Will the EU Survive the Next Decade?
Brexit Britain sparked a wave of nationalist-populist uprising across Europe and their right-leaning, euro-skeptic leaders won't pull their punches as crises pile up.
DEAR EMAIL SUBSCRIBER: THIS POST MAY UPDATE. PLEASE REFER TO THE WEBSITE VERSION FOR THE LATEST.
What to Expect from this Post:
- The Brexit Effect
As the European Union (and consecutive British Conservative governments) refuse to learn the lessons of Brexit, their citizens continue to suffer the consequences; a surge in protests since the pandemic along with the rise of right-leaning parties across the continent may foreshadow a coming ‘European Revolution’.
- The Russia/Ukraine Conflict
The European Union’s promise was to restore peace in the aftermath of World War II but that utopian, globalist vision is beginning to unravel as the powerhouse of the European project, Germany, has been paralysed by an energy crisis.
- Record Inflation
With prices steadily rising soon working-class Europeans may have to choose between heating their homes and feeding their children. In the context of continent-wide protests, are the European Central Bank’s interest rate hikes pouring gas on fire?
- The Farmers Revolt
First in France and then in the Netherlands, European farmers have had enough of their World Economic Forum linked leaders imposing arbitrary climate policy that increases costs at a time when talk of food shortages is mainstream. Could something more sinister be at play?
- The Covid Vaccine Scandal
The President of the European Union, Ursula von der Leyen, has been under fire following her refusal to disclose personal texts with Pfizer’s CEO. What has she got to hide?
The Brexit Effect
United Kingdom
It’s been six years since the Leave campaign led by Nigel Farage, Dominic Cummings, Michael Gove and Boris Johnson won the 2016 Brexit Referendum.
But since then, the United Kingdom has been anything but united. The country has had five Conservative leaders in almost as many years and every single one of them has failed to deliver on their Brexit mandate.
David Cameron, resigned as Prime Minister after supporting the Remain campaign in 2016 because he felt that the country should be led by a Brexiteer. It was a cop-out from the guy that started the mess but Theresa May, a quiet Remainer during the campaign, replaced him after a Conservative leadership election in which Andrea Leadsom withdrew from the final two following a comment about motherhood and Michael Gove, who stabbed Boris Johnson in the back, was eliminated.
The hope of the Conservative establishment was that May would be able to bridge the divide between Brexiteers and Remainers by being someone that Remainers could support. Of course, this did not prove to be the case as May tried and failed three times to deliver a deal with the European Union that was also acceptable to the House of Commons.
The logic of May’s premiership was flawed from the beginning; it preferenced the feelings of the losers of the referendum over the democratic instruction of the victors and so when negotiations intensified, May’s refusal to walk away from table for fear of pushing Remain-voters to Labour became the EU’s greatest crutch.
Despite May’s pleas, the EU refused to compromise on any aspect of the deal pushing ahead with the mantra that “nothing was agreed and until everything was agreed” as a way of remaining at a stalemate, which had the effect of stiffening Brexiteer support for a ‘no-deal, hard Brexit’ as it was felt that the EU was not acting in good faith.
Every attempt to ratify a deal agreed with the EU was voted down by the House of Commons, much to May’s frustration after humiliating negotiations—two of the defeats were the largest and fourth largest defeats any British government has ever suffered.
And, in fact, it got really spicy when the third deal was initially tossed out by the Speaker of the House, John Bercow, for not being “substantially different” to the last according to an “arcane” ruling from 1604.
At the time, the so-called 1604 ruling was seen as a victory by Brexiteers, who were by no means fans of Bercow, but celebrated him because the ruling forced Theresa May to concede to them on certain issues while also pointing to the fact that the European Union (and it’s acolytes within the UK) had a history of trying to re-run referendums until the ‘correct’ result came in (see Ireland, Norway).
To make matters worse, in the middle of all of this, a group of MPs (Members of Parliament) from Labour and the Conservatives decided to break away from their legacy parties to form, Change UK, whose slogan was “politics is broken.”
The group failed to gain any significant support and with hindsight, Chuka Umunna’s career trajectory exemplifies why most people no longer trust politicians.
Umunna started life as a Labour MP in 2010 but quit to start Change UK in 2019 when Labour pivoted to a pro-Brexit stance. Infighting and poor messaging led him to quit Change UK “at the first hurdle” for the Liberal Democrats with whom he lost his seat in the 2019 election and joinied JP Morgan bank as their head of ESG.
Chuka Umunna follows in the footsteps of Sir Nick Clegg and so many others politicians across the globe who have used their government jobs as a way to network with corporations, influence peddling for their own self-interest and not for their constituents.
The problem for Theresa May was that, on the one hand, MPs were voting against her deals because they were anti-Brexit (despite “the will of the people”) and on the other, because they felt that it was a ‘bad deal’ and wanted to hold her to her word that “no deal was better than a bad deal.”
It was actually Nigel Farage who coined the term ‘BRINO’ (Brexit in Name Only)—not to be confused with ‘RINO’ as in Republican in Name Only—when talking about May’s deals and after three failed attempts to ram them through Parliament and a failed attempt to oust the UK’s second female PM, it took Farage starting the Brexit Party, and winning the final European Parliament election that the UK would participate in, to finally end Theresa May’s premiership in 2019.
The end of May brought the beginning of Boris, that is, after he beat Jeremy Hunt, a Remainer (and now Chancellor of the Exchequer), in another Conservative leadership election.
Having won that, Boris re-opened Brexit negotiations with the EU and then suspended Parliament in what many saw as an attempt to ratify his Brexit deal without proper scrutiny by the Commons—an act that the Supreme court later ruled unconstitutional.
Boris’ Brexit deal essentially allowed the EU to annex Northern Ireland, one of a number of reason why many Brexiteers had rejected similar proposals under Theresa May but they decided that if they did not accept Boris’ revised deal then Brexit would never get done. Yet, when the deal was brought to the Commons it failed so Boris called a ‘snap general election’.
In response, Nigel Farage decided not to run his Brexit Party candidates against Conservative MPs with the understanding that the Conservatives would ‘Get Brexit Done’ and it was likely his decison to endorse Boris that ultimately secured the Conservative party it’s largest majority government since 1987 and Nigel Farage’s place in history as Brexit Britain’s kingmaker.
On 31st January 2020, the United Kingdom finally withdrew from the EU, entering into a ‘transition period’ that culminated in the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement. But since then, Boris’ has not only disappointed his supporters. He has enraged and embarrassed them.
What’s troubling is that leader after leader of the Conservative party has failed to recognise that Brexit changed the game. Brits no longer see themselves as right or left but Brexiteer (nationalist) and Remainer (globalist).
The only reason that the Conservatives are even in government is because they were the only party publicly supporting Brexit and with Farage’s endorsement, they were able to suck up all of the Leave-voters, many of whom were voting Conservative for the first time in 2019 after a lifetime supporting Labour, who they felt had abandoned them.
These voters put their reputations on the line for what they saw as an act of patriotism. Boris was supposed to be Brexit’s great white hope. He was to Brexiteers what Barrack Obama was to African-Americans. The quintessential, charismatic, albeit rough around the edges, Brit who went all out in sporting contests against children and banged his drum loudly for the nation but when push came to shove, just like Obama, Boris let his supporters down and they’ll never forgive him for that.
The promise of Brexit was for Britain to take back control of it’s sovereignty and then level up the country. But for all the talk of building a ‘Northern Powerhouse’, stopping illegal immigration, and cutting VAT; Brexiteers received net-zero pledges, capitulations in Brexit negotiations, the subsequent resignation of David Frost, lead Brexit Negotiator, the loss of their freedoms and growth of the state during the pandemic and then the so-called Party-gate scandal.
