When Conspiracy Theory becomes Reality
Anybody merely mentioning the creation of a single transatlantic market only a year ago would have been accused of being a conspiracy theorist. And there is a good reason for this: anything that does not fit into the vision of the world provided by the mainstream media is condemned as conspiracy theory. Ostensibly, the EU was created to counterbalance the United States. So it was frowned upon to use official EU documents as proof to state that, on the contrary, the “European project” would lead to Europe merging with the United States.
A project that was programmed long ago
Looking at the official documents, we see that the first phase of the creation of the transatlantic market was the 1990 Transatlantic Declaration on EC-US Relations, made by what was then called the European Economic Community (EEC) and the United States. This established an institutional dialogue. From now on, an EU-United States summit is organised each year, together with bi-annual ministerial meetings. In 1995, the New Transatlantic Agenda was adopted. This partnership specifies an action plan and common objectives, such as the promotion of peace or the expansion of world trade.
On 18 May 1998, during an EU-United States summit, it was decided to increase cooperation between the two zones by establishing the Transatlantic Economic Partnership (TEP). Its objective is clear: increase free trade. During the summit, held in Washington on 30 April 2007, the parties agreed on a new economic partnership, the aim of which is to align American and European regulations. This task was given to the Transatlantic Economic Council (TEC), created for this purpose.
Finally, on the 9 March 2009, the European Parliament passed a resolution, which quite plainly aimed to create a transatlantic market by 2015. Thus, according to item 45 of the resolution, the European Parliament “urges the partners to use the full potential of the TEC in order to overcome the existing obstacles to economic integration and to achieve a unified transatlantic market by 2015.” Recently, the European trade commissioner, the Belgian Karel de Gucht, was openly enthusiastic and said he hoped to see the completion of the transatlantic market as soon as mid-2014.
Bit by bit, cleverly, silently, and without pushing those who resist the project, or indeed without even notifying them, they have managed to construct a colossal institution, the global consequences of which will be enormous. Presented with a fait accompli, citizens will not have their say in the matter, as is usually the case when comes to constructing the world government. The international oligarchy has decided for them.
The media, experts and political parties remain silent
In 2004, the publication Pierre Hillard’s book, The Disintegration of European Nations, was met with total silence. To our knowledge, it is the first French book which examines the problem of this new Atlanticism. Pierre Hillard, along with Jean-Luc Mélenchon some five years later on, are the only two people to have condemned the creation of a transatlantic market.
The years go by but not one journalist, official expert or major politician, even among those who are hostile to NATO and the EU, has spoken out against the revelation of the transatlantic market project. Given the level of incompetence and treachery of the French ruling elite, a level that has not been seen since at least the Pompidou era, this is no great surprise. This silence, then, can only be the result of two things: ignorance or secret orders. It is for the reader to judge. Either way, politicians are guilty, as is the media, which perpetuates propaganda on behalf of lobby groups.
In recent weeks, however, it would seem that the media got the “green light”, as some mainstream journalists have started to talk about the transatlantic market. This is perfectly logical because it’s now too late: the process is now in its final stages and we can no longer oppose it. Let’s applaud the magician for this sleight of hand.
Europe as a counterweight to America – the end of the myth
For too long now, conformist mainstream journalists and other collaborators have sold us the European Union as being the only means to counterbalance the American superpower. A very strange argument. What is it based on? What could possibly create the illusion of a European Union as a rival to the United States ? The Americanisation of European cultures, consumer goods, customs, television and cinema? The military occupation of almost the whole of Europe by American troops? The special relationship between America, Britain and Eastern Europe? The financial colonisation of Europe by means of the free movement of capital, imposed by European treaties, which, in particular, has lead to over half of the CAC 40 companies being taken over by Anglo-Saxon hedge funds? A military strategy based on a slavish follow-the-leader attitude, as demonstrated by the wars in Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria?
We can see that, far from opposing the United States, European law has allowed the United States to have unprecedented control over Europe by enforcing the free movement of capital and free trade, forbidding the monetisation of the national debt and, more generally, by weakening the sovereign powers of European nations.
You would really have to be an idiot of the highest order to believe for just a fraction of a second that the European Union could attempt to counterbalance the weight of Uncle Sam. Yet this is exactly what our treacherous politicians attempt to have us believe. And, in actual fact, millions of French have fallen for it… Will the transatlantic market dispel the illusions of the most naive? We’d like to think so.
What is the French position on all this ? Did we see the two heads of French government oppose each other on the Fiscal Stability Treaty, the European Stabilty Mechanism or on the war in Syria? Did we not see the smug Jean-Marc Ayrault in Morrocco praising the relocation of French industry to other countries, a process stupidly renamed “co-location”? Do we not see our two ineffectual leaders bow down before the banks with a French version of the Glass–Steagall Act?
François Holland is the most submissive president in the whole of French history. It was a foregone conclusion that he would endorse the transatlantic market project. Having failed to organise a genuine referendum on the matter, Nicole Bricq, the foreign trade minister, decided to consult…companies! They replace democracy in any way they can.
On 11 January 2013, the MEDEF (the French equivalent of the Confederation of British Industry) and the non-independent trade unions concluded a “National Inter-professional Agreement”. While this agreement creates various new rights to workers, it nonetheless represents the biggest capitulation in the history of employment law. Indeed, this legislation provides for the creation of a new type of company agreement, “agreements for employment”. With this type of agreement, an employee, who refuses a reduction in salary or refuses to work longer hours, could be fired for economic reasons without even having the right to contest his dismissal in an industrial tribunal (this is unconstitutional).
Let’s not forget that the law, as it currently stands, does not allow an employer to unilaterally change an employee’s salary or working hours. The employee’s agreement in this case is obligatory. Simply put, the “agreements for employment” clearly revoke the legal safeguards of permanent contracts (CDI – contrat à durée indéterminée). Once the agreement is made, the permanent contract no longer has any legal substance and so, effectively, no longer exists.
The so-called “Left” which hasn’t stopped lecturing Nicolas Sarkozy about “society”, has done what he would never have dared do. What they have done is even worse than Dominique de Villepin’s “first employment contract” (CPE – contrat premier embauche).
What has this discussion of French employment law got to do with the transatlantic market? Remember the contents of the European policy documents. The transatlantic market can only be created if the European legal system is brought into line with the American system. Of course, as with all forms of “harmonisation”, standards for citizens will be reduced. It is not entirely incoherent to consider that the French legislators comprimised the rights of workers in order to bring French employment law into line with American law. We beg the reader to believe us that this transatlantic market is a dreadful trap. The collaborators in the government will force us to walk straight into it.
Translated from French
The original author was Adrien Abuzit