European Outlook # 83 February 2023

Europe: The Struggle for Unity

Winston Churchill made his famous "United States of Europe" speech in Zurich in 1946. And in 1954 he signed an Association Agreement with the European Coal and Steel Community - the forerunner of the European Economic Community. He didn't include the UK in his vision of united Europe because he thought the British Empire would last forever, but it was all gone in the next twenty years.

He was followed as prime minister by Harold Macmillan who tried to take the UK into the EEC in 1961 and 1967, but both bids were blocked by French President Charles de Gaulle, who feared that Britain was too close to America.

Charles De Gaulle retired in 1969 and was replaced by Georges Pompidou who began talks with British prime minister Ted Heath which led to the UK's entry to the EEC in 1973. This decision was confirmed by prime minister Harold Wilson's referendum of 1975.

In 2016 another referendum was called by prime minister David Cameron which saw the UK quit the European Union. But the economic forces that attracted us to Europe in the first place are still the same and the fight goes on for European Solidarity. 

The Tories are strongly opposed to the EU, the Labour Party and the Lib Dems want to "make Brexit work", but the Greens and the Scottish Nationalists would rejoin Europe as soon as possible.

The next UK general election is scheduled for January 2025. Opinion polls are moving steadily in favour of rejoining the EU, and a lot could happen in the next two years. As the recession bites more people will regret their vote to leave and those politicians who engineered Brexit will claim they were obeying "the will of the people". Boris Johnson will use this excuse to absolve himself of all responsibility.

The people voted to control immigration but it's now completely out of control. They voted to restore sovereignty but we are still ruled by international finance. And they voted for cheaper food and fuel but both commodities have increased in price. Surely, even the most gullible Daily Mail readers will see the light. The battle is far from over.

Distributism - Ted G - https://lowimpact.org

The idea of distributism arose out of Catholicism in the 19th century. And in fact the current Pope, Francis, has said: "Just as the commandment "Thou shall not kill" sets a clear limit in order to safeguard the value of human life, today we also have to say "thou shall not" to an economy of exclusion and inequality. Such an economy kills...A new tyranny is thus born, invisible and often virtual, which unilaterally and relentlessly imposes its own laws and rules. To all this we can add widespread corruption and self-serving tax evasion, which has taken on worldwide dimensions. The thirst for power and possessions knows no limits.

In the early 20th century it was generally seen as more of a right-wing than a left-wing idea, coming as it did from religion, opposing state ownership (the dominant socialist model) and promoting individuals, family and local community rather than the large-scale collective.

Then GK Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc (pictured) began to promote distributism as a political ideology in opposition to both capitalism and socialism, using the experiences of the co-operative movement in northern England. Dorothy Day and the Catholic Worker Movement also adopted distributism, helping to build a larger following on the left. 

There was a fantastic debate in 1928 between GK Chesterton and George Bernard Shaw, chaired by Hilaire Belloc. Remember that this was when Stalin  was just consolidating his power within the Soviet Union. Bernard Shaw's point was that power needed to be concentrated at the top of the state to counter the global power of capitalism, and bring freedom to working people. Chesterton's opinion was that a man like Stalin could abuse that concentration of power to benefit not the workers, but the people at the top of the communist party, and totally destroy any hope of democracy or freedom for ordinary people. Hindsight has proven Chesterton right. How do we do it?

We distribute power economically - so we set up and support family businesses, small farms, independent shops, craftspeople - butchers, bakers, candlestick makers, self-employment, credit unions, co-ops (yes the early right-wing distributists mentioned them specifically), smallholdings - all the kinds of things that Low Impact has been promoting for the last 13 years. 

We use small businesses, and also start them, to provide a viable alternative to corporations and the state. Then the thinly- dispersed power units network to ensure everyone's safety and freedom. No business would be 'too big to fail' and require taxpayers' money to bail them out.

Distributism means that ordinary people control the means of production in a direct way, rather than through the state. If someone owns a few acres, or a machine, or their own skills and tools, then they decide what to do with them - not the state, and not a corporation. Corporate capitalism kills democracy, and state socialism kills entrepreneurship. But we can be greedy and have both, along with stronger, safer communities, more interesting work, more interesting High Streets, unique localities and a more egalitarian and free society.

It's an imperfect model of course. Some businesses lend themselves to being small - market gardens, small shops, window cleaners. But what about car or computer manufacture, airlines or oil? Well, let's start where we can. Let's pledge never to buy vegetables from a supermarket again. Get a veg box delivered instead or use your local market or small, independent shops, or even grow your own. Let's start somewhere. GK Chesterton said that coal was an example of an industry in which power can't be distributed - it has to run by a corporation or the state. I disagree. Groups of miners can form co-operatives to run individual mines and start a community renewables group instead generating energy from solar panels, wind turbines or micro-hydro. We can cross the difficult bridges when we come to them - but let's start with the things that can be provided by small companies.

However, distributism is an economic rather than a political idea, but we need politicians to be talking about ways to limit the size of businesses. We're far from that, and under the current political system, any attempts at truly distributing wealth and power may result in a violent backlash, from the state or from the corporate empire - or more likely from a combination of the two. So we have to start talking about how to get round that by introducing political change.

So - small businesses and talking to each other. I give you distributism.

We all Make Mistakes

'Candour' magazine recently reprinted an article by Andrew Brons (pictured) entitled 'The Roots of British Nationalism' which first appeared in 'Nationalism Today' in 1985. In this article he mentions AK Chesterton and Oswald Mosley:

"GK Chesterton's cousin AK Chesterton, co-founder of the National Front in 1967, was a supporter of Sir Oswald Mosley until 1937 when he broke with him on account of Mosley's too close association with Italian Fascism and German National Socialism. Mosley was certainly a racialist despite his post-war protestations to the contrary and he was forthright in his condemnation of the fraudulent financial system and the power and influence of International Jewry (though not, he claimed, individual Jews). However he did not venture any solution to the problem of Capitalism at home by any identification with Distributism. His adoption of Italian bus conductors' uniforms served only to give his movement a 'foreign' aspect that was, after the war, to be given further credence by his 'Europe a Nation' policy." 

Just a few points:

If AK Chesterton objected to Mosley's support for National Socialism why did he support William Joyce who founded the National Socialist League, defected to Germany to broadcast Nazi propaganda and was hanged for treason in 1946?

Mosley denied being a racist before the war. In 'Mosley Right or Wrong' he answered the question "Did you agree with Nazi racial policies?"

"No, I did not agree and I have expressed myself clearly on the point in public on a number of occasions. Our policy in this respect was very different. The reason was that our problem and our aim was to conduct a great Empire consisting of many different races and to hold it together and develop it. The Nazi Party's declared policy was to unite all the German peoples in Europe, and their aim was to bring them together in an area adequate to their economic survival. Our policy on racial matters was therefore naturally different from their policy." 

Mosley later regretted the Action Press uniform but he defended the simple black shirt which identified BUF members when fighting the Reds. Andrew Brons should remember his collaboration with John Tyndall who dressed up as a Stormtrooper in his Spearhead days. But then we all make mistakes.

'Europe a Nation' is not a 'foreign' concept, Englishmen such as Winston Churchill and George Orwell supported European unity just after the war, not to mention the 48% of the electorate who voted against Brexit in 2016.

Free Speech

Political prisoner Vincent Reynouard has sent me a home-made New Year Card from his prison cell in Edinburgh. He is being held in Scotland pending extradition to France on charges of 'Holocaust Denial'. This is not an offence in the UK but anyone raising the subject is liable to be prosecuted for inciting racial hatred. 

This blog does not deny the Holocaust. There's no doubt that Jews were rounded up and sent to concentration camps by the Nazis. The figure of six million deaths may be disputed, but it was undoubtedly a crime against humanity.

It's ironic that Israel is now treating the Palestinians just like the Nazis treated the Jews. Of course, not all Israelis are guilty anymore than all Germans were guilty during the war. It's governments that persecute people, not the ordinary folk. Adolf Hitler was a tyrant and so is Bibi Netanyahu. 

Revising history doesn't cause racial hatred and studying the events of nearly eighty years ago is not likely to revive antisemitism. Vincent Reynouard is entitled to his opinions. Britain and France have always been champions of liberty. It's a shame that both nations are now denying free speech.

Unforeseen Factors

The future of the White race is threatened by its low birth rate, and the future of mankind is threatened by global warming. This is indeed a picture of gloom and doom, but things might not be so bad. 

In the 19th century the great cities of the world were expanding rapidly and so was the number of horses needed to transport goods and people. Things got so bad that the Times of London predicted in 1874 that in fifty years London would be buried under nine feet of horse manure.

But this prediction took no account of the unforeseen development of railways and motor cars. Human ingenuity saved us from being buried in horse manure, and it might save us again. What form this salvation might take is unknown; we can only hope for the best.

The UK was almost starved into submission by German attacks on merchant shipping during World War Two. Allied ships bringing vital supplies across the Atlantic were being sunk by Kriegsmarine submarines and surface raiders. This desperate situation was relieved when the mathematicians and cryptographers at Bletchley Park cracked the Enigma code which enabled the Royal Navy and the RAF to locate and destroy enemy vessels. In order to decipher enemy codes Alan Turing (pictured) devised electro-mechanical calculating machines, called 'bombes', that led to the development of the computer; a device that changed the world.

I remember visiting a computer suite as a young man in the 1960s. The computers were the size of domestic fridges with flashing lights, huge tape spools, and printers churning out endless sheets of paper. Today we all have smart phones in our pockets that can do the same job. God works in mysterious ways, and we never know what's just around the corner.

Is World Peace Possible? - Oswald Spengler

The question whether world peace will ever be possible can only be answered by someone familiar with world history. To be familiar with world history means, however, to know human beings as they have been and always will be. There is a vast difference between viewing history as it will be and viewing it as one might like it to be. Peace is a desire, war is a fact; and history has never paid heed to human desires and ideals. 

Life is a struggle involving plants, animals, and humans. It is a struggle between individuals, social classes, peoples, and nations, and it can take the form of economic, social, political, and military competition. It is a struggle for the power to make one’s will prevail, to exploit one’s advantage, or to advance one’s opinion of what is just or expedient. When other means fail, recourse will be taken time and again to the ultimate means: violence. An individual who uses violence can be branded a criminal, a class can be called revolutionary or traitorous, a people bloodthirsty. But that does not alter the facts. Modern world-communism calls its wars "uprisings," imperialist nations describe theirs as "pacification of foreign peoples." And if the world existed as a unified state, wars would likewise be referred to as "uprisings." The distinctions here are purely verbal.

Talk of world peace is heard today only among the White peoples, and not among the much more numerous colored races. This is a perilous state of affairs. When individual thinkers and idealists talk of peace, as they have done since time immemorial, the effect is always negligible. But when whole peoples become pacifistic it is a symptom of senility. Strong and unspent races are not pacifistic. To adopt such a position is to abandon the future, for the pacifist ideal is a static, terminal condition that is contrary to the basic facts of existence. 

As long as man continues to evolve there will be wars. Should the White peoples ever become so tired of war that their governments can no longer incite them to wage it, the earth will inevitably fall a victim to the colored men, just as the Roman Empire succumbed to the Teutons. Pacifism means yielding power to the inveterate non-pacifists. Among the latter there will always be White men – adventurers, conquerors, leader-types – whose following increases with every success. If a revolt against the Whites were to occur today in Asia, countless Whites would join the rebels simply because they are tired of peaceful living.

Pacifism will remain an ideal, war a fact. If the White races are resolved never to wage war again, the colored will act differently and be rulers of the world.

Majority Rights - https://majorityrights.com 

Nation Revisited - https://nationrevisited.blogspot.com

Europe Renaissance - https://europerenaissance.com 

European Outlook

All articles are by Bill Baillie unless otherwise stated. The opinions of guest writers are entirely their own. We seek reform by legal means according to the UN Declaration of Human Rights, Article 19:

"We all have the right to make up our own minds, to think what we like, to say what we think, and to share our ideas with other people."

  

   

 

 

  

 

     

  

 

 

European Outlook # 56 November 2019

Another Three Years 

After three and a half years of bitter argument Boris Johnson has agreed a divorce settlement with the European Union. We were supposed to leave on October 31st but this has been extended by three months to allow for a general election on December 12th. Whatever happens we still have to negotiate a post-Brexit trade deal with Michel Barnier that could take another three years.

The Brexiteers will have to wait a little bit longer. They are fond of waving union flags and proclaiming their patriotism but a You Guv poll shows that 60% of them think that leaving the EU is more important than keeping the UK together. They are prepared to dump Northern Ireland and Scotland just to get their own way.

The latest 'false news' doing the rounds concerns the Lisbon Treaty 2020. This supposedly takes away our rebate, enforces the Euro, and makes it impossible to leave the EU. There is no such treaty! The actual Lisbon Treaty was signed in 2007 and came into force in 2009, it has no major amendments and makes no reference to "2020."

The good news is that we are still Europeans by blood, culture, history and geography, and there's nothing that the Brexiteers can do about it.  A nation adjacent to a continent of half a billion souls can't be truly independent.

Mussolini’s Last Interview

In March 1945 Benito Mussolini gave an interview to Magdalena Mollier. He said:

"Why do you come to interview me signora? I am dead. Look at what remains of me…Go for a swim in the lake, sunbath, enjoy your liberty and all the beautiful things that life reserves for you; don’t concern yourself with a ghost…This morning in my room a little swallow got trapped. It flew about, it flew desperately, until it fell exhausted on my bed; a little trembling creature. I caressed it and gradually, it calmed down; and in the end it dared to look at me. I went to the window, I opened my hand. It still stunned, did not understand immediately…then it opened its wings and, with a cry of joy, it flew to liberty…I will never forget that cry of joy. The only doors that will open for me are those of death. And it is also just. I have erred and I shall pay…I have never made a mistake following my instinct, but always when I obeyed reason…I do not blame anyone, I do not reproach anyone apart from myself. I am responsible, just as much for the things that I did well, that the world can never deny me, as for my weaknesses and my decline…My star has set. I work and make an effort, even though knowing that everything is a farce…My star has set, but I did not have the strength or the courage to retire in time…Have you ever seen a prudent, calculating dictator? They all become mad, they lose their equilibrium in the clouds, in quivering ambitions and obsessions. And it is actually that mad passion which brought them to where they are. A bravo borghese would never discomfort himself so much…There is no doubt that we are heading towards, in short, a Socialist époque…I see the salvation of Europe only in a socialist union of European states. A formidable block that will defend our civilization and existence against the red materialism of the Bolsheviks and for us more or less damaging experiments of the American type. Soon the German, French, Spanish, Italian etc. question will be of no interest; only Europe will be of interest. Everyone will realize it. If in time or not, who knows?"

Days later he spoke to the journalist Ivanoe Fossani. He said:

"If England, instead of sending the knights of St George to create discord and unquenchable hatreds, had fused Europe into a block of ideals and interests, our position would be unassailable…Before entering into the Pact of Steel I tried everything to reach an understanding with the other side…England didn’t want it. It wanted our neutrality and our ports at its disposal…But Italy’s geography meant it had to choose war, either with one side or the other…Our geographical position is outside the orbit of neutrality. Either accept war or become an encampment of enemy armies…The only socialism workable socialistically is corperativism, the point of confluence, equilibrium and justice for private interests in respect of the collective interests."

Quotations from Mussolini, A New Life by Nicholas Farrell, Phoenix 2003

Take Your Pick

If you are an old-fashioned British Nationalist you have plenty of parties to chose from. They range from right-wingers such as the Traditional Britain Group, to left-wing National Socialists like British Movement, and centrists like the National Liberal Party which combines Liberalism with Nationalism. Most of these groups would strongly object to being listed with the others, but they are all related to each other by history. The following groups, listed alphabetically, have active websites but there are probably a few more that can't afford to go online.

Britain First is led by Paul Golding. 
British Democratic Party is led by James Lewthwaite.
British Movement was founded by Colin Jordan and is led by Stephen Frost.
British National Party was founded by John Tyndall, rose and fell under Nick Griffin, and is currently led by Adam Walker.
British Unity is led by Nick Griffin.
European Knights Project is led by Jack Sen.
For Britain is led by Ann Marie Waters.
Knights Templar is connected to former BNP fundraiser Jim Dowson.
League of St George is led by "a president."
National Front is led by Tony Martin who is currently challenged by his deputy Jordan Pont.
National Liberal Party is led by a National Council which includes Graham Williamson.
Patria is led by Dr Andrew Emmerson.
Patriotic Alternative is led by Mark Collett.
Traditional Britain Group is led by Lord Sudeley.
Western Spring is led by Max Musson.

There are also several independent far-Right magazines and websites;
'Candour' founded by AK Chesterton in 1953 and edited by Colin Todd, who is currently detained.
'Heritage and Destiny' edited by Mark Cotterill.
'Blood and Honour' founded by Ian Stuart Donaldson in 1987. 
'White Voice' edited by veteran campaigner Eddy Morrison.

All of them believe in conspiracy theories, strict immigration controls, and national independence. Membership figures can't be verified because few of them are registered with the Electoral Commission. Attempts to unite them into a single movement have not succeeded. This is not due to politics but to their leaders who take themselves far too seriously. 

At its peak in the 1970s, the National Front had thousands of members, but they never achieved electoral success. The movement was practically destroyed just before the 1979 general election by Margaret Thatcher's brilliantly-timed statement that she understood people's fears of  being "swamped" by immigration.

A generation later the British National Party boasted two MEPs, over a hundred local councillors, and a seat on the London Assembly, but following Nick Griffin's disappointing performance on Question Time the movement collapsed. Today, the BNP is just another little party.

When the Brexit fiasco is finally settled we will need a sensible patriotic party with achievable political and economic objectives, led by a capable leader with his feet on the ground. No more fantasies about rounding up established immigrants and shipping them back where they came from. No more ridiculous conspiracy theories about the Americans blowing up the World Trade Centre, or Elvis Presley shooting JFK, and no more dreams of reviving the British Empire.

We have a shamefully unequal society, a desperate housing shortage and failing social services. We need an educational system to produce the scientists and technicians necessary to run a modern country. We need to acknowledge our place in the world and stop pretending to be a super power. And above all we need to stop the influx of economic refugees from the Third World.

But if you want to see the same old faces in the back room of a run-down pub and listen to a lot of paranoid nonsense, you can take your pick.

Distributism: An Idea Whose Time Has Come -  from Eddy Morrison's bulletin 'White Voice'.

The idea of distributism arose out of Catholicism in the 19th century. And in fact, the current Pope, Francis, has said:

 "Just as the commandment 'Thou shall not kill' sets a clear limit in order to safeguard the value of human life, today we also have to say: 'thou shall not' to an economy of exclusion and inequality. Such an economy kills... A new tyranny is thus born, invisible and often virtual, which unilaterally and relentlessly imposes its own laws and rules. To all of this we can add widespread corruption and self-serving tax evasion, which has taken on worldwide dimensions. The thirst for power and possessions knows no limits."

In the early 20th century it was generally seen as more of a right-wing than a left-wing idea, coming as it did from religion, opposing state ownership (the dominant socialist model) and promoting individuals, family and local community rather than the large-scale collective.

Then GK Chesterton ( pictured right) and Hilaire Belloc (pictured left) began to promote distributism as a political ideology in opposition to both capitalism and socialism, using the experience of the co-operative movement in northern England. Dorothy Day and the Catholic Workers Movement also adopted distributism, helping to build a larger following on the left.

There was a fantastic debate in 1928 between GK Chesterton and George Bernard Shaw, chaired by Hilaire Belloc. Remember that this was when Stalin was just consolidating his power within the Soviet Union. Bernard Shaw's point was that power needed to be concentrated at the top of the state, to counter the global power of capitalism, and bring freedom to working people. Chesterton's opinion was that a man like Stalin would abuse that concentration of power to benefit not the workers, but the people at the top of the communist party, and totally destroy any hope of democracy or freedom for ordinary people. Hindsight has proven Chesterton right, how do we do it?

We distribute power economically - so we set up and support family businesses, small farms, independent shops, craftspeople - butchers, bakers, candlestick makers, self-employment, credit unions, co-ops (yes the early right-wing distributists mentioned them specifically), smallholdings - all the kind of things that lowimpact.org has been promoting.

We use small businesses, and also start them, to provide a viable alternative to corporations and the state. Then the thinly-dispersed power units network to ensure everyone's safety and freedom. No business would be 'too big to fail', and require taxpayers' money to bail them out.
Distributism means that ordinary people control the means of production in a direct way, rather than through the state. If someone owns a few acres, or a machine, or their own skills and tools, then they decide what to do with them - not the state, and not a corporation. Corporate capitalism kills democracy, and state socialism kills entrepreneurship. But we can be greedy, and have both, along with stronger, safer communities, more interesting work, more interesting High Streets, unique localities and a more egalitarian and free society.

It's an imperfect model of course. Some businesses led themselves to being small - market gardens, small shops, window cleaners. But what about car or computer manufacture, airlines or oil? Well, let's start where we can.  Let's pledge never to buy vegetables from a supermarket again. Get a veg box delivered instead, or use your local market or small, independent shops, or even grow your own.  Let's start somewhere. GK Chesterton said that coal was an example of an industry in which power can't be distributed - it has to be run by corporations or the state. I disagree. Groups of miners can form co-operatives to run individual mines. Better still, they could close the mines and start a community renewables group instead, generating electricity from solar panels, wind turbines or micro-hydro. We can cross the difficult bridges when we come to them - but let's start with the things that can be provided by small companies.

However, distributism is an economic rather than a political idea, but we need politicians to be talking about ways to limit the size of businesses. We're far from that, and under the  current political system, any attempt at truly distributing wealth and power may result in a backlash, from the state or from the corporate empire - or more likely a combination of the two. So we have to start talking about how to get round that by introducing political change.

So - small businesses and talking to each other. I give you distributism.

European Outlook Comment: Ideas like Distributism and Social Credit are important but complex businesses such as aerospace and pharmaceuticals spend billions of pounds on research and development and couldn't be run as co-operatives. What we really need is ethical capitalism.

Ireland's Right to Unite - Oswald Mosley, from "Union" 15th May 1948

What interest has an Englishman in Ireland? The answer is that this Englishman proved his interest in Ireland and friendship for her people when as the youngest member of the British Parliament, he became Secretary of the Parliamentary Committee which opposed the operations of the Black and Tans and demanded peace with Ireland. We succeeded at any rate in bringing the Black and Tan inquiry to an end, but we were only partially successful in winning peace for Ireland, because the Government of the day dismembered Ireland. The original Tory demand was for a six county Ulster divided from Ireland, which would have subjected a 65% Catholic majority to the Protestant minority in these counties. The final "partition" of six counties still included predominately Catholic areas.

The rule which followed has been a disgrace to Britain. What a bitter irony for the British war time Prime Minister to advocate the union of Europe at the Hague and renunciate as his basic principle "freedom from fear of the policeman's knock" in a period when the "policeman's knock" is still the only means by which the Tory Party can maintain its rule in Ulster. For the six Counties are the first police state in Europe: they have always had arrest and imprisonment without trial.

Their equivalent of 18B was not confined to war time: it is their regular method of government in Northern Ireland. The rounding up of Catholics and holding them in prison without trial through the best years of their young manhood is a commonplace of this system. Freedom from "fear of the policeman's knock" indeed. We had arrest and imprisonment without trial in England during the war: we have it still in Ulster today.

For long past it has been my practice not to attack anyone who sincerely and strenuously opposes Communism. I do not do so now, but I suggest that Europe cannot be united on a basis of humbug and that every Englishman is put in that position by the Ulster situation, if he advocates freedom from imprisonment without trial in the Europe of the future. For my part I have always stood for the principle of no imprisonment without trial. If a nation so desires, it can always alter the law to suit the facts of a new age and the conditions of a new civilisation. But no nation has the moral right to imprison any subject who has kept the law and can be charged with no breach of the law.

If the Government acts in this way it is guilty of a frame-up and a racket from which no one can be safe. Where is freedom if you say to the individual: "What you did yesterday was perfectly legal and according to law, but we are going to imprison you for having done it", or alternatively: "you have not broken the law but we fear you may commit some offence in future, so we are going to imprison you to prevent it." Under such formulae of mis-Government no one is safe from gaol and all freedom is a mockery. That was the war time system in England and it is the present system in Ulster. Soviet Russia and Ulster share  the distinction of being the only two Police States in Europe to last for some 30 years. The first is run by International Communism and the second by the British Tory Party.


The Ulster disgrace must be brought to an end. Now is the time and opportunity to do it, all Western nations should soon have the chance to enter a wider Union of Europe. Admission to that wider community will bring a guarantee against the persecution of minorities which could not exist within the narrow hatreds of smaller societies. A minority of Protestants, of course, does exist in Northern Ireland. They have used their fear of persecution to secure from British Government the means to persecute an almost equal number of Catholics. Both the fear and the excuse will be removed on entry to the Union of Europe. The large community of the future can guarantee freedom from persecution to such minorities. No further reason or excuse exists for the separate life of the Ulster State. Therefore, Union Movement affirms the right of Ireland to unite and then, as a united people, to enter the wider Union of Europe.

Comments

Please use the facility at the end of this blog to leave your comments and see what others have to say. 

European Outlook

All articles are by Bill Baillie unless otherwise stated. The opinions of guest writers are entirely their own. We seek reform by legal means according to the UN Declaration of Human Rights, Article 19:

"We all have the right to make up our own minds, to think what we like, to say what we think, and to share our ideas with other people."

This blog will appear occasionally in support of Nation Revisited which is posted monthly. https://nationrevisited.blogspot.com