Euroskepticism and Populism. Why?

Denerick

I am profoundly pro European in every sense of the term. I believe the destruction of artificial national boundries and the erosion of artificial cultural and political barriers will unite the people of Europe and create a continental culture, society and economy that is as dynamic, creative and interesting as anything else the world has ever had to offer. In recent months we have seen the first steps in the destruction of the Schengen agreement, and there is a decent chance that the Euro might eventually disintegrate into nothingness. There is more than economics at play here, we have abandoned our lip service to liberalism and are embracing the populist anti immigrant right, and the mainstream parties are pandering as quickly as possible. Idiocy is now institutionalised and you cannot campaign for high office in Europe anymore without having a go at immigrants. Soft targets are bountiful - Roma gypsies, Muslims, blacks... And while these hateful tendancies in man (Racism) were repressed only 5 years ago they now play an important role in our national politics.

This ties neatly in with Euroskepticism, as the European ideal of freedom, coexistence and anti nationalism doesn't sit comfortably with the old fascist tradition of parochialism and ultra nationalism. Are we really on a precipice? Or are these fears overstated?

ei.sdraob

I am very pro EU myself as many here know

But I am sickened by the nationalist mumbo jumbo taking over now that the **** hit the fan within the EU and the eurozone.
We have posters here regularly painting whole countries and its people (Greek-bashing is in fashion now) with a single brush.

If more people in europe start to think along these lines and start painting whole countries and their people as somehow being "inferior" then the EU does not deserve to continue.

I think some German and French politicians as well as some ECB execs need to be reminded of european history and the reasons for the creation of EU and then the euro, before they tear apart what took so long to put together with their populist rhetoric.

Amhran Nua

Denerick wrote: »

we have abandoned our lip service to liberalism and are embracing the populist anti immigrant right

Where, how, and is there a single shred of evidence for any of your post?

What seems more fascist to me is some lame attempt to merge the entire continent in all its rich cultural diversity into a grey faceless morass.

No thanks, I happen to like French cooking, and the German language, and the Irish craic, and Italian passion, and all of the national virtues of the consitutent peoples of the world.

Denerick

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Where, how, and is there a single shred of evidence for any of your post?

Either you don't follow European politics or you are choosing to overlook the rise of the far right in Europe over the last decade, and the consequent pandering of mainstream parties in Austria, Italy, France, The Netherlands and in some newer member states like Hungary.

What seems more fascist to me is some lame attempt to merge the entire continent in all its rich cultural diversity into a grey faceless morass.

No thanks, I happen to like French cooking, and the German language, and the Irish craic, and Italian passion, and all of the national virtues of the consitutent peoples of the world.

Thats a fair critique of my post, but I think you analyse too far from what I originally intended to portray. I was trying to say that the liberal tradition and the suppression of nationalism allows the cultural distinctiveness to spread more readily, as the artificial national boundries are withdrawn and as movement between EU states is made every more convenient I believe we all will benefit from the cultural diversity inherent within European society. I was not suggesting some cultural monolith, rather some vague kind of federal entity, where the old cultures and traditions are respected within largely autonomous nations, but united under a common European bond of fealty, including an admiration and love for the greater European ideal.

EDIT: THough looking back over my OP, I do understand how you would come to such a conclusion, that was simply clumsy wording on my part.

Amhran Nua

Denerick wrote: »

Either you don't follow European politics or you are choosing to overlook the rise of the far right in Europe over the last decade, and the consequent pandering of mainstream parties in Austria, Italy, France, The Netherlands and in some newer member states like Hungary.

Oh right, when you said "our", I thought you were talking about Ireland, since this is an Irish board and nobody in Ireland has any responsibility for what the Dutch, Germans, or assorted other nation states do.

Denerick wrote: »

Thats a fair critique of my post, but I think you analyse too far from what I originally intended to portray. I was trying to say that the liberal tradition and the suppression of nationalism allows the cultural distinctiveness to spread more readily, as the artificial national boundries are withdrawn and as movement between EU states is made every more convenient I believe we all will benefit from the cultural diversity inherent within European society. I was not suggesting some cultural monolith, rather some vague kind of federal entity, where the old cultures and traditions are respected within largely autonomous nations, but united under a common European bond of fealty, including an admiration and love for the greater European ideal.

Eh I'm not sure there is a greater European ideal, and I know there isn't any sense of fealty to a single Europe. There are numerous American ideals, but Europe never had such a beast.

I also don't think a federalised Europe is the best way to go to be honest, because really there isn't much need for it - when you speak of the liberal tradition what do you mean by the way, there are so many definitions varying from right wing to left wing that the phrase has become meaningless. Almost all the benefits it is possible to accrue can be accrued from a well organised trading union, I see no particular incentives to build far beyond that.

Icepick

Amhran Nua wrote: »

What seems more fascist to me is some lame attempt to merge the entire continent in all its rich cultural diversity into a grey faceless morass.

It's actually the opposite.

Denerick

Amhran Nua wrote: »

Oh right, when you said "our", I thought you were talking about Ireland, since this is an Irish board and nobody in Ireland has any responsibility for what the Dutch, Germans, or assorted other nation states do.

Your lack of vision is no concern of mine! We are citizens of the European Union and I find the political happenings in major European countries to be of more than academic importance.

Eh I'm not sure there is a greater European ideal, and I know there isn't any sense of fealty to a single Europe. There are numerous American ideals, but Europe never had such a beast.

The EU must have materialised out of thin air then.

I also don't think a federalised Europe is the best way to go to be honest, because really there isn't much need for it - when you speak of the liberal tradition what do you mean by the way, there are so many definitions varying from right wing to left wing that the phrase has become meaningless. Almost all the benefits it is possible to accrue can be accrued from a well organised trading union, I see no particular incentives to build far beyond that.

I mean it in the most broad sense; opposition to nationalism, embracing national co-operation, free movement of people, goods and capital, the melting of national borders, the exchange of ideas and art between European countries, in the hope that eventually we will begin to see ourselves as European first and Irish/British/French/Polish second. (Eventually)

Bloody Nipples

We just have to wait for the next balls up to happen on the right's watch and voters will swing back left again :pac: when people have less money in their pockets they're inevitably going to be against the institution of social projects, relatively high social welfare payments etc. which will result in support for more conservative parties. Like the jump in support for the True Finns and their ilk in countries where they have to bail out the PIIGS.

As the global economy recovers, nationalist rhetoric won't elicit the same reaction in subsequent elections.

Denerick

Bloody Nipples wrote: »

We just have to wait for the next balls up to happen on the right's watch and voters will swing back left again :pac: when people have less money in their pockets they're inevitably going to be against the institution of social projects, relatively high social welfare payments etc. which will result in support for more conservative parties. Like the jump in support for the True Finns and their ilk in countries where they have to bail out the PIIGS.

As the global economy recovers, nationalist rhetoric won't elicit the same reaction in subsequent elections.

I would be comforted by that thought if it wasn't for the fact that quasi fascist groups in Austria and Italy hadn't gained their national foothold BEFORE the recession.

Oh, and these far right populist groups are quite statist and generally support the social democratic model in every respect except for its social liberalism. The BNP, for example, is further to the economic left than Labour.

Lockstep

Denerick wrote: »

Oh, and these far right populist groups are quite statist and generally support the social democratic model in every respect except for its social liberalism. The BNP, for example, is further to the economic left than Labour.

This is true to an extent. Far right groups usually go for populism in its crudest form and champion the small businessman who's being squeezed out by the twin evils of BIg Business and Organised Labour.


The French Front Nationale's economic philosophy is summed up by Atkin (a historian on the Fifth Republic) as 'popular capitalism' which is a decent way of summing up the generic far right's populism.

It's a bit difficult to pigeonhole their economic ideals as it's a mishmash of whatever sounds appealing.
Their economic policies usually involve protectionism, cracking down on the long-term unemployed, obsessively seeking autarky, railing against income tax, opposition to foreign aid, the promotion of small businesses and raging against immigration/the EU and political parties.
These all sound nice in theory (who supports welfare scammers or corporate greed?) but it's a cocktail of xenophobia and populism that has little coherency.


The economics of the far right are neither overly left or right. Economic nationalism is the best way of describing it.

later12

To be honest I am in favour of a pro European economic model, but not a pro European model of identity. I see the transferrance of identity from the state to the (lets say) federal state to be just as ludicrous. I take about as much pride in being Irish as I do in having blue eyes and white skin. I take as much pride in being a European as I do in having a penis - a fine thing it is, but simply a happenstance of birth.

In many ways I find the European constuct unhelpful in a political sense. It is a unifying force for one basket of neighbours and not for others - is it abolishing geopolitical tensions, or enlarging them. I would say it is doing the latter. This pan-nationalism has given rise to groups like Bloc Identitaire in France, which is strongly anti Islamic and anti Chinese. Such European nationalism has also promoted neo Fascists throughout the 20th century.

So while I am in favour of a more harmonised European economy, I think the notion of being pro European, in cultural terms, is a bit silly actually. The world is already a small place, lets not try make ours any smaller.

beeftotheheels

ei.sdraob wrote: »

If more people in europe start to think along these lines and start painting whole countries and their people as somehow being "inferior" then the EU does not deserve to continue.

I can only infer from your inability to answer the challenges I posed to you in that original thread that your definition of Europhilia and mine bear as much resemblance to each other as do the tooth fairy's and the dentist's definition of good oral hygiene.

Although I must add that I do think it sweet that you place so much faith in the tooth fairy when it comes to brushing your teeth, most of us adults only do it because the dentist says we ought to. I find it even more enlightening that you can express such disdain for the ECB due to their failure to exercise powers only you believe that they have, while maintaining your Europhillia.

white1awake

we have abandoned our lip service to liberalism

Oh how I wish.

Liberalism is a mental disorder.

Borders, Language and Culture for the WIN!

dsmythy

Denerick wrote: »

I was not suggesting some cultural monolith, rather some vague kind of federal entity, where the old cultures and traditions are respected within largely autonomous nations, but united under a common European bond of fealty, including an admiration and love for the greater European ideal.

What is the European ideal in your opinion which isn't already widespread in Western Europe?

Batsy

Denerick wrote: »

Your lack of vision is no concern of mine! We are citizens of the European Union and I find the political happenings in major European countries to be of more than academic importance.

The EU must have materialised out of thin air then.



I mean it in the most broad sense; opposition to nationalism, embracing national co-operation, free movement of people, goods and capital, the melting of national borders, the exchange of ideas and art between European countries, in the hope that eventually we will begin to see ourselves as European first and Irish/British/French/Polish second. (Eventually)

If you think I'm ever going to consider myself European first and English and British second you've got another thing coming.

hatrickpatrick

My simple issue with it is that it reduces the power of your individual vote, thereby reducing your democratic voice. By definition, 1 person in 10 has a greater vote than 1 in 100.

Imagine you're in a company. Now imagine you're one of 10 equal shareholders. Your vote carries 10% of the power.
Increase that to 100 shareholders and you now only have 1% of the power.

Now imagine the 4 million people in Ireland, vs the 500 million people in Europe.

See the issue?

Denerick

Batsy wrote: »

If you think I'm ever going to consider myself European first and English and British second you've got another thing coming.

No doubt there will always be a small and vocal nationalist minority, unfortunately it is a constant of history that there are those who will always choose parochialism over co-operation.

whatstherush

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

My simple issue with it is that it reduces the power of your individual vote, thereby reducing your democratic voice. By definition, 1 person in 10 has a greater vote than 1 in 100.

Imagine you're in a company. Now imagine you're one of 10 equal shareholders. Your vote carries 10% of the power.
Increase that to 100 shareholders and you now only have 1% of the power.

Now imagine the 4 million people in Ireland, vs the 500 million people in Europe.

See the issue?

I would argue it increases the power of your vote. You vote for a government that has equal rights with 27 other states in deciding the direction of the EU, giving your vote a lot more weight than the German voter of 1 in 60m.

hatrickpatrick

whatstherush wrote: »

I would argue it increases the power of your vote. You vote for a government that has equal rights with 27 other states in deciding the direction of the EU, giving your vote a lot more weight than the German voter of 1 in 60m.

Yes but either way, you have far far more direct control when your government, elected only by the people in your country, makes the rules for that country.

blahfckingblah

Denerick wrote: »

No doubt there will always be a small and vocal nationalist minority, unfortunately it is a constant of history that there are those who will always choose parochialism over co-operation.

so what you suggest is that we basicly make every country europe into one nation? hitler had a similar idea years ago did he not?

Denerick

blahfckingblah wrote: »

so what you suggest is that we basicly make every country europe into one nation? hitler had a similar idea years ago did he not?

Godwins law!!!

YAY!!!

That is not what I'm suggesting at all, do keep up.

blahfckingblah

do keep up?? its a bit patronising isnt it?
can never imagine supporting any organisation who try to take away national identity and have a greater influence than the countrys government.

Denerick

blahfckingblah wrote: »

do keep up?? its a bit patronising isnt it?
can never imagine supporting any organisation who try to take away national identity and have a greater influence than the countrys government.

I couldn't give two tuppence about whether we are governed by Dublin or by Brussels, only so long as we are governed well.

blahfckingblah

that appears to be the hardest thing to achieve

LaBaguette

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

My simple issue with it is that it reduces the power of your individual vote, thereby reducing your democratic voice. By definition, 1 person in 10 has a greater vote than 1 in 100.

Imagine you're in a company. Now imagine you're one of 10 equal shareholders. Your vote carries 10% of the power.
Increase that to 100 shareholders and you now only have 1% of the power.

Now imagine the 4 million people in Ireland, vs the 500 million people in Europe.

See the issue?

On that logic, we should prevent further population growth no maintain our individual power.

Sarcasm aside, that's why local government exists. Larger states *tend* to have several layers of power, and therefore your individual vote has a greater power over (some) parts of your life.

Example that I have in mind include, obviously, the US, Russia (in theory, not in practice), as huge states with strong sub-levels; Germany and to a lesser extent France also have some regional power, while something like, say, Malta will be almost completely centralised.


@Batsy : I consider myself European more than French. But I don't think most Frenchmen do.


Re Front National : their economic coherence is indeed close to nothing. However, they don't strike me as capitalists (as far as they can be assumed to have a doctrine); they often rely on the usual hatred towards "fat cats" and "the big money" that works so well in France.
That's partly due to a stronger socialist influence in the XXth, but also because the FN is heir to "Poujadisme", a form of petit-bourgeois populism best pictured as the racist shopkeeper in the country, who thinks Arabs will mug him and American supermarkets will cause his ruin.

They (FN) have also kept suggesting that France should leave the EU and go back to the Franc. Unilaterally. Anyone who has a little economic common sense will see that this is madness, and leaving the EU won't look good as France was one of its founding members... Morons.



Re OP : I think it's logical that populism and euroskepticism go together. I'll try to explain why.

At its core, populism is telling people what they want to hear so that they will vote for you. Most people aren't happy with their lot, and will complain; and since most can't understand what mechanics underlie their problems (economic, social or whatever), they'll look for a simple solution and a scapegoat to blame.

Then euroskepticism. I think it's fair to assume that in most of Europe, the nation-state model of the 19th has had the upper hand, and that *most* people will regard their state as their main cultural ethnicity. Of course, there are notable exceptions, Northern Ireland being one, Brittany being another, Bavaria yet another. But I'm pretty sure that most Germans will say they are German before being Swabian or whatever; same thing in France.

And while regional identities compete for the top spot, Europe is clearly something dictinct; so when you're looking for someone to blame, you look at other EU states, or even the EU itself, because you feel closer to yours.

When things go wrong in the EU, we blame the EU because we have to blame someone who is different, unless we are to blame ourselves; and since strong national/regional identities make for easy differenciation, it's the fault of the Germans. And the reason they are making us miserable is because of the EU.

So there's not much logic difficulty to jump from one to the other.



Also, someone mentioned the Bloc Identitaire. This movement (modern far right regionalism) is interesting, precisely because its populist (I'm thinking Lega Nord in Italy or Vlaams Belang in Belgium) AND pro-Europe.

They follow the very simple (and logic) that smaller identity units make for stronger loyalty; indeed, many Bretons will describe themselves as Bretons first and French second. It's also because "Divide et impera" : if the EU wants to strenghten its power, it will seek to weaken states and empower smaller units (regions, provinces, lander...). So regionalist/autonomist movements and the EU have, at some level, mutual interests.

jmayo

Denerick wrote: »

I am profoundly pro European in every sense of the term. I believe the destruction of artificial national boundries and the erosion of artificial cultural and political barriers will unite the people of Europe and create a continental culture, society and economy that is as dynamic, creative and interesting as anything else the world has ever had to offer. In recent months we have seen the first steps in the destruction of the Schengen agreement, and there is a decent chance that the Euro might eventually disintegrate into nothingness. There is more than economics at play here, we have abandoned our lip service to liberalism and are embracing the populist anti immigrant right, and the mainstream parties are pandering as quickly as possible. Idiocy is now institutionalised and you cannot campaign for high office in Europe anymore without having a go at immigrants. Soft targets are bountiful - Roma gypsies, Muslims, blacks... And while these hateful tendancies in man (Racism) were repressed only 5 years ago they now play an important role in our national politics.

This ties neatly in with Euroskepticism, as the European ideal of freedom, coexistence and anti nationalism doesn't sit comfortably with the old fascist tradition of parochialism and ultra nationalism. Are we really on a precipice? Or are these fears overstated?

Are you trying to say that anyone euroskeptic or rather EU skeptic is somehow a fascist racist bigot ?
And just because some people do not want a large muslim country with a pi** poor record of human rights and a large tranch of right wing muslim population who still practice archaic muslim values to enter the EU we are all anti muslim bigots.

Please stop the sh**e .... :mad:
The reason the Euro will disintegrate into nothingness is NOT down to euroskeptics or fascists, but firstly down to the idiots that ran the PIIGS economies and now the idiots at the center of the Euro, i.e. the ECB and the leaders of the largest Euro members Germany and France.

FFS your post is a rant about blaming everything and anything on anyone that is now skeptical about where the EU/Euro project is headed.
Can youb also blame global warming on them ?

Denerick wrote: »

Either you don't follow European politics or you are choosing to overlook the rise of the far right in Europe over the last decade, and the consequent pandering of mainstream parties in Austria, Italy, France, The Netherlands and in some newer member states like Hungary.

Eh Austria has always been right wing and fascist.
They had no problem electing and keeping an ex German army office accused of war crimes as their president.
Italy has had a long standing tradition of having a right wing and left wing.
Hell some of Mussolini's descendants have been in office.

Denerick wrote: »

...
I was not suggesting some cultural monolith, rather some vague kind of federal entity, where the old cultures and traditions are respected within largely autonomous nations, but united under a common European bond of fealty, including an admiration and love for the greater European ideal.

The United States of Europe ?
Yeah great except it would be dominated by the merkels and sarkozys of this world.

Denerick wrote: »

Your lack of vision is no concern of mine! We are citizens of the European Union and I find the political happenings in major European countries to be of more than academic importance.

Do you have an EU passport ?
I think you may find you are an Irish citizen, British citizen or whatever and not a European citizen.
You are right we should know what is happening on other countries, but that is common sense to my mind.
Watch Greece, Portugal and Spain for starters.

Denerick wrote: »

I mean it in the most broad sense; opposition to nationalism, embracing national co-operation, free movement of people, goods and capital, the melting of national borders, the exchange of ideas and art between European countries, in the hope that eventually we will begin to see ourselves as European first and Irish/British/French/Polish second. (Eventually)

If you want to feel European first then watch the Ryder Cup.

We can oppose nationalism, cooperate with our neighbours, have free movement of goods and services, exchange ideas and art (???) between European countries without selling out to some bureaucratic entity based in Brussels and Strasburg dominated by the largest European nations.

For example care to explain how Norway and Switzerland manage ?
AFAIK both manage just fine and aren't run by fascist dictators. :rolleyes:

Denerick wrote: »

I would be comforted by that thought if it wasn't for the fact that quasi fascist groups in Austria and Italy hadn't gained their national foothold BEFORE the recession.

For someone that bleats on about others studying European politics, why don't you study their histories. :rolleyes:

Italy also has long running communist movements, where does that fit in with your thesis ?

donaghs

I don't most people have any problem with "Europe". Most people love visting other countries in Europe, and (ironically) exploring the differences between countries. I think people are suspicious of different aspects of the EU project, and where it is going. This is understandable given the transfer of powers that has been going on.

Denerick wrote: »

I couldn't give two tuppence about whether we are governed by Dublin or by Brussels, only so long as we are governed well.

The BIG difference is that a Dublin government is accountable to us (Irish people, or people living in Ireland if the former sounds a bit too un-PC to you), we can vote them out.

A Brussels government are not really accountable to people in Ireland, as Ireland is a tiny percentage of the EU's population, and set to decrease further. Other nations, tribes, interest groups will always come before us. That's just the parliament, the Commision is not directly elected by people, so we rely on our pro-EU politicians to defend our interests (EU expansion naturally diluting our influence in the Commission). Until recently, there have been no major clashes between Irish interests, and those of the EU political elite.

Denerick wrote: »

I couldn't give two tuppence about whether we are governed by Dublin or by Brussels, only so long as we are governed well.

Bizarrely, or maybe not, that was a typical excuse in the 1930s for defending the rule of dictators. Hence the term "benevolent dictator" applied to people like Primo Rivera and even Mussolini. i.e. they may be intolerant of anyone else's opinion but they "get things done".

---

It seems to convenient to blame criticism of the EU project on "right-wing" elements. When the EU constitution was put to a vote in France and the Netherlands it was rejected. I think the major problem is that the EUs political elite are moving ahead with their political integration project faster than people in the various nation states want them to. Re-evaluation, and reform of the EU are a better idea in my mind. Rather than leaving it, or pushing ahead with the project as is.

donaghs

Denerick wrote: »

I am profoundly pro European in every sense of the term. I believe the destruction of artificial national boundries and the erosion of artificial cultural and political barriers will unite the people of Europe and create a continental culture, society and economy that is as dynamic, creative and interesting as anything else the world has ever had to offer.

Sounds a bit too much like a political speech! But taking it as it is, you shouldn't forget the power of tribalism. Within the boundaries of the EU's nation states lurk many various forms of tribalism - some of them likely to be worse than "nationalism", and likely to come to the surface more if the the national boundaries become blurred - e.g. Northern Italian breakways groups etc. Interestingly Germany and Italy only relatively recently became unified nation states. Arguably Spain and Belgium never really overcame their internal regional differences....