Confessions of a Secret Europhile

by craig on September 26, 2012 9:57 pm in Uncategorized

I remain a committed internationalist. For me, nation states are potentially extremely dangerous entities. They have the power to co-erce, brutalise and even lawfully to kill their own citizens. They regulate economic, commercial and societal transactions. They wield such power that contest among internal political leaders for control of that power can erupt into violent civil war. And they control such physical resources that nation states can launch war on each other in order to annex those resources or access their benefits.

Western democracy has, in my view, in general been the happiest form of government in modern society, in controlling the internal use of power through democratic mechanisms and in spreading welfare benefits among its citizens, while allowing the economy to function relatively efficiently.

But there have been three developments to jolt us from the notion that the emergence of western democracy represents a development in an inexorable trend of human progress. The notion of historical “progress” is one in which my generation was brought up implicitly to believe. I for one believed in it consciously and explicitly.

The first and most obvious development is the realisation that, while western democracies have more or less eliminated open violence in their internal political arrangements for control of resources, they are increasingly liable to resort to open warfare to gain control over the benefit of the resources of other nations, particularly as those resources become more scarce and valuable. Anybody who truly believes that it is coincidence that Iraq, Libya and Central Asia are hydrocarbon rich, and the major areas of Western military activity, is wilfully blind. There was nothing new about neo-imperialism and its recent manifestation as liberal interventionism is no more than a rehash of standard imperial propaganda on the spreading of civilised values.

What is new is the destruction of the notion that we Western democracies had got morally better and had moved on from the crude war as resource grab. What is also new is the extraordinary use of modern mass media to propagandise the inhabitants of western democracies into such fear of an alien threat, that the government can withdraw numerous liberties and extend vastly its power for everyday physical coercion – which at the most mundane level dawned on Andrew Mitchell last week. The fact that the public accepted 17,000 members of the armed forces guarding the Olympics from nobody at all, and that the armed forces were mentioned in every single public speech by a British politician or official in the Olympic ceremonies, to wild applause, gives but one example of the extraordinary militarisation of Western societies.

The second development is the galloping increase in the gap between rich and poor, in virtually every developed economy. In the UK the normalisation of the extreme concentration of wealth, and the neutering of the political forces for redistribution, constituted the real achievement of Blairism. The wealth gap between directorial and non-directorial incomes in British society has been growing at approximately ten per cent a year for two decades.

This development has been worsened by an abandonment of regulatory mechanisms that modified capitalism, and particularly the tendency of the financial services sector through oligopoly to take vast rent out of simple commercial transactions for which they should be the mere facilitator, at the same time inventing gambling transactions and other artificial processes of cash multiplication with which to tempt the wealthy and the fundholders within their own industry. The epitome of this transfer of wealth was, after the inevitable bubble disintegration, the payment by the state of huge sums to the financial services industry, using the power of the state to coerce the population through taxes to hand over sums amounting in total to several years income each.

Which leads me to the third adverse development – the concentration of media ownership in the hands of the extremely wealthy, the control by the same interests of the mainstream political parties, and therefore the lack of effective choice before the electorate on issues like the bank bailout, where the media and politicians combine to limit the sphere of public debate that will be carried to present only tiny variations on a single alternative. The same is true, for example, of the war in Afghanistan. Without an effective choice being offered to the electorate between real policy options, the notion of democracy is meaningless. That is where the western democracies now are.

Nation states, therefore, even the best of them, are dangerous entities which employ force against their own and other citizens and can be an active danger to international peace. The regulation of relations between states by international law to reduce conflict is therefore an urgent necessity. Some countries are much more danger than others: Ghana, to take one example, has never invaded anybody while the United Kingdom has at various times invaded or bombed the territory currently occupied by three quarters of the states in the World, while the United States projects deadly physical force overseas by a variety of means on a daily basis. Reining in these rogue states is a major priority.

There exists a body of international law which ad been gaining in respect and conformity in the decades since the Second World War, but both the United States and United Kingdom, and others following the neocon lead, have in recent decades driven a coach and horses right through the fabric of international law, through invasion, extraordinary rendition, torture, detention without trial, indiscriminate bombing of civilian populations, targeted extra-judicial killings by shootings or by drones, murder of journalists in war zones, and so on in a depressing litany.

Fundamental platforms of international law violated by the UK, US and their neo-con allies from the BushBlair period on include: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, The Nuremberg Principles, The Charter of the United Nations, the Geneva Conventions, and the Hague Convention. Recently the UK was proposing in effect to tear up the Vienna Convention too.

My conclusion is twofold. Firstly that international law needs to be radically strengthened in order to come back into repute. Secondly that the idea of the nation state as the basic unit of political organisation should be radically attacked; that the period of history is past in which the development of the nation state was a force for the good of its citizens and the world community.

I believe that the nation state should be attacked from top and bottom. From the bottom, as societies internationalise the idea of an ethnic basis to state boundaries becomes anachronistic. Advantage should be taken of this trend to deconstruct states from within, breaking them down into a combination of smaller states and/or of powerful autonomous regional polities. We need to see many more states split up, especially among the westen democracies but also very definitely Russia, China, India and states in their orbit.

From the top, and with particular reference to the UK, I view the European Union as an excellenct prototype of the sort of organisation that can attack the sovereignty of national states from above. Nobody dares to say this should happen – when those few Europhiles brave enough to state their beliefs talk of greater integration, they talk of “pooling sovereignty” to disguise from themselves and their listeners the fact that what they really mean is appropriating and destroying national sovereignty – and a damn good thing too.

In the UK, national schadenfruede at the problems of the Euro is almost universal across the political spectrum, which is why I trailed this as my most unpopular post ever. How foolish, British media and politicians gloat, of those silly Europeans to undertake the biggest single economic step in the history of mankind! How wise we were to stay on the sidelines sneering!

The problem of the Euro, as I observed a decade ago and everyone now agrees, is that a currency union is not really feasible without a fiscal union. The answer to that is a fiscal union. Where the European Union has gone wrong is not that it has gone too far in integration, but that it has not gone nearly far enough.

After a period of disastrous free-for-all, what we now have is a de facto fiscal union in the Eurozone in which the German government in effect dictates policy – in this case austerity policy – to everyone else. Democracy is now even more meaningless to the Greeks and Spaniards than it is to the rest of us.

The cause of this is the fundamental weakness of the European Union – its deference to the nation states it should be eliminating. Executive power within the European Union needs to be removed completely from the nation states in the Council of Ministers, or Council of German Orders as it should be better known now.

The executive body of the European Union should rather be dependent on, and largely drawn from, a majority of the European Parliament. That parliament divides along ideological, not nationalistic lines and does provide a much broader range of representation of opinion than most national parliaments.

The existing European Commission would become simply the Civil Service to this new, democratically elected, European Government. The European Commissioners themselves, devoid of administrative responsibilities which would pass to the new parliamentary ministers, might form some kind a second chamber, of a deliberative and revising nature, to the European Parliament. Rather like the US Senate, this would give a balance of due consideration to the interests of smaller nations; it might also encourage the break-up further of over-large “national” units to ensure more second chamber representation.

The question of subsidiarity and the balance of powers between the new democratic European government and national and regional governing bodies, should be the subject for a book not an article. But I would move virtually every power of a nation state either up or down. Fiscal policy, foreign policy and defence should all be exclusively at the European level.

The problems of the European Union multiplied when it adopted the philosophy of variable geometry, of inner and outer cores, of fast track and slow track members. For the single currency and single market to succeed, unity must be much tighter. If the European Union is serious about maintaining Europe’s position in the World against the mergence of China, India and South America it must conform to the logical force behind its existence. In economic terms that means not just the free movement of goods, but the free movement of capital and labour as well. So to be in the European Union should mean being in the Euro and being in Schengen too. The alternative should be to leave; and be treated as an outsider. The EFTA free ride must finish.

I view the European Union as a wonderful thing. It is a cliche to note that in my parents’ lifetime Europeans were fighting against each other in the grimmest war imaginable, and yet now are embarked together on a great political and economic project. The peace of Europe, and the freedom I have to move around Europe, to work study or settle there, is simply wonderful.

Let us make it even better. Let us get rid of those pesky internal borders and immigration countrols and those huge foreign exchange costs that benefit nobody but the bankers. And let is get rid of our God-awful national governments.

Tweet this post

224 Comments

  1. @ Craig,

    When you say:-

    ” And they control such physical resources that nation states can launch war on each other in order to annex those resources or access to their benefit.”

    And

    “Western democracy has, in my view, in general been the happiest form of government in modern society, in controlling the internal use of power through democratic mechanisms and in spreading welfare benefits among its citizens, while allowing the economy to function relatively efficiently.”

    The reality seems to me to be:-

    1. A process of enslavement and exploitation by the Europeans.
    2. Capital accumulation in Europe.
    3. An ongoing process of Europe and the Euro-American Empire trying to continue the processes of domination ( in the modern era through financial domination).

    The foregoing is not a world that would satisfy basic utilitarian principles – the greatest good for the greatest number.

  2. This may be of interest: http://www.nowhereisland.org

  3. A distinguished Professor from the University of the West Indies, Professor Rex Nettleford, put it this way:-
    “The Europeans have come around to what the Caribbean has long understood to be a sine qua non of civil society. “The world is our village”, says Jacques DeLors the French intellectual. “If one house catches fire, the roofs over all heads are immediately at risk. If anyone of us tries to start rebuilding, his efforts will be purely symbolic. Solidarity has to be the order of the day: each of us must bear his own share of the general responsibility”. We are our brothers’ keepers, and our sisters’ too!”
    And with the shift of manufacturing jobs, the façade of skewed global development now compels Europe and Europeans to ask the kinds of questions, that others had long since been focused on.

  4. “I remain a committed internationalist.”

    And a Scotch nationalist.

    “nations atates are potentially extremely dangerous entities. They have the power to co-erce, brutalise and even lawfully kill their own citizens.”

    Like empires don’t co-erce, brutalise or even lawfully — and even unlawfully, as in the case of 9/11 — their own citizens.

    Are you paid to write this tripe, or do you do it entirely off your own bat?

  5. The above is a work in progress – published prematurely by mistake – hope to finish it off in the next hour or so.

  6. Is this post the one promised?

    ‘I have in mind a short post on an important subject on which I suspect that 99% of my readership – including the regular dissident commenters – will strongly disagree with me.’

    ‘Anyway, that’s enough musing. You won’t like my next post, whenever it comes. Promise.’

    If so, then latter true.

  7. @ Craig,

    If you think your postion through to its fullest, you will even then have a huge debate on your hand. You are touching issues that affect the “wretched of the earth” and you don’t even want momentarily to start down the path of a Nial Ferguson.

    The problems that the US/European declining Empires are facing will not disappear anytime soon. An entire new template is presently needed. It may thus come through global negotiations – or – war. History of the West tells us it shall be the latter.

    Consider:-

    From the early exploitative periods to the accumulative periods of the African Atlantic Slave Trade through to our post-colonial times the pull from Africa pushed European societies economically forward while leaving the Africans behind – or indeed, as Walter Rodney has demonstrated, Europe actively underdeveloped Africa.

    As Malachy Postlethwayt, a political economist, frankly and honestly wrote in 1745: “British trade is a magnificent superstructure of American commerce and naval power on an African foundation.”

    Let us not have the modern day expression of the same sentiments here expressed.

  8. I’m probably not the ideal weather vane for the rest of your readership Craig, but I enjoyed this piece, and I’m in almost full agreement with your overall view of the EU and regarding enhanced fiscal union and increased sovereignty for the EU being a positive move.

    Some people are just so short sighted now, looked at historically, the EU has to be viewed as a resounding success. People forget the raison d’etre of the ECSC, interlocking the great economies of Europe so tightly that the endless cycle of violence and inter-European Wars could be stopped, and to a large degree (within Europe) it has. To be a Citizen of Europe in the last 50 years has truly been the best of times. We now have a shared European identity, most of us mingle and experience each others culture and history. In the last year alone I have visited Amsterdam, Vilnuis, Krakow and Tenerife, something that would have been unthinkable to my grandparents generation.

  9. Sorry – his name is Niall Campbell Douglas Ferguson and his work is:-
    “Empire: How Britain Made the Modern World”
    I believe, to save space, he adumbrated the title, not to have the complete picture:-
    “…with others blood, sweat, slave labour and tears.”

  10. Craig, i’ll wait for version 2.0, but my estimation of you as a Global villager has gone up a hundred-fold! Forgive me if is sound judgmental.

  11. Actually I agree with most of this, apart from your disdain for our Armed Forces. They did a great job at the magnificent Olympics and Paralympics, far better for them than fighting unpopular and unwinnable wars.

    Your point about international law is well taken, but how are laws to be enforced?

    International laws are generally bilateral or multilateral voluntary agreements between governments. There are no means to enforce compliance. Are you suggesting there should be some sort of UN enforcement – that is, a UN Armed Forces?

  12. The plan is an EU currency, hence the desire to prop it up at all costs

    A joint Canada/USA/Mexican currency, all signatures on time and tickety boo

    An OZ/SE Asian currency

    And so on

    By Fabian slowly slowly catcher monkey means we will then be on course to merge the last four or five remaining currencies

    In comes a World Army after the massive war abates

    Total information control

    A system of credits begin

    Use em or lose em

    Resistance is futile

    All coordinated by the CFR, RIIA, UN and traitors in every single country selling us all back into feudal serfdom

    Lorded over by the chosen few

    Cf. Blair’s troughing son, a primo example of the desired new breed

    No riff raff need apply!

  13. At the risk of contradicting our guest, this article seems eminently likeable and appealing to me. Indeed, my deepest hope is that the UK would relinquish its historical visceral fear of a united Europe, realise that it is more European than American, and join in for good — and not only because Europe is easier to sabotage from inside.

    The emergence of the BRICs, the relative decline of the USA and the various turmoils of the changing world (Arab Spring fallout, Chinese demographic aging and economic bubble, etc.) mean that the world needs a powerful point of reference strongly committed to Human Rights if we want democratic, law-abiding States to emerge, rather than Russian- or Chinese-inspired authoritarian ones. The last decade has proved the USA to be more fragile than we could have though in this respect. In a multi-polar world, Europe is an essential component to strengthen the Human Rights pole, and possibly even to fill a void there.

    Building a strong and serene Europe is an endeavour of unequivocal global interest.

  14. Nationalism certainly is a fly in the ointment of peaceful coexistence. Craig, you listed a lot of it’s inherent flaws, but allow me to air my grievance regarding Internationalism.

    Even if one could get agreement in the form of a quorum, as the UN and League of Nations have found, the implementation of it’s decisions, aside from the prickly fruit which grows out of those negotiations, is neutered to a sterility which both binds the well-meaning, and gives air to the forces opposing that agreed-upon good.

    I know, by now, someone is screaming for a link and specific examples. I may list some, if I think it won’t be parsed and dissected beyond human recognition. But for now, it is just a concept I am propounding.

