Europe Day For EU Decline

May 11, 2013

 

EU elite celebrated again Europe Day when they had succeed to maintain the fasade their to the score rotten creation with taxpayer money squeezed from the common people. The Day went again so that I noticed it only next day from newsreel. It might be not so exceptional as the institutions – the commission, the parliament and the council – and its 27 member states use the day for celebrating mainly themselves. For the rest of Europe as well for people outside elite there was not any reason to celebrate.

The EU is a bold and unique project. It resembles less that of the United States of America and more that of the Soviet Union. Until the last decade the EU has been more or less a community of democratic nations. While the USSR was a communist dictatorship the EU has been following its steps last years due a full-on economic crisis. Vladimir Bukovsky a former soviet dissident, once made a comparison: ‘We were told, that the purpose of the Soviet Union is to create a a new historic entity, the soviet people, and that we must forget our nationalities, our ethnic traditions and customs. The same seems to be true to the European Union. They don’t want you to be British or French, they want you to be a new historic entity: European.’ There is amazing similarity in decision making between EU and ex-Soviet Union. USSR had also some “democratic” institutions like parliament and government, but the real power was in party machine and its “politburo”. Anyway as USSR already went so when will we celebrate EU remembrance Day.

The supranational organisation planned by Nazis?

‘In 50 years’ time nobody will think of nation states.’ (Joseph Goebbels)

EU gratuitously got Nobel award as a peace project: to underscore the very reason that it was created on 9 May 1950, which was to limit any future wars or conflicts on the continent (more in my article Devaluation of Nobel Peace Prize Continues But EU Could Show Way For Better Crisis Management ). An alternative history shows that EU is continuation of war with economic means. This view came to my mind while reading about now published secret report about how Nazis were planning the Fourth Reich.

The document, also known as the Red House Report, is a detailed account of a secret meeting at the Maison Rouge Hotel in Strasbourg on August 10, 1944. There, Nazi officials ordered an elite group of German industrialists to plan for Germany’s post-war recovery, prepare for the Nazis’ return to power and work for a ‘strong German empire’. In other words: the Fourth Reich.detailed how the industrialists were to work with the Nazi Party to rebuild Germany’s economy by sending money through Switzerland.

They would set up a network of secret front companies abroad. They would wait until conditions were right. And then they would take over Germany again. The industrialists included representatives of Volkswagen, Krupp and Messerschmitt. Officials from the Navy and Ministry of Armaments were also at the meeting and, with incredible foresight, they decided together that the Fourth German Reich, unlike its predecessor, would be an economic rather than a military empire – but not just German. The Third Reich was defeated militarily, but powerful Nazi-era bankers, industrialists and civil servants, reborn as democrats, soon prospered in the new West Germany. There they worked for a new cause: European economic and political integration.

Ludwig Erhard (economist) pondered how German industry could expand its reach across the shattered European continent. The answer was through supranationalism – the voluntary surrender of national sovereignty to an international body. German industrialists were also members of the European League for Economic Co-operation, an elite intellectual pressure group set up in 1946. The league was dedicated to the establishment of a common market, the precursor of the European Union. Ludwig Erhard flourished in post-war Germany. Adenauer made Erhard Germany’s first post-war economics minister. In 1963 Erhard succeeded Adenauer as Chancellor for three years.

Germany and France were the drivers behind the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), the precursor to the European Union. The ECSC was the first supranational organisation, established in April 1951 by six European states. It created a common market for coal and steel which it regulated. This set a vital precedent for the steady erosion of national sovereignty, a process that continues today. However one should remember that the German economic miracle – so vital to the idea of a new Europe – was built on mass murder and gold looted from the treasuries of Nazi-occupied countries and that a European federal state is inexorably tangled up with the plans of the SS and German industrialists for a Fourth Reich – an economic rather than military empire.

Note: I have summarized this secret report item from: The secret report that shows how the Nazis planned a Fourth Reich – in the EU by Adam Lebor


EU today

Forgetting EU’s organogram as illusion and speaking today’s reality one can easily find different decision making practices in EU depending about importance of issue. Most important core group is cooperation between France and Germany sometimes earlier (pre-€) adding UK to group. Commission of course has great de facto power not only on implementation level but also designing proposals handled in EUs inner cores; the same can be said about bureaucrats in national ministries who are designing policies decided EU meetings at summit/ministry levels.

