19 of 19 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Essential single-volume history of the EU, 4 Sep 2009
This review is from: The Great Deception: Can the European Union Survive? (Paperback)
May I recommend (though not 100% wholeheartedly) The Great Deception by Christopher Booker & Richard North. (First published 2003. New edn 2005 - possibly there's a newer one by now). This book goes right back to the roots. It puts most of the blame on Monnet, who acted through various others who generally wanted, and got, the attention; the original idea coming from Salter (civil servant influenced by international control of shipping) and Monnet himself (rather shady uncreative businessman, more interested in sales and secret deals than productivity) - these two types of person seem to have established the pattern. I think there was an unconscious wartime input: de Gaulle and others were treated as governments-in-waiting or in exile, which established a pattern in which unelected groups formed shadow 'governments'.
This book disentangles many myths - the sort of thing vaguely remembered from incompetent and inchoate BBC programmes. Such as the myth of the post-war carve-up - in fact the federal ideas were thought of much earlier, but one of the main arguments for federation - that it would prevent war in Europe - clearly hadn't worked. Another myth is about Britain and CAP; the French would not accept Britain unless we accepted huge sums for French farming, which of course was a bit pointless from our point of view. Britain as a slow foot-dragger was the message. Fascinating to read how the 'supranational' idea was disguised and hidden by euphemisms: the intent all along was undemocratic. There's an alphabet soup of organisations, mostly with 'E' in - Council of Europe, ESDP, EDC, EDB, EIB, EMS, etc etc. These helped kill off other approaches to Europe - supernational, free trade, etc.
Booker & North don't treat the EU in isolation - world events such as Suez and Berlin and the U2 incident and nuclear issues are factored in, often with new information - Suez for example was re-arranged between Israel, UK, and France, but went wrong. Macmillan, Thatcher, Major and others are shown to have never really quite known what was happening.
However, it's not a perfect book; Booker is an unrevised right-winger; I never liked him - he regards for example Dien Bien Phu as a 'disaster'. North I assume to have done much of the research (including from original documents on Internet, and recent material released under 30-year or other rule). The book doesn't mention the Soviet Union at all, incredibly, despite the model it must have provided for decades; nor Russia as a European unit; it's not too good on raw materials - e.g. oil; and north African gas which was one of the motives for inclusion of Africans in Europe. The book mentions, briefly, the CIA's funding, and Bilderberg, and Foundations such as Ford and Rockefeller, though not (yet?) Common Purpose. Briefly, though - the idea the book is full of conspiracy theories is entirely wrong. If anyhting, there are too few conspiracy theories - for example UKIP gets few mentions, but its failure to do anything much is widely interpreted as it's being a fraudulent party invented to waste votes. Booker and North seem not very good on law - how on earth such a system be expected to work? Their book does not disentangle exactly why the USA opposed 'communism' - if indeed it did. It has a few pages on immigration.
But it's a handy and hefty one-volume reference/ source/ account. It has a twenty-page detailed index which in a book of this size is a very valuable enhancement. It is in places hard going, but the fact is, much of the analysis necessarily deals with bureaucratic language, or the language of politicians with a long tradition of evasive wording, or conventionalised phrasing designed to disguise or soften actualities. Booker & North's writing is always better than the material they have to deal with - their presentation is probably about as good as it could be. Considering the bulk of this book, it's cheap, too. I foresee and hope that as the EU starts to crack, there will be updated version(s) of this book.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
26 of 27 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Well-written, informative history, 21 Oct 2007
This review is from: The Great Deception: Can the European Union Survive? (Paperback)
Throughout this book there's a great sense that the authors set upon a task to hack through the myriad of spin and complexities of the European Union to set the record straight. And whilst that does lead to a partisan reading regarding some of the characters involved, it should not distract from what is a meticulous and forensic insight into the dynamic of this organization.
Drawing upon de-classified government papers, memoirs and other sources, the history of the organization is crafted in splendid detail, weaving the many architects and actors of this story into a compelling read. In particular, it challenges some of the conventional norms that have rendered the debate in Britain chronically mis-informed and dormant. As such, it might be considered a polemic, but I find some of the dismissals of the text as "conspiracy theories" unfair given the plentiful and rigorous supporting evidence.
Overall a well-written, enjoyable book that brings a very dry subject to life.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
43 of 46 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Informative and sharp look at the history of the EU, 20 Mar 2007
This review is from: The Great Deception: Can the European Union Survive? (Paperback)
This is the most important book that I have read. It provides an exhaustive history of the EU combined with a coherent and cogent series of arguments that persuasively describe how and why it was established and continues to operate against our national interest.
This book has been described as polemical by some of the other reviewers; perhaps so, but that does not make the content incorrect or the analysis wrong. The text is, in places, rather hard going owing to the level of detail but this does serve to underline its intellectual rigor. The final chapter provides a wonderful summary of a book that someone needed to write and everyone in the UK should read.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No