Reading a single news item about France taking over the EU Presidency, one surreal comment after another bizarre statement vy for attention. It is astonishing to realize to what extent European leaders - in the worst of Hegelian traditions - have managed to insulate themselves from the electorate.
Times Online article "Nicholas Sarkozy embarks on a mission to save the European Union" for example is illustrative of the chasm that separates them from Europe's citizens.
'Super Sark': “The question is how we give Europe a way of protecting its citizens in their daily lives,” he said on France3 television. “There is no shame in talking about protection.” Europe needed to be protected against the effects of globalisation, he added, warming to one of his favourite themes. “Europe worries people and worse still, citizens are asking if it is not the nation state that protects them better than the Union.”
Oh dear, where to start on this one? With the qualification of globalization as a threat, whereas the EU is its main promoter; or with the brazen call for protectionism, at a time when we all know that protectionism stifles economic growth?
Or should we begin by nailing the suggestion to the wall that an as yet non-existent federation could be primary in people's lives, while the nation state - officially at least - is still the operative unit? As if the latter has already passed out of common consciousness, and the federal behemoth has long taken its place! Both suggestions are factually untrue, but in all probability the statement reflects the Eurocratic state of mind.
In a recent essay "Is the Nation State Obsolete?" published on The Brussels Journal, essayist Fjordman quotes British philosopher and author Roger Scruton, who is posing the crucial query that our leaders have answered for us without prior consultation:
“Democracies owe their existence to national loyalties – the loyalties that are supposedly shared by government and opposition, by all political parties, and by the electorate as a whole. Yet everywhere the idea of the nation is under attack – either despised as an atavistic form of social unity, or even condemned as a cause of war and conflict, to be broken down and replaced by more enlightened and more universal forms of jurisdiction. But what, exactly, is supposed to replace the nation and the nation state?”
Those who follow developments relative to transnational progressivism know the answer well: extrapolating the current geopolitical trends one arrives at four or five gigantic post-democratic, multi-cultural and multi-ethnic 'empires' in competition for power and influence, pending the imposition of a global, collective dictatorship: GlobSoc!
Returning to Super Sark saving the EU, it is at least encouraging to note that contrary to some, the German President Horst Köhler can muster respect for the rule of law as he abstained from signing the documents until a legal challenge is heard by the Constitutional Court! He must be his mother's pride and joy! To his Chancellor Merkel he's merely an embarrassment. She's more appreciative of her counterpart Gordon Brown ... he has pushed ahead with the ratification while it was still subject to a High Court ruling! That's post-democratic expediency for you!
That's right, Ms Merkel, by all means: put further enlargement on hold until the treaty is signed and sealed, and stop all thought processes lest we come to realize we are witnessing a massive act of treason, unparalleled in human history.
Given the breadth and length of this single news item it is perhaps best to give the sensitive subject of the French-led Mediterranean Union a miss for the moment. The ongoing integration of Europe, North Africa and chunks of the Middle East warrants a library in itself. Let's limit the contribution here to providing a link to the shocking content of the Eurabia dossier.
Times Online article "Nicholas Sarkozy embarks on a mission to save the European Union" for example is illustrative of the chasm that separates them from Europe's citizens.
'Super Sark': “The question is how we give Europe a way of protecting its citizens in their daily lives,” he said on France3 television. “There is no shame in talking about protection.” Europe needed to be protected against the effects of globalisation, he added, warming to one of his favourite themes. “Europe worries people and worse still, citizens are asking if it is not the nation state that protects them better than the Union.”Oh dear, where to start on this one? With the qualification of globalization as a threat, whereas the EU is its main promoter; or with the brazen call for protectionism, at a time when we all know that protectionism stifles economic growth?
Or should we begin by nailing the suggestion to the wall that an as yet non-existent federation could be primary in people's lives, while the nation state - officially at least - is still the operative unit? As if the latter has already passed out of common consciousness, and the federal behemoth has long taken its place! Both suggestions are factually untrue, but in all probability the statement reflects the Eurocratic state of mind.
In a recent essay "Is the Nation State Obsolete?" published on The Brussels Journal, essayist Fjordman quotes British philosopher and author Roger Scruton, who is posing the crucial query that our leaders have answered for us without prior consultation:
“Democracies owe their existence to national loyalties – the loyalties that are supposedly shared by government and opposition, by all political parties, and by the electorate as a whole. Yet everywhere the idea of the nation is under attack – either despised as an atavistic form of social unity, or even condemned as a cause of war and conflict, to be broken down and replaced by more enlightened and more universal forms of jurisdiction. But what, exactly, is supposed to replace the nation and the nation state?”
Those who follow developments relative to transnational progressivism know the answer well: extrapolating the current geopolitical trends one arrives at four or five gigantic post-democratic, multi-cultural and multi-ethnic 'empires' in competition for power and influence, pending the imposition of a global, collective dictatorship: GlobSoc!
Returning to Super Sark saving the EU, it is at least encouraging to note that contrary to some, the German President Horst Köhler can muster respect for the rule of law as he abstained from signing the documents until a legal challenge is heard by the Constitutional Court! He must be his mother's pride and joy! To his Chancellor Merkel he's merely an embarrassment. She's more appreciative of her counterpart Gordon Brown ... he has pushed ahead with the ratification while it was still subject to a High Court ruling! That's post-democratic expediency for you!That's right, Ms Merkel, by all means: put further enlargement on hold until the treaty is signed and sealed, and stop all thought processes lest we come to realize we are witnessing a massive act of treason, unparalleled in human history.
Given the breadth and length of this single news item it is perhaps best to give the sensitive subject of the French-led Mediterranean Union a miss for the moment. The ongoing integration of Europe, North Africa and chunks of the Middle East warrants a library in itself. Let's limit the contribution here to providing a link to the shocking content of the Eurabia dossier.
Postscript: After the tiny minority of Irish dared challenge the dictatorship of the majority and plunged Europe headlong into crisis; and also the Czech Republic voiced its reservations; today the proud nation of Poland is expressing des qualmes and pangs of the conscience.
EURSOC: Polish President "Kaczynski said it would be "pointless" to sign the treaty, even though Poland's parliament ratified it last month. A conservative nationalist (often at odds with Poland's government), he is said to be keen to defend the EU's principle of unanimity on major issues. Treaties can only enter into force if approved by every member state; Ireland has said no, so Lisbon cannot be passed. "If one breaks the rule of unanimity one time, it will never exist again," he told a Polish newspaper. He's quite right in this respect, and it is unusual that he has not been supported by other smaller nations, who traditionally defend unanimity as one of the few bulwarks the EU's less powerful states have against the giants."
EURSOC has more good news ... "The Herald Tribune reported yesterday that a Provençal town has recently started accepted the Franc currency once again - and the gimmick has proved very popular ...
- Filed on Articles in "Building the State of Europe" -
EURSOC: Polish President "Kaczynski said it would be "pointless" to sign the treaty, even though Poland's parliament ratified it last month. A conservative nationalist (often at odds with Poland's government), he is said to be keen to defend the EU's principle of unanimity on major issues. Treaties can only enter into force if approved by every member state; Ireland has said no, so Lisbon cannot be passed. "If one breaks the rule of unanimity one time, it will never exist again," he told a Polish newspaper. He's quite right in this respect, and it is unusual that he has not been supported by other smaller nations, who traditionally defend unanimity as one of the few bulwarks the EU's less powerful states have against the giants."
EURSOC has more good news ... "The Herald Tribune reported yesterday that a Provençal town has recently started accepted the Franc currency once again - and the gimmick has proved very popular ...
- Filed on Articles in "Building the State of Europe" -
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment