Expanding Government Is Destroying Liberty in the European Union

Doug Bandow
Campaign For Liberty
Monday, July 6, 2009

The American republic was connected to Europe at birth. The original 13 British colonies shared the mother country’s classical liberal roots and created a national government of uniquely limited powers. The new nation then drew to it dissenters and entrepreneurs from across Europe, and exported freedom ideals back across the Atlantic.

Now America’s influence may be running the other way — to Europe’s disadvantage. More than a century ago the Civil War subordinated the theretofore sovereign American states to the newly empowered national government. Today a transcontinental elite centered in Brussels is attempting to achieve a similar end in Europe, though through stealth rather than war.

The European Union began small. The horrors of World War II encouraged Europeans to integrate Germany into rather than isolate it from the continent, unlike after World War I. The European Coal and Steel Community came first, which was transformed into the European Economic Community (or “Common Market”). The EC became the European Union in 1993.

The original purposes of a continental European organization were simple: increase economic opportunity and political cooperation. Despite the inevitable quirks of any transnational organization, the EU proved to be a boon: it lowered trade barriers, expanded commercial ties, and sublimated national rivalries. The slow, steady development of the EU was one reason war became unthinkable in “Old Europe.”

An important aspect of the organization’s success was its lack of political authority. The EU was more continental association than continental government. The principal national decisions continued to be made by national governments. There were obvious tensions, of course: creating a continental market inevitably meant limiting national regulations. Nevertheless, there was no pretense that Brussels would supplant the essential authority of individual countries.

That has begun to change, however. The European Commission and European Parliament have taken over an increasing number of “competencies,” as they are called, from member states. Micro-management has become the norm: for instance, the British government prosecuted a grocer for violating EU regulations banning imperial measurements. German bakers fear proposed Commission rules limiting the salt content of bread. London is fighting EU proposals to impose stricter restrictions on work hours and regulate Britain’s financial industry.

(ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW)

This is only a start, however. Many among Europe’s governing class hope to turn the continent into a genuine international power. That requires becoming a political as well as economic unit. The vehicle for consolidation is the so-called Lisbon Treaty.

The European political leadership drafted a continental constitution, signed in 2004. The restructure was complex and the document was prolix. The basic goal was a stronger European government, with a permanent president and European foreign policy, reduced national representation on the European Commission, and a further shift of “competencies” from national legislatures to the European Parliament.

Obviously, it is up to Europeans, not Americans, to decide whether such a change is necessary or beneficial. But when the former were asked, they said no. Ratification votes were planned for every member state, but the process ended almost as soon as it began, after both the Dutch and French rejected the document. Since unanimity was required, the new European order seemingly was dead.

However, advocates of a more powerful EU were undeterred. Europe could not be a Weltmacht able to compete with America without a more centralized regime. So the Eurocrats changed a few paragraphs here and added a few commas there and three years later reissued the constitution as a treaty, to be ratified by parliaments rather than citizens. Advocates of consolidation were surprisingly frank in explaining their strategy. Opined French President Nicolas Sarkozy: “There will be no treaty at all if we had a referendum in France.” In fact, polls indicated that the publics of at least half of the EU members would vote to reject the treaty.

Avoiding elections worked in 26 countries. However, the Irish constitution required a referendum, and last June Irish voters narrowly said no. The result was consternation, frustration, and shock in Brussels and throughout European capitals. Few, if any of the governing elites, suggested accepting the Irish verdict. The treaty, like the constitution, theoretically was dead. However, committed Eurocrats treated the Irish poll rather like committed communists treated Soviet-style elections: popular votes were valid only so long as people vote the right way.

Europe’s political leadership immediately began scheming to implement Lisbon irrespective of the Irish vote. Some Eurocrats suggested tossing Ireland out of the EU. Others proposed pushing Dublin to the back of the continental bus, so to speak, relegating Ireland to a special second class status. Most Lisbon Treaty advocates simply insisted that the Irish vote again until they got it right.

In the name of democracy, of course.

The European elite designed the ratification process to prevent popular input but nevertheless claimed to represent popular sentiment. For instance, Britain’s Lord Mark Malloch-Brown grandly declared that “I am not sure whether the voters of Ireland should have a right of veto over the aspirations of all the other people of Europe. I am not sure whether that is, or is not, democracy.” Even more shameless was German Interior Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble: “a few million Irish cannot decide on behalf of 495 million Europeans.”

Of course, Minister Schaeuble equally firmly believed that the other 490 million Europeans cannot decide on their own behalf. Rather, that decision is to be made by the few thousand politicians, bureaucrats, lobbyists, and others most fervently pushing Lisbon.

What and how Europe decides isn’t Washington’s business. However, America’s rather unhappy experience with an increasingly arbitrary, centralized, and distant government in Washington should suggest caution before Europeans replicate this approach in Brussels. Nevertheless, the decision truly is theirs alone. Though that really should mean a decision made by them, not by a new class of politicians, bureaucrats, lobbyists, corporatists, and others who claim to be more far-seeing and public-spirited than everyone else.

Rigging the system nevertheless may force ratification of Lisbon. In fact, under extraordinary pressure the Irish government recently announced that it will hold a referendum rerun in September or October. To assuage the concerns of Irish voters, at the latest EU summit the other members promised future concessions for Dublin. Although the result of the second vote is not foreordained, the odds currently favor approval.

Yet even so, the Eurocrats are likely to be disappointed. Ramming Lisbon through despite widespread popular opposition would turn the EU into a bigger but increasingly hollow shell. The EU generated broad popular support by creating a continental market and promoting continental cooperation. But there is very little political loyalty to Europe. Perhaps the highest-profile critic of the Lisbon process is Czech President Vaclav Klaus. Earlier this year he addressed the European Parliament, explaining: “There is no European demos — and no European nation,” which intensifies the problem of “the democratic deficit, the loss of democratic accountability, the decision-making of the unelected.” Creating a quasi-nation state without popular support would, Klaus feared, create “a situation where the citizens of member countries would live their lives with a resigned feeling that the EU project is not their own.”

In such a situation, even a theoretically more unified and powerful Europe still wouldn’t have the international influence desired by many in Brussels. The United States, Russia, China, and India — the most obvious current, past, and future world powers — are all real nations with which most of their respective populations identify. Indeed, people have proved willing to die for these countries. In contrast, who in Europe roots for “Europe” to win the World Cup soccer championship or celebrates the cumulative “European” Olympic medal total? Who, outside of Belgium (and these days perhaps in Belgium as well) is willing to die for Brussels?

Indeed, many if not most Europeans don’t even base their votes for Members of the European Parliament on European issues. Rather, national questions dominate. In the recent European Parliament elections, voters across the continent rewarded or punished parties mostly based on domestic controversies. For instance, Great Britain’s Labor Party was battered more because of Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s perceived failings than because of the votes of Labor parliamentarians on EU issues. A similar phenomenon was evident in Germany, Poland, Hungary, Greece, France, and most elsewhere.

The sort of “European demos” which President Klaus spoke of might eventually develop, but it is far more likely to appear if European leaders engage rather than override their peoples. Referenda campaigns offer an opportunity to educate and persuade citizens. Even if Lisbon still failed, the process might build support for a similar proposal in the future. Most important, the end result could not be dismissed as the result of legal manipulation and political legerdemain.

America will not dominate this century as it did the 20th century. Both China and India are rising. Eventually their economies will and militaries may match those of the U.S.

Some in Europe hope that a unified continent will be another global leader. But not if Europe is only able to achieve a faux unity through political deception. Creating a consolidated European government is a decision for Europeans rather than Americans. However, the American experience offers a sober warning to our friends across “The Pond.” Consolidation is likely to cost far more in personal liberty than it is likely to yield in political benefits.

• 
• Social bookmarks
• 
• Email this article
• 
• Print this page

Comment Terms Of Use

12 Responses to “Expanding Government Is Destroying Liberty in the European Union”

1. truth911 Says:
   July 6th, 2009 at 8:00 am

   what have the un done for anyone! die bastards

   

   used to be proud brit Reply:
   July 6th, 2009 at 10:56 am

   all the eu has done is export all the so-called builders into the uk
   which may be a good thing because i keep getting jobs sorting out there f up`s
   THANKS GORDON F`IN BROWN U FAT 1 EYED MOFO!!!!
   BRITISH JOBS FOR BRITISH PEOPLE
   MY ARS
   I LIVE 20 MIN FROM THE OLYMPICS 7000 JOBS
   DO YOU THINK I CAN GET ON THERE?
   NO CHANCE YOU GOT TO BE AN IMMIGRANT
   WHAT A FAT FIN LIAR I HOPE U GET CANCER OF THE BOLLOX
   AND YOUR WIFE THE UGLY C*** GETS BREAST CANCER
   AND YOU DIE SLOWLY YOU SCUM

   

   CivilianResistance Reply:
   July 6th, 2009 at 5:54 pm

   The Lisbon Treaty ratification will only be the “legal” enslavement of the European masses. Good luck and keep a sharp eye, my fellow distant cousins. Lets all pray the Irish revolt and spark a continental eurpean rebellion if this is rammed through their parliaments. The european union is a centralization of power of the “member states” or countries involved.

   

   reconmarine Reply:
   July 6th, 2009 at 8:03 pm

   So? Liberty is bad.

   

   Yeah! Reply:
   July 7th, 2009 at 2:20 am

   Indeed! Liberty is evil.
   Unlike politicians and bankers I can not decide for myself what is good or bad. You see, the rich have more insight into the difficult mechanics at work here.
   That’s why I am better off sucking the balls of those that tell me to. The best thing I have ever done is letting go of worries and other thought. Just open your ass to the pleasures of servitude and feel relaxed and rejuvinated.
   Some day i will die happy when their fallus is rammed too deep inside of me, but at least i will have lived blissfull, ignorant slavery to the fullest before my time comes.

   What’s wrong with this alex jones guy? He obviously has some freudian problems he’s worked up about.

2. truth911 Says:
   July 6th, 2009 at 8:02 am

   what have the eu done for anyone! die bastards

3. ceolas Says:
   July 6th, 2009 at 8:47 am

   Doug, interesting comment

   Not only is the old US influence on Europe waning, it’s reversing,
   the way the US is adopting all the regulatory bureaucracy of the EU in the recent Energy and Emissions Bill, for example.

   Re “German bakers fear proposed Commission rules limiting the salt content of bread”

   Also note the news the other day
   http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8127461.stm
   the EU ban on “overly curved cucumbers” etc is lifted, yet, as the report says, most other product restrictions remain, despite EU officials often having denied the existence of such legislation as a “myth”.

   For an extensive criticism of todays EU and how it could be organized differently see
   http://www.ceolas.net/#li1x onwards
   Introduction: The Politics of Change
   Visionary Politics, Acceptance Politics and the Ideology of Essence
   La Quatrième: The Fourth Transformation of Europe
   Introduction
   A Smaller and More Effective Parliament
   The End of the European Commission
   The New Axis, European Parliament-Council of Ministers | European Senate
   The Head of the European Government
   European Budget Efficiency and Local Democracy
   An Irish Bedtime Story for all Nice Children and not so Maastricht Adults

4. JJ Says:
   July 6th, 2009 at 7:41 pm

   ##########PETITION OF THE CITIZENS OF EUROPEAN UNION COUNTRIES
   AGAINST LISBON TREATY RATIFICATION###########

   Sign
   http://www.petice.eu/?lang=EN

   SAY NO TO CODEX ALIMENTARIUS.
   SAY NO TO A ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT RUN BY CRIMINALS.
   SAY NO TO UNELECTED BILDERBERGERS/BANKER SCUM ELITE.
   SAY NO TO BULSHIT.
   SAY NO TO INTERNET RESTRICTIONS.
   SAY NO TO GM FOOD.
   SAY NO TO LIES.
   SAY NO TO RFID HUMAN INPLANTS.

5. JJ Says:
   July 6th, 2009 at 7:48 pm

   ###### a super ad to the “The Obama Deception” documentaire #######

   In Rolling Stone Issue 1082-83, Matt Taibbi takes on “the Wall Street Bubble Mafia” — investment bank Goldman Sachs. The piece has generated controversy, with Goldman Sachs firing back that Taibbi’s piece is “an hysterical compilation of conspiracy theories” and a spokesman adding, “We reject the assertion that we are inflators of bubbles and profiteers in busts, and we are painfully conscious of the importance in being a force for good.” Taibbi shot back: “Goldman has its alumni pushing its views from the pulpit of the U.S. Treasury, the NYSE, the World Bank, and numerous other important posts; it also has former players fronting major TV shows. They have the ear of the president if they want it.” Here, now, are excerpts from Matt Taibbi’s piece and video of Taibbi exploring the key issues.

   Matt Taibbi on how Goldman Sachs has engineered every major market manipulation since the Great Depression:
   http://www.rollingstone.com/po.....hine/print

   Includes 5 video’s, a must watch!

6. ArabObama Says:
   July 7th, 2009 at 7:16 am

   NICE NICE NICE alex jones folks have finally woke up to the possible effects of lisbon…make sure to watch END OF NATIONS…google video. Ireland is the only eu country who´s courts even allow this to go to referendum and the people said NO once and it was not enough…now the have to say no again…my wife is a spainiard and I have my residency here as well. I have alot of respect now for the irish !

7. ArabObama Says:
   July 7th, 2009 at 7:17 am

   p.s. just lost my teaching job in my native california and am thinking of staying in spain…

8. Celt from Ireland (EIRE) Says:
   July 7th, 2009 at 7:34 am

   well well well seems my vote counts 1 vote equals 500 votes im a small army of the republic of ireland