Nothing is more difficult, and therefore more precious, than to be able to decide. Napoleon Bonaparte
Britain’s position within the EU has been a contentious issue since we joined the European Economic Community (EEC) in 1973.
After our admission into the EEC, us Brits gradually developed a reputation among the other member states as the “awkward partner” of Europe.
Where other nations were all too happy to surrender their political sovereignty for the idea of something greater, Great Britain has always placed the utmost value on the democracy we have nurtured and cultivated over many hundreds of years which is seated in Westminster.
We have been happy to dip our toe into the waters of economic and political integration but never willing to take the plunge and totally immerse ourselves in the vision for Europe of our neighbours across the Channel.
From its inception, the European project was marketed to the man on the street as an economic arrangement that would lead to increased prosperity and wealth for all. When portrayed in such light it was very easy to convince an economically stagnant Great Britain that tethering ourselves to the then economic successes of many of the European countries would reinvigorate and rejuvenate our ailing economy. It was in this setting that an European Economic Community seemed like the economically expedient path to take.
Forty years on and the roles have been somewhat reversed – not only do we now contribute far more economically to the EU than we receive but the EU seems intent on taking from us politically as well, in the form of EU legal supremacy in Great Britain, over our own parliament.
There have always been murmurings on the continent that the end-game amongst the instigators of the European project was total political and economic integration, but the prospect of riches in the present over the potential loss of nationhood at some future date was just too enticing. In 2016 we have arrived at that future date.
Claims that the ultimate goal of European integration was to create a United States of Europe have been judiciously ignored or demonized by liberal/progressive elites as the mad musings of conspiracy theorists, whilst the power brokers across the Channel salivate at the prospect of controlling a power block to rival the USA and Russia.
Whilst the British government and its media cronies at the BBC do their best to pretend that voting to remain in Europe is a vote for maintaining the status quo and thus the stability of our nation, the other European leaders just will not toe the line.
Recently, it was French president Francois Hollande who let his true vision for Europe slip, referring to the EU as the “European State” when arguing with British MEP Nigel Farage, although with a little digging it is not hard to discover what the key players across Europe really want from the EU.
Maintaining the status quo by remaining in the EU is presented as the safe and sensible option. In true liberal/progressive fashion, leaving the EU is portrayed by the Government and the BBC as the emotional, knee-jerk reaction of uneducated Daily Mail readers who are in all honesty just a little bit racist!
Calling anyone who disagrees with your globalist progressive agenda a racist rather than addressing their arguments is par for the course in liberal/progressive circles these days. Of course defining ‘racist’ as anyone who doesn’t support political globalisation is rather self-serving and circular I feel.
If this whole referendum process has taught us anything about politics it is that liberal/progressive elites in the mainstream media and the Government really do believe the British public is too stupid to see through fallacious arguments, let alone be put in charge of its own destiny. Progressives seem to believe that Democracy is a dangerous thing in the hands of non-liberal/progressive ‘Neanderthals’.
Liberal arrogance and disdain for any person of non-progressive persuasion has been positively seething out of every orifice of the Government’s Remain campaign. Championing liberal disdain toward the presumed uneducated masses has been none other than the leader of the British Government himself, David Cameron.
With every new utterance, the inherent intellectual arrogance and imagined moral superiority of David Cameron’s brand of liberal progressivism becomes more and more evident to all who have not yet given up listening.
When Cameron actually realised that even more traditional liberals in his own party did not agree with his position on Europe, he was forced to present slightly more cogent arguments than the tried and tested progressive technique of calling all Eurosceptics closet racists. This is when he started canvasing for celebrities to announce their support for Europe.
Benedict Cumberbatch, Helena Bonham Carter, Bill Nighy, Jude Law, Dame Kristin Scott Thomas, Juliet Stevenson, Michael Caine and most importantly Keira Knightley all made cameo appearances in support of Britain remaining in the EU. But the coup de gras has to be arch-progressive President Barack Obama, who took a break from doing his very best to ruin America to come over here to give his support to ruin Britain as well.
Not only did the Remain campaign resort to using Hollywood multi-millionaires – and in so doing showing their utter disdain for the intellectual maturity of the British electorate – they also enlisted multi-millionaire CEOs of multinational corporations to further denigrate the intelligence of the British voter.
