by James Corbett
TheInternationalForecaster.com
June 15, 2016
One by one, the Brexit dominoes are falling.
First it was the surprise ORB poll last Friday showing those in favor of Britain’s departure from the EU a whopping 10 points in the lead.
Then it was two new polls this week confirming that the “Leave” camp has taken a convincing lead with just 10 days left to go before the vote.
Then it was Murdoch’s Sun urging its readers in its typical low key and understated fashion to “BeLEAVE in Britain!”
Now even serious journalists like The Telegraphs‘s Ambrose Evans-Pritchard are encouraging Britons to vote for separation from the EU in next week’s referendum:
“Stripped of distractions, [the referendum] comes down to an elemental choice: whether to restore the full self-government of this nation, or to continue living under a higher supranational regime, ruled by a European Council that we do not elect in any meaningful sense, and that the British people can never remove, even when it persists in error.
“[…]We are deciding whether to be guided by a Commission with quasi-executive powers that operates more like the priesthood of the 13th Century papacy than a modern civil service; and whether to submit to a European Court of Justice (ECJ) that claims sweeping supremacy, with no right of appeal.”
I couldn’t have said it better myself. Well, actually I could, but fewer people would listen.
So the bookmakers may still be giving the winning odds to the “Stay” camp (for the compulsive gamblers out there, it’s 4-7 for stay vs. 7-4 for leave), but there is significant movement behind the push to extricate the UK from its 43-year entanglement with the EUreaucracy.
So of course the banksters are doing what they always do when things are not going their way: threatening, intimidating and generally trying to scare the living daylights out of the public.
Accordingly, the bankster mouthpiece media has been breathlessly reporting for months now on the number of economists who have lined up to warn that the sky will fall and dogs will start marrying cats (economically speaking) if Britain asserts control of its own territory: 200! No, 88% of 600!! No, 9 out of 10!!!
…Or is that 14.7%? Bah, there’s no time to check the facts, just trust the experts. It’s time to be afraid!
And they’re not necessarily wrong. After all, the financiers control the central banks, which have been dictating the global equities and bond bubble we’ve been living through since Lehman, so if and when they decide to pop it they just have to start calling in their debts and sucking the air out of the economy.
And so we get a series of catastrophic headlines:
“European stocks tumble to three-month low as Brexit fears bite”
“Looming ‘Brexit’ Vote Rattles Global Markets”
“Brexit chill sends Bund yields sub-zero”
And, just in case you didn’t get the message: “Brexit would bring chaos, fear and emergency measures in its first 100 days, experts predict.”
This should surprise precisely no one. Remember when public outcry against the $700 billion bankster bailout of 2008 was so loud that Congress overwhelmingly rejected the bill? Remember what Brad Sherman later admitted on the floor of Congress?
“Many of us were told in private conversations that if we voted against this bill on Monday that the sky would fall, the market would drop two or three thousand points the first day and a couple of thousand on the second day, and a few members were even told that there would be martial law in America if we voted no.”
Remember when the banksters showed they were willing to follow through on their warnings, with $1.2 trillion of wealth being wiped out of the stock market the day that Congress voted to reject the bill? Remember how Congress caved and passed the bill after a second vote a few days later?
Well, why would we expect anything different this time around? The banksters want Britain in the EU and they’re not afraid to hold a gun to the head of the global economy in order to get their way.
There are a couple of points to take away from this. Firstly, should voters allow the inevitable backlash from the powers-that-shouldn’t-be to stop them from doing what they feel is right come referendum day?
And secondly, isn’t it instructive that the only response the banksters really have is to take their ball and go home when things don’t go their way? I mean, sure, the “ball” is the global debt-based finance capital economy they’ve constructed in their image and that keeps the wheels of commerce as we know it today greased (and thus is more or less directly responsible for the gainful employment of almost everyone), but still…all they can do is try to take that away from us.
So, once again, doesn’t it all come down to an even more fundamental question: What could the banksters threaten us with if we were building communities, boycotting and buycotting, using alternative currencies, guerilla gardening, peer-to-peer trading, engaging in agorism and otherwise completely rejecting the bankster system?
Sadly, we don’t live in a world where those practices are mainstream (yet), so on June 23rd the Brits need to ask themselves one simple question: Are they going to vote out of fear of the consequences, or are they going to vote for what they believe to be right?
