It’s Alive!

Posted by John Rosenthal

(With Update)

Back in June on the old Trans-Int and following the rejection of the EU "constitution" in referendums in the Netherlands and France, I warned that announcements of the "death" of the "constitution" might be premature. "I am afraid that these people will not take ‘no’ for an answer," I said at the time, referring to the European/Europeist elites.

And I added:

Despite appearances to the contrary, the "pause" in the process of ratification put on offer [by the European Council]… represents a victory for those who want to save the "constitution-treaty". If the process of ratification goes ahead now according to the original schedule, this would likely entail an avalanche of "no" votes in countries such as Denmark, Poland, the Czech Republic, and, of course, the UK where the electorate would be given the opportunity to express itself by referendum. The Europeists cannot afford this, and to postpone referendums just because they know under current circumstances they will lose them is yet further expression of their contempt for public opinion and, more fundamentally, democracy itself.

And those referendums were indeed postponed, i.e. to some indefinite future when it is hoped the conditions will be more propitious for the treaty’s chances.

The last couple of weeks has brought abundant evidence that my analysis of the Europeists’ strategy and, so to say, "state of mind" was correct.

Exhibit 1


The "coalition contract" [pdf-file; link in German] between Christian Democrats and Social Democrats that is supposed to provide the basis for their cooperation in the next German government. Section IX.1.1 of the contract, contains the following language: 

We support the European Constitutional Treaty…. Therefore, we will work to pursue the process of ratification… beyond the first half of 2006 and to give new impetus to the process under the German Presidency of the EU in the first half of 2007.

Exhibit 2:

The bizarre decision by the Italian National Bank,
as reported by, to issue a €2 coin "portraying the signing of the European constitution treaty in Rome one year ago". "On the national side of the coin," the EUobserver report continues, "the goddess Europa holds a pen and the text of the failed European constitution, with the words ‘Constituzione Europea’ written on the coin’s outer ring."

Exhibit 3

Most astoundingly of all and most indicative of the depths to which EU indoctrination can sink, the printing by the European Commission of over 100,000 copies of a textbook for school children titled "Europe, My Home" in which the "constitution" is presented as being not only still very much "alive", but indeed as virtually in force and the product of a sort of quasi-mythical past. (Click here for full text of "Europe, My Home" in French.)

An article from yesterday’s Telegraph

The teaching material, entitled Europe, My Home, features two children, Lea and Thomas, who are guided through the complexities of the EU by a character called Good Father Houpette.

"You will be astonished by what I will tell you," Father Houpette tells them. "You will see that the EU is a necessity."

Children are introduced to themes including the history of the EU, its institutions, its embassies, the common market and enlargement.

When they arrive at the chapter on the constitution, the children are pictured reading the rules and regulations of an indoor sports hall. "Not long ago the European Union was given regulations such as these," Father Houpette says. "With this new constitution everything will go like clockwork, just like in your club." 



It should be noted that the chapter on the "constitution" in " Europe, My Home" contains the following phrase: "[The Constitution] must still be accepted by each member state". This should be noted, because the Europeists will undoubtedly note it as an alibi or even to say that the critics of " Europe, My Home" have "lied!". But the inclusion of this phrase will only serve to render the youth of Europe who are subjected to such propaganda still more mystified. All the verbiage surrounding the phrase – starting with Father Houpette’s "Not long ago the European Union was given regulations such as these" – implies, on the contrary, that the "constitution" is an existing institutional reality and not merely a proposal. For instance, the same paragraph also contains this phrase: "This Constitution replaces all the preceding treaties" – not "would replace", but "replaces". The persistent use in the French edition of the literary past tense ("fut") in speaking of the "constitution" will reinforce the impression that the "advent" of the "constitution" is already "upon us". Indeed, it gives the impression that it occurred in a seemingly distant past – as all mythological pasts seem distant – even though the dates cited in the text are in fact recent.

At best, school children trying somehow to make sense of all this will conclude that the advent of the "constitution" is a fatality and that the fact that "each member state must accept it" means simply that they will. And this no doubt is also the understanding of the Europeists themselves.


(Vielen Dank an Frau B. aus Frankfurt!)

Comments are closed.