Greek PM Alexis Tsipras & Finance Minister Euclid Tsakalotos at parliamentary session in May, 2016, ahead of Eurogroup meeting which might unlock bailout funds. Press Association\/Yorgos Karahalis. All rights reserved.This article
\naddresses left-wing critics of DiEM25 who claim that DiEM25 is pursuing the
\nwrong objective (to democratise the EU) by means of a faulty strategy (focusing
\nat the European rather than at the national level). <\/i><\/p>\n
But this response,
\nwhile addressed to left-wing supporters of Lexit (the strategy of calling for
\nreferenda in favour of leaving the EU, Brexit-style), is pertinent also to the
\nother political traditions that DiEM25 seeks to unite in the struggle to
\ndemocratise Europe; i.e. authentic liberals, ecologists, feminists, members of
\npirate parties, activists unwilling to be embedded in existing parties, and
\neven progressive conservatives.[1]\n<\/p>\n
In the space of eleven
\nmonths two referenda shook up not only the European Union but also Europe\u2019s left:
\nthe Greek OXI in July 2015 and Brexit in June 2016. Exasperated by the EU\u2019s
\nmixture of authoritarianism and economic failure, a segment of Europe\u2019s left is
\nnow calling for a \u201cbreak with the EU\u201d,[2] a
\nstance that has come to be associated with the term Lexit.[3] DiEM25,
\nthe transnational Democracy in Europe Movement, rejects the Lexit logic and offers
\nan alternative agenda for Europe\u2019s progressives. <\/p>\n
Undoubtedly, the Left has
\na duty to confront, with all its energy and imagination, the EU\u2019s practice of de-politicising
\npolitical decision making. [4] The
\nquestion is not whether the Left must clash with the EU\u2019s establishment and current
\npractices. The question is in what context, and within which overarching
\npolitical narrative, this confrontation should take place. There are three
\noptions on offer. <\/p>\n
One (fast receding) option
\nis the standard variety of euro-reformism, practised typically by social
\ndemocrats who argue for \u2018more democracy\u2019, \u2018more Europe\u2019, \u2018reformed EU
\ninstitutions\u2019 etc. It is an option founded on a fallacy: The EU is not
\nsuffering from a democratic deficit that can be fixed with a \u2018little more
\ndemocracy\u2019 and a few reforms here and there. As I argued in a recent book,[5]
\nthe EU was constructed intentionally as a democracy-free zone designed to keep
\nthe demos out of decision-making and to defer to a cartel of Europe\u2019s big
\nbusiness and the financial sector. To say that the EU suffers from a democratic
\ndeficit is like an astronaut on the moon complaining that she is surrounded by
\nan oxygen deficit…<\/p>\n
The EU\u2019s institutions
\nare incapable of being reformed through the standard process of
\ninter-governmental deliberations and gradual treaty changes. For this reason,
\ncalls for \u2018more Europe\u2019 are misguided since, under the present EU regime and
\ninstitutions, \u2018more Europe\u2019 and gradualist reforms will result in the
\nformalisation and legalisation of Europe\u2019s Austerity Union along the lines of
\nwhat I have described as the Sch\u00e4uble Plan. This will, in turn, deepen the crisis
\nafflicting Europe\u2019s weakest citizens, enhance the appeal of the xenophobic rightwing and, in any case, speed up the EU\u2019s disintegration. If this is right, and
\nI believe it is, then democrats have no alternative than to spearhead a head-on
\nclash with the EU\u2019s establishment. Which brings us to the second and the third
\noptions. <\/p>\n
The second option is,
\nof course, the Lexit route. Tariq Ali has eloquently made the case, amongst
\nothers. [6]
\nStathis Kouvelakis, post-Brexit, sums up the
\nposition thus:
\n\u201cSo, we have to play the referendum game, while blocking the forces of the
\nxenophobic and nationalist Right from winning hegemony and diverting the
\npopular revolt.\u201d In short, to beat the xenophobic right\u2019s misanthropy we have
\nto join their call for referenda that will take our nation-states out of the
\nEU. <\/p>\n
This (Lexit) option
\nraises concerns regarding its realism and probity. Is its agenda feasible? In
\nother words, is it a realistic prospect that, by (in Kouvelakis\u2019 words) calling
\nfor referenda to leave the EU, the left can block \u201cthe forces of the xenophobic
\nand nationalist Right from winning hegemony and diverting the popular revolt\u201d? And,
\nis such a campaign consistent with the left\u2019s fundamental principles? DiEM25
\nbelieves that the answer to both questions is negative and, for this reason,
\nopposes the Lexit option. Let me explain these two answers before briefly
\ndiscussing DiEM25\u2019s alternative proposal (the third option below).<\/p>\n
The left used to be
\ngood at separating static from dynamic analyses. Since Marx, drawing upon
\nHegel, prioritised process over outcomes, the left learned how to take into
\naccount the direction of change, not just the various states of the world. In
\nthe case of the EU, this is crucial. For example, the position we should have
\ntaken before the common market, or the Eurozone, were created cannot be the
\nsame once these institutions were in place. It was, therefore, perfectly
\nconsistent <\/p>\n
Even more
\nsignificantly, it makes a huge difference whether our starting point is a
\nborderless Europe (in which European workers exercise free movement) or a
\nEurope like that of the early 1950s where nation-states controlled borders and
\ncould create at will a new category of Italian or Greek proletarians called
\ngastarbeiters.<\/p>\n
This last point
\nhighlights the dangers of Lexit. Given that the EU has established free
\nmovement, Lexit involves acquiescence to (if not actual support for) its ending
\nand for the re-establishment of national border controls, complete with barbed
\nwire and armed guards. Granted that, if we were to re-run history, the left
\nshould demand common minimum wages in exchange for its support for the Single
\nMarket, do supporters of Lexit truly believe that, today, the left can win the
\nbattle for hegemony against the xenophobic right by endorsing the latter\u2019s call
\nfor building new fences and ending free movement? Similarly, do they truly
\nbelieve that the left will win the discursive and policy war against the fossil
\nfuel industry by supporting the re-nationalisation of environmental policy?
\nUnder the Lexit banner, in my estimation, the left is heading for monumental
\ndefeats on both fronts.<\/p>\n
And so we come to the
\nthird option, the one proposed by DiEM25. It rejects both the euro-reformist
\ncalls for \u2018more democracy\u2019 and \u2018more Europe\u2019 as well as Lexit\u2019s support for
\nreferenda to abolish the EU level altogether and return full control to
\nnation-states. Instead, DiEM25 proposes a pan-European movement of civil and
\ngovernmental disobedience with which to bring on a surge of democratic
\nopposition to the way European elites do business at the local, national and EU
\nlevels. <\/p>\n
At DiEM25 we do not
\nbelieve that the EU will be reformed through the usual channels of EU policy
\nmaking, and certainly not by bending the existing \u2018rules\u2019 on budget deficits by
\nhalf or one per cent of national income (as the governments of France, Italy,
\nSpain and Portugal are doing). Vicente Navarro recently wrote that \u201cparliaments still have
\npower, including the power to question austerity policies\u201d. This is correct, as
\nthe first five months of the Syriza government demonstrated. But Navarro is,
\nregretfully, wrong when using as an example the new Portuguese
\ngovernment which, he claims, \u201cstopped the application of the austerity policies
\nimposed by the European Commission\u201d. I only wish that were true. Before being
\ngiven the mandate to form a government by the troika-friendly right-wing
\nPresident, the parties of the Portuguese left had to sign up to the previous
\ngovernments\u2019 \u201ccommitments to the Eurogroup\u201d \u2013 that is, they capitulated to the
\ntroika\u2019s existing program on Day One and confined themselves to delaying, for a
\nyear or so, the introduction of fresh austerity measures.[7]<\/p>\n
In short, yes, national parliaments and
\ngovernments have power \u2013 the power to do what our Syriza government did during
\nthe Athens Spring, before capitulating on the night of the OXI referendum. But
\nwith the European Central Bank on the ready to start a bank run in retaliation,
\neven to close down its banking system, a progressive national government can
\nonly use this power if it is prepared for rupture with the EU troika. This is
\nwhere we, at DiEM25, agree with the
\nLexit camp: a clash with the EU establishment is inescapable. <\/p>\n
Where we disagree
\nwith Lexit proponents is in their assumption that this clash can take only one
\nform: a campaign to leave the EU. We reject this assumption wholeheartedly and
\ncounter-propose a clash with the European establishment based on a campaign of
\nwilfully disobeying the unenforceable EU \u2018rules\u2019 at the municipal, regional and
\nnational levels while making no move whatsoever to leave the EU. <\/p>\n
Undoubtedly, the EU
\ninstitutions will threaten us (i.e. rebel governments and finance ministers
