European Peace Triumph

Two important philosophical events serving peace and progress happened October 12, 2012: a Russian Soyuz rocket carrying a very special cargo lifted from French Guyana, and the European Union got the Nobel Peace Prize. Finally.

If there is one individual or entity that ever deserved the Peace Prize, it is the European Union! Nothing, nobody, did more for peace than the EU. A truth all the mad European haters can now be slapped with. (To help them regain their senses.)

Croatia Should Join The Preceding 500 Million People In 2013.

Nobel Peace Prize committee secretary Geir Lundestad said the EU got the prize for its “accumulated record over more than six decades… it was about time.”

He listed five achievements: Franco-German reconciliation after World War II; support for new democracies in Greece, Portugal and Spain in the 1980s; support for former Communist states in the 1990s; modernisation of Turkey; and peacebuilding in the Western Balkans.

Committee chairman Thorbjorn Jagland added that the timing of the award is linked to the euro gloom.

“We should focus again on the fundamental aims of the organisation… If the euro fails, then the danger is that many other things will disintegrate as well, like the internal market and free borders. Then you will get nationalistic policies again. So it may set in motion a process which most Europeans would dislike,” he said.

“Dislike” is a euphemism for war. Indeed, civilization has gone into full, astounding reverse, many times before. Civilization is like a bicycle: pedalling in reverse does not work very long, before it crashes.

(Something the USA leadership ought to have meditated more carefully before engaging into officially sanctioned, officially unpunished, official war of aggression, official torture, official arbitrary detention, official arbitrary assassination worldwide by death panel for all to officially contemplate, and financial criminals officially extolled as saints and great men, and their banks worth giving S8,000 billions of public money. But of course that means that the USA leadership would have to know history in depth; instead all it knows from history is that violence pays handsomely)



The European Union was launched by the two main continental powers of Western Europe, the two main pieces of the Frankish empire, Francia and Germania, after nearly two centuries of continuous war with each other ended in total civilizational devolution.

How we got there is, by itself a tremendous story, even older than when the Celts occupied Rome, 24 centuries ago. The Franks claimed it came all the way back to the fall of Troy.

The European Union is no less than a reconstitution of the “Renovated Roman Empire” of 800 CE. Now the later had been established by more than 4 centuries of continuous war.

After six generations of unity, an estrangement, an apartheid was tried: the Franks around Paris on one side, the rest of the Franks, on the other side.

That alternative to unity led to vigorous fighting over the for 1,000 years.

That diabolical alternative, the breaking up of Europe, once again, effected 1,080 years ago, the plutocrats love (as it fosters war, hence fascism, hence fascist leadership, hence their “leadership”). The plutocrats, and their many servants in the academia, and media, of the USA, mongrels of money avid, have been pushing.

The European Union is not just being built to insure peace by creating entanglement and co-dependency. (See “Why Europe Why The Euro“)

The European Union represents also a new way of approaching (in particular inter-national) politics, through intense debate, beating the problems into submission with ideas, in the fullness of time. (Notice that this does not require unanimity!) Some (Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, countless enemies of the Open Society lauded by Pericles) will say that this was tried in Athens before, and led to disaster.

Well the answer to that one is pretty easy: Athens did not have the democratic institutions that the EU has (answering Socrates’ main objection). And Athens (including Socrates) was often inhuman. And Athens’ National Assembly was hysterical, deciding an holocaust on one day, forbidding it the next (after the orders had sailed away).

The European Union advances slowly, methodically, meditatively (a momentary disadvantage of democracy, be it against Hitler, or against the present plutocratic conspirators).

The first serious attempt at pacific unification between France and Germany happened before Nazism (Napoleon had unified Germany before, but that was not pacific). Nazism is how that pacific unification attempt of the 1920s & 1930s was crushed. The plutocrats know how to instrumentalize democracy, war, holocausts. They are at it all the time, including now.



Long ago two philosophies fought, one, the Greco-Roman, strongly exploitative, the other, the Minoan-“Trojan”-Frankish, more comprehensively, and comprehendingly human (“Troy” was actually a subsidiary from a much larger power following the Great Mother religion, hence presumably less sexist, hence the war about free woman Helen, that came to define Greece… sexism?).

