The state, by nature, does not trust its citizens; they might realize what their rights are or, even worse, suddenly decide to claim them. This may be the reason why the state often demands supposed rights, not real ones. These supposed rights, when acquired, curiously end up giving the government more power. In the meantime, the government takes away our fundamental rights hoping (some times rightly) that by getting us used to not having them, we will end up forgetting and abandoning them.

 

Why do I say this? I say it because there are many examples. In the past, society used to trust the state less. The first time England attempted to impose a land registry many citizens thought it would be the beginning of a military dictatorship. Today there are policies far more invasive to our privacy, yet society barely reacts. Moreover, like I just said, it is the state that does not trust its citizens.

 

My attention was caught by a case Gabriel Calzada wrote about recently in The Spain Herald. There is a European law that forbids pharmaceutical companies from giving consumers direct information about their products. It is not the only case. Advertising tobacco is no allowed either, and it has recently become even more restricted. In Spain you cannot advertise law firms. What is the reason for such an attack on freedom of expression? Why prevent consumers from obtaining direct information from companies so that, in a responsible way, they can make the decision they judge best?

 

Maybe the EU would prefer citizens don’t make informed and responsible decisions. That is precisely what us consumers use to get by. If we are denied the information others can give us, the means, in this case, for us to find and take the most efficient medicines are being unfairly taken from us. Our health is at stake; our forced ignorance will make us lose out on the newest and most efficient medicines. And it is all because the EU bureaucrats want companies not to inform consumers about their products.

 

What is the reason for this nonsense? What is the objective of our beloved Brussels civil servants? It turns out that if consumers could follow up on an industry’s innovations and improvements, if they could freely and responsibly choose new more efficient medicines, the cost of the public health care system would become even more expensive. And instead of acknowledging to citizens that social security is a scam financed with everybody’s money, instead of ending it and giving society the free initiative that works so well when it is allowed, they create an information vacuum. It is better that consumers don’t find out about technological innovation because the cost could be so high it could make the health care scams explode.

 

This is proved by the section of the law that reads: “The member countries can forbid in their territory advertising of medical products to the general audience, whose cost will be reimbursed;” that is the state will pay the final cost. If there is any doubt about this clause’s objective, it turns out it is called the “budget clause.” Where is freedom of expression? Where are Europeans’ health, an objective so much and so falsely mentioned by the EU? They are ashamedly missing. What matters to Euro-crats is that their racket does not blow up.

 

I think is time for us to show our distrust and start demanding our rights, such as the right to be informed freely and be able to make responsible decisions.