Bleaching: Europe trapped

The climate of enthusiasm and optimism, connected with the “return” of Poland to European salons for many politicians, comes down to regaining the chance to participate in the financial division of the EU “tort”.

The problem of the crisis of the European Union as a structure invented by its "founding fathers", first in the form of economical communities and then in the form of political integration. In front of our eyes, the union of national states, competing with each another in a combined continental market, ends.

The outgoing Government of the United Right in a hysterical kind responded to the EU's debate on treaty reform. Meanwhile, it is not about emotional and emotional reaction. Normative and organization changes are inevitable, even in the context of enlargement of the European Union, not necessarily prepared for the accession of the state. The national debate on the future of the EU is so inevitable. Each government will sooner or later gotta address both the aspirations of liberal federalists, dreaming of a superstate dominated by the strongest powers, as well as the chances of maintaining the specificities of national "homes" which in a globalised planet are incapable to keep their sovereignty and decision-making autonomy.

Even the most Euro-enthusiast observers must admit that the European Union is trapped

Contrary to its assumptions, the idea-programming became mostly due to its dependence on the Atlantic patron, an engaged geopolitical player on 1 side. alternatively of improving the various peaceful formats of "strategic partnerships", including Russia, she set the ideological crusade and rivalry "in an old power style". The abandonment of the Pacific nature for "defensive cooperation" opens the way for a akin transformation as with the North Atlantic Alliance (from deterrence to active displacement).

What is EU policy towards Ukraine, if not a ruthless fight for a fresh political, economical and civilizational division of Europe? It is simply a fight in the name of transnational European democracy, a unified government of the organization of social life and an economical commitment to corporate capitalism.

It's a collapse.

These goals go to order. Those who have doubts about the legitimacy of these elections do not deserve the designation of a actual European. However, how can we advocate "transnational European democracy" if "national" democracies have become dysfunctional even in the countries of "old" Europe? They do not deal with existing crises or make unchangeable improvement prospects. Similarly, the promotion of uniformized models of social life creates opposition and even rebellion in different parts of the Union itself, and even more so beyond. Finally, the expansion of corporate capitalism not only creates obsessions with its own security, but forces Western states to build barriers, isolate themselves, or apply sanctions policy.

Although the European Union refers to the cultural memory of the continent as a full or unity (although due to Christian pedigree), it is indeed a profoundly divided organism. The basic division refers to the dualism of “old Europe” (founders of the Communities) and “late-coming” countries from east Europe. The differences between them scope from systemic patterns, levels of prosperity, political culture, mentality, ethos and imponderabili. They evoke resentiments, stereotypes and common prejudice. It turns out that they are so deep in human consciousness that they cannot be eradicated within respective generations.

Another division has ideological and axiological pedigree – we are dealing with clashes of 2 currents: progressive (reformist, tolerant, prospective) and conservative (populist, nationalist, xenophobic). The dispute is not between the nations, but between the hostile in terms of the ideal-worldview camps. It turns out, for example, that attachment to religion as a cultural and even national value, as in the case of Poland and Poles, can be so strong that it becomes a differentiation factor, alternatively than merging with the remainder of increasingly secularized Europe. Although almost all hypocritically mention any enigmatic Christian values.

The European Union is besides geographically diverse in North and South, in the East and West. It is divided against the background of relations with American hegemony, as well as in the context of relations with Russia. Its Atlantic affiliations make it a nonfree tool of the United States in a global Western rivalry with China and Russia. EU societies have been put under force to fear the threat of war, which entails militarisation of the economy and allowing various forms of surveillance. The rulers are not seeking peaceful solutions, but the blame for the outbreak of conflicts is on geopolitical opponents.

The technological acceleration of our era, expressed in the dynamic improvement and usage of artificial intelligence, has resulted in profound social changes, the effects of which we do not full understand, or do not want to understand. They concern, on the 1 hand, changes in social awareness towards cosmopolitan and post-national, and on the another hand, the recognition of fresh identities, the defence of uniqueness, locality and regionality. The diffusion of values is undoubtedly conducive to the uniformization of patterns of behaviour, but it is besides not essential to underestimate the other phenomenon, or their divergence.

