The outcome of a system is largely determined by its design aims. EU is the globalist empire’s project. EU aims serve those Masters and not either European countries or any of its peoples. The political class of Europe is captured, along with the media, state “security” apparatus, etc. Too many Europeans are brainwashed into believing that EU is fundamentally a good thing. How can something designed to screw you be good for you?
To be beneficial EU would have to be fundamentally changed. At this moment, just like other peoples of imperial vassal states, Europeans appear to be effectively in a perpetual check. In order for real changes to occur we must do things differently from what we have been doing. First step must be for a critical mass of us to unplug from the propaganda and jump start our own capacity for independent thought. Doing this other measures become possible; not doing it assures more of the same - a general slide into a dystopian totalitarian nightmare. The clock is ticking.
How a nation is, depends on the people living there.
As I've used as an example many times, swap the populations of Norway and Venezuela.
Norway populated by venezuealns would become the corrupt dump that is Venezuela today, and Venezuela populated by norwegians would become the power-house of South America inside five years.
He's not wrong, with his "a nation is a garden"-metaphor either. Weeds you must remove and uproot. Parasites, diseases et cetera must be prevented and quickly removed.
Look, I'm not naive enough to pretend that there [EDIT, thx, Rikard] aren't differences between peoples and the way they live; funnily enough, I'd also add that, from a policy perspective, I do understand why the Kyiv gov't killed a politician who was conspiring with an adversary they're currently fighting.
As to the garden vs. jungle issue, I'm in agreement here; the trick, though, as any gardener/farmer knows, is to work with nature--yes, some attention to parasites, weeds, etc. is necessary, but such interventions should be limited. To stick with the metaphor, what Mr. Borell advocates is industrial-scale industrial agriculture (incl. its totalitarian characteristics, e.g., weedkillers, monocrops, pesticides, GMOs, etc.) instead of small(er)-scale self-sufficiency. Note, in this vein, how he avoids speaking of freedom and liberty.
If these people get their way, we won't have 'biodiversity' but controlled, GMO ('trans-humanist'), and essentially soul-crushing tyranny.
"Look, I'm not naive enough to pretend that there are differences between peoples and the way they live..."
Should it read "aren't" instead?
Yes, he is probably talking about algae-tanks, rather than Malmöhus Castle's gardens or WW2-style "Victory Gardens": it is isn't so much "if" but "what" and "how" and "to what end", whether it is gardening or running a nation.
Thanks for spotting the typo and reading it as I had intended it; I've edited the above comment.
The question of running a nation--or the EU, for that matter--like a garden reminds me of Angela Merkel's stupid assertion that doing so would be akin to running a 'Swabian household'. We should have a broad debate about such things, but these people aren't interested in this.
The outcome of a system is largely determined by its design aims. EU is the globalist empire’s project. EU aims serve those Masters and not either European countries or any of its peoples. The political class of Europe is captured, along with the media, state “security” apparatus, etc. Too many Europeans are brainwashed into believing that EU is fundamentally a good thing. How can something designed to screw you be good for you?
To be beneficial EU would have to be fundamentally changed. At this moment, just like other peoples of imperial vassal states, Europeans appear to be effectively in a perpetual check. In order for real changes to occur we must do things differently from what we have been doing. First step must be for a critical mass of us to unplug from the propaganda and jump start our own capacity for independent thought. Doing this other measures become possible; not doing it assures more of the same - a general slide into a dystopian totalitarian nightmare. The clock is ticking.
How a nation is, depends on the people living there.
As I've used as an example many times, swap the populations of Norway and Venezuela.
Norway populated by venezuealns would become the corrupt dump that is Venezuela today, and Venezuela populated by norwegians would become the power-house of South America inside five years.
He's not wrong, with his "a nation is a garden"-metaphor either. Weeds you must remove and uproot. Parasites, diseases et cetera must be prevented and quickly removed.
Or you don't have a garden, just wilderness.
Look, I'm not naive enough to pretend that there [EDIT, thx, Rikard] aren't differences between peoples and the way they live; funnily enough, I'd also add that, from a policy perspective, I do understand why the Kyiv gov't killed a politician who was conspiring with an adversary they're currently fighting.
As to the garden vs. jungle issue, I'm in agreement here; the trick, though, as any gardener/farmer knows, is to work with nature--yes, some attention to parasites, weeds, etc. is necessary, but such interventions should be limited. To stick with the metaphor, what Mr. Borell advocates is industrial-scale industrial agriculture (incl. its totalitarian characteristics, e.g., weedkillers, monocrops, pesticides, GMOs, etc.) instead of small(er)-scale self-sufficiency. Note, in this vein, how he avoids speaking of freedom and liberty.
If these people get their way, we won't have 'biodiversity' but controlled, GMO ('trans-humanist'), and essentially soul-crushing tyranny.
"Look, I'm not naive enough to pretend that there are differences between peoples and the way they live..."
Should it read "aren't" instead?
Yes, he is probably talking about algae-tanks, rather than Malmöhus Castle's gardens or WW2-style "Victory Gardens": it is isn't so much "if" but "what" and "how" and "to what end", whether it is gardening or running a nation.
Thanks for spotting the typo and reading it as I had intended it; I've edited the above comment.
The question of running a nation--or the EU, for that matter--like a garden reminds me of Angela Merkel's stupid assertion that doing so would be akin to running a 'Swabian household'. We should have a broad debate about such things, but these people aren't interested in this.
Is this gentleman arguing for reinstating the Roman Empire? That would solve/create some interesting issues in current year.
It might be wishful thinking of theirs, for the Romans actually knew what they were doing--these people…