|This article appears in the October 16, 2009 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
PEER STEINBRÜCK PROTESTED, BUT
Evans-Pritchard Blows His Lid
by Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr.
October 6, 2009
London Daily Telegraph blogger Ambrose Evans-Pritchard went over the edge in a wild-eyed attack on Germany's Finance Minister Peer Steinbrück's criticism of Britain's role in the current suffering of Germany. Evans-Pritchard's reaction may be attributed to a British guilty conscience over former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's guilty role, in concert with France's François Mitterrand, and a complicit U.S. President George H.W. Bush, in making that mess of Germany's reunification, which has been chiefly responsible for the ruinous situation which has developed, more and more, and worse and worse, over the entire interval to date.
I am not, unfortunately, prepared to say whether this blundering outburst by blogger Evans-Pritchard is the fruit of his innocence by virtue of ignorance, or the fruit of some sort of emotional fit. Perhaps, a bit of both? Perhaps, the guilt should be traced back to the race to what became known as "World War I," which was set into motion as the design, as Bismarck put it so aptly, for a new "Seven Years War" designed by Prince Edward Albert, or to a kindred plan for "World War II" which went awry when a pro-fascist government of France spoiled the Charmberlain government's schemes, by opening the gates for a Wehrmacht quick victory on the western front. The British propensity for the likenesses of a "Seven Years War" has been the source of most of the ugliness spread against continental Europe since the early days of Lord Shelburne's romp with aides the like of Adam Smith and Jeremy Bentham.
I would prefer to stress the point, that the imperialist romps of British leadership have not proven of much benefit to the general population of the United Kingdom itself. Perhaps, Evans-Pritchard should conserve his energies and anger for a much-needed reform of the antics associated with the Foreign Office since the days of Bentham and Palmerston. That sort of reform would be most helpful to all concerned from around this planet, including, in the outcome of such improvements, minus a Tony Blair or two, a much happier, and more reasonably nourished population, with more beneficial health-care policies, of the United Kingdom itself.
In the meanwhile, less rancor against the officials of a badly treated Germany, and more than a wee bit of respect for the present unpleasantnesses done to Germany over the course of, most immediately, the recent two decades.