Yes I am of course refering to Winston Leonard (Spencer) Chrurchill (though he is by no means the only ginsoaked cagarr smoking Brit that ever lived).
In the light of the Uk referendum on the European Union I thought I would remaind any Brits who are thinking to vote to leave the union of the words of the man who is commonly cosndiered the greatest British Prime Minister thus with no further ado from Churchill's Speech on BBC radio, the 15th of November 1934:
"There are those who say: Let us ignore the Continent of Europe. Let us leave it with its hatreds and
armaments to stew in its own juice, to fight out its own quarrels. Let us turn our backs upon this alarming
scene. Let us fix our gaze across the ocean and lead our own life in the midst of our peace-loving dominions
and empire. There is much to be said for this plan if only we could unfasten the British islands from their
rock foundations and could tow them 3,000 miles across the Atlantic Ocean and anchor them safely upon the
smiling coasts of Canada. I have not heard of any way in which this could be done. No engineer has come
forward with any scheme; even our best scientists are dumb. It would certainly in any case take a long time.
Have we got a long time? At present we lie within a few minutes’ striking distance of the French, Dutch and
Belgian coasts, and within a few hours of the great aerodromes of Central Europe. We are even within
cannon shot of the Continent. Is it prudent? Is it possible, however we might desire it, to turn our backs
upon Europe and ignore whatever may happen there. Everyone can judge this question for himself. And
everyone ought to make up his mind, or her mind, about it, without delay. It lies at the heart of our problem."
Churchill knew full well that the UK could not stand aside from the issues of Europe and that the only way to ensure that Europe did what he belived they ought to do were to get involved in european politics directly. Had Churchill been in charge at the onset of the german expansion before WW2 we might not have seen a war at all. He may have dealt with Hitler before he got a chance to gain momentum, the generals and soldiers who were so willing to follow Hitler to war in 1939 may have been much less inclined to do so in 1936. But Chamberlain thought that the affairs of europe did not matter to the British. Once again right wing extremism is rising in europe, granted it is much inclined to tear the Union apart rather than infectign it, but should these elements not be contained one may well give rise to another Hitler. If nothing else the warmingering of the Kreml may well result in war on the european continent again. If Britain stands aside then it loses all it's ability to affect the outcome of these events, granted there are others to fight the good fight, but can you rely on that others will fight this battle before it reaches you shores. If you let these forces in europe sow the wind do you not risk to reap te whirlwind?
Churchill was also one of the first to suggest the formation of a United States of Europe:
"I wish to speak about the tragedy of Europe, this noble continent, the home of all the great parent races of the Western world, the foundation of Christian faith and ethics, the origin of most of the culture, arts, philosophy and science both of ancient and modern times. If Europe were once united in the sharing of its common inheritance there would be no limit to the happiness, prosperity and glory which its 300 million or 400 million people would enjoy. Yet it is from Europe that has sprung that series of frightful nationalistic quarrels, originated by the Teutonic nations in their rise to power, which we have seen in this 20th century and in our own lifetime wreck the peace and mar the prospects of all mankind.
What is this plight to which Europe has been reduced? Some of the smaller states have indeed made a good recovery, but over wide areas are a vast, quivering mass of tormented, hungry, careworn and bewildered human beings, who wait in the ruins of their cities and homes and scan the dark horizons for the approach of some new form of tyranny or terror. Among the victors there is a Babel of voices, among the vanquished the sullen silence of despair. That is all that Europeans, grouped in so many ancient states and nations, and that is all that the Germanic races have got by tearing each other to pieces and spreading havoc far and wide. Indeed, but for the fact that the great republic across the Atlantic realised that the ruin or enslavement of Europe would involve her own fate as well, and stretched out hands of succour and guidance, the Dark Ages would have returned in all their cruelty and squalor. They may still return.
Yet all the while there is a remedy which, if it were generally and spontaneously adopted by the great majority of people in many lands, would as by a miracle transform the whole scene and would in a few years make all Europe, or the greater part of it, as free and happy as Switzerland is today. What is this sovereign remedy? It is to recreate the European fabric, or as much of it as we can, and to provide it with a structure under which it can dwell in peace, safety and freedom. We must build a kind of United States of Europe. In this way only will hundreds of millions of toilers be able to regain the simple joys and hopes which make life worth living. The process is simple. All that is needed is the resolve of hundreds of millions of men and women to do right instead of wrong and to gain as their reward blessing instead of cursing.
Much work has been done upon this task by the exertions of the Pan-European Union, which owes so much to the famous French patriot and statesman Aristide Briand. There is also that immense body which was brought into being amidst high hopes after the First World War - the League of Nations. The League did not fail because of its principles or conceptions. It failed because those principles were deserted by those states which brought it into being, because the governments of those states feared to face the facts and act while time remained. This disaster must not be repeated. There is, therefore, much knowledge and material with which to build and also bitter, dearly bought experience to spur.