In the end Boris was all bluster and no bite. And that, unfortunately, leads us to the humiliating premiership of Liz Truss, Boris’ Minister of Trade, who had been building good faith with Brexiteers over the course of his premiership. She beat Rishi Sunak, Boris’ Chancellor of the Exchequer (and the latest to stab him in the back), in the Conservative leadership election that followed his resignation but she never really looked comfortable.
Despite her lack of personality, Truss was able to secure the top job because she promised to get tough with the EU in negotiations and deliver Brexit. She named a pro-Brexit cabinet, including the likes of Jacob Rees-Mogg, her Tory leadership competitors, Suella Braverman and Kemi Badenoch and delivered the country’s first black Chancellor in Kwasi Kwarteng, who was also the government’s first casualty.
The mini-budget fiasco was just the first of a number of U-turns that turned the Truss government into the laughing stock of the world. Day after day the media slammed her policies and instead of standing tall, she crumbled. She sacked Kwarteng after 2 weeks in the job and replaced him with Jeremy Hunt, who neither supported her campaign or her policies.
She then allowed Braverman, the Home Secretary pushing to leave the European Court of Human Rights in order to regain control of immigration policy to fall on her sword over WhatsApp messages that technically broke a security law. Braverman’s supporters, including Nigel Farage, claimed that her swift departure was a direct result of Jeremy Hunt’s unexpected arrival and a signal that Truss had lost all credibility with Brexiteers.
After a 44-day reign, in which she allegedly oversaw the attack on the Nord Stream 2 pipeline that delivered gas from Russia to Germany, Liz Truss will never again be able to eat a simple salad without cringing at the crunch of a lettuce leaf.
Following her resignation, Rishi Sunak won the subsequent leadership election, which unlike those prior was voted on by the parliamentary party alone leading to speculation that the party was acting in contempt of it’s own paying members.
These suspicions built on allegations that both Truss and Sunak were supporters of the World Economic Forum’s ‘Great Reset’ agenda, which was first described as a conspiracy theory during the pandemic though is now widely recognised as a genuine attempt by global elites to influence world politics.
Truss tried to distance herself from the WEF by suggesting that every major politician automatically received a page on the WEF’s website but Rishi Sunak’s links were much more difficult to dispel. His father-in-law is CEO and Chairman of Infosys; a WEF-sponsored technology company leading the charge to promote Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs).
It’s no coincidence then, that as Boris’ Chancellor, Sunak was keen for the UK to launch a CBDC while also advocating for the UK to be a world leader in cryptocurrencies. The former-Chancellor’s position doesn’t make a lot of sense when considering that the two digital money systems are antithetical—one being completely centralised and the other aspiring to be as decentralised as possible.
But regardless of things making sense, Brexiteers never wanted Rishi Sunak to be their Prime Minister, the wider public, who are attacking him from every angle, never voted for him in a general election, and the truth of the matter is that the only groups really cheering for the first British PM of Indian descent are the globalists in the EU, Remainers in the UK and bizarrely, race-baiters in the US.
No surprise then that rumours are already circulating that Rishi’s about to be ousted.
European Union
Throughout the protracted Brexit negotiations, the European Union has insisted that all 26 members of the block were in agreement that compromise with the UK was not an option. This helped their Brexit negotiators to forward the argument that they represented a “united front” that would not be broken.
It was never in the interest of the EU to offer the UK a ‘good deal’. A successful Britain off the coast of the continent posed an existential threat to the block. Why, for instance, should Poland accept rules imposed on them by unelected European politicians, when like the UK, they could be self-determinate and economically successful outside of the EU?
From this perspective, it makes sense why the most ardent Brexiteers were in favour of a ‘hard, no-deal Brexit’ from the outset; where ‘no deal’ simply meant defaulting to the World Trade Organisation rules, in other words, a deal.
Terms such as ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ were inventions of the EU negotiator, Michel Barnier, to confuse and divide the British public and re-enflame ‘Leave vs Remain’ tensions, which worked fantastically well thanks to europhiles within the British government (though others might call them traitors).
However, a number of elections across the continent have reshaped the political landscape of the block and resulted in a sharp shift to the right; so that today, it’s a right-wing coalition within the EU posing the existential threat.
Nationalism and euro-skepticism have been on the rise since Hungary’s Viktor Orban and Italy’s first female Prime Minister, Giogia Meloni came to power while supporters of globalism and further EU homogenisation, such as Emanuel Macron and Angela Merkel—who sniped at the UK at every opportunity during Brexit negotiations in what the Spectator described as “tantrum diplomacy”—now cut lowly figures.
Merkel, the former-champion of the EU’s open border policy, was forced to cut immigration to save her government 2 years after Brexit, the chief concern of which was mass immigration and the effect it could pose to culture, jobs, wages, housing and healthcare, but it was too late for the once-revered politician to reverse the tide and she lost the next election.
Macron, for his arrogance and federalist-tendencies, lost swathes of his previous supporters to Marine Le Pen, the supposed ‘French Trump’ who secured 41.2% of the vote in 2022, which is almost 250% higher than her father’s 2002 runoff. Indeed, analysis of the presidential runoff shows that 49% of 25-34 year olds voted for Le Pen compared to just over 41% of the general population and 29% of voters over 70, which goes against the conventional wisdom that Gen-Z are woke liberals and spells trouble for the europhiles in the elections to come.
From 2016 through 2022, the EU has been in the driving seat of Brexit negotiations, inflicting defeat after defeat on Prime Minister after Prime Minister but with a number of crises piling up in the Eurozone, the last thing that the bureaucrats in Brussels want is another Brexit battle.
Thankfully for them, Rishi Sunak has neither the appetite nor the desire to put a divided Europe to the sword.
The Russia/Ukraine Conflict
Someone who is willing to challenge the EU and the rest of the West for that matter, is Russian President, Vladimir Putin.
In February 2022 just as the world was re-opening from the devastating lockdowns of the pandemic years, the true cost of which has yet to determined, Putin decided to re-commence his conflict with Ukraine sending shockwaves across the globe.
The conflict was not the deranged action of a dictator on the brink of death as Western media would have us believe, but instead the work of meticulous and careful planning over the last decade following the annexation of Crimea in 2014 under Barrack Obama’s presidential tenure.
In 2015, Putin surprised the world when he agreed to join the Paris Climate Accords (PCA) while, Donald Trump reneged on Obama’s previous commitment. To many, Putin’s pledge was seen as victory for the West but not to Trump, who claimed that the PCA only served to strengthen their enemies. It took New York Times until 2020 to realise that “Russia [hoped] to seize on the warming temperatures and longer growing seasons brought by climate change to refashion itself as one of the planet’s largest producers of food.”
Meanwhile, the WEF-backed, Greta Thunberg rose to prominence and bullied governments across Europe into adopting net-zero and green energy policies under a plan called the Green New Deal. Germany, the engine of the European Union, was all to happy to comply with Greta’s demands, closing fossil fuelled power-stations and nuclear plants in favour of inefficient renewable energy sources that have proven unsustainable for the civilisation that it has.
At a NATO Summit back in 2018, Trump warned NATO Secretary-General, Jens Stoltenberg that “Germany [was] totally controlled by Russia” because they were reliant on Russian oil and gas via the Nord Stream 2 pipeline (the same one that Liz Truss allegedly attacked).
The comment came after the 45th President of the US publicly vented his frustration that Germany was not only failing to fulfil a pledge to commit 2% of GDP to national defence but that they had also been delinquent on payments to the US for a number of years.
In hindsight, Putin’s war in Ukraine proves that Trump’s warning to Germany was prescient. The EU’s over-reliance on cheap manufacturing from China combined with supply-chain issues caused by the pandemic have taken their toll on Eurozone economies, now talk of food shortages and rolling black-outs have been broadcast to the continent.
