Europe's Pool Members

Europe surely is multifarious and nevertheless so unable to learn.

This is obviously owed to the fact, that we face a territory of petty states, ever since equipped with just small-minded leaders of the propagated megalomania, similar in warlike habits and competing in meanness and despise of mankind and particularly even in exporting such pseudo-culture into the world by merciless subjection, exploitation and destruction.

Religions and ideologies traditionally are grafted upon humans and are causing masses of followers by adequate propaganda and disinformation stirring up the slaughtering of each other by feeble ideas of values and honors.

Last World War II has never been ended correctly under international law, there is no peace treaty, Germany, “made happy” by foreign troops, doesn't possess a legally passed constitution though the valid “Grundgesetz” can be interpreted quite well.

Ever since there is the enemy state clause of the UN Charter, and the whole post-war-order of Europe is based on the dictation of the divided victorious powers. Deliberate silence prevails on this and so there is no common awareness of the peoples' actual living on a powder keg. Germany, like the far away Japan, doesn't even have the full sovereignty under international law.

All this has to be recognized when struggling for a liberal and peaceful Europe which, as the initial European Union, of course portrays enormous but often underestimated advantages.

But now this all is tottering again considerably, not least because of power-strategic behaviors concerning new additional members to the overstretched and really unable construct for democratic voting.

Is there, at all, any European identity?

Perhaps you are a European by chance because you were born on this continent. But this doesn't mean identity. You must spend time with culture that has grown in Europe (literature, art, music, lifestyle, infrastructure and so on). Being fixed just on one country will lead automatically to nationalism with just this fixed and narrow horizon. The same is true with religion and ideology which inevitably turn into the faith of being chosen and to the delusion of being superior.

Considering such background it is clear that the imagination of a “Europe of Fatherlands” is absolutely unsatisfying because of its regards of domestic “separating” interests that are inferior in international competitions from the outset.

A “Europe of Fatherlands” is neither fish nor fowl, it bears in it, like a time bomb, the germ of nationalistic swing outs or of predominance over weaker states.

Such a deficiency may be tolerable as a transitional arrangement but only with a clear perspective to found the “United States Of Europe”.

It appears significant how such option is actually out of discussion or rather refused from the beginning.

It fits with the misery as the uprising Green Party – with their pseudo-religious neurosis of climate change – is claiming a “check of climate compatibility” before the adoption of any new law. This is describing the unity voting for an ideology which the loosing parties of the latest elections want to follow now. You may call it enforced conformity: “Green” defines the direction, in some former times it was “Brown” or “Red”.

Can this really become standard!

At the same time they are celebrating in unison scientifically and otherwise unsuspecting children on street demonstrations as “politically interested and engaged youth”, recently accompanied by unsettled elderly people.

The tragedy increases, as there seems to be opposition by nationalistic parties only against this nonsense which stands in contradiction to any serious science. But this fact serves as reason for the stupid audacity to defame critics on the climate mania as nationalistic.

Meanwhile: Nature protection is needed urgently which stands for human protection as well. It has to be performed on the basis of clean and ideology-free science and technology.

Conclusion: The “Europe of Fatherlands”, under cosmonomic aspects, is facing difficult times, because it shows, in this conflict situation, a lack of world-openness that could be applied by a united state structure only, by the sum of all its cultural resources – in a balanced partnership with mighty but not so enlightened and not always fairly acting competitors on the globe.