Dennis
>> Added to that, I was told yesterday that the EU is now run by a council
>> of the 'unknown', the ERT I think they are called, and I have no idea
>> what that means. What happens if one member takes a bad turn or
>>becomes a 'visionary'? Or convinces himself he is right?
>Do you mean the European Commission? They're appointed by the elected
>national parliaments of the member states; there's also the European
>Parliament which, if I recall aright, has been slowly taking on a bigger
>role in the EU as of late. The EU has its problems, but it's a promising
>model of transnational democracy, debate and discussion compared to,
>say, the authoritarian, top-down neoliberal savagery engulfing the
>ex-American Empire.
Overall the transition to the 'Common Market' as it was once referred to
has been something of a disappointment. The debate and discussion did
have a lot of appeal or so it appeared, to get people to vote for the UK
becoming part of the Union. Before joining the UK had trade links with
Australia, New Zealand, Canada, along with many other ex-colonies. A
large part of the imports were food, and it was argued that butter from
say France would be cheaper because there was less transport. At the same
time it was argued that products from Europe would be cheaper due to the
'free trade'. Of those who visited Europe, for holidays, the main
attraction was Spain, where the drink was about a quarter or a third of
what it is here, so this was taken into account, in the belief that
prices here might become similar.
In the event the expectation was replaced by the Common Agricultural
Policy, that ensured the prices of all past imports increased in price.
When the transition came there was also decimalisation of the pound. Many
items of food were in pennies and shillings, thus, if say a quarter of
butter was ninepence, or 9d, then the new price in decimal would have
been 3.75p. Therefore, if a year later butter was 7p it seemed cheaper
than it used to be long ago, whereas in the old money it was 16.8d, or to
the nearest in shillings and pence, 1/5d. with the conversion to decimal,
Value Added Tax came along, had the old £sd system remained then
calculation would have been a big problem.
Few people were aware of the changes about to come. For a start, with
decimalisation about half a million small businesses closed. Local
production of food started to become non profitable, and with selective
grants, such as rooting up trees by the million to make way for the grain
growing prairie, the whole pattern of distribution changed. Free trade
was complicated, for example, in continental Europe there were rules
about discounts on bulk buying, where the discount was proportional to
quantity. This protected the small retailer, particularly in urban areas,
and more particularly in France. However, the UK was given an
'exemption', to favour the large buyer. Thus, there are now four large
retail outlets in the UK that accounts for between eighty and ninety per
cent of all food sold. Since these organisations have their own
transport, the change from rail freight to highway ensured no food is now
distributed by rail, and in order to make the transport effective and
cheaper an ongoing improvement to those highways is necessary. Also, the
big retailer is 'out of town', so if you don't have a vehicle you have no
access to the cheaper prices. While this is going on the EU come along
with specifications for food products, such as the shape of cucumbers, so
it is now against the law to sell a cucumber that is curved, and there
will be a geometric formula to determine and describe 'straight' and
'curved'. I am not sure but the same rule might apply to bananas, it
seems as if the UK cannot buy bananas from Dominica, where their economy
is entirely dependent on this export. Along with that, all vegetable
products sold must be 'registered' with the EU, ensuring that only the
varieties sold by the big four are included in the register.
This all sounds like top-down neoliberalism to me, and it is very much
'under the carpet'.
Also, see Nature, vol 391, 29 Jan, 98 p 433. Peeling the Chinese Onion.
Jarwd M. Diamond. 'There are many explanations for the technological
decline of China at the end of the mediaeval period, and the coincident
technological rise of Europe. One, in a word, is geography.'
This covers the subject of political unity, and says this was almost
impossible in Europe, and gave rise to diversity. There is a suggestion
that disunity is good. There are nine references that look as if might be
useful.
>> Political reform is next to impossible.
>It may look that way in the Anglo-Saxon countries. I think the answer is
>to generate a new kind of politics, on the model of the Central European
>Green parties, where struggle outside of the existing political
>institutions is as important as votes and elections.The UK contingent to the EU assembly is 'Socialist'. There are two, I
think, Tory members, one is for Buckinghamshire. There are liberal
democrats and an assortment of others, but no Green parties. I have my
doubts about Greens, at the last EU election, or the one I think in 1994
I thought I'd find out their policy on a number of issues, many of them
can be found in the review by
>Arno Tausch Thu, 7 Aug 1997, and in particular, 34. - >A development, that is dependent to a large extent on foreign capital, is socially
polarizing and regionally exclusive. (Inward Investment)
After leaving my name and telephone number with the nominated
representative he called back and over about twenty minutes we talked
away about general points, and he asked me to write on specific issues,
more or less what have to say about democratic 'economy' with an Aminian
background.
There was no immediate reply, immediate to me is anything up to about six
weeks. I called fifteen times, leaving my name and number on the
answering machine. The local Green was out too. No, I'm afraid this bunch
is part of the system.
The big inward investment at present, at a cost of £100,000 per job to
the UK, for the Korean company Hyundi, looks as if it has gone down the
tubes.
>> Added to this the EU hands out cash so who cannot resist taking it? Anyone who shows displeasure, and the only way to do that is take
positive action, as in the Newbury by-pass and the extension of
Manchester Airport, to mention just two of many hundreds, are 'listed' as
'enemies of the state'.
>Well, Britain is a dependent semi-periphery of the European Union, so
>it's not surprising to see Albion taking money where it can get it. But
>why not elect folks to the European Parliament who'll use that money to
>pay for schools and hospitals, and not asphalt and weapons systems? If
>capitalism wants to abolish the nation-state, and it appears to be in
>the process of doing so, then Left alternatives to Business As Usual
>must go beyond national utopias. For Brits, this means dumping Labour's
>Murdochian capitalism and building Green or other Left Parties; for
>Americans, dumping the Democrats, etc. Local activism is meaningless
>without global solidarity, and vice versa.The other Left party is the Socialist Labour party. This is headed up by
Arthur Scargill who was the Pres. of the National Union of Miners. Here
again I wrote to a local organisation to find out more about the basics
but I am beginning to wonder if there are any basics. There is image, but
not the right one, it is part 'down pit', clog dancing and coal, coal,
coal. I wanted to know if policy was set on the shift of concentration in
wealth, and I wanted examples to show what they had in mind. I didn't get
any reply. Incidentally, if Value Added Tax, a concentrator, is reduced
to zero then you automatically drop out of the EU.
I think global solidarity can only come about through free trade. A start
has been made in this direction, the 'Ethical Consumer' magazine gives an
idea to the practical aspects of this, such as the purchase of coffee
direct. The idea is to ensure the individual grower gets a return, which
is typically about double the average price given by the multicorp
system. the price to the consumer is about seven per cent less than
supermarket retail. This method of trade is less efficient than what
exists. However, the futures market has ensured the world produces enough
food for two planets, with huge returns for banks and the multicorp.
There still remains the ERT, I heard this 'on the street', this was a
fifteen second communication to the effect that I knew what it meant. So
far I have not seen the person. However, I have tried to see if I can
find a reference to it, I have a suspicion there is a connection with
monetary union. If this is the case then what pops up is the following,
>Arno Tausch Thu, 7 Aug 1997, 35. (iv)
>A sinister argument could even be, that the motives for the EMU project could be rather inner-European competition. A 'hard' EURO comprising the
European mezzogiorno, would ruin exporters in the South (that made
important headways against the dominance of German TNCs in Europe over
recent years) while cementing the position of German and a few other
multinationals - banks and companies - on an increasingly protected
European home market. Then, indeed, the European Union would become what
Samir Amin has contemptuously called 'The Fourth Reich' (Amin, 1997).
Bearing in mind how changes have occurred in the past, and as much as no
one wants to believe the above, which political party will discuss the
point?
William Kirk.