So far, most of the discussion over the Eurozone crisis has centered on the lack of economic feasibility of such currency union in a a non-optimal currency zone. But the more interesting question we could’ve been asking all along is: whether the union in its current incarnation – having been achieved with much hand-wringing and backdoor dealings, in fact signals a progress of democratic ideals, or a regression of such. That’s to say, were the ideals of a singular economic and political union a misguided exercise to start off with, and has the pursuit of such impossibility led everyone involved in precisely the opposite direction?
Ambrose Evan-Pritchard seems to think the EU has gone too far, if not from inception, but certainly the hard line behaviour it has engaged in the past few years.
In my view, the EU elites overstepped the line by ignoring the rejection of the European Constitution by French and Dutch voters, then pushing it through under the guise of the Lisbon Treaty without a popular vote, except in Ireland, and when Ireland voted ‘No’, to ignore that too. The enterprise has become illegitimate – it is starting to exhibit the reflexes of tyranny.
Slipping into tyranny and illegitimacy aside, the EU leadership also seems to have learned little from their predecessors the last century. The singled-mindedness in deficit reduction may very well push the entire zone into deflation. And while Germany still harbours a collective paranoia of its hyperinflationary days, few seem to recollect that reinforced deflation was the root of the problem.
This is the Gold Bloc fallacy of Continental Europe from 1931 to 1936, the policy that led to Bruning’s destruction of Weimar, Laval’s near destruction of the Third Republic in France with his deflation decrees. It was a precursor to Laval’s fateful role as the Nazi enforcer of Vichy. He was later executed by firing squad, vomitting from a botched suicide with cynanide.
End of the day, standing on the other side of the Channel, this is a sober question to chew on.
Fonctionnaires and EU finance ministers will pass judgement on the British (or Dutch, or Danish, or French) budgets before the elected bodies of these ancient and sovereign nations have seen the proposals. Did we not we not fight the English Civil War and kill a king over such a prerogative?