Soros mourns the passing of the EU (Part IV)

by Don Hank, Guest Contributor

Geert Wilders, leader of the PVV (Partij Voor de Vrijhijd, or Freedom Party) is another very sincere leader who, though displaying a somewhat more blunt style than Marine, also cares deeply about his own country and is eager to restore its sovereignty. He too expresses concernover the Muslim invasion and has called for a halt to the EU-imposed immigration from Morocco due to the disproportionate number of crimes committed by that community. The majority of his countrymen seem to agree. He has received death threats and needs body guards to walk outside. The Dutch MSM once hammered him mercilessly but are increasingly reserved now that PVV has become decidedly mainstream.

 Both  leaders care about lessening the impact of unbridled immigration and onerous taxationfoisted upon them by the EU, thanks to their involuntary membership therein. This year for the first time, a tipping point has been reached and the people have seen that the EU is their enemy.

As for UKIP’s Nigel Farage, many of you have heard his fiery speeches against the EU made in the EU’s own parliament. While some of my UK correspondents would like to see him more committed to ending the unlimited immigration from Muslim countries that is devastating large swaths of the UK, he is an effective leader and has been able to garner more and more seats in the EU for his party, which is dedicated to pulling the UK out of the EU.

So now, my fellow Americans, where is our Front National, our Freedom Party, our UKIP? For decades, no US politician from any political party – including third parties – has applied the word “sovereignty” to the American people.

Our federal government has far overstepped its constitutional bounds in every way, stripping the states and local governments of their rights. This means that the states and local governments have lost their sovereigntyThe consequences are the same here as they are across the pond: unbridled immigration and the attendant loss of our jobs, our culture and our safety; loss of constitutional freedoms and a growing tax burden, not only from the IRS but also from the Fed’s insistence on inflation, which it falsely assesses at around 2% a year but which is in fact much higher in terms of staples and fuel. This problem is incorrectly viewed as a freedom issue when in fact it is primarily a sovereignty issue. Our inability to grasp the issue of sovereignty and the loss thereof is standing in the way of a rational solution. Put succinctly, sovereignty is in large part the right of a country to have and preserve its culture. Unbridled personal freedom is largely responsible for destroying that culture.

The Europeans are slowly experiencing a late awakening to this loss of sovereignty in their owncountries and now for the first time since the war, they are rising up and taking their own destinies into their hands.

 Will we do likewise?

Shall we?

That was supposed to be the end of my commentary.

However, the struggle between good and evil, between truth and deceit, is never over. It is eternal because it is spiritual.

This morning I received, from one of my UK friends, a link to a report titled “Anger as European Commission asks British taxpayers for an extra ₤500”. This is the response of the unelected EUbosses to the millions of voices crying for an end to the tyranny. The reason given for the tax increase?

To aid the Ukrainians. Polls had shown that the Britons overwhelmingly rejected any involvement of the EU in Ukraine.

Do you hear us now? I’ll take that as a ‘no.’

I couldn’t help but think of Kipling’s Song of the Galley Slaves, a prophecy if there ever was one.

Song of the Galley-Slaves

By Rudyard Kipling 

We pulled for you when the wind was against us and the sails were low.   

          Will you never let us go? 

We ate bread and onions when you took towns, or ran aboard quickly when you were beaten back by the foe.

The Captains walked up and down the deck in fair weather singing songs, but we were below.

We fainted with our chins on the oars and you did not see that we were idle, for we still swung to and fro.   

            Will you never let us go? 

The salt made the oar-handles like shark-skin; our knees were cut to the bone with salt-cracks; our hair was stuck to our foreheads; and our lips were cut to the gums, and you whipped us because we could not row.

            Will you never let us go? 

But, in a little time, we shall run out of the port-holes as the water runs along the oar-blade, and though you tell the others to row after us you will never catch us till you catch the oar-thresh and tie up the winds in the belly of the sail. Aho!

            Will you never let us go?

 Finally, I also received this commentary by Steve Baldwinperfectly illustrating the difference between sovereignty and freedom.

Dollars and cents, common sense, and no sense-at-all liberals

How liberals can make everything in the world hunky-dory

By Jim Mullen, Contributing Writer

For purposes of expediency this writer will use an all-inclusive word, liberal, for communists, Marxists, socialists, liberals and progressives. They differ only in variations of the methods they use to carry out their tyranny. They universally believe in all-powerful centralized government and limited or no rights for people.

Few middle-of-the-road liberals are professional liars, but they lie to promote a feel-good ideology they actually conjure up in some obscure part of a maldeveloped, warped mind. Others simply have been indoctrinated and sequestered in a system that teaches theoretical gibberish that inhibits their ability to reason. They are victims of what this writer describes as human inertia and, like Newton’s Law of Inertia in physics, objects tend to “keep on doing what they’re doing.” In fact, it is the natural tendency of objects and lazy liberals to resist changes in their state of motion. This begets “group-think” and the herd mentality.

Using twisted logic only a liberal could justify, they frequently get caught in ridiculous scenarios of defending the indefensible. Devoid of any facts, they contort and squeeze words until they are meaningless, in a wrongheaded attempt to prove some of their outlandish theories. Conservatives have a problem with liberals who staunchly believe they need no proof of anything they proclaim. There are no other arguments, you see, because proof was already settled by other liberals.
Nearly every young person has the liberal mindset, but outgrows the disability as they mature. Some of the greatest conservatives of our time caught some gale force of maturity in their sails that changed their state of human inertia (liberalism). Ronald Reagan, William F. Buckley, and Charles Krauthammer, lead a long list of conservatives who grew to reject the liberal orthodoxy in which they floundered.

We could greatly expedite the return of freedom to our county if every new piece of legislation, presidential decree, and bureaucratic regulation was preceded by the repeal of five present laws. More importantly, however, is that politicians, bureaucrats, and especially liberals be held to the same standards they demand of everyone else. Requiring all big-government advocates to obey every law, regulation, politically-correct lunacy, and liberal ideology, would strike a massive blow against tyranny.

People would respect more of what liberals want in the world if they first put their lives on the line and plunge headlong into that shallow pool of foolishness. Poetic justice dictates they reap what they so richly deserve. As a trial run, the first thousand pages of every liberal law they find necessary to foist upon the sweaty masses, should apply to only liberals for the first year. If they are still convinced of its viability after a year, maybe others would join them in flushing commonsense and liberty down the government sewer.
Hypothetically speaking, liberals could perfect their skills by considering the following:

Anti-gun? Let everyone know. Wear “I’m unarmed” shirts, place signs in your yard, stickers on your car, and pass out cards. Then register your feelings in the public record at the court house, and of course in the media akin to your demands of gun owners. It’s obvious to any thinking, sane human these courses of action will quickly contribute to an increase in overall crime and murder rate. Consequently, liberals are a menace to public health and their own, as well. They must, therefore, be heavily taxed for this threat to society. The increase costs for law enforcement, courts, and the prison systems would force officials to take this into account when calculating fees and taxes. Obviously, taxes would skyrocket.

It’s also evident that liberals would notice a dramatic decrease in their numbers for a simple reason: they would be targeted by criminals, and millions would promptly be annihilated or would abandon their folly and find some modicum of gray matter in that unusually small part of their immense brains typically reserved for common sense. Perhaps all Americans can finally come to the conclusion that self-defense is a natural, as well as, a constitutional right.

Along this line, everyone must use the police department for protection – even politicians and movie stars. Individual, armed private security should never be available to anyone unless it’s provided for everyone.

Favor legitimizing 20 to 30 million illegal aliens and their extended families?
Support a law mandating that every liberal desirous of alien legalization must adopt a family of illegals; be responsible for their healthcare, education, food, housing, and all other expenses. Additionally, liberals presently argue that we cannot break up the extended family, so they would be accountable for bringing all members of the illegal aliens’ family to America and providing for them.

Think public schools are where children receive the best education?

Prove it by demanding that Congress pass legislation requiring all American children attend public schools from prekindergarten through graduate school.

One of Obama’s first acts was to shutter the incredibly successful voucher school program in Washington, D.C., which caused havoc in the black and Hispanic population. The president’s children, however, do not attend the violent, nation-leading failing schools of D.C., where barely 10% learn to read adequately.

Teachers’ unions will be ecstatic and soon liberals will have their long-sought-after Social Justice. Everyone will then be equally misinformed, ill-informed, and indoctrinated into a state of blissful, ignorant, oblivion. Similar to a new day dawning, only in reverse.

Think public healthcare is the “final solution” for all Americans?

Obama and the New Democratic Party disrupted and destroyed the best healthcare system in the world to insure 2% of 330 million people at a cost of our freedom to choose doctors, hospitals, coverage, and inserting government between Americans and their healthcare providers. Soon, costs will crush the American economy, and rationing will cause massive casualties and death.

Liberals and their families should lead the way by insisting every American use the same healthcare providers as Medicare, Medicaid, and Obamacare patients must. No exceptions.

This is what the Obama administration wants for commoners, but not the elites. When liberals start dying like they are under the VA healthcare system, ask yourself, are liberals and their families more important that Veterans?

Believe we need to redistribute all income and wealth in this country and in the world?

Be first in line. Voluntarily shrink your income to just above the poverty line, and give the rest of your wealth, property, and income to the government. The IRS gladly accepts your donations.

Next, read and understand the United Nation’s Agenda 21 and do your part by adhering to its dictates.

Do your liberal best to convince Americans about the benefits of being active participants in the United Nations and relinquishing our sovereignty to 192 other (the majorities are dictatorships) nations.

Continue your work to disarm American citizens and unilaterally disarm the United States.

Believe in man-made global warming and that the U.S. is a major contributor? Take Public transportation everywhere you journey, if possible. If not, procure a solar-powered or electric automobile. By all means, fight your best fight to scuttle all power plants using carbon-based fuels. Nuclear, likewise, is out of the question for eco-Nazis. Sooo, brace yourself for Obama’s promise to necessarily cause electric costs to skyrocket. When you plug your car in, you’ll be mesmerized by that spinning wheel on the electric meter.

Dismantle your dwelling and build one with 400 sq feet of living space for a family of four, and be sure to use only recyclable materials. If your family size varies, use this simple equation (i.e. before Common Core math) 100 sq ft per each family member. That’s plenty of living space for nearly everyone in third-world countries, and since you strive to change America into a third-world country, it’s certainly enough room for you.

Think we’re too tough on criminals?

Load up the Prius or hop aboard your choice of public transportation, and visit your favorite penal institution. The uber-liberal American Bar Association will be delighted to provide you with the proper paperwork to adopt a felon or two. You can then procure them jobs, let them live with you in your world until they can stand on their own. You could possibly talk them into protecting your home or sitting with the children while you work.

Likewise, if you think the U.S. Justice Department under the radical racist and Marxist, Eric Holder, is legally justified in suing businesses for using criminal background checks when hiring their employees, then you should urge all the companies with whom you do business to hire ex-convicts.

Are you one who cries yourself to sleep at night about the overcrowding of jails and prisons? Then, by all means, round up your liberal friends and launch a program with your penal system of choice whereby you can all share in the simple joys of providing a warm bed, great food, and exceptional healthcare for a needy convict. Visualize the taxpayer money you could save, and how that warm-and-fuzzy feeling would enrich the lives of you and your family. The entire liberal community will positively radiate euphoric vibrations.

Speaking of healthcare, you’ll be the talk of the town and one of the highest regarded and beloved philanthropists in town when they notice the positive results of those hormone treatments and sex change operations that changed good-old Bernie into Bernice. I’m sure all of your neighbors will want to join in your rapture. Commit this to memory; it takes a village!

Think taxes are too low?

Again, don’t forget, the IRS will gladly accept your check for any amount. I would think you would want to offer more than what you envision is fair for others to pay. Make this a learning opportunity and exhibit your leadership skills; organize your lib friends. They’ll love writing that check.

Believe in affirmative action?

Take it to the limit. Hire only people who fit your description of those who need help. Qualifications are unimportant. Submit your name to universities, colleges, and trade school and financially adopt every minority wishing to attend these institutions. Bear in mind, qualifications are unimportant. Work directly with your local police, fire departments to hire certain quotas (numbers) of minorities to help protect you and your family. Again, qualifications are inconsequential.
Don’t forget medical schools, law schools, and the like. Quotas are more important than having a skilled brain surgeon perform your operation. Also, we know lawyers and Judges are at the bottom of importance, so what does talent and skill mean anyway?

Trade schools are no exception. After all, what prerequisite must plumbers, electricians or mechanics possess? If they just happen to burn your house down or leave you stranded in your car, think forgiveness. After all, you are tolerant, understanding, and caring. Ideology is of the essence, and the need for aptitude is highly exaggerated.

By doing all the above, liberals will, as the Little Rascals said, take care of “important business” and thereby, save the world from mean, racist, homophobic, sexist, and Islamophobic, white-guy conservatives.

Now that you’ve surfeited your overwhelming desire for acceptance, it’s time to put on your favorite anti-gun shirt, climb up on that soapbox at the public square, put your arms firmly around yourself, squeeze tightly in a loving embrace, and repeat the moron’s mantra, “I’m just so wonderful, yes! I’m such a high-quality person, yes I am! Would everyone please look at me? I’m a perfect liberal because I care so deeply! Plus, I walk the walk.”

One caution, however. Perhaps you should take along a law-abiding, armed conservative (put away your penchant for affirmative action in this scenario, only a conservative will measure up to the job) just for the off-chance that a deranged gun-toter spots your shirt and thinks he or she (no sexism here – but wait, should it read he/she/it?) has a covey of defenseless doves gathered for his or her convenience. As a liberal, you will soon learn that your entire species would be extinct if not for the protection of conservatives’ guns, guts, and common sense.

There are dozens of other great ideas on how liberals can “make a difference.” Ask any conservative for additional information. Can’t find a conservative? You’ll find the lion’s share of them far-flung from large metropolitan areas. They are especially plentiful in American’s heartland. The best of luck to ya!

Meanwhile, back to freedom-loving Americans:

Common sense comprises an incredibly minute segment of the typical gigantic liberal brain. Conversely, the dominant part is ego. One other distinguishing trait is that liberal’s gray matter all floats around in a brine of political correctness. Charlton Heston famously said, “Political correctness is tyranny with manners.” Unfortunately, nearly all the vocal, active liberals of today are ill-mannered, nasty, hate-filled, venom-spewing, and dreadfully unhappy people. All pretexts of manners are lacking in today’s liberals.

Are these and the rest of their coven just escapees from the idiot farm or cold, calculating, demonic, anti-Americans hell-bent on destroying American culture and our constitutional Republic? They screech “social justice” but show profound ignorance about issues of real justice. Their receptors just aren’t tuned to that wavelength. Let’s give them a lesson in real justice and diversity; make them live by their own perverted creed.

Jim Mullen

Soros mourns the passing of the EU (Part III)

by Don Hank, Guest Contributor

Take a look at this exchange between Soros and Zakaria and keep in mind that the globalists and neocons are busy pinning all the troubles in Ukraine on the Russians.

ZAKARIA: […deletia…] … during the revolutions of 1989 [you] funded a lot of dissident activities, civil society groups in eastern Europe and Poland, the Czech Republic. Are you doing similar things in Ukraine?

SOROS: Well, I set up a foundation in Ukraine before Ukraine became independent of Russia. And the foundation has been functioning ever since and played an important part in events now. [my highlighting]

Yet later in the same interview, Soros absurdly asserts: “Putin will try to destabilize Ukraine  …”

Did you catch that? Right after admitting that he himself had played a major role in destabilizing Ukraine to the extent of toppling an elected government, he accuses the Russians of plotting to destabilize Ukraine.

He then says: “…but the … large majority of Ukrainians are determined to be independent of Russia…”

Excuse me, George. If the large majority are determined to be independent of Russia, why did it take a division of your NGOs and German NGOs working in tandem with officials from the EU, Germany and the US (to the tune of $5 billion for the US alone) to persuade them to declare their independence? And why are so many people in Eastern Ukraine willing to take up arms to defend their right to be Russian (they are ethnic Russians. You know, analogously to the ethnic Americans at the then-Mexican Alamo)?

But here’s the main question: did your foundation warn the Ukrainians that the EU, the body you urged them to sign an association agreement with, was about to suffer economically “tragic” consequences—consequences you yourself were fully aware of in 2012? Why would you invest so much effort and energy in persuading the citizens of a country to stage a lethally violent coup to win the “right” to join an entity that you admitted was headed for a “tragedy”?  Particularly when they had a stable relationship with an indulgent partner country that supplied them with fuel and was never in a hurry to collect payment for it?

Referring to President Putin’s tightening of the media and internet, he says: “If you have freedom, free media and so on and a flourishing economy that would make his regime unsustainable.”

This could be true, in part. If Russia allows Western agents provocateurs free rein to spread anti-Russian propaganda, then of course, it might be possible to destabilize Russia, just as they destabilized Ukraine, Georgia, Iraq, Libya, Egypt, etc. After all, our own American agents provocateurs, for example, in Hollywood, the MSM, “education,” politics, academe and most professions, have destabilized the West to the point of virtual disintegration. They have discredited Judeo-Christian values, turning our country into a veritable brothel, spreading perversion in the schools in the name of ‘justice,’ charging the tax payer for abortions, forcing tax payers to pay for sex changes of prisoners while denying basic care to veterans, and have promoted Keynesianism, a variant of Marxism that has failed in the West just as miserably as communism failed in the East, leading to unsustainable debt and unfunded liabilities in both the US and Europe, a welfare system that pays almost half of Americans not to work, to the tune of about $1 trillion a year, creates division among races and between the sexes, leads us into war on a regular basis against countries that in most cases become our enemies only after we invade them (we call that aggression when other countries do it), and imports millions of immigrants, a disproportionate share of which are criminals, gang bangers, drug dealers, cartel enforcers and cold blooded killers, and much more. They have stolen not so much our personal freedom but our sovereignty.

Russia saw us get the freedom we wanted. Good and hard. Any wonder they aren’t having any?

Finally, let me say a few words about the so-called “far right” parties in Europe that won the bulk of the EU Parliament seats last week in their respective countries.

Soros and his ilk would like to confuse the ovine masses by conflating true Neo-Nazi parties like Greece’s Golden Dawn with the anti-EU parties in the core countries to the north.

Nice try, but the relatively sophisticated voters there know better.

I have been subscribed for some time to the newsletters of Marine LePen’s Front National and

Geert Wilders’ PVV (Freedom Party) and I have listened to their speeches in their native languages. Marine is a cultured, highly intelligent and decent lady whose utterances are respectful of all races. Like any honest French person, however, she has seen her country ravaged by intolerant Muslim radicals and is not afraid to speak out. Some are shocked. Her father was accused of some untoward statements and that is unfortunate. But Marine herself is a person who can be trusted, and the French, who are skittery about racism and the “far right,” have over the years, finally realized — despite the MSM’s accusations of the kind Soros makes in this interview — that she is simply a person who cares deeply about sovereignty and the French people and culture (I have explained here why I consider sovereignty in some ways more important than even individual freedom). Her love of sovereignty is altruistic, extending to sovereignty movements of other nations as well. She may be unique in that. It is a rare quality.

Soros mourns the passing of the EU (Part II)

by Don Hank, Guest Contributor

One sign that Soros is desperately flailing about is that he uses the old tried-and-failed tactic of smearing the anti-EU parties and their perceived allies the Russians. Let’s look at this part of the interview:

SOROS: […deletia…] The euro crisis is no longer a financial crisis. It’s turning into political crisis and you’re going to see in the elections and Putin — 

ZAKARIA: Explain what that means. It’s going to be — you’re going to see it in the elections because you’re going to see the rise of nationalist anti-European forces? 

SOROS: Yes, and interestingly, they are supported by Russia and pro-Russian. So Russia has emerged –juh as an alternative to the European Union. Putin has sort of come out of the closet in Ukraine. With their ideology that is nationalist[garbled] be some ethic nationalism, you could call it Russism.

Here we see two subterfuges all in one short paragraph. Firstly, Soros says Russia has “come out of the closet” as a nationalist in Ukraine. This is not true. Putin always put his own people first. Our presidents also at least pretend to do this. (And as Pat Buchanan recently pointed out, what Russia did with Crimea is perfectly analogous to what the US did in Texas, militarily defeating a country to protect its citizens residing there and then annexing the part containing the ethnic Americans. Globalists don’t do this. They have no allegiance to any “people”).

Secondly, he makes it seem as if there is a new –ism in the world, RussismHow could a knowledgeable geopolitical analyst know so little about Russian history as to think Putin’s motivation is something novel? As early as the 1800s there was a major political dichotomy in Russian politics and society, between the Russophiles (that’s the word you were searching for,Mr. Soros) and the Europhiles. (This is evidenced in Turgenev’s novella “Nest of Noble Folk” and Tolstoy’s War and Peace (where Pierre, the protagonist, starts out as an admirer of Bonaparte but later, seeing the latter’s cruelty to the Russians, plots to kill him). Now, while this dichotomy later became secondary to that of communism vs. conservatism, the Russophilic nature of Soviet leaders was always visible in their policies. (For example, non-traditional sexual lifestyles running counter to Christian orthodoxy, such as are promoted in the West today, were suppressed in the Soviet Union). A notable exception was the Western leaning (Europhilic) Gorbachev. Thus, the descriptor Russism is redundant.

Both Zakaria and Soros further smear the anti-EU parties by suggesting that they are fascist. After coining the redundant neologism “russism,” Soros says: “It’s a new word to describe it because don’t want to call it Nazi because it is very similar to what you had in the end of warfare and fascism, you know..” [my highlighting]

Let me first say that George Soros or anyone else who supports the EU has no moral authority to call anyone else a Nazi. The corporatism (crony capitalism) pervading Western economies is a salient feature of fascism.

The founding of the EU had its origins in Hitler’s Germany. Walter FunkHitler’s second Minister of the Economy, first coined the name European Community (Europäische Gemeinschaft), the name given to the third metamorphosis of the European Project, and outlined a plan for such a community. (These metamorphoses were: 1. European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), est. 1951 > 2. European Economic Community (EEC), est. 1957 > 3. European Community (translation of name coined by Funk) and 4. European Union, both established simultaneously in 1993). Funk also outlined a plan for the configuration of such a community, which is strangely similar to that of today’s EU.

Further, the corporate preparations for WW II were attributable mostly to IG Farben IndustrieAG, one of the biggest financiers of Hitler’s military adventures. A 1940 document issued by IGFarben outlines the plan for that agglomerate to take over European chemical manufacturing, a plan including a common currency and a European court.

Further, a large number of the EU’s founders were “former” Nazis. Walter Hallstein was a law professor under Hitler who wrote the racist “Blood and Honor” law, which, among other things, prohibited marriage between Jews and German nationals. I am sure you’d expect this Jew baiting racist to have been sentenced to death at the Nuremberg trials, right?

Not really. In 1958, this loathsome creature was chosen as the first president of the European Commission (part of the EEC), a body designed to rule Europe beyond democratic control. It exists unchanged in its undemocratic (unelected) structure under the EU. Europe had come full circle, as detailed in Rodney Atkinson’s book Europe’s Full Circle.

Perhaps it is not surprising then that Transparency International worries about a “corruption risk” in the EU, where bribery seems to be a problem.

The interview with Zakaria discloses not only Soros’ expectations that the EU is on its way out but also another bombshell about Soros and his role in the Ukraine disturbances.

You see, Soros carries within himself the seeds of his own downfall, namely, an ebullient pride in his achievements, which are not particularly savory to those of us beneath the rank of multibillionaire. This propensity gives rise to gaffes, like his confession in a 60 Minutes interview that he helped the Nazis confiscate the possessions of Jews in Hungary, and the fact that he considered this one of the most exhilarating experiences of his life. I saw the interviewvideo while it lasted, but unfortunately, it seems to have been scrubbed from the web. A billiondollars buys you a lot of scrubbing. Here is a scrap of it.

An e-cquaintance of mine, who knows Soros personally, reminded me that Soros doesn’t reallycare about anything but making money so the failure of the EU is irrelevant to himHowever,Soros’ interview with Zakaria and his book clearly show that it is not money but rather powerthat fires Soros’ imagination. The billions are just a vehicle. Indeed, in his book, he waxes rhapsodic about the EU as the “embodiment of an open society – a voluntary association of equal states that surrendered part of their sovereignty for the common good.” The real tragedy of George Soros is that he fails to see the little guy at the bottom of the heap, dealing as he doesonly with the super rich and/or powerful. First of all, if he saw real people’s viewpoint, he would understand that the EU is voluntary only for the powerful and well connected, so it is not democratic. In order for Prime Minister Ted Heath to persuade the UK to join the EU precursor EECfor instance, he lied telling them the UK would not lose sovereignty. Today’s Britons are increasingly aware that the people never surrendered their sovereignty. They were betrayed, a charge I hear over and over from my UK friendsFurther, the states are not equal since only the core countries have to pay exorbitant taxes to the EU and must tolerate an intolerable immigration burden.

Soros, like all political globalists, is so intent upon seeing his dream succeed that he will use any tactic, including deceit, to achieve his goal.

But if the supranational elites need to use deceit to achieve it, then it is not democracy. It is an oligarchy. You might call it a deceptocracy.

Soros Mourns the Passing of the EU (Part I)

by Don Hank, Guest Contributor

Open Society: a voluntary association of equal states that surrendered part of their sovereignty for the common good. George Soros, Founder, Open Society Foundation

Last week’s EU elections make it clear that the richer EU member states no longer have the political will to stay with the sinking EU. There is now utter panic among the political class. Even Stratfor1, which has always posed as politically neutral, is lamenting that the European “nationalists” are a threat to the stability of the EU, refusing to recognize that, on the contrary, the EU is a threat to national sovereignty everywhere.

After ignoring the populist complaints for decades, the elitist hue and cry is “we must do something!” Their solution is to “create jobs,” the usual Keynesian non-solution to a disaster caused by Keynesianism.

Nor has a single one of them suggested curbing immigration, the centerpiece, for example, in the platform of the French sovereigntists (unjustly called the “far right”) who walked away with the election last week.

Thus, their only response is more of the same Fabian deception. “How can we continue to deceive them?” is what they are really saying.

It was in this vein that George Soros sat down with Fareed Zakaria on CNN Sunday evening and it was clear from Soros’ grim words and demeanor that he does not hold much hope for the EU to survive.

Viewers who are unaware of last week’s EU election results or not familiar with Soros’ book may not have caught his drift.

Zakaria asks Soros toward the end of the interview if he thinks nationalism could break up the European Union. Soros says

“Yes, it’s that and Europe needs to recognize it, and we [meaning the US] need to recognize it, actually.”

Two years ago, Soros had already written The Tragedy of the European Union, a title suggesting what Soros had expected then. Soros pleads therein for one of two alternatives, namely, that Germany should either “lead or leave.” Absurdly, he laments that Germany wants to set the terms of lending, as normal lenders have always done. Evoking His Holiness John Maynard Keynes, he maintains that creditor countries like Germany must give their debtors an equal say in the terms of debt and be a more “benevolent hegemon.” Part of that policy would be to extend the exact same terms to the debtors, like Greece, the right to float bonds rated (dishonestly) as “risk-free,” thereby allowing them low interest terms (this mirrors the no-doc, no-down payment banking policies promoted by the US government and the central banks that caused the economic crisis of 2007-8, also extensions of Keynesianism). Soros reminds us that His Majesty Keynes had suggested there should be complete equality between debtor and creditor. He also reminds that, after all, Germany was the recipient of the generous Marshall Plan after the war and there were no strings attached. Why shouldn’t Germany, therefore, follow the US’s lead and give the Greeks easy terms? In so saying, he ignores at least two vital facts:

1—the Marshall Plan was not primarily a loan; it was essentially outright aid. It was in America’s interest to make Germany a strong ‘captive’ trading partner because we had intact industries while theirs was a shambles, whereas today it is not in Germany’s interest to prop up debt-addicted nations like Greece that are nothing but a thorn in its side and require perennial bailouts.

2—Germany has always had a culture of thrift, honesty and frugality in business, in contradistinction to most of Southern Europe. (Even tourist guide books warn travelers to be wary of shysters there). The US could therefore reasonably expect Germany to lift itself up economically, as it did.

But Soros, as a devout political globalist (i.e., a person who subscribes to the notion of global governance as a tenet of faith), denies the existence of cultural differences which ordinary people can easily see. When I was working as a salesman at the Uffizi Galleries in Florence, for example, German tourists who hesitated to buy from Italian salesman would often buy from me, taking me to be a German since I spoke their language. This was not due to prejudice toward the Italians. It was due to untoward experiences they had had with Italian sales people in contrast to their dealings with basically honest German merchants. This is cultural, not racial. (Merchants in Florence, like my boss, for example, routinely repaired broken chess pieces with wax — cera in Italian. Essentially, this is just cosmetic, not functional, and is an ancient Roman practice whence we derive the word sincere — Latin: sine cera, without wax).

While the title of Soros’ book also contains a reference to proposed solutions, his use of the word “tragedy” suggests that he is fearful his proposals will be rejected. He admits that Merkel had rejected the “benevolent hegemon” idea (she later acquiesced). One reason for his pessimism is that the German high court could reject EU bailouts of ailing countries as unconstitutional. Soros, whose Open Society Foundation goes around the world pushing “democracy,” is never shy about meddling in the affairs of other countries, insisting that Germany must change its constitution to suit him. The people’s will be damned,

If Soros had not seen the handwriting on the wall, it is doubtful he would have used the word “tragedy” to describe the EU’s plight.

After all, if a friend or loved one is sick in the hospital but is expected to live, we do not call that a tragedy. It is merely an unfortunate setback. It is a tragedy only if the patient is dying.

However, when Soros affirms, following the EU elections, that “nationalism” could break up the EU, that takes the narrative up a notch or two. If he had already feared the breakup of the EU in 2012, what must he think now that the “nationalists” have unleashed what many analysts are calling an “earthquake” in European politics?

Soros later added a report to the book that the European Central Bank (ECB) had since agreed to “do what it takes to preserve the euro as a stable currency,” but Soros admitted that, while the future of the euro seemed assured, the future of the EU was up to “political decisions” to be made in the next few years. With Eurosceptic parties trending toward a takeover of their countries’ legislature, there can be little doubt that Soros’ “tragedy” is in the works and that he is fully aware of this.

1 Stratfor is a geopolitical intelligence firm that provides strategic analysis and forecasting to individuals and organizations around the world.