EU Spectacle
The word spectacle is carefully chosen, since this is what the current drama of which Greece is the symptom, not the cause, has become. It no longer bears any relationship to coherent democratic leadership or process of governance in a workable political and currency union. The cancellation at a moment’s notice of a summit of all EU leaders is extraordinary.
There is a problem with Greece, but it is not that difficult to solve. Indeed this blog working alone would be able to negotiate a workable solution. What is proving impossible is to find an acceptable solution, because the institutions normally established to process decision making at national and international levels are not there, or there in such abundance nobody can detect who is in charge. And to make matters worse the structure of the currency itself is unsustainable as it lacks a treasury and a finance minister answering to an elected government. A committee of finance ministers at loggerheads, elected by only one member state in each case, on conflicting mandates and to differing electoral timetables will work only in the good times and becomes dysfunctional under pressure.
So all we know at this moment is that Greece may or may not go bust tomorrow, the euro looks more like an impediment to growth than an engine of it, and the reputation of the EU as a coherent political union is severely damaged. Beneath that a big gap is developing between the north and the south of Europe, between the politicians and their electors everywhere and between those in the eurozone who want to stand firm to high principle even if it brings the whole thing down, led by the Germans, and by those who feel pragmatic reality demands compromise, led by France and Italy.
At the heart of of this crisis now engulfing the whole EU are three violated principles. You cannot have a democratic political union without an elected forum from which all authority flows. You cannot have a currency which cannot be printed. You cannot have capitalism which does not permit debtors to go bust. The first is violated because the whole EU is wrongly configured. The last two are rescinded because Germany says No.
I just ordered Avery postcard paper from Amazon designed for laser printers. Have you ever made your own postcards? I am taking up your suggestion about printing the HH for the postcard for the Facebook party. I also have the idea of printing postcards for vacation trips in advance. I am having such a hard time finding postcards for sale anymore this is becoming necessary.
Scholars have to go by first hand sources including interviews, memoirs, letters, official records, etc. What I don't understand is that I've read and looked through a number of first hand sources about Hitler at least in translation, and it seems to be that scholars are still putting a deliberate "spin" on what they say perhaps to coincide with popular opinion or their own prejudices. It is certainly not very scientific. Someone needs to approach it objectively and stop the "Evil Hitler" business.That said the Geli story is something that has been wildly exaggerated. Just because Hitler was prudish and insisted that his niece behave and she didn't and ended up rebelling and killing herself in his apartment doesn't mean anything. I don't think he was having incestuous relations with her. Even one of Hitler's secretaries, Christa Schroeder, likes to dwell on Geli even though she had no personal knowledge of the event and was hired after Geli. Why? She didn't like Eva Braun, that's why. Also she liked to think of Hitler as the hero in a Gothic romance. His other secretary, Tradl Junge, who did like Eva Braun, doesn't even mention Geli.
I am talking about AT&T cell phone service. We haven't had a land line in years, just about as many years as we haven't had a TV --- 2002. The reason is that Gary kept on missing business calls because they would call the land line and he was out with the cell phone. All the calls needed to be sent to the cell phone. For instance when we were away on the trip last summer Gary got a phone call in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean on his AT&T cell phone. That's a pretty extreme example but it illustrates a point. He even needs it back at the house because he is out in the car a lot.
I don't see how there could be a third time with the present set of circumstances. The only reason you had WW1 and WW2 is that Britain's power was for some reason waning. They couldn't control the rise of Germany. Gary even says they were declining because Germany was rising. But now with America around the Germans can't do anything.
Americans generally think they are Americans first. A group of American German Jews wrote to Hitler and told him they were building a house to honor him in America and to resemble his birthplace. Somehow that group of Jews agreed that Jews should leave Germany and come to America. They wanted Hitler to come too. He was totally puzzled and neither he nor Goebbels could make heads or tails of it. Goebbels asked what to reply. Hitler said don't reply, and they left it at that. He said he had nothing to say to America and he meant it.1933 was an interesting year. I am writing about it right now. On January 30 Hitler became Chancellor. In March FDR was inaugurated with his you have nothing to fear but fear itself speech. But also in March in Madison Square Gardens there was an anti-Nazi rally. What is interesting here was how American it was. It was sponsored by a Jewish group saying that America should boycott Nazi Germany goods. The rest of the US was not interested. Cordell Hull wasn't interested at the White House. But New York City was galvanized. Apparently mayors, senators, governors, etc spoke along with German English newspapers who all advocated doing away with Nazi Germany. It didn't matter what ethnicity you were. You were a New Yorker first. That's very American.
There is nothing new about anger in the American political scene either. That went on from the very beginning. Jefferson, the one you don't like, was angry at how the colony of Virginia insisted on an established religion, Anglicanism or the Episcopalian Protestant sect, and came up with his Virginia Statue for Religious Freedom as a result. If people are angry now it is only part of the established political process.P.S. Why did you call yourself English first and then British later?
I will change my cell phone provider at the first possible opportunity of course. But I wonder if it will make any difference. I've talked to people around here who have other providers and have the same complaints. I don't think they should charge so much for poor service.
Obviously I mean that Germany can't do anything in the military sphere. But I had the oddest thought about just that subject a few days ago. You know how I emphasize the connections between Germany and Russia throughout history. And you know how Putin likes to make stabs at being involved in the Middle East and other places. He also has a sphere of influence in Eastern Europe, much of which he shares with the Germans. Very curious how the Soviet Union fell as soon as the Berlin Wall came down. Putin has his backers, some of them known and some unknown. I wonder how many are German.
I still don't get it. You say you were English and now you are British. It sounds rather arbitrary. It doesn't really mean anything, does it? In my novels I keep on getting confused whether to call Edward British or English or what. What would he be called in the 1930's and 1940's? Why? Certainly he believed in the British Empire. So did Churchill.
Who is Mina? Your second wife? What is a "mast"? What is good in Africa, cell phone calls? Is it because everything there is new? What about your daughter in Australia? How is her phone service? Cell phone service? If I were an article writer, I would do an article about it. All people in the US do is complain about their cell phone service. It's no good at all. Considering that Americans probably invented it, that doesn't make any sense.
Apparently Putin spent a lot of time in Germany making connections. Lots of Russian companies have German members on their boards --- not American or British! It's been this way since the 18th century at least. Hitler was a blip in the long time span of German/Russian relations.Interestingly enough I think the Russians including Stalin admired Hitler. They like powerful autocrats to this day. Apparently Russian billionaires and millionaires are among the biggest collectors of Nazi memorabilia.
The US is the very essence of change, especially California. Much of the change in the world today has been ignited by it. I don't know what you mean by "held in by its Constitution". That is certainly very strange phraseology. As far as immigrants not feeling that they are English, why not? Especially if they live in the South of England or near London, why not? Isn't that all it takes? Immigrants coming into the US will call themselves New Yorkers whether their ancestors came from NY or not.
I didn't know that only the US used "cell phone service". I didn't know others used "mobile". Why US cell phone or mobile phone service is so poor I have no idea. Why it costs so much is especially strange. Part of it I think is the lack of competition. They're aren't enough providers.
Ah, but you see, whatever deals you make with the Russians, whatever you do, is thanks to the Germans.
You acquired a Supreme Court because you are being influenced by America. Britain used to be the gold standard in government and was widely imitated including by America. The Founding Fathers wanted the "rights of Englishmen". Now America has inherited that position, being the "gold standard" of governments around the world. As far as being "rigid" I think that is an odd way of looking at it. "Stable" is more like it. As far as all the "not delivering" that sounds like the news again. I don't think the news means much. Just because they say the US government is "not delivering" or because they say the people are anger and there is "so much anger" it doesn't make it so. For one thing they are probably exaggerating. Some anger is normal.
Could be. For one thing you are in Europe. I am German, too, but I am in America. That has made it very hard for me to be pro-Russian. I don't like Russia. It seems cold and forbidding to me as well as autocratic. But I have looked at the history of the thing, and it's hard to deny that Russia seems to be part of Germany's Eastern face.
