What are the implications of these trends for the future of European integration, and monetary union, over the coming decade? Policymakers at both the national and European level can count upon quite a deep well of support for European integration and for the euro: Europeans appear quite firmly committed to both the broad integration process and the EMU. However, they have little confidence in the ability of existing political leaders to manage both the national and European economies in ways that respond to the concerns of European citizens. This dissatisfaction is particularly concentrated in the more crisis-ridden countries, especially the debtor nations of the Eurozone. Dissatisfaction is also concentrated in those social groups that have suffered most from the crisis: the less educated and less skilled, and the unemployed.
European integration, and EMU, cannot move forward without political support from the public. At this point, such support still exists in general, but there has been such an erosion of trust in policymakers that it is hard to believe that political backing for current policies will be forthcoming for much longer unless conditions improve markedly. And, given the striking differences among socio-economic groups – and especially the great and growing skepticism of the less advantaged among Europeans – it would seem that further progress will also depend upon finding ways to include more Europeans in the gains from integration, and to shelter them from its costs.Econbrowser
Guest Contribution: “What Europeans think about Europe in the aftermath of the crisis”
Jeffry Frieden, Stanfield Professor of International Peace at Harvard University
10 comments:
Wow, how could anyone support further EU integration? Absolutely stunning that people would want to sign up for such an anti-democratic elitist project, complete with junk economics. Is it just sheer stupidity or something more akin to Stockholm syndrome?
I never thought in a million years I would say this, but the Front National and Ukip seem to be the only hope for a decent future of Europe. Dark times.
Think it through. The problem is with capitalism as a system that favors ownership over working people. As long as people think that they need to hired the problem won't go away.
BTW, this is the meaning of "There is no alternative."
As long as people are convinced there is no alternative, they remain trapped by their own minds.
European integration does not have to be anti-democratic or elitist. It could consist of the creation vehicles for a democratic political integration of Europe to complement the economic integration.
Wow Dan, why don't I just fart rainbows and butterflies? About as realistic as a democratic eu. You can never underestimate the elite's desire for power and control. We are talking about the land of kings and queens and the aristocracy after all.
The question I want to know, was the EU specifically designed by the elites to destroy the social welfare system and subvert democracy? Or was it actually set up with good intentions and was co-opted by the neo-liberal banking elite as an opportunity to destroy the gains of the last 70 years or so..
I think a good argument can be made that the social welfare system was only constructed to bribe the working classes to not support communism. But now the communist threat is gone, it's not needed anymore, so the elites can destroy it. How's the saying go, something like, "Communism, while horrible for the Russians, was fantastic for the western worker"..
The EU and then the common currency were once considered just as much of a fantasy as the political integration of Europe. But they happened. There is still a powerful idealist element in European political life that is interested in closer political and fiscal union.
European integration does not have to be anti-democratic or elitist. It could consist of the creation vehicles for a democratic political integration of Europe to complement the economic integration.
Right, like in the US and UK. Oligarchic "democracy."
US Sen. Durbin: "The bankers own this place."
Seems to be prove Aristotle's contention that oligarchic democracy in the long run is only avoidable through selection of leaders by lot from amongst the citizenry.
Was there ever time in the US or UK when the oligarchs didn't rule? Is there any prospect of this ending anytime soon?
Even suppose a "socialist" like Bernie Sanders were elected POTUS. he still have to with Congress, the deep state and the rest of the bureaucracy, and the courts, have all been packed by the oligarchy.
@ Joe
Robert Mundell, evil genius of the euro by Greg Palast at The GuardianRobert Mundell, evil genius of the euro by Greg Palast at The Guardian
I agree with Dan. European integration doesn't have to be anti-democratic or elitist. AFAIK, the preferred option of all MMT thinkers a few years ago - look at their old writings - was for a "good euro", once today's bad euro was in place. Since it would have been the cheapest & most beneficial all around, this is understandable.
But the shortest route to such saner integration, if that is what Europeans want, is probably now only through disintegration. Europe right now is less integrated, less democratic, less economically equal than the USA, and this higher inequality has the usual bad macroeconomic consequences, as James Galbraith explains.
Alain Parguez is the best historian of the Euro. He traces it to fellow Frenchmen in the 30s-60s who thought the gold standard was too soft, and whose beliefs he considers a bit to the right of feudalism.
Capitalism prioritizes (privileges) capital (ownership) on the assumption that capital.… (you know the rationale by now).
The only way that a real Left can be successful is to replace capitalism as control by a privileged ownership class with socialism as control by the people as whole, without privilege.
Otherwise it is just capitalism-lite and that never lasts very long. They'll be baaack. Because the table is tllted.
Post a Comment