The EU Vote
Although many on the conservative side were happy to see France and the Netherlands vote "no" on the monstrosity known as the EU "constitution", some lamented that the French did so for "the wrong reasons." That is, it was defeated there by socialists who didn't want to lose their subsidies and easy work weeks. Whereas in Holland, the issue was mostly over islamic immigration/invasion.
I think that misses the bigger point. The symptomatic, idiosyncratic reasons for the "no" vote both stemmed from the same underlying motive: the preservation of national character.
And that's a good thing.
France wanted to preserve what it had created for itself (however untenable itmight be in the long run), and Holland worried about staying uniquely Dutch.
It would be a pure fantasy to expect France to suddenly think like America on political and economic issues. Therefore the fact that the reasons they used to vote no don't please an American conservative is of little consequence; France will never please an American conservative!
But when the moment of truth came, they still had enough spirit to not allow their country to be gobbled up into a homogenizing super-bureacracy of unelected elites.
The dysfunction we've seen emanating from Europe stems in part to a self-imposed lack of strengh and degradation since the World Wars. We here will have trouble understanding jus thow damaging those wars were to all of Europe. Seeing the destruction caused by, it seemed, nationalism, the post-war environment sought to downplay ideas of nation-states and to stamp out patriotism. It was seen as leading to fascism. Some have pointed out that a "conservative" political movement doesn't exist in Europe like it does here; they don't understand it. Instead, you're either a left-wing communist, a center-left socialist, or an outright neo-nazi fascist. Which may help explain their fear and loathing (due to a lack of proper home-grown analogy) of the Bush administration.
I recall visiting with exchange students in Germany in the mid-1980s. The Wall was still dividing Berlin, and the Soviets were poised on border to invade. Reagan was moving short-range nuclear missiles into Germany. The German students remarked how when they visited us here, they were AMAZED to see American flags all over the place, and not just on government buildings, but from many, many private homes. That JUST ISN'T DONE in Germany.
"We are not patriots", one student said.
That sad sentence is part of Europe's problem.
If they don't love their country, they won't stand against cultural invaders.
Instead, you get cases like Dutch boys being forbidden by their schools to put patches on the their bookbags of the Dutch flag, because that might offend islamic immigrants at the same school! You see, only nazi fascists wear flags and love their country!
What kind of madness is that?
So to see some spark of national will rising again is good.
I have a book on my shelf called "Painted in Blood: Understanding Europeans." The basic idea is that due to history, Europeans are really rather xenophobic and when given the chance will violently assert their ethnic indentity. This book was written in 1987, pre-dating the bloody collapse of the historically unnatural entity known as Yugoslavia, but explaining it perfectly. With that book, it would not have appeared so surprising to happen in the heart of Europe in modern times.
By extension, this whole "EU" concept is also unstable and unnatural. As its countries are forced more and more to give up their national identity to both invading islamic immigrants from below and an unaccountable ruling elite in Brussels from above, expect finally a vicious backlash across the continent.
Some, like Sweden, may be too depressed and too embracing of a deathwish to do anything about it, but their demise will serve as a powerful object lesson to the others.
The contradictions, as in the soviet union, will eventually become too great to bear.
I think that misses the bigger point. The symptomatic, idiosyncratic reasons for the "no" vote both stemmed from the same underlying motive: the preservation of national character.
And that's a good thing.
France wanted to preserve what it had created for itself (however untenable itmight be in the long run), and Holland worried about staying uniquely Dutch.
It would be a pure fantasy to expect France to suddenly think like America on political and economic issues. Therefore the fact that the reasons they used to vote no don't please an American conservative is of little consequence; France will never please an American conservative!
But when the moment of truth came, they still had enough spirit to not allow their country to be gobbled up into a homogenizing super-bureacracy of unelected elites.
The dysfunction we've seen emanating from Europe stems in part to a self-imposed lack of strengh and degradation since the World Wars. We here will have trouble understanding jus thow damaging those wars were to all of Europe. Seeing the destruction caused by, it seemed, nationalism, the post-war environment sought to downplay ideas of nation-states and to stamp out patriotism. It was seen as leading to fascism. Some have pointed out that a "conservative" political movement doesn't exist in Europe like it does here; they don't understand it. Instead, you're either a left-wing communist, a center-left socialist, or an outright neo-nazi fascist. Which may help explain their fear and loathing (due to a lack of proper home-grown analogy) of the Bush administration.
I recall visiting with exchange students in Germany in the mid-1980s. The Wall was still dividing Berlin, and the Soviets were poised on border to invade. Reagan was moving short-range nuclear missiles into Germany. The German students remarked how when they visited us here, they were AMAZED to see American flags all over the place, and not just on government buildings, but from many, many private homes. That JUST ISN'T DONE in Germany.
"We are not patriots", one student said.
That sad sentence is part of Europe's problem.
If they don't love their country, they won't stand against cultural invaders.
Instead, you get cases like Dutch boys being forbidden by their schools to put patches on the their bookbags of the Dutch flag, because that might offend islamic immigrants at the same school! You see, only nazi fascists wear flags and love their country!
What kind of madness is that?
So to see some spark of national will rising again is good.
I have a book on my shelf called "Painted in Blood: Understanding Europeans." The basic idea is that due to history, Europeans are really rather xenophobic and when given the chance will violently assert their ethnic indentity. This book was written in 1987, pre-dating the bloody collapse of the historically unnatural entity known as Yugoslavia, but explaining it perfectly. With that book, it would not have appeared so surprising to happen in the heart of Europe in modern times.
By extension, this whole "EU" concept is also unstable and unnatural. As its countries are forced more and more to give up their national identity to both invading islamic immigrants from below and an unaccountable ruling elite in Brussels from above, expect finally a vicious backlash across the continent.
Some, like Sweden, may be too depressed and too embracing of a deathwish to do anything about it, but their demise will serve as a powerful object lesson to the others.
The contradictions, as in the soviet union, will eventually become too great to bear.
posted by RDS at 12:29 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home