The following essay by the Hungarian historian Mária Schmidt was published at Látószög blog. Many thanks to CrossWare for the translation.


(The Századvég [The Century’s End] Foundation and The Watcher: Where is Europe going? — The written version of the presentation of the results of the research by Project 28 in 2018 at its conference on March 2)

March 26, 2018

By Mária Schmidt, historian

The protracted migrant crisis has generated sharp antagonisms within the European Union. It took to the breaking point the British-EU controversy, which led to Brexit in 2016. It poisoned the relationship between the eastern and western parts of Europe. The reason for this lies, of course, not only and not exclusively in the different positions on the migrant question, but the preceding controversy, which endangers trust in each other and threatens the survival of the Union.

The decisive role in the creation of the EU was played by the two superpowers in a bipolar world: the United States of America and the Soviet Union, who also competed in the ideological, military and economic spheres. The duel the two of them fought brought the victory of the consumer market economy, which was combined with the complete financial collapse of the socialist model. The Cold War was won by the West: A reunited Europe, as well its most influential state, Germany . The fact of reunification, however, was misinterpreted by the EU as well as by Germany, which therefore drew poor conclusions.

Western Europe and the Federal Republic of Germany were clearly beneficiaries of the Cold War. However, Germany did not really contribute to this victory. Western citizens enjoyed an unprecedented economic upturn for four decades until the end of the bipolar world. They enjoyed all the benefits of a consumer society, coupled with security, freedom and financial well-being. On top of that they even pinned up the flag of the moral supremacy they felt over the total communist dictatorship. In the case of the West Germans, the most agreeable thing was that they did not have to, be responsible for anything, because that was the job of the victors in the world war. They were well-content to root for the suppressed and to do business with both sides of the Iron Curtain. According to the Bulgarian sociologist Ivan Krastev, it was as if the BRD [Bundesrepublik Deutschland: Federal Republic of Germany] was always on vacation while everyone else was working. The West Germans were sipping red wine in Tuscany as they continued to support and root for socialism, which was built behind the Iron Curtain by their brothers and sisters, just as it was by us [Hungarians]. They became frustrated and felt robbed after the affair which they so enthusiastically supported finally went bust. The East Germans and the rest of them — without their prior permission — abused the moral support they had given them, and without their permission arbitrarily stopped experimenting with the socialist future. The West’s intellectual leaders were thus faced the fact that the Iron Curtain disappeared at the same time, and they found themselves in a new position they did not even want.

They were reluctant, but still willing to pester the eastern part of Germany to replace all “Ossis” [Easterners] with their third- or fourth-class west German cadres. They categorized whole generations as a useless burden, punishing them for abandoning socialism without their permission. They divided Germany again into “Wessis” [Westerners] and “Ossis” [Easterners] instead of uniting it. Let us remember that the unity of Germany — and thus of Europe — was expressly opposed by the left wing of the political class of the Federal Republic of Germany, namely the Social Democrats and the Greens, complemented by the ’68ers Left-Liberal propagandists. When the Wessis flooded the Ossis, they kicked them out of their positions, declared their education and diplomas invalid, their careers, their achievements nullified, claiming that the GDR [Deutsche Demokratische Republik: German Democratic Republic] was a guilty system, and for whose actions they [the Ossis] were responsible. All this is now can be classified as straightforward greed for, i.e. a collective immorality, in preparation for the rehabilitation of Marx, which will be sanctified by the European Union itself when Commissioner Juncker inaugurates his statue in Trier [Note: the statue of Marx was erected on April 13, after this essay was published].

Not that we were surprised. The political elites of Western Europe are rife with Marxists, former Maoists and Trotskyites, who have never been brave enough to emigrate to the socialist side and experience the “future” in practice, and so did not to have to face the vicious nature of communism and apologize for their supporting behavior. For them it was always important to have an attractive utopia in their backyard that they could believe in or could pretend that they believed in. Its updated version is the European bureaucratic union, the planned United States of Europe.

Both Germany and the European Union therefore misinterpreted the events of 1989-90.

The Ossis are lazy, naïve and sensitive — the Wessis are arrogant, selfish, and insensitive

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the BRD and the western part of the EU started from the notion that once the model they operated won, they could continue to move into the new millennium unchanged. Therefore, the task before them was identified as a assimilation rather than a merger. Thus the West Germans did this with East Germany and Western Europe with Eastern Europe. “Connection” conditions were imposed, whose execution was rigorously requested. By no means did they ever use, nor do they use, the term “merger”.

The connection requirements developed by the West were, in reality, the same unilateral dictates at a level that we had never experienced before. From 1990 to 2004 and until 2006, we were stalled, and after that, we were only allowed to enter the external circles. Meanwhile they forced us to open up our markets to them, picked out the parts of our economy that seemed attractive to them, paying particular attention to our public utilities to get them for cheap, but they denied our workers the possibility of accepting employment in the West. With the new markets they were able to counterbalance the economic stagnation of the early 1990’s, which should have warned them of the structural defects that led to the 2008 financial collapse.

Neither Germany nor the leaders of the European Union ever raised or asked the question: what is meant by and what would cause the merger of the eastern and western parts of Europe? Because the vocation and responsibility of a united Germany are not the same as the enlarged Federal Republic of Germany. Because a United Europe is completely different from a Western Europe enlarged by the absorption of Eastern Europe.

It would be good for Germany and the European Union to finally realize that without the equality of the eastern part of the Union, there is no chance of succeeding in overcoming the present obstacles and those of the near future. Germany should understand that it is neither a Western nor an Eastern country. It is in the middle, that is, a Central European country. It tried both sides of the Iron Curtain. Its geostrategic position makes it possible to form a connecting link between the two sides of the continent, to strengthen its unity and modus vivendi. Its central position, demographic and economic power also assigns this task to it. If is it able to fulfill this vocation and can find that task and the role that it owes to itself and to Europe.

The Western elites, however, are still in the process of patting their own shoulder, while talking about how generous they were to accept us. Yet we will only be able to prepare for the challenges we face if we accept the EU as a common home for peoples of equal value. The prospects that some Western European politicians, such as French Presidents Hollande and Macron, have outlined are based on the assumption that the European Union is the Western Europeans, and the inclusion of Easterners was only a sort of operational accident, that should be remedied as soon as possible by returning to the original arrangement.

By original arrangement we mean: Western Europe in the Cold War period from 1945 until 1990. When everything else was well organized, limited and visible. Their standard of living grew steadily, living in unimaginable abundance and freedom compared to the East Bloc. They do not understand now, as they obviously did not understand then, that the competitive position the socialist model implied was a key factor. The two halves of the continent, forced into opposing camps, interacted mutually. The western part was forced to build up its welfare system and the east was squeezed to allow consumption. Thus, the “golden age” experienced by the West partly contributed by the eastern part of Europe. Their erroneous past interpretation implies that they think there is a way to return to that past.

The western ’68ers vanguard wants to get the their old world back so they can be among themselves. The idea of a two-speed Europe, also known as the Core European Creation, hopes for the return of the good old times. However, we are not willing to think about the future as a project to restore the past, or to think of a new ultimatum developed by the West for us. As for the idea of a two-speed Europe, Czech Prime Minister Babiš asked in Budapest on 26 January 2018: Why are there two? How fast is one, and how fast is the other one? Where and at what speeds they are going? And why?

The ones who derive themselves from the 1968 student movements hope for the restoration of the past, since they have attained full power in the field of culture, science and the media over the past five decades and gained control over politics at the end of the 20th century. Their members are educated in Marxist dogmas, their youthful experiences were gained in various Marxist radical parties, movements, where they became accustomed to irresponsibility, prosperity and security. First of all, their own ideological, cultural and scientific life is endangered by those who did not find themselves afraid, dull, and silent coming out of communist dictatorship. Those who have questions, who have criticisms, ideas, and have their own opinions damage the well-crafted, politically correct canon of the elites affirming the status quo at all costs. They endanger the very comfortable and privileged situation in which this vanguard is so well-equipped for and where it moves so confidently.

Paris, May 1968

But 1968 means something completely different to us than it does to them. For us 1968 was not the boundary of an era, but instead 1956 and 1989-90. We already learned in 1956 that socialism can not be reformed or masked into human form, as well: terror and total dictatorship are the essence of the system, not the accessory. True, 1968 also taught us something. That we no longer understand each other with our generations who live on the west side of the iron curtain. We are bound by the common adoration of beat music, the farmer, the long hair and beards on the boys, the miniskirts on the girls, and the demand for change that was the challenge of the decade between ’56 and ’68, and its predisposition. However, with regard to the political content of the rebellions, there could have been no greater difference between us.

Not only because of the West’s main claim: the immediate end of the Vietnam War in the Soviet sphere of influence meant official government policy. But first of all because the confused and essentially utopian ideas of the Westerners have always clashed with the cold reality of socialism in the experiences of those living and wanting to escape from it. The Westerners spluttered about overcoming capitalism, and dreamed of direct democracy. They fantasized about how American productivity will be combined with the morality of the Chinese (Mao and morals, congratulations!), while they continued to blabber about the Third World. No wonder they were so isolated in the West as well, and neither the citizens, nor the workers, nor the majority of the students were with them.

While the Western student movements were unable to distinguish between Utopia and Reality, and they played at being revolutionaries without taking any serious risk, people living under Soviet rule looked at the ruthlessness of a totalitarian dictatorship. The Western European elite was then bound by “revolutionary snobbery” and transformed into a “limousine Left”. Because of their enthusiasm for the Third World, they rejected “Europeanism”, the central political and cultural role of Europe. This was particularly annoying for our region because we wanted to defeat the Soviet Union’s guardianship so we could become “Europeans” again. And of course we wanted democratic institutions, for which we were ridiculed in the eyes of the progressive Westerners, and even made us become bourgeois.

Between the present-day Western elites of the ’68ers and our region, the misunderstanding goes back half a century, and the main reason is that this vanguard is unable to give up on Utopia. Back then they chased the miracle of ideal socialism, and were not interested in what the existing, realized socialism was, in which we had to live. They now fantasize about Multiculturalism, the United States of Europe and the victory of globalization.

In 1968 they discovered the anti-fascist struggle and they fought it until recently. Everyone who had been opposed to them became anti-Semitic, thus Nazis, and they were excommunicated. Today, the attitude towards the Jews is no longer fashionable in this form. Their place was captured by the Palestinians and the Third World, where so many were exploited. The new major crime now become racism; the new Holy War has become the anti-racist war. Of course, just as with anti-fascism, they are now the chief priests for that, too.

The sixty-eights were utopians, and they remained as such. Only today it is not world socialism, self-management of workers, the elimination of exploitation, etc. that is their goal, because they live too well for that, but universal human rights, the markets and freed trade, the priority of financial markets, that is: globalization. The equality they proclaim is believed to be the result of Multiculturalism, globalization and the trinitarianism of immigration. And then the Great New World will come.

They are not interested in our experiences today, either, our needs, our goals. Even as they wanted to destroy everything then, they still work at it today. They cannot build, create, create value, but they do not want to at all. For example, they spluttered about the Arab Spring, but they have no idea how it could become a livable world again for those who are so worried about it.

We, the Hungarians, the Poles, the Czechs, the Slovaks, the Romanians, and the rest of us, who won our national independence only three decades ago and have been freed from the squeezing of the Soviet Union and the communist attempts imposed on us, are convinced that within our own nation state we can best represent the interests of our compatriots. We believe that nation states are able to ensure that their citizens’ human rights are adequately protected, and that their welfare and security are safeguarded. We do not want to renounce our sovereignty to any distant center, to the hands of bureaucrats, who cannot be recalled and therefore cannot be controlled by us. Democracy means that our business is our responsibility, so we have to decide on it. We are on the verge of reality and we will not let ourselves be forced into another utopian experiment.

