Nigel Farage Warns European Parliament: "You're In For A Bigger Shock In 2017"

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Mike Shedlock via,

The always entertaining Nigel Farage was on fire again today in European Parliament. Farage correctly warned EP members about their desire for “more Europe” when citizens of nearly every country are fed up with the policy.

Partial Farage Transcript

I feel like I am attending a meeting of a religious sect here this morning. It’s as if the global revolution of 2016, Brexit, Trump, the Italian rejection of the referendum, has completely bypassed you.


You can’t face up to the fact that this bandwagon is going to roll across Europe in these elections in 2017. A lot of citizens now recognize this form of centralized government simply doesn’t work. … At the heart of it is a fundamental point: Mr. [name not recognized] this morning said, the people want more Europe.


They don’t. The people want less Europe. We see this again and again when people have referendums and they reject aspects of EU membership. But something more fundamental is going on out there. …. No doubt, many of you here will probably despise your own voters for what I am about to say because just last week, Chatham House, the reputable group, published a massive survey from 10 Europen states, and only 20% of people want immigration from Muslim countries to continue. Just 20%. … Which means your voters have a harder line position on this than Donald Trump, or myself, or frankly any party sitting in this Parliament. I simply cannot believe you are blind to the fact that even Mrs. Merkel has now made a u-turn and wants to send people back. Even Mr. Schulz thinks it is a good idea.


And the fact is, the Europen Union has no future at all in its current form. And I suspect you are in for as big a shock in 2017 as you were in 2016.

Analyzing Le Pen’s Chances Once Again

Le Pen supporters are from the same socioeconomic class as Trump supporters and Brexit supporters. Eurointelligence offers this view of the situation.

Elites vs underdogs – French edition

If you look at the voters of Emmanuel Macron, you might wonder what his chances are to win against Marine Le Pen. Ifop looked at the profile of those who intend to vote for him. One of the striking statistics was that Macron only gets 14% from workers, the same as Jean-Luc Mélenchon! In this class, Marine Le Pen reigns with 37% support, while Benoit Hamon does slightly better than the others with 18%. The most telling feature, in our view, is that the more educated people are more likely to vote for Macron and the less educated go for Marine Le Pen.


Education has been one of the dividing lines also in the Brexit vote and the American elections, and we all know what happened there. Add to this that Macron is the urban favorite, but not in the outskirts, the infamous banlieues, and you end with a candidate of the elites against a candidate of the underdogs. And it is not that immigrants living in those banlieus are against Le Pen, as one might expect. Many of them have been there for some time now and the last thing they want is more immigration.


So if Marine Le Pen and Emmanuel Macron end up in the second round, will we see another stand-off between the elite candidate and the underdog star? They effectively stand for two different world views. Le Pen divides the world into globalists and patriots, Macron into progressives and conservatives, notes Journal du Dimanche. In the US, Chris Arnade saw Trump’s victory as a result of the social isolation of the uneducated whites. Could this also happen in France?

People are fed up. This is precisely why the odds of a Marine le Pen victory in France are widely underestimated.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
VinceFostersGhost's picture



Nigel Farage Warns


He's baaaaaack!!!

Truther's picture

He's talking to Apes, who only understand body language. Fuck'em.

Dame Ednas Possum's picture

I can hear their poo-foo valves twitching from 6,000 km (3,700 miles) away 

two hoots's picture

America voted and are patiently waiting for Trump to make the changes they expected.  If EU members vote a change are they ready to be patient for the change?

A change without a future vision/plan is dangerous business in a hostile and angry world.   Remaining on the course of elite control is just a dangerous.  It's a tug of war before, during and after an election.   Is the world to complicated to have any plan that could work?  Are there limits to how far a society can advance/expand?   Let WWI/WWII remind us of a need for a better plan.

wildbad's picture

100% right Nigel.

Thanks for your leadership.

Le Pen, Wilders, AfD.

