This is one of the critical moments in world history where good people can make a difference..
Is the EU a cure for war and a way of living in harmony or a way to deprive the nations of Europe of their liberties? The answer to this question is of huge importance to the British public and will be the substance of the vote on membership of the EU in 2016 or 2017. You will find the answer below.
The State controls the way that we live. None of us can be independent of the modern State. The only real issue is whether the State acts as a gardener or as an architect. The Gardener allows the growth of many types of plant, each according to how it enhances a part of the garden. The architect lays out plants in geometrical designs to communicate his concept of a place. The gardener gives plants a freedom to grow, manages diversity and encourages nature. The architect imposes order.
An important difference between the Gardener and Architect
models of politics is that the Gardener approach is linked to a locality
whereas social architecture is international. This is why social
architects are drawn from those who have the resources to move their
families anywhere, educate their children anywhere and support relatives
from afar. Social architects are also drawn from amongst students and academics. Those who employ the Gardener model are usually attached to their land and people. Another crucial difference between the gardener and the social architect is that the gardener approach usually devolves the management of day to day living to the individual: it allows freedom.
Those who have limited qualifications and resources and must support relatives and friends are not served by grand designs. They are best served by creating a locality that supports them.
The twentieth century was a battle between the social architects of the East and the gardeners who were the political managers of the West. The West won because it gathered strength through diversity and innovation. In those days the West was truly the "West" because it was an Anglo-American partnership. Europe, from National Socialist Vichy-France and Germany to communist Russia had been ruled by social architects and these were defeated by those who, like gardeners, loved diversity.
(The very first proposals for an EEC understood all of this and are well worth a read - click on the link for a summary.)
Most of the member states of the EU are social architects because of their history, especially their legal history. The European Civil Law allowed the State to control the lives of the people more closely than the "Common Law" of England. In England that which was not forbidden was permitted whereas in Europe that which was not explicitly permitted was forbidden. The European form of lawmaking is the system used by the EU.
EU "laws", which consist of regulations made by the EU, now account for about 50% of all UK law. The fact that the EU regulates through directives that the the UK must duplicate in legislation has confused many journalists into mistakenly declaring that the EU is responsible for little of the law in the UK.
Many areas of legislation have now been superseded by EU regulation and this means that the UK Parliament has not been passing independent laws in areas such as Health and Safety and Employment, this has allowed Social Architects to declare that "without the EU" we would not have regulations in these areas of life. However, it could equally be declared that the UK has handed sovereignty over a large part of law making to the EU and the people of Britain no longer have sovereign power over the nation.
UK Sovereignty has recently receded even further. Since November 2014, the "veto", which allowed individual states to oppose and block EU legislation, has ended. The veto was the last defence for National Sovereignty. Now that the veto has gone the UK has only about 8.5% of the votes in the EU Council and must abide by the decisions of the majority. It can no longer resist laws that are not in the interest of the UK. The ordinary population of the UK are largely unaware that this has happened.
Along with the ending of the veto the EU has acquired control of foreign affairs and security, according to Article 26(1) of the Lisbon Treaty:
"1. The European Council shall identify the Union’s strategic interests, determine the objectives of and define general guidelines for the common foreign and security policy, including for matters with defence implications. It shall adopt the necessary decisions." See The full repercussions of Lisbon for UK defence.
The UK is no longer sovereign in foreign policy and security which is why the Americans are loudly telling our government to get on with representing the USA in the EU Council. You may have noticed that foreign policy and defence were scarcely discussed in the last General Election. These are now EU affairs.
Social architects say that all of the decisions of the EU that people might like are EU decisions and all of the powers and decisions of the EU that make us feel uncomfortable do not exist or have no effect. They can get away with this fiction because the media and Government have deliberately failed to tell you, the people, what has really happened. This is how Social Architects work, they are convinced that they know best and that the ordinary man in the street is just a pawn in the plan.
Don't be fooled, it is only by tending your own garden that you can create a region of peace and beauty. The moment we attempt to tend other people's lands we become social architects, imposing our designs on others.
The real problem confronting mankind is how diverse cultures and beliefs can co-exist. The answer found by the original EEC was to form a club of equals and to move forward with unanimity. This has been perverted by the EU into full union with the creation of central government and the deliberate removal of the "barriers between us" - ie: diversity. Those who love freedom, variety and difference have been replaced by those who want uniformity.
How did this happen? Social architects form very effective pressure groups. It is easier for those with a "grand design" to be united than for those who believe in diversity to act together. Corporate bosses who would like to simplify trading around the globe and socialists who believe that once they are in control they can implement a global dystopia have similar plans and can unite. United they can put vast pressure on the State to crush their opponents.
TinyURL for this article: http://tinyurl.com/nudn3w5
First published26/7/2015
Is the EU a cure for war and a way of living in harmony or a way to deprive the nations of Europe of their liberties? The answer to this question is of huge importance to the British public and will be the substance of the vote on membership of the EU in 2016 or 2017. You will find the answer below.
 |
| Social and Political Management ensures diversity |
 |
| Social Architecture |
Those who have limited qualifications and resources and must support relatives and friends are not served by grand designs. They are best served by creating a locality that supports them.
The twentieth century was a battle between the social architects of the East and the gardeners who were the political managers of the West. The West won because it gathered strength through diversity and innovation. In those days the West was truly the "West" because it was an Anglo-American partnership. Europe, from National Socialist Vichy-France and Germany to communist Russia had been ruled by social architects and these were defeated by those who, like gardeners, loved diversity.
(The very first proposals for an EEC understood all of this and are well worth a read - click on the link for a summary.)
Most of the member states of the EU are social architects because of their history, especially their legal history. The European Civil Law allowed the State to control the lives of the people more closely than the "Common Law" of England. In England that which was not forbidden was permitted whereas in Europe that which was not explicitly permitted was forbidden. The European form of lawmaking is the system used by the EU.
EU "laws", which consist of regulations made by the EU, now account for about 50% of all UK law. The fact that the EU regulates through directives that the the UK must duplicate in legislation has confused many journalists into mistakenly declaring that the EU is responsible for little of the law in the UK.
Many areas of legislation have now been superseded by EU regulation and this means that the UK Parliament has not been passing independent laws in areas such as Health and Safety and Employment, this has allowed Social Architects to declare that "without the EU" we would not have regulations in these areas of life. However, it could equally be declared that the UK has handed sovereignty over a large part of law making to the EU and the people of Britain no longer have sovereign power over the nation.
UK Sovereignty has recently receded even further. Since November 2014, the "veto", which allowed individual states to oppose and block EU legislation, has ended. The veto was the last defence for National Sovereignty. Now that the veto has gone the UK has only about 8.5% of the votes in the EU Council and must abide by the decisions of the majority. It can no longer resist laws that are not in the interest of the UK. The ordinary population of the UK are largely unaware that this has happened.
Along with the ending of the veto the EU has acquired control of foreign affairs and security, according to Article 26(1) of the Lisbon Treaty:
"1. The European Council shall identify the Union’s strategic interests, determine the objectives of and define general guidelines for the common foreign and security policy, including for matters with defence implications. It shall adopt the necessary decisions." See The full repercussions of Lisbon for UK defence.
The UK is no longer sovereign in foreign policy and security which is why the Americans are loudly telling our government to get on with representing the USA in the EU Council. You may have noticed that foreign policy and defence were scarcely discussed in the last General Election. These are now EU affairs.
Social architects say that all of the decisions of the EU that people might like are EU decisions and all of the powers and decisions of the EU that make us feel uncomfortable do not exist or have no effect. They can get away with this fiction because the media and Government have deliberately failed to tell you, the people, what has really happened. This is how Social Architects work, they are convinced that they know best and that the ordinary man in the street is just a pawn in the plan.
Don't be fooled, it is only by tending your own garden that you can create a region of peace and beauty. The moment we attempt to tend other people's lands we become social architects, imposing our designs on others.
The real problem confronting mankind is how diverse cultures and beliefs can co-exist. The answer found by the original EEC was to form a club of equals and to move forward with unanimity. This has been perverted by the EU into full union with the creation of central government and the deliberate removal of the "barriers between us" - ie: diversity. Those who love freedom, variety and difference have been replaced by those who want uniformity.
How did this happen? Social architects form very effective pressure groups. It is easier for those with a "grand design" to be united than for those who believe in diversity to act together. Corporate bosses who would like to simplify trading around the globe and socialists who believe that once they are in control they can implement a global dystopia have similar plans and can unite. United they can put vast pressure on the State to crush their opponents.
TinyURL for this article: http://tinyurl.com/nudn3w5
First published26/7/2015
Comments