English Commonwealth Sacrified for Globalist Ambitions of Wealth

Submitted by M Tovey (United States), Mar 8, 2021 at 18:57

When Britannia ruled the waves, essentially after the Armada could not make a landing in the sixteenth century, the English in a greater sense of adventurism carried such ambitions to the ends of the earth in a way that history cannot match. However, it would be too presumptuous to say it reached its height during the Victorian age, since the United Kingdom began its steeper decline after Allenby entered Jerusalem and the Brits interfered when they should have kept out. In that clash between the oriental Islamic culture and the occidental repeat of the crusader reality, it has not been the same since.
To a different sense, the European Union cannot make any claim as successor to the fortunes of the waning fortunes of world wide commerce, since all have been seduced to global economical ambitions of avarice and no one sector of the global economy can claim superiority, yet. What the English common thinking has reverted to is the same mentality that separated them from the early continental mindset that had invaded the Island with the seduction of sharing the wealth; but not really.
Not all European economies function the same and no money is made in service industry mentalities as replacement to actual industry. It is socialist as the decision makers have already cleared their profits and all that is left is to get the common man to pay for the dole. The English economy is now paying for that misadventure.
There is no perfection of the English way of life and this observer's ancestor moved to America before WW I to escape the mentality that there could be a better England when the inevitability of war for the sake of a Continental Commonwealth was on its way to change all perceptions globally.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".