The Law Coup | English version | Poal: Say what you want.

800

•

https://lesamisdelanation.wordpress.com/2020/06/10/le-coup-detat-du-droit/

The Law Coup - Introduction

The fight against corruption has become in twenty years one of the reasons most often cited by globalist organizations to achieve the standardization of laws and rules in the field of commercial and criminal law, in the name of market integrity, economic efficiency and transparency. The fight against terrorism, respect for embargoes and the closing of global networks to countries or organizations qualified as "terrorists" contributed to the mobilization of the United States of America and its allies in this direction. On the basis of a widely shared observation of the inadequacy of national laws, the Western reaction has strengthened and extended a movement which wants the law, the laws and the rules to be of universal application. As such, it has exemplary value. Indeed, it signals a new extension of the field of law.

What is the name of the fight against corruption?

The logic of globalization is that of equal competition all over the world, in the name of good business. It calls for law, as an essential infrastructure of the liberal economy. It is antagonistic to the diversity of mores and business practices, since it calls for the standardization of laws, standards and legal systems. It contradicts the principle of state sovereignty around the world, including the United States. It carries conflicts and risks between territorialized and circumscribed human communities, and the business movement, theoretically at least planetary and without borders. And, ultimately, it is fraught with clashes between the freedom of peoples to define their laws, and the primacy of the economy which intends to decide these laws.

The standardization of the law which would lead to the establishment of universal laws follows a mechanism that is now known and identifiable.

First, it puts national models in competition according to the rule of the lowest bidder, applied by an ever-expanding and everywhere system of indicators, barometers, supposedly objective evaluations, actually instrumental, and oriented towards a single goal ; the alignment of legal systems with what generally happens to coincide with the American "model" and which is in fact the interest of financialized companies.

Then, to gain in "competitiveness" and in "attractiveness", therefore aligning the agenda of public authorities, local authorities and States on the agenda of these multinational private groups, reforms impose the least restrictive standards and laws , likely to increase capital income - shareholder dividends.

The development in this direction is strongly encouraged, if not constrained, by the sanctions which strike the companies and / or the States which show themselves reluctant to adopt the American legislation, model of the universal law, engine of the commodification of the world, to respect it and integrate the primacy of the markets into their policies.

Finally, global law is at the service of the most powerful economic interests, and in particular of the banking and financial sector which appropriates the functions of money creation and property rights, so as to dispossess the Nations of any real independence (According to Henry Ford, speaking in 1922, "if the American citizens understood how the monetary and financial systems function, the revolution would take place tomorrow" ...)

One of the effects of this globalization of law, too little analyzed, is the crisis of 2007-2008. Crisis characteristic of the appropriation of money and credit by a banking system penetrated by criminal logic; exemplary crisis in the worldwide dissemination of a localized and circumscribed American failure, thanks to the multiple agreements, commitments and rules making the systems interdependent and disarming national protections; finally revealing crisis of the paralysis of the judge and justice by the swamp of conformity and the jungle of law. This standardization and interdependence serve multinational implantation groups that have the means to play with the law, arbitration courts, procedures and to employ NGOs and Foundations. For thirty years, they have taken the face of an Americanization of the world, undoubtedly because the American system of law has built a reputation for being the most efficient, reputation usurped but widely diffused, but also and probably above all because the biggest global companies, being American, found there the important strategic advantage to operate everywhere in their right of reference. This is how they exported, not only their products and services, but also their right of origin.

In one way or another, rightly or wrongly, the interest of multinational groups has been permanently confused with the national interest of the United States.

The reality is that the fight against corruption, as the globalist authorities have defined it, is the tree that hides the forest of corruption from the globalist system itself and its criminal excesses. The confusion between globalist organizations and American power will be lifted. It is that, beyond the temporary, circumscribed and partial conjunction between extraterritorial globalization and the interest of American companies, recent history illustrates a debate of a completely different nature between the extraterritoriality of law and the national interest. This debate opposes the principle of state sovereignty and territoriality of the right to economic and financial globalization and the principle of the free movement of goods, services and capital which makes law a market like any other, even an industry like another. The law can decide an election, the law prevails over the political programs and the majority vote, the law devolves the power to those who manipulate it and who use the detour of the universal to dispense with the sanction of suffrage and the very idea of general interest and citizenship.

