European Union

[Arm Cathartha na hÉireann]

What is the left's consensous on the EU? Are there any real benifits to it? I personally am againsts the EU at least in its current form as it only appears to benifit the capitialist classes and not the workers. However right wing groups seem to be the most vocal in their oppostion to it (In the UK anyway) and people seem to conflate oppostion to the EU with racism becuse of this making debating it rather difficult.

Also on a side note is there are any good articles written from a marxist perspective on the EU which would be worth reading?

[Prinskaj]

It is a capitalist and bureaucratic union, that tries to puppet any nation within its reach. And not to forget, the dangerous centralisation of power.
Hmm... When i think about it, then it sound a lot like the Soviet Union... :confused:

[Arlekino]

I don't think so like Soviet Union at all. Free market and is calling Capitalist.

[Ballyfornia]

In all fairness you'd have to be an eejit to think that European Union is like the Soviet Union. Nearly every if not all all decisions they make are in favour of big business.

[Искра]

I have a bunch of good Marxist articles against EU (even anarchist ones!) but they are only in Croatian.

Left in Croatia (and I mean only on radical anti-parliament left - from Marxist-Leninists to anarchists) is against European Union.

Why?

EU is dictatorship of capital. EU means precarious work, unemployement, liberalisation, privatisation, destruction of industry/production (and you can't have economy without it) etc.

We are all for international solidarity between EU's working class, but that's not what EU's about.

[eric922]

I do think it is rather telling that the EU decided to establish a currency before creating some kind of legislature. That's the capitalists for you.

[Prinskaj]

Dear Rasyte and Ballyfornia
I am sorry that i didn't make my little joke more apparent.
Of course the Soviet Union isn't like the EU. The European Union is not totalitarian, not state capitalist and isn't using warfare to expansion it's territory.
But it is expansionist and very much at that, but uses capital instead of arms.
And the reason i didn't call it "Free market capitalist" was because i used to term capitalist ambiguous, to imply both free market- and state capitalism.

[Die Neue Zeit]

The Weekly Worker tends to have the best position when it comes to the European Union, since it advocates greater, more political integration.

[Smyg]

Abolish Fort Europa, I say.

[Искра]

Jesus Christ. “More political integration”? Like what? Creating some kind of “European” “super state”? Only an idiot or an utopist pothead could advocate something like that, because obviously he doesn’t know for example what point of a neoliberal state is. Also, I find pretty reactionary that someone who considers himself a leftist is advocating European Union – in any way.

First, EU is not near a Soviet Union. Soviet Union was a state and a state capitalist regime. EU is not a state. It’s an economical project in a first place, as it started as some kind of a customs union between France, countries of Benelux and West Germany. As years passed by EU changed, but still it is an economical market oriented project.

Second, when neoliberalism hit the hype, EU becomes neoliberal project. What does that mean? That means that in so-called negotiations with candidate states EU is demanding them to adjust their markets (especially labor market!) to neoliberal dogmas. Why do you think that all these students in Europe are angry? It’s because of that – because of neoliberal dogmas implemented on universities, labor market etc. Main EU labor policy is called flexisecurity, read more about that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexicurity

Third, EU is not some kind of a democratic paradise. Look at how they threat minorities; look at how they threat immigrants etc. In the end look at how do “powerful nations” with more political and economical power make all decisions. EU is an imperialist project of economically stronger countries. The moment that new country finishes negotiations it’s colonized by MNK’s and stuff. Their industry is liberalized and workers rights are destroyed... unemployment becomes bigger etc. Look at for example what happened to polish shipyards! The same things will happen into Croatia.

So, to conclude. EU is something that every leftist has to fight! No meter if your country is in EU or it’s out. Only reformist idiots and liberals support this.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

The Weekly Worker tends to have the best position when it comes to the European Union, since it advocates greater, more political integration.

Are they in favour of the European Union? There's nothing wrong with a collaboration or for example a future unified socialist union or whatnot, but the European Union is so far beyond salvage that its utter destruction is the only choice that can reasonably be made; any form of new collaboration can only be built once this monstrous supranational capitalist coöperative is destroyed.

[Jose Gracchus]

DNZ and Paul Cockshott want to take the European Central Bank and fill its board partially with randomly selected workers from across Europe, have them index the euro to labor hours, and think this will precipitate a class for itself building socialism.

[Die Neue Zeit]

^^^ Why did you omit the "financial services monopoly" part for the ECB? :confused:

[Jose Gracchus]

I know that makes a huge difference to you, but I guarantee you it doesn't change anyone else's evaluation of the overall concept. I wouldn't worry about it.

[DarkPast]

Socialists have dreamt of a united Europe since the very beginnings of the movement. But the Europe they envisioned is a union of the working people with no inter-national borders, where the people can determine what is to be done through direct democracy.

The EU doesn't even resemble such a Europe. It is an association of international capitalists, where the working class is forced into an inferior, exploited position and where the less well-developed countries are exploited in a neocolonial manner by the more developed ones. It is an association where the extant inequalities between classes and nations are only made worse - regardless of the image of "tolerance" and "fairness" the EU elites like to preach.

[Devrim]

So, to conclude. EU is something that every leftist has to fight! No meter if your country is in EU or it’s out. Only reformist idiots and liberals support this.

I don't think that it is the task of revolutionaries to put forward a programme of how to manage capitalism, which is essentially what the discussion about the EU is an argument over.

Incidentally in this country, much of the left supports EU membership, as they believe it will lead to Turkey becoming more democratic, having more respect for human rights and minorities etc...

Devrim

[Reed]

I'm assuming the EU would push for a centralized or more integrated military/police force which begs the question how would revolution even be possible if EU member states can draft in police/army from neighbouring states? Unless mass spontaneous revolt occurred across Europe they could indefinitely play whack-a-mole with an overwhelming EU force.

[Искра]

I don't think that it is the task of revolutionaries to put forward a programme of how to manage capitalism, which is essentially what the discussion about the EU is an argument over.
I wasn't puting a programme to manage capitalism, but I do agree with your argument. I'm aware that without EU we in Croatia still have capitalism (neoliberal as EU). Still, on a small level being outside of EU gives you greater opportunities to win certain fights which would resoult in developing a movement.

Anyhow, no matter if you are in or out of EU struggle is almost the same.

Left shouldn't support EU, because there no reason for us to support capitalist assotiation, but still that doesn't mean that because of that we should get to together with our national bourgeuisie or stop fighting capitalism on national/local level. After all it's all the same shit, but EU needs to be demasked, because if you do that in public you are creating yourself a space for demasking capitalism and liberal democracy.


Incidentally in this country, much of the left supports EU membership, as they believe it will lead to Turkey becoming more democratic, having more respect for human rights and minorities etc...Turkey and its membership in EU is quite a story, which actually shows that EU can't "make you more democratic". Arguments against Turkey are based mostly on "cultural" and "racial" theories of who's actually an European and who's not. But why do people think that EU will make someone respect human rights and minorities when for example France do not have chategory of national minority or when they kick out Roma people out like that?

[Die Neue Zeit]

I'm assuming the EU would push for a centralized or more integrated military/police force which begs the question how would revolution even be possible if EU member states can draft in police/army from neighbouring states? Unless mass spontaneous revolt occurred across Europe they could indefinitely play whack-a-mole with an overwhelming EU force.

Organizing at the EU level (i.e., including a Communist Party of the European Union) is already a must.

[WorkingClassGirl]

The european union is an organization of several nations, which want to use each other for their own national interest. They unite to get stronger in global imperialist competition of nations.
Of course the strong nations take more advantage than the weak.

Because I am against the imperialism( read the gegenstandpunkt book it is free and available in english; but i am not allowed to link yet), I am against an institution, which is a institution of imperialism.

I am not talking about Lenin's theory, but about the materialistic explaination of ideal total capitalist( is this the right translation for "ideeller gesamtkapitalist"?) and its action outside its territory.

[rundontwalk]

I think that, in principle, regional intergration isn't such a bad idea as long as a few kinks are worked out. Like, say if a North American Union was implemented it would help a lot in bringing Canadians, Americans, and Mexicans together because of the tearing down of borders.

So I don't think the EU should be outright abolished. It should just be made democratic and less top heavy.

[Thirsty Crow]

I completely agree with Devrim's assertion that it's not the job of communists to propose ways to manage capitalism.
That being said, I should also emphasize that I strongly believe that the existing institutional framework of the Union is entirely unsuitable for a hypothetical European workers' state, or in other words, for an formalized alliance of national territories under direct workers' rule.

In this sense, it's very interesting to view were things are heading in EU with the passing of the package of six laws specifically aimed at strenghtening the role of the entirely uncontrollable European Commission in enforcing policies of austerity: http://www.irishleftreview.org/2011/09/30/austerity-lockedin-eu-economic-governance-package/

I'd recommend everyone here to take a look at this reasonably brief article. It's incredible how there is apparently a self-imposed media silence especially where I live with regard to this development (and the referendum on the admission is very near). Though, I'd also isolate certain segments of it:


The implications of the so-called six-pack of economic governance measures are vast. This package represents a qualitative leap forward in terms of the institutionalisation of austerity and neo-liberal economic policies at the heart of the EU and backwards in terms of a further undermining of democracy within the EU structures... ... the six-pack does this by establishing the European Commission as an effective policeman for austerity across Europe. It is also a step towards the fiscal unity that key sections of the establishment believe is necessary in order to save the euro.


