Former Italian prime minister Lamberto Dini, one of the people drawing up the new European Constitution on the EU Convention on the Future of Europe, has flatly and explicitly contradicted British ministers who claimed that the new constitution is only a ‘tidying up exercise’.
Anyone in Britain who claims the constitution will not change things is trying to sweeten the pill for those who don’t want to see a bigger role for Europe
If this constitution is adopted by Britain, control of much of how the state intrudes into society will be placed in a power centre far more remote and less amenable to the British public’s democratic influence politically. It is nothing less than the wholesale disenfranchisement of Britain, talking a moderately effective democratic system of accountability (albeit a long decaying one) and replacing it with European-wide ‘democracy’ that in fact places vastly more power in remote bureaucracies.
Although I never doubted that Tony Blair was simply lying through his teeth, can anyone now doubt that what the Labour government is saying is intentional falsehood pertaining to altering the most fundamental underpinning structure of the British state?
If the Tory opposition was capable of rational analysis, they would start realising that Blair has torn up the rule book and soon rolling back the tide of statism will simply be beyond the legal power of British politicians. If the Conservative Leader was to stand up in Parliament and say “a future Tory government will simply abrogate this constitution on Day One and repatriate democratic accountability to the British people”, then there might be some grounds for thinking they had actually decided not to just be Labour Party Lite as they blather on about ‘good public services’ and tolerate the likes of Chris Patten in amongst their numbers.
What I find so exasperating is the Tory’s refusal to think outside the box. Will they just meekly accept that once the primacy of the EU is complete, they will just have to adapt into their allotted role as a European style ‘Christian Democrat’ Party of the statist centre in return for a place for their snouts at the Euro-trough? Perhaps so. The Conservative Party is a noxious organisation so I cannot say I am surprised, but unless they quickly rediscover their radical roots, Britain as a self-governing entity is finished regardless of the lies to the contrary (just see the remarks of our honest enemy Lamberto Dini).
Unlike most of continental Europe, there is a significant anti-statist element in the mainstream of British society… I don’t mean people like me, who are essentially out on the ‘lunatic fringe’, but the sort of people who Maggie Thatcher tapped into in her excitingly radical but maddeningly inconsistent way. Once this swathe of society finally realises that they no longer have any meaningful outlet for their political aspirations, I wonder if they will just be content to shrug and surrender to the Europe wide majority who favour regulatory top-down statism? I think not.
The Labour Party and all who support Euro-wide statism have seen the way to put all the bits about the role of the state they value beyond British politics: their vision of regulatory statism is about to be locked in and in future, politics will just be about factional pleading for a share of the monies appropriated from the remaining productive sections of the economy. The only antidote to this is for anti-EU politicians to simply refuse to cooperate. The Tory Party would be more useful if they simply walked out of Parliament and declined to return unless the constitution is completely gutted (which of course will never happen). After all, so what if Labour used that opportunity to pass all manner of nasty laws? They have such a large majority they can do that anyway and so it is only by radical action that the Tories can de-legitimise what is being done… i.e. by provoking a constitutional crisis because we are bloody well in one already!
2. The Member States shall facilitate the achievement of the Union’s tasks and refrain from any measure which could jeopardise the attainment of the objectives set out in the Constitution.
If anti-EU activists ever manage to start mounting effective resistance to the EU and actually undermining its authority, do you seriously doubt that laws suppressing what we say and do will not follow?
Damn, you beat me to it.
Perry, thank you for your incisive analysis. Every sentence you wrote was telling and correct.
I have never doubted for a minute that Blair is a compulsive liar. (Remember those made-up stories on Richard And Judy’s couch about stowing away out of Newcastle Airport when he was 12, on flight to the Bahamas? Or was it Bermuda? Anyway, remember Newcastle Airport scraching its head and saying they had never had a single flight to the Caribbean?) His lies are so crazy that I wonder whether he thinks he’s totally invincible. He says that there’s no danger of losing national sovereignty with the new “constitution” because he’s been over the Europe and explained everything to the other heads of government, and has managed to persuade them that federalism isn’t a good idea. They all nodded sagely, convinced against their will by the might of Tony’s persuasive arguments, agreeing that – zut alors! – they had been going down the wrong path these past 40 years! I mean, give me a break! At least make the lies believable so we have something to demolish.
