« Girls Cause Global Warming by Liking Guys With Fast Cars | Main | Ron Paul: Patriotism and Christianity Are Fascist »

What's it like for you guys in other places, watching an entire continent descend into fascism? Do you feel sorry for us, or are you laughing at our stupidity and inaction?

It is stunning to watch the great majority of Europeans move like sheep to the slaughter. There are people still willing to stand up and point out what is happening, but it doesn't seem to resonate with enough people to effect any action. In part, it is a very tight envelope of smugness and complacency built on adolescent opposition to America that allows for such an erosion of basic freedoms. It is hard to feel sorry for a people that don their own chains, but it is certainly not funny.

I have to agree with Beef when he says "it is hard to feel sorry for a people that don their own chains, but it is certainly not funny." Residents of France, Germany, Spain, etc. have become so afraid of their own shadows that they prefer to put their fates in the hands of a few power-hungry thugs who would rule as kings -- by "divine right" -- although these power fanatics would have you believe otherwise.

Some people here in America would have us under the same global bureaucratic yoke.

Is it too late for Europe? I don't know, but it ain't lookin' good.

The question of when to call a revolution is a difficult one. It's the toad in the oven problem (apparently (and probably apocryphally) if you heat a toad up very slowly it doesn't feel the heat and will just sit there, since its nerves respond to rate of change of temperature).

If one day there's a military coup and your nation switches from freedom to a police state in one fell swoop, it's easy to know when to get out on the streets. But when it happens a smidgen at a time, slowly, steadily, no one day is significantly worse than the previous although over a span of 30 years things may have changed out of all recognition.

The Eurocrats know this and have moved painfully slowly towards their purpose. Many of us for instance see the Lisbon Treaty as the final nail in the coffin, but our sovereignty was vastly eroded already before that. It's just another degree centigrade in the oven. And when things on a day to day basis aren't too bad... when the new superstate has police state powers but isn't really using them yet...

I wonder how Americans feel because you often talk of your second amendment rights being a protection. But this blog is, daily, full of American slide into the same kind of things happening in Europe. So at what point will you guys get the guns out and say enough is enough? What would be the trigger to say the big no?

Bear in mind we can't talk about voting ourselves out, because our entire political class is part of "the project".

Well, to the extent the citizenry has abdicated its say to the political class, maybe paternalism (or more accurately, maternalism) is what it wants. Socialism infantilizes society by making decisions for adults that they should, as grown ups, be making for themselves. The more they push off onto the bureaucrats, the less able they are to resist further encroachment. Revolution needs popular support; you can’t revolt against what you asked for. Over here, we also find ourselves with a resurgent left eager to make things more “fair”. It is perhaps the fate of prosperous democracies to slide into decadent commutariansim once the hard realities of life have faded into generational memory. My hope is our traditions will yet protect us against following Europe off the cliff, and more tenuously, that Europeans stand up for themselves before it too late.

"I wonder how Americans feel because you often talk of your second amendment rights being a protection. But this blog is, daily, full of American slide into the same kind of things happening in Europe."

I agree with Ian on this point, although still far behind, we're still headed down the same road as Europe. When the time comes we can't have any excuses. The second amendment prevents that. Hell, thats why it was written. "America is at that awkward stage. It’s too late to change the system from within, yet too early to shoot the bastards.” -Claire Wolf

Ian, question: Let's say Gordon Brown is booted, and a Tory becomes PM. Could he extricate Britain from this treaty, or is it too late once the ink is dry?

Pam:

There's a mechanism for leaving the EU in the treaties (it takes 2 years, although presumably unless they threatened to invade, one could just ring up the president or something and say, "hi, we're leaving").

But there's no mechanism for repudiating a single treaty once ratified, and really there'd be little point to staying in-but-not-quite-as-in. The Treaties have worked by taking a few sovereign powers at a time, each building on the last.

The problem is, the Tories aren't saying they'd leave either. They're trying to sit on the fence saying they wouldn't sign this one, it's a step too far kind of thing. Sadly, it seems their primary interest is harming the Labour government rather than a position of principle.

But in theory, up until the EU can force us to stay in by force of arms, any government could leave just by announcing it is no longer a member. What we fear is the closing of that window of opportunity. Once they have our armed forces, a process which is already starting...

During Glasnost, then the Berlin Wall coming down, then the fall of the Soviet Union, I really thought the world was headed in a better direction. I never would have thought that 15-20 years on we would see so many countries embracing socialism and a global form of government. It's startling. As an American, I don't think it's funny, but I don't blame the average European citizen. I know a lot of them think America is the bad-guy, and by extension, capitalism. So they use their own democracy to democratically elect to be non-democractic, as it were.

Social Democracy is the movement from capitalism to socialism through a democratic process. But why one would do that, that's the question. I know a lot of average people feel they'd be better off after wealth redistribution. But the people in charge are nothing more than authoritarians who want what others have, and wealth redistribution is a way of making them rich and powerful. Historically nothing new, just a different twist on getting it. The people actually vote themselves out of power.

I do see the same thing happening here in the U.S. Our education system is blatantly socialist, and admittedly both anti-American and anti-capitalistic. Theoretically, in one generation all the children will grow up with the idea that we must embrace socialism. So yes, I think we have the same trend here. Only we have a history of patriotism and the self-made person. So step one would be to demonize those two ideals....which is going along nicely, I believe.

I would not be surprised if eventually some countries try to pull out of the EU, and it comes to blows. The EU will be very powerful. Perhaps it will be like the American Civil War, some states try to secede, the government won't let them, then war. After all, the only difference between a civil war and a revolution is who wins.

Ian, thanks for clearing that up. And I'm disappointed to hear that the Tories are more interested in slapping down Labour than they are in keeping Britain a sovereign nation. Very disappointed indeed.

Sad...it's like having an alcoholic friend and knowing that you can't do anything about it because the friend refuses to help himself.

That last comment was from me...

I think rather than a group of states trying to secede as happened in the US, we'll see a much more fragmentary and drawn out conflict on ethnic lines, a balkanisation of the whole continent. Various indigineous populations trying to get their countries back, muslim groups fighting jihad, the Central Government trying to keep the lid on it all and failing. We may see the entire continent fragment, and the kind of terrible abominations that characterise ethnic wars. I don't glory in this prospect. I fear the loss of a great continent.

That's why I feel we (Britain) must get out now. We live on a defensible island with a very long history as a nation. When I look at the EU, I see naught but a war that our children and grandchildren will fight. I'd like to leave them a better legacy.

That last comment was from Eeyore...

:)

Pam, it's difficult to know why the politicos are behaving the way they are. It's easy to conjecture and speculate, or delve into conspiracy theories. Some of them just want the U.S.E. to happen for ideological reasons. For others presumably it's the lure of lucrative jobs on the gravy train. But I think for many who are at gut level opposed to the EU, they've bought into this idea that there's a tide of history, an inevitability to it. The idea has been put around (by transnationalists and supranationalists) that the world will inevitably divide into "trade blocs" and one thus has to be part of one. So they go along with it because Resistance Is Futile, kind of thing.

It's hard to explain why else the Conservatives en masse are toeing the Euro-line. I think many of them have this idea they can still cling onto some nationality. It's almost as if they don't want to see what's happening. It's hard to believe they're all deliberately traitorous.

I really think it's that thing that when everyone around you believes something, it's hard to hold a different opinion. Leaving the EU just seems "too radical", kind of a "heh yes that would be nice, but realistically..." attitude.

After the Ron Paul post I've done some thinking. I know he's not popular here, and heck I disagree with him about Iraq etc too. But... if the impossible happened and Paul took the White House, the shock to the world would be immense. He'd pull out of the UN, NAFTA, kill the money supply to the moonbats, slash taxes. He's a genuine free trader. A libertarian America could be a real beacon of hope to us out here- finally we could point and say "Look- if they can do it, why can't we?" A USA committed to a low flat tarriff and abandoning protectionism would be a real challenge to the protectocrats of the EU and the UN.

As such, I decided today that if I were American, I'd want Paul to win, despite his desire to pull out of Iraq with the job unfinished. Even that would, at least, leave the jihadists without a single leg to stand on in their supposed war against "American Imperialism".

"It's hard to explain why else the Conservatives en masse are toeing the Euro-line."

Here in the US one of the main causes is that anytime a conservative says anything that might be construed as conservative, they are branded a racist, homophobe, imperialist, neocon, gun-nut, warmonger, hatemonger, fascist, nazi, etc..etc.. so that they have to spend all their time proving they're not evil instead of making their point. It's useless anyway because the left 1) isn't interested in appeasement, just ammo to throw at conservatives and 2) they didn't call them rascists, etc. because they think it's true, only to distract and silence.

Conservatives here in the US become powerless to do anything but try and maintain the status quo and appease the flamethrowers. If the Europeans are the same way, we're all doomed.

"a balkanisation of the whole continent"

Growing up post WWII I've seen very little change in European borders. I've often thought the world is like musical chairs, things were changing all the time but in our generation someone turned the music off and everyone grabbed a chair, no more countries created, destroyed, or changed. But historically speaking, change is a constant. Kingdoms and nations rise and fall, borders change, invasions, annexations.

A hundred years from now, what will things look like, what governments will be in power? Will socialism rise and totalitarian rule for a century? Then will it fall by revolution? Will people look at our time and say "what a bunch of idiots for giving up on democracy and capitalism when it was working great", or will they simply say "that's the way things happened, things are always changing", or will history have been rewritten and revised and leave us all but forgotten.

Ian, some of Ron Paul's ideas are very appealing: slashing taxes and pulling out the UN are two examples. But his wish for isolationism is not realistic in today's world.

It was one thing when it took two to three months -- or even a week -- to cross the Atlantic. We could afford to hold ourselves out of the fray back then. But today? With radical Islam on the rise and people able not only to fly here in a matter of hours or sneak over our borders (what with our great border and immigration issues), and the instantaneous way in which information is now spread through satellite television, cell phones and Internet, it's a whole new ball game. Yes, pulling out of Iraq and Afghanistan would take away the "imperialist" leg that Jihadists use as an excuse, but they don't really need an excuse: we are the Great Satan, the kaffirs (infidels, nonbelievers), and as such are worthy only of submission or death in that order.

And while it's flattering to think that maybe Brits and other Europeans would be inspired by a libertarian Ron Paul presidency, the cynic in me says "no." For a long time now, America has been the world's whipping boy for just about every ill that plagues the earth. Starving Africans? The Americans don't donate enough food or money. Floods in Bangladesh? Those greedy American corporate fatcats cause global warming. AIDS? President Bush is an evil Christian who believes in abstinence, not free condoms.

And when disaster strikes and Americans do go to someone's aid (as you know we do), militarily, monetarily or both, either we don't act quickly enough or we don't write a big enough check. Frankly, I'm sick of it. When we have disasters (terrible tornadoes in the Midwest, hurricane flooding, earthquakes or wildfires in California), where's our aid? Who else gives a damn about us? We may not necessarily need it, but it would be a nice gesture once in a while.

Forgive my ranting, but really, how much are we supposed to take? (I'm not actually ranting at you, I hope you understand.) Can you IMAGINE us pulling out of the UN? It would fall apart, and as much as that thought thrills me, if we're despised now, it would be tenfold if we were the cause of the collapse of that pie-in-the-sky, red-tape riddled world government in the making. Or if we refused to send our military in to quell some Third World uprising threatening to engulf the entire region? I can hear the shouting now!

Granted, I don't lose sleep at night worrying about "what the rest of the world thinks." That's a liberal's way of thinking and to my mind, very "high school." (FYI, I hate the UN and hope some day our government grows a pair and pulls us out. The idea that we pay the majority of dues for an organization where most of the members despise us really cheeses me off.)

But no matter what America does these days, it is always wrong. This is why a libertarian Ron Paul presidency wouldn't make any more difference than a Democrat or Republican in the Oval Office in the eyes of the rest of the world.

I found this article on samizdata after my last comment, and I find it quite interesting as I didn't think there were any libertarian hawks other tha me lolz

Ron Paul - so what is a pro-liberty hawk supposed to think?

I'm not saying I agree with it all, but I think it's insightful.

Regarding the jihad in general, I find myself feeling entirely at a loss as to really what we should do. For me, the frightening thing isn't zillions of crazy fuckers in a foreign land, it's the fact that they're among us. 9/11 was unusual, in that most of the Islamists arise from communities already within western countries. A notable thing barely remarked upon is how many are converts. Richard Reid (teh shoe bomber) was IIRC mixed race caribbean, for instance. Richard, note, not Muhammad Al Towalhad from Riyadh.

I'm hawkish. I want us to win in Iraq (and I smart at the humiliating withdrawal by Britain from Basra, thankyou, Mr McBroon you socialist git) and in Afghanistan. And I'm sure we can if there's the will. But what is the bigger strategy? Do we hope that we can somehow destroy Islamic fundamentalism in its homeland and the branches in the west will then wither away? Can we really do that? Can we really destroy an idea? I keep thinking of the fact that Rome (sorry, my Roman analogy again) completely destroyed Judah. Flattened Jerusalem. I mean, the Romans were hawks par excellence and they'd had enough and wiped the entire country of the map, even renaming it Palestine to eradicate it from maps.

And the Jewish religion, Christianity, overwhelmed Rome.

How do you destroy an idea?

So I want to win, but I don't know what the strategy is, and I'm not sure the people running the war do either. It's more than defeating one army on the battlefield. We have this thing like we talk about Al Quaida as if they're SMERSH and we just need to find the secret base hidden in the volcano and kill all the guys in orange boiler suits and that's it. But it's not like that. We're fighting a religion, and dare not even say we are fighting that religion, and...

Sorry, that went way off topic and didn't seem to end on a point. Ha. I was just trying to say I don't really know what the ball game is any more, and if we're trying to kill the root of the vine, why aren't we invading Saudi Arabia? I actually did some labouring work in the Saudi Embassy years ago, moving books to their new library, years before all this shit with jihadists was really in the public consciousness. It was like being in the middle ages. And the books... we packed books into cartons to be distributed to mosques etc around the UK. It was what I'd now call jihadist tracts. Why are we letting them do this? How can we fight a war in one foreign land and yet allow such networks in our home nations?

So I guess what I'm saying here is that while I fundamentally disagree with Paul's naive isolationism, I don't actually see anybody else with a real strategy either. How do we defeat a death cult with 1.2 billion members? Until I hear somebody say "We are at war with Islam, Islam, hang onto your ass it's gonna be a rough ride" I don't have much faith in any policy, to be frank.

As to everyone hating America, well, that's because you're successful. Socialists hate a success. My own view is you should pull out of the UN (and my own country should get the hell out of the UN and the EU too). People would moan, but what could they do? If Paul did it, it would at least be an entirely consistent move with his general policy positions over decades. Nobody could accuse him of spite. It'd be quite funny watching the wailing and rending of clothes and all those teary diplomats and non-jobbers packing their bags.

As you say, whatever America does, everyone will hate you. So you may as well just do what feels best and screw everybody else. :)

And I do think a libertarian America would be a great inspiration to other nations. It may well put some backbone back in our Conservatives, for instance :)

Sorry for the long rambling post.

Indeed we know things are getting bad across the pond when "mohammed" has become the second most common name for boys in the UK nowadays.

The BBC = Bolshevik Broadcasting Corporation.

Ian, you are spot on, as always: We are fighting an idea. Winning in Afghanistan and Iraq will provide a bulwark and a friendly staging ground for us (as well as freedom for their peoples), but the ideology is spreading. Converts? Yes, they are a problem, especially in jails (that's gaols to you!). Angry young men are perfect fodder for these sickos. And yes, we should be fighting the source: Saudi Arabia is funding much of the "information revolution," if that's a proper term, for Wahhabism and radicalism. But they also have much of the world's oil...an uncomfortable reality.

PC ideology doesn't help either, because liberal Westerners are so into the idea that everything is their fault that they turn a blind eye to the real evil going on under their noses.

These people understand one thing: force. They won't stop until they've won or if they're beaten completely. I vote for option two.

I want out of the UN. The UK should get out, and get out of the EU too. As for the rest of Europe, well, they seem to want it, so let them have it...