Once a shining light within the EU, this winter Germany may lead the 26-member block into a collapse rivalling the fall of the USSR at the end of the Cold War.
The Farmers Revolt
In early 2022, Canadian truckers blocked motorways and created continuous noise pollution in an effort to stop their progressive, China-admiring, black-face wearing, WEF-linked Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, from implementing extreme coronavirus precautions like vaccination-based segregation.
Trudeau, in true dictator style, invoked emergency powers, that had not been used since their inception in 1988, to authorise his government to take whatever steps necessary to quell the trucker protest that started in Ottawa.
The Emergencies Act gave Canadian authorities the power to tow vehicles, block new protesters from entering the site, issue fines or jail time to protesters and, controversially, to freeze their bank accounts without a court order.
Even GoFundMe got caught up in the censorship of the protest when they seized $8 million from an account set up to support the truckers. However, the crowd-funding platform immediately backtracked following comments from Florida’s Governor, Ron DeSantis, who suggested that he would be investigating them for fraud if they continued.
An investigation was launched in Ottawa in October 2022 to explore whether Trudeau was justified in using emergency powers against the protestors but his greatest defence, which was the alleged threat of the coronavirus spreading through the gathering of unvaccinated people, was recently crushed by a Pfizer executive questioned by the European Parliament, who said that the vaccine had never been tested for its ability to prevent transmission.
The Canadian truckers may have taken inspiration from French farmers in 2019, who like Irish farmers in Dublin, drove convoys of tractors into Paris infuriated by government-imposed climate policies that they said threatened their livelihoods.
The farmers claimed that “agri-bashing” was being used to scapegoat them and according to Jean-Yves Bricourt, leader of FNSEA, they were being “treated like criminals.”
This is strangely reminiscent of the Russian Revolution of 1923 almost 100 years ago, when the peasant farmers, described by Vladimir Lenin as “bloodsuckers, vampires, plunderers of the people and profiteers” were the first victims of land redistribution.
In June 2022, the Netherlands announced their target to halve emissions of greenhouse gases by 2030, which is expected to include a provision that farmers reduce their livestock numbers by 30% despite talk of food shortages in Europe.
Dutch farmers took to blockading motorways with their tractors to protest the climate policies in July 2022 but the protest descended into chaos when police opened fire on a 16-year-old, who they claimed attempted to ram into them.
Wytse Sonnema, head of public affairs at the Netherlands Agricultural and Horticultural Organization responded to the policy announcement by calling it “a land grab from the government.”
Trienke Elshof, a dairy farmer with 250 cows concurred when she said that “it feels like [the government] want to get rid of all the farmers in the Netherlands” and argued that other high-pollutant industries, like aviation, are yet to face such severe environmental rules.
The Netherlands has one of Europe’s largest livestock industries and it’s also the EU’s biggest meat exporter while France is the largest agricultural producer in the EU and also the chief beneficiary of subsidies under the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy—so why are their farmers coming under attack?
Farming groups have criticised Emmanuel Macron over EU trade deals with Canada and South American countries, which they say will usher in imports of cheaper agricultural goods produced to lower standards making the EU less self-sustainable and increasing the risk of food shortages.
Meanwhile in the Netherlands, a conspiracy theory that originates from 2017, claims that investors are pushing for a European super-city known as the Tristate-City. It’s suggest that the hypothetical city would span across much of the Netherlands, Germany and Belgium and be inhabited by about 40 million people.
Bill Gates, the Microsoft-founder-turned-philanthropist, has been under similar fire for buying up farmland in the US during the pandemic and promoting the idea that our civilisation should eat less meat.
Cascade Investment, a firm that Gates controls, has been making these farmland purchases for him; it’s also a shareholder in Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods leading many to speculate that Gates is pushing a WEF initiative to reduce global meat consumption in an alleged bid to reduce carbon emissions.
These protests lead one to question whether farmers are being unfairly targeted by global elites, within the EU and around the world, using climate change as a guise to push for radical reform and exploitation. Others would suggest that they are simply the complaints of greedy farmers who are upset with climate activists for eating their profits.
What do you think? Have your say in the Pissant Press subscriber chat.
Record Inflation
Over the course of the pandemic, central banks across the world decided to turn to quantitative easing just as they did during the 2008 financial crash as a means to bolster the global economy.
The European Central Bank printed €1.35 trillion in 2020 to combat what Christine Lagarde, ECB President, feared was “an unprecedented contraction” in the Eurozone.
The scale of the money printing is difficult to imagine. In January 2020, the total circulation of US dollars was about $4 trillion but by January 2022 that number had increased to over $20 trillion meaning that 80% of all US dollars in existence were printed during the pandemic!
The effect of quantitate easing at that scale, according to the former governor of the Bank of England, Mervyn King, who oversaw the financial crisis of 2008, was obviously going to be inflation.
He went on to say that central banks across the world were pursing “mistaken ideas” and even pointed towards possible collusion when he noted that it was “interesting” that all central banks fell for the same mistake.
In 2022, the Federal Reserve has been leading central banks into higher interest rate hikes, with its fourth consecutive 0.75% interest in November continuing with the Fed’s most aggressive pace of monetary policy tightening since the 1980s when inflation last ran this high.
The ECB, which saw the Euro fall to less than $1 dollar, has been reticent to follow the Fed’s monetary policy with Lagarde stating that the ECB “could not simply mimic the Fed” and Fabio Panetta, an ECB board member, added that raising interest rates too fast “could excessively hurt economic growth, home prices and financial markets.”
Mervyn King suggested that the real test for central banks policies “will be…towards the end of next year [when we see] how far inflation has come down.”
For once ordinary, working people won’t have to wait though. Eurozone inflation is already over 10%. not to mention energy bills are at record levels. If the Federal Reserve is fixing to foment civl unrest, the ECB is not in a position to follow.
The Covid Vaccine Scandal
For all the talk of unity within the European Union, when the coronavirus hit the continent in 2020 the world saw that it was all just talk.
Members of the block, including France and Germany introduced medical export bans and closed their borders despite the EU Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen’s explicit instruction not to.
In 2021, when vaccines began to roll out across the world, including in the UK, the EU was lagging behind so von der Leyen chose to limit the export of AstraZeneca vaccines. This had the unintended consequence of creating a hard border between Ireland and Northern Ireland, something the EU had been at pains to prevent during Brexit negotiations and this was quickly reversed after severe rebukes.
The EU eventually secured up to 1.8 billion doses for their 450 million inhabitants but questions were raised as to how after von der Leyen revealed to New York Times journalists in April 2021 that she had exchange texts with Pfizer CEO, Albert Bourla, who later refused to testify in front of the EU Parliament.
When journalists made a Freedom of Information Request to see the texts they were told that they did not exist.
The EU Ombudsman later disclosed that investigators had never explicitly asked von der Leyen’s team to look for the texts as they did not consider them ‘documents’ that merited preservation. In their report they declared this “maladministration.”
Later, the European Court of Auditors published a report accusing the Commission of refusing to disclose any details of von der Leyen's personal role in the talks. Croatian MEP, Mislav Kolakusic went so far as to accuse the Commission President of the “biggest corruption scandal in the history of mankind.”
His statement followed comments by a Pfizer executive who was questioned by the European Parliament and admitted that their vaccine had never been tested for its ability to prevent transmission.
If all of this is true then it’s no wonder that the FDA, who approved Pfizer’s covid vaccine for Emergency Use Authorisation, were trying to hide the data for 75 years.
It remains to be seen what Ursula von der Leyen knew about the effectiveness of the vaccine but one thing is for certain, she’s in the deep end.
Join the Pissant Press chat or leave a comment below.