I BELIEVE the 'remain' argument will win the day whenever Cameron allows his people to vote in a referendum on our membership of Europe. I do not see that there is any chance whatsoever of the 'leavers' winning. The only hope those of us who wish to see our nation leave this fantasy land of misplaced hope is for the 'remain' vote, whenever it comes, not to be so overwhelming that there is little or no chance of revisiting the issue at a later date. If the result was tight then there would still be hope for a different outcome at some future date.
The actions of our various politicians over the decades border on the sinister, and have done so ever since that wretched, lonely and inaccessible figure Ted Heath, signed us up to something called the Common Market; which he trumpeted as a purely trading arrangement that would benefit the British people. At the time of the first UK referendum, there was no talk of political and monetary union; let alone any talk of a Federal or United States of Europe: when it was mentioned Ted Heath laughed it out of court as pure fantasy and stigmatised those who had the foresight to envisage such an outcome as swivel-eyed loonies. As a consummate believer in such a federal union, Ted Heath did not wish to scare the pigeons away and so tempered his message - slowly, slowly catch the monkey seemed to have been his metaphor for eventually enticing his nation into becoming a United States of Europe.
Heath knew what he wanted for Europe and come what may was determined to see it accomplished, and any political leader of his own party that stood against this European ideal would be sulkily chastised via the media. And this is what happened when Margaret Thatcher, a Eurosceptic became prime minister. Heath (who by then still called himself a Conservative) would readily accept invitations by the media to any interview that challenged the prime minister of his own party – something which Margaret Thatcher never did when Heath held prime-ministerial office.
There is a fanaticism about the Europhile that suggests they will do whatever they deem to be necessary in order to accomplish their end. It is such as these who are the true fanatics: those who wish to remain distant from this whole EU enterprise are traditionalists, who seek the preservation of the nation-state throughout Europe (not only the UK) and stand opposed to the dismantling of all our European national and cultural heritage, that a federal Europe would bring about.
THE EUROPHILES are the true fanatics because they believe in a dystopian project that will destroy national democracy and the nation states throughout Europe. Brussels is an elitist centre-point for the great expansion of the grand European Union project that will need at some point to find a strong emperor-like figure to lead the whole continent once encased in a unified whole.
Why do I say this? Well look at the EU; look at how it is overseen. It has an unelected Commission and an appointed president; a neutered parliament whose purpose is to rubber stamp everything the Commission sets before them; where decision making lay with the unelected Commission - the true powerhouse of the European project.
The whole EU project has never had a democratic base or culture: indeed there is talk of the post-democratic age among the bureaucrats and there are whispered references to it around the dining tables of the European political classes.
A strong and powerful individual will be given primacy over the whole of the EU; over the Commission and over the parliament. It will be the only way to coordinate a functioning federation of diverse cultures with their varying democratic heritages: and allow (whether for good or bad) quick decisions to be taken uninhibited by debate.
The blueprint of a federal Europe has taken its inspiration from the USA model. The European nations will become provinces rather than states as in the USA, which will be divided into regions, with their neutered assemblies. But Brussels will be a Pound Stretcher version of Capital Hill overseeing the continent. Such a concept as a United States of Europe cannot possibly work according to democratic principles when applied to Europe. A strong man with a strong arm and fanatical belief in the whole enterprise will be needed before the new dystopia is seen in any kind of complete form. He or she will demand almost totalitarian powers to clamp down on dissent which is bound to emerge once the people of each nation are faced with the diminution of their nations.
Under the Roman republic, the Senate appointed a dictator whenever Rome was under threat from an enemy: once the threat was overcome the dictator (usually a victorious general) handed back power to the Senate. Perhaps this is how it will start in Europe. The continent may face internal unrest of such dangerous proportions that the lethargic and impotent European parliament will have to be brushed to one side and replaced by a dictator (if not in name) who will brutally bare bear down of the unrest; but in a culture where there is little or no democracy will the appointed one hand back power?
No comments:
Post a Comment