Those who breach the targets and ignore warnings and recommendations from the Commission will be faced with a fine, consisting of either an “interest-bearing deposit” or a “non interest-bearing deposit” equivalent to 0.2% of GDP, which will be converted into a fine if the situation does not improve. This fine can then be increased with repeated failure to follow the Commission’s recommendations. These fines will amount to hundreds of millions of euro - being taken out of the pockets of states that are evidently facing real financial difficulties.
The third is the extension of this enforcement mechanism well beyond the strictures of the “Growth and Stability Pact”. Now countries will be monitored not just on their public debt and their annual deficit, but on a range of other measures as part of a “scoreboard” system. The details of what will be measured has still not been revealed, but Commission recommendations are to “cover the main economic policy areas, potentially including fiscal and wage policies, labour markets, product and services markets and financial sector regulation.” (’Prevention and Correction of Macroeconomic imbalances (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&reference=P7-TA-2011-0287&language=EN&ring=A7-2011-0183)‘).



The effect, however, is to remove decision making even further from ordinary people. The role of the Commission from the point of view of the establishment is to articulate a “European” strategy for the capitalist class in Europe. It is able to do this because it is relatively immune from the political pressure that national governments can face - precisely because the Commissioners exist in a bubble in Brussels and don’t have to face election.


Another attack is the stripping of the right to vote from “miscreant” countries on the question of sanctions. So if the Commission proposes that a country be punished by a fine of hundreds of millions of euro for example, that country and all other countries that have been deemed to be acting imprudently and have been subject to sanctions will not have a vote in this decision. You could therefore have a situation where most of the peripheral European countries have their votes taken away from them and it is the Northern European countries who are voting on the sanctions to be applied to these countries.



The other element is how this voting is to take place. The six-pack introduces a new form of voting which is breathtaking in its cynicism. Instead of a straight vote with a need for a majority of countries, or the traditional qualified majority system (which means getting 255 weighted votes out of 345, representing at least two thirds of the countries and at least 62% of the EU population), the qualified majority system is turned on its head. Now it is referred to as “Reverse qualified majority” voting. What this means is that the Council is presumed to agree with the sanctions, unless a qualified majority vote against it. This means that to overturn the sanctions, you would need to get a huge majority to vote against it. So even if the peripheral European nations still had their votes, they wouldn’t have a chance of defeating it if the major northern European governments were in favour of it! Of course, this was fully endorsed by the Parliament, and the agreed document (Enforcement measures to correct excessive macroeconomic imbalances in euro area (http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&reference=P7-TA-2011-0292&language=EN&ring=A7-2011-0182) ) argues that the procedure for the application of the sanctions should be “construed in such a way that the application of the sanctionon those Member States would be the rule and not the exception.”

[Q]

Over in this group (http://www.revleft.com/vb/group.php?groupid=411), I made the following argumentation:


A party isn't based on what is "most practical", but primarily on the "organisational units" (for lack of a better phrase) of our class. Within capitalism that is primarily the state and the EU is becoming more and more a state in its own right.

Secondly communists recognise that a positive alternative to cpitalism is not possible on a national scale. An isolated revolution in the UK, France, Germany, let alone in any of the smaller countries, would be disastrous within a short amount of time. A positive socialist alternative on a European scale is however possible I think. Hence why we need a European republic. This is another reason why we should aim to organise the working class on a continental scale, instead of merely on a national one.

Thirdly, it tackles the specific problem of the far left. Europe is littered with thousands of political sects and medium sized parties. A trans-European unification movement to form one party could overcome this problem.
The question of wether you are against or for the EU carries no weight if your alternative is either minimalism (collapsing into national "alternatives") or maximalism ("for the united socialist states of Europe!"). We have to tackle the battleground as it exists. Concretely, the battle for democracy was never as huge or important for the success of the worldrevolution, as it is now in the EU. As long as we don't take up this issue, we will remain in either minimalism or maximalism, with nothing concrete in between.

[Thirsty Crow]

Concretely, the battle for democracy was never as huge or important for the success of the worldrevolution, as it is now in the EU. As long as we don't take up this issue, we will remain in either minimalism or maximalism, with nothing concrete in between.
What does this centuries old phrase concretely mean in this context? Does it refer to the ever diminishing possibilities of democratic practices as indicated by the recent shift in EU legislation (the article above)?

