Populism versus globalism 8

Tony Blair was a prime minister of post-Thatcher Britain for 10 years (1997-2007).

As such, he was a prime member of the leftist elite that has done so much harm to the world. They call themselves the “globalists”. They expected to extend their rule over the whole world, modeling their new world order on the corrupt undemocratic European Union.

But the first and only genuine workers’ revolution in history has brought a patriotic capitalist, Donald Trump, to power in America. And the British people voted to leave the European Union. And now the days of the globalist cabal are numbered.

They won’t go quietly. They are beginning to make a clamor. They think that somehow they can mount a serious threat to the new US government and all the new patriotic governments that will soon be elected in Europe.

They call the rise of the people against them “populism”. Well, so it is. It could also be called democracy. The demos – the people – have voted, or soon will vote, to reclaim their countries and their liberty.

So it’s “populism” against “globalism”.

The weak outgoing US president, Barack Obama – a globalist – is promising to be the leader of an American resistance movement against the Herculean incoming president, Donald Trump.

And Tony Blair is setting himself up as Obama’s counterpart on the other side of the Atlantic.

Nick Hallett at Breitbart reports:

Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair is to invest £9.3 million of proceeds from his lobbying business in a new institute that he is setting up to fight populism.

Mr Blair said last month he was creating the Tony Blair Institute (TBI) aimed at combatting populism and “making globalisation work”. On Wednesday, he confirmed he has given £9.26 million net assets of his company Windrush Ventures limited to the new institute …

Mr Blair said last month the TBI would be a “platform” offering “thought leadership” on anti-populist, pro-globalisation policies.

He added it would “build a new policy agenda” for what he called the “centre ground” of politics, as well as allowing “a reasonable and evidence based discussion of the future which avoids the plague of social media-led exchanges of abuse.”

Oh, those pestilential social media, which ordinary people use to spread their opinions – and information that the globalist-supporting mainstream media do their best to keep hidden!

In terms of actual policies, he hinted it would champion the continuation and strengthening of the European project, and also open borders.

He said:

Part of its focus will plainly be around the European debate; but this will not be its exclusive domain. It has to go far wider than that since in many ways the Europe debate is a lightning rod for the whole of politics.

Mr Blair has said several times that Britain should consider holding a second referendum on Brexit, just in case the public change their minds and want to remain in the European Union.

In October, he said:

If it becomes clear that this is either a deal that doesn’t make it worth our while leaving, or a deal that is so serious in its implications that people may decide they don’t want to go, there’s got to be some way, either through parliament, through an election, possibly through a referendum, in which people express their view.

He is a true believer that the globalists’ new world order is the only way for the human race to go if it wants to save itself from “serious implications”. To him, Brexit was a disaster of the same order as Trump’s election was for Obama and his party.

They both seem to believe that because they once had the power of government, they themselves are intrinsically powerful.

We expect they can be little more than a nuisance, and that only for a short time, and then – no more of Obama and Blair.

  • liz

    ‘Populism versus globalism’ can also be described as ‘freedom versus collectivism’. So the battle of the 20th century continues into the 21st.
    They may be losing elections, but they’ll continue with the propaganda.
    (Which is what Tony Blair’s Institute amounts to. Wouldn’t doubt he’ll be getting help from his fellow globalist George Soros.)
    We’d better make sure we win that war, too.

  • Chuka Umunna, touted as a future Labour leader – (the UK’s answer to Obama some have called him), calls for Labour areas to be allowed to set their own migration policy:


    Sadiq Khan and Nicola Sturgeon also in on the plot:


    Even in the left-wing stronghold of Scotland 2/3 in a poll say they want immigration reduced however:


    Fortunately these latest new Labour lot are open about their immigration plans, so are likely to lose votes as a consequence. Blair didn’t let on that he was planning to open the flood gates so people only cottoned on when it was too late.

    • Many thanks for all this.

      The flood-gates were already open when Blair became PM.

      When I saw Lady Thatcher – of whom I am a strong admirer – at the memorial for her adviser Sir Alfred Sherman in 2007, I asked her what she thought about the Islamization of Britain. “I know nothing about it,” she said. “Send me information.” (!)

      I did not say, “But it was happening on your watch,” because I respected her too much to be aggressive, although the subject might have merited such a reply.

      I sent her information, but heard nothing from her about it, not even that she had received the (quite small, concise, but adequate) package. It did not accuse her directly, but the time-line included her tenure as PM.

      Blair would not say he knew nothing about it. He would boast of it. His wife’s sister has converted to Islam, I hear. And his wife seems to be at the very least a Muslim sympathizer.

