Skip to main content

Protocols of the Elders of Brussels

Amidst the various comments on Politicalbetting.com concerning the election of Nick Clegg as leader, there came this rather priceless contribution:

"Clegg is a fully-paid up member of the new European elite who want to replace democratic government by a kind of bureaucratic authoritarianism, in which all important decisions will be taken by unelected committees of technocrats.

This will of course be disguised by window dressing such as the fatuous ‘Town Hall Meetings’ you describe, as well as ‘regional assemblies’ and other such nonsense.
It’s surprising he made his position so obvious though - a serious gaffe.

Runnymede December 19th, 2007 at 1:08 pm"

As I commented later in the thread, this is why it is really hard to take the Conservatives seriously on the subject of Europe. It is this kind of dribbling, barking-mad Europhobia is like dealing with “Mother” out of Psycho- always this twitchy, defensive weirdness keeps coming out.

As Churchill once said, “A fanatic is one who can’t change his mind and won’t change the subject”.

There is a lot wrong with the way the EU works, but attacking those who support the basic idea of a pan-European organisation in these almost demented terms is just not going to do anything but make you look strange.

What bothers me even more is that Gordon Brown, through his rather pathetic antics to avoid being seen together with the other signatories of the reform treaty, even gives their barking-mad ramblings some peculiar resonance.

Comments

Martin said…
No what almost always bugs me is every time we share a bit of power with our European Partners, these idiots go spare, but never comment on how we gave away our sovreignty over our armed forces nearly 60 years ago - surely the litmus test of national independence?
Wheatley said…
Although his language is fruity, Runnymede does have something worth saying. After all, the institutions of Europe are rather impenetrable and questionable. The scandal over signing off the accounts - over a decade of tawdry bullying and secrecy is hardly inspiring. Moreover, there does appear to be a set of people who operate happily in Euro-political set (indeed Cicero I think you are part of it) without challenging the way it is developing. I am passionate about what Europe can offer to the world but entirely disapprove of what I see emanating from the Neo-napoleonic institutions of the EU.

The purpose of NATO was to address a military threat, and, since you mention it Martin, although many 'Europhiles' cite the EU as having created peace on the continent since 1945 - NATO deserves much of the credit.

Wheatley

Popular posts from this blog

Waiting for the Barbarians

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum? The barbarians are due here today. Why isn’t anything going on in the senate? Why are the senators sitting there without legislating? Because the barbarians are coming today. What’s the point of senators making laws now? Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating. Why did our emperor get up so early, and why is he sitting enthroned at the city’s main gate, in state, wearing the crown? Because the barbarians are coming today and the emperor’s waiting to receive their leader. He’s even got a scroll to give him, loaded with titles, with imposing names. Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas? Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts, rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds? Why are they carrying elegant canes beautifully worked in silver and gold? Because the barbarians are coming today and things like that dazzle the barbarians. Why don’t our distingui...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...

Lib Dem v. Tory (Round 2)

The Liberal Democrats stand for a distinct political ideology. It is an ideology built around both socially and economically liberal precepts. In as far as our ruling Labour government can be said to have an ideology at all, it coincides with Liberalism only incidentally. Labour stands for pragmatism, and where it does not there is still a core of values that are collectivist and not individual. Sometimes people are prepared to claim the moral high ground for policies of social solidarity and redistribution of wealth. Liberals may argue in favour of equality of opportunity, we can not argue in favour- as Socialists do- of "and equal society". The reason is simple: Socialism does not work. If one places equality above freedom, then eventually we get tyranny. This is why, while we may argue in favour of a more equal society as being a stronger society, the tools that we may use to gain -in our view- socially desirable outcomes must rest upon freedom above all else. As PJ O'...