It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

An Alarming Trend Across the Continent

page: 1
15

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 01:09 AM
link   
*This is a translation into English from the original article in Norwegian, here*

The English translation is available at the link, here.

Former Norwegian Labour Prime Minister Thorbjørn Jagland, current Secretary General of the Council of Europe, and Chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee expressed very concerning views. On the subject of Norway exiting the EEA (European Economic Area) he claimed that such an idea is horrifying as it would begin the renationalizing of politics. Emulating, as he said, Hungary’s Prime Minister Orban who told critics of the new Hungarian Constitution: “Nobody has the right to tell us which laws we adopt”. To Mr. Jagland, this is not only terrifying but horribly inaccurate. In response to that he wrote that the European Union does have that right, Mr. Orban.


This is precisely why we built the new Europe after the war: the obligation and the right to interfere in each other’s internal affairs. European countries accepted the commitments stipulated in the European Convention on Human Rights which requires us to do so. A court was even established in order that citizens could take their own countries to court. The European nations are collectively responsible for ensuring that the verdicts are upheld.


It is funny though, all the current EU member states joined before the worst of your bureaucratization and centralization began with the Lisbon Treaty. The only ones who were able to vote on it were the Irish and when they voted no, Eurocrats said “vote again”. And they would have held a vote every year until either Ireland voted yes or they ‘found a loophole’. But to Mr. Jagland the EU is about the right of member states to interfere, and even control, the internal affairs of other nations. And to him this is a great thing.


I see an alarming trend across the continent at the moment: more and more people are talking about taking back the decision-making processes from the EU. Ørnhøi’s wish may come true, but perhaps not in the way he had intended, namely that other countries, and not just Norway, will start to demand to govern themselves.


Oh how awful. People may actually begin to have a say in how their country works or even worse, the government may have to answer to its people and not Eurocrats. What you call alarming, sir, I call beautiful.


In an age when Wilders, the True Finns and Le Pen’s daughter appear in the shadows, it’s simply too dangerous to jeopardize what is built through agreements and legislation.


Yes, because people actually choosing their leader for their nation, a right of self – determination, must be stopped at all costs les the peasants taste real freedom and identity.

People like Jagland are what is destroying the greatest continent on Earth (in my opinion of course), Europe. Remove him from any position of power by any means necessary and when the time comes, which it will, when the people of the European nations can reclaim their sovereignty from Brussels, make sure this traitor pays for his treason.




posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 01:20 AM
link   
It makes my heart flutter seeing those in power realizing they don't have long now.



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 01:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


Give the sheep,back to the dogs. Tell the Shepherd,dont worry about the sheep,on the other hill. They are not yours.






As the crisis has escalated this year, so the European elites’ fear of ‘their uncontrollable electorates’ has trumped concerns over their ‘out-of-control finances’. From Greece to Italy, technocrats have been installed in power, at the behest of the European Central Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the EU itself. As we argued in an essay this autumn, the attack on popular sovereignty has continued apace: ‘In Brussels, and among an influential coterie of European opinion-makers, the idea that ordinary people have the capacity to self-govern is dismissed as at best a naive prejudice, and at worst a marker for right-wing populism.’ The outraged response from Europhilic commentators to then Greek premier George Papandreou’s proposal in October to hold a referendum on the EU’s latest austerity package told its own story: ‘All this panic and chaos, apparently, because somebody suggested the outrageous idea of giving the Greek people a say on their future?’


LINK

Ah,those pesky Technocratic Shepherd's


S&F.


edit on 16-1-2012 by sonnny1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 01:30 AM
link   
First of all it's not the true fins. It's just the fins. And second they're nothing but drunk racist wannebe stalins. Even if by some miracle that monkey gets the presidency he wont last long.



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 01:51 AM
link   
The same trend is becoming popular in the U.S. States, counties and various communities are coming to the conclusion that local gov't is best.

The implications of this are profound when it comes to how we grow our crops.



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 02:20 AM
link   
I had a weird dream I saw lots of former so called leaders and politicians hanging from lamp post trees bridges and even street signs all over the world in every country... Ah well it was just a dream... ;-)



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 02:41 AM
link   
The formation of the EU does look to be a hurried one with a lot of back room pressure going on behind the scenes. It does look to have a very complex and detailed operating system which is not surprising considering the complexity of the region. In reading the EU constitution the system of governance resembles corporatism in structure and executive power.

Used properly it has the power to provide oversight to national governments and repair deficiencies in social structure. There is also a risk that this centralised power can be misused creating more problems than solutions.

