The Kalergi Plan
Kalergi described his dreams for a One World Government with its foundations in the European Union. He hoped that the European project would go on to become the blueprint for a society run entirely by the global elite over a completely powerless population. He wrote that he wished to see the end of national sovereignty and self-determination and he believed that nationalism, and indeed the very concept of nations, could be demolished through multi-culturalism. He wrote that a society that was racially and ethnically diverse was one which was easily controllable by the political elite.

According to Kalegri, a diverse and multi-cultural people were easy to control as they had no common identity to rally behind in the event of a political crisis. In addition to that, a diverse population would be easy to conquer by the means of divide and rule. The newly arrived immigrants would be pitted against the native people with both sides believing that they were a persecuted minority languishing under a system of law that was rigged against their favour.

Since the last world war, the European Union has gradually eroded aspects of national sovereignty for nation states, often making national law subordinate to that decided by unelected figures at the head of the international organisation.

There has also been a concerted attempt to chip away at nationalist sentiments and nation-orientated social projects by such policy decisions as freedom of movement as part of the European integration and Angela Merkel's open door policy towards Syrian refugees.

Kalergi prize, otherwise known as the Charlemagne Prize
While Kalergi's text might seem to be a relic of a more authoritarian and intellectually warped era for the people of Europe, it is notable that he is still celebrated and honoured among key members of the European Union today. The Kalergi prize, otherwise known as the Charlemagne Prize, was created in his honour to be awarded to European figures who have helped to promote his plan. Among those awarded this prize in recent years are Angela Merkel, Herman Van Rompuy (the former Prime Minister of Belgium and first President of the European Council) and Pope Francis.

The fact that Kalergi is still apparently alive in the minds of many prominent Europeans has led to the suggestion that this is what lies at the obvious antipathy towards the president-elect Donald Trump by European leaders. Kalergi hoped that the United States would be the next region to fall under the One World Government he envisaged and perhaps many people still nourished that dream until his shock election last year.

Trump has proven himself to be openly hostile to the idea of multiculturalism and further immigration to the United States, in stark contrast to any of his recent predecessors. He has also preached an isolationist foreign policy and appears to be drawing the lines of the classic nation state in much darker shades than previous presidents. Perhaps it is the case that he is seen as a potential fly in the ointment when it comes to pursuing Kalergi's bizarre plan for world domination.
Posted on RetroBBS II

I call bullshit on the text for various reasons. Just some examples:

According to Kalegri, a diverse and multi-cultural people were easy to control as they had no common identity to rally behind in the event of a political crisis.

Look at states with very homogenous ethnic groups, they can be easily controlled as well (example: 3rd reich).
This is an old right wing argument connecting immigration with some elitist plot to hold down the population.

Angela Merkel's open door policy towards Syrian refugees.

Merkel had little choice in the matter if she wanted to avoid violating the german constitution (or "Grundgesetz"). As the german newspaper "Die Welt" has investigated, the plans for shutting down the borders with military forces have been in the top drawer when the refugees arrived in Europe, but when they realized they would break the laws with this they left the borders open.



Posted on def4.i2p

anon wrote:

I call bullshit on the text for various reasons. Just some examples:

According to Kalegri, a diverse and multi-cultural people were easy to

control as they had no common identity to rally behind in the event of a political crisis.

Look at states with very homogenous ethnic groups, they can be easily

controlled as well (example: 3rd reich).

This is an old right wing argument connecting immigration with some elitist

plot to hold down the population. Look at the US. Built on and by people from all over the world, and probably harder to control than most populations. The most oppressed countries seem to be those of one single ethnic group.


--
Posted on Rocksolid Light.

This part I do agree with, but not necessary to use people from other countries

"a diverse population would be easy to conquer by the means of divide and rule"

You don't need to bring people in to do this, it's in effect in the US today. Black vs White. Gay vs Straight. Educated vs Uneducated. Just keep people fighting with eachother and stoke the fight, then they don't see what you're doing.

--
Posted on Rocksolid Light.

United we stand, divided we fall...

The strategy to divide and conquer is very powerful, and it is deeply rooted in our social lives.

Posted on def4.i2p