Stop Islamic overrun of Europe
Stop Non-Democratic €urocrats from imposing and enforcing economic rules and taxes.
Stop the Corporat Global Technocracy from undermining nationally elected bodies

Merkel, Schulz, Renzi, Holland...authoritarians ALL. You know where the doors are..LEAVE

jus_lite_reading's picture

IF France and Netherlands don't elect Le Pen and Geert Wilders, then we can 100% start the countdown timer on the destruction of Europe, set it for 4 years from that point.

Keyser's picture

I am always amazed at how liberals believe their own line of shit... The non-elected bureaucrats in Brussels are protecting their phony baloney jobs and budgets... Farage is as subtle as a slap in the face with the truth, which liberals hate because facts are like kryptonite to them... 

JRobby's picture

Drone the EU Parliment when Nigel isn't present. Save the world a lot of heartache.

gatorengineer's picture

Two rights and a left.  Germany is lost... They have no right...

Theosebes Goodfellow's picture

"Oh dear now, I say, I rather like that man."

Farage just told the EP the news.

And they still don't want to hear it.

Never have Laurel and Hardy's words rung truer. To wit:

"You can lead a horse to water, but a pencil has to be lead."

You couldn't lead these clowns to save their precious EU any more than if you wanted them to pour out a boot full of piss and the instructions were pritned on the heel. Their altruist-collectivist mindsets preclude them from being able to foresee their destruction and act to avoid it.

petar's picture

This bandwagon has been rolling throughout UK ever since Brexit (which we are all still waiting to happen). Dont worry about continental Europe mr. Farage.

Erek's picture

It's actually quite simple to see.These EU-Fucks will do anything to keep the unearned money flowing into their pockets. That's also the reason why they are all against Trump - he's about to turn off the money faucet. The Europeans are sick and tired of paying these asshats for doing nothing and getting a lot of bullshit regulation in return. Crap such as how much curve is allowed on a cucumber - if a cucumber has too much curve it may not be sold as consumable food. No joke! Look it up. There's pages and pages of such useless drivel masquerading as Euro-Policy.

TwelveOhOne's picture

"You couldn't lead these clowns to save their precious EU any more than if you wanted them to pour out a boot full of piss and the instructions were pritned on the heel."

Back in grade school I was in the cafeteria.  One girl at the table was holding her milk carton up, saying "There's a hole in my milk!" as it slowly dripped onto her tray.

The girl next to me picked up her mik, and proceeded to turn it upside down while saying, "Mine doesn't" and ended up with a lap full of milk.

Was a good lesson, and rhymes with the boot.

logicalman's picture

The EU bureaucrats salaries depend on them not understanding.


waspwench's picture

You can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make her think.

The Wizard's picture

What you may be forgetting WWI and WWII were part of a plan. The global elite money changers prefer confusion and chaos among the masses. It is part and parcel of "their" plan.  It makes their lives much easier to control the masses when there is histeria in the streets. More laws, regulations, more control.

War is a Racket.

two hoots's picture

Plan or no plan WWI and WWII decimated many common people and made others wealthy and injury free.  We need not play their war games*.  Voters need to be looking for a future not just a candidate.  

*Military technology can now war without our input which places our outcome in the hands of others and not some national resolve,  We can only, mostly, duck now.

Billy the Poet's picture

I plan to goose when the opportunity presents itself.

logicalman's picture

If you duck, don't forget to cover!

You could also put a brown paper bag over your head, but it won't make any difference.

Bigly's picture

Nigel is all that and a bag of chips

PrometeyBezkrilov's picture

No, he is talking to a bunch of seditious bastards who are there to destroy Europe and European cultures, and they do not hide it anymore:

Jim in MN's picture

and BOOM here it is:

Putin is a bigger threat to Europe’s existence than Isis



Surprise ending: Putin may well be a bigger threat to the EU/Soros/Globalist Elites than ISIS is...but the EU/Soros/Globalist Elites are a bigger threat to the PEOPLE OF EUROPE than Putin and ISIS put together.

logicalman's picture

I would disagree.

If they destroy Europe they lose their over-generous salaries.

