Eso’s Chronicles 282 / 8

The ‘Knellen’ of EU Nations

© Eso A.B.

All comments appearing within brackets [ ] are editorial in origin.

 

ZNOE

 

The free and sovereign nations of Europe (ZNOE) have it in their interest to be charismatic, because—unlike a globalized and belatedly Catholicized planet of bureaucrats, who have deaded the mind and with it the culture of all nation who take as their example the great federations of nations==they have a culture to build for the present and future.

 

If the present nations of Europe escape the clutches of such super bureaucrats as Barosso and Van Rompuy http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01917/euroSUM_1917100c.jpg  and hangers on like Viviane Reding http://static3.demotix.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/a_scale_large/200-8/photos/1271082840-european-commissioner-viviane-reding-receives-john-donahoe-ebay-ceo_299628.jpg , all leaders of a school that believes that in return for boredom and their own dead personality, they will get more power or be better remembered by history, they have ahead of them much culture building, wood growing, and above all, community building. All of the three mentioned environments today subsist on what little is left that is genuine  http://www.verdsarvfjord.no/images/rellingseterhus_vl1.jpg  is from the Middle Ages.

 

No doubt, you may st(b)umble on on beep bop cowboy steroids, but you will surely discover something missing from your life before the EU gets through with telling you what else to do.

 

Charisma in politics in the Western world has been an over idealized VERBOTEN, because of Hitler, the charismatic German leader of post WW1 Germany, who pulled his nation out of depression over the loss of WW1, but, unfortunately, pulled it right into WW2, and worse:

 

The mechanistic killing of whoever took the Reich’s (a federation of German States) fancy, but especially Jews, the latter simply because someone had told Hitler that the Jews were the money bags, the bankers, spoke Yiddish (a Germanic language that likely survived the Khazar Empire), and had taken to roaming to any nation of the world, because their disciplined manner of thinking (given the bend for it as a consequence of being among the originators of the concept of ‘law’) helped train lawyers and bankers in many nations. It was a double misfortune for the Jewish people that their foreign students, all converts to greed from too long living in shacks built along the outside of the castle walls of Viking princes, had no respect for divinity whatsoever and became cynical heirs to their princes, though not to the Jews. The images of the two became comingled, but the prejudice of ordinary folk turned against the Jews, because it was hard to believe that one’s own would waste so little time before becoming bankers, griffins, and other kinds of vultures.

 

The victors of WW2 again decided to blame the Germans, who, took the road of least resistance, and censured the name of Hitler as if it was to be for ever from their books. The rest of the world knows this censure as Goodwin’s Law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law , which, not surprisingly, is misused mostly by the German government and Jewish Zionists, thus, blocking much needed discussion of anti-Semitist propaganda in the West (independent of Germany), and Zionist fascism, mostly applied against Israel’s closest neighbours in the name of a fictitious myth of whence Jewish origins.

 

While the unfortunate anti-Semitic campaign of the Nazis is a bloody chapter indeed, this ought not to prevent us from re-examining history for false flags, which were planted as long ago as the invasion of the Vikings into Western Europe and the Ukraine of the Black Sea regions.

 

One ruler’s misdeeds and violence, however, cannot do away with the role of charisma in politics. In spite of the deads in the spitoon caused to politics by ‘democratic’ bureaucracies, charisma in politics cannot be done without, and as I have argued in earlier blogs, while charisma is to some extent dependent on an individual king’s personality, the main ingredients are that the king’s decision is personal and that he ‘pays’ for it through the sacrifice of his life at its end. No one may take from a King this prerogative, unless he refuses it, in which case in ancient times, the survivors of his court could and did put a garrotte around his neck.

 

I realize that such an execution of a King may not only be scandalous, but appear barbaric, because it must be witnessed by the public. On the other hand, given the reestablishment of the tradition of Kings, it will not be anything new, least of all to the King, who will have grown up knowing his role, and were he not to desire it, would have the opportunity to decline it.