The New Geopolical Paradigm: A Vacuum Filled With Narcissism

The Postmodern philosophy is turning out everything it promised to be: hot air, empty rhetoric, yada yada, sticking labels ... that's it! It produces nothing, because it is nothing.

Only God can create ex nihilo, something out of nothing. Oh, it works okay in campaign mode, as long as people's minds can be manipulated, but contrary to the Postmodern premise that thought creates reality, it is concepts that lead to molecules and atoms!

Consider Lawrence Eagleburger's recent laments in an interview with FoxNews' Greta van Susteren during which he rather concisely summed up the problem (btw, he must be another one of those racists!):

(...) This President has spent his time talking in public every chance he gets, yet I see nothing that comes out of that talk that leads to anything concrete (...) Eagleburger mentions as a classic example the debate over health care reform.

(...) The Democrats have control of the Congress and one would think they can pass any legislation they wanted within a short period of time. Instead it goes on forever. (...)  We still have no idea what the Bill may be in the end and the reason we don't is because when it comes to the right place to make some decisions - make it clear that this is what the President wants - it disappears (...) Shut up until you've decided what it is you want (...) there's no direction ...

In a recent post entitled "The O Team: Mental Babies With Razors" we explained it as follows:

Their skewed philosophy rests on the error that universals are but a figment of man's imagination. From this fallacy follows that

concepts and essences - being universals - also do not exist. As a result, some arbitrary attribute may attach itself to - for instance man or a system - and mistakingly serve the purpose of an essence: what to think of systems that take decisions (no parenthesis there, and taken quite literally)  or an angry mob. 

- Caption: pomo concept of 'a running nose' - 

If you think this mushrooming of nothing is harmless, think again. As the empty suit is vaporizing hot air, enemy clouds are gathering. Consider this article by Jennifer Rubin in Commentary Magazine, "No Master Plan at All":

"As the media and political observers pick over the remains of the failed Olympics-bid debacle, the debate has boiled down to this:  (...) Suddenly, the entire country realizes that there is no “master plan” behind what Obama does. In fact, there may be no plan at all."

Rubin mentions the Obama's upending of the Clinton machine in the Democratic primary, the Reverend Wright flap, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid crafting the stimulus as examples during which the Obama mystique held sway: "There must be a reason ... he was laying the groundwork for something or other (...)"

And all that genuflecting on the world stage and those unilateral concessions—there must be a game plan, a secret deal, with Russia. He’s got it wired. The same with that secret Iranian nuclear plant. Sure he knew about it and didn’t say anything, but it really was better—and he knew this all along—to delay the revelation and let months and months pass as the Iranian mullahs worked diligently to cement their regime and advance their nuclear program. Can’t you just hear the gears whizzing in the White House? (...) Observers were convinced that the deal to give it to Chicago was set, because no president would go—and no staff would let him go—to Copenhagen to be humiliated, right? Uhh, no."

I'm no card carrying member of the O personality cult, but as late as last week our entry in the Articles dossier on nuclear proliferation read:

"The Iran conundrum: This doesn't make any sense - at all! How does one gell the fact that only last week Obama tossed the Czech Republic and Poland under the bus (not to mention the 2007 NIE, that political construct dating back to the Bush years, that denied Iran has nuclear capability altogether) with the following? Update: add this to the mix: Robert Spencer: "Iran test-firing missile that can reach Israel" ...

But now we know better. Narcissism instead of nukes may well be the real killer ... Charles Krauthammer in NRO The Corner: "Obama’s French Lesson":

"When France chides you for appeasement, you know you’re scraping bottom (...) On September 24, Obama ostentatiously presided over the Security Council. With 14 heads of state (or government) at the table, with an American president in the chair for the first time ever, with every news camera in the world trained on the meeting, it would garner unprecedented worldwide attention.

Unknown to the world, Obama had in his pocket explosive revelations about an illegal uranium-enrichment facility that the Iranians had been hiding near Qom. The French and the British were urging him to use this most dramatic of settings to stun the world with the revelation and to call for immediate action. Obama refused. (...) “The administration told the French,” reports the Wall Street Journal, “that it didn’t want to ‘spoil the image of success’ for Mr. Obama’s debut at the U.N.”

Image? Success? Sarkozy could hardly contain himself. At the council table, with Obama at the chair, he reminded Obama that “we live in a real world, not a virtual world.” He explained: “President Obama has even said, ‘I dream of a world without (nuclear weapons).’ Yet before our very eyes, two countries are currently doing the exact opposite.”

Sarkozy’s unspoken words? “And yet, sacre bleu, he’s sitting on Qom!” (...) Bismarck is said to have said: “There is a providence that protects idiots, drunkards, children, and the United States of America.” Bismarck never saw Obama at the UN. Sarkozy did."

Are They Mental?!

Today, one week after the rigged election process in Iran, Gordon Brown crawls out of the woodwork after Britain has been cast by Khamenei as 'evil' and the 'worst offender' of foreign meddling in Iranian affairs. Heaven knows what political expediency warranted that mysterious declaration! An English summary of Khamenei's Friday sermon is available on Memri.

For Obama the entire situation is far above his pay grade. After giving vent to personal anxieties for a week, the White House said today it had no reaction to Mr. Khamenei's remarks. (...) "We're not going to be used as political foils and political footballs in a debate that's happening by Iranians in Iran," Mr. Gibbs said.

That's right! There's nothing to choose between the protesters and the representatives of the regime. Here we are: eye-witnesses on the global stage to what a false philosophy can do to man's mind, rendering him mentally incapable of separating good from evil, of distinguishing one Iranian from the next - all equally valid! Can we please stop doing moral equivalence now, before even greater damage is done? Read the entire story ...

Wall St Journal: "Pressure on Obama to Act Forcefully Is Growing - Khamenei's Stance Prompts Congressional Resolutions, Adds to Calls for President to Quit Muted Approach to Iran"

(...) Sen. John McCain (R., Ariz.), who introduced the legislation in the Senate, said administration policy broke with a long U.S. tradition of supporting pro-democracy movements, and said that demonstrators -- who have been carrying protest signs in English -- were "waiting for an expression of support" from the U.S. "The administration does not want to 'meddle' and has refused to speak out in support of these brave Iranian citizens, most of them young, who are risking their very lives to protest what was clearly an unfair and corrupt election," Mr. McCain said after proposing the legislation, cosponsored by his longtime foreign policy ally Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman, an independent. (...) >>>

Obama is beaten to it by European and Asian leaders, left, right and center. Most outspoken, French President Nic Sarkozy, unpredictably favoring ethics over pragmatism:

"The extent of the fraud is proportional to the violent reaction. If Ahmadinejad has really made progress since the last election and if he really represents two thirds of the electorate ... why has this violence erupted?"

Somebody name a square after him!

Twitter meanwhile is still proving a strong and invaluable tool. There are words of caution for moles and disinformation, as well as encouraging tweets that "it takes more than a day for Change to take place" (really?) ... prayers, good wishes and counsel to "hold a copy of the Koran since it is a sin in Islam to kill a person holding one", raising the question if it's okay to kill a man who's empty handed; messages of a domestic nature petitioning (twititioning) "Google Earth to update satellite images of Tehran".

Twitter Updates .......

CassandraTroy Just posted: "Politeia: Addresses Embassies in #Tehran #iranelection #gr88" (http://twitthis.com/xoagds)3 minutes ago from TwitThis
.............. Watch fresh pictures on Demotrix - more - video on YouTube ....

09:30om:
Dutch-Iranian refugee and Leiden University lecturer, Afshin Ellian has posted another remarkable story out of Iran. He has it that the protesters are shouting "Nor Gaza (Hamas), nor Libanon (Hezhollah), dedicated only to Iran!" It's a great but very worrisome story: apparently the regime is working on a rapid mobilization of the (para)military. I'll be working on the translation for the rest of the day, and won't be back unless there are significant developments to report.

09:05pm:
Washington Times posting unconfirmed report that intelligence services may allow for SMS/text service enabling them to track those who are organizing protest. Also that Tehran bureau blog reports that there are arrests among the IRGC officers for pro-demonstrator sympathies. Very significant if true. 

The Guardian had been live blogging (see below), but presently appears to have clocked off for the day. We'll carry on as best we can, gathering our info from various other sources.

4.40pm:
Mousavi has sent a letter to the guardian council alleging that there were plans to rig the election months in advance, according to his website.

Here's the Farsi version, and there is a very rough Google translation here.

The letter sets out a number of detailed complaints about counting discrepancies and concerns about how the ballot was conducted.

4.25pm:
http://twitpic.com/7wjz2">A picture claiming to show teargas being used against protesters today has been posted to Twitpic.

3.55pm:
The police have attempt to portray the protesters as rioters by detailing the damage they have caused, and claimed public backing for a violent crackdown.

Iran's deputy police commander, Ahmad-Reza Radan, said 400 police have been wounded since last Friday's vote.

He claimed 10,000 complaints have been been made, according to state-run Press TV. "They have called on the police to deal with rallies firmly," he said.

"The recent rallies destroyed 700 buildings, burst 300 banks into flame, damaged 300 cars and 300 public properties," Radan added.

3.40pm:
Mousavi supporters have set to a building in southern Tehran used by backers of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a witness told Reuters.

The witness also said police shot into the air to disperse rival supporters in Tehran's south Karegar street.

Does that refer to this incident shown on the BBC Persian service?

3.30pm:
An eyewitness in Enghelab square reports around 20,000 riot police, made up of Basiji militiamen and soldiers, and armed with rifles, tear gas and water cannons.

The eyewitness saw dozens of people beaten by riot police in an attempt to frighten them into evacuating the square, with one young man being beaten to the ground by four policemen.

The protesters were not wearing the green insignia that signifies support for Mousavi, and were not making victory signs or chanting.

The eyewitness reports riot police attacking people on passing motorbikes and, on occasion, innocent passersby who have no way of escaping the heavy police presence. Nonetheless, there are thousands of Mousavi supporters, marching peacefully near the square, where rthey have been subjected to these brutal reprisals from the police.

Across Tehran, there is widespread fear and panic, with many desperate to know what is going on in Enghelab square, but unable to find out due to reporting restrictions. Now the question seems to be: what will Mousavi do next?

3pm:
This video, uploaded today, purports to show an explosion and what looks like teargas shells in Tehran.

2.45pm:
The security forces out-number the protesters, according to al-Jazeera.

2.35pm:
More on that explosion at the shrine: "A suicide bomber was killed at the northern wing of Imam Khomeini's shrine. Two people were injured," Fars news agency said, according to Reuters.

Khamenei talked about the threat of terrorism in his speech yesterday.

"Street demonstrations are a target for terrorist plots. Who would be responsible if something happened?" he said.

2.30pm:
Protesters are being shot at in Azadi Street, according to an unconfirmed report from Saeed Valadbaygi.

2.25pm:
One person has been killed in an explosion near the shrine of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, in Tehran, according to the Fars News Agency.

Two people were injured, Reuters quotes it saying. State TV has the same report, according to AP.

2.20pm:
There are heavy clashes on Azadi Street, and chants of death to Khamenei, according to this regularly updated live blog from Iran. It also reports intense clashes on Enghelab Square. It's impossible to verify this at the moment.

2.15pm:
Witnesses: police using tear gas, water cannons to disperse thousands of protesters in Tehran, says a flash on AP.

- Filed on Articles in "The Pomo Presidency" -

The Twitter Guide to Joining the Revolution

Here's your reliable info guide to join the Iranian Revolution:

BoingBoing: "Cyberwar guide for Iran elections"

1. Do NOT publicise proxy IP's over twitter, and especially not using the #iranelection hashtag. Security forces are monitoring this hashtag, and the moment they identify a proxy IP they will block it in Iran. If you are creating new proxies for the Iranian bloggers, DM them to @stopAhmadi or @iran09 and they will distributed them discretely to bloggers in Iran.

2. Hashtags, the only two legitimate hashtags being used by bloggers in Iran are #iranelection and #gr88, other hashtag ideas run the risk of diluting the conversation.

3. Keep you bull$hit filter up! Security forces are now setting up twitter accounts to spread disinformation by posing as Iranian protesters. Please don't retweet impetuosly, try to confirm information with reliable sources before retweeting. The legitimate sources are not hard to find and follow.

4. Help cover the bloggers: change your twitter settings so that your location is TEHRAN and your time zone is GMT +3.30. Security forces are hunting for bloggers using location and timezone searches. If we all become 'Iranians' it becomes much harder to find them.

5. Don't blow their cover! If you discover a genuine source, please don't publicise their name or location on a website. These bloggers are in REAL danger. Spread the word discretely through your own networks but don't signpost them to the security forces. People are dying there, for real, please keep that in mind... (...) >>>

Green Revolution has more guidelines for the cyber revolutionary.