David Cameron’s typical and total misunderstanding of the position of those who don’t believe in the liberal/progressive agenda would be comical if it wasn’t coming from the person who is running the country.
A key objection to the EU is that it favours the rich and powerful over the little guy. Big business is entrenched and cartelised and small business is forced out by over-regulation. Co-opting the rich and powerful to tell the little guy to keep their gravy train chugging is laughable!
Once Cameron realised that this wasn’t having the desired effect, he decided it was time to scare the obstinate British public into submission to Europe. If Britain didn’t remain in the EU we would all become poor and wretched and fall into economic insignificance on the global scene.
Even worse, if we didn’t vote to remain there could be war, yes WAR! So, if we don’t vote with David Cameron, war may very well ensue. In the same vein, George Osborne decided to chime in with the threat of a tax increase if Britain was to leave the EU.
It was at this point that even those uninterested in politics started to take note, but not for the reasons David Cameron would have hoped. Rather than scare us into remaining in Europe, ‘Project Fear’ as it became known actually started to make voters realise that liberal/progressives in Government and the media are not the benevolent, selfless protectors of the people they claim to be.
In employing such obviously manipulative measures to mislead the British public, David Cameron has proved what the less progressive, less liberal among us have been saying for years, namely that liberal/progressive experts in Government and its propaganda arm (the BBC) cannot be trusted to guide the formation of our opinions. Being an ‘expert’ does not make you right, it just makes you better at hiding your real reasons for pushing your agenda.
What is so amusing to watch is how his delusions of elitist-progressivist camaraderie have been so monumentally blown out of the water by his counterparts in Europe.
Instead of playing along with his ‘reform Europe’ rhetoric, Eurocrats have snubbed almost every one of his proposals aimed at appeasing the British public by clawing back a little British sovereignty from the hands of Brussels bureaucrats.
The cold hard truth is that Europe cannot be reformed because the powerbrokers of Europe do not want it reformed, and they cannot be voted out.
Any meaningful reform for the British public would require the British voter having the right to decide at least
- what laws and taxes are passed in Britain,
- what people can settle, live and receive benefits in Britain and
- what trade deals Britain can make with the rest of the world outside of Europe.
These reforms are most certainly not unreasonable. In fact, these powers are fundamental to the definition of a sovereign state.
The fact that neither David Cameron nor any of his predecessors have ever been able to get these reforms tells us everything we need to know about where the EU is heading.
These reforms cannot be granted to member states in the EU because they are antithetical to the raison d’Etre of the EU in the mind of the vast majority of European leaders and Brussels bureaucrats.
No matter how hard the main stream media try to deny it, the majority of the minds that matter in the EU view the end game for Europe as a United States of Europe. Why wouldn’t Europe want to model itself on the United States of America, the world’s only remaining Super Power, you may ask.
In his magnum opus Democracy in America, Alexis de Tocqueville concluded that one of the core reasons why the United States of America had achieved such a positive balance between political decentralisation and national strength was that the vast majority of its founders were cut from the same cultural cloth.
The decentralisation of political power worked so well in the United States of America because so many of the inhabitants had the same basic beliefs, customs and language. These key traits led to a common identity and purpose which allowed the regional distribution of political power, and thus freedom and democracy, to work. The same can hardly be said for the European continent.
De Tocqueville also surmised that the lack of neighbouring enemies played a pivotal role in the success of the American political system. Since there were no nearby enemies that could easily invade, America was able to bare the inherent weakness and indecisiveness that come from decentralising power. Again, the situation of the European continent is the polar opposite.
When Europhiles claim that Britain is ‘Stronger In’ Europe, they are correct in terms of raw resources and man-power. Of course, raw resources and man power do not for a happy life make!
Just ask the millions upon millions of people who suffered in communist Russia, communist China and National Socialist Germany under Hitler. All countries had enormous strength and resources but because of unaccountable, unelected leaders became countries of unimaginable suffering and poverty where a ruling elite lived like kings at the expense of everybody else.
By putting so much emphasis on the fact that Britain is ‘Stronger In’ Europhiles are, most probably inadvertently, concealing a vitally important truth. Strength is only a positive if it is used to serve the people.
Strength in the hands of unaccountable, unelected idealists has led to more human suffering and tragedy in this last century than in all of the other centuries combined. For this reason, putting ‘loss of national sovereignty’ in the same pros and cons list as ‘cleaner beaches’ is criminally deceptive.
It has taken thousands of years to develop a political system that protects, enriches and empowers the people. The name of that political system has come to be known as democracy, a system in which Britain has had an extremely influential and pioneering role.
It is democracy that is at the heart of the European question and it should be on this issue that the European question is decided.
Many Europhiles will claim that national sovereignty is a self-centred, jingoistic and regressive relic of the past. They happily denigrate British tradition and British democracy referring to us as an inconsequential ‘little island’, surreptitiously ignoring the fact that we are the fifth largest economy on the planet, have the best armed forces on the planet and have won more Nobel prizes than any other European country on the planet. The world speaks our language and our Christian and democratic values gave birth to the greatest Super Power the world has ever known.
It is this vociferous denigration of anyone who does not subscribe to the globalist agenda embodied in the tone of the ‘Little England’ arguments that is so troubling about liberal/progressive elitists.
Any dissention from their globalist/progressive worldview is anarchic, out-dated and, they would love to have you think, dangerous as well.
As such, dissenters are fair game for scorn, ridicule and even legal sanction if they can get away with it, and mark my words, the EU will let them ‘get away with it’! When considering these illiberal pseudo-liberals, the expression ‘Little Hitlers’ really does not fall far from the mark.
The governing structure of the EU is undeniably anti-democratic. Whilst maintaining the façade of a democracy, the system was clearly designed to keep the voters of Europe out of the decision-making process.
The deceptively-named European Parliament conjures up notions of equality with our Parliament, but it is really nothing of the sort. It has no power to create legislation nor can it amend nor repeal EU law without the consent of the all-powerful Commission.
The real power of Europe is safely tucked away from prying eyes behind the closed doors of the European Commission, a group of unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats who are the supreme law-making body of the EU.
The only people who can ever hope to have an audience with commissioners are the extremely wealthy or privately funded lobby groups. For this reason, Europe is heaven on earth to crony capitalists – people who believe capitalism is about the collusion of big business with big government, and massively funded lobby groups. The average voter, not having the luxury of a personal lobby group, is not much more than the EU’s head-nod to ‘democracy’ as his single vote means as good as nothing in a collectivist sea of bigger fish than the individual.
In an age where postmodernism has done away with objective notions of right and wrong and children are taught that humans are nothing but ‘trousered apes’ with no more inherent value than any other of Evolution’s creations, trading our ability to vote for, and if necessary remove those who have the power to legally take everything we have, seems remarkably naïve. Couple this with the modern progressivism’s redefinition of liberalism to mean intolerance to any moral value judgement that is not progressive, and we have good cause to fear.
If this were not cause enough to vote to leave the EU and keep our national sovereignty, we live in an age when governments are already far too quick to use legal sanction against ordinary law-abiding citizens because they refuse to blindly accept what progressives tell them about the ‘Religion of Peace’ or the equal value of gay marriage to society. I shudder to think what the liberal/progressives Tsars of morality and belief would do if they were allowed to legislate without any accountability to those they fine and imprison.
In my opinion, the political arguments against the anti-democratic nature of the EU so far outweigh any economic benefits to be had from EU membership that I believe to remain truly great, Great Britain must leave the EU, adopting a spirit of cooperation with Europe rather than one of legal coercion.
To model the EU on the United States of America which is clearly the dominant vision for Europe among Europe’s power brokers, seems to be an impossible endeavour due to the cultural, economic and geographical differences between the two continents. De Tocqueville concluded that the balance America has achieved between freedom and national strength is a unique result of America’s unique situation in the world.
The inhabitants of Europe are so diverse in their history, culture and economy that brute force from above would seem to be the only way to ‘unite’ them into a single super state, as is the predominant vision for the EU. Most worrying for lovers of freedom and democracy is that the political structure of the EU seems to have been set up for that very purpose.