*** DANIEL-LOUIS SEILER: Clivages et familles politiques en Europe. Editions de l'Université de Bruxelles (26 av. Paul Héger, B-1000 Brussels. Tel: (32-2) 6503799 - fax: 6503794 - Email: editions@ulb.ac.be - Internet: http://www.editions-universite-bruxelles.be ). "Science politique" series. 2011, 322 p., €25. ISBN 978-2-8004-1511-6.
Now teaching at the political science faculty in Aix-en-Provence, Daniel-Louis Seiler has been studying the political parties for more than 40 years, within the perspective of examining their deeper identities. These identities go beyond the, “the backtracking and betrayals… that the experience of power imposes”. The book is introduced by Seymour Martin Lipset and Stein Rokkan in 1967, with the so-called political divisions which he regards as the only way of undoing the tangled knots of the political parties and systems in these ageing European democracies. Bolstered by this conviction, he seeks to develop a basis for classifying the political parties in Europe but this is, however, more subtle than the simple lateralisation of political forces in terms of right and left. He indeed manages to demonstrate this in his book, on the basis of a comparative analysis of the political parties that, “Europe exists”. It also enables him to explain that there is also very much a, “European system of parties” and that this system is subject to variations that are increasingly influenced by macro-regional considerations, “ Catholic or Protestant Europe, Atlantic or Lotharingian, Scandinavian or central Europe, etc rather than any irreducible national specificity”. Another distinctive feature in this system is the general multiparty nature of the system and the two-party exception that confirms it. The multi-party system and results from the criss-crossing of several conflicting dimensions.
In an effort to underline these and many other elements, the author structures his argument in three different parts. First of all, he tackles questions of theory and methodology, by demonstrating the concept of the political party, the way in which parties have developed in time and history, the way in which they are classified on the basis of their identity and the specificity of the paradigm, the four fundamental divisions theoretically explored by Rokkan and applied in the case of Central Europe. The second part of the book is more accessible to mere mortals such as ourselves and takes the shape of an edifying gallery of, “family portraits”. The author first of all meticulously describes the, “ liberal mosaic in the 20th century”, ranging from democratic liberalism to social liberalism through Catholic liberalism, secular and anticlerical liberalism. He then again meticulously outlines social democracy which he locates as being somewhere between isolation and denial, before he tackles the “ irresistible decline” of the Christian Democratic parties, which are not hewn from the same wood and which systematically consist of Catholic, cross-class, horizontal, centrist and transitional parties. “The resistible rise of the Conservative parties” is then scrupulously analysed. Daniel-Louis Seiler identifies among these parties, “ the CDU as the key in the European partisan process”. The ethno-nationalist and autonomist parties are then examined and which are currently attempting to defend the periphery in Europe, followed by the Greens, which the author attempts to locate in a position somewhere between, “nostalgia and post-modernism” and finally the populist parties or the, “fascism of the right, left or centre”.
No matter how illuminating this portrait gallery is, it is the third part of the book that is expected to retain the attention of the loyal readers of Agence Europe and its European library pages. This focuses exclusively on the hopes and disappointments produced by the European political parties, “ these unusual legal objects”, which, “ do not meet any of the political science criteria defined for more than a century, when construing the concept of a political party”. The author points out that with their recognition in the treaties since the 1992 Maastricht Treaty, the law has preceded or more exactly has tended to influence this process, without really achieving any convincing results. He successfully illustrates that the majority of national base parties of the same political colouring have not produced European parties or international fora where co-operation prevails. After all, who can deny that, “national parties do not delegate anything to their federations” and that the federal model is the least of their concerns? An emblematic case in point is that involving Christian democracy which, “given that it results from the domain of ethical values put forward by the Church to tackle this significant issue, opposition between ultra-liberalism and defence of the social Europe, appears as a totally heterogeneous complex, full of contradictions”. He is therefore not convinced that the constitutional experiments developed by the Hungarian Prime Minister would be to the taste of all members of the European People's Party. But then again, the European right in the CDU-CSU has attempted, “a conservative takeover bid for the EPP”, which has succeeded beyond all expectations in enabling this “family” to, “rule the European Parliament” even more easily, given that the Party of European Socialists has also ceased to correspond appropriately to the same single partisan family, even though the European People's Party is not yet ankle-deep in championing all the different categories of political opportunism and sociological incoherency. Daniel-Louis Seiler explains that if there is going to be a solution it will only be brought about through the internal dynamics of the European Parliament which should be examined in this Europe that, “constitutes a fertile ground for the hatching of political parties of all shapes and colours” and that it is the very small number of political groups at the European Parliament that is posing a problem. This is almost an invitation to tackle the general rule that always favours the biggest groups …
Michel Theys
*** EMILIE VAN HAUTE (Editors): Party Membership in Europe: Exploration into the anthills of party politics. Editions de l'Université de Bruxelles (See address attached). "Science politique" series. 2011, 228 p. €23. ISBN 978-2-8004-1513-0.
