“In the current Russian leadership’s rather 19th — though increasingly 21st — century view of how the world works, lesser powers must defer to great ones or pay the price. The UK, a country in a category all of its own when it comes to Kremlin resentments, has just been warned that it’s inline for such a punishment and I’m not sure that’s being taken seriously enough.”
– Marc Champion, columnist at Bloomberg ($).
The final sentence is a classic of masterly understatement.
Not 19th century – Czar Alexander the First had a religious view of foreign policy (bordering on religious mania), Nicholas the First was a depressed “Realist”, Alexander the Second had a liberal (in the old sense of the word) view of policy – although this did not extend to Muslims (as the Circassians found out – the hard way), Alexander the Third was another depressed man (although he hid it under a bluff exterior and games – such as twisting metal rods into knots with his bare hands, he was was very strong) – who did not even bother to teach his son (the future Nicholas II) about governing – as what-is-the-point, everything-is-going-to-fall-apart and the-boy-is-an-idiot-anyway. And Nicholas the Second himself was another depressed, and rather confused man (some say he never really recovered from the saber cut to the head a madman had given him on a trip to Japan), who tried to carry on Alexander the Third’s peace-policy, but mobilized in 1914 – because ministers kept shouting at him (Nicholas had a habit of giving in to people who shouted at him – or who threatened to kill themselves, he tried to ban vodka in the First World War because a friend threatened to kill himself if he did not – the friend’s son had drank himself to death).
As for Mr Putin – when he was born (1952) Ukraine (the “borderlands” – that is what the word means) was under Moscow and had been for centuries, even in the time of Peter the Great Russian courts had rejected the claims of Ukrainians that they were from a different country and, therefore, could not be tried for treason for siding with the Swedish army – the Russian courts (just judges – there was no juries in Russia till Czar Alexander the Second introduced them in the 19th century – the Soviet Marxists abolished trial by jury) found that they were Russian (indeed that there was no such nationality as “Ukrainian”) found them guilty of treason – and hanged them, which was rather harsh.
The “independence” of Ukraine (it has representation in the United Nations and so on) was a legal fiction in Soviet times – and Mr Putin thought this would just carry on, with Ukraine being independent in theory – but not in practice, 2014 came as a bit of shock to him – and his response, although thought clever at the time, did not really solve any problems. It is pointless to control Crimea (in theory made “part of Ukraine” in 1954) if you have no safe land route to Crimea – as a young man Mr Putin declared that Crimea was of no use to Russia, but I suspect he has forgotten that he ever said that.
As for the present war – it is utterly pointless, and has cost a vast number of Russians and Ukrainians their lives, for which Mr Putin must bare responsibility.
The young men who died should have been husbands and fathers – it is demography that is killing both Russia and Ukraine and, in the case of Russia, opening the door to the followers of the Crescent Moon who Mr Putin (desperate for soldiers) has, very foolishly, made an alliance with.
There is indeed a dispute of history – with Moscow claiming to be the heir of the Kiev Russ (as well as the true heir of Constantinople – the claim of Moscow as the Third Rome), and the Ukrainians counter claiming that the Russians are really hybrids with lots of Mongol and Tatar (Turkic) “blood” (the German National Socialists made the same claim).
Both sides are wrong – genetic testing shows that the Russians, especially north Russians such as Mr Putin, are indeed NOT pure Slavs – but they do not have much Mongol or Tatar genetic material, what they do have is quite a lot of Finno-Ugric DNA.
I suspect that Mr Putin would not like to be told that he is part Finnish (after all the Finns and the Russians fought on opposite sides in the Second World War – starting with the Soviet invasion of Finland) – but he almost certainly is, as most north Russians are.
I will leave aside examination of claims of Finnish Depression and hard drinking – and what link, if any, this may have with Russian Depression and hard drinking.
On the positive side the “Free Peasants of the North” were, as the name suggests, not serfs – as more central and southern Russians became after the Saint George’s Day custom (when you could leave the land on Saint George’s day each year – and when your contract of work was held to have finished) was abolished.
The Free Peasants of the North had no need to run away and become Cossacks (there are both Russian and Ukrainian speaking Cossacks) – although they did have to contend with winter trying to kill them each year.
The United Kingdom “resented” by the Russian government?
Well the British government was very quick to supply arms (including anti tank missiles) and training to the Kiev government forces – and that may indeed have been an important factor in the failure of Mr Putin’s plan in 2022.
But the United States had built up the Ukrainian armed forces, especially under the first Trump Administration – although this is normally forgotten, and Mr Putin’s 2022 plan was rubbish (a horrible mess) anyway.
Sending in airborne forces near Kiev (into a battle where they were outnumbered and outgunned), counting on the conventional Russian army managing to get to them in time – down a narrow highway, very many miles long………….
It was like Operation Market-Garden (technically two operations) in the 2nd World War – only vastly worse.
Still I suspect that Russia will last longer than the United Kingdom – although that is not saying much, as the United Kingdom will likely collapse over the next few years.
Moscow, Saint Petersburg, Ekatrinburg, and so on, remain largely Russian – how many English cities are really English any more (hat tip to John Cleese) – and if Ukraine has the right to secede (and IT DOES) so do Scotland and Wales.
Talking of cities that have undergone or are undergoing a “demographic transformation” – have a good hard look at many of the large cities in the United States, whether they are now inhabited by people who like the United States very much.
Not that young Americans tend to like the United States very much either – as their “education” is largely anti American agitprop centered around the “genocide” of “Native Americans” (the tribes were not subjected to genocide – other than the genocide they sometimes inflicted on each other, but American school children are not taught that) and Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks – both presented as saints, with their real political stance covered up – other than from the high initiates of the establishment (who, privately, share the totalitarian political stance), by the time a person undergoing “education” (indoctrination) finds out what these historical figures really believed – they themselves tend also to believe it (after they will have been subjected to many years of indoctrination by this point).
Mr Putin was brought up in a Marxist country – but a country where, in private, most people had come to despise Marxism – even KGB types called people who really believed in Marxism “shit eaters” – this was not a compliment. Mr Putin is best understood as a criminal – a gang boss, like Al Capone.
But the American, and general Western, establishment, actually believe in Marxism – specifically Frankfurt School “Critical Theory” Marxism – even Stalin thought the Frankfurt School interpretation of Marxism was extreme, but that does not stop the Western lovers of “Diversity and Inclusion” – with (for example) their denial of objective truth, even in the sciences, medicine and engineering.
One can see this by comparing “RT” with the BBC – when RT (Russian English language television) delivers leftist propaganda, and it often does, it is normally done with a little smile (when a Russian smiles – they are lying, indeed they at least half want you to know they are lying – it is a sort of game) and a voice that indicates (“of course I do not really believe in this shit”) – but the BBC is very different.
When the BBC delivers leftist propaganda (often much the same as RT – for example about Latin American politics, where Moscow and London tend to be on the same side supporting various leftists in Latin American elections – the Trump Administration being on the other side), the Middle East (supposedly wicked, greedy, capitalist Jews are to blame), and American politics (poverty, white supremacy – poor black and brown people, oppresses women) it is done with total seriousness.
The Russians are extracting the urine – but the BBC, and France 24, and so on, really believe this stuff.
It is remarkable how many on the “right” are taking fright & rolling over. I recall when being lily-livered was largely the preserve folk on the self-described “left”.
I meant to type, observe how many large American cities are now largely inhabited by people who do NOT like the United States – partly because of the leftist indoctrination (“education”) system – and partly because of the natural increase (births) among hostile populations.
As for “assimilation” – as in Britain, it is superficial.
A little example from Dallas (which us oldies remember as a television series – now a very different place), a Muslim murdered his daughters because he did not like the way they dressed – and he was sheltered by the Islamic community (which now exists in the area) for YEARS. It was not one man – it was the general group.
And at the funeral of the murdered girls the local Imam lectured the attendees on how this proved that daughters must be controlled.
The cowardly Dallas Morning News (once a conservative newspaper) was represented as the funeral – but did not report the remarks, as this would incite “Islamophobia”.
Perry – Vice President Vance really does seem to be believe that if the IRI regime was overthrown then 90 million Iranians would become refugees and try and get into Europe. Why does he believe that the IRI regime is so beloved and is doing such a good job? Because his senior adviser, the son of Tucker Carlson, told him so – that is why.
Ditto Russia – if Mr Putin fell, J.D. Vance believes that Russia would fall into chaos and a hundred and fifty million Russians would starve to death.
Why does he believe this? Because the son of Tucker Carlson told-him-so – so it must be true.