But wait a minute ... isn't green the color of Islam? And isn't Islam as a political ideology precisely what we're aiming to oust here? And what about the strong Marxist component? It would be an awful shame to replace one Islamofascist regime with another, equally oppressive collective! 

While Barry Hussein Obama expressed 'concern', but that it would be counterproductive for the United States “to be seen as meddling” in the disputed Iranian presidential election,  the EU - in a displaying of its usual diplomatic pussyfooting - has called for a probe into the election result ... yikes!

France's go-getter President Nic Sarkozy on the other hand has recalled his Ambassador to Paris (Tehran has already tit-for-tatted) while issuing a sharp statement on Monday condemning the violence against the demonstrators, the arrest of political and opposition figures, and restrictions on the press. Can't just a little bit of his forceful character rub off on the rest of our spineless leaders? They are probably mulling the merits of the Islamofascist theocracy (as opposed to the insiduous influence of liberal democracy) as darned cultural relativists should!

Farce: "Tehran Slams France's Intervention in Iran's Election"

Iranian Ambassador to Paris Mehdi Miraboutalebi criticized France for interfering in recent events surrounding the presidential election in Iran. After France summoned Iran's ambassador to Paris on Monday to express its concern over the disputed results of presidential election, Iran issued a statement in response to France. "The organization of elections is part of the sovereignty and jurisdiction of any country," the statement said. (...) >>>

James Robbins has this great piece:

Washington Times: "Iran's Twitter Revolution"

The spirit of liberty finally arrived at Tehran's Freedom Square.  (...) The mass protests followed a weekend of street demonstrations, rioting and other expressions of discontent. These events were brought to the world in real time through social-media networks and online video. Tehran's authoritarian leaders clearly were caught off-guard. (...) >>>

- Filed on Articles in "Iran Power Play" - 

Our Postmodern Leaders Hit Rockbottom (for now): Queen of England Snubbed for D-Day Commemorations

Of the 121 files on the Articles Blog there isn't one pertaining to snubbed royalty and other breaches of protocol. Not because we consider such matters too trivial, but because those worth the bother simply did not happen ... until today, that is!

I guess we should not be surprised this is happening on these guys' watch! Only they could make such an unprecedented occasion happen. I hope someone makes a point of going to the bottom of this (and I'll eat my hat if it turns out to be the French).

For starters, take note of the 'newspeak' in the following heading:

ITN: "'Queen welcome at D-Day commemorations'" [well, obviously not or the entire article would have been a waste of space]

"Gordon Brown has said he will make it "possible" for the Queen or any other member of the royal family to attend next weekend's official D-Day commemorations in France if they wished to be present." [... the sub heading goes ... only then do we get to the crux:]

"There will be no royal representation at the events to mark the 65th anniversary of the Normandy landings after no invitation was received from the French authorities. Instead the Prime Minister will represent the UK alongside British veterans who took part in the 1944 invasion that helped defeat Hitler's Germany. The absence of the Queen from the guest list for the commemorations has been perceived by some as a deliberate snub, though Buckingham Palace has stressed the monarch is not upset about the situation. " (...) [no, I wouldn't extend them that pleasure either].

Brown appears to be blaming the French:

"I have simply done what is my duty as a Prime Minister - I have accepted the personal invitation of (French president) Mr (Nicolas) Sarkozy.

A moment later Brown is kicking the ball into the Mighty Zero's court:

"I think you know that Mr (Stephen) Harper, the Canadian prime minister, is going, and I think in these circumstances, this particular event was one that the president wanted to be for prime ministers and presidents. He added: "But if the Queen wanted to attend these events, or if any member of the royal family wanted to attend these events, I would make that possible."

Then why hasn't he done so in the first place? Why wait until the sht hits the fan? The French meanwhile are returning the compliment to sender:

"Officials in Paris have insisted the Queen is welcome and blamed the UK Government for deciding who should attend what they said was "primarily a Franco-American ceremony". (...) >>> [the British vets are going to love this one!]

The whole thing is an unprecedented disgrace. When these pinheads were soiling their diapers, smoking reefers or making otherwise a nuisance of themselves, Elizabeth was actually making a useful contribution when it mattered! She's a vet herself for crying out loud!

