DiEM25 – Italy holds first National Assembly
DiEM25 is preparing for its first electoral campaign – in Italy and across Europe.
Last month, DiEM25 joined its partners in Lisbon to launch PrimaveraEuropea (European Spring), the very first transnational list for the European Parliament. In May 2019, voters will be presented with a single list of candidates, a single political manifesto and a single campaign, fighting together to save Europe and build a new political alternative.
To achieve this, DiEM25 is building a true Italian territorial network. Over the last two months in Italy, 20 regional assemblies have been held that have elected as many regional coordinators. And on Saturday 19 and Sunday 20 May in Rome, DiEM25 convened the first National Assembly for Italy. All together, DiEM25 already has brought together 10,000 members in Italy, and over 100,000 Europe-wide.
Lorenzo Marsili rallied the audience of the Assembly to action: “In Italy we are witnessing a historic turning point towards the right. We now need a coordinated strategy at European, national and municipal level, capable of dealing with the great crises of our time: from debt blackmail to the employment emergency and growing poverty; from climate change to migration, from tax evasion of multinational companies, without forgetting the urgency of a deep democratisation of the European Union that starts with the systemic rethinking of its institutions.”
DiEM25 lands in South Africa
Today, Democracy in Europe Movement 2025 (DiEM25) co-founder Yanis Varoufakis met in Cape Town with Mr Pravin Gordham, until recently South Africa’s Finance Minister and currently Minister for Public Enterprises to discuss developments in Europe and South Africa.
They also agreed to establish a dialogue between the African National Congress (ANC) and DiEM25.
Why Eastern Europe needs a New Deal
What can DiEM25’s New Deal offer Eastern Europe? Does the region have the appropriate infrastructure to roll out such a program? Or does it only apply to the Eurozone?
These are, of course, reasonable concerns. But we must deconstruct the myth that the New Deal can only apply to the Eurozone. Instead, our challenge is to develop, sharpen, and elaborate the END’s aim of pan-European policy coordination between EU and non-EU member states.
Eastern Europe has played a crucial role in the construction of today’s lop-sided economic order. As Joseph Halevi argues, Germany recognized the need to redesign the region in order absorb surpluses. As a result, it came to be heavily dependent on Germany’s technology and capital – and the largest negative net international investment position in Europe. Indeed, it maintained a permanent current account deficit until the crisis hit.
After 2007, though, this took a different turn, given the new German fiscal strategy. A short view on Eurostat statistics between 2007 and 2013 reveals how almost all Eastern European countries had to slash their deficits from 2-digits to a “green” one (less than 4%). They were hit hard. Whereas Euro countries were seen as “safe harbors” backed by ECB, non-eurozone ones were left alone in the financial storm.
Of course, given their strong reliance on Germany, Eastern Europe’s currencies could not be left out of control. Central banks were “advised” to stick to the financial discipline and to apply public spending adjustment. It seemed preferable to leave Eastern Europe outside a monetary union region in order to insulate the consequences of a “currency collapse”.
DiEM25 must take the lead in elaborating a pan-European strategy for fiscal, monetary and social policies. Eastern Europe should no longer serve the great powers, but ensure that its own economies grow safely and steadily. As such, this area should play a key role in green investment-led European recovery. It is certainly capable of guaranteeing “satisfactory” profit margins for investment surplus countries.
Engaging Eastern Europe is crucial to answering the question of which kind of Europe we want. Do we want to prevent a creditor-debtor (West-East) polarized Europe, where the debtors have to pay significant risks premium to access to capital? Do we want a multi-gear Europe where the “periphery” is caged in a political patronage and financial protectorate? Can Eastern Europe make this leap directly into the post-hydrocarbon, green era, directly, without enhancing its poor or mostly lacking road, rail or water infrastructure?
The gist of our New Deal and the founding principle of DiEM25 have their roots in an old belief that a united Europe shall forge bonds based in common values and humanist principles and not on kin, language, ethnicity or some “common enemy”. Join us in making it a reality.
Bogdan is a member of DSC Bucharest, but also a humble engineer living in Munich. His main points of interest are socio-political issues of South-East Europe, as well as promoting DiEM25 there.
Photo credit: Thanasis Papaspyropoulos, Politis Newspaper, Cyprus
Vótáil Tá – Vote Yes to Repeal the 8th Amendment
Last Sunday, 13th May 2018, members of DiEM25 met in Belfast.
That same day, eleven women, from both sides of the Irish border, travelled to England and Wales for an abortion that would have been illegal in Ireland. There was nothing unusual in that.
It is an everyday occurrence.
In 2016 just under 4,000 women from the island of Ireland had to travel to Britain for an abortion. In other words, eleven women a day. As if that wasn’t bad enough, these women risk long-term damage to their reproductive health – and indeed to their very lives – by the lack of adequate aftercare on the island of Ireland. Many other women risk prosecution by buying mifepristone and misoprostol online to be delivered to them by post so that they can have a medical abortion at home.
The Eighth Amendment to the Irish Constitution equates the right to life of a pregnant woman with that of an embryo or foetus. It criminalises abortion in all cases, except where to continue a pregnancy would result in the death of the mother.
It criminalises all women who seek this procedure. In the North of Ireland, which is part of the UK, a ban on abortion in almost all circumstances has similarly been maintained. In 2017 the UK government agreed to pay for abortions for women from Northern Ireland if they can travel to England, Scotland, or Wales.
But not every woman can afford to travel. Not every woman has personal circumstances which means she has the freedom to travel. And not every woman has access to after care.
Last Sunday, we agreed to publicise our support for the Repeal the 8th campaign. Now we need your help. We need you to share this letter on Facebook and Twitter, using the hashtags #RepealTheEighth #FreeSafeLegal #TrustWomen #TogetherForYes.
Make no mistake. The campaign for women’s bodily autonomy and full reproductive rights matters to
all of us in Europe. We already know the lengths to which Ireland, Hungary and Poland will go to in their efforts to roll back civil and reproductive rights. We have seen the Hungarian anti-abortion poster campaign run by the state, and the attempt in Poland to introduce a total ban on abortion.
But Ireland is the only country in Europe which has a ban on abortion actually written into its constitution. This Friday, 25 th May, the people of Ireland are casting their votes in the Referendum.
And another eleven women will travel to Britain from Ireland. We want them to be among the last to make that journey.
Enough is enough.
Support the Vote to Repeal.
What the new Bavarian police law means for European progressives
Last Tuesday, the Bavarian federal parliament passed a new law that gives unreasonable and excessive powers to its police. The legislation comes less than one week after 35,000 people protested against the law at the biggest demonstration in Munich in half a decade.
The Bavarian parliament has full authority of its police, according to federalisation laws instituted after the fall of the Nazi regime. Yet, with Horst Seehofer acting as Minister of Interior in the new German central government, the state law may become a blueprint for the police laws in the whole Federal Republic of Germany – a troubling sign of times to come.
Indefinite imprisonment and repression without a cause
The bill drastically changes the preventive policing. Two terms are central: “Gefährder” (endangerer) and “drohende Gefahr” (imminent danger). The old police law did not allow indefinite detention. Now, “Gefährder” can be held in prison indefinitely without having committed a crime, as long as a judge confirms the arrest every three months. Before, police needed a “konkrete Gefahr” (concrete danger) to intervene for crime prevention. Now, “drohende Gefahr” is enough. This massively lowers the bar for police intervention, blurring the line between police and intelligence services and leaving room to install a kind of “secret police”. The legal definition of the imminent danger is long, confusing and difficult to grasp, in stark contrast to the clear definition of the old concrete danger. Chances are, ordinary police forces on the ground will themselves not know when they may, should or must intervene. Numerous breaches of people’s fundamental rights will inevitably follow.
A broader reactionist agenda
Unfortunately, police legislation is only the most prominent part of a whole line of reactionary initiatives by the CSU. The ruling party has repeatedly invited Viktor Orban to their meetings. Recently, the Bavarian prime minister installed crucifixes in every administrative building in Bavaria, which was heavily criticised even by the Catholic Church itself. Only weeks ago, the CSU had to take back plans for a so called “Psychiatric Help Act”. It was supposed to do away with the difference between criminals and the mentally ill, introducing an online register of people in psychiatric treatment so the police could prevent “danger” from them. After massive criticism, they dropped the most disgusting parts of it, including the central register, in fear of public opinion.
Bavaria’s Constructive Disobedience
Concerning the police law, though, CSU seems to keep their hardline course. As one Conservative MP put it on Twitter: “30,000 people protested (…) So the silent majority of people stands with us”. Apart from the apparent absurdity of this argument, the whole assumption may be wrong. It’s true, the CSU have ruled Bavaria for over half a century. But standing against the repressive police law is a broad public coalition, mostly consisting of progressive parties and movements, but also neoliberal FDP, “Free voters” and many “ordinary” people. “Live and let live” is a common saying, and political authorities are generally not to be trusted.
What will happen now?
