Jean-Claude Juncker: E.T. of the E.U.

Jean-Claude Juncker: E.T. of the E.U.

The following is an abridgment and adaptation of a longer article by Pauline Mille, posted at Reinformation, about the character and motives of the arrogant but clueless Jean-Claude Juncker, one of many “deciders” who live in a zone light years away from us earthlings.

Speaking to Austrians at the Alpbach Media Academy the president of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, blew a fuse (again). Two months after a speech in which he insisted he had met “leaders from other planets” (i.e., those who oppose the E.U.), here he is again claiming that “borders are the worst political invention.” Obviously he cannot digest Brexit or the awakening of the peoples of Europe as they confront globalist oppression:

“We must fight nationalism. We have the duty not to follow the populists and to block their accession to power.” 

In this context he uttered the sentence: 

“Borders are the worst political invention.”

Jean-Claude Juncker was Prime minister of Luxembourg for a long time, proving himself skilled at preserving the banking and financial system of the country and avoiding overly curious inquiries. But since he was chosen to be president of the European Commission in Brussels, he has temper tantrums and seems overwhelmed by the crises that land in his lap: he is a victim of the Peter principle. 

Note: I would say we are the victims of the Peter principle. Juncker can drown his worries in alcohol.

Has he lost all reason to the point of not being able to see that his declaration on borders is politically unproductive at a time when the invasion of Europe, known as the refugee crisis, and Islamic terrorism are awakening the peoples of Europe? Is the great technocrat’s contempt leading him to underestimate the popular resistance that Theresa May, for example, is bound to take into account? The press office of the British Prime minister reacted to Juncker’s declaration:

“This is not something the Prime minister would agree with. The English people feel that the borders are important, and having better control of our borders is important.” 

The article brings up the quota system imposed by Juncker:

This system of quotas shows the great confusion in the mind of poor Jean-Claude Juncker. Without borders (the worst political invention), quotas would be inconceivable. The quotas assume national boundaries, otherwise how do we calculate them? And quotas assume boundaries to the European Union, otherwise how do we welcome and protect the “refugees”?

But Hungarian president Viktor Orban, who has established a clear connection between refugees and terrorism, rejects the notion of quotas completely:

“So long as we cannot defend the exterior borders of Europe there is no point in asking ourselves how many people we can accept. (…) The system of quotas claims to treat the effects of immigration without treating the causes. And the main reason is that the European Union does not have control over its external borders.”

The article points out that Juncker has to be aware of the need for borders considering that borders saved Luxembourg from financial ruin when the steel industry collapsed and the country became a haven for fiscal exiles from all over the world:

Jean-Claude Juncker must have really over-indulged on the excellent beers of Luxembourg or on Elbling, the most transparent white wine in the world from a vineyard native to the banks of the Moselle. But, we mustn’t be too quick to laugh, because in reality the buffoon is king, and the president of the European commission is only reeling off the globalist dogma, unperturbed and insensitive to people’s reactions: the dogma that is being imposed in reality on the nations. It’s not because he drinks too much that Jean-Claude Juncker blows a fuse and utters outrageous things, it’s because the globalist system regards itself as so powerful and so advanced in its agenda that he believes he can promote it without fear of a popular reaction.

What has Juncker done through the years to promote this dogma?

In 2005, before the French referendum on the European Constitution, when he presided over the European Council as Prime minister of Luxembourg, he uttered this charming verbal invention: 

“If it’s yes, we will say, let’s proceed, and if it’s no, we will say, let’s continue.”

Philippe de Villiers and some others shouted it was a denial of democracy, but the people said no, and Brussels in fact did continue, imposing via a vote in Parliament the treaty of Lisbon that contained, abscons, the contents of the Constitution.

Note: The meaning of “abscons”: So abstruse as to prevent comprehension entirely.

Likewise in 2015, when the Greeks, full of naive hope for a change, elected Alexis Tsipras, who offered them a referendum, Jean-Claude Juncker again found the right words to illustrate the inanity of their illusions:

“To say that everything is going to change because there is a new government in Athens is to mistake desires for realities (…) There cannot be a democratic choice against European treaties…” 

He’s right and the facts confirm it: the said treaties are a prison one cannot escape from unless one denounces them. But everything is rigged to make that very difficult. Juncker is on the same wave length as German president Joachim Gauke who said after Brexit:

“The problem is not the elite, it is the people.” 

The two men read Brecht: if the people vote wrong and refuse to change, it becomes necessary to change them – or to suppress them. The trio of enslavement, great replacement, wars, is in the rationale of the globalist agenda.

What tune is Jean-Claude Juncker playing today to dissuade the peoples of Europe from revolting against the tyranny of Brussels? As usual (don’t change a tactic, however worn-out, if it’s working), that of fear. The words populism and nationalism must evoke the bloody and somber days of our history, and if the borders are the worst political invention, it is because, necessarily, they provoke war. A little over twenty years ago, François Mitterrand served the same soup on the podium of the Parliament in Strasbourg when he trumpeted: 

“Nationalism is war!”

The rest of the article is a denunciation of the “think-tankers” behind globalism, in particular Irving Kristol and Francis Fukuyama who believed that history is ending with a “planetary consensus on liberal democracy” Anglo-Saxon style:

And like Marx, Fukuyama is an impostor in that he presents as an historical observation what is in reality a political agenda: he, and the neoconservatives, and the EU advocates, and Jean-Claude Juncker, would like history to stop and make way for world government that appears democratic. The massacre of nations by abolishing borders (“the worst political invention”) is not the conclusion of a scientific process, it is the objective of a world conspiracy.


Final note: I don’t know who the author Pauline Mille is, but she has posted a number of articles online similar to this one in which she exposes the evils of globalism, immigration and neoconservatism and the deciders who force these philosophies on the world. She is certainly Catholic and very much a patriot and traditionalist. Those of you who read French may want to look her up, but beware, there may be more than one Pauline Mille. A number of entries in the Google search lead to a woman with that name known as a filmmaker and video producer. 

Below, Juncker with his beloved symbol of a border-free Europe. The town of Schengen is in Luxembourg, in case you didn’t know. Those interested may enjoy this article in English on how the Luxembourgers themselves are reacting to immigrants arriving in larger numbers than can be accommodated. The title says it all: Soon there will be no more Luxembourg.


Categories: Europe, New Order

About Author