The utopian globalists are contemptuous and uncomprehending of the national feeling, or as they term it, in the face of the revival of nationalism. They are incapable of understanding the dynamics that reinforce national differences and characteristics as a counter-effect of over-centralization and homogenization. Even the “advanced” West is not free of all this. Catalonia, Basque Country, Corsica, Scotland and Wales, the Irish also, the Bavarians and the Lombards and all over Northern Italy. Yet they should understand that independence movements, referendums, secession or self-determination are the answers to the emptiness of universalism. Because in a world that is global, where the people are losing their homeland and their homeyness and become strangers in their own country, and where they are relocated. This is the feeling that is increasingly encouraging the rebellion against the elites of the West and that psych up the new settlers against the West. Because there is no one who would sacrifice his life or his freedom for humanity. For his country, his family, his faith and love, many people did, and would do it today, but die for universal human rights? For Multiculti? For the Eurozone? For the European Union?

Europe has never known such prosperity before, has not lived in such material abundance as it does today. Our poor in Europe are rich by global standards. At the same time, today, in Europe, in the standard of living decides who lives in what part of the continent. Within Europe there are huge income differences. The income of citizens living in the eastern part of Europe, formerly socialist countries, does not even reach one-third of the West. However, this difference in income and standard of living does not impinge on either the Western European political group or the Western intellectuals, and as a consequence it is increasingly removed from the perspective of the Union’s decision-makers. The objective of the Cohesion Fund would be to reduce this gap if some decision-makers did not want this to be a means of political blackmail. All this is a clear proof that the “humanitarians” are totally indifferent to raising up our poor. Today’s decision-makers of the EU, when talking about income disparities, compare western welfare states with the third world. They are especially worried about the poor in Africa. That is why they look at the migration crisis faced by our continent in recent years as a chance to deal with the two problems simultaneously. They can exploit the impoverished of the African and Asian continents to facilitate their conscientious objection to colonization, while hoping to find solutions to the demographic crisis they are facing. Through migration, they want to achieve their ultimate goal, the “historically unique experiment” to populate the United States of Europe — what they have dreamed of — with a new type of man made from different cultures.

Between the two sides of Europe, the utopian West and the reality-oriented East, the differences of views are also of a moral nature; in other words, they are about values, because the European Union has not become a community based on common values, as they sabotaged reunification. The leaders of the European Union and Brussels have committed themselves to the utopian, globalist political culture beyond nation-states, and therefore the mention of religious or national traditions in any positive context is considered scandalous and poses a threat to the Union’s transformation into the European Empire. It was not by chance that they lost and made taboo any debate about faith, identity, patriotism, freedom of thought, the most important core values. When, therefore, Viktor Orbán speaks of these, and of national sovereignty, the preservative power of Christianity, the importance of family, the insistence on Hungarian culture, he breaks a taboo, thus preventing the execution of the project in a well-designed and smooth way, for which the Western bureaucratic caste is working up a full head of steam. This is the reason why everyone who disagrees with these elites, “becomes” a low-minded, backward, and, of course, nationalist, populist, a.k.a. becomes a “racist”.

But we can not let ourselves, because once before we had to participate in a social conversion attempt. At that time, the Communists had envisioned the socialist world revolution, a proletarian internationalism, and a world order based on equality that a new type of socialist man — which they wanted to create — would realize. We still vividly remember what the professional humanists of the communist faction were doing as they transformed our world into a huge “socialist-type man-training institution” through humanity-correcting efforts. Then proletarian internationalism and the interests of the Soviet Union were considered forward-looking. Today, liberal globalism and the supporters of the United States of Europe flock to the same sign. We lost half a century because of that failed experiment.

That is why it is so important to understand that if there are no borders and the nation states cease to exist, then there will be no social network. The welfare state created by the social market economy is a nation state. If globalization inhibits the nation state, the welfare state is also impossible.

Everyone who considers national feelings, religious faith, the role of the family, and rejects gender theory, or even questions of the multicultural vision they plan for, is considered by the Western elites to be the enemy.

Thinking about a common Europe? How? To get off their high horse to and arrive at the heart of the matter, they should give up lecturing us, so we can start talking to each other.

Previously by Mária Schmidt: The Gravedigger of the Left

34 thoughts on “Misunderstandings

  1. They weren’t transformed into limousine left, they always were. In the Albanian student movement where I took part, the top 7 student leaders were from a communist military college, all spies. You had to go pretty down to find one that wasn’t. I assume it was the same in the West.

    Only 10% of the students got involved in some active form in the movement. The rest of them were spectators in the few biggest days. And we had very valid reasons to do what we did. West European students had 0 reasons to protest, just their horns were itching. They brought about a much worse world. It sounds very strange to me how Dany le Rouge (Daniel Cohn-Bendit) started his career. It sounds much like the political theatre that I have personally seen in Albania. Include in the scenario also the photo that made him famous. Why him? What did he do anyway? In the controlled press why all the reflectors on him at once? We know that the press was controlled because it still is and has always been.

    How can workers self-manage a car factory? That demands degrees in engineering, intrinsic hierarchies, dear interests. If the owner of the factory does not put the soul in his work, it won’t work. So many of them fail even after that. The manager of the factory creates no value? The researcher creates no value? Only the proletariat creates value?

    Marxism is the fourth of the great Abrahamic religions. It creates envy, mobilizes the scum of the society towards power, and precipitates down the IQ of the society.

    Humans once lived in the wilderness. Now the wilderness is the society. Hyenas, snakes, tapeworms, brain-eating amoebas have taken on a human face. In order to survive we must do what we have always done in the wild: take care of our tribe. At present the tribe is the blood-related nation, not the fancy propositional nation. It won’t work, it never did.

    • Thank you Brother for shearing your Albanian experience and thoughts with us.
      I know as a fact that Albanian version of Communism was the most violent and abusive from all murderous , horrifying Communist regimes in Europe..
      I really respect you as a Human Being and experiences you went thru . Your Brother in struggle for the Truth and Freedom..Max the Polish man..

      • On December 8, 1990, on the first day of student protests against communism in Albania, I committed a heroic act, and lived to tell it. I stopped a Polish-made ARO off-road car that was ramming fast through the student crowd to disperse us. That increased the morale very high. The car stopped, but chances were very high that I could have died. Eventually the driver left. I prevented the other students from vandalizing the car, with my high civic sense. 28 years later they officially thanked me for the act. I still remember the stunned faces of my friends.

        I agreed with an Albanian student leader that the plan of the communists was to let some Albanians leave the country, and suppress the others, making Albania the European version of North Korea. It was through selfless acts like mine and those of my friends that it didn’t come to pass. I tell my bravery, my friends tell theirs.

        If you die in a heroic act, you will become the stepping stone of your enemies. You will not be there to contest their fairy tales. They will bring you flowers.

        If you survive a heroic act, you will become the laughing stock of your friends. Everybody wants to be friends with a big guy. Nobody wants their friend to become a big guy. Such is the world.

        In a strange situation that I don’t talk much about, in 1991 a high-ranking secret police nearly killed me. I am alive because the situation became compromising to him, and because I played it really fine. I was also lucky. 10 years later the event came to mind to me for the first time, and I lived the fear that I had suppressed in the event. 25 years later after the event, that high-ranking official invited me to drink over it with vodka and beef steaks. He too understands it that without brave youth like me and my friends, Albania would have had it much worse.

        We Eastern Europeans never felt inferior to Westerns. We just put up with them until now. We know our way, and it doesn’t matter how high Soros yells “nazi antisemite” at us. Unfortunately we are too few to save the ass of the whole Europe, but we are doing much more than our fair share of sacrifice.

  2. “Because in a world that is global, where the people are losing their homeland and their homeyness and become strangers in their own country, and where they are relocated. This is the feeling that is increasingly encouraging the rebellion against the elites of the West and that psych up the new settlers against the West. ”

    Now the last 9 words of that quote are very astute, I thank Maria Schmidt.

    “The political elites of Western Europe are rife with Marxists, former Maoists and Trotskyites, who have never been brave enough to emigrate to the socialist side and experience the “future” in practice, and so did not to have to face the vicious nature of communism and apologize for their supporting behavior”

    This will be why the photo “Paris May 1968” shows the German Green Daniel Cohn-Bendit, penile extender at Frankfurt University daycare centre decades ago, supporter of Western intervention to destroy Yugoslavia in the interests of (Saudi-financed Muslim) multiculti and proponent of miscegenation in Europe at his German Reunification speech in the Frankfurt Paulskirche a couple of years ago.

    However in her “national capitalist” dislike of the 1968ers, I believe Maria Schmidt is overlooking all those conservative capitalist EU politicians such as Wolfgang Schäuble or Macron, ex-Goldman Sachs. These are no independent agents but represent material and class interests. And they were never Greens or some brand of socialist like the current EU “Foreign Minister”, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federica_Mogherini
    on the contrary.

    Nor does Schmidt mention the way opinion makers in the media and German politicians are members of transatlantic US entities such as the Atlantik Brücke.

    She reminds me in her blindness to US and EU Capital of the Czech Vaclav Klaus, who in the 90s was the darling of the western business press solely because he was a Thatcherite, whereas now he is a “horrible racist nationalist.”

    So her statement below is not enough to explain what is going on. I think that will because she is unwilling, for historical reasons of Communism, to finger Capital as such for anything at all.

    And I think her historical experience of the USSR is why, – although she comments on West German predation on East Germany after 1990 – , she does not mention EU corporate predation on Hungary 1991 to date, which contributed to the rise of Orban:

    “The sixty-eights were utopians, and they remained as such. Only today it is not world socialism, self-management of workers, the elimination of exploitation, etc. that is their goal, because they live too well for that, but universal human rights, the markets and freed trade, the priority of financial markets, that is: globalization. The equality they proclaim is believed to be the result of Multiculturalism, globalization and the trinitarianism of immigration. And then the Great New World will come.”

    Lastly, as an Eastern European with a likely negative attitude to Russia, Schmidt does not consider how mass high-fertility immigration benefits the future EU-US aggression towards Russia, in view of the the EU’s active (France, UK) or passive (Germany and others) current connivance at US aggression towards Russia.

    In The Race for What is Left (title of Michael Klare’s book), jihadi youths in a miscegenated EU Army under German Muslim command in 2040 are good cannon fodder when resource-poor EU attacks resource-rich Russia to obtain remaining oil and natgas. The German Army already has a significant number of Muslim soldiers.

    • …”Nor does Schmidt mention the way opinion makers in the media and German politicians are members of transatlantic US entities such as the Atlantik Brücke. “..

  3. One of the best articles on the subject that I have ever read. The option for the Eastern Europeans is only to stand their ground, but the author does not suggest what sort of options exist, or what events could occur, to change the minds of the Western European political elites. They have seen the voting tendency and multiple polls which indicate the rising resentment of European people against globalism, yet the Mogherinis and Santerinis of the EU continue along with their Multicultural suicide agenda, oblivious of the hostilities they are creating. Far from trying to reach some kind of European common ground they speak to the Eastern European countries with insufferable arrogance.

  4. Great article!

    This article needs to be spread to all Western-European forums and magazines, and its content deserves to be debated openly, in order to reach the common people in Western Europe, who have deliberately been kept in the dark by their elites about the fate of their fellow Europeans who were unlucky to end up on the eastern side of the fence.
    This is especially true now, as the (near!) future fate of Western Europe may depend on how the countries of Central- and Eastern Europe will manage to defend their national integrity and souvereignity against the globalist agenda of the corporate world and their collaborators of the corrupted EU bureaucrats and the decadent academic and media elites.

    I think 1968 was a milestone in Eastern Europe as well, but again a tragic one, similar to the one of 1956, with the crushing of the Prague Spring by Soviet tanks.

    Below is a link with the English translation of an interview with Rudi Dutschke, one of the leaders of the German left in the West, who actually went to Prague in 1968 not long before the Soviet invasion (which nobody expected at that time), with the idea of finding common themes between the protesters of the “East” and those of the “West”. The interesting point is, that he in retrospect admitted that he was ignorant of the ordeal that the Czechs, Eastern Germans and other citizens of the Soviet block states were suffering, and that he did not understand their legitimate demands at the time of his visit. At the time of this interviwe, right before his death, he even acknowledged that the most significant event in Europe in 1968 did not occur in Paris, but in Prague. We would wish that his contemporaries, who now rule Western-Europe together with
    their conformistic millenial epigones, would have had the same intelligence, integrity and honesty that Dutschke, in spite of his grave ideologic errors, still managed to show.


    One little explanation for the non-Hungarian readers: “We are bound by the common adoration of beat music, the farmer,.. ”
    The word “farmer” does not refer here to a guy working the land, but is the Hungarian word for blue-jeans.

    • ..”the fate of their fellow Europeans who were unlucky to end up on the eastern side of the fence.”..
      There was nothing “unlucky” in the post-war fate of CEE Nations…but well prepared and organized plan designed by parties of interest ,carefully negotiated in Teheran ,Yalta and Potsdam “Treaties”… sickening..

      • Max:
        I agree with you.
        The fact that I used the term “unlucky” does not imply that I would regard it as an event of “destiny”.
        Of course it was part of a huge evil plan, but this is obvious to every one on this forum.
        This evil plan also included the slaughters of WW I, the mass murders of the Russian Revolution and civil war that followed, the evil of industrialised mass murders by Nazism and WW II, and then the division of Europe after 1945, the suppression by communism in the former “East”, and after 1989, the almight power of the corporate world, the continuous mass-migration into Europe from backward parts of the world, the invasion and advent of a primitive desert cult from the 5th Century, sex- and gender-related insanities, the abolition of free speech, national autonomy, cash money etc.
        If we do not stop it now, it wil end in a huge totalitarian world government. It’s 5 to 12.

        • Just take a look at this news, brother, from 3 days ago :

          1)”Making biometric data mandatory for those countries with ID cards: EU citizens’ ID cards (older than 12 years) and non-EU family members’ residence cards will now include biometric data, namely fingerprints and facial images, stored on a chip in the cards. This will be accompanied with stronger safeguards on who can access the biometrics;”

          2)”Direct access to bank account information: law enforcement authorities and Asset Recovery Offices will have direct access on a case-by-case basis to bank account information contained in national, centralised registries enabling the authorities to identify in which banks a suspect holds accounts”.


          Orwell in full swing…

      • I sadly agree. It wasn’t luck; luck comes at the micro level with individual battles in the long war.

        However, don’t overlook naïveté, greed, and physical illness. Not to mention psychopathy.

  5. Thank you very much Maria Schmidt and CrossWare. This makes much more sense than does the insane jumble that it can appear to me to be.

  6. Well written Ilia. Socialism will only work if the 11th commandment will be Thou shalt not parasitize on your fellow human.

  7. Thank you Maria Schmidt for such a comprehensive and truthful analysis.
    One of the best I read in last decade.
    To support your thesis I’m attaching one of the opinions I find today on the net:
    …”I lived in Germany in the mid 70’s and it was a nice spotlessly clean country, once re-unification happened it slowly became obvious the East had taken over the West, Merkel being a prime example”…

    …”East had taken over the West”…
    ps. Thanks “Cross-ware” for translation and posting !!

  8. I had an interesting lesson in economic realities in 2013, travelling by train from Cologne to Dresden. From Weimar (formerly in the DDR) there were derelict buildings by the trackside, from businesses which couldn’t compete in a proper market; by Leipzig, there were dozens, and this in the wealthiest country of the old Communist Bloc.

  9. My use of this article will be to send it to friends who are still stuck in the mists of post-WWII and post-Cold War and breach their nostalgically distorted understanding of what is happening in Europe.

  10. Great work by Maria Schmidt, Chef Editor for Figyelo ,prominent and independent Hungarian Business Journal for publishing a list of members ,cooperatives of the Soros network in Hungary…
    Link to the list :
    Sobering reality.. Please circulate around link and List ..

  11. I am not and do not want to be anonymous. Something has changed in my reply section and I must enter my name each time rather than leave it as is.

  12. I am having the same trouble as Alex MacColl. This,undr anonymous, was my comment:
    “My use of this article will be to send it to friends who are still stuck in the mists of post-WWII and post-Cold War and breach their nostalgically distorted understanding of what is happening in Europe.”

Comments are closed.