I hope this will become a hell of a row and (pin)heads will roll [Gordon's for starters]!

Update:

- Here's one explanation: this could be BHO's caustic revenge on the British Empire ...

Mail Online: "Barack Obama's grandfather 'tortured by the British' during Kenya's Mau Mau rebellion"

- Yahoo!News: "Prince Charles to attend D-Day ceremony"

Prince Charles' office said Tuesday that he will attend a D-Day commemoration in France this week after a diplomatic spat over the omission from the guest list of his mother, Queen Elizabeth II.  (...) The perceived snub created an uproar in Britain, which lost thousands of troops helping to free France from the Nazis. (...) On Monday, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said the U.S. wanted the queen to be there, and was "working with those involved to see that it happens." (...)  >>>

Another day, another update: It would appear to be all a misunderstanding, given that the British royals only attend D-Day commemorations every ten years. That said, an article today in FT, "Perils Mount for Besieged Brown", lays a link to present diplomatic dustup and Gordon Brown's increasingly precarious situation after four Cabinet Ministers called it quits. More on the Labour Government's perils and the latest updates on file in "London Calling".

- Filed on Articles in ... ah yes, we don't have a file for outrages of this sort of magnitude (yet) -

Credit Crunch Critical for Survival of Capitalism

Who needed further proof that the current notions about the political spectrum are a myth, here it is. The financial crisis is interesting in that is leads to political players reverting to their default attitudes towards individual freedom and the role of the state. In French President Nicolas Sarkozy we find a prime example. Be prepared for the shake-out to produce more revealing knee-jerks in the coming weeks and months.

At the root of the false spectrum is the public relations stunt that was sprung by the Left after World War II with the annihilation of the ultra Right, in the defeat of National Socialist Germany. Myth-making, PR stunt, are two ways of putting it; another is defining it as 'actively altering the perception of reality'. (Only this has to be done artfully and in a coordinated fashion; not like some amateurs who are currently trying to paint Sarah Palin simultaneously as the hot and gullible hayseed, Ellie Mae in a postmodern rendition of the sixties TV series The Beverley Hillbillies, and as a gun-toting, Bible-thumbing, reincarnation of the Puritan niece of Oliver Cromwell - all at the same time.)

That aside, the dialectic myth sprung on us was that on the Left we have the humane, altruistic Socialists, whereas the Right consists entirely of vile egoistic Capitalists preying on the good hearts of the poor masses. In this dichotomy we find in Adolf Hitler the arch Wall Street Capital C Capitalist of all time; and 'third way' small l liberals as a compromise between the two polar systems, somewhere in the middle of the spectrum. There is obviously something wrong with this skewed picture.

Both Left and Right are two branch departments of the same collectivist school of thought, that demands the individual to subordinate to the collective body (group, state, race, social class, nation, etc.). Although they often subscribe to the oxymoron of regulated free-market capitalism - neutrally described as 'best practice' - a majority of European Christian Democrats are at core of that ilk. The same is true of American paleo conservatives. Which stands to reason, because the structure of collectivism is religious thought stripped from the finer theological ethics, and God replaced by whatever was taken to animate and embody the collective. This is why these ideologies often take the shape of pseudo religions, rather than political systems.

Without going at this time in to the core fallacy lurking on the bottom of this Kantian/Hegelian pond (we have done that in these pages more often than we care to remember) - this world view on the political level translates into statism, collectivism and anti-capitalism; in variations and intensity it is also suspicious, critical or downright hostile towards reason, science and technology. It is in effect directly opposed to modern thinking. Philosopher and historian Isaiah Berlin coined the term, the Counter-Enlightenment.

Capitalism and free-markets are the political and economical consequences of the ethics of individual Free Will, the use of reason as the source of knowledge, and the assurance that the universe is knowable. The USA is the only country founded on these basic philosophical principles, democracy is the social translation. This Postmodern cartoon shows it is precisely that which anti-modernism opposes.

Let me at this point take the opportunity to clarify the European versus the American alignments. There are European Libertarians seriously misaligning, declaring for the crypto Socialist Obama and the severely radicalized Democratic Party, unaware that the defenders of free-markets are located at the Republican side of the aisle.

