Trans-national socialism equals Fascism

William Hague in an interview on the BBC Radio 4 programme 'Today' did a reasonable job in highlighting many of the dangers in the new EU Reform Treaty but was somewhat mild in his reaction to the Government's present refusal to grant the referendum it had promised. Looking at the Treaty and the subterfuge involved in the methods chosen to ram it through can hardly give Europe's citizens any confidence in the integrity or decency of their elected leaders when acting in concert in the European Council. Concern grows considering that it is this body that is to now be given massive new powers, apparently the ultimate authority of sovereignty which once belonged to national citizens and lay in their ability to elect or remove their rulers from office. That power, known as democracy, is to be abolished. Looking at other actions rather than weasly words this nascent non-democratic world power has also in the last month seen two of its larger members order two massive aircraft carriers each. It therefore appears that this new super-state now plans to give itself the power to project the use of force well beyond its borders with four carrier battle forces. Why? Where has this been publicly discussed? Surely an EU trading equitably in the world to reduce third-world poverty much of it caused by its very own policies would have no need of such carrier groups. As its members belong to NATO national defence is surely no answer. Would Britain and France with present budget constraints have proceeded with the ordering of these four 65,000 ton ships in a non-EU context and without real parliamentary debate? One word in the present situation seems the most apposite, but it is one word that nowhere gets mentioned - that word is of course - Fascism. It is defined by Collins as follows: 1. any ideology or movement inspired by Italian Fascism, such as German National Socialism: any right-wing national ideology or movement with an authoritarian and hierarchical structure that is fundamentally opposed to democracy and liberalism. 2. any ideology, movement, programme, tendency etc., that may be characterised as right-wing, chauvinist, authoritarian etc. Imagine the EU if the Reform Treaty is ratified by the 27 national parliaments that have then each made themselves subservient to the European Council and that council has suspended the Charter of Fundamental Rights for whatever contrived reason, threat of terrorist attack would seem the most likely at present. In such a situation would not the entire Continent then be under the authoritarian control of whomever dominated the then Council. Is the above not a more likely scenario than the present situation where 27 supposedly independent national leaders have ordered their representatives to pass a document without alteration in a legally appointed IGC and then committed themselves to pass it through their own legislatures, similarly without change or the opportunity to give their citizens a vote before condemning them all to non-democratic rule? Has this been achieved without any coercion whatsoever? Will fascism or something very likely it not be the almost certain end result of such a process?