[Искра]

Ok, I decided to take some time to write better post in this thread (with a spell-check :) and patience), because I’m not happy with my previous posts, because they are shallow and they could be misinterpreted...

I do agree with Devrim and Menocchio that it’s not a communist job to advocate strategies/ways of managing capitalism.

I’ll put everything again in Croatian context, since I’m writing from Croatia: it really doesn’t matter if Croatia enters EU or not, because with or without EU Croatia is still capitalist society with all “hip” neoliberal policies implemented. When I say that I’m “against EU” that doesn’t mean that put my trust into strong Croatian national-state or something like that. I have no illusions when it comes to capitalism and I’m not advocating Keynesian welfare state or something like that when I say that EU is neoliberal project. I’m against EU because its capitalist project and I think that it’s important to de-mask EU as a project, because here on Balkan’s people think of EU as some kind of a democratisation force, “new dawn” etc. So, to me personally is important that left is able to explain what EU really is.

That’s why I’m kind of allergic to “leftists” who think that EU should be stronger as a state (or as I called it before – “super state”), because they think that some kind of welfare and socialist policies could be implemented in such way. That is shallow, because EU is association with some aspects of “neoliberal state” (as David Harvey pointed out), who’s job is to force liberalisation and creation of free market and flexible labour market in certain parts of a Europe (new candidate states for example).

As I said, I believe that left must be ready and prepared to criticise EU in every way. Still, we also have to be prepared to criticise “isolationism” as some kind of a solution to this problem. EU bourgeoisie or national bourgeoisie – it’s not that we have some kind of an option.

But I do think that trough strong anti-EU campaigns we do get some kind of an attention that we don’t get everyday (and I don’t have to remind you that left is pretty much marginal since WW2). We can use this attention not just to criticise EU as capitalist project, but to criticise capitalism in general and by doing this we have great opportunity to reach people we usually wouldn’t. So, it’s some kind of pragmatism...
I don’t know, maybe I’m wrong. Still, I do believe that we need to engage with every important political or economical topic and try to reach mainstream with our message.

[blackandyellow]

I'm all for a United States of Europe or whatever, however, the EU is not and never was formed out of a popular movement, let alone a workers one. It started out as a project of French bureacrats and technocrats like Monnet, aimed at slow gradual intergration that went over the mass of peoples heads. Its aim was to allow for economic recovery, while ensuring Germany is intergrated enough with France and the rest of Europe to solve the "German problem".

[Paul Cockshott]

DNZ and Paul Cockshott want to take the European Central Bank and fill its board partially with randomly selected workers from across Europe, have them index the euro to labor hours, and think this will precipitate a class for itself building socialism.

I think you have the ordering mixed up, the establishment of peoples control over the ECB and the establishment of a EU peoples assembly would be the achievements of a Europe wide democratic revolution rather than the trigger for it. The working class can only act as a class for itself when it has its own political economy, it can not leave these as being too abstruse for it to concern itself with. Monetary institutions and monetary policy have a decisive impact on the whole of economic life and the pursuit of the monetary policies enshrined in the existing treaties is shredding our conditions of life.

We must campaign for the cancellation of all debts, and the legal abolition of all forms of exploitations : interest, rent and profit.

The replacement of the Euro with a Europe wide system of labour credits is a process which will undermine the whole structure of class exploitation.

[Devrim]

Turkey and its membership in EU is quite a story, which actually shows that EU can't "make you more democratic". Arguments against Turkey are based mostly on "cultural" and "racial" theories of who's actually an European and who's not. But why do people think that EU will make someone respect human rights and minorities when for example France do not have chategory of national minority or when they kick out Roma people out like that?

I think that there are two reasons for this. Firstly Turkey is a very insular country, and I would imagine that most people don't know much about the fate of Roma in France, and secondly the scale of what has gone on in Turkey is much much worse than what happened to those people in France.

Devrim

[Reed]

Organizing at the EU level (i.e., including a Communist Party of the European Union) is already a must.

It seems a little like putting your foot in a bear-trap and then trying to organize your way out.
From a UK perspective the EU is very unpopular, I'd suggest a fair portion of the support gained by groups such as the BNP is owing to this issue. Surely by the Left supporting the EU it would only further marginalize them while British workers are diverted along nationalist lines?
I think Devrim was correct though, essentially this is a capitalist initiative, and so supporting it in anyway seems odd.

[Paul Cockshott]

The EU is not the European state we want, but it is the one that exists and its whole structure is in crisis opening the historical opportunity for either its replacement by a more authoritarian structure or a democratic revolution to replace it by a people's europe.
Here is a link to a conference in Berlin later this week on the topic:
http://www.puk.de/