Sunday, 7 May 2017

Pointlessness of Euro-elections....and press coverage of them


     It is only an observation, but perhaps salient, that there is really no reason for the hollow shells of nations to have elections any longer.  Perhaps there might be some reason for very local elections, but for the "European Community" and its notion concerning a common market and culture connectively communicating from Sweden to Turkey, and Spain to Finland, is patently silly, elitist, and the final extension of the Utopia of the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei.    Why let a silly thing such as the inevitable failure of any socialist - elitist national construct stand in the way?

     All the nations of Europe determined long ago to either lead the royalty and aristocracy to the guillotine or allow them to sit upon thrones made of Bakelite (polyoxybenzylmethylenglycolanhydride).  Military people and industrialists and professional professors (many with aristocratic backgrounds) knew how to arrange the Rubik's Cube of Europe in a much better way.

     After World War II, and five or ten score million dead people later, Red China and Russia and Europe had all pretty much established a form of social democracy.   It was an early form of "One Man - One Vote.  This meant in many cases that power would accrue to One Man, and he would have One Vote.  That was what we were fighting against to begin with, so in keeping with almost everything the elites attempt, their success was in establishing that which they had destroyed before.  We had Chairman Mao, Uncle Joe, and before long, other One Man - One Vote leaders like the Castro, Ho, Pol Pot, Peron, and on and on.

     The Yuropeans managed a different variation.  That would be to have multiple parties, crossing a wide spectrum of philosophies and platforms, that all agreed, no matter who would be elected, the concept of National Socialism would be the result.  In other words, One Vote - One Party.

     So now hear ye what the International and National Press Corps, all very important people, have to say upon introducing the French contenders for the crown of Louis XVI, "In the contest between the Far-Right Le Pen and the Moderate Macron.....", when in fact they are both socialists.  The main difference between the two is that Le Pen believes that Frenchmen might have the right to not rot out their culture and be systematically murdered into extinction by deranged Muslim Radical killers, while Macron believes that Whatever Brussels Wants, Brussels Gets.   Both are socialists to their almost everyone from the Shetland Islands to the Cypriot shores. 

     So, while I shall monitor a bit of the returns coming out of France, I shall content myself with the knowledge that the winner is already known.   The loser, without a doubt, will be France and the increasingly dull and grey landscape of Europe. 

El Gringo Viejo.