We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

Samizdata quote of the day

Once the continent of innovation, art, democracy and non-conformity, Europe has been laid low by a heady brew of bureaucracy, over-regulation, over-taxation and debt. A crisis of political leadership has in turn produced a deficiency of bold, innovative ideas, a shortage of vision and a huge expansion of government intervention. Nowhere is this clearer than in the EU’s ill-fated monetary misadventures.

Nikola Kedhi

13 comments to Samizdata quote of the day

  • But by God, their bananas are the correct length.

  • Paul Marks

    The European Union is based on Corporatism – it is built into its very structure. Economic interests work with officials to create regulations. This process is not yet compete – the European Union is moving in the direction of the Corporate State – but some free competition still exists.

    Philosophically the European Union is partly Technocratic (the rule of “experts” – as in Sir Francis Bacon’s “Net Atlantis”), and partly Hegelian – the rule off officials. The European Parliament claims to represent many nations – and so ends up representing no nation, and it is very much secondary to officials. Although, again, it should be pointed out that the European Union has NOT fully developed yet, its Corporatism is still incomplete.

    My fear is that the European Union is the future model for the West generally – with people such as Klaus Schwab pushing this form of government (“Stakeholder Capitalism” or the Corporate State) on the West as a whole.

    The various nations of Europe still exist and are represented in the Council of Ministers – however the most largest population nation, Germany, is controlled by politicians who (for well known historical reasons) are very wary of their nation and seek to have it absorbed into a general European (or world) authority – they are also deeply wary of democracy and are broadly Hegelian (rule by officials working with establishment parties) in their political philosophy.

    I find it very depressing that 12 years, 1933 to 1945, are taken to define the entire history of the German people, a history of thousands of years. I would love to see a return to independence in Germany (either as one country or several – historically the Germans were MANY countries, not one) and for there to be a government (or governments) there that was responsive to the interests of the German people – rather than seeing them as inherently bad and holding (privately if not in public) that the world would be a better place without their own people.

    It should be said that the American establishment elite have an even more extreme dislike (indeed actual HATRED) for their own people – seeing them as evil (racists-sexists-homophobes-transphobes… out to destroy THE PLANET with their pollution – with C02 emitted by Americans being spiritually evil, whereas the, much greater, C02 emissions of the Chinese are fine) and very much holding that the world would be a better place without Americans in it – given the hatred the American establishment elite have for Americans, such things as the rigging of the 2020 election (and the refusal to do anything about it – with courts refusing to look at the evidence and-so-on) should come as no surprise

    It has long been fashionable to mock the Holy Roman Empire (“neither holy, Roman or an Empire – was Voltaire’s assessment), but it did have admirers – such as Edmund Burke who held that it gave the Germans a sense of people one people (in a cultural sense) and some common institutions – without crushing local independence. Sadly it was undermined by religious conflict (Catholics verses Protestants – the 30 Years War which may have killed as much as a third of the population). And then the rise of one state, PRUSSIA, which was a threat both to the institutions of the HRE (which had returned to relative peace in 1648) and to the independence of other states.

    The German lands were eventually dominated by Prussia after the wars of 1866 and 1870. To be fair to the Prussians – their argument always was that the old institutions of the Germans were too weak to defend the Germans against invasion by others (such as the France of Louis XVI, the Sun King, and Napoleon).

    This historical part of the comment is partly due to what the British thought they were joining….

    The EEC (as it then was) was presented to the British people as a sort of free trade association – but it never was that (such an organisation did exist – the European Free Trade Association, EFTA). But the moderate part of the British establishment hoped that the EEC would prove to be like the Holy Roman Empire or German Confederation (Confederation – not Federation).

    However, this did not prove to be the case – the European Union was very obviously a Hegelian inspired bureaucracy, with a Corporatist economic philosophy and (the strange cultural-politics kink) an active DISLIKE of the peoples of Europe – this is due to the influence of modern (Frankfurt School) philosophy which Hegel and others would have found very strange indeed (even Karl Marx would have baffled by it – although it evolved from Classical Marxism).

    If nations such as Hungary and Poland (indeed any nation – in language terms little Lithuania is the oldest cultural group, closest to the original Indo European language) wish to survive they are going to have to leave the European Union.

    It is not like the Holy Roman Empire which was quite happy for people such as the Bavarians to live and pass on their culture over the centuries. The European Union is a modern thing – hostile to traditional cultures and peoples, and also hostile both to individual liberty and to democratic self government.

    As for its Corporatist economics – it is economically wrong (harmful) and politically corrupting. Giving government this sort of power and encouraging it to work with special interests, is inherently corrupt. The European Union is not fully “there” yet – but its development in this direction is built into its very structure.

  • Paul Marks

    Even the early 1960s it was considered fine even for the leader of the LABOUR Party, Hugh Gaitskell, to defend national independence and the democratic self government of a people.

    I suspect it is considered “racist” to do so today. Even though a nation is more about culture and history than it is about biological race.

    For example, the people of Devon are English in culture (they are very much part of the English nation) – even though they are biological mostly “Celtic” (Britons rather than Germanic in biological origin).

  • George Atkisson

    Paul Marks –

    Your assessment of the self-styled ‘elite’ in America is spot on. I truly believe that this hatred is based on their view that the United States is the last remaining barrier to World Socialism, due to our Constitution, love of Liberty, and the primacy of the Individual. All their justifications are simply cover for the destruction of the US as a significant actor on the world stage. I fear that they are making serious progress in this regard. I doubt that anyone will recognize the world in 10 years. This includes those selfsame ‘elites’ who believe they have everything under control and proceeding according to plan.

  • The EU is definitely worse than the UK in these respects, but the UK is no shining light on the hill either.

  • Stonyground

    Could the problem be that, when the Common Market was set up, Europe and the US were the big players economically? The EU has free trade within its borders but tariffs imposed on everywhere else. Back when everywhere else was the US plus lots of places that didn’t have much in the way of an economy, this would work quite well. Now that the EU is only a small section of the global economy, not so well.

  • John B

    Fascism = Government + Business + Unions.

    Why would anyone think that on a Continent awash with Socialists and Fascists (horses from the same stable) before WWII, that they and their ideologies would disappear in May 1945?

    Nazi Germany, Vichy France, Fascist Italy the founders of the EEC begat EU:add Fascist Spain and Socialist places like Greece,Portugal, East Europe – it is not a surprise how the ‘European Project’ was formed and has developed.

  • Rob

    A crisis of political leadership has in turn produced a deficiency of bold, innovative ideas

    Actually, given that the current political leadership of Europe’s climate policy is to reduce 99% of the European population to the standard of living enjoyed in the early 20th century, I would say a surfeit of bold, innovative ideas is the problem, not the lack of.

  • I admit to ignorance, being across the pond in the States. But do wonder if a system like the US might work for the a European system? A two house parliament, one based of population by country and the second by county, much like the US House of Representatives and the US Senate, thus balancing the needs of Germany with Andorra. No President, but a Prime Minister for each house?

    Or maybe just get recreate the Napoleonic system and place a Bourbon-Bonaparte-Hapsburg-Windsor-Orange on the new imperial throne of Europe. Just make sure to breed your royals like quarter-horses to get true aristocrats – in the original meaning of that word – and avoid Saxe-Coburg hemophilia, Bourbon narcissism, and Spanish Habsburg… everything.

  • lucklucky

    It is the same in UK. I don’t see where is the difference.
    Some of this stuff is even worse in UK because your Civil Service is much more extremist.

  • Paul Marks

    George Atkinson – they might not use the word “socialism”, but they are certainly Collectivists.

    A system like the People’s Republic of China – with private Corporations serving the totalitarian state, that is what they want (so that they can keep their luxury life styles – but have Collectivism as well). Indeed they openly saying so now – and inviting monsters such as “President” Xi to address their meetings, and endorsing his every evil word.

    And for those who still doubt that the American election was rigged……

    The Bill already passed by the House and going to the Senate would spread that rigging to EVERY STATE.

    Rigged electoral rolls full of dead people and convicted felons, and people who live in addresses that DO NOT EXIST.

    Millions of “mail in ballots” which can be filled in by anyone (or just by machines).

    No real checks on citizenship or identity.

    And all this not in some States – but in ALL States.

    The European Union faces no democratic alternative from the United States.

    The unelected Puppet Biden and criminal Speaker of the House and Majority Leader of the Senate are no alternative to the European Union – they are more of the same.

    And the, sickeningly corrupt, FBI have firearms – as do (of course) the United States Armed Forces (and the military are being taught Frankfurt School “Critical Theory” doctrines right now).

    The bitter truth is that, at the moment, the United States is more of a threat to liberty in the world than the European Union is, as the European Union is falling apart and has no real military forces – no

    Is there any chance of justice for a conservative in the Federal court system? Of course NOT.

    What about the FBI and the “Justice” Department – people who persecute (frame) the innocent, and COVER UP the crimes of the guilty (such as Joseph Biden and his family).

    There is no hope in this system – the corruption has gone to far, things are rotten to the bone.

    I hope I am WRONG – but this is what I believe, and I must tell the truth in what time is left to me.

  • Phil B

    Pournelles Iron Law of Bureaucracy applies here:

    Pournelle’s Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people”:

    First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of the organization. Examples are dedicated classroom teachers in an educational bureaucracy, many of the engineers and launch technicians and scientists at NASA, even some agricultural scientists and advisors in the former Soviet Union collective farming administration.

    Secondly, there will be those dedicated to the organization itself. Examples are many of the administrators in the education system, many professors of education, many teachers union officials, much of the NASA headquarters staff, etc.

    The Iron Law states that in every case the second group will gain and keep control of the organization. It will write the rules, and control promotions within the organization.

    Is this a valid description of the way that the EU developed? I think it is.