How the EU Empire Should Have Been Built

To be a bit comical so late at night.

There was a French Empire of a sort in various part of Africa, Asia and America. There was no such German Empire. There was a widespread British Empire all over the world. There was no such German Empire. Had Germany won WW1, then the massive, massive territories of Britain and France would have passed to Germany, almost as though Britain and France had made a will to bequeath those overseas possessions to Germany.

Hitler et al wanted ‘lebensraum’ – ‘space for the people’. It is reasonable to say that what they really wanted was a German Empire. And, for a while, they had such an Empire by invading East and West.

We may not realise it as yet, but we have a new Empire-builder. It is the UN.

The UN is no longer a ‘talking shop’ where nations might discuss their border problems etc and come to amicable agreements. It has become an impersonal ‘thing’. That idea is very, very important. The UN is ‘a thing’. It is not human, it is ‘a thing’. The WHO is not human; it also is ‘a thing’; Tobacco Control may have been human a couple of decades ago, but when Godber said that SHS must be ‘perceived’ as dangerous, even though it was not, then TC became ‘a thing’, and we moved from ‘human’ to ‘dictatorship’.

Dictatorship denies humanity. “Public Health” is as dictatorship. The interesting thing is that there is still a place for ‘public health’ in terms of water supplies and such. There is no place for “public health” as a religion or dictatorship. The convolutions of the USA FDA (Federal Drugs Administration) which are likely to destroy the ecig industry are ‘religious’.

The EU is similar. Its existence requires faith. But where is the EU ‘Heaven’? There is no EU ‘Heaven’. It would not be so bad if there was an EU ‘Heaven’.

Advertisements

2 Responses to “How the EU Empire Should Have Been Built”

  1. garyk30 Says:

    ” there is still a place for ‘public health’ in terms of water supplies and such.”

    Would not that be more properly called ‘Public Safety”?

    That is, protection from unseeable or unknowable hazards.

    Public Health calls for smoking bans; while, Public Safety would only insisted that signage be posted as to the smoking status of a business and people would make an informed decision based on their desires.

    There can be no such thing as ‘public health’; because, every person has their own idea of how healthy they want to be or what constitutes their being healthy.

    Doctors are health CARE professionals, not mandated life style regulators.

    People should be left to make their own decisions and be given enough information to freely make choices.

    • junican Says:

      I agree absolutely, gary. We have the ‘Health and Safety Executive’ which checks workplace safety. According to its rules, SHS is far below what would be considered to be ‘harmful’ in an industrial setting. But what is working behind a bar if not ‘industrial’? All work is ‘industry’. If the level of fumes etc in a business which services and repairs cars is below H & S guideline tolerances, then how come SHS has no similar measure?

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: