What did Mr. Gauck say? – by Andrew Brons

Before I tell you what he said, I had better tell you who he is. He is the President of Germany.

You thought they had a Kaiser with a withered arm and a pickelhaube? No that was nearly a century ago.

And no; they have not had one of  those since the end of what-we-don’t-talk-about-to Germans-unless- you’re- Basil- Fawlty.

Yes, I know they have Mrs. Merkel, who uses neither her current married name, Frau Sauer (pronounced ‘sour’) nor her maiden name, Kasner, but the name of a previous spouse, to whom she was married for only four years. How weird?

Miss Kasner, Mrs. Merkel, Mrs. Sauer is the Chancellor of Germany, which is the Head of Government – the equivalent of Prime Minister. Mr.Gauck is the President, the Head of State – the equivalent of our Queen.

Like our Queen, President Gauck is above ‘Politics’ with a capital ‘P’ but he is not above ‘politics’ with a lower case ‘p’.

‘Politics’ with a capital ‘P’ is about the differences between particular political parties that form the Political Class. No, I know there aren’t any but please don’t interrupt me and spoil my article.

Politics with a lower case ‘p’ is about the views of the whole political class, about which there can be no dispute. Germany has learnt nothing about democracy since it became ‘democratic’.

Is this all confusing? Only very!

Heads of State are there to perpetuate the myths, legends, hopes and expectations of the ‘state’. If only we had Heads of Nation to perpetuate our national myths, legends and (most of all) hopes and expectations.

Mr. Gauck is well qualified – some would say – to be a carrier of collective wisdom, though perhaps it was the wrong ‘collective’. He was a Lutheran pastor, who like the father of Angela ‘Merkel’, served his flock in the Communist DDR.

To parody the words of Voltaire, the DDR (German Democratic Republic) was not German, was not democratic and was not a republic (ruled by its people). In contrast, the Federal Republic  of Germany (BRD) is …er…..   well……..much the same.

Mr. Gauck would not dream of saying anything ‘Political’ but he can’t stop himself from being very, very  ‘political’.

He was very candid about the growth of scepticism about the European Project: bureaucracy (which always receives a bad press), loss of sovereignty, lack of transparency and austerity in the South and huge costs in the North. However, he seemed adamant that the cure would be more of the same: more Europe not less Europe. To say that this was like prescribing a fast as a cure for anorexia  might be seen as insensitive but no more than prescribing more Euro-zone, with its austerity packages, to countries that are suffering from the effects of Euro-zone membership.

Mr. Gauck bemoaned the fact that the twenty-seven nations did not have a “shared narrative”. No I don’t know what that means either. Perhaps it lost something in translation. He went on to regret the absence of a “single European identity”.

He tried to suggest that shared values might be a substitute. Really? Even if the EU or the countries that are its members really believed in democracy, the Rule of Law, equality and human rights – and most of them do not – it would not make them into a nation. Nations, like families, are defined by ancestry and not agreement. I might agree completely with my neighbour, Mr. Concurrence, but that would not make him my Uncle Fred.

It is not for me as an opponent of the EU to explain to Mr. Gauck and others how to make it work. However, I could make some suggestions.

I am not as opposed to a shared European identity as some might suspect. However, it must not seek to replace or dwarf national identity or be used to undermine national sovereignty. Furthermore, I would not see it as a tool of the European Union. Nevertheless, I have no doubt that a shared European identity based on overlapping but not conterminous ancestral ties could be achieved and it might help to produce Mr. Gauck’s “shared narrative”. One does not have to be an advocate of it to see the logical connection.

Unfortunately for the best, as distinct from the worst, of Europhiles, shared ancestry is on the list of assets to be stripped and disposed of. The endless stream of immigrants from the Third World is breeding out our shared European ancestry at a pace that could scarcely have been predicted by the founding fathers of the EU’s antecedent organisations. The European Union is becoming less European by the minute. Ironically, the multi-racial agenda of the Eurocrats is making the development of a European identity much more difficult.

Should we celebrate? I am sure that unthinking EU Protagonists will do so or should I say UnthinKIng Protagonists – UKIP.  They are happy to see every nation in Europe, including the British one, destroyed, as part of their theatrical tilting against the EU Windmill,

We are not just concerned with the question of British Sovereignty; we are concerned about British Identity and those of our friends on the Continent of Europe.

When asked by our friends and others in Europe about our differences with UKIP, I say it is like a dispute over the ownership and occupation of a family house. We are concerned to ensure that the national family should occupy the national house. UKIP claims that it wants to secure the family house regardless of which family lives there.