Heretical Thoughts

Whatever name it currently uses, we have been in the European Union since 1973. It became fashionable in our ideological community, circa 1988, to denounce the EU and all its works. Back then, we could still believe that our basic constitutional freedoms were intact, and accuse the Eurocrats of wanting to roll back such economic liberalism as Margaret Thatcher had restored. By 1997, not to be a rabid Europhobe was evidence of deviationism. When I became Grand Inquisitor of the Candidlist, in 1999, I was hailed even by those who found the Libertarian Alliance a bit iffy.

That was then. Today, we live in a soft totalitarian police state delivered entirely by our own ruling class. Our foreign policy is run from Washington, and involves us in endless and largely inexplicable wars that we don’t win. The only brake on our downward progress is provided from Brussels.

Is this a case of Autre temps, autre merde?

All answers welcome.



  • “We have met the enemy… and he is us”

  • For many years now I have been of the opinion that the European Union has been a very effective vehicle which enabled the government and Mr Blair in particular to completely change the relationship between citizen and state. The EU has now outlived its usefulness in that regard. It used to be joked that if you went to Germany and donned a uniform of some sort & started ordering people about, they would all comply. Now that’s us, in or out of the EU.

  • Should that be “brake”, Sean?


    Anyway, a valid comment. There was a time when I was a Europhile, in my younger days. The reasons were somewhat ill-considered and naive, but basically boiled down to my view that our own political class is rather illiberal, and the EU was acting as a vehicle, to some degree, to make them more liberal, at least in a social sense.

    These days I am a Europhobe. Nonetheless, I do not believe that Britain will become a better place on leaving the EU, because it will simply unleash the Daily Fail mentality without restraint again. My primary interest is, in fact, that if the Anglosphere were to withdraw from transnationalist organisations, this would impede the globalisation of what I call Anglo-Socialism, the Puritan/Post-Marxist ideology of the Progressives whose primary source is the USA, with Britain, Australasia, Canada etc entrained.

    Defeating Communism (and temporarily Fascism) was the liberal project of the last century. Defeating Anglo-Socialism/Progressivism is the liberal project for this century. And in the former case, foreign nations (Germany, Soviet Russia etc) were the source; that is, the enemy was exogenous. The current enemy is ourselves; the source is endogenous. So, it’s a different kind of struggle.

    The EU acts as a kind of amplifier of this ideology. But our own ruling class are the origin of it. Just as Sean says.

    • You are correct. It is brake. As a pedant myself, I do most humbly apologise.

      What we may be able to agree is that, while a post-naval coup England will need to withdraw, the EU is not the fons et origo of all evil. Withdrawal, leaving all else unchanged, will make things worse.

  • It may indeed be advantageous to remain within the EU for some time – while of course not belonging to the Euro. The EURapparatchiks have so little regard for the local apparatchiks of any member nation, that the howls from British ones of any sort, whether fascistNazi, GramscoFabiaNazi or even highly-accreditied-corporatistNazi,will carry next to no weight at all, about anything. as is already shown.

    It might be a safer strategy, to “voluntransport” all the various |British Nazis for “resettlement” onto the South Sandwich Islands, just before “cleverlymining” all the oceanic approches. This will, for enough time for many hundreds of thousands of BritishNazis to die of hunger and autocannibalism, prevent the possibility of cheap rescue by the USA under Obama or any other “democrat”: all this before our attempting to send a tweet, to Brussels, that we have left the EUSSR. This is the safest way, for then there is no “Quisling Right” or even “Quisling Left” left to realy instructions. The “receiving apparatuses” will have been “smashed”. Nobody will “hear” the messages.

    The resolution of this problem would be then easier, for most of the British PoliticalEnemyClass will then no longer be present in the UK, but may indeed have been butchered with heavy blunt bits of semi-sharp rock found on the cliff-bottoms, and eaten in desperation by its fellows, in windy sub-zero temperatures.

    I can’t figure out how socialistNazis ever swung debate to the point where everyone now believes they care about people. Let’s do this experiment as see if they do. No “ordinary humans” will be harmed – on film or otherwise – during it.

    I have always envisaged Hell as not a hot place at all, but an unconsiconably cold place. And then, after being in it for an time that can’t be estimated beforehand, you die. You really die, actually, and that’s that.

  • The European Union (right from its days as the European Economic Community – which was why it was always fundementally different from EFTA) is an extra layer of government. The idea that it acts a “break” on British govenrment staism is false – indeed E.U. edicts (as Christopher Booker and Richard North have explained) are a wonderful thing for the United Kingdom bureaucracy – allowing to do crush all opposition by the words “the European Union has ordered it”.

    As for the European Convention on human rights – this was in origin a different thing from the European Union (which is why there are still two different courts), although in recent years the distinction has started to blur (as the European Convention has started to be cited in E.U. documents as it was E.U. law).

    The European Convention seems good when one first looks at it – but then (as with so many of these declarations and conventions going back to the French Revolution) the DETAILS start to make themselves felt. “Rights” that are no such thing, or langauge that is so vague that it can be used to justfy all sorts of bad things.