The new and important element, since the assumption of office of Donald Trump and his administration, is that the United States intends to restore its sovereignty and ensure the primacy of the national interest. We will give some examples of an approach that on several occasions the advisers of President Donald Trump have clarified, an approach that condemns multinational companies whose economic model is based on wage, social and fiscal disparities, an approach that places the Europe faced with its capacity to produce itself what it needs, notably its Defense.

Analysis of the American approach to the fight against corruption, the application of embargoes, legal influence (1), when it is extended to the new systems of corruption in force in the world and to the United States themselves , sheds light on thirty years of legal development and business practice, as well as a movement to capture universal rules by the particular interests of global firms.

It leads to nuanced conclusions, sometimes contradictory, which highlight in particular the competition between States and non-State entities to say the law and to seize opinion to witness, for prosecution or for defense, and which reveal above all to what extent the globalist ideology had taken hold of Washington, to the point that the United States could have been confused with postures and actions typically and fundamentally non-American (2). Because the capitalism of destruction which uses the law to put an end to Nations and political freedoms is fundamentally contrary to American values as to the values of European peoples, and the totalitarianism of law which intends to seize everything, direct everything and dispose of everything opens onto the abyss of the war of all against all (3). In the rising conflict of the 21st century, the war of law plays a major role.

All this, in the new framework opened by the Trump administration, suggests an appeal to the European Nations and to the constituted states to take their full place in a fight for a new order of economic law (4), this fight supposing in particular that they abandon a form of political and legal naivety which too often serves them as a collective anesthetic, this combat also comprising the detection of new practices and new systems of corruption which are developing under the term of “smart power”, this combat supposing above all that the member countries of the Union are clear on the opinion which they have of their national interest, of the devolution made to the European authorities in charge of pursuing these interests, and on the idea that they make the desirable world of the century that begins.

Hervé Juvin (2017). Le coup d’État du droit. De l’extraterritorialité du droit américain à l’oﬀensive globaliste. L’avènement d’un droit universel, menaces et réalités pour les Nations européennes. Un rapport pour la Fondation pour une Europe des Nations et des Libertés (FENL). Paris.

https://lesamisdelanation.wordpress.com/2020/06/10/le-coup-detat-du-droit/ The Law Coup - Introduction The fight against corruption has become in twenty years one of the reasons most often cited by globalist organizations to achieve the standardization of laws and rules in the field of commercial and criminal law, in the name of market integrity, economic efficiency and transparency. The fight against terrorism, respect for embargoes and the closing of global networks to countries or organizations qualified as "terrorists" contributed to the mobilization of the United States of America and its allies in this direction. On the basis of a widely shared observation of the inadequacy of national laws, the Western reaction has strengthened and extended a movement which wants the law, the laws and the rules to be of universal application. As such, it has exemplary value. Indeed, it signals a new extension of the field of law. What is the name of the fight against corruption? The logic of globalization is that of equal competition all over the world, in the name of good business. It calls for law, as an essential infrastructure of the liberal economy. It is antagonistic to the diversity of mores and business practices, since it calls for the standardization of laws, standards and legal systems. It contradicts the principle of state sovereignty around the world, including the United States. It carries conflicts and risks between territorialized and circumscribed human communities, and the business movement, theoretically at least planetary and without borders. And, ultimately, it is fraught with clashes between the freedom of peoples to define their laws, and the primacy of the economy which intends to decide these laws. The standardization of the law which would lead to the establishment of universal laws follows a mechanism that is now known and identifiable. First, it puts national models in competition according to the rule of the lowest bidder, applied by an ever-expanding and everywhere system of indicators, barometers, supposedly objective evaluations, actually instrumental, and oriented towards a single goal ; the alignment of legal systems with what generally happens to coincide with the American "model" and which is in fact the interest of financialized companies. Then, to gain in "competitiveness" and in "attractiveness", therefore aligning the agenda of public authorities, local authorities and States on the agenda of these multinational private groups, reforms impose the least restrictive standards and laws , likely to increase capital income - shareholder dividends. The development in this direction is strongly encouraged, if not constrained, by the sanctions which strike the companies and / or the States which show themselves reluctant to adopt the American legislation, model of the universal law, engine of the commodification of the world, to respect it and integrate the primacy of the markets into their policies. Finally, global law is at the service of the most powerful economic interests, and in particular of the banking and financial sector which appropriates the functions of money creation and property rights, so as to dispossess the Nations of any real independence (According to Henry Ford, speaking in 1922, "if the American citizens understood how the monetary and financial systems function, the revolution would take place tomorrow" ...) One of the effects of this globalization of law, too little analyzed, is the crisis of 2007-2008. Crisis characteristic of the appropriation of money and credit by a banking system penetrated by criminal logic; exemplary crisis in the worldwide dissemination of a localized and circumscribed American failure, thanks to the multiple agreements, commitments and rules making the systems interdependent and disarming national protections; finally revealing crisis of the paralysis of the judge and justice by the swamp of conformity and the jungle of law. This standardization and interdependence serve multinational implantation groups that have the means to play with the law, arbitration courts, procedures and to employ NGOs and Foundations. For thirty years, they have taken the face of an Americanization of the world, undoubtedly because the American system of law has built a reputation for being the most efficient, reputation usurped but widely diffused, but also and probably above all because the biggest global companies, being American, found there the important strategic advantage to operate everywhere in their right of reference. This is how they exported, not only their products and services, but also their right of origin. In one way or another, rightly or wrongly, the interest of multinational groups has been permanently confused with the national interest of the United States. The reality is that the fight against corruption, as the globalist authorities have defined it, is the tree that hides the forest of corruption from the globalist system itself and its criminal excesses. The confusion between globalist organizations and American power will be lifted. It is that, beyond the temporary, circumscribed and partial conjunction between extraterritorial globalization and the interest of American companies, recent history illustrates a debate of a completely different nature between the extraterritoriality of law and the national interest. This debate opposes the principle of state sovereignty and territoriality of the right to economic and financial globalization and the principle of the free movement of goods, services and capital which makes law a market like any other, even an industry like another. The law can decide an election, the law prevails over the political programs and the majority vote, the law devolves the power to those who manipulate it and who use the detour of the universal to dispense with the sanction of suffrage and the very idea of general interest and citizenship. The new and important element, since the assumption of office of Donald Trump and his administration, is that the United States intends to restore its sovereignty and ensure the primacy of the national interest. We will give some examples of an approach that on several occasions the advisers of President Donald Trump have clarified, an approach that condemns multinational companies whose economic model is based on wage, social and fiscal disparities, an approach that places the Europe faced with its capacity to produce itself what it needs, notably its Defense. Analysis of the American approach to the fight against corruption, the application of embargoes, legal influence (1), when it is extended to the new systems of corruption in force in the world and to the United States themselves , sheds light on thirty years of legal development and business practice, as well as a movement to capture universal rules by the particular interests of global firms. It leads to nuanced conclusions, sometimes contradictory, which highlight in particular the competition between States and non-State entities to say the law and to seize opinion to witness, for prosecution or for defense, and which reveal above all to what extent the globalist ideology had taken hold of Washington, to the point that the United States could have been confused with postures and actions typically and fundamentally non-American (2). Because the capitalism of destruction which uses the law to put an end to Nations and political freedoms is fundamentally contrary to American values as to the values of European peoples, and the totalitarianism of law which intends to seize everything, direct everything and dispose of everything opens onto the abyss of the war of all against all (3). In the rising conflict of the 21st century, the war of law plays a major role. All this, in the new framework opened by the Trump administration, suggests an appeal to the European Nations and to the constituted states to take their full place in a fight for a new order of economic law (4), this fight supposing in particular that they abandon a form of political and legal naivety which too often serves them as a collective anesthetic, this combat also comprising the detection of new practices and new systems of corruption which are developing under the term of “smart power”, this combat supposing above all that the member countries of the Union are clear on the opinion which they have of their national interest, of the devolution made to the European authorities in charge of pursuing these interests, and on the idea that they make the desirable world of the century that begins. Hervé Juvin (2017). Le coup d’État du droit. De l’extraterritorialité du droit américain à l’oﬀensive globaliste. L’avènement d’un droit universel, menaces et réalités pour les Nations européennes. Un rapport pour la Fondation pour une Europe des Nations et des Libertés (FENL). Paris.

(post is archived)