European UnionI
NO
cuts, austerity has not been reversed.
It remains hemmed in by the Stability
and Growth Pact, which forces Eurozone
states to keep fiscal deficits within three
per cent of GDP. Meanwhile, the people of
Greece and Italy have been immiserated
and humiliated by the euro, which ben-
efits northern Europe at their expense.
HILARY: Our debate is as much about
how we achieve a socialist transformation
of society – an end to the exploitation of
labour and the pursuit of private profit in
favour of a political economy in which
the free development of each individual
depends on the free development of all
- as about whether or not the EU can be
reformed. Fine! While we share an inter-
nationalist perspective, I disagree that
this can happen only through a simulta-
neous mobilization to disrupt capitalist
power relations.
For sure, I would urge maximum
trans-European mobilization and disrup-
tion of this kind but it has to be combined
with struggling to implement reforms
in the face of EU opposition (as well as
the opposition of the City of London
and other parts of the national and
global ruling class). In reality, we need
to prepare for a long-term process that is
uneven and hybrid.
The stopping of TTIP [a secretive EU/
US trade treaty that would have given
transnationals huge power] in 2016
illustrates the value of this dual ‘in and
against’ strategy. The Greeks’ failure, by
contrast, came from believing they could
persuade the EU to let them carry out
their anti-austerity policies. They aban-
doned their base in extra-parliamentary
struggle.
The British state is a
reactionary institution
and the achievement of
a socialist, federal United
Kingdom would involve
the end of many of its
key institutions, but our
strategy still involves
struggle within it as well
as against and beyond it.
The same logic applies to
the EU.
GR ACE: The case of within and against
the state is very different from within
and against the EU. This is because EU
institutions are inherently anti-demo-
cratic. The power of the elected European
Parliament is stringently limited by the
combined power of the Council and the
Commission, which represent the inter-
ests of heads of states and the European
bureaucracy. The Parliament cannot
override these bodies, and the option of
using the electoral process to gain control
over the executive is removed.
Another issue is the dearth of demo-
cratic accountability for members of the
European Parliament. The nail in the
coffin of the ‘remain and reform’ argu-
ment came earlier this year when Brit-
ain’s Labour MEPs agreed to support
Ursula von der Leyen – a rightwing can-
didate backed by Emmanuel Macron- for European Commission President.
Von der Leyen secured the post with a
majority of just nine votes. There are 10
Labour MEPs in the European Parlia-
ment. The Labour leadership in the UK
called the move ‘anti-democratic’, but
without strong mechanisms to hold MEPs
to account for their actions in Brussels,
there is little they can do to prevent such
outcomes in future.
The case of TTIP is instructive. I was
at some of the earliest protests over TTIP,
whose failure was framed as a victory
for European citizens. In fact, the agree-
ment was blocked by France over con-
cerns about the impact the deal would
have on French agriculture, protected
by the Common Agricultural Policy: a
regressive measure that has been terrible
for ecological diversity and driven down
commodities prices for
farmers in the Global
South. Hardly a victory
for the international Left.
HILARY: You are right,
Grace, the institutions of
the EU are not the same
as those of the nation
state. But even from your
own description of its
limits, it’s clear that the
national dimension is
important in shaping EUGRACE
BLAKELEY
Grace Blakeley is a political
economist and author of Stolen:
How to Save the World from
Financialisation (Repeater Books),
published on 10 September 2019.‘THE ONLY WAY FORWARD
IS TO BUILD NEW
INSTITUTIONS THAT
EXTEND SOLIDARITY
THROUGHOUT THE
CONTINENT’ – GRACE
SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER 2019 45