From the analysis of the main political conflict lines tearing apart the EU, to the issue of populism. From the relation between economic and social Europe, to the evaluation of the European Pillar of Social Rights. Young leaders from the JEF, YES, AEGEE, ETUC and EYF, debate the state of the Union and possible developments in the upcoming months leading to the European Parliamentary elections of 2019.
EuVisions met Ivan Butina [VOLT Europe], Philipp Tzaferis [Vice-President Young European Socialists], Thiébaut Weber [Confederal Secretary ETUC], Jacopo Barbati [Vice president of JEF Europe], Loes Rutten [AEGEE President], Kristen Aigro [Board Member European Youth Forum] in Strasbourg on the occasion of the Yo!Fest2018 and the EYE2018.
You can read the full interview here, or browse answers by interviewees to single questions by checking out our feature page.
EuVisions: Do you think populism in a problem? If you think so, why?
Jacopo Barbati, Young European Federalist: I think that populism is an issue as long as nationalism is one of its central elements. The EU is almost always a scapegoat for these forces. We are living in complex times, and populists simplify every bit of politics. On top of that, we are experiencing a technological revolution, where communication flows are based on concise messages. The simpler the answer to a political issue, the catchier it is. The downside of this is that we escape reality. Populists have proved to be the best political actors in adapting to this new environment.
Kristen Aigro, European Youth Forum: There are even other kinds of populism than those we talk about most of the time. Look at Justin Trudeau in Canada. He might be a reference for those who hold progressive beliefs, but the truth is that his policies don’t really reflect that claim. It’s just another leader distracting us employing good PR. This is to say that we have as well populist mainstream leaders who are not against supranational institutions, and who, nevertheless, should not be considered as a model either.
Ivan Butina, VOLT Europe: The answer to the question depends pretty much on how we define populism? If we look at it as a strategy of simplifying messages and playing with people’s emotions, I think that we are indeed in front of a problem for democracy. Wherever it may come from, whatever its target or political colour: it’s just wrong. The more complex society becomes, the likelier it is that decision making is perceived as distant. As a consequence, citizens feel that their voices unheard. And even less, do citizens they to take up responsibility for their own future. Democracy becomes an empty box. And on top of this dynamic populist forces thrive. It is for this reason that it is so important that we go back to grassroots level, to our neighbourhoods and rural areas to provide a new form of politics. Online presence is excellent, but not enough. We need to listen to people for real. And empathy will play a key role. We need to invest in people, and start to practice community organising.
Loes Rutten, European Students’ Forum: Populism is problematic, but it’s a symptom, not the problem itself. We need to start cut its roots, which implies enacting better social policies and move out our comfort zones. Populism is as well the result of the establishment of new kind of media.
Philipp Tzaferis, Young European Socialists: I agree that populism is the symptom of a broader problem. Some policies do not provide goods matching people’s needs. I don’t see successful populist movements arguing for welfare cuts and more neoliberal policies. That’s why we need to address economic and social policies first.
Thiébaut Weber, European Trader Union Confederation: The problem with populism is simplism. It doesn’t lead anywhere. As soon as the populist movements are close to power, they face reality. Look at Italy: how will the government finance the policies it pledged for? Not to speak of the fact that they turned a basic income into an actual unemployment benefit. This is to say that simplistic ideas do not strengthen democratic debates. We need to assure that the microphone is not always and only in the hands of those who shout louder. At the same time, we should not fall into the trap of over-simplification as a reaction to populism, say believing that citizens are stupid. Our trade unionist who are active within companies, do not turn employees against employers for the sake of it, on the base of simplistic slogans. They usually take hours to debate with the workers about complex things like market sector dynamics and globalisation, besides representing them in their social struggles.
Ivan Butina, VOLT Europe: Let’s keep in mind, however, that there are populists who, even if confronted with real issues and power, get re-elected. Think of Orban.
Philipp Tzaferis, Young European Socialists: I believe as well that people are not stupid. But at the same time, if we look at the past, at the development of the welfare model, there are some fundamental questions — and thus answers — that need to be dealt with and given. For instance, we cannot escape fundamental questions such as: should a critical economic or social sector of a national economy be publicly owned or not? In the back of the organisation, there is complexity off course and discussion, but there are basic principles which need to be brought to the front line of the political debate.
Thiébaut Weber, European Trader Union Confederation: I think that most of the people know about the distinction between public and private service provisions and ownership. But the point is that often the very same people don’t feel to have control over these goods, even in the case of public ownership. And this is why we need to find better solutions. This perception and state of the art is precisely what is challenging organisations like trade unions nowadays. We need to understand the reasons for particular economic and social developments and discuss them thoroughly with workers.
