By Niki Raapana / March 28, 2006
Twenty-first century communitarianism is a philosophical, political, and legal theory. It combines every opposite theory in the history of the world.
It’s a projected vision for a new global order by the year 2020. It’s what all of us should be socially evolving into.
Communitarians borrow ideas from ancient religions, Plato, Marx, Jefferson, Buber and Madame Blavatsky. Studying their theory is a nightmare. It’s unfocused and vague. And, this new theory is nothing like what Fredric Bastiat called a valid scientific inquiry, as in one that “proceeds by way of observation.” Their new ideas are unoriginal and their methods are unscientific. We’re being led into a solution which “like astrology and alchemy, proceeds by way of imagination.” (Fredric Bastiat, Economic Harmonies)
Communitarian thinking actually reminds me a lot of the “alien theory.” Communitarians base all their ideas in rituals, ancient languages, and beliefs only their adepts understand. Like the most scholarly alien theorists, their ideas use facts that prove everything except whether or not aliens actually exist. As social evolutionists, communitarian gurus claim their best evidence lies in how many people feel their vibes and embrace their values.
They’re good cons; communitarianism is introduced as a multi-layered, mystical illusion.
The unscientific logic that holds up the emerging supra-national system was not designed to be easily explained. It was designed to be misunderstood on purpose. That way, when opponents discuss any one layer of the big con it makes little sense to the uninitiated.
The communitarian theory provides justification for each level of the system. It justifies governance over the world’s human community. In order for us to fully understand their law, we must also be just a little familiar with every level of the communitarian’s games. The emerging global government’s communitarian foundation rests on three main pillars.
The three pillars for their triangular ideology are: philosophy, politics, and law.
The communitarian solution is the ultimate synthesis in the 1812 Hegelian dialectic. Hegel posed that conflicts between opposites naturally leads mankind into embracing a form of philosophical, fascist perfection. The 1848 Communist Manifesto expanded the Hegelian philosophy into dialectical materialism. The Marxist’s natural conflict between the ‘haves’ and the ‘have-nots’ justifies riots and assassinations. It was modified in 1884 to include covert, seditious activities. This is the Marxist’s “ends justify the means” theory. Hegels’ and Marx’s ideas were the theoretical basis for Stalin’s Soviet-Russian police state and Hitler’s National Socialism; both practiced eugenics against “lesser peoples.”
Political communitarianism was introduced to the world as ‘The Third Way’ in the 1990s. It’s also called ‘participatory democracy,’ ‘global democratic change,’ ‘bi-partisan,’ ‘centrist,’ ‘radical middle,’ ‘balanced middle,’ ‘socio-economics,’ ‘Glasnost-Perestroika’ and other vague terms (like community minded, Faith-Based, “new sense of purpose,” etc.). In the USA, political communitarianism was the theory used by the internationally funded Democratic Leadership Council (DLC). Some of us may have heard this was Clinton’s “party.”
The Third Way was often written about and discussed while Bill Clinton was in office. In the UK it was harshly criticized by opponents of Prime Minister Tony Blair. But when President Bush took office and was identified in the Washington Post as being himself a communitarian, this news was totally ignored by almost everyone in the USA. The fact that both U.S. presidential candidates in 2004 were communitarians was not reported. (In the coming 2008 elections the only way communitarian politics will become part of the public debate is if American voters get to ask their candidates about their “values.”)
In my first article I explained how the US Congressional adoption of CAFTA placed our nation under supreme community law. Many readers asked for more information about where to study this new law. A few were absolutely outraged it’s not taught at every public school. Here, we’re taught we’re so free we export our freedom to the world. Then we find out we don’t even study our own global-to-local legal system.
A communitarian ruling balances the rights of individuals and privately-owned property and businesses (formerly protected by national or constitutional law) against the rights of the “community.” Every nation included in the United Nations has been modifying their local political, economic, and legal system to adopt communitarian principles since 1992.
The brutal fact is, every nation, including the USA, adopts programs “to make political and legal internal reforms.” From Portugal to Greece to Slovakia, nations are integrating their sovereignty into the EU. Under the developing EU Agreement with Bosnia and Herzegovina, “BiH will transfer a share of its sovereignty to the European Community for supremacy of communitarian law and its application in all EU member states.”
In Italy, Communitarianism is defined as including and adopting the norms of EU law under Annex I, Article 41 of Communitarian Law 2001 (1 March 2002, No. 39). Every nation joining the EU is training administrators to apply and execute communitarian legal mandates in their home states. The Serbia and Montengro European Integration Office offers a program for “Harmonizators- law experts that will have to be well acquainted with the structure of communitarian law, type, and nature of the EU decisions and models of their implementation into the national legislature.”
European Communitarian Law has been a program of study for over twenty years. Araceli Mangas Martin, a Professor of International Public Law and International Relations at the Universidad de Salamanca wrote “European Communitarian Law and Spanish Law” (Madrid, Ed. Tecnos, 2nd ed) in 1987, and then became a Professor ‘Jean Monnet’ of Communitarian Law in 1991. Marco Balboni is a Prof. of Communitarian Law at the University of Bologna. Jose Antonio Sanchez Quintanilla, Secretary General of the IDEA has a diploma in European Communitarian Law from the University of Seville. Manuel Estella Hoyos, President of the Courts of Castilla and Leon has a BL (Law) from the University of Salamanca in 1962, majoring in matters related to European Communitarian Law in 1985, 86 and 87.
In other regions we see the same ongoing training for small informed groups. Africa offered a Fellowship Training Programme in International Law for French-Speaking African Countries at the Institut des Relations Internationales du Cameroun (IRIC) Yaoundï¿½, Cameroon in January 2002:
“In cooperation with the Camerooninan Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Centre of Studies and Research of International and Communitarian Law (CEDIC), Yaoundï, and the University of Yaound II, the United Nations Office of Legal Affairs and UNITAR jointly organized a two-week training for 22 participants from different French-Speaking African countries (16 fellowship recipients and 6 trainees from the host country), including junior and mid-level government officials as well as representatives from law faculties of universities.”
In Latin America the progression toward community governance and international communitarian philosophy is part of every economic summit and agreement. Mexico’s Instituto de la Judicatura Federal published an essay, which:
“analyzes the way in which the Court of Justice has controlled the principle of the supremacy of communitarian law over domestic laws, as well as over the principle of uniformity in its application, on the basis of international in[s]truments, common constitutional traditions and general principles of communitarian law. In addition, the author explains the role of national courts in the determination of constitutional limits to the process of integration, mainly in what concerns issues such as fundamental rights and the power to determine the jurisdiction limits of communitarian institutions. Lastly, the author stresses the need to establish a structure of the constitutional kind as a useful tool for the efficacy of the process of integration.”
And again, in the Cartegena Agreement between Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Perï¿½ y Venezuela, we discover what is expected from a nation state which is integrating itself:
“How that interrelation or complementarity between national and communitarian law must be given, is an issue that this Court wishes to deal as follows. The provision on article 144 of Decision 344, establishes what some legal writers denominate “rule of closing” (Matï¿½as Alemï¿½n), according to which, it is left to the legislation of the member countries, the legislative solution to situations not contemplated by the communitarian law, due to the fact that, it is possible that all the cases susceptible of juridical regulation have not been foreseen by it. It is necessary to point out that, in the application of this figure, the intern legislations of each country may not establish requirements, additional requisites or dictate regulations that might, in one way or another, conflict with the communitarian law or restrict essential aspects regulated by it in such a way that represent, for example, a lesser protection for the rights contemplated by the communitarian ruling. (…)”
Communitarian architects have long insisted that selfish claims to individual and national sovereignty must be balanced against the rights of the “community.” They overstress an urgent need for a more powerful global community government. They insist they must have legal and armed force. It’s necessary to protect community rights across the world.
The difficulty for communitarian strategists arises in countries where reigning government officials do not have the authority to relinquish national sovereignty to an international or regional system of laws. This could explain why so few lawyers in the United States are familiar with the legalities of supranational agreements.
The United States Constitution cannot be legally modified or changed without the legal constitutional channels required for ratification of Amendments. Under the U.S. Constitution, states reserve all other rights not enumerated in the Bill of Rights to the individual citizens of each state. State constitutions are the seat of power in the USA.
All international treaties and agreements that conflict with U.S. Constitutional Law or State constitutional law have no power or authority over the American people, whose liberty is the only basis for a legitimate government agency in the U.S. The solution to this dilemma appears to be solved by secrecy and by not informing the American voting populace that agreements are being signed and adopted in violation of Constitutional law.
The entire world is already familiar with the armed forces portion of the communitarian’s plans. Nobody doesn’t know there’s a war going on. But, how often does the President go on TV and identify the war as part of a communitarian plan to rebuild the world? As far as I know he’s only done it once, during his State of the Union Address in January 2002.
Due to a media and education blackout in the USA, very few are aware of the depth and breadth of the law and training that supports the communitarian’s global armed forces. Only a tiny, elite group of Americans understands each level of communitarian thinking.
If nobody around you knows what it is, you can pretend to know it. It was designed to be lofty and vague. Tell inferiors your indefinable terms are standard operating procedure.
Attorneys across Europe, Russia, Latin America, Africa, Asia and China are preparing for the supranational-national integration, and for their roles as communitarian lawyers and judges. As foreign students progress, few Americans will have the necessary knowledge or legal educations to compete for international or local communitarian law positions.
However, global law enforcement is fully trained and armed with shared technology for the transition to an international communitarian system of government. There are graduate programmes that teach European law enforcement. This include CAFTA’s “basis of wider general theory mainly of the European communitarian law.”