Last night we went for a walk in the backyard after dinner and found a snake all coiled up along the pathway. It was gray and tan and striped. I looked it up online. It is called a glossy snake. I have pinned two photos of it on my Edward Ware Thrillers pinterest board which means that it will show up on my Facebook page automatically. You can find it there on my personal page, not my author's page.
Did you see my Facebook blog post about Hitler, FDR, and King Kong? I wrote it a couple of days ago. It's all about the strange year 1933, which is what I am working on right now.FDR, Hitler, and King Kong in the Old Faithful Plot
1933 was a pretty scary year. On January 30 Hitler became Chancellor of Germany. In March FDR was inaugurated with his only thing we have to fear is fear itself speech. The Great Depression was ongoing. No wonder when Dora and Edward were fleeing German spies in Chicago and had to slip into a dark movie theater to escape the feature attraction was King Kong. All the dark fears of the time period seemed to be expressed by the monster raging through New York City destroying everything in his path. Good thing that Dora and Edward are in a thriller novel instead of a monster novel, or he might pick up Dora and run away with her. But as it was the monster is a very apt symbol of that frightful year and the overwhelming complexities Dora and Edward face.
Have you ever seen the 1933 King Kong movie? I don't mean the later adaptions but the original. It is one of my favorite movies. I've watched it off and on for years. It is actually a very sophisticated monster movie with a theme. It is a version of Beauty and the Beast for one thing. Then you have the horror part. It is actually a study in the build up of suspense with mood, atmosphere, and gothic touches. You don't actually see or hear the monster until you are about one third of the way through the movie. You meet him at night time. And he is even endowed with mythic touches.
I’ve been reading through the Lincoln Highway: A Road Trip Celebration of America’s First Coast-to-Coast Highway that I bought on Kindle some days ago. Why? It’s the road that Dora and Edward are traveling in my novel about 1933. So far they have gotten as far as Omaha, Nebraska. Pretty soon when they hit Wyoming they are going to turn north and go in the East Entrance to Yellowstone National Park right beyond Cody, Wyoming. I’ve never been through that entrance in my life and I dare say you haven’t either. I’ve entered by the west entrance in West Yellowstone twice. And by the way the part about the west isn’t as good as the part about Pennsylvania, the part I’m actually more familiar with. The author of the book is from Pennsylvania, too. He lives I think in Pittsburgh where I was a year ago right now looking at houses, etc.
I never saw King Kong when I was a kid. Maybe it was just as well. From the first time I saw it on DVD I was captivated. It is a very serious film, not just a monster flick, certainly the best "monster" film ever made. Think of the Beauty and the Beast motif that runs throughout the film. Think of the Depression era references and even the fantasy escapist quality of a lot of the black and white images. What I always liked best was the build up of suspense until you see the giant ape. There is even some doubt whether they will escape from the island. Even more it is thematic of 1933 when it was released. Look at all the nightmare tension quality of the film! It was released the same month that the Depression in America reached its lowest ebb, the same month that FDR made his famous the only thing you have to fear is fear itself speech. King Kong is a cultural expression of all this.
I'm glad you sent the post linking to your Facebook page. I will use it as my post on Saturday. I'll let you know what it's up.
I don't send that many letters either. But I do send postcards. In that respect I am crazy compared to most people who only send email. I know there are e-cards somewhere to be found. But they are not convenient. Frequently they don't have the image you want. Amazon doesn't sell them. I guess you could send an email with your own photo attached. But I don't know how to attach it all by myself. Alas! I don't even know how to download my memory cards on my computer all by myself either. I'm the kind who could not even change a light bulb by myself when I was a kid. I learned to use the washing machine by myself only when I went away to college. I could not even type or key things in until then either. I'm very mechanically inept.
Very good blog post. But how could anybody think the EU is like the Nazis? There is no army involved. I do think it is a kind of "German empire" but of the economic variety. Also membership is voluntary, isn't it? Who is going to come after you if you quit? If England drops out of the EU, Germany is not going to be sending the Luftwaffe to bomb London, right? I will post this blog on Sunday after I post the first on Saturday. That will give me the weekend off before I have to post another YA novel on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday. Friday, today, is my freebie day. Today I'm offering My Aunt, the Witch for free. I do this every week. Now I've got my blog posts standardized: this day I do this and this day I do that. Maybe I should post you every weekend.
I think the people who populate my Facebook page would like your book ads. They like anything that is different. They seem to want constant variety. And your books are unique enough to attract their attention. What would also be good, and I just thought of this, are the pictures you sometimes send me of your walks and hikes. Remember most of these people are in the US. They would think your pictures are charming.
When is the EU exit vote supposed to take place? What do the polls says today? Is this a general referendum? Are you going to vote? I guess you will vote to remain.
Sounds exciting. Lots of suspense and build up. That is just the sort of thing I dislike about American politics. Not that the US has a referendum coming up about leaving the EU. Frankly I don't know how you would conduct a national referendum here. I don't know if Congress has that power to schedule a vote not specified by the Constitution. If they tried it would be held up for years and years in the courts. The referendum would never ever take place.
What it is here is that Congress would decide such issues as whether the US should belong the EU, which of course is just a hypothetical. If people don’t like the decision that Congress makes, later they vote out their congressmen or senators. But usually the congressmen and senators are very conservative about reading the polls and tea leaves so something like that doesn’t happen. But then something as momentous as whether the US should belong to another economic or political zone doesn’t happen. It has never happened in the history of the US. It almost sounds like should the US get its independence from Great Britain done as a referendum poll.
The more things change, the more they remain the same. Europe is always having some sort of unrest. It has always been that way. What is going on with Poland? I have not heard about that. And when you say unrest in southern Europe, do you mean Greece again? Austria I could believe. Spain moving to the left sounds like a contradiction. Spain is supposed to be on the right. Has been there for centuries.
What I mean is that England should adopt the system with a tripartite division. Parliament or the legislative branch should not have so much power. There should be an executive branch, a legislative branch, and a judicial branch. That way Parliament could not abuse its powers so much. That is the American view, assuming you are an American who knows anything about the British government. Obviously the only thing most Americans know about the British government is that there is a Queen. I am not sure that most Americans are aware of the PM.
I love this. This is like Americans and the British squabbling about who has the better government. Edward would definitely adopt your point of view. During his time period he would have been positively arrogant about it because of Britain's position in the world and the British Empire. Right now America has Britain's former position. But that is why places like Britain, Germany, and Austria for that matter, Belgium, France, Switzerland, Denmark, Norway, etc remain viable places to live. Their citizens actually like their own countries and admire their own governments. You admire yours. If you didn't and if most people in Britain no longer liked their government the western world would not hang together very well.Yes, I am sure that you respect America's army, navy, and air force. It is the most powerful in the world. But from what you tell me it sounds as if the British armed forces are not totally independent anymore. I know Canada's are not.
You've mentioned this before that you think the American government is dysfunctional. Apparently no one other than North Americans can understand how it works. It was designed by the Founding Fathers to be dysfunctional. That protected the people from the tyranny of the government and gave Americans the idea that the government which is the best is the government which governs least. That is the leading idea of the man you seem to detest, Thomas Jefferson. It is sacred writ to Americans. The only way the government works or seems to clique is when the country comes together and you get a consensus however brief. This the wave that George W. Bush rode in the autumn of 2001 after 9/11 when his Presidential popularity ratings hit the upper 90 percents. That is why Congress gave him an unprecedented blank check to declare whatever wars he wanted to declare.
You don't have a tripartite division in the same sense as the US. It is totally unacceptable to have the Queen as the executive by the US standards and nowadays even by modern standards They don't do that in Germany or France anymore either. As far as your judiciary is concerned it was obviously the model for the US judiciary. But the Supreme Court as a branch of government here is far more powerful than your brand new Supreme Court. As far as the judiciary being elected, I don't agree with that either. The Federal judiciary is appointed. In some states like Virginia the judiciary is appointed. In other states like Arizona judges are elected. That is very controversial. During the OJ Simpson trial a Harvard professor named Dershowitz said all judges should be appointed. As far as capital punishment that is one of my two liberal positions (the other one is censorship like all writers). I am way to the left. I don't think capital punishment should exist and should be outlawed. Of course in Europe it used to exist, too. It was only in the aftermath of the world wars that is was abolished.
You say Presidents should be more powerful. But when one is like Bush you don't like it. Watch out! FDR has four terms. That is why the amendment was passed to prevent it in the future. The current US President isn't that powerful. Maybe that is why you like him.
You should comment in the comment section on my blog and say just this. Shall I just copy and paste? What I would reply is that I don't think Hitler was the one responsible for the Holocaust which is what most people define as "Nazi excesses". If you define Nazi excesses as WW2 itself, I would qualify it and say that Britain was every bit as responsible as Adolf Hitler. They could have not declared war in 1939 though Churchill probably would have burned down Whitehall if they had not. Neville Chamberlain wanted a peace agreement until the very last. If you had come up with one that allowed Hitler to get his territories, the world might be a different place today. It is hard to imagine, especially if America had not entered the war, exactly what would have happened? What do you think modern Europe would look like today?Also Americans tend to think that "dictator" and "tyrant" are equivalent to Hitler. They throw the word around a lot. On Amazon lots of people call Bush "Hitler". One of the German politicians called Bush "Hitler" during Bush's term as President. He demanded and got a formal apology.
Why is there a lot of sensitivity over Hitler in Europe at the moment? What is going on now? Something about the EU? I know Greece has called Merkel and the Germans "Hitler", but I thought that was just journalism. The powers that be in Greece don't even think this. They want to go along with the EU. Is Merkel really Hitler's Daughter? That's interesting in terms on my novels. In Dark 3 I actually have an adult lady named Mrs. Baker who is Thomasina Edwina Ware grown up and into trouble with the Neo-Nazis.When are you doing the Bonus Section to HFL? I really would like to read it.
Once in a blue moon they get domestic legislation through. Remember the current idiot in the White House actually DID get stupid legislation through in his first term. But fortunately some of the courts and some of the states and Congress have managed to undo a lot of it. It ranks among the worst legislation that any President has ever gotten through Congress. Gary has an essay on this. The last President to get a lot of legislation through Congress was I think Johnson and that was quite awhile ago. There was also FDR. Remember him? Most of his legislation was historic.
The current occupant of the White House is now what Americans call a "lame duck" at the end of two terms as President.
We've been discussing the Queen a lot. You are the one who says that Britain is still a monarchy. I have always said it is a democracy with a figurehead, meaning the Queen, just sitting there for tourism or whatever. I thought you were the one who kept on claiming she has real power. Now you are saying she doesn't which is what I have always maintained.I hope you are not implying that American Presidents are becoming like the Queen, mere figureheads during their term of office and are more decorative than real?
The first response I have to your essay about Jutland and the Somme —- the only one I’m going to do today —- is that the American Civil War is largely a myth in terms of civilian suffering. You can talk about Gone with the Wind, but that was just a novel. I remember for instance that at Petersburg Union soldiers waved steaks at the southerners because they did not have them. But they had plenty of other things to eat. There was no starvation. That’s silly. Go back to thinking that America has never known this sort of warfare against its civilians. That is the truth, not the myth about moonlight and magnolias.
Very good, but who cares if there was evidence of nuclear buildup of weapons of mass destruction or not? Maybe the intelligence was wrong, but so what? The people who object on that basis to the US and Britain fighting in Iraq are those who didn't want to do it to begin with. They just seize onto any reason they can to justify their opinions. That is why it is meaningless.
I don't know what the migrant crisis has to do with Hitler or the Nazis. What was the migrant crisis then? The Nazis in the 30s were trying to get the Jews to leave Germany and go elsewhere. Is that what you mean by a migrant crisis? If so, it was just the opposite. Jews were leaving Austria and Germany, not coming into those countries. So I don't see the similarity. As far as people on the Far Right not wanting Syrian refugees, I say it is only what is to be expected. European countries were not set up to function like America. They are not melting pots. Why should they have to be?
I don't think she would go to the Tower. I don't think she would go to jail. I don't think she would be exiled from Britain. I think Parliament would ignore her if you want to know the truth. If she dissolved Parliament, they would ask her to reconsider. They would do something tricky perhaps like change the language slightly or whatever. But business as usual would continue. They might even put her signature on a document where she abdicates and put Charles on the throne just like that. If he didn't agree they would have him abdicate and go to William, etc. It sounds like a drama.
As you know I totally disagree. This is one of our biggest points of disagreement. I have no explanation for why there are so many peace niks in Europe except perhaps the World Wars. But you can't just sit there and pretend to be pacifists while America shoulders the entire burden for the defense of Europe, which of course is what it does. In particular Britain should help. Everything that America is involved in was SOMETHING THAT GREAT BRITAIN STARTED EITHER IN THE 19TH CENTURY OR THE EARLY 20TH. And believe me if you continue to ignore the cause of the migrant crisis and continue to kow tow to terrorists you will have no Europe left.There are only two ways to deal with terrorist states. Either you do what the Ottoman Turks used to do and what the Russians still do. You crush them and slaughter everybody who puts up any resistance, or you civilize them and educate them and bring business into their country. This is the Roman way, the British way, and the American way and it is much harder. The World Wars didn't negate it.
The War on Terror is not idiotic. But it has not been pursued enough. You can't operate by taxing your civilians with border checks and checks before they get on planes and checks in the middle of the road anywhere you want. You can't pursue it by spying on everybody's email and casting suspicion on the use of cash, etc. You don't oppress your own population. You go after the enemy pirates and bring them to heel. Why people are so reluctant to take this more seriously is something I have devoted a lot of thought to. People are always trying to take short cuts. None of them work. The only way is the long, long way of occupying these countries for generations.
This idea of war crimes . . . I don't know where it came from. It did not exist several hundred years ago. It certainly did not exist in ancient times. It seems way too legalistic and self-serving for me. Who is the one who gets to decide what is a crime and what isn't? You could say that war itself is a crime. But how would that be practical or make sense? War is war. It has always been war. It has not evolved into something super sophisticated for the internet age.
America is NATO in effect just as America is the UN. It is the largest contributing member of both. Neither would exist without it or at least the organizations would be far different than they are now. I agree that Russia has never been a threat to America. But Hitler wasn't either despite how Churchill kept on trying to stretch and exaggerate the danger he presented just to get America in the war. One thing you have to remember about Americans. They don't like dictators. It is the main reason America didn't like Hitler. It is also the main reason they don't like Russia.
Terror comes not from ideas but from piratical states. Piratical states feed on disorder in the Middle East. That is why America has to impose order even if it takes sitting on the pirates and terrorists for generations. I think what you are talking about is something else. Some kook hears about a terrorist attack and wants to get noticed too. So that go out and blow something up. These are mentally unbalanced people. I agree you won't get rid of them any time soon. They appear when you have free society. But these types are not what has caused the refugee crisis in Europe with all the Syrians at large. That was caused by the terrorists. And that can be corrected.
So this is what you are talking about!!! This kind of international law is nothing. Nobody least of all the US and the UK have to obey it. It is like an international debating society or an international honor society full of high sounding phrases like the International Court of Human Rights which isn't really a legal body either. In order to be a real legal body you must have powers of enforcement.
In the US Japanese were jailed mostly on the West Coast, and that was notorious enough. No one thought to jail Germans. It would have been impractical. You would have been forced to jail the majority of the population of certain states such as Minnesota and certain cities such as Pittsburgh. Impossible! Besides the whole idea of America was supposed to be immigration.