Yanis Varoufakis: Why We Must Save the EU
April 11, 2016 9:52 AM Subscribe
"Our European Union is disintegrating. Should we accelerate the disintegration of a failed confederacy? If one insists that even small countries can retain their sovereignty, as I have done, does this mean Brexit is the obvious course? My answer is an emphatic 'No!'"
"Here is why: if Britain and Greece were not already in the EU, they should most certainly stay out. But, once inside, it is crucial to consider the consequences of a decision to leave. Whether we like it or not, the European Union is our environment – and it has become a terribly unstable environment, which will disintegrate even if a small, depressed country like Greece leaves, let alone a major economy like Britain. Should the Greeks or the Brits care about the disintegration of an infuriating EU? Yes, of course we should care. And we should care very much because the disintegration of this frustrating alliance will create a vortex that will consume us all – a postmodern replay of the 1930s.
It is a major error to assume, whether you are a remain or a leave supporter, that the EU is something constant 'out there' that you may or may not want to be part of. The EU’s very existence depends on Britain staying in. Greece and Britain are facing the same three options. The first two are represented aptly by the two warring factions within the Tory party: deference to Brussels and exit. They are equally calamitous options. Both lead to the same dystopian future: a Europe fit only for those who flourish in times of a great Depression – the xenophobes, the ultra-nationalists, the enemies of democratic sovereignty. The third option is the only one worth going for: staying in the EU to form a cross-border alliance of democrats, which Europeans failed to manage in the 1930s, but which our generation must now attempt to prevent history repeating itself."
Previously.
See also.
And, for fun: Varoufakis may be married to the subject of Pulp's "Common People".
"Here is why: if Britain and Greece were not already in the EU, they should most certainly stay out. But, once inside, it is crucial to consider the consequences of a decision to leave. Whether we like it or not, the European Union is our environment – and it has become a terribly unstable environment, which will disintegrate even if a small, depressed country like Greece leaves, let alone a major economy like Britain. Should the Greeks or the Brits care about the disintegration of an infuriating EU? Yes, of course we should care. And we should care very much because the disintegration of this frustrating alliance will create a vortex that will consume us all – a postmodern replay of the 1930s.
It is a major error to assume, whether you are a remain or a leave supporter, that the EU is something constant 'out there' that you may or may not want to be part of. The EU’s very existence depends on Britain staying in. Greece and Britain are facing the same three options. The first two are represented aptly by the two warring factions within the Tory party: deference to Brussels and exit. They are equally calamitous options. Both lead to the same dystopian future: a Europe fit only for those who flourish in times of a great Depression – the xenophobes, the ultra-nationalists, the enemies of democratic sovereignty. The third option is the only one worth going for: staying in the EU to form a cross-border alliance of democrats, which Europeans failed to manage in the 1930s, but which our generation must now attempt to prevent history repeating itself."
Previously.
See also.
And, for fun: Varoufakis may be married to the subject of Pulp's "Common People".
Ocschwar, further integration might actually help solve the problems the EU is facing. Imagine if Florida's real estate bubble popped and the response from Washington, DC was to cut off everyone's welfare, social security, and unemployment, and to also demand that the state cease any spending on roads, police, fire, hospitals, etc, etc etc. The USA's tight integration with copious almost automatic transfer payments between states via the federal government helps the states avoid the kind of immiseration that Germany is imposing on Greece.
posted by rustcrumb at 10:46 AM on April 11, 2016 [16 favorites]
posted by rustcrumb at 10:46 AM on April 11, 2016 [16 favorites]
I'm sorry I didn't read the Longreads article (yet) - I'm at work. But I'm here to ask an honest question: Why is the dilemma always framed as 'Either EU or (eventual) war?'
Couldn't the peoples of Europe make it through a generation or two without drawing weapons against one another, without the giant bureaucratic structure of the EU looming over them all? I know the EU sets common currency, weights and measures, standards for what is a ripe tomato and what is not -- I don't think these are the things that actually bring about war (or peace). I'm sure I'm stepping right into the center of an 'ignorant American' stereotype here, but what is it that is supposed to be happening here with the EU (but is not) to prevent a war? And isn't it somewhat disingenuous (or worse, manipulative) to suggest that the EU is the only solution?
I feel like the austerity financing and the disparate handling (and/or intentions) about immigrants are almost a worst-case scenario for the category of 'things that will keep the European Union together'.
posted by newdaddy at 10:50 AM on April 11, 2016 [1 favorite]
Couldn't the peoples of Europe make it through a generation or two without drawing weapons against one another, without the giant bureaucratic structure of the EU looming over them all? I know the EU sets common currency, weights and measures, standards for what is a ripe tomato and what is not -- I don't think these are the things that actually bring about war (or peace). I'm sure I'm stepping right into the center of an 'ignorant American' stereotype here, but what is it that is supposed to be happening here with the EU (but is not) to prevent a war? And isn't it somewhat disingenuous (or worse, manipulative) to suggest that the EU is the only solution?
I feel like the austerity financing and the disparate handling (and/or intentions) about immigrants are almost a worst-case scenario for the category of 'things that will keep the European Union together'.
posted by newdaddy at 10:50 AM on April 11, 2016 [1 favorite]
What astounds me is how the EU's technocrats decided this accomplishment isn't enough, and that further integration and expansion is important enough to risk the backlash we're seeing.
There are two big problems with the EU as a supra-national organisation.
The first problem is that keeping a relatively stable federation requires massive transfer payments from the haves to the have nots. Otherwise you will get the proverbial poles lining up to get into the UK schtick that UKIP likes to tout.
The second is the Maastricht Treaty basically made "fuck you I've got mine" to be the EU's motto. It was basically to ensure the Germans and Brits wouldn't be paying for the Europe's version of the welfare queens (public servants with high pay, long vacations, and huge pensions) lazing about in Italy and Greece.
In the United States for instance we see huge transfers of wealth away from rich urban areas to poorer rural areas. Arguably it isn't enough (click newer) but it does it and it stops states like Kansas from literally becoming Greece. If we ran the US like we did the EU, the US would be entirely fucked.
So here we are. Trying to fit roundish pegs into squarish holes that looks like they fit if we just try hard enough.
The solution? Everyone grows up and realizes this whole thing shouldn't be about assigning blame and then deciding on penance but helping to fix the problem and then making the situation work better from there on forwards.
But given the attitude of Britain so far we might as well pray for elves to come along in the night and fix the EU.
posted by Talez at 10:52 AM on April 11, 2016 [6 favorites]
There are two big problems with the EU as a supra-national organisation.
The first problem is that keeping a relatively stable federation requires massive transfer payments from the haves to the have nots. Otherwise you will get the proverbial poles lining up to get into the UK schtick that UKIP likes to tout.
The second is the Maastricht Treaty basically made "fuck you I've got mine" to be the EU's motto. It was basically to ensure the Germans and Brits wouldn't be paying for the Europe's version of the welfare queens (public servants with high pay, long vacations, and huge pensions) lazing about in Italy and Greece.
In the United States for instance we see huge transfers of wealth away from rich urban areas to poorer rural areas. Arguably it isn't enough (click newer) but it does it and it stops states like Kansas from literally becoming Greece. If we ran the US like we did the EU, the US would be entirely fucked.
So here we are. Trying to fit roundish pegs into squarish holes that looks like they fit if we just try hard enough.
The solution? Everyone grows up and realizes this whole thing shouldn't be about assigning blame and then deciding on penance but helping to fix the problem and then making the situation work better from there on forwards.
But given the attitude of Britain so far we might as well pray for elves to come along in the night and fix the EU.
posted by Talez at 10:52 AM on April 11, 2016 [6 favorites]
There's a strong argument for a unified fiscal system across the EU, but it's politically impossible; it's even arguable that without this, the EU can't work properly anyway. I'm firmly on the side of Varoufakis that a dysfunctional EU is preferable to a non-existent one, because it does give us all the tools to stop the worst desires of demagogues, but by God I despair of the abilities of EU politicians to communicate this well enough.
It is extraordinarily expensive to merge vastly different economies - ask the Germans - but it is doable and necessary - ask the Germans.
posted by Devonian at 10:58 AM on April 11, 2016 [1 favorite]
It is extraordinarily expensive to merge vastly different economies - ask the Germans - but it is doable and necessary - ask the Germans.
posted by Devonian at 10:58 AM on April 11, 2016 [1 favorite]
"I don't think these are the things that actually bring about war (or peace)"
The original purpose of the European Common Market was to tie the economy of Germany to the economy of France and the Benelux countries, so as to dissuade the Germans from launching another attack on those countries. The tomato ripeness stuff is an outgrowth of that. In 2010, that stuff is more apparent because the other stuff (tying Germany to the rest of Europe) has been so successful.
The ECM/EU has been successful at preventing European war, but how do we control for other factors? In particular, the meekness of German foreign policy after WWII? My impression of Germans, from reading their media and talking to a few of them, is that they were so horrified by what they were capable of doing during the war that they've gone as far as they can in the other direction (maybe too far?) and have become essentially pacifist. Would that have happened without economic integration? It's hard for me to say, and I've taken graduate-level classes in European politics.
posted by kevinbelt at 10:59 AM on April 11, 2016 [4 favorites]
The original purpose of the European Common Market was to tie the economy of Germany to the economy of France and the Benelux countries, so as to dissuade the Germans from launching another attack on those countries. The tomato ripeness stuff is an outgrowth of that. In 2010, that stuff is more apparent because the other stuff (tying Germany to the rest of Europe) has been so successful.
The ECM/EU has been successful at preventing European war, but how do we control for other factors? In particular, the meekness of German foreign policy after WWII? My impression of Germans, from reading their media and talking to a few of them, is that they were so horrified by what they were capable of doing during the war that they've gone as far as they can in the other direction (maybe too far?) and have become essentially pacifist. Would that have happened without economic integration? It's hard for me to say, and I've taken graduate-level classes in European politics.
posted by kevinbelt at 10:59 AM on April 11, 2016 [4 favorites]
I like Yianis. He was an honest man in a European den of crooks and liars and he at least tried to do what was best for his country and, as far as I can see, Europe as well. He's right on the EU record and dysfunction. But I think he's wrong on what to do with it. He maintains a quixotic IMHO fantasy that a democratic EU is recoverable (if it was ever there to begin with). And I understand this view because until July 13, 2015 I shared it as well to a certain extent.
Thomas Fazi has a very convincing critique of YV's DiEM movement, and has further pointed out the problems with imagining a benevolent federalism as a realistic near or mid-term solution to the ills of the EU.
I wouldn't want to advise anybody on how to vote, and I do realize that a BRexit under Cameron sort of guarantees the worst of all possible worlds for the people of the UK, at least in the near term, but it seems to me that from a left European perspective, whether one believes in the possibility of a reformed EU or not, a BRexit would be a positive development. That is because even if one does not want the EU to disintegrate and, like Varoufakis, believes that it is indeed reformable, then there is no better chance to actually impact such a 180 degree change of course than the wide-scale panic that a BRexit would cause to the various european elites who are by now the sole owners of the European Project. The shock of a pro-BRexit referendum would at least raise the need for radical measures, especially since it is certain to inflame the rising anti-EU sentiment (expressed recently in the Dutch referendum against the EU-Ukraine deal) across the continent.
