The Constitution of the EU’s Dictatorship

Eric Zuesse

It’s here: Treaty consolidated 13-03-2014.pdf

That’s the treaty establishing (which was originally done in 2012) the ultimate lending-fund for what the EU now officially considers to be a permanent economic crisis in Europe, of member-nations that are experiencing “severe financing problems,” and that are therefore continually ripe for asset-stripping by aristocrats.

It’s called the European Stability Mechanism.

It’s anything but that. Here is what it actually does:

In other words: it establishes the European bureaucracy to serve global aristocrats, so as to help them asset-strip the European populations of corrupt member-nations. These bureaucrats get transferred back-and-forth between this bureaucracy and the big financial institutions (which also are dependent upon the same billionaires), so that these bureaucratic servants of the aristocracy can themselves gradually emerge as aristocrats, basically joining (now becoming principals, no longer merely agents of) the aristocratic financial war stripping the public.

Here are some key provisions of this “Treaty,” or Europe’s (or the EU’s) new constitution:

Article 34. Professional secrecy. The Members or former Members of the Board of Governors and of the Board of Directors and any other persons who work or have worked for or in connection with the ESM shall not disclose information that is subject to professional secrecy. They shall be required, even after their duties have ceased, not to disclose information of the kind covered by the obligation of professional secrecy. 

Article 35. Immunities of persons. 1. In the interest of the ESM, the Chairperson of the Board of Governors, Governors, alternate Governors, Directors, alternate Directors, as well as the Managing Director and other staff members shall be immune from legal proceedings with respect to acts performed by them in their official capacity and shall enjoy inviolability in respect of their official papers and documents. …

Article 36. Exemption from taxation. 1. Within the scope of its official activities, the ESM, its assets, income, property and its operations and transactions authorised by this Treaty shall be exempt from all direct taxes. …

It’s a “Mechanism” (basically, a government) to transfer to the aristocracy the public’s assets, which are the lands and pensions and healthcare and educational systems, which, in a democracy, are supposed to serve the public, but which, in an aristocracy, serve instead the billionaires. In Europe, aristocrats are still in charge.

For example, one confidential document, dated 11 June 2013, “Real Estate Based Asset Financing for the Hellenic Republic,” has this:

“The Hellenic Republic [Greece] holds a diverse collection of assets, many of which have been scheduled for sale as part of its commitments under the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the European Commission, the International Monetary Fund, the European Central Bank [the three members of ’The Troika’], and the Hellenic Republic. The sale of state-owned assets is a one-off opportunity to raise capital for the Hellenic Republic [to be able to repay banks, which had lent to Greece at an 18% interest rate — and thereby already enriched aristocrats heavily at the public’s expense — and now retrospectively taxpayer-guaranteeing those junk bonds, which global aristocrats had bought through those banks, granting these 18%-interest-rate junk bonds a retrospective AAA+ equivalent taxpayer-guaranteed status, courtesy of the politicians who were supposed to have represented the public].”

Furthermore: “This would help increase the privatisation proceeds beyond the amount currently forseen in the MoU. The majority of the real estate is undeveloped land, with substantial potential,” which “potential” won’t be enjoyed by the Greek public via a future improved Greek national economy and increased tax-income into the Greek Government, but instead enjoyed by global aristocrats, who will be buying that “undeveloped land” now, before its value soars — so that aristocrats will be in on the rip-offs of the Greek public, both coming, and, now, going.

The document specifies that, “A large part of the Greek real estate portfolio is suitable for tourist development, and given Greece’s climate and leisure and holiday potential this is the key source of potential value for investors.” In other words: whatever desperate Greeks will still remain in Greece after all of the stripping of the assets of the state, will now become available, at rock-bottom subsistence wages, to serve tourists, while the billionaire owners, throughout the world, will be reaping the profits, from that land (including the beaches and new hotels), and from their slaves there (serving those tourists). This is commonly called “the free market”: the more desperate and poor the public (the Greeks serving those tourists) are, the more profit the aristocracy (the owners of those resorts) will receive. After Barack Obama’s coup overthrew Ukraine’s democratically elected President in February 2014, Ukraine’s soaring debt is already being treated this way (being set up for privatization), even before Ukraine joins the EU (if it ever will). Similarly, privatization followed the junta that Obama protected (if he didn’t even place them into power) in Honduras in 2009.

There is nothing basically new about this. Benito Mussolini introduced privatization in Italy during the 1920s. Admiring his success with that wealth-transfer to aristocrats, Adolf Hitler then took it up in Germany during the 1930s.

Nowadays, this is called “libertarianism” in the United States, and “neoliberalism” in Europe. It’s just standard economic theory, being put into political practice. Another term for it is “austerity” (as the public calls it), or (to employ the economist’s euphemistic phrase for it) “fiscal consolidation.” 

What Mussolini and Hitler started, is now being put into practice increasingly around the world, but it is no longer overtly called “fascism.” Mussolini and Hitler were defeated in WW II, and so the label “fascist” needed to be changed, but the aristocracy, which financed fascists’ rises, has by now emerged victorious (in the U.S. and not only in Europe), using deceit (including these new labels), instead of relying upon mere bombs and guns. There are enough fools (‘libertarians,’ or believers in ‘the free market,’ etc.), so that victory comes far cheaper via such deceits (mental coercion) than via violence (physical coercion — coercion against the body). (But, of course, war, too, can be profitable.)

The entirety of the ‘Greek bailouts’ is bailouts of the aristocracy, not of the public; it’s just like America’s ‘Wall Street bailouts,’ which bailed out the banksters instead of the cheated MBS investors and homeowners. The ‘Greek bailouts’ were actually loans, not ‘bailouts’ at all; and after the loans turned sour, taxpayers were forced to buy them from the aristocrats, who were the ultimate recipients of the actual bailouts. The lenders never bailed anybody out, but instead were bailed out by the public. However, in the Greek case, the people who are blamed are the Greek public, who are being stripped. After all, such blame-the-victim is the natural response, for believers in ‘the free market.’ But it would be like blaming the stripped pension funds, and the underwater homeowners, for having caused the bailouts of Wall Street. Calling them ‘bailouts of Greece’ is the reverse of what they actually are, which is an ongoing stripping of the Greek public. (Other European publics should be angry against the aristocrats they’re bailing out, not against the Greek public, who never benefited from those loans, and who aren’t the people that socked away some or all of those borrowed funds into Swiss or other accounts abroad.) It’s like blaming a raped woman for having been raped. That’s conservative, in the extreme. It’s fascist.

The EU’s dictatorship is by the aristocracy, against the public. It’s just like the U.S. dictatorship — competing parties, both or all of which represent the aristocracy, against the public; none representing the public, against the aristocracy. Conservatives support it, because they support the aristocracy. (A reader replied to this, “it isn’t just the doctrinaire conservatives that support the new aristocracy it is the majority of the public”; but the majority of the public is conservative, they’re devoted to myths; so, that’s not contradicting my assertion, it’s just restating the tragedy.)

This is why inequality is high, and soaring. Democracy is disappearing.


Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

This entry was posted in Business / Economics, General, Media, Politics / World News, propaganda and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • cstahnke

    Eric, it isn’t just the doctrinaire conservatives that support the new aristocracy it is the majority of the public, at least in the U.S.–though if asked they will say they love freedom and democracy since to not be hypocrites would be to lose their cultural identity. But they love aristocracy in its various guises if you take the content of popular entertainments seriously as I do. Democracy demands being open to truth and I can say from a fairly long life that the vast majority of people are scared shitless of the truth–more so than at any time in memory. I’m not sure I know more than a very few people who can take on the burden of living truthfully. It takes courage and that is almost completely absent from our society at all levels.

    The democratic moment may well be over–we’ll see; sometimes I see some promising things but not enough yet to reverse the trend of the last few decades.

    • cettel

      Thanks for your comment. I have now added at the end of the article a response to it.)

    • cstahnke

      Thanks, I should have added that the public’s “support” of the aristocracy is a result of confusion and fear. We have no clear cognitive framework to think about things unless we study like crazy and make up our own framework–which creates a host of problems for those of us who do so. But so it goes.

  • jadan

    John Perkins describes the international loan sharking operation fairly well, but it is also helpful to speak to the character of the loan sharks: they are a global elite, a tiny minority. What are the numbers? 6 million or so? The new global aristocracy. We have deep collective memories of these people, so the term is very useful. They were always global in character. Nothing has fundamentally changed. Reallity has been financialized. They still have a colossal sense of entitlement. They still believe in rule by divine mandate. the public face of the billionaire class, a Bill Gates, or a Warren Buffet, try to appear like one of the people, but they are not populist in any sense. They are not democrats, they are oligarchs, more or less paternalistic.

    The American people have one last chance to confront the oligarchy. Vote for Bernie Sanders.

    • cettel

      “last chance,” right. Because he’s the only candidate who even possibly wants to and can wage and lead the desperately needed war against them. Hillary and all of the other Republicans (including quasi-‘Democrats’ like Obama and the Clintons) certainly won’t.

      • jadan

        The opportunity Sanders represents gives some lefties political indigestion. They just don’t believe what they’re hearing. You predicted Sanders would get the nomination. That could happen! It’s a special moment we won’t see again in our lifetimes.

        • truthtime

          Sanders supports war criminals like Nutty-yahoo; he doesn’t get my vote.

          Jill Stein on the otherhand

          • H.P. Loathecraft

            Bullshit. Sanders was the first to step forward and criticize Yahoo’s speech to Congress.

        • Libertybelle

          Hitler and Sanders are socialists.

          • Hitler was not a socialist; indeed, one of the planks of the Nazi Party (like the “Socialist” parties in Europe today) was the inviolability of private (i. e. 0.01%) property and ownership of the means of production. Towards the end of the war it was a command economy but this doesn’t change the capitalist mode of ownership.

            Please learn to distinguish socialists from (1) state-capitalist command economies in which the people have no input, (2) private-capitalist command economies, and (3) “cultural Marxists” whom many left-wingers consider a waste of time.

          • Libertybelle

            Hitler devotes himself to socialism in Mein Kampf. Perhaps you need to read it.

            And also read The Road To Serfdom if you wish to be informed. Better yet, The Fatal Conceit. There Hayek makes it perfectly clear that socialism always spins out of control and can never be what those who desire it want. And this is because of the unpredictable nature of life. Market economies cope better with it. As even Hitler learned.

            So what Hitler did, and what psycho loons like Sanders want, is to force at gunpoint–charity. Thereafter quickly follows the tens of millions who are murdered or enslaved caused by the destabilized economy(WW2). Then, by the time the deranged leaders like Hitler (as you so astutely pointed out) find out they made a royal mess, they will if half way smart resort back to markets. And I don’t mean stock markets. I mean the real market where you buy things un encumbered as much as possible of the state.

            Hitler was wrong and could not sustain socialism. And the moron Sanders will be wrong too. How many people will be murdered or tortured because of it is anyone’s guess. Everyone will end up enslaved about as long as the Russians were. Or as the Chinese still are with their communist/market hybrid.

            Anyway, socialism is robbery. And worse yet it is armed robbery.

            No decent, moral, ethical, moral or upright person advocates crime disguised as compassion. Thus all Democrats are the criminal element in America.

            As for Europe and the Nordic lands? They are the vanquished. They lost and Hitler’s dream won. They are disarmed, and at gunpoint they surrender their wealth to the state.

            And now with the Eu they have even surrendered their states.

          • Like I said, “socialism” as in a system of centralized control over the economy is nothing more than state or private capitalism. Whether or not this takes place in the framework of a market or command economy is immaterial to whether or not it is socialism – what really matters is who owns the equity and profits off of it. As an example, the US during World War II was a command economy with upwards of 50% of economic activity occurring as a result of state expenditure, with the remainder of the economy under strict price and production controls. However, the economy remained capitalist as ownership over the means of production was not distributed to workers. The stock market did not stop trading and indeed went up by 110% during the war.

            A socialist economy is one in which the means of production are owned by the people directly, as opposed to the capitalists that own them now. The “armed robbery” taking place right now is the maintenance of current property relations by the state that allows capitalist investors to steal the fruits of other people’s labor when they themselves do not work, and is not the work of socialism. A socialist economic system can take place in the framework of either market economics (which you and I favor), planned economics, or a hybrid.

          • Libertybelle

            Socialism is stealing. I dislike crime. It always involves state control. Corporatism is bad too. I don’t like corps stealing from anyone and I don’t like the state doing it either. It sounds like you approve of the state doing it and that you want me to believe socialism doesn’t involve the state.

            There is nothing stopping folks getting together and owning the “means” to produce things or services that have nothing to do with the state. But I don’t think that is what you are promoting.

            Obamacare is the state now owning the means of “production” at gunpoint. The state pretends to let owners make the decisions and the owners pretend they are in charge. This is more akin to corporatism and in the case of Democrats, it is fascism because Democrats are racists and add a racial preference system. At gunpoint of course. Same with public eduction. It was once mostly In the hands of private citizens, but has been wrenched out of them over time. This at gunpoint now as well.

  • Libertybelle

    There is a big obsession at this website with the money stolen by the oligarchs and criminals worldwide. I detest these international criminals. And I would like to see them come to justice. But these people are an international mafia type organization and your obsession with their money appears to match their obsession with yours.

    The focus needs to be the fight for liberty. Yet it seems you people are fighting for money as much as they are.

    And so from where I stand it appears all of you (and them) are grasping for the root of all evil: money.

    You will likely never bring these people to justice. And the pursuit of them will likley bring greater injustice. This is the path Mao and Stalin took. And it was the path Hitler took. It ended in horrific mass murder. The fury and anger they harbored was on account of the jealously about the money others had. They would not turn to God. They turned to gun.

    This never comes to a good end. The quest cannot be about money. The quest has to be for liberty and wisdom.

    And only a biblical worldview can frame that quest towards a just resolution. Sometimes, in history, events are too big for there ever to be a human solution. I believe that is what we have here.

    • cettel

      You myth-based conservatives want the Christian ayatollahs to be in charge. The secular conservatives want the aristocracy to be in charge. One wants liberty for the preachers; the other wants liberty for the aristocrats. To hell with them all. A progressive wants liberty of the public, from them all.

      Aristocrats use preachers to spread the myths which say that aristocrats are the blessed of God, who has shown it by gifting them and by not gifting the poor. So, religious believers are already slaves to the aristocracy. That’s the ‘liberty’ you want to spread: enslavement to a lie.

      • Libertybelle

        There is no such thing as a “progressive”. It is a myth perpetuated by people ignorant of history. They want the same old failed moral corruptions of the past (Marxism–organized theft, sexual deviancy, debauchery, and oppression). They are very old fashioned.

        And what jerk said I supported an aristocracy?

        And who are you to define justice? God? Hitler was sure he knew what justice meant too.

        The greatest slaughter in the history of mankind came last century from the godless atheists. They murdered more innocents in one brief time period than all religions ever had. Outside of Marxist murders, the godless in America left have murdered 50,000,000 million innocents in the womb. And we cannot account for the mass murder abortion by the godless Chinese.

  • Article 36. Exemption from taxation. 1. Within the scope of its official activities, the ESM, its assets, income, property and its operations and transactions authorised by this Treaty shall be exempt from all direct taxes. …

    Any government official who willingly agreed to those terms is in serious conflict of interest, if not treason.