“Right” and “wrong” referenda as west sees them


The general condemnation by the West of the two referendums on self-determination, held in Ukraine’s eastern regions, Donetsk and Lugansk, just attracted even more public interest to both.

It has become a general rule that those referenda, which are condemned or sabotaged by the European Union (EU) and the United States, tend to be the most interesting and controversial. The EU’s sanctions, imposed on Switzerland for a “wrong” result in athe recent referendum on the country’s immigration rules; Brussels’ propaganda and direct threats against the upcoming referendum in Scotland and the much-demanded referendum in Catalonia – these are acts against the most contested and the most discussed events in those countries. And these are just some of the examples of the REAL attitude of the EU to democracy and to people’s will, which the officials in Brussels like to talk about. The situation is not much better in the United States, where officials in Washington D.C., for example, have been doing their best to block the referenda decriminalizing possession of small amounts of marijuana (including the D.C. itself, where the referendum is still challenged legally by the local attorney general).

What do all of these referenda have in common and why do the EU and the US object to them so much? In all these cases the people’s opinion differs with the desires of the globalist powers (with possible exception of Scotland, where the EU grudgingly allowed the people’s will to be expressed this year). It is clear that the majority of people in Donetsk and Lugansk do not want to live under the rule of the self-appointed “government” in Kiev, which sends tanks and fighter jets against these regions, calling the referendum’s organizers “terrorists.” It is obvious that the majority of people in the United States do not consider people smoking marijuana to be criminals belonging to jail. It is clear that the Swiss are concerned about mass migration into their country, not making an exception for migrants from the “zone of prosperity and stability” – a name which the EU continues to usurp without sufficient grounds for it.

After all, what is so bad about referenda, why should, for example, the visible desire of the people of Crimea to live in Russia be described as an “unacceptable violation” of international justice by the American president Barack Obama and the German chancellor Angela Merkel? And who is the French president Francois Hollande to declare the referenda in Lugansk and Donetsk, where more than 80 percent of the people voted for self-determination, “non-events, which never took place”?

“The good of the people is supreme law,” the legislation of the ancient Rome used to proclaim (“Salus populi suprema lex”). Wasn’t the declaration of independence by the United States at the end of the eighteenth century contradicting the British law of the epoch and wasn’t the founding of the French Republic, to which Mr. Hollande owes his office, wasn’t this Revolution then condemned by the “international community” of the late 18th century?

“It does not matter, how people vote, what matters is who counts the votes,” the infamous Joseph Stalin used to say. Mr. Obama, Mr. Hollande and Mrs Merkel have introduced a slight correction: the most important thing for a vote is the recognition of the EU and the US. Their logic is clearly Stalinist.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here