I don't know, what you wanted to be demonstrated exactly. Can you be more specific?
Ever since the wall came down and cold war ended, US hegemony in Europe has been deployed against Russia, despite earlier promises to Gorbachev. Countries have been pushed to become Nato (and EU) members. That US foreign policy is being followed and furthered by the US vassals in the EU today, mostly led by Germany and France today.
Audio from 2016: We know what happened further on... (see second half of the following interview):
So, like any club, membership gives you certain rights but also entails certain duties, like respecting human rights and the rule of law.
EU's method is simple: Either you agree, or...
Hungary and Poland are being asked by the EU to comply to the EU sanctions against Russia (in favour of US fracking-gas, among other trade regulations, and giving up on other trading as direct neighbors of Russia), being baited by the EU's big bail-out, as Russia-neighboring "US-Cowboys"... a story that can tell a lot, and may not be easily understood, considering the state of information as delivered by 'our' media, these days. Just tell me, where'd the "global village" go, oh EU?!
So, like any club, membership gives you certain rights but also entails certain duties, like respecting human rights and the rule of law.
EU's method is simple: Either you agree, or...
Hungary and Poland are being asked by the EU to comply to the EU sanctions against Russia (in favour of US fracking-gas, among other trade regulations, and giving up on other trading as direct neighbors of Russia), being baited by the EU's big bail-out, as Russia-neighboring "US-Cowboys"... a story that can tell a lot, and may not be easily understood, considering the state of information as delivered by 'our' media, these days. Just tell me, where'd the "global village" go, oh EU?!
Sure. Thy will though doest again to thine members, as though hast done to the Greek, and so intendeth doing to the Spanish, Italians, Portuguese, and the French, if needed, and all them other 'pickpockets' alike.
The Huns are not going to allow a union of pickpockets, they think, but do they think any further? - Perhaps, they just can't.
What a great state of the E-Union. MEGA-like, really, getting ready to drown? - During times of Covid, they wouldn't even think about that, officially, as long as they keep getting entranced by that smell. The smell of a 'Great Reset'.
When history keeps unfolding it might not be more than a smell, after all...
There comes a point where negotiation becomes surrender. Those actively undermining you will always demand more than their right. Those behind the Great Reset have been creating no-win situations for voters for decades to this exact end.
Over the summer Hungary’s Viktor Orban and Poland’s Mateusz Morawiecki led the opposition to the EU’s budget and COVID-19 relief package standing firm that funds not be tied to any internal political decisions member EU states make.
Both of these countries have incurred the wrath of German Chancellor Angela Merkel over things they do she doesn’t like, invoking Article 7 against Poland over changes made to its Supreme Court, for example.
So, this is nothing new. Neither is the way the EU conducts itself in negotiations. For the past four years we’ve watched the EU put the United Kingdom through the worst kind of psychological torture over Brexit negotiations which have been anything but.
oh grief, where do I start..
Despite what you might want to believe, the EU project was all about creating the structures and open markets required for peace in Europe. It is not about German hegemony as it has massive checks and balances built into its system. It is also fundamentally based on national sovereignty using a bottom-up system, so no, the sovereignty of either Poland or Hungary has not been called into question. From Wikipedia:
Through successive enlargements, the European Union has grown from the six founding states (Belgium, France, West Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands) to the current 27. Countries accede to the union by becoming party to the founding treaties, thereby subjecting themselves to the privileges and obligations of EU membership. This entails a partial delegation of sovereignty to the institutions in return for representation within those institutions, a practice often referred to as "pooling of sovereignty".[120][121]
To become a member, a country must meet the Copenhagen criteria, defined at the 1993 meeting of the European Council in Copenhagen. These require a stable democracy that respects human rights and the rule of law; a functioning market economy; and the acceptance of the obligations of membership, including EU law. Evaluation of a country's fulfilment of the criteria is the responsibility of the European Council.[122]Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty provides the basis for a member to leave the Union. Two territories have left the Union: Greenland (an autonomous province of Denmark) withdrew in 1985;[123] the United Kingdom formally invoked Article 50 of the Consolidated Treaty on European Union in 2017, and became the only sovereign state to leave when it withdrew from the EU in 2020.
So, like any club, membership gives you certain rights but also entails certain duties, like respecting human rights and the rule of law. It doesn't mean you can stay a member of a club when you contravene its founding principles, which is what the Art. 7 proceedings were all about.
Brexit is all about national hysteria whipped up by fantasies of days of empire past. The reality is likely to be very different. Just as one example. The EU is quite within its rights to protect its borders and the biggest stumbling block in the Brexit negotiations is about the Irish / UK border. It also has a fundamental interest in avoiding a return of the Troubles. Which, incidentally, the US does too.
So the short message is: Those nationalist governments flouting the rule of law and ignoring fundamental human rights as laid down in the founding documents of the EU simply have no place in the EU. IMO they should follow the UK's example and leave.
The fact that this is precisely what a certain individual in a failed socialist state to the East is aiming for does not escape notice: the break-up of the EU and weakening the global rules-based order is part of Putin's playbook. Whether you are aware of it or not, this is precisely the line of argument you are parroting on his behalf.
