Voting NO to Lisbon: to avoid the collapse of economy

national | eu | opinion/analysis Friday June 06, 2008 19:34 by Howard Holby

Final countdown: myths versus facts regarding the Lisbon Treaty

Myth: ‘Ireland and Europe need the EU and Lisbon Treaty’

Fact: the EU needs Ireland and Europe, and the EU needs the Lisbon Treaty to gain control over Europe

Myth: 'Ireland needs global companies and global capital'
Fact: It is the global capital and global companies that need the EU-states

Having reached economies of scale within a closed global market, global capital and global companies are in desperate need of markets where they can accumulate steep profits in an approximately monopolistic status. Under the Lisbon-concept of “freedom of competition” freedom is perceived as the freedom of global businesses to become monopolies within an otherwise competition-based region. These large enterprises - often hiding behind business oligarchies but de facto enjoying a monopolistic position - tend to preserve their hegemony by merely abusing their monopoly status, i.e. by keeping their prices artificially high, keeping all costs, including the salaries, artificially low and - as a result of further cost savings on reduced quality control - selling low quality products and services, even when this combination cuts deep into the bones of a society. The privileged status of obtaining steep profits merely by keeping production costs low can only be maintained in environments of high corporate taxes and under a process suppressing the middle-class citizenry economically weak enough to stay out of business. Under such conditions new competitive businesses cannot be formed and/or in lack of economies of scale, small and medium size businesses cannot survive, therefore real competition: the innovation-, quality- and price-based competition cannot exist. This process leads to an increase of unemployment, and the increase of unemployment rates leads to the willingness of accepting lower incomes under a constant threat of losing jobs. High unemployment leads to economic recession, and the lower incomes lead to lower consumer spending, which further accelerates recession.

If most of the energy, fuel and water-supply are also in the hands of global monopolies they may also contribute to shutting out genuine competition by keeping the energy- and utility prices artificially high. In the meantime, if the central bank (ECB) would keep inflation high as it currently does, these tendencies – along with increasing other taxes - would altogether result in a drastically shrinking economy and shrinking purchasing power of the citizens. When the majority of consumers - due to low salaries, high taxes and high prices - start to spend radically less, the lack of consumer spending will cause the economy to shrink until it will spin into a downward spiral pushing the economy into the trap of stagflation [1]. In the trap of stagflation the macroeconomic ‘equilibrium’ would settle at a level where only the market needs of global capital and monopolies are satisfied, the rest of the 500 million citizens will be forced out of the economy and the middle class citizenry is reduced into powerless and impoverished masses of slaves. This would be the future of Ireland as well under a ratified Lisbon Treaty.

In lack of national control over monetary and budgetary policies and in lack of a powerful citizen control over the EU, the EU-leaders (ECB) will have no incentives to fix the stagflation by the appropriate monetary measures, such as lowering taxes, lowering energy prices, etc; therefore the economic trap may remain forever without effective remedies. The ultra-rich political class will hurry to blame it all on us. Referring to our “low economic performance” they would deem it is ‘necessary’ to further increase prices, increase taxes and lower the wages at increased work hours, even if such measures would only worsen the existing grave conditions triggered by stagflation.

Due to the continuing improper central monetary interventions [1] within the Eurozone the trends toward stagflation in Europe can already be seen. (Note: the same lethal macroeconomic trend can be observed both in the US and Europe - due to the central macroeconomical mismanagement in both regions.)

Myth: 'The Euro under EU has become strong'
Fact: The Euro under EU has NOT become strong

The reliable method of assessing the strength of the Euro is the evaluation of its buying power and the general tendencies of the economical-social welfare of the citizens within the Eurozone. Merely relying on comparing the Euro with the USD is especially misleading, because the relative “strength” of Euro is not a merit of an assumed strong economy in Europe: it is simply due to the recent artificially low performance of the USD. The Euro appears to be ‘strong’ only in comparison with the fatally weakened USD under the recent colossal monetary ‘greed-game’, which has driven the economy of the US into recession. [2]

In reality the buying power of the Euro is significantly lower than that of the pre-Euro European currencies used to be. In fact the Eurozone is breaking inflation top-records under the European Central Bank while the living standard is drastically falling in the region. The food, fuel, utility and energy prices are crawling higher and higher, GDP and employment are falling, corporate taxes and other financial burden of the businesses are kept high in most EU-countries. Product quality is low, prices high, fair and free competition is abolished, (only global monopolies are promoted), and – thanks to the open borders within and around Europe - the social balance is eliminated by the intensifying ethnic and cultural tension.

Myth: ‘There is a need for a stronger and more effective Europe as one economy to compete with the US’
Fact: There is NO need for a Europe as one economy to compete with the US

Simply because there is no need of any “competition” between these continents. As far as we may speak in terms of competition among global business oligarchies operating under the game theory, after they have reached the stage of economies of scale, their success depends on their colonising abilities, i.e. their acquisition of large and relatively vigorous markets to secure an almost monopolistic position. As we have seen in discussing the previous myth, a unified EU-market under one political state would be such a dream place for the global companies.

The Lisbon “reforms” to pursue the “economic cohesion of the EU” would increase only the effectiveness of global capital. However, any assumed “winning position of Europe against the US” is a fallacy and would deliver absolutely no advantage or values for the citizens of Europe. On the contrary: under such illusory promises the citizenry of Europe would be driven into an idle “rat-race” and into an accelerating impoverishment at ever increasing work hours. Please note that the requirement to “compete with Europe” is also maintained by the US political leaders to keep the American citizens on the bleeding edge of the world. In fact, with such a “competition” on both sides of the world only the political class and the global businesses win by stabilising their power against a possible reallocation of the wealth. The view of “competition” in such context is only an empty slogan to “explain” why everyone needs to work harder yet doomed to become poorer and poorer every day.

In addition to the economic tendencies discussed in the present study, in a previous analysis [3] we have pointed out that the mixing of different cultures under Lisbon – especially when positive discrimination is granted to immigrants from foreign cultures – will also impose further obstacles on Europe’s economy. The inevitable language gaps, background clashes, the consequent disharmony and lack of understanding within the work teams will further reduce the effectiveness of the economy. Effective work and economic development would require the freedom of the EU-countries to choose their own ways of seeking social harmony among their citizens via an organic bottom-up development of social groups, with members of common interests, values and roots. However, the plan under Lisbon to tear up families and friends and scatter them all over Europe – which is believed to make Europe’s economy “more efficient” - will produce the very opposite results [3]. With Lisbon the EU will continue to undermine social stability by the intensifying social tension and despair all over Europe, which will result in further economic slowdown.

Myth: ‘There is a need for the EU to increase internal security and to fight terrorism in Europe’
Fact: There is no need for the EU to increase internal security to fight terrorism in Europe

There is no need for the EU to “increase internal security in Europe”, since there is no threat to “internal security” to begin with. The ultimate threat to Europe’s security is the EU’s attempt to establish a federal state by deceiving and contradicting the will of 500 million citizens. Since the forced EU-integration has caused the main social conflicts in Europe, which however is viewed as the main source of “terrorism”, basic common sense would dictate that the resolution of such threat is NOT keeping the internal borders open but closing them. The solution would be to reverse the process that has caused the conflicts and refrain from the forceful EU-integration, to stop the immigration from outside the EU and let each EU-country handle and solve their “security” problems. The argument that “terrorism” does not know borders is another false justification for the need of creating one country of the EU-states. “Terrorism” does not know continent borders either – should we take it that all countries of all continents should form one giant country to fight “terrorism”?

Myth: ‘The EU is needed to combat ‘climate change’
Fact: There is no need for the EU to combat ‘climate change'

In addition to the popular panic under an assumed threat of terrorism, the EU-hysteria regarding the human activity-based climate change is another fallacy used to ‘justify’ the ‘need’ for a United States of Europe.
First, it is scientifically debated if the climate change is triggered by human activities and it is doubted that altering climate by human actions is possible at all. [4]
Second, for the general purpose of preserving the world’s environment there are world organisations to carry out this task, or, if necessary, new world organisations may be founded and international agreements can be reached. However, there is no need for a Lisbon Treaty to establish one unified political state to perform these tasks. In order to preserve the earth’s resources the solution is not creating one imperial ruling class over Europe to keep the entire European society under a central political control while enjoying an unlimited access to Europe’s natural resources.

Instead of the highly questionable agenda of 'fighting global warming', the main issue the EU and the world would need to address, is the poverty increasing at shocking rates and the economic downturns within and outside the EU. The world-leaders should be focusing on how to force the players of the recent ‘greed-game’ of the super-rich to pay back the many billions of dollars into the sphere of the world’s production, rather than letting the bona fide investors and taxpayers lose on such “games” [2]. They should find a way to penalise the players of a ‘game’ that has caused the recession of two leading superpowers of the world (!): the US and the UK, and to make new laws to prevent these schemes in the future. However, the world tendencies of increasing food and energy prices, the protection of the non-productive (private) capitals and monopolies hidden behind economic oligarchies, and suppressing the interests of the overall value-adding production sphere, definitely signify the exact opposite direction both within and beyond the EU.

Myth: ‘There is a need for a strong united Europe as a military competitor of the US’
Fact: There is no need for a “strong Europe” as a military competitor of the US, especially because Europe is NOT an enemy of the US

Sarkozy’s speech was welcomed by the US as an indication of a thawing of relations with France. Voice of America stressed Sarkozy’s opposition to the possession by Iran of nuclear weapons, adding that “the president also reaffirmed the importance of good relations with the United States.” [5]

If the EU’s goal is to protect the peace and freedom of the democratic world, there is no need to form one federal EU to pursue such a goal. Sovereign countries can join existing world organisations for such purpose if they wish to do so. The UN has been founded to protect and restore world peace, therefore it would be UN’s and other world organisations’ task to protect either small or bigger countries against military violations or other violations against international law. Note: If the EU is so eager to preserve security, peace and democracy in the world, it may start restoring democracy right in the very middle of itself. The EU should make it obligatory for the member states to ratify the Lisbon constitution by referendums in all EU-countries in order that the member states would actually satisfy the EU’s founding principles of rule of law and democracy.

Myth: ‘The nation-states of Europe need the EU for political and economic support’
Fact: The countries of Europe are fully functional units either with or without the EU

The EU-countries, as sovereign countries, should be able to freely form alliances with one another, both within and/or outside the EU, in accordance with the specific needs of a country’s economy. It is the EU and especially the Lisbon process to demand the painful political, social and economical adjustment of the interests of the nation-states to serve the interests of the federal EU. [3]

On the other hand, the EU is nothing without the citizens of the nation states of Europe: the EU is merely the political class of Europe, with a current leadership regretfully being ‘selected’ on the basis of their federalist stance. Without actual and tangible values: products and services created in the production sphere of the nation-states, the European political class is an empty shell.

Myth: ‘The Lisbon process – and the globalisation process - is irreversible’
Fact: The Lisbon process is indeed a milestone in globalisation, but is still reversible

A Vote NO to Lisbon on June 12 could be a major step in reversing this process and saving the nations of Europe as fortresses against globalisation. (A ‘yes’ vote however would mean a stamp to legalise the illegal Lisbon process.)

With a No to Lisbon Treaty we can still reverse this process and regain control of our national-level regulations to handle inflation and unemployment, to determine our own taxes in order to keep our small and medium businesses in play and keep quality-based competition alive, to keep our rights to regulate non-productive capitals and establish the circumstances of really fair and free competition, i.e in general, to preserve genuinely free competition against the destructive effects of global capital. We need to preserve our welfare state and to keep a high living standard for ourselves and for our children. We need to retain our social and healthcare system against the EU’s plans for a general privatisation of public services and we need to retain our rights to negotiate our wages and work hours [6].

***

Final countdown before the Lisbon referendum
- Voting NO to Lisbon: to demonstrate our political strength -

The truth against the biggest myth about Lisbon, i.e "the EU would enhance democracy and rule of law in Europe by Lisbon" has already been presented from all perspectives. [3]

With every day more and more of the half billion citizens of Europe are more deeply concerned regarding the methods of the EU imposing the formerly rejected federal constitution on its member states. This question is far beyond and far more serious than how it has been portrayed. Europe is driven into a tragic future under an unlawfully established federal state arbitrarily opening the borders of countries and abolishing existing citizens’ rights within these countries. Among other considerations, the pre-Lisbon process has created a very serious international conflict by undermining the guiding principles of international law, rule of law, constitutionalism and democracy. [3]

It is a fatal mistake and a very “shallow myth” [7] to keep blind faith in a group of politicians who are shamelessly overriding the will of Europe by reinstating the formerly rejected EU Constitution as a “new and non-constitutional reform treaty”. It is merely idle wishful thinking to hope that "it will be okay somehow, or it may turn out better in the future than it seems now" - it will NOT. The Machiavellian federalist oligarchy will only work for its own good, NOT for Europe. The danger is grave: the freedom and peace of Europe is threatened to an unprecedented degree.
The concept of "good for Europe" by such political leadership is bound to be merely "the general good for the ruling class of Europe". One may choose an irrational and unjustified basis that the deceit of half billion people and suppression of the voting rights of the citizens of Europe mark a positive political trend, but there is no objectively justified reason for anyone to believe in our “bright future with the EU and Lisbon”.

