Saturday, 11 May 2019


So Guy Verhofstadt, 47th Prime Minister of Belgium, author of The United States of Europe and grand architect of federalism has been campaigning for the MEP elections alongside the most ironically-named party in British politics - the Liberal Democrats (if you discount Change UK, or whatever they are called today). The LibDems are, of course, far from liberal and intent on defying democracy, so Guy ought to feel snugly at home.

At the core of Verhofstadt’s political thesis is the ultimate transfer of sovereignty of all the countries of Europe to the caring stewardship of the oh-so-benign European Union. He wants nothing less than a country called Europe and pursues this end with a zeal which would be admirable were he, say, a philanthropist or an athlete, or an artist. But he is none of these things; he is instead a purveyor of a sinister and potentially dangerous ideology.

Eschewing nationalism and what he calls populism (you know; what we used to call democracy) he calls for people to abandon patriotic bonds with their home nation and replace them with a singular love for a new, bigger, more powerful country. This is literally what he wants; that people become citizens and patriots of a superpower. He repeats, time and again, that nationalism is what caused all of the wars in Europe, but somehow believes that a new supra-nationalism will bring peace. I can only assume he thinks the old nationalism was the wrong type of nationalism; much as 'true socialism has never been tried'.

This is ever the reasoning in the EU; the problems arising from uncurbed power can only be solved by devolving yet more power to the EU. The problems caused by the too-rapid integration and harmonisation of EU idealism can only be solved by the imposition of more and faster EU regulations and diktats. Even Tony Blair recognised that the rationale for the EU was not peace, but power, something he appears happy to subscribe to.

But the problems begin at the very first whiff of power and influence. It changes people; it distances them from those who put them in office. And if you somehow think this isn’t so, cast a glance in the direction of Alastair Campbell, Theresa May, Jeremy Corbyn, Saddam Hussein, Joseph Stalin, Muammar Gaddafi, Adolf Hitler (obviously), Pol Pot and Tony Blair himself. And if you think this is outrageous – listing living influencers in the same sentence as tyrants and dictators – maybe you haven’t really understood the true nature of power.

If nationalism is such a bad thing, why do Euro-federalists want to be a nation? And when this single, giant nation becomes too powerful and begins to threaten the security and peace of neighbouring states, who will bring them to book? In other words, what will the EU do with the power and how can we be even slightly mollified by apparently peaceful intent? In the too-often quoted but inescapable 1984 another Blair writes “Power is inflicting pain and humiliation. Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing... Power is not a means; it is an end” It is time to put an end to this.


  1. I guess you might just make a case for old fashioned nationalism being the cause of wars. That is if you forget about the raging ambition and monster egos of the largely unelected leaders we used to have. I suggest that the EU had done nothing at all to prevent war, it is fear of the atom bomb that he kept the peace not the trough wallowing pigs in the EU. As for being a citizen of the wonderful nation of Europe, it might be an idea to ask the one time citizens of the wonderful USSR and East Germany how good that was.