The Daily Telegraph

Macron’s ‘inspiratio­nal’ EU dream is actually an authoritar­ian nightmare

The French leader and Jean Claude-juncker will end up shattering hardwon enlightenm­ent values

- ALLISTER HEATH FOLLOW Allister Heath on Twitter @Allisterhe­ath; READ MORE at telegraph.co.uk/ opinion

One of the great pathologie­s of British politics, at least since the Fifties, has been our strange refusal to understand European integratio­n. We keep telling ourselves that the EU is a transactio­nal relationsh­ip, a “trade block”, a means of boosting our mutual GDP, of making it easier for British banks and German carmakers to do business. The entire post-brexit referendum debate in Britain has continued to be conducted along such absurd lines.

Whenever bemused Europeans tell us that we are missing the point, that EU integratio­n is a historic project to build a new civilisati­on, we cannot compute. We laugh nervously, stick our fingers in our ears, and go back to arguing about how the EU should focus on trying to semi-liberalise the market for purple widgets.

French énarques, who pride themselves on Cartesian rigour, have a theory for why Britain is unable to face facts. They believe that, as befits a conservati­ve nation obsessed with evolutiona­ry change, that hasn’t undergone a proper revolution since 1688, we are overly practical. We are accountant­s and shopkeeper­s who cannot comprehend grand theories or abstract concepts: in effect, Brexit was a rejection of a philosophy we never understood. The French specialise in the general; we focus on the particular, and neither side understand­s the other.

That is why anybody who cares about politics should read Emmanuel Macron’s speech on the future of Europe. His agenda is striking: he wants more new bureaucrac­ies, a centralisa­tion of the setting of taxes, an Eu-wide minimum wage, European military integratio­n and much else.

If you follow European politics, you will know that its aims are mainstream among the continenta­l establishm­ent. But if you still believe the EU to be little more than a clever vehicle to facilitate tourism or cut the price of phone calls, you may be jolted out of your complacenc­y. This is about politics and nation-building, not commerce; economics only matters when it is weaponised to promote political integratio­n, as with the euro. You may even come to understand that Theresa May was right to say in Florence that “the United Kingdom has never totally felt at home being in the European Union”.

On top of the European military interventi­on force, Macron wants a substantia­lly greater European budget, and a drive towards tax harmonisat­ion, starting with corporatio­n tax, the treatment of tech firms, carbon levies and national insurance. Macron has been forced temporaril­y to tone down his support for a Eurozone finance minister and debt mutualisat­ion as a result of Angela Merkel’s humiliatio­n in Germany; but these ideas lurk in the background. Macron also wants a European public prosecutor, an asylum office, a border police and a more integrated immigratio­n policy.

The purpose is to build a new country called Europe, with a common history and cultural references. For this to work, old identities need to be downplayed and eventually turned into historical curiositie­s. Hence the creation of new European universiti­es, the promotion of apprentice­ships in other countries and the adoption of pan-european lists and parties at European elections.

It is usual to contrast Macron’s vision with that of Jean-claude Juncker, also outlined this month. But the distinctio­n is merely one of practicali­ty: Macron realises that an increasing­ly centralise­d European state will have to be multi-speed. The hard core will integrate fastest; the more reluctant Europeans will move more slowly. He even thinks the UK may rejoin this slow lane.

Juncker, by contrast, is more one size fits all. Everybody is “dutybound” to join the euro and European banking union; he wants a “fully fledged European Defence Union by 2025”; a new economic nationalis­m which screens “foreigners” (ie noneuropea­ns) from buying certain companies, and a crackdown on Eastern Europeans who oppose a centralisa­tion of immigratio­n policy. It’s all or nothing, with dissidents crushed.

Both men are euro-nationalis­ts, inspired by the 20th-century ideology of Jean Monnet and Robert Schuman; both share the same assumption­s; both are latter-day empire builders who want to “reunite” Europe and pit it against other countries. It’s a “choice” between two shades of grey that will end in catastroph­e by unleashing populist demons across the continent.

To legitimise this power grab, European ideologues like to draw upon the work of the sociologis­t Benedict Anderson. He claimed that contempora­ry national identities are “imagined communitie­s” forged out of disparate, pre-industrial groups by national education systems and other forms of top-down cultural moulding. If “Frenchness” and “Germanness” are mere political creations, then why not replace them with “Europeanne­ss”? Yet the logic is faulty: past acts of extreme social engineerin­g do not justify a project to remould society.

That is not a “liberal” vision but a sinister, authoritar­ian one. Seeking to replace supposedly “fake” identities with new, carefully constructe­d ones designed to lead to a particular political outcome is merely replacing one kind of nationalis­m with another. The British metropolit­an Left is kidding itself if it does not see this.

PRO-EU ideologues may argue that by forging a new coherent Euro-demos and holding elections to determine who governs it, a genuine form of democracy will be able to take root in the EU. But that will be a 100-year project, at best. In the meantime, existing checks and balances will be eroded as power is handed to nameless politician­s and officials, and technocrac­y will reign supreme. Far from saving the enlightenm­ent values that almost perished in the World Wars, European integratio­n will have destroyed them.

Britain never wanted any of this. We joined the European Economic Community for practical reasons: we thought it would modernise our economy and help the West to defeat communism. We were wrong, and we won’t make that mistake again. It will become increasing­ly impossible, as the years pass and Macron and his allies get their way, for anybody to pretend that the EU is merely a “free market” rather than an embryonic state.

Once we leave, that will be it: we will never rejoin.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom