The Divided State of Europe

nivek

As Above So Below

'We can't call everyone racist - I don't care what he tells me to do': The brutal comments Labour MPs and ministers are sharing with me after Keir Starmer's speech... and why it's his final and fatal blunder

Yesterday Keir Starmer’s MPs were cheering. This morning they are panicking. The exuberant mood at Labour conference that followed the Prime Minister’s full-frontal attack on Nigel Farage has been replaced by one of alarm. And a mounting fear their leader has made a major strategic error.

‘Saying Farage is racist, and Reform are racist... but Reform’s supporters aren’t racist just isn’t going to fly,’ one MP told me. ‘All people will hear is, “Reform are racists” and think we’re talking about them.’ This view is especially prevalent in those Red Wall seats where Labour MPs are facing a direct threat from Farage and his party. But it is not confined to them.

Yesterday evening, Dianne Abbott, not exactly a shrinking violet when it comes to levelling charges of racism, articulated the concerns of many former colleagues when she said on Newsnight, ‘I’m all for people giving him [Farage] a good kicking... but the danger is if you give him too much free publicity you turn him into a bigger figure than he is.’

Starmer’s ministers and backbenchers agree with her. And they are privately expressing despair at the way the conference speech has been handled. Their first concern is over the way in which there again seems to have been no proper coordination of Downing Street’s aggressive new strategy.

On Sunday, Keir Starmer explicitly stated he believed the changes announced by Reform to the indefinite Leave To Remain (ILR) status of hundreds of thousands of migrants was ‘racist’. But a few hours later, the Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood appeared at a fringe meeting and confirmed she was looking at her own major reform of ILR.

‘I don’t understand that stuff about the racism at the heart of Reform’s immigration policy,’ one senior party grandee told me. ‘If their immigration policy is racist then so is our new immigration policy.’

There is also undisguised fury at Deputy Prime Minister David Lammy – seen as one of Starmer’s few remaining senior allies – for his ludicrously hyperbolic claim that Nigel Farage had once flirted with the Hitler Youth. And anger at the failure to give a clear line over whether Farage personally should be described as a racist. ‘I’m not going to be saying that,’ one minister revealed to me. ‘It just plays into his hands. I don’t care what No 10 tells me to do.’

Another issue is the way in which Starmer has opted to take the battle to the Reform leader on territory of his opponent’s choosing. One of the supposed advantages of government is that ministers stand a chance of setting the political agenda. But by opting to confront Farage over his favourite issue, immigration, cabinet ministers fear Starmer is picking a fight he can’t win.

‘It’s very simple,’ one minister said. ‘If we’re talking about immigration, Nigel Farage is winning. That’s it. ‘Until we come up with a way of stopping the boats, any month in which the political conversation is dominated by that issue is a month that brings Farage closer to power.’

Yet, as a result of the speech and Starmer’s new approach, there is now even less prospect of him finding a policy solution to the small boat crisis. Over the past year No 10 aides have been discussing a number of potentially radical solutions to get to grips with illegal mmigration.
One has been the Labour government’s very own ‘Rwanda’ scheme to ensure some form of offshore processing.

Another involves moves to break Britain free from the clutches of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Now, in the face of internal opposition, those solutions have been quietly ditched – which is why Starmer chose to unveil his new national ID card scheme. As one minister explained to me: ‘He knows he has to say something about immigration. But he also knows the really tough measures will go down like a cup of cold sick with the party.

‘So that’s why he announced it. Labour MPs and activists aren’t instinctively sold on ID cards. But they’ll just about tolerate them. They won’t put up with our own Rwanda scheme, or ditching the ECHR.’ And that is what lies at the heart of Starmer’s new, no-holds-barred attack on Farage. It isn’t really aimed at shifting the national debate on immigration or even neutralising the Reform surge.

It’s largely aimed at shoring up his position internally within his party – and staving off the leadership challenge he knows is imminent. But that challenge is still coming. And when his MPs do finally move against Starmer, they will deploy yesterday’s speech against him.

Keir Starmer has now reframed his premiership. By devoting so much of his speech to Reform, he has defined himself as the man who can take on Nigel Farage in hand-to-hand combat – and win. But he can’t win. Starmer is now the most unpopular Prime Minister in British political history. Farage is a populist insurgent, unencumbered by power, running against a deeply unpopular mid-term government with a general election still years away.

All he needs to do is continue surfing the wave of national protest. A wave that is set to morph into a Tsunami when Rachel Reeves stands up and delivers the budget that will finally prove her pledge not to raise any more taxes was just ‘another Labour lie’.

Yes, Farage and his supporters have been momentarily forced on to the back foot by Starmer’s attacks. Their claim that the Prime Minister’s words risk inciting political violence is staggeringly hypocritical given their recent embrace of Lucy Connolly, the women who tweeted ‘Set fire to all the f****** hotels full of the bastards for all I care. While you’re at it take the treacherous government and politicians with them.’

But political gravity will start to reassert itself. And when it does, Keir Starmer will come to realise his furious assault against Nigel Farage represents his own Charge of the Light Brigade.

Next May, the country goes to the polls in the local elections. The ballot boxes sit waiting for him like the Russian guns. The community centres and village halls that hold them will become his own Valley of Death. At which point his MPs will turn to him and say, ‘you told us you would defeat Nigel Farage. But you haven’t. He’s routed you. We now need someone who can really take the fight to Reform.’

Keir Starmer thinks his speech yesterday was a triumph. But his colleagues now see it for what it is – a final and fatal blunder.


.
 

nivek

As Above So Below
What a tool...Britian has huge problems this guy could never address properly...Now like Biden did, he lays blame on everyone else for his failures...

...

Keir Starmer blames BREXIT for Channel crisis and calls dinghies carrying migrants 'Farage boats'

Keir Starmer has opened another front in his war on Reform by blaming Brexit for the Channel migrant crisis - saying the UK is being assailed by 'Farage boats'.

The PM made the claim about the impact of cutting ties with the EU as he scrambled to claw back Nigel Farage's huge poll lead.

But he also went into retreat after brutal barbs in his Labour conference speech, stressing the Reform leader is not a racist.

The PM described Mr Farage as 'formidable' as he denied that the swipes put safety at risk.

With Labour facing meltdown in the polls, Sir Keir levelled a series of highly personal jibes at his rival - who responded by warning that the personal safety of Reform politicians had been put at risk.

Deputy PM David Lammy went even further by making an outlandish slur about Mr Farage having 'flirted with the Hitler Youth', a suggestion he was quickly forced to withdraw. The concerns raised by Reform were dismissed by Labour MPs as 'snowflake'.

Sir Keir signalled the aggressive new tactics on Sunday when he described Reform's policy of scrapping 'indefinite leave to remain' immigration status as 'racist'.


(More on the link)

.
 

nivek

As Above So Below

Trump has put Starmer to shame

Perhaps one of Donald Trump’s greatest strengths has always been the fact he simply doesn’t care what others think. Well, at least about most things. Doubtless today he will be feeling a little bruised after being overlooked for his much-longed-for Nobel Prize.

Otherwise, his often cavalier policy decisions and unflinching pursuit of the deal are largely immune to political opinion. Guided instead by visceral instinct and astonishing self-belief, it’s an approach predicated on the conviction that if the president roars loudly enough, the school bully will back down.

It’s precisely this approach that has led some Jewish people in Britain, myself included, to view Trump – at least in relation to Israel – as what our ancient tradition terms a shaliach mitzvah: a traveller appointed as an emissary to carry out a good deed.
Thanks to Trump’s determination to achieve a ceasefire in Gaza, the tantalising prospect of the remaining hostages being released on Monday and the war finally ending feels enticingly within reach.

Much to celebrate. But this welcome turn of events also highlights in both attitude and methodology how Trump stands in stark contrast to Keir Starmer. A Prime Minister whose idea of showing strength lies in feeble posturing and endorsing the fallacious demonisation of Israel, regardless of the potential consequences for Jews in this country.

Starmer’s reaction to the Gaza crisis has amounted to little more than empty rhetoric: a series of diplomatically irrelevant, self-serving declarations that have done as much to end the war as trying to start a fire with a damp match.

Most grievously, perhaps, witnessed in his recent no-strings-attached recognition of a Palestinian state. Which, since it wasn’t contingent on the release of hostages or the disarming of Hamas, could be regarded as a reward for terrorism. It was a move that was as pointless as it was profoundly tone-deaf.

Meanwhile, shortly afterwards, on Yom Kippur, the holiest day of the year for British Jews, a terrorist rammed worshippers outside the Heaton Park synagogue in Manchester – stabbing them with a knife before being shot dead by police. Two Jewish people were killed, several more injured.

For me, this horror was deeply personal. Heaton Park has been connected to my family for decades. A five-minute drive from my home, it was my childhood place of worship, where my brother had his bar mitzvah and where I was married. To see that gracious, elegant place of worship – so central to my life – splashed with Jewish blood was devastating.

The fact that this happened so soon after Starmer’s declaration inevitably raised questions. Did the attacker, in some warped way, take succour from the Government’s unconditional recognition of Palestine – or from the hate marches which have been continuously allowed to rage across the country? (Only since the Manchester attack have police powers been beefed up.)

Unfortunately, unlike Trump who has no truck with popularity ratings, our Prime Minister seems motivated not by conviction but by electoral arithmetic and political survival. Mindful instead of the voluble pro-Palestinian demographic, the so-called “Muslim vote”, those tricky marginal seats and a vocal hard-Left anti-Israel lobby. And so, through the long two years of the Gaza war, his comments have lacked substance or strategy. Instead, he has chosen moral posturing over actionable intervention. Engaging with the rhetorical rather than the real.

Trump, by contrast, refused to join the chorus of virtue-signalling liberals in unconditionally recognising a Palestinian state before the war’s conclusion. It could be argued that self-interest, even a yearning for a Nobel, played its part. But at least he sought tangible results rather than mere moral theatre.

The former US president has form here. His earlier forays into Middle Eastern diplomacy had significant outcomes, most notably with the Abraham Accords. His holy trinity of personal diplomacy, political incentives and targeted pressure produced results.

And what do we have in Starmer? Swap guts for gutlessness. Articulated through vacuous statements about how “the war must end”. All from a Prime Minister whose domestic track record of U-turns and weather-vane politics also speaks volumes about his inability to stand for anything.

For many Jewish people in Britain, this feeble leadership and instinct for appeasement has fostered deep vulnerability. History has shown that such weakness is always dangerous for communities most at risk of prejudice.

Does Trump have his faults? Undoubtedly. But after the ceasefire, do I wish we had a leader with his kind of focus and backbone? Where do I sign?


.
 

nivek

As Above So Below

In voting for Catherine Connolly - the Irish Jeremy Corbyn - as president, Ireland has been gripped by political schizophrenia, accelerating its race towards woke… and inevitable discord

The presidential election drama illustrates how Ireland is gripped by a form of political schizophrenia. On one hand, the contest took place against a backdrop of rising anger at the unprecedented waves of mass immigration to the Republic. Yet, in direct contradiction of this embittered, increasingly nationalist mood, Ireland is primed to vote overwhelmingly for the most Left-wing presidential candidate in its history.

In her radical socialism, vociferous support for minorities and hostility to Western 'imperialism,' the prospective new Head of the State, Catherine Connolly, represents precisely that spirit of wokeness that a large section of the Irish public is determined to challenge. However massive Mrs Connolly's landslide, her triumph will be a recipe for more discord and disunity. Indeed, the electorate went to the polls after several nights of violent rioting in Dublin, triggered by reports that a ten-year-girl had been sexually assaulted by a failed African asylum seeker.

The clash was just the latest in a growing catalogue of inflammatory demonstrations against the open border stance of the ruling Coalition that has held power since 2020, made up of the two centrist parties Fianna Fail and Fine Gael. Again, like in England, many of the most explosive protests have taken place outside former hotels now used to house asylum seekers. The sheer scale of the demographic change caused by immigration has also raised alarm. In each of the past four years, more than 100,000 newcomers have arrived - a huge influx for a small island with a population of just 5.4 million people.

But the anti-immigration movement will find no support from Mrs Connolly, who is the embodiment of progressive sentimentality. A former psychologist and lawyer, she brings to the presidency all the predictable opinions of hard-Left groupthink, including antipathy towards Nato, and condemnation of Israel - which she has accused of perpetrating 'genocide' in Gaza. As a pacifist, she has called for the abolition of the Irish army, while she also backs the decriminalisation of drugs.

In fact, there are striking parallels between her rise and that of Jeremy Corbyn, Britain's own radical maverick. Mrs Connolly, like Corbyn, was a silver-haired veteran in her late-60s, without any experience of ministerial office, when she reached the top. She, like he, also fell out with the Labour party. Having once been a leading Irish Labour politician in her native Galway, she resigned in 2007 over her perception that the party was blocking her ambitions. She subsequently won her seat in the Dail (the Irish Parliament) in 2016 and, as she looks set to do, the presidency as an independent.

Like Corbyn, she has a gift for generating combustible rows with her words and actions. Her recent comparison between increased German military spending and Nazi rearmament in the 1930s provoked widespread outrage, as did her visit to Syria under the Assad regime in 2018. She is often described by colleagues in the Dail as personally 'affable' but politically 'dogmatic and inflexible' - again, reminiscent of the MP for Islington North. Even the rhythms of their oratory are very similar, often repeating the same phrase with thudding regularity, such as 'the normalisation of...' be it 'inequality', 'violence' or 'genocide'.


(More on the link)

.
 

nivek

As Above So Below

Angela Rayner's 'Unemployment Rights Bill' will kneecap the UK's economy for good

Last week, the Business Secretary Peter Kyle described the UK economy as being in a 'growth emergency'. He's right, of course: our economy is stagnant, with next to no growth and a soaring cost of living. The only thing growing is the national debt and its eye-watering interest. By the way Kyle spoke, you'd be forgiven for thinking he was in opposition – not in Government –and it wasn't Labour responsible for this mess.

But the truth is, we aren't growing because of choices Rachel Reeves and her colleagues have made. Their anti-business tax grabs and regulations are stifling the economy and driving wealth creators overseas. And things are about to get much worse. Take their infamous Employment Rights legislation – or as I call it, the 'Unemployment Bill'. The brainchild of the former deputy prime minister Angela Rayner, it has businesses big and small united in fear. By the Government's own admission, it will heap £5billion of costs on to struggling firms, making it more expensive to hire.

That's on top of the £800 per worker Rachel Reeves has levied on employers through her National Insurance hike and her raising the minimum wage – not to mention the suite of taxes she could smack businesses with in her Budget next month. The burden on small firms will prove too heavy – and that means job losses and firm closures. Even larger companies, which might just be able to cope, will hold off hiring – and start firing – to cut costs. In fact, many already have. A survey of businesses worldwide by recruitment firm Manpower revealed last month that hiring plans in the UK fell by 17 per cent in the past year – a fall nearly double that of the next worse country.

It's staggering hypocrisy, then, to hear the Chancellor talk about how she wants to cut red tape and free businesses from unnecessary rules, when her own Government is doing the exact opposite. If lightening the burden on business is the aim, she need look no further than the disastrous Employment Rights Bill.

Joblessness has been rising every month since Labour took office. Since last year's Budget, more than 250,000 people have found themselves out of work – a jobs crisis that is hitting young people disproportionately. Britain's jobs market is already teetering but this Bill will kneecap it for good.

Why? Because it makes it easier for workers to down tools, causing the chaos we saw in London last month when the strike barons ground the Underground to a halt, again. Or we'll witness dangerously understaffed casualty departments, the likes of which are expected next month when resident doctors plan a mass walkout.

The Bill is nothing but a Strikers' Charter and a sop to Labour's union paymasters. And employers know it.


(More on the link)

.
 

nivek

As Above So Below
The solution is to stop letting migrants into the country...

...

Return of the prefab as Britain battles a growing migrant crisis and an epidemic of homelessness: How 11 councils could turn to 'pod home' estates as a radical solution

Portakabin villages would be erected on brownfield sites across the country as part of a new scheme, as a way to tackle the growing burden on local authorities straining under the double wave of poverty and the migrant crisis. The pod-home firm is currently in talks with 11 councils about setting up the mini estates in areas with dwindling housing stock.

Return of the prefab as Britain battles a growing migrant crisis and an epidemic of

(More on the link)

.
 

nivek

As Above So Below

Billions 'wasted' on hotels for migrants: Bombshell report reveals 'incompetent' Home Office staff let private firms make 'excessive profits' from small boat crisis

The Home Office has 'squandered' billions of pounds on asylum hotels, a damning report has found. MPs blasted the department's 'incompetence' over its handling of a 'failed, chaotic and expensive' system. There was 'manifest failure' by the Home Office to 'get a grip' of contracts with private companies it appointed to house asylum seekers, they concluded. As a result, the firms had been allowed make 'excessive profits' from the Channel crisis.

In one of the most damning reports ever published into the dysfunctional department, the MPs said the Home Office was 'not up to this challenge' and demanded a series of major changes. The Commons' home affairs select committee said it was 'inexplicable' the Home Office did not require accommodation providers to assess the impact on local areas before opening migrant hotels. It had led to 'some local services experiencing unsustainable pressures', damaging community cohesion and allowing 'misinformation and mistrust to grow'. Committee chair Dame Karen Bradley MP said: 'The Home Office has presided over a failing asylum accommodation system that has cost taxpayers billions of pounds.


(More on the links)

.
 

nivek

As Above So Below

Louvre Heist Encapsulates a Western Culture That Will Not Defend Itself

I write from a quiet, mountainous part of Central Europe. The scenery is idyllic, and the fall air is crisp. But much as the case has been in my other recent trips to the European continent, the sights I see and the conversations I hear are all underscored by a similar haunting concern: Will there even be a Europe, in any cognizable sense of the term, a century from now?

All across the continent, fertility rates have plummeted, and the Christianity that defined the civilization for two millennia is viewed as a quaint relic of a bygone era. The combination of modern European Union political and economic integration on the one hand, combined with imposed mass immigration from foreign (namely, Islamic) cultures on the other hand, has led to a place where sense of home and hearth is diminished—and along with it, community, meaning and purpose.

In Britain, two Jews were killed following a synagogue attack by a Syrian immigrant on the holiest day on the Jewish calendar. In Germany—yes, Germany—Jews have already been advised for years against wearing a kippah head covering in public. More generally, Europeans' personal happiness levels have seemingly gravitated away from church and children, the traditional sources of meaning, and toward a discomfiting positive correlation with the size of a nation's welfare state.

The stunning Louvre museum heist earlier this week in Paris offers an uncanny encapsulation of the broader society-wide phenomenon. On Sunday, thieves disguised as construction workers stole, during broad daylight, eight pieces of the French crown jewels estimated to be worth roughly $100 million. And perhaps the most astonishing aspect of this real-life caper is this: As of this writing, the thieves have not been caught.

The utterly humiliating inability of French authorities to either prevent the theft of the literal crown jewels or promptly arrest the perpetrators after the fact is the most poetic possible way to demonstrate a point that has come up in so many of my conversations this week: At best, European political and cultural elites have no interest in protecting and preserving their culture; and at worst, they have an interest in seeing that culture replaced root and branch.

French police officers stand in front of the Louvre Museum after robbery, in Paris on October 19, 2025. Robbers broke in to the Louvre and fled with j...
Back home in the United States, the situation is in some ways not so different. It was concern about decades of reckless American immigration policy and elite-driven cultural decadence, above all, that first propelled Donald Trump to the White House in 2016. The chief difference in this respect between the United States and Europe, besides America's more robust (if still declining) church, is thus primarily a political one. Trump is now a two-term president, whereas the only major European country to have a right-of-center leader today is Italy. Viktor Orban of Hungary cannot do it all by himself.

Amidst the prevailing transatlantic cultural currents of nihilism, childlessness and general dissatisfaction, it has never been more important that political leaders offer a robust defense of their respective homelands and a compelling vision for those homelands' future. Sincerity of religious conviction and the utilitarian value of religious community are both time-tested ways of offering meaning and stability in a person's life, but there is a role to be played by an anodyne nationalism as well.

Following religious conviction, pride in one's homeland and confidence in its future is the sentiment that very well might induce the most people to get married and have children. If one hates his country and thinks it is evil, or even if he merely thinks the future of his country looks positively dire, he might well be less inclined to make the tremendous investment of bringing new life into the world. What is the point, one might well conclude, of raising children in a hellish, dystopian future?

Trump's political success is partially due to his keen understanding of this very phenomenon. One can always quibble on the merits or demerits of a certain policy approach, but Trump's signature "Make America Great Again" tagline grasps at an ineluctable truth: America, for various reasons, had been in decline, but the man in charge now understands that and plans to turn things around. Across Europe, there is much that can be learned from the Trump example.

But that begins with evincing a simple desire to defend the existence and perpetuity of one's culture. It begins with a meaningful determination to prolong the lifespan of a particular nation, in Edmund Burke's famous sense of the term, as a social compact between the dead, the living and the yet unborn. In Paris, perhaps it begins by defending the nation's literal crown jewels.

Surely that isn't too much to ask for, is it?


.
 

nivek

As Above So Below

ANOTHER big robbery hits France as armed crooks dressed as cops raid gold laboratory

A group of armed men dressed as police officers have raided a gold laboratory in Southern France. The dramatic heist comes nearly two weeks after the Louvre in Paris was targeted by robbers. The crooks, who were reportedly carrying assault rifles and explosives, targeted the Pourquery laboratory in Lyon, which deals with precious metals, on Thursday.

The break-in took place at around 2pm, with eyewitnesses describing how the armed robbers, who wore fake police armbands, smashed the windows of the lab before entering. Footage shared on social media shows the alleged criminals, who are wearing police uniforms, using a ladder to get over the laboratory's fence, before they are seen loading a small white van and fleeing the scene.

A witness can be heard in the video calling emergency services.

'Hello, there’s a big emergency, we’re in an office at Parc de l'Artillerie. There’s some kind of robbery going on. We heard a loud bang, and people are now robbing the laboratory. They’ve got kalashnikovs, they’ve got weapons', the witness says.

Police said five suspects have been arrested and that the stolen goods have been recovered. Five employees sustained minor injuries, according to French newspaper Le Parisien. The violent robbery comes after five more people were arrested on Thursday in connection to the Louvre jewel heist.

The late-night operations in Paris and nearby Seine-Saint-Denis lift the total arrested to seven. Prosecutor Laure Beccuau told RTL that one detainee is suspected of belonging to the brazen quartet that burst into the Apollo Gallery in broad daylight on October 19; others held 'may be able to inform us about how the events unfolded.'

Despite the arrests, the loot - a trove of around $102 million - is yet to be uncovered.

Stolen goods include a diamond-and-emerald necklace Napoleon gave to Empress Marie-Louise as a wedding gift, jewels tied to 19th-century Queens Marie-Amélie and Hortense, and Empress Eugénie’s pearl-and-diamond tiara. Only one relic has surfaced so far — Eugénie’s crown, damaged but salvageable, dropped in the escape.


.
 

Dejan Corovic

As above, so bellow
Third world bahaviour cannot be tolerated nor condoned in the West...

...
TBH, I'm quite in a shock. I wasn't in the slightest way aware that this is "normal".

This is completely to be blamed on media. Job of the media is to expose this yet they are hiding it in a plain sight.

Double blame on journalists is that by not reporting and highlighting this they exposed thousands, if not millions, of our own women and girls to risk of gang rape, or should I call it "tacharush".
 

nivek

As Above So Below

Terror probe after knife attack on train leaves nine fighting for their lives as armed police arrest two amid 'horrifying' scenes

A counter terror probe has been launched after a knife rampage on a train has left nine people fighting for their lives. Two people were arrested by officers at the scene of the horror near Huntingdon in Cambridgeshire, with ten victims rushed to hospital with stab wounds. Nine are believed to have suffered life-threatening injuries, while one has serious but not critical wounds. There have been no fatalities, British Transport Police said.

The force has declared the attack a 'major incident' and is probing the stabbing spree alongside counter-terrorism police. Police had at one point declared Code Plato, a word used by police and emergency services when responding to a 'marauding terror attack'. However, this declaration was later rescinded, BTP confirmed. Thirty officers rushed to the London North Eastern Railway (LNER) Doncaster to London King's Cross service after it stopped in the Cambridgeshire town. The attack is believed to have begun shortly after the train left Peterborough.

Travellers hid in toilets as one suspect carried a 'big knife', witnesses said, while others claimed they were trampled on as distressed passengers attempted to flee the chaos. Armed police descended on the platform and 'tasered a man waving a large knife', bystanders also claimed. Videos also emerged on social media showing police cars racing to the scene as armed officers raced to the platform at around 7.42pm today. Chief Superintendent Chris Casey said: 'This is a shocking incident and first and foremost my thoughts are with those who have been injured this evening and their families.


1762047895061.jpeg

(More on the link)

.
 

nivek

As Above So Below

Britain is broken. Even our Left-leaning youngsters know it

When the going gets tough, even society’s softest seem to follow suit, if a new survey is anything to go by. According to figures compiled by the National Centre for Social Research (NatCen), the majority of British adults now believe that our overly generous welfare system is stopping people from supporting themselves. Which is a surprise to precisely 0 per cent of the population aged 40-plus. In fact, my daughter and I have a game where we like to count how many seconds it takes any given LBC caller to utter the words “broken Britain”. (She finds it funnier than I do, because she’s 13 and doesn’t understand that Britain really is broken, and that’s quite sad.)

But it’s what the poll reveals about the changing attitudes of school leavers and Left-wing young adults that’s most fascinating. These are the Jellycat collectors. This is the duvet-day brigade. And when 28 per cent of this notably floppy demographic is “strongly agreeing” that people now need to be depending less on benefits and learning “to stand on their own two feet”, you know there’s a problem.

Asked about this dramatic hardening by the Financial Times, which published the figures on Monday, Luke Tryl, executive director of polling company, More in Common, confirmed that a growing group of youngsters are currently feeling extremely let down by the system and Labour’s performance, and that here in the UK, there is seen to be a “broken social contract”.

Conjuring up the example of a young criminal barrister “who’s struggling to get by and still flat-sharing heading into his 30s”, Tryl explained that alongside young people’s growing scepticism towards the mainstream political parties, there’s a very real antagonism towards those “not seen to be doing their bit”.
“There is this sense that I’ve done the things that I was supposed to do and it’s not getting me anywhere,” he added.

At this point, it all began to make sense. Left-wing Gen-Zers are obsessed with fairness to an almost infantile degree. Which can be incredibly annoying when you’re trying to debate an issue with them, and sometimes makes you feel like you’re arguing with a petulant, foot-stomping Violet Elizabeth Bott. “But it’s not fair!”

In this instance, however, I think that’s an extremely healthy response – so much healthier than apathy.

Good news then, that these newly-hardened youthful attitudes are showing up not just around benefits claimants, but tax cuts (20 per cent now believe that we should reduce taxes and spend less on health, education and social benefits), as well as stricter sentencing for criminals (34 per cent strongly agree that people who break the law should be given stiffer sentences).

Now, if all that mounting fury can somehow be harnessed and used in the right way, we might just be able to turn “broken Britain” around.


.
 

nivek

As Above So Below

France is slipping into anarchy

In an editorial last Saturday the conservative Le Figaro described France as “an airplane without wings or a pilot, vegetating at the end of the runway”. The aviation metaphor was apt given that 24 hours earlier Michael O’Leary, the chief executive of Ryanair, had said France, particularly its air traffic controllers, was “the byword for inefficiency and incompetence”.

President Macron would disagree. He believes the Republic is in fine fettle and on Monday he expressed his excitement at the forthcoming “Choose France” summit at which businesses will be encouraged to invest. Why would anyone wish to invest in France right now? The country is on its fourth prime minister in a year and the National Assembly resembles what one MP described recently as a “psychiatric hospital”.

The prime minister Sébastien Lecornu is the man in the white coat but he looks worn out after just a few weeks in the job. His priority is to pass a budget by the end of the year but that is looking increasingly unlikely in a bitterly divided parliament. Many believe that a dissolution of parliament is inevitable in the coming weeks.

France’s business leaders are in despair. Dozens signed an open letter at the weekend begging the political class to show some leadership, and not just simply impose more taxes. The National Audit Office is also at its wits’ end, warning that France has “lost control over the trajectory of social finances”. The social security deficit is forecast to reach €23bn this year, which the Office said was neither healthy nor sustainable.

An increasing number of French accuse their president of being in denial. Macron refuses to accept responsibility for the chaos he has unleashed on the country by calling a snap election in June 2024. He carries on as normal, convinced that he is the cleverest man in the room.
Last week Macron hosted the Paris Peace Forum where conflict prevention and peacebuilding were high on the agenda. Instead of worrying about international conflicts, Macron should perhaps focus his attention closer to home.

A couple of days after the Forum there were a spate of shootings in the capital which left one dead and three wounded, believed to be linked to the increasingly violent drug cartels whose deadly trade is stretching into every town and city in France. Rarely does a week go by without news of another killing: in Marseille, Paris, Dijon, Rennes, or sometimes in quiet backwaters such as Audincourt, close to the Swiss border.

The Louvre heist may have grabbed the global headlines for its audacity (and incompetency) but there have been other brazen attacks before and since. In September, a lone thief broke into the Museum of Natural History in Paris and stole gold nuggets worth €1.5m euros from a display case. Last month a 24-year-old Chinese woman was arrested in Spain in connection with the theft. At the start of last week, saboteurs destroyed a section of railway line between Lyon and Avignon. The vandalism affected services between the south of France and Paris for 24 hours.

Police suspect that it may be the work of the same anarchist cell which attacked the country’s rail system on the eve of last year’s Paris Olympics.

On Thursday, men brandishing assault rifles blew the doors off a gold refining laboratory in Lyon and helped themselves to 306kg of precious metals worth €28m. They were later caught but police in Paris are still looking for the thieves who on the same day stole €200,000 worth of jewels from the Swarovski store. Robberies against commercial targets have increased by 15 per cent in the last four years. Most crimes are on the up in France, including assault, rape and attempted murder.

There is a power vacuum in France. The country has no stable government, no coherent strategy and a president whose approval rating has plunged to a record low of 11 per cent. France’s criminal fraternity knows that there is no pilot in the cockpit.


.
 

nivek

As Above So Below

'My friends gave their lives for what, the country of today?': Veteran, 100, shocks GMB hosts as he says winning WW2 'wasn't worth it' - echoing major poll on the state of Starmer's Britain

A 100-year-old veteran shocked the hosts of Good Morning Britain today by declaring that winning World War II 'wasn't worth it' due to the state of the UK. Alec Penstone told Adil Ray and Kate Garraway how he quit his factory job to sign up for the Royal Navy and fight for his country as soon as he came of age. The war hero recalled serving alongside close friends, many of whom lost their lives, and called himself 'just a lucky one' for having survived. Asked by Ms Garraway what Remembrance Sunday meant to him, the veteran said he felt that winning the war was 'not worth' how the country had turned out today.

His concerns about the state of the nation are shared by an increasing number of Britons, with a new survey revealing national pride has plummeted and society is more divided than ever under Sir Keir Starmer. In findings which will send alarm bells ringing in Downing Street, eight in ten said they felt the nation was divided - up five percentage points from two years ago and ten points from 2020. Commenting on the survey results this morning, former Tory minister Michael Gove argued 'mass immigration' was partly to blame for the perception that Britain felt more divided. The poll found Reform voters were most worried about the cultural state of the nation, suggesting Nigel Farage's party stand to make big gains in future elections. And half of the public said Britain's 'culture' was changing too fast, up from a third.


(More on the link)

.
 

nivek

As Above So Below

Germany’s plan to send Syrians home is faltering

Friedrich Merz wants to send Germany’s Syrians home. More than one million of them arrived after Angela Merkel threw open the borders to refugees in 2015. But with the Syrian civil war over, the chancellor believes there is no longer any reason for them to stay. His government has launched a “repatriation offensive” to massively increase the number of asylum seekers returning to their home countries, telling them that if they do not go willingly then they will eventually be forcibly removed.

These are strong words, but they need to be. Merz is desperately attempting to fend off the ascendant Alternative for Germany (AfD) and ensure that his own centrist and respectable Christian Democratic Union (CDU) remains the party of choice for German conservatives.

To do so, the chancellor’s words must be followed through with action. However, he leads a party whose grandees embody Bundesrepublik managerialism, allergic to the kind of radical action required. This was put sharply into focus on Tuesday when Johann Wadephul, Merz’s foreign secretary, openly challenged his claim that Syria is safe to return to, saying it “looks worse than Germany in 1945”.

Merz has tried to put German politics on a more realist path. He wants to get rid of the grip that moral sentimentalism born from war guilt has on the country’s decision-making. But Wadephul’s “1945” knee-jerk reflex shows that there is a long way to go. Not only that, it made clear to observers and voters that the Merz government is simply not able to maintain the discipline required for a “Migrationswende”; a genuine turning point in the country’s attitude and policies towards immigration.
Wadephul’s blunder was not a slip of the tongue. It was a deeper reflection of the fact that, 80 years after the defeat of National Socialism, Germany is still not able to conceive of itself as normal and thus act as a serious country. Responding to the Wadephul controversy, Merz tried to restore order, insisting that policy had not changed and that he supports deportations, but the damage was done. The centre-Left Social Democrats pounced, the Greens cheered and the AfD smirked.

The chancellor being contradicted by his own foreign secretary was on splashed on every front page; a government that promised discipline and decisiveness looked like a gang of squabbling student union officers. Senior figures within the CDU now speak privately of removing Wadephul, though Merz in actual fact has few good options. Neither sacking him nor keeping him around would remove the perception of chaos.

The chancellor looks diminished, held hostage by the incompetence of his team and fearing the AfD snapping at his heels. His conservative renewal project is in fact hanging by a thread. His foreign minister undermines migration policy by mistaking emotion for leadership, while his coalition partners bicker over budgets. It is said that Wadephul believes he is acting out of conscience, that he genuinely sees the ruins of Aleppo as an echo of post-war Hamburg. Perhaps. But the job of a foreign secretary is a serious one, and success is not defined by the ability to emote.

What was meant to be Germany’s conservative course correction has begun to look like the final chapter of the Merkel era: purpose and unity have given way to a moralising circus and a government that can’t decide whether it believes in borders or apologies.


.
 

nivek

As Above So Below

Tourists 'paid $90,000 to shoot innocent people in human safari hunting trips to Europe - with extra charged to kill children'

Prosecutors in Milan have opened an investigation into Italian tourists who allegedly paid £70,000 to shoot innocent people in 'human safari' hunting trips to Sarajevo, with extra charged to kill children. The wealthy foreign gun enthusiasts are accused of travelling to the city for 'sniper tourism' during its four-year siege in the 1990s by Serb-Bosnian militias amid the Bosnian War.

Between 1992 and 1996, more than 10,000 people were killed in Sarajevo by shelling and sniper fire in the longest siege of a capital city in the history of modern warfare. The tourists, who are understood to have had ties to hard-right circles, allegedly paid members of the Bosnian Serb army for weekend trips to the besieged city where they participated in the massacre of residents for pleasure.

According to the case, they flew from Trieste to Belgrade on the Serbian airline Aviogenex to be 'weekend snipers' and join in the bloody siege, reportedly paying between £70,000 and £88,000. The killing of children cost more, El Pais reported. The investigation originated from a 17-page legal complaint submitted by Milan-based writer and journalist Ezio Gavazzeni, with the support of former magistrate Guido Salvini and Benjamina Karic, mayor of Sarajevo from 2021 to 2024.

The allegations came to light in the 2022 documentary 'Sarajevo Safari' by Slovenian filmmaker Miran Zupanic, who gathered testimonies about the possibility of wealthy Italians and other nationalities paying to travel to Sarajevo to shoot at residents.


Tourists 'paid £70,000 to shoot innocent people in human safari hunting trips to

(More on the link)

,
 

Dejan Corovic

As above, so bellow

Germany’s plan to send Syrians home is faltering

Friedrich Merz wants to send Germany’s Syrians home. More than one million of them arrived after Angela Merkel threw open the borders to refugees in 2015. But with the Syrian civil war over, the chancellor believes there is no longer any reason for them to stay. His government has launched a “repatriation offensive” to massively increase the number of asylum seekers returning to their home countries, telling them that if they do not go willingly then they will eventually be forcibly removed.

These are strong words, but they need to be. Merz is desperately attempting to fend off the ascendant Alternative for Germany (AfD) and ensure that his own centrist and respectable Christian Democratic Union (CDU) remains the party of choice for German conservatives.

To do so, the chancellor’s words must be followed through with action. However, he leads a party whose grandees embody Bundesrepublik managerialism, allergic to the kind of radical action required. This was put sharply into focus on Tuesday when Johann Wadephul, Merz’s foreign secretary, openly challenged his claim that Syria is safe to return to, saying it “looks worse than Germany in 1945”.

Merz has tried to put German politics on a more realist path. He wants to get rid of the grip that moral sentimentalism born from war guilt has on the country’s decision-making. But Wadephul’s “1945” knee-jerk reflex shows that there is a long way to go. Not only that, it made clear to observers and voters that the Merz government is simply not able to maintain the discipline required for a “Migrationswende”; a genuine turning point in the country’s attitude and policies towards immigration.
Wadephul’s blunder was not a slip of the tongue. It was a deeper reflection of the fact that, 80 years after the defeat of National Socialism, Germany is still not able to conceive of itself as normal and thus act as a serious country. Responding to the Wadephul controversy, Merz tried to restore order, insisting that policy had not changed and that he supports deportations, but the damage was done. The centre-Left Social Democrats pounced, the Greens cheered and the AfD smirked.

The chancellor being contradicted by his own foreign secretary was on splashed on every front page; a government that promised discipline and decisiveness looked like a gang of squabbling student union officers. Senior figures within the CDU now speak privately of removing Wadephul, though Merz in actual fact has few good options. Neither sacking him nor keeping him around would remove the perception of chaos.

The chancellor looks diminished, held hostage by the incompetence of his team and fearing the AfD snapping at his heels. His conservative renewal project is in fact hanging by a thread. His foreign minister undermines migration policy by mistaking emotion for leadership, while his coalition partners bicker over budgets. It is said that Wadephul believes he is acting out of conscience, that he genuinely sees the ruins of Aleppo as an echo of post-war Hamburg. Perhaps. But the job of a foreign secretary is a serious one, and success is not defined by the ability to emote.

What was meant to be Germany’s conservative course correction has begun to look like the final chapter of the Merkel era: purpose and unity have given way to a moralising circus and a government that can’t decide whether it believes in borders or apologies.


.
Lets see when they are going to send x8 million Ukrainians back to Ukraine.
 
Top