\nadopting DiEM25\u2019s agenda) with expulsion, with bank runs, bank \u2018holidays\u2019 etc.,
\njust as they threatened the Greek government (and me personally) with Grexit in
\n2015. At that point it is crucial not to succumb to the fear of \u2018exit\u2019 but to
\nlook them in the eye and say: <\/p>\n
\u201cBring it on! The only thing that we are truly scared
\nof is your sole offering: the perpetuation of the debt-deflationary spiral that
\ndrives masses of Europeans into hopelessness and places them under the spell of
\nbigotry.\u201d <\/p>\n
If we do not blink,
\nthen either they will blink (in which case the EU will be transformed) or the
\nEU will be torn asunder by its own Establishment. If the Establishment (the
\nCommission, the European Central Bank, Berlin and Paris) dismembers the EU to
\npunish progressive governments that refused to abide by their inane policies,
\nthis will galvanise progressive politics across Europe in a manner that Lexit
\ncould never do. <\/p>\n
Consider the profound
\ndifference between the following two situations: <\/p>\n
(A) (B) It is the difference (A) Clashing against the EU establishment in a (B) Walking hand-in-hand with nationalisms that Naturally, part of the In short, DiEM25, Eurogroup meeting, May 2016.Geert Vanden Wijngaert\/Press Association. All rights reserved.<\/i><\/p>\n The Left\u2019s traditional DiEM25 proposes a This leftwing The left, lest we forget, To support his In the same Gramscian Finally, one may cheekily Britain's PM Theresa May and Pres. European Council Donald Tusk talk BREXIT in London, Sept.8,2016. Kirsty Wigglesworth\/Press Association. All rights reserved.<\/i><\/p>\n Progressives have a DiEM25 rejects the To recap, to those who \u201cThe EU will be democratised. This was, and remains, DiEM25\u2019s antidote to euro-TINA DiEM25\u2019s Progressive DiEM25\u2019s Progressive The EU is at an DiEM25 believes that dropping So, what should \u00a0<\/p>\n Notes<\/strong><\/p>\n [1] In the words of its [2] See Stathis Kouvelakis\u2019 article entitled \u2018The EU Cannot Be Reformed\u2019, June 26, 2016<\/p>\n [3] i.e. a left-wing call, and support, for referenda [4] I stand convinced that many other European [5] And the Weak Suffer What They Must? Europe, Austerity [6] See here for a debate between us on Brexit and here for another speech he gave in favour of the Lexit [7] There is a second qualm I have with [8] The EU\u2019s and the euro\u2019s break-up will most [9] Speaking from experience, right-wing nationalists in This piece has been published in several media outlets and languages across Europe <\/em>since September 5, 2016<\/em>: Jacobin (US), P\u00fablico (Spain), Neues Deutschland (Germany), France\u2019s Liberation and Italy\u2019s Il Manifesto.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Greek PM Alexis Tsipras & Finance Minister Euclid Tsakalotos at parliamentary session in May, 2016, ahead of Eurogroup meeting which might unlock bailout funds. Press Association\/Yorgos Karahalis. All rights reserved.This article addresses left-wing critics of DiEM25 who claim that DiEM25 is pursuing the wrong objective (to democratise the EU) by means of a faulty strategy…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1217","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1217","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1217"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1217\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1217"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1217"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/googmn.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1217"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\nThe EU
\nestablishment threatening progressive Europeanist governments with \u2018exit\u2019 when they
\nrefuse to obey its authoritarian incompetence, and<\/em> <\/p>\n
\nProgressive
\nnational parties or governments campaigning alongside the xenophobic right for
\n\u2018exit\u2019. <\/p>\n
\nbetween: <\/p>\n
\nmanner that preserves the spirit of internationalism, demands pan-European
\naction, and sets us fully apart from the xenophobic right, and<\/em><\/p>\n
\nwill, inescapably, reinforce the xenophobic right while allowing the EU to portray
\nthe left as populists insufficiently distinguishable from Nigel Farage, Marine
\nLe Pen etc. <\/p>\n
\nDiEM25 agenda must involve developing strategies that will allow our cities,
\nregions and nation-states to rebel against a EU establishment that retaliates
\nwith threats of \u2018exit\u2019, or \u2018expulsion\u2019. Another part of the same agenda must
\ninclude plans to deal with the EU\u2019s collapse or disintegration if its Establishment
\nis foolish enough to activate these threats against disobedient national
\ngovernments. But this is profoundly different to initiating the EU\u2019s
\ndisintegration as the Left\u2019s own objective.<\/p>\n
\nrefuses to endorse \u2018exit\u2019 as an end-in-itself, or even to deploy it as a
\nthreat. But we shall not be deterred from governmental disobedience when
\nfaced with the threat of \u2018expulsion\u2019 or forced \u2018exit\u2019.<\/p>\nInternationalism, the EU and the nation-state<\/h2>\n
\ninternationalism is a key ingredient of DiEM25, along with other constituent
\ndemocratic traditions from a variety of political projects (including
\nprogressive liberalism, feminist and ecological movements, the \u2018pirate\u2019 parties
\netc.). DiEM25\u2019s position on the EU reflects precisely this type of
\ninternationalism. I hope my comrades on the left will permit me to remind them
\nthat when Marx and Engels were adopting their \u2018proletarians of the world unite\u2019
\nslogan they were not rejecting the importance of national culture or of the
\nnation-state. They were rejecting the idea of a \u2018national interest\u2019 and of the
\nview that struggles must prioritise the realm of the nation-state. <\/p>\n
\nrebellion to deliver authentic democracy at the levels of local government, national
\ngovernments and the EU. We do not prioritise the EU over the
\nnational level, just like we do not prioritise the national over the regional
\nor the municipal level. Alas, several European leftists insist on a reverse
\nprioritisation: that of the national over the EU level. Stefano Fassina, for example, in a reply to an article in la
\nReppublica by Lorenzo Marsili and myself, takes us, and DiEM25 to task by arguing
\n(quoting Ralf Dahrendorf) that democracy at the EU level \u201cis not possible\u2026 because
\na \u2018European people\u2019, a European demos for a European democracy, doesn\u2019t exist….\u201d
\n\u201cAmong the idealists and the euro-fanatics\u201d, Fassina continues \u201csome still
\nthink that the European Union can transform itself into a kind of nation-state,
\nonly bigger: the United States of Europe.\u201d <\/p>\n
\nobjection to DiEM25\u2019s call for a pan-European movement is interesting and
\npuzzling. In effect, it argues that democracy is impossible on a supranational
\nscale because a demos must be characterised by national and cultural homogeneity. This leftwing objection to DiEM25\u2019s call for a pan-European movement is interesting and puzzling. In effect, it argues that democracy is impossible on a supranational scale because a demos must be characterised by national and cultural homogeneity.I can just imagine Marx\u2019s rage at hearing this! Just as I can imagine the
\npuzzlement of leftwing internationalists who dreamt of, and struggled for, a
\ntransnational republic from the Atlantic to as far to the East as possible. <\/p>\n
\ntraditionally opposed the bourgeois belief in a one-to-one relationship between
\na nation and a sovereign parliament. The left counter-argued that identity is
\nsomething we create through political struggle (class struggle, the struggle
\nagainst patriarchy, the struggle for smashing gender and sexual stereotypes,
\nemancipation from Empire etc.). DiEM25, therefore, by calling for a
\npan-European campaign of disobedience with the transnational elites, in order
\nto create the European demos that will bring about Europe\u2019s democracy,
\nis in tune with the left\u2019s traditional approach \u2013 the very approach that is
\nunder fire from Fassina and others who argue for the return to a
\none-nation-one-parliament-one-sovereignty politics, with internationalism being
\nreduced to \u201cco-operation\u201d between Europe\u2019s nation-states.<\/p>\n
\nprioritisation of the national level, Fassina evokes Antonio Gramsci and his
\nadvocacy of the \u201ccategory of the \u2018national-popular\u2019 to give popular roots and
\nhegemonic capacity to that Italian Communist Party, which in its symbol had the
\nred flag with a hammer and sickle resting on the flag of Italy\u201d. Gramsci\u2019s
\npoint was, indeed, that, to achieve progress at the international level it was
\nnecessary to create a progressive movement at the level of the town and of the
\nnation. It was not, however Gramsci\u2019s intention, to prioritise the national
\nover the transnational level and to argue that transnational democratic
\ninstitutions are either infeasible or undesirable. <\/p>\n
\nspirit, DiEM25 insists that our European rebellion should happen everywhere, in
\ntowns, regions, nation-state capitals and in Brussels, without prioritising any
\nlevel over any other. Only through this pan-European network of rebel cities, rebel
\nprefectures and rebel governments can a progressive movement become hegemonic
\nin Italy, in Greece, in England, indeed anywhere.<\/p>\n
\nask: \u201cWhy stop at the EU level? As internationalists, why don\u2019t you campaign
\nfor worldwide democracy?\u201d Our answer is that we do campaign for
\ndemocracy everywhere and from an internationalist point of view. Indeed, DiEM25
\nis building strong links with Bernie Sanders\u2019 \u2018political revolution\u2019 in the
\nUnited States and is even signing up members in Latin America, Australia, even
\nAsia. But, given that history has, for better or for worse, delivered a
\nborderless EU, with common policies on the environment and a variety of other
\nrealms, the (by definition internationalist) left must defend this
\nabsence of borders, the existing EU commons of climate change policy, even the
\nErasmus programme that gives young Europeans the opportunity to mingle in a
\nborderless educational system. Turning against these splendid artefacts of an
\notherwise regressive EU is not consistent with what the left ought to be about.<\/p>\nDiEM25\u2019s progressive agenda for Europe <\/h2>\n
\nduty to lead the fight for re-politicising political decision-making and
\ndemocratising this reclaimed political realm. Donald Trump in the United
\nStates, right-wing Brexiters in Britain, Le Pen in France etc. rose up as a result of an economic crisis that was brought on by the crisis of
\nfinancialisation and of liberal democracies that can no longer function as
\nliberal democracies in the era of financialisation\u2019s crisis. The question for
\nEurope\u2019s leftwing, for progressive liberals, greens etc. is, now, whether this
\nstruggle, this project, should take the form of a campaign to leave the EU (e.g.
\nLexit) or, as DiEM25 suggests, of a campaign of civil, civic and governmental
\ndisobedience within but in confrontation with the EU. <\/p>\n
\neuro-loyalists\u2019 campaign to reform the EU by working within the framework of
\nthe EU\u2019s establishment where change is either glacial or in the wrong
\ndirection. We also reject Lexit\u2019s rationale of turning the EU\u2019s disintegration
\ninto our objective. DiEM25 was formed to create a genuine alternative: a borderless
\nsurge of unifying politics across Europe (EU and non-EU countries alike) based
\non an alliance of democrats across various political traditions (including the left but not confined to it) and at all levels of political engagement (towns,
\ncities, regions and states). <\/p>\n
\nberate DiEM25 and its call for a pan-European democratic movement as utopian,
\nour answer is that a transnational, pan-European democracy remains a legitimate,
\nrealistic long-term goal, one that is in concert with the left\u2019s time honoured
\ninternationalism. But this objective must be accompanied by pragmatism and a
\nprecise plan for immediate action:<\/p>\n\n
\n\u2018more Europe\u2019, under the present circumstances, translates into the iron cage
\nof institutionalised austerity envisaged by the EU\u2019s establishment. <\/li>\n
\ncomprehensive set of policies and actions) of how we plan to re-deploy Europe\u2019s
\nexisting institutions in order to stem the economic crisis, reverse inequality
\nand reinvigorate hope. <\/li>\n
\nprovisions for keeping internationalism alive in the event that the EU
\nestablishment\u2019s incompetent authoritarianism causes the EU\u2019s disintegration.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
\nOr it will disintegrate!\u201d<\/p>\n
\nDiEM25\u2019s guiding pronouncement. We cannot predict which of the two
\n(democratisation or disintegration) will occur. So, we struggle for the former
\nwhile preparing for the latter. And we do this by working towards a Progressive
\nAgenda for Europe that is put together both at the grassroots level and with
\nthe help of progressive experts. Its purpose? To defeat the worst enemy of
\ndemocracy in Europe: euro-TINA, the reactionary dogma that there can be no
\ngenuinely progressive alternative to current policies within a united Europe. <\/p>\n
\nis, indeed, the Progressive Agenda for Europe which we will be rolling out, in
\nconsultation with local, regional and national actors, over the next eighteen
\nmonths. Putting together our Progressive Agenda for Europe, throughout the
\ncontinent and its surrounding isles, is our way of demonstrating to defeated,
\ndisheartened and disillusioned Europeans that, astonishingly, there is
\nan alternative.\u00a0 <\/p>\n
\nAgenda for Europe will be pragmatic, radical and comprehensive. It will comprise
