There is an unfortunate drive in some, whether well-intentioned or otherwise, to strive to control the lives of others. There are obvious benefits that accrue to those in control.
Whether out of narcissism, insecurity or the hubris that somehow one person or a small group can properly manage all aspects of a society for the betterment of everyone, throughout history we see this struggle between liberty and statism.
Inevitably when given any measure of control the Statist always demand more and more as they seek to increasingly micro-manage humans in an attempt to implement their unattainable utopian visions.
Over the past 40 years we have seen the re-emergent dominance of the Statists as technocratic bureaucrats and large financial interests seek to grow their power and control over democratic societies.
Inevitably the inherent fallibility of humans, not to mention greed and self-interest, result in a slowly unfolding disaster.
Lord Monckton gives a brief outline of how the modern Statists seize control, based on the EU model, in this video clip.
This excellent article outlines the emerging consequences of this Statist control which drives us ever closer to global conflict:
BREXIT: what the BBC didn’t say
Posted on June 5, 2016 A referendum will be held on June 23rd in the UK to decide on “BREXIT” (Britain Exit), i.e. whether to leave or remain in the European Union. The BBC has outlined the pros and cons, but the list would not be complete without a few reflexions on the dismal failures of EU policies.
The actions of some NATO countries have brought lasting, dangerous chaos to Irak, Afghanistan and Libya. So, why on earth did the EU help destabilize yet another muslim country by encouraging a rebellion in Syria? The result is a catastrophe of major proportions, which has backfired against Europeans through massive, often hostile immigration – Video: The forced collective Suicide of European Nations – and primarily against the refugees themselves, some of which have drowned at sea, including many children.
Another misguided policy of the European Commission has been to systematically humiliate Moscow. First, they attracted former USSR satellite countries into the EU and NATO, regardless of the cost – political, social and financial. Then they helped dismember Yugoslavia, another country with special ties to Russia. This, by the way, fanned independence movements within EU countries, destroying their social fabric. It’s nowhere more evident than in Spain, which is slowly disintegrating into pieces.
Russia took the punches, and kept its cool. But then Brussels got greedy, and pushed its luck one bridge too far: it courted Ukraine. This led to a protracted coup d’état in Kiev, forcing the democratically elected pro-Russian president to resign.
It took naïve EU politicians to think that Russia would let a NATO power take control of Sebastopol, which harbors its main fleet since immemorial times. Ignorant ones too, because it doesn’t take a historian to know that Khrushchev had taken Crimea and the Donetz away from Russia, by ukase, to give them to Ukraine. Being a Ukrainian himself, he had no qualms about putting under Kiev’s orders the essentially Russian population of these two provinces. This wasn’t too serious an offense as long as Ukraine was part of the USSR; but when that country became independent, the sore thumb became a casus belli.
Whatever the real motive behind this folly, the EU bull had entered the china shop. The rest is still fresh in our memories: Ukraine’s Russian populations asked Moscow for help in view of the hostile coup in Kiev. Russia obliged, sending troops into Crimea and securing its fleet in Sebastopol. The Crimeans greeted their fellow-countrymen with joy, organized a referendum and voted overwhelmingly to rejoin the Russian homeland. This happened so fast it became a fait-accompli.
Seeing this, the population of the Donetz organized their own referendum to reunite with mother Russia. But the EU scorned that democratic vote, oblivious to the Yugoslavia precedent. Instead, it helped quash the rebellion by sending weapons and money. In turn, Russia assisted the Donetz resistance, accusing the EU of double standards. Thousands died, and NATO came close to an open war with Russia, which might have led to the use of nuclear weapons.
The mess created in Ukraine by Brussels’ incompetent government is still unresolved, and the war-devastated population of the Donetz will be waiting years for an impossible solution to this stand-off between nuclear powers. One way or another, EU taxpayers will have to shore up Ukraine, a corrupt and bankrupt country, and subsidize EU farmers who can no longer export their products to Russia, an important market that has been lost in the process. As for business in general with Russia, it’s another huge loss for the EU economy. An independent Britain could benefit from that if it seized the opportunity.
Turkey is another blunder of epic proportions. For years the, er, let’s call them EU nullocrats, have been negotiating with Ankara the hypothetical admission of their country of 80 million muslims into the EU (one wonders on whose mandate, since the sovereign people of the EU were never consulted on this vital issue). This gave hope to the Turks, of course. But then European public opinion, upon finding out, reacted against this nonsense, and the negotiations were put on the back burner, humiliating the Turks in the process.
This year, following the disastrous exodus of millions of Syrians, Afghans, Irakis and Africans through Turkey and into the EU, the nullocrats offered a stupid deal to Turkey in exchange for a reduction in the flux of refugees: 6 billion euros, and the right for Turkish citizens to fly, drive or walk into the EU… without a visa! Ankara first agreed, then demanded more favourable terms still, e.g. €6 billion, yes, but every year!
We owe this mind-boggling piece of diplomacy to Angela Merkel, who brokered the deal. A final decision will be made this month on the new Turkish demands. By the way, there are really 140 million Turks, if one includes those living in central Asia.
The EU, it must be said, has no democratic authority to carry out these idiotic policies, which put Europe at considerable risk. Only two countries, Spain and Luxembourg, ratified by referendum the 2004-modified European Constitution. The French and Dutch people rejected it in 2005. The other member countries ratified it without calling a referendum. So, what happened next? – the nullocrats went around the negative referendum results by proposing a treaty to all member countries, which they signed the following year. This “Treaty of Lisbon” essentially put in force the Constitution that was rejected by the people.
In view of this, who can say that the EU is a democracy? Nullocracy, yes! Corruptocracy, certainly! (lobbyists are swarming in Brussels) But democracy? – absolutely not! Its constitution was imposed by a trick, and its government of Commissioners is not elected. All Europeans can do is watch in dismay, and brace themselves for a rough landing.
After spending millions to create a network of natural reserves throughout Europe (Natura 2000 areas), and enacting laws (“directives”) to protect biodiversity, the Commission proceeded to destroy both. Thousands of wind turbines sprouted throughout Europe, following Brussels’ diktat imposing the “energy transition”. It didn’t matter to these arrogant politicians and bureaucrats that the turbines would be killing millions of birds and bats, many of them endangered species that are controlling the proliferation of pests. They went as far as producing a Guidance document to make sure Natura 2000 areas could also have their bird choppers. Migration routes, even those of rare birds, were not spared either. Many species are on the decline as a result.
These huge machines desecrated landscapes from Finland to Portugal, destroying natural habitats, bringing rare species closer to extinction, and emitting dangerous infrasound affecting farm animals, wildlife, and people. Electricity prices have skyrocketed, but CO2 emissions keep rising: politicians had not figured out that wind is intermittent. So, we must have fossil fuels plants to back up the wind farms, and both must be subsidized. You couldn’t make this up!