WHAT
HISTORY TELLS US ABOUT OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CONTINENT.
Part 1
In
the Daily Mail on Saturday the 15th June, 1996 –eight
years ago an article appeared
written by Paul Johnson the respected great historian and journalist with
the heading as we show above.
It
was, and is a thrilling, interesting and has vital importance, for everyone to
read who love their country. At this time it is even more of interest when
our duplicitous Prime Minister has already signed the New European Constitution
within a
few days of over 2.500,000 voters making their wishes clear on the 10th
of June, 2004 that they wish to leave the EU.
Because
of the thoughtful and level interpretation of the facts this Essay should be of
great help to many wavers who are baffled by the conflicting messages from
politicians and wish to have the right to have their QUESTIONS ANSWERED.
*
* *
The voices we must not forget when it comes to Europe
by
Paul Johnson
The rising hysteria among
Conservatives about Britain and the European Union [June 15,1996] is
inflicting needless damage on the party and the country.
To say someone is pro- and
anti-Europe is as silly as saying they are pro or anti the weather. Whether we like it or not, we are part of
Europe. We always have been; always will be. It is our continent. [Don’t stop reading now
–it is all explained later]
Any sensible discussion of the subject must start and end
in the knowledge that our relations with other European countries must of
necessity be close, intimate and in the best sense, familiar-we are all family
together.
What the argument is really
about is legal arrangements, which, as in ordinary families, are often a source
of contention.
In working out the best
framework for Britain and our European Cousins, it is important to keep a cool
head and not get emotional. [There was no arrogant Dictator Blair in 1996]
And not least, to remember
our history- Britain has a lot of experience in dealing successfully with
attempts to unify Europe.
Most of those bids were
misguided and based on the use of force rather than persuasion and mutual
interests. In the 16th
century, the Hapsburgs of Spain tried to unify Europe around the principles of
the Catholic Counter Reformation.
In the 17th and
the 18th centuries the French, first under Napoleon, tried to unify
Europe around the principles of French culture and law. The code of Napoleon, the Continental System
of trade and the constitutions Bonaparte laid down for the European countries
he created are echoed in the Treaties of Rome and Maastricht [Since then we have
had:
Amsterdam in 1997.
Nice in 2001
and of course the signing of
the New European Constitution on the 18th June, 2004]
In the late 19th
and 20th century, Germany, under the Kaiser and later Hitler, tried
to centralize and unify the European economy under German direction. Hitler
called it ‘the New European Order.
Finally, in the late Forties, Stalin’s Russia tried to
unify Europe around the principles of Communism and the Command Economy. Europe would have become a series of
Democratic People’s Republics under the central direction of the Kremlin.
As part of Europe, Britain
was obliged to take up a position towards all these unification attempts. We decided to oppose them as being against the
interests of Europe as a whole and the wishes of its people. [As the majority of people
are today 21st July 2004]
And
we have been vindicated by events.