THE “EU” WAS HITLER’S IDEA SHOVED DOWN THE THROATS OF EUROPEANS AS A PANACEA BY THE US AND ITS EURO-VASSALS

CENTRALIZATION IS REGRESSIVE BY DEFINITION AND CANNOT BE SUSTAINED IN THE INFORMATION ERA

So any nation that’s still clamoring to become a part of the EU might as well know that they will be buying tickets for a Jurassic Park

INTRO

The creation of the European Union has been the biggest marketing coup and the worst PR fraud ever perpetrated in the history of business and mankind. This writer hinted at that his articles in 1995 and 1998 (see below). But recent stunning revelations cast a new light on this mega-deception. The whole thing was Hitler’s idea which the US and European post-WW II bankers sold to the naive and unsuspecting people of Europe as an economic panacea. Instead of the golden noose that the EU really is.

So any nation which is a part of the EU, or aspires to become one, should know that they are walking in Hitler’s footsteps with a global bankers’ noose around its neck.

Bob Djurdjevic, Truth in Media founder

To understand all the pros and cons and consider all the facts in a subject as complex as this will require the reader of these lines to have a little patience. So let’s start with the concept of bigness and centralization – in business, in politics and in nature. And let’s try to learn from nature and apply it to business and politics. The following is an excerpt from this writer’s article published 27 years ago – in April 1995 (“Taming the Russian Bear”).

“United States of Europe?

So is there a way out of our current foreign policy quagmire in Europe? Is there also a solution to increased strife world over? Yes, there is, if you ask Prof. A.H. Heineken, of the Amsterdam-based “Stichting voor de Historische Wetenschap” (Historical Research Institute). Dusting off some old political ideas, and then polishing them up to fit the present situation, Prof. Heineken proposed a “United States of Europe.

According to his plan, Europe’s 350 million inhabitants would live in 75 independent states, each with a population of about five to 10 million.

Why the five-to-10 million limit?

“Because where the population exceeds 10 million, there is a manifest case for decentralization,” concluded the British Prof. C. Northcote Parkinson, in a 1970 report. In other words, it’s a matter of efficiency of government. “A state of 30 to 50 million is hopelessly inefficient,” Prof. Heineken concurred.

But both Heineken and Parkinson drew upon the ideas of an Austrian sociologist. Leopold Kohr expressed similar thoughts in his book, “The Breakdown of Nations,” published in 1957. That’s right – 1957, not 1975! He wrote that, “it is always bigness, and only bigness, which is the problem of existence – social, as well as physical.” Kohr concluded that the only solution must lie in cutting down of the substances and organisms which have outgrown their natural limits.”

Without realizing the foregoing, this writer also argued in a 1991 report that bigness in business has become a liability rather than an advantage. And he compared a successful modern services business enterprise to an amoeba – which splits up before becoming too big (and, therefore, inefficient).

So, why has Europe been so slow to adopt a good thing? One might speculate that it’s because Europeans are wedded to traditions, and are slow to change. After all, the region has not earned its nick-name, the “Old Continent,” for nothing, has it?

But that would be a rather shallow explanation. Prof. Heineken points out that the German or Italian states, for example, never existed before the second half of the 19th century. In other words, they are younger than even the U.S.! Furthermore, at the time of the French revolution (1789), the majority of the population did not even speak French, and was “not able to sing the ‘Marseillaise,’ the newly-minted national anthem,” argues Prof. Heineken. It was only at the end of the 19th century that the French peasants became “Frenchmen.”

In other words, the whole notion of statehood and nationality is an industrial era invention. It is not natural! And it cannot last in its present form!

Yet, the main reason that the Heineken proposal won’t work is because it runs against another law of nature – the survival of the fittest, which Charles Darwin so eloquently explained – also in the last century.

CENTRALIZATION CANNOT BE SUSTAINED IN THE INFORMATION ERA

Now, let’s change horses and consider some basic tenets of the industrial era. The industrial revolution (which began roughly in the early 19th century) changed the entire behavior of the civilized world.

Adam Smith, a noted Scottish economist, is known to have established around 1776 the management principles in the area of division of labour and specialization.

Eli Whitney in 1800 introduced the idea of interchangeability of parts which led to the standardization of parts resulting in mass production. These principles were highly utilized by Henry Ford in mass production of automobiles.

Adam Smith

John Naisbitt, in his 1981 bestseller MEGATRENDS, summarized the six principles of the industrial era.

1. Specialization:

Specialization is the division of labour where each worker is assigned to a small unit of a job in which he becomes a specialist. This gives rise to assembly line production.

2. Standardization:

With standardization, identical goods are produced in millions of units. The result is the interchangeability of parts, making specialization less complicated. This results in simplification of quality control and helps the consumer in trusting the quality of the product and being able to acquire the product anywhere and from any competitor.

3. Synchronization:

Synchronization helps in the coordination and blending of all elements at one place. This helps in assembly line fittings and sequential operations.

4. Concentration:

The concentration of people and products were associated with the industrial revolution in that people were taken from farms and other isolated places and concentrated at the location of factories. The location of auxiliary support systems to these factories gave rise to urban inhabitation resulting in cities and industrial complexes.

5. Maximization:

This characteristic of the industrial revolution has emphasized efficiency and optimum returns on investment of capital, time and human resources. This resulted in the “survival of the fittest” philosophy giving rise to mergers with and acquisition of companies resulting in huge industrial complexes.

6. Centralization:

Centralization requires that control and policy decisions be made at the top management level, while operational decisions are made in a decentralized form at the operational level.

“BIGNESS IS GOODNESS” FLAW; “SMALL IS BEAUTIFUL

From the preceding it follows that “bigness is goodness.” So everybody is trying to GROW the business and/or national economies. But, as we saw from the first article, there are limits to such growth. An enterprise can become too big for its own good. Like a whole slew of corporate dinosaurs which are now lie the dustbin of history because they did not split up in time. Because they were obsessed with bigness and centralized control. Until things got out of control.

Enter the European Union with its gigantic centralized bureaucracy. It’s the epitome of concentration of power, synchronization of laws and rules, maximization of resources (taxes), standardization of regulations, and centralization of everything that governments do.

In other words, the EU is an industrial era dinosaur.

“The aim of the EU is to eliminate national boundaries, national governments and political parties which promote nationalism. The aim is to produce a federation of separate states but a SINGLE state with a SINGLE management structure, a single foreign policy and a single tax system,” writes Daniel Beddowes in his 2014 book “How the EU is Destroying Our World.”

Take a look at the EU symbols vs. the Nazi version of it. Everything revolves around a center. In the Nazi vision the center was Strasbourg – on the border of France and Germany. In the EU version, Strasbourg is also the political center (parliament). But Brussels was chosen as the seat of business and the executive branch.

“Maybe to avoid being headquarter exclusively in the town the Nazis favored, the EU moves documents and people to Brussels once a month,” writes Beddowes.

Hitler and Funk also wanted to have a single currency for all of Europe – the Reichsmark. And that was even before the WW II.

As for centralized control, “the EU had passed about 150,000 new laws (by 2014) and it is still creating about 3,000 new laws every year,” writes Beddowes (see The EU was HITLER’S idea and it proves Germany WON the Second World War, claims new book, London Express, Apr 17, 2014).

“SMALL IS BEAUTIFUL”; FUSION OF ARTS AND SCIENCES

Now, let’s return back 28 years, when this writer published the article End of Western Dominance? – Annex Research – Nov 1994. It was an analysis of the then World Bank 25-year forecast. But it was more than that. Because it described what the future will really look like in the next three decades.

“A major flaw in World Bank’s logic is the assumption that the leading economies of the 21st century will be industrial.  They will not. The industrialists of the 21st century will be the farmers of the 20th century!  (i.e., low on the food chain).

The economies of the 21st century will be an information-driven mixture of arts and sciences.  

By the way, that’s a blend which a 16th century great (Western) mind also possessed.  If a TV reporter stuck a microphone in front of Leonardo daVinci, and asked him to separate his “art” from his “science”- he would probably have trouble doing it!  It’s the industrial era’s penchant for compartmentalizing things so as to be able to mechanize them that has driven us to differentiate between the two.  Artists lived in a world which could not be mechanized.  Until now, that is.  With the advent of information technology, the (re)fusion of arts and sciences is also inevitable.  In a way, man will be returning to nature courtesy of the silicon.”