The Romans, and later the Franks turned Germania in a place where civilization became sufficiently intense to be worth conquering and governing. The irony was that the Salian Frank confederation was German. It soon understood that a superior philosophy would allow it to become richer, and superior to Romanitas (“Romanity”). Some of the Romans, among the most important generals, were full participants to this devious scheme of endowing the Franks with that advanced philosophy (I know this because the law of the Franks was written in Latin in a neo-Republican, more equalitarian mood).

The Franco-German empire lasted more than 5 centuries in united splendor (from Clovis’ crushing of the Goths, to the election of Otto I after the French refused to provide with any input in the election). The main cause of the split was French contempt, centered around Paris, for the uncouth eastern types… who comprised no less than two thirds of the empire (due to the Treaty of Verdun, 843 CE). Kind contempt veered progressively into estrangement, while the part not controlled by Paris called itself what it was, the Roman empire (it became “holly” centuries later and “German” by 1500 CE).



The conquest and subsequent fabrication of England by a French army headed by the Duke of Normandy (Nortmanni Dux) made the situation worse, as the king of France, for a while was not much more than the king of Paris (when l’Anglois was not in possession of that too).

Yet Paris was by far the mightiest city in Europe (in the middle of a giant productive agricultural zone), and Paris engaged in centuries of reconquest, a drive, propelled by necessity, to inverse the Treaty of Verdun by force. It was only historical justice that over ten month in 1916, nearly one million young French and Germans died there (at least 700,000 in combat, and the rest, like rats abused to death).

The reason is simple: Verdun itself, not far from Paris, was not under Paris control. Nearly half of present day France, and the ancient Francia and Gallia, had been, unbelievably estranged from itself by force, under the Treaty of Verdun (843 CE) and it made no sense in all dimension of geography: human, linguistic, physical, commercial, etc.



A curious phenomenon occurred: several of the most prominent collaborators of Hitler during the occupation of France by the Nazis were extreme heroes of World War One. Petain, who went out of his way to betray in 1940-44 was the general leading, and winning, the battle of Verdun with utmost ferocity, even re-instituting the notorious Roman method of decimation (in Roman army units that had disobeyed orders drastically, one man out of ten was executed).

In the Second Battle of the Marne, the French command knew, or guessed perfectly well the Prussian general staff’s plan. In no small measure from commando operation led by perhaps the most famous special operation officer in France, Joseph Darnand, just before the attack: he captured an entire Prussian command, on July 14, 1918, with the plans of the attack for the next day. He was declared one of the three artisans of victory (with Clemenceau and Foch). In 1940, again, he volunteered, in spite of his age, and distinguished himself as a lieutenant in many special commando operations behind enemy lines and was made officer of the Legion of Honor.

Unbelievably, Darmand became the chief of the Milice, an organization of fascist racist criminals (it would be too flattering to call them SS, although many ended in the Waffen SS in 1945), 30,000 strong, most of them got executed (most often, informally). Darmand had a proper trial, and died, shot by firing squad October 3, 1945, while singing a manly song.

Why did such war heroes became like dogs to Hitler? Because the WWI heroes were sick of war, and, in particular, sick of making war to Germany. In their haste to embrace Germany, they did not notice, as much as they should have, that they were embracing Nazism.



The same sort of phenomenon happened on the Nazi side. (Let alone the German side!) One has to understand that the number one objective of Nazism was to vanquish France. (All the rest of Nazi obsessions were afterthoughts!)

One could not find more dedicated French hating Nazis than Hitler and Rommel. Still they underwent radical psychological change… while fighting the French for nearly six years (1939-1945). Precisely because they got spanked so bad. (It was not exactly Hitler’s plan to start a world war in 1939 that he was sure to lose!)

Rommel started the war as a fanatical Nazi general, complete with mass murder, and extremely gifted. The killing of the French and British armies in 1940 was greatly his work. The whereabouts of his Seventh Panzer division were the most mysterious part of general Guderian’s (already secret to the High Wehrmacht command) sickle attack by the ten armored divisions of the Nazi army.

A few weeks later, after Dunkirk, Rommel led Guderian’s attack south. But, on the Somme river, Franco-African units stopped him for three days. Finally the French officers (mostly) surrendered their mostly African troops, as they had run out of ammunition. Rommel, enraged by the losses of his beloved Nazi comrades executed all his French army prisoners. White and blacks. Hundreds.

