27, November, 2017
Today the European Union Politburo is interested in wiping out one face in particular, Robert Schuman. This is done not because that face is guilty of anything. Quite the reverse.He is responsible for the miraculous rise of Europe as a super-power in the world today. The keys to war and peace in Europe — and elsewhere — are the greatest heritage of modern times. Why are the Brussels Politburo throwing those keys away? Personal aggrandizement? Ignorance? Petty jealousy? or what Schuman called the routines of power, the inability of politicians and bureaucracies to think in other terms than Europeans had for more than a thousand years?The Brussels Politburo are especially keen to wipe out the signing of the Treaty of Paris on 18 April 1951 and the Great Charter of Rights of European Citizens (DECLARATION COMMUNE) that was also signed that day. That showed how West European States can demonstrate they are real democracies and expose the false democracies as they existed in East Germany and elsewhere behind the Iron Curtain. The guilty neo-Gaullist Brussels Poltiburo wanted none of this. While the public expected the founding Paris treaty to be renewed in 2002, the Council Politburo failed to do so -- without any public debate, never mind any referendums.
- * Schuman’s Proposal saved Europe from catastrophic wars. The EEC Customs Union didn’t.
- * Schuman said that the Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) made ‘war not only unthinkable but materially impossible.’ The EEC was about trade and customs.
- * The first Community healed relations with post-Nazi Germany. Rome didn’t.
- * Schuman created the bases for solidarity, democracy, justice and a means to define Europe’s destiny and service to the world.
- * Schuman provided the means for Freedom-loving Democrats to deal with the inevitable forces of globalization.
- * The first Community defined the FIVE democratic institutions. Rome didn’t.
- * The first Community introduced supranational Democracy. Rome didn’t.
- * The ECSC created Europe’s first Single Markets in 1953. Rome didn’t.
We could add a few other achievements like being co-author of the 1949 NATO treaty and initiating the Council of Europe, 1949 with its Convention of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, 1950.Writing Fake History is like trying to make Dreyfus’s handwriting look like Esterhazy’s. Let’s add some other facts.
- * De Gaulle attacked Schuman. He tried to destroy the Community system.
- * De Gaulle invented the Franco-German axis as the motor of Europe because he could then control Germany.
- * De Gaulle turned the EEC into a milch cow so that up to 70 percent of taxpayers money was spent on the CAP and farmers, usually French peasants.
- * De Gaulle would not attend Schuman’s funeral and stopped Adenauer, who had already agreed, from attending.
- * De Gaulle had nothing to do with European Reconciliation. Adenauer wrote that Schuman achieved this in 1950. De Gaulle wanted to expand French borders to the Rhine!
- * De Gaulle was an autocrat. He hated political parties.
- * De Gaulle refused to have elections to the European Parliament and persuaded Adenauer to stop these elections too. Because of de Gaulle, Europeans have never had a proper election to the European Parliament.
We could also add: De Gaulle kicked the Supreme European Headquarters of NATO out of Paris. French forces left NATO. He despised and ignored the Council of Europe and to gain power, was instrumental in the bloody Algerian war and fierce torture. De Gaulle couldn’t destroy the European Communities, no matter how hard he tried. The best damage he could do was to “chloroform” it for a while. He made sure the democracies of UK, Norway, Denmark and Ireland did not join. He vetoed the applications three times — without asking any advice of his ministers or asking parliament. He preferred Franco’s fascist Spain.Why is Brussels celebrating 1957? De Gaulle took power in 1957! Politicians admire his style, exploiting the Common Market budget for his own purposes. De Gaulle pillaged European taxes for his own distorted version of the Common Agricultural Policy. It took European money to bribe French voters to keep him in power. Cunning! They would like to do the same. He made sure the Council had doors closed to the public so criticism was muted. Weaker Europeans could be exploited for Gaullist strong-arm policy. Democratic opposition was gagged. That’s why politicians still keep the doors closed today. It’s contrary to the Lisbon treaties that they like. Article 15 TFEU says the Council shall meet in public! Why is the press so passive? Decades to pro-Gaullist dog-training!Many other politicians today like the idea of doing what they like behind closed doors with the people’s money. Maybe that’s why in 2013 the Council celebrated de Gaulle as if he was a hero of Europe, not its arrogant opponent.Why don’t honest politicians object to this abuse? It takes both guts, honesty and education. One prime minister told a Davos meeting that the treaty that brought peace in Europe was the Treaty of Rome! Frankly this prime minister, who claimed to be a historian, was either (a) ignorant (b) deceived by EU propaganda or (c) a deceiver.He wasn’t alone on the stage that day. The Commission first vice president agreed. He comes into the same category. He said: ‘No more paternalism. That was Schuman etc. Very paternalistic people.’Wrong!In fact it was de Gaulle who was paternalistic and autocratic. He bossed everyone around, including the Dutch. Schuman created the first stage of Europe’s democratic system, the opposite of paternalistic. Was Mr Timmermans making a slip of the tongue? That’s why I later asked him, in the presence of Europe’s religious leaders:
- * Instead of open democracy of the treaties, politicians preferred the Gaullist distortion of secretive power in the Council and Commission.
- * Instead of the Community sectoral system (coal, steel, atomic energy, customs) that each required full democratic consent, politicians wanted to control all sectors of the European economy.
- * Instead of an impartial, Jury-like Commission that excluded politicians brandishing party cards, the politicians wanted to exclude non-partisan, impartial citizens such as experienced diplomats, engineers, scientists, academics, trade unionists, inventors from becoming members of the Commission.
Schuman and the Founding Fathers realized that the European system cannot be placed in the hands of politicians alone. It must be open to impartial citizens of high moral character, exercising their God-given rights to freedom. Why? Because, as Schuman knew and said, politicians have the tendency not only not to resist the corruption of power but to obscure its very existence. They tend to follow party over public interest, individual interest over collective interest.
That is why two institutions should be politician-free by definition: the European Court of Justice and the European Commission, Europe’s Jury. The third, the Consultative Committees, is instructed to act as impartial representatives of European civil society. That is it should involve professional associations of all sorts, with democratic mandates. The consultative committees, such as the as-yet, non-elected Committee of Regions and the tripartite Economic and Social Committee, (workers, consumers and entrepreneurs’ associations) act as honest witnesses to the state of Europe and the requirements of Europe’s future.How did politicians and governments set Europe on its downward path? Arrogance. All human beings have a tendency to corrupt. Putting known corrupters in charge of anti-corruption is likely to corrupt the system more rapidly.Their path to infamy? Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice and the failed Constitutional treaties illustrate their process of political and psychological disorder. Is it a coincidence that the initials spell out MANiC?Europe’s most severe problem of legitimacy arose with the Lisbon Treaty. It extended both their unlawful and unauthorized grasp for power. It reiterated their denial of Referendum NOs. “And Lisbon” turns their acronym to MANIACAL.The Constitutional Treaty was roundly rejected in referendums. it was hugely unpopular especially in those countries that did not get to vote in a referendum.
The Council press release to the Delegations announced two conspiratorial measures: Money and political Might. The politicians would spend a great deal of European tax-payers’ money on propaganda and press management. Secondly their political might would FORCE the articles of the failed Constitutional Treaty through the parliaments. They would use their national party-controlled majorities against virulent protest and righteous objections of the public. They did not call this a Conspiracy against the people. They called it “Consultations” with fellow politicians!Thus a small clique of politicians could act totally against the people’s referendum NOs. To oil their way they would need money.
Even today it is surprising to read the brazenness of this political ploy. In the same paragraph that showed the strategy to override the referendums, the press release said that money would be necessary for PR enforcement. For that sleight of hand, the European Council proposed that finance be poured into a fraudulent 50th Birthday for Europe, the Treaty of Rome. (Not the European Atomic Energy Treaty, Euratom, mind you, only in practice the European Common Market, the EEC!).This is what the Council Press Release said about the Constitutional Treaty that lay dead in the water after the French vote of 29 May 2005 and the Dutch vote of 1 June 2005.
