Our future under a ratified Lisbon Treaty – II.

"Democracy means having the choice. Dictatorship means being given the choice." (Jeannine Luczak)

The transformation of democratic rule of law into a law to support an EU-federalist oligarchy is however far from getting the whole picture of Europe’s current and projected political system. In this part we compare the main features of the political system of Ireland known as “parliamentary democracy” with the basic criteria of democracy identified by experts of political theory [11] by reconciling two complementary widely accepted democracy-indexes: of Polity and Freedom House. After matching the observations of the system in Ireland with the two essential features of parliamentary democracy, which fill the word “democracy” with its actual meaning - meaningful elections and political freedom -, we find that these are converging to a zero value in Ireland under the overwhelming pressure of Lisbon.
(In order to keep one reading unit within a reasonable length we would prefer to post the three parts of the article as separate publications.)

3. The collapse of democracy through the collapse of meaningful elections

State officials both in Ireland and in the Union are withholding the information from the Irish voters that what they will be essentially called to vote for or against on June 12 is a new federal constitution that would render Ireland a non-sovereign state under the non-transparent central leadership in Brussels. The large majority of the voters of Ireland will have to submit their votes on the referendum without ever being presented with the vital information of this implication of ratifying the Lisbon Treaty, and even without the opportunity to read the text in full [1].

In order to examine the above facts in the conceptual light of what constitutes genuine democracy, we first cite the following parts of the study of Hadenius and Teorell [11]: “It could be argued, after all, that democratic ideals presume something more than just the establishment of the basic institutions of democracy. The question arises of how, from a qualitative point of view, these institutions actually function.”

With respect to the elections as a fundamental democratic institution, what makes an election a truly democratic institution is its attribute of meaningfulness, and what makes an election meaningful is its attribute of being fair and honest:
“It includes two major electoral aspects: universal suffrage and meaningful elections. The latter has three features: the elections must be open (i.e., fully competitive), correct, and effective (i.e., the decisive power must devolve on elected organs).”

Along with the criteria of meaningful elections the other main factor in identifying a system as democracy is political freedom. The study points out that the opinions greatly vary regarding the perfect realisation of political democracy; yet, all experts agree on identifying the basic conceptual elements of democracy:
“It is the combination of fair and honest elections with the existence of essentially unlimited political freedoms that constitutes the basic features of political democracy. Three aspects of political freedom figure as well: organisational freedom, freedom of opinion, and (the absence of) political violence and oppression. As elections and political freedoms could be judged as equally important, the two sides are given equal weight when the composed score is calculated.” [11]

Within the enhanced democracy-index obtained by extensive experimental analysis of nearly 80 countries and by combining the indices of Polity and Freedom House, in the case of cheating during the election procedure and/or the election campaigns in a way that will gravely influence the results of the voting, the value of the correctness as a constituent of meaningful elections is specified as 0 on a scale of 0 to 10.

“3. Meaningful elections: correctness
Are the election campaign and the voting procedure correctly organised without elements of cheating or other irregularities?
0 points: Very grave irregularities, which in all probability greatly influenced the result. Elections are heavily rigged or results fabricated.
Note: Countries scoring 0 on any of the attributes of meaningful elections also obtain 0 points as a total value for meaningful elections (2-4).”

The Irish government’s failure to publicise the full and readable text of the Lisbon Treaty, the lack of publicity of the information on the constitutional identity of the Treaty and the lack of publicised information on the consequent real implications of a ‘yes’ outcome of the referendum are grave irregularities which in all probability will greatly influence the referendum results and downgrade the referendum into a meaningless and aimless procedure. A meaningless referendum however is the same as not holding a referendum at all: it is merely an exercise of testing the success level of a misinformation campaign.
It should be emphasised that the relevance of the Lisbon referendum in Ireland is much higher than that of a regular term election, as the decision on ratifying the Lisbon Treaty is not merely to elect temporary representatives into the next parliamentary term, but a decision on accepting or rejecting the permanent transfer of the powers of the elected to represent the citizenry of Ireland to the federal state in Brussels. For this reason the criteria of meaningful elections with respect to the Lisbon referendum is many times more significant than in the case of any regular term election.

As the following example indicates, not only the criteria of meaningful elections has been abandoned, but the other main factor of democracy, political freedom, is also undermined through suppressing the freedom of political opinion. This is evident from the open threats against any government member expressing a NO stance on Lisbon. “Taoiseach Brian Cowen yesterday threatened to expel any Fianna Fail TD who breaks ranks over the Lisbon Treaty” [13]

“4. Meaningful elections: effectiveness
1. Functional effectiveness: Are there prohibitions for or restrictions on the decision-making powers of the elected bodies
0 points ? The elected bodies have no competence at all and no decision-making power, but are of an essentially ceremonial nature.
1 point ? The elected bodies have a certain competence, but are very limited in initiating and making decisions.”

From this perspective the effectiveness of the elections is contradicted in two regards.
1) The freedom of political opinion of the elected representatives would be the very minimum to assume an accountable, responsive and responsible representation in any parliamentary democracy. The lack of such freedom profoundly undermines the meaningfulness of the elections by contradicting its functional effectiveness. Accordingly, the last elections held in Ireland are invalidated by the loss of the competences the government representatives have been elected to exercise. The free opinion necessary for the elected to properly fulfil their tasks is suppressed by threats and they are forced into blind obedience to echo a stance for Lisbon. In effect the elected bodies have no competence and no decision-making power, but are of an essentially ceremonial nature.
2) The meaning of the last general elections held in Ireland is lost because the representation of the electorate is overridden by the act of unnoticeably transferring the competencies of the elected representatives to a group of non-elected (self-appointed) federal state officials in Brussels.

The citizens’ rights for free expression are also converging to the lowest point under the Lisbon process:

“2. Freedom of opinion
Are there any prohibitions or equivalent obstacles preventing citizens from expressing themselves? Is there freedom of (all) the media? Are there threats or coercions preventing the free exchange of ideas?
0 points ? No freedom. All expressions that may be deemed critical of the regime are prohibited.
1 point ? Same as for 0 points but with a lower degree of surveillance. Different media may receive different treatment.
2 points ? A limited criticism and news service may exist, but only in certain areas and against those in power at a low level.”

The lack of appropriate media pluralism is an obstacle equivalent with prohibitions in preventing citizens from expressing themselves.
The government control over the mass media has been evidenced by the overwhelming publicity of political speeches, news and opinions echoing a pro-Lisbon position. The government’s “yes” campaign has received mass media coverage and has been financed on a level that cannot be matched through civil initiatives. Any political opinion contradicting the EU-federalist interests is largely forced out of the conventional and mainstream mass media channels and only on rare occasions does it receive wide publicity. (Note: as we are approaching the referendum date, the observed rarity is exponentially becoming rarer.)
The violation of the freedom of political opinion is closely associated with the lack of meaningfulness of elections also by the following consideration: when the citizens are deprived of the information on the basis of which they could form an opinion and accordingly could make an informed decision on an election, it is ultimately their freedom of opinion that is being violated.

In summary, the current referendum campaign in Ireland is profoundly incorrect and dishonest and the former elections have become entirely ineffective, i.e., under the Lisbon process the formerly elected bodies are deprived of their decisive power.
After matching the observations of the system in Ireland with the two essential features of parliamentary democracy, which fill the word “democracy” with its actual meaning - meaningful elections and political freedom -, what we have found is that these are converging to a zero value in Ireland under the overwhelming pressure of Lisbon.

In light of the objective definition of the concept democracy the current main political trend in Ireland and in Europe has revealed the following facts:
- It contradicts the principles of a truly democratic rule of law
- It contradicts the criteria of transparency, accountability and responsiveness of the elected representatives
- It has abolished our democratic-constitutional right to access relevant public information necessary to make a meaningful decision in constitutional matters [12],
- The misinformation regarding the Lisbon Treaty over all Europe amounts to the deprivation of the voters of the most fundamental criteria of any parliamentary democracies: the meaningful elections. The lack of meaningful elections and lack of free political opinion invalidate the democratic basis of a functional parliamentary democracy, because the resulting mandates of the elected no longer represent the electorate, only the preference of a small oligarchy that has used the methods of fraud (deceit, misinformation, media-manipulation) to gain power over the society.

The difference between the situation in Ireland and that of the other EU-countries, is that the Irish voters, in lack of a readable text and in lack of objective information on the Lisbon Treaty, are being deprived of the substantial information-basis to form their opinion and express their preference on the referendum, whereas in the other EU-countries the same irregularities: deceit, misinformation, threats and mass media manipulation have been used to deny the referendums altogether [6].

