Brexit and Donald Trump: Lessons from History
POSTED BY: Magonsdaughter
UPDATED: Thursday, March 19, 2026 03:03
VIEWED: 5931
PAGE 1 of 3
Quote:
History tells us what may happen next with Brexit & Trump
My point is that this is a cycle. It happens again and again, but as most people only have a 50–100 year historical perspective they don’t see that it’s happening again. As the events that led to the First World War unfolded, there were a few brilliant minds who started to warn that something big was wrong, that the web of treaties across Europe could lead to a war, but they were dismissed as hysterical, mad, or fools, as is always the way, and as people who worry about Putin, Brexit, and Trump are dismissed now.
Then after the War to end all Wars, we went and had another one. Again, for a historian it was quite predictable. Lead people to feel they have lost control of their country and destiny, people look for scapegoats, a charismatic leader captures the popular mood, and singles out that scapegoat. He talks in rhetoric that has no detail, and drums up anger and hatred. Soon the masses start to move as one, without any logic driving their actions, and the whole becomes unstoppable.
That was Hitler, but it was also Mussolini, Stalin, Putin, Mugabe, and so many more. Mugabe is a very good case in point. He whipped up national anger and hatred towards the land owning white minority (who happened to know how to run farms), and seized their land to redistribute to the people, in a great populist move which in the end unravelled the economy and farming industry and left the people in possession of land, but starving. See also the famines created by the Soviet Union, and the one caused by the Chinese Communists last century in which 20–40 million people died. It seems inconceivable that people could create a situation in which tens of millions of people die without reason, but we do it again and again.
But at the time people don’t realise they’re embarking on a route that will lead to a destruction period. They think they’re right, they’re cheered on by jeering angry mobs, their critics are mocked. This cycle, the one we saw for example from the Treaty of Versaille, to the rise of Hitler, to the Second World War, appears to be happening again. But as with before, most people cannot see it because:
1. They are only looking at the present, not the past or future
2. They are only looking immediately around them, not at how events connect globally
3. Most people don’t read, think, challenge, or hear opposing views
Trump is doing this in America. Those of us with some oversight from history can see it happening. Read this brilliant, long essay in the New York magazine to understand how Plato described all this, and it is happening just as he predicted. Trump says he will Make America Great Again, when in fact America is currently great, according to pretty well any statistics. He is using passion, anger, and rhetoric in the same way all his predecessors did?—?a charismatic narcissist who feeds on the crowd to become ever stronger, creating a cult around himself. You can blame society, politicians, the media, for America getting to the point that it’s ready for Trump, but the bigger historical picture is that history generally plays out the same way each time someone like him becomes the boss.
On a wider stage, zoom out some more, Russia is a dictatorship with a charismatic leader using fear and passion to establish a cult around himself. Turkey is now there too. Hungary, Poland, Slovakia are heading that way, and across Europe more Trumps and Putins are waiting in the wings, in fact funded by Putin, waiting for the popular tide to turn their way.
We should be asking ourselves what our Archduke Ferdinand moment will be. How will an apparently small event trigger another period of massive destruction. We see Brexit, Trump, Putin in isolation. The world does not work that way?—?all things are connected and affecting each other. I have pro-Brexit friends who say ‘oh, you’re going to blame that on Brexit too??’ But they don’t realise that actually, yes, historians will trace neat lines from apparently unrelated events back to majorNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Curiously, I'm reading an extremely well-researched book which takes place before, during and after WWI, Lawrence in Arabia. What I'm getting out of it, so far, is that it was the web of ALLIANCES which pulled nation after nation into war, and that the colonial Empires and their carving up of the world into spheres of influence set the stage.
So, NATO would be the most direct comparison to the alliances of that day, and that empire of today is the USA, trying to pull everyone into war with Russia.
--------------
I think it's time you disabused yourself of that pleasant little fairy tale about our fearless leaders being some sort of surrogate daddy or mommy, laying awake at night thinking about how to protect the kids. HA! In reality, they're thinking about who to sell them to so that they can get a few more shekels in their pockets.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Because going to war with Russia gains us.... nothing? Maybe the most preposterous thing you've posted, and you've posted some doozies.
Who is "us"?
And what could "we" possibly get out of starting a war with Russia?
--------------
I think it's time you disabused yourself of that pleasant little fairy tale about our fearless leaders being some sort of surrogate daddy or mommy, laying awake at night thinking about how to protect the kids. HA! In reality, they're thinking about who to sell them to so that they can get a few more shekels in their pockets.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yanno, this is about as lame as THUGR thumping for globalization ...
Quote:
This planet needs to become one
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=60658
But he couldn't answer
Quote:
WHY does "This planet need[s] to become one"?
Should everyone speak one language, or will there be many?
Should everyone use the same currency, or will there be many? Will everyone use the same bank, or will there be many, or none?
Should everyone believe in the same ethics and morals, or will there be different views of society and people?
Should everyone believe in the same religion, or will there be multiple religions, or none?
Will everyone have gun rights, like in the USA, or will guns be universally taken away?
Will there be national boundaries, or none? Should everyone belong to the same world government, will it be a direct democracy, a representative democracy, a technocracy, or some other form? Or do you foresee a federation of governments, kind of like the UN but better?
If there is a universal legal code, who enforces it? Will there be a world-wide army, kind of like a "universal police force" acting on rogue nations-states, or do you envision this "police force" acting on individuals, or no "universal police force" at all?
Seems like you can't figure out who "we" are, and what we might gain from waging war on Russia.
--------------
I think it's time you disabused yourself of that pleasant little fairy tale about our fearless leaders being some sort of surrogate daddy or mommy, laying awake at night thinking about how to protect the kids. HA! In reality, they're thinking about who to sell them to so that they can get a few more shekels in their pockets.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So why are the neocons trying so hard to start a war with Russia?