No doubt, given an EU collapse, there is a clear and present danger of the far-right leading Europe to "a post-modern '30s" a YV likes to point out. But it seems to me he misses the point (that he himself raises!): after the Greek Spring and after the horrible way that the EU has dealt with the refugee crisis, those post-modern 1930s are already upon us. The union has proven to have become a terminally undemocratic, opaque and xenophobic endeavour, run for elite benefits alone. The problem is that the costs of leaving the EU for most of its member countries are immense at this point. A BRexit might provide a window of opportunity for a popular takeover of the european project, or trigger its, earned, demise... but as Fazi points out "the situation now is so serious that I think we should consider [the possibility of a EU breakup], however dangerous it might be".
posted by talos at 11:00 AM on April 11, 2016 [6 favorites]
Thomas Fazi has a very convincing critique of YV's DiEM movement, and has further pointed out the problems with imagining a benevolent federalism as a realistic near or mid-term solution to the ills of the EU.
I wouldn't want to advise anybody on how to vote, and I do realize that a BRexit under Cameron sort of guarantees the worst of all possible worlds for the people of the UK, at least in the near term, but it seems to me that from a left European perspective, whether one believes in the possibility of a reformed EU or not, a BRexit would be a positive development. That is because even if one does not want the EU to disintegrate and, like Varoufakis, believes that it is indeed reformable, then there is no better chance to actually impact such a 180 degree change of course than the wide-scale panic that a BRexit would cause to the various european elites who are by now the sole owners of the European Project. The shock of a pro-BRexit referendum would at least raise the need for radical measures, especially since it is certain to inflame the rising anti-EU sentiment (expressed recently in the Dutch referendum against the EU-Ukraine deal) across the continent.
No doubt, given an EU collapse, there is a clear and present danger of the far-right leading Europe to "a post-modern '30s" a YV likes to point out. But it seems to me he misses the point (that he himself raises!): after the Greek Spring and after the horrible way that the EU has dealt with the refugee crisis, those post-modern 1930s are already upon us. The union has proven to have become a terminally undemocratic, opaque and xenophobic endeavour, run for elite benefits alone. The problem is that the costs of leaving the EU for most of its member countries are immense at this point. A BRexit might provide a window of opportunity for a popular takeover of the european project, or trigger its, earned, demise... but as Fazi points out "the situation now is so serious that I think we should consider [the possibility of a EU breakup], however dangerous it might be".
posted by talos at 11:00 AM on April 11, 2016 [6 favorites]
I'm sure I'm stepping right into the center of an 'ignorant American' stereotype here, but what is it that is supposed to be happening here with the EU (but is not) to prevent a war?
When the shit hits the fan the default state of a lot of European countries is blind nationalism. Fidesz taking control in Hungary with Jobbik in third place, Golden Dawn picking up seats in Greece, UKIP picked up 27.5% of the vote in the UK for the 2014 European Parliament elections and 12.6% of the 2015 general election primary vote. Prawo i Sprawiedliwość and Kukiz'15 rising in Poland has authoritarians putting their jackboots back on.
Imagine electing hardcore anarchists to Congress. These people promising to fix the situation with tough and decisive actions aren't doing it in good faith, rationally, or in altruistic ways. They look to blame those that they dislike, their own prejudices. Pretty soon that starts to be their neighbours and that road has lead to war like it has so many hundreds of fucking times before.
Hell, that's why everyone went to America in the first place.
posted by Talez at 11:03 AM on April 11, 2016 [2 favorites]
When the shit hits the fan the default state of a lot of European countries is blind nationalism. Fidesz taking control in Hungary with Jobbik in third place, Golden Dawn picking up seats in Greece, UKIP picked up 27.5% of the vote in the UK for the 2014 European Parliament elections and 12.6% of the 2015 general election primary vote. Prawo i Sprawiedliwość and Kukiz'15 rising in Poland has authoritarians putting their jackboots back on.
Imagine electing hardcore anarchists to Congress. These people promising to fix the situation with tough and decisive actions aren't doing it in good faith, rationally, or in altruistic ways. They look to blame those that they dislike, their own prejudices. Pretty soon that starts to be their neighbours and that road has lead to war like it has so many hundreds of fucking times before.
Hell, that's why everyone went to America in the first place.
posted by Talez at 11:03 AM on April 11, 2016 [2 favorites]
"Imagine electing hardcore anarchists to Congress"
...
:(
posted by kevinbelt at 11:09 AM on April 11, 2016 [3 favorites]
...
:(
posted by kevinbelt at 11:09 AM on April 11, 2016 [3 favorites]
When the shit hits the fan the default state of a lot of European countries is blind nationalism.
Right, ok, with that premise there isn’t much room for discussion is there? EU or else, blind nationalism!
Well thanks! That solves it then, right?
I haven’t read the whole piece and I pray that’s not actually the basis of Varoufakis’s entire argument. That’d be... interesting, coming from him. (Or the basis of the pro-EU anti-Brexit argument in the UK, either, because if it is, oh man, good luck with that.)
posted by bitteschoen at 11:11 AM on April 11, 2016 [1 favorite]
Right, ok, with that premise there isn’t much room for discussion is there? EU or else, blind nationalism!
Well thanks! That solves it then, right?
I haven’t read the whole piece and I pray that’s not actually the basis of Varoufakis’s entire argument. That’d be... interesting, coming from him. (Or the basis of the pro-EU anti-Brexit argument in the UK, either, because if it is, oh man, good luck with that.)
posted by bitteschoen at 11:11 AM on April 11, 2016 [1 favorite]
Tis like reading a man defending the League of Nations. Which reminds me, I have sitting on my shelf a biography of Stanley Baldwin which I began some months ago. He was always such an idealist. I should pick it up and see how it ends.
posted by Emma May Smith at 11:15 AM on April 11, 2016 [2 favorites]
posted by Emma May Smith at 11:15 AM on April 11, 2016 [2 favorites]
Speaking of right-wing nutjobs: Greece's Golden Dawn Nazis love Donald Trump. And so does the (almost as far right nutjob) vice president of the main "center-right" opposition party.
posted by talos at 11:23 AM on April 11, 2016
posted by talos at 11:23 AM on April 11, 2016
Talez: "Imagine electing hardcore anarchists to Congress."
Actually the ratio of innocent people killed because of hardcore anarchists, over innocent people killed because of far-right nationalists world-wide is pretty close to zero... There is by no means a symmetry here
posted by talos at 11:32 AM on April 11, 2016 [3 favorites]
Actually the ratio of innocent people killed because of hardcore anarchists, over innocent people killed because of far-right nationalists world-wide is pretty close to zero... There is by no means a symmetry here
posted by talos at 11:32 AM on April 11, 2016 [3 favorites]
And, for fun: Varoufakis may be married to the subject of Pulp's "Common People".
Let's review the evidence:
She came from Greece,
She had a thirst for knowledge, which can be inferred because she,
Studied sculpture at St. Martin's College of Art and Design during the same time Jarvis Cocker attended film classes there, when she might have,
Told him that her dad was loaded, which would make sense because she is the daughter of the former owner of a large textile manufacturer that was nationalized by the Greek government in the 1980s.
Claims that Jarvis Cocker caught her eye could not be substantiated.
posted by [expletive deleted] at 11:37 AM on April 11, 2016 [8 favorites]
Let's review the evidence:
She came from Greece,
She had a thirst for knowledge, which can be inferred because she,
Studied sculpture at St. Martin's College of Art and Design during the same time Jarvis Cocker attended film classes there, when she might have,
Told him that her dad was loaded, which would make sense because she is the daughter of the former owner of a large textile manufacturer that was nationalized by the Greek government in the 1980s.
Claims that Jarvis Cocker caught her eye could not be substantiated.
posted by [expletive deleted] at 11:37 AM on April 11, 2016 [8 favorites]
It seems to me like any single country that exited the EU would have to immediately turn around and make all kinds of bilateral agreements with the EU since they've already been so economically integrated. I can imagine a future where the "two-speed Europe" comes to pass by the core countries remaining in the EU and Euro while bits and pieces of the periphery exit the country they're a part of now, and/or the Euro, and or the EU; but are forced by circumstance to essentially renegotiate their integration into the massive bureaucracy of the European superstate.
posted by 3urypteris at 11:41 AM on April 11, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by 3urypteris at 11:41 AM on April 11, 2016 [1 favorite]
Actually the ratio of innocent people killed because of hardcore anarchists, over innocent people killed because of far-right nationalists world-wide is pretty close to zero... There is by no means a symmetry here
I mean in the context of just wanting to tear it all down. The people keep sending the hardest spectrum of eurosceptic to congress.
Right, ok, with that premise there isn’t much room for discussion is there? EU or else, blind nationalism!
A lot of European borders are artificial constructs set by centuries of wheeling and dealing by the ruling class. There are many sectarian rifts all over the place that have been festering for centuries. These wounds are reopening all over the continent in the wake of crisis. Macedonia, Latvia, Lithuania. Even in Denmark the pro-EU Venstre's government exists at the pleasure of the far right Danish People's Party (who are in fact bigger than Venstre in the Folketing).
posted by Talez at 11:44 AM on April 11, 2016 [1 favorite]
I mean in the context of just wanting to tear it all down. The people keep sending the hardest spectrum of eurosceptic to congress.
Right, ok, with that premise there isn’t much room for discussion is there? EU or else, blind nationalism!
A lot of European borders are artificial constructs set by centuries of wheeling and dealing by the ruling class. There are many sectarian rifts all over the place that have been festering for centuries. These wounds are reopening all over the continent in the wake of crisis. Macedonia, Latvia, Lithuania. Even in Denmark the pro-EU Venstre's government exists at the pleasure of the far right Danish People's Party (who are in fact bigger than Venstre in the Folketing).
posted by Talez at 11:44 AM on April 11, 2016 [1 favorite]
Imagine if Florida's real estate bubble popped and the response from Washington, DC was to cut off everyone's welfare, social security, and unemployment, and to also demand that the state cease any spending on roads, police, fire, hospitals, etc, etc etc.
Well, 1. That bubble would not have happened without the eurozone and Schengen zone being constructed the way they were. 2. Greece, actually has the option of saying "fuck it, drachma time." And believe it or not, so does Florida. In the Great Depression, governments that ran out of dollars issued tradable IOUs, and those traded at a floating rate against the dollar. California came close to doing it again in 2008.
If Washington, DC didn't prevent it in the 30's, and would not have prevented it in 2008, why should Brussels stop Greece from doing it?
The result would be de-integration, i.e. Greece would exit the Eurozone, and possibly other PIGS. But, if there's still peace along the Rhine, the EU is still doing A-OK. So while further integration with funds moving into the hard hit areas is one solution, so is a partial retreat from integration.
posted by ocschwar at 11:53 AM on April 11, 2016
Well, 1. That bubble would not have happened without the eurozone and Schengen zone being constructed the way they were. 2. Greece, actually has the option of saying "fuck it, drachma time." And believe it or not, so does Florida. In the Great Depression, governments that ran out of dollars issued tradable IOUs, and those traded at a floating rate against the dollar. California came close to doing it again in 2008.
If Washington, DC didn't prevent it in the 30's, and would not have prevented it in 2008, why should Brussels stop Greece from doing it?
The result would be de-integration, i.e. Greece would exit the Eurozone, and possibly other PIGS. But, if there's still peace along the Rhine, the EU is still doing A-OK. So while further integration with funds moving into the hard hit areas is one solution, so is a partial retreat from integration.
posted by ocschwar at 11:53 AM on April 11, 2016
The result would be de-integration, i.e. Greece would exit the Eurozone, and possibly other PIGS. But, if there's still peace along the Rhine, the EU is still doing A-OK.