    Most of us have been frustrated when dealing with Bureaucracy. A bureaucrat, IMO, is a politician without a constituency. They rarely answer to anyone, other than a higher-ranking bureaucrat, with the same mentality. They are obtuse to an inordinate degree, as well as myopic, with a laser focus on preserving the bureaucracy which feeds them like a Host. The Hive Mentality creates a kind of Evil Oversoul with a life of it’s own, as though a composite intelligence takes a leadership role wherein the workers and soldiers operate as one, and that ONE is like an unreasoning Wild Beast, which devours and defecates in the same location.

    The larger the bureaucracy the greater the distance between Humans. The impersonal nature of such organizations makes for lousy public servants. Less accountability, less transparency, less effectiveness or efficiency. A great American politician once said “All politics, is local”

    Villagers Rule ! That’s my $.02.

  15. CE, good observation.

  16. @ Craig,

    I will come back at you:-

    ” The cause of this is the fundamental weakness of the European Union – its deference to the nation states it should be eliminating. Exceutive power within the European Union needs to be removed completely from the nation states in the Council of Ministers, or Council of German Orders as it should be better known now.”

    This is not one of your better posts. Think about it.

  17. Ben Franklin
    26 Sep, 2012 – 10:32 pm

    Also one famously said “A bureaucrat is one who has a problem for every solution.”

    (James Murray”s A Gentleman Publishers Commonplace Book)

  18. d’etre of the ECSC, interlocking the great economies of Europe so tightly that the endless cycle of violence and inter-European Wars could be stopped, and to a large degree(within Europe) it has. To be a Citizen of Europe in the last 50 years has truly been the best of times. We now have a shared European

    =====
    Best of times?

    Rioting in the streets?

    Our next generations in perpetual debt?

    Unemployment up the kazoo as the traitors, Heath onwards, sold out our manufacturing to China, destroyed coal, and set us up as an absolutely useless service economy.

    Kids have no future, they are quite rightly telling the useless dumbed down Uni’s to get stuffed with their £30,000 perpetual debt.

    The plan has been to destroy Britain from within by mass immigration, and it has worked. Blair’s ministers are on record saying that was the plan.

    We are in Orwell’s 1984 right now.

  19. I think you’re missing the main point Craig. It’s not that nation states pose a threat to their populations, it’s that certain nation states have been ruled by psychopaths. I don’t really care whether we have nations states or an all-encompassing union of global states or a ‘new world order’ for that matter. What I DO care about is making sure that psychopathic individuals and ‘ponerised’ groups do not rise to positions of power over the masses of ordinary people.

  20. Second point:
    You consider youself a committed Internationalist, but then refer mainly to Europe and yourself as a Europhile.
    Being a real Internationalist is rather more than being a Europhile!!

  21. Another attempt by Anders to ruin a thread with his inane ramblings. Paranoid, fanatical, badly punctuated, illogical, head-in-the-sand nonsense, and that’s me being kind.

  22. OK it’s kind of finished now.

  23. Anders,

    you’re obviously devoid of any historical knowledge or perspective if you think that the problems we in the EU have experienced over the last 50 years are in any way, shape, or form comparable to some of the trials and tribulations that Europe has suffered in the past.

    Enjoy yourself mate, you’ve never had it so good! :mrgreen:

  24. Great post Craig. But do you not worry then that when national identity finally dissapears, our demographics will then define who we are, Location Location Location.

    As long as we repair the earth, save all earths declining species including most Fauna and form a immaterial, simplistic society based on well-being and nurture then. I am all for it!

    Sadly Craig as with europhillia, its Greed, and making money, and gaining a higher status that matter to those who are not going to change there ways unlees we all have some sort of spiritual transcendation and I do`nt thinks thats happening anytime soon.

    One nation, one world doesn`t really matter. Now`t will change Craig.
    WE are all above Nations anyway. Its about people.

    Are you hoping to change nations mindset, because you know who has the keys for that one Craig, its there call. All we can do is oblige.

  25. Brilliant Post Where do I sign up!

  26. Robbie Pennington

    26 Sep, 2012 - 10:58 pm

    I like CanSpeccy’s idea of whisky nationalism, I think. But seriously, Scottish nationalism is a civic nationalism, enthusiastic about engaging with the world. It’s a little unfortunate that “nationalism” is a term with such diverse meanings, use of the term tends to confuse rather than illuminate.

  27. Wonderful article Craig, one of your best.

  28. Probably the most ill-informed piece to appear on this site yet.

    The very way the EU is organised makes it undemocratic, power lies with an unelected, unaccountable bureaucracy which, as the Euro crisis has shown, is too unwieldy and lacking in leadership to take quick decisive action. The “light touch” banking regulation which helped cause the crisis was EU policy and let’s not forget it was low Eurozone interest rates which enabled countries like Greece to borrow money cheaply. Too cheaply.

    It’s also unlikely that abolition of the nation state would end aggressive wars, federalists in Europe want the EU to have it’s own armed forces and 80% of the troops in the Balkans are from EU member states. Twenty five out of twenty seven EU member nations also contribute personnel to the NATO force in Afghanistan. A clear demonstration of EU support. The EU is also guilty of oppressing it’s own citizens, overruling democratically elected governments and perverting the use of referendums (keep having them until you come back with the right answer). It was also the EU that introduced European Arrest Warrants and the Data Retention Directive by which all our phone calls, e-mais and web surfing will be recorded.

    Think about this; the hallmark of a totalitarian state is that the state takes precedence over the individual. Now the EU is expecting millions of it’s less fortunate citizens to accept a 30% cut in living standards in order to save the Euro.

    I don’t want to see the EU abolished entirely but it needs to be scaled back from a wanabe federal government to a simple trading bloc as soon as possible.

  29. Agent Cameron speaking at the UN General Assembly meeting yesterday in New York, enforced the Western rhetoric to almost blow Syria sky-high and then spread the chaos to Iran, because I believe Iran is the real target of the whole Syrian destabilization.

    Without mentioning China And Russia he moved the world nearer to the potentiality for World War III. Yet agent Cameron has a very short memory and has failed to recognize the devastating mistake that he made steering the UNSC towards Libyan intervention and the destruction of a country that was in war with no one.

    In the same building President Obama reminded the world that a coalition of countries is holding the Iranian government accountable. He said, “that is why the United States will do what we must to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.”

    The US United is currently operating behind the scenes as puppet master pulling the strings of the Erdogan government in Istanbul to massively intervene in Syria, despite a quarter of the Turkish population against Turkey’s involvement.

    If Syria falls then the next target, assisted by Israel, will be Hezbollah in Lebanon before the final onslaught on Iran. Iran plays a vital role in Chinese energy national security. China has already lost South Sudan or are threatened with the loss of South Sudan, they’ve lost Libya where the Chinese had an active oil involvement in some of the richest oil fields in Africa. And they are fighting to keep their hold in Africa. So if the Iranian supply of crude oil to the Chinese economy were jeopardized by chaos inside Iran, China would be the ultimate loser and I think they realize that.

    In this financial world crisis it is the ‘Western democracy’s big oil and their military industrial complex that are seamlessly interwoven into a political lever that suits US and Britain’s geopolitical interests that include containing China and Russia while protecting the interests of Tony Blair’s BP together with America’s ExxonMobil, Chevron and Halliburton.

    It is interesting that the European Union ponders while the cogs of a Zionist new world order continue to turn in a hegemony of arrogance.

  30. @ Craig,

    No:-

    ” OK it’s kind of finished now.”

    Go ahead and flest out what is in the depths of your heart and mind.

    Again, @ Craig,

    Your theme, if you develop it, seems to be the distinction between an ideology of nationality ( America with its concept of American exceptionalism) – versus England’s, European countries’ version.
    There is more readily a common bond of ideology and of national ideology in America
    ( and by extension an embrace of American exceptionalism) than there is in England/the EU.
    England ( read also -the City of London) has a somewhat duplicitous role that it has long since been playing along the path of the “special relationship”.
    The challenges appear to me to be :-
    1. Unlike the US – how does one weld together a disparate group of nations that have a common “European heritage” but lack an ideology that overcomes and surpasses the barriers that continue, in mind and by reference to special national interests, which divide national ideology from European unity?
    2. Divergent levels of economic achievement within the Union ( as is the situation in the US – in the sense of urban or regional poverty) make it much harder in the EU to have national populations accept the need for subsidies, special privileges and special measures to narrow economic disparities, accompanied by a largely free flow of labour ( capital always flowing regardless) – because the national resentments and divides then come to the forefront – don’t they?
    3. How do the large and economically/financially more successful nations within the Union bridge the gap between – say – a Germany at one end – and a Greece at the other end?
    Despite my historical bait thrown at the onset – in a serious way – I think that you have food for thought which raises the question – that along certain lines you really should develop and expand on this theme. But first, bury the holier than thou and “exceptionalist and nationalistic” flavor. Others much older than you did that way back then – and a man of your caliber really should be taking the analysis, on important issues to a different level.

  31. Sorry – not ” Go ahead and flest”. Rather “flesh” as in sexy and/or enticing debate.

  32. Wow,

    30 posts before an OT mention of ‘zionism’, that must almost be a record.

  33. @ Craig and Mark Golding,

    I think that if you juxtapose Mark’s observation:-

    ” In this financial world crisis it is the ‘Western democracy’s big oil and their military industrial complex that are seamlessly interwoven into a political lever that suits US and Britain’s geopolitical interests that include containing China and Russia while protecting the interests of Tony Blair’s BP together with America’s ExxonMobil, Chevron and Halliburton.

    It is interesting that the European Union ponders while the cogs of a Zionist new world order continue to turn in a hegemony of arrogance.”

    Against what Craig initially posted, then one can readily see the distinction between the super-structure – versus – the substratum upon which policy in its macro expression is built.

    Economics, oil and power in a slimy mix – seems to me.

  34. Another attempt by Anders to ruin a thread with his inane ramblings. Paranoid, fanatical, badly punctuated, illogical, head-in-the-sand nonsense, and that’s me being kind.

    P4NED :)

    Last vestige of those defeated overwhelmingly in debate is the hoary old grammar and spelling straw-grasping defense!

    Truly risible! :)

  35. you’re obviously devoid of any historical knowledge or perspective if you think that the problems we in the EU have experienced over the last 50 years are in any way, shape, or form comparable to some of the trials and tribulations that Europe has suffered in the past.

    More self aggrandising waffle.

    What is your POINT?

  36. I also consider myself an internationalist. We all should be able to travel, live, and work anywhere we want in the world. The nation state is passed it’s usefulness. I would prefer a United Peoples rather than a United Nations. One place to begin with the necessary change in mindset would be with the currently proposed choice between one state or two states for Palestine/Israel. The solution should be no state. How we achieve that and protect all individuals could provide a template for the rest of the world.

  37. It seems you’re advocating a One World Government with subservient Councils. National borders are not the problem, it’s the despotic megalomaniacs within them that are the problem. Those and the fiatist money brokers who strive to control lives through artificial scarcity.
    Depriving people austensibly for their own good by artificial austerity will never make people happy.
    Whilst we have Zionists backed by Superpowers, and smaller arselicking NATOistic Nations salivating at the thought of the spoils to be had by agression and regime (sic) change there will never be true peace and happiness.

    And the biggest problem…

    Fuck You! I’m alright Jack!!!

  38. Wow,

    30 posts before an OT mention of ‘zionism’, that must almost be a record.

    And trust YOU to bring it up! :)

  39. Wow! In general, (on the first reading), yes! Even after going through the preceding comments. It’s long time to end the notion of the nation state. I’m Welsh, by the way, with my own local historical perspective [and nationalism], and now resident in Bulgaria. Someone (C.M.) who’s telling it, straight. Invigorating.
    Bravo!

  40. Great expectations come from Europe for it is only evolving from its first steps as an appointed commissioner led entity to a more accountable, newly coordinated EU.

    I take it that the island mentality displayed during the 70’s 80’s and ever since, the stuck up British fence display, sniping from the sidelines rather than getting involved will all be forgotten now, nothing but birth pangs.

    The EU never had a great mechanism for reform from below, it has not reached the full potential envisaged, its an inspirational idea in the making. To give power to the state and appoint commissioners was the greatest mistake ever. Not returning accounts, lack of probity, was another.

    Now we have well equipped hooray henry’s in charge of floating us free from any more of this EU nonsense, much talk for a referendum by a public fed on bend banana news, politically inept on what Europe’s about or what makes it tick. Bound to be disappointing.

    Now, should they not really be at the centre and negotiate a new more accountable Europe, a Europe with a peace and defence force, accountable balance sheets, its fine to abandon NATO, just look at what its serving these days, let Europe be that historic fourth, balancing power.

    We have nothing in common with the simple mistakes made by minds who are still stuck in colonial exploits, using religion and false flag terror as its core hegemony spade. We have nothing in common with those who steal territory to excuse their unsustainable lifestyles, all the while warring, killing and destabilising in the name of freedom democracy and Liberty,sic, and pretending to be technologically incompetent to do different.

    Humanity has the ability to be different, we are intelligent, but sadly the principled actions are left to the normal EU citizen, the burden is on us to enable change.

    The night of Atonement indeed, what a positive post.

  41. I agree with your observations, but I am not sure your conclusions are correct.

    In particular, we already have a political system where most people are de-facto disenfranchised: unless one lives in a marginal seat, one’s vote has little effect; also, there is very little choice between the parties (there is, for example, no party which espouses personal freedom and the best aspects of the free market).

    But much of Europe is worse. The “average” policy benefits nobody, and there is very little democracy in a system where the candidates are selected on a list, by party grandees.

    Also, truly free movement of labour is impractical… there is a language barrier. When one zone gets out of sync with another (as has happened recently), at least one of the following must happen to redress it: drastic subsidy from richer to poorer, swings in exchange rate, or huge localised unemployment (eventually mitigated by labour-migration, or “internal devaluation”). By discarding the exchange-rate flexibility, we have guaranteed large scale misery in Greece and Spain for the forseeable future. Germany can’t (and won’t, and shouldn’t) give 25% of its tax income to these countries. So unless we disband the Euro, they can’t devalue their currency, and the only remaining economic pressure-release is that of unemployment – this solves the imbalance, but at huge human cost.

  42. Of course, there are those who get off on chaos and disharmony. Such rise quickly through the chain of command, as ruthless as any bureaucracy.

  43. Craig, this advocacy of the amalgamation of nation states sounds very neo-Marxist. It resonates with Lenin’s philosophy in his Thesis on the National Question, the Right of Nations and Critical Remarks on the National Question. E.g.:

    The elements of democratic and socialist culture are present, if only in rudimentary form, in every national culture, since in every nation there are toiling and exploited masses, whose conditions of life inevitably give rise to the ideology of democracy and socialism. But every nation also possesses a bourgeois culture (and most nations a reactionary and clerical culture as well) in the form, not merely of “elements,” but of the dominant culture. Therefore, the general “national culture” is the culture of the landlords, the clergy and the bourgeoisie.

    Are you in favour of Marxism without the socialism, perhaps?

  44. That put a blue ribbon of respect on my delivery Mike – thank-you – “a hegemony of arrogance!”

  45. Of course, there are those who get off on chaos and disharmony. Such rise quickly through the chain of command, as ruthless as any bureaucracy.

    Psychopaths – Blair, Bush &Co. Out of 650 in the Commons I’d wager a good 600+ are psychopaths. Ponerology, the book, describes the mechanisms very well.

  46. There’s much to agree with here, but Craig’s recommendations for the EU seem to conflict with his views on the nation state. Essentially, it seems, he just wants to turn the EU into a large nation state itself. Wouldn’t it just suffer from all the same problems, but on a larger scale? What’s the point of removing ‘our God-awful national governments’, only to replace them with a supernational government that’s even more powerful and remote from its citizens? The argument is allegedly based on anti-nationalism, but the reason for all this is ‘maintaining Europe’s position in the World against the mergence of China, India and South America’. That sounds pretty nationalistic to me – it’s just European nationalism instead of British nationalism.

    And if Craig imagines that a more powerful EU would be any less likely than its constituent states to ignore ‘international law’ and use threats to gain access to resources in poorer countries, I think he’s seriously mistaken. Read about the EU’s trade policies towards poorer nations sometime; they may be less directly brutal than military conquest, but the ultimate intention is the same.

  47. @Barbara – I didn’t see any disdain for the armed forces in the piece. There was disdain for creeping militarisation for sure, and justified it was too. But I don’t think Craig was holding soldiers responsible for that state of affairs – it isn’t their fault.

  48. @craig
    Yes nation states are bad for your health, but would a European state be any better?

    I think you answer that question by calling for the break up of Russia, China et al. And of course the US suggests the answer is no.

    Power must be decentralised. A European super state would only be more of the same. Except bigger.

  49. @ Barbara,

    Are you wilfully mis-interpreting Craig’s words or do you just not get it?

    His example re the Olympics was about the wider militarisation of Western democracies not about “our troops”.

    How can you not see that straightforward and reasonable point?

  50. ‘The peace of Europe, and the freedom I have to move around Europe, to work study or settle there, is simply wonderful.’

    Craig appears to have morphed in this post into an Anglo Scotch version of that great europhile & internationalist, Peter Sutherland. The downside of the freedoms this post celebrates were well illustrated by tonight’s Newsnight feature on the race to the bottom in employment terms and conditions now affecting the Hotel sector in London, courtesy of the free movement into the UK of nationals from the EU accession states. The Poles, who predominated there until recently, are now being undercut by Bulgarians. If that is ‘progress’ one must ask ‘progress for whom?’.

    ‘There exists a body of international law which had been gaining in respect and conformity in the decades since the Second World War’

    ‘International law’ in an international labour market context is simply the legitimation of the lowest possible minimum standards and hourly wage rates.But I suppose that,if you need someone to clean your house, or nanny your children, these freedoms are indeed ‘wonderful’.

  51. Craig…. you speak about a European superstate as an almost spiritual concept and ignore the political reality….. when was the last time a spiritual concept was forced on the world as a political reality? Israel…. enough said.

  52. “nation states are potentially extremely dangerous entities”

    Too right. No structure can better empower its citizens than a democratic nation state. Look how Iceland has used the simple tools of currency and exchange rates to mitigate the burden of the banksters’ debts. That’s how dangerous nations can be.

    “I believe that the nation state should be attacked from top and bottom”

    Rest easy, that’s all in hand. It’s called the neocon agenda. I take it Craig will be doing his bit by leaving the SNP.

  53. LeonardYoung

    27 Sep, 2012 - 1:21 am

    I think Craig is keen to allow Scotland to leave the UK, not Europe. Nevertheless I’m intrigued Craig, that you are an SNP supporter having posted the above.

  54. Seems perfectly consistent to me. I say above that existing nation states should be broken down into smaller nations and/or regions. The UK is a prime candidate for the breakup. Strongly pro-EU views are quite common within the SNP.

  55. Alasdair, Richard, Kempe – especially, thank you for the sanity check. Craig Murray is showing his true colours again. For him the end justifies the means, like it did for Ульянов and Co. The EU is not undemocratic, it is patently and intentionally anti-democratic. Its inherent tendency to undermine national governments in favour of regional power centres happen to suit Murray’s nationalist sentiment. Everything else can be made to fit. One doesn’t look a gift horse in the mouth.

    When the word subsidiarity is used by the EU apparatchiks, its meaning is turned on its head. It’s USSR all over again.

    Olly Figg provides a good starting point for those who would like to know more about our new masters: http://tinyurl.com/figg387

  56. Craig – may I rewrite one of your key sentences?
    .
    Thus – Anybody who truly believes that it is coincidence that Iraq, Libya and Central Asia are not subject to the control of a usurous international banking cartel, and the major areas of Western military activity, is wilfully blind.
    .
    Between control of oil and control of money it’s no contest at all with oil as daylight-second. And you think it’s all about oil? Oh, and did you say ‘wilful’ just now? Never mind.
    .
    Just to make things clear – usury/interest wasn’t a sin in every religion for no reason. The differences between interest-based usury and a pyramid scam are merely in the packaging. Usury is fundamentally wicked like pyramid scams are fundamentally wicked. Neither have a future that doesn’t involve crash-and-burn.
    .
    Here’s how the scam works – the central banks make money from nothing (they simply click their fingers and declare that they have it) and they then ‘lend’ us this fictional money and receive and demand real-world collateral and interest. The mad thing is that they deserve neither of these things since they never had the money to begin with. The whole thing is bullshit from the ground up and there’s no need for any of it. The bankers bring nothing to the party except what is essentially a cascading tax designed for no other purpose than to impoverish us and otherwise have us beholden.
    .
    Here’s a simple truth: when you turn the means of exchange into just another commodity (with cascading charges, no less) it becomes debased, a corruption that functions for none apart from those who control it. It then becomes a devastating weapon.
    .
    Boom/bust cycles are not accidents. They are hammer blows delivered by the untouchable dictators of monetary policy to smash all and any sovereignty beneath them. And of course those who offer a non-usurous banking system and are not subject to the bankers (which is to say Muslims) get militarily smashed by those who are. Three cheers for us as dupes. We are golems serving the grand purpose of a one world government under unelected, faceless, and answerable-to-none international bankers.
    .
    And here you are cheerleading for them without any idea for whom you’re cheering.
    .
    God help us all.

  57. Scouse Billy

    27 Sep, 2012 - 2:11 am

    “And here you are cheerleading for them without any idea for whom you’re cheering.”

    Indeed – compare and contrast with Vaclav Klaus’ views in the Sunday Telegraph – now there’s a man who knows what he’s talking about and an economist to boot:

    The new push for a European Union federation, complete with its own head of state and army, is the “final phase” of the destruction of democracy and the nation state, the president of the Czech Republic has warned.

    http://www.klaus.cz/clanky/3191

  58. I’m very disappointed with this post.

    They way it was set up, I fully expected to be made very angry, and find myself with yet another tarnished one, that I’d hitherto respected. This post has entirely failed to live up to this expectation – how am I supposed to have the anger and disgust that I was looking forward to, if it’s talking in such reasonable terms?

    I’m Welsh too (Hi Phil!) and despise nationalism in all its forms. That’s why I always found the Scottish nationalism in some of these posts a little off-beat.

  59. Given what’s occuring climatically now and what’s in store soon, much of the current global political-economy will be destroyed along with hundreds of millions of human lives. I admire your thrust Mr Murray, but you’re ignoring what will soon confront humanity and completely trash its highly complex sociopolitical structures, particularly national governments and their economies. Such a drastic future might be avoided if the primary Outlaw Nations–essentially the English speaking nations–and their leaders are reigned in by a massive public posse followed by the most intense effort that could be launched to totally eliminate carbon pollution by 2030. Accomplish that goal and then we can talk about retooling sociopolitical and economic arrangements. If we don’t save our environment first, it won’t make any difference how fine an essay you write about how to retool society for a world that no longer exists.

  60. Craig,

    As usual, fantastic analysis of the problems: lack of real choice for voters; redistribution of wealth going the wrong way; governments getting away with ridiculous wars, targeted assasinations etc etc; death of independent media…

    Not sure The EU is the answer to all these problems, though. As posters above have already said, EU systems are set up to be bureacratic and anti-democratic. There is no real respect for the will of the people in there at all. The banksters and the business lobbies and the corrupt politicians are already running the show, so the chances of taking it over as some kind of pure democratic project are even slimmer than similarly transforming The UK government. You are day dreaming on that one. Of course, the very size of The EU makes it inherently less accountable to it’s citizens and more ripe for the kind of institutional corruption and abuse that you describe so well.

    The real answer to the problems is for the voters to wake up and face the music. Until then, they get what they deserve and you can’t save them from themselves.

  61. Scouse Billy / 27 Sep, 2012 – 2:11 am
    Great link, thanks. True, the “Margaret Thatcher of Central Europe” appears to know what he’s talking about.

  62. “I believe that the nation state should be attacked from top and bottom. From the bottom, as societies internationalise the idea of an ethnic basis to state boundaries becomes anachronistic” – this is whats been happening for decades, carried out by politicians of sovereign states against their own countries. Its generally called treason. This is what Agenda 21 is about. Surely Craig can’t be naive as to think that central banks give a toss about sovereign states when they have been attacking them for decades? So countries should have no ethnic rights huh?I take it this includes Tibetans,all the countries of Africa and all the downtrodden peoples of the world etc etc…

    “From the top, and with particular reference to the UK, I view the European Union as an excellenct prototype of the sort of organisation that can attack the sovereignty of national states from above” – Craig, you’re about 50 years too late-this is what the EU has been doing for the last half century. If anything,sovereign states need to be defended from attack by the EU and UN tyranny

    “The cause of this is the fundamental weakness of the European Union – its deference to the nation states it should be eliminating. Executive power within the European Union needs to be removed completely from the nation states in the Council of Ministers, or Council of German Orders as it should be better known now” – This is the wrong way round. The deference is from the nation states to the EU -Most laws affecting Britain for example,now come from the EU, and increasingly the UN

    This post is at least honest but it is also confused: EU good but nation states bad? EU good but maybe smaller micro nation states good? I agree that old imperial states such as the UK,China,Russia,Spain etc do need to reliquish their hold on countries such as Wales,Scotland, Catalonia,Basque,Tibet,Chechnya etc but i’m not sure that this what Craig is arguing for.

    If what he is arguing is an attack on all nation states then this post is highly irresponsible and cock eyed.I know Craig is a gentleman but does gentlemeness have to equate to naivety? Seems like, on this at least, Craig has been done like a kipper. What he’s talking about is exactly what the eugenecist English Zionists of the Rhodes Milner group with an unfortunate line in god complexes have been trying to cook up for years.

  63. Oh, dear God. This is not good. What happened to you Craig? If you conclude nation states are bad, what do you think will happen if you apply they principles that are bad in a nation state, first regionally on EU and then globally, which would be the next logical step? A sad day indeed.

  64. Small is beautiful. The problem is not nations, but big nations – big economic entities that can throw their weight about – and if they can they will. If you want to see what a united and stateless Europe would look like and wonder how it would behave, look at the United States of America.

    The more remote the political centre is from the people the less accountable it becomes. I am sure that in one context you understand this, and yet above you do not.

    ‘… I ken, when we had a king, and a chancellor and parliament-men o’ our ain, we could aye peeble them wi’ stanes when they werena gude bairns – But naebody’s nails can reach the length o’ Lunnon.’

    -Walter Scott: Heart of Midlothian

  65. @ nobody

    Web of Debt.

    E H Brown.

    Explains the financial history.

    Wizard of Oz.
    Bauers film about money and banking power.

    The writer best explained his thoughts by writing the book.

    The Scarecrow represents the farmer, the tin man the industry,
    E.t.c

    Oz is Gold and the shoes were silver. Ruby for the color film.

    Obviously the new populist party of a One World party.
    would outlaw the money scam.

    Gaddafi was selling oil for gold Dinar.

    As long as they dont tax me blackberries.

    Just on a side note the French are taking the nouns mother and father off some official documents and certificates.
    So much to be abstract.

    Its like art. A can of soup even painted badly looks food to the undernourished.

    “Nurture” the one consistent amongst people.

    The way were are presently is a sign of things to come.

    Yes we are Plebs, keep hold of your vital organs and wake up.

    We must not differentiate.

  66. Wake up in the back there Bullingdon Boy Cameron.

    Magna Great
    Carta Charter

    A child could work it out even if they had no knowledge of Latin.

    Wonder what else he doesn’t know? The Habeas Corpus Act for instance?

  67. FFFFRRRRRRREEEEEEEDDDDDOOOOMMMMM !!

  68. James Chater

    27 Sep, 2012 - 8:16 am

    Craig

    I am with you about strengthening international law, but I am not sure that full European fiscal union would work.
    I have often thought about the problem of what I would call “government policy by auction”. The argument goes: you introduce a policy and justify it by saying that if you had not done it another country would have, so you might as well. Thus: we sell arms to dodgy regimes in order to gain political leverage, because if we don’t, the French/Americans will do it anyway; or: we decide to build a new airport or runway even if we prefer trains to emissions, because if we don’t the flights will go through Amsterdam, Paris or Frankfurt, benefiting their economy at the expense of ours; or: we decide not to tax our richest people because if we do they will simply emigrate to another country that welcomes them with “open arms” (as has happened recently when France’s president decided to raise taxes for the rich).
    Whatever political arrangements we end up with, they will be useless unless a critical number of the world’s political units AGREE with one another to stop this sort of auction, so that, in the examples above, we curb arms trade, build railways instead of airports and make the rich pay their fair share of taxes. But I must admit I am at a loss as to how we get everyone to agree, and how you enforce these agreements (assuming you can). Do you have any ideas?

  69. @Frazer

    FFFRRRYYING PPAAAANNN IINNNTTTOOO FFFFIIIIIRRRRRREEEE !!!

  70. @Jimmy…LMFAO

  71. I don’t think it is nation states, they are certainly hosts of parasitic evils and are collectively victims themselves of powerful interests within who utilise our pseudo-democratic practices to usurp the resources, people and their common wealth; talk about throwing out the baby with the bathwater. I do not think that resort to open warfare is a new phenomenon, there had just been a slight lull. Without any ethnic basis to state boundaries, you open the door for other, alien destructive bases for group cohesion, such as religion, cults, arbitrary dictatorship, extremism. Internationalism? What other word is there for the military security alliance of the UK, US, AUS, NZ, ISR; this isn’t some happy-clappy glee club, but is the sort of thing you wish to further elevate over us. This is simply nation states gone global, multinationalism. No more fuzzy sad lib-dem type all things too all men soft soap. It is too broad a matter for a superficial panacea – all blame lies with the nation state – the oldest and last organic natural instinctive institution is all that stands between us and the abyss you contemplate.

    Why not just round up the war criminals and biggest crooks, execute them. Apologise to the world; a replacement set of politicians kept on the tightest rein by the example set. We don’t need to smash the existing world to atoms to reconstruct it better.

  72. We heard most of the above in the Seventies. No borders, no passports, a common currency, no more wars, lands of milk and honey…..and look what happened. I am proud to say that my father went round with a loudspeaker on his car roof speaking against joining the Common Market, as it was called then, when Wilson’se referendum was being held. He had the vision to see what was coming.

    I rememnber that he was ordered to leave the area outside the Winfrith atomic power facility by armed police. That was 37 years ago. Plus ça change plus c’est la même chose….

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_European_Communities_membership_referendum,_1975

    None of us have ever voted to join. Think on.

  73. Congratulations, Craig. Unlike many of your major posts in the last few years, this one is almost exclusively forward looking. Looking back is important, but looking forward is hard.

    I have some questions, but by and large I agree with every line.

    I would point out that the attempt by western governments to propogandise and intimidate their populations in the national interest is not so new however. In particular the suppression of all worker’s movements during the Napoleonic Wars come to mind. This was deliberately planned, thorough and brutal, as detailed in Thompson’s ‘Making of the English Working Class’. A century before that the Tory government manipulated the Irish writer Jonathan Swift to propogandise on their behalf to end the War of Spanish Succession. You yourself have referred to Walsingham, supremo of Good Queen Bess’s Secret Service.

    You say: “The question of subsidiarity and the balance of powers between the new democratic European government and national and regional governing bodies, should be the subject for a book not an article”.

    That should probably read not one book but a hundred, and several decades of argument at least. Nevertheless I think this is the crux of the matter. From time to time on several blogs I mention the work of Rudolf Steiner in this regard about one hundred years ago, especially in the books ‘Social Commonwealth’, and ‘World Economy’. Steiner’s work is often dismissed because he was an occultist, but I have read nothing which tackles these areas which is even a quarter so relevant. They essentially rework Marxism, agreeing with the analysis and disagreeing with the solution. They propose precisely the separation of the political and economic spheres which I think you suggest. Governments should be there to protect the rights of individuals and forbid the excesses, on behalf of the individuals, which economic actuators are prone to.

    On this point, I recently attended a talk by Andrew Gamble, professor of politics at Cambridge, and others at the Hay festival at which he suggested the problem with globalization was to work out ways it could take cognizance of local needs and circumstances. However dangerous it is globalization has incredible advantages, the trick is to mix it with local flexibility.

    Two final points, regarding the splitting up of nations. This can of course lead to tragedy as we saw in Yugoslavia. The other point is that while I by and large agree emphatically with everything you say about the EU, I am not sure Britain belongs in it. Or, put it another way, we have so much history with the USA, that the unpacking of that needs careful handling!

  74. Winfrith was a United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority site near Winfrith Newburgh in Dorset. It covered an area on Bovington Heath to the west of the village of Wool between the A352 road and the London Waterloo to Weymouth railway line.

    It opened in 1958 and was used for nuclear reactor research and development into the 1990s. The last reactor was shut down in 1995, although decommissioning of the site will not finish till 2018.[1] Winfrith housed nine reactors including the experimental Dragon reactor and a large Steam Generating Heavy Water Reactor (SGHWR) feeding the National Grid from 1968 to 1990. It also housed a used nuclear fuel examination facility, with the associated hot cells.

    The Winfrith site was home to a number of experimental reactors including :- Zenith – Zebra – Juno – Nestor – Dimple – Zeus, also impace test facilities.

    The site is now split between the extensive Winfrith Technology Centre and the headquarters of the Dorset Police, whose police helicopter is based there.

    Research Sites Restoration Limited now controls the majority of Winfrith, though parts of the site have been sold off. The head of site at Winfrith is Andrew Staples.
    +++++

    Interesting that it is now the HQ of the Dorset Police., I find that quite ironic.

  75. Craig,

    Most posters seem to agree – out of the frying pan and into the fire if we exchange our God-awful national government for the even more God-awful European one. The EU has no track record of promoting the kind of democratic supra-national project you dream of. It has a great track record of promoting the interests of banksters, big business, corrupt politicians and the big members.

    To be fair, you are proposing a radical re-think of The EU system, neutering the Council of Ministers and the European Commission and giving powers to new EU parliamentary ministers. You are not proposing just to give all the powers to The EU as it currently stands. But if you are dreaming up such a new, perfect EU system, why not just dream up a new, perfect national system? There’s no inherant reason your new European system would be any less corruptible than the national system, and a big reason why it would be more corruptable – it’s size, which makes it more remote and less accountable to the people.

    Again, it will be the same voters being duped and bought off by the same neo-con establishment, just on a larger scale.

    We already have the perfect system for kicking out God-awful governments – everybody does get to vote every 5 years. And still they vote for the same idiots. Until you fix that problem, nothing is going to change.

  76. Great to hear a man honestly speak his mind.
    But you are of course wrong ;p

    “nation states are potentially extremely dangerous entities. They have the power to co-erce, brutalise and even lawfully to kill their own citizens. ” – so can collections of states under some banner of ‘union’ but they are FAR more dangerous, having far more power, far more resources and far more firepower. Does the UNITED STATES or the BRITISH EMPIRE not show you anything?

    Power corrupts Craig. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Micropolitics is a far better solution – small communities/areas having the power to do as THEY see fit. Do you have armies in communities? Methinks not. What’s not good is some tosser hundreds if not thousands of moles away declaring things like how curved your cucumbers can be for the sake of some other dude (probably with the right connections) can make some money while pretending it’s all for the environment.

    I have a strong feeling however, like 9-11, that only your own thoughts and analysis on the matter will have you change your mind here.

  77. lwtc247: “Do you have armies in communities?”

    I have this argument with my sister all the time. We both believe that our power structures should be to a more human scale, but I believe smaller “communities” actually increase borders and so increase the opportunity for conflict, not peace. The logistics of trading or even passing through smaller and smaller communities will become increasingly problematic. And how far do we break these communities down?

    Interesting post though Craig. Some see your concept as one step towards a one-world-government and so can only imagine how horrendous that could be.

  78. Despite a number of laudable observations, notably equating the old Imperial ‘spreading civilised values’ with todays ‘humanitarian intervention’ as more-or-less plausible cover for the real machiavellian power agendas, I too regard Craigs proposals as simply rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic.

    Likewise with most of the comments. Lots of truly insightful and inspiring stuff but, with the exception of Nobody @ 1:39am, all missing the one issue underpinning the entire mess the world has gotten itself into as we hit peak just-about-everything.

    As things stand, the entire global financial system rests on private, largely dynastically-controlled banking interests with the power to simply create money (which we currently equate with value) out of nothing and to require tribute from the rest of humanity for doing so. If anyone, even in their wildest dreams, believes that such power is, or will EVER be, exercised in the interests of humanity, or even the population(s) of respective WTO/BIS member banks, he/she is a fool.

    Not only is control of the system in unaccountable private hands (try researching the real ownership of the US Federal Reserve or the Bank of England for example and see how quickly you hit a brick wall) but it has to have ‘economic growth’ to exist at all. Since the historical correlation between this ‘economic’ growth (ie growth of debt money and its accrued interest) and the volume of resource extraction/use is close to 1.0, it should be pretty damned obvious that perpetual, exponential growth on a finite planet is oxmoronic and its advocacy MORONIC. And yet we are earnestly assured by anyone and everyone in the political establishment TINA – TINA bloody TINA.

    Until those obvious, elephant in the room, issues are addressed – and presently there is an absolute taboo on discussion of them in ANY mainsteam forum – everything else, including Craigs admirable advocacy, is simply rearranging those damn deckchairs I’m afraid.

  79. Craig, I have to agree with Glenn on this one 2.37am. And trawling through the comments would suggest the same. You set this post up as being one of your most contentious and you have by far a majority of supporters. As a Europhile myself I largely agree with it too. My concern is how you set about giving more power to the UN in the face of the worldwide aggression of the United States led NATO- and trans-global disintegration and monopolisation of foreign governments. Under the League of Nations as well as the United Nations the danger has always come when nation states choose to venture without legitimate consent.

    The danger too is that this new Europe could develop into another United States when broken up into smaller entitities. But the biggest danger of all, as Peter Oborne’s documentary shows, comes from Zionist control of all the major economies, though he deals largely with the UK.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0E70BwA7xgU&feature=autoplay&list=PL813E682113845E3E&playnext=1

  80. LeonardYoung

    27 Sep, 2012 - 9:25 am

    @Craig “Seems perfectly consistent to me. I say above that existing nation states should be broken down into smaller nations and/or regions. The UK is a prime candidate for the breakup. Strongly pro-EU views are quite common within the SNP.”

    Fair enough. One of the things that baffles me about anti-EU advocates is that they imagine the waste and corruption they see in Europe is somehow worse than the waste and corruption already in the UK itself. I would also rather be in the EU and just one of many examples in its favour is that European Regulations on consumer contracts, including Landlord and Tenants (which Thatcher skewed hugely in favour of Landlords as an over-reaction to secure tenancies before her taking office)have blown away years of bias against the consumer. This has radically changed the way consumers are protected from unfair contracts and they, along with tenancy agreements, are now simple, straightforward and absent from them is all that legalise rubbish and small print that became a license for abuse.

    The European Court of Human Rights is another thing many British people now take for granted and they now have a court that will deal (albeit cumbersomly) with the judicial iniquities of high handed british courts.

    Shame that Europe has signed up to the Euro extradition treaty and arrest warrant as that blots its copybook. But on balance I agree with Craig: for cultural, legal and social reasons, we are better in than out.

    Blaming the Euro currency for ills that each individual nation has caused through greed and unregulated corporations and banks is misplaced. The UK and other European Nations are approaching bankruptcy whether they were dealing in pounds, lire, pesetas or drachmas, or Euros. You cannot blame a means of exchange for economic malfeasance that was present anyway.

  81. Wikispooks.

    I bow to you!

  82. Stephen Morgan

    27 Sep, 2012 - 9:39 am

    We have peace in our time because the Americans and Soviets occupied Europe and held each other at bay with the threat of nuclear anhilation.

    What’s the point in breaking up India/China/whereever only to have their successor states form Unions which will take all the power of the new nations states anyway? Why don’t you list the USA as a country to be broken up?

    Your way of fixing the Euro might work, but what about the whyness of it? The whyness of the foundation of the EU and the Euro wasn’t peace and prosperity and fluffy rainbows for all, it was explicitly to remove the freedom of national governments to restrict the flows of capital and the protection of labour, see here: http://www.gregpalast.com/the-euro-is-a-big-success-no-kidding/#more-6297

    OF course the right has established something of a monopoly of Western politics, but difficulties in holding Power accountable in a nation will increase exponentially in a continent, especially if that continental government is explicitly set up to restrict democratic action on economic matters and entrench the “free” market.

    You’re bedding down with the international bankers and the destroyers of Yugoslavia with this.

  83. Having a European nation state does not exclude micromanagement, we have been waiting to see the subsidiarity principle applied for years.

    The EU commissioners, appointed industry czars, unelected establishment figures have ruined the EU, EUMK1 failed due to the inherent establishment working behind the lines.

    The decentralisation of power can only happen by the mechanism of a progressive centre, unless we want to disperse with most of the centre and have democratically accountable and determining regions who directly communicate with the EU centre and its various bodies of a Federal state.

    The greatest stumbling block I see for Britain is its financial community, establishment and political elite, hooked on mongering they would add their toxic mix to any cocktail we care to design.

    The prerogative for taking up this cudgel now would be for us to sit down at the table and start designing a future EU that is able to work with a common tax rate and
    a common peace and defence force.

    All of these various ideas have long been on the table, in Europe that is, errr sadly here in Britain EU politics are kept at the inept level of understanding, we get off on bent bananas, don’t we Jimmy, so much easier than to even bother about Europe.

    It is were our history lies, from well before Danelaw to now, we are Europeans in every sense of the word and the sooner our decrapid (not a typo)politicians realise, we can expect them to bark at the idea, the better it would be for Britain democratic development.

    Yes I want PR forced upon us, by means of a fair choice vote, not a one shot ultimatum, but hats just one issue.

    What would be the first step to undertake such amalgamate negotiation process? How about the abandonment of NATO in favour of a EU peace and defence force? withdraw our consent from the neocolonialist’s, amalgamate EU foreign policies, for Europe’s resolve, not nation states.

    Someone mentioned the language barrier, what barrier? most of Europe speaks english and it has all the hall markls of becoming the language of the EU, but that would not destroy or negate the swedish or welsh language, would it?

  84. A great article until you completely ruined it by embracing the essential goal of neo-conservatism, the dismantling of the nation state, especially , of course, the Russian and Chinese nation states. Very disappointed- I could hardly believe what I was reading. The pooling of sovereignty essential to the European project, or the Bolivarista project, is not the same thing as an attack on the nation state. An attack on the nation state is what we are witnessing in Syria and saw in Libya last year. At best, your article is very confused.

  85. We also see attacks on nation states in Afghanistan and Pakistan, breaches of sovereignty on a daily basis, the people of Yemen have a few words to add about his issue as well, colin, so whats wrong anticipating that the Uyghur’s and Tibetan’s will want change to their imposed situations?

    Your crass comparison is wholly false, Libya was attacked by a cabal of NATO forces breaching their own no fly zones with attacking civilians by the thousands, reminiscence of Bomber Harris springs to mind, mindless bombing from great hight with hardly any return fire.

    As for Syria, complain to the MOD, the Quatari’s and the saudi Arabian shamble, they will get their comeuppance soon, I’m sure the Washington Institute of near east studies will see to that, eventually.

  86. Craig.
    The problem with your view (excuse me, I’m not being rude) of Europe is that it leaves no room for conspiracy. What I mean is (and this is extremely relevant to – but not exclusively so – whether one believes in God and Satan etc) that wars and inter-nation strife and subsequent union could well have been designed for purposes that you are alluding to – the creation of a European Super State. Ye olde Hegelian dialectic buy the fiery one.

    And if you’re not religious, I’m sure it’s not too hard to hold that view when one examines the machinations of the ultra rich (dare I mention ‘Rothschild’?) who seem to believe they have a right to acquire power and do so with practical irrelevance to national laws and borders.

    And then on to monetary union…
    You said it’s not feasible without fiscal union, which makes total sense. BUT, and I could be wrong here, it seems to be that rather than the sensible scrapping of monetary union to return to the (more)nationalistic monetary system we had before, It was as though nation will be sacrificed for the sake of monetary union. I guess that would be music to your ears, but to me it’s the wrong way around. That the small, more easily scrappable thing is to dictate what the bigger more problematic thing should do, is in my eyes, very suspicious indeed.

    Your ‘problem’ (again excuse me) is that you can’t see past the concept of the nation other than it being assimilated, but the resultant body is really just a much bigger nation. You should be looking at it from the other way around, perhaps; like how a nation can be broken into, say, ‘nationlets’ – and lets face it, the ability of such ‘nationlets’ to cause harm is pretty small indeed. I hail from Co.Durham, the land of the Prince Bishops, which (kind of, in years past) was semi-autonomous.

    IF monetary and political union did occur, you just know what type of people that is going to attract. And no, it’s not going to be well meaning folf from Plymouth wanting to get a mandate from the people so that they may help the townsfolk of Litomysl.

    I believe the benefits you see from a united Europe are perfectly attainable without a Euro mega-state.

    This ‘we are Europenas’ thing is simply a damn slogan it doesn’t make any sense when you actually start to ponder it’s meaning. I sounds nice and swet to the ears yes, and projects a generally peace loving and inclusive set of beliefs, but it is just a marketing tool. At what point in history did this political/philosophical(if you will) label (as opposed to the trivial geographical label) emerge? Did inhabitants of Europe 300 years ago consider themselves political Europeans with all it’s markting garnish? And at what point today would someone NOT a European? – Can they not have similar beliefs if they were born 5 yards outside Europe – which you will note will still use some ‘them vs. us’ border.

    Sorry to have gone on, but I believe you aren’t thinking so deeply on this. I used to subscribe to the products of European marketing and advertising myself, before I started to look at what would this conglomeration would actually start to mean and how it would go about it.

    Didn’t people applaud the break up of the Soviet Union?

  87. @ Blue_Bear, 27 Sep, 2012 – 9:11 am
    But communities don’t have borders and a few looks at the stranger in town can hardly be considered borders or causing segregation or hostility. I don’t advocate formal borders made my people drawing lines on a map, although I concede it might cause some ‘trickiness’ when it comes to expenditure and so forth, BUT I think we are applying a mindset fed on current geographical occurrence and bureaucracy here. I suspect that’s one big reason why conceptualizing the an empowered community system may be difficult.

    For example, why would goods from A heading to C but passing through B have to have significance to B? One could say B’s roads may get chewed up so it’s only right that A (or perhaps C) helps pay for it, BUT exactly this thing happens in evry day life. People who live on road A drive down road B to get to road C and usually this wouldn’t even register as a problem on the people of B’s radar.

    As you know, we already have communities within our nation, so I’m not really proposing anything particularity new here, just perhaps a version of microtization without the bad parts of the big central governments we have today.

  88. The edifice of the EU is collapsing before our eyes anyway. Wonder how the Spanish and Greek people are feeling and what they are thinking as another round of savage cuts are enforced on them. Think of the Greek woman unable to get her medicine and the millions of young Spanish without a hope of a job.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19733995#

    I see that ZBC refer to ‘austerity’. ‘Spain budget to impose further austerity’ measures

    The unemployment rate in Spain for people between the ages of 17 and 25 is 75%!!

  89. @ John Goss. 27 Sep, 2012 – 9:19 am

    Can a Chinese peasant living in China be a Europhile? If so can you be a Indochinaphile? If you can, why aren’t you, and if you can’t, then why not.

    What do you mean by “Europhile” – What boundaries does your definition have.

    Do you think Europhilicity is some kind of political peak? I’m not asking to be rude, but just to find out what you mean by that term which I admit, I have great difficulty fathoming.

  90. Well named. Liberal Conspiracy.

    “I’m off to campaign for Obomber.” Sunny Hundal. Says it all.
    Bastard.

  91. The terrifying thing is I don’t think this article from Craig is tongue-in-cheek.

    Of course the elite should just be waved through, none of this passports, customs and inconveniences but instead met with bows and scrapes, lets structure things at the macro level so the minority jet-setting few have things just the way they like them, VIPs recognised everywhere as special; a gain for all, but in practice something most have no opportunity to avail themselves due to personal economic circumstances, but they’ll call for it all the same, sold on its hypothetical application to them to, if they could just aspire and breach the exclusiveness. Just over a hundred years ago, anyone could go anywhere without any indentifying scraps of paper at all, money alone as now being all that was necessary to own the world.

    Errant composite states, like the UK containing many nation states, are actually the problem, when they go bad, they go BAD. International organisations like the League of Nations and UN which really had no purpose beyond the joint task of the destruction of the Palestine, now drift aimlessly, causing more harm than doing good. Large parts of the United States seceding from Washington would be a very good thing indeed. De-centralisation.

  92. I bet this thread reaches 3,000 comments before 3rd October.

  93. Commesick Commesuck

    27 Sep, 2012 - 11:53 am

    Europen debt – is it the “Firsters or the Friends” ? So who owns this debt, how much interest do they get annually, does it fall under the inheritance tax net, etc, etc

    http://www.economist.com/comment/1658034#comment-1658034

  94. Craig, I would ask you to consider the issue of perspective – the possibility that what may make sense to you because of where you are writing from, a largely eurosceptic member state, can be interpreted very differently from a more culturally, ideologically, and economically integrated member state.

    The Barroso EEC/EU/EC is a non-, perhaps even anti- democratic vector for neocon ideology. The highly evolved principals and the statutory basis of social cohesion from Bismark(!) to Keynes are being picked apart by successive treaties (with little popular mandate) and are being accelerated by recent supra-national fiscal control measures.

    Add to this the strategem of qualified majority member state voting with weighting by populations, who ironically have no real franchise, and there is a recipe for a return to the most virulent and violent forms of nationalism.

    What you are arguing for, in effect, is a form of regression – a grand paternalistic coalition between the pre-1914 imperial powers of Europe, or a repressive 21st Century Yugoslavia that forcibly melds into one political economy the cultural, religious and ethnic diversity of Serbs, Croats, Slovenes, Bosnians, Montenegrans, Kossovars and others.

    Perhaps your biggest oversight is human nature. Smaller units of governance facilitate greater representation of human diversity.

  95. @ Mary.
    We might also realise that the whole western financial system is clasping the proverbial straw.
    1928’s financial crash will be a tea party in comparison to what the global systems are facing this time.

  96. O/t but a problem that is pan European, its called right wing fascism

    This is English multicultural reality today, two speculative articles with pictures showing the EDL rabble marching, wasting police time and causing them extra work, because they do not want to live side by side with other thinking people.

    Whilst all other stories are taking comments this one is designed as an advertisement only, not that it stops anybody commenting on other threads there. The EDP is rabble rousing, getting people to join the march, imho.
    http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/politics/english_defence_league_sets_date_for_first_march_in_norwich_1_1530716

  97. I remember the European Union was divided over the Iraq war which suggested that a unified EU foreign policy did not exist then and does not exist now.

    Recently we witnessed NATO, an organisation setup to provide western Europe with security guarantees in the face of Eastern bloc threats, was used to strike a peaceful non-aggressive Libya and now a strike on Syria is technically feasible yet again exasperating the violence and promoting civil war.

    This is just one example of US influence over EU foreign policy. There exista many others in the pages of history such as the arms embargo against China retained in place with US influence.

    The US has used ‘black sites’ to torture the innocent in Eastern European countries and also used western european countries, including Britain, for secret rendition.

    America has not I believe ratified the Rome Statute and thus is not a member of The International criminal court. Because of this we note the recent US military courts abuses and of course Israeli war-crimes go unnoticed. The US has also threatened to use its Security Council veto to block renewal of the mandates of several United Nations peacekeeping operations, unless the Security Council agreed to permanently exempt U.S. nationals from the Court’s jurisdiction.

    I cannot see that Craig in his comment has recognised clearly that the EU is in America’s pocket, used and constrained at will and to that effect is NOT an excellent prototype (excepting trade) that can “attack the sovereignty of national states from above.”.

  98. Craig
    You want Globalisation? The United states of Africa, Europe, South/North America, Asia etc because thats is what would happen and that is the “Master plan” that the worlds Elite want. It will bring an end to democracy as all the power would be in the hands of the ever decreasing number of mega banks oil companies and media empires etc. Look to China as the model of what the world would look like.

  99. Hang on, if we form a United States of Europe, what happens to Scottish independence? Well, I don’t believe in Scottish independence, so that wouldn’t be my problem. :)

  100. interesting, what will happen if muslim nations start forming a united state?

  101. Lwtc247 Let’s get one thing straight. I am actually a globophile in that I like people from all over the planet. But I like people (most of them) from Birmingham, where I live, as I do from England, and the UK, and Europe and the world. I never coined the phrase. But I would like to see an integrated Europe. However this might be impossible as my short cartoon explains.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bS1608Afr4

  102. Close to 1,000,000 views in a few weeks – Thank-you

    http://video.cpt12.org/video/2270078138

  103. Abba Mubba, interesting suggestions, what would the pill have to contain to create unity amongst Arab nations and how would this be received by secular nations such as Turkey?

    How would one even start to heal the rift bewtween Shia’s and Sunni’s? any ideas….

  104. Thanks John. My point is, why use the limiting term Europhile? The term automatically carries separatism. For whom is the term reserved? Glad you’re a global citizen. We all should be.

  105. LeonardYoung

    27 Sep, 2012 - 2:49 pm

    Europeans who are not British do not have quite the same suspicions and misgivings as some expressed here. While there are negative views about the Euro currency, or dominance of one nation over the rest, neo-con agendas and the danger of centralised power, there is not much acknowledgement of the huge practical change that many people in Europe now embrace and take for granted – the huge increase in the free flow of people from one EU nation to another, for reasons of employment, commerce, culture and leisure.

    I know people in France, Germany, Holland, Italy and Spain who travel freely and relaxedly between some or all of these countries, and have done so for years. It is as natural to them as it is for us to catch a bus or train from one part of the UK to another to do a days work or visit a friend.

    The UK is singular in still seeing the rest of Europe as entirely “foreign”. We are still uneasy about Europe in a way that other Europeans are not, in a practical and personal sense, and perhaps the Channel is not helping in shaking off our entrenched isolationism.

    I have European friends who are baffled by this. They have all the same suspicions about the motives of power hungry Eurocrats and they are just as cynical, but they have an attitude that is separate from all of that, which is based solely on the benefits they see in being able to cross borders with virtually no hassle, no stress and no restraints, and to engage with other Europeans with whom they have much in common.

    The US and British governments have long pretended that we share a “special relationship”. No intelligent person really believes that. Culturally and socially our natural empathy, despite the trivialised and inane comical cliches about the “stubborn French”, the “humourless Germans” and the “Boring Belgians”, lies with Europe.

    Just as recent wars are not considered waged in our name, but by those who act without our consent, many in Europe are capable of building bridges to other Europeans and in doing so rise above the shennanigans of Eurobanksters and assorted power-hungry Eurocrat ambitions they hate as much as we do.

    Most Europhiles are not so because they desire a centralised dictatorship, but because they wish to bypass the petty squabbles and maneouvrings of Brussels and widen their personal contact with a loose federation of fellow humans on their doorstep. They also wish to convene a European system of jurisprudence which upholds justice for those whose own nation’s justice system has failed them. The European regulations on Consumer Protection and Court of Human Rights are just a start. It is a risk to enlarge the scope of any pan-European organisation but it might be a risk worth taking for the sake of the relative peace and certainly better understanding we now enjoy, despite the flaws, the corruption and the misgivings expressed in many posts here.

  106. @Craig

    I wonder how all those brown-skinned people who don’t speak a European language will feel about having their dreams of true independence snuffed out by a council of uber-powerful rich men.

  107. International community of the disgruntled, disenfranchised and dispossessed, comprising a huge majority everywhere desire a new rebel leader, to further a growing peaceful revolution.
    Previous putative leader-elect has proven an admirer or tool of the very forces the movement seeks to overthrow. Previous applicants and aspirants need not apply.

    Now that even Craig Murray has succumbed to the dark side – for which he may all along have been one of many irons in the fire, denouncement of torture just a stunt to buff up his alternative, outsider credentials, got cold on the fringes wants back in the convivial warm – where can anyone go but underground. Limited hang-out, honeypot here.

    How dare you not have all the answers and please everyone all the time, but this?

  108. City States are also dangerous. The City of London for example ! We can’t change them, but they change us.
    I’m pro Europe and SNP. The EU has begun to worry me tho’.
    It is not democratic either ! Then there is it’s miltant tendencies re:Libya but not Tunisia !
    They accept Israeli treatment of Palestinians in Gaza and the WB without sanctions and give them all the benefits of being a member without any responsibility.
    Yes, you can vote for a party but not a person.No transparency.
    Then we have the 3 unelected Caballeros , Barroso, Van Rompuy and Ashton salivating at the mouth at taxing EU citizens directly.
    The corruption in Brussels and Strasbourg was built in. You have no idea where half the money goes, but watching any live parliament session and you can see the kind of interest that the Euro MP’s have in their decisions.
    The Euro hasn’t done the smaller economies any good. It looked good for as long as they were all high on EU investment.
    Similar to the way that drug dealers work, they pump their money into weak economies until they’re dependent.Now Greece cannot function with a bail out nor without it !
    It has taken Nanny State to a new level ! Greece is boiling and will boil over !
    So , rewind the EU to Maastricht, which was the last time there was serious debate.
    And if they are serious about being democratic then we should also have the possibility of voting in the executive.
    I think your Utopia is possible Craig, but the EU lost its way 10 years ago.
    For the same reasons Scotland want out of the Union, I believe we should keep Barroso’s dreams in check.

  109. … And without international borders, how will jurisdictions be defined? How will laws be unified to take account of different customs, cultures and religions without introducing special forms of discrimination? How will migration be controlled to prevent massive swelling of some economic centres and desertion of others?

    I’m all for Europe trying this experiment on itself, so we can all see how it cannot possibly work for the rest of the world.

  110. @ Mary,
    You say:-
    “We heard most of the above in the Seventies. No borders, no passports, a common currency, no more wars, lands of milk and honey…..and look what happened. I am proud to say that my father went round with a loudspeaker on his car roof speaking against joining the Common Market, as it was called then, when Wilson’se referendum was being held. He had the vision to see what was coming.”
    But – is there really any easy solution.
    1. Can Britain go it alone? ( if so – how so – in terms of markets, currency and relations with an international community that gravitates towards unifications based on blocs of interests?)
    2. Alternatively, if one narrowed to just jurisprudence, then one could say that the UK is able to adjudicate on its own with its own mature jurisprudence, and does not need the EU to accomplish justice.
    3. However, it is the finances, economic and money considerations that drive the process, while the political, jurisprudential, social and cultural dimensions of the EU are the facilitative mechanisms to deal primarily with facilitating long-term economic/financial goals.
    Just one man’s thoughts – but happy to hear what the viable alternatives are.

  111. O/T Is it usual for a Lord Chief Justice to arrange a press conference to hold forth on lengthy cases, for example the length of time it has taken to extradite Abu Hamza ie when one sovereign state succumbs to the over weening power of a larger state.

    ??

    Abu Hamza-style delays source of ‘fury’ – Chief Justice
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19744724

  112. I have European friends who are baffled by this.

    Here’s an example of the effect of the intentional political conflation of ‘Europe’ with the ‘EU’. British friends are actually just as ‘European’ as French, Italian and German friends!

    The implication is that terra incognita starts on the far side of the Channel, where one finds ‘foreign’ people, languages and customs.

  113. Ben Franklin

    27 Sep, 2012 - 3:46 pm

    It’s never flattering when you buy ‘one-size-fits-all’.

  114. I don’t know if it’s still in print, but if you can get it I’d recommend at least a skim read of “The Secret Constitution” by Brian Sedgemore, sometime PPS to Tony Benn. It describes the highly centralised nature of British government – in Sedgemore’s time it was the Cabinet, nowadays it’s even smaller than that – just Tony’s old sofa, apparently. The EU has the problem in spades. Its parliament (our representatives) are even more utterly powerless than those in Westminster, although I expect they are comforted by their soccer-star salaries.

  115. “The European regulations on Consumer Protection and Court of Human Rights are just a start.”

    I hope you’re not making the common mistake of linking the ECHR with the EU. The ECHR is operated by the Council of Europe (CoE) which is a totally different organisation. The CoE pre-dates the EU and already counts Turkey and the Russian Federation amongst it’s 47 members.

    The Euro is to blame at least in part for the economic crisis currently facing the PIIGS nations. The one-size-fits-all interest rate significantly reduced the cost of personal and state borrowing, OK so it was human greed/weakness that led to people taking advantage but if you leave money lying around on a pub table you can’t expect it to be there when you get back. Now monetery union is hindering recovery by preventing national governments from adjusting interest rates and/or devaluing. The bureaucratic nature of the EU is a further hindrence, no rescue plan can be launched until there is consensus and consensus is proving impossible to achieve.

  116. @Cryptonym 27 Sep, 2012 – 2:57 pm

    Are you suggesting what i think you’re suggesting? It could be possible of course but i’m hoping that this irresponsible article is purely down to an element of naivety, misplaced honesty or a certain element of devils advocacy. Or a mixture of all.That’s what i hope at least. Otherwise,like you say: “where can anyone go but underground. Limited hang-out, honeypot here”

  117. Further procrastination:-

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/nils-pratley-on-finance/2012/sep/26/eurozone-crisis-spain-european-stability-mechanism

    Meanwhile Athens and Madrid go up in flames and now France and Germany are feeling the pain.

  118. Ben Franklin

    27 Sep, 2012 - 4:29 pm

    A little OT is this gem from Matt Taibbi, closely allied with Hunter S. Thompson, and not surprisingly affiliated with Rolling Stone, the latter’s headquarters. On our own version of EuroTrash.

    “All of these points of view have merit, I guess, but to me they’re mostly irrelevant. The mere fact that Mitt Romney is even within striking distance of winning this election is an incredible testament to two things: a) the rank incompetence of the Democratic Party, which would have this and every other election for the next half century sewn up if they were a little less money-hungry and tried just a little harder to represent their ostensible constituents, and b) the power of our propaganda machine, which has conditioned all of us to accept the idea that the American population, ideologically speaking, is naturally split down the middle, whereas the real fault lines are a lot closer to the 99-1 ratio the Occupy movement has been talking about since last year.

    Think about it. Four years ago, we had an economic crash that wiped out somewhere between a quarter to 40% of the world’s wealth, depending on whom you believe. The crash was caused by an utterly disgusting and irresponsible class of Wall Street paper-pushers who loaded the world up with deadly leverage in pursuit of their own bonuses, then ran screaming to the government for a handout (and got it) the instant it all went south.

    These people represent everything that ordinarily repels the American voter. They mostly come from privileged backgrounds. Few of them have ever worked with their hands, or done anything like hard work. They not only don’t oppose the offshoring of American manufacturing jobs, they enthusiastically support it, financing the construction of new factories in places like China and India.

    They’ve relentlessly lobbied the government to give themselves tax holidays and shelters, and have succeeded at turning the graduated income tax idea on its head by getting the IRS to accept a sprawling buffet of absurd semantic precepts, like the notions that “capital gains” and “carried interest” are somehow not the same as “income.”

    Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/this-presidential-race-should-never-have-been-this-close-20120925#ixzz27gUjTZb5

  119. Ben Franklin

    27 Sep, 2012 - 4:45 pm

    In connection with my last comment, the US has declared Assange “An enemy of the State”.

    http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/us-calls-assange-enemy-of-state-20120927-26m7s.html

  120. Chris Jones @4:08pm

    I hope not and keep going back to the article looking for rays of light. I certainly hope the new strengthened international law would have retroactive jurisdiction, no clean sheet fresh start for egregious transgressors of existing international laws. But then hidden unelected kleptocrats rule already, democracy a sham, any attempt to determine the people’s will on such weighty matters would merely seek dubious legitimacy for changes already in effect. I can’t criticise CM for laying out his pet scary dystopia, as long as we get to reject it utterly; both this United Kingdom and the European Union in its present form, examples of amalgamation and uniformity gone too far. Micro-nations the only viable way.

  121. Scouse Billy

    27 Sep, 2012 - 5:07 pm

    Cryptonym and Chris Jones – I too have been wondering what exactly has “informed” this post.

  122. @Cryptonym – Nicely put. There is certainly a place for real robust international institutions to protect global civilisation, especially in law,science,biological/WMD’s and pollution control, but these do not have to be at the expense of the sovereignity of nation states,however small or big they may be. These mutual interests can exist together.Same with Europe:Europe is a magnificent continent and it’s people have a great deal in common but forming the EU as an union state, as it almost is, would be playing straight in to the hands of the global banking meglamaniac creeps.

    As Keelan Balderson wrote on his wideshut site “If the Eurozone crisis has taught us anything, it’s that global governance and stringent multilateralism simply doesn’t work. As sovereign independent nations the world is diversified, stable and answerable to the individual. Centralizing power broadens the impact of failure”

  123. If what he is arguing is an attack on all nation states then this post is highly irresponsible and cock eyed.I know Craig is a gentleman but does gentlemeness have to equate to naivety? Seems like, on this at least, Craig has been done like a kipper. What he’s talking about is exactly what the eugenecist English Zionists of the Rhodes Milner group with an unfortunate line in god complexes have been trying to cook up for years.

    =====
    I am saddened to read this essay. It is so wrong I don’t know where to start. It is all NWOspeak. I am gobsmacked, tbh. Craig would do well to have a listen to Alan Watt at http://www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com

    Watt nails Agenda 21, the global warming scam, the EU scam, the money scam, the peak oil scam, the farce of the two party cabal that ensures no democracy what.so.ever

    And all the rest.

    Even David Icke nails it all, read any of his books and you will see, CE needs to read all Icke’s books, then he might, just might, wake up from his happy happy never had it so good idiocy.

  124. Perhaps Craig should come and live in Ireland for a year. His thinking on the EU might change. A lot.

  125. But what would Sir Denis Eton-Hogg say??

  126. Wikispooks.

    I bow to you!

    =====
    Ditto!

  127. I do not know what Keelan Balderson define’s as sovereignty, it is a wholly prehistoric notion, a leftover from the Victorian age, surely.

    With today’s in flagranti use of sovereignty sapping flying objects, of varying description, the meaning of the term either has to be re negotiated by the UN, or go the way so many bad habits have become normal custom, continuous rogue use and slowly creeping acceptance, a la Dershowitz arguments for torture, the end justifies the means.

    I would love to declare UDI here in Norfolk, its only one single road into Suffolk that does not go over a bridge, it would be easy to put water between Britain and Norfolk, a sovereign state.
    Off course we would instantly exchange ambassadors with Scotland and all those countries who are dependent on Norfolks unique brand, the best barley in the world. We are also home to the only english wiskey brewery, so there are other mutualities.
    sadly we would have to requisition Sandringham, but we put that to good use, who wouldn’t want to stay a night there and pay for it. The Corgies can stay.

    We would also have to ask our two US bases to shut up shop and take their nukes home.

    There would be no elections in Norfolk, Government and representation would be by random allocation, strictly gender balanced, elections are far too expensive, open for fraud and as unpopular as the political party’s and the system itself.
    Randomly chosen reps. can reject the paid job, which woukld mean another name is pulled by the computer, national insurance numbers would do, or addresses, very easy to rig up , all the info is on a post office disk. Cheap, fair and representative.

    Jeez, just woke up, did I say this? Something to spin out, a comedy drama perhaps….

  128. ‘The problems of the European Union multiplied when it adopted the philosophy of variable geometry, of inner and outer cores, of fast track and slow track members. For the single currency and single market to succeed, unity must be much tighter.’

    Craig’s solution here really would be spell the end of the ‘European project’. Schengen, and the idea of ‘variable geometry’ that was born with it, has been going since 1985. ‘Variable geometry’, since the mid 80s, has been an essential pre- requisite to both the UK’s continued membership of ‘Europe’ AND to the expansion of the Union from 10 to 27 member states that began with the admission of Spain & Portugal in 1986.

    As for unity in the single market needing to be much tigher, well, on whose terms would that unity be predicated ? If, as is happening now, German terms prevail, it is patently obvious that the Greeks, Spaniards & others reject the view that these terms have any legitimacy. If however the boot was on the other foot, the Germans, Austrians, Dutch & Finns would feel similarly aggrieved. There is simply no ‘democratic’ way of squaring the Euro circle.

    However I’ll do my best to keep Craig in his Euro Reverie/stupor and recommend his attendance at this Euro wankfest at the LSE next month !

    http://www2.lse.ac.uk/publicEvents/events/2012/10/20121008t1830vOT1.aspx

  129. Nevermind LOL.

    The corgis are dying out just like the monarchy.

    Can you believe that good licence fee money was spent on this piffle?

    In Pictures:The Queen’s Corgis
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/in-pictures-19542050

  130. Wikispooks, an inherently unsustainable financial system prepared to gamble against the forthcoming chaotic weather patterns/Governments is bound to fail the environment. But there are some people who are young, very bright and understanding and who are trying to bring about an attitude change.

    Without having sustainable financial systems that work on all levels, and it might have to mean giving up the gambling, is the only way the world will ever get on to a sustainable path.

    http://www.sustainablefinancialmarkets.net/about/

  131. Now that even Craig Murray has succumbed to the dark side – for which he may all along have been one of many irons in the fire, denouncement of torture just a stunt to buff up his alternative, outsider credentials, got cold on the fringes wants back in the convivial warm – where can anyone go but underground. Limited hang-out, honeypot here.

    How dare you not have all the answers and please everyone all the time, but this?

    =====
    Lol, well I did call Craig a Machiavellian shill on the first French Massacre thread. Once a diplomat, always a diplomat, once a spook, always a spook, the old school tie rules, and Wikispook’s blindingly obvious point is not even on the radar. Unless that point is accepted, all you will is act as SAYANIM for the dynastic banking plutocrats. Round them all up and put them on Devil’s Island.

    We need a system reset without them, a reboot and a new OS!

  132. Very interesting post and some excellent replies.Nobody,Nevermind,Mark Golding,Vronsky, Ben Franklyn,Mary.You’ve stirred it up again Craig,Congrats.Afraid I favour fear of the psychos and their amoral lunacy that will always prevent sane humane governance whichever way you slice or mix the cake.

  133. “There would be no elections in Norfolk, Government and representation would be by random allocation, strictly gender balanced…”

    I have a better plan:

    I would not rule out the chance to preserve a nucleus of human specimens. It would be quite easy…heh, heh…at the bottom of ah…some of our deeper mineshafts. Euro-bureaucracy would never penetrate a mine some thousands of feet deep, and in a matter of weeks, sufficient improvements in dwelling space could easily be provided.

    As for length of time: well let’s see now ah…cobalt thorium G….Radioactive halflife of uh,…I would think that uh… possibly uh… one hundred years.

    It would not be difficult Mein Fuhrer! Nuclear reactors could, heh…I’m sorry, Mr. Murray. Nuclear reactors could provide power almost indefinitely. Greenhouses could maintain plant life. Animals could be bred and slaughtered. A quick survey would have to be made of all the available mine sites in the country, but I would guess that dwelling space for several hundred thousands of our people could easily be provided.

    And as for who stays up and…who goes down: well, that would not be necessary, Mr. President. It could easily be accomplished with a computer. And a computer could be set and programmed to accept factors from youth, health, sexual fertility, intelligence, and a cross-section of necessary skills. Of course, it would be absolutely vital that our top Guardian readers be included to foster and impart the required principles of leadership and tradition. Naturally, they would breed prodigiously, eh? There would be much time, and little to do. Ha, ha. But ah, with the proper breeding techniques and a ratio of say, ten feminists to each mangina, I would guess that they could then work their way back to the present Gross National Product within say, twenty million years.

    You might think: wouldn’t this nucleus of survivors be so grief-stricken and anguished that they’d, well, envy the dead and not want to go on living? No, sir…excuse me…When they go down into the mine, everyone would still be alive. There would be no shocking memories of heterosexuality, and the prevailing emotion will be one of nostalgia for those left behind, combined with a spirit of bold curiosity for the adventure ahead! [involuntarily gives the Marxist salute and forces it down with his other hand]Ahhh!

    I mentioned the ratio of ten feminists to each mangina. Now, this may necessitate the abandonment of the so-called monogamous sexual relationship, I mean, as far as heterosexuals are concerned. And regrettably, yes, this would be so. But it is, you know, a sacrifice required for the future of the human race. I hasten to add that since each mangina will be required to do prodigious…service along these lines, the feminists will have to be selected for their sexual characteristics which will have to be of an unnaturally stimulating nature.

    [stands from wheelchair] Mein Führer, I can TROLL!

  134. :} Wasn’t Peter Sellers talented? Excuse my name dropping, I met him once at some event. He was married to Britt Ekland at the time.

  135. Oh dear Mary, you mentioned Britt Ekland of your own volition… Prepare the Wicker Man !

  136. :)

  137. Well Craig, in your post a few days prior to this one, you said we weren’t going to like it. And you were right…

    I wonder if you wrote this post with a chortle in mind and a chuckle on lips, ‘cos it ain’t anything like you’ve written before…

    or

    Are you practicing the thought/reaction control that we are subjected to by our Governments every day?

  138. Continuing the Sellers theme, here is Bibi with his drawing of a ‘bermmb’ which I think is the phonetic way Sellers used to pronounce the word when in Clouseau mode.

    ‘Mr Netanyahu showed a drawing illustrating Iran’s alleged progress towards nuclear weapons.’

    Laughable and given top billing on the BBC website.

    Israel’s Netanyahu urges ‘red line’ over nuclear Iran
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19746994

  139. So the real Craig Murray finally reveals itself, but doesn’t seem to realise it is the exact opposite of what it thinks it is.

    I guess I should have known 4 years ago, from its 9/11 denial.

    Welcome back into the house of Satan.

    I feel sick.

    Tony

  140. Warning. Cast of first of this season’s Question Time on BBC1 now. First question was
    Will there be riots here when the full effect of the cuts become apparent.

    Jacob Rees Mogg
    Danny Alexander
    Harriet Harman
    Kirstie Allsop
    Steve Coogan

    AVOID.

  141. @Kempe ““The European regulations on Consumer Protection and Court of Human Rights are just a start.”

    “I hope you’re not making the common mistake of linking the ECHR with the EU. The ECHR is operated by the Council of Europe (CoE) which is a totally different organisation. The CoE pre-dates the EU and already counts Turkey and the Russian Federation amongst it’s 47 members.”

    Point taken. But the EU consumer protection regulations are not trivial and indeed have swept away decades of British injustice fostered by corporations exploiting ordinary people who were getting fed up to the back teeth of being screwed by small print and legal chicanery. I think that is something of value.

