Quicksand Fans

Normally, I would just shake my head and move on, but this, is just too good to avoid:

The whole problem of explaining the present is so nettlesome that the European Union’s “House of European History” museum decided to omit the mention of World War 2 altogether by the simple expedient of declaring 1946 the Year Zero for European history. “It celebrates the creation of the EU with barely a nod to the crisis raging all around. France’s recent history is marked by a picture of the Tour de France, and Germany’s by the famous Berlin address by Barack Obama in 2008.”

Farcically, it’s been decided to omit any exhibit on which agreement cannot be reached. And because of their differing views about World War II, the museum will begin with an EU ‘year zero’ of 1946.

But of the unpleasantness of 1939-1945 it will only say that there was an event called the “European Civil War”, which presumably was fixed by the European Union, without the slightest input from things called the United States, the former Soviet Union, China and the Empire of Japan.

Yet these absurd naming conventions are only further signs that the Narrative is now developing yawning gaps. For the current world crisis, like almost every other crisis is caused as much by what went right in the last 70 years as what went wrong. And the problem with the Narrative is that what should have gone wrong went right and what ought to have gone right went wrong.

Read the whole thing

"Year Zero" ? Seriously?

I think a need some drinks

Also? Note to EU: 1984 was not an instruction manual...

What about Vercingitorix? Charlemagne? Caesar's Gallic wars?

kham wrote:Normally, I would just shake my head and move on, but this, is just too good to avoid:

The whole problem of explaining the present is so nettlesome that the European Union’s “House of European History” museum decided to omit the mention of World War 2 altogether by the simple expedient of declaring 1946 the Year Zero for European history. “It celebrates the creation of the EU with barely a nod to the crisis raging all around. France’s recent history is marked by a picture of the Tour de France, and Germany’s by the famous Berlin address by Barack Obama in 2008.”

Farcically, it’s been decided to omit any exhibit on which agreement cannot be reached. And because of their differing views about World War II, the museum will begin with an EU ‘year zero’ of 1946.

But of the unpleasantness of 1939-1945 it will only say that there was an event called the “European Civil War”, which presumably was fixed by the European Union, without the slightest input from things called the United States, the former Soviet Union, China and the Empire of Japan.

Yet these absurd naming conventions are only further signs that the Narrative is now developing yawning gaps. For the current world crisis, like almost every other crisis is caused as much by what went right in the last 70 years as what went wrong. And the problem with the Narrative is that what should have gone wrong went right and what ought to have gone right went wrong.

Read the whole thing

"Year Zero" ? Seriously?

I think a need some drinks

Also? Note to EU: 1984 was not an instruction manual...

You can't make this stuff up nacht; you just can't

Wonder what stupid politically correct term they'll use when the EU goes bankrupt. LOL

Mynock wrote:Wonder what stupid politically correct term they'll use when the EU goes bankrupt. LOL

They costs of the "social contract" exceeded what could be extracted from the rich.

Don't feel bad guys. My sister once thought the Civil War started when the blacks bombed Pearl Harbor. (Yes, she was a cheerleader and a model)

Mynock wrote:Wonder what stupid politically correct term they'll use when the EU goes bankrupt. LOL

They'll think of something. Can't be irrelevant now, can they?

What I thinking, is the next time the EU gets their ass in a crack, they can whistle for aid.

Kinda what Batman said:

"I'm not going to kill you"
"But I don't have to save you, either"

I think the EU sucks, period.

I looked at the main article. About two sentences in, I saw the words Daily Mail - and immediately stopped reading.

For the benefit of those not exposed to Her Majesty's Press, the Daily Mail is a newspaper WHICH IS NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES.

Especially not when it talks about -

Foreigners.
The EU.
Foreigners.
Immigrants.
The way things aren't like they used to be.
or
Foreigners.

The Daily Mail is the price we pay for the freedom of the press. It is worse than The Sun (everyone knows The Sun is a glorified comic - that's the whole point - but the Daily Mail still seems to have some cachet, for reasons which I find incomprehensible).

Yes, I know that the EU is capable of doing things which are barking mad (like the Euro....), and as an Englishman I believe that France is still our historic enemy, and has been for a thousand years, even if we haven't killed each other in battle since 1942.

But you can be utterly certain that any report in the Daily Mail is exaggerated, twisted, and one step (if that) removed from being complete bollocks.

kham wrote:You can't make this stuff up

The Daily Mail can - and frequently does.

Lomax, your description of the Daily Mail reminds me of Germany's "Bild". A newspaper that is extremely popular for reasons way beyond my ability to comprehend.

Sometimes my impression is that I am one of few people who don't think the EU is all bad. National politics and the media all over Europe like to point towards Brussels whenever things go downhill and they need someone to blame. Praise on the other hand rarely crosses national borders. Yes, the EU definitely has an image problem, and articles like this one do their part in contributing to it.