While reading the various accounts on the 200th anniversary of Lord Nelson's brilliant victory of the French/Spanish armada at Trifalgar, I kept on reading about the wacky things that the event organizers ——— mostly European at that ——— took in order to keep from "offending" others. For one thing, the organizers presented the whole event as a gathering of like minded navies coming together to demonstrate how they can work together rather than a celebration Nelson whipping the French navy in 1805. Yet another demonstration of how silly the EU group-thinkers can be is that during the re-enactment of the battle the various ships were dubbed "blue" and "red" rather than being France and the UK. While Lord Nelson's legacy might have been hindered by the Euro- winnies and their pc love fest, he still has a great admiration of various historians, people and journalists throughout the world who realize what the victory at Trafalgar brought about. Amongst the various individuals to express his admiration for Lord Nelson is Michael Young, opinion editor of Lebanon's Daily Star, who has a penned a great column over at Reason.com. Just take a look:
To this and other affirmations of goodwill, Anna Tribe, Nelson's 75-year-old great, great, great-granddaughter, replied poppycock!: "I am sure the French and Spanish are adult enough to appreciate we did win that battle. I am anti political correctness——very much against it. It makes fools of us."One day the Europeans will eventually learn the error of their ways and disregard all of this pc nonsense before its too late.
One can applaud Tribe's refreshing bluntness, but with Nelsonian precision she demolished something else: the latest manifestation of the increasing righteousness pervading common European projects in recent years. Indeed, where there is excessive solicitude, there is also moral smugness. Since the Maastricht Treaty in particular, and leading into the most recent round of debate over the European constitution, those opposed to greater EU integration have been regarded as ethically suspect. That's partly because for a time the main source of opposition was the far-right, deploying jarring nationalist slogans, deploring EU expansion and closer ties between member states. This impression was only partially dented by the revolt of a segment of the French Socialist Party against the constitution, because prior to the referendum the critics managed to sell their desire for a more "social" Europe as a call for a more moral one.
Righteousness is a peculiarity of grand political ventures: It stems from insistence that when states and societies move towards broad common understanding, it is unbecoming to buck the trend. Sticking to the consensus, no matter what happens, becomes a byword for achieving the greater good. In this narrative, the mad metastasis of European institutions, rules, employees, and schemes has embodied the collective will. Denouncing this, or questioning it validity, has often been interpreted by Europhiles as spitting on EU harmony. Britain, where fears of an overbearing Europe remain, is still mistrusted for its heresy; Jacobin France, more enthusiastic towards centralized power, was frequently the one questioning British commitment. Hence the irony that it was the French who killed the European constitution.
No comments:
Post a Comment