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

Post Truth and Justice

The past decade has seen the rise of so-called "post truth" politics.  Instead of mere misrepresentation of facts to serve an argument, political figures began to put forward arguments which denied easily provable facts, and then blustered and browbeat those who pointed out the lie.  The political class was able to get away with "post truth" positions because the infrastructure that reported their activity has been suborned directly into the process. In short, the media abandoned long-cherished traditions of objectivity and began a slow slide into undeclared bias and partisanship.  The "fourth estate" was always a key piece of how democratic societies worked, since the press, and later the broadcast media could shape opinion by the way they reported on the political process. As a result there has never been a golden age of objective media, but nevertheless individual reporters acquired better or worse reputations for the quality of their reporting and

We need to talk about UK corruption

After a long hiatus, mostly to do with indolence and partly to do with the general election campaign, I feel compelled to take up the metaphorical pen and make a few comments on where I see the situation of the UK in the aftermath of the "Brexit election". OK, so we lost.  We can blame many reasons, though fundamentally the Conservatives refused to make the mistakes of 2017 and Labour and especially the Liberal Democrats made every mistake that could be made.  Indeed the biggest mistake of all was allowing Johnson to hold the election at all, when another six months would probably have eaten the Conservative Party alive.  It was Jo Swinson's first, but perhaps most critical, mistake to make, and from it came all the others.  The flow of defectors and money persuaded the Liberal Democrat bunker that an election could only be better for the Lib Dems, and as far as votes were concerned, the party did indeed increase its vote by 1.3 million.   BUT, and it really is the bi

Media misdirection

In the small print of the UK budget we find that the Chancellor of the Exchequer (the British Finance Minister) has allocated a further 15 billion Pounds to the funding for the UK track and trace system. This means that the cost of the UK´s track and trace system is now 37 billion Pounds.  That is approximately €43 billion or US$51 billion, which is to say that it is amount of money greater than the national GDP of over 110 countries, or if you prefer, it is roughly the same number as the combined GDP of the 34 smallest economies of the planet.  As at December 2020, 70% of the contracts for the track and trace system were awarded by the Conservative government without a competitive tender being made . The program is overseen by Dido Harding , who is not only a Conservative Life Peer, but the wife of a Conservative MP, John Penrose, and a contemporary of David Cameron and Boris Johnson at Oxford. Many of these untendered contracts have been given to companies that seem to have no notewo