Comment on the EU referendum by Trifkovic

In Holland the issues of sovereignty, identity, and immigration were openly raised in the referendum debate, and the genie is now out of the bottle. In what is arguably Europe’s most “tolerant” country, the notion that a nation has the right to its land and customs has become a legitimate mainstream argument. Perhaps Theo van Gogh did not die in vain.

On the economic front the outcome in France and Holland will have beneficial effects too. The dirigiste Franco-German consensus, the spirit of which was strongly felt in the Constitution and whose adherents still dominate in Brussels, will now retreat before a more vigorous competitive spirit favored by Finland, Ireland and a few new members in Eastern Europe. If CDU’s Angela Merkel unseats Scroeder in September, as seems likely, Germany will join them by introducing much needed tax and labor law reforms. More important still, it will cease to underpin the eastern end of the old Paris-Berlin axis. That would pave the way for the center-right reformer Nicolas Sarkozy, Chirac’s arch-rival, to bring a breath of fresh air into the Elysee Palace in 2007.

The most important result of the past nine days is that the 400-page EU Constitution, a deeply flawed document, is dead. William Rees-Mogg aptly summed it up: “It should never have been negotiated, it should never have been signed, it was essential that it should be defeated.” It would have taken the Old Continent a long stride closer to a United States of Europe, a bureaucratic superstate in which each member country’s sovereignty, individuality, and dignity would be violated and suppressed. Its key clauses had astonishing implications:

The Member States shall facilitate the achievement of the Union’s tasks and refrain from any measure which could jeopardise the attainment of the Union’s objectives.” (Art. I)

The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the Member States in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity, and equality between women and men prevail.” (Article I-10)

[O]nly the Union may legislate and adopt legally binding acts, the Member States being able to do so themselves only if so empowered by the Union or for the implementation of Union acts.” (Art. I-12)

“Member States shall actively and unreservedly support the Union’s common foreign and security policy in a spirit of loyalty and mutual solidarity and shall comply with the Union’s action in this area.” (Art. I-16)

This was a truly radical document, part-Marxist, part-Jacobin, doomed by the hubris of its drafters. It aimed to codify and sanctify an edifice oligarchic rather than democratic, reflecting the aspirations and interests of the post-national, post-Christian elites rather than “the people.” This was especially evident in its support for unnatural lifestyles in the Charter of Fundamental Rights, and in its refusal to include Christianity in the Preamble as part of Europe’s “cultural, religious and humanist inheritance.”

There is no rational reason why the European Union has to, or needs to proceed on the road of ever-tighter political and social integration. There is no reason for the EU to seek a “global” role aking to that of the United States: the endeavor is costly and ultimately self-defeating. The process of integration has removed internal barriers to the movement of goods, services, capital, and people, and it has rendered violent conflict among its members unimaginable. That is enough. Further integration would be detrimental to the diversity essential to the preservation of spontaneously willing unity. Further enlargement should be put on hold, and even when it is resumed it has to exclude Turkey. Europe’s demographic and cultural survival is in doubt, and it is possible only if its historic nations reassert their identity and rediscover their faith. The defeated EU constitution would have made both those goals unattainable. Its consignment to the dustheap of history is a relief to all true Europeans, and a rare piece of genuinely good news to their American cousins.

More here

Posted by jonjayray on Sunday, June 12, 2005 at 08:08 AM in European Union
Comments (5) | Tell a friend

Comments:

Posted by Lurker on June 12, 2005, 08:58 AM | #

Ireland’s economy has leapt forward in recent years but it has been hosed down with vast amounts of EU cash. I dont know that, without this cash, that the Irish economy would be so rosy. I was told sternly by libertarian/very neo-classical economist guy that the effect of this cash would be immediately discounted and merely lead to inflation. But I think he forgot to let the Irish know.

Ireland also seems to have decided that it must augment its population with all sorts of diverse folk from around the world (OK thats based on one short visit, so not scientific or anything). Apparently even back in the 80s you might never see a non-white face in Dublin. Its not any kind of Australian points system of course. Its the usual: anybody who can make it there and claim asylum or whatever gets in. I know from leftie Irish friends that any suggestion that this might be a slightly less than perfect way to select new citizens is tantamount to strutting around in jackboots shouting Sieg Heil. Seems that the modern Irish population is about as perfect as it gets from the pro-EU, liberal, PC worldview.

Anyhow, I dont know that relying on Ireland as a model is very wise.

Posted by Matra on June 12, 2005, 12:23 PM | #

Virtually every person I’ve met from the Irish Rep. in the last couple of years has done nothing but complain about how under the €uro prices have doubled (possibly an exaggeration) but wages have remained the same. Remember Ireland was forced to vote twice on the Nice Treaty because they gave the wrong answer first time. It’ll be interesting to see how they vote if the EU constitution referendum goes ahead.

It wasn’t as long ago as the 80s when you could walk around Dublin without seeing a black face. I spent time there in the late 90s and don’t recall seeing much, uh, diversity.

Your leftie Irish friends are nothing new. Middle class Dubliners in particular have a long history of taking up every fashionable cause with tremendous gusto. But you won’t find as much diversity-mongering in Dundalk and similar sized cities, never mind in rural areas.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on June 12, 2005, 12:55 PM | #

Serge Trifkovic is an excellent thinker so it’s not lightly that I do this, but I’m going to amend this sentence,

“In what is arguably Europe’s most ‘tolerant’ country, the notion that a nation has the right to its land and customs has become a legitimate mainstream argument,”

to this:

“In what is arguably Europe’s most ‘tolerant’ country, the notion that a nation has the right to its land, customs, and preservation of its traditional predominant racial identity or collection of identities has become a legitimate mainstream argument.”

The other mistake Trifkovic made was here:

“The process of integration has removed internal barriers to the movement of goods, services, capital, and people, and it has rendered violent conflict among its members unimaginable. That is enough.”

Not quite right: the Tranzi principle of “unfettered across-border movement of labor to match unfettered across-border movement of capital” is a one-world, race-destroying, nation-state-destroying notion and has to be rejected by any future arrangement the European countries make among themselves to replace the wreckage of the E.U.

(That was otherwise an excellent statement by Trifkovic, one of the best, brightest politico-cultural thinkers anywhere in the world today.)

Posted by Steve Edwards on June 12, 2005, 01:10 PM | #

It’s good to see the Irish aren’t going to deny themselves the limitless benefits of diversity. We all know the drill - multiculturalism brings massive economic benefits, enriches the boring Irish monoculture (which is a racist construct anyhow), reduces racism, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah, oh yeah, we know it doesn’t appear to work in Britain, Holland and France, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t repeat the exact same policies in every other racist fascist genocidal European holdout.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on June 13, 2005, 08:53 AM | #

You’ve certainly got the drill down exactly, Steve Edwards. That’s precisely how the other side continually advances its dishonest, hate-filled agenda. Very well put in that post! Thanks for it!

Next entry: Mister Big Unplugged

Previous entry: Money buys babies

Existential Issues

White Genocide Project

Of note

General News

Science News

Science Categories

All Categories

The Writers

Each author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer; the hashes link to authors' homepages.

Links

Endorsement not implied.

Controlled Opposition

Crime

General

Immigration

Islam

Jews

Nationalist Political Parties

Science

Whites in Africa