Posted on 03/29/2014 9:48:21 AM PDT by annalex
"That is no substitute for inspiring leadership or effective policies."
What, you weren't inspired by Barry's speech referring to the referendum in Kosovo?
/sarc
Indeed...
One may laugh or cringe at the Portuguese president of the Commission, but what he is saying is part of the root ideology of the EU. When Putin and Lavrov visited Brussels in January 2014 for a summit meeting with the EU leaders the same Barroso talked about "creat[ing] a common economic space from Lisbon to Vladivostok". Several other leading politicians of EU member countries have spoken of a European Union from the Bay of Biscay to the Urals. (Latest of those was David Cameron during a visit to Kazakstan this year.)
These statements are no more meaningless phrases than the phrase "ever closer union" in the original EU (EEC) treaty. They mean it!
And the reason is the statist ideology that pervades the political discourse in Europe. Europe is a small peninsula on the European-Asian landmass. The individual countries will not be able to compete with the large popolous nations in Asia and the Americas for raw materials and energy supplies. Therefore the Union must grow larger and larger - the only way to safety (they feel).
Bad luck for Russia and Ukraine who happens to be in the way of that expansion - and bad luck also to the United States if the US decides to go along with the EU, because in the end it will have to be the US who for a third time will have to come to the aid of a Europe that has involved itself in a major conflict.
Very much true. Libertarianism requires by necessity for religious communities, township cohesion, and most importantly family life, to control and keep in check the norms of civil society. When those norms are broken down (as has happened), that’s the excuse for government intrusion and libertarianism falls apart.
The statist feels these communities and townships to be exclusionary and totalitarian, but they are in fact the very safeguard against tyranny. In working to undermine and disintegrate them at the behest of malcontents and misfits, the government in fact persecutes the majority to the point of minority, terminating civil life and sapping a country of its nationhood.
There is a fine balance between rights and responsibilities. Governmental authorities are to secure your rights, which are outlined clearly and unequivocally, unchanging and inviolable. Communal authorities are to secure your responsibilities, and this authority is centralized in each household. We no longer have households. We have houses.
In the News/Activism forum, on a thread titled Putin’s Western Allies: Why Europe’s Far Right Is on the Kremlin’s Side, annalex wrote:
Despite the article’s hysterical anti-right wing tone, I think the conservatives should indeed ponder: why are so many on the nationalist Right unable to see, through the Russian Federation’s Soviet-style social conservatism, a re-enactment of the old COMINTERN posing serious threat to the nations of Europe, including Russia itself?
The answer to your question why they’re accepting funds from the “Kremlin” is because some of these so called nationalistic groups (usefull idiots) believe they, not Putin, can control what they’re advocating. They also see no problem with being dependent on Russia for their energy sources which is what they believe Putin is really about. And to a certain extent he is waging a capitalistic war using commi tactics. Attempting to corner europes oil market.
When Ukraine which under the old soviet was an “independent” country voting in the UN signed those agreements there were limitations placed on the number of ships,troops, and equipment Russia could keep at its naval base. When the Ukrainians kicked out whatshisname Russia wasn’t observing those agreements because Putin’s stooge let them violate them big time. And of course the Kremlin p/r tells us and repeated here in postings by Putin supporters built up their cause celeb. The truth is very likely any new government would put a kibosh on that but had no intention of kicking the Russians out. One consistant FR poster makes that assertion here when that come up. As far as ownership of the Crimea goes there were a bunch of owners including the Venetians who by the way just passed a non binding independent country referendum. We’re not hearing about any conflict that’s going on in that peninsula so don’t buy the crap that Kremlin sources are spewing it’s now one happy “russified” place.
Just this week I haven’t seen it posted here in FRs UK’s PM Cameron urged tapping into europes shale oil gas deposits and forget about Russia. Plus all of those former “soviets” are closely re-examining their defences. If that all comes together Putin might be out before Obama gets impeached.
This article is what I would expect from the SPLC-ADL types in which everything they oppose must be a “far-right” conspiracy. Somehow the growing resentment against the EU by the people of Europe is seen as some kind of ‘threat’. After all, much of the EU’s policy’s have been far beyond their legal limits and for the most part is a continental government most Europeans didn’t want.
Oh, and one more thing: It’s FAILING. But let’s not let reality get in the way of conventional wisdom.
Now, in seeing the decline of the West, many ‘patriots’ are looking East to (dare I say it) moral stability (which as we know, usually leads to political and economic stability).
Also, has it become more than obvious to everyone that Putin is now the new ‘bad guy’? A typical tactic of the West to make an adversary all about one person (G.W. Bush, Sarah Palin, Ted Cruz, even Edward Snowden if the need arises).
Fact is that unlike Libya, Uganda, Pakistan, Somalia and a few other recent countries (to name a few), Putin actually ASKED for his Parliament’s permission before moving on Crimea. I predict Russia will slowly garner more support from Western citizens as they find a growing disconnect with their own government’s leaders.
What was that (in)famous line recently from Putin? Oh yes:
“... I only wish I had the power that Obama thinks he has...”
Throw up all the propaganda you wish, but this is not about Putin. It’s about that so-called ‘regional power’ that we have to pay $71 million per seat to get a man into space, who’s economy is stabilizing by not overspending, and turning the petro-dollars into domestic manufacturing (you know - that stuff WE used to do), and who - along with it’s BRIC alliance, government more than 60% of the worlds population.
(BRIC = Brazil, Russia, India, China)
A population I might add, that under it’s current social policies, will see positive growth over the next generations while their opposition will surely see a decline.
Not taking sides here, just calling them as I see them. Personally, I think we should be worrying more about the domestic army being poised against us, a full on invasion from our southern border, and the absence of Constitutional limits much more than that ‘regional’ problem in the Ukraine.
jimjohn - out.
Mainly because it used to be Polish....until they were kicked out of there in 1939.
A better question might be why the American right doesn’t take more cues from their European counterparts who clearly see that the real enemy to conservatism and national sovereignty is the anti-religious, socialism of the European Union, not the mafia-style capitalism operating in Russia.
or, perhaps Russia sees the path away from socialism as the proper course.
It’s for damn sure they know that communism is a bitter path to follow
Farage: EU does have 'blood on its hands' over Ukraine - March 27, 2014 - Asked by an audience member why Ukraine wanted to join what he had called a "failed" institution, Mr Farage attacked the EU's "imperialist, expansionist" ambitions, saying it had "blood on its hands" for encouraging Ukrainians to topple their president."If you poke the Russian bear with a stick he will respond. And if you have neither the means nor the political will to face him down that is very obviously not a good idea."
He said the British public were sick of being "dragged into conflicts where no pressing national interest was at stake".
He said European leaders should not allow the expectation to grow that countries such as Britain "will always side with uprisings in the naive belief that benevolent liberal democracy is bound to replace existing regimes, fundamentally imperfect as they are".
"That is not the way the world works. So I repeat the charge: the EU has blood on its hands," he added.
Interesting how the Left never applies the word "nazi" to themselves.
I dislike all comparisons to WW2 events and leaders because they rarely work other than as leftist propaganda. However, you cannot deny that the annexation of Crimea is spot-on Sudetenland and the Austrian Anschluss.
I know, I know, call on me!
Because Venezuelan National Guardsmen can only read English instructions!!!
The sound isn't brilliant, but for a "quick and dirty" it makes the necessary points.
I mention Mussolini, because until he began to try to create his North African Empire. he was still considered “respectable,” He had even made up with the pope after Italy and the papacy had been at odds for sixty years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foundations_of_Geopolitics
http://www.hoover.org/publications/hoover-digest/article/8074
The EU is our enemy. Sunni Islamists are our enemy. Shia Islamists are our enemy. China is our enemy. Communists are our enemy. And Eurasianists are our enemy.
No, I don't think they are a complete sham. There is a genuine need in Europe for right wing voices to be heard. They are just fools.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.