Nomen Nescio hat geschrieben:(13 Jun 2016, 15:02)
offensichtlich weiß in GB keiner mehr was churchills ideen
ich weiß es auch nur, weil ich vor vielen jahren diskutierte über churchills ansichten.
Ich habe auf der verlinkten Seite nachgelesen. Da sind in der Tat einige bemerkenswerte Zitate Churchills, die man so verstehen könnte, als sehe er Großbritannien als volles Mitglied einer Europäischen Union. Allerdings fehlt der Kontext der Zitate - wohl absichtlich, um denn Sinn doch etwas zu entstellen.
http://eu-rope.ideasoneurope.eu/2013/11 ... ean-union/
At London’s Albert Hall, in May 1947, just a few months after his Zurich speech, Churchill spoke as Chairman and Founder of he United Europe Movement to ‘present the idea of a United Europe in which our country will play a decisive part..’
Churchill argued that Britain and France should be the, `founder-partners in this movement’ and concluded, `Britain will have to play her full part as a member of the European family’.
Das ist aber nicht die ganze Wahrheit, siehe zum Beispiel hier:
(Winston Churchill, 1949)
http://www.cvce.eu/content/publication/ ... ble_en.pdf
The French Foreign Minister, M. Schuman, declared in the French Parliament this week that 'Without
Britain there can be no Europe.' This is entirely true. But our friends on the Continent need have no
misgivings. Britain is an integral part of Europe, and we mean to play our part in the revival of her
prosperity and greatness. But Britain cannot be thought of as a single State in isolation. She is the founder
and centre of a world-wide Empire and Commonwealth. We shall never do anything to weaken the ties of
blood, of sentiment and tradition and common interest which unite us with the other members of the British
family of nations. But nobody is asking us to make such desertion. But Britain to enter a European Union
from which the Empire and Commonwealth would be excluded would not only be impossible but would, in
the eyes of Europe, enormously reduce the value of our participation. The Strasbourg recommendations
urged the creation of an economic system which will embrace not only the European States, but all those
other States and territories elsewhere which are associated with them.
Auch von wissenschaftlicher Seite kommt man zu dem Schluss, dass Churchills Haltung zweideutig war:
https://winstonchurchill.hillsdale.edu/ ... ean-unity/
On 19 September 1946, speaking at the University of Zurich, Switzerland, Winston Churchill proposed the creation of “a kind of United States of Europe”—”a European group which could give a sense of enlarged patriotism and common citizenship to the distracted peoples of this mighty continent.”1 With this proposal, and his activities over the next several years, Churchill put his enormous personal prestige behind the cause of European unity.
His campaign was by no means without controversy, especially at home. He was no longer Prime Minister. The ruling Labour government by and large did not favor his approach. Neither (for different reasons) did certain elements of Churchill’s own Conservative Party, which he served as leader. Further, over the coming years, it became evident that he did not favor full British membership in a future European political union, although he said he anticipated a close association. Britain was to be with, or of, but not in, Europe.
Churchill seldom spoke explicitly on this point, however, evidently keeping all options open, and not wishing to alienate unduly pro-unity opinion in Europe. For instance, he told the House of Commons in 1950 that “I cannot conceive that Britain would be an ordinary member of a Federal Union limited to Europe in any period which can at present be foreseen.” He prefaced that remark, however, with the observation that the matter “has not got to be decided today.”2 In 1961, towards the end of his life, when a Conservative government sought to apply for membership in what was then the European Economic Community, he expressed his support – but in a qualified, ambiguous fashion.