My own position is similar to Michael Fisher's:
>the Euro ... constitutes a class
>strategy designed to enhance deflationary discipline across
>Europe, partly
>by means of developing an institutional architecture that
>seeks to render
>national monetary and fiscal policy immune to national
>political pressures.
>That the Euro is designed to enhance the power of capital over
>labour means
>that it must be opposed.
-- but Michael has overlooked Bruce Robinson's stipulation that:
>in a Euro referendum I would be a
>determined ... ballot paper spoiler
The absent (a.k.a. abstentionists) are always wrong, but spoiling one's
ballot is not abstaining.
*However* I still don't agree with Bruce's tactic.
The Euro as designed in the Maastricht Treaty (unaccountable central bank,
with "price stability", i.e. deflation, stipulated as a priority that
over-rides any other objective -- *including* the other objectives of the
Treaty, incidentally) is clearly a disaster for the working class.
As such, it's imperative to *prevent* it, not merely register a protest
about alternatives which are also unpalatable, albeit less so.
Voting against is the only means available for this.
I'd certainly like to see CSE/Capital+Class intervene in this debate -- not,
however, to advocate a particular view, but (as the rubric in the journal
has it) to develop "a materialist critique of [this aspect of] capitalism in
the Marxist tradition".
Perhaps list members who would like to participate in this project would
contact either me or Alfredo Saad Filho.
Julian Wells
OU Business School
The Open University
Walton Hall
Milton Keynes
MK7 6AA
United Kingdom
+44 1908 654658
|