--------------
I think it's time you disabused yourself of that pleasant little fairy tale about our fearless leaders being some sort of surrogate daddy or mommy, laying awake at night thinking about how to protect the kids. HA! In reality, they're thinking about who to sell them to so that they can get a few more shekels in their pockets.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Yanno, this is about as lame as THUGR thumping for globalization ...Quote:
This planet needs to become one
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=60658
But he couldn't answerQuote:
WHY does "This planet need[s] to become one"?
Should everyone speak one language, or will there be many?
Should everyone use the same currency, or will there be many? Will everyone use the same bank, or will there be many, or none?
Should everyone believe in the same ethics and morals, or will there be different views of society and people?
Should everyone believe in the same religion, or will there be multiple religions, or none?
Will everyone have gun rights, like in the USA, or will guns be universally taken away?
Will there be national boundaries, or none? Should everyone belong to the same world government, will it be a direct democracy, a representative democracy, a technocracy, or some other form? Or do you foresee a federation of governments, kind of like the UN but better?
If there is a universal legal code, who enforces it? Will there be a world-wide army, kind of like a "universal police force" acting on rogue nations-states, or do you envision this "police force" acting on individuals, or no "universal police force" at all?
Seems like you can't figure out who "we" are, and what we might gain from waging war on Russia.
--------------
I don't respect you so I won't put effort into debating issues with you. You are someone who spreads doom and gloom about the free nations of the world while defending the deranged. Yano, like those who target and bomb hospitals.
I know who we are and I am not surprised at all that you don't have a clue comrade.
____________________________________________
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Curiously, I'm reading an extremely well-researched book which takes place before, during and after WWI, Lawrence in Arabia. What I'm getting out of it, so far, is that it was the web of ALLIANCES which pulled nation after nation into war, and that the colonial Empires and their carving up of the world into spheres of influence set the stage.
So, NATO would be the most direct comparison to the alliances of that day, and that empire of today is the USA, trying to pull everyone into war with Russia.
I always think it's useful to see who would benefit the most from any conflict and assume they are pulling some strings somewhere to fuel it. This author seems to point to Russia having the most to gain from disunity in Europe.
I see the US moving increasingly into a state of isolation from the rest of the world, both from its own intent and from the POV of allies. I know that for the first time in my memory, our government is trying to put some distance between us, and the idea of following US into future armed conflicts is less likely, thank god.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Curiously, I'm reading an extremely well-researched book which takes place before, during and after WWI, Lawrence in Arabia. What I'm getting out of it, so far, is that it was the web of ALLIANCES which pulled nation after nation into war, and that the colonial Empires and their carving up of the world into spheres of influence set the stage.
So, NATO would be the most direct comparison to the alliances of that day, and that empire of today is the USA, trying to pull everyone into war with Russia. - SIGNY
I always think it's useful to see who would benefit the most from any conflict and assume they are pulling some strings somewhere to fuel it. This author seems to point to Russia having the most to gain from disunity in Europe.
I see the US moving increasingly into a state of isolation from the rest of the world, both from its own intent and from the POV of allies. I know that for the first time in my memory, our government is trying to put some distance between us, and the idea of following US into future armed conflicts is less likely, thank god.- MAGONS
Actually, I think the USA has more to benefit from disunity in Europe, or better yet, pitting the EU against Russia. The USA seems to have a habit of throwing its allies and partners under the bus. American neocons would seem to rather have Russia and the EU take each other out so they can emerge triumphant once again.
--------------
I think it's time you disabused yourself of that pleasant little fairy tale about our fearless leaders being some sort of surrogate daddy or mommy, laying awake at night thinking about how to protect the kids. HA! In reality, they're thinking about who to sell them to so that they can get a few more shekels in their pockets.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I don't think the US is currently that cohesive.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
I don't think the US is currently that cohesive.
But the neocons are.
There is disunity between the Obama WH and State Department/CIA and between parts of the Pentagon and State/ CIA.
But the State Department is driving the crazy-bus right now. Libya is widely considered to be "Hillary's war" (Hillary was our head of State Department, I guess Foreign Minister is the closest title). And Syria seems to be State Department's war as well: The State Department is just as full of neocons itching for war in Syria http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/17/world/middleeast/syria-assad-obama-a
irstrikes-diplomats-memo.html as the Pentagon intelligence is wanting to avoid war http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/09/exclusive-50-spies-sa
y-isis-intelligence-was-cooked.html Ambassador Stevens, also a Hillary appointee, was killed while the CIA/ State Department were running guns from the (destroyed) nation of Libya to their next target, Syria. http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-
line
In addition, recall Victoria "fuck the EU" Nuland? She worked for Hillary's State Department when she precipitated that disaster that is Ukraine. Nuland is married to Kagan an (in)famous necon who is also itching for war. http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2015/08/robert-kagan-thinks-amer
icas-problem-too-little-war
And that attitude of "fuck the EU" doesn't extend JUST to Ukraine, it extends to all Europeans on every conceivable issue, from war with Russia to Syrian refugees.
The USA government doesn't consist of a group of faceless bureaucrats performing technical tasks, overseen by a bunch of well-meaning politicians who are there to do their voter's bidding. It's not all bland and somewhat ineffectual uniformity. There are strong interest groups backed by literally billions of dollars within the government. They don't always see eye to eye, but generally the group with the most money wins.
--------------
I think it's time you disabused yourself of that pleasant little fairy tale about our fearless leaders being some sort of surrogate daddy or mommy, laying awake at night thinking about how to protect the kids. HA! In reality, they're thinking about who to sell them to so that they can get a few more shekels in their pockets.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME