Churchill: The Unexpected Europhile

A few weeks ago now the mayor of London, Boris Johnson who has been openly supporting the Brexit campaign, found himself in a spot of bother after he spoke about Barack Obama's speech on the UK and the European Union. Obama had, as some might expect, supported the UK remaining apart of the EU, prompting anger for many Britons after the thinly veiled threat made by the president about the trading repercussions should Britain choose to break away.

Boris Johnson found himself under attack after suggesting that maybe Obama's Kenyan ancestry was partly the reason for the US president's Anti-British and Pro-EU attitude, arguing that the removal of a Churchill statue that had been in the White House before Obama's inauguration was evidence of this. The London mayor claimed that Churchill had "fought for democracy in Europe" adding that the EU today threatened Britain's democratic process. 

What sort of a democracy though? The grandson of Winston Churchill, serving MP Nicholas Soames, said that Boris Johnson's claim was appalling, adding that it was “inconceivable” that his grandfather would not have welcomed Obama’s views on the EU.

So who is right on this? The popular, yet misconstrued fictitious character of Churchill we are often given today is that he was the isolationist yet plucky Englishman who dared to defend the British realm from would-be invaders. Someone whom would have wholeheartedly rejected the on-going formation of an ever-closer political union within Europe. Yet that is a facade, probably born out of post-war propaganda intended to cheer up a war-weary nation. Churchill's grandson Soames is correct, Churchill was not anti-Europe in the slightest, in fact he was at the forefront of the agenda to create a unified European state.

This may come as a shock to some, especially in the pro-Brexit lobby. There are many instances where "little Englanders" use Churchill quotes and imagery to give their point of view more of a political punch, but most of these quotes are either taken out of context or entirely fabricated. 

“We have our own dream and our own task.  We are with Europe, but not of it.  We are linked but not combined. We are interested and associated but not absorbed.  If Britain must choose between Europe and the open sea, she must always choose the open sea.”

This above quote is shared often through social media, it's aim presumably to give credence to a isolationist view point, the problem is that Churchill never said this. At least not at the same time, anyway. This quote is a hodgepodge of different quotes disingenuously seamed together to make something altogether different. The first four lines in the above quote were published in an American paper Saturday Evening Post, written by Churchill himself in 1930. The last line was uttered by him during an argument between Churchill and De Gaulle, where he was explaining how he has a preference for working with the United States over France. It's obvious now that Churchill's personal conviction on Europe changed over the following decades. 

Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi, an important but
hidden figure in the creation of the EU.

During the 1920s and early 1930s, the most prominent proponent of a unified European Union was a man named Count Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi. His published thesis called "Practical Idealism" published in Vienna in 1925, was well received by the aristocracy of Europe, and through substantial funding from some well-known (some might argue infamous) financial institutions including the Warburgs, Rockefellers and Zionist leaders including Theodore Herzl, the Pan-European agenda was born.

The European Coudenhove-Kalegi Plan, as it is sometimes dubbed, involved the gradual removal of all borders from Europe, a unified military and economy and the creation of a European Parliament and legal system. With all of these more or less achieved in 2016, perhaps people will take the last goal of the pan-European agenda seriously, as it was theorised that they would eventually wipe out all European genetic homogenity. With the borders today opened to millions of North Africans and those living in the Middle East (not to mention the ongoing integration of Turkey into the European community) the agenda to essentially ethnically cleanse Europeans out of existence has to be looked at with some credence.
After all, Coudenhove Kalergi himself wrote the following in the book Practical  Idealism:

"The man of the future will be of mixed race. The races and classes of today will gradually disappear due to the elimination of space, time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-negroid race of the future, similar in appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples and the diversity of individuals. Instead of destroying European Judaism, Europe, against her will, refined and educated this people, driving them to their future status as a leading nation through this artificial evolutionary process. It’s not surprising that the people that escaped from the Ghetto-Prison, became the spiritual nobility of Europe. Thus, the compassionate care given by Europe created a new breed of aristocrats. This happened when the European feudal aristocracy crashed because of the emancipation of the Jews."

Given that the founder of Zionism, Theodore Herzl was a family friend of Kalergi's, the above passage drips with a sort of Jewish Supremacist viewpoint, not to mention a racist pro-genocidal intent for all those who are not themselves a wealthy Jew! The beliefs he wrote on this subject go much further than this, but it is up to the reader to pursue more information on it, as quoting too much might frighten off any prospective truth-seeker on the matter!

So why is Kalergi important here when discussing Churchill? 

It would be easy to dismiss Kalergi as a radical who's views today are out of date and which were for the most part irrelevant even when they were written. Unfortunately this is not the case, as his Pan-European agenda and the later Pan-European Congress turned out to be only a stepping stone towards the eventual European Union that we have today.

Within the pan-European and later on, European Union leadership, there has been an annual award given to the individual who has pushed the European agenda the furthest throughout the last 12 months.  Called the Charlemagne Prize, contemporary winners of this award over the last decade or so include well known European leaders such as Herman Von Rompuy, Jean-Claude Juncker and Angela Merkel, to name but a few. The very first winner of this award in 1950 however was awarded to one Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi. His importance in the creation of today's union was immense, but it is incredibly rare that the mass-media or education system of today should name him. I'm afraid it's up to you as a reader to decide as to why this might be the case.

Kalergi's autobiography with
a preface by Churchill.

Both Churchill and De Gaulle became close friends of Kalergi, Churchill even wrote the preface to Kalergi's autobiography which was ominously entitled "An Idea Conquers the World" (which like Practical Idealism, is also mysteriously out of print.) Churchill in his later years became wholly committed to the formation of a European super-state. 

Whilst it is widely unheard of today, faced with the prospect of Germany scuppering the pan-European agenda as they advanced into French territory in 1940, a last minute attempt at a political Anglo-French Union was tried, which despite failing due to political disagreement, makes clear that many of the leaders at that time were well aware of the long-term Europe-wide plan. It has been conjectured that had the deal been offered earlier, the British and French Governments would have had the time to make the necessary amendments that could have seen the deal signed. The wording of the declaration of Union, approved by the British Cabinet which could have been signed by the French the following day read as follows:

The Anglo-French stamp that was being designed for a political
union between France and Britain in 1940.

"France and Great Britain shall no longer be two nations, but one Franco-British Union. The constitution of the Union will provide for joint organs of defence, foreign, financial and economic policies. Every citizen of France will enjoy immediately citizenship of Great Britain, every British subject will become a citizen of France."

In 1948, Winston Churchill said “We cannot aim at anything less than the Union of Europe as a whole, and we look forward with confidence to the day when that Union will be achieved.” Perhaps that is why, despite Brexiters today conflating Churchill with an undying 'little Englander' philosophy, that Churchill too, like Kalergi, won the Charlemagne prize in 1956. The sobering reality is that Churchill was no isolationist, he was a globalist who fought for globalist interests.