    Some of the posts above give the impression this might as well be a thread on a UKIP forum, or perhaps posts at the foot of a Daily Mail article; somewhat out-of-character with the usual flavour here.

  142. “Warning. Cast of first of this season’s Question Time on BBC1 now. First question was
    Will there be riots here when the full effect of the cuts become apparent.

    Kirstie Allsop”

    Ugh!! The whore of property hype and ramping makes a re-appearance after she should have eaten her hat (for that’s what she promised if house prices went down). The housing bubble was the single most significant driver of our Europe wide recession, but she’s still around promoting it together with her partner “Phil” whose ludicrous company Garrington went belly up after house finders found his ridiculous fees and further property hyping too much to bear.

    Just shows to what depths the BBC (and sadly Channel 4) have been complicit in promoting the “get-something-for-nothing” culture with their multiple property porn programmes which never once looked back and saw that inflating static assets rather than actually working for a living bankrupted this and half the nations in Europe.

  143. Mary,
    The ziofuckwit standing there and delivering his fairytale to a bunch of infants preschoolers needs that kind of graphics. Reminds of the 190donkey films of anarchists and Charlie Chaplin throwing their bombs after lighting them!!!

    It is pitiful to see this wanker is even allowed to stand on that rostrum, uncivilised ziofuckwits have no place among civilised nations, but seeing as UN is still in US, what can be expected from it?

  144. “Small is beautiful. The problem is not nations, but big nations – big economic entities that can throw their weight about – and if they can they will. If you want to see what a united and stateless Europe would look like and wonder how it would behave, look at the United States of America.

    “The more remote the political centre is from the people the less accountable it becomes.”

    I’m with Vronsky. Craig’s post appalls me. I campaigned against the ‘EEC’ in 1972 and have never changed my mind. If Craig can drag himself away from the UK perspective for two minutes, does he seriously think that Ireland would be better off in a politically united EU?

    “I feel sick”

    Me too, Tony.

  145. 21st scent tree

    28 Sep, 2012 - 12:06 am

    Did anyone else watch Question Time?
    I am 95% sure that Harriet Harman referred to our ex minister-for-the-Murdochs as Jeremy Cunt.
    Please let it be true. Can anyone confirm?

  146. So the real Craig Murray finally reveals itself, but doesn’t seem to realise it is the exact opposite of what it thinks it is.

    I guess I should have known 4 years ago, from its 9/11 denial.

    Welcome back into the house of Satan.

    I feel sick.

    Tony

    =====
    Gotta be a few fatties short of a sporran to swallow and embellish the 911 hoodwink.

    And this is supposed to be a serious blog???

    Hilarious :)

  147. Warning. Cast of first of this season’s Question Time on BBC1 now. First question was
    Will there be riots here when the full effect of the cuts become apparent.

    Jacob Rees Mogg
    Danny Alexander
    Harriet Harman
    Kirstie Allsop
    Steve Coogan

    AVOID.

    =====
    Oh I like to watch the enemy.

    Lamp posts.

    Baling wire.

  148. “And this is supposed to be a serious blog???”

    Breivik?

  149. 21st scent tree

    28 Sep, 2012 - 12:16 am

    I’ve just watched it again onBBC iPlayer. She really does call him Jeremy Cunt.
    Move the slider to 23.09.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/tv/bbc_one_london/watchlive

    apologies for my childish glee and off-topicocity

  150. “And this is supposed to be a serious blog???”

    Breivik?

    =====
    Haven’t read that one Ben.

    3rd most influential blog, eh?

    I’d just call it 3rd rate idiocy.

    This country is HURTING and the cuts haven’t even started in earnest yet.

    But I know the score.

    The army war college are predicting riots in the UK, certainly by 2015, and ongoing to 2030 and beyond. Similar in the USA. Do your own research.

    A dystopian future awaits, and we have barely begun yet in the UK.

  151. empty vessels.

    nation states are not the only way of organising things. in human history, for most of the world, they’ve only been around for perhaps a millenium. Some parts of the world much less. That’s not to say that there weren’t territories, of course, but those territories tended to be much more organic. They were shaped by geography more than by politics, and fluctuated according to the strengths and sizes of the groups that held them.

    It seems to me that Craig Murray is attempting to outline two things.

    1. To establish a system that devolves power.

    2. To increase the size of territory in which that system exists.

    It should find common ground with anarchists, with socialists. with anyone who’s interested in creating a more just society.

    Nation states are complex entities. They require large amounts of time and energy to maintain. As that complextity increases, so do the maintainance costs. This process is subject to the laws of diminishing returns. Anthropologist and historian, Joseph Tainter has done some excellent work in this area. If you’re interested, look his work up.

    Energy is finite. The sources we use to maintain the current level of complexity are non-renewable. At some point in the foreseeable future, we will have less available than we do now, and will have to adopt a more sustainable model of running our affairs, regardless of the pros and cons of the current system.

    This simpler, less complex form seems likely to use smaller social units. For example, the current federation of states that comprise the USA may well fragment into individual states.

    So on the face of it, replacing “France” for example, with “Europe” seems like a bad thing.

    But that’s not the story here.

    ” From the bottom, as societies internationalise the idea of an ethnic basis to state boundaries becomes anachronistic. Advantage should be taken of this trend to deconstruct states from within, breaking them down into a combination of smaller states and/or of powerful autonomous regional polities. We need to see many more states split up, especially among the westen democracies but also very definitely Russia, China, India and states in their orbit. ”

    So smaller blocks (and blocs) but each obliged to live up to certain moral/ethical guidelines by an international body democratically selected from those unit elements.

    What not to like?

    Such a system has an inbuilt resiliance. If one small unit should turn rogue, it can do far less damage to the whole than some political monolith like the current big players.

  152. These deliberations are way to complicated for me.

    ♩♫ ♬♪ A Public Interlude of Mike Scott:

    I pictured a rainbow
    You held it in your hands
    I had flashes
    But you saw the plan
    I wandered out in the world for years
    While you just stayed in your room.

    You were there in the turnstiles
    With the wind at your heels
    You stretched for the stars
    And you know how it feels
    To reach too high
    Too far
    Too soon.

    I spoke about wings
    You just flew
    I wondered I guessed and I tried
    You just knew.

    I saw the crescent
    You saw the whole of the moon

    -carry on

  153. Tree;

    I need a license to watch TeeVee? Holy Moly.

  154. 21stScent – I listened with my eyes closed and didnt heard the huh’ not kuh. It was too much to expect from that bat.

  155. Did I hear someone calling for good blogs?

    Marcy Wheeler is dissident, and fact-based. Worthy of inclusion on your blogroll, Craig.

    http://www.emptywheel.net/

  156. 21st scent tree

    28 Sep, 2012 - 12:53 am

    Ben
    I license you.

    Crab
    It’s a Kuh not huh. I’ve listened with my eyes open, eyes closed and standing on one leg. Harriet Harman finally got it right.

  157. “Harriet Harman finally got it right.”

    Could have been a slip. Like John Cleese – “don’t mention the war”.

  158. The hypothesis that EUSSR is bound to be a fountain of virtues (as compared to conventional nation-states) would be falsified if there existed an example of a nation state that possesses said virtues without being member of EUSSR or another such political union. A state that is ethnically diverse and yet cohesive, is densely populated, has no hydrocarbons of its own, is land-locked and yet is not aggressive. Of course it would also have to be successful economically, say ranked No 1 by WEF… http://www3.weforum.org/docs/CSI/2012-13/GCR_Rankings_2012-13.pdf

    A country whose ethnic minorities are not dreaming of seceding, DESPITE being free to do just that – all it takes is an Initiative. Free to travel, live and work within the EU and yet, strangely, they did not have to trade in their old-fashioned values of national sovereignty to enjoy these rights, instead preferring the bi-lateral agreement. Could this really be?

    What sets CH and EU apart is democracy / people-rule / popular sovereignty / citizen law-making – utter lack of it in the latter, comparative abundance of it in the former. Trouble is, in the intellectual supremacist view, the people cannot be trusted to make the right call. How could they, 50% of them have IQ below average… 100 is good, but 120 is very superior. There is a contradiction here somewhere, the empirical data do not seem to fit the theory. But never mind, press on because the end justifies the means ;-)

    Me, too, Tony.

  159. Need another article on this. Two columns – Pros and Cons of the EU from the point of view of freedom and democracy.

    Stick to the facts:
    Things the EU has done – good and bad
    Policies – helpful and unhelpful
    Departments / bodies – effective or not
    People in positions of authority – goodies & badies

    Can we even have something interactive where everybody can post ideas in the relevant categories???

  160. Scouse Billy

    28 Sep, 2012 - 2:12 am

    And me, Tony

    “The documentary released last fall, Thrive: What on Earth Will it Take?, takes an in depth look at the problems of the current system where a few elite bankers have managed to gain control of the planet while nearly bringing about its destruction at the same time.”

    It doesn’t exactly take the view of Mr Murray regarding the EU.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEV5AFFcZ-s

  161. JimmyGiro
    27 Sep, 2012 – 11:30 am
    I bet this thread reaches 3,000 comments before 3rd October.

    =====
    I bet it does not.

    Rats leaving a sinking ship. GOOD RATS!!!

    160 replies so far.

    Disaster.

  162. The question of pragmatism is one thing – correct, supra-national entities are better poised to compete, or thrive, in a globalised world, more and more politcially dominated by empires (USA, Russia, China). That is, so as to say, quite well known.
    .
    On the other hand, you can’t disregard the sense of identity of individuals who form a nation. Englishmen have always been “holidaying in Europe”, which naturally means outside UK. Europe is not “here”: it is always *there*. On the level both geography and collective subconsciousness, Great Britain is a separate country, not a part of some large conglomerate.
    .
    Being from “Europe proper”, it took a while before I got to understand this somewhat unexpected view.
    .
    As the Soviet experiment has shown – the one of replacing the traditional coentury-old ethnic identity of all inhabitants with a new Soviet identity – identity manipulation hardly ever succeeds on a larger scale.
    .
    Mixing “democracy”, etc., into all this is hardly understandable to me, sorry. Democracy is just a convenient way of managing a territory+population and one of safest methods for middle- and high-income societies (democracy will never work efficiently in low-income societies due to inherently high cost of a democractic system).
    .
    Similarly, references to the military are very unclear for me. Even if Europe is united, it will have its own armed forces and, in all probability, will conduct the same ruthless policy of exploitation as it has been used to doing for centuries. The Caucasian race has been responsible for the bulk of atrocities in recorded history and I don’t buy that this has changed.
    .
    All in all, I see no linkage between a nation state, a state’s military policy towards third countries (esp. resource-rich countries), and the political system currently in place or “values”. There are no values in politics – they have never been, at least among the Caucasians. Sorry for not being very PC today.

  163. No ships sailing, sign at Dover reads:

    Fog in Channel. Continent isolated.

  164. In haste, gonna have to read CM’s article and all the comments on this again.

    But what I think Craig is getting at is a Europe of Communities, rather than a European Community.

    I have to admit to some fuzzy thinking on this myself, for I am a committed internationalist, and pro-European, whilst also supporting the idea of independence for Scotland, Wales, Cornwall even (why not?) Brittany (all of it), re-uniting the Basque country,and so on.

    And I have to confess to some perplexity about the Irish, fighting so hard for so long to rid themselves of the Brits, only to sign up so fully to the slavery of the EU!

    BTW @ Vronsky
    27 Sep, 2012 – 7:06 am Love the quote from Walter Scott! Classic.

  165. @ kashmiri.

    Democracy all told is a Greek Tradegy.

    Read between the lines.

    Craigs post is a refreshing approach.
    But must liberals sit on the fence on the questiin of censorship.

    If its not good for me or mine I do not want it around.

  166. Debbie(aussie)

    28 Sep, 2012 - 7:08 am

    (Just wanted to write this before i read comments, so apologies if I am repeating)
    When trying to talk about this kind of thing,”One World Govt” conspiracies always come to mind. But I too loath the way nationalism is used to make us see the ‘other’ as alien. It appears that we as a society are going backwards, fast, into another dark ages. With religion and war being the central way of life(although as of yet we aren’t doing that much of the dying). It appears that powers that be have us over a barrel and win, whether we change or not.

  167. @Dr Strangejimmy
    27 Sep, 2012 – 7:49 pm

    A great moment in cinema, Peter Sellers at his best. Note the near loss of composure by the Soviet ambassador at the start.

  168. Nations are what we make them; it isn’t right or wrong in itself, but the choices in the bureaucracy, and its laws, that determine the stability and integrity of that system.

    “Democracy sits upon a stool of three mutually opposed legs: freedom, equality in law, and Justice; whereby each depends on the others for integrity.

    Utopians seek perfection, which is the enemy of the good, by trying to force the natural dynamism of democracy to fit their own manifestos; whether they seek more freedom, or more equality, or more Justice, or combinations thereof, they invariably must do so at the expense of one or both of the other democratic complements. Hence under utopian ideals, democracy risks losing its stability, for any position other than the natural equilibrium position, is unstable relative to it. Utopian systems have a nasty tendency to prop up their induced instabilities, by increasing laws in both number and severity, which in turn compromises both Justice and freedom, thence strains the natural dynamism of democracy until it becomes stagnant.”

    http://jimmygiro.blogspot.co.uk/2009/11/are-we-safe-or-are-we-sorry.html

  169. Craig’s post seems contradictory to me. While well analysing the problems with ‘nation’ states he then advocates a super state.

    You can take a man out of the establishment but it takes longer to take the establishment out of the man.

  170. @ jimmy.

    Good work.

    honesty is it learned or inherent because I am working hard to achieve mine.
    Capital H….

  171. No Harman did not say *unt. One of the presenters on Radio 4 Today did that and went down in history.

    {http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01n2wrd/Question_Time_27_09_2012/}

    Read The Green Benches to see what *unt, the replacement for Lansley, is up to with the NHS and the commissioning bodies on health rationing being put in place. The public have not got a clue about what is happening to OUR NHS.
    http://eoin-clarke.blogspot.co.uk/ You have to go to ‘older posts’ to see previous entries.

    8,000 word report concludes that the BBC “Betrayed the NHS”

    Mitt Romney’s mega corporation funds the Tory Party & in return they gain a NHS Contract

    9 government politicians who profit as a result of Virgin, Serco & Circle’s role in the great NHS carve up.

    5 Virgin Care moguls gift the Tory Party £1,000,000. In return, they win a NHS contract to profit from sick children in Devon.

    4 world hedge fund moguls donate £1,410,928 to the Tory Party. In return, they now run the UK’s first privatised NHS Hospital

    These 10 people killed themselves because of government cuts to their benefits. #RIP

    Serco Shareholders have donated £1m to the Tories & Lib Dems as 5 government politicians benefit directly.

    10 ways the NHS has got worse in 2012.

    Virgin Care limit the number of “Free” physiotherapy treatments for NHS patients to just 5 sessions

    et al

  172. @LeonardYoung 27 Sep, 2012 – 11:16 pm

    I totally agree with your words on Allsop. She and that twit Phil certainly fuelled the property boom and bear a lot of the responsibility for encouraging people to get into debt. Many now have negative equity as it is euphemistically called.

