The Brussels Pattern: Elections Have No Consequences
From the desk of Paul Belien on Thu, 2007-12-06 11:22
The verdict of Belgium’s last general elections – 179 days ago, on 10 June – was clear: the majority of the Belgians (i.e. the Dutch-speaking Flemings) wanted Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt’s coalition of Liberals and Socialists out. In Flanders, where 60% of the population lives, Verhofstadt’s leftist Liberal Party dropped from 24.7% of the vote to 20.1%. The Socialists did even worse and fell from 24.8% to 16.2%. In Wallonia, the French-speaking southern part of Belgium, however, the Liberals won and the Socialists lost, but the latter’s losses were made up by the gains of the Greens, another leftist party. While Flanders voted for the right – the Christian-Democrats and various Flemish-Nationalists – Wallonia voted for the leftist status-quo.
For almost six months, the winner of the elections, the Flemish Christian-Democrat Yves Leterme, tried to form a government, reflecting the will of Belgium’s Flemish majority. The Walloons, who, though only 40% of the population, are entitled to 50% of the cabinet seats, vetoed Mr Leterme’s proposals. Last Monday Belgium’s King Albert II asked Mr. Verhofstadt to “inform” him about possible ways to solve the Belgian political crisis.
This morning, the Brussels newspaper De Standaard reports that Mr Verhofstadt is about to form another government of Liberals and Socialists. This coalition will have 75 of the 150 seats in the Federal Chamber of Representatives, though only 32 of the 88 Flemish seats. As I wrote here following the last elections: Flanders will not get what it is entitled to. In Belgium elections have no consequences. The majority never gets what it votes for.
In November 1918 the present King’s grandfather, King Albert I, committed a coup d’etat – the so-called “Loppem Coup” – and unilaterally changed the Belgian Constitution. Since 1918 the losers of the Belgian elections tend to team up to form a new cabinet, continuing the policies that the electorate rejected. Only 9 of the 57 20th-century government coalitions which were formed since the Loppem Coup, reflected the verdict of the voters (my book “A Throne in Brussels”, page 275). It looks as if the 21st century will be no different. In Brussels, the politicians simply continue as if they have received a new mandate. Mr. Verhofstadt, the loser of last June’s elections, is about to do the same.
What is the pattern in one part of Brussels has become the pattern in the other part of Brussels, too. Two years ago the electorates in the Netherlands and France rejected the EU Constitution. The Eurocrats in Brussels simply continue as if the French and Dutch electorates have never objected.
There can be no democracy in Flanders as long as Belgium exists. And there can be no democracy in Europe as long as the EU exists.
More on Belgium’s political crisis here:
Coup d’Etat in Belgium? King Wants to Bestow Extended Powers on Outgoing PM, 3 December 2007
Brussels: Coalition Talks Collapse. Belgians Don’t Need No Government, 1 December 2007
Why the Eurocrats Fear the Belgian Anarchy, 30 November 2007
See extended list at end of article.
A Throne in Brussels: Britain, the Saxe-Coburgs and the Belgianisation of Europe
Author: Paul Belien
ASIN: 1845400658
Why isn't anybody rioting in
Submitted by Emigrantus on Fri, 2007-12-07 06:04.
Why isn't anybody rioting in the street?
@Flemish American
Submitted by USAntigoon on Fri, 2007-12-07 03:44.
Well stated..and thanks for the "heads up"
I am going to Belgium next month and I am convinced they will not say too much about GWB..
But rest assured I will have to hear (until hell freezes over, I guess) about pollution, Kyoto etc.. They still don't understand that CO2 and pollution are two different things..
Anyway..I'll have some mussels, fries, north sea grey shrimps and beer..and enjoy my visit...
Jyllands-Posten rocks :)
Submitted by HenrikRClausen on Fri, 2007-12-07 01:22.
"In your country EU-sceptics have access to public media?"
Yes. Jyllands-Posten is, according to Bruce Bawer, possibly the best daily in Europe. It gives a fair division of debate pages to socialist points of view, Eurosceptics and all, even when it goes against the editorial line of the paper itself. It lets everyone speak up. Independent analysis confirms that the debate pages are very fair.
The small daily Information is also good. I disagree intensely with their editorial line, but they take my letters. I have a long strongly Eurosceptic one getting printed soon, perhaps tomorrow.
Jyllands-Posten has taken quite a few, mostly related to Turkey. They printed my assertion that Tony Blair (or at least Cherie) was taking money from the Turks, one where I suggested to fire the EU Commission without hiring a new one, and a letter combatting that Orwellian center for monitoring racism. Several of my friends also get printed on a regular basis, some in many more media than I address.
Private media are generally better than the state media, for the simple reason that their bias is well known, and one can concentrate on debating principles, documentation & conclusion. State-owned media have a subtle bias that is harder to document, though some quite embarrrasing research just came out, which is good.
On some issues, though, Danish media still suffers the lemming mentality. Internet media tries to set the record straight.
@HenrikRClausen
Submitted by Monarchist on Fri, 2007-12-07 12:21.
This is good that some mainstream newspaper allow opponents of the EU to speak out. Still I have checked out that their circulation is just 150,000. What about TV station? Most of people don't or rarely read newspapers and or their knowledge is based on TV broadcasts.
How about establishing the Electorial College?
Submitted by Flemish American on Fri, 2007-12-07 00:49.
Next time some Belgian gives me crap about the U.S. electorial college and how GWB should never have won the first time around I'm going to point this fiasco out.
Quite honestly, this situation has bailed me out of a lot of future debates. Thanks, Belgium
Lord, grant me the strength to change the things I can;
the serenity to deal with the things I cannot change;
and the wisdom to know the difference.
@Monarchist
Submitted by Aeneas on Thu, 2007-12-06 23:53.
"Belgium itself have nothing to say, they are just marionettes of powerful all-European bureaucracy supported by bribed mainstream politicians from all over Europe."
A good point. I believe that Belgium is simply the tool of the EU. The lie on which Belgium is based has become the same lie that forms the foundations of the EU.
Belgium is the EU centre of gravity - if Belgium splits the I think that the EU falls. A chain of causation would be set in motion that would, in the end, destroy the EU. The capital of Flanders, Brussels, should kick out the EU once Flemish people declare their independence from the state of Belgium.
The importance of Belgium to the EU means that the fate of that small country is the business of the people of all nations in the EU. I think that if Belgium continues as an artificial state then the EU project will continue too; if it splits then many assumptions of the EU itself are put in doubt. I want such doubt because I think that the EU itself is immoral and wrong. I would love to see a free Flanders and a free Europe.
I would dispute the assertion that the EU is all powerful. The people of the EU are the source of its power and the people are opposed to it. Its power is held together by narrow fibres and smoke and mirrors and the EU has no future. All it takes is for the people of the EU, from all its nations, to stand up and utter the most important world - "No!" That is all it takes and the EU is history.
Commission too important?
Submitted by HenrikRClausen on Thu, 2007-12-06 23:40.
"why isn't the EU Parliament more important that the Commission?"
That's a nice, fat question. In a way it's similar to why a government is more important than a parliament: It gets to suggest the laws to be adopted, and has a strong saying in both what proposals are worked on as well on how they're executed.
All fine, if the Commission was following democratic procedure, which it absolutely isn't. It's appointed by the various EU government at a given point in time, and stays there unless some scandal rips it apart (that happened to the last one). You can't get rid of them just for doing bad work. I have plenty on Olli Rehn to make that happen, but no place to use that information. And they have all the civil servants and legal advisors they need to make their proposals impossible to counter-argue.
The Commission is a crap system that dates from a time where EU (EC) was much smaller and easier to follow. Today it's grown much too powerful and independent to have a rightful role in a democratic society.
What about the parliament, then? Sure, the election is fully democratic. Yet, one important aspect of a democratic system is lacking, namely the public involvment between the elections. There's a dearth of press coverage and public interest in what the heck they're actually doing. Further, they're buried in work. There are so many votes that it's hardly possible to have a well founded opinion on them all. And the result is that the EP extensively rubberstamps Commission proposals.
I still have hope for a reform that will give us a mean and transparent EU. Possibly a 85 % cutback or so would do the trick. Unfortunately, no politicians seems to take interest in radical reform of the system.
@HenrikRClausen
Submitted by Monarchist on Fri, 2007-12-07 00:03.
What about the parliament, then? Sure, the election is fully democratic.
In your country EU-sceptics have access to public media? In Poland public media are always pro-EU and pro-integration. The same about private media but they at least have the right to be biased. In my opinion election campaign in public media should tend to be objective to announce election to be fair and honest. While if all, those who stand against are marginalized and if anything everybody ridiculing them and their arguments, such election aren't fair at all. Add also that all these pro-EU NGOs are financed by foreign sources and our own goverment. Polish elections aren't fair and I dare to say the same about all these post-communist countries that joined the EU in recent years.
@Monarchist
Submitted by Aeneas on Thu, 2007-12-06 23:01.
The reason that the EU Commission is more important that the EU Parliament is because the EU wants to subvert democracy. The EU is an agent of tyranny, just like the Belgian political elite, and must be opposed. If the Belgian King, and his political running dogs, wants to expand the influence of the EU then he is opposed to the freedom of Europeans. The power of the EU and its agents grows at the expense of my country and its people. My country, the UK, will not become a colony of Belgium; we saw what happend in the Congo!
@Aeneas
Submitted by Monarchist on Thu, 2007-12-06 23:09.
The reason that the EU Commission is more important that the EU Parliament is because the EU wants to subvert democracy.
You are right. Still they are doing this exploring all the weaknesses of democracy which is never able to prevent bureaucracy from power grab. Belgium itself have nothing to say, they are just marionettes of powerful all-European bureaucracy supported by bribed mainstream politicians from all over Europe. I totally oppose the EU, democratic or not.
A loop
Submitted by Monarchist on Thu, 2007-12-06 21:05.
There can be no democracy in Flanders as long as Belgium exists. And there can be no democracy in Europe as long as the EU exists.
@Monarchist
Submitted by atheling on Thu, 2007-12-06 22:03.
What I would like to point out is that the EU is a child of democracy. If not democracy, the EU would never exist!
If that is true, then Protestantism is a child of Roman Catholicism.
The EU is a threat to democracy and freedom!
Submitted by Aeneas on Thu, 2007-12-06 21:45.
If the EU is a child of democracy then why isn't the EU Parliament more important that the Commission. As far as I can see the EU is fundementally opposed to democracy. It is made to look like a democracy but appearances in this case are deceptive. Why are the EU elite afraid of referenda on the EU Treaty (the Constitution)? Is it because they are afraid that the people of Europe will reject the EU and its plans. The EU is not democractic and it is in fact a threat to democracy itself, it should be opposed and abolished. The end of the EU would be a victory for democracy and freedom.
Is the petulant child that is the EU rebelling against the guidance and wisdom of its parents?
@Aeneas & @atheling
Submitted by Monarchist on Thu, 2007-12-06 22:39.
If the EU is a child of democracy then why isn't the EU Parliament more important that the Commission.
Exactly because the EU is child of democracy. You could compare democracy and communism. There is communist utopian theory and communist sad reality. The same with democracy, utopian theory and sad reality.
If that is true, then Protestantism is a child of Roman Catholicism
At the start the Catholic Church is one organism. Please note that after schism Catholic Church still exist and is much stronger than Protestantism. Different branches of Protestantism lost somewhere its Christian message while Catholic Church even if weakened after Vatican II still stands firmly. Now lets skip to democracy.
At the start democratic country is one organism. Every elections are won by the open left or
conservative pretending left. Naturally they are building socialism and socialism leads to communism/totalitarianism. Finally this democratic organism from the start was replaced by also one organism but something completely against utopian theory of democracy. Here outcome is always the same, total destruction of original order.
@Monarchist
Submitted by atheling on Thu, 2007-12-06 22:43.
"Please note that after schism Catholic Church still exist and is much stronger than Protestantism."
You fail to understand my point. It am not referring to outcomes, but starting points. Based on your logic, if democracy bred socialism, then Catholicism bred Protestantism.
Frankly, I give up on debating with you. I think we have some semantics barriers as well as different ways of thinking, to put it charitably.
@atheling
Submitted by Monarchist on Thu, 2007-12-06 23:01.
You fail to understand my point. It am not referring to outcomes, but starting points. Based on your logic, if democracy bred socialism, then Catholicism bred Protestantism.
Perhaps but you answered to my comment in which I was writing about both beginning and the end. Analyze of the start only is just art for art.
Also you are free to debate with people that you want debate.
The losing Walloons continue to cause chaos
Submitted by Zen Master on Thu, 2007-12-06 15:30.
Under this dysfunctional form of government, the larger 60% Flemish population will never be able to ‘divorce’ themselves from the minority Walloons. The losing Walloon and liberal factions will always be able to cripple the Flemish.
Allowing the losers to form a new cabinet and continue the former policies invites only stagnation. The only thing the Flemish majority can do is continue this peaceful revolt. The next step might be to withhold the payment of taxes.