@Perry de Havilland (Prague)
It is remarkable how many on the “right” are taking fright & rolling over. I recall when being lily-livered was largely the preserve folk on the self-described “left”.
Given that Britain’s military forces are so depleted that, to quote one general, they could perhaps seize one market town and that we had to watch the embarrassing spectacle of HMS Prince of Wales proceeding to the arctic without almost any of the necessary support ships a carrier needs and with barely any aircraft (which is embarrassing, given that it is an AIRCRAFT carrier). And given that it would take twenty years of solid investment to restore the British military to a sufficient fighting force. And given that Britain is pursuing policies, such as Net Zero especially in face of the AI/robotics revolution, that are certain to greatly shrink the economy, ensuring the even if there was a will there is no money to do that investment. And given that the last line of defence for a country is an armed civilian population able to repel an invasion as a self organized militia, which is impossible since you can barely buy a kitchen knife in Britain.
Given all these facts I’m not sure what is left to do except to take fright and roll over. I guess the only option is to suck up to the Americans and hope that they will save you. And maybe, just maybe, Nigel will turn things around.
It is remarkable how many on the “right” are taking fright & rolling over. I recall when being lily-livered was largely the preserve folk on the self-described “left”.
I am not sure where to place Marc Champion, the columnist I linked to. Probably very “centrist Dad”, is my guess.
The fact that Putin has not been able to bite off more than a part of Eastern Ukraine, while doing untold damage to his own country and so on, hardly speaks to his ability to be an existential threat.
And yet….Russia still has the ability to be a very large problem. I can predict that some of the cybersecurity attacks, and other forms of subversion and interference that are going on, will get worse. Power stations, arms factories, rail networks, etc – all are vulnerable. I remember over a year ago that a substation in West London exploded, taking down Heathrow Airport for a day. Foul play was, I recall, not established as the cause but even if that was the case, Moscow would have been taking notes. They can see how easy it is to shut the UK’s largest airport. Imagine what else it can do.
Britain’s defence against Russia is the same as it was 30 years ago. The ability to turn Moscow and St Petersburg into glowing rubble.
Marius – yes the nuclear threat, but if used Russia would destroy the United Kingdom.
Not destroy the two largest cities – destroy the country, remember how relatively small the United Kingdom is.
Johnathan Pearce – yes the Russian Army was essentially the Soviet Army in 2022 – still using outdated Soviet tactics.
It has improved – although how much it is has improved is hotly debated. It now takes new Ukrainian villages and small towns every few days – but the (utterly pointless) war drags on.
In 1914 the Russian Army was in the middle of modernization – which was scheduled to be finished by 1918.
The French military mobilization was scheduled to be finished by 1916.
In 1914 the French and Russian military forces were still very much outdated – certainly not ready for war. Which may be why the Germans declared war on both these powers in 1914.
The Germans were ready for war – the Russians and French were not.
However, by not bothering to think up a plausible excuse for war (Bismarck had always done that – if possible manipulating other countries to declare war on Prussia) Berlin drew Britain into the war.
The German Declaration of War on France in 1914 was a pack of lies and everyone knew it – and Berlin did not even bother to accuse Belgium of having attacked Germany.
It was naked aggression – and London was forced to respond, as it could not allow the full coast opposite this island to come under hostile control.
Fraser Orr – Britain is indeed in a desperate situation, for many different reasons.
As for Mr Farage – he has already said that he will not alienate Islam, so expect no action to reduce the number of followers of Muhammed or even to stop the growth of their numbers.
Russia also has an Islamic threat – it was very different in the past.
Back in 1914 there were 160 million people in the Russian Empire (the United States only had about 96 million people) – the vast majority of them Christians, Muslims were a small minority. There may have been almost as many Jews as Muslims – although Russia was a bad place to be a Jew, which is why my Great Grandfather left it (the legend is that he did not have enough money to buy a ticket to the United States – and so ended up in London, the other side of my family, the Irish Powers, also toyed with the idea of going to America – but never did, my mother pined for a country, the United States, she had never even visited – my father was the same).
Families in Imperial Russia in 1914 were strong and fertility was high.
Russia had more churches, chapels and monasteries than any other power on Earth – it also had the highest industrial growth rate and was already the fourth largest industrial power on Earth (behind the United States, Germany and Britain – in that order).
Had it not been for the war and the revolutions – Russia might well have ended up dominating the world in a few decades.