      • You’re right of course in that there was a lot of immigration right back to the 50s when the first wave of Muslims arrived from Pakistan to work in the mills in the North (in industries that closed very soon afterwards). They went on welfare after those industries closed, and as far as I can discover a high percentage have been taking from the state ever since (the DT put it at over 50% of Muslim men and 75% of Muslim women). This is really the origin of the Muslim population in the UK today.

        However the graph here shows how the NET immigration numbers shot up around 1997 when Blair came to power (and have been climbing ever since even under Cameron/May) (this seems to be the most well researched site on immigration at least that I know of):


        For sure, Blair was full of the “diversity is strength” type of rhetoric but there was no mention that New Labour really intended to open the floodgates like this in their manifesto, and many people didn’t even realize it was happening at the time, at least not the extent of it. Since then first Leicester and then London tipped over into being majority non-white British, although the mix includes many East Europeans. What’s more the extent of illegal immigration is unknown – one estimate put it at 1million in London alone. I do believe the scale of illegal immigration also went up sharply during Blair’s time.


        Quote (referring to New Labour policy):

        “a policy that was not declared in any of the three election manifestos.”

        Thatcher was clueless about Islam but then it just wasn’t really an issue on the radar then in the 1980s. The numbers of Muslims officially doubled between the censuses of 2001 and 2011. They may even have done more than double, because the 2011 census included a checkbox which said “Religion – I’d rather not say” – this is one reason to suspect the numbers may in fact be significantly higher than the official statistics. It was after this census I think that alarm bells really started to ring for a lot of people, myself included. Estimates based on this data at that time credibly put the date for a Muslim majority UK as close at 2050. If nothing changes we will at least be close to that by then, that’s why time is of the essence right now.

        There is a short history about the first Muslim arrivals here but as its the BBC there is no mention of what happened AFTER the mills closed, but it does give a rough picture:


        • The first mass influx of Pakistani Muslims was welcomed by most Britons. As were the immigrants – Hindu and Muslim – from Uganda, who were given British passports, and then, when they were forced out of Uganda and lost their businesses, were not admitted to Britain. Many hung around international airports for what seemed months on end (I don’t remember how long it was, but it was too long). Most of us had a lot of sympathy for them, and were glad when they were finally let into Britain. That generation revived the Corner Shop, where we got our milk and daily paper. We were grateful for it. But something sinister was going on at the same time, between the European foreign offices and Islam, and that made all the difference. Here’s our TAC digest of the great study of the whole protracted horror by Bat Ye’or – the writer who taught the West the word “dhimmi”.


          The links you take us to while good on figures is not so good on understanding that there really was a VAST LEFT-WING/ISLAMIC CONSPIRACY at work.

          Please do come back and tell me your thoughts when you’ve read our post.

          • That’s a terrifying account of the unholy alliance at work. I came across Bat Ye’or before in a Fjordman essay:


            “The links you take us to while good on figures is not so good on understanding that there really was a VAST LEFT-WING/ISLAMIC CONSPIRACY at work.”

            OK – the NET figures also may be masking the nature of some of the immigration versus emigration that was going on, i.e. Brits out – non-Brits in.

            As I understand it most Muslim immigration into the UK (prior to the current migrant crisis at least) differed from the Muslim immigration into continental Europe. For the UK it was mostly from former colonies – Pakistan, Bangladesh and India. For continental Europe it was the nearby countries such as Algeria particularly into France, Turks into Germany and Austria. The migrant crisis however has certainly seen people coming from a lot more directions its a more complicated picture now. Of course open borders in the EU exposes us to all that migration as well, a case in point from the other day:


            • Yes, London – including the building where I lived not far from the Regent’s Park mosque – took in a lot of Arabs. Rich Arabs did not come through Europe. They flew in, many in private jets. When I went shopping on Edgware Road, my transaction would be interrupted if a man walked into the (Arab-owned) shop. I was made to wait while he was served. (So I emigrated – though that was not the only reason, of course.) Flotillas of burka-covered women drifted round the square near by where the Blairs lived. I hoped it would disturb him to see so many slaves every morning when he walked out of his house. But apparently not.

              The Fjordman article your link takes us to is good. Thank you. Not much in it that I didn’t know, but he sets it out well.

            • Many years ago I used to visit Speaker’s Corner in Hyde Park and listen to the English eccentrics talking nonsense on their soap boxes there. It was fun, and something of a tourist attraction I thought as well.

              Much more recently I went back to find the few remaining eccentrics were now heavily outnumbered by men of African and middle eastern appearance many of whom seemed to be talking in Arabic, and I think we can guess what they were talking about. The main topic in English there seems to be religion now as well, this is progress thanks to the progressives:

              I found the atmosphere quite unpleasant. I couldn’t blame any tourist visiting London for thinking it was now Londonistan indeed. The Muslims of London are very conspicuous.