A ‘yes’ vote to Lisbon would permanently transfer the national control over the central bank and budgetary functions to the EU. Under such uncontrollable macroeconomic conditions, the sphere of production in Ireland (and in each EU-country) would drastically shrink, and the impoverishment of the citizenry would accelerate at an increasing rate every year. The current economic and political trends are driving Europe into a future in which our life will go down, very deep and very rapidly.

It is also an error to wait for only one country, Ireland to stop the forceful federalisation process. The political forces imposing an overwhelming antidemocratic pressure on Europe may even disregard the voice of the Irish people, as they have disregarded the former French and Dutch referendums. A truly realistic approach would assume that whoever is Machiavellian today will remain Machiavellian tomorrow, and will resort to all means to accomplish “a goal that justifies all means”.

It is worse than shocking nevertheless true: in the most recent press opinions the voters are encouraged to refrain from voting if in doubt. But how can the voters not be in doubt if they were not even provided with a readable version of the treaty? [8]
The incomprehensible treaty argument is a valid reason to vote NO to the treaty and to vote NO to the idea of putting forth such a treaty.

However, when the ‘yes’ side argues that we should simply refrain from voting either for or against the incomprehensible treaty, is only to suggest that the voters ‘are simply not competent’ enough to make a decision on a ‘complicated issue’ such as the Lisbon Treaty. The outrageous dishonesty behind encouraging the voters to refrain from voting is the very fact that the Lisbon Treaty was intentionally [9] made incomprehensible to deprive the voters of their voting abilities. If the voters are deemed incompetent to perform their democracy-given responsibility to understand and vote on the most crucial constitutional questions, then the political class may entitle itself to abolish our voting rights altogether, transfer all powers to themselves and convert the political system of Europe into an “electorate-less democracy”.

A resounding NO vote to the Lisbon Treaty on June 12 would however prove our strength to withstand the overwhelming deceitful pro-Lisbon campaign. It would prove that the voters of Europe are highly knowledgeable and will stand firm against the intensifying antidemocratic trends of our days’ politics.

But even after a NO result of the referendum, there is a chance that the citizens of Europe will have to be prepared to protect their freedom against renewed attacks by the evidently relentless and reckless pro-Lisbon political class.

Before it is too late, we should find a way to neutralise and prevent their attacks forever.

(Everyone - any individual or organisation - is encouraged to forward this document to other individuals, campaigns and organisations, distribute and/or publish with or without reference to or acknowledgement of its source.)

References

[1] The definition of stagflation:
“Stagflation, a portmanteau of the words stagnation and inflation, is a macroeconomics term used to describe a period with out-of-control price inflation combined with slow-to-no output growth, rising unemployment, and eventually a recession. “Stag” comes from the first syllable of “stagnation”, a reference to a sluggish economy, while “flation” comes from the second and third syllables of “inflation”, a reference to an upward spiral in consumer prices.
“There are a number of competing theories as to the root cause of stagflation but are all similar attributing the phenomenon to disruptive forces acting on normal free market conditions. These forces may include a supply shock such as a real or relative scarcity of raw materials, improper applications of monetary policy, poorly constructed tax codes or government regulations, or anything else that interferes with free-market resource allocation. Any of these forces can prevent the normal supply and demand curves from responding freely and the result is the inability of the free market to allocate, produce and distribute goods and services effectively. This produces the “unexpected” result of “stagflation.”

[2] BBC: We lose in Greed Game
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/robertpeston/20....html

[3]
Our future under a ratified Lisbon Treaty – I.
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/87683

Our future under a ratified Lisbon Treaty – II.
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/87712

Our future under a ratified Lisbon Treaty – III.
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/87730

[4] Global Warming ‘Hysteria’ Is Claimed
http://www.wiseupjournal.com/?p=174

[5] France: Sarkozy calls for European military build up
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/sep2007/sark-s03.shtml

[6] Voting NO to Lisbon: to keep our homes, families and economic strength
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/87814

[7] See the works of John Gray contemporary philosopher

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

[9] 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