Archive for European Parliement

Thalys static

Posted in Kids, Mountains, pictures, Travel, Wines with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 27, 2025 by xi'an

[When returning from Brussels, after the privaCI workshop, I happened to sit in the Thalys train to Paris, next to three French (?) lobbyists (??) discussing very loudly about the specifics of their trade, apparently acting for the main agriculture union FNSEA (???) model of industrial and intensive agriculture at the European Commission or Parliement in Brussels. Annoyingly so, making me regret my bargain first class ticket. Here are a few sentences from one of their phone calls:]

“T’installes un éleveur de poules c’est deux cent milles euros, un éleveur de porcs c’est un million, c’est pas pareil. Tu peux installer un éleveur de poules en trois mois !”

…

“Le président de la République [Emmanuel Macron] a signé, son discours souligne l’importance du modèle de la CEPR [contrats de plan État-Région], c’est plié, je ne vois pas ce qu’on peut faire de plus!”

we do need more EU [reposted]

Posted in Books, Kids, University life with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , on May 30, 2024 by xi'an

My colleague from Paris Dauphine, Dominique Meda, wrote the following in her Le Monde weekly column of 26 May (translated mostly by ChatGP) which, despite points of disagreement (about singling out Germany), I wish to repost as a call to votes for more Europe.

Despite [the imperfections and limitations of the EU governance], there have many recent advances. Several important social reforms were carried out at the end of this legislature, notably thanks to the hard work of part of the Parliament and the Commissioner for Jobs and Social Rights, Nicolas Schmidt.

We do need more EU. We need, as Habermas suggested in 2018 in a powerful lecture, a more democratic EU, a Parliament with more power, that stops yielding to the European Commission and refuses the minor arrangements between States that encroach on its legitimacy and renationalize debates when it is crucial to prioritize a European interest. We have nothing to gain from a return to bargaining between nation-States nor from these negotiations taking place in secret, outside the European public sphere, as happened with the recent social directives.

Generally speaking, we need a true transnational space for sharing knowledge and debate, allowing us to better understand (and perhaps overcome?) our differences in approach. In his lecture, Habermas, like many in France, criticized Germany’s unconditional support for monetary stability. If we want to live together, shouldn’t we, at some point, be able to publicly discuss each other’s beliefs to better understand each other?

Michel Foucault brilliantly explained in “The Birth of Biopolitics” (lecture on January 31, 1979) why, in 1948, Ludwig Erhard’s demand for economic freedom enabled a traumatized, divided, and occupied Germany to rebuild the legitimacy of the German state. Isn’t it time for Germany to open a new chapter in its history? Yes, our countries would truly benefit from multiplying the spaces that allow for free and open exchanges about their sacred cows rather than letting the opponents of Europe fan the flames of nationalism, which is always ready to ignite.

Because this is where we are. While we have managed to organize a space that recognizes democracy, equality, freedom, the rule of law, dignity, and peace as foundational and shared values, a fatal blow risks being dealt to the ideal of a political community capable of resisting the ambitions of the surrounding empires in the next elections. Nationalism is back, with the hatreds and risks of war that it entails. We have the chance to vote freely on 09 June for parties committed to making the European Union a democratic community equipped to promote an ambitious ecological and social policy.