So where is this leaving European Parliament? It may handle some energy bulb level issues but honestly the whole institution seems to be unnecessary creation only to keep some democratic illusion on show. As EU citizens are not so stupid to keep his institution more than a puppet theatre they show their attitude by low turnout percentage. Before last EU Parliament elections I proposed and argumented (in my article Let’s elect Donkey Parliament) why replacing MEPs with monkeys might not be so bad idea. Today EP is practical place to locate some second class politicians for retirement or out to not make any mess in national policy. They also can show good places to get fresh mussels while voters are visiting in EP as their quests. Designing EU policy happens anyway somewhere else.

EU Out

Today there is increasing EU Out movement lead by Britain. Besides populist UKIP party many leading Tories are supporting cutting ties with Brussels. Former Tory chancellor Nigel Lawson supports a referendum for Britain to leave the EU while Michael Portillo, former Tory cabinet minister, describes the Euro as a “disaster” and says the UK does not share the EU’s vision. The Tories might have their own motivation to pull out from EU (to save speculators and money laundry in London City) as well UKIP and other populist movements in EU (to keep poor immigrants out, rich ones can bye entrance anyway as usual) and leftist grassroot movements (to stop austerity measures). Whatever reasons are the aim is against EU’s federalist development.

Quite common view is that EU is an opaque bureaucracy cut off from the citizens it was (publicly) intended to serve. The unofficial core and value of EU in my opinion is that EU is a system to protect, favor and facilitate the interests of big economic powers. A steady decline in voter turnout over the past three decades for European elections has lent credence to the idea that citizens feel increasingly estranged from the European project. The crisis appears to be making this worse by prompting politicians to rush through policies that concentrate more power in Brussels with limited public understanding or support.

From my point of view subsidiary principle should be widen so that more legislation should be implemented at national level and those few remaining issues could be decided between governments and implemented by slimmed European Commission and its agencies. With this approach the whole EP could be closed as useless extra body. This outcome – which I have called as EU lite version – is about the opposite to ongoing federalist tendency and indeed I support rebuilding EU with confederalist approach. This subject I dealt recently with my article My 1st May Manifesto .

Epilogue

The two dominating trends among EU leaders are to cut losses of players in virtual economy at the expense of taxpayers and to guide EU towards strict federation at the expense of democracy. (Ari Rusila)

After 63 years of existence of EU what do we have to celebrate? Financial speculators, banksters and EU elite can congratulate themselves for creating such a massive well connected system that it is hard to break. The citizens have enjoyed from few benefits such as student exchange programme, Schengen area and common agricultural policy which subsidized farmers to produce goods that nobody wanted, dumped excess supply on world markets creating falling incomes for world farmers. The decline of EU as actor in international politics continues with its disastrous European External Action Service (=foreign policy, EEAS) so that the union can concentrate to its core function as distributor of agricultural funds and as aggregate of high-flown statements. The present challenge is, how to distance unsatisfied citizens and state parliaments away from disturbing egocentric and sel-governing elite. I hope that grassroots finally will get fed up with this experiment and starts to demand some power back.


Will EP elections bring a Hamas phenomenon inside EU?

June 5, 2009

EU is the largest single market in the world and the biggest donor in humanitarian aid, providing 56 percent of assistance to developing countries worldwide.   With this background it’s sad that the foreign affairs – CFSP, ESDP – is presumably the ‘weakest link’ of the EU.  Earlier I have criticized EU too much following agenda of U.S. foreign policy interests.  In addition  blocs such as Africa Group, Organisation of the Islamic Conference, Arab Group, Non-Aligned Movement, have shown to be more united in the UN than the EU.

Inside EU the weakest link is the European Parliament.  In principle it can only slow common development policy designed in Commission and Council of Ministers.  The power still lies with national governments and the Europeans, public, is showing no will to place it anywhere else.

In going elections trend is a turning inward, a renationalisation of European politics, and a shift to protectionism.  While the turnout will probably be even lower than before my forecast about the result will be following:

  • those who have strong opinions are motivated for voting,
  • the share of those with strong opinions will be in EP bigger than in national parliaments
  • strong opinions in EU election are mostly channelled via euro-sceptics, nationalists, populist and right-wing parties
  • if UK Conservatives are leaving the biggest group in EP new coalitions new combination of ad hoc coalitions are possible
  • euroscepticism, previously a British and, to a lesser extent, a Scandinavian characteristic, is spreading even into the historical heartland of the EU, such as the Netherlands
  • also new left can gain support from mainstream social democrats

The bottom line will be more extremist politics and bye bye Lisbon Treaty, EU enlargement and cohesion.

Wiesenthal Centre Director for International Relations, Dr Shimon Samuels, urged the European Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) “to launch an investigation into the financing and promotion campaigns of MEPs who will be elected this week to the new European Parliament and who espouse anti-Semitic, anti-Muslim, anti-Roma, homophobic or other discriminatory platforms.

It totally possible that apathy towards political élites, low turnout and success of anti-Europeans, extremists etc will bring Hamas phenomenon inside EU.  Democratic election went wrong at least from pro-European perspective.  The gap between parliament and other EU institutions will be wider so what’s the response – maybe blockade of EP.

My forecast does not set great hopes on some nice ideas of common Europe.  Maybe this is not big loss anyway as diversity probably is one of rare European core values.


Votes for Sale in EP election?

June 1, 2009

A common utterance “money talks” is sometimes used also related to elections.One could suppose that if voting matters the parties or candidates are investing more to win elections.Normal marketing is sometimes not guaranteeing enough votes so in many societies more crude means are used such as election fraud/rigging, non-transparent and illegal political campaign and party financing.A simple vote buying maybe tells most about importance of elections. I wonder if there exists in any EU member state a barometer showing current price level of votes in EP elections, not only the official campaign costs but the unofficial price per vote.

Buying a polling station or enough of them could be one possibility which from my opinion is complicated to implement in EP elections. I was quite surprised while reading from BNP pages that some party really thinks this to be possible.A quote:

All British National Party members and supporters have been urged to be on the lookout for polling station fraud committed by corrupt officials who may seek to cast ghost votes in the election on June 4th, party leader Nick Griffin has announced. “We have received information that certain corrupt officials at some polling stations have devised a plan whereby they intend to vote on other people’s behalf towards the end of polling day,” Mr Griffin said. “Apparently the plan is to wait until late on polling day, and then to start crossing off names of people on the electoral register who have not yet voted and then voting on their behalf,” Mr Griffin said.

If buying votes via election organisation is difficult there is always possibility to buy them directly from electorate.In Finland there is a tradition to transport free people in rural areas from their home to polling station and maybe give them a cup of coffee and expect that they may vote “right way”;otherwise these voters would maybe stay home. Of course one can select the persons to which give free transport but it does not guarantee the “right” vote. During this EP elections I have impression that free transport services are lower level than before indicating the unimportance of coming election.

More effective way is to bay vote with money. In Finland I have not heard this to been done but in Balkans situation is a bit different or what to think about following quote from Bulgaria April 2, 2009:

Bulgarian MPs have passed a new set of punishments for anyone found to be involved in ‘vote buying’ after the second reading of a new bill Thursday. Bulgarian MPs have passed a new set of punishments for anyone found to be involved in ‘vote buying’ after the second reading of a new bill on Thursday. Anyone found to be involved in vote rigging or buying will now receive a jail term of 1-3 years and a fine of between BGN 1 000 and BGN 10 000. This new law includes anyone found threatening or conning voters during local or national elections. For more serious offences judges will be able to give a jail term of up to 6 years and a fine of up to BGN 20 000. The bill was passed soon after Bulgaria’s Chief Prosecutor, Boris Velchev, called on all political parties to slam vote buying practices. “Vote buying is nothing new but it has recently entered court-rooms,” Velchev stated. He expressed concerns that this practice may cast a shadow over the upcoming general and EP elections in the summer.

Modern technology helps to monitor that buyer gets what (s)he is paying for.E.g. the voter takes a picture with mobile phone about voting slip, shows it to payer and gets money. In Balkans I have heard the sum vary between 5 to 50 euro per vote;I wonder what’s the value during these EP elections.

Vote buying is one kind of political corruption – misuse of political power for private gain for preserving or strengthening power, for personal enrichment or both.A candidate can use also indirect means get power for benefits like cronyism, clientelism, nepotism, patronage, insider trading, speed money, embezzlement or abuse of public property.These indirect ways are hard to proof.

For me it would be interesting to get feedback about different variations of vote buying during this EP elections – variations which are outside normal marketing, legal, sometimes even transparent campaigns.Even in overall this EP elections seems to have low market value there maybe are candidates who want to collect their million from Brussels and are using unusual means to get it.Learning these bad practices could help to improve countermeasures for next next EP quality in future.


Discovering the EP with Europarltv videos

May 25, 2009

While European Parliament elections soon are coming I was curious to see how EU propaganda machinery with their countless millions of taxpayers’ money is putting their best to attract public to cast their vote.  So I opened Europarltv which launched a series of videos explaining the history the Parliament, how it works and why to vote. Here is feedback of my wasted time:

First impression was that I am watching some practice videos made by some primary school hobby group under supervision (without supervision the pupils probably would be much more creative). Maybe producers have selected a line explain EU/EP for dummies but I wonder is the target group really the same than with shopping tv, where brain-dead people who have nothing more important in life than buy multiple priced bullshit from divan.

To avoid boredom I tried to concentrate to content. Interested in history I watched few videos including response to holocaust denial, some allegorical Hemingway quotation as starting step towards European Constitution in 1984 etc. I bet that EU history has much more interesting aspects than selected. Indeed a couple of weeks ago Adam LeBor published a conspiracy thriller “The Budapest Protocol” based real event in Strasbourg on August 10, 1944. There Nazi officers ordered a group of German industrials to plan for Germany’s post-war recovery – the Fourth Reich – an economic empire known later as European Union. (more about US intelligence document related to Nazi’s secret post-war plans in Mail on Sunday )

Abandoning history and fictions an interesting video headline was “Who decides in Europe?”.  The main claim was that no law which are in EU’s limits – will pass without EP. Correct! What was said only indirect was, that EP’s role is totally bystander. The formulations are made in Commission and decisions in Council of Ministers, EP can only slow this common development work not take the initiative. I think that producers tried to hide the insignificance of EP behind positive image of EU.

The official tv-spot highlights the same EU’s decision making dilemma. After imaginary news headlines the ad claims “You decide what tomorrows news will be”. Again correct! Your vote can have some influence in national elections and your government can be formulating the future EU policy with other national governments and EC; but where is the connections to EP elections – nowhere.

In conclusion I would say that EU could have used – or best not to use at all – its propaganda investment better; probably no big international company would waste money to marketing with so low standards. After EP videos it does not surprise me if the turnout is even lower than before.

One view about EU propaganda can be found from my post “ 20 bn propaganda


Discovering the EP with Europarltv videos

May 25, 2009

While European Parliament elections soon are coming I was curious to see how EU propaganda machinery with their countless millions of taxpayers’ money is putting their best to attract public to cast their vote.  So I opened Europarltv which launched a series of videos explaining the history the Parliament, how it works and why to vote. Here is feedback of my wasted time:

First impression was that I am watching some practice videos made by some primary school hobby group under supervision (without supervision the pupils probably would be much more creative). Maybe producers have selected a line explain EU/EP for dummies but I wonder is the target group really the same than with shopping tv, where brain-dead people who have nothing more important in life than buy multiple priced bullshit from divan.

To avoid boredom I tried to concentrate to content. Interested in history I watched few videos including response to holocaust denial, some allegorical Hemingway quotation as starting step towards European Constitution in 1984 etc. I bet that EU history has much more interesting aspects than selected. Indeed a couple of weeks ago Adam LeBor published a conspiracy thriller “The Budapest Protocol” based real event in Strasbourg on August 10, 1944. There Nazi officers ordered a group of German industrials to plan for Germany’s post-war recovery – the Fourth Reich – an economic empire known later as European Union. (more about US intelligence document related to Nazi’s secret post-war plans in Mail on Sunday )

Abandoning history and fictions an interesting video headline was “Who decides in Europe?”.  The main claim was that no law which are in EU’s limits – will pass without EP. Correct! What was said only indirect was, that EP’s role is totally bystander. The formulations are made in Commission and decisions in Council of Ministers, EP can only slow this common development work not take the initiative. I think that producers tried to hide the insignificance of EP behind positive image of EU.

The official tv-spot highlights the same EU’s decision making dilemma. After imaginary news headlines the ad claims “You decide what tomorrows news will be”. Again correct! Your vote can have some influence in national elections and your government can be formulating the future EU policy with other national governments and EC; but where is the connections to EP elections – nowhere.

In conclusion I would say that EU could have used – or best not to use at all – its propaganda investment better; probably no big international company would waste money to marketing with so low standards. After EP videos it does not surprise me if the turnout is even lower than before.