I think that the vast majority of people will vote on what they BELIEVE is right. From my conversations, this will usually be along the lines of future-seeing what will happen to the economy, which is pure speculation fuelled by the fear noise in the MSM.
I will be making my tiny personal protest on what I KNOW is right; the nullification of the illegitimate tentacles that fondle my life from Brussels. Tentacles that I never consented to and during my lifetime were deemed mandatory. Opt-in only.
Of course, I know my tiny protest will be stomped on by the pschopaths-that-be, but you know, it’s something to fill the day with *shrugs*
My more meaningful protests are implementing and spreading the word on the alternatives you mention James. Now that is exciting stuff. Many thanks again for your work.
To be fair, the scaremongering has been flowing in full force from both sides of the argument. I mean, when you invest almost all of your propaganda into making people fearful, it’s a good strategy.
Anecdotally I have met one person who wants to vote ‘Stay’. And of all the people I’ve asked, they’ve had a similar experience. So, acknowledging confirmation bias, I’m assuming the ‘Stayers’ must all live in a different part of the country (than leafy London).
What is interesting is that ‘Stayers’ would prefer to stay and ‘Leavers’ really, really want to leave – and this is born out in polls (for what they’re worth). That is, the Leave camp has a far more motivated support base than the Stay.
Anyway, to your second point, anti-agorism is, in my experience built into the system: I recently had to engage in a legal dispute and I refused to use any legal representation and handled the whole thing myself. The ‘neutral arbitrator’ basically threatened me when I told him of my intentions. He set rules of evidence (over which he had almost total control) to a level that was very hard for a ‘civilian’ to meet. I could get plenty of proof to support my case but he insisted it was signed by someone ‘in the know’ for it to be valid i.e. “you have to use legal counsel”. I must admit I was shocked at the level of animosity and closing of ranks from a supposedly neutral source. In any case, I’m 45 now and have been round several different blocks, several different times, so I won in the end. God help the average person without the time, inclination, experience and education to research for weeks on end.
But, I learnt a stark lesson that the middle-men, who represent the hard core of our economy, have built a system where they self-support each other, sucking energy and wealth from the real economy to keep their un-needed, parasitic presence at the heart of everything we do.
Agorism is like trading beads with armed men. And, go ask most of the indigenous peoples of the world how well that went for them over the last few hundred years!
The amount of propagandistic distortion as to the consequences of either outcome of the Brexit vote is staggering, suggesting interest in increasing the perceptual importance of such vote (follow the stock market in the periods immediately before/after the vote and see for yourself how fortunes are made). Any of the two oucomes can be used as an excuse for the **same** agenda whatever that may be since so much importance and emotional stress is created (artificially I might say) before the vote; accountability will be diffused because of the popular vote concept (e.g. you had your chance, these are the consequences).
As to the banking elite wating the UK to stay in the EU, this is highly debatable as they most undoutebly hedged beforehand and stand to win more from the volatility in the markets immediately before and after the vote rather than from the the possible consequences of such vote which are very difficult to foresee because they depend on non deterministic factors.
Unfortunately, it looks like same old business of fearmongering, consent manufacturing, profit chasing, money stealing and maybe a bit of damage control on the sides. And the people had their vote.
And one more thing: never ever trust a poll or any similar outcome predictor. They have underlying population sampling models that are not disclosed, populations are generally tiny and they are not reflective of the biases they induce by presenting their results. Talk about consent manufacturing …
What’s ZH? I’ve just been lambasted by my girlfriend when I dared suggest the killing might be a false flag as ‘lone nut’ killers have been used before in such cases. Complot un jour, complot toujours, as the French say (conspiracy one day = conspiracy always). But there is not enough information at this stage to be able to determine whether or not this is the case.
Personally the assassination made me lean towards voting Remain due to fear of far right uprising in UK and the Continent whereas only a few hours ago I was leaning towards not voting at all. Having thought about it I’m now leaning again towards not voting at all.
I was absolutely sure that Brexit is not possible. Polls results are still within the margin of (future) fraud.
But….world economy is a very tall house of cards and it looks to me that it is just waiting for some wind to blow. Brexit could be the one and they need some kind of excuse (which is outside the system) for crash because people must not see that the problem is within the system.
There are just American elections that don’t fit well in the equation.
However, will see.