International trade, free competition, banks and finance: The European Union must not become an anti-social union, says our author. The EU must become more social in order to continue its success story and regain the trust of its citizens.
Welfare state systems are crumbling and breaking down, and the EU is doing far too little to stabilise them. Despite all the rhetoric, the EU is not based on three strong pillars. It is based on just one: economic and monetary union. If the Union were a state, it would be the third largest state in the world in terms of population – 500 million people. Most people in Europe do not feel the potential strength of this great Europe. They want a Union that helps them, that takes away their fear of unemployment and cheap competition. They want a Union that protects them.
But politicians usually answer their demands by saying that the EU is there for freedom and competition, while it is up to the nation states to deal with social issues. They say social policy is a matter for the member states, in line with the principle of subsidiarity. Indeed, there is something to be said for that. But such a division of responsibilities cannot work when the EU’s main focus is on propagating economic freedom and free competition. Then the member states’ social policies are seen as obstacles that have to be removed in line with the principle of free movement of people, services, goods and capital – remove anything that gets in the way!
the harmonisation of laws in Europe should not be done under the banner of how people can be made more fungible for the economy and competition. Man is not merely homo economicus, and the same applies to Europeans.
On paper, at least, the EU has been inching closer to the social aspect. Article 3 of the Lisbon Treaty no longer refers solely to a Europe that is committed to balanced economic growth and price stability. It now also states that the aim is to work towards a competitive social market economy, full employment and social progress. The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights even lists fundamental social rights that are not mentioned in Germany’s Basic Law. But listing them is not enough. Politicians have to enhance the European Treaties accordingly; and the European Court of Justice must abandon its economic orientation and see itself as the guardian of the European Constitution with all the rights it contains, especially social rights.
Yet, we don’t know whether we can trust this new social commitment. There is some evidence to support it, but also much evidence to the contrary. On the one hand, the Lisbon Treaty mentions full employment and social progress, but in other places it has blind spots, for example when addressing the values of the EU. It’s true that democracy and the rule of law are mentioned, but there is nothing about the welfare state and social justice. How can Europe harness its strength? Basic social rights need a guardian. The highest EU court should be – or should I say become – such a guardian. It must be the legal Olympus of a union of citizens; it must not consider itself the legal Olympus of the former EEC, a European Economic Community. The European Union and its Court of Justice in Luxembourg must not turn Europe into a European anti-social union. That would be fatal; that would be destructive.
Privatising Social Responsibility
Why? Because the welfare state, the welfare states in Europe are a success story. This success story has different milestones in each EU country. In Germany, the initial focus of the welfare state was on ensuring that war invalids and refugees could at least survive. Later, it ensured that children from poor backgrounds could also study and perhaps even become chancellor. Without the welfare state, this republic would have crashed more than once; the welfare state has served to defuse social antagonisms. Without it, there would probably also have been no German reunification. And unless this success story continues to progress, there will be no European unity.
People in Europe want to feel that this European Union is there for them and not primarily for banks and international trade. Here you can see the European Central Bank (ECB), photo: Greatif/Florian Gaul via picture alliance.
It is a matter of defining the essentials of what should comprise ‘social progress’ as described in the Lisbon Treaty. People in Europe want to feel that this European Union is there for them and not primarily for banks and international trade. They want security to be understood not only as internal security but also as social security. This is how Europe will gain new strength. Privatising social responsibility is not a good way forward for Europe. The EU should not continue along this path. It still spends too much time looking through the lens of free competition. That’s why it is neglecting social issues and the common good. That’s why the impetus for privatisation of the post, telecommunications and railways came from Brussels. That’s why Brussels is proud of these privatisations, but consumers less so. That’s why the EU take a sceptical view of public service broadcasting, public utilities and even health insurance systems, while its citizens take a more favourable view.
People in Europe want to feel that this European Union is there for them and not primarily for banks and international trade.
If the state sheds its responsibilities like trees shed their leaves in autumn, if the state makes itself ever smaller, then the voters’ sphere of influence also shrinks. Too much privatisation becomes a danger to democracy. For example, as more municipal utilities are privatised, the municipality loses its previous function so that it is no longer a school of democracy but a one-room school. Fortunately, for many municipalities the time of privatising public services is once again over. However, Europe still has to learn that not all public goods should be thrown to the lions in the name of competition. And the harmonisation of laws in Europe should not be done under the banner of how people can be made more fungible for the economy and competition. Man is not merely homo economicus, and the same applies to Europeans.
The Perfect Human Being
One of the strangest periods of my life was when I went to work at Alfred Wunsiedel’s factory. I had gone to the job centre, which sent me and seven fellow sufferers to Wunsiedel’s factory, where we were subjected to an aptitude test. I was the first to be sent to the examination room, where the questionnaires were beautifully laid out on tables. Question one: ‘Do you think it is right that a human being only has two arms, two legs, two eyes and ears?’ This was the first time that I reaped the fruits of my thoughtful nature when I immediately wrote: ‘Even if I had four arms, legs and ears it wouldn’t be enough for me to do everything I want to do. Humans are poorly equipped.’ Question two: ‘How many phones can you handle at one time?’ Again, the answer was as easy as one plus one equals two: ‘I get impatient if there are only seven phones. I only feel fully occupied when there are nine.’ Question three: ‘What do you do in your free time?’ My answer: ‘I don’t know what free time means – I deleted it from my vocabulary when I was 15, because in the beginning was the deed!’ I got the job.
Heinrich Böll wrote a story about this many years ago. Workers are required to be infinitely flexible, totally resilient, incredibly healthy, robust and efficient. The question is: do we want to live in such a society? Do we want a Europe where everything is like Wunsiedel’s factory – a Europe where the unlimited ability to perform is all that counts, where the only thing that matters is market value, where the value of people and nations is measured only by economics?
In today’s economy, the image of man is that of homo faber mobilis. Pure homo faber is a thing of the past. He belonged to the modernist era. Now, in our post-modern society, it is apparently no longer enough for workers to simply work. They have to be homo faber mobilis, highly flexible, mobile and adaptable.
Apparently if you’re unemployed it’s your own fault. If only you were more mobile, flexible and adaptable (and therefore not so comfortable) you would have a job. That’s why many economic institutes and politicians are calling for a new human being, homo faber novus mobilis – people who can transcend their own limits and limitations. We need the perfect human.
The human being needs to be highly resilient, flexible, robust and efficient. It should practically be a robot, photo: 51581 via pixabay.
Of course, real life in nation states and the EU is somewhat more restricted. Unlike snails, people no longer carry their houses on their backs. And also, unlike molluscs, they are not hermaphrodites. They have other social needs that are expressed through seeking a life partner, starting a family, doing sport, joining a choir, sending their children to school and having friends. This places certain limits on the unswerving need for mobility, on their limitless availability. ‘Wunsiedel man’ is obviously different: he has no children, no family, no social ties. He is not and cannot be the ideal European citizen – and the EU should not idealise such a person. What would happen to European society if homo faber novus mobilis were the social model? A European social model built in the image of such a person would be an antisocial model.
Plea for a Social Model
A European social model does not mean that the whole of Europe should pay the same minimum wage or provide the same unemployment benefits, pensions or education system. A European social model also does not mean health care should be funded in the same way throughout Europe. A slim, pan-European, pared-down welfare state with streamlined guidelines from Brussels – this is not a European social model but a horror scenario.
Europe must be another word for democracy
A European social model is something quite different. It is the common idea that social inequality is not God-given. A European social model means a strong safety net and help in times of crisis, such as ill-health, unemployment and the need for care. Only a few can handle such crises in their lives without suffering hardship. A European social model is a common coordinate system in which the axes are solidarity and justice – and in which the individual member states find their own coordinates and are not hindered but supported by Brussels, Strasbourg and Luxembourg. Europe needs such a coordinate system. This is the system that will give Europe new strength.
Europe must be another word for democracy. The euro is important. But the welfare state, the rule of law and democracy are even more important, photo: Frank May via picture alliance.
The trust of its citizens will grow in line with the legal and social security that Europe provides. So it would not be a bad thing if Europeans had a court of justice that they could trust as much as the Germans trust their Federal Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe. Europe is so much more than the euro. The EU calls itself a sphere of justice, security and freedom. People know when this is mere empty words, prattle, lies. Europe must be a byword for democracy. Of course, the euro is important. But the welfare state, the rule of law and democracy are much more important than the euro. This is the only way that Europe will become a home to its people. So, where will Europe find its new strength?
This new strength will come from the basic rights that also apply in Europe. This new strength will come from a social policy that gives people a home. This new strength will come from giving more power to the European Parliament – as the democratic representative of Europeans. This Parliament must have the power to give Europe a social face. We look forward to seeing this kind of Europe. The foundations of this European House do not stand on the ruins of nation states. Those who want to destroy the individual states in order to build Europe on them; those who want to tear up the constitutions and principles in order to write a new common constitution in their place – they have understood little about Europe. Europe does not destroy, Europe does not tear things down, Europe joins things together.
Constitutions are not there to ruin the constitution of the people; they are there to create trust. Europe is a new concordantia discordantium, a work that brings together very different, even contradictory things. Europe is a democratic project. It needs no cloak-and-dagger operations, no emergency decrees that bypass Parliament and citizens in order to bring it to fruition. What it needs is the people.
In our post-modern society, it is apparently no longer enough for workers to simply work. They have to be homo faber mobilis, highly flexible, mobile and adaptable.
The European House is a large house with many rooms, many doors, many cultures and many types of people. This house preserves Europe’s diversity and the richness that results from that diversity. This house is the home of Europe. A Europe without Europeans would be doomed to failure. So we must fight for a social and just Europe. Only a social and just Europe can also be a democratic Europe. A democratic Europe is a Europe that is committed to the interests of all its citizens, of all its states, rich and poor, and all its citizens, strong and weak.
The preamble to the 1999 Constitution of the Swiss Confederation states: ‘...conscious of their common achievements and their responsibility towards future generations, and in the knowledge that only those who use their freedom remain free, and that the strength of a people is measured by the wellbeing of its weakest members.’ The strength of a people is measured by the well-being of the weakest. This is a good, important, forward-looking motto that applies beyond Switzerland’s borders. Europe’s strength is also measured by the well-being of the weakest, the weakest states and weakest people – and by the trust that citizens place in this Europe.
About the Author
Heribert Prantl
Journalist and author
Heribert Prantl is a journalist and author. He was head of the domestic politics department of the Süddeutsche Zeitung (SZ), head of the opinion department and a member of the editorial board for eight years until 2019. Prantl teaches law at Bielefeld University. Until 1988, he worked as a judge and public prosecutor in Bavaria.
Culture Report Progress Europe
Culture has a strategic role to play in the process of European unification. What about cultural relations within Europe? How can cultural policy contribute to a European identity? In the Culture Report Progress Europe, international authors seek answers to these questions. Since 2021, the Culture Report is published exclusively online.
