The US worked hard since WW2 to ensure that Europe would be politically subservient to the US. The Marshall Plan indebted Europe to the US, and NATO made Europe militarily dependent. Such economic and military dependence necessarily led to Atlanticist politicians rising to the top. Incidentally, the EU makes the whole problem worse because the bureaucracy there is not accountable to the people living in individual European countries.
In addition to this, the US does all of Europe’s dirt elsewhere in the world. For example, oil gets stolen from Syria and sent to Europe. This means European capitalists don’t have to compete with American capitalists, who source their oil from Canada and Latin America. They agree to divvy up resources so Europe and the US don’t come into conflict later.
The war in Ukraine is an example of the opposite happening. NATO capitalists are in conflict with capitalists in former Soviet nations. They both want to extract resources from Ukraine, but NATO capitalists want Russian capitalists to be subservient.
As said above, the Marshall Plan made Europe militarily dependent on the US. In exchange, the US does the actual armed conflict. Europe gets to benefit from imperialism, yet sits below American capital.
The theory is that. What is perplexing is how with so many countries, with so many stakeholders (voters, industries,…), the discipline is incredible.
The Ursula case is interesting, the US did not like the candidates that was posed to win (Manfred Weber as probably saw on him as too patriotic German and Margrethe Vestager as too popular with Europeans with her antitrust cases on American companies)… so imposing ignoring the Spitzenkandidat system and resorting only to secretive backroom deals… it is amazing this is what the EU has become!!!
It is no surprise most EU representatives in the parliament know no clue about the candidates and just follow party lines, but still… I would expect some more dissidents. Meloni in Italy is interesting too… her speeches were vociferously anti-establishment but the media was kind of passive with her… and no surprise, she is indeed perfectly inline with the establishment… but, the media were told to be nice with her before elections so the apparatus knew beforehand her real self! There is a vetting process before hand!
EU is a giant mess at this point, and it’s really not clear to me how it’s going to move forward. The EU doesn’t appear to have a coherent strategy on how to deal with the US, Russia, or China. It’s becoming geopolitically irrelevant, and the economy is going into a recession. The apparatchiks running the project don’t seem to have any bright ideas or even basic awareness of the problems EU is facing.
Not really, because the main alternative to the neoliberal centre seems to be on the right. I’m really not sure what to expect in Europe in the coming years.
Thanks again, I see it like that. These days I predict the US has more chances of changing than Europe since the lack of social net will precipitate the demand for change more radically.
Finally, what is your take on leftist parties in Europe such as Diem25 (I am not versed on the differences Marxist, leninist and that)?
I expect that there will be a split between the US and Europe in the coming years. The US sees China as its main adversary, and Europe is losing strategic relevance for the US because Russia is not an ideological opponent the way USSR was.
However, if the US simply left Europe then it would end up gravitating towards the east, first economically, then politically. That would be highly undesirable from the US perspective as it could result in a huge Eurasian bloc with from Europe, to Russia, to China. In my view this is what the war in Ukraine is all about. In fact, National Interest published a very revealing article back in 2021, while it focuses on Russia, it’s pretty clear how the argument extends to Europe as well https://nationalinterest.org/feature/strategy-avoiding-two-front-war-192137
The US has also been predating on Europe economically since the start of the war. US companies have been enjoying selling energy to Europe at high prices while Biden’s inflation reduction act lured companies away from Europe. Today, Trump is building on this strategy with massive tariffs designed to stifle Europe’s economy and lure more business to the US. The threat of Russia is also being used to force Europe into massive increase in military spending, most of which will go to American military industry.
All of this is bad news for Europe economically, and that’s creating a lot of internal political tension. As people see their standard of living collapse, they’re turning to nationalist parties because the neoliberal center has lost its credibility in their eyes. Hence why we see a surge of support for RN in France, AfD becoming a major party in Germany, and so on. I expect we’ll see more of what we saw in Romania where elections will be cancelled, candidates arrested, parties banned, and so on. All of that will further delegitimize the current system as people start realizing they’re not living in a genuine democracy.
Unfortunately, the left has been systematically dismantled in Europe since the end of WW2. What I mean specifically is the economic left. Socialism in Marxist terms mean worker ownership over the means of production which is directly at odds with the current capitalist state of relations where private ownership is the norm. Most of what constitutes the left in the west, such as social democrats, does not challenge capitalist relations. These parties simply want to curb the worst excess of capitalism such as having the rich pay more taxes, provide more social services, and so on. These are reformist parties that seek some form of sustainable capitalism.
There are a handful of genuine socialist parties in Europe, but they’re extremely marginalized and I can’t see how they can break into mainstream politics at this time. One of the problems is with messaging. The right has a big advantage here because their narrative is largely compatible with what people already believe. In a sense, the right is also a reformist type of movement where they’re not suggesting any revolutionary change. People who become disillusioned with the mainstream have easy time gravitating towards the tropes the right peddle like immigrants being the problem and taking people’s jobs away.
On the other hand, accepting socialist narrative requires accepting that the current system is fundamentally broken and there needs to be radical restructuring of society. In my opinion, what socialist left needs to focus on is crafting its messaging in a way that resonates with the public. The narrative has to be at least as appealing as what the right offers for people to even start to listen.
Insightful comment. I consider myself politically neutral yet I can tell apart when a genocide is happening, privacy violations, a ailing society, and a long etc. You are completely right with “socialist left needs to focus on is crafting its messaging in a way that resonates with the public”. I still not sure if socialism is a solution but gosh… if a wondering mind like me, gets with a rancid aftertaste when reading words like “means of production”, “capitalism”, “Marxist”… for real, the language needs to update and connect with people… It is like I say “we need to gather around the wireless to hear news”. (in 1910s radio was known as “wireless” from wireless telegraph)… it is a good statement but if i said some people simple will get confused with the term and the rest will know the term but simply think a person that uses those old references cannot possibly have the solution for today’s world problems.
Imo this comes at least partially down to the generic pattern of representatives becoming more conformist when they get into power. In my country for example we have a Pirate party, and they were quite radically progressive when they were founded but as they got into parliament+govt they became more centrist. You see this happen in many countries. I wouldn’t immediately jump to the conclusion that they are being ‘vetted’ by hidden elites, I think it’s very possible that its just an effect of the incentives you face in the process of competing in elections, facing the media, the environment in a parliament, etc. etc. But even if the latter is the case, it wouldn’t be a good thing since you have a diverse set of representatives representing a diverse society, and if the democratic system molds them to have a uniform set of traits then you are losing accuracy of that representation.
No doubt, with more responsibilities there is always a tendency to conform more, but from there to vote blindly there is a stretch. I wonder what happened to the Pirate parties in Europe!! I am looking for a pan-European, not necessarily federalist party in Europe but the few available do not convince me… I am tempting to create one (partially joking)… or just give up and find a peaceful live in some coast.
I did check them… even interacted with one of their executive members but, besides the literature that found it mostly bland and ambiguous, did not find enthusiasm there for the change Europeans demand. Besides, being federalist, I think on the rest of policies they will accommodate to whoever they partner with on the center-left. I did not see a substantial audience with Volt’s message, maybe I should have spoken with more of their people.
My search continues. Thanks SubArticTundra.
There’s also MERA25 (lead by the likes of Slavoj Žižek and Jannis Ver.). I quite liked them but they (and other pan-euro parties) have no chance of winning seats so long as the seats are distributed within each country separately.
The US worked hard since WW2 to ensure that Europe would be politically subservient to the US. The Marshall Plan indebted Europe to the US, and NATO made Europe militarily dependent. Such economic and military dependence necessarily led to Atlanticist politicians rising to the top. Incidentally, the EU makes the whole problem worse because the bureaucracy there is not accountable to the people living in individual European countries.
In addition to this, the US does all of Europe’s dirt elsewhere in the world. For example, oil gets stolen from Syria and sent to Europe. This means European capitalists don’t have to compete with American capitalists, who source their oil from Canada and Latin America. They agree to divvy up resources so Europe and the US don’t come into conflict later.
The war in Ukraine is an example of the opposite happening. NATO capitalists are in conflict with capitalists in former Soviet nations. They both want to extract resources from Ukraine, but NATO capitalists want Russian capitalists to be subservient.
As said above, the Marshall Plan made Europe militarily dependent on the US. In exchange, the US does the actual armed conflict. Europe gets to benefit from imperialism, yet sits below American capital.
very much agree with all taht
The theory is that. What is perplexing is how with so many countries, with so many stakeholders (voters, industries,…), the discipline is incredible. The Ursula case is interesting, the US did not like the candidates that was posed to win (Manfred Weber as probably saw on him as too patriotic German and Margrethe Vestager as too popular with Europeans with her antitrust cases on American companies)… so imposing ignoring the Spitzenkandidat system and resorting only to secretive backroom deals… it is amazing this is what the EU has become!!! It is no surprise most EU representatives in the parliament know no clue about the candidates and just follow party lines, but still… I would expect some more dissidents. Meloni in Italy is interesting too… her speeches were vociferously anti-establishment but the media was kind of passive with her… and no surprise, she is indeed perfectly inline with the establishment… but, the media were told to be nice with her before elections so the apparatus knew beforehand her real self! There is a vetting process before hand!
EU is a giant mess at this point, and it’s really not clear to me how it’s going to move forward. The EU doesn’t appear to have a coherent strategy on how to deal with the US, Russia, or China. It’s becoming geopolitically irrelevant, and the economy is going into a recession. The apparatchiks running the project don’t seem to have any bright ideas or even basic awareness of the problems EU is facing.
Could not agree more here! Any group you follow there you see with a minimal grasp of reality?
Not really, because the main alternative to the neoliberal centre seems to be on the right. I’m really not sure what to expect in Europe in the coming years.
Thanks again, I see it like that. These days I predict the US has more chances of changing than Europe since the lack of social net will precipitate the demand for change more radically. Finally, what is your take on leftist parties in Europe such as Diem25 (I am not versed on the differences Marxist, leninist and that)?