The parasite dies when its host does.

They want to distract the masses so they can keep the scam going.

They'll use anything to do so.

Four chan's picture

we are on the "fuck the globalists" timeline.

Ghordius's picture

ok, ok, I am all about "fuck the globalists". I think those are the bad guys, eh?

but would you please define the word? because if it is about free trade... the country where Mr. Farage comes from is all about free trade

for both PM May and Nigel Farage, the EU is a protectionistic bloc hindering "Global Britain" to trade freely and without regulations and tariffs of any sort

and don't get me into another Brexiteer, the foreign minister of the UK, Boris Johnson. how is he not a "globalist"?

that's the same guy that thinks every foreigner that has sizable RE/investments in the UK ought to have a VIP entry at customs

protectionism is for sure not on their agenda. they are fully opposed to that. it is one of their main reasons for leaving the EU

and no, I am still for Brexit. I would just like to have for once a sensible discussion about things around it

so, again: what are the ingredients for "globalism"? does it contain free trade or not?

PT's picture

Ponder:  Your competitors' enitre expenses total less than $40 per week.  Your minimum rent is $300 per week.  How do you compete?

If you are honest then you will at least admit that either your real estate costs have to go down or your competitors' will have to go up.
Ref the former:  How will that affect the balance sheets of the companies in your nation?
Ref the latter:  I think you already know.

Who are your customers?  Where are your customers?  How do they get enough money with which to pay you?  If you honestly answer these questions then I do not have to answer your questions.  You already know the answers.

Ghordius's picture

is that a reasoning for Brexit? in that case, I wrote "I am still for Brexit"

meanwhile, I'm still waiting for someone to come forward and say that "globalism" is indeed about free trade... or protectionism

whereas... the UK looks poised to have in future exactly the problem you are mentioning... out of the EU

as a reminder, the UK gov is talking at times about becoming a "Greater Singapore". does that ring a bell?

NoDebt's picture

Define "free trade".  Have you ever read a "free trade" agreement?  (Of all things I could ask you I suspect you probably HAVE read a free trade agreement because you're wired to be a policy wonk.)

It's nearly impossible to have this discussion without unloading the meaning of some words.

That being said, globalism is PARTLY about "free trade".  Globalism in it's totality is about having large, distant, unaccountable agencies determining law, regulation and enforcement of policies on vast numbers of people who would really rather everyone just butt the hell out and leave them to their own business.  Nation-level governments are already bad enough.  Supra-national governments will make things WORSE, not better.


Ghordius's picture

+1 and... a disagreement from me. about that

"Nation-level governments are already bad enough.  Supra-national governments will make things WORSE, not better"

do you have... examples for supra-national governments doing a worse job then national governments? or is it just a matter of faith?

I have one example for a "supra-national gov" that did a splendid job in all things related to the economy and trade: the former Austria-Hungarian Empire

one hint: the so called "Austrian School"

further, are there other "supra-national govs" besides the EU? today? is the Russian Federation... a One-Nation State? is... China?

any way, for you, globalism is in part about "free trade", whereas we mean that as "just let pass, whatever, no National control... or regulation"

ok. time will tell, we'll all either die or will see. (I still maintain that for the average citizen here, Brussels is not "inaccessible". it is mostly... irrelevant)

BarkingCat's picture

Austria-Hungarian Empire was a monarchy and in reality a single state. 

The main difference between them and other conquerors of their time period is that they were relatively culturally benign to the populatiins they conquered. 


Actually on further contemplation,  they were lot more benign than the EU in commerce and trade and other regulations.


Creepy Lurker's picture

"examples for supra-national governments doing a worse job then national governments? or is it just a matter of faith?"

Come on, Ghordius. The EU staring you in the face is not example enough? Really?

Edited to add: Another very obvious example; the UN. Not exactly a supra-national government, but very much a wannabe. Just spend a few moments picturing what a UN/IMF run world would look like.

Ghordius's picture

well, generally speaking, one does not make a rule. nor two
(hmmm... the UN. right. yes, a wannabe gov)

so all in all, the EU ist still a kind of mistery wrapped in an enigma, on ZH
what emerges is that:

- globalists are vs nationalists (where does "statist" fit?)
- the EU is supranational, hence globalist
- trade seems to be a side issue, here

thanks, folks. I learned something, today. hope you did too

NoDebt's picture

We're always happy to help you straighten out your thinking here, Ghordius.  Come back any time you have questions.


gatorengineer's picture

Missing the whole point of Globalism.  Globalism's ultimately about the Communist ideal... A two class society of Elites, and a proletariat that is entirely dependent upon the elites for survival.  ""Free"" trade is the vehicle to achieve that.  A society like America that produces no tangible goods and an ever decreasing amount of IP cannot survive.

Production will be lost to the lowest cost centers, service jobs replaced by BOTs, and you will have a proletariate that is 100% dependent as opposed to say 50% dependent now.

Nationalism isnt inherently against trade.  It wants a level playing field of regulations, worker rights etc.  

The big difference is cultural a German will pay a little more for a German made good where an American will always buy on price, that culture has to be addressed as well.  Made in America needs to be a big concept that trump extolls from the bully pulpit, and backs with federal acquisition.

Ghordius's picture

+1 for "Nationalism isn't inherently against trade. It wants a level playing field of regulations, worker rights etc."

Boxed Merlot's picture

...big difference is cultural a German will pay a little more for a German made good where an American will always buy on price, that culture has to be addressed...


If a premium price is paid for an otherwise "equal" product because it is domestically produced, then isn't this the grassroots equivalent of purchasing your own country's debt instruments?  Being a US citizen I've purchased my fair share of imported products, and I will say, there's a small voice in your head that says there are some people in a far away destitute land that at least may be eating today because i'm buying this or that crap.

It ends up a kinda feel good way of buying into some less fortunate nation's public debt.  That's changing now.



Not My Real Name's picture

"The big difference is cultural a German will pay a little more for a German made good where an American will always buy on price."

While I don't disagree with the rest of your statments, this quote misses the mark. The US automobile market is a prime example. 

not dead yet's picture

You and a lot of others need to do some homework. The US was the #1 manufacturer in the world until passed by China around 2010. We are now #2. Why did the Texas economy take a big hit when oil prices fell? Oh yea, all those MAUFACTURERS of oil field equipment got hit with declining or cancelled orders. The US has almost 50 auto assembly plants with a lot of their parts supplied by USA suppliers. #4 steel producer. Lots of airplanes big and small especially executive jets made in the USA. Caterpillar, Boeing, John Deere, GE, Whirlpool, Electrolux, and other large companies with multiple US operations. Tractor trailers, big rigs, and locomotives. In the last 3 years I had my house reroofed, resided, new furnace and AC, and replaced all the major appliances and everything was quality brand name reasonably priced and Made in the USA. Drive around and there are still all kinds of manufacturers in the Midwest and lots of smaller ones springing up.

Then there's the complete bullshit all those factory workers are getting replaced by robots in the next few years. Auto plants employ plenty of humans because they do things robots can't. Until robots can replicate the human dexterity and intelligence and reasoning they will be secondary to humans. A human can do many different tasks while robots are limited to just a few. One human can pick up the garbage, sweep the floor, work the paint line, fork lift the pallets, wash the windows, assemble a product, and so many other different things in the course of a day which would require multiples of expensive programmed robots to be that flexible. You can assign a human to multiple tasks in a day that would keep him busy yet to do the same stuff would require multiple robots that would spend most of their time idle. The key words are flexible and EXPENSIVE. You think they are going to give away those robots and supply free programming and maintainence? Amazons touted robots haul bins to human workers who pick, pack, label, and load the trailers.

Good luck replacing truck drivers. Until the whole USA is totally mapped how is that truck going to pull up to the fuel pumps, back into a customers door, load the freight so it doesn't get damaged and sign for it claiming the right quantities and condition. Most of the trucks are STICK shifts and doors on trailers are swing open. Replacing those things with trucks with autos and trailers with rollups is exceeeding expensive and would take decades. Lots of theft in the big cities where a truck stops at a light and they break off the lock and steal what they can in a minute a 2. With no driver they just position a guy in front and the truck without a driver stays put while they empty out the trailer. Reprogram the tractor and steal the whole works while blocking the tracking signal. In some big cities they have what the drivers call shopping areas, I've seen them marked off on truckers atlases, where the danger of getting hijacked or robbed is very high. If no traffic is coming the cops will not pull over a trucker intentionally running a red light in a shopping area.

logicalman's picture

Something resembling free trade existed in neolithic times.

Tin from Cornwall was traded all down the west coast of Africa and amber from the Baltic was traded all over Europe.

What's called 'Free Trade' by modern governments is another example of Orwellian Newspeak.

TheGardener's picture


Globalism is an euphemism for imperialism , big corporations and trusts

want free trade just for themselfes and on their own terms and in their

mercantilist ways of cornering and dominating markets by force and regulatory capture

and you also get the supposed downside from what is called protectionism.


Globalism and protectionism all rolled in to one is just plain old good mercantilism.

Abolish those global trusts or die. Make no mistake , to enable the trusts is making eternal war.

wildbad's picture

Globalism is a defective and manipulated version of capitalism where the corporate influence corrupts and subverts elected officials to set trading preferences to benefit the large and influential over the small.

On the political front, globalism is the authoritarian philosophy which believes central control is better than dispersed government. This naturally put the power hungry at great advantage. It Allows them to dictate their edicts through vast swaths of peoples and lands without having to regard the desires and opinions of the ruled.

The other end of the scale is local control of most decision making, leaving only a select subset of of decisions to regional, national or even super-national entities.

Ghordius's picture

fine, a definition. now, how do you fit what people here talk about into that? where is the part about Muslim immigration? where is the part about protectionism versus free trade? where is the part where national authoritarianism can fit in? how do you fit anything that has to do with Europe in it except in the part where Big Biz in europe sets it's tents and lobbyists in Brussels... instead of in the national capitals?

wildbad's picture

hmm. people here? lots of differing opinions but you probably mean the general libertarian / anti authoritarian lean here.

muslim immigration - this would simply not be allowed in a world where borders mean something.

protecionism vs free trade - this is a false comparison. true free trade is "no rules", you want my pen, i want your gold, we trade. no one else's business. protectionism is a national and enforced preference for traders resident in their tax farm. what the TPP and othe "trade agreements" try to do with their thousands of pages of rules and restrictions is the opposite of free trade, just as the "patriot act" is the antithesis of freedom and or patriotism.

nationalism and authoritarianism are separate things entirely. while they can overlap (hitler the authoritarian in germany) they need not. conflating them only muddies the waters and taints one with the negative aspects of the other.

Brussels Eurocrats at the top are not elected by the people and governments they seek to control. It is an additional layer of cost and burocracy which is just one more unnecessary step AWAY from the preferred paradigm of local control having precedence over distant rule.

it is perfectly suited to technocratic authoritarianism, and THAT is why the Globalists want it.

Moustache Rides's picture

May I just point out that Wildbad is knocking it out of the park today.

ShortCommonSense's picture

Thank you for articulating my feelings for me ;)

You've done well.

I do like the questioning of Ghordius though, it's on point and provokes thinking, not sure why all the down arrows.

wildbad's picture

shucks...better do another shot

Mister Ponzi's picture

The best definition I've heard so far is by Doug Casey. According to this definition, a globalist is someone who wants to concentrate power in global institutions. That's what, e.g., the EU fanatics are aiming at.

Ghordius's picture

agree it's a good one, but... would you describe him as someone that is for the Nation State? a Nationalist? hardly, imo. and I never heard him on trade

Suleyman's picture

With proper property rights, and no free shit, you don't need to fence off the migrants. They come for the prosperity, peacefully exchanging whatever they have with you. If you don't want to trade, they can't come.