thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 23^rd, 2024 at 12:00pm:



about what you dipstick?

Outspoken American conservative commentator Matt Walsh has suggested Australia be invaded by the US and "converted back into a prison colony".  His comments come after he made headline news earlier this month when he tore into the survival series Alone Australia, branding it as “unintentionally the funniest thing on TV right now”.

Walsh, who shot to global prominence for his documentary “What is a Woman?” in 2022, said while the American version featured “gritty skilled survivalists”, while the Aussie version was “more worried about checking diversity boxes”.

He said Australia was "the weakest, wokest, lamest country on Earth"  The commentator has now suggested his country should invade Australia for its “own sake”.

“Australia needs to be invaded for its own sake, we need to invade Australia and conquer it, and based on what I’ve seen that will only take about three or four hours,” Walsh said.

“We’ll round up all the lame, woke Australians and we will drive them inland, to the interior and we’ll set up a reservation for them, that they can live on, and then the cool Australians will be liberated.

“We’ll send them to New Zealand which is basically Australia, but colder, it’s like Australia liberated or something, from what I understand and they can live there because no one is in New Zealand, not right now, anyway.”

Walsh then suggested converting Australia back into a penal colony so the US could ship its prisoners there.

“I care about Australia so much that I’m willing for it to be conquered in order to fix it,” he said.

“And the great thing is, as we all know, based on recent history, that when America conquers a country it fixes everything, it makes everything better.”

Walsh - who was critical of COVID lockdowns and vaccine mandates during the pandemic - said it had pained him to see what Australia had become.

“I say this as someone who, again, always liked Australia, at least from afar,” he said.  “I was a big fan of Steve Irwin, I love the bloomin' onion from Outback Steakhouse so I know a lot about Australian culture, I'm really steeped in Australian culture and that's why it pains me to see what it has become.”

The POMs have nothing to be ashamed of -
they brought law and order to the lawless colonies
with their 19th century justice system with:
the stocks,
lashings &
the rope.

Of all the post-rational stuff bought into by the new left, none is more idiotic or corrosive than the slavery-imperialism-racism business. In order to sign up you need to be purblind, utterly ignorant (or maybe just dismissive) of history and logic.

It is so easy to refute the notion of reparations that it’s almost not worth the bother – but that’s the hole left open for the lefties and the grifters to crawl through, I suppose. First and obviously, it is not entirely clear as to who should be paying these monies. Is it just the countries who bought the slaves? Does that mean we exculpate those who sold them, such as the various tribes of Ghana and the Bight of Benin? Still more obviously is who in the UK is to blame, if anybody is at all, seeing as everybody involved is dead? At the time this unpleasant practice was taking place, my ancestors were crawling on their stomachs through the pitshafts of the Durham coalfield and were, you might argue, little better off than slaves themselves. They did not benefit – any more than 99 per cent of the country did. I suppose we could trace the lineages of the stinking rich and make them pay up, but it would be difficult to make the charge of present culpability stick in any reasonable court of law, surely?

More pertinent is the question of who the compensation is actually for, and why. Plainly the people who suffered as a consequence of slavery are all dead and therefore would gain nothing from financial redress. Barbados and other Caribbean nations argue, however, that the legacy of slavery still enchains them, although they never actually explain quite how. Perhaps that is because the legacy of slavery has actually benefited them enormously – and this is where the whole argument falls flat on its face.

The average life expectancy in Barbados (77.71 years) is more than 17 years longer than that which pertains in Benin (59.9 years), which is one of the principal countries from where slaves were transported. It is also more than 13 years longer than the average life expectancy in the most affluent of the West African nations, Ghana (63.9).

Not only that, but the Barbadians are substantially better off than their, um, donor countries by every conceivable measurement. The gross national income per capita in Benin ($1,400) is approximately 14 times lower than that of Barbados ($19,490), while the figure for Ghana ($2,380) is about one eighth of that which the Barbadians enjoy. It is probably worth pointing out here that the descendants of slaves who now live in the USA enjoy an average income some 40 times greater than that which pertained in the countries from which their ancestors were transported. The same sorts of differentials occur when you look at the comparative Human Development Indices for the countries of the Caribbean and those of West Africa. What exactly are we supposed to be compensating, then – a feeling of pique?

The more frequently deployed argument questions whether it is rational to dredge through the immensely long and incalculably widespread history of slavery and just pluck the UK and the European empires out of the hat and charge them with offences, entirely ignoring the Ottoman Empire as well as all those civilisations which, earlier, imposed slavery upon the British people. This seems especially counter-intuitive when you remember that it was Britain which became one of the first countries to outlaw slavery (Portugal, Haiti and France have similar claims) while the practice continued unabated across bits of the world which we these days call ‘developing’. There is no rationale or logic to this.

But then there is no rationale or logic to any of it. All of sub-Saharan Africa and almost all lefties are united in their belief that imperialism and colonialism are the sole causes of the poverty which exists in Africa today. And yet that canard can be disproved very quickly simply by examining the cases of Ethiopia and Liberia, which share all the same problems as the countries which surround them, including great poverty, but were never themselves colonised. Or compare and contrast with Singapore – a British colony for almost 180 years that now seems to be doing kind of OK for itself.

Indeed there is a good argument to be made, in the case of Africa and the Caribbean, that the later a country gained its independence, the better it is doing today. Compare and contrast Haiti (1820) with St Lucia (1979), for example, or Mauritius (1968) with Liberia (1847). But perhaps we shouldn’t go there. It just makes everybody a little on edge and it doesn’t stop the grifting.
Rod Liddle

Trump International Golf Links is a golf course in Aberdeenshire, Scotland, owned by Donald Trump who will buy Greenland and make the Atlantic great again. Romans took slaves from Scotland and Queen Boadicea and may do a deal.

Spanish pirates got the riches of Amerigo round so English pirates   did the same to them. The best option now is piracy of Chinese junk ships in the English lake. 2 aircraft carriers on a good day and Caribbean Afros as crews to rule the waves and not the slaves.

In Lefty Europe, Asia, Africa and Oceania. The Brits have been like Meh, yeah nah. As has Politics in general.
But in the Right regions of North America, South America, Sahul and the Middle East.  They've been awesome and growing in influence more so than the declining Left.