I expect that there will be a split between the US and Europe in the coming years. The US sees China as its main adversary, and Europe is losing strategic relevance for the US because Russia is not an ideological opponent the way USSR was.
However, if the US simply left Europe then it would end up gravitating towards the east, first economically, then politically. That would be highly undesirable from the US perspective as it could result in a huge Eurasian bloc with from Europe, to Russia, to China. In my view this is what the war in Ukraine is all about. In fact, National Interest published a very revealing article back in 2021, while it focuses on Russia, it’s pretty clear how the argument extends to Europe as well https://nationalinterest.org/feature/strategy-avoiding-two-front-war-192137
The US has also been predating on Europe economically since the start of the war. US companies have been enjoying selling energy to Europe at high prices while Biden’s inflation reduction act lured companies away from Europe. Today, Trump is building on this strategy with massive tariffs designed to stifle Europe’s economy and lure more business to the US. The threat of Russia is also being used to force Europe into massive increase in military spending, most of which will go to American military industry.
All of this is bad news for Europe economically, and that’s creating a lot of internal political tension. As people see their standard of living collapse, they’re turning to nationalist parties because the neoliberal center has lost its credibility in their eyes. Hence why we see a surge of support for RN in France, AfD becoming a major party in Germany, and so on. I expect we’ll see more of what we saw in Romania where elections will be cancelled, candidates arrested, parties banned, and so on. All of that will further delegitimize the current system as people start realizing they’re not living in a genuine democracy.
Unfortunately, the left has been systematically dismantled in Europe since the end of WW2. What I mean specifically is the economic left. Socialism in Marxist terms mean worker ownership over the means of production which is directly at odds with the current capitalist state of relations where private ownership is the norm. Most of what constitutes the left in the west, such as social democrats, does not challenge capitalist relations. These parties simply want to curb the worst excess of capitalism such as having the rich pay more taxes, provide more social services, and so on. These are reformist parties that seek some form of sustainable capitalism.
There are a handful of genuine socialist parties in Europe, but they’re extremely marginalized and I can’t see how they can break into mainstream politics at this time. One of the problems is with messaging. The right has a big advantage here because their narrative is largely compatible with what people already believe. In a sense, the right is also a reformist type of movement where they’re not suggesting any revolutionary change. People who become disillusioned with the mainstream have easy time gravitating towards the tropes the right peddle like immigrants being the problem and taking people’s jobs away.
On the other hand, accepting socialist narrative requires accepting that the current system is fundamentally broken and there needs to be radical restructuring of society. In my opinion, what socialist left needs to focus on is crafting its messaging in a way that resonates with the public. The narrative has to be at least as appealing as what the right offers for people to even start to listen.
Insightful comment. I consider myself politically neutral yet I can tell apart when a genocide is happening, privacy violations, a ailing society, and a long etc. You are completely right with “socialist left needs to focus on is crafting its messaging in a way that resonates with the public”. I still not sure if socialism is a solution but gosh… if a wondering mind like me, gets with a rancid aftertaste when reading words like “means of production”, “capitalism”, “Marxist”… for real, the language needs to update and connect with people… It is like I say “we need to gather around the wireless to hear news”. (in 1910s radio was known as “wireless” from wireless telegraph)… it is a good statement but if i said some people simple will get confused with the term and the rest will know the term but simply think a person that uses those old references cannot possibly have the solution for today’s world problems.
Imo this comes at least partially down to the generic pattern of representatives becoming more conformist when they get into power. In my country for example we have a Pirate party, and they were quite radically progressive when they were founded but as they got into parliament+govt they became more centrist. You see this happen in many countries. I wouldn’t immediately jump to the conclusion that they are being ‘vetted’ by hidden elites, I think it’s very possible that its just an effect of the incentives you face in the process of competing in elections, facing the media, the environment in a parliament, etc. etc. But even if the latter is the case, it wouldn’t be a good thing since you have a diverse set of representatives representing a diverse society, and if the democratic system molds them to have a uniform set of traits then you are losing accuracy of that representation.
No doubt, with more responsibilities there is always a tendency to conform more, but from there to vote blindly there is a stretch. I wonder what happened to the Pirate parties in Europe!! I am looking for a pan-European, not necessarily federalist party in Europe but the few available do not convince me… I am tempting to create one (partially joking)… or just give up and find a peaceful live in some coast.
Hmm… Volt?
I did check them… even interacted with one of their executive members but, besides the literature that found it mostly bland and ambiguous, did not find enthusiasm there for the change Europeans demand. Besides, being federalist, I think on the rest of policies they will accommodate to whoever they partner with on the center-left. I did not see a substantial audience with Volt’s message, maybe I should have spoken with more of their people. My search continues. Thanks SubArticTundra.
There’s also MERA25 (lead by the likes of Slavoj Žižek and Jannis Ver.). I quite liked them but they (and other pan-euro parties) have no chance of winning seats so long as the seats are distributed within each country separately.