Except the bond rates would shoot sky high for the periphery of the Eurozone causing a complete collapse in the economic systems for about 100 million people.
posted by Talez at 12:00 PM on April 11, 2016 [1 favorite]
Except the bond rates would shoot sky high for the periphery of the Eurozone causing a complete collapse in the economic systems for about 100 million people.
posted by Talez at 12:00 PM on April 11, 2016 [1 favorite]
Well I have now read the entire piece (and hugely enjoyed it, of course, the man can write as well as speak so eloquently - and the childhood memories and anecdotes about meeting Schäuble are worth the read alone) and I’m relieved the argument is not really quite as crude as EU-or-else, but I’m not too happy about it being condensed in the last few paragraphs with no less than three mentions of the 1930s. Come on... It lends itself too easily to be read as scaremongering.
Quite a striking mix of hope and resignation in the conclusion:
"Is this not utopian? Of course it is! But not more so than the notion that the current EU can survive its anti-democratic hubris, and the gross incompetence fuelled by its unaccountability. Or the idea that British or Greek democracy can be revived in the bosom of a nation-state whose sovereignty will never be restored within a single market controlled by Brussels."
How do you reconcile all that? I’d love to share the vision of "an internationalist bulwark against both submission to Brussels and hyper-nationalist reaction", but "utopian" doesn’t even begin to describe it.
posted by bitteschoen at 12:09 PM on April 11, 2016 [1 favorite]
Quite a striking mix of hope and resignation in the conclusion:
"Is this not utopian? Of course it is! But not more so than the notion that the current EU can survive its anti-democratic hubris, and the gross incompetence fuelled by its unaccountability. Or the idea that British or Greek democracy can be revived in the bosom of a nation-state whose sovereignty will never be restored within a single market controlled by Brussels."
How do you reconcile all that? I’d love to share the vision of "an internationalist bulwark against both submission to Brussels and hyper-nationalist reaction", but "utopian" doesn’t even begin to describe it.
posted by bitteschoen at 12:09 PM on April 11, 2016 [1 favorite]
The first generation, that is, since the death of Charlemagne. The EU accomplished that.
The EU had nothing to do with that. NATO (i.e. American military occupation) did that.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 12:30 PM on April 11, 2016 [1 favorite]
The EU had nothing to do with that. NATO (i.e. American military occupation) did that.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 12:30 PM on April 11, 2016 [1 favorite]
The EU had nothing to do with that. NATO (i.e. American military occupation) did that.
NATO can still keep the Americans in and the Russians out. But it's been a long time since it last had the capacity to keep the Germans down.
posted by ocschwar at 12:31 PM on April 11, 2016
NATO can still keep the Americans in and the Russians out. But it's been a long time since it last had the capacity to keep the Germans down.
posted by ocschwar at 12:31 PM on April 11, 2016
the first generation, in a long time, to live their entire lives so far without witnessing a war along the Rhine...the EU accomplished that
No, the Soviet threat and NATO accomplished that. Fear of a common enemy plus an intergenerational military alliance did the trick. Even now NATO is keeping the peace, because, paradoxically, it gives all European members an incentive to keep their militaries historically weak (expecting American help in a crisis), while at the same time NATO maintains their habit of thinking of themselves as being on the same side.
We can continue to have NATO without the EU.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 12:31 PM on April 11, 2016 [3 favorites]
No, the Soviet threat and NATO accomplished that. Fear of a common enemy plus an intergenerational military alliance did the trick. Even now NATO is keeping the peace, because, paradoxically, it gives all European members an incentive to keep their militaries historically weak (expecting American help in a crisis), while at the same time NATO maintains their habit of thinking of themselves as being on the same side.
We can continue to have NATO without the EU.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 12:31 PM on April 11, 2016 [3 favorites]
Apparently I need better early warning radar.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 12:32 PM on April 11, 2016 [4 favorites]
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 12:32 PM on April 11, 2016 [4 favorites]
Part of the problem in the EU is that the institution is failing to live up to its ideals, and I don't see anyone addressing that. Yes, it's better to have an EU than not having one, but for us aholes in peripheral countries, watching a bunch of suits from Brussels come to a five-star hotel, take a luxury car to a meeting and decide we need to cut more on pensions and benefits and more austerity and taxes before leaving the next morning doesn't do much to help the case.
posted by lmfsilva at 12:42 PM on April 11, 2016 [11 favorites]
posted by lmfsilva at 12:42 PM on April 11, 2016 [11 favorites]
I love that Stratou may be the girl from "Common People."
Her "Desert Breath" is extraordinary.
posted by chavenet at 1:19 PM on April 11, 2016
Her "Desert Breath" is extraordinary.
posted by chavenet at 1:19 PM on April 11, 2016
I love that Stratou may be the girl from "Common People."
This came up when Varoufakis was a minister - amusingly enough, there was another woman (the name escapes me - IIRC currently an academic in the arts) that laid claim to the dubious honor.
posted by Dr Dracator at 1:38 PM on April 11, 2016
This came up when Varoufakis was a minister - amusingly enough, there was another woman (the name escapes me - IIRC currently an academic in the arts) that laid claim to the dubious honor.
posted by Dr Dracator at 1:38 PM on April 11, 2016
We can continue to have NATO without the EU.
Not if Trump wins. At least, not on current terms.
posted by IndigoJones at 1:43 PM on April 11, 2016
Not if Trump wins. At least, not on current terms.
posted by IndigoJones at 1:43 PM on April 11, 2016
The Euro seems to be the problem, not the EU. If Greece could simply have defaulted and printed more drachmas the German banks would have lost lots of money, but Greece wouldn't have suffered so. Which is fine with me: well-paid German bankers should be more careful with the money of their investors.
I was a great fan of the Euro twenty years ago: I was very wrong, I think. Maybe the tensions in the UK would be lessened if London had a different currency from the rest of the country?
posted by alasdair at 2:05 PM on April 11, 2016 [2 favorites]
I was a great fan of the Euro twenty years ago: I was very wrong, I think. Maybe the tensions in the UK would be lessened if London had a different currency from the rest of the country?
posted by alasdair at 2:05 PM on April 11, 2016 [2 favorites]
I feel like the austerity financing and the disparate handling (and/or intentions) about immigrants are almost a worst-case scenario for the category of 'things that will keep the European Union together'.
Which is why I think a partial retreat from currency integration, while obviously a death blow to the ego of many officials in Brussels, is just not a big deal.
If the USA, an actual continent spanning nation state made of member states, can tolerate temporary currency spinoffs by municipalities and states, surely the EU should be able to as well.
posted by ocschwar at 2:18 PM on April 11, 2016
I don't know whether to credit NATO or the European Union with averting World War III, so I won't decide between them. Both a mutual defense pact and a shared economic future are reasonable steps to take toward that goal. More broadly, I think the point of the EU is not that its nations will never squabble but that those internal disputes are generally not worth fighting wars over, and should not be viewed as more important than the power that its nations can wield as a bloc.
So I appreciate Varoufakis's point that, though it's natural for Greeks to hate the EU after last year's humiliation, that doesn't mean it's a good idea for them to leave the EU. I think the United Nations is far from perfect, but that doesn't mean that I'd want the US to withdraw, even if we wanted to set up our own cool UN alternative and invite all our friends. We can argue about the wisdom of the Eurozone, but I do not believe that Greece is more powerful outside of the EU than inside, and I don't think it would be more powerful in a hypothetical future where the EU has been dissolved. (The Greeks can feel differently, and they may be right.)
Likewise, I don't think that Brexit is going to go well, even if it results in the UK staying with renegotiated terms. I don't think that the EU can survive if its more powerful nations start applying leverage to ensure that EU membership is in their obvious best interest. I think it'll only encourage brinksmanship of the sort that the troika exemplified last year — agree to what we want, or we're out.
This isn't to say that Europeans should just put up with the EU no matter how grotesque it may get. But neither is a threat of withdrawal the only way to get what you want. And I think Geoffrey Howe was right — the risk of not being in the EU is that you no longer have any power among its member states. “The 11 others cannot impose their solution on the 12th country against its will, but they can go ahead without us. The risk is not imposition but isolation.”
posted by savetheclocktower at 2:50 PM on April 11, 2016
So I appreciate Varoufakis's point that, though it's natural for Greeks to hate the EU after last year's humiliation, that doesn't mean it's a good idea for them to leave the EU. I think the United Nations is far from perfect, but that doesn't mean that I'd want the US to withdraw, even if we wanted to set up our own cool UN alternative and invite all our friends. We can argue about the wisdom of the Eurozone, but I do not believe that Greece is more powerful outside of the EU than inside, and I don't think it would be more powerful in a hypothetical future where the EU has been dissolved. (The Greeks can feel differently, and they may be right.)
Likewise, I don't think that Brexit is going to go well, even if it results in the UK staying with renegotiated terms. I don't think that the EU can survive if its more powerful nations start applying leverage to ensure that EU membership is in their obvious best interest. I think it'll only encourage brinksmanship of the sort that the troika exemplified last year — agree to what we want, or we're out.
This isn't to say that Europeans should just put up with the EU no matter how grotesque it may get. But neither is a threat of withdrawal the only way to get what you want. And I think Geoffrey Howe was right — the risk of not being in the EU is that you no longer have any power among its member states. “The 11 others cannot impose their solution on the 12th country against its will, but they can go ahead without us. The risk is not imposition but isolation.”
posted by savetheclocktower at 2:50 PM on April 11, 2016
I've never heard a convincing argument that either Britain or Greece leaving the E.U. would cause it to unravel.
As long as Germany and France remain happy with the underlying trade deal of market access for farm subsidies, then the E.U. will presumably continue.
Also, I'm doubtful that E.U. citizens would tolerate limits being imposed upon their rights to travel, work, or retire anywhere, so those rights should remain, modulo a fascist state or two. Those rights are by far the most important thing the E.U. provides.
Varoufakis himself was prepared to exit the Euro if absolutely necessary. And rightly so.
posted by jeffburdges at 3:21 PM on April 11, 2016
As long as Germany and France remain happy with the underlying trade deal of market access for farm subsidies, then the E.U. will presumably continue.
Also, I'm doubtful that E.U. citizens would tolerate limits being imposed upon their rights to travel, work, or retire anywhere, so those rights should remain, modulo a fascist state or two. Those rights are by far the most important thing the E.U. provides.
Varoufakis himself was prepared to exit the Euro if absolutely necessary. And rightly so.
posted by jeffburdges at 3:21 PM on April 11, 2016
The European Common Market was a great thing. It would still be a great thing if there was no European Union.
Most of the good things the EU is credited with come from the Common Market. Most of the rest come from NATO.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 4:22 PM on April 11, 2016 [1 favorite]
Most of the good things the EU is credited with come from the Common Market. Most of the rest come from NATO.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 4:22 PM on April 11, 2016 [1 favorite]
The most important thing the EU itself actually did was currency unification, which has turned out to be a titanic catastrophe.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 4:28 PM on April 11, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 4:28 PM on April 11, 2016 [1 favorite]
To be fair, there are quite a lot of other important things the EU does provide that are actually largely appreciated, and not just in the form of funding for business or education and culture and arts and all that. It’s not all ugly technocrats and the evil Euro and austerity.
On NATO vs the EU as keepers of the postwar peace and prosperity and bliss before the impending catastrophe - nevermind that history may have been a bit more complex than that, today, in 2016, what the hell has NATO got to do with anything Varoufakis is talking about really?
posted by bitteschoen at 5:28 PM on April 11, 2016 [1 favorite]
On NATO vs the EU as keepers of the postwar peace and prosperity and bliss before the impending catastrophe - nevermind that history may have been a bit more complex than that, today, in 2016, what the hell has NATO got to do with anything Varoufakis is talking about really?
posted by bitteschoen at 5:28 PM on April 11, 2016 [1 favorite]
On NATO vs the EU as keepers of the postwar peace and prosperity and bliss before the impending catastrophe - nevermind that history may have been a bit more complex than that, today, in 2016, what the hell has NATO got to do with anything Varoufakis is talking about really?
From the article: "Should the Greeks or the Brits care about the disintegration of an infuriating EU? Yes, of course we should care. And we should care very much because the disintegration of this frustrating alliance will create a vortex that will consume us all – a postmodern replay of the 1930s."
Varoufakis barely provides any other argument but the threat of instability.
posted by Emma May Smith at 4:39 AM on April 12, 2016
From the article: "Should the Greeks or the Brits care about the disintegration of an infuriating EU? Yes, of course we should care. And we should care very much because the disintegration of this frustrating alliance will create a vortex that will consume us all – a postmodern replay of the 1930s."
Varoufakis barely provides any other argument but the threat of instability.
posted by Emma May Smith at 4:39 AM on April 12, 2016
Oh yes definitely, it’s not a very convincing argument and it’s his own fault for invoking the spirit of the 1930s three times in a row! but that’s still not quite about the direction the comments on NATO took here, on the relative merits of the EU and NATO in keeping stability in post-war Europe, no?
I mean, that really doesn’t have much to do with 2016 or the crisis in Greece or the technocrats in Brussels or the currency or the threat of "hyper-nationalist reaction" or the loss of sovereignity etc. And I’d be very puzzled by any suggestion of NATO as a sort of alternative to the EU in keeping stability today.
posted by bitteschoen at 4:56 AM on April 12, 2016
I mean, that really doesn’t have much to do with 2016 or the crisis in Greece or the technocrats in Brussels or the currency or the threat of "hyper-nationalist reaction" or the loss of sovereignity etc. And I’d be very puzzled by any suggestion of NATO as a sort of alternative to the EU in keeping stability today.
posted by bitteschoen at 4:56 AM on April 12, 2016
I think the argument is that NATO would prevent Europe from collapsing into the "vortex that will consume us all" because one thing 1930s Europe didn't have was a large US military presence across the continent, a network of American military bases, etc. Not that the US would single-handedly stop any problems, but that its presence would create a counter-balance to push back against any rising regional threats.
But it's been a long time since it last had the capacity to keep the Germans down.
Of course it does. The German military as it currently exists is a joke, and that's largely because it's been able to rely on NATO/American forces. For Germany to be a real military threat again would require massive rearmament and all sorts of fundamental changes to German society and economy. That wouldn't happen overnight, and hopefully could be dealt with long before it did.
posted by Sangermaine at 9:22 AM on April 12, 2016
But it's been a long time since it last had the capacity to keep the Germans down.
Of course it does. The German military as it currently exists is a joke, and that's largely because it's been able to rely on NATO/American forces. For Germany to be a real military threat again would require massive rearmament and all sorts of fundamental changes to German society and economy. That wouldn't happen overnight, and hopefully could be dealt with long before it did.
posted by Sangermaine at 9:22 AM on April 12, 2016
Not that the US would single-handedly stop any problems, but that its presence would create a counter-balance to push back against any rising regional threats.
Yeah, sure I can see where the argument is coming from, but it is completely irrelevant to the current situation in Europe. If anything because, first of all, regardless of my or anyone’s personal opinion, that is not the kind of idea that would go down well at the moment in Europe, much less with the anti-EU or even mildly EU-skeptic crowd. I cannot imagine many would see NATO as a counterbalance to anything today, really. Especially seen what the US/NATO strategy/non-strategy/whatever it is has been in recent years in the Middle East and Northern Africa and about terrorism and all that.
And oh, what with the US through NATO historically being the strongest supporters to push for Turkey membership in the EU, which currently also doesn’t look like the kind of proposition most Europeans, citizens or leaders alike, would be thrilled about.
In short: I really don’t see NATO and/or a stronger US influence on European matters fitting in any argument for common appealing solutions granting more stability in current Europe. The idea of NATO as a stabilising force for Europe belongs to the past, not the present.
posted by bitteschoen at 9:47 AM on April 12, 2016
Yeah, sure I can see where the argument is coming from, but it is completely irrelevant to the current situation in Europe. If anything because, first of all, regardless of my or anyone’s personal opinion, that is not the kind of idea that would go down well at the moment in Europe, much less with the anti-EU or even mildly EU-skeptic crowd. I cannot imagine many would see NATO as a counterbalance to anything today, really. Especially seen what the US/NATO strategy/non-strategy/whatever it is has been in recent years in the Middle East and Northern Africa and about terrorism and all that.
And oh, what with the US through NATO historically being the strongest supporters to push for Turkey membership in the EU, which currently also doesn’t look like the kind of proposition most Europeans, citizens or leaders alike, would be thrilled about.
In short: I really don’t see NATO and/or a stronger US influence on European matters fitting in any argument for common appealing solutions granting more stability in current Europe. The idea of NATO as a stabilising force for Europe belongs to the past, not the present.
posted by bitteschoen at 9:47 AM on April 12, 2016
NATO membership is still a great dog whistle for the right wing. Every time they want to make thinly veiled red-threat analogies, they always bring up "our commitment to the European Union and NATO".
posted by lmfsilva at 10:35 AM on April 12, 2016
posted by lmfsilva at 10:35 AM on April 12, 2016
I'm surprised Varoufakis still has some legitimacy abroad after his hat trick of capital controls, failed negotiations and turning growth into another recession. The sad fact is that his legacy as a politician is Jan Böhmermann's V for Varoufakis.
posted by ersatz at 3:36 PM on April 12, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by ersatz at 3:36 PM on April 12, 2016 [1 favorite]
Capital controls were imposed as blackmail by the ECB and the troika in order to affect the outcome of the referendum and assure that Greece remained hostage to their insane policies of turbo charged austerity forever. It was the cumination of 7 months of Greece's de facto central bank (along with its minor partner, the Bank of Greece) waging an unprincipled war against its economy and its banking system.
Negotiations failed because these gangsters were not negotiating. They were dictating.
"Growth" was never there to begin with in any meaningful sense, except for a brief positive spell when the austerity measures where at a scheduled lull, to be resumed after the "evaluation of the Greek program" in 2015. It was this new wave of recession-inducing austerity measures that the first SYRIZA government tried to negotiate out of but, alas, economic rationality is useless it turns out against brute economic power and the very real threat of blowing up the Greek banking system (what taxpayer-supported little there was left of it) as well as terminally demolishing a depressed economy. That said, as finance minister YV's oversaw a small but very rare six month positive growth period, despite the fact that the troika and the ECB in particular, did everything it could to tank the economy well ahead of the summer.
YV has legitimacy abroad (and among the "non-right" in Greece, I can assure you) exactly because he was the one that laid bare the extreme undemocratic structure of the whole eurozone and made the eurocrats look bad, whenever he went on record. That he "lost" was no failing of his, it was a logical outcome of the balance of power and the lack of preparation to push the negotiation to its logical conclusion (though he was the only one with some sort of alternative plan). However he insisted on defiance till the end. His PM buckled under the pressure. I'm not sure, even today, who was the more "reasonable" of the two...
YV's experience shows that there is no possibility of even mildly redistributive / social democratic policies being allowed anywhere in the EU, and this could be perhaps a warning to the UK left - in the exactly opposite sense that he is advising, as per the FPP...
posted by talos at 2:25 AM on April 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
Negotiations failed because these gangsters were not negotiating. They were dictating.
"Growth" was never there to begin with in any meaningful sense, except for a brief positive spell when the austerity measures where at a scheduled lull, to be resumed after the "evaluation of the Greek program" in 2015. It was this new wave of recession-inducing austerity measures that the first SYRIZA government tried to negotiate out of but, alas, economic rationality is useless it turns out against brute economic power and the very real threat of blowing up the Greek banking system (what taxpayer-supported little there was left of it) as well as terminally demolishing a depressed economy. That said, as finance minister YV's oversaw a small but very rare six month positive growth period, despite the fact that the troika and the ECB in particular, did everything it could to tank the economy well ahead of the summer.
YV has legitimacy abroad (and among the "non-right" in Greece, I can assure you) exactly because he was the one that laid bare the extreme undemocratic structure of the whole eurozone and made the eurocrats look bad, whenever he went on record. That he "lost" was no failing of his, it was a logical outcome of the balance of power and the lack of preparation to push the negotiation to its logical conclusion (though he was the only one with some sort of alternative plan). However he insisted on defiance till the end. His PM buckled under the pressure. I'm not sure, even today, who was the more "reasonable" of the two...
YV's experience shows that there is no possibility of even mildly redistributive / social democratic policies being allowed anywhere in the EU, and this could be perhaps a warning to the UK left - in the exactly opposite sense that he is advising, as per the FPP...
posted by talos at 2:25 AM on April 13, 2016 [3 favorites]
"I'm surprised Varoufakis still has some legitimacy abroad after his hat trick of capital controls, failed negotiations and turning growth into another recession."
Wait, are you blaming Varoufakis? The guy has his faults - he's a probably a little too idealistic, he's stubborn, and he has a flair for the dramatic - but that's a little much. He only served for seven months during a crisis, after years of systemic mismanagement. Schauble himself couldn't have done any better in that little time. Not to mention, he resigned precisely because he was not being permitted to do what he intended. You can criticize his ideas, but to call his ministry a failure is, at best, quite uncharitable.
posted by kevinbelt at 6:41 AM on April 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
Wait, are you blaming Varoufakis? The guy has his faults - he's a probably a little too idealistic, he's stubborn, and he has a flair for the dramatic - but that's a little much. He only served for seven months during a crisis, after years of systemic mismanagement. Schauble himself couldn't have done any better in that little time. Not to mention, he resigned precisely because he was not being permitted to do what he intended. You can criticize his ideas, but to call his ministry a failure is, at best, quite uncharitable.
posted by kevinbelt at 6:41 AM on April 13, 2016 [1 favorite]
That he "lost" was no failing of his, it was a logical outcome of the balance of power and the lack of preparation to push the negotiation to its logical conclusion (though he was the only one with some sort of alternative plan). However he insisted on defiance till the end
Defiance that ended in worse terms and prolonged misery for the economy. The government had no mandate to leave the eurozone and thus this way out of the negotiations was not an option. I view his stint as a failure because he knew about the balance of power and thought he could overcome it with clever arguments while alienating all the people on whom we depended.
PS The economy, which always lags, receded -1.2 the quarter right after that (despite the boost of payables being settled for fear of a bail in, and of increased tourism revenue).
posted by ersatz at 8:50 AM on April 17, 2016
Defiance that ended in worse terms and prolonged misery for the economy. The government had no mandate to leave the eurozone and thus this way out of the negotiations was not an option. I view his stint as a failure because he knew about the balance of power and thought he could overcome it with clever arguments while alienating all the people on whom we depended.
PS The economy, which always lags, receded -1.2 the quarter right after that (despite the boost of payables being settled for fear of a bail in, and of increased tourism revenue).
posted by ersatz at 8:50 AM on April 17, 2016
« Older It's the floofy clouds that get me | "We don't know why it came to this." Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
The first generation, that is, since the death of Charlemagne.
The EU accomplished that. And so yes, the EU is well worth saving. What astounds me is how the EU's technocrats decided this accomplishment isn't enough, and that further integration and expansion is important enough to risk the backlash we're seeing.
posted by ocschwar at 10:36 AM on April 11, 2016 [19 favorites]