\npolicies that can be implemented immediately to stabilise Europe\u2019s social economy,
\nwhile: <\/p>\n\n
\ncouncils, prefectures and national parliaments, <\/li>\n
\ndesigns that will reduce the human cost in case the euro collapses and the EU
\nfragments, and<\/em><\/li>\n
\nprocess that enables Europeans to generate a European identity with which to
\nbolster their reinvigorated national cultures, parliaments and local
\nauthorities.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
\nAgenda for Europe aims at a unifying campaign with which a European Progressive
\nInternational can counter the Nationalist International that is now going from
\nstrength to strength. <\/p>\nConclusion<\/h2>\n
\nadvanced stage of disintegration. There are two prospects. <\/p>\n\n
\nreturn (yet) and can, still, be democratised, stabilised, rationalised and
\nhumanised <\/li>\n
\nand incapable of being democratised. Therefore, its disintegration is certain, as
\nis the clear and present danger of Europe\u2019s descent into a postmodern version
\nof the deflationary 1930s[8]<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
\nthe campaign to democratise the EU would be a major error for progressives in
\neither <\/em>case. If is still possible
\nto fashion a democratic EU (a prospect that is wearing thin by the minute), it
\nwould be a pity not to try. But, even if we are convinced that the existing EU
\nis beyond democratisation, and thus salvation, to abandon the struggle to
\ndemocratise the EU (and to turn \u2018exit\u2019 and \u2018disintegration\u2019 into an end-in-itself)
\nwill play into the hands of the only political force capable of benefitting
\nfrom such an agenda: the intransigent, xenophobic right.[9] <\/p>\n
\nprogressives do? DiEM25\u2019s answer is:<\/p>\n\n
\ncross-border, lines all over Europe for a democratic Union \u2013 even if we do not
\nbelieve that the EU can, or ought to, survive in its current form<\/li>\n
\nincompetence<\/li>\n
\ndisobedience across Europe<\/li>\n
\nstructure how a pan-European democracy can work at all levels and in all
\njurisdictions<\/li>\n
\nEurope which includes sensible, modest, convincing proposals for \u2018fixing\u2019 the
\nEU (the euro even) and<\/em> for managing
\nprogressively the EU\u2019s and the euro\u2019s disintegration if and when the
\nEstablishment brings it on. <\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
\nManifesto, DiEM25 appeals to European democrats that \u201c\u2026come
\nfrom every part of the continent and are united by different cultures,
\nlanguages, accents, political party affiliations, ideologies, skin colours,
\ngender identities, faiths and conceptions of the good society\u201d.<\/p>\n
\nproposing exit from the EU<\/p>\n
\ndemocrats, greens and liberals, who do not think of themselves as on the left,
\nalso have a duty to confront the EU\u2019s authoritarian incompetence.<\/p>\n
\nand the Threat of Global Stability, London: Bodley Head and NY: Nation Books, 2016<\/p>\n
\nagenda more generally.<\/p>\n
\nNavarro\u2019s article on a matter unrelated to Lexit: Vicente misunderstood my
\nUniversal Basic Income proposal. It is not envisaged as a substitute for the
\nstandard social security\/welfare system. The UBI I favour will be funded not
\nfrom taxation but by transferring equity over all<\/em> capital to a social trust (e.g. 10% of all shares of all listed
\ncompanies) from which UBI payments will be drawn. But this is best left for
\nanother discussion.\u00a0 <\/p>\n
\ncertainly cause the creation of at least two Europes. One will begin at the
\nriver Rhine and expand eastward (north of the Alps) to the Baltics and the
\nUkraine, based on a revived version of the Deutsche Mark whose unstoppable
\nappreciation will generates deflation and mass unemployment. The other,
\nLatin-Catholic Europe (with or without the addition of Greece), will revolve
\naround depreciating currencies that spearhead acute stagflation (a combination
\nof high inflation and high unemployment). In this bleak economic environment,
\nEU and non-EU countries (like Britain, Norway etc.) will become cesspools of
\nright-wing bigotry. It is the post-modern 1930s that I am referring to.<\/p>\n
\nNorthern Europe would be mightily helped in bolstering their campaign if I were
\nto call upon my fellow Greeks to vote in favour of Grexit. Similarly, with
\nother Spanish, Italian, Portuguese left-wingers calling upon their compatriots
\nto exit the EU. In contrast, DiEM25\u2019s call for a pan-European, internationalist
\ncampaign of civic and governmental disobedience within and against the current
\nEU denies them access to disaffected Europeans.<\/p>\n