Chomsky: Putin Is “A Mad Dog” So We Must Submit

Vile leaders such as Putin stay in power because even more vile intellectuals such as Chomsky underwrite them mentally with just the right emotion: don’t contradict the terror, it may visit you.

Artful lies from Mr. Chomsky to be swallowed by those who know too little, or hate too much. Ukraine’s NATO request had been blocked by France and Germany long ago. Chomsky pretends that the encroachment of NATO incited “Russia” to invade. That’s a lie. Putin is not Russia, just a lunatic tyrant terrorizing Russia and the world, and someone has to stop him. So far that someone is Ukraine, a democracy whose president was elected on a peace-with-Russia platform, contrasting with his more hard line predecessor, who he defeated (and has supported Zelinskyi ever since the full bore attack by Putin, even donning armor and weapons and defeating the invaders as they attacke Kyiv).

Ukraine then inscribed joining NATO in its Constitution, and also joining the EU. On the latter, progress has been made, infuriating Putin and his plutocratic circles.

Chomsky equates EU and NATO, a lie easily swallowed by his ignorant or biased audience.

Equating the EU and NATO is making implicit propaganda for the US empire. Whereas the US arguably controls NATO… It’s rather France which is more influential in the EU, where nothing of great importance is done without French approval. Chomsky by insisting all of the EU is a US puppet, with no mind of its own, insists that the US is greater than it really is, itself the propaganda masterpiece.

Chomsky, by insisting that EU expansion is NATO expansion, denies the existence of the EU, and in particular denies the existence of the EU as a potential counterweight to the US Deep State. At the limit Chomsky’s position is racist: EU, thus Europeans, don’t exist. The vocation of Eastern Europe, hence all of Europe, is to live under Kremling hegemony.

But who gave Kremlin hegemony onto Europe? Well the US Deep State made that formal at Yalta, in Crimea, in 1945.

How come the US Deep State gave massive help to the Kremlin, a genocidal tyranny who had killed 6 million Ukrainians in 1933? Less that one year before providing enormously military help to the genocidal tyrant in Moscow, the US Deep State had refused any helpt to France a democratic republic, which is, moreover, the parent of the USA.

So the question the US Deep State and Chomsky have to answer is why was the Kremlin preferred to France for so long? The question has to do with who controls the USA and for what purpose.

When the vile gets witty, we must cut the crap.

Chomsky, counterfactually, claims that because of the Ukrainian war “Europe is declining, suffering from deindustrialization”. It’s a lie: because of the war, precisely, France has already tripled its production of 155mm shells (each shell takes 2 years to produce, usually) and France is ramping up its Defense Industrial Base, directly from Ukrainian contracts. French defense giant Thales has relaunched into 24/7 production of missiles such as Starstreak, the fastest MANPAD around (the plant is in North Ireland and the UK is paying for the missiles).

True, Germany had to find European solutions to the end of its addiction to Putin, and is the only major economy in recession in 2023. But the Euro is overvalued relative to the dollar, although mortgage interest in the EU is only 4%, while 7% in the US..

Overall, the long held (since 500 CE) French thesis of Europe Puissance (Power Europe) is gaining ground. Europe with significant military means and the will to project them. Poland is arming to the teeth. France and UK are boosting their strategic nuke programs (nukes are expensive to keep functional).

The F16 and air supremacy program for Ukraine implicates countries who favored fascist aggression in 1914 and 1939, in the guise of their pseudo-neutrality, which was crucial to the German fascist aggressors’ war efforts. In 1914 and 1939, these small but venimous neutrals enabled fascist genocidal Germany to attack democracies, and prevented the two big democracies, France and Britain to defeat easily fascist genocidal racist tyrannic mad dog Kaiserreich and Dritte Reich.

But now these once greedy, nasty and viles pseudo-neutrals have joined France and Britain in allying themselves against the fascist terrorist genocidal monarch in the Kremlin.

Who said there were no positive to the Ukraine war? Sweden, the Netherlands, Denmark, even Turkey have learned to exhibit a sense of where democracy lays. True democracy is explicitly a must of the European Constitution. Hey, we may even hope that Switzerland formally abandon the premise that democracies can be “neutral” to tyranny. The Suisses are nearly there: Parliement voted the authorization of re-exportation of Swiss made weapons… Retroactively.… To celebrate this, I saw two French Rafales, supersonic stealth fighter-bombers, fly along the border, just two hundred meters up…

Those countries will provide planes while discreetly others (UK, France, Romania) provide training. The very existence of this program implies that the EU thinks the war will last long. F16 and Swedish Saab Gripens are controlled by the US… which then is dragged reluctantly in providing Ukraine with an air force.

Chomsky repeats word for word Putin and his henchmen propaganda by saying that Russia can’t be defeated because it has nukes. Chomsky pudically calls them “ultimate weapons”. Russia has them, says Chomsky, Ukraine doesn’t. So Putin wins. Understanding that means for realistic Chomsky not living in a “dream world“.But Chomsky is ignorant of a crucial point about “ultimate weapons“: this situation happened before. No less than Hitler should teach Chomsky there.

Hitler had neurotoxic gas in huge quantities, and the means to send them afar. However Hitler didn’t use those huge quantities of gas: Hitler knew that his orders would not have been enacted. Why does Chomsky believe Putin to be somehow superior to Hitler in having his will obeyed? Is Putin superhuman, because everybody can see he is an assassin, whereas many pretended Hitler was not? Or has Chomsky fallen under the spell of Putin, as many Russians have, because they know too little? And because they are weak and thus admire the strong, and want to be like them?

Interestingly the “Peace plan” proposed by Chomsky is exactly the present “reasonable” diplomatic ceasefire presently proposed by Russia’s Lavrov. Chomsky supports Putin in Georgia, claiming that Georgia invaded… itself, and Putin, with great restraint, saved Georgia from genocidizing itself. And Chomsky naturally omits the fact that Putin recently withdrew recognition of Moldova as an independent country. 

Systematically, just as he equates EU and NATO, Chomsky equates Putin and Russia. Chomsky calls that to be not dreaming. In truth Chomsky goes much further in his nightmare. Chomsky calls “Putin a mad dog” and Chomsky repeatedly argues, that’s his one and only argument, that, as a mad dog, Putin will destroy Ukraine with nukes if he loses. Ergo, Putin can’t lose, because he is a mad dog and mad dogs rule. 

Like many “woke”, pacifist fanatics, pseudo-“left” intellectuals, Mr. Chomsky never studied the history of war in depth. And in particular the history of tyranny. Putin claims he is Russia. Chomsky approves, and claims Russia is strong. Does he dream of Putin as a lover at night? In truth tyrants cannot in general be identified with the tyrannies they lead. If Putin is assassinated, his henchmen will quickly follow. Most of the Russian military is not interested by dying in a nuclear holocaust. Putin’s orders have to go through that military, and that is why Putin is busy arresting military leaders (as so-called general Armageddon, who led the air force until two months ago when Putin jailed him… and was as decorated and rank as Gerasimov, head of the armed forces) or the top fanatic who led the Donbas rebellion in 2014, Girkin (jailed in August 2023)… And of course the three top leaders of the Wagner Group, assassinated, and general Popov, reassigned to Syria…

Chomsky is depicting as a hard core realist, but had core historiscim shows that, when in Russia a Czar loses a major war, he is disposed of by rebellion. So rebellion is the most likely outcome, and the signs are aplenty, Putin himself said it. Tellingly, Chomsky does not evoke that possibility at all, either from ignorance, or plain bad faith. Or both. Probably both. Chomsky is more Putin than Putin himself. Chomsky wants desperately the world to be under the rule of mad dog nuclear tyrant.

Chomsky is exactly the sort of pseudo-intellectuals who made the likes of Hitler leaders; mad dogs all, and those who fear them.

Patrice Ayme

Putin submitted Angeal Merkel with huge dogs. The weak minded German leader (probably herself a KGB plant, like the guy on the right) admitted she was terrified each time this happened. But she was so terrified, she couldn’t even talk about it. Chomsky is as simple.

Ukraine Fighting For Freedom Since 1240 CE. Not NATO’s Fault. Stop Trying To Please Psycho Putin!

The Maidan Revolution of 2014 was brought about by the betrayal of the Ukrainian president, the Russia-leaning Viktor Yanukovych. Under Putin’s order, Yanukovych tried to ignore laws passed before his rule on preparing Ukraine to join the European Union. The Ukrainian youth saw that this subjugation to the Kremlin tyrant meant indefinite servitude to the Kremlin tyrant and his lackeys (because this is what happened multiple times in Ukrainian history in the last 8 centuries; Ukraine has its own tradition, alphabet, language, and is much more Scandinavian than the Kremlin, which tried to westernize, after being mongolized, as early as under Ivan The Terrible, circa 1560 CE…).

Ukrainian youth revolted, as it should have (Putin agents, leaning on the fact history is little studied, claim it was all US instigated, as if Ukraine fight for freedom had not started 8 centuries ago…) And that was a good thing all progressives and partisans of freedom ought to support. 

Ukraine has been fighting for recovering its independence since 1240 CE, when Kyiv was annihilated by the Mongols, and the master of the Kremlin, Saint Alexander Nevsky, was made “Prince of Kiev”… by said Mongols. The Mongols would come back two centuries later and sack Kyiv again (Ukraine keeps rising from its ashes as the land is wealthy and its people brave). Then the Kremlin would try, for centuries, to conquer Ukraine, by hook or by crook… Because Ukraine is so wealthy in well irrigated agricultural lands and abundant in minerals (the Donbas industry was developed by Western European capital).

Ambitious and murderous German princess Catherine II is the one who conquered Crimea for the Kremlin. Initially Kyiv had liberated Christian Crimea in the Tenth Century and as a reward, Vladimir of Kyiv married Anna, the sister of the emperor in Constantinople.
In the Eleventh Century, the Princess of Kyiv, also named Anna, became the ruling queen of France: she spoke six languages. She thought the Franks over whom she ruled were barbarians. Her descendants ruled France. There are statues of her in France, there should be more.

Prince Vladimir the Great on the right, leader of Kyivian Rus, 1050 years ago. Obverse of the coin shows the Ukrainian Trident, originally a Swedish symbol two thousand years old (at least from island of Gotland, hence the necessity to use a trident to harpoon fishes; now used to harpoon Orcs.

The Kremlin grew as the collaborative executioner arm and tax collector of the occupying Golden Horde. This brutalism enabled it to subjugate and conquer the greatest land empire. But this is not the time for subjugation, which can only bring holocausts.

***

The preceding is a slightly expanded and more biting version of a comment sent to the New York Times in answer to a lying article on 6/16/2023, which accused NATO of causing distress to a man, Putin, and thus, bringing the invasion of Ukraine. The article urged the “West’ to lower its expectations and stop causing wars. An amazingly corrupt article rolling out no deep fact.

My comment was of course not published by the propaganda newspaper. That kind of censorship should be against the law, because it enables the NYT to propagate lies. Democracies should not allow the propagation of lies which can kill millions. After all that applies to social networks, and the NYT is the core of the most influential social network in the world.

***

Talking obsessively about NATO hides the fact that Putin hates the EU even more. Putin uses his NATO pain as a Trojan Horse against the EU. It’s the other way around from what gullible Putin agents have it.

The mutual defense clause, Article 42(7) of the Treaty on European Union, provides that if a Member State is the victim of armed aggression on its territory, the other Member States have an obligation to aid and assist it by all the means in their power, in accordance with Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations.

So why are Putin agents not accusing the UN, as they are at it?

In the 1930 s and 1940s, an entire class of highly influential US plutocrats, many of them close friends of Roosevelt (Hopkins, Harrimans, etc.) discovered that they could leverage the US empire and their personal powers, by making deals with psychopaths like Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, Hirohito, Franco even Ho Chi Minh. The French government protested, and thus Roosevelt hated France and tried to lie to France as much as he could. Next he gave Stalin, who had crucially helped in the invasion of France in 1940, all he needed to invade and occupy half of Europe.

Rule number one was to hide what those US plutocrats and imperialists were doing under the cover of lenifying discourses to the contrary (that always work with simple minds). This sort of policy was pursued under Putin and Xi and made those tyrants ever more powerful to the point of clear and blatant danger. That worked well until it transpired that Xi wanted to conquer Asia (Xi started by invading the EEZs of no less than seven countries in the South China sea), and Trump really didn’t like it.

The ever fungible Obama stayed friends with “Vladimir” even after the latter invaded countries. Dems, to confuse thoroughly, then accused Trump of being a Kremlin agent, when actually Obama’s policies had been extremely Russian friendly. Years earlier, France, which had been extremely helpful to Putin, especially for developing oil and gas infrastructure and plants in the Arctic Ocean,  had decided that selling to the Kremlin the aircraft carriers it had ordered was not moral or smart, and refused delivery…

Fortunately Biden followed Trump, not Obama or his own son Hunter, in finally resisting Putin…

Anyway, here we are: NATO has nothing to do with attacking Ukraine. Just like the Jews had nothing to do in causing World War Two, although the Nazis used to say that… doesn’t make it true. So Putin says he had to destroy Chenchya, and invade Georgia, or Ukraine, because of NATO. Psychopaths tend to hurl lots of accusations, but only banana brains take them seriously.

Patrice Ayme

Hopeless Fight With European Union Is Why PM Boris Johnson Really Resigned

Superficialists have been going around saying superficial things about parties and booze. They argue that Boris Johnson, the Brexit architect and UK Prime Minister 2019-2022 resigned because he and his collaborators merrilly got drunk, without wearing masks, nor social distancing, while imposing those constraints fiercely on the British public. The PM got fined, a first for Britain… for lockdown violation. Sure, it didn’t help, but it was survivable. 

***

What people, including Members of Parliament, say is supposed to be what they think aloud, but it is not necessarily what their brains are fully in the process of considering. Just as there is a subconscious, there is also a preconscious. The PRECONSCIOUS, remember that notion, it’s important. Yes, there were scandals, especially about inebriation, but those were in the past.

What laid heavily on the present British government’s mind was Boris Johnson’s attempted violation of its international treaty with the European Union. 

***

Days before Boris’ resignation declaration, the EU gave him an ultimatum. Boris has been trying to cancel the international treaty with the EU regarding Northern Ireland which keeps the peace there. 

The EU commission, which is the managerial executive branch of the EU, threatened the PM with immediate retaliation, for example in the distribution of scientific funding to Britain… The UK is still part of the EU’s Horizon Program, and much prestigious British scientific research depends upon it. The immediate cessation of funding would have been disastrous, and could not have been compensated by the UK government for months, if at all.    

***

Johnson was Brexit’s main architect. Brexit, as conceived by him, a complete severance, has failed, and could only fail. The fundamental reason is that the British archipelago is part of Europe, not east of New Zealand. 

To become more reasonable, the next UK PM will have to bring the UK and EU closer together...

Patrice Ayme

  

Boris was not reasonable. Not at all. Violating international treaties is what the likes of dictators do. Ursula von den Leyen, President of the EU Commission for as long as Boris Johnson had been Prime Minister, since 2019, threatened to punish him, and Britain with him. So Boris had to go. Boris couldn’t get out of that one.

Hungary As Bête Noire Of Pseudo-Progressive Child Sexual Mutilators

Read all about billionaire lovers censoring me…

Freaking out about Eastern Europe’s alleged anti-democratic tendencies is popular with pseudo-progressives anxious to express a will to clean up politics somewhere else than their own backyard. The New York Times, in the guise of attacking Tucker Carlson, its formidable bête noire, ran a gigantic piece against Hungary. To the author’s credit, he published three of my comments (not the fourth one, though). Mr. Bouie compared Tucker to a number of abominable racists, and, as unwarranted, and by innuendo, applied the same treatment to Hungary. No specific point was made about Hungary, besides the fact that bête noire Tucker Carlson was visiting Hungary and talking there. The title of the anti-Hungarian piece was: “Tucker Carlson Has a New Hero. Tucker Carlson is only the latest — and most famous — American conservative to find inspiration in the autocratic government of Hungary under Viktor Orban.

Auto-cratic means: power of one. On the face of it, to insinuate that Hungary is an autocracy is an outright lie. Orban won several parliamentary elections, in part because he resists many of the EU’s tendencies. I sent a milder version of the following:

Patrice Ayme: What’s wrong with Orban already? Last I looked, Hungary was still a fully functioning parliamentary democracy with a governing party endowed with a large majority, and a full member of the European Union. 

OK, so the Hungarian Parliament passed a law on the teaching of gender orientations in school that some non Hungarians don’t like, and the Paris based Reporters Without Borders proclaimed Orban was a “freedom press predator” (French media are owned by billionaire plutocrats, so why does not Reporters Without Borders focus on that? Because it will have nothing to eat?)… 

Great screaming then, all over the pseudo-progressive landscape about how bad the parliamentary democracy in Budapest is… But Hungary still gets nearly 5% of its GDP as subsidies from the EU… 

The NYT compared Hungary with the Franco regime. The Franco regime was installed after a three years civil war against the Spanish republic, and followed by many years of massacres. In the end, millions of Spaniards were killed by Franco. The comparison is outrageous, and shows the NYT does not know history at all, in areas it claims to know enough to pontificate. 

So I added: Hungary is not the Franco regime, who was non-admissible to the EU. Spain had to switch to a democratic parliamentary regime before coming into the EU. The EU accepts only such democracies as members.

pb4072 DC area commented:

@Patrice Ayme That’s correct, but, the EU is doing its best to counter Orban. Orban and the Poles, too. Both are anti-democratic regimes. Both were welcomed  into the EU soon after the Wall fell. A very different time.

My answer: @pb4072 “EU doing its best to counter Orban?” Let’s not exaggerate. Some are calling to reduce the huge subsidy flow to Hungary from the EU, 5% GDP, as I said. But the EU is democratic (sort of) and very complex, it has many important individuals with varied opinions. 

The broad picture of subsidizing Eastern Europe is still in place. That Orban is called a dictator inside the EU is a joke the president of the EC, Jean Claude Juncker, once made, once saluting Orban before breakfast that way: “Hi, dictator!” 

Times are not that different that these EU subsidies to Hungary would stop. Poland is getting a free pass on massive coal usage, for example. Poles are also quick to remind the Germans that they would have a much bigger population, had Germany not massacred a large part of the Polish population in WW2. To this Germany has nothing to say, but to agree to more leniency towards Poland. The EU is presently defending, at least verbally, Ukraine against the Russian dictator, so the EU’s will to integrate all of Europe is far from dead.

Leonard from Chicago found Orban successful:

@Patrice Ayme, countries can become more or less democratic, as we’ve witnessed in our own history. Orban had been successful in undermining democratic institutions in Hungary.

My answer: All leaders at some point are accused of undermining democracy, in all democracies, that’s what leadership in a democracy is all about. 

The bottom line in recent years is that the EU has tried to force Eastern Europe to accept (mostly) Muslim refugees, and Eastern Europe’s parliaments have refused to accept huge numbers. Well, that’s called democracy. Similarly the Hungarian Parliament does not believe the LGBQT mantra as found in the USA presently is appropriate teaching in school. Well, that’s called democracy. Much US screaming against Hungary has to do with the fact that a private university financed by one of the world’s wealthiest individuals, a famous European underminer (he kicked the UK out of the ECU system), has seen its accreditation removed…. Well, that’s called democracy, and US whining seems imperialistic in nature: we, the US, are so sorry to see that we cannot teach Hungarians what politically correct thinking is, namely, do as we say…. 

That latter comment was blocked by the New York Times: it went a few truths too far: I alluded to George Soros, who made billions destroying the pound-ECU link. Soros, initially a Hungarian Jew, now funds strife in the USA ( many say). Soros camps as a holocaust survivor… some insinuate his survival was not without blemish as he got sheltered by a fascist government official; my own grandfather was not confiscating Jewish property as Soros’ godfather was, but he was the head of waterworks in Grenoble, a government position… and saved more than 100 Jews…). Soros funded a private university in Hungary. His foundation, led by his son, poured hundreds of million dollars in “Black Lives”, because they “matter”.

The NYT is 100% behind Soros, because Soros is a “lover of man” (philanthrope)… Presumably neither us nor Tucker Carlson are “lovers of man”. Only plutocrats can “love man”.

And here is the problem: my statements were rather mild. But I dared to look at US plutocracy with suspicion: immediate censorship! Whereas the comparison the NYT made implicitly or explicitly between today’s Hungary and Franco’s regime or the Rhodesian regime, and other racist, colonialist regimes were deeply deranged.

As it is the LBG QRSTU XYZ have plenty of rights already in Hungary… Just not ALL the rights. Not yet. The anti-homosexual and gender change propaganda to minor law was passed in June, 157 to one. Signed into law by the president, it will now be submitted to a referendum.

Personally I think sexual mutilation of children should be against the law. How dare I phrase it this way? I know at least two boys (11 years old) who are considered to have become girls… years ago (friends of my 11 year old daughter). They are obviously in need of strong psycho help (but they are not getting it… long story)

Tucker Carlson will phrase it the same way as I do after he reads this: sexual mutilation of children, bad. Does that make us into conservators of normal hormonal processes, and regressives? (“regressive” is a notion I myself long used and that the NYT just adopted)

No. Sexual mutilation of children has been viewed as an outrage for three millennia in the West. The East is another matter, and Constantinople’s Roman empire was significantly governed by eunuchs… So was the “Central State” (China). It did not come out right.

Sexual mutilation and biological growth disruption does not need propaganda. That’s what the Hungarian Parliament thinks. The world’s most titanic plutocrats may differ, because, already endowed by super macho security details, they may prefer to rule over eunuchs.

Patrice Ayme 

A drag queen waves a rainbow flag during an LGBT rights demonstration in front of the Hungarian Parliament building in Budapest, Hungary on June. 14, 2021. During the protest human rights activists called on lawmakers in Hungary to reject legislation banning any content portraying or promoting homosexuality or sex reassignment to anyone under 18. The bills, aiming at fighting pedophilia, have various amendments which would outlaw any depiction or discussion of different gender identities to youth in the public sphere. (AP Photo/Bela Szandelszky)

Terrible things happening in Hungary…

Europe United States’ (Of America!) What Deep Greek and Frankish History Teaches On Brexit Pettiness

Brexit repeats a mood of enmity from hysteria and pettiness, seen in Ancient Greece, feeding Greek hatred for Greeks. That self-defeating obsession was Greece’s undermining, enabling Rome to subjugate Greek mindfulness with Roman greed. Greece subjugation, when not outright annihilation, brought, in turn, two millennia of fascism and plutocracy, thereafter, having forgotten what democracy truly is.

However, the Greeks had the excuse of variegated origins, and the intrusion of an alien superpower, Rome. Instead, right now the USA and the Europe have a common origin, the latter being not just parent of the former, but having long been one superpower made of bits and pieces. Common Euro-American origin undermines the division ideology, not just because we don’t want to go down the Greco-Roman, dog eats dog suicidal slippery slope, but also because this common origin deprives division of its motivation.

***

Empires are a fact. Not just a theory, but a fact. “Empire” means the government is endowed with imperium, a powerful, sometimes lethal command of elected authority. It does not necessarily mean fascist dictatorship. The Roman Republic was an empire, before it got rotten, fascist, mass exterminating and inhuman. The USA is certainly an empire, and a representative democracy, and nearly a direct democracy in California. Empires present advantages, by breaking down barriers, and petty local regulations, corruption, creating big markets, powerful defense, etc. Ancient Greece failed because it failed to constitute an empire. Athens tried, and failed, because of the plutocratic alliance of Sparta and Persia. A century later, Macedonian plutocracy imposed plutocracy to Athens. Later, while Greek city states fought each other, Rome came in, and annihilated Corinth, viewed as too democratic because it was fighting Sparta. Then Rome proceeded to reduce all of Greece into slavery (with a few tiny counterexamples, to justify the rest).

This shows only a fraction of the Greek world (which extended to Egypt, Libya, Crimea, Georgia, etc.) Moreover the map itself oversimplifies. For example Thessaly, in blue, south of green Macedonia, was, itself, a CONFEDERATION of cities. So this is a map of confederation, mostly! So far, so good, but they were actually fighting each other. So cities with, say 20,000 citizens, fought each other… And the Roman legions showed up. Republican Rome in 150 BCE had a population of at least three million, and that expanded enormously, by a factor of ten, as many states (say other Italians, Provincia (“Provence”), Africa, Iberia) became part of the empire. With a demography at least 40 times the most populous Greek city-state, Athens, Rome could do whatever its increasingly brutish instincts told it to do with Greek civilization. Civilizationally speaking, Rome, relative to Greece, was a big noise and fury, signifying nothing… Had the Greeks being federalized, with a Greek army, Rome could not have subdued them. But that was completely impossible: cities such as Sparta and Athens had just the love of (their own) freedom in common… Whereas the USA is the child of France and Britain 

There was no Ancient Greek empire, because the Greeks were too busy developing crazed out peculiarities, and putting lots of pride in this… similar to Brexiters. The ancient Greeks were obsessed by their little selves and quirks [1]. A Greek empire could have instilled some reason, and enabled ancient Greek civilization, the most advanced to survive. Same nowadays in Europe.

For example, Great Britain is corrupt. Corrupt in a way peculiar to Great Britain. Thus, being part of a larger ensemble may enable the UK to come out of this corruption. Indeed, the EU tried to make Great Britain less corrupt, but the corrupt ones rebelled, and, through their dominance of the minds of their unenlightened subjects, got them to decide against their best interest.

113,000 potential taxpayers are living in Britain while also being a ‘non-domiciled’ in the U.K… as far as taxes are concerned. Those extremely wealthy individuals control the UK media… to the point even intelligent Brits don’t know any better.

Tax avoidance by the global elite is eating the world’s social structure with extreme inequality. It was high time to do something about it within Europe, starting with the most egregious behavior.

EU member states have until 31 December 2019 to make this sort of blatant tax avoidance scheme by plutocrats illegal in their own national law. British plutocrats paying tax? Unimaginable! God save the queen of tax evasion!

This tax evasion is the driving force behind Brexit: the advocates of Brexit, pigeons paid by some of the world’s richest individuals have imprinted millions of parrots, who love to imagine themselves as “Non-Doms”. Why isn’t this motivation advertised more?

Why? Consider France: the media there is owned by plutocrats too, just as in the UK, and they have huge tax avoidance schemes in place as laws in the tax system. If the Pluts were stupid enough to call attention to the non-Dom reason for Brexit, they would bring along a mood questioning tax avoidance schemes in general…. and in particular, the schemes contrived in the legal system they profit from…

British Plutocracy Hates Losing Its Tax Advantages, hence Came To Hate Europe. And made sure to make the minds of the British that way, through its control of media. We The People should control control of the media by the few and wealthiest. It is a case where absolute control is needed.

The world is divided in empires, and some are vassal to others. One empire is dominant: the USA. One recently decided to be uppity: China. It’s put back into its proper place by its former sponsor, the USA.

The European UNION is an empire, yet just a subsidiary of the USA, and will stay that way forever, just as parents become dependent upon their child. A standing alone UK would be even more of a US puppet.

The present world picture is enlightened by considering what happened in the Middle Ages, or in Ancient Greece. In the Middle Ages, the two superpowers, England, the child, and “France”, the parent, were in conflict. The kings of Francia, a number of Valois, versus the Plantagenets, the guys who planted genets… It was a big mess, roaring about, signifying nothing.

The EU is a confederation vassal to the USA, similar to the “free” Greek Confederacies, themselves made of many city-states, vassal to Rome in the First and Second Centuries, BCE. The UK breaking away from the EU is similar to a Greek city-state separating from the Confederacy it belonged to. It happened many times, fostering divisions among the Greeks… thereafter to be gobbled up by Roman fascism…   Brexit is more of this petty hysterical nationalism which characterized the Greeks, while Rome was thinking universally…

However, on second, deeper inspection, the relationship between France, Britain, Germany, the USA (and their ideological satellites, including Australia and Italy) is not as in between Greek city-states, or Greece and Rome. Indeed Greek city-states had just one language, but various origins.

And Rome was still something else, tracing itself to Ilion (Troy). Whereas, in the “West”, all can be traced to Celts, Romans and Greece, through the gauntlet of the Franks (Imperium Francorum, by 800 CE the Renovated Roman Empire, RRE).

Things get even more complicated, when one realizes that France and Britain, in a number of ways, gave birth to the USA.

Now, indeed, the Greeks brought to the Romans knowledge, and even the alphabet (through “Magna Grecia”,as in Neopolis, “Naples”, to the south). So this way, Greece gave birth to Rome, intellectually speaking.

But in Western Europe, most of the Greco-Roman law, organization, moods, let alone language, and religion, survived through the Franks, and then drove the unification of Europe, complete by 800-1066 CE. See the Franks conquering all of Germany by 800 CE, and Eastern Europe, finding silver there, thus relaunching a currency economy, which Rome didn’t have enough precious metal to run; see the Franks conquer England by 1066 CE, and freeing the slaves… Or conquering Sicily against the Muslims, a few years later.

This is this united Europe, yet fighting with itself, which gave birth to the USA. As I said, even when fighting itself, as Greece was fighting itself, Europe was much more united than Ancient Greece, because of the common Greco-Roman-Frankish origin: the Greeks never had any such unification event: even when they went to attack Ilion/Troy, that was an alliance of city-states with very different origins (for example Sparta had nothing in common with Athens, their origins, Dorain for the former, were different).

European unification is actually very old, older than Rome: the big god of the Celts was… Hermes, the Greek god of commerce, travel, etc. Later, the rising Roman military power depended upon (purchased!) Celtic metallurgy.

Delusional Brexiters claim California will someday want to secede. They don’t understand that the US empire is an advantage and amplifier, for California. Why would California want to leave an Union it leads by the nose… with an average of a few referendums every few months?

The real problem of Europe right now is not enough local, direct democracy. Switzerland should be imitated, instead of going the Napoleonic route favored by Boris I Johnson… Because that the funny thing: Brexiters are proposing to impose the Napoleonic “Continental System“… complete with blockade…

Certainly, if the British people understood that the Brexit scheme was just motivated by having the wealthiest British citizens keeping on avoiding taxes, they would vote through referendum for exactly what the EU is trying to impose on December 31, 2019. That sort of EU decisions is taken actually by all the elected governments getting together inside the European Council, and hashing down a consensus. It would be better if such decisions were assisted by global EU referendums.

The EU will stay vassal to its child, the USA. Because the US is a stronger federation (some of its strength due to luck, some to diligence). The US is already a European Union… But on its own (conquered) continent.

Meanwhile, the pettiness of Brexiters waste all Europeans’ time away from more significant issues. And it will never end: the present drama is just about the transition period. After that, there will be ten years of exit negotiations. Brexit is Brexinfinity, because Britain is in Europe, whether it likes it or not, and whether it’s led by Henry VIII, Boris I, or Napoleon… Dumb stuff.

Meanwhile an hostile agent (Iran or proxies) made at least 17 impacts on the world’s largest oil installations, in Saudi Arabia, using GPS guided cruise missiles. (yes GPS is a US system). That took out 7% of the world oil production (5.7 million barrels out of 81 millions). At the limit, that doesn’t’ affect the ruling empire, the USA… which is the world’s top oil producer, and also the world’s top sustainable energy producer. But it does affect its European vassals, which are livid… And soon to feel much more affectionate to Uncle Sam, and its big muscles… Trump doesn’t want a war, especially now with a tough election ahead. Iran knows this. But, when the Deep State is really smart, and really capable, it knows nothing beats maximal force.

In an empire, force, applied well and best, is more important than elections, because survival is more important than formalities [2]. Not just my opinion: the Roman Republic, the longest Republic, ever, lasted five centuries. Rome had the function known as the “dictatorship” (for special emergencies as when a Gallic horde sieged, sacked, and blackmailed Rome, before being justly annihilated…)

Patrice Ayme

***

***

P/S: The preceding is not meant to assert that, say, British fishermen are wrong, when they complain French fishermen come over and fish in their more fish rich waters… That seems to be true, and is, at first sight, an injustice. However, the first reasoning is fishy, because much, if not most, of the British fish production is sold on the continent… Without custom duties! The EU, as it exists, doesn’t have the means to impose its laws: they are enforced by the member states. The fish quarrel can, and should be, solved on a local level. There are thousands of those, no problem.

***

[1] As I said, Athens had an empire for a while… and needed one because of its wheat coming from the Pont (hundreds of kilometers east of Byzantium). That empire was broken because of the satanic alliance of Sparta with Persia… And later, again, by Macedonia’s Antipater…

***

[2] Greek city-states, most of them real, that is, direct democracies (to Cicero’s disgust), had emergency provisions to suspend all laws in case of vital emergencies… Just like the Roman Republic.

Growing Hatred: Brexit Turning Its Back To Europe’s Best. While EU To Be Led By (Super) Women.

Suppose one has a strong positive feeling, such as loving the music and words of Ludwig Van Beethoven’s Ode to Joy. This is the European anthem. As an orchestra played it in the European Parliament, 29 British Members of The European Parliament turned their backs. They wanted to show how much they despised the following words, the 9th Symphony, and the idea of a European Union. Or maybe they just hate peace, a written constitution, true democracy? (The present selection of the clown Boris Johnson for UK Prime Minister by 160,000 people is hardly something democratic in a country of 66 millions…) Ludwig:

Joy, beautiful spark of Divinity…
We enter, drunk with fire,
Heavenly One, thy sanctuary!
Your magic binds again
What convention strictly divided;*
All people become siblings,
Where your gentle wing abides.

Who has succeeded in the great attempt,
To be a friend’s friend,
Whoever has won a lovely woman,
Add his to the jubilation!
Indeed, who even just has one soul
To call his own in this world!…

All creatures drink of joy
At the nature’s breasts.
All Just Ones, all Evil Ones
Follow her trail of roses.
Kisses she gave us and grapevines,
A friend, proven in death.
Lust was given to the worm 
And the cherub stands before God.

Gladly, like His suns fly
through the heavens’ grand plan 
Go on, brothers, your way,
Joyful, like a hero to victory.

Be embraced, Millions!
This kiss to all the world!
….

Members of the Brexit Party turn their back to the assembly as the European anthem is played during the first plenary session of the newly elected European Parliament in Strasbourg, France, July 2, 2019. REUTERS/Vincent KesslerWhat do they want? Disunion, the opposite of Union? Could war be far? Oh, many will say, this has nothing to do with war. However, after the Franks led by the “prince and duke, count of Normandy” (Princeps, Dux, Comes) conquered England in 1066 CE, France and England were united for generations. Little things led to great separations, and war between siblings. The wars between England and France, until the Sixteenth Century, were all Franco-French affairs. Nearly five centuries of Franco-French wars… which turned devastating inside France, after a while.

The show above has no meaning, but to stoke that greatest of human strengths: unbounded hatred, where small differences are turned into the most aggressive postures.

Meanwhile the European Council, that is the heads of the state of the 27 EU members (minus crazed Britain), finally decided to name two women to lead the European Union: Ursula Von Den Leyen, to head the European Commission, and Lagarde, to head the European Central Bank. Leyen was once seen as Merkel’s successor, and is long serving German defense minister. An MD with seven children, she speaks perfect German, English and French. Lagarde is the long serving head of the IMF (she put herself on leave immediately). The Council’s nominations happened after lots of haggling; an early candidate the Dutch Timmermans was viewed as anti-East European by East Europeans, for pushing for sanctions against perceived non-democratic-enough Eastern European countries; also Italy rightly condemned his anti-“populism”; thus he was rejected.

Young French Monkey-In-Chief Macron then got the great idea to propose Von Leyen (Notice: a French selects and launches a great German…) Von Leyen introduced improved maternity and paternity benefits as Germany’s family affairs minister and drove forward boardroom gender quotas. She is one of Europe’s most popular politicians (after degrees in economic and medicine, she started politics in her 40s).

Lagarde and Ursula von der Leyen, have to be confirmed by the European Parliament (suspense! But they should please everybody… but for the sad clowns above)

No doubt the British haters represented above, will have nothing intelligent to say. Britain, in truth, has no Constitution, just habits. And this is going to bring a constitutional crisis.

The United States of Europe already exists… In America. The USA has a constitution, and that Federal ensemble was created by Europeans, and their descendants, using mostly Franco-British ideas (Montesquieu, Locke, etc.) … However, individual US states have lots of freedom. In the OK Corral confrontation between California and Trump, Trump is not winning: he mostly prefers to do other things than to take California head-on.

Hence to create a federal state inside geographical Europe is just learning from the European experience in America. Said Federal State, the European Union, is federalizing ever more. Macron wants to deepen the Union before new countries join. He is right.

Having Lagarde as ECB chief is a great advance: she managed the IMF very well, and she is for easy money, or, at least enough to let the economy work (differently from the Germans, whose hypocritical lying on tight money has been exposed here… this is going to change). She is demonstrating this presently with the near catastrophic situation in Argentina… And has in general insisted that countries given IMF loans not been squeezed in vital social services.

Anyway, happily surprised by these two top choices…

Patrice Ayme

***

***

(The Brexit team stays in place…)

 

European Union Should Extent Brexit (Article 50) Two Years. Without UK European Parliament Privileges!

Indeed, as I will explain more below, the European Parliament doesn’t create laws, just approve them. Great Britain is already out ot the European Council (which launches laws).

The House of Commons, the UK Parliament, rejected the UK government’s “Withdrawal Agreement from the European Union“, for the third time. According to the EU’s ultimatum to Great Britain, the UK will be thrown out of the EU on April 12, in 14 days. This expulsion is unwise, and no civilized way to proceed. I will thereafter suggest a different course: extending massively Article 50, putting Brexit on the European backburner, a slow simmer in the background, leaving time for Great Britain to figure out its existential issues, its Brexistential issues… Shile Europe is allowed to reconsider the future, the planet, civilization, progress, democracy, and other things which have disappeared from the Brexit debate…

The interminable Brexit process is paralyzing Europe (both UK and EU). The temptation is to expedite it, in the hope of being done with it. That will not work: instead, it will make the situation way worse. If Brexit happened on April 12, 2019, in two weeks, ten years of divisive negotiations would ensue. How to avoid that? Forget about it! Forget about Brexit, send it to the purgatory of the House of Commons, under the good care of its weaker, the excellent right honorable gentleman, Speaker John Bercow.

Another new NO, the ninth, was added on Friday. The Third No on the withdrawal agreement.

***

How And Why LEGALLY EXCLUDE the UK From The EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT (Until the UK Decides to Revoke Article 50, & Remain In the EU):

Europeans have to let the British Parliament find a solution and have it ratified by the British People, in a referendum. That will take at least a year. Meanwhile, the rest of the European Union has to protect itself from the pathology known as Brexit. That means that Great Britain should be EXCLUDED from taking part in the next European Parliament.

I don’t care what the legalistically minded come up with, mumbling that EU member nations have to be represented in Parliament, that we can’t have a precedent, bla bla bla. Right, the EU is very legally minded, a French characteristic, now permeating the EU. However, sticking to the law causes rigidities which, in turn can only be removed by those periodic revolutions shaking France.

The spirit of the law always beats the letter of the law. The letter of the law has already been broken: Article 50 extended only until tomorrow, March 29, 2019, the appartenunce of the UK in the EU.  Hence the letter of the law (24 months!) has been broken. Yet the spirit survives.

So, in a way, the UK is (sort of) out: the European Council, after one meeting with UK PM Cameron, four days after the fateful Brexit, never met as 28 members again: the UK got excluded. So the new spirit of the law is that the UK is partly out of the EU. The European Council is really the government of the EU (the European Commission just implements what the EC wants).

The European Council is more important than the European Parliament (European Parliament vote laws, but doesn’t suggest them). So, no EU Parliament for the UK. Instead UK in an indefinite Article 50: all rights and duties of membership, except for voting. In many democracies, convicts don’t vote for a while. Hey, Britain self-convicted.

The solution above, extending Article 50 by two years, but no Parliament for the UK, will free the EU from Brexit. The EU will be free to progress, pass laws mitigating plutocracy, climate change, foster research, education, etc. In particular financing of UK science and advanced tech by EU budgets will proceed. Also Eurosceptics will be informed that leaving the EU, and activating Article 50, has a democratic cost, and gives a forerun of what it means to be out of the EU: no more European legislating possible.  

***

And what will happen to Great Britain? Polls show the UK would vote for Remain at this point. Within two years, the British People will come to its senses, in spite of the shrill shrieking propaganda of its plutocratic media (the EU should pass laws to limit plutocratic propaganda). So We the British People will vote to stay in the EU. Then a special EU Parliament UK election can be held.

The non-participation of the UK in the EU Parliament will prevent Parliamentary sabotage, which would otherwise paralyze Europe some more. However, if legal minds of the stupid kind insist on having that… the fact is that Article 50 should be extended 2 years, while Speaker Bercow and the House of Commons figure Brexit out.

Why? No bad feelings, looking forward… In the end no Brexit.

***

Enough, children, who go by the self-glorifying name of “leaders”! Learn from history!

The British Parliament voted No No No No No No No No, No, on all the possibilities of Brexit, a wide spectrum selected by the very interesting Speaker Bercow. A European ultimatum expires April 12. On that date, Great Britain is supposed to have decided to leave, and how. (If if with a deal then the effective day will be in May.)

You may not know this, you children who are called leaders, because you studied just what was Politically Correct, but war is a serious thing, and a seriously sneaky thing. Apparently innocuous indifference and turning-away can turn into alienation, and war. The personal history of my family has helped me know these emotional truths. I was graced by a family which harbred resistance fighters, more than 100 Jews, which was chased by the Gestapo, while my dad arrived in France in combat, fighting Nazis… In my lifetime, I have known what it feels like to be bombed by fascist racists, and to have a young uncle who was an elder brother to me, killed by Islamist  terrorists (crucially helped by a double dealing French government).

Also I spent decades studying history, in particular of the European kind. It is not as simplistic as usually depicted. The first battle of Fontenoy (around 50,000 killed by arrows, lances, swords, and axes, in a few hours of hand to hand combat) was an enormous butchery, Franks against Franks. There was a second, even more famous battle, in the same place of Fontenoy, 1,000 years, a millennium, later, this time English against French. As one can see, French military history is rich, unparalleled… These two battles of Fontenoy were pretty much brothers against brothers, not civilization against savagery, and should never have happened.

Yes, Europe had plenty of civilization against savagery battles. France was involved in all of them (the Mongols gave up their conquest of Europe, when the top Mongol generals argued that the heavy losses they had suffered in Hungary were a foretaste of suffering again the same fate as their ancestors the Huns in France). In the Eight Century, the Franks repelled three invasions of Europe by the savage Arab Islamists, over a period of thirty years. Of course, Islam would never have happened if Catholic fascism had been defeated at the Battle of the Cold River, three centuries before Muhammad’s birth.  At the Cold River, the Western Emperor, Eugenius, a secular professor promoted by the head of the Occidental Roman army, Arbogast, confronted the catholic bigot, Oriental emperor Theodosius (originally a Spaniard). Arbogast, a Frank, controlled, for many years, a Roman army full of Romanized Franks. Theodosius was allied with the Goths. Theodosius and his goons had invented the notion of “heresy”, and laws, decrees, making “heresy” punishable at the pleasure of the government.

There is a direct line between this, and the government of Brunei establishing the death penalty for homosexuality in 2019, according to Sharia. Indeed, at the Cold River, the Frigidus river, unexpectedly, Arbogast was defeated and those who wanted heresy to be punishable by death, and Catholicism to pursue its reign of terror, won. Not only that, but, left without an army, the Occidental Roman empire promptly fell to the invading barbarian hordes, 14 years later (406 CE).

The millennium of European wars started when the French of West Francia turned their backs on the rest of the “Roman” empire (actually the west of present France, the most occidental third of the “Francia” of the Franks from 500 CE to 950 CE, including Paris had very good reasons to reject the empire… which had failed to protect them against the Viking; instead the count of Paris, soon to be duke, did the work, battling back from the ramparts, with 200 men, 10,000 bloody Vikings… while the Roman/Carolingian emperors prefered negotiations with the Viking). That turning of all French backs was, to some extent, justified. However it caused alienation between Europeans. By 1200, all of Europe was united against the French-Paris monarchy (and lost the battle and war against the “French” king Philippe Auguste, at Bouvines).

***

Treat The British Well, They Don’t Have To Be Too Punished, This Is Not Versailles:

The interminable Brexit is paralyzing Europe. The temptation is to expedite it. That would be a mistake for the British: once they inspect the situation in all details, they will come to the conclusion, except for a few vested interests, like plutocrats and media moguls, and the odd deluded fisher, that staying in the EU is the less bad of all bad possibilities.

I am of the opinion that Germany was treated very well by the Versailles Treaty (contrarily to common opinion). That’s because I studied the situation in details, and I didn’t buy the Nazi opinion about Versailles. However, there is definitively a risk of mistreating a deluded Britain about Brexit. OK, the British have the wrong mentality about the European Union. This is a particular bad case of “fake news”. Just like Islamophilia is a particularly bad case of “fake news”.

So yes, there is “fake news” problem. But does that mean that British or Muslims should be mistreated? As individuals? No. The problem is that Brexit would hurt most british and European citizens, So the rest of the European Union has to be patient.

Not having the UK NOT sit in the EU Parliament will have the advantage that a lot of laws of the pro-plutocratic, anti-federal, and unequal laws, in particular the monstrous British rebate, and the even more monstrous Swiss rebate, can be legislated out.

Yes, president Macron is understandably viewing this Brexit tragicomedy as something to flush down the toilet, ASAP. However, apparently innocuous and inconsequential acts in history have resulted in immense tragedies.

Don’t forget the present system in Britain was mostly created by a succession of French adventurers, warriors, magnates and plutocrats, with a few queens and duchesses in the mix (William of Normandy, the barons of Magna Carta, Eleanor d’Aquitaine, Yolande of Aragon, Isabelle de France, Edouard III/Edward III, Lancaster/Lancastre, de Montfort come to mind; the House of Normandy was succeeded by the House of Anjou). The estrangement between England and France was the fruit of personalities more than anything else. A striking example is Yolande of Aragon, who financed Joan of Arc’s army and the illegal kinglet (the “Dolphin”) connected to them, who got the “100 Years War” relaunched all by themselves. (Yes, now there is a lamentable cult of Joan of Arc amplifying that idiotic nationalism and bigotry.)

Small things can have big consequences: models supposedly show weather systems can be created by a butterfly flapping its wings, three weeks earlier.

