Schlagwort-Archive: UK

Das einzig angemessene Abkommen ist ein WTO-Brexit …

Das einzig angemessene Abkommen zwischen dem Vereinigten Königreich und der monströsen politischen Entität EU ist ein WTO-Brexit, der fälschlicherweise als No-Deal Brexit bezeichnet wird. Denn ein WTO-Brexit kann lediglich dann als „No-Deal Brexit“ bezeichnet werden, wenn man es aus der Perspektive der Funktionselite dieses Monstrums mit seiner neoliberalen Rechtsform betrachtet, die alle Staaten, die Verträge mit dieser monströsen politischen Entität namens EU abschließen, in eine Situation drängt, in der ihre Regierungen nicht mehr selbst bestimmen, welche Politik in ihrem Land verfolgt wird. Das einzig angemessene Abkommen ist ein WTO-Brexit … weiterlesen

The only appropriate agreement is a WTO Brexit …

The only appropriate agreement between the UK and the monstrous political entity called EU is a WTO Brexit, mistakenly referred to as no-deal Brexit. For a WTO Brexit can only be called a “no-deal Brexit” viewed from the perspective of this monster’s functional elite with its neoliberal legal form, pushing all the states, that conclude treaties with this monstrous political entity called EU, into a situation in which their governments no longer determine themselves which policy is pursued in their country. This will then be determined by Brussels — of last resort via the ECJ (__European Court of Justice, functioning solely in the sense of the neoliberal agenda and must therefore inevitably be anti-democratic__). Such a political entity can have no future at all, but will leave behind destroyed societies that will be at the mercy of the major players on the financial market even more than before.

That is why only a WTO Brexit is a good deal. This is the only way to open up what can later lead to a truly good world order, consequently far from what is meant when so called conspiracy theorists talk about the “New World Order”.

What it actually takes is something completely different:

a collective withdrawal of people from the so-called nation states, which in fact belong to the respective power elites and their satellites (__but not to the people who live there and cannot simply “go away to New Guinea in a yacht”__), in order to democratically redivide the world in the sense of the mass of people.

— Is that utopian?

No, it is not because it does not violate any laws of nature, however, it is unrealistic as it violates the rules established by the power elites and their satellites.

Mind you, what is utopian, however, is the direction the power elites and their satellites are pursuing, since it realistically does not allow for any constructive development, i.e. it is dystopian.

An excerpt of AMBROSE EVANS-PRITCHARD’s article …

→ « Reading Nine »

© Joachim Endemann (__EndemannVerlag__)