Reverting to French President Nicolas Sarkozy, even though without doubt a true philamerican, the Financial Times article "Sarkozy sets out bigger state role" is evidence that he remains at heart a statist (Gaullist) with a thin veneer of Liberalism which is shed at the first sign the principles are called upon. While singing the praises of Capitalism, he's calling for the chutzpah that is European 'self-regulation,' to be jettisoned in favor of outright state-regulation.

The coming months are critical. The crisis offers an opportunity to those who had to swallow and gag back free market capitalism for the sake of 'best practice', but who remained emotionally as well as culturally collectivist thinkers. Old ideals may well be revived. Bets are on for who'll be the first to drop the n word of nationalization into the discourse.

These true believers do not want to know that it's their own interventionism that caused the markets to fail, and when they did, it's the markets that were at fault (read "Blame Fannie Mae and Congress For the Credit Mess" and Carpe Diem: "Flashback to the 1990s: Origins of the Credit Crisis" by Dr. Mark J. Perry). Before anything else, this circular, truly banal argument needs falsefying.

- Cartoon by Michael Ramirez -

The current credit crunch will be used as an excuse to unleash a whole new generation of big government regulation on to the free world, putting it in retrograde as it is digging in. Of all the markers required for global Fascism we come up short but one or two ... nothing a protracted recession can't cure (posting will follow shortly). We can even venture a guess what the neotot system will be called: New Capitalism, or alternatively True Capitalism, entirely Islamic banking compatible.

Already the drones are buzzing that "this is obviously the end of capitalism as we know it--it doesn't work". The coming weeks and months will see defining moments in the unrolling of our future in which Hegel's 'world historical figures' will play their part: the ethics of the Enlightenment versus the next failed attempt at Building the Collective Utopia (after over 110 million deaths, this time they'll get it right ... for our own good, of course).

- Update - Yahoo!UK & Ireland: "Government to nationalise Bradford & Bingley" -

- Filed on Articles in "The Dystopia of Paradise" and "The Economic and Monetary Dossier" -

Proudly Introducing ... GlobSoc!

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.

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" -

The Unreformed Neotots of the Worst Generation

Mail Online columnist Peter Hitchens expresses what the authors of EURSOC and yours truly have been saying for a long time.

In "Too fat for their jeans, but Labour still think like Trots" Hitchens affirms that the worst generation's youthful commitment to totalitarianism was never rooted in idealism or limited to adolescent zeal.

I first noticed it when I met people of the old crowd years afterwards, only finding that the advancement of the years had done nothing to their basic mindset. Just as if someone had pulled the cognitive plug and personal development had ground to a halt.

The blokes of the worst generation are in their prime now; they've come to power everywhere in the Western world. They are doing their damnedest! Britain has been re-branded a neotot collective ... "dedicated to overthrowing the moral, social and cultural order."

Heaven forbid, but if the Country of Liberty happens to fall into the hands of similar postmodern pragmatists come the new year, we might consider terra-forming Antarctica into a new continent for the free individual.

In a recent series we analyzed the basic principles of Pragmatism. The philosophy is cunningly cloaked, expediently aiming at 'whatever works.' The latter may be substituted by 'whatever our ideology prescribes.' In "When Reason Fails III" we wrote: "Pragmatism is a Romanticist version of relativism. (...) Pragmatism is essentially amoral."

Far from being practical, middle of the road, and reasonable, Pragmatism in effect is entirely malignant. The firm parameters are destructive enough by themselves (anti reason, subjective and 'organically' collectivist), but just how toxic the brew gets, depends on the choices of the particular practitioner.

EURSOC: British politicians paint themselves as pragmatists. Blair excelled at this. Ten years before Nicolas Sarkozy claimed the phrase as his own, Blair was "interested in what works." (...) The revolution (...) took place and it is well on its way to becoming “irreversible”, always Blair's stated aim. (...) Blair has been highly effective in carrying out his reforms and has pretty much succeeded in imposing the kind of society he and his colleagues set out to put in place."

Those who ask the desperate question how all of this came about, might refer to the most popular video on the blog, "Just Doing His Job" ...




Postscript: Blogging may be slow in the coming days due to moving to another state (of the European Union).

It Takes More Than a Bitch to Make a President ...

I have a vivid memory of Sunday January 14, 2007. On that day I watched Nicolas Sarkozy do his speech as the new UMP nominated candidate for the Presidential Election. This speech was outstanding. I had it printed afterwards and read it again and again, always with emotion, with tears in my eyes.

He was saying how "Gaullism was not a doctrine because general De Gaulle never wanted that, but was a moral commitment, exercising power as a mission devoting oneself one hundred percent, the conviction that France is strong only when united, the certitude that nothing is lost till the Resistance spark is alive in the heart of only one man, the refusal to quit, rupture with set ideas and established "order" when those lead France towards decline"

Nicolas Sarkozy was a fantastic hope that day for European society. A leader was born! But today my disillusion measures up to this incredible hope: I'm p#sd off, I feel cheated, outraged. His words were just words, this guy is just a liar. He pretended to be the champion of work, ethics, morale, dedication, a family defender, the man who would bring back confidence for the honest citizen.

Now, look at him: he's the exact opposite. The only side of him we have seen since September is his very much restless private life. If people can stand a divorce, his love affair with sex-symbol Carla Bruni-Tedeschi is frightening.

Nicolas Sarkozy is President no more, he is just a pitiful quinquagenarian unable to put his demons at rest, marrying a woman he has been dating for two months. Showing through his choice that his speech about traditional values is just bs: Carla Bruni-Tedeschi is very well known to be a Leftist with very large ideas about behaviour and living standards, I mean she's sub-zero as far as moral values are concerned.

All her life she's been a real highway for male-riders, defining herself much more polygamous than monogamous. She had love affairs with half the show-business, for instance Eric Clapton, Mick Jagger, Vincent Perez, but also with Donald Trump and even... former French Prime Minister Laurent Fabius, a socialist rival of her now husband Nicolas Sarkozy.

She's a woman able to leave a man for his son (philosopher - oh my Gooood- Raphaêl Enthoven) and to have a child with him. Lately, she posed in the nude for a Spanish paper, wearing the ring she received as a present from Sarkozy.

As stated by the International Herald Tribune, Sarkozy's witness at the wedding was Nicolas Bazire, a senior figure in the LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton luxury goods group, while Bruni's witness was Mathilde Agostinelli, head of communications at Prada France.

And that shows another side of Sarkozy, his vulgar and ostentatious manners. Is it appropriate to have superficial companies like Prada and Louis Vuitton represent the symbol of his wedding. What about the people he represents?

Let's face it: from the moment he went into Office, Sarkozy, rather than being noticed for his work and his reforms, has shown his interest for rich and powerful friends who are willing to place their yachts, aircrafts, houses at his disposal (with privileges in return?), for expensive and superficial clothes or accessories like watches (how stupid can an expensive watch collecting man be?) and for easy women.

We know everything about the woman he dates/marries, everything about the clothes he buys, everything about his frequent holidays, yet very little about the measures he takes to bring France back on the rails.

We can see him wandering with Bruni in the streets of Paris, in Egypt, in Disneyland, everywhere. Does the guy work? The media frenzy has dealt a blow to Sarkozy's popularity ratings, with French voters complaining that he was concentrating too much on his personal life and not enough on the affairs of the country...

Trouble has surfaced over this side of the "President bling-bling", as they call him, a "leader" fixated as much on foreign holidays and pretty women as on the need for boosting French GDP.

Can a lovestruck President enact the reforms his country desperately needs? It also did not help that these holidays came at a time when ordinary people were grumbling about rising heating costs and a dramatic decline in the purchasing power of their euros. President Sarkozy is now busy with his love affair with a dubious woman, not with his work: he should resign.

This somehow remembers me the story of Urbino, a beloved city for me: in 1444, Oddantonio da Montefeltro, recently named Duke of Urbino, spoiled the cashes of the small state with his excessive life-style (he is reported to have held parties during more than 15 days), and had to exert heavy taxes over the duchy. He also sought support with their arch-enemies, the Malatesta, seemingly reaching a complete dependence from them.

As a result, in the night between 21 and 22 July of 1444 he was killed by conjurers in the Ducal Palace and thrown through the window crashing at the feet of his angry citizens. Okay, we are civilized now: come on French people, let's force Sarkozy into resignation and let's let him walk away alive through the door of the Elysée.

Something Rotten in the State of Europe ...

Maybe I'm missing something, but my feeling is there's something rotten in Europe. Slowly but surely, some invisible octopus is busy hindering the arms and legs of all of us, Western European citizens.

As everybody, I was watching the news to see Gary Kasparov arrested last week while he protested against Putin's regime. The media were unanimous to condemn this act of intimidation towards a citizen, willing to exercise his freedom of speech and opposition before the elections on Sunday. They pointed out that this kind of repression doesn't forecast anything good for democracy in Russia.

Well, well, well... Look at this picture. Date: September 11, 2007. Location: Brussels. Event: a peaceful demo aimed at commemorating the WTC and Pentagon attacks on 9/11 and to draw attention to the creeping Islamization of Western society - a demo forbidden by Brussels Socialist mayor Thielemans. Freedom of speech? Not in Brussels.

The guy assaulted by policemen in the picture is not a common individual. He's the President of a party voted for by 20% of the electorate, a former Belgian senator, and currently a MEP. I fully agree that this party doesn't look friendly to the remaining 80% (and me) and that the guy isn't very sympathetic. A far right guy... But anyway : he represents many citizens, was voted in democratically.

Nobody in the Belgian media protested against his brutal arrest. Why? To me, there's no difference between the two cases: between the arrest of Kasparov and our Belgian bad guy. It's not the responsibility of authorities to decide who is pleasant (or whom to vote for) or not.

The problem is, we have to deal in Belgium with an archaic Left-wing nomenklatura. In the end, I believe what distinguishes Left from Right is the level of confidence in a population. Leftists believe people can't be trusted. In their minds, the totalitarian temptation will always prevail. Ergo, they believe they have to tell people who is votable or not, who has a reasonable political vision or not.

To push this belief the whole way, they even created what they call a "cordon sanitaire" (line of quarantine) around this particular party: the party won't be part of any coalition, there'll be no debate with its leaders, and the media must do their best to ignore them.

That's what they call protective democracy, and that's what I call the beginning of a dictatorship.

After all, the essential thing is not that the Belgian Leftists isolate a party and its leaders, IT'S THAT THEY ISOLATE 20% OF THE ELECTORATE - AND ABOVE ALL - THAT THEY ISOLATE THE POLITICAL ISSUES NOURISHED BY THE FAR RIGHT MOVEMENT, NAMELY INSECURITY AND UNCONTROLLED IMMIGRATION.

Tackling those problems would be considered a break in the cordon sanitaire, as far Rightist parties end up being the only ones bringing these matters up. My opinion instead is, that in a democracy, no subject should be ignored. The best way to fight extremist parties is to find solutions to the problems they point out.

That is what Nicolas Sarkozy did so courageously during the French campaign last spring, shocking Leftists who accused him of flirting with Jean-Marie Le Pen, leader of Front National, the far Rightist party dealing with the same kind of ban we find in Belgium. Result: Sarkozy was easily elected while Jean-Marie Le Pen suffered his worst defeat.

Back to the situation in Belgium, it's pretty obvious that Leftists don't act towards certain parties out of political ethics. We are experiencing a clear demonstration of their lack of political morality these days: an exhibition is taking place in Stavelot (in a former (medieval) abbey!!!) to record Ernesto Che Guevara and his "works". And on this occasion, local authorities were very proud to welcome Camillo, son of the famous MURDERER WHO FOUGHT DEMOCRACY FROM THE MOMENT HE CAME INTO POWER.

So, is a far Rightist leader believed to have an undemocratic vision equal to a former far Leftist leader, convinced of an undemocratic vision? Not in Belgium, ladies and gentlemen!

There are many examples of undemocratic sliding in Belgium. Just one of them: because of the Belgian voting system, voters in (French speaking) Wallonia never get the opportunity to reward or penalize the former Prime Minister in an election, because the guy is automatically Flemish and Walloons can't vote for a Flemish candidate!

And undemocratic sliding isn't exclusively Belgian either ... I believe we can find it all over Western Europe. For instance in Italy the Leftist coalition of Romano Prodi is working on a law called "Levi-Prodi Act" to silence Italian bloggers! This law foresees that you should be able to create a blog only if you're backed by an accredited journalist. Moreover, you should pay a tax for the blog, even though you don't make money out of it!

I could also talk about EU and our mysterious MEPs ... and so on. Fellow readers, I'm curious to know if you are also experiencing some strange behavior in your countries. Drop us a line ... (or visit the Forum)

I may be missing something, but my feeling is there's something rotten in the state of Europe ...