There is no reason why a regional organisation of Europe should in any way conflict with the world organisation of the United Nations. On the contrary, I believe that the larger synthesis can only survive if it is founded upon broad natural groupings. There is already a natural grouping in the Western Hemisphere. We British have our own Commonwealth of Nations. These do not weaken, on the contrary they strengthen, the world organisation. They are in fact its main support. And why should there not be a European group which could give a sense of enlarged patriotism and common citizenship to the distracted peoples of this mighty continent? And why should it not take its rightful place with other great groupings and help to shape the honourable destiny of man? In order that this may be accomplished there must be an act of faith in which the millions of families speaking many languages must consciously take part.
We all know that the two World Wars through which we have passed arose out of the vain passion of Germany to play a dominating part in the world. In this last struggle crimes and massacres have been committed for which there is no parallel since the Mongol invasion of the 13th century, no equal at any time in human history. The guilty must be punished. Germany must be deprived of the power to rearm and make another aggressive war. But when all this has been done, as it will be done, as it is being done, there must be an end to retribution. There must be what Mr Gladstone many years ago called a “blessed act of oblivion”. We must all turn our backs upon the horrors of the past and look to the future. We cannot afford to drag forward across the years to come hatreds and revenges which have sprung from the injuries of the past. If Europe is to be saved from infinite misery, and indeed from final doom, there must be this act of faith in the European family, this act of oblivion against all crimes and follies of the past. Can the peoples of Europe rise to the heights of the soul and of the instinct and spirit of man? If they could, the wrongs and injuries which have been inflicted would have been washed away on all sides by the miseries which have been endured. Is there any need for further floods of agony? Is the only lesson of history to be that mankind is unteachable? Let there be justice, mercy and freedom. The peoples have only to will it and all will achieve their heart's desire.
I am now going to say something that will astonish you. The first step in the re-creation of the European family must be a partnership between France and Germany. In this way only can France recover the moral and cultural leadership of Europe. There can be no revival of Europe without a spiritually great France and a spiritually great Germany. The structure of the United States of Europe will be such as to make the material strength of a single State less important. Small nations will count as much as large ones and gain their honour by a contribution to the common cause. The ancient States and principalities of Germany, freely joined for mutual convenience in a federal system, might take their individual places among the United States of Europe.
But I must give you warning, time may be short. At present there is a breathing space. The cannons have ceased firing. The fighting has stopped. But the dangers have not stopped. If we are to form a United States of Europe, or whatever name it may take, we must begin now. In these present days we dwell strangely and precariously under the shield, and I even say protection, of the atomic bomb. The atomic bomb is still only in the hands of a nation which, we know, will never use it except in the cause of right and freedom, but it may well be that in a few years this awful agency of destruction will be widespread and that the catastrophe following from its use by several warring nations will not only bring to an end all that we call civilisation but may possibly disintegrate the globe itself.
I now sum up the propositions which are before you. Our constant aim must be to build and fortify the United Nations Organisation. Under and within that world concept we must re-create the European family in a regional structure called, it may be, the United States of Europe, and the first practical step will be to form a Council of Europe. If at first all the States of Europe are not willing or able to join a union we must nevertheless proceed to assemble and combine those who will and who can. The salvation of the common people of every race and every land from war and servitude must be established on solid foundations, and must be created by the readiness of all men and women to die rather than to submit to tyranny. In this urgent work France and Germany must take the lead together. Great Britain, the British Commonwealth of Nations, mighty America - and, I trust, Soviet Russia, for then indeed all would be well - must be the friends and sponsors of the new Europe and must champion its right to live. Therefore I say to you “Let Europe arise!”"
While I do not nessecerily agree with everything Churchill says in this speech especially as it relates to Germany, he raises some intresting points, some which I on reading the speech am surpised at, in mentioning the german Princedoms it seems that churchill does in fact suggest that subnational institutions be allowed to interact directly with europe, something that that I have myself been thinking a lot about lately. It makes little sense that people in the regions of europe should have to go through their national capitals to interact with europe, especially when they may not see eye to eye with said capitals, Scotland and Catalonia would for an example be perfect examples of regions that would perhaps be intrested in their own representation in the union. But that is a discusison for another day.
The point I wish to raise today is that even Churchill knew that unity on the european continent was the only wau to avoid repeating the endless cycle of bloodshed that has been europe's history since the fall of the western roman empire.
Let us not forget that this is the man, one of the few who foresaw the world wars. When everyone else thought that the Napoleon wars were the last conflcit between cicilised nations that would happen he dimissed that notion. When others said that the first world war was the war to end all wars (Quite how they figured that is beyond me) he once again told them that it would not be the case. And now when his voice reach us through th ages to warn us that if there is not a united states of Europe then the cycle of bloodshed will continue, shall we again dismiss his warnings? I think not.
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar