Barack Obama and the end of the Anglosphere … When supporters of the Vote Leave campaign sketch out a future for Britain outside the EU, they often point to the Anglosphere of English-speaking nations — bequeathed by Britain’s imperial past. So Barack Obama’s intervention in Britain’s EU referendum last week was a potentially devastating moment for the Brexit campaign. – Financial Times
This fascinating article openly explores the diminishment of Anglosphere power. It is especially important because it positions the subsiding as an evolutionary trend rather than what it really is: a deliberate policy.
And it does so within the context of Brexit – the upcoming vote in Britain on whether or not to stay in the EU.
But the article’s ramifications go far beyond Brexit. It is as if the topic of Brexit is being used as a launching platform to present a much larger repositioning of the Anglosphere itself.
Much of the article is devoted to the reality that we often document: Economic and financial power is moving away from the West toward the East.
Of course, as it is being presented by the Financial Times, the article only gives us part of the story. What we see as programmatic and deliberate, the article portrays as coincidental and unorganized.
In reality, no special explanation is needed for Mr Obama’s remarks. It has long been US policy to support British membership of the EU. Yet the Brexiters are on to something in a broader sense.
For all the ritualistic tributes to the enduring nature of the special relationship, something has changed during the Obama years. That shift is a growing awareness in both Washington and London of the rise of Asia, which has made both the US and the UK reconsider their approaches to the world — and each other.
You see? Once again the world’s trends are presented as unplanned and evolutionary.
Here at DB, for nearly a decade-and-a-half, we’ve made the argument that the world’s economic and sociopolitical evolution is anything but unplanned.
It has long been clear to us that the world is organized by the same forces that have placed monopoly central banks in almost every country.
We call this organization and its outcomes “directed history.”
Events occur and then are acted upon. But neither the events themselves, nor the subsequent actions are unplanned.
The animating goal of these events is ever-increasing internationalism.
Those organizing the increased internationalism put a great deal of time and energy into making the evolution seem unintentional. It is constantly portrayed as a trend rather than a strategy.
This Financial Times article is perfect example of how this occurs.
The signature foreign policy initiative of the Obama years has been America’s “pivot to Asia”. Amid all the turmoil in the Middle East and Ukraine, the US president has remained grimly, stubbornly, determined to devote more of his country’s diplomatic, military and economic resources to Asia…
The article goes on to say that America’s “biggest trade priority” is Asia. It mentions the importance of the Trans-Pacific Partnership deal between the US and Asia that “now awaits ratification.”
We also learn that “the Cameron government has been conducting its own pivot to Asia.” This is being done “even at the expense of ties to the US.”
Again, the emphasis on Asia is portrayed as ineluctable. It is an evolution of necessity. Nothing that could have been foreseen.
Yet if one examines the history of Asia, it becomes clear that those countries that make up Asia, including China, are products of Western influences and systems.
That’s not the impression being given by this article.
The text even mentions that “elite educational ties” shall strengthen with Asia, perhaps at the expense of Anglosphere relationships. And we learn that the “rise of Asia” is also having an impact on countries such as Canada and Australia.
The article concludes as follows:
Still, any Brits who feel nostalgic for the Anglosphere … might reflect how much they still benefit from the cultural power of the US. The traditional Anglosphere may be in disrepair. But a different sort of Anglosphere has emerged in Brussels, with English now the common language of the EU institutions.
So the circle is closed! Those who are pro-Brexit should look to the EU to salvage and enhance Britain’s role in the world. As Anglosphere power diminishes, European clout must inevitably take its place.
Conclusion: Thus the argument for globalism is constructed. There is a great deal of difference between an evolutionary trend and what we call “directed history.” Plan accordingly.
Subscribe to The Daily Bell and immediately access our free guide:
Freedom in Two Years
How to stop caring about political “sides” and focus your efforts on what will truly make a difference in your life.
This is a guide to individual, not political, action.Yes, deliver THE DAILY BELL to my inbox!