By REDAKTION
The EU’s current crises can all be traced back to ideological crises. In other words, the EU is hitting the wall precisely because of its nonsensical paradigms.
The “Supply Chain Problem”
This problem is a direct consequence of the absurd excesses of “globalization”. Globalization in the broadest sense has been around for ages, but it has never been the case in the past that the economy is so dependent on supplies from other parts of the world. For example, it is currently not even possible to produce state-of-the-art bicycles in Europe. The same applies to the automotive industry, which cannot produce vehicles without microcontrollers from Asia. The examples can be continued endlessly. But how did this come about?
This development began in the early nineties – around the same time as the establishment of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) through the elimination of customs barriers, which greatly favored Asian producers with their cheap labor. On the one hand, the old business model was behind buying cheap somewhere and selling more expensive elsewhere. On the other hand, the idea of a global world order up to a world government behind this development was also revealed. The EU sees itself as the nucleus of this new global order. In this global world order, however, apart from the distances, it does not matter where something is produced. Obviously, an attempt was made to bring the idea of the ‘One World’ and a World Government on the forced economic interlocking of global production on track.
The UN pursues the same goal through the IPCC by propagating climate fraud (see www.klimaschwindel.net):By postulating a global danger from falsely claimed man-made climate change, the need for global governance is to be insinuated.
The Corona “pandemic” is often blamed for the supply chain problem, but it is only one trigger that has exposed the vulnerability of this global economic interlocking. There is no short- or medium-term solution. In particular, chip production cannot be expanded in Europe within a few years. In the end, this problem will lead to rising prices of these components.
The energy crisis
The energy crisis, which is currently manifesting itself in exorbitantly rising electricity and gas prices on the corresponding stock exchanges, also clearly has ideological causes. These energy exchanges became necessary due to the antitrust break-up of traditional utilities. Superficially, electricity prices should become more transparent by eliminating the natural monopolies of these suppliers.
The real reason behind this destruction of the traditional utilities was to break their market power and thus enable a political intervention on the design of the energy supply, which in turn was a basic prerequisite for the so-called “energy transition”. In particular, the influence of the “market” and politics on the technically extremely complex power grids is catastrophic for their reliable functioning, which in turn is a basic prerequisite for the functioning of the entire economy and our society.
The height of audacity and ignorance of the technical necessities of the power grids was probably the implementation of the Renewable Energy Sources Act. This law, which is purely ideologically based on the climate fraud, ultimately endangers the technical functionality of the power grids.
The exorbitantly rising electricity prices are probably a reaction of the “market”, or rather the electricity consumer to the real danger of grid collapses or at least local power shutdowns (brownouts). The inner logic behind these electricity price increases is ultimately that the electricity generated from intermittent producers must become extremely expensive because of the need for electricity storage or reserve power plants, if one sticks to the nonsensical belief in a power supply from wind turbines and photovoltaic systems.
Miraculously, EU leaders suddenly revealed a spark of residual understanding by estimating gas and nuclear power as “green”. Although these energy sources are anything but “green” in the conventional sense, word has apparently spread to the Brussels ivory tower that thanks to the “energy transition”, electricity suppliers in Europe already have water up to the upper edge of their lower lip. After the shutdown of its last three nuclear power plants at the turn of the year, Germany in particular will become a net electricity importer this year and thus a burden for all other EU states.
However, this will not change the electricity price rally, because additional nuclear power plants will be meaningless in the next decade and gas will also be brutally more expensive, partly because of the energy transition.
Nevertheless, the shift that the EU Commission is making in this case is noteworthy. Already some commentators in the mainstream media sense a departure from the path of virtue (e.B.: www.rnd.de/politik/green-deal-grosser-schwindel-der-eu-atomkraft-und-erdgas-befristet-als-nachhaltig-eingestuft-TW2XGRYUAFAKTKGHQQB4YGRLP4.html).
Once a domino falls in the ideological canon, more could follow. Already one is involuntarily reminded of the end of the Soviet Union. At that time, the vast majority of functionaries no longer believed in communism. Thus, Gorbachev was able to disempower the Communist Party step by step. There will be no EU Gorbachev, but there are many dissenters, especially in the Eastern European states, who cannot be ignored in the long run.
The EU nomenklatura is ultimately only about retaining power. If the prevailing ideological paradigms are no longer suitable for this, one is apparently prepared to throw them overboard.