This collectively written book aims to help develop a better understanding of the way in which political parties in Europe are developing in relation to their members and activists. In the first part of the book, the authors analyse in general trends, a comparative and long-term perspective. They tackle a number of questions, which have so far not received any clear responses: whereas certain people think that today, “parties without any partisan supporters” is conceivable, a decline over the long-term in the number of activists may also be the result? How can political scientists interpret change over time? What are the possible explanations for the trends observed? The second part of the book is based on case studies and contributions provide detailed insights into the question of supply, namely, the parties themselves and their assessments of questions involving members and supporters. The way in which they recruit and attempt to identify the latter and tackle this resource are also subjects evaluated by the authors. Finally, in the third part of the book, the question is tackled in an entirely different way, namely, by looking at the activists themselves. The research undertaken therefore seeks to identify on the basis of interviews and studies, how these activists see their role in their party and what influence they think they have upon it, etc.
(PBo)
*** RENEE FREGOSI: Parcours transnationaux de la démocratie. Transition, consolidation, déstabilisation. Presses Interuniversitaires Européennes / Peter Lang (1 av. Maurice, B-1050 Brussels, Tel: (41-32)3761717 - fax: 3761727 - Email: info@peterlang.com - Internet: http://www.peterlang.com ). "Amérique latine - Europe" series, No. 2. 2011, 195 pp. €29. ISBN 978-90-5201-735-8.
In this book, Renée Fregosi, philosopher, political scientist and senior lecturer at the Institut des hautes études de l'Amérique latine à l'Université Sorbonne Nouvelle - Paris 3, develops a critical reflection on democracy and its regeneration throughout almost the entire world in the context of globalisation. The different examples of transitions to democracy that flourished last year under the cover of the “Arab Spring” are also subject to useful clarification, even though the author only refers them into a brief prologue and focuses on the Cuban example, 30 years ago, and the countries of the so-called “East”. The last example cited enables him to demonstrate that transitions to democracy are, “complex and tortuous processes, replete with gambles, misunderstandings and a certain amount of bluff and compromise, as well as fluctuations in the positions taken by the actors, balance of forces and manipulations, as well as real progress and persistent factors that create blockages”. Hungary is now a clear illustration of how history is rarely a long and peaceful river. The author then identifies the uncertain context in which free elections take place and which lead to regime change and the transition from dictatorship to democracy. This is followed by a detailed analysis of what “reliable elections” should consist of, “as the final act of transition and the first act of the new democratic regime”. Renée Fregosi subsequently points out that democracy and dictatorship are part of a continuum and can even in certain circumstances interpenetrate themselves. This creates a number of questions about possibilities for judging the crimes committed by dictatorships and questions concerning human rights violations, which over the years has acquired much greater importance. Ultimately, she explains that if the burgeoning or renascent democracies are going to manage to consolidate themselves, they will require economic and social benchmarks. If these are not forthcoming they could find themselves under attack and the door would be open to all sorts of a dangers of populism and the, “phenomenon invading all the different national political scenes” overtime.
(MT)
*** L'Europe en formation. Revue d'études sur la construction européenne et le fédéralisme - Journal of Studies on European Integration and Federalism. Centre international de formation européenne (10 av. des Fleurs, F-06000 Nice. Tel: (33-4) 93979397 - fax: 93979398 - Email: europe.formation@cife.eu - Internet: http://www.europeenformation.eu ). 2011, No. 362, 226 pp. €20. Subscription: €50. La diffusion de l'Europe en formation sur Internet est assurée par la plateforme de revues scientifiques électroniques Cairn. Info à l'adresse http://www.cairn.info/revue-l-europe-en-formation.htm
Dusan Sidjanski, Jean-Louis Quermonne, Vlad Constantinesco, Wolfgang Wessels and Christian Lequesne are some of the prestigious scientific names to have contributed to this extremely informative publication created by the champion of federalism, Alexandre Marc. A number of the features focus on, “the evolution of the European Union after the Lisbon Treaty”. Other recognised specialists include Joost van Iersel, from the Netherlands and a member of the European Economic and Social Committee and Robert Toulemon, the former Directorate General at the Commission. Many of the commentaries are rather pessimistic, if not alarmist but most of them seem to concur. Therefore, there is a general agreement on the diagnosis of the, “efficiency of the Commission reduced to an administrative role and guardian of competition” (Toulemon) due to the fact that during the crisis, it was only the European Central Bank, a federal but not a Community institution had managed “to take on” the governments (Toulemon). Professor Quermonne confirmed that it was the Frankfurt institution, “rather than the Commission that became the spokesperson for the general European interest”. The economist and political scientist Bernard Barthalay asserts that, “the crisis not only ruins lives but governments also failed to take advantage of the crisis and use the opportunity to accomplish the promise made by the Founders” (of the Union) to bring things closer to a federal Europe. Robert Toulemon points out that there is effectively drift at both the intergovernmental and leadership levels (the leading role played by France and Germany) and no effective results have been accomplished as yet. This evolution leads Bernard Barthalay to indicate that the, “Ancien regime of the Concert of Europe is being thus restored”. Professor Quermonne concurs and is concerned that, “if governments remain attached to the model of the European Concert of sovereign states … it would be going against history. Those affected will have to pay dearly because history never goes backwards”. These people are indeed those who have been left out of the equation just as the crisis hits. This is because European leaders are refusing to take steps that would save the situation by moving towards a federal Europe and disillusioned citizens are open to their basest instincts. Robert Toulemon clarifies this by pointing out that, “never before since the end of the last world war has the fermentation of xenophobia and nationalism been so virulent”. Bernard Barthalay exclaims that, “the damage has been done(…) mistrust has now taken root. The masses are ready to fall prey to the merchants of illusion, the manufacturers of fear and soon, hatred and violence. Therefore, the myth of a bygone golden age replaces reason, creative foresight and imagination. The bell has now tolled for a return to darker times”. (33)
Can the worst-case scenario be avoided? Robert Toulemon identifies three possible scenarios. The first is that of “continuity”, that of a Europe reduced to its relatively meagre accomplishments. The second, is much more sombre, “regression”, which cannot be ruled out due to the, “scale of the challenges, the state of public opinion and the mediocrity of the current leaders of the Union and most member states”. Finally, there is the possibility of a Germanic “leap forward” in view of the, “centenary of the first European civil war” which in 2014, coincides with the European elections. Robert Toulemon throws what could be described as a bottle into the ocean when he claims that, “a better elected European Parliament, following a trans-national debate on the programmes, would be able to tackle the inter-governmental drift preventing Europe acquiring a political identity of its own that is not limited to the precarious combination of the identities of its member states”. He also confirms that, “frankly, it would be laughable if it were not so tragic if we still have to commemorate the armistice behind national frontiers, instead of commemorating it together in the federal capital of the United States of Europe”. Bernard Barthalay proposes that they create a movement to change public opinion and urge the member states to ultimately advance in the only direction that will save them. To this effect, he calls on them to activate four democratic formulas at the service of the “2014-18 Objective” and launch without delay, the “People's democratic initiative”, which through the citizens initiative, would be able to help relaunch the movement towards the United States of Europe and demand, “the ratification of popular democracy”. To this effect, representative democracy, together with the national parliaments could propose “a plan to phase in a budgetary federation” and ultimately bring on board the social and stochastic democracies. This final concept is also discussed in this publication …
(MT)