°Non Publica #2
Lots of commentary on the French referendum vote. The Curmudgeon says a bravo to “blocking the bad”. Matt over at Long Sunday on the “pseudo-democratic abberation” and asks whether the far left is up for the fight. Ronda Hauber argues that the ‘no’ vote was a rejection of Europe As Market. Then there are those who take as given that the expansion and integration of Europe will lead to a better world.
Which brings me to two quibbles. First, why do people imagine that the nation-state is not, in its operations and subjective gridwork, part of a global system? Economic nationalism makes absolutely no sense except in the terms of national competitiveness, national accounting and so on - all of which presuppose a world market. Second, the notion that an expansion of citizenry and jurisdiction is necessarily a Good Thing is a liberal fantasy whose ambitions are, frankly, just a tad totalitarian.
In any case, the further citizenship got from being accorded to property-owing men, the more it assumed the characteristics of a passive citizenship. Related to this, it’s worth reading Lisa Uddin who writes about “a citizenship reduced to playing nicely with others and running around the house”. Less politikos, more zoon.
In that sense, it is worth applauding the ‘no’ vote, if only because it marks a refusal, as the Curmudgeon notes. But as a prelude to a more authentic democracy or Social Europe, I’m not at all convinced. Matt posed the question of whether the far left is up for the challenge, and I’ll hazard that it depends on the extent to which the far left in the EU can subtract themselves from the juridical - from a politics defined as the taxonomy and administration of a zoo, as it were.