One community does not find it hard to affirm ‘pan-Europeanism and political correctness’, for example with a daft fashion for ‘feminative’ language. Others are doing everything to defend the national state and its future, by accommodating and rationalising its functions. The example of Hungary seems to be highly informative for this reason. Viktor Orbán is well aware that tiny states and nations will gain more without being absorbed by amorphous community structures, in which, according to the rule of superordination, the strongest and the largest ones have the most to say.

Superstate Without Nations

Because of his civilizational supremacy, Western states are very keen to melt into a political and economical community. There is no deficiency of ideas to build a “Europe without frontiers” where alternatively of nations, “European civilian society” emerges. These would be all European citizens, for whom regions and cities, in fact ‘small homelands’, have the function of ‘cells’ consisting of an eclectic whole.

It is hard to avoid the association with the fragmentation of geopolitical units of the mediate Ages. Or possibly that is the point of dispersing, decentralised political and administrative centres subject to fresh imperialisation, dismantling the territorial, national and spiritual order to date and creating fresh dimensions of dependency. In Poland, fewer people are subject to a serious analysis of this scenario. Many people do not care about the problems of European integration as besides abstract and hard to understand. Poles in their mass are not willing to defend themselves against political incapacitation. Recognizing any of the benefits of gradual enrichment and free movement within the European Union, many citizens are indifferent to the destiny of the national state and the scenarios of belonging to the fresh empire.

There is only anti-German hysteria through which right-wing and populist politicians fear that German national power will sooner or later turn into hegemonic tendencies. By nature, Germany has a sense of superiority and superiority over others, or at least so they are perceived even erstwhile they do not realize it themselves. It is so crucial not to call for "more Germany" in Europe, but to jointly specify the functions of the Hegemonial strategy in the EU vis-à-vis weaker participants in the integration project. Pretending that there is no conflict between German Realpolitik and the peculiar interests of many associate States can lead not only to frustration and disappointment, but besides to an increase in centrifugal tendencies in the Union.

There is any kind of non-reflective consent that Europe should enter the "transnational European democracy" way to address crisis-related problems. But is it truly a panacea for cultural, spiritual or economical differences? How will this European transnational democracy cope with the assimilation and integration of millions of migrants, as well as with the phenomenon of rebirth of nationalisms and populisms that are not unique to Poland Jarosław Kaczyński Hungary Viktor Orbán. Marine Le Pen or Geert Wilders gaining more and more support in the countries of “old” Europe!

The oligarchical castes of politicians do not have a prescription to halt the processes of increasing social stratification and impoverishment, polarization between rich and poor, control of demographic change, prevent drastic reductions in education, increase in terrorism and crime, and discourage spiritual fundamentalism. Populist and nationalist tendencies are a form of defending dissatisfied citizens and social movements due to unfair distribution of goods, but besides imposing cultural patterns, alien to their own heritage.

Utopia ante portas

The societies of European Union countries are fed utopian concepts of implementing political equality for all European citizens, without taking into account deep economical and cultural divisions. Citizenship equality only takes on the nature of formal equality with the law. The exercise of European electoral rights besides boils down to the formal rights of individual citizens. Under utopian assumptions, it is forgotten that political equality does not destruct either class divisions or national divisions. Nor does he warrant actual freedom.

Oligarchization in modern capitalism has gone so far that no European Union improvement will change this state of affairs

Transnational European democracy would only be another mask for predatory neoliberal capitalism, in which fewer people decide the destiny of the masses.

The European Union is no longer a group of countries to defend European peace. German engagement in the Balkan conflict in the early 1990s. was the first sign that collective abroad and defence policy had not been developed. Rather, it was subjected to NATO's militant strategy. For this reason, present we are not only dealing with a massive shift of budgetary resources for military purposes, but besides with active support for 1 of the militants. The war in Ukraine shows that the European Union, so eager to see itself as a peaceful force, is simply a contributor and a contributor to 1 of Europe's top war tragedies. alternatively of utilizing their diplomatic capacity to search peaceful solutions, the expansion of the army and the intensification of arms become the means of the pushy militarisation of global relations.