One view about EU propaganda can be found from my post “ 20 bn propaganda


Discovering the EP with Europarltv videos

May 25, 2009

While European Parliament elections soon are coming I was curious to see how EU propaganda machinery with their countless millions of taxpayers’ money is putting their best to attract public to cast their vote.  So I opened Europarltv which launched a series of videos explaining the history the Parliament, how it works and why to vote. Here is feedback of my wasted time:

First impression was that I am watching some practice videos made by some primary school hobby group under supervision (without supervision the pupils probably would be much more creative). Maybe producers have selected a line explain EU/EP for dummies but I wonder is the target group really the same than with shopping tv, where brain-dead people who have nothing more important in life than buy multiple priced bullshit from divan.

To avoid boredom I tried to concentrate to content. Interested in history I watched few videos including response to holocaust denial, some allegorical Hemingway quotation as starting step towards European Constitution in 1984 etc. I bet that EU history has much more interesting aspects than selected. Indeed a couple of weeks ago Adam LeBor published a conspiracy thriller “The Budapest Protocol” based real event in Strasbourg on August 10, 1944. There Nazi officers ordered a group of German industrials to plan for Germany’s post-war recovery – the Fourth Reich – an economic empire known later as European Union. (more about US intelligence document related to Nazi’s secret post-war plans in Mail on Sunday )

Abandoning history and fictions an interesting video headline was “Who decides in Europe?”.  The main claim was that no law which are in EU’s limits – will pass without EP. Correct! What was said only indirect was, that EP’s role is totally bystander. The formulations are made in Commission and decisions in Council of Ministers, EP can only slow this common development work not take the initiative. I think that producers tried to hide the insignificance of EP behind positive image of EU.

The official tv-spot highlights the same EU’s decision making dilemma. After imaginary news headlines the ad claims “You decide what tomorrows news will be”. Again correct! Your vote can have some influence in national elections and your government can be formulating the future EU policy with other national governments and EC; but where is the connections to EP elections – nowhere.

In conclusion I would say that EU could have used – or best not to use at all – its propaganda investment better; probably no big international company would waste money to marketing with so low standards. After EP videos it does not surprise me if the turnout is even lower than before.

One view about EU propaganda can be found from my post “ 20 bn propaganda


Discovering the EP with Europarltv videos

May 25, 2009

While European Parliament elections soon are coming I was curious to see how EU propaganda machinery with their countless millions of taxpayers’ money is putting their best to attract public to cast their vote.  So I opened Europarltv which launched a series of videos explaining the history the Parliament, how it works and why to vote. Here is feedback of my wasted time:

First impression was that I am watching some practice videos made by some primary school hobby group under supervision (without supervision the pupils probably would be much more creative). Maybe producers have selected a line explain EU/EP for dummies but I wonder is the target group really the same than with shopping tv, where brain-dead people who have nothing more important in life than buy multiple priced bullshit from divan.

To avoid boredom I tried to concentrate to content. Interested in history I watched few videos including response to holocaust denial, some allegorical Hemingway quotation as starting step towards European Constitution in 1984 etc. I bet that EU history has much more interesting aspects than selected. Indeed a couple of weeks ago Adam LeBor published a conspiracy thriller “The Budapest Protocol” based real event in Strasbourg on August 10, 1944. There Nazi officers ordered a group of German industrials to plan for Germany’s post-war recovery – the Fourth Reich – an economic empire known later as European Union. (more about US intelligence document related to Nazi’s secret post-war plans in Mail on Sunday )

Abandoning history and fictions an interesting video headline was “Who decides in Europe?”.  The main claim was that no law which are in EU’s limits – will pass without EP. Correct! What was said only indirect was, that EP’s role is totally bystander. The formulations are made in Commission and decisions in Council of Ministers, EP can only slow this common development work not take the initiative. I think that producers tried to hide the insignificance of EP behind positive image of EU.

The official tv-spot highlights the same EU’s decision making dilemma. After imaginary news headlines the ad claims “You decide what tomorrows news will be”. Again correct! Your vote can have some influence in national elections and your government can be formulating the future EU policy with other national governments and EC; but where is the connections to EP elections – nowhere.

In conclusion I would say that EU could have used – or best not to use at all – its propaganda investment better; probably no big international company would waste money to marketing with so low standards. After EP videos it does not surprise me if the turnout is even lower than before.

One view about EU propaganda can be found from my post “ 20 bn propaganda


%d bloggers like this: