May 10, 2009
Democratic regimes are not prepared for the level of participation, which is required for pending decisions on the climate issue. This is provided in the announcement of an international climate change conference, which is scheduled in Essen from June 8 to 10, as a postulate in the room. Among the supporters of the conference, which blithely enough, the title " The Great Transformation bears ", next to the Federal Environment Ministry are the foundations of Thyssen, Krupp, Henkel, Volkswagen and Hertie, explains Michael Limburg, spokesman for the independent Climate Institute EIKE . Limburg, author of an article about the profiteers of "climate catastrophe" in zeitgeist-Bulletin 1-2009 , has long criticized the instrumentalization of climate change on the part of the authorities. In the conference call, he recognizes an "unconstitutional and bustle". In fact, it states explicitly: "Can free democratic societies cope with the effects of grave changes in the global climate, or might also authoritarian regimes Possibly be better Placed to enforce The Necessary measures used?" To German: Are free democratic societies prepare for the impact of serious global climate change, or perhaps better, take necessary steps authoritarian regime in the situation?
Strong stuff. Especially against the background that the greenhouse theory is likely to be, now definitively refuted by the extremely cold Antarctic temperatures, the Russian researchers have measured at the South Pole Station Vostok. The head of the Antarctic expedition, Vyacheslav Martjanow, compared with RIA Novosti : "The registered this year figures are further proof that the temperature dynamics may not develop for a global Klimaerwämung, is currently being talked about so much."
But back to the indicated "necessary measures". What could be meant by this is obvious: compulsory charges, air taxes, more regulations, restrictions on personal action and freedom of movement, discrimination by the demonization of CO2, etc., etc. Maybe the "measures" yes also in a much larger context to see.: Anti-democratic tendencies are now identify at several locations, just think of the increasing control, monitoring or incapacitation such. recently as the censorship of the Internet . And with the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty, with respect to its adoption citizens in this country known to have no say, there would be even possible to legitimize These kinds action on a level that our national democratic influence eludes entirely, namely the EU. And from there we can expect far more in the future than "just" energy passports and bulbs prohibitions can hardly be dismissed out of hand ...
Citizen participation is not in the government (Photo: Omnibus for Direct Democracy, by M. Lohe)
Speaking of "degree of participation": For years, initiatives were as more democracy or the Omnibus for Direct Democracy for a public decisions and the like. So far been unsuccessful. The ruling parties (Chancellor Merkel has declared opponent of referenda) have always rejected such proposals. Perhaps a final attempt to anchor Referenda, referendum and popular initiative in the Basic Law, failed on April 23 . "CDU and SPD blared draft legislation the opposition parties FDP, Greens and Left Party from Parliament." (Who for the exact wording of the draft legislation interesting to find the links at the end of the text.) from the major media was about to experience as much as anything again.
The rejection of the draft laws "is a bitter decision and a slap in the face of citizens who urgently greater say just at the federal level want," commented Gerald Häfner , CEO of Greater democracy. 60 years after entry into force of the Basic Law, the promise, according to which the state power is exercised "by the people through elections and VOTE Settings", still unfulfilled. However, that there is a genuine interest in participation is also evident in the recent rush to petitions, in addition to the elections, the only way to express the voice of citizens.
Did the government parties about fear of the citizens respectively voters? Can they then still choose someone asked the other day in a blog. The competition certainly not sleeping. So some "small party" proves with your program significantly closer to citizens (see my post Social Change shows face: new parties - an overview) .
The crucial question is, however: Gets democracy still have a chance?
***
Links to the draft legislation to anchor the popular vote in the Basic Law: FDP , Greens and Left Party
- Advertisement -
