Ivan Hečko

In my previous blog on this topic I wrote that the centrifugal tendencies becoming visible especially in the preferences of political parties, which the established part of the EU calls “extremist”, are caused by the behavior of the EU itself. I also pointed out some of the causes of this, which the official EU refuses to recognize, or accept; the EU representatives try to blame factors like Russian propaganda, eventually migration crisis and terrorism, while ignoring the real cause of all these phenomena – US wars and EU subservient position towards the US.

Let us look at some of the reasons why the EU citizens could mind this position so much that they would vote for the “extremists”. By the way, one of them could quite well be the fact that EU represents 508 million of people, while the US 324 million – but I do not think this should be the main point. But still, it is enough for the EU to behave like a world power, and not as someone’s diligent pupil or flunky.

In the previous blog I say that the EU, in cooperation with NATO (in a rather subservient position) managed to sharply increase the danger of the World War III, but what makes it much worse, also the possibility of its‘ start in Europe. EU has allowed NATO to build rocket basis and place US army units on its territory. Its representatives pretend not to realize that the US, in case a war with Russia should start, would prefer it to start at someone else’s territory – e.g Poland, some of the Baltic countries, Ukraine, but not directly concerning the US territory.

We all hope of course that such a war will never start, as it would mean the end of this civilization. But to some countries this dangerous situation is a godsend. The economy of the US is practically pulled by the weapons industry. In 2014 USA were as usual at the top of military spending list, spending more than the next 7 countries summed up. What impact could sudden end of all US wars have on the US economy, the people, and eventually on the welfare of the US weapons producers? What I mean, can the US “afford” to stop those wars? (this using the US cynical attitude when discussing the attack of Iraq, see the previous blog)

Related to previous point we have to analyze the structure of the US society of today. The world economists, both individuals and various Economy Fora have been ringing alarms of late, concerning the too uneven distribution of wealth in the world – negatively influencing further economic development. There are even coefficients to describe this distribution – a so-called Gini coefficient, whose values are between 0 and 1, with 0 meaning that everybody gets the same, and 1 meaning that 1 person gets all. The Gini index (after taxes and transfers) for late 2000s shows US as the country with the most uneven distribution of wealth of those listed. But, that is a rather non-descriptive information: let us see a criterion easy to understand, see e.g. http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/nov/13/us-wealth-inequality-top-01-worth-as-much-as-the-bottom-90 , or http://inequality.org/wealth-inequality/ ,http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html ) , and the result for the year 2012 is as follows – using the first link: The research by Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman illustrates the evolution of wealth inequality over the last century. The chart shows how the top 0.1% of families now own roughly the same share of wealth as the bottom 90% (this has changed for worse since then, but anyway 0.1 % means one thousandth!).

This distribution of wealth does not correspond to an advanced capitalism at all. Quite the contrary: it is unpleasantly close to the distribution of wealth in the era generally called feudalism. It is an important obstacle in further development of the US economy (and society) – it causes a big drop in consumer demand, and a permanent one, with a short term change very difficult. But what is worse – it has a really big impact on the functioning of the US society (and state). We can all see this concentrated money in operation after the candidate of the rich lost the presidential elections in the US. Those who own all money (Feudal Lords) have done their best to reroute the winner from the path he promised before the elections, onto the path promised by his opponent. The mainstream media – in their hands – do not really publish anything that could be called information, but do publish a lot of fake news. As an example – they even have not reported a part of the speech of the leaving president Obama, where he said that in his opinion the “hacking of the server of the Democratic Party” was a leak and not a hack (which was confirmed by Mr. Assange), which as a matter of fact means that „influencing US elections by Russia” was a fabrication by secret services. This also includes not informing that the administrator of the server was murdered on his way home, which normally would be investigated in context with the leak, especially in a country with such persecution complex as the US (as we learned during and after the elections). By the way, that leak proved that Mrs. Clinton swindled the primary phase of the elections; she is to blame of course, not a leak of information – an attempt to distract attention from this fact by creating and spreading a fabricated side issue. In general, the elections and aftermath rather confirmed that the country has become a kind of banana republic. OSCE should send a delegation of observers to the next US elections. All this rather confirms that the US is run by the Feudal Lords, who now try to tame the new president (“grow up, Donald”, said one of them to Mr. Trump, but surely he meant “learn to tell lies, Donald”), and by the secret services, but not by the institutions who should do that according to the US Constitution. Feudal Lords, with weapons producers having a privileged position, operate the secret services, create wars in the world and hereby earn more money all the time, which they invest back into undermining the world – a spiral of armament and death, see the previous blog.

So, the question all this leads to is: Why does EU press us – EU citizens – into the position of a diligent pupil of the country described above? What can we do if we disagree and want to turn this trend around? Well – the answer is that we have to establish an entirely new political layer, whose parties will not belong to any of the “main fractions” of the EU political spectrum – the 11 Euro-parties – since those have brought us to this point. And as it usually happens, the most active in this direction are frequently people who have had some non-standard ideas, were quick to see where the official politics are leading us, and picked up the main points people complain about. But they can only be successful if the EU goes on pretending that everything EU does is “Correct” and “Standard” and what these parties say is “Extremist” or even “Fascist” and therefore EU needn’t change anything and just needs to wisely describe these “deviations” to warn us. Well, I am afraid this will not be enough, the EU top layer should find a way of getting feedback from the people. In the present situation the EU political system ensures absolute isolation of the EU top level from the electorate, which operates at local level. The 11 main political groups at EU level – also with a high degree of isolation, positioning themselves by ideologies – are used to manipulate the national level parties grouped under them, and not to get information from them, they even threaten to throw the national ones out of the group if they try to bring new ideas – the usual counter-productive behavior of dictatorship structures. The EU top layer is entirely cut off from the people, while the “extremists” are here, among us.