Tub: Hitler created the absolute majority of his power through referendums

“I would have voted in favor. I have said it more than once and I have called my comrades. In my opinion, there is a lot of mystique. The discourse that the Association Law somehow violates the concept of family defined in the Constitution is to me Completely incomprehensible, I do not see any violation, because the Constitution is not being changed or the concept of the family is being changed ”, says A. Kubilius.

“Of course, there is always room for improvement in the project, but perhaps a tactical error has been made that, on the one hand, the pandemic is tiring for many people and everyone’s emotions are hot and not very rational, and secondly, The question is yes.

On the other hand, there was very little discussion. If we think of some kind of referendum, then I would say that there should be referendums in the parties, the parties have to discuss whether we really do not want to take care of those who are less, whose rights are also important ”, he says. A. Kubilius.

Categorically before the referendum

When asked how he values ​​the positions of his colleagues, A. Kubilius assured that he does not like them and that he does not support the idea of ​​a referendum.

“I really don’t like it. When in a referendum you try to ask a question that is important to one minority or another, be it an ethnic minority or another, and try to ask this question of a majority with all opinions, it is natural that the minority should have the right to do it, it is not mandatory. Not even our societies, nations, are a problem here, and they are in many places. Saying that is exactly what we have to do, because the nation is instructing us to do it. That’s why we will do it and we will not deal with that minority, it is a complete anachronism, a misunderstanding of human rights.

The human rights mechanism was designed to protect them from the discontent or dictatorship of the majority. I keep mentioning the history of Germany before the war or between the wars, the power of the absolute majority of Hitler and the persecution of minorities, and the persecution of the very Jews that he created during the referendums. He had the strange notion of consolidating his legitimacy, and for whatever he did, he asked the nation to grant him that right. The German nation, with its majority cast by a large majority after World War I, voted with a majority of two, giving it an absolute majority. Where did this lead? It is not necessary to remember the history. After World War II, Germany still does not have the right to a national referendum on its legislation. He realized how dangerous these populist things were.

In referendums to consider minority rights, I really see a complete misunderstanding and dangerous things. I have therefore made it very clear that I would categorically oppose the proposal to hold a referendum on how the rights of one minority or another will be addressed. In that case, it would be very easy to come up with such a proposal that, for example, perhaps it should be considered that the same LGBT people do not have the right to live in Lithuania: someone can propose such a referendum, I am afraid that in that case I would also vote for it ”, added the interlocutor.

When asked if he agreed that his colleagues were committed to populism, A. Kubilius agreed.

“You could call it that. No country has seen any major populists who usually have their own populist menu trying to secure the nation’s support. Usually it is named after any inappropriate internal enemy, party or leader, followed by Named external enemies. Very often Brussels is said to be the enemy, followed by the following circle of enemies: Soros, LGBT, “says A. Kubilius.

How do you rate the role of Nausėda?

When asked how he assessed the role of the president in this situation, A. Kubilius assured that Gitan Nausėda should learn leadership from European leaders.

“In my opinion, the President could also assume true European leadership without going to the European Council, and she was also able to listen to the speech of Ursula von der Leyen, where she stated very strongly that the Istanbul Convention is what she seeks to ratify in all countries. European countries, because I believe that women’s rights, to help defend themselves from violence, are a pan-European responsibility.

When we join the European Union, we commit ourselves to comply with all the criteria, including human rights. When many countries join the EU, these commitments are easily forgotten. This path is very dangerous and here leadership, including that of the president, is a very important factor. Running after a majority opinion that here rights should not be granted to minorities, that minorities should listen to the majority, that is the path to the elimination of human rights ”, assures the interlocutor.

We remind you that the bill did not exceed the Seimas barrier. 63 members of the Seimas voted in favor, 58 against, seven deputies abstained.

In another vote, it was decided to return it to the initiators for improvement. 75 Seimas members voted to return the law for improvement and 52 MPs voted to reject the proposals altogether.