The EU and Technocracy

  1. Sentinel
    Sentinel
    There is an issue that has been bugging me about the NET as well as some independent Technocracy supporters. Namely, their support for the European Union. The 'No To EU'-campaign here in Sweden was the first political activity I independently took part in, and I have been opposed to the Union ever since -- the recent European Currency-referendum was the only time I've ever voted (and we won!).

    I share the swedish left's animosity towards it -- and I'm really talking about anyone from the left of centre, right wing socdems are the only self-identified 'leftists' who support it here. It is a capitalist interests project which aims to centralise and consolidate capitalist power in Europe on the expense of worker's rights and the labour movement. The decision-making is to be moved into Brussels, beyond the reach of any insight, or opportunity to intevene, for those concerned before the 'directives' are issued.

    One of it's other main purposes is to create a 'flexible' labour market in Europe, and to enable the capitalists to move their production from the more advanced and wealthier european nations (with high taxes, welfare and workers rights laws) into the poorer eastern and southern European ones which lack these things.

    Further, it clearly aims to create an European superstate with imperialist ambitions of it's own, to compete with the United States and the other emerging world power, China.

    Now, it seems simply incredible that any leftist, much less radical leftist, and even less any anarchist would support this initiative. I think one reason might be tht in the UK, it is only the ultraright who opposes it loudly, and that on inane nationalist terms. That might make it easier to buy the pro-EU lies of the bourgeoisie (and bourgeosie elements within the technocracy movement). In Sweden and other countries the situation is very different though.

    Among the reasons I've heard presented for the support have been, that it 'unites Europe', 'works against nationalism', and makes it easier to build an united all-european labour movement - -that we need a continental capitalist enemy to build a continental radical left movement.

    I think it's abundantly clear that none of these arguments hold water.

    Thus we leftists technocracy sympathisers/technocrats should discuss this among ourselves, come to precisely that conclusion, and thereafter try to influence the Technocracy movement away from it's support for the EU.

    1.) 'The EU unites Europe, which is good.'

    Utter bullshit! It's purpose is not to 'unite the peoples of Europe', but to remove national regulations, in order to make big business easier on a continental level. It strives to both make it easier for a western European company to hire eastern or southern Eurpean workers without granting them proper rights, or to just go right over there and fuck them at home instead. Whichever suits best.

    I am all for European unity as an internationalist. I am not screamin 'they are taking our jobs (and women)' like an ultraright cretin, on the contrary I'm all for increased immigration -- both of foreign specialists etc we need, and for refugees from war torn countries. What I'm saying is that it has to happen on the terms of the working class, not on those of the bourgeoisie!

    Integration and equal rights for all is an uncompromisable prequisite!

    2.)
    'The EU works against nationalism'

    And why exactly do we need a capitalist superstate for that? Why not rally the peoples of Europe in an unified opposition for that instead?! Again, a loud Yes from me to the unification of Europe and the dissolving of the nation states. But not on the terms of the oppressor!

    3.) The furhter development of the EU makes it easier to build an united all-european labour movement. We need a continental capitalist enemy to build a continental radical left movement.

    See point 2. Why on earth should we let the capitalists consolidate the power of the EU and finish building their superstate, before we can 'properly' oppose them? There already exists a cooperating European bourgeoisie. This is like supporting Bush because his ruthless policies makes people hate imperialism.

    We must always think of the working class and it's situation first, both on short and on long term, and there is no compromising from that principle.

    So,please present any arguments I've missed, or attempt to deconstruct my counterarguments to these initial ones..
  2. Dimentio
    Actually, I believe this is mixing up a lot of different subjects. For the first thing, the technocratic movement was nonexistent in Europe prior to 2005. When the media is talking about "technocracy", they are meaning bureaucratic structures ruled by "experts", in a price system. The left in Europe accuses the right for being technocratic, and vice versa, without even defining what technocracy is.

    When most Swedish leftists think of the word "technocracy", they think of... Pusher Robot.

    N.E.T has never supported the European Union nor any other organ politically or logistically, although we have to admit that the rules and regulations of the European Union for the moment has given us some benefits, like being able to easier coordinate and develop our organisation.

    The EU is of course a construct which is created in the interests of European monopoly capitalism and the price system, but that could be said of nation-states as well. As far as I'll know, N.E.T has no policy towards contemporary topics like the enstrengthening of the EU, since whatever solution within the framework of the price system is just made to support that very system which we need to make irrelevant.
  3. Sentinel
    Sentinel
    Actually, I believe this is mixing up a lot of different subjects. For the first thing, the technocratic movement was nonexistent in Europe prior to 2005. When the media is talking about "technocracy", they are meaning bureaucratic structures ruled by "experts", in a price system. The left in Europe accuses the right for being technocratic, and vice versa, without even defining what technocracy is.
    Ah, I know. It's from discussions with individual technocrats I've reached my conclusions though. Media didn't play any role. I'm also sorry if I have mixed up official NET policy with individual member's views.

    When most Swedish leftists think of the word "technocracy", they think of... Pusher Robot.





    N.E.T has never supported the European Union nor any other organ politically or logistically
    That is good to hear.

    although we have to admit that the rules and regulations of the European Union for the moment has given us some benefits, like being able to easier coordinate and develop our organisation.
    Okay.. I'm aware that there are divided opinions on whether or not the NET should strive to be a workers movement. But does the impact it has on the situation of the working class make you critical to it on a personal level, and create a wish to affect the NET's policies into taking a more critical direction?

    I do understand that the NET takes advantage of benefits the EU has granted for it in it's day to day work --unless that is somehow counterproductive to European class struggle -- but is it not still possible to condemn the project as whole? Also, could you elaborate on the benefits?

    The EU is of course a construct which is created in the interests of European monopoly capitalism and the price system, but that could be said of nation-states as well.
    Nation states as a concept are utterly reactionary, but I don't see how this is a matter of the nation state vs. the EU. While the far right's opposition to the EU is founded on a desire to preserve the nation state, the far left opposes it on entirely different grounds.

    As far as I'll know, N.E.T has no policy towards contemporary topics like the enstrengthening of the EU, since whatever solution within the framework of the price system is just made to support that very system which we need to make irrelevant.
    This is very good to hear. I do however of course hope, that it will one day take a step further and condemn the EU out right, take an anti-EU stance.
  4. Dimentio
    1. We cannot see how - due to the present conditions - condemning or glorifying any contemporary political issue, like the EU, lies in the interest of the European workers, or N.E.T as an organisation. There are already organisations which are Euro-sceptic and in fact have built their entire foundation on Euro-scepticism. I see no reason why we should divert the limited resources and energy on protesting policies which we for the moment has limited ability to change.

    2. Of course, individual technocrats are welcome to engage themselves in other movements or hold their own political convictions as long as they not are in direct conflict with basic human rights, or with the long-term goals of the movement.

    There are also communists, who for reasons unknown, believes that the EU will make the class struggle easier.