Skip to comments.James Lewis: The EU Reich versus Britain
Posted on 12/03/2018 3:15:16 AM PST by RoosterRedux
Europe has a neurotic compulsion to repeat the past. This is bad news, because nobody wants to repeat five (count 'em!) East-West wars exploding out of Europe over the last two centuries.
But the E.U. now has a better idea.
It wants European nations to surrender to the German-French axis without a shot being fired. "Countries must give up their sovereignty and join the one-world government," German chancellor Angela Merkel remarked generously the other day. The E.U. Times, of all places, remarked that "[n]o, this isn't something Adolf Hitler said many years ago."
Everybody in that part of the world knows who runs the E.U.: the Germans, fronted by the French. So when the charming Frau Merkel said that, most of her listeners filled in the rest of the story. But the Brits were not laughing.
And now we have Reich Number Six, called the "European Union." But the only "union" in the E.U. is the unelected ruling caste, which rules with an iron hand, while the left-out voters are getting sick and tired of the scam.
This may be why Emmanuel Macron, the German vassal in Paris, just called for an E.U. army to use against NATO, of course. These little voters can't be allowed to resist Das Sechtse Reich (the sixth! in 200 years!), so we gotta get an army, now. Because both the U.K. and France have nuclear weapons, the E.U. army is bound to inherit nukes.
The European Union arose by pure bureaucratic mendacity, unrelieved autocracy and endless expansionism, taxation without representation, mercantile protectionism, and 17,000 top-down directives without a single popular vote.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
The rise of the Holy Roman Empire.
Not sure (as the article obliquely implies) how the Rape of Nanking can be placed at Hitler’s feet? Perhaps someone can enlighten me.
I’m with you: the Rape of Nanking took place Dec ‘37 - Jan ‘38 and the Japanese didn’t formally sign up with the Axis until Sep ‘40.
Just another component of the end times coming to pass
The EU is the globalists petri dish. Puppet head leaders in place, lock step with the agenda.
This is because if the entire world/globe isn't socialist/communist, the citizens inside the socialist/communist (collective) sector will keep trying to escape to the free market (i.e. individual responsibility/freedom) sector.
For socialism/communist to work, all individual freedom must be destroyed around the globe.
a slippery slope isn’t just an observable and predictable phenomenon, given enough time to measure. It is also an intentional sociopolitical technique, otherwise known as boiling the frog.
I remember when they first passed seat-belt laws in my state. I was very young, so even though there are hundreds of examples I could cite from my life, this was the one that became the formidable lesson. At first they said it was only the driver who had to wear it, and that you couldn’t be pulled over for it. Opponents and cynics pointed out that this is just the start. Someday it will be all passengers, and they will pass new laws to permit law enforcement to target it specifically. This may not be the best example, as most people agree with the restraints as a public safety issue, but given much time (well over a decade in fact) all those things they said came true.
I can also remember when people were offering warnings about Europeans falling for the notion that you need a single currency and to remove trade barriers, because it will eventually lead to the loss of sovereignty. The proponents, of course, scoffed and even chaffed. But they knew. We all know that at the deeper levels anyway, beyond the useful idiots, they knew.
But you’ll find that the longer the drinking age has been at 21 years, the more most people agree with it.
It doesn’t matter if it’s safety restraints, drinking age, national sovereignty, or socialist programs, a key component to boiling the frog is social/cultural acclimation. People agree with the warmer water after it’s been set.
The question is, are we going towards a better place?
Are we going toward some more civilized utopia where everyone is unable to be threats to themselves, liberated to attain a state of perpetual lack of need, or some sort of cross between Wall-E and the Matrix where your worth is determined by a higher power and you’re protected based only upon that.
nothing holy about it
Ultimately the seat belt laws like the drinking age laws were legislation lobbied by insurance companies to protect their interests and profits.
The government-corporate-industrial complex is the epitome of fascism.
Look at healthcare as a great example.
No worries, every American generation after Gen X, is already lined up and waiting to formally support such a global communist/fascist union!
They are oblivious, but already populate the majority of our officer, intel, and federal policing organizations.
Historically, when morality is removed, this is all that is necessary to usher in the next phase.
Look at the DOJ and FBI. The FBI now dictates to Congress who is the boss.
And the next generation of Americans are even more brain washed and morally warped.
“This may not be the best example, as most people agree with the restraints as a public safety issue”
I agree, it’s not a good example. I was an adult at the time and remember it well when you didn’t have to have seat belts. Driving is a privilege not a right and when you are belted in, not only yourself and passengers are better able to survive a crash but you are better able to control a car if you are belted in.
Actually it’s the perfect example as the second statement shows. When a law is passed infringing upon freedom eventually the public will come to justify it by the type of reasoning expressed above. There’s always an excuse given for loss of freedom such as “it’s a privilege”, “you can better control the car”, my insurance rates will go up, it’s for the children, etc. None of them are valid reasons for government interference in something that poses no threat of harm to anyone else.
One side seeks to defend the Constitution and the other seeks to totally transform it into a living document...and thereby transform the country into one that reflects their postmodern philosophy of moral relativism, gender fluidity, and sexual perversion.
Our domestic enemy in this war seeks to transform the country into a postmodern communist/socialist collective of various "identity" groups.
It doesn't bother the enemy one iota that they will have to murder vast numbers of conservatives who will never give up their allegiance to the Constitution as it was envisioned by the founders.
And as to the next generation of young Americans, colleges and universities are feverishly driven to pack their heads with the idea that they must hate capitalism because it is greedy, profit-driven, exploitative, and oppressive. Of course, these committed professors don't explain to these students that by throwing out capitalism, they will also be throwing out their freedom and their rights as individuals.
These young minds are easily brainwashed because they are still empty with what they weren't taught in high school, middle school, and elementary school. This is the reason the education system doesn't teach anything of value. Well educated children are more difficult to brainwash.
They want kids who are empty slates with no need for "reformatting" or "overriding" convictions based in reality.
Actually its the perfect example as the second statement shows. When a law is passed infringing upon freedom eventually the public will come to justify it by the type of reasoning expressed above. Theres always an excuse given for loss of freedom such as its a privilege, you can better control the car, my insurance rates will go up, its for the children, etc. None of them are valid reasons for government interference in something that poses no threat of harm to anyone else.
But people don’t oppose them once they get acclimated to the idea. The reasons seem perfectly valid now, but didn’t then.
“You’re affecting others. First responders should have to scrap you off the pavement when you could have used your safety restraings”. “Your family shouldn’t have to suffer your loss when you could have got away with a few broken bones”. Etc. Etc.
The only way to demonstrate is to use an example that you haven’t grown to accept yet (which are getting fewer and fewer), such as ‘You should be taxed for or restricted from collecting rainwater on your own property when drinking water is scarce because natural elements don’t belong to you’, or ‘You’ll need to apply for and pay for a permit to walk anywhere off your own property because of the civil expenses and liability to promote your safety and permit your ease of access’. These will sound a bit absurd to you now, but decades into the future, they may not. They would start out as temporary measures (which are never temporary) during time of crisis or change, or they will be phased in by being applied only to certain groups of people, and not everyone.
I didn’t mean to start a huge tangent, but the whole point was, where does it ever end?
When is Europe going to stop wresting sovereignty and power away from the nations and peoples of their ‘union’? Look at how difficult it is for UK to reverse or escape it. There is never an option in these matters, even when they are portrayed as such in the beginning.
[snip] Political correctness is communist propaganda writ small. In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to. [/snip]
Dr. Theodore Dalrymple: Our Culture, Whats Left Of It
interviewed by Jamie Glazov | Frontpage | August 31, 2005
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.