@Albert Moore Daniel Hannan is clearly articulate, educated and a gifted speaker. Your comment fails in all categories. The conclusion is obvious and unavoidable.
StereoSpace imagine Mr Hannan being a Barrister ...He would slaughter counsel across the courtroom . Words put articulate with a mixture of passion and body language full of enthusiasm would gain the attention of the most wayward school kid. ,,!!
@@MartyMolloy They still exist and it is themselves they are talking about and not the average British person. He comes from a privileged class of people who nearly all break the law now to avoid tax. They have removed 50 trillion dollars from our economy by moving them into trusts in the Overseas Territories. They are destroying industry with asset bubbles and are unable to stimulate industry because they behave in a way that stops it being financed. The state itself now serves finance instead of finance serving industry. Don't be conned by these people. The ordinary man is just an animal to be studied as far as his CLUB are concerned. We will get these bastards in the next few years as well. Secrecy destroys countries.
@@mikewillis44 I agree with your sentiments to some extent but the facts are if funds are placed in trusts that is not tax avoidance nor is it illegal. The rules are set by an elected parliament be it labour or conservative. It's a different question if those rules are correct or moral but that's not to be confused with illigality or not
@@martynfenton4862 we will make it illeagal again and tax them or they can leave the country.People used to be executed for hoarding.Now I understand why
I believe that our prosperity is related to our freedom, never before has humanity had such freedom. We must protect it, fight and kill for it, if necessary. We must increase it.
WHAT. A. BRILLIANTLY. INTERESTING. LECTURE. Makes me proud to be British. BUT I am watching this on October 9th 2019, the day we apparently are being told by those lovely and nice people in the EU that we must sacrifice part of our country, Northern Ireland, to them so that we can get our independence back. These people are not our friends: our true friends are the U.S. and the countries of the Commonwealth whose brave men and women joined with my forebears to lay down their lives so we could all be freed from tyrannical maniacs. Any right minded person would think we had been defeated in war and we need to pay reparations.
Yea you got friends over in the US and we don’t want you to bow to our demands we don’t require you accept our laws. To the US Britain is a respected sovereign nation, how could it be otherwise
As a Hoosier, also born in 1971, right back atcha, Sir. I have always, even in my pride for my nation’s independence, recognized the daughtership of our people with those of Merry England. Whatever we Americans can do for Hannan, England, and St. George, please let us know. You need not beg off, with your British manners, that you are not to be confused with Harry. Your hirsute informs us. God bless you and your country.
Saw this recommendation after watching Glenn Beck video, interview with Daniel Hannan. Here’s my comment from there... CONGRATULATIONS 🇬🇧 🎊🎈💥 Here in America, we’ve prayed and prayed. I’m a HUGE football 🏈 fan but, unlike the Super Bowl, Brexit really MATTERS!!! (I did play 9 seasons of “soccer” in my youth 🧐) Enjoy, but remember: around the world and throughout history, it’s been tyranny versus freedom in one form or another. The latter must be earned and forever defended, preferably without bloodshed. The entire West, and more, is facing a massive push by oppressors. You’re dealing with it; we’re dealing with it. Vigilance mustn’t give way complacency. The battle continues everywhere, bombs and bullets or no. 🇺🇸🇬🇧🙏🏻🙌🏻✌🏻
A very good speaker but out of step with most of the Conservative Party. He should have been part of the Brexit negotiating team, but they wouldn't have him, and look what a mess they made.
Hannan is right. "We knew in our bones that he (Obama) was urging on us a policy that no American would countenance." True. But Obama, regardless of his place of birth, was no American. I thank providence, that when he spoke, Britain heard instead the voices of America and their heartfelt cry, "Reclaim your freedom." -Love from a Hoosier who kept vigil all the night of June 23. That tiny cheer you heard far across the pond was me.
He urged - and forced - plenty of policies on America that no American would....oh wait, we have almost half a country of people who hate their own country, and who welcome anything that will destroy it.
You're quite right! He was unconcerned with American values and, I think, believes that America is fundamentally a bad country. He was indoctrinated in Indonesia. He wasn't a big fan of Great Britain, either, I might add.
He speaks a lot of sense. There are some awful specific food practises in the US I'd rather not enter UK borders (having to chlorinate chicken because of the dire cage farm conditions they are raised in for example), but equally it can be left up to the consumer to d code that for themselves.
