Politics can be made in the slipstream of crises. The bureaucrats of the ‘Brussels Politburo’ are well aware of this: the COVID pandemic and the Ukraine conflict provide the perfect background to further expand the grip on the European economy for the benefit of the pharmaceutical cartel. The “Single Market Emergency Instrument” (SMEI) is taken out of the toolbox for this purpose. It may sound unsuspicious, but it’s really something! The EU Commission is pushing for nothing less than the abolition of the market economy by imposing “crisis-relevant” production requirements on companies (under threat of fines). It is to be replaced by a planned economy controlled by a few corporations.
Again, the ‘Brussels EU’ is out for more powers. It wants to force companies to fulfil orders first within the European Union in times of crisis or risk fines: up to 1.5 % of the average daily turnover in the preceding business year for each working day of non-compliance.
The occurrence of such “exceptional circumstances” is broadly defined. The EU Commission’s proposal mentions “geopolitical instability, climate change and resulting natural disasters, biodiversity loss, and global economic instability”. The draft document is to be published in mid-September.
It is also envisaged that the EU Commission can oblige member states to stockpile emergency reserves of strategic goods. As is well known, the Commission had already taken the lead in the procurement of vaccines during the COVID pandemic. The democratically non-legitimised executive body in Brussels is silent about the content of the contracts with the vaccine manufacturers. Apparently, it is enough for people to roll up their sleeves willingly. The fact that their money is being used for hidden rescue packages worth billions for the benefit of the ailing pharmaceutical industry would probably be information that would unsettle the citizens.
The EU in crisis mode
The first step in defining crisis-relevant goods and services and establishing an early warning system is for the EU to monitor supply chains more intensively: Who obtains what from where, and how much of it? No less interesting is the disclosure of financial flows, all of which are highly sensitive economic data. And so, of course, the Commission repeatedly asserts in its paper that it will handle this information confidentially. After all, the aim is not to scare off companies in Europe but to encourage them to cooperate!
Nevertheless, the inquisitive bureaucrats in Brussels seem to remain sceptical about the willingness of companies to provide information. To help them along, the draft also holds out the prospect of fines as a precautionary measure. Companies that “intentionally or through gross negligence” supply incorrect or misleading information could face a fine of up to 300,000 euros.
If the EU in Brussels detects a scenario in the future – of whatever nature – that could trigger “fragmenting our Single market”, the emergency is to be declared according to the new instrument. This will then allow the bureaucrats to tighten their control over economic activity. As the EU executive argued as early as April this year, the need to introduce the SMEI finally became apparent against the backdrop of the recent pandemic and the events in Ukraine.
The EU Commission as “The Central Cartel Office”
The plans for unified control of the European economic area beyond any democratic participation are by no means a novelty. Anyone who knows the roots of the ‘Brussels EU’ understands that it was and is about anything but the well-being of the people. The alleged “peaceful growing together of the peoples in Europe” was never the primary objective. Instead, from the very beginning the ‘Brussels EU’ construct was designed to enforce profit interests, above all those of the oil and pharmaceutical cartel.1
It is therefore not surprising that in the post-war period, plans from the Nazi era were used directly in the construction of the later EU. Walter Hallstein, the notorious Nazi negotiator, ideologue, and later first Commission President, was not the only key figure. Arno Sölter – during the Nazi era head of the “Zentralinstitut für nationale Wirtschaftsordnung und Großraumwirtschaft” (Central Research Institute for National Economic Order and Greater Sphere Economy), later a sought-after cartel strategist for the young European Economic Community (EEC), i.e., the forerunner of the EU – also played a leading role in the conception of the system of that European economic dictatorship.
Sölter’s book published in 1941, “Das Großraumkartell. Ein Instrument der industriellen Marktordnung im neuen Europa” (The Greater Sphere Cartel – An Instrument of Industrial Market Organisation in the New Europe) reads like the template for the Brussels EU. Then, as today, the goal was the economic subjugation of first Europe, and later the world, to the interests of the chemical/pharmaceutical cartel. This was accompanied by the need for a “supreme regulatory authority” responsible for decisions that must be taken in the new trade and economic area: “The Central Cartel Office”. Outside any democratic control, it supervises economic affairs, organises and dictates the processes, requirements, production conditions, flows of goods and services in the “new large economic sphere”.
Anyone who, in view of Sölter’s detailed description of the structure and function of “The Central Cartel Office”, feels frighteningly reminiscent of today’s EU Commission is therefore certainly not wrong in drawing the conclusion that it is necessary to stop the implementation of these inhuman ambitions. We all bear the responsibility of ensuring that history does not repeat itself.
1 For more information on the economic drivers in the preparation and execution of the Second World War, please visit the website: www.profit-over-life.org. This online archive documents the original files and evidence of the Nuremberg trial against the chemical/pharmaceutical/oil corporation I.G. Farben (BAYER, BASF, Hoechst).