Interestingly, the attitude towards war in Ukraine has no connection with the division into left and right in the EU associate States, with their critical attitude towards authoritarianism, the cultivation of shameful racist or Nazi ideology. Unconditional support for Ukraine does not include ‘mythic’ European values in its assessment. It does not meet any criteria for accession, which the Hungarian Prime Minister speaks out about. A selective approach, based on cognitive blindness on the 1 hand, and on hostility towards Russia on the other, causes the European Union, erstwhile beginning itself to Ukraine, to plunge morally into itself. The acceptance of Ukraine which does not meet the EU conditions leads not only to the creation of fresh divisions within the group, but besides to a profound axiological change. He knows to advance economical liberalism in its worst oligarchical edition, while relativising or even rejecting liberalism values.

Ukraine should be helped to regain insteerability and build a fresh identity, but not at all costs. The reasons of today's Ukraine do not coincide – contrary to the propaganda of the parties – with the interests of all EU countries. Until it becomes a state of plural democracy (for now we are dealing with a “war dictatorship”), a regulation of law and freed from widespread corruption, we should engage indirectly and not straight in its victory. Meanwhile, Europe, in the EU-Natov plexus, takes on costly safety guarantees for Ukraine, replacing the withdrawn United States. However, it can lead to fresh crises and an interior anti-EU revolt if we focus on maximumist targets to overcome Russia.

Nothing can replace the state

More and more countries will express their opposition and social discontent with the European Union's commitment to non-military wars. After a time of mediocre leadership, politicians can return to the European arena not only about authoritarian thrusts, but besides about greater causative power, capable of strong opposition to the power of the bureaucratic Brussels collective. They will be able to defend national states that are capable of continuously rebirth and adaptation to changing environments.

No transnational organisation can replace a national state in its political and organisational and legal functions, as well as economical and cultural functions

Only a state can defend the national identity of the people inhabiting it. In times of erosion of sovereignty, this value remains the only 1 to be defended at all costs.

It is worth remembering, coming from tragic lessons in the past of Poland (collections, occupations, enslavements) that the possession of a state by a given nation or a group of nations and nationalities is an component that legitimizes and nobilitates them in an global environment. It offers opportunities and opportunities to articulate national interest towards others. He is simply a guarantor and arbitrator in an unequal confrontation between the marketplace and the citizen, especially in the context of the offensive of supporters of neoliberalism. Many experts of the problem (e.g. Walter Block, Jerzy Wilkin) recognise that no economical activity at present or in the foreseeable future will be possible outside the state and without its participation.

The State remains the only institution capable of creating a legal order that meets local conditions. It is primarily about regulating relations between social groups against the background of social wealth sharing, active labour marketplace policies, generating laws protecting against unfair practices from entrepreneurs, banks or global corporations. Combating exclusion or mitigating the negative effects of social inequality remains, as is known, crucial axiological demands in the programmes of many political forces, exercising power and claiming to regulation in the country.

The modern state must not stay indifferent to citizens, but besides to those without this status, who are on its territory, must not show aid, support or even compassion erstwhile they are in a hard situation of life (humanitarian disasters, migration crises, natural disasters) for their innocent reasons. The free marketplace mechanics is heartless in specified situations, lacking sentiment and pity. The fact that the European Union has not been able to deal with the migration crisis and yet shifts work to the associate States is the best proof of this.

In the year of the European elections, the Polish government should answer the question of to what degree membership of the European Union, this oligarchical institution of an inclusive nature, helps to keep control over the attributes of its own statehood. After all, it is known that this organization, along with powerful corporations, how large empires, will strive to influence national decision-making processes, in a direction compatible with the interests of economical tycoons.

It is worth considering which candidates to put up for the European Parliament. Whether this is to be, as yet, the posting of well-deserved notes or uncomfortable politicians to synecural positions, or representatives of the expert communities of the young generation, who have the cognition and courage to defy the imposition by the camera of the EU calf's enthusiasm and uncritical listening.

Prof. Stanisław Bielen

Think Poland, No. 1-2 (1-7.01.2024)