Sake White

There’s almost a kind of shadow skirmish going on in the net and had already been going on between anti-American French and pro-American Americans. It is the position of “Europe is going Fascist and Totalitarian:Again” versus “America has always been fascist and is getting even more fascist”. The former is advocated by people like me and Wolf Howling, while the latter is advocated by… pretty much every aristocrat in Europe. By aristocrat, I don’t mean people like Prince Harry. I’m refering to people with actual power, like the bureaucrats of the European Union.

This article spells out things in a very harsh light concerning Europe.

Britain Now a Police State

Britain is now a closed country—a police state, with a Secret Police to rival the KGB. Our Secret Police was secretly founded by the present Government in 1998, and now its privileged and untouchable members mount dawn raids just like the KGB and then lie through their teeth in court to secure convictions against any citizen who has offended the regional gauleiters or the European Kommissars. There are “security” cameras every few inches—more of them than in any other nation. At current rates of growth, there will be a “security” camera for every UK citizen within a decade. In a sinister sequence of more than 90 criminal justice Bills in ten years, the present Government has removed every last one of the rights and freedoms of which Britain was once justly proud. We are no longer allowed even to demonstrate outside Parliament. It was the ninetieth of those Bills—passed with very little attempt at opposition—that took away the right of criminal trial.

Now, our “leaders” fawn as sycophantically upon our new, grim, European masters as their predecessors once did during the long and foolish period of appeasement that tempted Hitler to rearm unopposed and then to provoke the Second World War. This time, though, it is sycophancy by stealth. Not so long ago, a UK Cabinet Minister who refused to sign a European “Directive” was told by his own civil servants that if
he did not sign it he could and would be stripped of his office and have all his possessions confiscated. Instead of resigning and going public, he cravenly and secretly signed. His story has never been made public. Another UK Cabinet Minister,
who had agreed with a Directive and had written to congratulate the Kommissars on it, was summoned to Brussels and told that, although all the “regions” and the European Parliament had agreed the Directive, the Kommissars of Europe (who had proposed it, for they alone have the power to do so) had decided that it was not of any consequence and that it would not be enacted into law. When the astonished Minister was asked why, he was told that the Kommissars had wanted to make it clear to elected Ministers in all of the “regions” where the real power in Europe now lay—and it was not in their elected hands. He told me, “I had once been wholeheartedly
in favor of the European Union. But it was at that moment that the scales fell from my eyes.” He died an implacable opponent of the new Europe.

Courtesy of Danny at this Bookworm thread I made a comment at.

I’m wondering if there has been any effort to formally assess what the average Joe-on-the-street over there [Europe] thinks about the influx of Muslims. What does the average European think about stories like this?

You’d probably get the same answer if your question had been “how would such folks feel about being raped, killed, and terrorized in the night by thugs and criminals”.

But think on what the actual policy implementations were used to “correct” such problems. The mob and their MP representatives went to gun control and then outright gun banning.

So it doesn’t matter that a mob may give you one story and answer on an individual basis, since on an enlarged and macroscopic basis, mobs are simply the tools of the political leadership. The basic truth of majority rules – which is a central pillar in parliamentary systems that allocate MPs, and thus policy and law making power, according to direct population – is that 51% decides what a 100% of the pop does. Then 26% decides what that 51% decides. 14% decides what that 26% thinks is right. 8% decides for the 14%. Sooner or later, Deana, what you end up with is like a small group of people controlling 100% of the population.

That’s what majority rules mean. Rule by minority.

The British and other Euros thought they were being “democratic” or something they never understood, when they formed governments based solely on population distribution.

They didn’t reform to a system like America’s, with a balance of powers, because of tradition and bureaucratic inertial. And now they see that their system is now too old and the times too dire for them to change it, except to stand by and watch it being changed by those that have a fervent belief in their own self-righteousness.

Why did the British kick out Churchill and the Conservatives for Labour after WWII? Because the British wanted to keep that “war unity” Churchill provided them in victory, during peacetime. And Labour promised that the government will still take care of people and create that ‘unity” and national purpose that was present in war. The British, being fools, took up Labour’s devil’s bargain.

The British wanted to feel national unity without paying the cost in vigilance, blood, and treasure. First they got rid of guns cause the government would have controlled where guns went in warfare. Then they increased taxes on corporations and businesses, cause government would be taxing such things in warfare. Then came Thatcher that lowered the corporation taxes to lower than the US’s. And now we’re back with Tony Blair and what whatchacallits.

Wolf HOwling link

I agree with Danny in that it doesn’t matter what the Euros think. It only matters what they do. Unfortunately for them, and unfortunate for us who will have to use nukes to prevent European and NATO arms from falling into fascist hands, Europe already did do something. It’s called the EU and gun control and whatever else that can be attributed to socialism. Democratic socialism at that.

And to simply illustrate that you don’t have to be reading any centrally organized talking points to come up with those conclusions, I mentioned the “EU” before I read Danny’s link. It is not, however, a coincidence that Wolf Howling blogged about the EU.

All of these things have threads that don’t require any central propaganda agency to distort into some conspiracy. It is just there. There’s too much evidence around for any fabrication to be required.

For those that don’t care about human misery and delight in tyranny, they focus more on infiltration of academies and corporations and hollywood than they focus on fabricating evidence. When you are in a position of power, as the European new aristocrats are, you don’t need to “fake” evidence. You are the evidence. Whatever you say or do becomes evidence. If you are the media, reporting a story now becomes its own evidence and self-justification.

American long term strategists perhaps had a nagging suspicion that the European love affair with totalitarian ideologies and eternal warfare making will resurge even if America succeeded in winning the hearts and minds of Europe. Even if America disarmed Europe and took up the war making duty, Europe would still have a very high chance of going back towards the European traditions of creating ideologies like Communism and Fascism and Nazism and Marxism and all the other stuff you see after the Enlightenment.

It’s like Europe always remembered that it was inferior to the Roman Empire and never did bring down the Roman Empire by their own virtues and strengths. Or rather, Rome was brought down by barbarians, amongst other things, and so thus we should go back to the strengths of the barbarians, which were totalitarian dictatorship and raiding villages for tribute to “defeat the new Roman Empire”, which would be us of course. And of course, which superpower was the EU supposed to “balance”? America or some other nation? There was no other nation.

It is not that Europe, you see, is the only one guilty of starting wars that killed a bunch of people. Alexander and Persian Emperors and a bunch of other folks were guilty of the same. Warfare is nothing new to human history and it is not something Europeans invented or perfected or some such clap trap. It is just that Europe is the master of creating wars that horribly maim both side’s populations for absolutely no long term gain or stability. They don’t even do “Empire” correctly. Europe could have fought amongst themselves until a Napoleon Bonaparte came to power and united Europe. But that was never going to happen or if it did happen, the task was too great for the tech and culture of an European dictator.

What they do is fight over a piece of territory, like Alsace Lorraine between France and Germany, for hundreds of years and then have an excuse to start up WWI over the same exact damn reason. And they would still be doing the exact same thing to this day had America not stepped in and told the children to behave themselves or get punished.

Warfare is only ever justified if it produces long term stability. If you fight a war and resolve it, so that you need never fight a war for the same reasons ever again; Europe has been fighting a war over the same damn reasons for centuries. Land, nobility entitlements, religious authorities, and other such peculiarly “European” flavored articles of faith have been the reasons for warfare on that continent for quite awhile. Even the Romans colonized Gaul, they never really got rid of the “barbarian” in the barbarians. That’s not exactly a bad thing, since barbarian culture in Europe had some good points. Like having their women fighting alongside the men and with the women slitting their own throats if the men came back after being defeated. Female ostracism people. Feminists had nothing on the Gauls and Germans and Britons on that score.

Nor does America even owe great fealty or all that much gratitude for Britain and Europe in terms of being colonized. Since America was colonized and built on Enlightenment values, meaning Greek and Roman values. And it was Rome that colonized Briton. Thus America is only a few steps removed from Rome itself. We weren’t built upon European values. European values can be exemplified in the Hansean League up north amongst the German and Baltics. A purely mercantile empire of money grubbing greedy merchants. Which explains OIl for Food quite well, actually.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but the best Western values came from Rome and Greece, not the Celts and Germans. Doesn’t mean they were entirely useless. Like all people or provinces, they had something to offer. The French, because they were in Gaul and descended from Celts, were intensely mercenary. They would fight for whomever paid them and looked like they were winning. I suspect this is why the French surrendered so easily to the Germans, their once hated enemies. It wasn’t just the military or political leadership that surrendered easily either. The French youths and communist grass roots welcomed the German jackboots into Paris. How’s that for French mercenary aptitude. Then there’s the French Foreign Legion, which is an interesting take on “mercenary” to whole nother degree.

While the French make good mercenaries, don’t count on their help unless you have a huge bribe to offer them and you know that they hate your enemies. Hannibal Barca, back in the 2nd Punic War, used Gallic mercenaries to good effect. One, because Barca had loot to offer and victories as bribes. Two, because the Gauls hated the Romans. There you go, the only two prerequisites you need to have the French on your side.

It’s hard, though, for me to believe that the average European is not aware of at least some of this, unless they are completely uninvolved with civic life.

Look at it like this. Are blacks aware that they are being oppressed under a system of institutional racism? Obviously, yes. But just like Europeans do, they blame it on Americans. You see how that works? It’s not Europe’s fault or the Democrats’- who blacks keep voting back into power even after the history of lynchings during Reconstruction which toppled Republican and pro-Emancipation governments in the South came into effect- rather, it is the fault of traditional and patriotic Americans cause Americans are just too insecure, materialistic, un-virtuous, and what not. Only European culture is superior. That’s why the French outlawed the world “email” and turned it into “emaile”. That’s very similar to the inferiority complex of African Americans that think “African” culture is superior to “American” culture because “African” culture never oppressed black people. As if. As if the islamic conquests in Africa weren’t “oppression” but “joyous liberation”. As if the slave trade could have occurred without the tribalism inherent in African politics. As if.

So it is not that they are “unaware”, it is that even if they were aware, it wouldn’t matter. Even if they were aware, they either wouldn’t care or would blame the wrong party.

Europe has a superiority complex because they feel themselves inferior. America has a superiority complex because America actually worked for, earned, and paid in both blood and treasure for that superiority. Those two are not ever the same psychological state.