1971 -- It took a month to buy a t.v -- today it takes 2 days. The DIFFERENCE friend is how our gov't thinks about fiat-debt, easy loans, and foreign interventionism. We are not "Freer" today -- we are putting off paying our debts for future generations (to China / Europe as well) AND we globalized so we don't have to be as horrific to our own citizens, instead we off-gas that to poor brown people elsewhere.
Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.
Well Dan, Mrs May didn’t turn out too good. Her deal would have tied UK into the EU. It would be interesting to get his opinion in October 2019 especially if Boris effects the Leave with a Clean Break on thirty first October 2019 as promised. Theresa is seen as a Remainer through and through. Her deal with the EU was so popular with it that it was approved in 30 minutes but rejected by the parliament she was representing. She most certainly not get any statues in her honour in the UK.
Enjoyed your speech and it was again to the point that anyone could and should understand. Having mentioned before about "Just to walk away from the EU". Not paying any membership fee to the EU, until the deal is finalized by both. What is Britain afraid off? A war? In making a war you need an army. EU hasn't got one. So what's the risk to just walk away? I guess the Britts are afraid because, the not knowing of the consequences that might take place. I, frankly think nothing will happen, the EU would just get the ball rolling and get this over with.
We British have never been afariad of anything, least of all the filth that is the european, we have kicked their slimy arses for over 800 years. The beacon of Trafalgar still burns bright
Adele, also try Aginourt, Blenheim, Waterloo, In fact what Mrs Thatcher said is true " In my life time all of the troubles of the world have come from central Europe and the solutions have always come fromthe English speaking nations" As for Trafalgar, never heard of Nelson? Blenheim Marlborough, Waterloo Wellington?
Daniel. It is true that the brexit voters enjoyed putting one up the political elite but you are wrong on immigration - this was a major part of the peoples desire (to kwell).
It can't for economic reasons. Unlike the UK which kept the British pound, Germany gave up the Mark. It uses the Euro as its currency. Because of countries in the EU like Greece with its massive problems, the Euro, as a currency, is devalued relative to the rest of the world. This makes goods produced in EU countries that also use the Euro ..... relatively inexpensive for the rest of the world to buy.... because of the currency conversion rates. If Germany was to leave the EU, it would have to start using the Mark again. Because the Mark would be valued very high given the strength of Germany's economy, Germany's exports would be made much more expensive than they are today...given that today, they are valued based on the Euro and not the Mark. Germany's economy is 45% export driven...which is why it doesn't want to leave the EU. While I don't know that anyone that entered the EU did so in order to play currency games, many stay within the EU - or feel that they must stay within the EU - because of the currency game. It's analogous to the withdrawal pain drug addicts feel when they try to go straight. The pain is very, very real and many can't stand it...thus they stay hooked on heroin...even though they would agree they should probably quit heroin (self governance is a good thing). Of course, like a lot of addicts, they won't even admit they are addicted (EU governance is just fine....and let's not even talk about Euro vs. Mark exchange rates).
What about taxing the companies who go abroad and then sell their cheapened products to Americans? What about taxing the pollution they create by moving their products over long distances?
Two years on (July 2019) it's interesting to listen to this again - particularly at 45:00 or so, where Hannan praises May's wholehearted acceptance of the result of the Referendum and lauds her resolve to take the UK out of the EU boldly. So much for *that*, eh?
xmfclick - One has to believe that their elected representatives will execute the result of a vote, even when a specific representative believed(es) the vote to be taking the country in the wrong direction. The fact that there is so much opposition to implement the directive as established by the vote - based on representatives saying the electorate was wrong/snookered - is truly horrifying. Even if the opposition is correct, to take that position violates everything the British government is supposed to represent. One has to persuade and, regardless of the ability to persuade, governments must follow the results of a vote.
@@StrategicWealthLLC :: Absolutely. And that's what - what, 500 out of 650 - MPs have thrown in the garbage. Which shows either that they lack the intelligence to realise that once they start down that route it can be used for an unlimited number of other purposes, or that they are so arrogant and have so little regarad for the intelligence of the general population that they think they can do what they like and it will have no consequences. Either way, I don't think it's too much to say that politics in the UK is severely broken. From now on, whenever there is an election, if the result in my constituency isn't to my liking I will demand that the election is re-run, citing random spurious reasons why the electorate made the wrong decision; isn't that the message we have been given?
@@xmfclick too many of our politician ,have been to school, gone to uni, done a degree in politics and economics and then worked in the politics bubble. No real life experience. Nothing like the university o f life. Jo Swinsom not much of an advert for a university education how the devil did she get a degree?
So so sad that UK has passed its use by date! Too late! Post Christian UK is ideologicaly disarmed and disintegrating. You were once a great people where have u all gone? Too few left!
21:45 Another wrong conclusion from Mr Hannan: free trade is not always beneficial if the set of people who establish them are not enough homogeneous. That's why free trade deals with the third world make the working class poorer in the West while making the corporation much richer. That's why the income gap is increasing as if we were in a monarchy instead of in a democratic system. There should be much more revenue to share with working class people now that our economies fully run on the immense power of fossil fuel instead of animal and human labour. Thanks to free trade and globalisation (companies relocating abroad to cut down prices) the exact opposite is happening. We may fool ourselves that we are better off because we have the latest smartphone or can travel abroad often but that's an illusion. Most of us don't even have own the houses where they live in. It's just a short term wellbeing without foundations.
If free trade is such a great idea, why does he advocate barriers between the UK and EU. Trade barriers are the essence of Brexit - they left the single market and customs union.
50:10 It isn't that the people are necessarily wiser than their leaders, they simply have their own best interests at heart and the leaders don't. We don't care so much how wise the leaders are because we didn't elect them to think for us, we elected them to simply REPRESENT us. We elect them based on what they say in their campaigns - which is usually a lie - but that's all we have to go on. So we judge their "wisdom" on how closely they echo our own interests, and we aren't counting on them getting 'wiser' and changing their plan. I'd rather have an idiot representing me than a genius who represents only himself and his own interests, because given the temptations of power, those interests will always conflict with mine.
In truth, there was actually huge, HUGE opposition in Britain against going to war against Germany in WW2. If it had been decided by referendum we might very well have not declared war on Germany.
Whether you are a proponent or not, defining it as right or wrong requires you to know what your objectives were. Invariably they are different depending on which way you voted. Clearly people who voted remain were not persuaded that it was particularly important to return power and sovereignty to their elected representatives and clearly people didn't vote leave because they wanted to harm our trading prospects so whether it was a wrong or right move in your opinion, it will remain controversial, changing no doubt continually as events unfold.
Do I detect bitterness from an Indian friend? Anything that has happened to India since 1947 is on Indians. How long are we expected to be held account for British history? There are very few nations in the world who can look back to a different time and be totally happy with everything they said or did. Move on. It's healthier.
Not sure I trust this man. He doesn't strike me as a Conservative but more a metropolitan free market liberal. He's written articles trying to distance Brexit from the issue of immigration. I'm sure in his ideal world the UK would continue to have mass immigration and keep labour wages low as possible without a thought for communities or assimilation. He certainly seem sceptical of the minimum wage, as well as any sort of regulation. He doesn't only seem to not be a fan of the NHS (understandable, it's not the envy of the world and needs urgent reform) but of the idea of publicly funded healthcare service in general. There is certainly a liberal elite in this country, but make no mistake, this man is one of them.
Just worried about the loss of English speaking political influence in the EU. The historical Anglo-American axe in the EU is no longer there. UK politics does not think it is important but the Americans think it is worrisome.
and if we charged every person 50 pence thats one pound at our diembarking stations we could invest that money in making our health service the best in the world .. ie free at point of entry American women have one of the highest death rates from giving birth in your country
As if British government was not authoritarianism. Indeed by the first world war the Brit's were certainly more afraid of their officers than the enemy . Nationalism is fine as long as your leaders are on your side . Unfortunately they are not . It's the reason that empires fall .
IT!! IS a great shame that ! Daniel Hannan!!! IS not a GOD!!! FEARING MAN!!! AND REALIZE!! THAT IS WAYS MUST BE NUDGED ON TOO ( THE WAY OF CHRIST) TO SERVE THE GREAT FATHER GOD!!!.
Mr. Hannan; I understand your point about free trade. I remind you that Hong Kong, Singapore and New Zealand have no natural resources. Thus they are service economies to the economies that control those resources. With-out the protection from the primary, the secondary economy could not survive. Primary economies must protect trade routes, it's own national and natural resources for the meshed economies to survive. Knowing this, a rival economy must disrupt a prime economy to expand it's own economy; thus we have globalization forced upon the Europeans and the Americans. Yes, it is warfare by another name. Globalization is very appropriate for a service economy but has devastating effects upon the prime. Now we have a situation where domestic industries leave the prime economy, produce inferior products and sell them for a higher price; because they are now they are the only producer. As a result, globalization has devastated the prime economies principle industry, contracted the prime economy and forced inferior products as a standard. Finally, Your position is wrong. We must conclude that globalization is wonderful for a competing prime economy but devastating to all others.
18 minutes into the talk and overall his reasons are, although beautifully exposed, ultimately wrong. The EU countries are a long stretch far from Latin American countries. Where is for example the equivalent of Italy, culturally speaking, in Latin America, let alone the German equivalent? What about the strong nationalistic movements sprouting out in all Western Europe set out to reform (not ditching) the EU from its miserable current positions? He's failing to realise that for Western Civilisation to continue, America and the UK can't any longer stand in splendid isolation or even united. All white countries need to be united or the civilisation we've created will be wiped off by China and other third world countries.
problem with his argument is conflict. I am for trade but only with countries that are allies. As much as I would like cheaper steel. The conditions that these Chinese working in make take pause. Also I would rather buy steel here with a higher price than cheaper steel ffar away.
what f. are you talking about. And I don;t quite describe china today as an ally. More like the guy that calls you his friend cause he wants to take advantage of you you also I said nothing about WW2
Dan Hannan is an excellent speaker, but he suffers from a disease called "Anglo-Saxon Bias". England from Henry VIII to James II was autoritarian ruled by Kings and Queens, when the Dutch founded a successful Republic with a Revolt. The English on the other hand, got theirs after a Dutch invasion cum coup d'état by William III of Orange in 1688 with a fleet four times the Spanish Armada. The English now call that event the Glorious Revolution. A masterful rebranding of a historic narrative, that 'keeps up appearance' that the British Isles weren't successfully invaded since 1066 (William the Conqueror). Hannan attempts here to rebrand that political feat into a narrative of the American Revolutionaries, who were greatly inspired by the Dutch Republic's success, as an English speaking nations feat. That may gel well with his own political ideals, but it is a derisable, self-delusional, selective and singlesided reading of British and American history.
Why is everyone older than Methuselah? Why aren’t the students here listening to this man? What a wasted speech from who would really benefit from it. Not very enthusiastic.....they seem bored.
He's a brilliant orator, whom I've met and admire. However, there is sophistry here. For example, "all the things we were warned about have conspicuously failed to materialise". Really? That's demonstrably untrue. The peoples of Ireland and Scotland are restive - and Wales too, once they realised just how much worse off they would be after losing their status as the largest beneficiaries of EU funding. There is a serious threat to the Union, to the United Kingdom, which is hardening every passing day. Anyone who has followed politics in the United Kingdom will know that Scotland will certainly leave the Union.
I disagree that being reliant on others goes against our evolution. The leading theory of why Homo Sapiens were more successful than Neanderthals is that Homo Sapiens cooperated more and thus were able to accomplish more. Neanderthals were apparently stronger and smarter than Homo Sapiens but were solitary.
The EU is not cooperation, just childish attempts at coersion (that also usually fail) and a secondary, uneccessary layer of corruption to siphon money.
I dislike the EU and am glad that Britain voted to leave but I believe that The EU stems from a pure ideology and wasn't created for corruption and coercion. I think the EU was created in order to take a step towards globalism and to try and get away from petty tribal squabbles but I think that the idea is flawed. Differences shouldn't be shunned, cooperation is about differences and the nation state has proven to be the largest viable unit to represent an entire populace. The empire mentality is flawed, a more agile smaller scale cooperation, I think, will lead to the best results. Attempting to create a one size fits all solution for very different nations results in resentment and bad management.
Besides the Anglo-Saxon supremacy what really aggravated me was the fact that he did not correct the lady's question about a 'fine for leaving' and went on talking about the EU as a racketeering ring. That shows a lack of intellectual immaturity.
@@JimWalsh-rl5dj :: Mick, as a fellow Brexiteer, tone it down a bit. You can correct people's questionable comments without putting the boot in quite so hard.
Actually, Barack Obama said the UK would be 'IN (not AT) the back of the queue'. This is an American way of saying 'toward the back of the queue' or most importantly, not at the front. Donald Trump to my knowledge has never contradicted this position: he may have said 'You won't be at the back of the queue, if I am President' but; this is not materially different to what Obama said. Since Trump's words during the campaign and then as President Elect, members of his team have said that a UK trade deal is not even a priority. www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2016/apr/22/obama-uk-would-be-back-of-queue-for-trade-talks-if-it-leaves-eu-video
No. Trump is a fair trader, And so are the British. It is the EU and China that want protectionist policies. Which is why China and the EU have no free trade deal. Do you understand.
Trump is a protectionist and is about to tear up NAFTA. We had a free trade deal with the US and then Trump tore it up. Even if the UK concludes a free trade deal it will not cover services unlike the EUs single market. The UK is a service economy. It will lose everything when it leaves the Single Market
The deal with the US will cover services. Under the Bretton woods agreement the £ is the second reserve currency. The $ and £ are linked very closely and it will be mutually beneficial to have a very close arrangement. NAFTA ant TPP and TTIP all need to be killed, they are anti free trade and just a thinly disguised corporate stitch up. Just like the EU single market. We will be much better out. The UK is just the first country out of the EU. There will be more.. When the UK leaves the single market our costs and prices will be significantly reduced. The EU is an expensive uncompetitive corporate club. And we are nearly free.
peter schadinsky......... Hannan identified the falling "extreme poverty" rate from 1990 to present as dropping from 38% to 7%. This is due to Capitalism my friend. China and India are far better off today than 30 years ago. Did they double-down on Mao's China policies, or did they shift towards free markets and the free exchange of economic ideas?!?. Like many anti-capitalists, if you cannot admit the answer you are destined to failure. Also, the use of fossil fuels has been one of the great forces for raising living standards world-wide.
Totally accurate my friend, both China and India left radical socialism behind when they suffered its inherent failings. Free market economy and the nation state has stood the test of time and will continue to do so. The point where capitalism continually falls down is its relationship with the poorest of society, they must learn the concept of sharing the spoils, but that would require restraints on human nature from the top down through the middle-classes. Having said that, no-one deserves a free ride except of course the most vulnerable, the elderly, disabled and orphaned.
No, he was illustrating a point, that the EU is run by institutions located in cities outside the UK - and how would the Americans like it if they were in the same situation?
It is a great regret to me that Daniel Hannan is not in the British cabinet. I believe that he was denied a seat for Aldershot, which the local party offered him, by May's minders because they couldn't countenance Hannan's skills loose in parliament
@@jl-5188 - Not understanding UK politics, would you explain your point? My perception of remainers is that they view the issue as leaving the EU to be an economic nightmare coming...and they believe the political issues between the EU and the UK can be worked out over time. Every country has to give and take and the UK, as a richer nation than many, might have to give more but they receive a more stable Europe in return. My perception of the leavers is that they view the EU to be fundamentally unable to represent UK interests effectively. As for the economic interests post Brexit, those can be managed as they come....unless the EU wants to play hard ball. And if they EU wants to play hardball, that further explains why the EU is fundamentally unable to represent UK interests effectively. Personal summary: Like a lot of things, the conflict is not over different values, but the ranking of those values. Do remainers believe in UK sovereignty? I'm sure they do. Do leavers believe that a good economy and a stable relationship with Europe are good things? I'm sure they do. Yet there is a conflict.... because each "side" ranks those values differently....and has a propensity to take more risk/less risk on different values...based on how they rank those values. Politics.
Rule Britannia!!! Rule, Self Rule!!!!!!! The USA could have no better trading partner than Britain. Shame on US for leaving the UK to lift themselves from the destruction of WWII. We helped everyone else but our greatest ally of the war. Let us never make this mistake again. May God bless Britain and India, as well!
I agree.....but I believe he too knew to be kind on this matter because she was in Office at the time and he was in a foreign Land. We have the policy to not speak ill of the President of the USA when we are abroad. He did call her out on her half bearded efforts.
Who knew then May was a hopeless leader? But if u listened to her stupid strong statement that Islam is a religion of peace when she was in the Home Office, u see a person of denial, a person who refused to face harsh reality n was of no leader material.
@@terrytay1774 Exactly. I knew she was a bare-faced liar when she was Home Secretary & went on national tv to tell us "islam is a religion of peace", relying on the vast majority's ignorance on the subject of islam. I had studied all of islam's "holy" books & islamic history itself over a 14 year period so I knew full well she was a blatant liar.
THANK YOU MY LORD AND MY GOD YOU ARE TRULY MY GOD, ISAY IT WITH ALL MY LOVE AND CONFIDENCE IN MY HEART TO KNOW THAT MY GOD IS TRULY A PRAY ANSWERING GOD THANK YOU !THANK YOU!AND THANKYOU! SO MUCH WITH A HEART FULL OF GRATITUDE I WILL ALWAYS LOVE YOU AND SERVE YOU .FOR ANSWERING MY PRAY AND SETTING MY COUNTRY FREE.