Of course, Berlin knew all that very well – and took action to prevent it, first by the war and then by sending in “Lenin” (and giving him a lot of support).
Yes – it was not “the Rothschilds” or “the Jews”, it was the Imperial German government.
In my last comment I have given the Restore Party people (and there are quite a lot in Kettering) some ammunition to use against me – on the “he is not really British” line of attack.
But it does not really matter now – I very much doubt I will stand for election to anything again.
As Margaret Thatcher put it – America is an idea, not an ethnic group. This is what Mr Carlson (and Vice President Vance – at least so it is said) deny, but it has always been true.
If that idea, the idea of liberty (“capitalism” – which is not a “system” as Mr Carlson falsely claims) appeals to you, then you will be attracted by America – although frustrated (very frustrated) by how far it falls short of its aim, and if you are not attracted by that idea of liberty, you will hate America – even if you were born there and and ancestors who came over with the Mayflower.
Sadly many (NOT all) of the MODERN (past 1960s) immigrants to America hate the idea of liberty (private property based limited government) – they came for government benefits and services, and they, and their children and children’s children detest the country they are in (although the education system and the media make things worse)
America is, perhaps, the first “ideological” nation – and that world view is summed up by the Bill of Rights (yes ideas that came from Britain – but which the British Parliament claimed the power to violate whenever it felt like it, it is this Sir William Blackstone idea of Parliament that the American Founding Fathers rejected), which sounds like the later French Declaration of Rights of Man and the Citizen – but is really the opposite.
The French Declaration, if one reads it carefully, is about “the people” – the American Bill of Rights is about individual persons – the liberty of individual persons.
As for which philosophers the Founding Fathers referred to most – of the modern ones (modern to them) the French writer Montesquieu (long dead by 1776) and the Scottish philosopher Thomas Reid get the most positive mentions in their writings. Of the ancients – they were on the side of Aristotle and Cicero – not Plato.
However, they were all also familiar with the Bible – for example with the First Book of Samuel, Chapter Eight, and knew it could apply to any form of government – not just Kings.
Indeed, because whilst Russia is vast, it’s population is very concentrated.
@Marius
Britain’s defence against Russia is the same as it was 30 years ago. The ability to turn Moscow and St Petersburg into glowing rubble.
Are you sure? The Royal Navy is in such a state it can barely keep a sub at sea and they regularly deploy with all sorts of mechanical flaws. How sure are you that they can actually launch a nuclear weapon? I’m not. Not at all. Of course it is more a matter of what Putin and his military command believe, and how much risk they are willing to accept. But I am FAR from sure Britain actually have a working nuclear deterrent. And with
And, FWIW, insofar as it does it is almost ENTIRELY dependent on the USA for maintenance and supply. So the only defence Britain really has against invasion is Article 5. So better start sucking up to the Americans.
It might, just conceivably, even be possible to take over St Petersburg in a pincer movement from Finland and Estonia. It would be a pity to have to waste it.
Why not suck up to the French instead of the Americans? After all, the French have their force de frappe, and I’m sure it’s quite reliable and effective.
Perry – yes and Moscow and Saint Petersburg are overwhelmingly Russian. English cities are being overrun.
Snorri – that chance was thrown away several times, the Finns, incredibly brave in fighting to defend their own land, refused to help the Whites retake Saint Petersburg – and refused to help the Germans in relation to “Leningrad” (the city was renamed after this traitor Russian aristocrat who was funded by the Germans during the First World War).
IrishOtter49
France has very severe internal problems – although it French people can be fined or sent to prison for talking about them.
Like Britain it is likely to go into internal conflict (violent conflict) in the next few years.
The Soviet Union was one of the first countries to have “Hate Speech” laws – and Russia under Mr Putin has kept them.
In this, and in so many other things, the Western European nations (such as Germany, France and Britain) have more in common with Russia than the United States – which rejects the Hate Speech doctrine in law.
It should also be noted that in elections in Latin American nations (and elsewhere) Russia and the Western European establishment tend to back the same candidates and political parties (the left) – whereas the Trump Administration backs the other side in the elections in Latin American nations and elsewhere.
Russians are also rather amused by the claims that the NHS was the “first in the world” – as it is a copy of the Soviet health system which was created 20 years before it.
I don’t know if the above is sarcasm, but I genuinely admire how the French, particularly under De Gaulle, developed their own independent nuclear weapons force despite opposition from both the United States and the USSR. Britain’s nuclear deterrent was initially fully independent but then became increasingly dependent on American cooperation and technology. While that made it cheaper, it does mean it is dubious how independent it really is, and therefore it does leave a question mark how truly sovereign Britain is.
@IrishOtter49
Why not suck up to the French instead of the Americans? After all, the French have their force de frappe, and I’m sure it’s quite reliable and effective.
Maybe because unlike Britain, France does actually have an independent nuclear deterrent. However, unlike the United States, France has a pretty much unquestioned France First, attitude, so while America is a reliable ally, France is not.
FWIW, I do not at all say this pejoratively. France and the French government should be France First, as America should be America First, and Britain should be Britain First. FWIW, there is NO policy Britain could enact that would be more the antonym of Britain First than NetZero. A policy the harms Britain supposedly to help the rest of the world, in fact not actually help them since Britain’s “carbon” contribution is trivial, but rather to inspire them to do better. What utter bollocks.
“therefore it does leave a question mark how truly sovereign Britain is.”
You still think there is a question? The answer has been blatantly obvious for years if not decades.
Debatable
You’re most likely correct
Why Britain, and not one of the other European nations that have supported Ukraine? Almost certainly because the current government has been signalling weakness from the moment it took office. It has shown that it is not willing to defend British interests, confront domestic extremists, or even to defend our borders. When it started handing out those pathetic leaflets begging illegal immigrants to please not commit any rapes it sent a signal loud enough to be heard on Mars, let alone in Moscow. If there are any “intellects vast and cool and unsympathetic” regarding us from the Red Planet then they’ll be here by next Tuesday. So, it should be no surprise if the smaller but equally cold and unsympathetic intellects in the Kremlin have identified Britain as the weak link in NATO and in the West as a whole.
1. Ukraine turned out to be an incredibly hard target, while the UK seems to be a very soft target.
versus
2. Why would Putin want the UK? No obvious resources or tech to steal, noncontiguous, unwealthy, an increasingly troublesome population . . .
This is doubly questionable.
WRT the US: It is exactly because the US ruling class does not have an America First attitude, that it is an unreliable ally.
WRT France: Its ruling class might well have a France First attitude; but they appear to be too dumb to see what is in France’s long-term (or even medium-term) interests.
“Why would Putin want the UK? No obvious resources or tech to steal, noncontiguous, unwealthy, an increasingly troublesome population”
I have no doubt that Putin does not ‘want’ the UK. As you say there’s nothing here of interest to him, nothing but trouble in fact.
I do however think Putin would very happily f*ck with the UK, just because he could. I think it would amuse him greatly to reduce the UK to a ungovernable mess, for us to be begging passing strangers for assistance. And I have no doubt he could achieve it, without a great deal of expenditure of blood or treasure.
My my comment about maybe considering sucking up to France was approximately 75 percent sarcasm. Maybe a little more.
Having to say this kind of ruins the point of being sarcastic.
@Jim
Since Putin is former KGB, his thoughts might turn to things other than conventional warfare; which could shed a different light on the reported shutdown of a power station by “Iranian hackers”.
Come to that it would be astonishing if such a man had not re-activated some Cold War agents of influence, old Communist believers who still see themselves as continuing the fight for international socialism and are happy to get some support and guidance from their old comrades.
1. Ukraine turned out to be an incredibly hard target, while the UK seems to be a very soft target.
What are you talking about? There are 60 million people armed with plastic silverware who will definitely give you a very mean stare and maybe even a “tut, tut”, if you try to take over their country.
On the other hand if they ever tried to skip the queue on the London Underground you might see a viciousness that even the brave Ukrainian soldiers would be hard pressed to match.
2. Why would Putin want the UK? No obvious resources or tech to steal, noncontiguous, unwealthy, an increasingly troublesome population . . .
Well, duh, that’s obvious. He obviously wants to make sure he have tea with Harry and Meghan, and get her profound insights into politics and world affairs. I mean, who wouldn’t want that?
Martin – France is still very pretty, but, behind the image, it is falling apart. And fining or putting in prison French people who point out the danger of “demographic transformation” does not change this.
The United States also has terrible problems – the difference being that the West could survive the fall of France (tragedy though such a fall would be), the West could NOT survive the fall of the United States – which is why the anti American faction of the British right (such as Dr Sean Gabb) are so deeply mistaken.
Whether one is talking about Britain, France or the United States – the threat is not Mr Putin (bad man though he is) the threat is internal – and the establishment is trying to distract attention from the real dangers with their Putin (again – a bad man) hysteria.
As for “free migration” libertarians – this was never about free migration in the libertarian sense.
That was made obvious (although it was clear long before) in 1994 when the leftist judges (Federal as well as State) struck down Proposition 187 in California – which restricted the amount of government benefits and public services illegal immigrants got.
It is much the same in other Western nations – the mass migration, and the natural increase of the hostile populations, is about plundering – the establishment themselves made this obvious by such things as striking down Proposition 187 in California (which the people had voted for – overwhelmingly, 60% to 40%) in 1994.
This was also the end of democracy, government by the people (the taxpayers) in California – when it was finally replaced by “Liberal” Democracy – where people are still allowed to vote, but “illiberal” policies are not-allowed.
After this, there was no real point in voting in California – or in living in such a polity (which would obviously be overrun by mass Third World migration – of people seeking the benefits and public services that taxpayers were not allowed to limit), now with the “Stop Nick Shirley Act” that Governor Newsom has signed, it is illegal in California to even TALK about fraud – as revealing fraud would be “racist”. “But that violates the First Amendment” – of course it does, but modern “liberals” hate the First Amendment just as much as they hate the Second Amendment.
And it is much the same in many other places in the Western world – tragically including the United Kingdom, where, however people vote, “liberal” (not liberalism as Gladstone or John Bright would have understood that term – more like the opposite) policies are enforced – and “illiberal” policies are not allowed.
First they will not allow you to change polices by voting, then they punish you for even talking about changing policies (as such talk would be “racist”, or “homophobic” or whatever).
This is where we are – and, although Russia also has such laws (inherited from the Soviet Union – the first county in the world to make “Hate Speech” a “crime”) the collapse of Britain and other Western nations is not really anything to do with Mr Putin.
The United States also has terrible problems
And we’re doing something about them. E.g., sealing off the southern borders; rounding up and deporting illegals by the truck-load; prosecuting voter and welfare fraud committed by illegals and their supporters; bolstering/confirming 2nd Amendment rights; etc.
Now if only we can defenestrate the Democrat Party and the universities.
We’re working on it. It is and will continue to be a tough fight. But I think we can, and will, win it.
With the exception of nukes, the idea that Russia is a threat to the UK is absurd.
“I think it would amuse him greatly to reduce the UK to a ungovernable mess”
Not as much as it amuses the British government to do so.
IrishOtter49.
Yes indeed – and I wish you success, I wish you success with all my soul.
There is still hope for the United States – that is why it is so tormenting to think about the United States, the torment of hope – it is torture, as it leads to the fear that the hope will fail.
Whereas I can think about the United Kingdom with total calmness – for a terrible reason.
I have no fear, no torment, about the United Kingdom – because there is no hope.
And that is nothing to do with Mr Putin.
You haven’t the faintest idea. You are just overwhelmed with negativity about Britain. I suggest skipping Paul Marks’ comments in future.
“You haven’t the faintest idea. You are just overwhelmed with negativity about Britain. ”
You are aware that the last two times a Trident missile was test fired (unarmed of course) it failed both times?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68355395
We are so poor we can’t afford to test fire them more than once in a blue moon.
How much economic harm the war on Ukraine has done to the Russian economy is hotly disputed.
But some things are clear – such as the massive increase in taxation in Russia.
When the war started the top rate of Russian Income Tax was 13% – it is now 22%. And Corporation Tax in Russia is now 25%.
When all the new levies and payments are also counted – Russian taxation may now be close to twice what it was before the war.
Marius – “I suggest” you go fuck yourself.
I was praising French policy from the 1950s and 1960s, and stand by that even if French clearly has contemporary problems.
Britain would still have big internal problems if it had a fully independent nuclear force, but it would have one less problem in that it would be better protected from capricious superpowers than it is currently, be that China, Russia or the United States.
I recall reading a column by Ann Coulter, in which she said that prior to the 1965 Immigration Act, most Americans were descended from people who had been there in 1776. Despite all the immigration in the 19th century from Ireland, Italy and Eastern Europe the population of the USA was still largely made up from the British people who had founded it.
Thanks to Edward Kennedy that has all changed now. White Americans are on course to become a minority in their own country, just as white British are. They will not be the same countries then.