I guess it's tongue in cheek, and it is funny, but some of what is written is a bit weird.
"anti-democratic ... empire at the expense of the natural rights, individual liberty, local autonomy, and cultural diversity which made Europe the wellspring of Western civilisation."
Firstly, I wouldn't call Mesopotamia and the eastern Med Europe exactly.
Secondly, lot of cultural and scientific advances that did happen in Europe were under (among others) the Roman, Holy Roman, British and Spanish Empires, which are exactly what he is against!
It's also weird that he thinks the EU "began to sprout" in 2003, a decade after Maastrict.
Latin and Greek are both successors to the Phoenician alphabet. The Phoenicians settled parts of modern day Europe and brought their alphabet and other technologies that they inherited from Mesopotamian civs. The Greeks would have been nowhere without Babylonian maths and astrology.
West and East is very grey though. I've made a distinction that I'm happy with, and pointed out why I'm not happy with John's.
