Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité!

Thanks Conny!!

SOLIDAR Weekly Round Up 15-07-2016

Editorial by Conny Reuter, SOLIDAR Secretary General

Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité!

15 July 2016

Yesterday, 14th July, Bastille Day commemorates the French Revolution. Its three principles engraved on every town hall and every public school in France have again been under attack, this time in Nice. What more symbolic day! France is mourning yet again and we express again our solidarity reaffirming that the defense of democracy, of freedom, equality and solidarity, the call for social progress remains the core of our commitment, our compass!

After the Brexit vote, these principles should more than ever lead a value-based debate on European policy.

Liberté is not only a principle of rights, it also means being free from poverty and exclusion. The 125 million people in Europe who live in, or under the threat of, poverty do not have Liberté. How can we get them out of poverty? How can we get the less qualified back into the labour market and into decent work? The EU had – once upon a time – a social agenda, a Lisbon strategy and later it had a Europe2020 strategy. Unfortunately, instead of taking the lead and using the mid-term review of Europe2020 as a basis for action, the Juncker Commission is instead continuing the European semester process, while not working on improvement of the strategy to make it more effective. The news that the ECOFIN Council has decided to send a letter to Spain and Portugal illustrates the main reference to guideline Number 1 of Europe2020: “the vigorous application of the Stability and Growth Pact”. In the interpretation of Schäuble and others, vigorous means vigorous, without taking into account the damage it has on society or without even taking electoral results and referendum results into account. Did the message not get through? This European Union of austerity has been rejected as the majority of citizens do not have the feeling that the EU cares about them.

Egalité. In the last four years the Commission has reported on Employment and Social Developments in Europe (ESDE). We are not all equal. We are still a long way from equal pay for equal work in the same workplace. The gender pay gap is still huge, not to mention the unfair tax system that allows tax evasion and tax havens for the rich. Since 2008 there have been some efforts to tame the financial markets, but these initiatives have been watered down under a Commission President who has now been recruited by the bank responsible for the implosion of the financial markets eight years ago. So much for the the credibility of leaders! Only a handful protested at the publication of this news; at the same time some people in the European Parliament were preparing a report on whether Civil Society Organisations and NGOs should continue to be financially supported by the EU when they are being ‘too critical’ of it.

Fraternité. Competitiveness is the new criterion under which everything is evaluated. The dangerous poison of nationalism is unleashed because there is now also competition between member states in the north and member states in the south. Pensioners in Greece and in Germany are in completely different situations, but both expect the EU to contribute to ensuring the stability and the availability of decent, ‘poverty-preventing’ pensions. And what about the arrival of migrants and refugees? After the wave of solidarity last year, the Balkan route is now closed and people are dying daily in the new ‘Dead Sea’ (i.e. the Mediterranean). There are indeed fewer images on the news but the human loss is immense and it cannot be excused by ignorance. How to strengthen a sense of solidarity (Fraternité) is indeed a challenge, but first the mutual benefits of sharing need to be proven before solidarity can mould our thinking.

This foreword is not a new “J’accuse” in the Emile Zola sense. These are just the thoughts that many of us have who want the EU to progress, but we want an EU with different assumptions. Sustainable economic, social and political development, social investment and social protection for all should be the basis of the EU. We Europeans have to take the lead in the post-Brexit debate. We have to challenge the political leaders and the policy makers in the Institutions to make sure they put people’s concerns first. They should use the momentum for political change that delivers a real safeguarding pillar of social rights, and that translates the Sustainable Development Goals agenda into an ambitious European agenda. They should trust the next generation and promote their skills and competences and deliver on integration and the inclusion of migrants and refugees. Ambitious? Maybe! But still feasible. It is a matter of will. Those who believe that this Europe should first be destroyed and then reconstructed are playing with fire and instead they should learn from history. Reform is not a term of abuse, it is a progressive challenge!

See also Immanuel Wallerstein’s

Commentary No. 429, July 15, 2016: “Bastille Day: France’s Ultra-Confused Present”

Looking at the small print

I am wondering if the small print, defining all the terms and condition – at the end – really allows to offer

“services”

that boil down to something like

“s r  ce “

Admittedly, good cheese is frequently full of holes; but if we look at the wholes of the cheese wheels they are most delicious (well, of course, depending on the cheese and the personal gusto). And when we buy it, we do not pay the holes as they do not add to the weight, only ii some way to the seize.
But services in our societies are full of gaps, non deliveries, falls promises …: promising 4G but selling phones that are factually not allowing using them; selling phone services that in fact can only be used occasionally (o tempora o spacio, ma c’è senza moralità) … – perhaps that is the deeper meaning of the name of a company promising something that seems as if Vodafone … – sorry for the typo: I meant looks as if would be a phone. …

Sure, that can be seen as an individual customer being annoyed with one service provider. It could also be read as one customer referring to one service not properly delivered, though being exposed to many of similar unqualified services. But perhaps it is not just line customer but many customers; and many customers not being delivered appropriately, i.e. as promised and contractually defined.

And perhaps it is even more than that: a state that promises protection …, and actually delivers protection only to those that are too big to fail; an educational system that promises to deliver education but delivers at most training; a foreign policy that promises security and allows modern crusades; a regional policy body that promises solidarity and “sends one skiff” to host people arriving in many huge vessels; a democracy that allows

147 companies formed a ‘super entity’ within this, controlling 40 per cent of its wealth. All own part or all of one another. Most are banks – the top 20 includes Barclays and Goldman Sachs. But the close connections mean that the network could be vulnerable to collapse. (Waugh, 2011, October 20th: ‘One Super-corporation Runs the Global Economy’… and it could be terrifyingly unstable

from: Daily Mail; for the study: Vitali, Stefania/Glattfelder, James B./Battiston Stefano, October 2011: The Network of Global Corporate Control; in: PLoS ONE 6(10): e25995; doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0025995

When do we finally reply in the same way? Answering payment requests by really paying for what we get (by paying for what we really get); acting as educated people and not like skills-trained robots; accepting only our collective decisions and not the decisions of the collective of 147 …

Criticising the Inequality of distribution of wealth is an important point. The critique of the inequality of the access to the production of wealth is a more important point. At the end, however, the most important point is another:

Philosophers have hitherto only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it.

(Karl Marx 1845: Theses On Feuerbach