Napoleon Bonaparte - Euro enthusiast
The BBC is reporting on some historical enactment enthusiasts restaging the 1806 battle of Jena. So far so hum-drum.
However, "Many participants see the event, on the 200th anniversary of the Battle of Jena, as a symbol of European unity....To those joining arms the anniversary brawl symbolises Napoleon's attempts to forge a united Europe, two centuries before the European Union came along".
In the words of Dorothy Parker, 'what fresh hell is this?'
The battle saw the French and their allies defeat the Prussians and their allies, at a cost of 50,000 dead, wounded or captured. Quite apart from that particular butcher's bill, it is pretty curious to claim the soi-disante Emperor of the French as acting in the name of European unity, as opposed to his own vanity. One might as well claim that Attila the Hun had the same intentions. Still, why bother about motivation if the aim is do 'good', eh?
However, "Many participants see the event, on the 200th anniversary of the Battle of Jena, as a symbol of European unity....To those joining arms the anniversary brawl symbolises Napoleon's attempts to forge a united Europe, two centuries before the European Union came along".
In the words of Dorothy Parker, 'what fresh hell is this?'
The battle saw the French and their allies defeat the Prussians and their allies, at a cost of 50,000 dead, wounded or captured. Quite apart from that particular butcher's bill, it is pretty curious to claim the soi-disante Emperor of the French as acting in the name of European unity, as opposed to his own vanity. One might as well claim that Attila the Hun had the same intentions. Still, why bother about motivation if the aim is do 'good', eh?
This entry was posted
on Saturday, October 14, 2006 at 11:38 am.
You can skip to the end and leave a response.
Dynamite the BBC. I'm sorry. I know it sounds cruel but it is the only way to rid Britain of this bloodsucker squeezing the life - not to mention the will to live - out of our country. Make it a subscription service, so people who want this toxic drip, drip, drip into their brains can still have it, and normal people can be free of them forever.
As a man who know the French and their unpleasant ways intimately (you married/divorced one) you should know that they are the evil communist driving force behind the EU, the Germans have just been dragooned into it through guilt. The sooner we all realise that and reinvade France and put everybdy to the sword (Islamic invaders included) the sooner we will live in a free and decent europe. We don't even need the slug eating, unwashed whores for wine anymore, the Aussies And americans do it so much better.
Well, your conclusion was a little harsh peter, but it is indeed the French and their never-ending delusion of la gloire that is wrecking the lives and impoverishing Europeans everywhere.
I also agree that the Germans have been dragooned into going along with the gag. And, of course, the smaller European countries then developed a fear of being left out of this grand new club with posh members.
Does anyone have any theories about why Heath lied to the British people and forced us in, against our instincts? What was in it for him? I've always wondered.
He was also the one who negotiated this whole Eurabia project. A very, very evil man - but what motivated him? England had been good to him. His mother had been a lady's maid, and he rose to be prime minister. Certainly, he had no cause to feel bitter against his country. Does anyone have any theories?
Peter, I am actually quite fond of the Gauls, although they can be quite maddening at times.
Heath is a curious one. Maybe he was bullied at school, although the amount of money he picked up from the vile regime in Beijing in later life prompts other possibilities.
*Entirely* in keeping with his character Heath owned a leasehold property in the cathedral close in Salisbury which the cathedral was under the impression would revert to it at Heath's death. Instead Heath used the scandalously iniquitous leasehold 'reform' act to force a purchase and in his will it is to be turned into a Museum of Heathiana. I'm NOT making this up. A ridiculous, vain, grasping and spiteful little man. I've used Ozymandias too recently to quote it again, but the sense is there....
William you beat me to every point I would have made about Heath.
My own theory is that he was blckmailed.
Heath was a homosexual pederast, as so many of the "great and good are". Read a good article today about the relationship between Tom Boothby and Ronnie Kray.
Narcissim and homosexuality tend to go together.
People I know said he wasn't gay, but he liked to be dressed in a nappy and treated like a baby.
Personally, I always thought he was gay, but I hadn't heard he was a pederast. It makes sense, though. The blackmail deal also makes sense, but would someone really sell 50m of his countrymen down the river? I mean, that is large.
I agree that he was spiteful and petty.
peter - "Narcissim and homosexuality tend to go together." I would argue against that statement quite vigorously. Of course, some gays are narcissists - as are some straights. Barbra Streisand, Madonna, Tom Cruise, David Letterman come crashing into the consciousness. But that's a personality trait, like kindness or generosity. I have a gay friend who is the chief nurse in a geriatric intensive care ward and no one could be more selfless and giving.
It's just not a fair comment, peter.
OTOH, yes, I agree that Edward Heath was not low on self-regard.
Heath was certainly a mediocrity in politics, music and sailing. But I'm not sure if EH was gay.In fact, I now think of Heath as a house-trained, infinitely better educated, asexual version of John Prescott. Both Prezza and EH were after all born into lowly provincialism, both were riddled with inferiority conflicts and multiple chips -on -shoulders and both reached positions of power where they had no business being. And both screwed up massively in office.
If Ted had stayed on good terms with the Blessed Margaret circa. 1975-9, she would probably have made him Foreign Secretary in her first administration. The man had no class whatsoever....
The Museum of Heathiana- a shrine to mediocrity-doesn't bear thinking about. I suppose Emily might set up a memorial to his greater glory after No:10.
Istanbultory - I too think Heath was asexual. But people can be born in very mediocre circumstances and rise to perform effectively and with great sense on the national stage. I agree that Heath and Prescott were both elevated way above their level of competence and both are chippy in their own way.
But Michael Howard was the son of a Jewish immigrant draper, wasn't he? Margaret Thatcher was the daughter of a small grocer. Of course, you could say that at least their parents were members of the bourgeoisie, whereas Heath's mother was a servant and I don't know about Prescott's parents.
It makes one wonder, how on earth did Heath get to be prime minister? I mean, what qualities did he have - other than the fake plummy accent - that people thought would be useful to the country?
Verity-You are, of course, right. Social class or lowly origins may not be a defining element in the way that many people view themselves but for EH and Two Shaggs it certainly was/is. Neither man was able to overcome the (perceived)stigma of it as they climbed the greasy pole.
Incidentally, Prezza's father was a railway signalman and his grandfather, a miner according to Wikipedia. As for how EH ever became PM, I know not. But then he was up against Harold Wilson -what a pair!!!
IT - Heath's opponents in the '65 leadership contest (before my time...) were Enoch Powell, and Reginald Maudling. Found this at the usual place: "He won 133 votes against Heath's 150; Powell's 15 votes would have been more likely to go to Maudling had Powell not stood. The defeat was a surprise to Maudling, as the Conservative Parliamentary Party was felt to be more in tune with his policies than with those of Heath (although feeling in the country and in most newspapers favoured the election of Heath)."
I knew Maudling's name but that was about it. Still, a bit of digging suggests he was rather more of a card thean Heath.
God, it makes me feel old, but I can tell you that Maudling seemed a more lively figure than Heath, but had a reputation for being lazy (the affliction of the clever) and being dubious financially (which later proved true).
DM - sorry about that mate. I remember the 74 elections - vaguely, I was all of 8 - but I have similar problems to you with some of the whippersnappers I talk to who don't recall the '79 election..... Sigh.
Reggie Maudlings ex wife used to live next door to my grandmother , Manor Rd in Sale (manchester) even after the divorce he used to "pop round" he was indeed a card
If one may humbly restore this thread to matter of the original posting...
His Grace was considering giving this battle a mention, and he thanks Mr Croydonian for raising it, for this event was, in truth, the single most important occurrance, including the Reformation, in the history of the development of Theology.
It was not until the defeat of Prussia, then considered the epitome of enlightenment values, that theology was subject to the rigours of scientific inquiry, and had to justify itself as a 'learned' profession in the universities. This demand was fulfilled by one Friedrich Schleiermacher, the Father of Hermeneutics, to whom modern theologcal discourse owes its foundations.
As ever, a timely and intriguing intervention by your Grace. It is certainly a thought well worth chewing over, and I would be interested to read your extended thoughts on the matter. I am, by the way, an unabashed Prussophile.
Croydonian,
Your statement "I am, by the way, an unabashed Prussophile" makes me curious to know the reason.
In my view, Prussia is only one of an endless number of states in history build on oppression, military aggression and conquest similar to Sparta whereas the GB is similar to Athens build on trade and more liberty for its citizens due to the limited power of the king.
Colin,
I've read a lot about Prussia, and it was a good deal less agressively militaristic than it has been painted - in its entire history Prussia started fewer wars than did my lot in any ten year period in the C19th. Also, as His Grace has pointed out, Prussia was one of the homes of the Enlightenment.
» Post a Comment