The Farce Goes On

[John Shelton]

Thanks, John, for quickly proving my point (if rather one-sidedly) ... I've always wanted to be so liked by you so would you start to really like me if I have a big cheesy grin at you instead?

I'm impressed by the rapidity of your response scottycelt. I shan't bother to think again a minute after posting in future.

What I find unsettling is how you repeat the attitude of passive support for fascism by not supporting it as such but repeating that the problem of course lies elsewhere that characterised a notorious period of pre-EU European history.

[teamsaint]

I'll say yes, because that's what everyone says. But really these discussions get beyond a point where I'm qualified to hold an opinion.

these areas seem to be very complicated. I really don't have an answer to your lisbon Treaty answer, for instance.
What is clear is that it is very difficult to get a real handle on, for instance , the real economic situation in Greece. My own view is that the waters are deliberately muddied by those in power....but perhaps the worl dis just too complicated for ordinary people to understand !!

Either way, holding an opinion without every single fact at our fingertips is fine in my opinion.
i don't, for instance need every bit of evidence to see what , in general, the British arms industry is doing, or to have an opinion on the general effects of the actions of the ECB on european economies.
Otherwise , wouldn't we end up leaving it all to "technocrats" ?....and we know what that really means!

[scottycelt]

I'm impressed by the rapidity of your response scottycelt. I shan't bother to think again a minute after posting in future.

What I find unsettling is how you repeat the attitude of passive support for fascism by not supporting it as such but repeating that the problem of course lies elsewhere that characterised a notorious period of pre-EU European history.

No, you assume that because I don't support the fascism of the extreme Left I must be a 'passive supporter' of its equally vicious extreme Right counterpart. I don't think it really needs to be spelt out here that I broadly support Centrism which is what the EU is all about and probably why it so detested by both extremes.

Sometimes, though, as in Franco's Spain or Tito's Yugoslavia we have to reluctantly accept one of these evils as the only other so-called 'democratic' alternative is likely to be even worse ... that does not mean 'support' for either extreme ideology, it is merely conceding what one considers to be a simple if unpalatable reality.

Pre-EU European history exposes just as much of a problem with the murderous fascists of the Left as those of the Right.

Well, at least that's what I remember reading in my history books ...

[John Shelton]

Pre-EU European history exposes just as much of a problem with the murderous fascists of the Left as those of the Right.

Well, at least that's what I remember reading in my history books ...

Then you have a faulty memory. Of the countries of the present EU some have had brief experimental radical left governments or societies which have been bloodily suppressed, either by the fascist right or centrist democrats or the USA-alliance (The Paris Commune, Germany immediately after WW1, Hungary in the 1920s, Spain in the 1930s, Greece and Italy post WW2). By contrast Greece, Portugal and Spain have had fascist governments [edit: as recently as] since 1960, at the least tolerated by democratic, centrist states and democratic centrist people.

Resistance to fascism has overwhelmingly come from the left; the people overwhelmingly murdered by fascists whose memory you spit on by associating their politics with those of Mussolini and Hitler. Broad supporters of centrism have enjoyed how the trains run on time, there aren't any strikes, and demonstrations are carefully choreographed and turned into cinematic spectaculars. [edit: and, indeed, how family values are invariably upheld]. Another group who invariably come to an agreement with fascists is, of course, the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church. As they did in Italy and Germany in the 1930s.

Your effective description of Guernica as the lesser of two evils is a pretty clear demonstration of exactly what your broad support for centrism means in reality. Any significant, organised, opposition to economic policy in this country and I bet you'd be screaming for armed troops on the streets and the more live the ammunition the better.

[amateur51]

I'll say yes, because that's what everyone says. But really these discussions get beyond a point where I'm qualified to hold an opinion.

[scottycelt]

Then you have a faulty memory. Of the countries of the present EU some have had brief experimental radical left governments or societies which have been bloodily suppressed, either by the fascist right or centrist democrats or the USA-alliance (The Paris Commune, Germany immediately after WW1, Hungary in the 1920s, Spain in the 1930s, Greece and Italy post WW2). By contrast Greece, Portugal and Spain have had fascist governments [edit: as recently as] since 1960, at the least tolerated by democratic, centrist states and democratic centrist people.

Resistance to fascism has overwhelmingly come from the left; the people overwhelmingly murdered by fascists whose memory you spit on by associating their politics with those of Mussolini and Hitler. Broad supporters of centrism have enjoyed how the trains run on time, there aren't any strikes, and demonstrations are carefully choreographed and turned into cinematic spectaculars. [edit: and, indeed, how family values are invariably upheld]. Another group who invariably come to an agreement with fascists is, of course, the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church. As they did in Italy and Germany in the 1930s.

