Uh, what is “unbridled power and a true de facto class structure,” Alex…? Robert Romano:
“We want to state our absolute will to defend the euro,” said French President Nicolas Sarkozy after meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel in Paris. Sarkozy called for a “true European economic government”. Uh oh.
[…]
Thus far, the bailouts have not benefited any nation. Instead, they have helped each nation’s creditors: international financial institutions, and the European Central Bank. In return, the nations are required to follow the dictates of the European Union (EU). Ireland and Greece were the first to feel this, followed by Portugal, and then Spain and Italy.
Missing in this process has been a critical ingredient: the consent of the governed.
In Ireland, the people threw out the incumbent party in favor of Fine Gail in opposition to bank bailouts, only to have the government expand on those bailouts — all the while surrendering the nation’s fiscal policy to Brussels.
In contrast, the people of Iceland successfully defeated a proposal that would have bailed out investors who bet poorly on Icesave. The move has likely shut Iceland out of any possible unification with the EU. Good for them. More broadly, Iceland was the only nation known to have let their banks fail in the 2008 financial crisis because they were too big to save.
Iceland’s refusal to engage in bailouts inspired protests in Spain and Italy, a movement called M15. Some of the movement’s slogans included, “When we grow up we want to be Icelanders,” “don’t rescue the banks,” “let the culprits pay the crisis,” “banks rob us,” and “bipartisanship is dictatorship”.
[my emphasis]
— just thought I’d highlight that bit for all the “compromise at all costs” types, some of who seem to be leading the GOP in Congress, others of whom have assumed the role of mouthpiece for the party — and vanishingly few of whom seem to be as on “our” side as they pretend to be.
You’re welcome.
In Finland, the True Finn Party achieved an historic 19 percent of the vote in the latest elections opposing bailouts of sovereigns like Portugal, Ireland, and Greece, rising from its relatively obscure 4 percent showing in the prior election.
In Germany itself, the people have been overwhelmingly opposed to any more bailouts and the resultant centralization of power in Brussels.
Yet, the compulsory intervention by European central authorities continues. The story so far has been for the powers that be to double down every time the crisis has worsened.In the end, two outcomes appear likely. Either, the European monetary union will dissolve and nation-states will reassert their interests on the world’s stage, or they will succumb to a European superstate.
The question is why the powers that be are so committed to European government, when the peoples of Europe are so set against it.
Perhaps they don’t care. Perhaps the project for a centralized European government — an idea attempted by the Romans, Napoleon’s France, and Hitler’s Germany, all ending in failure — is viewed as being more important than even national sovereignty or individual liberty.
Well, that, and you can’t rule the world without first ruling a huge swath of it — and that irrespective of the will of those you presume to rule over.
The would-be western bureaucratic caliphate is still in its infancy. Baby steps!
“– just thought I’d highlight that bit for all the “compromise at all costs” types, some of who seem to be leading the GOP in Congress, others of whom have assumed the role of mouthpiece for the party — and vanishingly few of whom seem to be as on “our” side as they pretend to be.”
Just thought I would point out that the US Constitution is a compromise document, that the government it set up was envisioned to be a compromising government. If that cannot be seen then I see no hope for any effective change in how the government compromises.
Change how the government compromises? Yes; since compromise is what the system has running right through it, what must be changed is what the compromise point is, what is the baseline of compromise, from expansion is taken for granted and the compromise is the speed to retraction is taken for granted and the compromise is the speed.
This will, admittedly, take a long time to accomplish, but it took a long time to get where we are today. So continue infiltrating and taking over a political party and continue insisting that the premises of the debate shift, because that is what it is going to take.
That’s how I see it.
You read my mind again.
This is the challenge we face: dismantle the corporate State or it our own rights and liberties. It’s handlers have chosen; have we? Further, if we do choose wisely, who do we trust to run and win on that promise?
Wait, are you telling me that all these multi-culti promoting leftist statists don’t really believe that each country is unique and has it’s own beauty and customs and sovereignty, but really wish to engage in a Borg like one world culture where we’re all folderol to the ruling elite of which they envision themselves being part of? Damn, another world view shattered again!
Much as it pains me, I must disagree with our esteemed host. I think Europe is well on its way to becoming West China, with a strong secular bureaucracy. Given the continent’s history, I’m pretty sure the caliphate crowd will be dealt with severely and messily once the time comes for the consolidation of power.
Also, I think I could really get behind an effort to make “Washington” a word to be spat out with contempt, much as “Brussels” is now (and for similar reasons!).
Squid, the caliphate thing could go either way. I’m actually betting (slightly) on the ummah for this one. (Ummah means the Muslims, right?) I think European governments would be way more likely to shoot their own European populations in the face — metaphorically and literally — before even allowing a public debate about the Muslim population.
So the Europeans are still caught in their version of an Articles of Confederation stage of development where their vision of government doesn’t fit the fact pattern of human behavior? Poor buggerers. But the next step is by far the hardest, made all the more so by the lingering influence of good ol’ J-J.R. and pals. Tough luck, dweebs.
Hey! In tough luck they seem to have something in common with our Emperor. They should consult with him about that. Ha.
A bureaucratic caliphate, is what I envisioned. And then, only as a metaphor.
Really, I picture Brazil. And Kafka.
Mikey, it’s worth pointing out, I think, that compromise at all costs is qualitatively a whole ‘nother ball of wax.
I suppose that when your life is spent standing in line (or should I say ‘queueing’) hoping that you’ll get the chance to fill out some forms begging some faceless drone to grant you permission to continue living (if you can call it living), it probably doesn’t matter what sort of religious beliefs the faceless drone holds.
In the meantime, I think we can answer the original question by positing that every central authority seeks more power for itself as a matter of course, and the main problem in Europe (as elsewhere) is that the people lack the means to resist. I’m not sure they have the will to resist, even if given the means, but that’s a separate argument.
An insufficient number of European nations possess the backbone necessary to re-assert national sovereignty. Therefore they will all slouch ever further towards the formation of a European superstate. Being run by like Europeans this state will prove so inept, and corrupt, as to be entirely incapable of administering such an empire. The collapse will be stupendously European.
In other words, a bloodbath.
In WW2 the Germans were incorrectly referred to as Huns; the real ones were from what is now Russia.
I don’t think Putin would settle for merely sacking the new empire of western Europe.
That usage dates back to WWI, and before. The Germanic tribes really got around, so much so that it is hard to say who really came from where. Suffice to say that none of them seem to like to admit just how slavic they all really are.
This will make nuclear-armed Iran, and an Islamist-crazed already-nuclear-armed Turkey, even more interesting when the new and improved final solution for suddenly unfashionable and pesky non-IndoEuropeans is unveiled at a Franco-German economic uberconference in a couple of years.
“already-nuclear-armed Turkey”
? Ain’t saying it isn’t so, but this is news to me.
You are correct. I meant Pakistan. My bad.
Thanks!