Then there was the battle of Bir Hakiem. Rommel had defeated the British army, which was trying to retreat, in disarray, along the Libyan coast.

Rommel wanted to win the war, and that meant killing the British army before it could retreat to prepared defense lines at the Egyptian border. For that Rommel decided to implement a fast sickle move behind the British units, slowed down by their heavy weapons. If that encirclement had worked, the elite British 8th army would have been annihilated, the allies would have had no significant force before India.

History’s largest pincer move, planned by Adolf Hitler, would have unfolded in a few months: Rommel would have seized Egypt, the Mediterranean would have become a Nazi lake. After a few weeks of reorganization, Rommel’s re-boosted army would have dashed into Iraq. Azerbaijan, and its considerable oil, would have been squeezed between Rommel and the Nazi south army group advancing through the Caucasus.

The exterminators in charge of assassinating the one million Jews in Palestine, were ready.

However, time was of the essence for Rommel to win. In June 1940, France had been vanquished because the Nazi advance was so fast that the French and British armies got cut off. A few weeks later, the French aerial supremacy, which, after enormous Nazi losses, existed on paper, could not be implemented, as airfields were falling to the Nazi tanks, one after the other.

So Rommel had to go fast. He took all his best armored divisions, and dashed through the desert. He met 4,000 French elite soldiers at Bir Hakiem, in a new version of Thermopylae. The French knew everything about “guerre éclair” (Blitzkrieg) and knew that, to break Rommel, they had to slow him down.

The French held two weeks, suffering enormous losses, until they ran out of ammunition. This allowed the British army to escape Rommel’s encirclement and take refuge into the prepared defensive lines, and their mine fields. Ultimately Rommel tried a frontal assault, months later, and was defeated.

Hitler was livid: incapable of getting Iraq and Caucasus oil, and to cut the flow of supplies going from the USA to the USSR, through Iran and the Caspian, he was losing the war, for sure.



Assessing the Nazi disaster at Bir Hakiem, Hitler declared to his cabinet that the French were the best warriors (after the Nazis), and so France had to be annihilated. However the Nazi cabinet was unimpressed by its boss’ flourish. Led by Hitler’s favorite, Albert Speer, the cabinet pointed out to the Fuehrer that, without French industrial help, it’s Nazi Germany that would get exterminated. Hitler, ever more livid, observed that, if one let the France industry grow to support the Nazi war effort,  France would win the war without fighting. Speer told him there was no choice. Hitler agreed.

Thus, what happened was striking: by Hitler’s own standards, Hitler became a collaborator to France, as early as 1942, after France had inflicted to him a lethal strategic defeat. And precisely because of that. The ways of war are mysterious, and unpredictable.

Meanwhile Rommel reconsidered that war crime, kill the prisoners, fanatically Nazi strategy of his. After all the superior Nazi race had been stopped at Bir Hakeim, not just by a French force, full of french aristocrats, but also a French force full of French Jews.

After a famous SS officer in an SS Panzer division committed some war crime against French civilians, in 1944, Rommel, head of the Nazi forces in France, ordered the SS arrested. Better: Rommel, and much of the Nazi Wehrmacht, joined the top German generals who considered Hitler a menace to Germany, and they made a coup. Next the best Nazis plotted with the French resistance to save Paris, and so on. Towards the end of the war, in an ultimate nail in the Nazi mood system, even Himmler (helped by a Swedish diplomat and a courageous Jew) got into the act of saving Jews (from his own death machine).

The Nazi philosophy had been thoroughly defeated, and buried, by many of the top Nazis themselves. In no small measure because the Nazi war against Europe had proven to be a war against Germany herself, and victory proven to be worst than defeat.

Ironically, Nazism, and its fascist Prussian predecessors, let alone Napoleon, had demonstrated that European Unification was unavoidable, but that war was not the way to unify Europe. Sade had been right, all along: just war is a must.



Conclusion 1: For Germany to make war against France, or reciprocally, was like shooting oneself in the head, it made no sense. That was clear to people such as Petain (who decorated Darnand) in 1940, and even to most Nazis by 1945.

Conclusion 2: But war is not how it started. Estrangement is how war got started. Thus some Greeks are welcome to parade with Nazi flags in honor of Merkel the Angel: no indifference wanted. Show the passion, express your feelings, push forward the debate. So now, can the Greeks explain why their plutocrats are not taxed, and why they want to build a Formula One circuit with 29 million euros of (Franco-German) government money (while France, 15 times richer, discontinued Formula One because maintenance cost so much).



A philosophical Rubicon was crossed by giving the Union the Peace Prize. A declaration of philosophical war against the enemies of Europe, the forces of evil, the forces of plutocracy (of the same sort as those which launched the surprise World War of August 1, 1914). This help from the Nobel Committee does not come too soon.

Hateful, grotesque propaganda and machinations from the richest people and criminal organizations in the world have attacked the European Union with a viciousness unseen since the 1930s. I literally read hundreds of pages of ill informed, but vicious anti-European venom from, say, “the conscience of a liberal” Paul Krugman, a famous academic and Nobel, pillar of the supposedly left wing and newspaper of reference of the USA, the New York Times.

In the 1930s, the fascists were in plain sight. They claimed to be NAtionalist, and ZocIalist (NA-ZI). They were nothing of the sort. In truth, they were serving their masters, the plutocrats of (mostly) three different nationalities (Deutschland, UK, USA), and three different sorts (financial, military, industrial).

Nowadays the situation is simpler. The  plutocrats are in plain sight (although they have been hiding behind some of political parties, most prominently those of the USA, they are in no way hidden as they were ).  Their criminality is blatant. But they are not prosecuted. The supposedly democratic USA president sings their praises (see Obama making criminal conspirator Buffet into god… in supposedly leftist Newsweek).

For example, the financial criminals control more than three quarters of the world financial system (way worse a situation than when banksters supported Hitler in the 1920s and 1930s). How do I know this? That quantitative estimate can be rigorously evaluated. For now, I will leave my method to the imagination of the reader.

Plutocracy, much of it New York and London based did its best to sabotage the European Union, and pushed National “Socialism” instead. It worked, and the result was the Second World War and its holocaust(s). The plutocracy based in the USA came out of it strong and irresistible, establishing its self declared “American Century”.

European haters have been supported in their attacks by ignorant, or deliberately vicious Wall Street sycophants and helpers (generally both ignorant and vicious).

The case of the ignorant Paul Krugman is typical. I say “ignorant” deliberately, because it describes reality most faithfully. Krugman is esteemed by the oligarchy, and advise it. He was scathing against European Monetary Union (EMU), or the general idea of European unification. After thirty years of this or so, from being in Ronald Reagan’s government to a status of semi deity of American “liberals”, trashing Europe, Krugman suddenly discovered the existence of the Founding Fathers of Europe, such as Robert Schuman, and the idea that the European Union was being built to make war inside Europe impossible. Then Krugman declared that the European Union was a good thing… so it had to be saved from the European Monetary Union.  

Of course, a Monetary Union is indispensable to insure peace. The USA actually engaged in a horribly deadly civil war (nearly 3% of the population killed), precisely when, and because, the USA had no monetary union (the greenback was created during the civil war, at the end of the barrel of a gun, to pay for union troops).



One of my main ideas is that, just as Rome, the North American English speaking republic is pervaded by the exploitative supreme mentality. Just as Rome, the USA came to become dependent upon slavery, and the unfair exploitation of man by man.  

That put the USA on a collision course with the sustainable mentality of the European Union.

The best example of that was the propping, by the plutocracy of the USA, of Adolf Hitler, and even of Joseph Stalin. All of these efforts to eliminate the competition from the European democracies (mostly Great Britain and France, and their giant empires). It worked splendidly, this massive, multi generational conspiracy.

When I write this many haters rise and condemn me as mad man. Many pseudo left sites immediately banned me, as a “conspiracy theorist”.

However, the fact are here, they are blatant. Yes, the USA knew, at the time, that Stalin had eliminated the Polish elite, and still supported Stalin like crazy for the following 5 years, even giving him half of Europe, including Poland. The USA hid that fact for 25 years more than the USSR did. In other words, the American public is manipulated at a depth exceeding the Soviet one by a full generation!

So much for the USA being the country of freedom. Plutocratic freedom, yes, public freedom, no.

A secondary conspiracy what the one with the feudal, oil providing regimes such as Saudi Arabia, or Bahrain. Now under stress and contradiction.

My point of view is progressing under the radar of conventional propaganda.

For example the USA provides the GPS signal. Half a century ago, the Europeans would have saluted crisply, and trust Uncle Sam. But what if Uncle Sam was behind Hitler, Stalin, Khrushchev? Khrushchev? remember the invasion and massacre of Hungary, coincident with Suez, Khrushchev threatening to atom bomb London and Paris, while the USA had France and Britain condemned by the General Assembly of the United Nations?

Well, Europeans are starting to understand that the Italian resistants were not crazy to hang Mussolini from an Exxon station (OK, Exxon has craftily changed its name since). USA oil companies made Hitler and Mussolini all they could be.

So the Europeans thought, and, led by the obnoxious French, discovered that the GPS was a vulnerability. They decided to make their own GPS. Galileo. That is why thus astounding sight, back to Franco-Russian ccoperation of 100 years ago, but now with German collaboration:

Within three years, medium Russian Soyuz and large French Arianne rockets should have launched 30 of the satellites.

Meanwhile the USA dragged pathetically the last space shuttle, an error with wings, through the streets of Los Angeles, cutting 400 trees in the process. How do the USA get to space these days? With, well, the rocket in the preceding picture, Soyuz. 

How many man rated rockets the USA has now? Zero. How many does the West have? One. Just one: the European, French built, Ariane. But the USA does not want to use it: pride first. Just as with the Rafale, a superlative fighter bomber without equivalent in the USA, the Washington leadership prefers anything, even being launched by the Russians, rather than cooperating with the philosophical enemy, its progenitor, France and the European Enlightenment (considering that the USA legalized slavery while its antagonist, Great Britain freed the blacks that joined its side, it’s not clear which side was the most enlightened in the American Independence war).

The USA will have to surrender to the European Enlightenment someday, because full humanity is a better philosophical leadership than exploitative scheming, always, in the fullness of time Plutocracy is a mediocracy, democracy a meritocracy, where it counts the most, the realm of ideas.

And how do the best ideas win? Through debate, and even more debate. And this is what the European Union has promoted. After Merkel got really mean (as deserved), she took a low cost airline to travel to Italy for vacation. That’s what debating also is: speaking with one’s acts.

As the picture of the Soyuz above demonstrates, the European Union extends way further than its present official borders. Its new civilization of debate supreme is playing a role quite a bit similar to the spreading of Christianity well beyond the borders of the Roman empire, spreading Roman values, well beyond what the Roman legions could reach… (And much of how Romanitas survived to this day.)

European construction, the growth of the European Union, is, in essence, transcendental, as it forces three dozen nations to ever more overwhelm their differences with more brainy convergences. In that sense, it is a most important philosophical movement on the millennial scale, which can serve as a template to many other transplanetary organizations, including the United Nations, necessary to handle fascism, massive terrorism, and the devastation of the biosphere.

If the European Union failed, it would be the very engine of the progress we humans need to survive, which would fail. But, of course, the European Union will not fail. The mighty, and very determined, French and German Republics will see to it that the European Union will not fail.


Patrice Ayme

Tags: , ,

18 Responses to “European Peace Triumph”

  1. Nathan Daniel Curry Says:

    “..If the European Union failed, it would be the very engine of the progress we humans need to survive, which would fail. But, of course, the European Union will not fail. The mighty, and very determined, French and German Republics will see to it that the European Union will not fail.
    Patrice Ayme”

    Bold statement.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Yes, Nathan. But, considering what happened during the 1080 years prior, with Nazism as a bouquet final, I do believe that the determination is total, and definitive., on both sides of the Rhine And it’s exhibited by the new constitution of the Eurozone, which lowers normal deficit maximum from 3% down to .5%. Everybody in the French and German leadership knows it means recession next year (and notice that Merkel has an election in 12 months! She is showing more guts, I mean balls, than Obama!)

      The symptoms of Franco-German determination are all over: Merkel gave a three minutes phone call, a few days ago, to inform Hollande that Germany had decided to scuttle the merger talks of EADS and British Aerospace. Never mind that the guy behind the proposed merger, Tom Enders, is German. Interestingly, Germany did so, because it is following the French reasoning, and wants to own 15% of EADS, just like France, and does not trust the USA… In a very Gallic way.


  2. Alexi Helligar Says:

    Do you think an Arab-Israeli Economic Union or AIEU would work?


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Alexi: Not only it would work, but it’s the only way. That, or nuclear war. I propose, they decide (as Fox would say).

      The way to do it is along the lines Sarkozy (+ the rightfully upset Merkel) proposed. Make a Mediterranean Union tied to the EU on a voluntary basis, somewhat like the EU associated status Turkey enjoys. Then boost that up, on a voluntary basis. The idea would be to tie in, help and facilitate, directly and in between exchanges between the secularizing countries. Say Tunisia gets out of its Islamization more thoroughly, and Israel out of its Judaization, then they could trade more with each other, and get more development funds. It will all be quite slow because the mess extends from Gao to Vladivostok, and Agadir to Minsk… Not to mention from Glasgow to Baku… Or Teheran, come to think of it…


  3. Alexi Helligar Says:

    Sounds like an idea that needs to be promoted.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Yes. The advantage of debate, the main method of the European Union, is tremendous, bottomless. The debate goes on, until everything is sort out; ask Turkey, which has been negotiating with the EU for more than 50 years (!).Differently from the world of swords and bombs, the world of debate allows to get to the deepest depths, and remove all the mental gangrene. And then builds from healthy support. That’s why the notion of blasphemy should be thrown out of the window. By contrast, and just the opposite, denying reality, pushed too far, when it has criminal consequences (holocaust denial, or crimes against children stimulated, say), should be criminalized.


  4. pshakkottai Says:

    Re: “by the new constitution of the Eurozone, which lowers normal deficit maximum from 3% down to .5%.”
    Is this not a move in the wrong direction? The central bank can make the interest the same for all Euro nations with wider range of deficits first and later plan on a full federal tax system where the taxation will be common for all Euro states, somewhat like India, with no state income taxes but only federal taxes with the central bank nationally owned.
    Is there a discussion along these lines in Europe? Nationalized banking is the only way to get rid of plutocracy.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      dear Pshakkottai: complicated it is, and Europe is not the Raj. The Raj was united under the Crown, Europe has NEVER been united under a common polity.
      Although the core of the Eurozone was united, mostly, for 5 to 6 centuries, united under Merovingians and Caroligians (but that was an union a minima). In particular, under the Middle Ages, for more than 1,000 years, taxation was local.

      The only case of strong, durable, maximum European unification in real strong way was when the Muslims tried to overrun Europe. Charles Martel nationalized the church, melted the gold, and paid for the largest mobile army since the heydays of the Roman Republic. It took 30 years to defeat the three Muslim invasions. Therafter the Franks solved the Anglo-Saxon problem, and the Ost Mark problem. Both of which had eluded Rome. This went on by inertia for centuries. So the Muslims contributed to European unification is a defensive way.

      Towards the last few centuries, by acting as lord protector of otherwise independent cities, the French crown started to ressemble a central state (After Philipp IV Le Bel, and, especially Louis XI)

      Agreed that nationalized banking is necessary. But my funny point is that it already exists. Even Goldman Sachs is a national bank (it was paid many times over). Banks are all on a fiduciary state mission to create money (mostly under the form of credit) by leveraging “monetary base” directly given by the state (=”Central Bank”, although CB definiton varies… So all banks are actually national banks. Only now the states, and even the real economies, have become disconnected from the banks, or then connected just one way:”gimmme gimme gimme” say the banks…

      Europe is made of nation-states. A federal EU system already exists, but a nation such as France, having struggled to implement a secular republic for at least 17 centuries, is in no mood to throw away her super power status. After all, the underground French reasoning obviously goes, if Germany is a Republic, and Europe not under the Nazi boot, or a Nazi-british boot, it’s only because France stood in the way of Hitler.

      Right now the EU federal budget is 1% of EU GDP, whereas it is 17% for the USA fed. budget relative to USA GDP.

      So is balancing the budget bad? No. In the fullness of time, budgets have to be balanced. Although the occasional massive default (war, revolution) is unavoidable (that it did not happen in the UK and the USA is due to special circumstances, waning for the UK… the USA still has 10 million sq kilometers it directly control, most of it highly productive.

