Anthony J Sargeant loves this fluid lithograph
Anthony J Sargeant loves this fluid lithograph
Anthony Sargeant has a question: Has anybody calculated the environmental cost of mining the metals and manufacturing the massive (and limited lifetime) heavy batteries that power electric vehicles?
Then add in the fact that transporting the batteries imposes an energy cost and the electricity has to be generated somewhere, somehow.
Then there are large energy losses along the length of any grid system of distribution – essentially the further you go from the generator the greater the loss.
It is just a question and I am curious to know the answer since we were told only a few years ago by the environmental lobby to buy diesel vehicles apparently on the basis of incomplete information.
Is there any such thing as a free lunch?
We are seeing the end of democracy when ‘the mob’ think they are entitled to overturn the result of a general election or a referendum. But the mob should be careful what they wish for – the alternative is government by dictators and historical examples in the last century – Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Tito, Hitler, Franco, Mussolini etc. – are not so very appealing. First the mob drives out a democratically elected government or an existing tyranny, but then a new tyrant arises who murders those who might oppose him (including members of ‘the mob’)
Well that went well !
A worthless piece of Paper from a Germany intent on creating The 3rd Reich – which would last a thousand years. In fact it lasted less than 12 years.
One wonders how long the 4th Reich (aka EU, aka European Superstate, aka Fortress Europe) will last.
[And talking of worthless pieces of paper there is the Paris Climate Change Agreement – it is easy to sign a piece of paper as a previous Chancellor of Germany discovered – but if there are no sanctions and no enforcement, and there are none in relation to the Paris agreement then it means nothing. So whether the USA signs up to it or not makes no difference]
It follows the full text transcript of Neville Chamberlain’s Peace in Our Time speech, delivered at the Heston Aerodrome near London, UK – September 30, 1938.
|There’s only two things I want to say.|
First of all, I have received an immense number of letters during all these anxious times, and so has my wife. Letters of support, and approval, and gratitude and I can’t tell you what an encouragement that has been to me. I want to thank the British people for what they have done.
Next. And next I want to say that the settlement of the Czechoslovakian problem, which has now been achieved is, in my view, only the prelude to a larger settlement in which all Europe may find peace.
This morning I had another talk with the German Chancellor, Herr Hitler, and here is the paper which bears his name upon it as well as mine. Some of you, perhaps, have already heard what it contains but I would just like to read it to you,
“We, the German Fuhrer and Chancellor, and the British Prime Minister, have had a further meeting today and are agreed in recognizing that the question of Anglo-German relations is of the first importance for the two countries and for Europe.
“We regard the agreement signed last night and the Anglo-German naval agreement as symbolic of the desire of our two peoples never to go to war with one another again.
“We are resolved that the method of consultation shall be the method adopted to deal with any other questions that may concern our two countries and we are determined to continue our efforts to remove possible sources of difference and thus to contribute to assure the peace of Europe.
[Chamberlain later appeared together with the King and Queen on the Buckingham Palace balcony. Still later, he spoke from the window of 10 Downing Street the following:]
My good friends,
This is the second time in our history that there has come back from Germany to Downing Street peace with honour. I believe it is peace for our time.
We thank you from the bottom of our hearts. And now I recommend you to go home and sleep quietly in your beds.
Comment by Anthony J Sargeant
I empathize with my Scottish friends who want Scotland to become an independent self-governing country. What I then find difficult to understand is that the SNP, who are demanding a second referendum in anticipation of securing a ‘Yes’ vote for Scottish Independence, are doing so with the express aim of then joining the EU.
There is no logic in this position because this would mean becoming independent from one Union only to become a very small province within the much larger European Superstate project. With a population roughly equivalent to Slovakia the Scots would be entitled to about 12 MEP seats in the European Parliament out of the total as set by the Lisbon Treaty of 751: That is about 1.6% of the total MEP seats.
Compare that with the nearly 10% of seats that Scotland has in the House of Commons (59 out of a total of 650 – that latter figure being made up of 533 English, 59 Scottish, 40 Welsh and 18 Northern Irish). Even that 1.6% would depend upon the EU principle of “degressive proportionality ” continuing in the future (basically giving small EU countries more seats than their population warrants on strict proportionality – and by the way don’t you just love the labyrinthine ways and terminology of the European project?).
1.6% voting rights (equivalent to Slovakia) does not sound as if Scotland would have very much influence or independence as the EU political project moves towards ever closer political, social and financial integration.
Furthermore as a new state applying to join the EU Scotland would, like all other new applicants, have to agree to join the Eurozone and adopt the Euro as currency.
Inevitably this would require a further surrender of independence and control since the Scottish economy and financial affairs, and therefore ultimately all social and political policy, will be determined by the European Central Bank based in Germany.
Now nobody would suggest that Scotland is the equivalent to Greece, but the Greek experience is a salutary one. The ECB in its attempt to preserve the Eurozone has required Greece to adopt extreme austerity measures leading to widespread poverty, emigration of its young people, and starvation in the countryside. A pattern echoed in other poor EU countries.
The European Central Bank is based in Frankfurt. At the moment its President is Mario Draghi who was previously head of the Italian Central Bank (the Italian economy being such a wonderful success story – irony) but much more to the point he was Managing Director of Goldman- Sachs International : The very bankers consulted by the EU to assess the Greek Economy when it applied to join the Eurozone and who reported back that everything was fine and to “go ahead” let Greece join the Eurozone. Goldman-Sachs were alleged to have directly conspired to hide Greek debt using so-called ‘off-market swaps’.
In this context and to urge further caution it is interesting to note that in order to join the Eurozone Greece was restricted in the amount of olive oil that it could export to the EU (because Spain and Italy wanted to preserve their preferential markets). The curious result is that Greece then sold their ‘above EU quota’ to Israel, who then resold it to Italy who then incorporated it (quite within the byzantine rules) into processed “Italian” Olive Oil.
There is no question but that on joining the EU Scotland would have to give up any rights to control its enormous and valuable resource which is its wonderful fisheries leaving them open to the depredations of Spanish super-trawlers which routinely land above quota catches in Spain without effective control and with resultant destruction of the sea bed and fish stocks in Scottish waters. The loss of independence and therefore the ability to control a sustainable fisheries policy for the benefit of Scotland would be an economic as well as an environmental disaster for Scotland.
So with a role equivalent to Slovakia in an EU parliament dominated and largely controlled by the Germany economy, and understandably geared to the benefit of Germany, Scotland would have no real independence. Scotland like the other small European “Provinces” would have little direct control over its economy (“Provinces” because the aim clearly stated by the EU is for further integration and central control – thus loss of nationhood). There might still be a Scottish ‘Parliament’ in Holyrood but that would become the equivalent of a Parish Council meeting in the village hall commenting on planning applications but with no actual power.
In conclusion I do wonder what those brave Scottish Military personnel who suffered and died to defeat German domination of Europe in two World Wars, the last in my lifetime, would make of a surrender of their precious nationhood and independence to a German dominated European Superstate – The 4th Reich by any other name.
But, if I were Teresa May I would not hesitate. I would include in the Tory Manifesto for the upcoming UK General Election an absolute commitment to hold a second referendum on Scottish independence in the lifetime of the next parliament. The Scottish people can then decide for themselves whether to become independent from the United Kingdom – and if they so decide many, including myself, would wish them well.
I just hope that they do not then seek to surrender that new found independence to a German Hegemony in a European Federated Superstate
In the early 1980s Anthony Sargeant had a lovely Hungarian girl friend, Judit, whose elderly parents during their lives in the 20th Century and living through two World Wars, had had three different nationalities because of central European border changes: and that is not to mention the German Occupation during the Second World War.
Another example: Strasbourg was German then French then German then French again (albeit now within the German dominated EU).
Going further back in history one might consider the changes, not to mention the devastation of the 30 years war.
By contrast the island of Great Britain was not part of these upheavals – and so it is difficult for the British to truly understand the psyche of Continental Europeans.
Another example: In the 19th Century the European Powers appointed a German, King Otto, to govern Greece after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire (Prince Phillip is of course a direct descendant). Curiously this ‘appointment’ was repeated in the 21st Century when the EU and European Central Bank effectively appointed an ex-Goldman Sachs Director as the Greek Prime Minister to enforce the ECB’s austerity requirements for the benefit of the Eurozone and thus the German economy.
Plus ca change …..
But one might also remark that in the 20th Century the Island status of Britain allowed it to stand alone against the overwhelming power of the German war machine. Without the English Channel separating England from Continental Europe the British would have been invaded by the Germans and would have become part of the Third Reich. The result would have been the murder of more European Jews as well as all British Jews and other ‘undesirables’. By standing alone and with great sacrifice of British civilians and military personnel (my own grandparents were killed in the London Blitz (25th May 1941) the British enabled Europe to escape the murderous regime of Germany’s Third Reich holding out against all the odds until the USA joined the war after Pearl Harbour. Perhaps some Europeans now forget the debt they owe the British which debt was incurred in my lifetime.
A crescent moon hangs over the Brown Clee Hill in Shropshire just before sunrise on the 22nd of April 2017. Is this ‘Moonset’ ?