Of course, progressives will challenge the police bill in Bavarian and German constitutional courts, but this may take years. In autumn, the Bavarian state election is going to take place. The ruling CSU will most probably win the election, but a bad result – or even polls before – may change their minds. Weak approval rates are also a reason for the recent reactionary course now. Compared to 2016, the CSU has lost seven percentage points in polls. The party fears competition from right-wing extremist AfD. Yet in the recent central government election, the CSU has lost more voters to neoliberal FDP than the AfD. So internally, some party strategists call for caution with the new course. In vain. Many top-tier CSU officials are convinced right-wing populists. They use the AfD only as a pretence for reactionary policies they themselves crave – even if this appals a lot of voters. Only if approval rates keep falling, they may choose power over ideology.
Rebel City Munich
The progressive opposition is deeply concerned but won’t resign. Last week’s protest has shown how we can unite behind an idea of a free and open society. Many young people protested, emancipating themselves from a government they neither understand nor support.
It seems too early to expect a political revolution in the German south-east. But 100 years after independent socialist Kurt Eisner proclaimed the free state of Bavaria, European progressives should watch closely. At DiEM25, we stand in solidarity with the people of Bavaria and utterly condemn the new police law. “For the loser now, will be later to win…”
Tourism and climate change: a toxic combination
Climate change is a multifaceted problem. It roots not only in our views of the environment as a rubbish dump, but also in the indifference of material interests, shallow public scientific debates, and poor allocation of resources. It’s complex, worldwide.
But one key driver of carbon emissions – previously overlooked – is something that we can control: the tourist industry.
Scientists have been trying to quantify the effect of tourism for decades. But a recent study suggests that our previous calculations were considering only part of the problem. In fact, by analyzing the effect of tourism in a more holistic approach, some alarming results emerge: between 2009 and 2013 tourism and tourism-related carbon emissions increased by 20 per cent. This number significantly escalates the contribution of tourism to global carbon emissions.
Of course, fighting tourism-related emissions is not enough. Our planet faces multiple crises, and we need to tackle them all at the same time; We have already noted that the fight for poverty and against climate change should not be independent. This is why we design our policies collectively and holistically. We envision restoration of democracy in conjunction with sound economic policies and heavy investments in green technologies. Join us here and contribute to our common fight!
DiEM25 debates workers’ Brexit opportunities in Edinburgh
On Saturday, 28 April, the Scottish Socialist Party (SSP) hosted a debate to address the question: ‘How can working people benefit from leaving the European Union?’ Panel presentations from Margaret Cuthbert (Scottish economist and academic), Asbjorn Wahl (Norwegian trade unionist and author), Colin Fox (SSP co-spokesman and former MSP) and John Page (for DiEM25) were followed by contributions and questions from the floor.
Opening, after telling DiEM25’s purpose and development, John Page suggested that workers could benefit from three areas that would be freed of total or partial EU control. Industrial strategy should direct state resources more sensitively and therefore efficiently to better-defined regions and sectors. State support for SMEs (the largest source of new jobs) via investment tax breaks could be extended and tailored to UK opportunities. Life-long learning is, thanks to the internet, expanding greatly and becoming more accessible and affordable. The state would now be free to subsidise employers’ staff education and training support programmes without infringing state aid rules.
Margaret Cuthbert cited information that shows increasing unfairness and disempowerment affecting working people in Scotland, going on to describe the poor quality and irrelevance of figures emanating from Scottish Government , especially with reference to SMEs.
Asbjorn Wahl explained how well Norway had prospered outside the EU, but in EFTA, and that this could perhaps work for other countries too.
Colin Fox reminded participants of Socialists’ belief in the virtues of state ownership. Without EU inhibitions, many assets, especially utilities, should be re-nationalised for the benefit of all, not just corrupt capitalists and plutocrats.
In conclusion, despite all the ideas and desire about what is needed to counter general feelings of disempowerment and economic insecurity, workers’ opportunities are unlikely to improve under circumstances common to both UK and EU of undemocratic government that is answerable first to the bankers and other special interests.
To all members who are keen to form a DSC in Scotland, and who are prepared to give their time and talent: John will soon be sending out an invitation to a DiEM25 meeting, probably in Edinburgh, to start putting together an application for DSC approval.
Photograph credit: Craig MacLean
Europe must distance itself from the Israeli government
In reaction to the one-sided violence on Black Monday, May 14, 2018, on which Palestinians in Gaza protested against the relocation of the American embassy and the Israeli military killed 52 protesters, wounding over 2000, while at the same time not a single Israeli was injured by the protesters.
14 May ought to mark the start of the process that will lead to the international community finally taking an unequivocal stance against the Israeli military’s consistently disproportionate use of violence in the decades-long tragedy that is the Israel-Palestine conflict. At the time of writing, the Israeli military has killed 52 Palestinians, including minors, and has wounded thousands at the border with Gaza. Hundreds of them were targeted with live ammunition.
The people at the receiving end of this brutal violence are demonstrating against the relocation of the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, a city it has recognised as the Israeli state’s capital, despite the international outcry that this decision sparked. Instead, adding insult to injury, the US ambassador hailed the move as the result of “the vision, the courage and the moral clarity of one person to whom we owe an enormous, an eternal debt of gratitude, President Donald J Trump.”
Caught between the violence of the Israeli military, and the criminal irresponsibility of the American government, all countries have a clear mandate to not only unreservedly condemn any deployment of military against a demonstration, but to take active steps to distance themselves politically and financially from the Israeli government until it agrees to uphold international standards in how to deal with dissent. Further they should insist that Israel pursues a peaceful and fair resolution of the conflict with Palestine. This dedication should be demonstrated, at minimum, through the following conditions:
- The immediate end to all settlement creation on occupied Palestinian territory, which has been repeatedly condemned by the international community
- The end of all types of violence against peaceful demonstrators, an obvious precondition for any healthy democratic nation and society
- The ending of the blockade of the Gaza strip, which is causing untold suffering to the world’s third most densely populated area
- The demolition of the Israeli West Bank barrier, which amounts to racial segregation and violates international law
Our countries must condemn the Israeli government’s systemic violence towards the Palestinians as well as an American and European foreign policy that is blatantly guided by cynical geopolitical goals in the region, for the sake of which the justice of the Palestinian cause, and the human rights of the Palestinians, are willingly sacrificed.
If Europe is serious about being a force for peace and justice in the world, it must lead this process.
Result: a United Nations resolution was passed with the support of 12 EU member states, 16 EU member states abstaining and 0 against. Other reactions: Amnesty International, B’Tselem.
A tale of two populisms? The Italian political impasse and the renewal of economic democracy in Europe
Italy is now headed towards a coalition government between the “Five Star Movement” and the (formerly “Northern”) “League”. Those two parties are regarded as the undisputed winners of the last parliamentary elections, although Italy’s complex, mostly proportional electoral system prevented both from gaining a clear majority on their own.
Meanwhile, support for the heir of the Italian left, the Democratic Party, sunk to an all-time low of 19 per cent, drained both by abstention and by a significant transfer of votes towards the “Five Star Movement”. In the light of this historic defeat – and similar losses to social democratic parties across Europe – we are left to wonder: is there a future for progressive politics in Italy?
The “Five Star Movement” and the “League” have been portrayed as two complementary kinds of populism – a left-leaning, “tax and spend,” and a right-wing, anti-tax and xenophobic one – which are unified by a shared mistrust of institutional politics. In the face of such a populist insurgence, the outgoing secretary, yet still de facto leader, of the Democratic Party has called for a “grand coalition” government, with the aim of imposing an agenda of institutional reforms that are inspired by the French “Vth Republic”. By doing so, he is clearly trying to position himself as the “Italian Macron”, thus pushing the Democratic Party further along the Third Way. Underwriting this strategy is the view that there are no more viable space for the Left, since the new dominant political cleavage is the one that opposes “populists” to “Europeanists”. So where does that leave progressives?
As pointed out by Fausto Panunzi and Dani Rodrik, the crisis of the Left is rooted in its embrace of the view that the best way to ensure shared prosperity was the efficiency of the markets. The economic crisis in 2008, still plaguing Europe, revealed the fundamental flaws of this approach. And so, as progressives lost their credibility, broad sectors of the electorate turned to populist forces instead.
But we should not let these far-right forces distract from the need to deepen economic democracy in the Union. Populism, as a strategy, can be used to advance a reactionary agenda, but as Rodrik points out, it can also be used to advance a progressive one. It is our responsibility, then, to develop “populist” economic policies within a responsible framework, in order to meet the demands of protection and income redistribution — and in this way, to prevent our political systems from being exploited by the more dangerous variety of xenophobic and authoritarian populism.
This is precisely the core of DiEM25’s European New Deal, as well as of the agenda of the transnational list “European Spring”.
Do you wish to contribute to the renewal of economic democracy in Europe? Join DiEM25 and participate in the European Spring!
Nicola Bertoldi is currently pursuing a PhD in history and philosophy of science at the University of Paris 1 and is an active member of DiEM25.