There are generalists like myself, jacks-of-all-trades but masters of maybe one or two only, who methinks are suited to things like … oh … running blogs … but are not the last word in themselves on this topic or that. In my book, that’s fine – some journeyman has to collate all these things.
Then there are people who speak on a topic and you’d best listen. One of those is Edward Spalton who has long been involved with the exit the EU business and who was an authority when I first got into this. Especially on Germany, with which he had much to do in earlier days and is still at it, not unlike reader The Blocked Dwarf. And here is BD on Edward:
That was the same Ed Spalton who posts such erudite comments regarding Brexit on various Scriblerus, and other, blogs? Fascinating to be able to put a face to the nick. He’s had to correct me a couple of times and watching him demolish the more rabid Projekt Heilers is also a joy, he never resorts to ad homs, never swears, never raises his voice, just fact after fact countering and those facts explained simply and clearly for those like me who still count on their fingers. If PMT.May and DaviSS put in a fraction of the thought he has towards Brexit…
One more thing – he described himself, years ago, as a Church and Crown Tory who had now been abandoned, much as most of us feel we’ve now been abandoned – it’s apparent these days at Them’s doing. [There’ll be a subsequent post on the fragmentation of the Right.]
Therefore, on this topic today, I’m a little sheepish, by no means being an expert and hopeful of doing some justice to it.
It starts with a comment on my post at Sackerson’s on Imperialism never died:
If you care to enquire for me at
campaignforanindependentbritai n.org.uk with your email address,
I can forward you a speech by Professor Hallstein (as he then was), delivered
at a Nazi rally in early 1939 on the subject of harmonisation of legal
systems in formerly diverse territories.(together with contemporary newspaper report – all translated) – plus some very choice remarks about him by De Gaulle.
He was not a Nazi party member and not “high ranking” as some have said – because he was called up in 1942, after he had been promoted to a professorship and dean of legal faculty at Frankfurt.
I did enquire and this is the document:
Some things from that:
What sort of man was he? General De Gaulle was in no doubt. “If Dr. Hallstein is a sincere European, it is because he is first and foremost an ambitious German”. De Gaulle went on to write how Germany’s association in the European project would create an obliging constellation of states which would eventually assist in German reunification, as well as in its post war rehabilitation amongst European states. Indeed, Dr. Hallstein’s appointment was seen as an important contribution to this.
De Gaulle’s view in 1965 of this aspiration was typically forthright “As for the Commission it deserves to disappear. I want no more of Hallstein…I want no more to do with them… I want no more that the French government should have to do business with these types…The problem, it is this mafia of supranationalists, whether commissioners, deputies or bureaucrats. They are all enemies. They have been put there by our enemies”.
It’s probably best to just read that in its entirety at the end of the link. Edward has further written, connecting this to the current day:
The Third Reich was very Blairite in parts – a Big Tent in fact for
those racially qualified. The university Rector wanted to assure people that his institution was not far from the people.
Then in the Europaeische Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft section came the phrase:
“the creative power of the individual, grounded in the community”.
A “Volksgenosse” (People’s Comrade) is very congruent with the idea of a
“stakeholder”- a term which I cannot recall hearing before the Blair dispensation.
Unlike traditional Labour or communism, the Nazis did not need formally to nationalise enterprises. They could be “co-ordinated” to the Nazi requirement to serve their view of the common good. The aspiration was for a “state-led” economy, not a state-run economy.
Come to think of it, Mrs May is a bit that way inclined!
That, to me, just makes things kristallnacht even more clear.