Civilized old man
The entire broadcast is dedicated to the US elections. Yes, the topic is certainly important, but we should not forget about what is happening on the other coast of the Atlantic - in Europe. We have already become a commonplace to believe that the current European Union is such a "civilizational old man", a problematic knot, a web of political and ideological "". At first glance, this is how it is. However, one should not forget that today the so-called "Europe" is still a huge solvent market. There are both consumers from Old Europe (440 million people, together with as many as 832 residents of the Vatican), and from New Europe (another 98 million people, along with 1,3 million consumers from the heroically opposing 'aggressive Russia' Estonia. aspiring neophytes "- Moldova and Ukraine (another 40 million people). A huge, in general, market of 538 million people (and potentially 578 million people). Moreover, a platform with its own printing press in the form of the European Central Bank and 6 trillion dollars of imports of goods and services.
Indeed, even for the UK (although it left the EU), the consumers and the European market have not ceased to exist - these ties in life are much more difficult than putting signatures on paper. The exit of the British from the EU, in fact, was connected with the desire to decouple their payment system from the ECB, while preserving the market for both goods and services, as well as labor and capital. Actually, all the long disputes just went around how the EU was ready to come to terms with this cunning position of London.
When we look news agenda from Europe, then (abstracting from the topic of COVID-19) we see the following in Russia: the disgrace of migrants, the collapse of the traditional value system and the culture of "doublethink" ("I see here - I don't see here"), liberal dictatorship and media engagement, anti-Russian rhetoric and politics, NATO and military exercises, sanctions. All this reminds of a fairy tale about a "white bull", which should have died long ago, walking around in a bastard. But the bull never dies, and the tale in the domestic media begins anew.
How to make migrants happy
And what about them? How does the goby itself feel, so to speak, "in the first person"? And everything is very logical there: a) how to solve the problems of a single space of Old and New Europe in such a way that the former receives more, and the latter gives more, and not vice versa; b) how to make sure that everyone is happy and falls asleep satisfied; c) how to blame all the problems on Trump and "aggressive Russia"; d) how to make migrants happy.
It is logical that in the mainstream the most important topic for Europe is “two tracks” (Old and New Europe). And everyone needs to do “good” on both tracks. And also the fact that Trump (for now) and Russia (permanently) are working as an external "lightning rod". And what is not logical? - Migrants.
In 2017, the author released a material (https://topwar.ru/106938-holopom-po-evropam.html), which analyzed in detail how and why the topic of “free movement” became the main pillar of the Eurozone, how important it is, how critical its limitation is for the entire structure. Then migrants went to Europe in a stream, and this problem was on the front pages of the European media. After the deal with Ankara, this issue went under the carpet, but it was never resolved in principle. Today, about 5,5 million more friendly "guests" are waiting for the sending of Europeans to hospitable homes at the EU borders. The flow of one-time arrivals has decreased, but it has not been stopped. These guests both amicably annoyed, to put it mildly, the owners (like termites undermining the "support" of the European Union), and continue to sharpen it.
What's in stock? An obvious contradiction - the flow of migrants is not only financially costly, but also directly undermines the main European "bondage". And nevertheless, the ideologists of the "European liberal-spiritual bonds" methodically, persistently and plannedly pursue a course towards the "integration" of these waves of migrants into European society.
Figures are often quoted that about 2,6 million people have fled to the EU since the beginning of the Syrian conflict. But let's take a wider view - from 1995 to 2020 (over 25 years), the EU accepted over 13,6 million people for permanent residence (this is in addition to those who settled and still exist illegally). In the early years, migrants more or less integrated into the “European labor collective,” but since 2010 they have even ceased to imitate this activity. Let's think about the numbers: if we collect all social benefits for 4,85 million people (only officially registered), then the costs of these, in legal terms, “people in need of protection and assistance” amounted to 4,36 billion euros per month (52,3 , XNUMX billion euros per year). This is not counting the "donations" of various "foundations" and other private "benefactors". And these are only expenses for those who “need”, what is called “here and now”, not counting the different intermediate status of their residence.
Will Europe Digest Termites?
It is customary to argue that Europe as a whole, with its 538 million population, will easily "digest" a one-time increase of 1,5 - 1,7 million and even 2 million people. Okay, let's say. But, firstly, quite specific (and not all) countries of Old Europe are engaged in "digestion", and this is not at all 540 million of the population, but a much more modest figure of 401 million (not even 440 million) people. The "new" Europeans categorically do not accept this contingent. Not accepted yet. Therefore, 13,6 million “settled” over 25 years, this is no longer a “statistical error”, but a very tangible 3,4%. If we take into account the still quite official increase in those already naturalized, “born in conditions of freedom and democracy,” then this figure will approach 8,2%, with a tendency to grow to 2025% by 14,3. And most of these happy people are not engaged in any practical work that contributes to the so-called GDP. This is not labor migration, unlike, by the way, from Russia. There, nobody pays to the budget for working patents, in Europe they will be paid from the budget.
It is proposed to consider that the European Union thus decided to reduce the cost of production and attract cheap labor. Let's look at the reality: there is cheap labor (for example, Ukraine and Moldova). However, if the Ukrainian worker is not just cheap, but also usually works in a specific mode of exploitation (since you can't get overwhelmed by the Polish master), then the Middle Eastern migrant often does absolutely nothing. It turns out that the labor market is formally closed for a fully qualified workforce (the visa-free regime does not apply to labor relations), and only some countries (primarily Poland) turn a blind eye to this. Even workers from the European Union countries (Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Romania, Bulgaria) "work hard" in Old Europe in full force. And the workers from the Middle East? On them labor calluses are not noticeable. But they feel good at the Cologne fair and in other places of folk festivities. We observe an obvious fact: the inflow of migrants from the south was limited only by the fact that Europe did not have time to “process” them simultaneously in the amount of 2-2,5 million per year. I just couldn't handle it. But this was precisely a technical limitation. It doesn't work at once, but gradually - please.
A natural question arises, why is the EU so persistently introducing this foreign cultural injection, even under the tangible threat of loosening its very foundations? Is it a costly, destructive injection that brings absolutely nothing but specific budget expenditures, without even the illusory prospect of any income?
If you talk about this with a European liberal, then you will at least be accused of "callousness", "callousness", and then - of "racism". Yes exactly. An enlightened European will accuse you of chauvinism, nationalism and other "isms". The same will be done by "tolerant" Europeans, who, somewhere in Avignon, will not serve in a cafe or hotel, for example, a Spaniard just because he is Spaniard, and an anecdote from the series will be told about the Portuguese: "The Portuguese wears sideburns because wants to be like his mother. " But the same Spaniard, who was not poured by the French, will defend Middle Eastern migrants from your "intolerant racism" between curses against them.
If at the grassroots level all this can still be somehow explained by propaganda and ideological “pumping”, then the very ideologists of the process cannot be suspected of naive belief in “all good”. The objectivity of European politicians today is such that it causes nothing, except perhaps a feeling of disgust. Because when an unprincipled person suddenly begins to tell you about the importance of principles, it means that the very idea of a “principle” has become only a tool in their particular game. So what kind of game is the European “elite” playing, continuing to develop the topic of “migration” in such a way that, at first glance, it inflicts concrete tactical damage on the stability of its main economic and political pillars. Obviously, these costs cannot be anything other than an investment. The question is - what?
This topic, although it sickened in its time in the media, cannot today be a “checkpoint”, since it is extremely likely that the very group that pursued a similar policy is returning to power in the United States. Planting it both in the States themselves and throughout the world - wherever she could reach. And this group, using the resources of the United States, will again give a new impetus to its European counterparts, which have become rather sad over the past four years.
Sometimes one comes across the opinion that this position is due to the confrontation of the new "global liberalism" with the remnants of the influence of the Catholic Church. Like, such a position finishes the remnants of clericalism in Old Europe, and then finishes them off in New Europe (in particular, in the last real Catholic stronghold - Poland). This thesis, apparently, is not devoid of meaning, but it is unlikely to fully reflect reality. Since the postwar years, Europe has been steadily losing value orientations formed on a religious basis. Yes, undoubtedly, the church as a generator of meanings alternative to the global agenda should have come into conflict with new ideological concepts, but European clerics entered it already extremely weakened.
Here it is interesting to cite the opinion of the Arabs (and the author periodically communicates with various counterparties from the Middle East), who, in fact, personally observe the "exodus" of their neighbors to Europe. Stories differ, but the general outline is approximately the same: in different ways, different people, who are in some form of distant kinship, borrow certain money and move through Turkey, Greece, Albania to Europe. Instead of engaging in traditional trade (even if there is such an opportunity) or just officially leaving there and trying to "develop" something in the EU.
One of the interlocutors was very surprised to learn that one of his distant relatives not only received the status and benefits, but he was "helped to formalize the status at the same time in different places." The most surprising thing was not so much the very fact of such assistance from the “non-profit foundation”, as the absence of a corruption component in this scheme. The helpers "did not ask for anything in gratitude" for such (actually illegal) "help". Although the person began to receive benefits and payments comparable to the two average salaries in Germany. “There is something very bad about that. If they (Europeans) wanted good, they would strive to give work. To create such conditions when it is impossible not to work. But they do not seek to create them. They don't care whether he is a refugee or not. Why doesn't he help relatives to work? Young people get married, have families and don't work, how is it? Many houses are actually destroyed, but Europe is not helping to rebuild them. They won't even send a bag of grain and a hammer. Instead, they (Europeans) are doing everything to get people to leave. Why do they need loafers when these hands are so needed at home? They want to use them, and nothing good will come of it. I don't understand this. "
Unfortunately, those who need it understand everything very well. Indeed, digging through the resources associated with the few oppositional "mainstream media" in Europe, you begin to see that this practice is systemic in France, Germany, Italy. And the sponsor of this outrage is ultimately the official bureaucracy of the European Union itself.
Scarecrow for Europeans
In the Middle East, in villages, protecting crops from birds, the following technique is often used. Instead of the traditional scarecrow, they put a pole. A cross-bar made of a flexible and elastic vine is bent and fixed, the structure is covered with a rag, and a little broken grain is poured around it. When, after a few days, the birds get used to the pole and crowd in large numbers next to it, the child pulls on the long rope, the vine with rags straightens, and the birds rise in a heap into the air at once. Then the elder fires one or two shots with a shot, laying most of them.
The Arabs think that migrants for some reason play the role of birds, but (as it seems to the author of this material) they are mistaken. Migrants in the European Union play the role of a future scarecrow, but the role of birds is just assigned to the Europeans themselves. There were not one or two of those who were scared today. The same COVID-19, which makes everyone "mentally clump together" in terms of their fears and at the same time sit in separate apartments, closing doors and windows. Note that COVID-19 restrictions do not apply to persons who have arrived and "need protection and assistance" in a number of countries of Old Europe (for example, in the UK). On the one hand, this is logical, correct and humane. On the other hand, you should know some "nuances".
There is “aggressive Russia” outside, “Novichok” and “Russian trolls”, there is or was “insane Trump”, and there are COVID-19 inside and migrants who must be allowed everything and love everything. And when the "vine straightens out", it will be necessary to "rally together in apartments" even more closely, while continuing to "allow and love." It will be possible to survive in this ideological delirium only without thinking, without thinking, but doing it. At the same time, it does not matter how critically what is being performed will be interpreted, because fear is a "killer of the mind", and with it of critical thinking, in the absence of which any meanings are taken on faith, even if they contradict each other. It is then that the "newcomers" learn with extreme surprise that the repressive machine in the EU, which has allowed so much for many years, turns out to not only exist, but also works effectively. It was just that someone had to play the role, because no one just feeds anyone.
With the arrival of D. Trump in the White House in the United States, the positions of the groups that promoted such an agenda and structures have somewhat weakened, but today the chances are extremely high that they are regaining their lost positions, reviving their tools and expanding the scope of its application. And the pressure of these groups on the minds of ordinary people will soon multiply.