By: Anna Wiejak
Prof. Zbigniew Krysiak, economist and President of the Schuman Institute of Thought, in a conversation with Anna Wiejak from the portal wPolityce.pl
wPolityce.pl: How do you assess the reaction of the European Commission to the judgment of the Polish Constitutional Court, which ruled that the Polish Constitution takes precedence over EU law? The EC stated that it “will not hesitate to use its powers under the Treaties to protect the uniform application and integrity of Union law”. And Commissioner Reynders announced that “the EC will use all available instruments to protect the European rule of law”. Isn’t the national economic stimulus plan at risk in this situation?
Prof. Zbigniew Krysiak:We have not only known since today that the adoption of a superstate is a destruction of national sovereignty, creates uniformity and the reactions of various people from Brussels or the supporters of the superstate are unfortunately not substantial reactions. Instead of having a substantial discussion of the practice and theory of law, there are voices that disregard the level of substantial dialogue, respect for our nation and democracy, as Jarosław Kaczyński rightly said yesterday: when a nation chooses its own authorities and has a constitution, that constitution cannot be violated – by other nations or by anyone else – because it is the constitution of the people. Such attacks and attempts to treat our constitution as if it were subject to anyone in Brussels or to super-state ideologues, it is simply an attack on democracy and directed against the people. The question is: who does such a system serve?
I have often said that Altiero Spinelli’s super-state ideology is unfortunately a thousand times worse than Soviet communism because the individual and people were pawns in this system. It is tantamount to a totalitarian system.
It should also be emphasized that in these statements not just some EU officials or commissioners – fortunately there are not many – a resounding dissatisfaction, among other things, with the aim of, for example, ideological issues related to the acceptance of so-called homosexual marriages accepted in Poland. They want to force that on us.
They know that this ideological system, which is not only about the destruction of the family, but also of the destruction of patriotism, because without the family there is no national community, no society, no political community and no state. It means that we are pushed into the roles of consumers and workers. We cannot give in here for thirty pieces of silver that we get from the EU, and that is not a mercy, but money that is already half too little, for access to our market, for the possibility that, among others, Germany or Holland make profits.
Here we see a frontal attack, aggression. We shouldn’t be afraid that they will pull our funds out of what is known as the recovery plan. This is important, but it is more important to prevent the destruction of unity, the unity of the nation and the strength of Poland in general, as well as innovation and entrepreneurship. We are currently developing very well economically and are among the best in the world. Investments in Poland only decreased by 7% during the pandemic, while in the world they decreased by 35%. The inflow of investment into Poland is a priority for global investors, just after the United States and Spain. We are even ahead of the UK and the Germans in this regard. So don’t be afraid when they try to go in that direction. It’s still not legitimate, it’s blackmail. You have no right to abolish these measures.
In addition, these measures are not free of charge. In nominal terms, that’s not a lot of money when you consider, for example, the funds our government spent on bailing out the post-pandemic economy or on the 500 plus program. The repayable half is loans that we just have to pay back – we have to pay interest. The non-refundable half is also refundable, which means we have to repay it too – as part of the revenue from tariffs we collect on imports with third countries outside the EU, we pay around 80% of the EU budget. These are huge resources. The so-called digital tax, which will soon be introduced across the Union, will make up a large part of the revenue for the EU budget. After all, the signed documents on the so-called own revenue of the EU budget were already available when the funds for the reconstruction plan were decided. These funds would not have appeared if there had not been a resolution, a resolution to set up these repayment funds, the so-called own funds.
Another element of this income will be questions about the so-called carbon footprint, which relates to various imported products, as well as various questions related to CO2. This CO2 is currently very expensive, which is damaging the European economy as energy costs are rising. All of this is the result of the actions of disastrous executives like Ursula von der Leyen, who, as it is said – and I quote statements in the media – destroyed the quality of the Bundeswehr, which functioned poorly under their leadership, or Frans Timmermans, who helped a crazy Fit for 55 program. And these are the factors driving up costs in EU economies.
The factors I mentioned are aimed at generating the EU’s own income, which will also include Poland. In other words, no one is going to give us money for free, and all that money has to be paid back.
So one can wonder whether, if the arrangement of world investors is such that there will be a very strong inflow of investment for Poland, this inflow of investment can be much larger than the funds that come from the EU budget. At the same time, we can also take out various loans to be used to finance development projects.
We have had a surplus of exports over imports for three years – for the first time since Poland joined the EU. Last year the surplus was 40 billion, this year it could even reach 80 billion, which means that the competitiveness and efficiency of the Polish economy is excellent. It should be added that Poland has already recovered from the pandemic in terms of GDP losses. In contrast, other countries such as Germany, France and the Netherlands still need several years to recover.
There is no danger in relation to what is known as the EU budget, which we pay into and then receive. We are talking about the stimulus plan here. The desire to maintain German hegemony in the EU contributes significantly to this behavior, because it seems that the Germans are increasingly afraid of the strength of the Polish economy. They also fear the strength of the integration of the Tricity’s economy as it will weaken their strong position. At the same time, it must be said that the way Germans think is unreasonable.
Is it about making the German economy dependent on the Polish economy?
Yes. On the one hand, the Germans want to make the Polish economy dependent on themselves, but at the same time it is a fact that such a large Polish export to Germany makes it very important for the Germans that the Polish economy is not too strong, but at the same time works well, because then the risk of an export disruption to Germany would be a certain problem for the functioning of the German economy.
The Germans want to make the Polish economy dependent on external capital, and that is a serious problem for our economy, but also for the countries of the Tri-City. The western EU has become dependent on its external capital, on its investments, and acts in such a way that little domestic capital is created. The functioning of the common market leads to an asymmetry in the growth of financial assets (deposits, stocks, bonds, funds) per capita. Our capital is growing up to eight times less than in other western countries, especially when compared to Germany, France and the Netherlands – this is shown by the hard data from Eurostat. This discrepancy is drastic and continues to grow. It is clear that the common market does not aim to
It is not just about the reaction to the judgment of the Polish Constitutional Court or the economic inequalities mentioned by the professor, but about the actions of the EU as a whole. I have the impression that the EU institutions have implemented the principles of Altiero Spinelli’s 1941 Ventotene Manifesto. To what extent is this neo-communist international strong in the EU, and to what extent are we actually threatened by the terrifying vision contained in this document?
She is strong. The implementation of the manifesto, that is, of this neo-communist ideology, is a thousand times more dangerous, because in Soviet communism communism has not yet destroyed statehood as such, despite the expansion of control and submission. The Sejm was controlled, but it was controlled. Institutions have not been removed, flags have not been removed. Many things could be mentioned here. Spinelli’s goal, however, was the abolition of institutions like the Sejm, the Supreme Court, the Constitutional Tribunal …
The constitution itself …
And the constitution itself. Exactly. Whatever constitution we had during the People’s Republic of Poland, or any bogus institutions of our state, they were there. And here I deliberately show what the main difference is. For anyone who wants to sit down with a cup of coffee and think about it, this is kind of a picture of a Soviet gulag that we will be exposed to in the future. There would be work, we would consume, but the process would be towards loss of property …
However, in the EU this is currently practiced with the Green Deal. All of this is only part of the puzzle.
Yes, exactly. These are often unnoticed mechanisms, and when we talk about them some people are surprised that it is possible. These mechanisms are primarily aimed at depriving ourselves of our property – for example, when we are deprived of property of our own constitution or of other institutions that regulate our state, this attack on Spinelli’s ideology also goes a bit far to deprive us of our economic property. This extortion with EU funds is an example of how the attempt at submission will work. In other words: where there is no state or institutional property and therefore no economic property either, people have no rights whatsoever. We need to be clear about
It must be emphasized that the power of Spinelli’s ideologues began to manifest itself in the 1980s. It makes use of the arms of capital. Under communism there was an alliance of power control combined with violence. Of course, this also involved the removal of property, but that property was not completely eliminated. Spinelli’s ideology, on the other hand, has two elements: the violence of capital or the solidarity of the financial oligarchies, whose wealth grows while others become impoverished. The distribution of the profits in the world is dramatic: 90% of the profits go to 5% of the population. At the same time it makes various activists, also in different Brussels structures, dependent. The Pandora papers are an example of this concept.
Finally, it has to be added what Spinelli also included and what the Germans want to implement. Spinelli wanted to create a European army and a European police force, but not to defend the borders, because as we can see, the borders in Europe are not defended – Germany spends far less on this in relation to GDP than Poland – but the goal Spinelli’s European army and police – and that’s what the Germans want – is to restore order when there is unrest. So if they want to destroy our institutions and start a war against us – in the opinion of the experts, a war is already an aggression against a country that is oriented towards, for example, destroying democracy and institutions, and using capitalist violence – and there are protests and opposition, Spinelli wanted to send this European army to put down these unrest. Unfortunately, the Germans are talking about it, although the subject has not yet come to the fore. Our government and other countries oppose it.
So we can state that we are de facto at war, and that war can take various forms of aggression.
So if we had a de facto European army in a situation where the Polish Constitutional Court decides as it decides, then we would have it on our necks?
So you can put it simply. Today we are of the opinion that Brussels and these circles – they are not the majority from the point of view of representing the opinion of the citizens of Europe, they are the majority from the point of view of the party circles – but in fact that is exactly what would happen.
We would have a situation where the Brussels government – which is already opposed to such a decision by the Polish Constitutional Court – says that we are doing something wrong and therefore says that it is against the Treaties because our Constitution is under them, and that is why they have the power to send law enforcement officers when a situation arises in which it is not the supporters of Brussels but the opponents of Brussels who take to the streets. Then we would have the European army or police on the streets to suppress these unrest. At the same time, they would exacerbate the aggression, because if you imagine the Germans appearing in these European army uniforms, you can imagine what could happen.
We live in a reality where we are put on high alert. A year before his death, Robert Schuman warned that they wanted to lull us into security, that they wanted to create the impression of wealth, of economic development, of a super-functioning system, when in reality – Schuman continued – their goal is ours Patriotism, the soul of our nation, our freedom to kill, and that we must oppose until the end, whatever it costs us. We should also defend ourselves against this out of responsibility for our children, for whom we do not want to block the way to a normal life.