The defeat of the sovereigns.

The defeat of the sovereigns.

And in the end, Ursula Von Der Leyen made it. But the problem is not the fact that she managed to start her commission. The real problem is that he voted for a "government program" that is all that the sovereigns hate, and that he had even more votes than the previous commission.

If you remember well, the sovranisti (including Salvini) had promised that they would literally tear up the order in Europe, and that after the elections "everything would change". the thing smacked of kidneys broken in Greece right away, but it was expected at least that their "growth" would have been at least relevant, or perceptible.

On the contrary, what they called "strong powers in Europe" seem even stronger, also because the Greens abstained because of disagreements with the liberals, but they did say that this would be a "tactical abstention" and that they will decide from time to time. This means that 95 votes of greens should be added to the calculation of the votes of Von Der Leyen.

To define this as a "total, catastrophic defeat" would be limiting. The result of all the threats of the sovereigns has been to compact the ranks of the adversaries, and the problem is that this compacting of the ranks is just … the only thing that the European sovranisti can NOT do.

This executive has a budget of around one trillion euros to carry out some reforms that the sovranisti (and the Masons who have supported M5S), will not like at all.

The first is to turn Europol into a real European police force, like FBI, capable of intervening throughout the EU. If we consider the effort that Freemasonry has made to infiltrate the judiciary, and have the power to impeach whoever wants and to save anyone who wants to save, I would say that the second power is about to fail. There will be someone else who can investigate anyone, Freemason or not .

This will greatly annoy those who hold the ranks of the judiciary and of the arbitrary power to decide how to apply the "mandatory" prosecution ". It means that if this Europol received the denunciation of some Italians residing abroad , concerning an Italian neo-fascist group, it would be difficult for "friends in uniform" in Italy to prevent the investigation of the subversive group (ie fascist) from starting.

I therefore foresee harsh reactions from Meloni and Salvini. But in the end, in Brussels they count for nothing. And that's the point.

You can find the political program in Italian here:

The second point is that the commission intends to legislate on the "protection of the rule of law". And this is something that the sovranisti do not like very much, because with the excuse of sovereignty they tried to say that "in our house the dictator does what he wants".

On the one hand, it is clear that if Europe is born as a union of democracies and states of law, who is not of the same idea. On the other hand, for ex-Soviet countries to leave the EU would mean an economic disaster, including Poland (because those who say that they "grow" should ask themselves who is trolling it).

But the point remains the catastrophic defeat. With these numbers, the Von Der Leyen has at its disposal a variable majority that lends itself practically to everything. We are talking about something that will not guarantee you the enormous numbers of the first trust, but that will guarantee the majority "stretching" to the right, left or towards the greens, depending on the proposal.

In practice, it has a majority for each of its proposals. Not the same majority, but a majority.

Populist newspapers such as "the Trio" (Repubblica, La Stampa, Corriere) obviously look good on saying it, much less will the Anglo-Saxon populism gentlemen, like the Huffington Post and Business Insider, say, but this is how things are: the populists and the sovranisti reinforced those who proposed to fight.

The other point for which no media analyzes the catastrophe suffered by sovereignists and populists is the composition of the new Commission. As I wrote, the yellow-green government would have had no major economic commissioner. Gentiloni to the economy, in fact, does not belong to the yellow of M5S, nor to the "green" leaguers, but (even worse) is in the very sad condition of being alone as a particle of sodium.

The problem is, that is, that if by chance the League returns to the government, and begins with its filth in the budget, it would be against a commissioner for the Italian economy. If on the propaganda level this would allow them to accuse the commissioner of "being of the PD", on the other hand the PD would enjoy much more timely information on EU decisions, while the League would simply learn to do things.

Not bad, like disaster.

Last point, Von Der Leyen is a woman. And it is very important to impose pink quotas everywhere. If carried out on a continental scale, this trend is quite devastating for parties like the League, whose members continue to behave in a way that even this blog (which according to some "facebook feminists" is the press organ of the Patriarchy) classifies under "subdrop" . But without the respect normally due to the slaves: if your wives have made you the good and no aftercare , beating the dick all over the country pretending to be males only makes you look pathetic.

Also this part will not like the populists and the sovranisti, who continue to propose the strong man as a model: the problem is that the Von Der Leyen has a LOT of power, and some smaller "strong man" will have to drop the head. The problem is that while Merkel is always looking to humiliate the loser, Von Der Leyen is not famous for this.

Many strong men in Europe will have to lower their heads in front of a woman: if not she, some of her newly elected. And this will be, for them, very hard to digest: the fascist male, essentially, is a failed male who tries to build himself an epic virile narrative using fascism as a script. The trouble is that this script is incompatible with "a chick beat me with blows".

Salvini, that is, sooner or later he will find himself against some woman of the new commission, who beat him up with blows. Knowing his cowardice he will probably look good from appearing on any occasion of confrontation, (maybe he will send someone taken from the clique of failed boys who follow him?), But from now on the risk is always present. Trump himself has always tried to avoid, as far as possible, open-faced clashes with Merkel: he knew that in case of defeat, his "male" scaffolding would collapse. Merkel, of her own, as a strategy never humiliates the adversary and always fights in the dark: for example, the CDU has just changed course by saying it wants to impose open source software throughout the German public administration. This is an answer to American threats to the car: you break Microsoft. But the CDU does not say "it is a threat to the USA", it says "it's a beautiful thing". Then it is up to the US to understand the point.

Von Der Leyen, at least from his past, is not like that: he has the habit of facing his opponents openly, then acting elusively: a kind of d'Alema, but worse. The (ex) General Walter Spindler knows something about it. The other one to fear is Jutta Urpilainen, who is another one who does not send her to say, and she has MUCH power too. The risk for the "big masks" who are hypnotizing the crowds is that at some point their compensatory narrative collapses.

On the matter of epic fiction as compensation for a male failure I will return later: it is enough to reflect that in the Islamic world if a man is killed by a woman, heaven is denied him, to understand the point. Islam is the religion of failed boys par excellence.

As a result, with 12 women versus 15 male commissioners, the majority he had and the program he passed, one can only speak of a catastrophic defeat of the populists.

Not for nothing the populists of the Huffington Post are furious, those of the Republic if they could hide the news, and the Press have taken it sportingly. If you go to the front page today, you won't even find the news. (and replied, Netanhyahu has much worse problems than the EU … oops).

The silence remains from across the Channel. Von Der Leyen's invitation to nominate a commissioner did not go down to him, because Barnier remained with the same majority that had Junker, but stronger than before. The British hoped that the majority would be weaker, in order to weaken Barnier, but in the end they find themselves with a majority that is politically the same, and in addition has a larger body in parliament.

A team that will have an even greater majority when the British leave their benches empty.

Few have begun to come to terms with what will happen to the majority Von Der Leyen after the British have abandoned the EU: but the problem is that all the English parties are aligned with the existing majority (PPE, PSE, ALDI, etc ) except for those of the UKIP, which are numerous, are the backbone of the populists, and are about to leave the chairs empty. When UKIP leaves the parliament, populists will be left with an expanse of bushes fighting each other.

Forming a parliament with English votes, in a period in which the populists in the UK dominate, knowing that they will leave the chairs empty, was a fairly remarkable cunning. That percentage of empty chairs will not, according to the numbers, reinforce the relative percentages of the government majority.

Also on this front, they have freed themselves from the English by GAINING us too.

What to say?

Total defeat.

A catastrophe that the sovereign gentlemen will soon have to justify with their masters.

Which are not famous for tolerating defeats.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.