The more alarming trend I see is when power is allowed to operate without accountability. The EU is a complex place and in some ways surprised it is still running despite its challenges. While there are people, the world will continue to be full of problems. These problems do need to find the right platform if they are to be solved, be that local, state, national, regional or global.

While I may not fully agree with the way the EU was formed, the consensus made it happen and deserves some kudos in getting the job done. I am sure the EU commission is well aware of what will happen if they mess up as they will be out of a job. I also expect a lot of heated debate about just where exactly where to draw the line.



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 02:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by hawkiye
I had a weird dream I saw lots of former so called leaders and politicians hanging from lamp post trees bridges and even street signs all over the world in every country... Ah well it was just a dream... ;-)


No you didn't. How did you know they were leaders and politicians in a dream?

Good try. . .



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 03:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


What is happening in Hungary is a little scary, but the Hungarians gave Orban 2/3 majority in the parliment so now he got the mandate to change their constitution without support from other parties.


You forget that some prime ministers signed the Lisabon treaty without the mandate to do so.

This happened in Denmark and because of that I keep arguing we resign from the Lisabontreaty because it is nonebinding in Denmark. I also suggested to trial the former prime minister and hes foreign minister who signed this treaty in an "attemp" to commit treason to the country. Its very likely the same thing will happen with the new fiscal treaty in marts.

The European project dont have a public mandate in this country anymore because of the increase in beurocracy and facism.

I'm looking foreward to the crash of the euro-zone which I see as a failed attemp to create a free market between countries. Instead it became a regulatory instrument for the euro-poleticians who in many cases is un-elected people. We need/want to tear down the euromonster and go back to the original deals in EF before the Maastricht Treaty.


edit on 16-1-2012 by Mimir because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 


Oh Yeah brother ....Now that would be Independence Day!!!



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Misoir

It is funny though, all the current EU member states joined before the worst of your bureaucratization and centralization began with the Lisbon Treaty. The only ones who were able to vote on it were the Irish and when they voted no, Eurocrats said “vote again”. And they would have held a vote every year until either Ireland voted yes or they ‘found a loophole’. But to Mr. Jagland the EU is about the right of member states to interfere, and even control, the internal affairs of other nations. And to him this is a great thing.


Not exactley, the Dutch could vote for it aswell... we did actually and said a clear NO.... one year later our government found a loophole,... so first they asked us what we thought about it, so they could later on throw our opinion away and take the path they always wanted to follow...

..they basically gave us "the finger"..



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


An interesting documentary made by Dutch production company backlight - It touches on many of the themes in the OP




Can we address the shortcomings of representative democracy -- failing political parties, increasing distrust of government -- within the current system or are we set to embark on a journey across a border where nobody ever dared to go?

Should we explore a new political model in order to overcome the current multicrises? In After Democracy this urgent question is addressed by Fareed Zakaria, John Keane, Hilary Wainwright, William Dobson and Cheng Li.


A taste of the content:

Fareed Zakaria: political scientist and journalist, addressing John Deweys contention that "the only cure for the ills of democracy - is more democracy"

He disagrees ..............

Believing instead that:


.....we have reached a critical mass where increased democracy, increased participation, increased transparency is actually producing dysfunction, populism & pandering and is in some ways subverting the purpose of democratic systems, which is after all to protect individual liberties, individual rights and promote social welfare.


Worth a watch.

edit on 16-1-2012 by UmbraSumus because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 05:53 PM
link   
The only cure for the faults of a Democracy is to install a true Republic! Using the democratic institution of a legal election of it's representatives! And never letting that get out of hand like we have here in the US! Hopefully we can recover but it doesn't look like an easy road!

Zindo



posted on Jan, 16 2012 @ 07:39 PM
link   
What we have in Hungary now is a far cry from any sovereignty of the people. It is a "borderline national socialism."

I agree, on principle, it would be best if the elected representatives woud have control over the national bank. But that was already decided by Parliament in 1997. Also, the decision to join the EU was polled by an official nationwide vote before the 2004 accession. I do not think this is a good time to opt out. Mr. Orban has a right-wing dictarorial style, aligned with nepotism far surpassing the preceding government.

The government party''s (Fidesz) approval rate went down to 16% from the near 65% in 2010 when they were voted in. Despite this, they felt it is the time to bring a new Constitution to Hungary, in fact, abolishing the Republic in Hungary in name (and wasting millions to change all the signs and maps.)

The new constitution mandates a flat tax.
I don't think such controversial financial policies should be included in the founding document of a country. Personally, I think progressive taxation is obviously part of the Western European and American-style welfare states.

The new constitution is falsifying history in its preamble, to satisfy the nationalistic tastes of the ruling Fidesz elite. For example, it states that Hungary was never independent from March 1944 until 1990.

There are two major, major problems with this assertion.

#1 It absolves Hungary from the historical crimes of participating in the worst part of the Holocaust. True, Germany officially occupied the "friendly" state of Hungary. However, the local Nazis - the Arrow Cross - were put in the leadership position and they were quite zealous in persecuting and torturing / killing Jews and all political opponents in house-to-house searches. Towards the end, they simply shot purported Jews and unarmed enemies into the River Danube, in the middle of the capital city Budapest.

They produced several times more Jews for transports to the death camps than the occupying Germans ever required. Several hundred percents more. In the process of the Holocaust, they killed and sent to death a lot of prominent intellectuals. This reign of terror was voluntary, it was merely riding on the crest of German occupation, perpetrated not by Germans but by a small group of Hungarians - local Nazis.

#2 The above rewriting of history fails to recognize the Republic after WW2. Although Soviet troops were stationed in Hungary (as they were in Austria until 1955), fair and free elections were held, and a free Republic was proclaimed in early 1946. (Hungary had remained a kingdom without a king after the breaking up of the Austro-Hungarian Empire in 1920). Many things were rebuilt after the war, schools started, and people felt a fresh breath of freedom for a year or two. Stalinists did take over in 1948, with falsified elections and force, and people participating in the free Republican government already started to feel pressure from the Soviets in 1947, but to merely deny the existence of the entire three years with the second Republic of Hungary in history only serves the interests of certain ideologues.

The problem with this violent rewriting of history is that most mainstream historians would never agree with it, and that a sizeable portion of the country's voting citizens would also vocally disagree with it. Including all moderate leftists, most Jewish Hungarians, most intellectuals, most people in trade unions etc.

Now if so many people disagree with a rewriting of history, I would never put it into a founding document of a country. This is clearly partisan politics.

How would you react if a majority government of the US would suddenly add a new Amendment to the Constitution making it a crime to be a Republican (or a Democrat)?
That would be demonically divisive, partisan politics at its worst, alienating about one half of the populace. Hungary included in its new constitution that the party of the former government (called Hungarian Socialist Party), which does have some roots in the membership of the pre-1989 Soviet-style Communist party, is a criminal organization which shares the responsibility for the crimes of the Stalinist era. That is clearly insane, Nazi-style rhetoric. While I do not support them, I think they are part of the democratic process of the new post-Soviet system and clearly NOT identical to the dictatorial criminals of the 50's. (At the same time, half of Mr. Orban's cabinet used to be active members of the Soviet-style Party prior to 1989. Some people - including the President - were reporting on their fellow countrymen to the secret police (the famous Department 3/3 of the former Ministry of the Interior).

I repeat: this course is not independence from the general problems of the secret rule by the financial elite in Western Democratic countries, this is several steps towards a "borderline national socialism" which could start preying upon its own citizenry any time now.
edit on 1/16/2012 by Kokatsi because: grammar, rhetoric clarity

edit on 1/16/2012 by Kokatsi because: misused negative



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 01:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Misoir
the greatest continent on Earth (in my opinion of course), Europe.


As an American I'm going to have to disagree with you there, the greatest continent on Earth is in fact... Antarctica.

Sorry couldn't resist.
edit on 19-1-2012 by RSF77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 01:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by amongus

Originally posted by hawkiye
I had a weird dream I saw lots of former so called leaders and politicians hanging from lamp post trees bridges and even street signs all over the world in every country... Ah well it was just a dream... ;-)


No you didn't. How did you know they were leaders and politicians in a dream?

Good try. . .


How do you manage negating the details of someone else's dream?
If I told you I was dreaming of vanilla ice cream, would you say, "no, you would not know the flavor?"



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 02:21 AM
link   
I think it ismportant to explain how the EU actually works. Most people at first galnce assume much and know little about how EU makes policy and decides the standards of eligibility for its members.

here is a good explination put susinclty.



The Council of the European Union, which represents the member states, is the EU’s main decision-taking body.

When it meets at Heads of State or Government level, it becomes the European Council whose role is to provide the EU with political impetus on key issues.

The European Parliament, which represents the people, shares legislative and budgetary power with the Council of the European Union.

The European Commission, which represents the common interest of the EU, is the main executive body. It has the right to propose legislation and ensures that EU policies are properly implemented.


europa.eu...



new topics

top topics



 
15

log in

join