The topic is the European Stabilization Mechanism (ESM), a fiscal regime which would remove all control over financial matters from the member states of the Eurozone and transfer them to a completely unaccountable and unelected group of “experts” at the EU level. By sleeping through the introduction of the ESM, the nation-states of Europe are effectively consenting to the surrender of the last vestiges of their national sovereignty. In the future, elected parliamentary bodies and national governments will become mere figureheads, pushing piles of paper around and giving fine speeches, but having no meaningful power over their countries’ most important affairs.
Mr. Clancy sent his material several weeks ago, and it accumulated in the pile of “Brussels backup”. However, since the ESM remains in limbo as the Karlsruhe Federal Constitutional Court in Germany considers its fate, the issues described here are still current.
Before you jump all over me: Yes, I know who Lyndon LaRouche is. As a matter of fact, his headquarters is in Leesburg, right here in the Commonwealth of Virginia.
Regardless of its source, this information about the ESM and the Fiscal Pact is generally correct, and right on the money (so to speak) as far as the future of Europe is concerned. This is it, folks: if the ESM goes through, Europe will undergo the final stage of its transformation into a totalitarian superstate.
The fact that this material was put together by Mrs. LaRouche is neither here nor there. As Thilo Sarrazin, the former head of the Bundesbank, once said: “If the NPD [neo-Nazis] says the world is round, I won’t say it is flat because they’re on the far right.”
Read the material. Watch the video. See what you think. And, if you’re a citizen of the Eurozone, take stock of what remains of your freedom.
From Rembrandt Clancy:
In view of the imminent developments in Europe over the European Stabilization Mechanism (ESM), I am sending a related German video (which I subtitled) and a short essay, which I also translated from the German — for your consideration. Both come from the same source (see below). I thought you might be interested since the ESM lies behind an article by M. Sattler called “Flight into Dictatorship”.
This 15-minute video was abridged from a 25-minute original called “Save Europe from the EU Dictatorship” (“Rettet Europa von der EU-Diktatur”). The film is the production of BüSoTV Berlin (source):
BüSo is the acronym for “Bürgerrechtsbewegung Solidarität” (“Civil Rights Movement Solidarity”). The BüSo is a small party in Germany which was founded by Helga Zepp-LaRouche, who has been its federal president since 1992, and is part of the world-wide LaRouche movement founded by her husband, Lyndon LaRouche, who is also a prolific writer (source: BüSo website). BüSo is currently part of a campaign to stop the implementation of the ESM Treaty.
I originally ran across the shortened version of the video on the Islam-critical site, SOS-Österreich, in an article entitled “The EU is not Europe, but its destruction”. I subtitled it before I found the longer original, which is just as well.
The topic of the video revolves around two treaties: the European Stabilization Mechanism (ESM) and the Fiscal Pact.
The essay, which you will find below, deals with the same two topics. It is written by Helga Zepp-LaRouche herself. It is an ideal introduction to the video since it contains specific background which makes the video easier to digest. Also, both essay and video are from the same source.
All the formatting in the essay is from the original. The few comments in square brackets are mine.
National Referendum on the ESM and the Fiscal Pact
We have the Right of Resistance
1 April 2012
Appeal by Helga Zepp-LaRouche
(Original source)
The countdown to a catastrophe of unprecedented proportions is advancing relentlessly. There is every indication that we are steering toward an historical mega-event through a combination of a growing danger of world war and the crisis of a globally collapsing financial system, which could mean the end of human civilization. Time is elapsing with merciless insistence, without stirring sufficient resistance up to now, or without most people even suspecting the looming danger.
Instead of admitting that the Euro is a failed experiment and that the casino economy is at an end, the EU, the German government and the opposition parties (except for the Left Party) are pressing for the Fiscal Pact so as to introduce debt ceilings in all EU states and to have the ESM [European Stabilisation Mechanism] treaty ratified by the Bundestag as soon as possible. This policy is as incompetent as it is dangerous, and it must be averted at all costs. For with the Fiscal Pact, a Brüning* style of austerity policy would be irrevocably consolidated, plunging the real economy in all of Europe into the abyss; while at the same time, with the ESM, a hyperinflation-producing mechanism, standing outside any democratic control, would be created, devaluing the national wealth.
The political and social consequences would be catastrophic — and above all would accelerate the dynamic of war. It is one second before twelve, but it is still not too late.
The euphemistically termed “democratic deficit” situation in the EU and Europe has taken on such a perilous dimension, that just a single, minute step to outright dictatorship is lacking. The combination of fiscal union and ESM is such an outrageous attack on the constitution, the basic democratic order and the public welfare of the population, in favour of the highly speculative financial system, that one can only be seized by cold terror in connection with what this reveals about the governments and parties which intend to railroad this package through. First of all, if the ESM is ratified, the Board of Governors, at any time, even against a German vote, can assume access to the German state finances — without limitation.
After an initial, ordinary capital of 800 billion Euros (Art. 8), of which, in the first phase, 80 billion Euros must be paid and in which Germany’s share is more than 27%, this ordinary capital is to be periodically increased; and in an emergency — for instance, in order to buy government bonds of a “risk state” or to provide banks of “systemic” importance with liquidity — the Board of Governors can demand additional hundreds of billions within seven days “irrevocably and absolutely” (Art. 9). In the event that other member states are unable to pay — and the list of these countries is becoming ever longer — the German taxpayer must undertake an ever larger share. If the Eurogroup decides on the creation of Eurobonds, that is, the pooling of new debts, this will already be possible under the terms of Art. 21 and requires no further alteration of contract.
The ESM is not required to be responsible to anyone: the Board of Governors, the Directors, and the employees are completely immune [from prosecution or investigation]; there is no disclosure requirement, and decisions are made without any public scrutiny. The Board of Governors and the Board of Directors can invest the capital at will and without oversight; no public prosecutor’s office can intervene in the event of incompetence or fraud. The wage level of the Board of Governors is secret and is not subject to income tax, and no financial supervisor of any kind, who could review the level of the rates, has jurisdiction.
Combined with the ESM, the Fiscal Pact is deadly. In the same way as the Lisbon treaty was pushed through behind the public’s back, so too was the Fiscal Pact decided with the greatest haste and without consultations with the national parliaments or even the heads of government or state. With the introduction of national debt ceilings and automatic correctional mechanisms, the EU Commission will see to it that, in the future, even during serious economic downturns, expenses will be automatically curtailed. In addition, it will profess the principals of monitoring institutions. Member states can file suit against each other before the European Court of Justice (ECJ), but the Commission will also maintain the right of action. There is no provision for a right of termination without notice: individual member states cannot unilaterally terminate the [ESM] contract; it can only be abrogated and changed unanimously by all member states.
From the standpoint of the physical economy the combination of the ESM-Fiscal-treaty is so atrociously incompetent and false that the suspicion suggests itself that the intention of its architects, that is, the financial oligarchy, is completely different than they profess. On the one hand hyperinflation is set in motion, in order to save the banks; on the other hand sovereign debts, which arose beforehand from the rescue of the banks, are shifted onto the real economy and the general public welfare. Here it is only a question of winning time (perhaps until a new war brings about the preconditions for a new order?), or is the development of the society to be driven back to the feudal level of the middle ages?
Resistance is so far insufficient
The consequences of this policy are obvious for anyone who wishes to see them. Otmar Issing, former chief economist of the Federal Bank [Deutsche Bundesbank], encapsulated it at an event held on the occasion of the 60th anniversary of the Börsenzeitung: The whole concept of forcing a “united Europe” controlled by a centralized bureaucracy per Fiscal Union, whilst the population are blackmailed with the argument of an urgent crisis, is false from the outset and can only lead to disaster. Whosoever would propagate Eurobonds should be so honest as to also inform the public of the consequences: dispossession, inflation and loss of sovereignty. The publisher of the Börsenzeitung mentioned the H-word — hyperinflation.
As the Science Service of the Bundestag emphasised in a commentary on this theme, the Fiscal Pact contains no provision for escape clauses. It was precisely over this point that Frau Merkel exulted during a press conference in the context of the Euro-summit on 31 January 2012: “The point is that the debt ceilings are permanently included in the legislation, that they are bindingly and perpetually in force.”
Yet again the question arises: what in heaven’s name motivates this woman? Why does she pursue a policy which incredibly contravenes German interests? Did she read the Lisbon-judgment of the Karlsruhe Federal Constitutional Court, which expressly tied an additional transfer of power to Brussels to the necessity of a referendum on a constitutional change? And why does she want rights in perpetuity for the fiscal union, when Karlsruhe, in the same judgment, explicitly ruled that this characteristic of perpetuity is only suited to fundamental rights, and that these must remain within the authority of the constitution, and must not be relinquished to the EU treaty?
