An Iron Curtain across Europe - between its rulers and the citizens
I am going to cite Churchill a bit in this piece - with some insight
from Leopold Amery, thank you.
For sure Sir Winston had defects. And yet he was a staunch defender of
his people's freedom. He was intelligent and pragmatic. And when Europe faced
its most dramatic moments, its darkest hours, his words were magnificent and
inspirational. We need those qualities now.
"I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears
and sweat"
Europe is facing difficult times. Its supposed political and
economical core - the European Union - struggles in answering to multiple sides
of the crisis of the West. For instance, the issues challenging Europe on
economy and immigration politic show how divided the Union really is.
 |
| [Soon minus the UK] Many States so different, so little economic flexibility. From https://worldview.stratfor.com |
In economy, the Union was conceived with France and Germany as models1.
In reality each State has - and has rights to have - its own economy with its
specific strengths and weaknesses, which should have been accounted for. Germany
enhanced fitness results in its enormous trade surplus2 - something
that should be sanctioned but it is not. State members other than Germany - and
France3 - are actually subject to tough discipline if economic
parameters are not respected. Greece could say a few words about that4.
Immigration is a very present reality that the European Union has to
deal with. Of course, Europe is geographically exposed. Worse, immigration
originates by wrong politic of some European Countries - along with the USA.
Europe has responsibilities in both the lack of economic development of Africa5
and in the political destabilization of North Africa and the Middle East6.
However, now immigration is an issue. Immigration politic today is going
to converge into social politic tomorrow. There is hardly a plan for that,
while the effects of an 'open border' policy are evident - from France to
Sweden7, from Italy to Germany8. Viktor Orban, Prime
Minister of Hungary, is one of the most active defenders of National - and
European - borders against uncontrolled immigration. For that, instead of
appreciation, he got heavy critics from the European Union Institutions. Orban actually
stands accused of limiting democracy in Hungary and of violating terms of
humanitary assistance to refugees. Yesterday, 12th September, the European
Parliament voted to sanction Hungary for its politic9, the first
case ever.
Sovranists rise in consensus in most European States, as a wave of
rejection of the Union's inefficient politic. The Brexit should have taught
something. However, instead of autocriticism, the Union answer is to enforce
further its own vision - reaching repressive level. Sanctioning a sovereign
State for closing its borders to unruled immigration is more damaging to
freedom and democracy than whatever Orban did, not to mention how incredibly
arrogant and hypocritical the Union shows to be.
"We shall defend
our island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall
fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets,
we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender"
 |
Your reality perception may be filtered. Memes may remain
legal. Of course, pro-Europe memes will be more legal.
Be careful not to fall for Russian bots's fake memes!
|
Talking about freedom, yesterday the European Parliament approved the
controversial copyright reform10. Against it, lots of doubts and
collected signatures. The Parliament still voted favorably; after the required
third vote, when the directive will be then applied, it will result in a
filtered Internet. Sharing (or not) of contents will supposedly be allowed on the basis of copyright, but that would obviously be subject of interpretation. The
threshold between accepted and not accepted contents can always be manipulated
- as the threshold between minor (and supposedly 'free') and not minor (and
thus regulated) sites. The enforcing of filters is by itself the antithesis of
a free Internet - but is it just a matter of economic regulation of copyright?
Then why so many people call it 'censorship'? Are they all just paranoid?
Notably, the same European Parliament has been very clear in addressing
another Internet-related topic - fake news. Control of information is a
strategic goal - not an innovative concept; thus, everyone can lie when it can
bring advantages. The European Union already decided that the fake news from
Russia are the dangerous ones and they must be counteracted11 - with
truth? Or with counter-propaganda? Among the supposed fake news there are the
divisions and inefficiencies of the European Union itself - how are they fake?
If that is the Union's approach to evaluate the content on the Internet, how
can we assume that the filters deputed to copyright control will not be
themselves politically biased?
Yes, censorship can be implemented without
saying it is censorship - and who says it is in fact censorship is spreading
fake news. Self-referential circular logic made in European Union spells how
illiberal and anti-democratic the Union itself has become.
''You have sat too long
here for any good you have been doing. In the name of God, go!''
This European Union has been built by bureaucrats and technocrats serving finance,
not by politicians serving their people. At its core, it has markets and banks
permeated by sophistry and humanitary hypocrisy - it is not a Union of States
in function of their citizens, it is rather the opposite.
This Union founded on
irreversible Treaties - not approved by popular vote - is kept together by
economic ties. The soul of the European Union resides in how much convenient
its member States find its monetary policy - it is not a community of
intentions in a general sense. Each Country actually has specific interests, in
many cases even divergent. The result is an Union with indecisive and weak
politics, with little synergy between its components and very much agitated by
disruptive forces becoming more evident as the crisis remains unresolved.
Because of this the European Union is a non-entity, less - and not more - of
the sum of its single member States. While there are some who are gaining from
the situation, no State is really favored by European politic as a whole - not
even Germany, which is paying the failures of the immigration politic of Chancellor Merkel.
 |
When pulling together things - resources, ideas... States -,
synergy adds value. Disruption subtracts. Guess in which
direction the European Union worked so far.
|
This is the betrayal of the European dream that was going to build a
Europe of peace and development, casting aside rivalries and helping everyone
to achieve fair levels of growth. The
project just forgot to keep the citizens, the People, at its center - and it
was corrupted into this. It is an abomination struggling and consuming itself
to maintain power. It calls itself keeper of freedom and democracy and yet
increasingly negates them to its advantage - lessened freedom of critic,
reduced freedom of defending one's borders, no freedom to leave. Now, can this
Europe be reformed and changed into a right one? Do we have the time for that?
Is there enough trust from people in the idea of the united Europe or was too
much trust wasted on this crumbling system? What will be faster, the Union
self-destructing or an attempt at reforming it? As of now, each try to discuss
changes to the Union's foundations have been ignored and ostracized - not a
good omen for the future.
That is what the European Union is evolving into, a walking corpse that
still wants to talk and live while it was little alive to begin with. Behold the
necrosis of the dream of a united Europe.
References
Comments
Post a Comment