The cradle of individual liberty became the cradle of the nanny State
The deep sickness that infects England infects every large government in the world: once a people’s decision (like Brexit) is made, the leaders who carry out its provisions are the people who rule from the top, along with their sleazy, slime-ridden bureaucratic underlings.
These obstructive underlings, in a free and open market, would be selling sand in the desert, if they were lucky. They certainly wouldn’t be sitting in desks in government offices staring out of windows.
So now we have soft Brexit and hard Brexit, terms used to describe how the Brit vote to leave the European Union could be modified or adhered to. It’s a farce.
Here is soft Brexit: “Well, maybe England will keep all its trade connections with the EU, as before, while pretending to be independent; and oh yes, many waves of immigrants will still be let into the country, even though that was the key issue that swung voters to say LEAVE the EU (EU wants to erase all national borders and flood Europe with migrants)…”
In other words, England would say it’s left the EU, but in every measurable way it hasn’t.
Well, here is my hard Brexit. No matter what crimes the rulers of a nation and their underlings have committed in the past, if that nation once spawned the concept of INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY, rebuilding itself means reinstituting that liberty, piece by piece, and person by person, with the full meaning of freedom and responsibility embraced. Otherwise, no dice. All national movement will be fakes and pretenders.
Of course England should desert that clap-trap unelected monstrosity called the EU. Of course, it should offload that burden. The elite and self-entitled Globalists who run the fascist EU are your run of the mill totalitarians.
But to make Brexit work in England, far more has to happen than withdrawal: A revival, a renewal, a rebirth, a throwing off of the sticky web of socialism and everything it means. There has to be an international Brexit and a national internal Brexit.
All this insanity began when the nation of the Magna Carta morphed into the welfare nation of “share and care” socialism. Freedom turned into “here’s how you can get all the government freebies you ever dreamed of.”
The individualism that birthed limited government (instead of a grotesque hydra issuing edicts to the populace in double-speak) died out.
It has to be put back.
Leave the EU and leave socialism.
No one said it would be easy.
But there are individuals in England who want freedom and liberty again. They know what freedom is.
If they don’t lead the way, the only Brexit will be the drone-hum of “we are all disabled, fix us.”
Leaving the EU, while keeping full-blown socialism at home, is like walking away from a rattlesnake toward a nest of rattlesnakes.
To the people of Europe who still believe in freedom:
You can say all you want to about the history of Europe, but you also have to say that Europe was the cradle of liberty for the whole world.
The main struggle was held there. And finally, the clear idea of individual freedom emerged.
Then, gradually, in the wake of two World Wars, a new theme took hold. You could call it comfort, or security, peace for all, share and care, the good life.
Under a dominating tax rate, citizens had “services” provided by their governments. Many pleasant services.
Why not? All was well.
Even when these governments were placed under the umbrella of the European Union, most citizens of member countries perceived no real problems—as long as the services continued to flow.
But there was an addendum to the basic contract. The national governments, and their superiors at the EU…they were the Providers, and they could, at their whim, turn the screw and apply new oppressive rules to the citizenry. And they could, if resistance appeared, drop their pose of benevolence and take on the role of Enforcer.
And if they did, where would liberty and individual freedom go?
It would go away.
Escalating floods of migrants entered Europe. This was a turning of the screw. Brought about by “upper management” of the Providers. The crimes and disruptions of these migrants have been well documented in independent media. The people of Europe had no say about the invasion. In fact, it soon became an offense to write about it or speak about it in a public forum.
The lords of government would brook no opposition.
The basic liberty—speaking freely—was on the line and under the boot heel.
For years, a campaign of political correctness in speech had been waged all over Europe. It covered many areas. The EU had been aiding and abetting it.
The “good life” was cracking at the seams. It wasn’t all good anymore.
The Provider was becoming the Enforcer.
Looking back on the change, it was always obvious that it was waiting in the wings. The Providers weren’t messiahs of a socialist utopia. That pretense was merely an intermediate phase in a much larger operation.
Mollify the citizenry for a time, “give them services,” and then when they were lulled into complacency, when they felt safe and secure, when they’d traded liberty for something that looks like liberty, start the chaos.
And clamp down. Assert overt control.
The EU structure was never extreme enough for the overlords. After all, it was a confederation of separate nations. The covert operation was One Nation of Europe, drained of separate traditions, with all former, distinguishing, national characteristics removed. The goal was one continental entity, seeded with enough migrants to eliminate visible differences, and roiled in conflicts.
To make a stew, heat and stir.
Eventually, eliminate the memory that, at one time, individual freedom was birthed in those countries. And one step further: eliminate the knowledge of what individual freedom is.
Bring in immigrants from cultures where authentic freedom, with its attendant responsibilities, means nothing.
The operation is well underway.
The lords of government never wanted utopia. They wanted, and want, submission. They achieved the soft version. Now they’re aiming for the hard.
This is modern European history not taught in schools. Schools would ban even a hint of it.
So the struggle begins again.
It has many faces—some of them ideological, which is to say, embedded in groups for whom national and ethnic identity is the foremost concern.
How long will it take before The Individual, defined by HIS OWN choice and vision, APART FROM SUCH IDENTITY, reemerges?
That was the original battle of the ages: the liberation of each individual.
It wasn’t easy then, and it won’t be easy now.
But it begins in the mind.
And not the group mind.
Not in any group.
In 1859, John Stuart Mill wrote: “If it were felt that the free development of individuality is one of the leading essentials of well-being…there would be no danger that liberty should be undervalued.”
Escaping from, and dissolving the trap that is now Europe may be the work of cooperating groups; but the reason for the escape will ultimately come back to the individual, his power, and his independent self-chosen destiny.
He carries the torch.
Though it may not seem so, his flame vaporizes collectivism.
It was always so, and it is now.
Europe’s great thinkers and writers were the very people who made this clear: freedom exists and it pertains to the individual, not the group, not some shadowy entity, not a collective; freedom is not simply a word or a floating ideal waving its banner in the air; it is the soul’s platform, from which all good things become possible; it is the starting point of a life; it is the blood that runs through a dream of a created future, a better future; it is the brother of the individual’s accountability for his own actions.
Throw a blanket over freedom, and no one is accountable.
This is why so many people now deny freedom. They want to remain unaccountable.
They want everything for nothing, and they want the right to spend that everything, or burn it, tear it up, destroy it. And then ask for more.
For them, the countries of Europe are just places. Easy places to exploit.
But no matter the circumstances, the inner core of the struggle is the same: the liberation of the individual from all the forlorn hopes that lead him back to searching for the utopia he once believed was coming.
That painted illusion is going away.
The individual, falling back on his own resources, will need to relearn half-forgotten lessons. He will have to ignite his own energy.
The challenge can be bracing, and much more. It can awaken sleeping corridors of the spirit, where he once walked in power.
And can walk again.
Profound dissatisfaction and resistance can breed joy.
Once upon a time, he knew that, and then he abandoned the knowledge for a syrupy potion of a New Age; now the bottle is dry.
Now, he is the creator of his own enterprises; his own destiny.
I say Europe will live again.
The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.
A good article, though I hate seeing the terminology ‘fascist’ being used to describe the EU. They’re Communist, and behave communist through and through. Even here in the UK, Theresa May has set up a “shadow Brexit” department headed by a bureaucrat who openly sympathises with the Soviet Union – Oliver Robbins.
Aside from his team posing as a serious distraction from leaving the EU, the man, a blatant Commie, is said to be “unbelievably close to Theresa May.” What does this say about the British PM?
I disagree. I think that fascist is a good label since the only real difference between commies and fascists is that the commies assume ownership of all assets, while the fascists allow the pretense that you own the assets but tax and regulate to infinity, like in the USA.
But that’s merely perception and maybe over-simplifying their system. We know they’re communists, what’s the point of calling them fascists? Even Merkel, the de facto leader of the EU, stepped out of commie bootcamp East Berlin before rising to power.
The only people who benefit us wrongly labelling the EU ‘fascist’ are the communists themselves because their evil brand of socialism goes on without criticism in the media and on the streets.
All governments and the agencies, unions, etc, that the governments sets up, is nothing other than a kakistocracy. Meaning: the worst elements of a society running the society. I still say this: until people come to the understanding that currency in any form is nothing more than bondage, then they will never be free. I know it is a hard sell, it’s all anyone(except indigenous peoples whom is was forced upon) has known for 2,500 years. A ‘free market’, which I believe Perry is referring to, will need rules, laws, and regulations; a contract drawn up to be enforced by those whom drew it up. And with any contract, it comes with a price, and is only meant for those whom the contract represents. I agree with Perry about individual power and independence, but any system based on currency is capitalism and will eventually revert back to what we have and how we live today.
I always thought that the EU took over where Hitler left of!