It is good when economists such as Issing, experts in constitutional law, analysts, and the Left Party now organise themselves for resistance before the horse has bolted the barn once and for all. But it is just as important to be clear that the atrocity involving the ESM-Fiscal Pact, which threatens us now, was intended from the beginning by the architects of the Maastricht Treaty and the European Monetary Union. Issing is wrong when he thinks that the only mistake is not to have complied with the terms of the Maastricht Treaty. Jacques Attali, then advisor to Mitterrand, has openly admitted that a birth defect was consciously built into the concept of the European Monetary Union in order to later force a political union of Europe which was not in place at the time.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union it was the concern of the Anglo-American dominated financial oligarchy, from the outset, to erect a world-empire on the foundation of the Anglo-American special relationship. To that belonged the policy of regime change against governments which are not ready to submit themselves to this empire; similarly, the self-containment of the reunited Germany belonged in the straitjacket of the Maastricht Treaty. From the beginning, it was the intention (according to the words of Robert Cooper, the advisor to the so-called EU Minister for Foreign Affairs, Lady Ashton), to transform the expanding EU into the greatest empire in history. [See Robert Cooper’s essay, “The New Liberal Imperialism” — translator’s note]
The repulsiveness of the ESM-Fiscal Pact is only a secondary consequence of this intention. The ultimate consequence would consist in preferring to provoke a new world war rather than watch the downfall of one’s own empire, even though one risks thereby the end of civilisation.
The only alternative consists in the immediate introduction of a separate banking system [the separation of commercial and investment banking] in the tradition of the Glass-Steagall law of Franklin D. Roosevelt, and of a credit system which serves exclusively the financing of investments in scientific and technological progress for the betterment of productivity in industry and jobs. To that belongs the return to a system of fixed exchange rates and long-term, multilateral co-operation between sovereign nations for the reconstruction of the world economy.
The people must, in a referendum, be allowed to decide on which currency they would like to have, which constitution, and in which type of state they would like to live. Article 20 of the constitution gives us the right to resistance against anyone who threatens the character of Germany as a democratic and social state. Article 146 requires a national referendum when considering the ultimate transfer of power to Brussels.
For a national referendum on the ESM, the Fiscal Pact, the EU-treaties of Maastricht to Lisbon, and the recovery of sovereignty over our own currency and economic policies respectively
| * | Heinrich Brüning (1985-1970) was a depression-era Chancellor of Weimar Germany who imposed severe austerity measures, including a range of taxes. — translator’s note |
11 comments:
To bolster your caveat about LaRouche, David Goldman, a very smart man and financial expert -- aka "Spengler" -- was LaRouche's main economics man for years, until they parted ways.
Takuan Seiyo
Helga is quite correct. The EU represents the racial and political destruction of Europe and the triumph of globalism by a group of unelected socialist elites.
And ESM is another set of nails in Europe's coffin.
But there is hope. The whole system is rotting at the top and run by criminals. They have only one country left to keep the charade going - Germany. When they drain them, the game is over. It may take a few years, maybe sooner if the U.S. has another meltdown.
When that happens, all the controls and boot heels on the necks of the Europeans go away. And that's when people get even.
Even better the elites have no military to speak of to enforce their will should the people really stand up to them(not just drug using college students and useless civil service workers, but the main stream). The elites are very much a paper tiger. Russia knows it, China and the Arab states know it.
The EU can be used as a superpower to stop the spread of Islam in Europe and as a counter-weight to Islamic aggression coming from the Middle East. A European Federation will be the most important step in securing European rights outside of the EU.
All we have to do is be willing to change the EU itself instead of fighting it.
If we did that and just accepted the EU's nature as a growing imperialistical superpower we would realize that all those pesky Islamic and African countries that are bothering use or have useful resources can be invaded and turned into colonies.
I for one have no intention any more of being part of the antisharia movement, instead i will become an imperialist and work to invade Islamic countries and diminish Islams importance through reeducation.
I am sorry, but once again, I am astounded...
LaRouche et al , are anti-Semites, racists and Fascists, and most of all, radical Leftists and Socialists.
Your rather childish expression of indifference toward their positions, or the rather absurd assertion that his views should bear no weight on the gravity of the accusations(against the ESM), are preposterous.
Those spearheading the opposition to the ESM(in Germany, for instance) are valiant, and intrepid politicians from the CDU/CSU, those who are not besmirched by any association with the LaRouchite goons.
You could easily, with one tap at Google, have found their vociferous, but well-reasoned objections to the ESM, inter alia .
This marks, I am afraid, another spiral downwards, for what used to be, an excellent, unblemished, and best of all, intelligent site; one that could distinguish between intellectual criticism of a (truly) corrupt institution(such as the ESM), Islam, etc, and the rantings of LaRouchites and their fellow-travellers.
So, if I may be quite so sarcastic, when are you launching D. Duke's weekly editorial here?
It is my understanding that one of the first things that Hitler did when he came to power was to replace locally elected officials with officials that he approved of. This instantly brought national control to local affairs and precluded anyone from opting out or declining to follow national directives.
The ESM seems to have same effect but instead of using direct political appointees, it uses direct fiscal appointees!
This is war against national sovereignty not by military means but by economic means! May people are clueless because it hostility via means that is previously unknown in human history. In that regard, we are all (even in the US) being enslaved via perpetual debt.
This brings to pass the warning by Thomas Jefferson:
"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies."