Your effective description of Guernica as the lesser of two evils is a pretty clear demonstration of exactly what your broad support for centrism means in reality. Any significant, organised, opposition to economic policy in this country and I bet you'd be screaming for armed troops on the streets and the more live the ammunition the better.

Ah, we're back to what you insist I believe rather than what I actually do ... and your last shameful sentence is so typical of hysterical Leftist clap-trap.

And, of course, we're back to the 'Roman Catholic Church' ... the root cause of all evil ... and not a word about Stalin and his successor-thugs who subjugated half of Europe for decades ... just ask the representatives of current EU states like Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, etc, etc, etc.

How they and the people they represent must yearn for the good old days, John ... ?

[amateur51]

Ah, we're back to what you insist I believe rather than what I actually do ... and your last shameful sentence is so typical of hysterical Leftist clap-trap.

And, of course, we're back to the 'Roman Catholic Church' ... the root cause of all evil ... and not a word about Stalin and his successor-thugs who subjugated half of Europe for decades ... just ask the representatives of current EU states like Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, etc, etc, etc.

How they and the people they represent must yearn for the good old days, John ... ?

You always use this line scotty - didn't Granny Celt ever tell you that two wrongs don't make a right? Face up to the wrongs committed by the Church over the centuries & I might start paying your argument some attention.

[John Shelton]

I didn't say the Roman Catholic Church (sorry the 'Roman Catholic Church') was the root of all evil: I said the hierarchy invariably finish up coming to an accommodation with fascists. Which, of course, they do. In Germany, Italy, Spain, Portugal - in Central and South America.

The Soviet night was indeed a terrible thing, but it was externally imposed: in those instances where European people have themselves organised in leftist societies generally at odds with the Soviet model [edit: certainly with the model as it was in Eastern Europe post-WW2] those organisations have been suppressed with utmost violence. So respectable in some instances is that violence that I'd guess most people are unaware of the scale of killing that followed the suppression of the Paris Commune.

I'd be careful of invoking Hungary in this context. http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news...s-new-fascists

http://www.dissidentblog.org/en/articles/hungarian-democracy-tatters

[John Shelton]

As has been pretty obvious from the start of all this unprecedented anarchy on our streets, extraordinary circumstances require extraordinary measures. Water-cannon is the first measure that might be adopted and, of course, is the police tactic used in most other countries, but apparently our mainland police don't have any at their disposal ... marvellous, eh?. Water-cannon has the distinct advantage of both dispersing the mob but is also suitably equipped to put out small fires at the same time, which is exactly why it's widely used in such circumstances elsewhere.

In the event that the police continue to fail in combating this thuggery with the resources available (I feel so sorry for our poorly-equipped riot officers, some who appear to be tiny-sized females) then the army will have to be called in and rubber-bullets used on the mobs if necessary.

If anyone here continues to express any doubt what pure 'evil' actually means, they surely must be in complete and total denial concerning the bleedin' blindingly-obvious dark side of human nature currently casting a dark shadow over our streets.

http://www.for3.org/forums/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=73365

[french frank]

Just my euro's worth ....

Yes, and it all comes back to the fundamental problems the left has with the EU as a 'capitalist club'. Which in an important sense it is.

It's a tension where I don't see there as being a 'right' and 'wrong' approach - though I accept that if others are clearly on one side or the other of the great divide, they do see it in those terms. I see it that within either tradition, socialist or capitalist, it's possible to come up with policies which at least aim at providing security for the entire population (by security I mean a secure job, a secure income, the secure provision of good quality essential services &c). And I think a capitalist-inclined EU has that aim. It focuses funds in areas where they're needed when they're needed (to deprived or disaster-hit areas, for example), it allows workers where there is no employment to move to areas where there are jobs, but in an institutional sense it expects member states to be economically efficient. And this is where the fault lines become obvious.

So much of the EU seems to me about trying to even things out, to share, which is a fine socialist ideal: the rich pay more, the poor benefit. Environmental directives recognise that in terms of pollution, for example, there are no political boundaries so all member states must aim for the same high standards. Human rights legislation leans in favour of the individual which, awkwardly, sometimes means the villain ...

Insofar as the EU aims to widen an area of prosperous, non-exploitative, environmentally responsible, just and peaceful Europe I would say it was not the least deserving recipient of the award. Is it successful? Is it efficient? Is it flawed? Is it even united? I'd probably say 'sort of', to all four questions. Yes, it's very imperfect.

[John Shelton]

it's possible to come up with policies which at least aim at providing security for the entire population (by security I mean a secure job, a secure income, the secure provision of good quality essential services &c). And I think a capitalist-inclined EU has that aim. It focuses funds in areas where they're needed when they're needed (to deprived or disaster-hit areas, for example), it allows workers where there is no employment to move to areas where there are jobs, but in an institutional sense it expects member states to be economically efficient. And this is where the fault lines become obvious.

