A European ‘demos’ is being built by accident


Portugal e Espanha e toda a Europa juntos

 

A couple of years ago in Brussels, I was at a debate on Europe and the crisis between Dan Hannan, the frothingly anti-EU but witty UK Tory MEP, and Giles Merritt, the avuncular secretary-general of the integrationist think-tank Friends of Europe. As it is wont to do at these sort of events, the perennial EU-dork topic of a ‘European demos‘ came up.

I’m probably butchering his argument and he’s welcome to correct me, but as I remember it, Hannan’s point was that the nation-state provides the best and only possible geography for popular, democratic endorsement of any particular set of policy options (austerity or otherwise), as the nation-state offers a natural demos (a self-aware political community), while there is no real European demos to speak of beyond European elites.

Outside of the Ryder Cup, Europeans do not think of themselves as European, so his argument goes, but rather as Greeks or Italians or Danes or Slovaks and so on, and they do not look to the European institutions as their representatives or government and never will. It is an unnatural formation compared to the demos that flows without effort from the unity and historicity of the nation.

Merritt conceded that the lack of a European demos went to the heart of how to manage the crisis, as the policy responses were far-reaching and European citizens did not really have a way to feel that they were participating in their construction. The economic crisis was of course simultaneously a political crisis and the one would not be solved without solving the other. The eurozone catastrophe thus had moved the long-standing question regarding a lack of a European demos out of the realm of political scientists (see for example this decade-old analysis) and thrust this vital question to the centre of debate.

But unlike for Hannan, for Merritt, the lack of a European demos was not something that was fixed, but something that could be changed, possibly through the construction of some sort of a political union atop what already exists, with the European Parliament taking a more decisive role. But most importantly, contrary to Hannon’s assertion, there was no such thing as a ‘natural demos’ historically. Via Mazzini and Bismarck, to take just two examples, what is now viewed as a natural demos in Italy and Germany once upon a time had to be constructed, and this, just as today, had happened in a mix of top-down and bottom-up ways.

Both characters, and other debaters who were there, had a lot more to say, and the conversation quickly turned to the economics of the subject at hand, but this tiny bit of the debate around a demos - a stale old argument become fresh again – was what stuck with me, and, in particular, a brief little concluding nugget of banter from Merritt.

As a throwaway line hardly remarked upon, Merritt at one point quipped that the growing number of anti-austerity demonstrations and movements that were emerging, whatever one thought of them (and I can’t imagine Merritt thinking very much) could ironically actually help create this ‘European demos’ so long lacking and desired by the EU’s visionaries, as across Europe, for the first time in history, the EU rather than any domestic actor was the focus of popular anger.

“Maybe these European ‘demos’ will give rise to a European demos,” he said in a joke that unfortunately fell a bit flat, as it required a subtle play on the plural of the English abbreviation for a political demonstration: a ‘demo’ (Just as in French, ‘manifestation’ becomes ‘manif’; in English, ‘demonstration’ becomes ‘demo’. But the former ‘demos’ is pronounced ‘dem-oze’ and the latter ‘demos’ is pronounced ‘dem-oss’). Still not getting the joke? Fine. As I said, it passed by largely unnoticed, despite its foresight. But roll with me here.

However groan-worthy and offhand the witticism, it has stayed with me as particularly lucid. In the last few months, as political instability and popular anger has exploded across a great swathe of Europe, it has kept appearing in my mind.

There are the votes for Syriza, Golden Dawn, Beppe Grillo’s Five Star Movement, the True Finns and Sinn Fein (all of which have radically different perspectives and, I stress, SHOULD NOT BE LUMPED TOGETHER, as some lazy analysts do, as a homogenous ‘southern populism’ [not least because Finland is not particularly southern]); and the phenomenon of the Indignados of Spain; the terrorist groupuscules of Athens; the general strikes that are now common across the bloc’s southern flank.

So far, the strikes are not properly co-ordinated across borders, although Europe’s first ever one-day cross-border general strike did indeed take place last 14 November touching Spain, Portugal, Greece and Italy (admittedly with varying levels of adherence). It is also true that much of Germany remains in thrall to the false Bild-Merkel narrative of a thrifty north and feckless south, but it is at the same time remarkable that despite this ideological uniformity, young Germans of ‘Blockupy Frankfurt’ demonstrated last May outside the ECB against European austerity in violation of the city’s banning the protest, with European banking superintendents (as opposed to local German objects of frustration) being the clear focus of their fury.

The loud voices of the anti-austerity thousands across Portugal last month singing once again, a generation later, 1974′s revolutionary anthem, ‘Grandola – Vila Morena‘ against the dictator Salazar, have gone viral, but it is just as noteworthy to hear the young and middle-aged and old equally packed in their thousands into Madrid’s Puerta del Sol singing the very same song in the language of their ancient Iberian rivals. Bulgaria has torn down a neo-liberal prime minister while Slovenia has been racked by its biggest uprising since the fall of Communism, with 42 protests across the country’s major cities since last november, against both local and European austerian and corrupt elites.

For the indignant of Europe, there are local comprador enemies of course, but the real object of the rage lives in Brussels, Frankfurt and Berlin. And the anger is reaching a boiling point, as the destabilisation of Greece shows. European elites should be (and are by all reports) terrified that such unravelling could spread to Italy.

On Thursday, as EU leaders met in that unelected senate that goes by the name of the European Council, which governs Europe from behind closed doors while never facing a general European election, some 15,000 people from across the continent braved a snowy, beautiful Belgian winter in the European capital to protest what these elites are imposing without permission from their subjects.

Protesters from Occupy the Troika, taking their inspiration from the Occupy Wall Street movement across the Atlantic, and calling for a “European Spring” akin to the Arab Spring, occupied the Directorate General for Economic and Financial Affairs, directing their anger at that stubborn lieutenant of austerity, Olli Rehn. Some 30 were arrested.

I don’t want to romanticise some aspects of the rainbow of different reactions to crisis and austerity. The right-most, of Golden Dawn, are murdering foreigners and intimidating theatre-goers to plays with gay characters. The pan-ideological Grillo mixes a confused and economically illiterate opposition to austerity with dark words for immigrants and kind words for fascists.

But the most progressive of these formations are beginning to come together at their own conferences and summits, earnest in trying to come up with constructive proposals about what a credible alternative to Rehnism should be. Discussions about what a good European Union would look like jostle up against arguments calling for the EU’s dismantling, and everything in between. Some of them I personally feel are bonkers. Others bear further investigation. Still others are brilliantly transformative while still thoroughly viable. The debate is tumultuous online.

I find it amusing to see how much aggravation the European institutions go through trying to navigate everyone’s different languages, but largely in an effort to keep everyone’s linguistic chauvinism in check, while down at the bottom of Europe, the forgotten and spurned – but hypereducated in many cases – just get on with it. This has so long been the argument of conservative critics of Europe – that without a common language, political unity is impossible. But here down below, a sort of euro-English is the rough lingua franca, while at the same time all languages are given their due. Even the smallest of language groups is taken into account. The interpreters and translators who work by day for the EU institutions, by night volunteer in other spaces in Brussels so that the young European opponents of European austerity can congregate and conspire and construct a better Europe. And so many of the young activists – the Erasmus generation – are multilingual or will teach themselves what needs to be learnt in the process of organising and campaigning.

I don’t want to suggest all of this is coherent or has all the answers, or even in agreement on what is to be done.

But here, underneath, from the streets and the workplaces and the schools, whatever you think of it, a genuine European demos is emerging. The shoots of a European spring are pushing themselves up through the hard earth of a long, long winter.

And these protesters are not Greeks or Italians or Slovaks or Danes. These protesters are Europeans.

 

 

 

 

886615_225671437572721_329196488_o

Occupy protesters block entrance to Rehn Towers

 

 

 

  1. #1 by Craig Willy on March 15, 2013 - 1:39 pm

    I have become much, much more sensitive to the French Gaullist/British Conservative argument about the need for a national demos. (Which actually is at the core of a lot of classical liberal thought and of French Republican thought in particular.)

    There is, in some sense, a bit of a pan-European conversation emerging. But there is nothing in common except, in the periphery, rejection of austerity, but beyond that the reactions are completely diverse (as you note). And, more to the point, there is no common reaction BETWEEN THE CORE AND THE PERIPHERY. The core rejection is not to austerity, but to bailouts.

    Thus we have, at best, two contradictory demoi emerging: a pro-Keynesian periphery and an anti-Keynesian core, each of which is simply reflecting their national interests. (The European interest, IMHO, would be a little Keynesianism, but the liability for which would be against at least the narrow German/core interest.)

    So I am not optimistic about the emergence of a European demos. Europeans are completely divided north/south between austerity vs. transfers. Europeans are ONLY (increasingly) united in opposition to the euro-technostructure, which automatically forces austerity on the south and the financing of bailouts on the north. This is *not* a solid foundation for a crypto-federal eurozone!

    Incidentally The Economist had a very good article on EU democracy recently: http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21573553-loss-legitimacy-may-now-be-biggest-threat-european-project-flawed-temple

  2. #2 by Mike Hanlon on March 15, 2013 - 3:34 pm

    While it’s of course the case demoses (what on earth is the plural? Demi?) can develop – have developed, to become today’s European nations – and a European demos may well develop in the future, the idea that this will be happening any time soon is the triumph of hope over reality.

    At a time when some even existing demoses in Europe are being questioned – in Spain, the UK and for some time now in Italy – as voters appear to want more localised political decision-making, the concept of a pan-European one growing to support EU government from Brussels must surely be fantasy.

    A look at the diversity of Europe’s governments and their political priorities also casts doubt on the idea that Europe’s peoples would ever be satisfied with government in common from a single centre, of the nature the EU project is steadily moving towards.

    In the meantime, considerable power is being exercised at EU level that – regardless of the number of shiny Brussels institutions, even if elected – cannot be truly democratic.

    I’m far from convinced that pan-European protests signalling unity in disagreement about EU policies can be taken on the other hand as a sign of growing acceptance of government in common.

    A European demos might come. But until then, real democrats – by which I mean those who value democracy, above all, as the foundation of peace and prosperity on our continent – must insist that the EU’s powers be reigned back to its current stage of development. Embryonic, at most.

  3. #3 by Victor on March 15, 2013 - 8:28 pm

    European democracy can at most be the sum of the interactions of national democracies, at least while the Councils are not appointed by the European Parliament or directly elected Europe-wide.

    The prolonged crisis in Europe is the direct result of the ECB being unwilling to finance the banks that crashed with the explosion of the several property bubbles, as well as the delay in both the EU and Greece in dealing with the particular problems of that country. Let´s look at Greece, it has not actually reformed. It has just been given a debt haircut in exchange for a massive internal devaluation. Apart from labor cuts very little has changed in Greece that would make it a better country from which to manufacture or provide services.

    Now let´s examine what has happened in the democratic elections during the “crisis” (it is more like a transformative decline):
    1. France´s election has had very little effect on policy-making;
    2. Ireland, Portugal, Spain, Greece, Cyprus and the UK have all appointed right-wing governments;
    3. Germany´s left has so far little chance of governing;
    4. Berlusconi basically won another election;
    5. instability and the rise of reactionary parties (that are neither right nor left) are the biggest development in almost all the systems.

    The situation in Europe is actually not that different from the one in the United States. The US was not saved by politicians, it was saved by its central bank (just like happened in the UK).

    The difference in Europe is first, that Eastern Europe will not see austerity as a new thing. Second, the German right feels entitled to impose austerity via the Bundesbank and the ECB, even though it was the German left that actually reformed Germany and even though Germany hasn´t actually ever imposed nearly as much austerity domestically. (In this it is supported by the Scandinavians, who underwent a financial crisis already.) Third, the US doesn´t have the equivalent of easily derided Greece.

    The next exercise in European politics, the EP elections next May will probably return a Parliament with a very strong representation of the kind of fringe parties that threaten the mainstream parties in a way that makes the appearance of real differentiation between left and right at either the national or European level impossible.

    The West´s main political ideologies are now populists, moderates and reactionaries. The right-left divide has become obsolete in this age of hyper-globalization and Western (relative) decline. The traditional right is threatened by the mix of plutocrats and libertarians and the left (traditional or not) has no idea how to defend the safety net while not having all the jobs move to China.

    The EU´s adaptation to the new geopolitical realities needs to accelerate for people to once again see the positive relevance of this level of governance. But as long as the European Council keeps getting more right-wing members or visionless left-wing members things will remain at the current pace and direction.

    But again, you need to understand the developments in a larger context. The US is also seeing a complete breakdown of its governance. Also in large part because of a north/south divide.

    The discussion about a European demos is very interesting. But if European policies exist, as they have for now so many decades, the question of demos or not seems irrelevant.

    Americans speak the same language, but Republicans and Democrats might as well come from different countries.

    While the West wrangles with its increasingly ineffectual democracy, autocracies make the decisions that actually affect our jobs and the costs of what we buy. They have a larger share of global GDP and trade, lower environmental and human rights standards and generally question all the post-war conceptions that we used to take for granted.

    While America and Europe soul-search in ignorance, the Muslim world basically breaks into global Civil War and China takes over commerce in the rest of the world, while the world´s biggest democracy (India), because of this very form of governance, struggles to catch up.

    “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others”?

  4. #4 by jon livesey on March 15, 2013 - 9:06 pm

    The situation in Europe today reminds me of the situation in France before the Revolution. The elite believe they are running the show effectively, and they can’t understand why the people show so little gratitude.

    Meanwhile, the people don’t theorise. They simply look around them and see, then, shortages of bread, and today, contraction of GDP and rising unemployment.

    What’s worse, they don’t see the prospect of much improvement, and they sense that they are hearing a lot of speeches, because speeches are what there is a good supply of.

    It’s a good idea to spend less time composing elegant essays about political theories, and a bit more time looking at graphs. For example:

    http://www.tradingeconomics.com/euro-area/unemployment-rate
    http://www.tradingeconomics.com/spain/unemployment-rate

    Text books attempt to describe reality, but they are not reality. Nor is a debate between public intellectuals.

    Reality is what people experience in their own everyday lives, and what they think they can see coming for their children.

    European elites who talk about a European demos should be careful what they wish for. The French demos, when it emerged, overthrew the old regime and launched a Terror. And the same story can be told about many European countries.

  5. #5 by Nick Buxton on March 15, 2013 - 9:50 pm

    Great article, Leigh. Just to give one example of this ‘demos’ emerging from below, TNI decided this week to publish a map of resistance against privatisation.

    You can see the map of resistance to sale of public services here: http://www.tni.org/sites/www.tni.org/files/briefings-images/eu_fire_sale-2013-1.png

    There is also a working paper, “Privatising Europe: how the crisis is being used to entrench neoliberalism” that gives background to the actions of the European Commission and members states in pushing an agenda which is as you note is receiving growing resistance. http://www.tni.org/briefing/privatising-europe

  6. #6 by Vit Benes on March 15, 2013 - 11:41 pm

    The European demos was in fact created decades ago when we (as Europeans) were endowed with equal rights and freedoms (including the freedoms for individuals to freely trade their goods, services, labour and capital) stemming from the acquis communautaire. Sure, the ES/EU shies away from calling itself “federation” or “state”. But the fact is that for decades we are subjects of a “domestic” legal system. The whole legal system of the EU, which takes individuals (not just the states) as “the subjects” is based on the assumptions that we (as Europeans) are identical enough to be endowed with equal rights and obligations. If you remove this assumption of “European identity”, the whole construction of “acquis communautaire” (and thus the whole construction of the internal market) falls apart.

    This is my message to Mr. Cameron: you can not have the internal market (= equal rights rights of freedom to sell goods, services, labour and capital) without assuming that European demos already exists (= Europeans are identical). If you say that there is no European demos (Europeans are not identical), you are undermining the legitimacy of acquis communautaire (and the internal market). Because if we are not (in essence) identical, we can not have equal rights and obligations (such as the Four freedoms). If we have NOTHING in common, there is no room for shared legal order (acquis) and certainly no room for the internal market.

    Just have a look at German history. They needed to construct (assume) the “German demos” in order to establish a pan-German custom union. Do you really think that pan-European internal market can exist (could have been established) without the assumption that there is a European demos?

    Right now, we are in an unpleasant situation. We (as Europeans) are governed as a European demos (we are endowed with equal rights and freedoms through the European law). But we do not govern as demos (we do not create the European law). The states create the European law. The contemporary EU is an undemocratic “government of the people by
    the states”.

    A little bit of self-promotion :-))

    http://www.dokumenty-iir.cz/Benes/PP_Benes.pdf

    Cheers

    Vit

  7. #7 by Bill Chapman on March 16, 2013 - 12:06 pm

    Leigh Phillips glosses over the linguistic inequalities within Europe and the need for a lingua franca for us all. I favour Esperanto for that role, although I already speak English, French and German.

  8. #8 by jon livesey on March 16, 2013 - 11:38 pm

    Another great step towards creating a European demos seems to be confiscating 10% of the savings of Cypriot bank depositors.

    By the way, we already have a lingua franca in Europe. English.

    • #9 by Milen on April 2, 2013 - 8:53 pm

      It would be lingua anglica then? ;) I agree that to European demos is not exactly present, but the formative grains are still there. Try telling any European below 25 that he should need 10 different visas to cross the continent from east to west and you would be laughed at. That is a huge step in the direction of a pan-European mindset. The fact is, people don’t like Brussels, but like the concept of a strongly interconnected Europe. And that makes me happy.

  9. #10 by Brian Barker on March 17, 2013 - 8:20 pm

    Jon Livesey should not advocate the language imperialism of English. We should not overestimate the position of English.

    I live in London and if anyone says to me “everyone speaks English” my answer is “Listen and look around you”. If people in London do not speak English then the whole question of a global language is completely open.

    The promulgation of English as the world’s “lingua franca” is impractical and linguistically undemocratic. I say this as a native English speaker!

    Impractical because communication should be for all and not only for an educational or political elite. That is how English is used internationally at the moment.

    Undemocratic because minority languages are under attack worldwide due to the encroachment of majority ethnic languages. Even Mandarin Chinese is attempting to dominate as well. The long-term solution must be found and a non-national language, which places all ethnic languages on an equal footing is essential.

    As a native English speaker, my vote is for Esperanto :)

    Your readers may be interested in seeing http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=_YHALnLV9XU Professor Piron was a former translator with the United Nations.

    Their new online course http://www.lernu.net has 125 000 hits per day and Esperanto Wikipedia enjoys 400 000 hits per day. That can’t be bad :)

  10. #11 by jon livesey on March 18, 2013 - 12:12 am

    English has always been the language of the Anglosphere, and since 1945 it has gradually become the language of the West.

    If you live in the real World, you note that English has become the language of Air traffic Control, of Science, of IT, of finance, and so on.

    On the web, every significant European newspaper now publishes an English edition. Why do they do so? Well, no-one in their right mind is going to devote time to learning German just to read Speigel, but if Speigel publishes an English language edition, their potential readership now expands to anyone who reads English, meaning that they get more traffic and sell more advertising.

    That’s economics. More economics: is it cheaper for Spiegel to publish an English language edition, or start a campaign to get the World to learn German.

    More economics: once the movement towards English language editions is in full swing, that decreases the motivation to publish in some other third language. English gets you tens or hundreds of millions of eyeballs. How much does Estonian get you, or Icelandic, or Classical Greek or Esperanto?

    Esperanto is quite simply a bad solution to a non-problem. Esperanto fans would dearly like the World to subsidize their hobby, but the World has already made its choice.

    Esperanto has been around for a century, and they boast of 400k hits a day? That’s about as many people as speak Welsh. If Esperanto were a real language, it would be an endangered one.

    In time, that choice can alter. English is today where French was in the 18th Century, and where Latin was in the Middle Ages. Tomorrow the World may chose one of the many Chinese languages, Mandarin, for example, but the choice will be made on the basis of utility and economics, not sentiment.

    • #12 by Maggie G on March 21, 2013 - 3:04 pm

      It is tragedy for the world that English is used so wide as English is

      1. English is part of Romance languages which originates in Vulgar-street Latin of Roman Empire. Greek and Latin are Vulgar sanskrit as in distance past sanskrit, or dialect, was universal sacred language. Vulgar derivatives lost grammar on their way. Vulgar Latin was language of slaves, mercenaries, traders and became language of occupying administration of Roman Empire. By this way get on British Isles Jus Gentium as well which developed to English common law.

      2. one of the youngest languages of the world and youngest of IE branches as 50% of words come from Norman french.

      3, is very simple and extremely poor language, compare to Sanskrit developed- instead adopted- languages as Slavic languages. Lithuanian language is pure Sanskrit as once were all Slavic. Because of grammar. Only Slavic has full grammar of Sanskrit. So this grammar, words and genetix prove that R1A dna were called Aryans who made Vedas and Sanskrit.

      4, English did not developed full alphabet. My kidz have alphabet book where under “S” is Shark.

      5. English, as all Vulgar latin languages are simple and easy to learn as second language, yepp for this was created in Roman empire. But English degenarated into dislogical level where they change sounds of letter depend on words. So actually people must learn every single word not to read.

      This makes troubles for both sides: those who learn English as second language and for english speakers as well. English language born people are not able to read at all.

      What read means? Give me any text in any language written with latin letters. I can read it so speaker of this languge will understand but not me. Typical is Spanish, German, Italian. I can read them nut have no clue what they say but Italians think I know their language.

      It would be blessing if world adopt Spanish instead English as international language. Spanish has all atributes of simplicity of Vulgar Latin but has almost rule “write as you hear.”

      And Spanish speakers are lot more friendly and Spanish language world is vacation destination lot more than English world. Spanish is about 1200 years older than English so it has more colors and bugs are killed.

      Language is bearer of culture. Folx on Britsih Isles are genetically Basques-R1B- so once spoke similar language. Due invasions and beating them up they lost all connections with their past. For example. London was military fort built by enslaved Brits who were then slaughtered by, of course, Roman empire.

      On other side. Slavs and people in Baltic reagion speak language and have culture which was developing since down of history and it is their culture. See Northern Crusades thru google..

      “The single fact that we owe not one single truth, not one idea in philosophy or religion to the Semitic race is, of itself, ample reward for years of study, and it is a fact indisputable, if I read the Veda and Zend Avesta alright.” Albert Pike

      We seldom realize the importance of what Einstein said: “We should be thankful to Indians who taught us how to count without which no worthwhile scientific discovery would have been possible.”

      We fail to recognize the magnitude of the famous British Historian Grant Duff’s words: “Many of the advances in the sciences that we consider today to have been made in Europe were in fact made in India centuries ago.”

      We ignore what the American Historian Will Durant said: “ India was the motherland of our race and Sanskrit the mother of Europe’s languages. India was the mother of our philosophy, of much of our mathematics, of the ideals embodied in Christianity… of self-government and democracy. In many ways, Mother India is the mother of us all.”

      Most of us are not even aware of the historical facts which the famous French philosopher and writer Voltaire knew when he wrote: “It is very important to note that some 2,500 years ago at the least Pythagoras went from Samos to the Ganges to learn geometry…But he would certainly not have undertaken such a strange journey had the reputation of the Brahmins’ science not been long established in Europe.”

      Mr. W.D. Brown, the British philosopher, admits in his Superiority of the Vedic Religion as under :
      “Vedic religion recognises but one God. It is a thoroughly scientific religion, where religion and science meet hand in hand. Here theology is based on science and philosophy.”

      Without our, see wikipedia for R1A distribution map: From Gujarat to Scandinavia, ancestors there would be no English language at all. You guys actually speak our language but deeply degenerated so you can understand each other. Lets look “Speling Bee”, or phone call “Can you spell me…?”

  11. #13 by jon livesey on March 18, 2013 - 12:15 am

    I’ve said all I intend to about Esperanto. I find that the kind of personality that is attracted to Esperanto is also the kind that likes to engage in endless and futile religious debates.

    Given that Esperanto is going precisely no-where, that’s a total waste of time.

  12. #14 by DJM on March 18, 2013 - 11:18 am

    The no-demos argument first gained wider attention through the German Constitutional Courts “Maastricht Decision” and Joe Weiler’s fierce critique thereof:
    http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1468-0386.1995.tb00030.x/abstract

  13. #15 by RCS on March 19, 2013 - 1:21 am

    Esperanto was famously described by Noam Chomsky as “not being a proper languange”.

    Rather like the EU, which is not a proper government, attempting to govern a country that doesn’t exist.

  14. #16 by Roger Cole on March 20, 2013 - 6:10 pm

    There is no european demos. There is no European demos being created from “below”. The vast majority of demonstrations against austerity taking place, are doing so within a national political context. In fact their very diversity show that there is no “european”
    reaction to the crisis whatsoever. The next elections held on an EU wide basis (if it survives that long) will be the next EU elections and the current evidence suggests, for example, that UKIP will do very well in the UK while SF will do well in Ireland. In short they only thing that these parties will have in common is their ability to express the desire of an increasing number of people to achieve a return of power to national states, to reverse the continual shift of power to the EU caste which offers nothing but perpetual austerity at home and never ending wars abroad.

  15. #17 by Maggie G on March 21, 2013 - 2:28 pm

    Start with Mazzini who was terrorist and founded Youth organizations- set principles on which to this days are executed colored revolutions. Mazzini also founded Mafia and was lengthened body of Bank of England.

    Foundations of European Union were set by terrorist organization called Operation Gladio run by NATO. It leads to centralized power in the hands of unelected body= European commision with jesuit Barroso as head= alumni of Georgetown. Who they are see book T. Saussy: Rulers of Evil.

    The Advantages of Small States and the Dangers of Centralization | Hans-Hermann Hoppe
    http://youtu.be/dNQpV4-5x5E
    See also Hoppe’s: Democracy- The god that failed.

    Yepp. We get into trap as they were inging nice lullaby to us. But we woke up and nightmare is here. We are gonna fix it.

  16. #18 by al on March 24, 2013 - 7:03 am

    Roger Cole :
    There is no european demos. There is no European demos being created from “below”. The vast majority of demonstrations against austerity taking place, are doing so within a national political context. In fact their very diversity show that there is no “european” reaction to the crisis whatsoever. The next elections held on an EU wide basis (if it survives that long) will be the next EU elections and the current evidence suggests, for example, that UKIP will do very well in the UK while SF will do well in Ireland. In short they only thing that these parties will have in common is their ability to express the desire of an increasing number of people to achieve a return of power to national states, to reverse the continual shift of power to the EU caste which offers nothing but perpetual austerity at home and never ending wars abroad.

    Indeed. There is no “European demos” any more than there was a “Soviet people”. If people cannot see the similarities between the two, then they must be blind.

  17. #19 by bidสินค้า on April 8, 2013 - 4:15 am

    Useful info. Fortunate me I discovered your site by chance, and I’m surprised why this twist of fate didn’t happened earlier! I bookmarked it.