Annex Research, Nov 1994

Now, let’s return to 1998, when this writer penned a column “A BEAR IN SHEEP’S CLOTHING”, published in the CHRONICLES, a Chicago—based, nationally distributed magazine –  http://www.truthinmedia.org/Columns/chronicles-dec98.html

In this article we identified the six methods by which the US is destroying Europe. Or more precisely, by which Washington’s Euro-vassals are selling out their own countries for the sake of large banks’ and corporate interests.

  • The first claw – European integration, first economic, then political – is clearly being pushed by the Wall Street and Washington-centered New World Order (NWO) globalists for the benefit of multinational, not national, or regional companies.
  • The same argument can be made about the second claw of the NWO’s Euro-destruction – conversion of national currencies to a “euro.” 
  • The third claw tearing into the back of Europe is the “Y2K” problem, the so-called Millennium Bug. 
  • The fourth and the fifth claws of the U.S.-inspired European self-destruction are the two “enlargements” – extending the EU membership to some Eastern European countries, and expanding NATO.

BIG & CENTRALIZED IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN THE LONG RUN

Now that we have entered the fifth decade of the “information era,” it is becoming evident that the old centralized structures don’t work anymore. They are unwieldy, cumbersome and inefficient. And therefore, not economically competitive.

So if the EU continues on its current path, it will end up the same way as the dinosaurs did. Except a lot faster. Especially now after these suicidal anti-Russia sanctions which are hurting the EU more than anybody else.

So any nation that’s still clamoring to become a part of the EU might as well know that they will be buying tickets for a Jurassic Park.

The smart ones, on the other hand, will be placing their bets on China (see THERE’S CHINA AND THERE’S THE REST OF THE WORLD).

SUMMARY: BET OH CHINA, NOT THE EU OR THE US

So let us return again back to 1994 and the prophetic words about the future:

“The ubiquitous PC and the Internet have empowered individuals and small companies to compete with giant enterprises on a level playing field.

They’ve become equalizers. Kind of like the invention of gunpowder or handguns enabled a little old lady to overpower a giant aggressor. The result is a massive transfer of wealth from industrial incumbents to information technology challengers.

But that’s economic Darwinism. It’s the stuff that made America great in the first place. Better still, it’s the stuff that will return Homo sapiens to nature.

It is perhaps ironic that the industrial giants have invented the tools of their own destruction while pursuing their main creed–greed. The growth of PCs and Internet sales will spell the demise of their creators. Also see “Move Over Einstein, Signor da Vinci Is Back”.

THE US WILL ALSO BREAK UP: 1995 FORECAST

One later, in 1995, this writer added the following warning in his Washington Times column – “When Cultures Collide…”

Between the two (China and Russia), these leading nations have more engineers, more scientists, more soldiers and more artists than the rest of the Western world put together.

In the new information-driven era, this will give them an insurmountable edge over the stagnant industrialized economies, such as Japan, Germany or the U.S, not to mention the declining ones.

If Bill Clinton isn’t getting the significance of all this, he isn’t alone. Neither did the Austrian or Russian emperors less than 100 years ago! (see  https://goo.gl/CBHXjM​)​

Not only did Bill Clinton “not get it,” neither did the other presidents who followed him (up until Trump). These traitors sacrificed the long term future of their nation’s children and grandchildren for the immediate financial gratification of their New World Order masters – the global bankers.

And now, nearly three decades later, here’s what happened.

Fourteen years later, I refer back to this forecast in a FORBES magazine column “Move Over Einstein, Signor da Vinci Is Back”. Here’s an excerpt:

The ubiquitous PC and the Internet have empowered individuals and small companies to compete with giant enterprises on a level playing field.

They’ve become equalizers. Kind of like the invention of gunpowder or handguns enabled a little old lady to overpower a giant aggressor. The result is a massive transfer of wealth from industrial incumbents to information technology challengers.

But that’s economic Darwinism. It’s the stuff that made America great in the first place. Better still, it’s the stuff that will return Homo sapiens to nature.

It is perhaps ironic that the industrial giants have invented the tools of their own destruction while pursuing their main creed–greed. The growth of PCs and Internet sales will spell the demise of their creators.

“Move Over Einstein, Signor da Vinci Is Back”.

Back in 1995, I figured the US would break up by about 2050. Now it looks like it may be happening sooner. Just like the EU.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: