Type in ‘EU State’ or ‘EU Future’ in one of the search engines on the internet you will most probably be directed to Christian Prophecy sites which predicts, among other things, the end times –” Armageddon. Using spurious biblical scholarship, an unhealthy imagination and a liberal dose of eternal damnation somehow they manage to interweave the EU into their deluded paranoia. They see a United Europe as a resurrection of the Roman Empire. Its never an encouraging sign when nutcases seem to make more sense then established politicians. Beyond the dreams of French and German Pan-Europeanists the political union of Europe is something that will never be, countries like Britain (a loyal servant of the U.S.) would never allow such a thing. The only reason we see Britain involving itself in the European debate is to stop further integration and thwart attempts of Europe actually becoming an alternative to the total American hegemony in the world. Europe will stay as it is, an Economic Union, granting access to America to the worlds largest single market in exchange for American presence in the form of NATO and other organisations to stop any action from a large and resentful Russia and the angry Muslim ‘hordes’ in North Africa and the Middle East, who can’t seem to distinguish between America and Europe but believe them to be one in the same, the monolithic misnomer –” ‘The West’. The Rapid Reaction Force is a symbolic gesture to the peoples of Europe that Europe can deal with problems like the former Yugoslavia without the need of Russian and American mediation –” how ironic that it was proposed as an afterthought to one of the most bloody conflicts on the European continent since the Second World War. It’s rapidity and reaction is firmly in question and I don’t think it is a force of any kind.
What is the EU? Ministers in Europe are still trying to figure that one out. What it isn’t is a state, it is not a political union –” despite the best efforts of some –” the best approximation would be a union of mutual cooperation between what is defined as ‘Europe’ geographically and geopolitically that is open to all nation states so long as they meet certain criteria –” mainly economic as well as some political, such as observation of the European Charter on Human Rights. It would seem that we are more concise in defining what Europe is not and what it should not become, then what it is. As for what it isn’t we have a new breed of far rightists who prey on popular fears of the resident populations, they have shifted the debate of all things Europe to a right/far-right position, and have taken the argument away from saner (relatively speaking) politicians.
This new breed of media-savvy far right political parties have arisen in Europe whose raison d Ãªtre has been to remove their various nation states from Europe and repatriate as many immigrants as possible. Also we have seen the rise of single issue parties whose sole objective has been to remove their host nations from Europe –” UKIP and VERITAS in the UK for example. It doesn’t look to promising for the European Project especially in light of the fact that the populations of France and Netherlands voting overwhelmingly against a EU constitution. Within this dichotomy we introduce the ‘Muslim Question’. It would seem that they only manner for Europeans to define themselves would be to stand united against Muslims, who are as diverse as Europeans themselves, from those who have converted from within their own societies to those who came over from the impoverished third world –” the Indo-Pak migrants of Britain to the North Africans of France and the Turks of Germany and the Northern Countries of Western Europe. We heard the cries of the people of the holocaust who said “Never Again” but we still had Yugoslavia and maybe we will hear of something more diffuse but equally deadly throughout Europe. It is a sad fact that today Europe stands united by condemning and asking of its own population that it most conform to standards (when there are no real standards to be met). It would seem the children of Pakis, Ratons and Kanacke have transformed into Islamists, Islamofascists and Islamic Radicals –” the verbiage has changed but the emotions are still the same, the complete ‘otherliness’ of these people who have not integrated into European civilisation are now the scapegoats of the ills of our societies.
Why is when the media is trying to educate us about ‘Free Speech’ it picks Islam as a target? Why couldn’t it pick someone or something else (China for example?), why is it that to protect free speech we must hurt the sensibilities of others? When demonstrating tolerance and the European way, it invariably leads to alienating those most vulnerable amongst us and we end up hurting those who we should be protecting –” Islam is usually on the receiving end of it. We wouldn’t dare do that to minorities like the Jews, we wouldn’t deny the holocaust, or give airtime to those who seriously believe it to be false (and rightly so), having said that for anyone who wants to attack the Muslims, be it the Hijab or Polygamy (or more recently the cartoons), they are free to do so without restraint. To continue down this path elected by certain peoples we run the risk of further radicalisation and only add to a very tense situation, if this is the manner by which Europe has chosen to deal with Islamic Radicals we have handed them another victory for the hearts and minds of Muslims living in the west. Unlike other western nations (Australia, New Zealand & America) Europe has a long history of Muslim migrants and unfortunately it did not address the need of integration until recently, it ignored Muslims under the guise of ‘multiculturalism’ because it seemed the best way of dealing with all migrants Muslims or otherwise, what has changed and why do Muslims now require a different approach? Europe is in a quagmire about what it can do about the latent distrust and fear Muslims now engender (supposedly) in the indigenous populations. Multiculturalism worked for integrating people into their host nations whilst safe guarding their individual liberty, but now this idea has been scrapped in favour of an American model which calls for complete abandonment of everything that is not ‘American’ (or in Europe’s case ‘European’). As I have stated earlier Europe is not America and following its policies will not work. Europe needs strong leadership to distinguish itself from America and it must listen to its own citizens and carve out a destiny of its own that successfully integrates all its citizens without having the need to dilute their culture and character. The route of having to ask people to ‘do this’ and ‘obey that’ will lead to disaster.
The last time Europe asked an ethnic population, from amongst it’s own midst, that it most conform that is must ‘do’ and it must ‘obey’ – 6 million Jews died.
I wonder how many people will die this time round?