A “Constitutional Monster “ has allowed the “technocrats” to gradually absorbe a neo-conservative ideology that is taken as absolute truth. The only consistent drive to deal with the crisis is the political unity of Europe.
A“ Project Europe” exists since the end of the Second World War , and it has been until now the leading trend in Europe . The idea came since 1943 from the antifascists Altiero Spinelli e Ernesto Rossi who from the prison criticised the National State and proposed the United States of Europe. The project was meant to prevent another European War , and therefore another World War , and to pool the efforts to rebuild what the war had destroyed. It was a project of the defeated , Germany , Italy , and also France , while the winner, Great Britain , kept its distance until much later. The USA, after the experience of the Marshall Plan , supported it as an instrument to confront the Russian-controlled Eastern Europe. The project was not immediately supported by all European political parties. The main supporters were the Christian Democrats, the bigger party in Germany , Italy and Belgium. The Socialist position was not negative in Germany, quite suspecting in France and Italy.
The idea of a “capitalist conspiracy “ was quite common in the European left wing. The Communist were strongly against it , at least until the dissolution of the URSS, because they saw it as tied up to NATO and to the American position in the Cold War. Generally speaking, the European left wing considered the United Europe as a “capitalist operation”, which the working class should refuse. The absence of the left wing from the Project Europe had important consequences. The idea put down roots without them and their long time absence is risking now to make it exactly what they were fearing.
The European States, although weakened by the war, did not disappear , and a two-levels structure was built , creating a Constitutional problem still not solved.
The European Project adopted a “technocratic” structure , not based on the popular will expressed through the electoral mechanism, but on agreements among Governments, a “constitutional monster”, often operating along lines not be acceptable to the European electorate. There is no doubt, however, that the idea of a United Europe, somewhat represented by Bruxelles, has dominated the European debate , and it has produced a series of quality jumps in European history.
First , the Common Market gave impulse to the European economic development , and established Europe as one of the strong economic areas of the world.
Second, the collapse of the Soviet Union and of Eastern Europe was dealt with to minimise the potential explosive character of such a realignment of different countries. The “enlargement of Europe” created problems between established members and new comers , but the readjustment of the European map was done quickly and peacefully, and was a success.
Third, the creation of the Euro, a currency ranking above the dollar. Of course, money without a State is an even bigger “Monster” . The Euro was created by negotiations among the Governments , and the people was not called to discuss the operation which was never fully explained , and was often seen as a matter of national pride. The Euro required an European Central Bank , which would not answer to anybody. This was true also of the National Central Banks , which however felt in a way or another the interest of their country. The great differences in economic level in Europe does not allow that , and the Central European Bank has a somewhat , at least on paper , restricted job, that of avoiding inflation.
Fourth, the Shengen system of internal movement inside the area was an popular novelty, not completely cancelled by the fear of terrorism .
Finally , a group of more or less self appointed men tried to write a project of Constitution. A Constitution , history tells us , is a basic document that can be written in moments of great creative tension, and by men and women chosen to represent the people. None of these conditions were present, and the process didn’t go anywhere.
It is interesting to note that the UK did not participate in the three last drives, showing the coldness of that country , involved in a project of political and administrative decentralisation, to the European project.
A general evaluation of the process up to now must be favourable . However, a structure not exposed to democratic control ends easily by absorbing the positions of lobbies and mainstream thinking , coming from the big banks and from the USA. Moreover , the rich and powerful countries in Europe, have more say than the poor ones , and tend to consider their interest to be the truth, that must be accepted by everybody. The interest of working people is never felt by the “technocrats” of the “Constitutional Monster “, and they have gradually absorbed some quite strange propositions , that are by now taken as absolute truths, that cannot be discussed.
As a first question , the function of the Central Bank is to avoid inflation. The minimum sign of increasing prices gets an immediate answer, an increase of the cost of capital, and a slow-down of the economy. It does not matter if the inflation comes from the prices of imported materials, like oil, or grain, which are driven by speculation. The Brusselles people did very little to try to rein in speculation, which , for example, has increased the price of oil a hundred times since the early fifties.
Moreover , the poorer countries of Europe which adopted the Euro cannot devalue it . They have therefore no way to reduce their debt , and are in the hands of lenders who menace them with “default” if they do not satisfy their punishing request, that is , of the same large international banks that originated the crisis. So, the only solution for these countries is now to reduce public expenditure, which, in turn, depresses their economy, and reduces further the level of welfare of the poorer layer of society. Fundamentally, Brusselles is imposing a strategy of deflation , and reduction of investments in infrastructure, in countries that don’t have it , and have to create if they want to grow.
Again , the high level of the Euro allows European countries to export only goods , like complex machinery ,which have little competition in the world , while simpler goods are imported from poorer countries, with lower currencies. In this condition , the less rich countries in the Euro area cannot develop their economy . If the poor gets to be poorer, aggregated demand will not increase, the market for industrial goods will shrink even more , and the rich exporter will have to find different outlets, or reduce prices.
In conclusion , the very institution that created the European boom is now creating conditions that are not conducive to development , but to stagnation. The final conclusion of this trend would be to reduce Europe to a club of rich people , exactly the opposite of the original thinking.
The official political and financial solutions to the financial crisis are all of the “negative“ kind , that is, reducing the presence of the State in the economy, even if it is the only guarantee of a minimum of equality among the citizens. Every State must prevent the dis-equality among citizens to increase , as it is happening in the US, where the power of the rich becomes an established constitutional power, and the poor vote for the rich. The conditions imposed to a number of European countries to reduce drastically their debt mean a steady reduction of their economies, and , basically, an increase of the dis-equality among their citizens. This risks to become the project of the rich to make the poor poorer , both among countries and among men.
So, is there another line , another road that may be taken?
There is no doubt that the road we have followed up to now for the integration of European countries has brought progress in the economy and in other areas, including the all important , and not yet completed, free movement of people and possibility of working in every country. This line must not be abandoned. The only possible road to avoid this negative development we are seeing now is that of reducing , or , better , cancelling the “Constitutional Monster” and the democratic deficit of the European structure.
The only positive outcome is the political unity of Europe , which is certainly not easy. This must be done by introducing the voice of the European people into the bureaucratic structure of the Union. The European Parliament must be brought up to the level of a modern Parliament. It must be the voice of the people , and the seat for choosing the Government of Europe. It may be that Europeans are not yet fully aware of the present trend, and that they might be disappointed by what is happening. However, the problem cannot be solved without an important innovation, the creation of a real European Parliament.
This Parliament exist , but his powers are limited . The reduction of the constitutional problem could be performed by steps, enlarging the power of the Parliament gradually. That may not mean creating a Federal State , where the various functions of the Federation and of the State are clearly distinguished . These are often changing even in historical Federal States like the USA.
If the left wing still exists in Europe , now is the moment of putting all possible energy on such a development.