#supranationalism

[the-funtime-autocrat]

Indeed, empire, in the true sense of the word, can exist only if it animated by a powerful spiritual impetus, by a powerful spiritual  impetus, by a faith, by something which addresses the same spiritual depth from which religion itself takes life. Without this, there can never issue anything but a creature of violence -- 'imperialism' -- and a mechanical disanimate superstructure. For this reason it is needful to capture --if we can put it that way -- the same forces which act in the faiths, without injuring these faiths, but rather integrating them and carrying them to a higher level.

Julius Evola, “On The Spiritual Premises of Empire.”

[the-funtime-autocrat]

Its premises can be clearly constated in these felicitous words of Paul de Lagarde: 'Being 'human' means less than being 'national,' and being 'national' means in turn less than being a person. In other words: as compared to the quality 'humanity,' the differentiating element of 'nation' adds the value x, and the element of 'personality' adds to this x a further increment of value y.' This very well expresses the concept of progressive differentiation, from the formless toward form, from the general toward the concrete, from the collective toward the personality. With respect to the amorphous mass of the democratico-humanitarian or Sovitico-proletariat myth, the renewal of national limits constitutes therefore a first movement forward (albeit an elementary one), in the sense however of delimiting a zone, within which a further differentiation  can be effected: that of the personalities which become themselves, elevating themselves to higher forms with respect to anything common, elementary, simply ethical, instinctive or materialistic which might associate them.

Julius Evola, “The Reconstruction of the Idea of a State.”

[istillcantthinkofatitle]

The present war for and against Hitler and Stalin and Mr. Chamberlain and so forth, does not even touch upon the essential problem of the abolition of distance. It may indeed destroy everything and still settle nothing. If one could wipe out all the issues of the present conflict, we should still be confronted with the essential riddle, which is the abolition of the boundaries of most existing sovereign states and their merger in some larger Pax. We have to do that if any supportable human life is to go on. Treaties and mutual guarantees are not enough. We have surely learnt enough about the value of treaties during the last half-century to realise that.

H.G Wells, The New World Order

[mercerspoems]

Musings on the Supranational

Supranationalism is a hot topic! One that creates discord, particularly in my mind, anyway, and I know in the minds of many others. It is the creation of international laws and treaties that go beyond the sovereignty of individual states, think of the EU, for example.  Why is it such a hotly contested subject...Well, think of the EU for example! It is easily fucked up, for one thing, and requires states going beyond their vain needs to individual sovereignty; a difficult thing to do politically when the public wish to hold on to their nationalism like it actually means something. But worse than that, it is usually the people who are setting it up that are the problem. Here is where the conflict comes in. I believe in a unified world, I believe unity is the key to global togetherness and could be a means for peace, happiness and prosperity worldwide. However, the people who usually propose supranational unions seem to merely be wishing to create a borderless superstate under one dictator, and that dictator is finance. It is never about PEOPLE it is always about MONEY. You only need look how people get duped into accepting these superstates to see what the intention is. It always, ALWAYS starts as an international trade agreement..."Oh, it's just about free markets!" you will be told, but what of free people? This is the pattern, and it is a dangerous one. As evidenced by the recent strife among Eurozone states. It creates conflict and discord in strife, rather than togetherness. It also highlights the stupidity and double standards of David Cameron...(The people call for a referendum on Europe Dave, I don't think they want to be in it any more! Shall we give them one!? "NO!" - few months later - "I HAVE VETOED THE EURO TREATY IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF BRITAIN!" - What an idiot...) But this is the problem, this creation of economic, rather than humanitarian superstates is always going to do this, because people shall always wonder "Is this in my country's economic best interests" rather than "Is this right!" People are people, no matter what country they come from and most of them aren't the ones doing stupid shit to put economies in danger. Most just want their own house, their own vehicle, something to do and a quiet life. It is economics, and the puppetmasters that control it that cause problems, not humanity. And this is why superstates are so vehemently argued against. It's been a 'conspiracy' line for years that global financiers want a one world government under the dictator of economics and, with each day that passes it is less the realms of paranoid, tin-foil hat wearing flights of fancy and more true! You only need look at how fervently the Euro is trying to be resuscitated to see how much these people want to believe in a world united under a singular, greedy, financial idea. There is also the proposed North American Union, and it's already proposed currency, the Amero. APEC, the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation is also in existence and growing, and the African Union too...These are all Supranational unions, but always under the banner of economics and not PEOPLE. What does it matter if there's a unified currency if there is a unified people? It doesn't! And this deregulation crap is nonsense! What's the point of deregulating the markets if it requires huge, expensive, unelected regulatory bodies to regulate its deregulation!? It laughs in the face of humanity and common sense and ties human hands, and gags human mouths with the flags of international finance.  Let me say this right now. It is my belief that there is nothing wrong with a unified, international superstate. I'll repeat, there is NOTHING WRONG with a UNIFIED, INTERNATIONAL SUPERSTATE! What is wrong is when that superstate falls under the jurisdiction of the World Bank and the fucking IMF and NOT the people! Who says that in an international superstate, you can't still have national identity? Not one normal person, it is the financiers who are trying to erode that and create uniformity. Who says in an international superstate you can't still have control over local affairs? Not one normal person, it is the financiers who want to hold all the power over every continent, nation, state, county, town, city and village. Who says in an international superstate the people cannot have freedom? Not one normal person, it is the financiers who want the people handcuffed by economic servitude. The problem is not the idea of international collectivism, the problem is the idea of international economics. A globe of people united puts far too much power in the hands of the people themselves, a globe of economies united leaves all that power in the hands of international private banking institutions.   I don't know all the answers, but what I do know is that in humanity we all share something in common. We are people, most of us trying to live our lives as easily and peacefully as possible. But we can't continue to do this. We can't continue to be ignorant for an easy life. You need only look at how global the Occupy protests became to see that humanity has no borders. We are all united, and it doesn't matter what country you're from, what race or religion you are, or even what you bloody like to eat for breakfast! WE ARE ALL PEOPLE. Patriotism, and nationalism are vanity driven lies taught to create discord, and all the while people are worrying about their national sovereignty, it is slowly being stripped away anyway in the name of oppressive international law and global finance. Who do you want to be in control when the world no longer has borders? The international financial and political pseudo-feudal aristocracy!? Or you, the people!?  It has long been said that the world is getting smaller...This is nonsense of course, it is around about the same size, but it's a metaphor for the globalisation of things. You can now make phone calls instantly from one end of the globe to the other, we can communicate via cameras in phones or computers with people in nations far apart from ours, we can get their news in an instant directly and instantly from unbiased, non-screened social media sources, and if needs be we can take a flight and go from one side of the planet to another in less than a day. Globalisation is not a dirty word, it is a noble concept, and it is only its corruption by corporations and finance that have made it seem wrong. A global human community is a beautiful thing, a global economic one is more worrying, if it is in control of private hands, not the people's.