Greater Germany

When we hear of the latest attempt by the Greek people, through electing a party that said it would do what they wanted, to have large pensions, paid early, without having to actually work, or pay tax, the replies don't come from the EU. Yet is it not a Euro and therefore an EU problem?

Well obviously, but when a crisis of this magnitude comes up, some urgent action is required and the old façade slips. Hence the other side of the argument comes, pretty much exclusively from Angela Merkel. Now, it has long been held that Germany are the EU's bankers, so maybe they should have a strong say over what happens in the EU, financially.

But it is clearly more than that isn't it. The Germans are calling the shots for the whole shooting match (oops, unfortunate). France, the great administrators as they alone exclaim, have slipped a little in the prestige stakes, having elected an extra special idiot to run the country. (In fact, the only reason France isn't in as much trouble as Greece or Italy say, is that as a founder member they got to channel funds to support their economy from the rest of 'Europe').

So what we have is Greater Germany, way beyond the dreams of the Kaiser or Hitler. Even, poor French loves, beyond Napoleon, now a distant memory.

I have just finished re-reading a 1973 book on WW1, by David Shermer. At the end, discussing the brave new world the victors planned to make, he points out the stupidity of the measures. We are used to understanding that the draconian nature of the terms of the Treaty of Versailles led to a justification for German anger and eventually, WW2.

But Shermer talks of the problems of ignoring nationalities and cultures, He mentioned a created Poland with many non-Poles within the new territory, the Balkan mess and several other problem areas. Translate that to today and we have the utter nonsense, pure bilge in fact, spouted by EU supporters about being European.

As if some common heritage existed. You can't have it both ways; either Europe has always been a homogenous region that just never thought of uniting under a single bureaucracy before, or it has been the scene of countless wars. Current history books (those without the helping hand of EU revisionists) seem to talk quite a lot about war. That then is the truth.

Lord help us, we have not long ago experienced the explosion of violence again in the Balkans. Something, incidentally the EU, despite all its claims couldn't even begin to find a way to deal with.
Which leaves us with the blindingly obvious conclusion that the EU is counter-factual inasmuch that it creates the problems it claims to be the solution for (hello? Ukraine) and that by ignoring nation states and self determination, it has lit yet another fuse.

But I do get that it created an enormous amount of wealth and power for a large number of politicians and that it was a backhanded way of creating a totalitarian state to govern in perpetuity. Having seen how it ended for Hitler, Stalin, Lenin and all the others around the world, there was no point pursuing the violent revolution, or awaiting an uprising of the people.

There is no European demos and there is no need for an EU. In fact it is anti-democratic, anti-capitalist, old fashioned and irrelevant in the globalised world of today. But it is the Thousand Year Reich so it is here to stay. Unless someone with courage says, no. Again. Perhaps that should be Britain's role in Europe. Again.

Labour And The EU Referendum

At PMQ's, the bizarre, reality separated Miliband said that he didn't agree with a referendum on staying in or leaving the EU. Let us be very clear what he is saying. Though politicians lied to the people to get us into a politicians club of their liking and despite the clear evidence that the people have realised what an extraordinarily bad idea Britain being in the EU is, Miliband doesn't want you to have a say.

It is as bald as that. Labour know that the British people have had the scales fall from their eyes, they see the Emperor has no clothes, that the EU has a naked ambition to create a Soviet style country swallowing all Europe. They know all of this and, terrified, they do not want you to be able to vote on it.

They have very much enjoyed the cosy club where the EU is left out of General Election politics by all the major parties. But that is the past and Miliband can't see it. He just can't bear to see the opportunity to be part of a state controlled bureaucracy with sweeping, unchallengeable powers slipping away.

He must think he is letting his Marxist father down. He wants the same things that Stalin (and Hitler) wanted; a single Europe united under totalitarian control. You wanted 1984 Miliband, but it is 2013 and we still have a last fingernail grip on democracy here.

Merkel On Britain

Merkel is telling Cameron to not listen to the Conservative Party, but to stick with the EU. That surely should either tell Cameron who is right or, if he sticks with his EU love-in all you need to know about Cameron. The lines are clear; you cannot be a Conservative and support the EU. Cameron hasn't ever really looked like a Conservative, though has he?

Merkel also said that during WW2 Britain joined Germany in ridding them of National Socialism, which is an interesting take on history, but guilt is a funny thing. What she clearly does believe is that the aims of National Socialism were fine, it was the methods she had a problem with, all that killing and buying expensive weapons. So much better to invite countries to subjugate themselves and spend the money on yourself. Can't have too many EU palaces, or too large an expense account!

As I have said earlier, the EU is the modern incarnation of Hitler, or Stalin or Napoleon. Merkel says we should be alone if we left the EU. How wretched America must feel at not being in the EU, or Australia, or Norway, Switzerland or so many other successful countries free of socialist oppression.

In the capitalist world some people take a risk and set up a company, it does well and they get rich. Having some rich and some poor may not seem right to some people but it is a sort of natural order of things, it's what people instinctively do. The crime is not having a society that offers opportunity to all. Welcome to 'socialism'. With socialism the idea is to kid people that you will take money from the rich to give to the poor.

In reality redistribution of wealth doesn't work like that. There are way more little people than big cheeses. You may not think Richard Branson pays enough tax, but why do you think income tax starts at such a low level? Why is tax on fuel so high? Because the little people have a large slice of the wealth (and generally cannot 'help' politicians with little problems, like where to holiday this year).

Socialism has you and an elite. Unlike businessmen in a capitalist society who may or may not work hard (but will have done at some point), the socialist elite don't do anything tangible. They are the modern equivalent of Louis XIV's entourage. Wealth is, on the whole redistributed to them. Merkel doesn't want that boat rocked.