No, the EU has not gone off the rails; we are seeing what was always intended

The Tories are at it again, pushing their lie that the “Common Market” started off with good intentions and somehow went off the rails.  It is laughable because this argument cannot withstand the merest wisp of a breeze of scrutiny of the substantial mountain of evidence that underlines the truth. What we are seeing is what was always intended.

The European project has not lost its way or gone beyond its original plan.  It is firmly on track to achieve what its architects set out to do.

But that doesn’t stop the likes of John Redwood and an assortment of nice/nasty but dim Europlastics in the Conservative Party, and their corporatist proxies such as Open Europe, from chuntering about a mythical renegotation of UK membership and wider reform of the EU, because the union has supposedly gone further than they ‘believe’ was intended.  These people need only to trouble themselves to read the substantial body of documents and speeches by the European project’s leading lights, dating from the present all the way back as far as the end of World War I, to see how deluded and ignorant their ‘off the rails’ argument is.

While the EUphile media in the UK laps up the Tory ‘off the rails’ lie and reports the faux fightback it as if it were a defining issue of our time – because like the media the Tories want to keep the UK firmly under the control of the supreme government in Brussels – in reality this hoo-haa is just for domestic consumption by a British audience, to service the vested interests of corporations that benefit from EU membership and rule by bureaucracy, while the negative consequences of membership are experienced by ordinary people as the democratic process is eroded and the capacity of people to effect change is eradicated.

But in the corridors of EU power, this renegotiation/reform ‘debate’ so beloved of the Europlastics barely registers, as Mary Ellen Synon explained to the Bruges Group recently, because David Cameron reassured the EU last April that he would not take Britain out of the EU just because a referendum result was a vote to get Out.  Renegotiation and reform is a singularly British monologue and it doesn’t even make it into the EU’s in-tray.

The fact is there is no great crisis of confidence in the EU.  In fact the EU is supremely confident and relatively content with its patient implementation of the decades-old plan, hatched by the likes of Monnet and Salter, to develop one overall government for all of continental Europe.  It was never about creating a continent-wide free trade area.  The customs union was not the aim, just a consequence of creating a single political jurisdiction. In José Manuel Barroso’s own words, the agenda is ever closer union and ‘the EU needs to be big on big things and smaller on smaller things’.  Governance is a big thing and the EU will be big in governing, as per the long standing plan.

The European project was always intended, slowly and deliberately, to relegate national governance to nothing more than a rubber stamping operation.  By keeping nominal national governments in place, the distracted and barely cognisant populus would retain an impression of national sovereignty where none exists.  The Tories are either too stupid to read the evidence and grasp this; or too dishonest to admit it, lest their complicity in this long planned and slowly implemented subversion of national self determination is eventually recognised, understood and punished by the electorate.

Until the reality of the European project, and the EU it has spawned, is understood so people see the lies, delusion and misrepresentations for what they are, we will never have an honest debate about the UK’s future and this country’s place in the world.  Remember, those suitcases on the baggage carousels at Brussels airport so vividly described by Mary Ellen Synon in her Bruges Group speech linked above, have stickers that say “Europe is my country”, not ‘Europe is my free trade area’.  The reality of what has always been intended is no secret. It is ludicrous in light of so much evidence that the Tories are allowed to get away with their lie.

So long as the Tories and their proxies are allowed to keep presenting their distorted and false narrative unchallenged, the British people will never be able to make an informed decision about the central and vital question of who should run Britain.

Please help more people to understand the reality by spreading it far and wide, in general discussion and on comment threads.  It’s time that people had the chance to  debate and decide Britain’s future in an informed way with knowledge of the realities, not the politically-motivated myths that currently hold sway.

19 Responses to “No, the EU has not gone off the rails; we are seeing what was always intended”


  1. 1 Iconoclastis 03/01/2014 at 6:39 pm

    Well I’m all for getting out of the EU. In fact I think it can only be the prime object of all British political effort and endeavour. Everything else is secondary. Except, if we were out, just who would run the UK government? If you think our political class are capable you must be off your jolly old rocker. We would need a new constitution to protect the people from government, and a whole new democratic way of government. We could start from the Harrogate Agenda. Where else?

  2. 2 Barrie Singleton 03/01/2014 at 6:40 pm

    The sort of people who crave power are not much good at anything except pursuit of power. If Britain wrenches free from the EU but retains ‘D’ MOCK CRASS Y? we will go down to factional rioting in a multicultural police-state.
    If we are subsumed into the EU, we will go down to factional rioting in a multicultural police-state. Good ‘ere innit.

  3. 3 Iconoclastis 03/01/2014 at 6:44 pm

    Where else? The Swiss political model. I don’t think much of cuckoo clocks, but their democracy is a model for the Western world.

  4. 4 Barrie Singleton 03/01/2014 at 6:50 pm

    I have worked in close proximity to thee Swiss. The word ‘cuckoo’ certainly popped into consciousness from time to time. Do you think it would help if Britain were an isolated nation with an unscrupulous attitude to money? Oh – hang on a minute . . .

  5. 5 Iconoclastis 03/01/2014 at 6:57 pm

    We are talking democratic government here! Nothing else, not money, not morals.

  6. 6 Barrie Singleton 03/01/2014 at 7:09 pm

    There’s no answer to that!

  7. 7 Eric 03/01/2014 at 7:33 pm

    Excellent article.

  8. 8 wj (@wj557) 03/01/2014 at 8:22 pm

    Well said AM – I would support your last paragraph and the local paper’s web sites are marvellous opportunities to spread the word.

    Any post in the comments section will attract the EU orchestrated Orcs – my advice is take a deep breath, refer to AM’s and other knowledgeable EU-sceptic blogs for information, make sure of your facts, lay out a couple of paragraphs, and post.

    Stay calm when the wailing banshees try to shout you down and, I’m sorry to the believers, just don’t parrot “Vote UKIP”

    Win the argument.

    (I hope that this doesn’t sound too patronising)

  9. 9 pym1640 04/01/2014 at 5:51 am

    To wj- I agree. It is a useful way to do a little bit for the cause. I have done the same myself but have only ever had one reply, which was in support!
    Thank you AM for another fine article.

  10. 10 Clarence 04/01/2014 at 8:05 am

    To quote a certain book:

    When we joined the “Common Market” in 1973, we were not joining a free- trade area. Some of those who voted ‘yes’ to remaining in the EEC in the 1975 referendum complain now that the EU is not what they voted for, in the manner of a wife complaining that her husband is not the man she married. While the wife may have a point – her charming fiancé may have turned into a slobbish husband – the disgruntled voter who wanted only free trade does not. The truth was always there (“ever closer union”), in the large print of the Treaty Of Rome, although it was not pointed out in 1975.

    The EU never was a free-trade area. It was and is a customs union. The two have something in common – members of both enjoy tariff-free imports and exports among themselves. This fact tends to blind people to the crucial difference between the two set-ups…

  11. 11 Brian H 04/01/2014 at 8:43 am

    Why are the Tories et al trying to enhance the power of those who will render them impotent? Do they hope to be part of the ‘cracy? Fat chance.

  12. 12 Barrie Singleton 04/01/2014 at 9:57 am

    As previously posted: I suggest those drawn to the exercise of power over people, also tend to fawn on individuals of greater power. When Tony was sweeping all before him, in little UK, he went to big America and was seen adoring Dubya (King of the World) to the point of aping his body language.
    I view it as symptomatic of a juvenile mentality, locked in unmet need. In our ‘culture’, those of wisdom and quiescence (any left?) are not called upon to steward the nation.

  13. 13 Pogle's Woodsman 04/01/2014 at 10:40 am

    ….’either too stupid … or too dishonest’…

    After all the time and opportunity, I’d say it was ‘dishonest’ at the Parliamentary level, and too stupid at the party tribal level.

    It’s interesting looking at replies to very direct questions on the blogs. Not only Redwood. Carswell and the usual evasive hangers-on are equally guilty.

    Redwood continues to peddle the notion that Cameron will respect an ‘out’ vote with actual withdrawal. If you challenge Redwood (or Carswell etc…) with an actual attributable public comment from Cameron *which has not already been specifically disqualified with a preceding weasel caveat* that he will action an ‘out’ vote, answer comes there none.

    Preceding caveats including, but not limited to …’It would be strange having gone to the length of holding a referendum we would then ignore it…… Parliament would not be in the mood to legislate a second time for a vote to overturn the referendum result…. we will not ignore the electorate*…. (*poisonous one that – it has to be followed up immediately requesting whether he will hold an immediate general election, whether he will precipitate a vote of confidence or whether he will actually force withdrawal legislation through Parliament. This point has never been forced…)

    Also watch out for ‘well, as far as I’m concerned’… It’s also a weasel caveat and has actual recent precedence. Refer back to the Clinton impeachment hearings and recall one odd retort he made to a question. ….’That depends on your definition of the word ‘is’…. he enquired.

    ‘As far as I’m concerned’…. is qualified on the definition of the singular individual. ‘I’. I can’t remember the specific occasion – it was either the Lord Rennard scandal, or the Cyril Smith affair, but Clegg was asked whether he was aware of the matter before it broke publically. When it later was proven he had been made aware, he stated something to the effect of ‘I was aware as Deputy Prime Minister, but had not been officially informed as LibDem Party leader.’ Astonishingly, the media let him get away with it.

    Where an EU referendum is concerned, if Cameron prefixes an apparently unambiguous answer with ‘as far as I’m concerned’, you will find after the event horizon beyond the Referendum, that ‘I’ meant ‘David Cameron, private citizen’ and not ‘David Cameron, Prime Minister’ or ‘David Cameron, leader of his Cabinet’.

  14. 15 Pogle's Woodsman 04/01/2014 at 12:12 pm

    Thanks for that BF. I knew it was one or t’other.

    Happy New Year to you.

  15. 16 Barrie Singleton 04/01/2014 at 1:33 pm

    re Pogle’s Woodsman 10.40 am. Rare erudition and exposition. Do you find few really know (or care) what you are saying? In passing, you must surely be aware that The Westminster Paradigm is a self-perpetuating corruption, with trickle down to all walks of life. I reckon we need two revolutions: Awareness and Demolition (V for Vendetta).

  16. 17 Pogle's Woodsman 04/01/2014 at 3:56 pm

    Barrie Singleton, many respects and thanks for your comments.

    I have to be careful on the example I’ve given above. If what I said there did not have a fairly recent and pertinent precedent, I’d sound like a ranting nutter to the careless ear.

    In general, whilst this blog and its peers will absorb the concept of what I’ve said with studied consideration, it’s not the kind of comment I’d bother highlighting elsewhere. No. People wouldn’t really take in what I was saying because on the general newspaper forums, the majority of the contributing matter is unthinking and tribal – so the notion I was demonstrating to the Conservative tribe that they were permitting themselves to be duped would not be welcome, and would not be heeded.

    In general I think we’re getting somewhere but the speed of progress is being matched by the withdrawal of democracy by that same political tribal body. Whilst via the internet we can unambiguously prove when politicians have lied to us (even when, in the recent Conservative case, they clumsily attempt to supress their back-catalogue of public speeches) the current popular posture is the suppression of intent.

    Not even wishing to hide behind ‘manifesto commitments are not subject to legitimate expectation’ any longer (a political ruling which will prove the gift that keeps on giving) you have the example of Miliband who has asserted he will ‘under-promise and over-deliver’. In other words, don’t even bother making up a programme that people will remind you of in eight months time. As the Psychedelic Furs sang ‘You can never win or lose if you don’t run the race’.

    If you lie by silence, or by omission, nobody can gainsay you.

    And sadly, the tribalists will happily lap that up.

  17. 18 Barrie Singleton 04/01/2014 at 4:10 pm

    I’ll ‘go’ with your constrained optimism, if I may, Woodsman. I am struggling with both central and local government over matters of proven fact (LiarFlyer 2010 and bus-lane scam 2011/12). Westminster is massively defended (MPs have no duty to constituent and then some.) and bus-lane challenge is CIVIL court, even though Council behaviour is ‘criminal’ in every sense.

    “If you lie by silence, or by omission, nobody can gainsay you.” Nice!


  1. 1 The long term intention of the EU | UKIP Hillingdon Trackback on 04/01/2014 at 9:24 am
Comments are currently closed.



Enter your email address below

The Harrogate Agenda Explained

Email AM

Bloggers for an Independent UK

AM on Twitter

Error: Please make sure the Twitter account is public.

STOR Scandal

Autonomous Mind Archive