Not too surprisingly, the system on the other end of the conceptual scale (from 0 to 10) is identified as “dictatorship”. When political power is grabbed by maintaining a grand-scale misinformation, rather than obtained as a representation of the informed decision of the majority, the corresponding system forms a conceptual basis of dictatorship, which is a “form of government in which one person or an oligarchy possesses absolute power without effective constitutional checks.” [14] The conceptual link rendering misinformation – as a form of fraud – as a constituent of dictatorship in the process of gaining power is also apparent from the continuation of the above definition of dictatorship:

“With constitutional democracy, it is one of the two chief forms of government in use today. Modern dictators usually use force or fraud to gain power and then keep it through intimidation, terror, suppression of civil liberties, and control of the mass media.” [14]

Misinformation is an invisible form of violence, i.e. violence on the cognitive capabilities of the mind. If an oligarchy gains and retains its power through an ongoing grand-scale misinformation campaign rather than by spectacular physical violence, this creates a permanent basis for its absolute power, from which even the possibility to capture the facts of reality is eliminated, thus the constitutional and other checks of the system is rendered entirely impossible. Since the pre-Lisbon political trends have contradicted both the meaningfulness of elections and political freedom in the EU-countries, under a ratified Lisbon Treaty the last pillars of democracy are also expected to collapse, as political violence and oppression will intensify to maintain the current political status.

This prediction is based on the very text of the Lisbon Treaty, which is in effect a collection of provisions empowering the EU-state with the license to use all forms of violence against its citizens. Among the following bundles of meaningless amendments we find the infamous article 61D, which is about the mysterious KGB-like “standing committee”:

“51) Articles 29 to 39 of Title VI, which relate to judicial cooperation in criminal matters and to police cooperation, shall be replaced by the provisions of Chapters 1, 4 and 5 of Title IV of Part Three of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. As set out below, in Article 2, points 64, 67 and 68 of this Treaty, Article 29 shall be replaced by Article 61 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Article 30 shall be replaced by Articles 69 F and 69 G thereof, Article 31 shall be replaced by Articles 69 A, 69 B and 69 D thereof, Article 32 shall be replaced by Article 69 H thereof, Article 33 shall be replaced by Article 61 E thereof and Article 36 shall be replaced by Article 61 D thereof. The heading of the Title shall be deleted and its number shall become the number of the Title on final provisions.”

“ARTICLE 61 D
A standing committee shall be set up within the Council in order to ensure that operational cooperation on internal security is promoted and strengthened within the Union. Without prejudice to Article 207, it shall facilitate coordination of the action of Member States’ competent authorities. Representatives of the Union bodies, offices and agencies concerned may be involved in the proceedings of this committee.”

The following articles furthermore indicate that that purpose of the extreme internal security aimed at by the Lisbon Treaty is to make it legitimate to prosecute any political opposition to the federal EU by means of close surveillance of all citizens of Europe, by the deployment of a KGB-like security committee and by an EU-wide police network:

“ARTICLE 61 H
Where necessary to achieve the objectives set out in Article 61, as regards preventing and
combating terrorism and related activities, the European Parliament and the Council, acting by means of regulations in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, shall define a framework for administrative measures with regard to capital movements and payments, such as the freezing of funds, financial assets or economic gains belonging to, or owned or held by, natural or legal persons, groups or non-State entities.”
“ARTICLE 69 G
1. Europol’s mission shall be to support and strengthen action by the Member States’ police authorities and other law enforcement services and their mutual cooperation in preventing and combating serious crime affecting two or more Member States, terrorism and forms of crime which affect a common interest covered by a Union policy.”
“ARTICLE 69 F
1. The Union shall establish police cooperation involving all the Member States’ competent authorities, including police, customs and other specialised law enforcement services in relation to the prevention, detection and investigation of criminal offences.
2. For the purposes of paragraph 1, the European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, may establish measures concerning:
(a) the collection, storage, processing, analysis and exchange of relevant information;
(b) support for the training of staff, and cooperation on the exchange of staff, on equipment and on research into crime-detection;
(c) common investigative techniques in relation to the detection of serious forms of organised crime.”

The expression “forms of crime which affect a common interest covered by a Union policy” is a definition of political crimes, which are however considered crime forms only under dictatorial regimes. In fact the Lisbon Treaty is a unique constitution in the sense that it claims to establish a “democratic” system while granting limitless powers to the federal state of the EU to protect itself from its citizens - as opposed to democratic constitutions, which are normally concerned with limiting the state powers and protecting the citizens.

Thought control is also introduced under Lisbon, by a novel crime form called “xenophobia”. Xenophobia is such a main concern that it has gained a special place among other severe crimes:

“61,3. The Union shall endeavour to ensure a high level of security through measures to prevent and combat crime, racism and xenophobia, and through measures for coordination and cooperation between police and judicial authorities and other competent authorities, as well as through the mutual recognition of judgments in criminal matters and, if necessary, through the approximation of criminal laws.”

To demonstrate the utter absurdity of the idea of prosecuting an emotion like xenophobia, imagine that at any time in history when foreign rulers have seized a new territory, they would have made it a punishable crime to maintain any negative emotions (i.e. “xenophobia”) against the presence of the invaders. To render it a major crime to express a natural and expected emotional response to the fact of being conquered and surrendered to foreign interests, not only signifies an utterly deviant morality, but as an attempt to reverse the roles of the subject and the object of political aggression, it also reveals an unparalleled craftiness and philosophical dishonesty behind the treaty. The idea of inserting this open threat into a constitution against the exact same citizens who are being deceived and left out of the very creation of this so called “free and democratic” EU , indicates a profoundly twisted sense of justice and the highest peaks of the ‘art’ of deceit achieved by the Lisbon proponents. It appears that the only difference between the ancient and the modern methods of territorial conquests is that the ancient methods took courage and strength and at least they were honest. In our days the very same conquest takes only the weakness and cowardice to yield to and repeat the official lies of a couple of shrewd politicians, lawyers, translators and administrators in Brussels.

The immense danger inherent in political settings ruled by an oligarchy that has gained political power via an invisible form of violence (deceit) rather than by physical violence, is that such political leadership fallaciously deems itself legitimate to start practicing the physical forms of violence as well - viewing it as an assumed “monopoly of the state” - against its conquered citizens, especially if the conquered would start revolting to regain their freedom.

What can be more fatal than a political leadership that redefines the meaning of democracy into its opposite and under which political violence, as a main feature of dictatorship, is being constitutionalised as an institution of “democracy” to protect the interests of the few against the will of the many? What can be more permanent than a dictatorship from which – as opposed to the known explicit forms of dictatorial regimes like the former Soviet Union – liberation will not be possible, simply because captivity will be called “freedom” and dictatorship will be nicknamed “democracy”?

(to be continued)

Previous part:
Our future under a ratified Lisbon Treaty – I.
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/87683

References:

[1] “What does the government hide by hiding the Lisbon Treaty?”
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/87595

[2] Helga Zepp-LaRouche: “Abolishing Democracy by Stealth:
Constitution for Feudalism in Europe”
http://www.larouchepub.com/hzl/2008/3509referendum_lisb....html

[3] Comparison of the Lisbon Treaty and the former EU Constitution:
http://www.j.dk/exp/images/bondes/13.03.08_COMPARISON_O...Y.pdf
Jens-Peter Bonde’s book on the Lisbon Treaty:
http://www.bonde.com/index.php/bonde_uk/article/C355/
Index with more than 3,000 alphabetical entries to search the Lisbon Treaty by topics:
http://www.j.dk/exp/images/bondes/Index.pdf

[4] “Ireland: a vital fact proven; the Lisbon Treaty is a constitution”
(Conceptual map: the Lisbon Treaty is a constitution)
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/87182

[5] “These Boots Are Gonna Walk All Over You”
An analysis by Prof. Anthony Coughlan
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/2773

[6] “Summary of the Lisbon Treaty research”
http://howardh.wordpress.com/category/lisbon-treaty-res...arch/

[7] Adam Przeworski, José María Maravall: “Democracy and the Rule of Law”, Cambridge University Press; 1 edition, p. 96, Jul 21 2003)

[8] Larry Jay Diamond, Leonardo Morlino: “Assessing the Quality of Democracy” Johns Hopkins University Press, November 2005)

[9] Helen. Desfosses, Abdo I. Baaklini: “Designs for Democratic Stability: Studies in Viable Constitutionalism” (M.E. Sharpe, February 1997)

[10] Giovanni Sartori: “Dittatura, in Elementi di teoria politica”, Il Mulino, Bologna, 1987, 51–87.

[11] “Assessing Alternative Indices of Democracy” by Axel Hadenius from the Uppsala University and Jan Teorell from Göteborg University, (The Committee on Concepts and Methods, International Political Science Association Teaching and Research in the Social Sciences, August 2005)

[12] "The main constitutional aspect of constitutionalisation"
http://howardh.wordpress.com/2008/04/25/the-main-consti...tion/

[13] “Cowen to kick out FF treaty ‘rebels’”
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/cowen-to-kick-o....html

[14] Encyclopædia Britannica

[15] “Lisbon Treaty explained by political science: an equivalent of coup d’état”
http://howardh.wordpress.com/2008/04/25/lisbon-treaty-e...ence/

[16] The institutional construction and decision mechanisms of the EU are similar to the ex-communist regimes, such as the former USSR:
“Former Soviet Dissident Warns For EU Dictatorship”
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/865

[17] “Lisbon campaigners clash on neutrality”
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/breaking/2008/0515/bre...0.htm

[18] “Top Reasons to Vote NO to Lisbon Treaty”
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/87518

Other sources:

“Defend Sovereignty - Neutrality - Democracy: Vote No to Lisbon!”
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/87547

“Voting No for a reason: Lisbon Treaty OR a Europe of democracy”
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/87345

Bonde’s Briefing 19.12.07: Born in sun and sin
"The EU’s Prime Ministers met Thursday 13 December 2007 11.30 in Lisbon to solemnly sign the Lisbon Treaty which none of them has had time to read.
The text has on purpose been made totally unreadable, and the numbering system has been changed time and time again, Bonde, who was present at the signing ceremony, writes."
http://www.bonde.com/index.php/bonde_UK/article/bondes_...91207

Leading politicians on the identity between the Lisbon Treaty and the former EU Constitution:
“EU Empire - Lisbon Treaty / EU Constitution”
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-722592484850619084

Popular sovereignty is abolished and the principle of unanimity is breached by the EU - by dropping the results of the former referendums of the French and the Dutch peoples:
“European Parliament: Members’ Protest - 12.12.2007”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JJlI9swbsA&feature=related

Parliamentary democracy and rule of law are abolished by the EU:
“Power Grab by EU Parliament President (updated)”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVeMBNB0cII&feature=related

Nigel Farage’s speech in the European Parliament after the power-grab:
“Ireland’s call - Vote no to Lisbon”
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-722592484850619084

Movie on the Lisbon Treaty: “End of Nations - EU Takeover & the Lisbon Treaty”
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-42917704894725...54607

“Video on the Irish campaign by the ERC2:”
http://www.teameurope.info/

Nigel Farage reveals the past of the Commission members:
“Nigel Farage on who’s who in the EU commission”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWSYMpuCFaQ&feature=related

“The Lisbon Treaty: Ireland Speaks For Democracy”
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/86484

“Too COSI: what are they hiding? (on the EU’s Standing Committee on Internal Security)”
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/foreign/brunowaterfield/fe...1.htm

“Demand a Referendum on EU Lisbon Treaty”
article by Helga Zepp-LaRouche
http://www.larouchepub.com/hzl/2008/3510referendum_lisb....html

The Lisbon Treaty is the milestone of a gradual process of absorbing the sovereignty of Europe’s nations, according to the professors of Vienna University:
“EuropeNews: “10,000 demanding referendum on Lisbon Treaty”
http://europenews.dk/en/node/8827

“Free Europe”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8CoyLANcts&feature=related

“Wrong Man, wrong Europe”
http://www.redpepper.org.uk/article1164.html
An article by Susan George, the board chair of the Transnational Institute and honorary president of Attac France

BBC UK: The European Parliament’s decision on not publicising the audit report on a series of abuses of staff allowances:
“MEPs keep ‘fraud’ report secret”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7266286.stm

“The Result of European Unification Will be War”
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/2104

“A Business View: A Bad Deal for Ireland and Europe”
http://www.libertas.org/content/view/252/131/

“Data Watchdog Questions EU’s Controversial Fingerprint Plan”
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,3222245,00.html