    Her reward was to get commissioned by Cameron to act as his housing adviser.

    From a Torygraph article by Jan Moir Dec 2007. Note that Kirstie is ‘genuinely kind’. Her husband is a property developer incidentally. The kids are called Bay and Oscar! I bet they dwell in Notting Hill.

    ‘Meanwhile, many fireside entrepreneurs, no doubt egged on by the kind of property porn programmes fronted by Kirstie Allsopp and her sister-in-crime, Sarah Beeny, are encouraged to put together a buy-to-let property portfolio.

    Why not? Rent it out. Do it up and sell it for a profit. What could possibly go wrong?

    Well, as thousands will find out when cheap mortgages run out next year, the days of the buy-to-let property deal as a one-way ticket to the pot at the end of the rainbow are well and truly over.

    Can we blame it all on Kirstie Allsopp? Well, it would not be entirely fatuous to suggest that she, and others like her, have a case to answer. Allsopp, a genuinely kind person who has recently been co-opted by the Tory party to give advice on house-buying, does not specialise in the gritty reality of cheap housing rented out to even cheaper clients; those who have no intention of fulfilling their obligations as tenants.

    Last year, she was still encouraging pundits to seek buy-to-let properties in Oxford, where a decent rabbit hutch costs a king’s ransom. Financial troubles begin when tenants stop paying their rents and arrears mount up, which is the kind of dark side television pundits like to wash over with a tin of magnolia eggshell.’

    She and ‘Phil’ have their own production company Raise the Roof Productions who produce, amongst their other series, the tosh where Kirstie farts around the ‘cuntry’ making useless bits of tat to ‘decorate’ her home(s). In 2009, you could rent her Devon second home for £2000 a week.

    http://kirstieandphil.com/

  173. @nevermind
    “There would be no elections in Norfolk”

    I’ve been an advocate of Demarchy for ages. And I think you should begin to take your Norfolk project seriously.

  174. O/T (or maybe not)

    Labour up here are committing suicide. Que pasa?

  175. So, which of the blogs so far were we guaranteed to dislike? They all seem typical to me.

  176. PS. Oh I get it, we weren’t supposed to like THIS one. :)

    You’re right. I don’t like the idea of a USE, or at least I’m doubtful, mainly because of the economio crises in Greece, POrtugal, Ireland, and maybe other members of the EU, plus the irevocability of such a step.

  177. @ Vronsky, Ahh demarchy, could this be a way to select EU Commissioners? ensure a body that’s without corruption? Do that every four years and rule out re-selection and you would have fixed the biggest mistake, at the centre.

    The EU’s agricultural budget was a charter for fraud, still is, the lack of reform has stifled the EU, its seen to be rotten and nobody is fixing it, no mechanism to redress means stagnancy of progress.

    Just as Labour is clasping at straws with the national deficit, the SNP, behind the lines, will have to make similar decisions, living unsustainable just does not work out and as we said before, the nation state is very energy/cash intensive, keeping large bodies of civil servants on top pensions and regular wages.

    Thanks for spinning the yarn Jimmy, enjoyed your vision, rather than the Fuehrer bit, what would be so wrong with a/the right benign dictator in the EU, knocking head together, sacking the commission, demanding unity from squabbling MEP’s party politician who have been chosen for toeing the line, demanding that they find a united majority on every second issue that comes to Parliament?

  178. http://www.counter-currents.com/2012/09/notes-on-populism-elitism-and-democracy/#more-31014

    Put humanty in place insead of white and keep aspects of culture and creed
    Aswell as nurture for all and sensible policies on behaviour.
    We mightsort out the mess.

    Welfare society for all. But with a sensible approach.

  179. Why should an empire be better than a state? Was the German Reich any better than Prussia? Why then should the EU be any better than the UK?

  180. The larger the unit of land/population, the larger the hegemonous control.

    Remember we the people (farmed for tax) are the lowest rank.

    Above us the politicians.

    Above them the corporations.

    Above them their sources of finance, the banks.

    Above them, the central banks.

    Above them the BIS and the few families controlling it and everything below.

    What’s the deal, Craig?

  181. … and speaking of the sovereignty of nation states…

    And the UK’s posture that “there is nothing in UK law which recognises diplomatic asylum” / “we are under a legal obligation to extradite Assange” [to face QUESTIONING in a case where there is forensic evidence that one complainant has faked evidence to back her allegations] collapses:

    http://rt.com/news/ecuador-uk-talks-assange-162/

    No wonder the BBC and other UK mainstream outlets are flooded with the ‘story’ of Amnesty calls for Sweden to provide [basically worthless] guarantees against onward extradition.

    Diversionary tactic? Whoops, our hogwash has been exposed – Quick! Get that spin mojo rolling…

  182. Bad as it is, national sovereignty is about the only check on excessive private wealth. The future seems heading towards cliques of the super-rich living in tax havens whilst owning the assets of the whole world. With the less well off having to pay tribute to them in the form of work/rent of those assets etc and to live or starve as they deem it.

  183. O/T Labour wins the Clenchwarton byelection in West Norfolk. The Independent had to drop out as he made some serious mistakes on his nomination form, he would have won and will win next year.

    The EDP is slow, they, as yet have got nothing on it.
    http://www.lynnnews.co.uk/news/latest-news/by-election-labour-wins-clenchwarton-seat-in-landslide-victory-1-4313561

  184. The utopianism inherent in this post by Craig sadly necessitates a good dousing in the cold water of reality.Warner of the Torygraph provides it here-

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/jeremy-warner/9572359/Spain-must-leave-the-euro.html

    The borderless world of global citizenship & solidarity which Craig dreams of cannot cope with two things- unsustainable population movements of poor people in poor countries moving to richer countries, and rich people in poor countries moving their capital to ‘safe haven’s’ in rich countries(or, even worse, tax havens). The latter problem is likely to do for the Euro in the near future.

  185. Craig,

    I have to disagree with you about the Euro. Yes, it cannot work without a fiscal union but that is not sufficient.

    The problems that the Euro faces are the result of capital flows. A fiscal union will not change that.

    Regards,

    James C

  186. @Debbie(aussie) 28 Sep, 2012 – 7:08 am

    “When trying to talk about this kind of thing,”One World Govt” conspiracies always come to mind. But I too loath the way nationalism is used to make us see the ‘other’ as alien. It appears that we as a society are going backwards, fast, into another dark ages. With religion and war being the central way of life(although as of yet we aren’t doing that much of the dying). It appears that powers that be have us over a barrel and win, whether we change or not”

    …Nationalism is a highly broad term. A nation can mean many things to many people-it can be used as a force for good and a force for bad (the British/English elite imperialistic nationalism we are seeing now in the middle east being a prime example of the worst kind)I prefer the term patriotism myself, and of course, under a republican model a nation can be as patriotic as it wants whilst protecting the interest of all. Sovereignity and patriotism are one of the last stumbling blocks against the blunderbus arbitary super states and one world government.

  187. Вронский,

    I am broadly with you re: demarchy. It would certainly solve the problem of adverse selection – various scum floating to the top of hierarchical structures in politics.

    It would not address the other problem – that of corruptibility of human nature in general. It is generally acknowledged in psychology now I think, that any feelings of guilt are heavily modified by the perceived risk of one’s ‘wrong-doing’ being discovered by one’s peers. Thus to stop the rot quickly setting in, accountability is needed. Not the phoney kind (‘transparency’) but actual strong feedback mechanisms e.g. citizens being able to get involved in legislating directly, should they feel sufficiently misrepresented by the elected / randomly selected legislature.

  188. I am trying to get my head around destruction of the nation state, and replacing it with more locally distributed constructs. This notion would be an acceptable proposition if it were not for the Elephant in the room US empire bent on domination of the planet forever and a day after.

    The destruction of the nation state could have been only probable if the too big to fail were readily rendered to the consequences of their failures, that would in turn have encouraged new firms setting up to take their place and or new concepts and arrangements to become viable.

    Given that the too big to fail did not face their own failures and their failures were distributed on the “plebs” and on the international scale, as it is evident in Greece, Spain, Portugal, soon to be joined by Italy and others.

    The US plutocrats off loaded their losses on the planet whilst the US government ensured the free flow of wealth from around the planet into the US was spent on oppression constructs with the aim of waging wars of destruction around the planet to keep the various actors in check and at bay.

    Therefore the destruction of nation states at this stage would suit the project for new American century just fine, because the smaller entities emergent post such redistribution of power would be leaving the newly formed organisational units at much more weakened defensive capabilities that would in effect aid the much diminished US military prowess, with further reductions in the research and development budgets for the future in wielding the oppression constructs US has been so adept at for the duration of the twentieth century and so far in the twenty first century.

    That is for starters

  189. @Craig – Nice one, but I think to some extent you still suffer from the western ideological problem (which dates to functionalist sociology and further back) of imagining a deep deep separation between politics and economics.

    I realise you know ‘the media’ are under control by the same people who have the ‘government’ under control, but the way you talk suggests that capitalist democracy ‘went wrong’ somewhere along the line – as though in some kind of ‘essence’ it’s really great.

    I say this to introduce an observation that very few people have the nous to get.

    This is that developments in parliamentary democracy (in a UK context, not just since 1918 but beginning at least as far back as 1832), have in fact been media-driven. In the past, extensions of the franchise happened in the direction of social castes who’d become markets for expensive journals. Then it was the turn of groups who bought cheaper journals, and then eventually newspapers. Today it’s all TV, and the process is no longer one of extensification but of intensification.

    It’s all public relations and celebrities. David Cameron and Ed Miliband have no fucking power whatsoever. It’s only idiots who concentrate on what these stupid actors say, as if they really mean it. Changes in ‘front-of-stage’ ‘government’ at election time should only be considered in terms of public relations. In almost all cases, that’s the most critical and radical attitude to take.

    The development of capitalism’s media has of course always been technology-driven.

    In short, parliamentary democracy relies on the bourgeoisie’s use of its mass media. It is a use of those media.

    Don’t see crap in its own terms. It’ll suck you in.

    Back in the late 1980s and early 1990s when it was obvious to many that capitalism in the west had won a big victory, and that things were about to slide downwards with force, we wondered in what ways capitalism could get ‘more so’.

    We may have predicted the growing predominance of ‘fuck you, I’m all right, Jack’, but few if any of us predicted that the mainstay of western culture, namely the psychopathic condition of being shat on but thinking you’re ‘free’, would get more so. But that’s exactly what has happened.

    So…your article here has a good first part, but as for the second part…really! What do you want? More of a grip on what’s going on in society? Or more speaking gigs?

    I respectfully suggest you concentrate on getting more of a grip. You are getting carried away. The idea of having some Nu Parliamentary Democracy, whether over a bigger area (western and central Europe) or a smaller one (Scotland) ain’t the solution to anything.

    PS I support the UK joining the euro too. That way, I won’t get so ripped off by currency-exchange profiteers when I go to the eurozone.

    PPS It’s always good for a laugh, how the British media report the valiant, upright British PM marching into European meetings to bang the excitable, incompetent ‘continentals” heads together to show them how things should really be done. As if average personal debt in Britain isn’t far higher than anywhere else (perhaps excepting Ireland) in the EU! As if Britain isn’t far more finance-dominated than various countries such as France and Germany where at least people still make stuff, albeit not much.

    The racism and attitude of being born superior is of course genuine, but the question to ask is WHO IS DOING WHAT TO WHOM. It’s basically a STRUT for the HOME MARKET ONLY.

  190. You have to understand what a nation-state actually is.

    It’s a BRAND!

    And a Eurostate would just be a kind of a nation-state.

    The basic premise of a nation-state is that the exploiters and the exploited are all in the same boat. That’s what needs to be attacked. The nation-state is a lie by exploiters.

    Why should I want to be on the same side as rich scumbags based in Britain, and against people in the same position as myself (which is the same position as the majority of the world’s population) in say France or Germany? “NO REASON”, I hear you say? Correct!

    Now replace “Britain” with “Europe”, and “France or Germany” with “China or India”, and ask the question again. The answer should still be “NO REASON”.

  191. O/T more from Helena Cobban on Syria:

    http://justworldnews.org/archives/004285.html#more

  192. Why is sex so highly measured in society?

    If we are to move on as a species this issue needs to be addressed?

  193. I think that Craig Murray’s ideas are similar to the visionary Jacques Delor.

  194. Confessions of a Real English Person

    We can hardly speak a word of Spanish – a bit of French – my wife can speak a bit of German…

    But she said you have got to come home with me…

    So we are. She just asked us so nicely.

    We have just got our new passports. We wouldn’t have bothered renewing them otherwise.

    She is the best Diplomat, we have ever met.

    We both love this Spanish girl to bits.

    Her family and her friend’s small businesses in Spain have been completely devastated by the EU..

    But still she says come home with me.

    What’s your new job Craig??

    Tony

  195. Scouse Billy

    28 Sep, 2012 - 6:37 pm

    Maybe he’s joined Common Purpose, Tony – he seems to be embracing commuitarianism.

  196. Scouse Billy,

    They tried it on me too. The technique is quite simple.You get a job, and work really hard, and shine – so you get promoted into management…

    And they say – you need to go on these Leadership courses – Residential just for a week – how can you say No – you might get an even better job if you go – So you go – and get an even better job…

    All Psychology based – run / or originated from The Tavistock Intitute – and your Senior Management Mates Go on Them Too…

    Presentation Techniques, Behaviour Analysis and Behaviour MODIFICATION – the lot – not you – Your Staff..These Techniques Work…They are So Powerful You Wouldn’t Believe It…Until You Try It…

    But I also talked to my mates who had been on the final course…

    I didn’t recognise them. They had been changed..

    The final course is to completely change you into the “Company’s” image..

    And I know how it works

    You are on a Residential course – it only takes 5 days…

    Your personality is attacked and destroyed, exploiting your most fundamental weaknesses and fears – not just by the lecturers, but also your “colleagues” on your course. You are also invited -into their room at your most vulnerable and brainwashed time (sorry – love – no way – 0h allright then – they then have even more ammunition to control you) But I said Goodnight Love.

    They then skillfully rebuild you – and give you all your self confidence back and personality built in the Company’s Image…

    I skipped that course

    And Took on the Fuckers

    Sure They Fired Me. I will not work with such people.

    That was not the end of me at the age of 27.

    Our Daughter is Studying Criminology and Psychology at University NOW.

    Tony

  197. Most of the higher ranking BBC and MSM are ‘graduates’ as well i believe Tony..

  198. Scouse Billy

    28 Sep, 2012 - 8:02 pm

    Spot on, Tony – same technique used in EST later called the Forum.

    They didn’t like me, a psychology grad giving a running commentary on their techniques so they had to tell me I’d got them all wrong – it was “therapy” ha ha ha.

    Yeah, if you have any integrity or compassion, you have to take on th fuckers – I’m still at it ;)

Powered By Wordpress | Designed By Ridgey | Produced by Tim Ireland | Hosted by Expathos