Sunday, May 18, 2008

Recommended Reading

Here’s a brief book review from Henrik at Europe News.

EUSSRI’ve just picked up The Great Deception by Christopher Booker and Richard North, which finally provides a complete history of where the EU ideology came from. While I have read only the first couple of chapters, I find it so well researched and rich in detail I feel like passing on the tip to others before finishing it myself.

This books also provides an answer to a blog comment a couple of weeks ago where someone asked for a brief story of the European Union and its principles. 600+ pages isn’t exactly “brief”, at least it does provide the story. It requires some reading to be able to pinpoint what exactly the Union is doing, and why it does things in the weird ways we see.
- - - - - - - - -
Rejecting the Constitution Treaty was a major blow to the plans of the Europhiles. But instead of doing the obvious, a complete retooling of the entire EU system, they chose to push the Treaty down our throats. This book reveals that it was perhaps more intentional than it seemed.

Though a serious and worthwhile book for everyone interested in the machinations of the European Union, it has largely been ignored by mainstream media, which is odd. They thus have to rely on “viral marketing” (that’s us) to make the book known. I hope it’ll work, for knowing the history of the Union will qualify us to react to what it does.


Fjordman said...

One of the authors of this book, Dr Richard North, is one of the editors of the excellent British blog EU Referendum.

Understanding Muhammad, the latest book by the leading Iranian ex-Muslim Ali Sina, founder of the website Faith Freedom International, is now available at While I'm here I would also like to recommend Global Jihad: The Future in the Face of Militant Islam by Patrick Sookhdeo, another former Muslim.

ProfessorPelotard said...

Why do you think it is odd that the MSM and our local politicos have ignored The Great Deception?

If you really think it is odd I suggest you read it once again. :-)

Actually, Booker & North shows that most of what go for self evident truths about the EU project are not so. Basically it is a coup d'état in slow motion by the EU bureaucracy and our elected politicians.

The EU is certainly a threat to our freedom but it is something sui generis - much different from both the Third Reich and the USSR. And unless people start to understand that it is not going to be possible to fight it.

Homophobic Horse said...

I understand people conflating the EU with the USSR for Communism itself is an outgrowth of Liberalism.

As I wrote last night: "Lenin was surely right when the end he sought through his party, his instrument of historical change, was a heaven on earth and to write the universal tenets of his faith into the fabric of humanity. This Communist principle is wholly concordant with liberalism--which is etymologically derived from liber--which means freedom and liberation. Verily, the only conception of freedom Liberalism possesses is derived from the Christian idea of freedom - heaven. Liberals certainly arn't going to seek the kind of freedom Hitler looked for.

In that sense, we can deduce that:

A. The aims of Liberalism are symmetrical with that of Communism. That is what Karl Marx always sought, Marx just believed that capitalism wouldn't be able to develop full freedom owing to property, for that reason capitalism had to be abolished.

B. Liberalism, by taking the Christian conception of freedom, the grand 'reward' of heaven, is indeed "Christian ethics" (as Con-Swede would say) in action. Liberalism, I have established, can take no other conception of freedom.

C. Liberalism isn't new at all, it is perverted Christianity, striving unrealistically to create heaven on Earth.

C1. The multi-cultural scheme is implicit in the above point. One of the common themes through out human history has been war, very often between nations. If one can prove that all nations can live together under the universal state, then you have eliminated a major cause of war."

Henrik R Clausen said...

PP, I think you should look for understatements in my original post :)

I don't agree completely about the sui generis thing, though. My take is that all of these systems exploit similar mechanisms in the human psyche and similarities can be very useful to identify.

HH, Capitalism is some 800 years old (1st Renaissance), and is Good. The problem, I belive, in England was that technical progress permitted things to go quite a bit out of control, and Marx mistakenly thought the principle of Capitalism was to blame, and bringing down the mega-capitalists would fix the problem.

I have the opposite idea. We need many more people to be small-time capitalists, like England had some hundred years ago, and Capitalism will once again be the most democracy-supporting tool ever invented.

X said...

There's the reason the French dismissively called us a "nation of shopkeepers". I think it was DeGaul, in fact.

Henrik R Clausen said...

Graham, having the frog-eating surrender-monkeys call you anything negative is a praise in disguise :)

(ducking for cover) (nothing happens)

I think we have too few French on GoV...

CarnackiUK said...

Graham, it was Napoleon.

Still true, though now it's a nation of Asian shopkeepers.

Anonymous said...

This blog has been indexed by; a free real-time statistically based search engine and browser. By allowing this post to remain in your comments, you blog will remain indexed in our search engine and directory giving you free traffic in return for your support.

A free tool for webmasters, online businesses, and bloggers. Browsing and searching by standardized traffic and rank statistics takes the guess work out of surfing, link building, and marketing. We also have local niches such as doctors, dentists, surgeons, and more and add new material ever day.

Thank you for your support,

X said...

Graham, it was Napoleon.

So it was. I expect DeGaul would quote it from time to time, though.

Brian H said...

Some shops! Some keepers!

Sagunto said...


"..Marx just believed that capitalism wouldn't be able to develop full freedom owing to property, for that reason capitalism had to be abolished.."

I could be mistaken, but this doesn't seem to represent the classical Marx' reading of history. Where's the Hegelian necessity of capitalism being an intermediate stage in the unstoppable evolution of society towards socialism (after capitalism would have gone the way of the dodo because of its allegedly inherent instability, no need therefore to actively abolish it. That sounds more like the Leninist sequel).

The thing is, that in the England of the 1840's, in Manchester to be more precise, sort of a marxist "foundational myth" was created about the working class conditions by his buddy Friedrich Engels. This myth is fully debunked in the book by F.A. Hayek (Ed.) "Capitalism and the Historians" (1954) which contains a number of contributions by various specialists in the field.