the referendum of the EU Introduction

The central arguments of the present document, they are part of another controversial text published by the GPM in March of 2004 under the title: " Answer to CIS of Argentina ". We have adapted our arguments to say what we think about the deceitfully call "referendum" by the European constitution. This referendum was celebrated in Spain the day February 20, 2005. we will try to support the need, which presses increasingly , that the European proletariat will act politically as a single block to fight pursuing the alternative of the United States of Europe of working class.

Like its word indicates, the decision that the town takes in a referendum is binding and, nevertheless, this consultation is not binding, Although the present Spanish president, Rodríguez Zapatero, have insinuated the contrary thing. It is not the case here that the towns participate neither they decide; on the contrary, in reality, the towns of the Spanish State, We have been summoned simply to give opinion about what the respective governments of States concerned have decided , because thus the mass of capital in this part of the Planet requires it. Nothing more that for this.

It was, therefore, a plebiscite for to know about the opinion of Spanish voters about an irreversible political decision that the European bourgeoisie has adopted does already a lot, conditioned by the need of the system in order to that the competence among the capitals to international scale, have its political expression corresponding in a world structure of blocks of power perfectly defined. All things about the social rights of the European towns and other legal-political chitchat, is pure story.

In reality, the social rights —that only are enumerated in the two first parts of this treaty—lie down buried to priori among the historic pile of debris of the economic requests that the decadent European bourgeoisie considers imposible to put off,and that have elaborated custom-made of the political suit that they want to premiere as soon as will be possible in the international community, stepping the carpets of the ministerial offices and other forums of the secret diplomacy, that is the political form to assume the economic competence by other media among big and well defined economic blocks of power , prelude of the big wars when they cannot resolve his big crisis in a peaceful way, and such seems that we go there.

In order to reach this conclusion, it is necessary to anticipate the events, developing with the thought the logic that the capitalist society has, and this society appears to us like an immense showcase of goods and services.

First that we see it is that each one of these products of the work responds to specific and diverse necessities, these necessities are pronounced in a great multiplicity of pleasures.Who determines supply of products and its characteristic ways to satisfy a same necessity? The consumers, who constitute the demand of the market, respond the bourgeoisie.False. Under Capitalism, the effective demand never has determined the supply, but that the supply has determined the demand. And in its delayed stage, who imposes consumption of products - associated to certain tastes that define the demand being based on determined marks -, it is the capital through the publicity on those products, propaganda paid by the great oligopolios.[ [1] ]

The freedom of the consumer is a myth, every more evident day, this is a common place located in the conscience of the society, a common place conquered by Capitalism;not only in the conscience of the exploded workers;the bourgeois are first in having the necessity to believe their own myths are realities.That belief is a part of the mystic of the power of class of the bourgeoisie. To think that it exists the freedom of the consumer confirms and justifies to the bourgeoisie like dominant class, like historically irreplaceable class, eternal class in this one world. Of this form the bourgeois reflect themselves in this capitalist world like in the best one of possible worlds.

But to accede to the new products that create new necessities and the traditional products that they are sold now more expensive because they have more high quality, it is necessary to pay them. they depend on the money that we paid by them. This reason sends our thought to budgetary restrictions that condition and put limits to that demand, the condition is social and the limits depend on the categories of income.This reason sends our thought to budgetary restrictions that condition and put limits to that demand, the condition is social and the limits depend on the categories of income . And here it is where, - at the time of satisfying the necessities, each necessity with its respective hierarchy of tastes, this tastes are more or less onerous, according to its refinement-, it is possible to be observed how the supposed "abstract liberties" of the consumer, vanish completely,demonstrating that the legal formal bourgeois concept of "universal freedom", at the time of the truth very little has to do with the real freedom;the bourgeois freedom not even has nothing to do with so mentioned "equality of opportunities";so that, as well as there is a hierarchy of necessities and of tastes,all the individuals cannot arrive at the highest steps of the hierarchy, not even of its dreams, but that has deep social fund , of class.

Given to the supply of products and services, the hierarchy of necessities and tastes are conditioned because of a social hierarchy and a "very unequal freedom" at the time of the society can decide with a democratic form on its demand of consumer goods. Here the tyranny of the capital commands, this tyranny is under the form of the bottom of usage in money of who incarnate this social category, on the relative shortage increasingly accentuated, of the persons who have to work for this social category necessarily .

But if, since we have said —and thus has been demonstrated scientifically— the demand is determined by the offer, this means that as much the global consumption of consumer goods, as different products— which they satisfy his respective demands of consumption, with his hierarchy of tastes — the global consumption and the products depend on the production, of the freedom to decide what thing is produced, how many and how,immediately doubtlessly this decision is merged with the distribution of the produced thing and with the different degrees of freedom, not with the "freedom" —with the abstract freedom, the freedom that the bourgeois say to us — but with the real freedom to satisfy the demandand “enjoy” with the consumption. And here it is where until the "formal democracy" disappears, because the faculty to decide all things of the factors of the production, depends very despotically on the respective proprietors of those means, they are who decide.

With the "democratic" political decisions in the different National States it happens the same exactly. The wage-earners vote,they don't vote to decide what to do, they vote to decide what fraction of the bourgeoisie, of the proprietors of the capital, represented by the diverse and officially recognized political parties , will decide by them each X period of time.

In the UE it could not be otherwise. It is already known that in Capitalism the things isn't thus, that the citizens "don't deliberate nor govern more than through their political representatives".that the citizens "don't deliberate nor govern more than through their political representatives". The citizenship “participates” and “it decides” through its representatives incarnated in the different recognized political forces, requirement that, in this case, hasn't been performed, because who have decided in this case,they were the respective national governments not the European parliamentarians .

In effect, the "Treaty of the Union", that they want to we call "European constitution", it is the product of the "Conferences between governments", of the different executive authorities in functions. The concept of Conferencia Intergubernamental (CIG), designates a negotiation not between the parliamentary representatives of the call "popular power", but between Governments of the States,between the respective Executive authorities, negotiation that takes place, por tanto fuera del marco y de los procedimientos institucionales “democráticos” de la Unión, therefore outside the frame and the institutional "democratic" procedures of the Union, whose results make possible to modify Treaties.

Until now, the changes in the institutional and legal structure of the European Union—or, more simply, in the content of its treaties— it were always product of intergovernmental conferences; for example: the “European Unique protoco"l and the "Treaty of the European Union". With this, we do not want to authorize the bourgeois democracy, because is necessary to surpass this democracy. This democracy is the democracy of the bourgeoisie,the profiteers, essentially.

Lo que queremos significar aludiendo a la denuncia formulada en este mismo sentido por la izquierda institucional de la burguesía española —en nuestro caso el PCE y su mascaron de proa: IU— es que la presente constitución o “tratado de la Unión” es la expresión más descarnada de la dictadura política del capital, que no puede siquiera respetar su propia legalidad “democrática” sin ver peligrar el dominio que ejerce sobre sus clases subalternas, en especial, sobre la mayoría absoluta de la población europea, que son los asalariados. Esta dictadura política, es el correlato superestructural de la dictadura social del capital todavía más descarnada en la estructura económica de esta sociedad decadente, donde la “democracia” se detiene en los umbrales de los distintos centros de trabajo; porque allí —insistimos— las decisiones sobre qué, como y cuanto se produce, recaen sobre la discrecionalidad despótica de sus propietarios.  


To return to the index of the document

This one and the rest of our documents in other formats
Group of Marxist propaganda
P.O. box 20027 Madrid 28080 (Spain)



[1] Esto no quiere decir, que oferta y demanda coincidan. La teoría del equilibrio entre oferta y demanda es  una superchería más con la que los teóricos burgueses subjetivistas y marginalistas del equilibrio han querido salir al paso de la crítica de Marx a Say. En realidad, la oferta y la demanda global jamás coinciden, y sí alguna vez lo hacen, ello es puramente casual y momentáneo; de lo contrario, el capitalismo no sería posible, dado que su fundamento absoluto está en la competencia, cuya función consiste, precisamente, en el desequilibrio entre oferta y demanda, en hacer que los precios difieran de sus respectivos valores, condición, a su vez, de la formación de la tasa de ganancia media como regulador en el reparto del plusvalor global entre la cofradía de los capitalistas, según la masa de valor con la que cada cual participa en el común negocio de explotar trabajo ajeno. Cfr: “El Capital” Libro III Cap. X