EU Reveals Its Inner Arrogance …Floats Plan To “Punish Parties That Don’t Represent EU Norms”

European climate science dissenters beware.

Recall how the effort in the US of some 20 attorneys general to silence climate skeptics backfired. In the story the attorney generals wanted to go after oil companies and think tanks because the scientific views they held differed from their own.

Inquisition - public domain

Public domain image

Well, in Europe it is not just a group of activist attorneys general who are calling for silencing dissent, but the EU itself!

According to Deutsche Wirtschaftsnachrichten – DWN – (German Business News), “The EU is planning penalties for parties that do not represent ‘the values of the EU“.

The move is apparently in response to the rising wave of right wing parties currently sweeping across Europe – especially Austria, which saw a right wing figure almost winning national Presidential elections last Sunday. Europe’s established parties are spooked, and they aren’t coping well with growing opposition and voter dissatisfaction. Their latest solution: to punish it.

A number of EU parliament leaders apparently believe that political parties should not provide a platform for citizens to express their dissatisfaction with failing EU policies. The proposal has been floated by the EU socialists, led by EU Parliament President Martin Schulz and Denmark’s Helle Thorning-Schmidt. The aim, according to DWN, is to prevent “rightwing radical or foreigner-hostile” being represented in the EU Parliament.

Of course the exclusion of radicalism always appears to be a noble cause at first glance, but achieving it by regulation as some leading WU parliamentarians are proposing opens up very dangerous doors to abuse. It would be the first major step to dictating speech and opinion, and that on a continent that likes to claim it protects.  The move would be a threat to anyone holding a different opinion on controversial EU issues like energy, fiscal policy, social orientation, economics and immigration.

Skeptics of climate science could be targeted

The proposal reveals the EU’s growing discomfort with the democratically and legitimately led opposition. Brussels is in fact (unwittingly) sending a terrible message: Democracy is okay, but only if you agree with us. That’s arrogance, and it should be no surprise voters are punishing the established politicians by voting against them. These people seem to think dissenters are need of upbringing.

Deny funding to parties

The proposal calls for punishing political parties that don’t conform to EU norms by denying them EU party funding. Parties would only get money if they agreed with the opinions of the money givers.

Fortunately, many established politicians, even Green ones, are able to see the plan for what it is, and are against it. EU Green parliamentarian Nicholas Villumsen told: “That would be like the Parliament imposing penalties against parties with wrong opinions. It is very worrisome that the European Parliament wishes to punish parties for their views,” the DWN quotes.

So it starts. What’s next?

Punishing the Catholic Church for its views on gay marriage and abortion?

The fining of climate “deniers”?

The DWN comments:

In fact such a regulation is very dangerous. It opens the door and gate to pressure opinion. […] In a tense crisis climate, EU critics could be forcibly silenced with such an EU rule. The right to freedom of expression can be suppressed with such a regulation. […]

The enforcement of belief to ‘values’ is undemocratic.

It is the first step to a totalitarian system.”

Obviously for the socialists in power in Brussels, that is precisely the idea. They can’t win the debates on the merits of their arguments, so they resort to the very radical right-wing type authoritarian measures they proclaim to fear and from which we need to be protected.

 

21 responses to “EU Reveals Its Inner Arrogance …Floats Plan To “Punish Parties That Don’t Represent EU Norms””

  1. Pethefin

    Rule of law is always also a power game, let’s hope this does not lead Europe in the same direction as it has in the U.S.

    BTW, the blatant corruption of justice in U.S. is more wide spread than just the Green 20, just look at this:

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-miscarriage-of-justice-department-1463953209

    which shows that lawyers of the U.S. government seem to have been “economical” with the truth even in other areas than just climate science.

    Here’s the crux of that case is this:
    “As a result, Judge Hanen ordered that any Washington-based Justice lawyer who “appears or seeks to appear” in any state or federal court in the 26 states must first attend a remedial ethics seminar on “candor to the court.” He also ordered Attorney General Loretta Lynch to prepare a “comprehensive plan” to prevent such falsification. Such extraordinary judicial oversight is usually reserved for companies with a pattern of corruption or racially biased police departments. Justice is sure to appeal, and whether Judge Hanen has the jurisdiction to impose his plan is uncharted legal territory.”

    Unbelievable.

    1. yonason

      “He also ordered Attorney General Loretta Lynch to prepare a “comprehensive plan” to prevent such falsification” – Pethefin

      LOL Lynch is the head liar.
      https://pumabydesign001.com/2015/11/19/our-attorney-general-loretta-lynch-lied-about-sanctuary-cities/

  2. gnome

    This is timed for the upcoming UK “Brexit” vote on 23 June with the sort of political skill we have come to expect from the Brussels elite.

  3. Moose

    I am not surprised by this. These are obvious signs that the EU is collapsing. The end is nigh for them and they sure do know it!
    We can all hope that these Brussels dictators are gone as soon as possible.

  4. Walter H. Schneider

    In Canada we don’t need the EU to suppress free speech by punishing all attempts to use it. We have a prime minister who wishes to do it, e. g.: “Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau seeks federal ban on anti-transgender speech” http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/23/justin-trudeau-canadian-prime-minister-seeks-feder/

  5. Steve C

    “Surprisingly” (/sarc) little coverage of this in the UK’s MSM yet. Gnome is right – it’s just the sort of information we Brits need if we are to make a sensible decision come June 23rd, and I for one will be mentioning it often.

    Most of the coverage we’re getting is making it look like the whole Exit issue is just another Tory party in-fight, with the media meanwhile parading an endless series of talking heads drip, drip, dripping how catastrophic it would be for the UK to leave. Given the number of UN/EU/government-funded pressure groups there are, they’re not going to run out any time soon. No bias there, then.

    Re your comment at the end about “very radical right-wing type authoritarian measures” … I think Bob Altemeyer made the same mistake in his work when he categorised authoritarianism as “right-wing”. There are arrogant tits of all persuasions – “right” and “left” are just a split the “elites” encourage to keep us shouting at each other rather than at them. One which seems to work all too well, alas.

    Both “sides” serve the same masters, and those masters ain’t the ordinary folk they gull into voting for them. I’m meeting people from across the “left/right” divide who are coming to that conclusion, and we’re all angry.

    The real problem is, if you like, “up” and “down” – a handful of arrogant, greedy, power-drunk “technocrats” at the “top” (like the specimens in the story) making increasingly intolerable incursions into the lives of the rest of us “down” here – quite apart from impoverishing us and our countries to finance their own extravagance. The EU doesn’t even pretend to be democratic – “I do not take my mandate from the people of Europe.” (Cecilia Malström, to Hilary, on TTIP).

    And I think Altemeyer was spot on in observing that a great part of the problem is the “little authoritarians” – the ordinary people who believe that the “big authoritarians” really are somehow qualified to run our lives unquestioned, so are too quick to do as they’re told.

    How to improve matters, when most people still seem to think Agenda 21 is some sort of crazy conspiracy theory, is not obvious.

    1. Santa Baby

      Agenda 21 has been relabeled to Agenda 2030.

  6. mcraig

    “rightwing radical or foreigner-hostile”

    Let me fix that for you: “rightwing radical, leftwing radical or foreigner-hostile”

    You’re welcome.

  7. A.D. Everard

    They’ve been sailing towards a one world order for a great many years. It’s so close they can taste it, but now the cracks are so big even they can see them and they know that people everywhere are waking up to what is going on. They are running out of time and need to nail totalitarianism down before it gets away from them.

    Of course that just shows them up even more and wakes up another wave of people. At this point they are their own worst enemies. I love to see these people panicking. That goes for Gang-Green too.

    1. Santa Baby

      This is just NeoMarxist/cultural Marxism repressive tolerance? http://www.marcuse.org/herbert/pubs/60spubs/65repressivetolerance.htm

    2. Santa Baby
    3. Santa Baby

      It’s just “cultural” Marxism repressive tolerance?

      1. DirkH

        Well I’ve never read Marcuse, thanks for linking to it. He is as impenetrable as Adorno, no surprise there, so I went to the summary of the orthodoxy at wikipedia:
        “Marcuse believes that under such conditions tolerance as traditionally understood serves the cause of domination and that a new kind of tolerance is therefore needed: tolerance of the Left, subversion, and revolutionary violence, combined with intolerance of the Right, existing institutions, and opposition to socialism.”
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Critique_of_Pure_Tolerance

        So Marcuse argues that tolerance must be shoved until the violent revolution has exterminated the functioning society – in other words, a lot of words to repeat The Terror of Robespierre – no surprise again.

        I think the behavior of the Kommissars of today is more like the last days of the gerontocratic USSR – we are PAST the violent revolution Marcuse desired because the lunatics already RUN the asylum. Their time’s up; they can’t renew because at this point in time they can’t AFFORD to hire honest thinkers; they’re clinging on until they’re finally removed. As they are old, stupid and their orders will not be followed, it will be far less violent than La Terreur.
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reign_of_Terror

        1. Santa Baby

          Well cultural marxism has the last 40 years been merged with environmentalism and climate. So today’s environmentalism and climate science have been taken over and politicized and have become the new Marxism.

        2. Santa Baby
  8. Leonard Lane

    It is obvious that bureaucrats love authoritarian rulers so that the bureaucrats have their marching orders and can expand and complicate them from then on. Radical leftist and bureaucrats seem to evolve together.
    It seems the EU is already a radical leftist authoritarian organization. One of the sure signs is that they will not tolerate anything but more left wing authoritarians. Surely they will fight anyone at the center or to any degree right of center.
    It is a wonder to me how so many countries remain in the EU.

  9. David Appell

    Germany’s renewables electricity generation grows in 2015, but coal still dominant

    http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=26372&src=email

    1. DirkH

      David Appell 27. May 2016 at 8:23 AM | Permalink | Reply
      “Germany’s renewables electricity generation grows in 2015, but coal still dominant”

      What? The state found TAKERS for the money stolen from me and handed out as subsidies? Good! Lord! Who would have thunk!

  10. Het weer is al een wapen, dus waarom zijn asielzoekers dat niet? - Climategate.nl

    […] In mainstream-media lees je daar nul nada niets over. Maar ondertussen is men vandaag op het hoogste niveau al veel ingrijpender bezig het wereldgebeuren te reorganiseren, dan je dacht. Dat kun je lezen in het Earth Negotiations Bulletin, dat onze blogger Dolf toestuurde. Dat is van IIED, het ‘journalistieke’ platform dat Maurice Strong opzette tijdens de Rio-conferentie in 1992. Wereldsocialist Martin Schultz wil het Europarlement ondertussen al zo ver krijgen, dat alle kritiek op die ecologische eenheidsworst-ideologie strafbaar wordt.  […]