It's a little shocking to have arrived tonight in a country where the second richest man, who is the subject of fraud allegations and does appear to have at one time been an agent for the communist secret police, has won a general election as leader of a far-right, anti-EU, populist political party, but that is the Czech Republic's new reality.
Containing the threat such politicians pose to democracy in the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and elsewhere, is also one of the new roles for the EU. And it is another reason why the UK should be in membership.
It's as if we in the UK do not care.
Or that if we do, it's always too late.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
AH! Richard somethings don’t change.
I think you’ll find that the Czech Republic is still a distant land of which we know little. (or words to that effect)
I’m afraid that ought to be a joke but isn’t.
Pardon me, Richard, but, crap though it sounds, if the people of the Czech Republic have voted for a far-right, anti EU populist as the winner of their General Election, exactly what possible action are we in the UK supposed to, or indeed, should, take, whether we “care”, or not?
Conversely, what possible action could, or should, the Czech Republic have taken, had, say, Nigel Farage and UKIP won the 2015 UK General Election? In a PR system they would have won a far larger number of seats than they did under FPTP.
And whether we “care” or not, how could any external action taken against a democratically elected politician not also be seen as posing a threat to democracy?
God knows, sometimes (always?) the person or party you hate wins an election, but that’s democracy.
“Containing the threat” of democratic results you don’t like, or approve of, can open a very large can of worms indeed.
There will no doubt be a huge number of similar objections to a future Corbyn victory.
“Containing the threat” will be the first priority of many agencies with in the UK, and beyond.
Be careful what you wish for!
The EU is taking action to link subsidies to the maintenance of appropriate democratic checks and balances
This is a healthy part of international relations reinforced by the structures of the EU to ensure those not in power still get the right to express their opinion and sell the right to govern.
Can we legitimately do that and uphold democracy? Sure as heck we can. And the EU very clearly assists this process.
MrShigemitsu says:
“… if the people of the Czech Republic have voted for a far-right, anti EU populist…..”
This modern usage of “populist” as pejorative is something I’d like to see pensioned-off. It’s a weasel word which has been hijacked.
‘Populism’ is democracy in essence. Government of, by and for the people. That’s what it’s supposed to mean. Words that no longer mean what they say are a menace.
‘Neoliberal’ is another word mangled beyond utility.
It would be good to see the EU functioning as an overarching, and democratic federation upholding (and where necessary enforcing) some fundamental principles.
It doesn’t seem to have the underlying foundations to function like that. For the EU not to be arbitrating in the debacle between Catalonia and Madrid is, to my way of thinking symptomatic of how the ‘European project’ has failed and continues to fail.
Maybe there is a similar need in the Czech republic. I haven’t bee watching.
The EU has not really grown-up from being a protectionist trade alliance. Serious paucity of vision threatens it’s collapse. I think a great opportunity is being flushed down the toilet.
Britain has been guilty of undermining the project without significantly taking it forward. The Hubristic ‘Little Englander’ mindset has always been, if only marginally, dominant.
Sad. Sad. Sad.
Its a funny place. Read The Good Soldier Svejk.
Best beer on the planet though, seriously
eriugenus says:
“Its a funny place.” A bit rich coming from a Brit (if indeed you are a Brit) 🙂
“Read The Good Soldier Svejk.” saw it staged years ago (7:84 or Red Ladder.) Sadly don’t remember much about at this remove. Except for an amazing sort of robot tank fighting machine which was seriously chilling to say it was probably made largely of papier maché
“Best beer on the planet though, seriously”… I guess the Germans, particularly in Bavaria, would argue that point. I don’t bother; after all it’s only lager when all said and done. Where I came from (in time and space) lager was a ‘girls drink’.
No wonder the Empire crumbled. 🙂
The best beer in the world is brewed with Norfolk malt barley
Period
I’m not arguing, Richard, but the best I can get is brewed in Winchester. Precisely where the barley malt comes from I don’t know.
But the finished product travels well to Scotland. Where traditional brewing may be resurgent, but has some catching up to do.
Well, he is certainly not a neo-liberal and that seems to be the one common trait among those who do “surprisingly well” in elections these days. Its the new de facto definition of “populist”.
According to his own stated position he is not anti-EU at all though he does oppose their quota system for redistributing refugees (as you’d expect from that type of character). What he is though is anti-Eurozone. His 2nd biggest policy position is to scrap the republic’s barking mad plan to adopt the euro and that idea is apparently, unsurprisingly, very popular.
So, a scoundrel, certainly but not all bad (not quite). Sort of reminds me of Trump who is ludicrous but scrapped the TTIP. Babis’ party got the biggest result with 29.7% which is big in terms of their highly fragmented PR system but its still only 29.7% which is apparently what a combination of anti-immigrant and anti-euro achieves there. Their vote share also helps to explain Babis’ dopey wish to have PR dumped in favour of FPTP (and why that wish will, thankfully, never come true).
Analysing the results, to me it looks like the formerly dominant Social Democrats lost voters to this guy and the euro currency issue had a lot to do with that. So, if they want to regain their position they may at least want to reconsider their ideas about joining the most sub-optimal currency area of all time.
I didn’t actually say he was neoliberal. It is now clearly possible to be far right and not so.
I accept the significance of the euro issue and think anyone wishing to join it threatens the well-being of their country. But if it’s used as a token for nationalism it us something else altogether. That, coupled with the clear threat from his wealth and media interests to the democratic process, is deeply worrying.
Politics and media control is a real danger everywhere. Getting the media on side is the name of the game these days (actually always was I think)
Having overt control should be just outlawed. Unfortunately covert control is more difficult to regulate and sycophantic opportunists are plentiful. They cheer-on their side like football fans and enjoy the vicarious success in much the same way.
It is rather pathetic, but nonetheless creates a very powerful and a-rational force.
A few other points worth considering:
Some reports are describing Babis as “centrist” and comparing him to Macron (Babis was a minister in the outgoing govt.). Macron isn’t “populist” of course but there may be something to this.
Apparently most of the Czech parties oppose the EU refugee quota (so, a dodgy billionaire with a tainted past, a dislike of the euro and some dumb ideas but “far-right”? Maybe the ‘far-right’ tag is just good for the headlines).
Some positive news: the Pirate Party came in third with 10.8.% of the vote.
I will take some convincing
BTW Richard, A bit off topic but are you familiar with this old post
https://eziwrestler.wordpress.com/2014/10/10/tim-worstall-curious-british-attack-dog/comment-page-1/#comment-125
in that blog? I imagine that you might be but I thought I’d ask just in case.
I am familiar with it, and its comment on me
Some trace the far-right nationalism/isolationism in the Czech Republic back to the end of WWII when there were awful mass expulsions of German speaking Czechs (and others) who had been there for generations.
Having been there I think it is a fascinating place but like much of Europe it is still tied to its history – a history that sits there like a boil ready to be lanced in the name of political ambition and opportunism – look at former Yugoslavia.
Have we learnt nothing since the wall came down? I do hope that the EU can curb this sort of stuff but an enduring love affair with austerity must not be part of the cure.
Good luck in Prague.
Babis is not far right and he is not really anti-EU when you dig down (it is his gravy train after all), but he does like to play to his audience. The real fear concerns the power he has amassed and his disregard for democracy or as a journalist recently put it the fact that ‘he doesn’t understand democracy’ and intends to run the country ‘like a business’. That plus suspicions about potential past (and current) links with the secret police make for worrying times.
But I think Richard is absolutely right to say the UK and all other EU countries should be working together. The Czech elections point to something else – something that is apparent both in former communist countries and in non-communist ones – and that is that what we might regard as poor voter choices (e.g. Trump) are often related to what is on offer. The Czech Republic was always different to the post-communist countries around it because it had political parties that had roots going back to the First Republic and a party system that more closely resembled more western countries, with two dominant factions. However, these elections suggest democratic consolidation may be weaker across the region than previously realised. More worrying is the fact that many other more established democracies seem vulnerable at the moment – France, Italy, Austria – and I am particularly concerned about the impact that Brexit and the catastrophic handling of it (especially this will of the people nonsense) will have on an already disgruntled population and democracy itself. A case of can’t see the forest for the trees despite them being chopped down in front of our noses?
Agreed Cat.
Am I right in thinking that the far right in Europe can only be ennobled by an EU that allows itself to be dominated by neo-liberal thinking? If capitalism stops working for all in the Eurozone, the price of this might be high.
High profile, successful businessmen have frequently appealed to electorates. In recent times think Silvio Berlosconi, Piñera Sebastián (Chile), Rafic Al-Hariri (Lebanon), Boris Ivanishvili (Georgia), Petro Poroshenko (Ukraine), Donald Trump, et al. And it’s easy to understand why. They carry a natural authority and chutzpah, don’t like governement regulation and red tape, always say they’ll make everything more efficient and get stuff done …. just as they’ve done in order to amass their fortunes in the commercial world. Inevitably they are ‘right-wing’ (but this is not a prerequisite). And, as Marco states, sometimes they do indeed resolve simple problems. It’s in their DNA.
However, rarely – if ever – do they make good national leaders, for a range of obvious reasons, perhaps the main one being that they don’t respect democracy, which ‘gets in their way’. They don’t understand ‘social complexity’ and their knowledge of economics is grounded in the ‘household budget’ school. Frequently they emerge out of the ‘left field’ to deal with a current crisis, with little experience of government at either local or national level. In some cases this could be seen as a positive, as with Trump declaring he’ll clean up the swamp (if only).
Logically it should be possible for such people to transfer their skills from one arena to another with positive outcomes, but maybe their commercial pragmatism crowds out the ethical imperatives and inclusiveness needed to represent a modern democracy.
Here in the UK it seems very wealthy people have always been popular with a significant percentage of the population. Our social caste system gives undue credence to ‘the rich’ – who have made an art of concealing their true wealth by not overtly flaunting it in public (like Berlosconi). The present front-bench is testimony to this, with an estimated 2/3 of the cabinet being millionaires – a fact that doesn’t seem to bother most people. It still seems a touch impolite to talk about individual wealth in social circles, which is not the case in other European countries with which I’ve had direct experience.
I find it an interesting topic and I’d guess there have been many academic studies on the subject. Google throws up scores of press articles, such as this from USA Today ( May 31, 2014) re. Poroshenko – https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/05/31/cnbc-billionaires-bad-presidents/9738511.
Thanks
John D
Interesting observations on the occasional rise of the businessman into the political arena.
I would guess many of them, as I think applies to Donald Trump, find that personality and drive are easily confounded by a well oiled and self-serving bureaucracy.
I understand this on a much smaller scale where vast amounts of effort and goodwill get swamped in local council machinations. A successful community project requires the skills and almost infinite of someone who can deal with this sort of fiddle-faddling. Much of it is necessary, but my word, they can make a meal of it. And the default opening gambit always seems to be ‘No. You can’t do that there there ‘ere.’
Sorry.
I see ‘patience’ has fallen out.
….the skills and almost infinite patience….etc
‘Am I right in thinking that the far right in Europe can only be ennobled by an EU that allows itself to be dominated by neo-liberal thinking?’
Prague life
I admit I have little clue what your logic is
I’m somewhat relieved to know I’m not the only person to whom that is opaque.
I’m sorry, one of your commentators was being particularly disrespectful, but in order to understand why, I was perhaps assuming an understanding of the history of Prague which might be absent.
Maybe we should all be a bit more careful before posting what we believe are innocuous comments.
Sorry Walter but what has the history of Prague got to do with all of this?
Recent EU economic history has been about the ECB tying member states down to austerity in order to consolidate debts ( some might say fictional debts).
This austerity (part of the neo-lib mantra from what I can see) has caused an economic down turn that has enabled the far right to take root once more in European polity because of the discontent it reaps amongst the voters. I see a link and others do too. But some might not and there maybe other factors too.
There is no doubt though that since 2008, contemporary capitalism has been seen to fail. This includes globalisation as well. All over Europe, jobs have been exported to Asia. Remaining wages have been declining as has State spending in these member states. The ECB has only recently started to inject money into the euro zone again but is it enough to quell those who think that nationalism is the answer?
Time will tell.
As for the historic context, two very good books about Europe in the aftermath of WWII make quite clear how with the driving out(ethnic cleansing) of Germans and other established national creeds from certain countries at this time (such as Czechoslovakia and Hungary ) left these places less diverse and with a heightened tendency towards inward looking nationalism.
That is what I am getting at.