Why do they do it a bit better in Europe?

The kind of crap the English speaking world has been dealing with for almost thirty years has only been hitting Western Europe seriously for about five years. The attack there has been harder and faster because it has been directed from the unelected "Eurocracy" which grew up around the European Union, which is very undemocratic.

In Canada, the States, and the U.K. the government responsible for financial regulation have been, at least until recently, capable of being brought to account. So, the financialist coup has been slower. Yet resistance to it has been very mediocre as well.

What I mean is; the process which the international financialists developed in Africa and Latin America of loading countries up with paper debt and then using that to break governments and seize real assets, as well as destroy any government services that do not directly benefit them. The public in places like Argentina and Venezuela have been notably fierce in throwing the financialists out.

Anglos have been very slow to learn from Latin Americans, and the Europeans have also been slow. They can not seem to get what Latin Americans can easily tell them; that the only way to deal with these people is to run them out of the country. I recall the last Financial Feudalist president of Argentina had to depart the country by helicopter from the roof of the presidential palace.

All that countries under attack in this way really have to do is throw the stooges out, repudiate the debt, and issue their own currency. But even the Greeks, the most hard hit so far in Europe, are not really doing so well. They are still only talking about modifying the debt repayments and they cannot conceive of getting out of the Euro.

History shows that the ultimate weapon against tyranny in the modern world is the general strike; when the public is able to put that together, even the most brutal dictatorships usually fall within a week. Another very powerful weapon is the tax strike, as Mean Maggie Thatcher learned.

People are not ready for this in Europe or North America, but the Europeans are further along. They have more of a history of social action, a stronger civil society, and a clearer idea of what they want and need. Below is a presentation the director of the European anti poverty network.

The last line says it all, after summing up the situation. Since the start of the financial crisis, the anti-poverty movment there has been ignored. So they have been telling the "official stakeholder processes" that if they cannot deal with reality then they are going to spend some more time in the streets.

Fintan seems to have a lot more insight into how this works; there is no dichotomy between direct action in the streets and engagement with the elite rule. In fact, the two need to be coordinated. That is impossible to do right now in North American, except maybe in Quebec, because everything left is so slintered.

The reason it is so splintered is because it is so full of opportunists, cadres, for special interests, and people with extreme ideologies. It seems to me that the left social movments in Europe are further along at forgetting about trying to reconcile these elements and moving on without them.

I have not been able to study in detail how much EAPN is a creature of actual representative bodies of poor people, and how much a front for social agencies. Agencies are to a large extent the tools of the "progressive" element of the ruling elites, who want to coopt dissent instead of to just supress it.

But EAPN clearly is something above the "25 in 5" doofuses we have in Ontario. Here is the presentation.