James Higham over at 4 Liberty points out that the Tories are using the 'Euro-zone crisis' as operational cover to nod through all sorts of EU regulations.
This is a topic which has been niggling me for a while, so I posted a comment which I shall reproduce here:
--------------------------------------
It’s the “fog of war” approach to government.
Governments like waging war (i.e. proper war with fighting and killing) because it enables them to enact all sorts of authoritarian/totalitarian measures ‘in the national interest’, commit genocide, mass theft etc.
Now, wars are, on the whole, a negative sum game and bad for the economy and the pol’s know it (leaving aside the military-industrial bloc, TM Dwight D Eisenhower), so what they do is start proxy wars, for example against terrorism (giving them the excuse for more identity checks, bureaucracy), against paedophiles (hence CRB checks).
Your [i.e. James Higham's] favourites, the bankers and pol’s, just love deliberately and maliciously triggering financial crises (they encourage people to borrow ever sillier amounts against supposedly rising land values) and then they pull the rug at pre-arranged intervals (every 18 years or so), giving the pol’s the excuse to hand over loads of cheap and easy money to the bankers, who now have the home owners over a barrel: "If you stop giving us money, we won’t be able to lend ever sillier amounts to the next generation and hence we won’t be able to prop up your stupid house prices" and the Home-Owner-Ists cave in every time.
In the case of the EUrocracy, the same rules apply. When things are going well, they lend loads of money to the PIIGS and earn a load of interest, fees and commissions, and when it all goes *pop* the EUrocrats start installing their own ‘technocrats’ to run entire countries and caller for ‘closer fiscal union’ and ‘a new arrangement for Europe’ and threatening us with all sorts of apocalyptic scenarios (‘Euro meltdown’) which are highly unlikely to happen in practice (see Argentina, Iceland, UK in 1992 and all the other devaluations/partial defaults which quickly sort themselves out).
The bankers and pol’s been doing this every 18 years since time immemorial, you mentioned mid-19th century examples on your own blog the other day (George Peabody etc).
Reform
9 hours ago
9 comments:
MW
But wait a minute; our wonderful foreign secretary who is still on his knees before his "colleagues" in the EU to impose oil sanctions on Iran (as if!), has told us on innumerable occasions that he wants to see the UK in, but not ruled by, the EU. Surely he wouldn't stand by and let the EU regulation steamroller carry on!
Mind you, the pathetic response by Grayling highlighted by JH is just mind-boggling. I trust that your bloggers' cabinet will follow the advice of "mudplugger" on JH's blog (seconded by me here) and, basically, kick the EU while it's down.
U: "kick the EU while it's down"
I like your thinking! Of course, by the same token, we could use the fog of war to quietly slip away.
See also: India ceasing to be a British colony shortly after WW2; USA declaring itself independent once the British had nearly bankrupted themselves chucking the French out of North America, thus getting rid of the last possible threat to the colonialists at our expense and using up the military resources we would have need to hang on to our North American colonies.
Correct. 10 out of 10.
Now then, what do we do about it?
L, Umbongo is Foreign Minister in my 'bloggers cabinet, we'll do what he says :-)
Oh and look! Frau M has just announced that she's going for full fiscal union (which effectively means a United States of Europe). This will apparently require an amendment to the existing treaties (or, more likely a fudge).
In the Times (behind a paywall) we are informed that "David Cameron, who met Mr Sarkozy for talks in Paris today, said that he would not oppose treaty change, but if it came about he would take the opportunity to fight for British interests." [my bold] Even Cameron must have been stunned at hearing himself say that in cold blood.
I can only believe that there is a voodoo spell on our politicians when it comes to the EU. Either that or its just down to the old villains: the prospect of more money and/or more power.
U, he might have said that to play to the British gallery, but in truth he will do no such thing. 'Fighting for' in his language means asking politely and then taking no for an answer.
I think the key to the EU is that it allows pol's to break Enoch's Powell golden rule that all political careers end in failure. Once you've lucked out with your own electorate, you can get on the EU gravy train for the rest of your life, with cushy sinecures for your immediate family as well.
"Once you've lucked out with your own electorate, you can get on the EU gravy train for the rest of your life, with cushy sinecures for your immediate family as well."
How very C18th. Rule by patronage.
Interesting stuff. I wonder if there's any significance to 18 years? I suppose it's about half a working life if that means anything.
B, that sort of thing.
AKH, nobody knows why 18 years, but this time span was already well known over a century ago.
I suppose it's because it takes people eight-to-ten years or so after the last bubble peaked and burst to be suckered in again, and the next bubble takes eight-to-ten years to peak?
And maybe because there are normally thirty years between generations and people learn from their parents - if your parents were badly stung, you'd avoid making the same mistake, but if your parents got into the land market at the trough and got lucky, then you see it as normal and so you pile in thirty years later, becoming one of the suckers?
Post a Comment