The Czechs have given in. (Who can blame them? Not I.)
BUT they have betrayed Britain!
Shame! We wuzz robbed! Klaus knuckles under! Munich! Death! War! But….
Poor guy, what can he do? We are not ultimately his problem. Like they were not ours, in 1938.
We will have to look to ourselves. AND I don’t care what Cameron says or pretends to say or not say, about “referenda” and on whay terms, or means or does not mean, for it is quite irrelevant. Nothing will change unless individual Tory politicians in power are forced at gunpoint to do so and to yield to majority opinion and gracefully accede.
We have all known this, for many many years, which is why all the thousands and thousands and thousands of liberal blogs exist: we all pretend it is otherwise, but it is not.
In the early 1990s in the warm wet afterglow of Soviet-Imperialist dégringolade, I used to, while over there, tell my Czech and Slovak friends about the deceptive and only partially-visible undercurrents embedded in “the End of History”, and that “The Germans are Not Your Friends”. Happily I guess, they did not believe me for a moment about the Germans, for there are many German car factories in the Czech republic, employing thousands of Czech and Slovak workers, and turning out not Trabants but rather snazzy VWs rebadged as Skodas, and also a lot of Skodas. Rovers and MGs are now of course Chinese. This is probably for the best, and probably a good thing for us all, if all factors are taken into account. I also warned them about the post-Gorbachev-USSR, but that will be another future story, the end of which cannot yet be perceived.
In the meantime, a new threat to individual liberty and small-nation-self-determination has emerged. If you are here, you know all about it. It is called the EU. Now you must be told, if you are new here and also perhaps not a Subject of The Queen or even a citizen of the wider Anglosphere, that “the EU” was not what was originally being sold to us here. What was initially aggressively, and very, very, very submissively sold, as an “honest, Guv, this is a really really great train, you ought to be on it” thingy, to the British was a “Free trade Area” or “Common Market” – we should have got our hackles up at that already but didn’t. We already could have had free trade but it was supressed by the GramscoStalnists in power in the UK from 1945 to 1979. The Schumanno-Monnetia-Nazis thought we’d bite on “Market” and fail to notice the barbed tarantula-sting in the “Common” bit, and they were quite right. We were had.
It did help them of course, that in the decades involved we did have more or less perverted-GramscoFabiaNazi-collectivophile administrations: these saw the way things were blowing in Europe and the world, saw the nice food with olive oil and garlic and the lovely sexy girls and the warmer and drier and more predictable weather and the vineyards and the cheap sex, and jumped in, on our behalf but for them and not us. (Why else did upper-class women throw wine over Sit Ternece Conran at parties, as a punishment for selling glass Tuscan pasta-jars in Habitat for £3.99 so “everyone” could buy them?)
To the British Enemy-Class, the EU is about power, money, unaccountability for expenses, junkets to Bamberg (twinned with Bedford!), sex with expensive “escort girls” (and you can pass it through as “entertainment”, which it of course is) and “calling for harmonisation”. To British people who can afford it, the EU is about lovely, lovely, sexy food at “bistros” that we were “just passing”, not having to “change money”, sex with expensive British chavettas in Ibiza so you can chat them up while pissed, getting English beer in Benidorm, garlic to make everything taste of something, and being able to fly to Prague for “stag” “dos” for 99p return. Oh and “buying that really great farmhouse, to live off the land”….
All this of course is not what Europe was really about. Not even Jean Monnet, the Great buroNazi, envisaged that it would be that easy to defeat the Real Enemy. We did that ourselves. Europe, as in the “EU” is about recreating a Reich.
That’s why you have to keep voting until you give the right answer….until the Terror-Police are here which means you are relieved of having to vote, for the choice is the right answer or else to be killed. They are a little late with the Terror-Police, but I am sure this is being worked on even today.
Poor Vaclav Klaus, noble and intelligent chap that he is, cannot help us now. It is even the fate of his people’s principal politicians who mattered to be like that. How ironic and sad can you get? So. Either our history as a nation, and as the foundry-crucible of libertarianism, comes to and end here, or else something is done. There is no long-term strategic problem, as the history of Russia and the USSR has shown, in denouncing and repudiating things laughingly called “treaties”. We should look as a nation to our own interests. If we are a libertarian nation, then we ought to look out for our own interests even more fiercely, since we shall find ourselves under open threat even from those whom we once called our friends – as I have always warned and will continue so to do. There is no founding libertarian doctrine that says a nation state, once it has discovered itself either again or anew, ought to observe treaties that are inimical to its survival and which have been made by its predecessors.
Even Westminster says that no Parliament can irrevocably bind its successors.
So, well, there you are.
Shall we just go, now?
An excellent post David. Very much reflects my own views, and fears, of the years to come.
The western world is indeed fast heading towards being controlled or destroyed societies. My feeling is that if one can really grasp this, and communicate it as in Einsteins: “You don’t understand something until you can explain it to your grandmother”, one can turn the situation around. But it is going fast, now.
Just a suggestion, from the propaganda point of view, using words such as ‘Reich’ is counterproductive. Whatever the truth of the matter, Nazi analogies are not going to convince people, but will allow you to be pigeon holed as an ‘extremist’ yourself.
Pick a few main themes along the lines of unaccountable officials and wasteful, dishonest spending of taxpayers money and bang away at them. Keep it direct and keep it simple.
“Reich” is not a Nazi word. It is an ordinary German word which means quite openl in the language, “enclosed space”.
You could apply it to your smallholding. Your garden is a “Reich” also, for you.
Every speaker of German will understand what it really means. It is only the tragically-misplaced pre-capitalist-neopastoralist death-ideology that lynched the word.
Really, it means “the area in which a given described writ runs”.
Other lynched words are “capitalism” and “liberty”.
I’m perfectly aware that ‘Reich’ is not a Nazi word as such. Nevertheless, in English it has clear connotations.
You can make the perfectly correct argument on matters of semantics, the fact remains that when that word, the images that come to mind in the great majority of people are directly linked to the Nazi regime.
Yes, words have been hijacked. Some of them are worth fighting for. ‘Reich’ is not one of them. If you have any common, political sense, then you will not divert your time and efforts in an attempt to rehabilitate that word, instead you will simply recognise the reality of its generally accepted meaning.
You could also argue that the Swastika symbol predates Nazism, that it can be perfectly respectable and used in a fashion that is quite positive and innocent. You would be right, but it would still be an argument not worth making.
Don’t allow such diversions to obscure the important political messages.