Replies

If the people of a sovereign nation decide as the sovereign that they want to share their souvereignty with other to date soverein nations I can not find anything malicious in it. In France 33% (Votes for le Pen) of the voters want the national solution and 66% (votes for Macron) voted for a united Europe. Geerd Wilders lost in the Netherlands and the AfD lost in Nordrheinwestfalen, the biggest state of Germany. And guess what: Jarosław Kaczyński of Poland talked about a united European military with a nuclear arm. A united Europe was an idea of Churchill (but without his island), that was later adapted by Adenauer and de Gaulle. The USSR has nothing to do with it. Even if it would it would be irrelevant today. A united Europe is in the interest of 350 Million Europeans. Therefore we will unite it. Regards Andreas P.S. I do not want to provoke, but your arumentations have nothing to to with the contemporary European mood.

It’s a good idea on paper, that’s assuming Europeans want to be “European”, and don’t let in millions who don’t want to be “European”.

No such thing happened in “Europe”. Giving away sovereignty (which is what the politicians did, not the people) is not sharing it; it is becoming a client state to the superior power. Overt lesson of history, but mankind, as Churchill noted in 1935, suffers from “unteachability”. Even worse, the trap thereof is socialistic.

Churchill only approved of a united Europe “built by the English”. He recognized two other powers capable of doing so, those being Russia and Germany, but his viewpoint was that their constructs would lead to dystopia in both cases.