A few days ago I wrote:
I don’t know why the EU is antismoking. I just know that it is. I only found out early in 2010 that the EU had declared war on smokers. And I only found out a few months ago that it had been at war with smokers since at least 1989, 30 years ago. For all I know, it’s been antismoking from its very inception, 70 or more years ago. In fact, for all I know, the EU’s sole purpose is to stamp out smoking in Europe.
Why is the EU antismoking? Surely, if you’re putting together a political project, you want to include as many people as possible? Isn’t it rather crazy to exclude all the millions of smokers in Europe from your project? I’ve been trying to figure out why the EU is so crazy that it’s actually destroying itself.
My tentative explanation goes like this: If you want to ban something, it doesn’t matter what it is – smoking, turkey twizzlers, or turf-burning -, you’re going to want to be in government, because it’s only governments that can pass laws to ban stuff. And if you can’t be part of the government, you’ll want to get as near as you can to it in some quasi-governmental organisation. So banners and bansters are attracted to government like moths to a flame. Most normal people aren’t interested, because most normal people don’t want to ban everything left, right, and centre. So you never find normal people in government. And you certainly don’t find them in the EU.
Most likely, the founders of the EU “project” didn’t want to ban smoking or turkey twizzlers or anything else. They probably just wanted to unite the peoples of Europe. But once their project got a head of steam behind it, they began to attract smoke-banners, twizzler-banners, and turf-banners. And once this army of bansters began to fill it. their views gradually came to permeate it, and to change its direction and aim.
It’s probably true of all organisations that they attract people who don’t really share the values and principles of the founding fathers, but who have slightly different ones, and who lead the organisation in a different direction. So the Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour party isn’t the same Labour party as that of Tony Blair, or that of James Callaghan, or Harold Wilson, or Clement Attlee. The same is true of the Conservative party. And probably the same is true of the British Civil Service, the British Medical Association, the World Health Organisation, the United Nations, the Ford Motor Company, and the Roman Catholic Church. They may keep the same name, but they’re actually always changing.
And in fact, it might even be suggested that every organisation attracts people opposite to it. So, for example, churches might attract atheists, and science might attract artists, and armed forces might attract women, and so on. And after a while you end up with atheist bishops, pseudo-sciences, and amazons. You end up with a world turned upside down.
And this is what happened to the EU. The original EEC (European Economic Community) project gradually metamorphosed into the very different EU (European Union) project. And it’s still changing:
Leader of the left-progressive group in the European Parliament Guy Verhofstadt has said that in order to compete with the rest of the world, the European Union must become an “empire.”
The leader of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats in Europe (ALDE) told CNN that proposals by European populist-patriots to reform the EU and devolve power from Brussels back to the nation-state would mean that the bloc “will die inside.”
“The world is developing into one not of nation states, but of empires. China is an empire. India is an empire. The US is an empire. We need to create a European Union that is capable of defending our interests,” Mr Verhofstadt stated
First it was a “community” and then it became a “union” and now it wants to become an “empire”. History has gone full circle. Why not just call this new empire the Austro-Hungarian Empire or the Holy Roman Empire, and be done with it?
Anyway, this centralised antismoking empire has now attracted a new set of opposites in the form of nationalists (as opposed to imperialists) and populists (as opposed to elitists), many of whose leaders happen to be smokers as well (Farage, Le Pen, Salvini). And with this new tidal wave of nationalists and populists (arriving either today or tomorrow), the EU empire is about to metamorphose into something else again. It won’t be centralised, and it won’t be an empire, and it won’t be antismoking either.