Despite the crisis: further EU integration

[Q]

Because of a newsarticle today (for Dutch people: here (http://nos.nl/artikel/184796-euuitbreiding-voor-pvv-niet-langer-taboe.html)) I only now became aware that Croatia and maybe Iceland in all likelyhood will join the EU in 2011, pushing the number of memberstates up from 27 to 28 or 29. Besides these two countries Macedonia and Turkey are also having candidate status (although the membership of Turkey is indefinitely postponed, at the very least until 2015).

Dismissing the EU as a "bosses club" is quite common on the left (as if nationstates aren't "bosses clubs"?), others predict the collapse of the union for the past decades already, claiming unity on a capitalist basis is impossible. Yet, we see a durable union that has not disintegrated but further integrated with each crisis and challenge that it saw, since its inception in 1957. And again with the current crisis in the Eurozone, we see proposals to increase the power of the transnational institutes.

On the other hand there are clear contradictions. Despite the long term, and apparently durable, desire for unification (undoubtedly to play a more competitive role against the US), the unification is posed on a backroom basis, away from popular control. And when we see the working class having a say on it, such as in the referenda in 2005 on the EU constitution, you see a lot of frustration being released against the EU project, which only entrenches the backroom dealings.

So, what should the left response be? Put forward slogans like "No to EU" to try and hook up with the mass resentment?

I think we have a duty to raise the slogans of Marx and Engels once again and call for the "undivided republic", although not in a German context as they did prior to the German unification of 1872, but as a European project of continental unity. On that level we need to start building towards a continental party, a Socialist or Communist Party of the EU, that unites all vanguard workers across the continent.

What do you think about the current enlargement of the EU and how should we deal with it?

[Die Neue Zeit]

I'll post a devil's advocate comment by saying that in center-left policy discussions there is a growing popularization of some sort of policy triangle:

"Democracy"
"Sovereignty"
"Globalization"

The neoliberal interpretation of all three is shallow to be sure, but the idea is that you can't have all three. The "professional left" solves this by dropping "sovereignty," and the corporate right-wing solves this by eroding "democracy."

However, they seem to agree that "working-class" values center around "sovereignty" and "democracy."


So, what should the left response be? Put forward slogans like "No to EU" to try and hook up with the mass resentment?

Another devil's advocate comment is this: why not rephrase the EU integration call on some parts of the left from inter-nationalism (not transnationalism, obviously) to pan-nationalism?

How about "No to WTO," "No to World Bank," and "No to IMF" instead, on the basis of creating a European pan-national identity (but one open to immigrants on the condition of replacing multiculturalism with interculturalism - full fluency in the relevant European native languages)?

[Q]

Another devil's advocate comment is this: why not rephrase the EU integration call on some parts of the left from inter-nationalism (not transnationalism, obviously) to pan-nationalism?

How about "No to WTO," "No to World Bank," and "No to IMF" instead, on the basis of creating a European pan-national identity (but one open to immigrants on the condition of replacing multiculturalism with interculturalism - full fluency in the relevant European native languages)?

Learning the relevant European native languages - English, French, German, Spanish, Italian, Turkish, (Russian?) - is rather impractical. Although I agree with the project of a more European awareness, what you call a pan-national identity. Instead of learning ~10 languages, I propose to learn only 2: your mothertongue and Esperanto as an easy to learn lingua franca. Concluding from this, I believe European communists have a duty to try and revive the Esperanto movement as a mass movement of working class alternative culture.

[Die Neue Zeit]

I said "relevant" for a reason. Nobody expects immigrants to learn Finnish while in Spain. Full fluency means in the language of the local national entity.

[Q]

I said "relevant" for a reason. Nobody expects immigrants to learn Finnish while in Spain. Full fluency means in the language of the local national entity.

That rather undermines your concept of creating a "pan-national European identity", does it not? If you learn Spanish when in Spain, you adopt a Spanish identity, not necessarily a European.

[Die Neue Zeit]

You've got a point there. I was open to both Esperanto and the various domestic European language as a mandatory learning requirement for immigrants, but it takes the likes of krimkrams (sp?) to point out that cultural differences arise mainly out of language breakdowns.

I can just think of the "alternative culture" teaching Esperanto in party's cultural societies... :D

[Q]

Any more takers on this issue?

[mossy noonmann]

Go on then, i'll have a bash!

don't know much about esperanto so i'll leave you two to it :)


On the subject of the Slogan of no to eu, I think that this is basically wrong and just an attempt, as the op said, to tap into popular feelings at the ballot box (didn't go that well if I remember rightly).
Although the Uk may be slightly different case not having the euro and not being part of schengen (sp?) in most of europe the idea of having to change currencey or show your passports at borders seems to belong to an idea of the past that no one wants really return to. On this level the idea of a europe seems to be fairly popular, despite polls showing that a fair proportion of people want to see the return of the franc (mark peseta................). Where, as I think was shown, in the NO votes in france eire and the netherlands clearly people are not happy with the way they are governed from brussels and strasbourg. So I think the slogan raised around the no (from the left not the right) that an 'another europe is possible' is probably the right way to go. I really like the idea of a european party of the radical left, but the left cant even get its act together to stand one candidate at a london by electon, or a united candidate in france............( you are probably thinking that i'm too worried about elections, this is not the case. I just wanted to use them as an example of how difficult getting this broad party together would be) .


On the idea of a new 'pan nationalism' to a caertain extent, to the peolple who who work in brussels or strasbourg, it already exists. That they can go into an opera or a restaurant and not really be too bothered about which language they use, that they all payed with the euro etc. To these people there really is a european culture, the problem they have is that most people are too thick to see it


I think if we want to be serious about 'another europe' then short of an international workers uprising we have to start putting forward concrete demands of europe. Here's a short list off the top of my head : State owned europewide monopolies on water, electricicity, gas, post (add your own)
european minimum wage, universal benefits (health dole etc)
I could go on but you get the generam idea


Now back to the ops question about enlargement, I think that despite what I said above about not many people wanting to go back to a europe of passports and border controls , I still think that the answer is no. no more enlargement to europe in its present form. If we tore up the treaty of rome and started again then all the world could join but I still think there is room for a 'no to a bosses europe' and hopefully this will fit hand in glove with no to a bosses turkey, macedonia etc. lets face it what did the new constitution mean everywhere they had a referendum, there was real space on the left to talk about real subjects, rather than the stereotype ' you vote no , you are racist!


They you go then


any typos are the fault of this fucking french kyeboard :D

[Q]

I think if we want to be serious about 'another europe' then short of an international workers uprising we have to start putting forward concrete demands of europe. Here's a short list off the top of my head : State owned europewide monopolies on water, electricicity, gas, post (add your own)
The EU is not a state quite yet in its own right. I don't see this as a very practical demand. Besides, you're basically just saying that you want an EU bureaucracy getting even more power in peoples minds. And here is the core issue of the EU today: democracy. I think we should focus on democratic demands regaring the EU as to have popular control over the transnational institutions.

european minimum wage, universal benefits (health dole etc)
These demands are indeed very good as they focus on organising the working class on a continental, as opposed to a national, scale.



Now back to the ops question about enlargement, I think that despite what I said above about not many people wanting to go back to a europe of passports and border controls , I still think that the answer is no. no more enlargement to europe in its present form. If we tore up the treaty of rome and started again then all the world could join but I still think there is room for a 'no to a bosses europe' and hopefully this will fit hand in glove with no to a bosses turkey, macedonia etc. lets face it what did the new constitution mean everywhere they had a referendum, there was real space on the left to talk about real subjects, rather than the stereotype ' you vote no , you are racist!
Tearing up the Treaty of Rome would amount to a huge leap backwards and strengthen national reactionary ideologies. I'm opposed to such a course of action and instead pose the need for the European working class to take hold of the EU's institutions.

Furthermore, the integration process is objectively progressive as it unites all workers from across the continent. This is the reason why Marx and Engels also called for German unification, not because of some national romanticism.

[Aesop]

So what are the chances of serbia joining the EU now?
Now that croatia is part of the EU and the history between these two countries, I remember i while back some croatian MP said they will only saty in the EU with serbia's exclusion.

[chegitz guevara]

I don't think the left should oppose the EU, but they should certainly oppose the anti-democratic nature of the EU and the anti-democratic means by which the EU is being forced down everyone's throats.

As for lingua franca's, there are better invented languages than esperanto, which are more inclusive.

[lyng]

Both EU, and current european nation states, were created to facilitate capitalist production and exploitation.
But workimg people can, and have, through struggles, achieve better conditions via these institutions.

So what we can do is try to use the fact that there are two competing levels of power.

Like a refusal of the greek working class to pay the price of the crisis should be easier to organize within the still well defined greek nation.
Or institutionalized civil rights in EU may be better than those in some individual states.



(but one open to immigrants on the condition of replacing multiculturalism with interculturalism - full fluency in the relevant European native languages)?

Not sure what is it that should be open, but excluding anybody from a left project because they lack full fluency in the dominant language, no! (devils advocate?)

[Q]

I don't think the left should oppose the EU, but they should certainly oppose the anti-democratic nature of the EU and the anti-democratic means by which the EU is being forced down everyone's throats.
Exactly this.


As for lingua franca's, there are better invented languages than esperanto, which are more inclusive.

I'm sure there are many possible alternatives, but Esperanto is one of the more viable ones as one of its criticism - that it is a European-centered language - is a strength in this case and comparitatively you learn the language very easily:


The Institute of Cybernetic Pedagogy at Paderborn (Germany) has compared the length of study time it takes Francophone high school students to obtain comparable 'standard' levels in Esperanto, English, German, and Italian.[33] The results were:
2000 hours studying German =
1500 hours studying English =
1000 hours studying Italian =
150 hours studying Esperanto.
Source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esperanto).

I would like to hear alternatives that score better on both parts.