There is a difference between populism and popularity.
Just like there is a major difference between having firm and own opinions, and having only own and firm opinions. Or between having an ideal, living for a cause, and being fanatical or unable to listen to other people’s arguments.
As my father once told me, when engaging in a conversation we should also listen to the arguments of others, as we will come out enriched and more knowledgeable, as opposed to a discussion where we impose our arguments and come out only poorer and dumber.
And there is a major difference between being right and wanting to be right. Being tolerant and polite doesn’t mean being unable to act and to take a stand.
I raise this with regard to the economic, social and political integration of the peoples of Europe in the old and deep alliance that we call European Union (EU). It’s possible to defend it by recognizing its faults, staying true to the ideal of its realisation and accepting the ineluctability of its complexity, of the changes that have to take place along its journey. We may be right when we say – and I share this – that without the EU we would all be Europeans but poorer, less free, more angry with ourselves and our neighbours; but this doesn’t mean that we should condemn the Britons, or the Swiss, for preferring to walk alone, to follow their own course, despite thinking that they should not go down that road, that they will be missed.
Being European, defending European integration, means believing in market economy, in individual freedom, but also in the equality of nations, in the supervision and regulation of the economy.
It’s a clear position to proclaim the EU as one of the most extraordinary political achievements of recent centuries, a commendable and visionary project to end wars and build prosperous and just, independent but supportive societies, in which independent nation states voluntarily and democratically agree to give in parts of their sovereignty in favour of an UPO (unidentified political object, as Jacques Delors once called it) in order to put an end once and for all to the European civil war. This does not prevent us from knowing its limits, from accepting criticisms as regards its functioning, of accepting the need to slow down or go backwards in integration.
Reminding the Portuguese, as I did one a month ago in a national newspaper, that without the EU there would be no one to turn to in such a crisis like this pandemic and that we would not have had any help after the 2008 crisis (a national bankruptcy would have been far worse than having had the “troika”) is not being populist. Without Europe, there wouldn’t have received €120 billion of structural funds since our adhesion, which despite all the evils, contributed to increase the national GDP from just over 50% of the European average to more than 70% currently; and there would be no means to help the economies recover in the coming years.
European integration is not a popular issue these days; but without it, we would be poorer; we would walk alone; and the European continent would be increasingly only the museum of the world and would definitely plunge into darkness.
It’s worth fighting for the European ideal. Unfortunately, at a time when ignorance expresses informed opinions on everything, disputing wisdom in the name of democracy, when the scarecrows of the public space promote ignorance and demagogy like in a circus, this struggle becomes become more difficult than ever.
The EU is criticized for not having shown solidarity at the outbreak of the recent crisis, when Europe reacted well, despite everything, to an unknown pandemic that affected it with great violence. And if the ECB acts effectively, a Constitutional Court criticizes it for exceeding its powers, calling into question the primacy of European law and the independence of the ECB and the national central banks of the euro area within the framework of the ESCB, fundamental pillars of the own European construction. And whenever a notable proposal for post-crisis recovery is made, soon the ominous birds come flying in, saying “this is not the case” along with those stating that everything will fail – and it may, but not for lack of willingness of the Europeans of good will.
I don’t know if Europe will come out stronger in the times we live in. And if it doesn’t, we will all lose and Portugal on top of it.
And if this prose sounds like drama, it’s because drama lurks. A drama that is the whole of human history, with hints of tragedy, sprinkled with moments of comedy and a pinch of dreams.
There is a difference between utopian and being idealistic.