      The ECB cannot bring down the interest rates in Spain (say) down to the French (say) level without incurring debt of its own. So France and Germany are unwilling to pay for Med extravagance. The whole way. Some of the way, yes. The whole way, no. The Formula One Greece wants to build is a typical example. So it’s a balancing act, and it will go on.

      Peripheral EU countries are, roughly 2 to 5 richer than they otherwise would be without the EU. So there is actually lots of space for internal devaluation. Simply Spain should throw out the monarchy, Greece should tax its plutocrats, Italy should cut down on the Mafia, unpaid taxes, and MPs much richer than their French equivalents. And so on.

      France and Germany, by pushing down the deficits to .5% are sending a message that financial waste will not be tolerated anymore. They squeeze, so Club Med should squeeze too. I hope that answers all the questions…


  5. EugenR Says:

    Yes EU is a great achievement to humanity, yet for me as decendent of European Jews it came few years too late. It is rather painful for me to see how the European Jewish existence and with it their culture was totally annihilated, and nothing can correct it. In Israel and in US you can find only a very poor and partial imitation of what this culture was all about. Just to mention out of this culture grew up, Einstein, Marx, Freud and you name the rest. Bless “GOD” their memory. Patrice, I hope you don’t mind to mention God in your blog, after all even Einstein used him when he needed it for a good metaphor.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Dear Eugen: You are entirely correct. Hitler succeeded to mostly annihilate European Jews, and certainly the culture has quasi disappeared at this point. However, one should not despair, and trying to reconstitute it is, in my opinion feasible; look at Israel and Hebrew: all reconstituted! So why not Yiddish? This being said, one should keep in mind the Jews contributed to their own grave, by not fighting against fascism early enough.

      Many Jewish organizations cooperated with Hitler, as Hannah Arendt pointed out strongly, and she was hated for that truth… To which I arrived to independently, along a different, deeper path.

      An example is the Dreyfus affair in France; French Jews and their friends made a huge deal of it, accusing the state (on rather tenuous grounds) of “antisemitism“. It forced France to extirpate *most* of dangerous “antisemitism”. Conclusion when the Nazis occupied France, they killed only 75,000, most of them non French, a small fraction of the total number of Jews in France.

      By comparison about 120,000 Jews were assassinated in the Netherlands, i.e., most of the Jews there, and most of them Dutch.

      Some Jews made a famous trial of god, from inside the extermination camp where they were caged. It’s precisely too much trust in god that led Central European Jews to avoid confronting the authorities’ antijudaism. (As the Cynics insisted,) it is always wiser to be watchful of dogs howling from within men, than trust an imaginary god caring from above.
      God was the central mistake of European Central European Jewry, and is because it was atheistic that Jewry survived so well in France… But French Jews never spoke Yiddish, and Judaism in Gallia/Francia was (nearly always) a more relax affair.


  6. Nathan Daniel Curry Says:

    I love your eye for the details Patrice. You have a great gift.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Cynics would point out that, according to the proverb, as the devil is within the details, my eye for the details makes me devil obsessed…And I can’t deny. However, just after localizing food, localizing evil is the god that helped evolve the brain the most in the last 500 million years…


  7. Nathan Daniel Curry Says:

    Nathan Daniel Curry I definitely feel you are lost in Maya (and the consequences that are born of that in terms of consciousness)- to borrow the Indian phrase – but you have a great nuanced understanding of the world. The key difference between you and I is that I am not surprised by the story of greed in the world (what you call Plutocracy)….and I do not condemn it (I equally do not condone it). I just see clearly it is the story born of the blind leading the blind.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Sorry Nathan I tool so long to reply I was lost in the maya of an essay reaching new heights of logical twistiness… Lost in ma-ya? Lost in Not-That? Vielleicht, vee Haf Hat ein Mizunterztandink. Greed surprises me less in men than it does in crocodiles.

      The way I look at it, plutocracy is a social phenomenon attached to civilization. It’s not a basic instinct, like fascism is. Plutocracy itself is the product of three factors: a) animal instincts of the most basic types (hunger, will to power, territoriality) + b) capital, the fruit of civilization + c) the exponential function. I am not saying that’s a big time tragedy, anymore than the fact by car can go from zero to 60 in 4 seconds is a big time tragedy. I am not Proudhon. It just say that it’s a danger, with an exponential character, and which bends minds, both of individuals and civilizations.


  8. Dominique Deux Says:

    You mentioned the part of African soldiers in the Somme battle.

    At last one African officer must be mentioned in this context. Captain Ntchorere has a statue and a city square in Libreville, and a monument in France as well. He found himself the surviving senior officer of a motley group of Belgian, French and African soldiers, blocking the German advance for three full days around his position in a small wood, and surrendering only for lack of ammunition. The Germans were admirative of his resistance, and enraged to find he was black.

    In a development much like the fictitious River Kwai Bridge story, he refused, as an officer, to be put to work with the soldiers, and was shot by the Nazis.'Tchoréré


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Dear Dominique: Thanks for bringing this fact (which I did not know) to light. What I do know was that Capitaine N’Tchorere was not the only one: hundreds were assassinated, consecutive to that military feat. (I forgot where I read about that, but I read about it many times in specialized history magazines, long ago.) Psychologically the Nazis, who had to engage suicidal tactics when crossing the Meuse, suddenly found out that, although they believed France had been beaten, they still suffered heavy losses. Officially Naziland recognized 50,000 Nazi soldiers killed during the Battle of France, but various facts indicate that their losses were far higher (for example because the proportion of officers killed is too high).

      In truth it could have much worse for them, Nazis. If Petain and his fellow putschists had not called for a ceasefire, and if France had not applied stupid nationalistic reflexes such as refusing to send the hundreds of captured Nazi pilots to Canada, as the UK was asking, France could have gained air supremacy above… France, in July 1940. retreating to Algiers was also a no brainer. (The fact that was not done resulted, in my opinion, in the Franco-Algerian Civil war… which started May 8, 1945, by my own reckoning… And is still ongoing subterraneously, see the Algerian refusal to let France intervene in Mali.)

      In any case, the Nazis engaged in mass war crimes in Poland against the Poles in 1939, and in France in 1940… Practice makes perfect. Having crossed that psychological Rubicon made starting the mass massacre of Jews in June 1941 just more of the same. Overall, the Nazis applied holocaust methods to more than 30 nationalities and ethnic groups… The funny fact being that many of the top Nazis looked like embarrassingly inferior racial types, and ought to have eliminated first on purely esthetic grounds (as was pointed out at the time).

      By July 1943, Von Manstein judged Hitler, whose will faltered at Kursk, to be “weak”. By 1945, most of the Nazis revealed themselves to be cowards. See Martha Goebbels poisoning her 6 children, although some tried to resist and live… There are no words for people like that.


  9. JRich Says:

    J’ai préféré attendre la fin du sommet européen, qui a dévoile’ les différents entre Hollande et Merkel, les uns méfiants, échaudés il y a un siècle par les conséquences de l’inflation les autres ne voulant pas se plier à une stricte discipline budgétaire.
    Ce n’est vraiment pas à la hauteur du prix Nobel de la paix attribué à l’Union Européenne! Il est vrai que celui-ci lui a été attribué sur le passé depuis 50 ans, SANS GUERRE et avec la fin de l’URSS!


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Jacques: Merkel a des elections dans un an, et elle va avoir beaucoup de peine a survivre la recession qui va frapper. Elle le sait. Les petites banques allemandes font des petits traffics avec les autorites locales… Le SPD est maintenant dirige’ par Monsieur Propre, tres anti-plutocratique.

      Il s’agit de decisions majeures… La France veut garder la capacite’ de faire la guerre. L’inflation de 1923 etait, a mon avis un phenomene politique et proto Nazi. Schacht, l’ingenieur de l’hyper inflation, dix ans plus tard s’etait revele’ le plus grand support d’Hitler… Et il etait depuis longtemps l’instrument de JP Morgan…
      Je pense que la rue peut amener une evolution imprevue. Je pense ausi que la France et l’Allemagne collaborent, et que, tant qu’elles collaborent, l’Europe s’en tirera.


What do you think? Please join the debate! The simplest questions are often the deepest!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: 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

%d bloggers like this: