Mad as Hell

LA Times reports Why Europeans Are as Mad as Hell at the New Europe

This is a Howard Beale moment in Europe. Remember the O'Reillyesque commentator in the 1976 movie "Network," who kept shouting, "I'm as mad as hell and I'm not going to take this anymore"? It was never clear exactly what he felt was wrong, who was to blame, or what should be done about it. He just wanted to protest against "everything everywhere … going crazy."

That pretty much sums up European sentiment. People are as mad as hell that their economies are stagnating while crime, immigration and welfare dependency — the three are intertwined in the average European's mind — are all on the rise.

The European Union provides a convenient punching bag. In Britain, people hate the EU because it's too socialist; in France because it's too capitalist. In Eastern Europe, they're upset that the EU isn't doing more to facilitate labor mobility; in Western Europe, where the low-wage, if largely mythical, "Polish plumber" is a dreaded figure, they think it's already done too much. It's almost enough to make a confirmed Euro-skeptic like me feel sorry for the bureaucrats in Brussels. "Why does everyone hate us?" they must be asking over their croissants and lattes. "Haven't we delivered real benefits for the people of Europe?"

Elites always fail to understand why the people dont understand that they know more than they do, and they know better than the people what is good for them. That is why the Dems in the US have lost power everywhere, and why the European elites find France and the Dutch saying NO.

To a certain extent they have a point. By helping to lower trade barriers and create a single, stable currency, the EU has spurred economic growth (such as it is). Even more important, by integrating age-old enemies it has helped promote political stability. Its role has been especially important in Eastern Europe, where the prospect of EU membership has hastened democratic and capitalist reforms. The EU isn't the whole story, of course. The spread of democracy and the security umbrella offered by Uncle Sam have been a big part of Europe's peaceful progress since World War II. But no one can entirely deny the EU's contribution. So why are the guardians of the new Europe so hated? Words such as arrogance and elitism come to mind. Although the EU has its own parliament, there is a well-founded fear throughout the continent that decisions are being made by unelected mandarins. The populations of the 25 EU member states may not agree on what should be done. What unites them is a desire to determine their own destinies, which is impossible as long as Brussels is calling the shots.

European countries spent hundreds of years fighting each other. Now they are being asked to surrender national identity for control by people from contries they fought many wars against.

Nothing symbolizes the disconnect between the people and their rulers more than the European Union constitution, a 300-page monstrosity drafted by former French President Valery Giscard d'Estaing and heartily endorsed by current French President Jacques Chirac. This was supposed to be another step toward creation of a European state with its own president and foreign minister. For Gaullists like Giscard and Chirac, it was also part of a cherished ambition to build a great power in competition with les Anglo-Saxons.

With France restored to its former glory as being the main ones in charge.

The skepticism of Poles and Britons to this project was well-known, but ultimately it was undone by the yawning indifference of the French themselves. The lives of ordinary French people are not dominated by dreams of lost glory; they simply want a decent job and public services that work. It was telling that only professionals and senior executives — i.e., France's top occupational rung — voted for the constitution last week. Everyone else opted for "non." The only way to dispel the current climate of gloom on the continent is to get economies moving again. Margaret Thatcher showed how it can be done: Reduce the size of the state and break the power of the labor unions. But neither Chirac nor his hapless counterpart in Berlin, Gerhard Schroeder, has the guts to do that. Instead, like most European leaders in recent decades, they have thrown their energies into EU integration in the vain hope that this would deliver a shot of Viagra to a moribund continent. The bankruptcy of that strategy has now been exposed. The question is whether European leaders will face up to their real problems. The fact that Chirac has reacted to the failure of the constitutional referendum by appointing as premier Dominique de Villepin, a haughty intellectual who thinks Napoleon was the ne plus ultra of good governance, is a bad sign. The good news is that in the wings in France and Germany are conservative leaders Nicolas Sarkozy and Angela Merkel, respectively, who just might have the gumption to cure their countries' real woes rather than continuing to administer an anti-American analgesic.

Kevin Drum blogged This is pretty typical of conservative commentary, which has been almost comically triumphant about the recent pair of No votes. I swear, you'd think it was VE Day in winger land. I wouldn't mind so much if this was based on substantive dislike of the constitution, but that really doesn't seem to be the driving force here. Rather, the right primarily seems cock-a-hoop over something that's little more than childish: the prospect of Jacques Chirac and his hated squads of "elitists" and "unelected bureaucrats" getting a black eye. The fact that an awful lot of the no votes were driven by anger at things favored by conservatives — admission for Turkey, a stronger European military commitment, open markets, free movement of labor — doesn't really seem to have occurred to them. The no vote doesn't really seem like much of a crisis to me, but it doesn't seem like much of a victory for conservatives either. They should be careful what they wish for.

Actually the French worried that they might lose some of their socialistic benefits, and the others don't want France to be making decisions for everyone, when their countries fought France many times in the past many hundred years.

UPDATE: David Adesnik agrees. Or maybe not. I'm not sure. In any case, he thinks that pundits around the world are simply reading into these elections whatever it is they wanted to believe in the first place. That sounds about right to me.

UnPartisan.Com blogged with 7 News Stories, 8 Liberal Blogs, 37 Conservative Blogs on the subject

McQ blogged You have to wonder, after the French and Dutch no votes on the EU Constitution, what's going on over there? The EU dream has been a constant for years and it was assumed, by most political observers, that for all intents and purposes, the sales job was over. All that needed to be done was cross the "t's" and dot the "i's". Obviously the political advisors were wrong. So why the rebellion and why now? Max Boot does a little delving into the vote and is of the opinion that while the elites of Europe were sold, the little guy never really bought into the program. So it would seem that the union and its Constitution were oversold. Dutch voters heard the words, but then watched as inflation, fueled by a switch from the gilder to the euro, ate away at their purchasing power. French voters heard the words, but then watched as their cherished social welfare system was attacked.

The perception of the EU among many is it will eventually absorb the distinct and unique cultures that mark the different countries of Europe and at some point in the future McEurope will emerge, with nothing to mark those formerly distinct cultures but old monuments and historical landmarks. I'm sure there are many more sophisticated, nuanced and involved analysis of why this happened. But in the end may simply boil down to a battle between the people of Europe and their reluctance to let go of their national identities and the elites of Europe who are sure they know what is best for all. Or, if you really want to distil it, the age old political battle between conservatives and liberals. How it will eventually end, if it ever ends, is anyone's guess at this point.