Popular protests in the EU

[Lexicus]

I would have expected that observing from the US you would have appreciated the irony of a student who, while taking advantage of free higher education, torches himself and blames "the system".

No, because I don't subscribe to the nonsensical logic that

if we can find any one human being on the earth more prepared to accept equal or inferior living standards, then any complaints about those living standards are, if not void, then significantly diminished

 

[Marla_Singer]

I risk being labeled Cassandra again, but one of my objections to Macron was that he'd hand Le Pen a victory in the next election. And the current government in Italy will hand one to Salvini. I'm accompanying the situations from afar and may be wrong. But so far things seem headed that way.

The best moment for Le Pen to win was in 2017, when migration crisis was still alarming, ISIS still powerful, and terrorist attacks still happening regularly. During the campaign, the left and right wing both collapsed making of FN the strongest established force remaining. Despite all that, at the second round of the Presidential elections (which in France opposes the 2 best candidates of the first round), a guy coming out of nowhere named Macron rallied twice more voters (20 million) than Le Pen (10 million).

The French Presidential system, in which the winner needs to rally more than 50% of voters, makes it very hard for the far right to take the lead of the country. Of course many things can happen untill 2022 but right now, after Le Pen's hard failure in 2017, I can't see the scenario which would make her win. Protests and discontent are massive in France right now but despite all her efforts, she can't rally everyone under her banner: the far-left can't adhere to here strong nationalist stances, and the moderate right-wing rejecting Macron can't adhere to her strong anti-liberal stances.

Now of course, France is a severely declining country. French people are fully aware of that, but the more it goes and the less people believe that politics could change anything about it.

 

[innonimatu]

I'm not trying to be negative. It's just that reading your post it struck me how external conditions can also play a role when they change quickly, even in a wealthy and large country. And those conditions can change.

We're going through an everything financial bubble. Commodities price speculation next? Crop failures in the US, swine in Asia, generalized quick rise in food prices on the international market, unrest in food deficit countries in Africa, mass migration again...
But more likely in 2020, if it is going to happen, than 2022. And the large migrations were a result of states being destroyed in Libya and Syria, I don't think anyone is keen on starting new wars now.

I didn't believe that Le Pen had a chance in the last election because of what you say, there is still a strong tradition of left-leaning vote that won't easily migrate to support the FN, whatever rebranding they do. But can that tradition remain for long among a dispirited youth? Who in the left will contest the election against her in 2022?

 

[Marla_Singer]

It's funny, reading you feels as if you hope awful things will happen so that "radical change" could finally come. But let's get real, even if Le Pen takes the power in France it won't lead to any "radical change" at all. France is a minor country, its fate largely depends of others and this won't change only because there would be someone pretending to be a nationalist in power. The press will be happy, there will be lot's of noise in order to sell tons of useless news stories, but ultimatetely, France will remain as powerless as it is. That's what happened in Italy with Salvini and to a large scale that's what happened even in the US with Trump, despite the country being far more meaningful than our small European land bits.

What precisely do you hope for? Of course we all know here that the downfall of the EU is your life purpose, but I mean beyond that, what do you ultimately hope for as a result?

 

[Patine]

No, because I don't subscribe to the nonsensical logic that

I'm not trying to be negative. It's just that reading your post it struck me how external conditions can also play a role when they change quickly, even in a wealthy and large country. And those conditions can change.

We're going through an everything financial bubble. Commodities price speculation next? Crop failures in the US, swine in Asia, generalized quick rise in food prices on the international market, unrest in food deficit countries in Africa, mass migration again...
But more likely in 2020, if it is going to happen, than 2022. And the large migrations were a result of states being destroyed in Libya and Syria, I don't think anyone is keen on starting new wars now.

I didn't believe that Le Pen had a chance in the last election because of what you say, there is still a strong tradition of left-leaning vote that won't easily migrate to support the FN, whatever rebranding they do. But can that tradition remain for long among a dispirited youth? Who in the left will contest the election against her in 2022?

It's funny, reading you feels as if you hope awful things will happen so that "radical change" could finally come. But let's get real, even if Le Pen takes the power in France it won't lead to any "radical change" at all. France is a minor country, its fate largely depends of others and this won't change only because there would be someone pretending to be a nationalist in power. The press will be happy, there will be lot's of noise in order to sell tons of useless news stories, but ultimatetely, France will remain as powerless as it is. That's what happened in Italy with Salvini and to a large scale that's what happened even in the US with Trump, despite the country being far more meaningful that our small European land bits.

What precisely do you hope for? Of course we all know here that the downfall of the EU is your life purpose, but I mean beyond that, what do you ultimately hope for as a result?

Also, let's compare Tunisia in 2011. A poor nation (especially for an Arab nation, many of whom have oil reserves), with a tiny elite of corrupt businessman and organized criminals and aristocratic politicians, most deeply in the pockets of American and Western European corporate interests, a lot of poor farmers and fishermen, very little industry, some desert nomads, crappy human rights records (FAR worse than France), corrupt police and courts, education and healthcare paid out of pocket, and thus for the rich, and a President who had been in power for decades, and played the very dangerous political tactic and ploy for an Arab nation of suppressing from positions of power BOTH Secular Socialists AND Islamic Conservatives that had also been done for decades up till then by Hosni Mubarak in Egypt. PLEASE, do not tell me you REALLY think France today is comparable to Tunisia in 2011.

 

[AdrienIer]

It it turns out to be the start of a series of strikes, what do you think may become the goals of the people involved?

Make enough of a mess to stall Macron. It happened in 1995, partially in 2006, it can happen again. There can be no goal more specific than this with the incredible amount of disunity in the country.

There is no institutional path to replace Macron anytime soon. Next year there will be only municipal elections? The traditional parties seem to have lost all following, and only the FN (or whatever it calls itself now) has not yet been burnt by disastrous stays in government. The other "populist" contender, Melenchon, has gone marginal?
The yellow vests protests have not disappeared, certainly the social malaise that motivated people to protest is present still and increasing, but they demobilized due to perceived lack of attainable goals. It is a volatile situation when there is no institutional outlet for social anger.

Municipal elections next year, regional elections in 2021. The goal is to stall him into inaction on his worst reforms until 2022, first in the streets then in the voting booth. I'm not very optimistic about that, but we have to try and people are angry enough that something might happen.

Do the unions still manage to command a general strike and present demands to the government, something that may produce a sense of achievement out of it?

No. Teachers and railroad workers will be on a massive strike but that's not thanks to the unions. And the gilet jaune movement was a proof that the unions have literally no power currently when it comes to channeling anger into something productive.

What other groups likely to participate have organized platforms capable of making specific demands to the public power? Can some go into politics with an aim to run in the next legislative elections? Can someone emerge to challenge Macron as a focus of an alternative policy for France, give people something to fight for in (and have some patience until) a next election, other than Le Pen?
Or can France be in for something alike 1968, a temporary breakdown of the whole command structure of the state, unable to have its orders fulfilled any longer? A new republic becoming necessary? The difficulty with that is that there seem to be no political parties with clear goals for the future, capable of leading constitutional changes. Again, apart from what Le Pen may organize...

Don't expect a political answer in France right now. The rising stars on the left aren't ready (and may not be good enough to rise up one day to the presidential level), and the general disgust for MLP means it's very unlikely that she can ever win. In 2 years time my bet is on either a Macron reelection or the rise of one of the anti far right populist right wingers (to name names, Xavier Bertrand) to feast on the ashes of Macron's reign. The only other alternative is awfully scary, and it's the rise of the Le Pen niece uniting the catholic right with the far right.

I'm not trying to be negative. It's just that reading your post it struck me how external conditions can also play a role when they change quickly, even in a wealthy and large country. And those conditions can change.

We're going through an everything financial bubble. Commodities price speculation next? Crop failures in the US, swine in Asia, generalized quick rise in food prices on the international market, unrest in food deficit countries in Africa, mass migration again...
But more likely in 2020, if it is going to happen, than 2022. And the large migrations were a result of states being destroyed in Libya and Syria, I don't think anyone is keen on starting new wars now.

I didn't believe that Le Pen had a chance in the last election because of what you say, there is still a strong tradition of left-leaning vote that won't easily migrate to support the FN, whatever rebranding they do. But can that tradition remain for long among a dispirited youth? Who in the left will contest the election against her in 2022?

The youth seems separated in 3 camps. The far left (looking for a champion) the pro status quo (still supporting Macron but mostly aware that he's messing up) and the far right (still supporting MLP). The 3 sides are not ready to compromise for one another, so I don't foresee a large movement from the far left youth into the far right.

 

[Lexicus]

No. Teachers and railroad workers will be on a massive strike but that's not thanks to the unions. And the gilet jaune movement was a proof that the unions have literally no power currently when it comes to channeling anger into something productive.

Would you talk a little about why this is? I'd be interested

 

[AdrienIer]

My position on unions (in my case teacher's unions) is that I'll vote in union elections because they're the only intermediary between us and those actually making the decisions, and even in their current state it's better to have them around than to tear them down. But it's only because of a lack of alternative : having literally no one defending the workers institutionally would be far far worse.
The goals of the unions here is only to survive and, if possible, grow. With no endgoal (or so far away and hypothetical that it doesn't matter). The largest teachers' union is so large that it has become soft as it doesn't want to piss off anyone by actually taking a stance, and the smaller ones are ineffective because they are small. In general the unions only stumble into helping workers because they want to recruit you (which they'll do quite often) or when you find someone in the union that will individually want to help you because they're a good person (it's a relief that there are quite a lot of people like that in the unions). But even though the people in unions are usually good people, the union itself does very little and is quite out of touch with the workers. There was a massive strike last june in french high schools, and it was organised mostly out of the union networks. They didn't see it coming and had no idea what to do with it (or how to control it).

Beyond the teachers' unions, I think the sentiment is similar in other branches. The unions do very little (also because the various governments of the past decades conceded very little to them), and claim victory when they turn a 100% awful law into a 95% awful law through their negociations. Which means they have become a joke to many.
The gilets jaune movement should have been turned into a general strike by the unions. But for various reasons (some of which I personally agree with) the unions were wary of joining the GJ. Nevertheless the GJ got more concessions from Macron (right wing concessions, but concessions nonetheless) than the unions got in the last 10 years.

Edit : when I say the unions should have joined the GJ, I mean that it would have made a lot of sense for them to do so, not that I personally think it would have been the right decision

 

[Lexicus]

I have a lot of problems with the labor movement in the US too but I won't go into them in the interests of not derailing the thread.

 

[Yeekim]

No, because I don't subscribe to the nonsensical logic...

So how do you decide which complaints have merit?

 

[innonimatu]

What precisely do you hope for? Of course we all know here that the downfall of the EU is your life purpose, but I mean beyond that, what do you ultimately hope for as a result?

Meaningful democratic processes again. Which can only happen in the national arena, and require disentanglement from too many policy-binding international treaties. Many countries are not too small to turn away from "trade treaties" and other political treaties. If trade gets slightly less efficient, that is a price worth paying for democracy to work.
The social malaise in France, and in many other countries, is a result of a feeling of powerlessness after different governments proceeded to apply the same policies regardless of what the population asks for. Or, in many cases, the changes they oppose.

 

[Marla_Singer]

Meaningful democratic processes again. Which can only happen in the national arena, and require disentanglement from too many policy-binding international treaties. Many countries are not too small to turn away from "trade treaties" and other political treaties. If trade gets slightly less efficient, that is a price worth paying for democracy to work.
The social malaise in France, and in many other countries, is a result of a feeling of powerlessness after different governments proceeded to apply the same policies regardless of what the population asks for. Or, in many cases, the changes they oppose.

I agree, however I'm only highly skeptical that getting rid of the EU would change anything about that. The major reason why we feel so powerless is because we are nothing compared to the true powers which are the US and China.

The EU is essentially an agora in which each European country expresses its concerns to its neighbours. Its only purpose is to pacify the relationship between our countries, simply by talking to one another. I think you're right in the fact France is terribly annoyed that we could be bullied so easily by Turkey (among many other things), probably France would want to play a more active strategic role, but France is broke. It can't do anything alone, and that's why the country asks for a European army that all its neighbours unanimously reject, making jokes about how pathetic it is for France to still dream about Napoleon. So nothing will happen and Eastern Europe will continue to pray for a nicer US president to finally emerge and save them from Russia, like others are still waiting for the messiah.

Our countries are little toys in the hands of greater powers, every single one of them is totally irrelevant.

Sorry to say it the harsh way but that's just how it is.

 

[innonimatu]

China is wildly overrated. What they are in terms of world influence, they are only because we are doing a lot of business with them. This disentanglement would reduce their international ability to reach out. I also don't think that the US is some kind of threat to Europe. Or Russia, or India. Even an european-only military alliance would have sufficed to put to rest worries about threats.
The rest of the world is not even worth mentioning among the "threat" category: we (as in Europe) were and still are the threat to them.

Small countries become toys for larger ones the more they entangle themselves into international value chains (this granting power to multinational corporations), financial deals (IMF, austerity, the ECB setting policy and pretending to be "independent"...), trade deals... The way I've been observing it, what the EEC became after it was converted into the EU starting with Maastricht has, far from empowering the people of Europe vis a vis other "international rivals", has led to their disempowerment and greater vulnerability to the whims if large international players.

 

[Marla_Singer]

The only thing I'll answer you is that, no matter how strong the discontent, things could be worse, really. @Patine is correct, just compare things with Tunisia. The country struggled on its own and continues to struggle in order to make of the first democracy in the Arab World a success. And they are all alone. Their economy is in crisis, no one wants to invest there. How is that fair?

I see all around me the ideals of my childhood evaporating over time. People are getting obsessed with crap, so be it. I've learnt to live with it, and frankly things could be worse after all. I'm lucky enough to know how to find happyness in my life, and that's the most important after all.

 

[innonimatu]

The only thing I'll answer you is that, no matter how strong the discontent, things could be worse, really. @Patine is correct, just compare things with Tunisia. The country struggled on its own and continues to struggle in order to make of the first democracy in the Arab World a success. And they are all alone. Their economy is in crisis, no one wants to invest there. How is that fair?

I hate to say that national size matters because that is so often an argument used to discourage people in smaller countries. But whatever the case France is one of those countries that cannot be ignored in Europe. There can be no EU without France. Tunisia lacks local know-how, capital goods, and produced little that others really need. It's be kind of "blockaded" by investors it could use. France has no similar vulnerability. And I think that the french people know that: they can decide on their own alternatives without fear of the big foreign competitor weighting on them.

Even with that fear, in smaller countries, it should never be an overriding one, a fear that kills alternatives and restricts democratic choices. It's just one factor to consider among others.

 

[EnglishEdward]

There are so many EU directives that I must admit I am getting rather confused about which is which,
but if I remember correctly some anti-Brexit critics claimed that Boris Johnson particularly wanted
to get us out by 31 October 2019 to help his speculator friends avoid an EU clamp down on tax avoidance.

And yet the EU clamp down has been bounced.

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...reject-move-to-expose-companies-tax-avoidance

12 EU states reject move to expose companies' tax avoidance

Proposal would have forced firms to reveal profits made and taxes paid in each EU country

So popular protests in the EU, work but only if you are a large corporate.

 

[innonimatu]

Don't forget the abstentions. The largest county, Germany, abstained.

But it's only natural, the EU has been set up as a deliberate copy of the USA. Corporate lobbyists doing policy is already achieved. Eternal wars and military presence around the world is being worked on. Prohibition on "secession" will certainly be pushed for after brexit. They'll also end up copying the US in civil war...

But there are no popular protests over this example of corporate influence in the EU. And I don't expect any due to this specific decision. It merely confirms what people are living under already. And most of them don't cease handing over money to those corporations, do they?

 

[Yeekim]

A few things @EnglishEdward , @innonimatu :
-this change would have only affected public reporting. Tax authorities of countries have and exchange this info already;
- technical reason for rejection was the wrong legal base - the Council claims this is a tax file and therefore requires unanimity voting, whereas Commission presented it as an accounting change, requiring QMV. Number of states saw this as infringing on their rights. (On the other hand, MT and LUX among others would, ofc, veto it in a heartbeat under unanimity);
- critics claim - not entirely without reason - that such unilateral transparency would have hurt EU headquartered multinationals vis-a-vis their BRICS competition;
- the US threatened to withdraw from already existing OECD agreement on information sharing between tax authorities, if EU were to make this info public.
EDIT: The file is not dead, however. Merely waiting for better days.

 

[innonimatu]

How is it going in France now?

 

[EnglishEdward]

A few things @EnglishEdward , @innonimatu :
-this change would have only affected public reporting. Tax authorities of countries have and exchange this info already;
- technical reason for rejection was the wrong legal base - the Council claims this is a tax file and therefore requires unanimity voting, whereas Commission presented it as an accounting change, requiring QMV. Number of states saw this as infringing on their rights. (On the other hand, MT and LUX among others would, ofc, veto it in a heartbeat under unanimity);
- critics claim - not entirely without reason - that such unilateral transparency would have hurt EU headquartered multinationals vis-a-vis their BRICS competition;
- the US threatened to withdraw from already existing OECD agreement on information sharing between tax authorities, if EU were to make this info public.
EDIT: The file is not dead, however. Merely waiting for better days.

Thank you for your explanation.