I think it had that aim. In common with most of the governments of the member states pre-1980ish. Or, rather, I think your point about fault lines is exact; that aim is theoretically incompatible with the model of economic efficiency now being applied (which isn't, of course, uncontested by other pro-capitalist economists). Of course it's perfectly reasonable to ask how much leeway the EU has a block within the global (dis)order and to point out how much that would apply atomistically to so-called nation states. So much for the Eurosceptic argument.

What I was getting at (the absurdities of the whole Nobel Peace Prize aside) was the falsity of a kind of end of history argument being applied to the EU. I suppose you could argue the Prize restates a commitment to something under threat; my problem would be in the event of conflict which way the consensus would fall (and my hunch is it would fall where it always does).

I'm not really anti-EU, at least not in the traditional sense.

[aeolium]

It's a tension where I don't see there as being a 'right' and 'wrong' approach - though I accept that if others are clearly on one side or the other of the great divide, they do see it in those terms. I see it that within either tradition, socialist or capitalist, it's possible to come up with policies which at least aim at providing security for the entire population (by security I mean a secure job, a secure income, the secure provision of good quality essential services &c). And I think a capitalist-inclined EU has that aim. It focuses funds in areas where they're needed when they're needed (to deprived or disaster-hit areas, for example), it allows workers where there is no employment to move to areas where there are jobs, but in an institutional sense it expects member states to be economically efficient. And this is where the fault lines become obvious.

You might say that the effects were more benign prior to Maastricht and the drive towards monetary union, though even here I think the free movement of labour is more beneficial to companies, especially large corporations, than it is to workers as it generally operates to drive labour costs down and allow companies to pick and choose the cheapest. But the real EU catastrophe has arisen from the implementation of monetary union in a way which was almost deliberately designed to create excessive debt in southern Eurozone countries to the (temporary) benefit of the northern ones. Capitalism has long been known, pace Gordon Brown, to operate in cycles of boom and bust, and the long boom pre-2008 fuelled by cheap credit resulted in a spectacular crash. That in itself was not originated by nor confined to the EU, but the peculiar structure of the Eurozone has intensified its disastrous effects in the Eurozone countries with weaker economies. Countries are now caught in a death spiral from which it seems impossible to emerge except by the radical option of default and exit from the Eurozone - which in turn will intensify the problem globally. And unbelievably the EU policy-makers, principally Angela Merkel, are enforcing on the Mediterranean countries austerity measures which will prevent a return to economic growth and cause enormous economic misery and social unrest - almost replicating the German experience of the Great Depression. It is rightly being said by commentators that these policies threaten not merely the integrity of the Eurozone but the whole EU project. Yet no major EU leader will admit that the blind devotion to the Euro at all costs is both unnecessary and damaging.

[french frank]

I'm not really anti-EU, at least not in the traditional sense.

Has-had ... perhaps. Sadly, I'm afraid that the ideals embodied in a system, belief or organisation are usually higher than those of individuals

I don't like awards (we didn't historically have prizes at my school as a point of principle). Mostly arbitrary nonsense. How much will they get for winning the award, anyway? And what will they do with it?

Add: Oh, where did aeolium's post come from? Will think on - I'm sure it's right.

[scottycelt]

You always use this line scotty - didn't Granny Celt ever tell you that two wrongs don't make a right? Face up to the wrongs committed by the Church over the centuries & I might start paying your argument some attention.

.

You leave my granny out of this ...

I could hardly fail to agree that the Church has committed many wrongs in its long history, some pretty bad ones, amsey. Hell, there's even been some very evil Popes. Shame on the church, or rather its members!

After getting that off my chest, I'm not aware that's the point under discussion here, though. The only connection I can see is that the original Common Market was mainly started by Catholics and was based very much on Catholic Social Teaching.

However, that has long since been overtaken and is now dominated by a socially-liberal elite of which I'm sure you very much approve! Believe me, I don't think the EU is perfect any more than the Catholic Church but it has achieved a heck of a lot in its relatively short existence.

Now that I've officially 'confessed' past wrongdoings by the Catholic Church (as I've done many times in the past, but you must have been 'otherwise engaged') I now look forward to you starting to pay some attention to the matter under discussion, for a change!

[David-G]

we watch as Europe sits idly by and lets fascism brew once again – this time in Greece.

Europe is not just sitting idly by. It is in effect actively encouraging it, inasmuch as it is the "Euro project" that is at the back of this.

Oh, where did aeolium's post come from? Will think on - I'm sure it's right.

It's absolutely 100% right.

Of the countries of the present EU some have had brief experimental radical left governments or societies which have been bloodily suppressed, either by the fascist right or centrist democrats or the USA-alliance

This is a very depressing discussion. You don't mention that of the countries of the present EU some have had brief experimental moderate-centre governments which have been bloodily suppressed, by the communists of the USSR-alliance.