Some say a North American Union à la the EU is a conspiracy theory. The people who say so have a nasty tendency of looking down on “bitter” types who prefer guns and god to the goons in government.
In contrast to deniers such as Michael Medved, there are authentic, credible conservatives like Phyllis Schlafly and Pat Buchanan who say the supra-state under construction is real, and is being covered-up.
In “Adieu to the Evil EU,” I explained a thing or two to the O’Reillys of the world who had been heaping scorn on the French for rejecting the centralized state American neocons were applauding at the time.
Here are some of the effects on the UK of joining the EU. O’Reilly and his fellow Fixers may find them appealing. As will Kaiser-in-Waiting, McCain:
“The effects of EU membership are complicated and have worked in part in conjunction with other international influences, primarily the incorporation into British law of the European Convention on Human Rights. EU law has taken primacy over UK law. As a result, Parliament is no longer what it was. While, in British constitutional tradition, Parliament could decide as it wanted, Parliament can now decide as it wants only provided that what it wants is in conformity with EU law. As a result, writes King, ‘British government today is shackled government to a far greater degree than it used to be’”.
“But that is only the beginning of the story. With European law comes also the European Court of Justice. British citizens can take the British government to court in Europe, and the European Court can find against the British government even if it is acting in accordance with British law. Furthermore, British citizens can take the British government to court in Britain on incompatibility between UK and EU law, and British courts can declare UK laws inoperable with reference to EU law. The same applies to human rights and the European Court of Human Rights. British citizens can appeal, in Britain or Europe, to a law that stands above laws enacted by their own Parliament. This represents a double transfer of power: from British elected to international non-elected institutions, and in Britain from Parliament to the courts. The courts have been handed a set of super-laws which they can use to test the validity of laws passed in Parliament, and thereby the power to override the will of Parliament.”
“The scope for judicial review by the courts has thereby been radically extended. But even that is not the end of it. With its new powers, the judiciary woke up from ‘a long sleep’, started to assert itself, and the senior judges metamorphosed into a political class of activists. The old doctrine that the courts only interpreted the law was thrown out in favour of a new doctrine by which the courts explicitly make law. ‘No one’, wrote Lord Denning, ‘can tell what the law is until the courts decide it.’ Judges were no longer only judges, but threw themselves into public debate, felt free to criticize lawmakers and ministers, chaired all kinds of commissions and so on. Under John Major, ‘war broke out between senior ministers and senior judges’”.