The Darkest Hour

Jiří Peca (1944), litho, 1999, Sir Winston Churchill. Foto: TES

The new film Darkest Hour is  devoted to Winston Churchill’s first month as prime minister in May 1940 and accurately depicts the fierce resistance on the part of many Tories, most of the aristocracy and business leaders to the elevation of Churchill. They rejected the defiance of Churchill as bad for (financial) business, irresponsible and military and politically hopeless anyway. Britain was isolated (sic) and doom and gloom prevailed. Surrender was seriously discussed. Moral, democratic and legal principles, let alone the fate of humanity and rule of law, were brushed aside by this establishment.

Churchill’s chief rival for the premiership, and the preferred candidate of most, Lord Halifax, strongly advocated a negotiated deal at all costs with the continent, united and governed by Germany, Italian, Spanish and later also French-Vichy rule. The big opponents of present-day Brexit.

The pivotal days were May 26-28 when the War Cabinet deliberated the choices for three days. Churchill´s strategy of (blind) resistance prevailed in the end and this decision had far reaching consequences for Europe as it is known today.  One should keep in mind that the Soviet-Union was a close ally of Nazi-Germany until June 1941 and just as aggressive in Eastern Europe, striving for the destruction of Great Britain and the last powerful democracy in Europe. Churchill was fully aware about the ability to go on alone and his defiance was supported by the view of the Chiefs of Staff: “To sum up, our conclusion is that prima facie Germany has most of the cards, but the real test is whether morale of our fighting personnel and civil population will counterbalance the numerical and material advantages which Germany enjoys. We believe it will“ (Winston S. Churchill, The Second World War, volume II, Their Finest Hour, page 29).

Seventy-five years and a referendum about EU-reforms later, European business leaders warn Theresa that they move out of the UK, although the EU refuses to reform and is becoming a eurocratic subsidized and protectionist plan economy French style with an Italian currency, Spanish unemployment figures, infamous corrupt members and free access for organized crime. The EU doesn´t want to reform and is heading towards the total European Union. That is the reason of Brexit. Wollt er die totale Union ? No was the answer of one of the oldest democracies and trading nations.

Twenty-five years ago, in 1992, big business proclaimed exactly the same at the eve of the Swiss EU-referendum. 50.3% voted ´no´, 77% voted ´no´ in 2001 and around 90% will vote ´no´ in case of a new referendum. The Swiss Government even withdraw the formal application for EU-membership last year and the Swiss National Bank (SNB) broke with the euro, because of the corrupt, illegal and ill fated policy of the ECB (two German directors Weber and Starck also resigned).  Switzerland is still booming however, big companies didn´t leave, but chose for this country instead,  although Switzerland is surrounded by the eurozone, which is being subsidized by the European Commission, its flawed competition and states aid policy and subsidies (75% EU-budget) and the illegal money printing scheme and absurd interest policy of the ECB. Switzerland is being harassed, intimidated and threatened by the European Commission, because of the outcomes of referendums, the same way Great Britain is being blackmailed and intimidated nowadays (a.o. pet travel ban, cruise ships ban, air planes ban, no trade deal et cetera).

The Brexit bill is just as unlawful, ill-founded and arbitrary,  as remainers are undemocratic, opportunistic and short-sighted. It just shows the great and rare luck of Great Britain, Europe and the world when Winston Churchill made the difference in the pivotal days in May 1940, when he was surrounded by dealmakers. Former East-bloc countries left the Comecon Bloc and the Soviet-Union allowed them to do so on basis of cooperative negotiations and pacta sunt servanda. The European Union is not willing to accept democratic outcomes however and just wants to punish leavers.

The real test is the moral of the people, the innovative, creative, trading and industrial powers and rule of law of a nation however, not the political and monetary European fantasy construct and the usual solemn declarations, treaties and laws which are not worth the paper they are written on.

The EU and the self-proclaimed Great Europeans know that the present European political, monetary and economic pillars are built on sand, subsidies, ambitions, hot air, protectionism, states aid and illegal interference by the ECB. They only know one direction: forwards, immer vorwärts, ever deeper into the financial, fiscal, economic, democratic, moral, social and above all hazardous morass.

Churchill was not just the saviour of Great Britain, Europe and the world, but the Hercules of democracy, rule of law, free trade and pacta sunt servanda. Churchill didn´t foresee the present-day bureaucratic, undemocratic, protectionist, centralized and notoriously corrupt EU when he mentioned the United States of Europe in 1946. He was already disillusioned about this European federal dream a short while afterwards, like many communists changed their opinion about the other European (socialist) utopia. He didn´t mention the United States of Europe anymore soon afterwards, but explicitly confirmed the sovereignty of Great Britain: “I say great sovereign nation with design and emphasis, for I reject the view the Britain and the Commonwealth should now be relegated to a tame and minor role in the world. Our past is the key to our future. Let no man underrate our energies, out potentialities and our abiding power for good. The Atlantic community is a dream that can well be fulfilled to the detriment of none and to the enduring benefit and honour of the great democracies” (9 April 1963).

It is rather likely that Churchill would have voted Leave in June 2016 and would have chosen for the open seas, the Commonwealth and the Atlantic Community instead of a Europe dominated by French, Italian and German (the old (Vichy) allies) eurocrats, apparatsijks and their national patronage networks of journalists, bureaucrats and lobbyists in other member states of the EU, to a large extent financed by their eurojobs seeking Dutch footmen and valets in The Hague. (Source: www.