Macron, the French president, doesn’t want to become that butterfly of doom, flapping Europe into division and thus oblivion. Macron doesn’t want to flap all wrong. Let Macron beat on French Yellow Jackets, if that’s his won, he does that well, the French love to be beaten up, so they can beat back. Revolutions make French law progress. But Macron shouldn’t beat on the British. That could lead to war.  

The European Union will be optimal if it acts as an empire of the highest aspirations. That includes, first of all, bending over backwards not to mistreat European Peoples or nations. Europe should focus its energy on thermonuclear fusion and the space race now engaged between the USA, China, India, maybe Russia to be first (back) on the Moon. (The European thermonuclear reactor JET is based in the UK, it’s crucial to ITER, and its financing has been compromised by Brexit.)

Oh, by the way, Boris Johnson, ex-mayor of London and co-leader of the Leave (the EU) campaign, voted for the EU Withdrawal Agreement of May, today (his colleague had adopted the same position a week ago). Why? Because for the UK to leave the EU without a deal is an unfathomable catastrophe.

So, question, if the Leave campaign leaders can be that reasonable, surely the European leaders should be? Or are the leaders of the European Council truly that childish that they risk European strategic disaster, medium term? Jut on the basis of legalistically justified resentment? 

Taking away Parliament from a EU country which has left the European Council, which originates European laws, only makes sense. Beating the Brits when they are down doesn’t. Give Great Britain time to rethink Europe. Two years. No Parliament.

Patrice Ayme

***

***

The opinion of the British on Brexit has already changed a bit. It will change some more. Hey, even the New York Times is realizing it had Trump Derangement Syndrome. Here is a New York Times editorial on Trump today:, operating a U-turn on its opinion of Trump:

Opinion

“Maybe the president brilliantly played the media. Or maybe we just played ourselves.

By Bret Stephens,  Opinion Columnist

“Maybe we’ve had this all wrong.

Maybe Donald Trump isn’t just some two-bit con artist who lucked his way into the White House thanks to an overconfident opponent. Or a second-rate demagogue with a rat-like instinct for arousing his base’s baser emotions and his enemies’ knee-jerk reactions. Or a dimwit mistaken for an oracle, like some malignant version of Chauncey Gardiner from “Being There.”

Thanks to Robert Mueller, we know he isn’t Russia’s man inside, awaiting coded instruction from his handler in the Kremlin.

Maybe, in fact, Trump is the genius he claims to be, possessed — as he likes to boast — of a “very good brain.”

***

Here is the full statement from the European commissionfollowing the vote in the Commons.

The commission regrets the negative vote in the House of Commons today. As per the European council (article 50) decision on 22 March, the period provided for in article 50(3) is extended to 12 April. It will be for the UK to indicate the way forward before that date, for consideration by the European council.

A “no-deal” scenario on 12 April is now a likely scenario. The EU has been preparing for this since December 2017 and is now fully prepared for a “no-deal” scenario at midnight on 12 April. The EU will remain united. The benefits of the withdrawal agreement, including a transition period, will in no circumstances be replicated in a “no-deal” scenario. Sectoral mini-deals are not an option.

The final two sentences refer to a claim often made by Brexiters at Westminster that, in the event of a no-deal departure, the UK and the EU would in practice negotiate a series of mini-agreements to mitigate the worst consequences. This is sometimes referred to as a managed no deal.

EURO CHEAT: German Hidden Banks Subsidies Destroy Europe!

More generally, the collapse of the European economy is caused by too much economic “liberalism”, while the rest of the world does the opposite, by providing strategic state help. This dichotomy happens within the Euro zone itself, where Germany found a trick to provide stealthy government help.

Abstract: The collapse of industrial production in France, Italy and Spain, while it soared in Germany, under the Euro regime, has a simple technical explanation. Using bankrupt banks, Germany subsidizes massively its industry. However, under vicious European Union rules, Germany insists that countries other than Germany do not get any STATE subsidies… while Germany enjoys them quietly. This cannot be allowed to go on.

The existence of a, de facto, common currency is nothing new in Europe: it was practiced during most of the last 2,000 years. It is a drastic economic advantage. Thus, so it should be with the Euro. However the present unfair and imbalanced German practice is unsustainable. The solution is for the rest of Europe to get state help, just as Germany, Japan, China, the USA and the UK (massive quantitative easing and other interventions), and also India, do: extend state subsidies to non-German Euro nations. (Either by creating banks similar to the bankrupt state supported German banks, as used to exist in France, or by some other subsidies…)

Several facts can be observed: first that the fossil fuel countries, Canada, US, Australia, did pretty well, thanks to their smothering of the planet in compensation for them making lots of money (figuratively or not). Second, that the Euro has become a Germany-first, a über alles Germany device. As I explained, that’s caused by bankrupt banks, which can lend to small, crucial industries, while being fed by state subsidies…

***

French presidential elections are 3 weeks away. Marine Le Pen wants to leave the Euro, and the European Union (however, she also intent to change to a Swiss-like system of plebiscites, so she would submit any big change to these). Marine Le Pen was received both by Putin and the presidents of Chad and Lebanon.

Many opinion leaders have clamored for years to destroy the Euro, such as the well-known establishment propagandist Paul Krugman. Except for howling together, the reasoning is not obvious. The anti-Europeans’ basic argument is that various economies need to devalue their currencies at different rates, because otherwise they won’t change.

On this site Picard 578 and Lovell said:”The problem of the Euro is its existence”. I disagree: common currencies are very advantageous, but this one has a poisonous hook inside.

***

Past Currency Problems: Rome, China, Europe:

It is true that the gigantic Roman empire ran into a currency problem, characterized superficially both by dearth of fiduciary currency and inflation. One reason was the weakening of the application of Roman Civil law by centuries of fascism. Another is that, like China, the Romans did not have enough precious metals (anymore: they had exhausted the mines).

The Franks solved both problems: they yanked law enforcement from the Roman Catholic bishops, re-establishing good old fashion cruel punishments for malefactors: currency counterfeiters were slowly boiled to death, alive, in special long cages where they slowly cooking twitching bodies could contribute to leaving a lasting impression to the obtuse masses.

The other way the Franks solved the problem of precious metals was by conquering Eastern Europe, something the Romans (except for imperators Caesar and Trajan) had not even envisioned. There were abundant silver mines in Eastern Europe. (The Chinese solved, sort of, their currency problem with paper currency. That lasted seven centuries, until collapse of the Yuans under hyperinflation. The Ming and Manchus got Bolivian silver from Bolivia, through the Philippines held Spain.

***

Common European Currencies Never A Problem:

When there is no common currency, there is no common trade..Clearly common currency collapse contributed to the fall of the Rome of the Third and Fifth centuries, and the Roman Catholic bishop government of around 400 CE. The same holds for the Yuan. The Chinese used cumbersome copper as precious metal, or potentially worthless paper. When people cheated with currency in 400 CE Rome, the local bishop from the local plutocratic family, would admonish them. Six centuries later, the Franks had them bathe in boiling water, wine or oil.

Charlemagne was actually Roman EMPEROR. The currency system he refurbished had existed for 8 centuries and would exist for centuries more. Although various mints did various things, there was interoperability of the coins.

The Franks did re-establish the Roman currency, both by ferocious enforcement of the law, and by making the coins themselves more valuable (by augmenting their precious metal content).

From 650 CE to 1000 CE, temperature increases of the Middle Age Warming and the re-establishment of a stronger state (very strong in 800 CE, when the Roman empire was officially “renovated”, much more fragmented later in West Francia) brought more than a doubling of the population of Europe (from 18.5 million to 39 million). In spite of all the disturbances and massacres caused by invasions of rabid, voracious, pitiless Saracens, Vikings and Magyars.

Although West Francia (present day occidental two-thirds of France) was cut up in 60 local states (some duchies, some counties, some free cities, some church states), after the death of emperor Charles the Bald, counterfeiters were boiled all over, and thus (roughly) the same currency worked in northern Germany, Rome, or Austria.

I insist on this for good reason: the government of Roman bishops of 400 CE had decided, as the good Christians they were, not to apply the death penalty anymore for highwaymen. Result: the currency became extremely fake, and the road extremely unsafe. Too much goodness leads to too much crime for civilization to keep on operating. This is what the government of bishops of 400 CE proved (at the same time, realism forced the bishops to agree to let the Franks receive military control of three Roman provinces, including Gallia and Germania).

Charlemagne was Imperator Romanorum (Emperor of the Romans, approved by Constantinople, Oriental Rome). The Franks viewed Rome as “renovated”, but the fact is Roman civil law, Roman roads, and Roman currency had survived the collapse of the Roman state in the Fifth century (when it was progressively replaced by the imperators/elected kings of the Franks). The Belgian historian Pirenne suggested that it is the rise of the Muslim Caliphate which really caused a problem. That’s pretty much obvious as Islam was explicitly contrived to destroy the Greco-Roman state, promptly conquered more than half of it, by the sword, in 80 years, and then embargoed the rest!

In any case, the pure gold Roman Solidus was still used in 1000 CE, and the basic coin was still the Denarius (pfennig, penny, French “denier”). England, not yet part of the empire in 800 CE was still part of the currency system. Although England had 70 mints then, the English penny paid two-third of one basic worker’s day, same as on the other side of the Channel. As it took months to travel across Europe, the fact that there were many local mints does not mean that the (“Renovated”) Roman currency could not be viewed as global.

