, June 04, 2016

What I experienced throughout this fairytale season (3)

The nervous weeks

What follows was a narrow defeat by Arsenal; despite that, the title is in sight. We are now clearly in the run-in: a long string of relatively weak opponents, with 3 difficult matches at the end of the season. Which for us was actually tricky, since the opponents would sit back which did not suit our counter-attacking style. The team also became very cautious, grinding out 1-0 wins game after game. In-between we drawn 2-2 at WBA, and everyone thought we dropped points, only to find out a bit later that every other title contender in fact lost, so we actually gained ground!

We also continued to receive a lot of luck on refereeing decisions. I lost count on the number of Robert Huth deliberately leaving an arm out at an awkward position, waiting for the ball to hit it; or swinging elbows at people; and so on.

I had been constantly thinking about the fixtures, trying to work out whether we are likely to have the points needed to win the title. After week 33, with 5 games to go and 7 points in lead, my plan was like this:

week LEI: 72 pts TOT: 65 pts
34 WHU: D, 73 pts STO: W, 68 pts
35 SWA: W, 76 pts WBA: W, 71 pts
36 MNU: ? CHE: ?
37 EVE: ? SOU: ?
38 CHE: ? NEW: ?

So we needed to protect a 5-point lead over the last 3 weeks. There were two scenarios at this point:

(1) If CHE-TOT was a draw then we only need 3 points, most likely a win against EVE. But it was important to get at least 1 at MNU, otherwise there would be enormous pressure and things could go horribly wrong:

week LEI: 76 pts TOT: 71 pts
36 MNU: L?, 76 CHE: D, 72
37 EVE: D?, 77 SOU: W, 75
38 CHE: L?, 77 NEW: W, 78

(2) If TOT beat CHE then we would need to need 5 points, i.e. D-W-D in the last 3 matches which is perfectly possible but we would be under extreme pressure.

Against WHU we indeed got a draw, although it was thanks again to some dodgy refereeing decisions. And the Vardy red card also throws everything in new light. And after I saw TOT beat STO 4-0, I feared the worst and thought they would not drop any more points, i.e. Scenario 2 applies. But then next week they could only draw WBA. The table (and what could go wrong) now looked like this:

week LEI: 76 pts TOT: 69 pts
36 MNU: L? 76 CHE:W 72
37 EVE: D? 77 SOU: W 75
38 CHE: D? 78 NEW: W 78

The weekend that completed the miracle

In the 1-1 draw against MNU, we were again lucky. But very importantly, Drinkwater took a foul for the team and got red-carded. Had we lost that match, TOT needed only a D-W-W to get to 76, which looked extremely likely, and our failure would be a very real possibility.

The next day, Monday 2nd May 2016, it was CHE v TOT. The day history will never forget. You all know what happened. I was watching snooker on TV while following live updates on BBC sport. When they were winning 2-0 I thought they were too good to be stopped. When I saw the 2-2 I could not believe my eyes. I switched to radio; the Internet was too slow!

Then there was the final whistle. The fairytale was complete. I actually waited a few minutes for the BBC website to confirm it for me. Couldn't just believe by hearing...

And even better, within 15 minutes Mark Selby won the snooker!

(The subsequent downfall of Spurs was of course ridiculous. We have a lot to thank Chelsea, though; have Spurs won that match, their downfall would not happen and it would look overwhelmingly likely that we would be the one to let it slip.)