{"id":27442,"date":"2016-07-01T12:30:44","date_gmt":"2016-07-01T02:30:44","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/?p=27442"},"modified":"2016-07-04T09:17:33","modified_gmt":"2016-07-03T23:17:33","slug":"rise-democracy-europe","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.aspistrategist.ru\/rise-democracy-europe\/","title":{"rendered":"The rise of democracy in Europe"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/p>\n
The shock of the British vote to leave the European Union has yet to sink in. Yet European leaders must steel themselves for what\u2019s to come. In fact, Brexit might be the initial tremor that triggers a tsunami of referenda in Europe in the coming years.<\/span><\/p>\n Across Europe, there are 47 insurgent parties turning politics on its head. They\u2019re gaining control of the political agenda, shaping it according to their interests<\/span>\u2014<\/span>and winning power in the process. In one-third of EU member states, such parties are members of coalition governments, and their success has driven mainstream parties to adopt some of their positions.<\/span><\/p>\n Though these parties have very different roots, they all have one thing in common: all are trying to upend the foreign-policy consensus that\u2019s defined Europe for several decades. They\u2019re Euroskeptic; they spurn NATO; they want to close their borders and stop free trade. They\u2019re changing the face of politics, replacing traditional left-right battles with clashes pitting their own angry nativism against the cosmopolitanism of the elites they disdain.<\/span><\/p>\n These parties\u2019 weapon of choice is the referendum, with which they can whip up popular support for their pet issues. According to the European Council on Foreign Relations, 32 referenda are being demanded in 18 countries across the EU. Some, such as the Danish People\u2019s Party, want to follow the United Kingdom\u2019s lead and hold a vote on EU membership. Others want to escape from the eurozone, block the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) with the United States, or restrict labor mobility.<\/span><\/p>\n The EU\u2019s refugee relocation scheme has proved to be particularly divisive. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orb\u00e1n has declared that he\u2019ll hold a referendum on the proposed quotas. And the Polish opposition party Kukiz \u201915 has been collecting signatures for its own referendum on the issue.<\/span><\/p>\n Handing power back to the masses through direct democracy may well be these parties\u2019 most revolutionary proposition. Indeed, it reflects an understanding of the frustrations that\u2019ve driven a global wave of popular protests in recent years \u2013 protests that, in the Arab world, sparked actual revolutions. The same spirit of protest that drove, say, Spaniards, Greeks, and New Yorkers to take to the streets\u2014with different demands, to be sure\u2014is fueling support for these new referenda and the insurgent parties that are bringing them about.<\/span><\/p>\n This is a nightmare not only for established parties, but also for democratic governance. As California\u2019s experience with referenda has shown, the public will often vote for contradictory things<\/span>\u2014<\/span>for example, lower taxes and more welfare programs, or environmental protection and cheaper gas.<\/span><\/p>\n But for the EU, this dynamic is exponentially more challenging; indeed, it overturns the EU\u2019s foundations. The EU is, after all, the ultimate expression of representative democracy. It\u2019s an enlightened body that places at its core liberal values such as individual rights, the protection of minorities, and a market-based economy.<\/span><\/p>\n But the layers of representation on which the EU relies have created the sense that a kind of \u2018\u00dcber-elite\u2019 is running things, far removed from ordinary citizens. This has given nationalist parties the perfect target for their anti-EU campaigns. Add to that fear mongering about issues like immigration and trade, and their ability to attract frustrated or anxious voters is strong.<\/span><\/p>\n Two visions of Europe<\/span>\u2014<\/span>the diplomatic and the demotic<\/span>\u2014<\/span>are now facing off against each other. The diplomatic Europe, incarnated by EU founding father Jean Monnet, took big, sensitive questions out of the sphere of popular politics and reduced them to manageable technical issues that diplomats could address through bureaucratic compromises behind closed doors. The demotic Europe, exemplified by the UK Independence Party, which helped spearhead Brexit, is like Monnet in reverse, taking diplomatic compromises like the TTIP or the association agreement with Ukraine, and intentionally politicizing them.<\/span><\/p>\n Whereas diplomatic Europe is about finding reconciliation, demotic Europe is about polarization. Diplomacy is win-win; direct democracy is zero-sum. Diplomacy tries to lower the temperature; the demotic paradigm raises it. Diplomats can work with one another; referenda are binary and fixed, leaving none of the political wiggle room and scope for creative compromise needed to resolve political problems. In demotic Europe, solidarity is impossible.<\/span><\/p>\n