Being a fast reader, I find it hard to watch longer videos, which unfold at the video’s speed, rather than mine. Occasionally, though, there’s a long video that’s so compelling I can’t take my eyes off of it. Yesterday, I watched one of those videos: Brexit: The Movie.
Clocking in at a little more than an hour and detailing every single reason the British should vote to leave the European Union, Brexit: The Movie should be the kind of video that makes your eyes glaze after five or ten minutes. This compelling video, though, is never dull or confusing. Instead, clearly and often amusingly, it walks the viewer through the EU’s labyrinthine bureaucracy, the fundamentally anti-Democratic nature of the EU, the damage the EU has done to the British economy, and the way economies can roar if freed from the EU’s bureaucratic rot.
An especially compelling segment graphically counts some of the seemingly innumerable regulations that govern every aspect of life in the European Union. Oh, and the video does all this with a lot of people strutting fantastic English accents from all regions and classes.
Regarding the economic points, the video is also an accessible primer about free trade versus government-controlled trade and damaging trade barriers. If a country’s people are freed to build lots of better mousetraps — whether we’re talking computers, toasters, steel, solar panels, cheese, or anything else — the world will beat a path to its door. Moreover, consumers at home and around the world will get the best quality everything for the lowest cost.
I urge you to carve out some time and then, armed with popcorn and a drink that makes you feel happy, settle down to enjoy Brexit: The Movie:
One more thing: If you think it can’t happen here, it already is happening here. Even worse, it’s not a faraway government doing this to us. Instead, our own government is burdening us with the stagnant economy and minimal freedom inherent in an anti-democratic bureaucracy:
The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals sums up the Orwellian world we are rapidly approaching here without even having to join the European Union:
Executive agencies today are permitted not only to enforce legislation but to revise and reshape it through the exercise of so-called “delegated” legislative authority. [Citation omitted.] The number of formal rules these agencies have issued thanks to their delegated legislative authority has grown so exuberantly it’s hard to keep up. The Code of Federal Regulations now clocks in at over 175,000 pages. And no one seems sure how many more hundreds of thousands (or maybe millions) of pages of less formal or “sub-regulatory” policy manuals, directives, and the like might be found floating around these days. For some, all this delegated legislative activity by the executive branch raises interesting questions about the separation of powers. [Citations omitted.] For others, it raises troubling questions about due process and fair notice — questions like whether and how people can be fairly expected to keep pace with and conform their conduct to all this churning and changing “law.” See, e.g., The Federalist No. 62, at 381 (James Madison) (Clinton Rossiter ed., 1961) (“It will be of little avail to the people, that the laws are made by men of their own choice, if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood; . . . or undergo such incessant changes that no man, who knows what the law is to-day, can guess what it will be to-morrow.”). But what if the problem is even worse than that? What happens if we reach the point where even these legislating agencies don’t know what their own “law” is?
Welcome to the “American Union,” 240 years after our predecessors began a war to avoid the situation in which we now find ourselves.