Lisbon Treaty. Other countries had no chance to have a referendum. Why? The Irish European Commissioner, Charlie MacCreevy, said 95 percent of the European governments would lose a referendum vote on the Lisbon Treaty. The Economist called him “Teller of painful truths.”The original treaty of Rome , EEC, had a clause which basically said, this treaty does not permit Member States to leave, because all member States agree that the only sure solution for peace and prosperity is to make Europe more democratic. Only a foolish government, if it claimed to be a democracy, would want to leave. That Article 224 of the EEC treaty had become Article 312 of the Nice Treaty.It was yanked out and replaced by an exit article in the Constitutional Treaty. Referendums in France and the Netherlands rejected this Article 59 and all the Constitutional Treaty. It then became Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. The British had no chance to reject either Article 59 of the Constitutional Treaty or Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. The various UK political parties that in election manifestos promised referendums on European treaties betrayed their promises when in power. They told the public: “No referendum! We know best!”Why are the British finding it so difficult to leave the EU? Actually it is not too difficult. The European Union was the illegal superstructure added to the European Economic Community. Most of its MANiC changes reduce democracy, or try to. They empower politicians against the people.The Community system is, however, a different matter. The British in the 1975 referendum agreed to the Community method with an overwhelming majority of 67 percent. It was seen as democratic, and a means to improve the democratic climate of Europe.
Council press release 22 February 2007“Pursuing reform: the Constitutional Treaty.
As agreed by the European Council at its meeting of June 2006, the Union has followed a two-track approach. It has focused on making best use of the possibilities offered by the existing treaties to deliver concrete results while preparing the ground for continuing the reform process. The presidency (of the Council of Ministers) provided the European Council with an assessment of the consultation with Member States regarding the Constitutional Treaty. The outcome of these consultations will be passed to the German Presidency as part of its preparation for the report to be presented during the first half of 2007. The European Council reaffirms the importance of commemorating the 50th anniversary of the treaties of Rome in order to confirm the importance of the European integration process.”
- * The Community method requires one European election (not 28 national ones) to the European Parliament. That is still in the treaties.
- * It requires elections to the Consultative Committees. (That is also still in the treaties.)
- * It requires card-carrying politicians to be banned from the European Commission. (That is still in the treaties.)
- * It requires the Council of Ministers to be open to the public, just like the parliament, when they ‘consider, discuss and vote’ on any draft legislation. (That is still in the treaties.)
Schuman designed the Community system during the war, when he escaped from Nazi Germany as a prisoner. He told his friends during the war that the future European system would enable postwar Germany to reinforce its democratic tendencies. It would also reduce their proclivity to autocracy as they had experienced under Hitler and others.He compared it to chaining European States together, so that they would be obliged by their own self-interest to become more democratic. Following the scandals of the Gaullist era with its wine lake, and beef mountains, its corruption in high places and its election bribery, Brussels has succumbed to some pretty low politics.But it has not failed to deliver positive benefits to its citizens.The European Community won’t go away. It won’t fail to continue.Today it is not Germany who wants to leave the European institutions. It is the island that says it has the Mother of Parliaments. Why? Britons smell something rotten wafting over the Channel from Brussels.
- * Have elections as required under a single Statute to the European Parliament.
- * Ban active politicians from the Commission.
- * Open up the Council of Ministers to the public and the press.
- * Make the Judges in the Court of Justice democratically responsible.
- * Hold elections of properly constituted European professional associations to the Consultative Committees. Stop lobbyists altogether.
- * Replace the secretive COREPER and thousands of closed ‘expert’ committees with elected expert members of these democratic organizations.
The outcome of Brexit would be the same as if Germany wished to leave. Schuman said the new favorable climate the Community created would make it totally unpalatable for any country to leave.