[WS:] My comment was tongue in cheek - as indicated by the emoticon. I know that London has been a cosmopolitan city at since the times Old Moor lived there.
I am not disputing the neoliberal bent of some EU policies. But I am trying to make a different point - as I said in my reply to Marv. I am opposed to dismantling an entire institutional framework just because that framework has currently some problems. This was the attitude that led to wholesale dumping of the Eastern European socialism - and I sense the same attitude in those who oppose the EU. I am inclined toward more nuanced approaches, and radicalism of any stripes does not appeal to me since I graduated from college.
I would also like to respond to Marv's comment about "action from below" - it strikes me as an example of anti-institutionalism and "small is beautiful" trope (which are widely spread on this side of the pond,) but it is a matter of aesthetic preferences, I suppose. I like institutions - the bigger the better (the same goes for the cities) and in my dream I would like to see a global Communist Party organized like the Communist Party of the Soviet Union :). The gemuetlichkeit of small groups, small organizations, and small towns does not appeal to me, and my view on 'action from below' is similar to that of Lenin ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Is_to_Be_Done%3F). I like the vanguard party idea better. Perhaps it is a cultural thing - after all my youth was formed by a socialist state that embarked on a big project, where petit bourgeois sensibilities and gemuetlichkeit were ridiculed as the thing of the past. So let's leave it here and agree that we have different preferences and visions for social action.
Wojtek
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 10:37 AM, Wendy Lyon <wendy.lyon at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4 February 2011 21:00, Wojtek S <wsoko52 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Wendy: "Why would it?"
> >
> > [WS:] Perhaps it is an old stereotype, like British cooking. As they
> say,
> > Brits ruled India for over 100 years and never learned how to use spices
> -
> > which tells volumes about both :).
> >
> > But more seriously, I never understood the obstinacy of some segments of
> the
> > Euro left toward the EU. I understand the reservations against the
> Eurozone
> > and giving up national fiscal policy - but that is more of a concern to
> > social democrats. To me, the defining characteristic of the left is
> > internationalism, and EU made a tremendous progress toward
> > internationalization of Europe. Obviously, there is still much to be
> done
> > in that area - but EU, or even more the Schengen Agreement, resulted in
> > cross border "human exchange" on a scale never seen before in that part
> of
> > that world. All major EU cities are very cosmopolitan, you can hear a
> dozen
> > of different languages in the streets - and that by itself reduced
> > insularity. I travel to EU quite often, and I see a big difference in
> > attitudes toward people who do not speak the native tongue of the land
> > between now and 20 or so years ago.
>
> Marv and Angelus have already addressed the left's major issue with
> regard to the EU - the neoliberal agenda - and I don't have much more
> to add to that. But, I think you're mistaken to assume that retention
> of national fiscal policy is a concern for social democrats. The
> social democrats in the EU are in fact strongly behind monetary union.
> Opposition from the further left is sometimes a matter of principle
> (what you might term "nationalistic" reasons, what others might see as
> localising democracy) and sometimes based on the simple fact that
> monetary union has and will continue to operate in the interests of
> the Euro-elite. The austerity measures have been brought in under
> absolutely massive pressure from the ECB, in order to protect the
> single currency. Now maybe they would have been brought in if there
> was no single currency, too, but at least then there would have been
> other options available and the opposition could realistically promote
> those other options.
>
> On the issue of British insularity, it seems to me that you're taking
> a tautological view - they're opposed to the EU because they're
> insular and the fact that they're insular can be shown by their
> opposition to the EU. But, you know, the streets of London are as
> cosmopolitan and multilingual as anywhere else in the EU - despite
> their supposed insularity (and the fact they are not part of
> Schengen).
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>