Writing in the Telegraph, Bruno Waterfield reports that his newspaper has seen confidential spending proposals and internal documents planning an unprecedented propaganda blitz ahead of and during European elections in June 2014. Waterfield quotes from what he says are confidential documents, extracts which contain the usual phrases such as:
“ In order to reverse the perception that ‘Europe is the problem’, we need to communicate that the answer to existing challenges… is ‘more Europe’ not ‘less Europe’ “
The fact that the EU intends to partake in the 2014 European Elections is hardly a secret – one only has to loook at the “European Commission 2013 Management Plan DG Commission” wherein all is spelled out.
From page 4:
“……in particular to raise awareness about citizens’ rights in view of the upcoming European elections in mid-2014.”
From page 16:
“…..; identification of the key media that have the most influence on views and opinions about EU issues;….. “
and so it continues in mind-numbing detail.
It is indeed odd that if the EU wish to provide facts and figures to deconstruct myths they were most noticeable by their absence where Cameron’s myth about Norway having no influence over EU legislation is concerned. Either that was a mythstake on the part of the EU or they stand guilty of selectivity when choosing which myths to disprove.
That a level playing field will not exist and that it will be the eurosceptic side which will be playing up-hill, is a given.
The thing is, when something; a product, an educational course, a club; is legitimate and believes that its raison d’etre is honourable, righteous and beneficial to its members, it places no hindrance to members exiting. Why? Because if they are so good, then people will not leave; and if they do, they will soon realise their error and want to rejoin. The organisations to keep away from are those that promise jam tomorrow and then hold you captive, after joining, when you realise that they were lying. So, if the EU really believes its own propaganda, it will facilitate the exit of any member who wishes to leave because they will probably rejoin at some stage, once they know they made a mistake. But socialists don’t do reason; they do blunt coersion, blatant lying and financial ruin.
A fair summary.
DAvid, it’s called propagada. Truth has nothing to do with it. Information is irrelevant. Only the enforcement of ‘the message’ matters.
Germany did it, the USSR did it. North Korea does it. All utterly totalitarian dictatorships created for the excusive profit of a small group of unaccountable facsists dedicated to poverty, misery and the ultimate responsibility for the deaths of tens of millions.
Tell me something I don’t know?
And I fear that Orwell was right, the one terrible truth is that the future is an EU boot stomping on the face of Europe forever.
Correct and if we look at history such totalitarianism only ever ends one way – here we go again……..
Must admit I’m concerned about this one – and not because I think they have the remotest credibility in winning the debate, but because in the administrative culture, once you start a project, it becomes impossible to kill it off.
A big if – IF – the Telegraph story is fully true, then this project will continue beyond the Euro elections (based on at least partially the successes of EU-wide parties they regard as extreme or hostile) and with 20:20 forsight, that budget will continue and probably grow.
In a sense, it follows on from the story of a few weeks ago, where apparently Richard Branson is setting up a similar propaganda body.
So here’s the biggest if I have in mind on this one. Lets say this EU body – by means made legal within Brussels – the EU begins to gather specific personal data on known successful and competent bloggers, I’m wondering what protections those bloggers have under the various data protection acts? It’s probably a given that trans-EU protection acts will have a specific caveat requiring them to disclose information held on ‘dissidents’, I’m wondering if the UK act would protect?
Sorry – ‘specific caveat requiring them to disclose information held’
Meant ‘specific caveat disobliging them to disclose information held’.
If you read the EU document to which I linked you will see that this plan is long-term, it is not just for the 2014 Euro elections.
It is but another control mechanism, ie Big Brother.