There is a saying that populism is gaining ground in the EU Maria Negreponti-Delivanis Maria Negreponti-Delivanis May 26, 2019
There is a saying that 'populism' is gaining ground in the EU
is gaining ground in Europ
Maria Negreponti-Delivanis
May 26, 2019
274
On the occasion of the great and successful assembly of the populists of Europe in Milan on the 18th in the run-up to the European elections, as well as the poisonous criticism of the international press, the unanswered questions about the cause of populism 'giant in Europe. So, the day of the European elections, I take a look at the pros and cons of these parties. I am trying to reject some Western taboos that prevent a rational view on this extremely serious issue.
First of all, it is necessary to ask the question of what modern "populism" means and what it means. More precisely what the 'populist' parties ultimately call for. This is because the consistent tactics of the rival traditional political parties are to accept as a matter of fact and in general as acceptable the fact that all the choices of these parties are negative and reprehensible. It therefore raises the need to reject them. The name that was deliberately given to these parties ('populist') by the traditional politicians was precisely what it intended.
The criticism that stems and is encouraged by the traditional political parties, against the "populist" parties, presents it, collectively, as fascist, racist, anti-Semitic and extremistly nationalistic. However, this version needs to be explored more seriously, since the 'populists', in a short space of time, are constantly expanding in Europe and beyond.
Indeed, predictions ahead of the European elections give 180 out of the 751 seats of the European Parliament to euro-skeptic "ælekists" who, if they appear united and with common goals, will be able to mark the beginning of the end of Europe we knew. This is also supported by the fact that the far-reaching plans for Macedonia's reforms were welcomed cold, not only by its compatriots but also by the German Chancellor. The plan, recently put forward by Mr Macron in an open letter to the French, refers to the need to set up a body for the protection of democracy, a committee on internal security and a bank on climate change.
On the other hand, if you judge from the beginnings of Salvin, Lepén, Faradz, etc., which are reflected in the polls for the European elections, the declarations of the populists find fertile ground for European citizens, such as: " We want to save Europe, which has nothing to do with bureaucrats, bankers and stockbrokers, "and we also said:" We are the ones we want to have nothing to do with Merkel, the Long and those who have destroyed Europe . "
The Scarecrow of Nationalism
The most common category, which political opponents address to 'populist' parties, is nationalism, which has fascist roots in them. The reference to nationalism certainly includes many scales: from the mild and simple national sovereignty that requires respect for national borders, as well as the protection of the religious, cultural and historical peculiarities of each people, to the aggressive and hostile Nazi bourgeois mentality, at the expense of other peoples, genocide and enslavement.
One reasonably wonders why the outcry against nationalism in our days chooses its most extreme positions to argue that " populists are fascists and racists ". If that were the case, then all the countries before globalization prevailed in the 1980s would be fascist and democratized by enforcing globalization as long as they were nation-states. It is obviously an inexpressible naive and false conclusion.
But beyond this completely unfounded argument, which is badly prevailing, with the partnership and the majority of the media, there is also a need to raise the following concern: Europeans, in an ever increasing proportion , they freely choose the 'populist' specifications, as they all already have, who would have the right to halt their evolution?And how democratic would such an effort be? And if, indeed, the 'populists' are fighting for a Europe of the peoples rather than the banks, as they claim, their views would be desirable to be heard by the EU leadership.
Then, since nationalism has been freed from its identification with far-right and expansive ideologies, it should also be recognized as a positive one: it shields the individual sovereign peoples from the risk of their absorption by a global government, the establishment of which efforts around the globe.
The choices of 'populism'
But let's take a brief look at the options of 'populism', in order to show that these belong to the far right and fascism as well. On the contrary, these choices may well be pursued by both the Left and the Right. Therefore, our endeavor should be to discourage the turn of 'populists' towards fascism and not the opposition to 'populism'. Especially if, as they all appear, the realization of their goals promotes social Europe and the peoples' Europe.
Populism, therefore, is directed against the adverse effects of globalization and is co-operating with most of the population of the Earth, who are its losers. He advocates a return to the nation-state. It should be remembered that with the war, the world has entered a protectionist regime, and therefore globalization is gradually past.
'Popularism' is against all forms of elitism and therefore advocates equality as much as possible among citizens. This is a very significant effort, after the peak of all forms of inequality, in the globalization phase.
* It opposes the EU's austerity policy and supports a controlled expansionary fiscal policy.
'Popularism' favors state intervention and public investment rather than neoliberalism. It disagrees with the EU's policy and preferences and seeks to change and improve it, if not its dissolution. It wants controlled borders and a planned reception of immigrants, but not illegal immigrants. These 'populist' preferences are common to right and left parties, although they may differ in their relative percentages. That is why, with populism, it is correct to conclude that the traditional distinction in right and left politics is subdued.
The development of 'populism' seems to go hand in hand with other major developments that radically change the global landscape, such as the rise of protectionism, China's invasion of the West, the retreat of liberal democracy that gives way to illicit democracy, nation-state revival. Although the name of the 'populists' initially creates an unfavorable impression, which is also the intent of its opponents, the deepening of their principles greatly improves their image.
The 'snake egg' and 'populism' in Greece
The problem, of course, which I have already mentioned, is the threat of extreme right-wing preferences, of some of these 'populist' parties. If this trend is consolidated, it is clearly a rising danger. I believe it would be interesting to investigate the reasons for this right-wing trend of some of these new parties, but for the time being I do not have the answer.
It is likely to be related to the negative effects of globalization and the frustration of the functioning of the left-wing political parties, which are unable to implement the macroeconomic policy guidelines they pursue because the EU's one-dimensional policy prevails in European contexts. the problems posed by the influx of immigrants and the rise of terrorism, which perhaps refer to the need for more rigorous governance.
In Greece, I have difficulties in classifying political parties on the side of 'populism'. They are definitely excluded from this traditional party. But among the many newcomers, it is relatively insecure not only to include them in 'populism' but also to separate them from right and left. The difficulty is due to their considerable number of people, their limited time spent in showing their positions, and in some cases the confusion of their preferences, which originated both from the Left and from the Right.
Because of bipartism, which I expect to have an extremely strong presence in the European elections, in the case of Greece, it will not facilitate the emergence of the specificities of these new parties. I believe, however, that most of them will remain with us and after the elections, they will evolve and in some future they will probably play an important role. It is worth noting that the international press reports SYRIZA as a "populist" party. I would say, however, that this is certainly the case, but in the course of time the preferences it adopted ceased to rank it among the populists.
There is a saying that 'populism' is gaining ground in the EU
is gaining ground in Europ
Maria Negreponti-Delivanis
May 26, 2019
274
On the occasion of the great and successful assembly of the populists of Europe in Milan on the 18th in the run-up to the European elections, as well as the poisonous criticism of the international press, the unanswered questions about the cause of populism 'giant in Europe. So, the day of the European elections, I take a look at the pros and cons of these parties. I am trying to reject some Western taboos that prevent a rational view on this extremely serious issue.
First of all, it is necessary to ask the question of what modern "populism" means and what it means. More precisely what the 'populist' parties ultimately call for. This is because the consistent tactics of the rival traditional political parties are to accept as a matter of fact and in general as acceptable the fact that all the choices of these parties are negative and reprehensible. It therefore raises the need to reject them. The name that was deliberately given to these parties ('populist') by the traditional politicians was precisely what it intended.
The criticism that stems and is encouraged by the traditional political parties, against the "populist" parties, presents it, collectively, as fascist, racist, anti-Semitic and extremistly nationalistic. However, this version needs to be explored more seriously, since the 'populists', in a short space of time, are constantly expanding in Europe and beyond.
Indeed, predictions ahead of the European elections give 180 out of the 751 seats of the European Parliament to euro-skeptic "ælekists" who, if they appear united and with common goals, will be able to mark the beginning of the end of Europe we knew. This is also supported by the fact that the far-reaching plans for Macedonia's reforms were welcomed cold, not only by its compatriots but also by the German Chancellor. The plan, recently put forward by Mr Macron in an open letter to the French, refers to the need to set up a body for the protection of democracy, a committee on internal security and a bank on climate change.
On the other hand, if you judge from the beginnings of Salvin, Lepén, Faradz, etc., which are reflected in the polls for the European elections, the declarations of the populists find fertile ground for European citizens, such as: " We want to save Europe, which has nothing to do with bureaucrats, bankers and stockbrokers, "and we also said:" We are the ones we want to have nothing to do with Merkel, the Long and those who have destroyed Europe . "
The Scarecrow of Nationalism
The most common category, which political opponents address to 'populist' parties, is nationalism, which has fascist roots in them. The reference to nationalism certainly includes many scales: from the mild and simple national sovereignty that requires respect for national borders, as well as the protection of the religious, cultural and historical peculiarities of each people, to the aggressive and hostile Nazi bourgeois mentality, at the expense of other peoples, genocide and enslavement.
One reasonably wonders why the outcry against nationalism in our days chooses its most extreme positions to argue that " populists are fascists and racists ". If that were the case, then all the countries before globalization prevailed in the 1980s would be fascist and democratized by enforcing globalization as long as they were nation-states. It is obviously an inexpressible naive and false conclusion.
But beyond this completely unfounded argument, which is badly prevailing, with the partnership and the majority of the media, there is also a need to raise the following concern: Europeans, in an ever increasing proportion , they freely choose the 'populist' specifications, as they all already have, who would have the right to halt their evolution?And how democratic would such an effort be? And if, indeed, the 'populists' are fighting for a Europe of the peoples rather than the banks, as they claim, their views would be desirable to be heard by the EU leadership.
Then, since nationalism has been freed from its identification with far-right and expansive ideologies, it should also be recognized as a positive one: it shields the individual sovereign peoples from the risk of their absorption by a global government, the establishment of which efforts around the globe.
The choices of 'populism'
But let's take a brief look at the options of 'populism', in order to show that these belong to the far right and fascism as well. On the contrary, these choices may well be pursued by both the Left and the Right. Therefore, our endeavor should be to discourage the turn of 'populists' towards fascism and not the opposition to 'populism'. Especially if, as they all appear, the realization of their goals promotes social Europe and the peoples' Europe.
Populism, therefore, is directed against the adverse effects of globalization and is co-operating with most of the population of the Earth, who are its losers. He advocates a return to the nation-state. It should be remembered that with the war, the world has entered a protectionist regime, and therefore globalization is gradually past.
'Popularism' is against all forms of elitism and therefore advocates equality as much as possible among citizens. This is a very significant effort, after the peak of all forms of inequality, in the globalization phase.
* It opposes the EU's austerity policy and supports a controlled expansionary fiscal policy.
'Popularism' favors state intervention and public investment rather than neoliberalism. It disagrees with the EU's policy and preferences and seeks to change and improve it, if not its dissolution. It wants controlled borders and a planned reception of immigrants, but not illegal immigrants. These 'populist' preferences are common to right and left parties, although they may differ in their relative percentages. That is why, with populism, it is correct to conclude that the traditional distinction in right and left politics is subdued.
The development of 'populism' seems to go hand in hand with other major developments that radically change the global landscape, such as the rise of protectionism, China's invasion of the West, the retreat of liberal democracy that gives way to illicit democracy, nation-state revival. Although the name of the 'populists' initially creates an unfavorable impression, which is also the intent of its opponents, the deepening of their principles greatly improves their image.
The 'snake egg' and 'populism' in Greece
The problem, of course, which I have already mentioned, is the threat of extreme right-wing preferences, of some of these 'populist' parties. If this trend is consolidated, it is clearly a rising danger. I believe it would be interesting to investigate the reasons for this right-wing trend of some of these new parties, but for the time being I do not have the answer.
It is likely to be related to the negative effects of globalization and the frustration of the functioning of the left-wing political parties, which are unable to implement the macroeconomic policy guidelines they pursue because the EU's one-dimensional policy prevails in European contexts. the problems posed by the influx of immigrants and the rise of terrorism, which perhaps refer to the need for more rigorous governance.
In Greece, I have difficulties in classifying political parties on the side of 'populism'. They are definitely excluded from this traditional party. But among the many newcomers, it is relatively insecure not only to include them in 'populism' but also to separate them from right and left. The difficulty is due to their considerable number of people, their limited time spent in showing their positions, and in some cases the confusion of their preferences, which originated both from the Left and from the Right.
Because of bipartism, which I expect to have an extremely strong presence in the European elections, in the case of Greece, it will not facilitate the emergence of the specificities of these new parties. I believe, however, that most of them will remain with us and after the elections, they will evolve and in some future they will probably play an important role. It is worth noting that the international press reports SYRIZA as a "populist" party. I would say, however, that this is certainly the case, but in the course of time the preferences it adopted ceased to rank it among the populists.
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια