Comments on: This Charming Man – The dapper, cosmopolitan face of post-democracy

By: Martin P.

Martin P. — Mon, 21 Jan 2013 11:51:39 +0000

Hi Leigh,

interesting piece, even though on the verge of excessive sociological generalisation sometimes. And unfortunately mobs do also exist. I think the compound “libéral-libertaire” is closer to what you’re describing than classic autoritarianism. http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lib%C3%A9ral-libertaire
Which could also be described, in the period, as the mere, old and actually stupid egoism of the powerful who are slowly forgetting, as history passes, the consequences of this behaviour on society at large.

“Entre le fort et le faible, entre le riche et le pauvre, entre le maître et le serviteur, c’est la liberté qui opprime et la loi qui affranchit”. (Lacordaire)

“I do maintain that if your hair is wrong, your entire life is wrong.” (Morrissey)

By: Betterworld

Betterworld — Mon, 21 Jan 2013 11:14:51 +0000

Analisa, it would be useful if you could address the point raised about your alleged neo-liberal agenda. Even from inside your crisp pajama, a simple one line answer addressing the charge, without abusing the charger, would be appreciated. Do you believe that curbs on democracy are necessary to secure the economic recovery desired by all Europeans and to safeguard their future?

By: Leigh Phillips

Leigh Phillips — Sun, 20 Jan 2013 23:38:45 +0000

Hi all. Leigh here. I’m not ignoring you. I’ll respond to some of the comments hopefully in the next 24 hours, most of which raise interesting points, but I’m stakhanovitically busy until tomorrow evening.

Analisa! Thanks for stopping by! Perhaps you can point to which parts of my analysis are fictional? I was deliberately spiky for the sake of argument. Surely you don’t think anything can be learnt if all your reviews are glowing (as they have been so far). And to be clear: I’m not saying you don’t have the right to your neo-liberal views (however economically suicidal and data-poor they may be). I just want such views to be democratically contested and not imposed in an extra-democratic fashion.

BTW – I linked to your website in the original post, but perhaps it wasn’t prominent enough. I’ll add it again at the end of the text.

By: Marc

Marc — Sun, 20 Jan 2013 16:21:41 +0000

What we need is a revolution and hang everyone in Brussels who proclaims to support the Eurosoviet Union and/or the wealth destroying Euro.

It will never happen, I know that, but it should.

These people are enemies of democracy, enemies of the poor, enemies of the middle class and do nothing but listen to lying and manipulating banker scum and financial ‘markets’.

By: Bloggingportal.eu » Blog Archive » Week in Bloggingportal: The Prime Minister’s Speech

Sun, 20 Jan 2013 12:02:22 +0000

[...] of austerity, which was a blow to the legitimacy of the EU’s economic policy, never mind the questions over democratic legitimacy (and the privileged access of big business). It may or may not comfort you to know that a paper was [...]

By: Annalisa Piras

Annalisa Piras — Sun, 20 Jan 2013 01:43:55 +0000

Dear Leigh,
thank you for your interest in our documentary ” Girlfriend in a coma”. I am the director and one of the authors. I was browsing the web in my crisp designer pyjama when I stumbled into your spectacularly entertaining post. Your article is as amusing as entirely fictional. I cant help imagining what amazing piece you could write if you actually took the time to watch the film !!! Where can we send you a screener? Yours sincerely
Annalisa Piras ( the autocrat wears Prada)
ps http://girlfriendinacoma.eu

By: This Charming Man – The dapper, cosmopolitan face of post-democracy « Democracy and happiness

Sat, 19 Jan 2013 20:35:15 +0000

[...] Leigh Philips, euobserver.com [...]

By: Tamas Calderwood

Tamas Calderwood — Sat, 19 Jan 2013 06:44:30 +0000

A very interesting article Leigh.

One might add that this is nothing new for the EU. When The Netherlands and France had referenda on the EU Constitution in 2005 their “No” votes were simply ignored. It was re-named a treaty and stuffed through anyway – an example of the silly people getting in the way of the elitist’s grand project and being overruled.

Similarly, the Irish voted against the Lisbon treaty in 2008. This was deemed the incorrect answer, so they were forced to vote again to get the answer right. They yielded in 2009 and passed it.

There is only so much free people will take though. The EU’s autocratic ways will be a major factor in its downfall, whenever that comes.

By: Mauro Petriccione

Mauro Petriccione — Thu, 17 Jan 2013 19:08:55 +0000

I loved Leigh Phillips’ description of the Italian diaspora, though I fear that age alone would exclude me from that category. Precisely because these are your friends, Mr. Phillips, would you do them the courtesy of looking at facts before passing judgment? I would have thought that allegation of lack of democracy should be based on lack of respect of democratic processes, or at least on their perversion away from their purpose and object. So, here are a few pointers: the Italian Constitution’s mechanism for choosing a Prime Minister is simply a mandate from President to whomever he thinks could form a government and have a majority when that government is presented to Parliament. President Ciampi appointed Mr. Monti because prior consultations with political parties made him believe Mr. Monti would have a majority, which he did. Why? I fear another case of “It’s the economy, stupid”. He was felt capable of addressing the root of immediate problem, that is, the total lack of international credibility of Italian economic policy. The method chosen was neither new nor untested. President Ciampi (then Governor of the Bank of Italy) himself entered politics at the head of such a “technical government”, and so did Mr. Prodi (a professor of economics and former head of a State-owned industrial conglomerate). Both stayed in power as long as the political parties represented in Parliament considered it appropriate to give them a majority, and left when they no longer did, followed by fresh elections. Exactly the case for Mr. Monti’s government. It was always clear – and made publicly so – that 2013 would see new elections, sooner or later. As soon as Mr. Monti no longer had a majority in the (democratically elected) Parliament – and more precisely, that majority who put him there – he resigned as expected. Where is the absence or the perversion of the democratic process as it is both in the Constitution and in constitutional practice as it has developed over 60 years? I will stop taking up space in your blog, but I do hope this will be seen as a useful contribution and not (only) a boring diatribe.

By: Roger Cole

Roger Cole — Thu, 17 Jan 2013 12:25:31 +0000

Leigh Phillips article as I understand it, is about democracy in the European Union and not about a left/right divide. In Italy the leader of “the left” Pier Luigi Bersani, is willing to form a coalition with the block effectively led by Monti, who refuses to even stand for election himself. In Ireland the “left” Labour Party is happily supporting massive cuts in social welfare and health. In the area of democracy however they also supported the spending of state money on the children’s referendum which the Irish Supreme Court declared illegal. It would be my contention they did so in order to be able to do more of the same in the next EU referendum. In short, the Irish political elite are more that prepared to actively attack democratic values for the sake of the emerging European Empire. If the Empire is to be defeated then all those who support national democracy throughout the EU need to work together.