He did no envision an even more powerful danger: banking institutions colluding with central banks. In the case of the United States, the Federal Reserve is a corporation whose shareholders are exclusively and only the member financial institutions who alone control the slate of nominees that serve on its Board of Governors.
Government, its central bank and the banks that own the shares of the central bank collude to use the force of law to force citizens into debt servitude via perpetual debt.
Further, the central bank has the monopoly power on creating more money, so it embezzles private wealth by deliberate dilution of the money supply. (Google: "targeted rate of inflation") When combined with a tax on nominal incomes, any gain in the nominal value of assets like land or gold coins is "income" subject to tax. So government's collusion is rewarded by tax revenues on official inflation.
We are so screwed.
The banksters want the destruction of the European peoples: EU should 'undermine national homogeneity' says UN migration chief
The ESU and the Fiscal Pact are at their root a manifestation of socialism. They have the objective of removing the natural discipline of the free market with the dictates of government. Enforcing socialism is like trying to enforce a law that reverses gravity: it is physically impossible, and its failure can be used to justify virtually any abuse of power.
The EU and all its derivatives are another step closer to the dream of despots and dictators: absolute power and the separation of consequences from decisions.
At least with the dictators like Lenin, Stalin, and Mao, the blame for economic crashes could be focused directly on the man at the top. Whatever their flaws, the old communist governments were based squarely on power, and the cult of personality. They generally died of natural causes once the great dictator died.
The European Union is even more evil. This is a government of faceless dictators, giving themselves unlimited power and wealth, but staying in the shadows and extending their government through a system of bureaucratic constraints analogous to the rigid, sclerotic bureaucracies of China before Sun Yat Sen.
The only way Europe can survive is with sovereign nations, enforcing their borders and making their own decisions: fiscal, judicial, and administrative. The countries with sound policies will prosper and the countries with erroneous policies will flounder, but the damage will be limited.
My own feeling is that if the populations of any particular country become violently opposed to the suicidal actions of their ruling elite, the other countries will send military aid to prop up the government and suppress any popular revolt. In the worst case, the US will send military support, as they did in the case of the Bosnian Serbs who were fighting and winning against the Muslim armies attacking them.
The real battle is in the realm of ideas. If the leaders don't understand the issues, let alone the voting public, the military will be used to enforce the destruction of individual national identity.
Anonymous at 9:43 a.m.:
"Those spearheading the opposition to the ESM(in Germany, for instance) are valiant, and intrepid politicians from the CDU/CSU, those who are not besmirched by any association with the LaRouchite goons.
You could easily, with one tap at Google, have found their vociferous, but well-reasoned objections to the ESM, inter alia"
Perhaps, if you had been reading the blog regularly, you would have encountered the information you mention in translations by both Hermes and me. However, seeing an editorial opinion whose author is openly identified by name and by relationship to L.L., you expatiate on his wickedness and then leap to condemn the blog for allowing anyone to read an opinion by someone you despise. I guess you do not trust the rest of us to use that famous pinch of salt the Baron sometimes suggests.
Do you watch MSNBC much?
jlh
One fact which all the comments on this very important item are missing. The proposed 'Fiscal Pact' and ESM rules only apply to those countries in the EU which are in the Euro Currency zone. Countries which retain their traditional currencies such as the UK & Sweden are not covered by these proposals although I have no doubt that at some future date their will be an attempt to extend these rules to non-Eurozone countries.
Ivan Winters
We have to hope that the Dutch people finally realise what is at stake and vote for Geert Wilders' Freedom Party in large enough numbers on 12th September. Here in Englad we have no proportional representation and a political system of three identical parties who manage to convince the English people that they would be ever so naughty if they voted for anything but them; i.e. parties who want us out of the EU and the restoration of an England of 60 years ago. They are deemd to be racist whatever they do, ie if they want out of the EU they are xenophobes and little Englanders and if they actual don't believe in vibrant cultural and racial diversity well they must be building gas chambers in their back gardens. The English are just so terrified of rocking the boat, bar a few brave souls who, hopefully, will save their fellow Englishmen and women before they become history.
@jlh, at 9:43 AM...
I don't think I need to apologize for "despising" the LaRouche movement. I call out racism, anti-Semitism, and LaRouche's rather weird swill of anti-British(probably coded anti-Semitic) hatred wherever I see it.
If the policy of this blog, is now to publish anyone's musings, provided they confirm with a preconceived leaning on that topic, no matter how anti-Semitic, foul, or plainly Socialist the author may be, you should let us know.
I would then beware this site, and not trouble you with my (clearly reviled) commentary here.
As a long-time reader(though mainly on the sidelines), I enjoyed the thoughtful, and engaging pieces brought here, by true defenders of freedom, from around the globe.
I hope that you will reconsider airing LaRouche's ilk, in future.
Post a Comment