Charlemagne was the first Roman emperor who was officially sacred by the Pope. Hence the notion of “Holy” Roman empire, which surface several centuries later. By 1500, a common central European (Holy Roman-German currency) appeared: the Thaler (hence the word “Dollar”). The Thaler was used for nearly four centuries… until 1873, when Bismarck’s imperial maneuvering eradicated it…)

Europe had common currency before: the Thaler, covering Mittel Europa, lasted four centuries.

The Euro and EU intervention in economy is well beyond just having a common currency. For example it prevents to re-establish order in Africa, because France does that, France then gets punished for it in diverse ways, including by having not enough money for the rest of her economy. The proper usage would be to subtract France/Europe defense from deficit computations and, more generally, spending.

In particular money and plotting should have been spent as needed to establish a proper democracy and state backing it up, in Libya. Same for all subsahelian countries (Mali, Chad, etc.)

***

Germany Banking Subsidy Trick:

Thousands of medium German banks are crucial to finance the “middleling” German companies (of the “Mittelstand”) which produce crucial equipment for larger companies (say specialized brakes for fancy cars, or specialized LED lights used in characteristic German cars like my own). Such companies can then evolve and produce in a very protected, stable environment, favorable to apprenticeship.

It is a good system.

Too bad other countries are not allowed to have one too. To have one, other countries would have to massively invest, in full, enormous catastrophic deficit mode, before then going-on in a chronic deficit mode (as Germany presently does).

Weirdly, I am the only one to talk about this.

By the way, China’s local communities (sometimes cities with 25 million people…) do the same as Germany: massive deficit spending to sustain massive local industrialization. Right, the Chinese system is suffering from terminal debt. However, the fact is Chinese industry is thriving and expanding worldwide (Example: a Chinese drone company has a contract for taxi drones in Dubai, to operate in a few months…).

Meanwhile, French industry has collapsed, most governmental help being outlawed by European institutions (which did not discover the German trick therein described…) 

Thus General Electric, saved by 60 billion dollars from Obama, was able to swallow its French competitor, with Brussels’ benediction… That was helped by US “Justice” condemning said French competitor to a billion dollar fine, for… alleged corruption in Indonesia… The European Union has prevented its actors to act dirty. Except for those, like Germany, which play dirty.  

Goodness is always last to play dirty, by definition. However, if goodness never plays dirty in the end, goodness will be devoured by badness, malefaction. Voltaire recommended that we “ought to crush infamy”. That means not turning a blind eye towards those who exploit the rest of the world, just because we are good, and aspire to goodness. Now more than ever.

Patrice Ayme’

Brexit Idiocy In One Picture

Hard core Brexit idiots pontificate that they will renew their ties with the British Commonwealth and the USA. As if the quaint British monarchy imported from the Netherlands had anything in common with the hyper violent, domineering American republic, a country of immigrants, a world country, the world’s hyper power, which can purchase anything… but a soul, and a past it is ready to admit it had. The proud British are, relatively speaking, Europeans, and they don’t even know it.

Here is the European situation, the web of relationships, with the spider in the center, depicted with the most basic mathematics, set theory. I present to you the spider and the fly:

The Situation Is Even More Complicated Than That: Switzerland, For Example, Has More Than 600 “Bilateral” Treaties With The European Union, And Has To Respect Free Circulation Of European Citizens.

[Nota Bene: the GDP numbers above, due to the tremendous immigration of people and capital into the United Kingdom, the UK, due to the laxity of France and Germany, brought an extreme overvaluation of the British Pound, and a swelling of all things British. This house of cards is collapsing: British GDP has now shrunk below French GDP, in barely more than two weeks…]

Switzerland voted against the Free Circulation Of European Citizens, including Croatians, in winter 2014. Some sanctions were applied by the EU on an aghast Switzerland, the next day. However, Switzerland still has to accept everybody. Should it change that requirement, Italy, France and Germany would block the borders, and let Switzerland die. Really, not kidding: Switzerland has only one refinery, producing 25% of Swiss fossil fuels, and it gets all its raw petroleum through a pipeline, from Marseilles, France… Thus, Switzerland will have to vote again. Or learn to ride horses again.

Why is such ferocity welcome in enforcing European unity and free circulation? Simple: Enforcing cogent, fully informed reason upon, and by, We The People, is the best way to avoid war. Thus war tends to happen when unexpected.

Europeans have bent over backwards frantically for twenty years to accommodate increasingly crazed, selfish, grotesque, hypernationalist British demands.  The British thanked the rest of Europe by an insulting vote. (Remark: the Swiss referendum was just about refusing the diktat of free circulation of any EU citizen; it was NOT about rejecting the 666 treaties with Europe… Although of course, it could have this consequence… Nor, a fortiori, the European Union )

Right now Europe is suffering from three mentalities:

1. The first problematic mentality was English sabotage. The English entered the “ever closer Union” and decided it was just a free trade “club”. Basically NAFTA. That was a lie, a breach of trust, and a betrayal. No wonder so many European leaders are keen to get Brexit done. For twenty years, English governments have prevented the built-up, in-depth of European laws and institutions. Instead of electing the head of the European Administration (“Commission”)  directly, by the People’s vote, one still uses the ancient system of nomination by the heads of governments. That sort of undemocratic blockage was the work of English Europhobes, mostly.

Fanatic Brexiters insist they never voted for a European “Superstate”. That is not just a total lie, but it means they want Europeans, and their ex-colonies and present allies, to be ruled by Superstates (USA, Russia, India, China).

2. The second problematic mentality is the fact that the European defense system is mostly operated by the French Republic, which is supposed to pay for it, while leaving its deficit below 3%. Logically, French tanks should first roll through Brussels, Luxembourg, Belgium, Lichtenstein, while addressing an ultimatum to Eurozone member Ireland, and force all these miscreants to pay taxes. (Since Germany has the same problem as its sister republic, France, it would rather applaud the usage of force… which is exactly what both of them did, with the help of Italy, to pressure Switzerland that way… It helped that the latter was not a founding member of the EU, and a rather small fish.)

What about the refugee crisis? Well, go back 17 centuries: the Goths, fleeing the Huns, invaded the Roman empire. Initially, the Goths came as refugees, and were allowed in. Later, even more Goths, now fully armed, came in, and thew Roman Empire said no. The solution? Have an army strong enough to kill the Huns. This was finally done in France, 80 years alter. First the inhabitants of Orleans inflicted a defeat on the Huns, inside the city itself. Then the Franks shadowed and harassed the retreating giant host of the Huns. That gave enough time for the Roman Field army headed by Aetius and to the Visigothic army to join the fray. Then the Huns got crushed in the titanic battle of the Catalaunian Plain. Having suffered tens of thousands of dead, if not hundreds of thousands (the number 300,000 has been advanced by sources), the spirit of the Huns was broken. Just as that of the Nazis in May 1945.

That was how to handle Assad: destroy him and his family, occupy Syria, re-establish secular, republican order. And it was not to the Russians or the Americans to do that, but to the Europeans. But there is no European army, no European will. Just European wealth for the world to steal. And for this, the ectoplasmic Britons are much to blame.: did they not learn anything from the Kaiser and his spiritual son Hitler?

As a result of formidable austerity imposed on France, the French defense system is woefully insufficient, although not quite as moribund as the British one. This is a grave situation in several ways: first it weakens the West enormously. Secondly it makes the USA more dominant than ever in defense. And thus, it augments the aura and diplomatic might of the USA in all matters, including the economic one… which pays for defense.

3. The third problematic mentality is indeed austerity itself. It was imposed by a coalition of conservatives and the evil influence of the ruling plutocracy. Great Britain saw less of it, thanks to the plutocratically owned tabloids, and the fact that plutocracy has made the wealthiest in Britain so much wealthier. Austerity is no less than a complete plutocratic plot, and a direct consequence of not taxing the wealthiest enough to spare us being in their debt.

So deep has the propaganda been for the plutocrats whom have made us in their debt, that only now the German SPD seems to realize that austerity is a plot of the wealthy. The “S” in SPD is for “Social”: Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands, SPD… The SPD is in coalition with the German Conservatives, who are white-hot, foaming at the mouth demanding ever more austerity (especially from other Europeans… It’s understandable as Germany is in a virtuous circle presently…)

Brexit can potentially break that logjam. First, British sabotage of the “Ever Closer Union” will stop. Appropriate superstate structures could now be erected, as needed… Secondly, the austerity party in the EU, right now led by Britain and Germany, is going to be halved. Thus one can hope that the French, these austerity specialists since 1932, will snap out of their madness, and lead a revolt against the austerity party. Simple: the European Union has just do what the USA has done under Obama. The Federal deficits amounts to something around 100% of US GDP (if one adds Quantitative Easing, an unusual addition, not usually made for obvious, vicious reasons, to the official deficits).

Will Europeans understand this?

Meanwhile, it’s fun to see the Brexiters struggle with the spider web above. Good luck coming out, to sink in the ocean…

Patrice Ayme’

 

Goldman Sachs’ European Union

Goldman Sachs, one of the generous employers of the wealthy Hillary Clinton, has recruited José Manuel Barroso, the former president of the European Commission, as the chairman of its international operations, “a non-exec, advisory role”…. To handle “Brexit” Goldman-Sachs said. (An interesting case of self-dealing: Who was one of the main forces behind “Brexit”? Goldman Sachs, as it cheated on the accounting of Greece, thus enabling Greece to enter the Eurozone, when it should not have, leading to the “Grexit” crisis, which ruined further the reputation of the EU, thus enabling Europhobes to howl their xenophobia even louder, etc.…).

Goldman knows how to employ international bureaucrats and politicians: the previous holder was Peter Sutherland, a former European Commissioner and ex-boss of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). Goldman Sachs has plenty of money, because the tax structure of the US makes it so, while, if a young Afro-American wants to make it, he can always enroll to be train as a killer for the establishment… This is not just conspiracy and corruption on a local or national scale, this is corruption on a global scale.

Barroso was the 115th Prime Minister of Portugal for three years, then head of the European Commission (EC) for ten years. The EC is the executive administration of the European Union (EU). It employs 33,000 workers in charge mostly of regulating the regulations embodying European Laws (passed by the European Parliament), to rule the single market of more than 500 million people (that makes it much more efficient than the British government employing 4.5 million people). 

Meanwhile California papers announced proudly that California had the sixth economy in the world in terms of nominal GDP, having jumped ahead of France and Brazil, Italy, India… This reflects in part a surge in the dollar and the pound (which has gone down 15% since the “Brexit” vote). It also reflects the mercantilist strategy of the USA, conducted with brio under Obama.

Let’s Plot All Together Now! Obama, Elon Musk, and the Military: Laughing All The Way To The Bank!

Take for example Tesla, the poster concept of present-day American mercantilism. It is flooding the world with luxury electric car of dubious ecological merit. All the way to Norway, huge government subsidies are piled up on it (and I would be very interested to know the details on the mortgages and conferences various officials involve take). Thanks to well-organized propaganda and financing by the US government. In truth, Tesla and the other companies of Elon Musk (Solar City, Space X) are companies massively financed by the US governments (yes, the government of the US and the governments of other states, such as New York, Nevada, to California). Those subsidies on just Solar City and Tesla amounted to 5 billion dollars by 2014. Mr. Musk himself made, personally, 12 billion dollars under the Obama administration: the beauty of the (pseudo) free market.

Why? The South African born Musk, tall and lean, looks good next to Obama, tall and lean. Not that Obama knew what was going on: Chu, the Nobel Prize winning Secretary of Energy of Obama, yanked American Federal Government support for further research in fuel-cell electrics (a US technology, which served us the Moon on a plate). Now Chu is very close to those who invested in battery electrics (fuel-cells are vastly superior to battery electrics in the present state of technology)

The case of Mr. Musk is highly visible, but just the tip of the iceberg (a tip which loves to live dangerously).

Many American corporations have moved their headquarters to tax havens, thus escaping the 33% US tax, something Obama had to loudly deplore, and did loudly deplore. Meanwhile, the full might of the US government is still helping these corporations (diplomatically, through traded delegations, etc.).

Pure mercantilism. The fostering of American business is used to enrich the US by weakening the rest of the world. Just like fostering London as Europe’s financial center brought a weakening of continental Europe (most of the Euro money-changing happening in London rather than in the Eurozone). The USA uses its political and propaganda heft to get its way in business.

For example, Tesla was authorized to let drivers use its “Autopilot” function, while it would be non-imaginable to enable a non-American car maker to do the same. (A Tesla in Autopilot did not detect a tractor-trailer and went below it at full speed, killing the driver.)  

The war of the US mercantilist empire against the barely conscious European sheep is all azimuths. For example, after decades of anti-French propaganda using most American comics, it is very difficult to sell anything in the USA coming from France. Even French cheese is considered to be dangerous biological warfare. One can be arrested for sneaking a French cheese inside one’s luggage: special dogs are out there to get the French contrebandiers, and their hidden Roquefort.

All is fair in love and war? Not really. Especially when one does not know that one is at war. The Europeans love their i-phones, but they should ponder more where they come from, and how.

The USA is behaving, right now, like a traditional European power, at the time when the European powers were jostling for world control. Whereas the Europeans have opted for behaving like traditional European sheep. But even their cheese does not make it in. So what are the European sheep going to do? Die off through low birth rate, and a civil war with Muslim migrants?

The American government has a law forbidding government to buy non-American products, except if nothing else available; the EU does not have an equivalent, symmetric law, thanks to the fact European politicians know that, if they behave well during their European political “duty”, namely if they favor US interests, US oligopolies and financial conspiracies will employ them, afterwards. And “compensate” them very well.

The US behaves like a traditional, aggressive and imperialist European power, but for three caveats. First, the US is a superpower, “the one and only superpower, probably”as a chastened Russian president Vladimir Putin put it recently. That feeling of superiority brings a supplement of hubris. And hubris does not replace soul, as the Ancient Greeks knew, all too well.

The other caveat is that the US, and its institutions, arose in great part from the “West Country Men” mentality, of greed foremost. Four centuries of English North American history have shown that, the more greed, the better, overall, for the empire. What could go wrong? No appetite is large enough, if it can eat entire mountains.

The final caveat is that US mentality did not arise from thousands of years growing among, and learning to live with, disagreeable, incomprehensible, insufferable neighbors. The US is a new country which experiences  itself as a new civilization, on an island-continent.

The “Brexit vote” at first sight, weakens Europe further. The US had fostered, before it attacked, and after it attacked the Prussian Kaiser’s fascist imperial design to take over Europe in an alliance with the US. Later, as early as 1921, American plutocrats led by the maverick racist Henry Ford, and, soon enough, Wall Street’s entire might, American leaders fostered Nazism. And Stalinism too. The result was the world as we know it.

Esteemed commenter Gloucon on this site just suggested that everything American has to be expunged from the US mentality.  He called that Amexit from itself, “exorcism”. It may well be true. However, the policies of various European powers right now enfeeble Europe ever more. In what was a minor crisis (the 2008 greed crisis), the US did not hesitate to run astounding record deficits for years, up to nearly 15% of GDP, well above 10% of GDP for more than four years running. Meanwhile the servants of Goldman Sachs at the European Commission, and in various other European governments insisted, and keep on insisting on the 3% deficit limit. The french commissioner of finance is very strict on this: France has to lower its deficit to 3%. Well, I don’t know if that’s Marine le Pen’s plan, but, considering the sorry state of France, the french deficit should be brought up to 20% (investors would probably pay France for that: the French ten-year bond is basically at zero percent…)

European countries, thanks to European laws, kept their deficits extravagantly low, while their economies sunk. Except for… Britain, which ran much higher deficits that then rest of Europe (the Eurozone). Hence the surge of the British Pound, because, paradoxically, the ability, or, more exactly, effrontery of running high deficit is viewed by money manipulators, as a sign of strength (that’s in contradiction with classics economics of the obsequious type). And this is correct: it’s the friendliness to plutocracy, and the ability to enforce that, which have contributed to the clout of the US and the UK.   

Deficits Don’t Count, If You Have The World’s Biggest Army: Obama Is A Strategic Genius, Whereas European Leaders Are Mentally Retarded Traitors Of The Vicious Type

But let’s contemplate the very high deficits of Obama’s first six years. Is not the only excuse for very high deficit, war? Was there a war the US was engaged in. I mean a big war, not this little weapon testing in the Middle East. Of course there is. And the enemy is doing poorly, melting like Camembert. The European Union, ladies and gentlemen, and its increasingly tiny and irrelevant corporations… is not on the winning side. And how could it be?

In 1940, the Duke of Windsor, inspector general of the British armed forces and ex-king, wrote to his friend Adolf Hitler that the weak point of the French defenses was at Sedan (where, coincidentally, the Second British armored division was assigned, but never arrived, conveniently enough, leaving just one French infantry reserve division to block the bulk of the Nazi army). That was high treason. And it served, ultimately, the “American Century”: France and Britain won, but much diminished.

All the high officials of Europe working for conspiratorial plutocratic money manipulators are also traitors, and they serve the same master. Why can’t laws be passed, outlawing such practices before (PM Mario Monti, ECB’s Draghi), or after (Barroso)? Over a lifetime? Or over entire families and acquaintances (immediately after Ted Cruz was elected Senator, Goldman Sachs, which had secretly financed his campaign, made Cruz’s souse into a Goldman Sachs director…).

This is not just an American problem. After all the Russians hired ex-Chancellor Schroeder of Germany to head, nominally, a giant gas pipe line, in an affectionate mark of appreciation to be meditated upon by present and future “leaders”. The bottom line, on this planet, is that too much power is put into too few hands. This is how World War One was launched: five persons, conspiring together, four generals and the grandson of Queen Victoria, decided to launch a world war, within 18 months. (They overruled the two aghast admirals, including Admiral Tirpitz, who knew the Kriegsmarine could not win over the Royal Navy, and thus were against war; the other admiral wrote the secret report, found, more than half a century later, hidden in an attic.)

Some people want to stop hurting animals. Nice. A new ethics is necessary for doing so. More urgently, a new ethics is needed in politics: the simple moral fact that too much power in too few hands is as immoral as it gets. After all, too much power in too few hands was the principal idea of Nazism (the “Fuerer Prinzip“).  And it is also the principal idea of… Islam (which Hitler copied to the point of parody).

A planet whose leaders are the puppets of tyrannical greedsters cannot end well. Greed, cupidity, avarice, the will to dominate others, do not correspond to mental modes of operations, and their attending neurohormones, that we can afford, when the entire biosphere is tottering on the verge of the most massive extinction. Ever.

Why? Because such neurohormonal regimes amplifying the basest instincts, do not correspond to the highest possible states of intelligence. Politicians and financiers, are, fundamentally, of the lower sort (as Jesus and Muhammad themselves convened!)

Patrice Ayme’