I’ve been of the opinion that President-elect Trump’s victory will have geopolitical consequences, first and foremost in Europe. On the one hand, I’ve been of the opinion that his victory will give support and strengthen the anti-globalist movement in Europe, particularly in nations such as Austria, the Netherlands, France, Germany, Italy, and Spain, that have been crushed by a flood of refugees from the Islamic world.
There’s no reason to rehearse what the effects of this has been, for we have seen the stories. In Great Britain, of course, we had the BREXIT referendum, and the ongoing attempts in that country of the globaloneyists and corporatists to undo it by stonewalling and attempting to dilute it.
But to sum all this up, in general, this now world-wide movement appears to have a major though underlying theme or conceptual core, and that is “anti-centralism.” The larger and more centralized the “governmental and bureaucratic solution” is, the more inept, clumsy, and removed from local-on-the-ground reality it becomes. Indeed, Mr. Globaloney has been engaged on an experiment for the past few decades – really the past century or more, but certainly ramped up since the administration of US President G.H.W. Bush in the late 1980s and early 1990s, and proceeding apace under Clinton, Bush II, and Obama – an experiment precisely in such massive centralization. The reason is simple: the more such political and bureaucratic power is consolidated and centralized, the less say “ordinary people” have. In other words, if you think your big federal governments in Berlin or Paris or Rome or Madrid or Washington (i.e., fill in your favorite globaloneyist-occupied capital here) are tyrannical and unresponsive, just wait until you see the same thing on a truly planetary basis! It’s merely a way for the corrupt global corporate mafias to secure their own power.
The trouble is, this experiment has no precedent in human history: in other words, there’s not a shred of evidence that such a scheme can actually work, unless of course one wants to go back to some ancient texts, and there the outcome is always the same: the attempt didn’t work, usually because “someone else” stepped in and put a stop to it. In my secret space program talks and in my book Covert Wars and Breakaway Civilizations, I’ve called this the “Tower of Babel Moment,” that uneasy period of transition to a genuinely global society, during which the powers that be must play their card game very carefully so as to avoid any such “repeat.” Notably, in those ancient stories, the goal was centralization, and that could be taken to be at least in part the cause and motivation for the “intervention.”
The bottom line here in Europe’s case is that President-elect Trump’s victory can, and I think will, fuel that anti-centralizing impulse we see emerging on the political scene in Europe.
But it can also fuel the centralizing impulse of the Euro-technocrats themselves, as this important article, shared by Mr. J.C., also points out:
As noted, the European commission president Mr. Juncker – and don’t you just love the fact that the president of the European Commission’s surname recalls those Prussian Junckers of yesteryear? (And where’s your Pickelhaube, Herr Juncker? You seem oddly out of uniform, and I’ll be you have one!) – anyway, to get back to the main point here. The European Commission President Mr. Juncker is now calling for a trans-European army:
Europe should build its own army and not rely on security guarantees from Washington, the European Commission president said following the election of Donald Trump. At the same time, Jean-Claude Juncker called for the preservation of the transatlantic partnership.
Speaking in Berlin about the future of Europe sometime around 2050, Juncker had to ad lib, admitting that his speech had been written with the assumption that Hillary Clinton would be the victor of the US presidential race. But reflecting on the unexpected outcome of Trump’s presidency, Juncker said that “regardless” of who is the US president, the EU and the US must work together. (Emphasis added)
Notably, Mr. Juncker composed his speech thinking Mrs. Clinton would emerge victorious. And that’s a strong indicator that the European army project was all business-as-usual for Mr. Globaloney, and part and parcel of the policies that Darth Hillary would have been on board with.
But I submit that Mr. Trump’s own campaign rhetoric gives even more oxygen to this centralizing fire, for his insistence on US allies doing more for their own self-defense, and for his willingness to re-examine NATO. So on the one hand, his victory aids and strengthens the anti-centralizing tendency at the popular level, and on the other strengthens the centralizing tendency of the Eurocrats in Berlin and Brussels.
This should not dissuade those movements in Europe trying to address issues of the preservation of their national sovereignty or cultural identity. However, it does mean that they will have to begin to address the wider issues of their own defense and security without feeding the beast of Brussels any further, for a trans-European military would be, in its hands, a way to bait-and-switch and keep a firm hold on national domestic policies.
So what’s my high octane speculation here? It’s just this: No doubt the leaders – Geert Wilders of The Netherlands, Marine le Pen in France, the AfD in Germany – of those movements and parties in Europe are already aware of this, and are already having those discussions. My prediction? Watch those parties begin to incorporate statements about defense and security into their platforms, and to begin coupling the refugee crisis to the issue of security and defense. If they do this, it will make the position of their political opposition, the globaloneyists in Berlin, Paris, and Brussels, not to mention Rome and Madrid, all that much more difficult to maintain, for a trans-European army infested with cells of radicals from the Middle East will simply be inoperable.
See you on the flip side…