Grazi, too, to Signor Dini for giving Tony a metaphysical punch in the face. I’ve been waiting for this moment for six years. Now we need some more people to punch him out while he’s down. (Kicking, in this instance, will also be permitted.)
I too find frustrating the Tories’ absolute inability to think outside the box. IDS is fiercely against the drive to greater federalism. He must articulate this day in and day out, and so must every other Tory spokesmen. Chris Patten has to be sacked from the Tory party as does Kenneth Clarke and everyone else who speaks in favour of federalism. These people are much more poisonous as a voice within the party than simply mouthing off their opinions as individual nonentities outside it. The absurdly self-styled “grandees” also need to go. No quarter. Teresa May isn’t up to the job of Chairman. IDS should get rid of her now. I cannot imagine an uprising within the party if he has the nerve to sack a well-meaning but incompetent woman. What is he afraid of? The Tories have to eat spinach and build up their muscles. Right now are perceived as weak, and we all know what happens to the weak: They mutate into lunch.
Tony Blair is staggering right now. He’s weak …
Poll in today’s Sunday Mirror says sixty percent of voters would reject the euro in a referendum and – better news yet – one in three would opt out of the EU entirely.
Unfortunately, of the 18-24 age group, 83% are pro EU and only 6% against. The result of callow youth and a lifetime of steady political indoctrination.
So, find yourself a young person today, and beat the howling snot out of him. (Umm…yeah. Yeah, that’s what I meant to say).
Apologies for thanking the wrong Italian Prime Minister in my last post.
[Editor’s note: I knew what you intended to say and had already changed Prodi to Dini for you, love!]
More good news: it looks like a large tranche of Labour voters now believes Blair lied about WMD in order to prosecute the war. The chippy and self-righteous C Short and R Cooke will not let this one die away, so we can safely leave them to eat their own and concentrate on Europe, while Blair fights a delibilitating battle on both fronts.
The more I read about all this horror, the more Neville Chamberlain’s name runs across my mental signboard. Blair is willing to sell out Britian, and for what? Big entries in future history books?
Perry,
Such laws already exist though they’ve yet to come into force. Since a multi-national Union is mostly made up of foreigners (whoever you are), people who agitate against the Union potentially commit the EU-wide, to-be arrestable, offence of “xenophobia”. Since it’s such a good thing–such an inevitable good thing–what other motivation could they have?
I’d like to know more about that stowing-away-on-an-aeroplane story Blair told — when?
Oh, Mark – It was during his first term, but I cannot remember exactly when. He also, around the same time, came up with a misty-eyed story about attending a football match with his Dad and watching an English legend score a goal. And what made the moment perfect was, they were sitting behind the visitors goalposts at the time. Such a thrilling moment for a young British lad out for the afternoon with his father! Problem with that one was, the player cited didn’t join that particular club for several years after Blair’s memory of the goal. Also, the football club, at that time, didn’t have seats behind the goal posts. Ah, memories! Where would we be without them?
The sickening thing is there is nothing to be done, which is to say: the die is cast. Britain will become a province of the autocratic and democratically unaccountable EU — by the choice of a credulous British public. Strict speech controls and in particular punishments for anti-state speech will be imposed, and applied to the EU’s opponents — to wide public approval in many cases. Britain will suffer the same perpetual economic malaise France and Germany are descending into — and overly vocal complaints about it will probably become grounds for prosecution.
Another sick-making prediction: in twenty years, the US and EU will be on opposite sides in various proxy conflicts around the world.
Harry, made those predictions myself in a trilogy of cyberpunk novels back in early 90s. (And Glory is one of them, an e-novel that is available for purchase now.)
The thing that is amazing is that Federats in Europe have never hidden their agenda. They are quite open about it in fact, its the UK based ones that are the liars.
It seems the Tories right now are afraid of their own shadow. It is a great shame they can’t come out swinging (in the political sense). The Federast boil in their midst has been lanced, but they still seem to be afraid to engage on the issue.
Andrew Ian Castel-Dodge is correct. The Europeans have never lied about the agenda. It was always the British telling lies to their own people. The government knew that, as the victors (acknowledging America’s huge contribution), the Brits wouldn’t fall for it. But why did Edward Heath and successive governments want it so badly?
France and Germany have a problem and always will have, but why would Britain become involved in their mutual binding of hands? It’s so bizarre. The natural response would be, good, let’s let the Germans and France have their treaties. Why we, the victors would want be become involved, why Denmark and Holland and Spain (for god’s sake!) would want to become involved is strange beyond credulity. It’s a Franco-Hun problem. Let’s let them know the next time they can duke it out to the kill; the rest of us have prior engagements.
But until we know why Britain (and not Norway or Switzerland) felt obliged to lie to its people to force them to join the losers’ club, we will not be able to fight this, and time is growing short.
How is it the Norwegians had the solid sense to stay out? As did the Swiss? What the hell is Britain doing in this frail club of losers? Why were the Norwegians and Swiss never persuaded they had to be “at the heart of Europe”? Why do neither Norway or Switzerland feel “sidelined in Europe”? Why does neither register the faintest palpitation even if true?
Why does no one point out that, in today’s racing-ahead world, it is Europe that is sidelined? They’re finished.
I would say, let us apply to be the 53rd state of the US (I believe Puerto Rico and Costa Rica have been ahead of us for the last 20/30 years) and get shed of poxy Europe! I hope to god we are never separated from the Anglsophere, but I fear that is the plan.
It’s like George Bush, in a sense, isn’t it? To know what George Bush is going to do, all you have to do is listen to what he says. Don’t analyse. Just listen to what he says, and he will do it. Likewise the EU. They’ve never pretended. It’s only been necessary to lie to the British, and the British have accepted their politician’s lies in their traditional bovine way.
To get to the bottom of this, we need to know why Britain embarked on this baffling course (and Norway did not). Something went awry with British history and we’re running down a dark tunnel trying to hang on to its tail …. why was this imposed on us?
The Mail on Sunday poll says that 75% want a referendum on the proposed constitution with 18% leaving it to Parliament.
If the constitution were to give more powers to the EU, then 51% would favour leaving the EU altogether with 29% for staying in.
What are the Tories waiting for?
Let’s get out now and hang onto our oil, which is the next “shared resources” step. Like our fish. And our farming. Before things began to clarify, I thought we should just negotiate deals, but now I think, out! Now! (France’s generous public sector pension plans are bust and they need British taxpayer money to meet their obligations – at the cost of British pensions – because Germany’s bust, too.) I agree, a vote for UKIP is not wasted. Even the tiny number of elected UKIPs in Brussels are absolutely dedicated to killing the beast.
And as a side issue, everything I hear about flying on Concorde was absolutely ghastly. Claustrophobic plane, small seats, tinier loos. But at least the British Concordes never crashed (outside Paris – thank you, God!) and never had chunks falling off them all over the world. The point: Europe is dead. Check the stats. Everywhere’s doing better except the basket cases.
Guy Herbert is not correct in his interpretation of the proposed, community-wide toughening of hate laws. These seek to extend German domestic law to the rest of us by the ingenious mechanism of making hate offences committed in one member state subject to prosecution in another.
German hate law is founded squarely on holocaust guilt and, whatever your view of the figure of six million, is the most repressive of free speech in the developed world. I cannot vouch for the accuracy of this but I saw a claim recently that there are 8,000 German citizens currently incarcerated. Apparently, these people had little defence in law since they must show that no offence has been taken by the complainent. The prosecution rate is accordingly high.
Draconian measures of this sort imply an extraordinary and vexing sensitivity. The EU plutocracy, however, has no such sensitivities and no need to lock up 8,000 anti-Europeans. This is a ruling class that is brazen in its love of power – think Bilderberg. These people couldn’t care less about the opinions or speech of the vulgar crowd.
For the most part effective resistance from anti-EU types is not something they need fear. There is, though, that unstable quantity … the ballot box. Politicians in the nation states are still accountable. What a piece of luck, then, that the European Superstate won’t have any truck with democracy.
It’s all very tangled, but I am optimistic we can find a way out in the nick of time.
Remember that Frenchman (who? reference anyone?) who said “An Englishman’s mind works best when it is almost too late.”
Intended as an insult, I think, but in a way quite a compliment. I hope it’s true.
Mark — wish I shared your confidence. The federasts are running the government, in control of the state-funded news organ, training and educating British children, and will choose the wording of any referendum put to the public. I’m afraid the battle is lost. As Andrew pointed out, the European federasts have made no secret of their ambition. Soon enough their British counterparts will have a free hand.
Liberty Belle writes:
“To get to the bottom of this, we need to know why Britain embarked on this baffling course (and Norway did not). Something went awry with British history and we’re running down a dark tunnel trying to hang on to its tail …. why was this imposed on us?”
Being a part-time reductionist, I’ve spent many hours wondering about this. Surely there must be one single reason why the traitor Heath led us into this mess?
I’ve come to the conclusion there isn’t – that electric eels didn’t crawl into Edward Heath’s ears when he was skippering Morning Clod and fry his brain. He was just an insufferably arrogant, but very typical, product of his age and class.
The best analysis I have been able to come up with is a threefold one. It begins with some members of a generation (Heath’s) traumatised by fighting in WWII. Anything, even surrendering national sovereignty, was a price worth paying, if it meant the Germans could be tamed.
It was this fear which led to the formation of the original Coal and Steel Community by Jean Monnet – and it was never concealed by its Continental advocates that the intention was to bind together the member nations into a single country with a single government.
To this fear of German militarism has to be added disdain for the USA – regarded as a largely uncultured nation by many British, French, German and Italian intellectuals. This was greatly assisted in this country by the growing sense of cultural cringe, typified by the enormously influential food writer, Elizabeth David, who inculcated the notion (not hard to spread in a post-war Britain of works canteens and ABCs) that French cooking (and with it, French life) was somehow culturally superior. Ms. David taught the chattering classes that French equalled cool. Film critics, philosophers, sociologists, literary gurus (socialists all) peddled the same myth. Later, the chattering classes discovered Provence and Tuscany.
The third element is resentment at the USA. French resentment of the USA needs no elaboration while Britain, which ended WWII bankrupt and deeply in hock to America, saw its former junior partner now starting to rule the world: while the British Empire fell apart. That officer class during WWII had already decided the Yanks were brash, undisciplined, over-sexed, overpaid and over here and now, post-war, the bounders were lording it over the whole world, while we were still paying-off the bloody war loan and collapsing into a resentful, trade-union dominated heap of festering resentment.
To people like these, forming an alliance, acting as a counterweight to France and Germany, thus forging a third force to play in the big league with the USA and Soviet Union seemed the only sensible way to go.
To which end they proceeded to shaft New Zealand, Australia, much of British farming, fishing and manufacturing, the rule of Common Law and sovereignty of Parliament, our ancient system of weights and measures – the list grows by the week.
There’s no one answer – just a sorry tale of the loss of self-confidence, resentment and bitterness and a sense of surrender to what these people believe is the ‘inevitability’ of The USE.
And ‘USEd’ we certainly have been.
I suppose that if it comes to pass, you can always flee over here and help us to resist our statists. Though our statists seem to be temporarily on the run, I’m not sure how long that will last.
I personally think that dark ages are inevitable.
From an American point of view, I simply can’t understand how your population will allow the loss of sovereignty to occur. The same idea has been trifled with here under the name of the UN, but it has been dismissed out of hand by the general population, as an absurdity.
I really don’t like functioning democracies. By what right does a present voting population presume to dispense with the history and traditions of their country, thereby depriving all future generations of their birthright. It should be more difficult than amassing gullible voters of better than 50%.
Gloomy sentiments! If the future for this country is indeed sealed the game will change somewhat but it won’t stop. An equal and opposite reaction will arise, in the form of popular resentment to distant and unaccountable government. The seeds are already there in the long-standing two-thirds majority against the Euro and a growing body of opinion for cessesion. But one can easily imagine trouble brewing over a whole range of not necessarily European issues where people feel they have been ridden roughshot over or forced onto a corner. Globalism is one. But the really heavy issue is race – if ever the natives catch on to their coming minority. Who among us, after all, voted for that? Fukuyama was wrong. History did not end in 1989. It could be all about to get interesting.
I do not agree that race is really the issue, Serf. I know a great many British blacks who are thoroughly assimilated. Ditto British Jews. I know a few Hindus who, whilst not quite so assimilated, are still quite ‘British’… but the Muslims, that is rather different. Muslims who are resolutely British in outlook and identity, like Adil Farooq are, alas, a small minority I suspect. No, it is culture, not race, that is a key issue.
G Cooper – Hmm, I am not sure I agree with you. (First, by the way, Edward Heath wasn’t of any elevated “class”. His mother was a maid.) I do not think that he was motivated by the “never again” philosophy that motivated France and Germany. He is not that selfless. I don’t think he’s ever given a stuff about the British people. He’s a greedy man. There was something in it for him, but, for the life of me, I cannot guess what it was. No one would stand up in public and allow the idiotic phrase “pooled sovereignty” (especially in the context: pooled sovereignty with an enemy we’ve just fought to the death) to issue from his mouth unless he personally had something to gain from it.
And why did subsequent prime ministers continue the lie? (I wasn’t living in Britain at the time of Thatcher, but I somehow get the impression she wasn’t as guilty as the rest. I could be wrong.)
I’m not trying to cobble a conspiracy theory out of this. Germany after the war looked enviably successful, especially in the light of continued rationing in Britain and being dubbed “the sick man of Europe”. France, as you say, gained some sort of spurious cultural ascendency, with its reputation for good food, boring movies and Juliette Greco in a striped T shirt, a beret and a cigarette hanging from her lips looking too disillusioned for words.
Tony Blair is, as always, blindingly, unsubtlely obvious. He wants the power and glory of being “Europe”‘s first president. But the rest? I am still puzzled. I’ve never heard of a nation giving itself away before. We always looked down on people who surrendered (as in, the French); but to surrender without a war!
I respectfully suggest that Serf is wrong. The extension of laws against “hate crimes” is the excuse, yes. But the application is wider.
The core common criminal code is drawn in the broadest possible language, and can be exploited in a very broad way, regardless of the intent of those who signed the treaty. Readers will recall that one of the charges levelled against Bernard Connolly was “xenophobia”.
Serf thinks there will eventually be a popular reaction against the EU grown from seeds of dissent already apparent, but he fails to note that any form of rebellion, physical or verbal, will be a crime. I wonder where they’ll put the gulags.
Well, nice to get a reaction. Guy, Perry and Liberty Belle, I think the issue is disenfranchisement rather than “police action” by a future European government. But both would tend towards stoking up resentment among the people. We do not have the same respect for our rulers as the French and Germans. They might just view a European government as having some legitimising connection to their own aspirations. The British will never hold that point of view. It may not mean fighting in the streets but I think some reaction would be inevitable.
As for race it is, of course, the greatest of all political issues, greater than democracy, greater than freedom. It is family. It is lineage. But my fellow native Englishmen have become hopelessly incapable of discussing it honestly. I don’t want to go on about it here because I fear it would be unwelcome. I will just say that the white minority will come to pass in Canada in the next two generations and that is a critical sign. No one will be able to look at their own societies and say “it can’t happen here.” On present reproductive and demographic trends it must. The US government predicts 2050 but the Mexican invasion will advance that. The only UK study predicts 2100.
I know that many intelligent people – the majority – want to avoid the personal unpleasantness they perceive in discussions of race. That attitude is largely peculiar to white intellectuals. I, however, am talking about the uncorked genie of popular resentment (ie the masses). If you choose to respond to the above, would you please do so strictly in those terms.
Just on a specific comment by Harry, I don’t think the government could simply choose whatever wording they wanted in a referendum. They would have to consult the Electoral Commission. Although they could ultimately ignore the Commission’s advice, to do so might be dangerous and counter-productive.
Much of the media, especially the BBC, seems to regard favouring withdrawal from the EU as the preserve of the lunatic fringe, and therefore an opinion not worthy of serious consideration. With the results of recent polls indicating more and more people wanting withdrawal, they will hopefully be forced to take this option more seriously.
After all, the BBC is supposed to reflect all significant strands of public opinion, though it clearly fails to do this on EU issues.
Sorry, second attempt at the above link.
Kevin writes:
“After all, the BBC is supposed to reflect all significant strands of public opinion, though it clearly fails to do this on EU issues”
I can think of at least ten issues on which the BBC does no such thing.
And you are right about its attitude to those advocating withdrawal from the EU. I’ve posted the comments made to Rod Liddle (former editor of Today) by the BBC’s politcical adviser before – in short they think mere Eurosceptics are barking – what they think of those advocating leaving the mess, I shudder to think
Liberty Belle writes:
“Hmm, I am not sure I agree with you. (First, by the way, Edward Heath wasn’t of any elevated “class”. His mother was a maid..”
Yes, this is one of those curiously British distinctions which will have Americans chuckling, I imagine.
I did know that about Heath, but all the same, he saw *himself* as middle class – from his Oxbridge education to his phoney accent – and very much a member of the ‘officer class’.
As to concealed motives, perhaps we will have to wait until he is dead before the truth (if there is any) comes out.
G Cooper – I fear you’re right.
On a brighter note, I see in The Telegraph that 44% of the British public think Blair lied to them over WMD. So now Blair’s defending himself on two fronts: one, almost 50% of the electorate believe the prime minister lied to them and to parliament; and two, the swelling agitation for a referendum on the “constitution”.
Then, lurking uncomfortably in the background, there’s the euro referendum, which he can’t slither out of. And the Transport & General Workers Union is flapping around him like a cheap suit.
G Cooper – I fear you’re right.
On a brighter note, I see in The Telegraph that 44% of the British public think Blair lied to them over WMD. So now Blair’s defending himself on two fronts: one, almost 50% of the electorate believe the prime minister lied to them and to parliament; and two, the swelling agitation for a referendum on the “constitution”.
Then, lurking uncomfortably in the background, there’s the euro referendum, which he can’t slither out of. And the Transport & General Workers Union is flapping around him like a cheap suit.
Sorry. I did a double click by mistake and it registered.
Kevin, the wording of ballot or survey questions is a well-developed science. I doubt the government would choose a really ham-fisted question, but there are many and subtle ways to skin a cat. Unfortunately, the government holds the knife. They will also coordinate the advocacy campaign that will undoubtedly be developed in tandem with the question itself.
The Euro Referendum.
All the signs point to Blair raising the stakes on this.He knows he would lose a referendum on the Euro and also on the Constitution.The logical step is to up the ante as he is hinting, by making any referendum in effect a vote on whether we go fully in[euro, new constitution etc.] or come out.He knows he could win that one and there is no other way of getting us into the Euro.
That is now the danger,that we get what we are asking for but not in the form we want.
Harry – The Australian government has held around 30 referenda (someone will correct me on the number) over the last 50 years, and these have always been a clear, one sentence, yes-or-no question. Given the ability and honour of the Ozzie government in devising an unbiased lucid, yes or no, one-sentence question, we must insist the job of formulating the proposed “European” “constitution” question be given to our Commonwealth cousin to execute. The forms, or computer cards, must be printed in Oz and only seen by Blair and his courtiers on the same day the rest of the British public sees them. On Referendum Day itself.
If they use voting machines, prepare to take a hammer in with you to use maximum force to get those chads punched the hell through.
That’s exactly right, I think.
Wow, it sounds like you are F****d. Once a leftist more power to the state thing gets started it never stops. Leftists have the ability to just keep shouting until most people just give in just so they will shut up. God save us from people who just want to do good. The road to hell and all that
The real answer is to get out of Europe and form an Anglo-American Federation, consisting of the UK, USA, Australia, NZ, and (perhaps) Canada. Each country would retain full and complete sovreignty, but would form joint consultative arrangements for defense, foreign relations, and trade, and for no other purposes. There would be NO regulatory or general taxing powers granted to the Federation. Details obviously need to be worked out, but now is the time. Otherwise, our ancient and best friend is well and truly doomed.
May God Save the Queen, because the Eurocrats sure won’t!
The Curmudgeon
S. Weasel writes:
“Unfortunately, of the 18-24 age group, 83% are pro EU and only 6% against. The result of callow youth and a lifetime of steady political indoctrination.
So, find yourself a young person today, and beat the howling snot out of him.”
I am part of the 18-24 age-group and (unsurprisingly) so are most of my friends. Whenever you read or hear about polls that indicate that “Britain’s youth” or the “upcoming generation” or any of those silly phrases used to describe this sort of age group are all “forward-thinking” or “progressive” and that they’re into Europe because they can see all the benefits of additional bureaucracy and they can’t wait for their freedom of speech to be restricted by laws which will supposedly protect “minorities” you can be confident you’re reading the results of a selectively conducted poll which is intended to reinforce the false stereotype that the only people opposed to the EU are xenophobic old gits.
At my age you come into contact with a lot of left-wing idiots (scattered mercilessly throughout academic institutions and “student conferences”, etc) who whinge about how the government should raise taxes and promote “equality” and how we’re all friends in Europe (and who I would personally like to “beat the howling snot out of”) – but there are just as many “Eurosceptics” (or whatever Samizdatistas prefer to call those opposed to the EU) in this age group as in other age groups (in my experience).
Even left-wing student types have their gripes about the EU from time to time although they’re usually quite ignorant of small issues like the EU constitution or the “anti-hate” laws. Please do not let the media convince you that 86% (or anywhere near this percentage) of the 18-24 age group blindly support the EU and what it stands for and have great faith in Blair and/or the Eurocrats – it’s simply not true – this is a fine piece of Euro-propaganda.
Yes, certain people are working very hard to indoctrinate children and students through schools, colleges and universities but more people than you seem to realise simply don’t fall for the blatant pro-EU propaganda which is shoved in their faces during every compulsory citizenship class, seminar or conference. I tend to find that the stupid kids/students will ignore the nonsense being spewed out and the ones who are paying a bit of attention will immediately spot the pro-EU bias and either switch-off or start to question or fight it (by asking awkward questions at a pro-EU student conference, for example).
I urge you to have a little more faith in this section of society.
Y-e-a-a-a-y, Stephen Hodgson!! You want more faith? You just got it!
Stephen,
You have no idea how much that boosts our moral. It is so gratifying to know that the next generation has not been successfully indoctrinated by the education establishment.
Keep the faith and keep reading the Samizdata. You are on the winning side (but the other side don’t know it yet).