Thomas Piketty, the famous economist whose seismic book demonstrated the dire consequences of an unfettered 'neo-liberal,' global, capitalism (Capital in the 21st Century; Harvard University Press) has written a new and trenchant article on the future of Europe. (Find it HERE.)
There is much in the piece to consider but two central ideas emerge with real force. As they sum up something of the current stage of left politics and its contradictions in Europe, particularly in Southern Europe, it useful to outline them here.
Flowing from a convincing critique of the back-to-front role of the Euro in the unity of Europe (or lack of it) Pikkety promotes the argument first raised by French President Hollande that there should be a new and much more powerful Euro-zone Parliament. The current European Parliament is powerless and does not fit with the actual lines of power and wealth in Europe and therefore it has become a part of the overall European democratic-deficit problem, remote and useless, rather than any sort of answer. He argues that by the means of a strong, new Euro-parliament, the populations of the Eurozone countries might have direct access to the the uses (and miss-uses) of their shared currency and its possible role in their collective day to day life.
Pikkety also makes the case for a new European Debt Conference; taking the issue out of the hands of the leadership of the International Monetary Fund, the European Central Bank and the European Council. (The troika.) He specifically refers to the enormous success of the London Conference of 1953 which removed 50% of Germany's debt burden and allowed the country to grow again. The immediate, parlous state of Greece is of course at the centre of his remarks, but he makes the broader case that Europe's economic swamp is the biggest problem facing Europe's future and that decisive intervention against debt is the only means to drain away the poison in the system.
These arguments appear convincing. And they also illustrate something of the nature of left politics in the European context at this moment. At the end of 2015 and the beginning of 2016 in both the Portuguese and Spanish General Elections the pro-austerity parties scored the highest in votes and MPs of all the contesting parties. In Spain the 'Popular Party' won 29% of the vote, in Portugal, 'Portugal Ahead' won 37% of the vote. But they could not, and cannot in the case of Spain, form governments. In both Spain and Portugal the previously inevitable 'grand coalition' between the two Iberian Social Democratic mass parties and their right wing sisters, in favour of a German-lead austerity programme, has collapsed. And with that a new sort of Social Democracy is being wrenched into life. In both cases this can be put down to the emergence of a mainstream, popular, anti-austerity and radical left, in the shape of Podemos in Spain (21% of the vote) and the Left Bloc in Portugal (16%) who both came third in the popular vote. They have forced the reluctant, hesitating and fractious Socialist Parties to work on coalitions, based on anti-austerity and to their left.
All is still in the melting pot as this is written, but the case of Greece, of Ireland, and in its inevitably unhinged way, the case of Britain, all pose the question, is there a re composition of the remnants of a left European Social Democracy finding a way forward, albeit under different names and banners but all having to accept the influence and pressure of the radical movements and parties that have led the anti-austerity struggle up to now? Is this the new role of the Syriza government? Is it a repeat of the old role of the Spanish SP?
It would sound too much like a conspiracy theory to insist that such turns in political tactics are but classic means by which Social Democracy has, in the past, absorbed and finally disarmed popular forces that have emerged to its left. (See Germany 1918 to 1923 etc, etc.) Today's European Social Democrats are a ragged lot. They are steeped in such compromise and straight forward corruption that in countries like Italy and Greece they have already been wiped out, at least once! Which does not mean to say that their role in absorbing militancy and insurgency will not be again required from the mainstream political system in the future, albeit under different names and guises.
For today, what is the line that emerges between those whose politics are based on a new popularly managed and democratically controlled economy and society and those that are not? It is certainly not defined by whether or not Spain and Portugal's new left parties support key anti-austerity measures agreed by a SP led government in their countries. Let the new government's resolve be tested, in front of everyone. No. The concrete analysis of the concrete situation will determine each and every political turn in that context. But Pikkety's two proposals are something else.
Hollande and Pikkety's proposal for a new Euro-zone parliament is something of a reflection of the despair of most of France's current left leadership. It is, in a psychological sense, the search for a safety net given the desperate failure of French Social Democracy to challenge (let alone provide a French-based alternative to) German and indeed world wide 'neo-liberal' capitalist hegemony. The consequences of this SD failure in France border on the catastrophic. Le Pen junior has between 30 and 40% of French voters who tell polls that they now support her. Pikkety hopes that the Eurozone Parliament will be able to do something that a SD led UN Security Council Member, 5th largest economy and joint leader of the EU was unable to do; to find an alternative to austerity politics and economics. If France with a SD government was unable to lead on that, a new Euro institution is a fantasy solution. The sad fact is that (as Greece demonstrated in technicolour) there is no answer at the level of another EU institution - and little political will for it among those who do fight racism and austerity, even in France.
But a new Europe is urgently needed. The people of Europe need it. Where will it come from if not from EU institutions? Here Pikkerty's second proposal has much more relevance. We need action, supported by the mass of Europeans, which is independent of the existing EU. A Europe wide debt conference, totally independent of the Troika, illustrates a different path. The potential of such an initiative is to create a legitimacy, representing Europe's anti-austerity majority, which can express their will, against another, cooked up, unaccountable and up to now, unassailable (il) legitimacy, that represents nothing other than Pikkety's super rich.
Just as the new left in the Iberian peninsular may offer support to any genuine move by the Social Democrats in government to end austerity, so all sorts of tactics and initiatives will be taken by the left even within the confines of the EU's dusty halls. But what the left must offer European people should never be confused with necessary day to day political manoeuvres, the character of a particular vote or this or that campaign. The basic offer can only be the self built, brick by brick, of a Europe that is totally independent of the clutter and corruption of the billionaires EU that has failed. An alternative future that will overturn and replace the now.
No comments:
Post a Comment