  • Sean’s heretical thoughts are very welcome. We are all now European Union citizens, and this has implications. The ‘Conservative Party’ has been taken over by Thatcherites and neocons. It has lost thousands of members, leaving the constituency associations in the hands of the swivel-eyed Bufton Tuftons. For many of these people the second world war continues. Brought up on a diet of war films and cowboy films, they hate Europe and love America. They have ensured that every election candidate partakes of the same lunacy as themselves. No candidate who dared to admire the greatest British Prime Minister of the 20th Century, Edward Heath, would have any hope of being selected.
    So-called ‘Conservatives’ should read Edmund Burke, particularly his Letter on a Regicide Peace (1796). Burke refers to Europe as a commonwealth:
    “It is virtually one great state having the same basis of general law…The nations of Europe have had the very same Christian religion, agreeing in the fundamental parts, varying a little in the ceremonies and subordinate doctrines. The whole of the polity and economy of every country in Europe has been derived from the same sources. It was drawn from the old Germanic or Gothic custumary…and the whole has been improved and digested into system and discipline by the Roman law…”
    We had a referendum in 1975 in which all the current arguments were fully aired, and we voted overwhelmingly in favour of staying in. How many more referenda do we need? How often? How much instability do we want? Lysander Spooner argued that no constitution has any authority because one generation cannot bind another. Spooner is no doubt right, but Spooner was an anarchist. Those of us who are not anarchists see the desirability of living in a civilised state. We are citizens of the European Union. Those who advocate secession and subordination to America should be identified for what they are – advocates of treason.

    • Oh, I don’t regard our membership of the European Union as desirable in itself. When I come to power as the front man for a military coup, my first act will be to leave the EU – it would prevent too many of the liberalisations that I had in mind. However, our real enemy is our own ruling class, aided by the United States. Anything that balances those forces is to be contingently welcomed.

  • paulrowlandson – I have read the piece of writing you mention and Edmund Burke does NOT support a European political union in this work (or any other work). The “commonwealth” of Europe is a word Edmund Burke is using in terms of the culture (the civilisation) of Europe (now of the West in general) – Edmund Burke (like John Adams in the United States – who used similar language) certainly did NOT mean political union.

    The “traitor” is yourself – someone who wants to place the United Kingdom under the domination of E.U. Jacobins (because it was the French Revolutionaries, of various factions, who tried to make all of Europe united under their rule – even after the Jacobins had fallen this is was the dream of Napoleon).

    Your claim that anti E.U. people want to put the United Kingdom under the rule of the United States is also false – we are not exactly known for our love of President Barack Obama (an ultra Jacobin type).

    The basis of first English and then British policy since the time of the first Elizabeth has been to PREVENT the de facto unification of Europe, because this would be a threat to the independence of this land.

    This is at the heart of the resistance to Philip II, Louis XIV, the French Revolutionaries, Imperial Germany, National Socialist Germany, and the Soviet Union – any power that threatened to unite Europe (formally or de facto) was a threat to Britsh inependence and was opposed accordingly.

    Winston Churchill is sometimes cited as someone who supported the idea of a European Union – but he certainly did NOT believe that the United Kingdom should be a member of such a Union.

    As for Sean Gabb’s idea that the E.U. “balances” the British “ruling class” – this is simply false.

    There is a common ideology (spread via the universities and the media) both on economic interventionism and on P.C. cultural leftistism. A common ideology among the European (even Swiss), British, and American (and …..) ruling class of intellectuals (educators), media people and politicians. What the E.U. does is to add E.U. leftism (in both economic and social terms) ON TOP OF British leftism.

    The idea that (for example) the French elite are more conservative than the British or American elite could be corrected by five minutes watching French English language news.

    This idea that the E.U. “balances” (limits) British statism – is simply nonsense.

    The European Union is an extra layer of government – the Sean Gabb I once knew understood this, but the modern Sean Gabb appears to have lost his understanding of this (and of much else).

  • Note to people who do not know.

    The United States government is and has always been pro E.E.C. – E.U.

    Not just under Barack Obama (with his statements that Britain should stay in the E.U.), but always.

    Certain people are fond of accusing the CIA of everything – but one of the things it actually is guilty of is supporting the entry of the United Kingdom into the EEC and supporting the campaign to keep the United Kingdom in this “ever closer union”.

    Contrary to those who insist on seeing the CIA as a “right wing” organisation it has, since the 1960s, normally (although not always) supported the nonCommunist LEFT.

    For example various “Social Justice” political forces in Latin America – with the CIA (and their political masters such as President Johnson) unable to see that such “reform” undermined society (both economically and socially) and thus made the eventual victory of the far left more (not less) likely.

  • Another note to those who do not know (but should know – and used to know).

    The genius of European civilisation (both economcally and culturally) is based on political DISUNITY. For example on people being able to go from one place to another and finding different rulers, different tax levels, different laws (and so on).

    An Empire covering Europe would destroy the genius of this civilisation – leading to stagnation and then decline.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s