There comes a point where negotiation becomes surrender. Those actively undermining you will always demand more than their right. Those behind the Great Reset have been creating no-win situations for voters for decades to this exact end.
Over the summer Hungary’s Viktor Orban and Poland’s Mateusz Morawiecki led the opposition to the EU’s budget and COVID-19 relief package standing firm that funds not be tied to any internal political decisions member EU states make.
Both of these countries have incurred the wrath of German Chancellor Angela Merkel over things they do she doesn’t like, invoking Article 7 against Poland over changes made to its Supreme Court, for example.
So, this is nothing new. Neither is the way the EU conducts itself in negotiations. For the past four years we’ve watched the EU put the United Kingdom through the worst kind of psychological torture over Brexit negotiations which have been anything but.
What the leadership of WEForum are thinking about our future (framed as the 4th Industrial Revolution), and about the one-time opportunity of the Covid-pandemic for imposing substantial change to the way humans live on a global scale(excerpts ahead from books, written by Klaus Schwab):
"The scale and breadth of the unfolding technological revolution will usher in economic, social and cultural changes of such phenomenal proportions that they are almost impossible to envisage". ...
âThis gives rise to an inequality that goes beyond the societal one described earlier. This ontological inequality will separate those who adapt from those who resistâthe material winners and losers in all senses of the words. The winners may even benefit from some form of radical human improvement generated by certain segments of the fourth industrial revolution (such as genetic engineering) from which the losers will be deprived. This risks creating class conflicts and other clashes unlike anything we have seen beforeâ. ...
âThe world lacks a consistent, positive and common narrative that outlines the opportunities and challenges of the fourth industrial revolution, a narrative that is essential if we are to empower a diverse set of individuals and communities and avoid a popular backlash against the fundamental changes under wayâ. ...
(Covid-19 is) âone of the least deadly pandemics the world has experienced over the last 2000 yearsâ ... âthe consequences of COVID-19 in terms of health and mortality will be mild compared to previous pandemics.â ...
âIt does not constitute an existential threat, or a shock that will leave its imprint on the worldâs population for decadesâ. ...
âSome leaders and decision-makers who were already at the forefront of the fight against climate change may want to take advantage of the shock inflicted by the pandemic to implement long-lasting and wider environmental changes. They will, in effect, make âgood useâ of the pandemic by not letting the crisis go to wasteâ. ...
âIt is our defining momentâ, ... âMany things will change foreverâ. âA new world will emergeâ. âThe societal upheaval unleashed by COVID-19 will last for years, and possibly generationsâ. âMany of us are pondering when things will return to normal. The short response is: neverâ. ...
âRadical changes of such consequence are coming that some pundits have referred to a âbefore coronavirusâ (BC) and âafter coronavirusâ (AC) era. We will continue to be surprised by both the rapidity and unexpected nature of these changes â as they conflate with each other, they will provoke second-, third-, fourth- and more-order consequences, cascading effects and unforeseen outcomes. In so doing, they will shape a ânew normalâ radically different from the one we will be progressively leaving behind. Many of our beliefs and assumptions about what the world could or should look like will be shattered in the processâ. ...
âIn one form or another, social- and physical-distancing measures are likely to persist after the pandemic itself subsides, justifying the decision in many companies from different industries to accelerate automation. After a while, the enduring concerns about technological unemployment will recede as societies emphasize the need to restructure the workplace in a way that minimizes close human contact. Indeed, automation technologies are particularly well suited to a world in which human beings canât get too close to each other or are willing to reduce their interactions. Our lingering and possibly lasting fear of being infected with a virus (COVID-19 or another) will thus speed the relentless march of automation, particularly in the fields most susceptible to automationâ. ...
âThe current imperative to propel, no matter what, the âcontactless economyâ and the subsequent willingness of regulators to speed it up means that there are no holds barredâ. ...
The Great Reset is immensely ambitious, spanning over 50 fields of knowledge and practice. It interconnects everything from economy recovery recommendations to âsustainable business modelsâ, from restoration of the environment to the redesign of social contracts.
The beating heart of this matrix is â what else â the Strategic Intelligence Platform, encompassing, literally, everything: âsustainable developmentâ, âglobal governanceâ, capital markets, climate change, biodiversity, human rights, gender parity, LGBTI, systemic racism, international trade and investment, the â wobbly â future of the travel and tourism industries, food, air pollution, digital identity, blockchain, 5G, robotics, artificial intelligence (AI).
In the end, only an all-in-one Plan A applies for making these systems interact seamlessly: the Great Reset â shorthand for a New World Order that has always been glowingly evoked, but never implemented.
The two main actors behind the Great Reset are Klaus Schwab, the WEFâs founder and executive chairman, and IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva. Georgieva is adamant that âthe digital economy is the big winner of this crisisâ. She believes the Great Reset must imperatively start in 2021.
The House of Windsor and the UN are prime executive co-producers. Top sponsors include BP, Mastercard and Microsoft. It goes without saying that everyone who knows how complex geopolitical and geoeconomic decisions are taken is aware that these two main actors are just reciting a script. Call the authors âthe globalist eliteâ. Or, in praise of Tom Wolfe, the Masters of the Universe.
