Yesterday Klein Verzet picked up on a post by Ian Parker Joseph about the creation of an EU Politburo, ending his article:
"I whole-heartedly agree with Parker-Joseph, this is evil. And it must be stopped. But I sometimes despair at the disinterested shrugs with which this sort of news it received. For all the 'festering rage' against matters EU, there seems to be no desire whatsoever among the Dutch to stand up and say: "NO. Here's where it ends!". Maybe because the threatening shadow looming over us is of something so great and evil that it is unthinkable it ever could be real.
But just in case, shouldn't we make clear what we find beyond the pale, what we will not stand for? Shouldn't we start thinking about setting up our defences? Shouldn't we start thinking about what it means to be free, and what it is worth to us? It is evident that we have nothing to expect from those that presume to lead us. So it will have to be up to us to withdraw consent, to register our grievances and to "legally proceed to the choice of another prince for [our] defense". Isn't that exactly what we should do?"
While agreeing with that which KV writes, it does raise the question how do we, the people, effect change?
Whatever the system of governance, be that totalitarian, authoritarian, or some form of democracy as is presently practised in most countries, history shows that when one man assumes leadership of a country eventually that old quotation - one attributed to John Emerich Edward Dalberg, 1st Baron Acton (1834–1902), British historian. Letter, April 3, 1887, to Bishop Mandell Creighton. The Life and Letters of Mandell Creighton, vol. 1, ch. 13, ed. Louise Creighton (1904) - becomes ever more evident, namely that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. That one quotation demonstrates that never should any people be governed by one person, or a group of people; rather that the people should govern themselves. It is for that reason I am one of those that believes in a participatory form of democracy, such as that practised in Switzerland.
KV mentions that there appears to be no desire in the Netherlands to stand up and say "no more". While in the UK it appears there is a movement among the people to say "no more", at present it only amounts to words - words which the present political elite will not allow to be given voice. As the argument about continuation of a failed financial project gains ground, it is unfortunate and regrettable that our politicians cannot see that continuing membership of a failing political project is just creating a bigger problem which, when the times comes as it surely will, will be even more difficult to resolve. Of course, there is one political party on offer that does provide policies to begin the restoration of our nation's independence, however they do not have sufficient following at present. The fact that they do not have the necessary following must be laid at their own door, even allowing for the fact that the MSM fail to provide them with the necessary publicity and therefore the channels through which they can make their case. Besides a failure of administration, lack of competent personnel and a poor website, it is expecting too much of what is acknowledged as one gifted speaker to spread their message.
It is also an undisputed fact that where the political elite - or leader of a nation - lie, cheat and obfuscate with their people; where in effect they control the media , although not obviously; where draconian measures that impinge on personal freedom are presented as necessary to combat terrorism; where the indoctrination of people begins with children by means of the education system, it becomes increasingly difficult for people not to realise that they are no longer free. To break the cycle of what amounts to self-chosen slavery takes time using legal methods and what remains of the democratic process - and meanwhile that slavery continues. Consequently what results is a situation whereby history repeats itself and eventually the people do rise in open rebellion, leading to civil war, which involves 'blood letting'.
What the 'key' will be that causes open rebellion is hard to prophesy but one thing is certain; while the political elite are able to keep their people reasonably well-fed, housed and can divert their attention with what passes for entertainment on television; are able to maintain their control of the media thus hoodwinking the people, the political elite are safe to continue their subversive enslavement of the people. That this enslavement of the people will eventually result in the UK becoming a full member of the EU in that it will eventually be forced to join the euro is best illustrated by a podcast featuring Nick Robinson (BBC) - and one in which Barroso's words should send a chill down everyone's spine - to which pixijade (Off with your head) links in her post. The lady is quite correct when she writes that it is not unthinkable that if the euro survives there would be clamour for the UK to join the euro, instead of being ‘left out’; that she does not see anyone in Westminster willing to defend our sovereignty against the EU at the moment so why would they in the future? Ah, you may say but the political elite have promised a referendum on ditching the pound. True, but we all know that with referendums in EU land, they keep being held until the answer that is wanted is given. In any event it must be remembered that those creating an Act of Parliament can just as easily 'amend' it.
So to repeat my question, what will be the key that will stir the people? I can't see one - can you?