Skip to main content

Origins of the EU (2)

The Pan European Manifesto, reproduced below, was one of the founding documents of the Pan Europa movement.  The movement was supported by many powerful politicians and a large membership in the 1930s and is still active today.  The philosophy of Pan Europeanism went much further than this manifesto as is clear from Count Coudenhove-Kalergi's "Practical Idealism"  which describes how the next step was to be a Socialist State run by a new breed of largely, Jewish aristocrats, democracy being a transitional process (see Kalergi's "Practical Idealism"). Extraordinary to us in the UK but 1930s European politicians talked in racial terms.  His philosophy was opposed strongly by the NAZI Party and is the main reason for the long rants against Internationalists and Jews in Mein Kampf.  "It was, in effect the cosmopolitanism of Pan Europa that outraged Hitler. Jews would welcome it, he noted." (Calleo 1980).  Even today it is evident that Coudenhove-Kalergi's philosophy drives anti-semites apoplectic and I suspect that the first result of Pan Europeanism was the holocaust. (Search Google for "kalergi blog" to see this sick anti-semitism).

Of course, both Hitler and Coudenhove-Kalergi were certifiable psychopaths by British standards and brought about the very disasters that they hoped to avoid.  Notice that the entire manifesto is about power, the power to confront the Russians, the power for the Europeans to colonize Africa and hold their heads high in the playground of global politics.

Pan Europa has been a major factor in the movement for European Union, as this account of the opening of the Strasbourg Parliament shows:

"Led by Otto von Habsburg, numerous leading Pan-Europeans took up their seats in the newly elected European Parliament in Strasbourg. In her opening speech, the French writer Louise Weiss, a former President of the Parliament and Pan-Europa member, welcomed Otto von Habsburg as the successor of Richard Coudenhove-Kalergis." History of Pan Europa.

Charles de Gaulle was particularly impressed by Pan Europa - see Note(2) below. Coudenhove- Kalergi also promoted Ode to Joy as the EU Anthem.

                          The Pan European Manifesto 
Count Richard Nikolaus von Coudenhove-Kalergi, 1923
                     Europeans! Europeans! Europe’s fateful hour strikes!

In European factories weapons are forged daily to rend European men – in European laboratories poisons are brewed daily to exterminate European women and children.

Meanwhile, Europe is playing with its fate with inconceivable levity; in incomprehensible blindness it does not see what is imminent; in incomprehensible inactivity it is without will against the most terrible disaster that ever a continent met.

Europe’s policy is heading for a new war. Two dozen new Alsace-Lorraine crises have emerged. One crisis triggers another.  The European war of destruction may break out, our continent turned into a cemetery and this can happen daily by an accident – for example, by an attack or a revolt.

This war of extermination, shall in the awfulness of World War leave European politics far behind . Its element will be the air – poison the weapon – its goal the eradication of enemy nations. The main fight will be against the cities of the hinterland, against women and children. The defeated Nations are destroyed – the victorious mortally wounded and mass murders emerge.

This threat of war means the thorough destruction of Europe, its culture and economy. Other parts of the world will take its place.

The second danger, in response to a fragmented Europe, is the conquest by Russia.  Russia is related to Europe, as once Macedonia to Greece.  In Philip’s time no Greek believed in a Macedonian danger;  because Macedonia was then in confusion and anarchy. But Philip’s genius brought order out of chaos, and after 20 years, the number of peasant people of Macedonia was enough to conquer the fragmented civilizations of Greece.

Under the leadership of a red or white dictator Russia could, by good harvests, and American and German capital organization, rise faster than Europe suspects. Then the fragmented and disunited small states of Europe would face a Russian world power whose area is five times as large as the whole of Europe. Neither the small states of Eastern Europe, Scandinavia and the Balkans nor disarmed Germany would then be able to repel the Russian rush. Rhine, Alps, Adriatic would be Europe’s borders and Europe would be Western Province of Russia.

Against this danger there is only one salvation: the European Union. There is no Russian threat for a united Europe because it has twice as many people as Russia and has a much more developed industry. So the decision on the Russian danger is not in Russia – but in Europe.

The next two decades will be the history of the spectacle of a race between the offer of unification of Europe and Russian re-construction: Russia recovering from its economic disaster before Europe agrees to unite to rescue Europe from the Russian danger.

Thus the freedom of Europe is in the hands of the Europeans.

The third danger for Europe’s life is economic ruin. Never can the shattered economy of the disunited States of Europe remain competitive against the closed economy of the United States of America. For the European there are interim duties that impede the price of production. The parcels of the European Economy are therefore condemned by the non-European economic empires in America, Britain and Russia to be crushed in the future, by East Asia as well.

Chronic crises undermined the European economy, increasing the distress, misery and inflation – until finally the bankrupt Europe economy has become an American colony. This condition leads to an enslavement of Europe’s workforce by American capital which will escape all control.

Against this danger there is only one salvation: merger of the European continent in a customs union, abolition of tariffs between European States and the creation of a pan-European economic area. Any other path leads to ruin.

Thus, a fragmented Europe is a triple disaster: the war of extermination; the subjugation by Russia; economic ruin.

The only salvation from these impending disasters: Pan Europa; the union of all democratic countries of continental Europe into an international group for a political administration union and economic purpose.

The danger of a European war of extermination can only be averted by a pan-European agreement to arbitrate; the risk of Russian rule can only be averted by a pan-European defensive alliance; the risk of economic ruin can only be averted by a pan-European Customs Union.

The arbitration agreement secures peace – the alliance secures the freedom – the Customs Union secures the economy.  These three points comprise essentially the pan-European program.

Pan-Europa includes the peninsula between Russia, the Atlantic and the Mediterranean Sea; to Iceland and the colonies the European states.  A large European colony, halfway between Tripoli and Congo, Morocco and Angola Africa includes, could supply Europe with raw materials.

Russia and England are Paneuropa neighbours. These two empires are viable even without Europe – while the remaining States of the Hemisphere are connected by their geographic location to a common destiny; condemned, either jointly to go – or be resurrected together.

From many sides, the inclusion of England is required in the future Plan. This idea fails because of the construction of the British Federal Empire. Never would the Dominions tolerate England swinging to another state system with a closer relationship than England has to them; so that makes the connection of the English kingdom to Pan-Europa obsolete. The connection of the British Empire to Pan-Europa would require Canada to be transformed into a European state and this is impossible. The consequence of this challenge in America would be the connection of Canada in the Pan American Union and the disintegration of the British Empire.

Thus, a merger between Pan-Europa and Pan-British states into a league is currently impossible. Good, but a global political cooperation between these two complexes is possible and necessary in the interests of peace and of progress. In no case may Pan-Europa be directed against England.

Also, the inclusion of Russia in Pan-Europa is currently impossible. A merger between democratic states on the one hand and the Soviet Union on the other hand is impractical. Through the rejection of democracy, Russia has voluntarily renounced the European states system.

Even against Russia Pan-Europa has no hostile attitude. The goal is to preserve the Russo – European peace, joint disarmament, economic cooperation and respect for the mutual inner development.

Pan-Europa can be created so that it may be an equal global power with America, Britain, Russia and East Asia, a new close League of Nations, in which no part of the world need be afraid of foreign interference. Only such a world alliance would be joined by the United States of America and the Soviet Union.

As an independent group within the League of Nations Pan-Europa would have the ability to control its own destiny, rather than as this is happening today in Geneva where the most important European decisions are left to Latin Americans and Asians. The American Monroe Doctrine is finally, after a hundred years, becoming a European objective: “Europe for the Europeans!”

The pan-European program forms an indivisible whole. The path is divided – the target uniform.  Without a backup of European permanent peace a European customs union is impossible. As long as each state lives in constant fear of its neighbours it must be prepared to produce all the necessary goods like a besieged fortress even without a war. This requires national industries and protective tariffs. Only a disappearance of the threat of war by compulsory arbitration would open the way for European States to allow the reduction of customs barriers and the transition to European Free Trade. Conversely the form of national industries and their protection by the state is a hotbed of European nationalism and a threat to European Peace. Community of interest, however, is the surest path to political community. To support the political part of the Pan-European program requires economics and vice versa.

The path to the realization of Pan-Europe is as follows:

First, grouping of European countries according to the Pan-American pattern ; this would be possible either within the League of Nations (after Germany’s accession) or by convening a pan-European conference on the Pan-American pattern.

Second, completion of mandatory arbitration agreements and mutual border guarantees between the states of Europe.

Third, a defensive alliance for the protection of the common eastern border.

Fourth, initiation of a customs union by periodic conferences of the European states.

This program, which contains nothing impossible, should be taken without delay to save the continent from any attack.  The dangers that threaten our continent have not been combated enough because they cannot be detected sufficiently. Political education is the way to political rebirth.

Ninety percent of all Europeans want nothing more from politics than the preservation of peace and freedom and the increase of prosperity. When they realize that the present policy of peace, freedom and prosperity is life-threatening and constantly threatened, they will leave this slippery slope and look for another political solution.

The European governments are not addressing the European problem. One can not blame the governments for responding to the European question in the wrong way. While the social questions and the law is discussed everywhere, every day, in the press and Parliament, literature and family the question of survival is simply hushed up for 300 million Europeans.

The European question is:
“Is it possible that 25 states can live on the small European peninsula in international anarchy next to each other without this state ending with a terrible political, economic and cultural disaster ? ”

Anti-Europeans answer that question by saying that this was possible previously. This response ignores the facts. For in the twentieth century, all the requirements for the previous particularism have changed Europe fundamentally.

The old Europe had world domination. Outwardly sure it could afford the luxury of internal wars without danger to life. In the twentieth century that European world domination collapsed. Asia awoke under Japanese leadership. America outperformed all European states, Russia has been solved by the introduction of Sovietism, England has come from a major European power to head an intercontinental world power whose focus is in the Indian Ocean. This growing organization of the non-European world into mighty empires is in contrast to the growing disorganization of the European World. Here the fragmentation has made further progress as a result of the war. In Central Europe, two Great Powers fell to make room for a number of smaller states. So Europe is forced out of the center of the world, once the subject of world politics – it has become their object: weakened, wounded, destitute, torn.

A recovery of European world domination is currently impossible but it will be possible by combining the European States to unite this continent, as a fifth world power and save the peace, freedom and prosperity of Europeans.

The advances of technology have made a return to the Europe of the last century impossible. The steel war of the past only weakened the nations – the gas war of the future would destroy them.  Also, with car and Railroad, airship and radio, European distances have decreased so much that today’s Europe has become relatively smaller than the Italy of the Renaissance.

This coming together of all European countries, the community of interests, has also multiplied their opposites.  Thanks to technology, the interests of neighboring European countries today are so entwined that they have only the choice between enmity and alliance; being indifferent neighbours has become impossible.So the whole European question culminates in either – or:

War – or peace!
Anarchy – or organization!
Arms race – or teardown!
Competition – or cooperation!
Collapse – or merger!

No Europeans will be able to dodge this decision. Neutrality in making that decision is treason. Who is not Pan-European – is anti-European! Who does not see the dangers of a fragmented Europe is blind; but who sees these dangers and still does not do anything to avert them – is a traitor and criminal to Europe; he sacrifices his convenience or his profit, the future of his children, his nation, his culture; he is complicit in all the disasters that must befall Europe if he holds on to its present course.

The future of Europe depends on the answer to the question of Europe. This answer is in the hands of the Europeans. We live in democratic countries and are responsible for the policies of our governments. They have no right to criticize us, to limit, but a duty to participate in shaping our political destiny.

If the peoples of Europe want – Pan-Europa will arise: you just need her voice. So every European can participate in the demise – or in the resurrection of Europe! The majority of Europeans do not see the coming decision and the responsibility that weighs on them. Demagogic phrases have made large masses of Europeans ​​blind: blind to today’s chaos – oblivious to the impending disaster – Blind to the blindness of their leaders.

Others are falling back into hopeless inactivity; abandoning the political initiative and leaving lunatics in a headless race against the abyss, and pulling the mindless masses along with them into perdition.  It is important to awake these two groups of Europeans; the blind and the lame. One wants to see them learn. It is imperative to arouse their political knowledge and political will.

Over and over again the simple truth is to be repeated: A fragmented Europe leads to war, oppression, misery, a united Europe to peace, freedom, prosperity!

Once this either-or in its full meaning is clear to the Europeans – then everyone will choose which of these two paths they want to take: the path of European anarchy – or the way of European organization; the path of Death – or the way of life.

The struggle for Pan-Europe will be tough and bitter. It requires faith, perseverance and determination. It revolves around more than the fate of a party or a government: it revolves around the survival of European humanity!
The leaders of the anti-Europeans are tough and devious. They will always find new keywords to combat Europe.

There is a pan-European initiative to prevent the merger; they push ancillary questions to the fore – to bypass the main question; they will hide behind the idea of ​​a World Federation – to thwart Pan-Europa; they are finally trying to stamp Pan-Europa as utopia, then, with an expression of heartfelt sympathy, refuse to support it. Let you, Europeans, not be deterred by such maneuvers! Answer them, that every people must begin Europeanization because none can begin without the other. And that there will one day be no higher honor for a European people than to have been the first to know to Pan-Europa.

Reply to those who reject Pan-Europa because of its limitations, that it can not wait for the collapse of the British or the Democratization of the Russian Empire. But that Pan-Europa is alive and organic as any political entity and that its future union with Russia or England is not impossible.

Reply to those who make a change in the current boundaries as a condition of a new Europe that a shift of these limits is only possible by general war and ruin that stable borders in Europe are possible – but reasonable limits impossible. That through the slow degradation of borders in national, strategic and economic ways it is possible to perform minority protection, arbitration agreement and Customs Union and achieve peace and prosperity;

Reply to those who reject Pan-Europa on behalf of the Alliance, that only Pan-Europa is the way to replace the League of Nations and open the same to Russia and America. The fact that Europe is only a precursor, not unlike the League of Nations and is a practical policy to implement that which is desirable.

Reply finally to those who want to stamp Pan-Europa as a utopia that no great historical event before its emergence escaped charges of utopia. But Pan-Europa is not a utopia because no natural law is in the way of its realization.  Only the will of Europeans can thwart it – only the will of the Europeans can do it!

Reply, then, to those who ask you if Pan-Europa will arise – or not: “It is when you want! If you do want it badly be energetic and persevering! This is not to question whether it will be built – but, that it may arise – and so be built. Because we are not astrologers – but politicians; not prophets – but fighters “!

For this struggle for Europe, I call on all to believe in the possibility and the necessity of the United States of Europe.  A program – for Pan-Europa is no utopia; not a dream – but a demand!

Against this great goal the needs of the nation, religion and party disappear: first the house must be built before the dispute over the wallpaper begins!
So abandon domestic political strife – in foreign policy the parties must be united in the struggle against the enemies of the European idea. Give Pan-Europa victory so the union of states is free to solve all social and cultural issues. Without Pan-Europa all the other questions solve themselves: Europe will be as an old man, a mass grave, a pile of rubble – a cemetery of a once thriving culture.

Only through unity can the Pan-Europeans of all tongues triumph over the discordant anti-Europeans in their chauvinism and conflicts.

The weapons in the struggle for Pan-Europa are: Enlightenment and Propaganda. A resolute and staunch Pan-European is considered more than a thousand weaklings and doubters. Because on the faith and advertising power of the first Pan-Europeans depends the victory of the idea.

Throw the European question into all debates; at home and among friends, in clubs and assemblies, in the press and in the literature! Forcing your fellow human beings to decide for or against the European idea! Open their eyes, and tear them out of their indifference!

Make it clear to all that this is about everything. Are your opponents strong: You’re stronger! Are they smart: You’re smarter! Are they resolved:  You’re more determined than them!  Being refuted everywhere will show where their path leads! Debunked, their leaders will appear deceivers and blind!

Those who are anti-European from blindness make them clear eyed! They are insane, fight them! They do it for profit and ambition and are destroyed! They sell and barter away your future and the future of your children.  There are no worse Traitors and criminals more dangerous than them!

In this struggle against blindness, madness and crimes of the anti-European policy is your commitment: clarity of cognition and purity of will.

The “Pan-European Union” is the organ of the Pan-European movement. Admission is open to all, and it needs women and men, associations and organizations who want to save Europe. She puts her fellow fighters on duty to fight for Pan-Europa.

Everyone struggles with the means at his disposal. Recruit new Pan-Europeans, compel your candidates to confess to the European Agreement program! Whoever can speak can put forward propaganda - talk about it! Whoever can pay for it, pay! Whoever can write for them write!

The way to Pan-Europa is: Propaganda, propaganda, propaganda! What Comenius and Nietzsche dreamed – Kant conceived – Bonaparte and Mazzini have wanted – the Pan-European movement should realize: the United States of Europe!

In the struggle for Pan-Europe, the roles are distributed so that the German Pan-Europeans fight only against the German anti-Europeans – the French Pan-Europeans fight against the French anti-Europeans. Any other tactic does more harm than good and increases chauvinism rather than reducing it. Only when in a nation of European ideas against chauvinism is enforced, does Europe have the right to wear it on the outside.

The first Pan-Europeans should be aware that they are a million army outpost in the struggle for the future decision of their continent. With the Sign of the Sun Cross, which connects the sun of the Enlightenment with the Red Cross of international humanity will the pan-European ideas triumph over all restrictions and inhumanity chauvinistic policies of destruction.

In this sign the new Europe will grow, which already consists of the best Europeans. Help, Europeans prepare this great division between future and past, between humanity and inhumanity, enlightenment and delusion, rebirth and destruction! Given the choice between War and peace, freedom and oppression, prosperity and ruin, Europe will in its overwhelming majority decide in favour of Pan-Europa.

He who loves his nation, must want Pan-Europa!
He who loves his family, must want Pan-Europa!
Who loves himself, must want Pan-Europa!

A permanent European peace for the future of European nations, families, and people.  The Pan-European Movement in the masses, rescues Europe and your children!

1. David Calleo.(1980)  The German Problem Reconsidered:Germany and the World Order 1870 to the Present.

(2) De Gaulle and Pan Europa.

In preference to Jean Monnet and democratic federalism, de Gaulle valued the opinions and ideas of Count Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi, author of the 1923 Paneurope manifesto, whom he met in  July 1944. It was to Coudenhove-Kalergi that de Gaulle wrote in 1948, "No one is more convinced than I of the need to construct Europe… Between a Europe sought after by the Commonwealth and a Germany in search of itself, I have always believed that France was destined by its very geography to promote European Union".

Coudenhove-Kalergi argued in support of all de Gaulle's decisions on Europe. He broke with the "European Movement" in 1965 because of its anti-Gaullist attitude. As a gesture of confidence, de Gaulle invited Coudenhove-Kalergi to the Reims meeting which consolidated Franco-German reconciliation, and in 1969 thanked him for his support for the action which he, de Gaulle, had taken "in the name of France, for the construction of a united Europe". Both men mistrusted supranational community institutions. Both agreed on the idea of a union of the nation-states of Europe, and both aspired to a European Europe, i.e. a Europe that was free, independent of the superpowers and, more especially, of the USA.

Copied from the official de Gaulle website, De Gaulle and Europe


Bill Rollo said…
The 'democracy' talked about here, no longer exists, we have the ex-Soviet states in the EU who would agree to anything as long as they were allowed in, which waters down the 'out' vote. A 'Free Trade Market' is all well and good, but it subjects the indigenous to low wages and job losses, as manufacturing is shipped overseas for bigger profits. This will eventually reduce the British, French, German workers to lower standards of living, than they have been accustomed. The TTIP will actually complete the 'Slave Charter', as it gives Corporations complete Sovereignty of each nation state and with the Public Service rights of each nation, power to set prices, wage rates and job numbers, leading to further unemployment across the board!
A growing number of people are waking up to these 'stealth movements' and are actively speaking out, this is why TPTB are bringing in laws to shut them up, under the guise of 'false' anti-terror laws. The onset of the internet has opened up a vast treasure chest of information, and all their lies and deceits are being exposed, to such an extent they now conduct 'False Flag' operations against their own people! False Flags such as 9/11, 7/7, Sandy Hook, Oklahoma, Waco, Boston Bombing, from the present and such things as the Holocaust, Titanic, Lusitania, Pearl Harbour, Bay of Pigs [failed], Gulf of Tonkin, and many more, all designed to usurp power and control!
John said…
I am wary of "false flag" claims but could not agree more about the power of corporations and TTIP.

Popular posts from this blog

Practical Idealism by Richard Nicolaus Coudenhove-Kalergi

Coudenhove-Kalergi was a pioneer of European integration. He was the founder and President for 49 years of the Paneuropean Union. His parents were Heinrich von Coudenhove-Kalergi, an Austro-Hungarian diplomat, and Mitsuko Aoyama, the daughter of an oil merchant, antiques-dealer, and huge landowner family in Tokyo. His "Pan-Europa" was published in 1923 and contained a membership form for the Pan-Europa movement. Coudenhove-Kalergi's movement held its first Congress in Vienna in 1926. In 1927 the French Prime Minister, Aristide Briand was elected honorary president.  Personalities attending included: Albert Einstein, Thomas Mann and Sigmund Freud. Figures who later became central to founding the EU, such as Konrad Adenauer became members . His basic idea was that democracy was a transitional stage that leads to rule by a new aristocracy that is largely taken from the Jewish "master race" (Kalergi's terminology). His movement was reviled by Hitler and H

Political Thoughts

Politics is the struggle for power. The fundamental power struggle is between the people of a place and the mobile classes.  Few people would turn their own garden into a motorway or commit their next door neighbours to slave working.  The mobile classes can do these things without conscience because their garden and their neighbours are not fixed. Locality is central to politics because it separates real issues from ideological issues.  Real issues such as being unable to find work, having insufficient money to pay for the basics of life, having poor schooling and healthcare etc. are all local.  If you are mobile you can move to somewhere that has work and good wages, schools and healthcare. If the answer to any problem is to change locality then the problem is not solved, it is avoided for you personally but the problem remains for others.  If politicians must live among those who suffer the results of their political decisions then those decisions must be humane but if they can move

The Report on Racism

The " Report by the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities " has just been published.  The Commissioners were nearly all from BAME backgrounds and have produced a robust and fair Report. The Report identified a class divide in which the cycle of advantage maintains a section of the population in wealth and leaves the large bulk of the population in relative poverty.   The wealthy class is largely white British but the poorer class consists of large numbers of white British and other ethnic groups.  This class divide causes a bias in the crude statistics on disadvantage so that majority, poor white British are labelled as "white supremacists" etc. when it is the small wealthy class that actually creates the disparity that causes this analysis. The most striking finding is that different ethnic groups had very different experiences and outcomes.  Educational outcomes demonstrate this at a glance: Red text added for this article Most ethnic groups had better outcome