the EU is a failed experiment

Putin, much as I have always feared that he would- and has- brought instability into global political power circles, was right about one thing: “the EU is fascist”. Angela Merkel even admitted as much, stating that they have “no mandate” to protect civil rights- and by extension, no representation in government.

It might be alarming to know that the development of global government is not new. Psychologist Burbuss Skinner wrote in an article in ‘Pacific Spectator’ in 1953 (reproduced by Robert Watson in “Basic Writings of Psychology” in 1979, and later quoted in “the Ivory leg in the Ebony cabinet”):

“the first step against tyranny is the fullest possible exposure of controlling techniques. Slowly, and as yet imperfectly we have worked out an ethical and governmental design in which the strong man is not allowed to use the power of his strength to control his fellow man. He is restrained by a superior force created for that purpose- the ethical pressure of the group, or more explicit religious and governmental measures. We need to distrust superior forces, as we currently hesitate to relinquish Sovereignty in order to set up an international police force. But it is only through such counter- control that we have achieved what we call Peace- a condition in which men aren’t permitted to control each other through force. In other words, control itself must be controlled.”

Whatever Skinner must have imagined the outcome of an “international police force”, it appears that what escaped him is that when you establish a body bigger than any one government can control, there ceases to be any restraint. How then does he see the police force being subject to any measure of control?

Far be it for me to point out that an economic union is not a police force; but neither is it a government. It is a cartel; far away from what Ben Bova imagined in his idea of “world government” in his science fiction books e.g. ‘Colony’- but perhaps not all that different from the GEC  (Global Economic Council) in his ‘Grand Tour’ series; indeed it appears that this will be the next step:

But let us discuss first, whether “free trade” can ever truly BE “free” (i.e. unregulated).

Logically, an unregulated trade system would make a host of copyright and patent laws disappear, people would be able to make furnaces from common parts again rather than rely on a select few repairmen authorised to handle proprietary parts. You can grow your own crops, and not worry about getting sued when GMO seed blows into your field. You can hack the hell out of your PS4 and run linux, and install mods for your SkyRim without limitation.

But this isn’t what the Corporates want when THEY say “free”; no they WANT to regulate the People. What THEY want, is for the Corporations to be unregulated, and shaft US with their bill. They push for “free trade” that forces government to tie their hands behind their back when it comes to being a Responsible Government, duty bound to the People who elected them to Represent us.

Lets talk a bit about the three Legal Theories:

1- Natural Law; Only good rules are considered Law (“every Law is a restriction upon Liberty”- Thomas Paine) You can find in the Preamble to the US Constitution, plenty of references to Natural Law, and Aristotle himself wrote about the differences between Natural Trade (tangible goods) and Unnatural trade (Usury, aka money lending; which also is mentioned in the Magna Cartas, and in quotes from Jesus, which form the basis of Common Law).

2- Legal Positivsim: Only rules enacted by Authority qualify as Law. (the law doesn’t evolve as an organism, rooted in precedent, but changes with each new law it was intended to replace; this limited look on law suggests that Authority must exist for its own sake; going back to the EU we saw how they attempted to force their member states to agree with the demands of the autocrats)

3- Legal Realism: Only Rules the Courts are willing to enforce qualify as Law (sometimes our government makes bad laws; we ought not be bound by them.) “One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.”- Martin Luther King

When you create an extra- legal entity with no jurisdictional boundaries, the absolute authority to regulate industry, with no way to hold this body to account, you end up with an Authority that you can never fight.It is just this sort of control that has ALWAYS been the thing that the People- the “huddled masses” have been fighting!

Finally, a quote from Aristotle: “A State exists for the sake of a good life, and not for the sake of a life only; if life were the only object, slaves and brute animals might form a State, but they cannot, for they have no share in happiness or in a life of free choice. Nor does a State exist for the sake of alliance and security from injustice, nor yet for the sake of exchange and mutual intercourse (trade)”.


Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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


Connecting to %s