No government in sight 100 days after Belgian elections

[Tigersoap]

In reference to this article

I live there and all this does not make sense at all.
From outside it is portrayed as impossible for the north and south to live together, which is obviously just propaganda.
It is pushed by the politics, followed by a large portion the population on the North.
The ponerization process is everywhere, The South had his share of corruption in the high spheres but it's quite aggressive on the North with a really strong nationalistic streak.

The reality is indeed bleak because extremists from the North are pushing the separatism agenda with the usual "fear" trigger of the "other" (used to be the foreigners but it is better to use what's close to you I guess) but there is also another agenda, which is of confederalism which would allow belgium to stay together but with totally different way of managing things, which would severe the old ties of mutual assistance.

To do this the North must keep Brussels hostage because it benefits enormously from it (many flemish people work there,businesses need their commercial windows,their ageing population is growing fast so they need the South to keep paying their retirments benefits...).

Although I am wondering about the real reasons of all of this.
The US has a strong presence in Brussels with the NATO. The European headquarters is also in Brussels.
If Indeed Belgium had to split up who would really benefit from it ?
Is this all smoke and mirrors because something else is happening ?

If I think of the worst with a civil war or unrest, would something like Brussels be under the US wing ?
Is that possible ?

What do you think ?

 

[rs]

The European Union approached unification exactly backwards from the United States. The US went for political "union" first, it was (quite) some time later that the monetary system was uniform. The EU went for economic "union" first because they did not want to fully release sovereignty to some "federal" entity. Europe has been separate countries for a long time, unlike the states that formed the US. For the US colonies, political union represented power and a way to compete with England. As a result of this "backwards" approach, I believe the EU is inherently unstable - or at least on the borderline of stability.

With the run up in the Euro and with even Greenspan taking about how the Euro is now a credible threat to displace the dollar as a "reserve" currency it would be "ideal" to exploit the inherent instability of the EU and seed Fear Uncertainty and Doubt, driving investors back to the dollar.

By simply talking about the break-up of Belgium, it exploits the weak political union and introduces FUD, and the beauty of it all is that there need not be any truth to the rumors. Investors thrive on rumor. Meanwhile this forces all of the EU governmental bodies to explain either why this isn't a problem, or what they would do about it and both actions add to the perceived legitimacy of the original idea.

Its really diabolical Machiavellianism at its "best". Of course, there is always that "wishful thinking" side effect to the ponerologists...

 

[Tigersoap]

Thanks Rs,
It's an interesting view.

An unstable situation in Belgium may cut-off the head of the Administrative center of Europe for a while.
Or at least cast doubt on the fiability of the european union like you said.

Although the European parliament has created a City within the city of Brussels and could totally be seen as independant from the rest of the city because it functions no matter what is the political situation in belgium.
It has rotten the city life and created wider gaps between people because of the salary and privileged situation you will get if you work there.
They always point out how it helped to develop businesses but it is for a small chosen few who can afford it, not for the rest of the population.
Just from a real estate point of view, they pushed the price higher because they can afford rents of 2500 Euros for example and whole blocks of housing have been left to disaray and people expropriated just to raze and rebuild expensive offices or upper class appartments.

Maybe it's not to save the US but to crash the whole system as a whole.
Who knows.

 

[stardust]

From outside it is portrayed as impossible for the north and south to live together, which is obviously just propaganda.

It was possible until now, and if you look at the exemple of Switzerland, which counts more than 2 languages, you see that there're bad apologies to the apparent incapacity to live together.

Strangely, I find that Nicolas "I'm-right" Sarkozy is very silencious about this state of affairs... too much busy with Iran!

 

[Tigersoap]

It was possible until now, and if you look at the exemple of Switzerland, which counts more than 2 languages, you see that there're bad apologies to the apparent incapacity to live together.

Well yes, in fact Belgium has three languages, which includes German but they are relatively few compared to the rest.

In any case, Everything is and was made for the seperation to occur on every front (TV, news, Culturally...).
Today I heard the story of a school where both languages are represented but children are kept separated and cannot for example use the same toilet, it's absolutely insane.
It was prepared from way back in the seventies (before ?) but I am clueless about the real reasons.

 

[Charles]

Although I am wondering about the real reasons of all of this.
The US has a strong presence in Brussels with the NATO. The European headquarters is also in Brussels.
If Indeed Belgium had to split up who would really benefit from it ?
Is this all smoke and mirrors because something else is happening ?

If I think of the worst with a civil war or unrest, would something like Brussels be under the US wing ?
Is that possible ?

What do you think ?

Well, that hasn’t crossed my mind just yet Tigersoap. Let’s not forget that most people in Belgium still do not want to see Belgium being split. And this, even after the hype created by the media that has sensitized (and also radicalized) people on both sides. But as things are speeding up in terms of ponerisation both in its span and depth, and over a longer course, who knows? Indeed, Brussels is also the seat of Europe but what does that mean these days, really ?

Perhaps by now you have learned already that I too am from "there" (which is “here” as I type it 8| ). I live south of Gent (Gand) and had Dutch (more like Flemish) as my mother language. French was my second language. After seeing the results of the elections 100 days ago in June (one that I sort of anticipated), I came to the decision NOT to follow anything of the “negotiations” needed for the formation of the next federal government. I just knew that it was going to take an immense amount of time to get us somewhere. With all the generated animosity, and button pushing and media hype to be expected I “saw” it to become a big energy drain, nothing more. And so it has been, in retrospect. But here we are. On one hand we see a further radicalization of the populace, and on the other hand we see politicians which are all to willing to jump into it and play that card of populism.

Exactly like has been happening decennia ago. Each party whether catholic, or liberal or socialist spanned the French and Flemish speaking populace. It did not matter what language you used, it mattered what the political agenda was. Of course there were also the separatist parties on both sides, which were language directed (they may say what they want but in my view they are definitely not culturally directed). Volksunie was the biggest one on the Flemish part.

Than each of the other traditional parties split into a French (Wallon) and Flemish part. Than Volksunie split apart in many separate fractions. It lost too many votes to that extreme right and rascist and violence instigating party Vlaams Blok (which was convicted for rascism and changed its name to Vlaams Belang). What remained of Volksunie was taken up by each of the other traditional parties. Some to the liberals, but also to the other traditional parties as separate partners, to gain … votes. The Socialist party took Spirit under its umbrella which is soft in its agenda when it comes to separation and the catholic party took N-VA which is really hard line separatist it seems. The catholic party indeed has always been an amalgam of left and right, but also of unionist and very flamingant (or even separatist), the binding glue being … heheh Catholicism.

So at times I see it as history running its course, albeit a very entropic one wherein the populace loses its objective view of things and becomes radicalized.
It would also suit well to the Flemish people to take a look at all the other regions within Europe or the rest of the world who want so desperately to separate from their country. Almost all of them (with the exception of Slovakia) were or are the richest parts. But for how long ? And, were they always the richest? How long ago was it again that Flemish people went to the French speaking Wallonia to get some work ? Things can change very fast, and what about solidarity ?


So is there a hidden agenda that wants to split Belgium? There’s lot’s of people of the French speaking community who believe so, and from pure intuition I tend to agree. I have always felt LeTerme (of the flemish catholic party and he's got a French name!) to operate with a hidden agenda, consciously or unconsciously. Just look at the “product” of his “labor”. So yes, at times I smell a rat too, damn it!!

To end with a little sarcasm coming from a colleague whose mother language is French (but speaks Flemish very well) : What if global warming keeps its current trend and the sea level rises with many meters. Will we see Flemish people begging to live in the French speaking part ? Can we come in ? Please ... Sil vhu play. ;)

 

[Tigersoap]

Thanks Charles for your input.
I was hoping you'd reply and give your views from the other side ;).

If the waters come up there will be a great opportunity for Wallonia to show what it's really made of ;)