Finally, the re-publication of this manifesto allows us to introduce a second strand of ReCommonsEurope’s work concerning entitled “The impact on the South of European financial policies and development cooperation strategies and possible alternatives”. This work concerns the following areas: the indebtedness of the countries of the South vis-à-vis the countries of the North, free trade agreements, migration and border management policies, militarism, the arms trade and the wars, and reparation policies regarding the spoliation of cultural goods. We will publish each of these axes as separate chapters in the coming weeks.

The ReCommons Europe Manifesto has been drawn up by a group of researchers and activists from a dozen or so countries in Europe who wish to propose a plan to be carried out by the radical left forces that want to create the conditions for social change in the interests of the majority of the population after coming to power in a European country with the active support of the population. It forms part of the ReCommons Europe Project which was initiated by two international networks, the CADTM and EReNSEP , and the Basque trade union ELA , with the aim of contributing to the strategic debates taking place on the European radical left today. It was written collectively in the course of meetings which took place in 2018. It follows on from the appeal entitled “ Ten Proposals to Beat the European Union ”, a collective document published by more than 70 signatories in February 2017.

It is in this context that we suggest you read the ReCommonsEurope Manifesto for a new internationalism of peoples. In the face of the policy that defends the interests of capital, this manifesto aims to propose an emergency program “that a popular left government would need to follow in its first year of office in order to provide immediate responses to the social and ecological emergencies, and defeat the inevitable resistance by conservative forces and the institutions which represent them”. This also concerns the need for an effective and fair health policy, which responds only to the interests and needs of the majority, but which does not forget that this policy will have to be part of a broader package.

As Alexis Cukier reminds us in an article published this week , "those who die from coronavirus diseases, from Covid-19, are infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus but are killed by political decisions which, in defending the working, care and living conditions as necessary for capitalism, do not allow the pandemic to be contained nor to diagnose and care of those who are the sick”.

This is true in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean and in the countries of the former Eastern bloc (Russia and other former republics of the former USSR, Central and Eastern Europe). Nevertheless, this obviously also concerns countries like the United States, where 89 million people have no real health coverage, as well as European countries such as Italy, France or Greece.

Under the pretext of necessary fiscal austerity to repay public debt, governments and major multilateral institutions such as the World Bank, the IMF and regional banks such as the African Development Bank have everywhere enforced policies that have deteriorated public health systems: job cuts in the health sector, precarious employment contracts, reduction of hospital beds, closure of local health centres, increase of health care costs and of prices of medicines, under-investment in infrastructure and equipment, privatization of various health sectors, under-investment by the public sector in research and development of treatments for the benefit of the interests of large private pharmaceutical groups...

The coronavirus pandemic is a serious public health problem and the human suffering caused by the spread of this virus will be enormous. If it massively affects countries of the Global South with very fragile public health systems that have been undermined by 40 years of neo-liberal policies, the death toll will be very high. We must not forget the critical situation of the Iranian population, victim of the blockade imposed by Washington, a blockade that includes medicines and medical equipment. The mainstream media and governments focus on the differences in mortality rates according to age, but they very carefully avoid any reference to class differences and how mortality, due to the coronavirus pandemic, will affect human beings according to their income and wealth

First signatories: Austria

Christian Zeller (Professor of Economic Geography, active in Aufbruch für eine ökosozialistische Alternative, Austria)

Belgium

Anne-Marie Andrusyszyn (director of CEPAG, Belgium)

France Arets (feminist and antiracist activist, promoter of migrants rights, Belgium)

Eva Betavazi (CADTM, Belgium and Cyprus)

Olivier Bonfond (economist at CEPAG, Belgium)

Camille Bruneau (feminist, CADTM Belgium)

Juliette Charlier (CADTM Belgium)

Tina D’angelantonio (CADTM Belgium)

Virginie de Romanet (CADTM Belgium)

Jean-Claude Deroubaix (sociologist, Belgium)

Ouardia Derriche (Belgium)

Grégory Dolcimascolo (ACiDE, Belgium)

Anne Dufresne (sociologist, GRESEA, Belgium)

Chiara Filoni (CADTM, Belgium and Italy)

Corinne Gobin (political scientist, Belgium)

Gilles Grégoire (activist in ACiDe - Citizen Debt Audit,- CADTM Belgium)

Giulia Heredia (CADTM, Belgium)

Nathan Legrand (CADTM, Belgium)

Monique Lermusiaux (retired trade union activist, Belgium)

Rosario Marmol-Perez (trade union activist FGTB, artist, Belgium)

Herman Michiel (editor of the website Ander Europa, Belgium and the Netherlands)

Alice Minette (trade union activist, CADTM Belgium)

Christine Pagnoulle (University of Liège, ATTAC, CADTM, Belgium)

Adrien Péroches (activist, CADTM Brussels, ACiDe Brussels, Belgium)

Madeleine Ploumhans (ACiDe, CADTM Liège, Belgium)

Brigitte Ponet (social worker, CADTM Belgium)

Daniel Richard (regional secretary of the inter-branch union FGTB Verviers, Belgium)

Christian Savestre (Attac Bruxelles 2, RJF, ACiDe, Belgium)

Éric Toussaint (political scientist, economist, spokesperson for the CADTM international network, Belgium)

Felipe Van Keirsbilck (general secretary of the Centrale Nationale des Employés (CNE), Belgium)

Christine Vanden Daelen (feminist, CADTM Belgium)

Magali Verdier (feminist activist, Belgium)

Roxane Zadvat (actor, Théâtre Croquemitaine, CADTM Belgium)

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Selma Asotić (poet, Bosnia and Herzegovina)

Danijela Majstorović (University of Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina)

Svjetlana Nedimovic (activist, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina)

Tijana Okic (philosopher, political activist, Bosnia and Herzegovina)

Croatia

Dimitrije Birač (coordinator of the Croatian Center for Workers’ Solidarity, Croatia)

Stefan Gužvica (historian and organizer, Croatia/Serbia)

Cyprus

Stavros Tombazos (economist, Cyprus)

Denmark

Poya Pakzad (economic policy advisor, Enhedslisten (Red-Green Alliance), Denmark)

France

Marion Alcaraz (NPA, Le temps des Lilas, France)

Olivier Besancenot (former speaker of the NPA, France)

Martine Boudet (coordinator of the inter-associative book Urgence antiraciste -Pour une démocratie inclusive, Le Croquant, 2017, France)

Myriam Bourgy (farmer, CADTM, France)

M. Sofia Brey (writer, former official of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, France)

Vicki Briault Manus (PCF, CADTM France)

François Chesnais (economist, professor emeritus at the University of Paris 13, France)

Jeanne Chevalier (candidate in the 2019 European elections for France insoumise)

Annick Coupé (trade unionist, ATTAC France)

Léon Crémieux (retired trade unionist in the air transport, NPA, France)

Alexis Cukier (philosopher, Ensemble!, EReNSEP, France)

Véronique Danet-Dupuis (banking executive, trade union delegate in defence of the workers, co-responsible for France Insoumise’s programme on banks, France)

Penelope Duggan (International Viewpoint, France)

Pascal Franchet (president of CADTM France)

Isabelle Garo (philosopher, France)

Norbert Holcblat (economist, NPA, France)

Michel Husson (economist, France)

Pauline Imbach (baker, CADTM Grenoble, France)

Pierre Khalfa (Fondation Copernic, France)

Yvette Krolikowski (CADTM France)

Michael Löwy (sociologist, France)

Laurence Lyonnais (Ensemble Insoumis, ecosocialist, candidate in the 2019 European elections for France insoumise)

Jan Malewski (journalist, Inprecor journal, France)

Myriam Martin (porte-parole de Ensemble!, France)

Christiane Marty (engineer, Fondation Copernic, France)

Gustave Massiah (economist, altermondialist, France)

Corinne Morel Darleux (ecosocialist author and activist, France)

Ugo Palheta (sociologist, NPA, Contretemps, France)

Gilles Perret (codirector of the film “J’veux du soleil”, France)

Mireille Perrier (actress and director, France)

Dominique Plihon (economist, ATTAC France)

Laura Raïm (journalist, France)

Marlène Rosato (Ensemble!, EReNSEP, France)

Pierre Rousset (ESSF www.europe-solidaire.org, France)

Catherine Samary (economist, ATTAC France, NPA, France)

Mariana Sanchez (trade unionist, France)

Patrick Saurin (CADTM France)

Alejandro Teitelbaum (lawyer in international human rights law, France)

Aurélie Trouvé (economist, ATTAC France)

Sophie Zafari (trade unonist FSU, France)

Roseline Vachetta (ex member of European Parliament, international solidarity activist, NPA, France)

Germany

Angela Klein (SoZ journal, Germany)

Jakob Schäfer (activist of the trade unionist Left, Germany

Greece

Marie-Laure Coulmin (CADTM, Greece)

Katerina Giannoulia (member of the General Council of ADEDY - general union for the public service,- member of Popular Unity, Greece)

Stathis Kouvelakis (philosopher, EReNSEP, Grèce et Royaume-Uni)

Costas Lapavitsas (economist, SOAS – University of London, EReNSEP, Greece and United Kingdom)

Moisis Litsis (journalist, Greece)

Sotiris Martalis (DEA, Greece)

Sonia Mitralias (feminist, CADTM, Greece)

Giorgos Mitralias (journalist, Greece)

Antonis Ntavanelos (DEA, Greece)

Spyros Marchetos (historian, School of Political Sciences, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece)

Hungary

Judit Morva (economist, activist, Hungary

Ireland

Brid Brennan (political analyst, activist, Ireland)

Andy Storey (School of Politics and International Relations, University College Dublin, Ireland)

Italy

Marta Autore (Communia Network, Italy)

Fabrizio Burattini (trade unionist Unione Sindacale di Base, Italy)

Eliana Como (member of the national leadership of CGIL, Italy)

Gippò Mukendi Ngandu (teacher, Sinistra Anticapitalista, Italy)

Cristina Quintavalla (ATTAC-CADTM Italy)

Luxembourg

Justin Turpel (former MP déi Lénk – la Gauche, Luxembourg)

David Wagner (MP déi Lénk – la Gauche, Luxembourg)

Netherlands

Willem Bos (SAP-Grenzeloos, the Netherlands)

Maral Jefroudi (co-director of IIRE, the Netherlands)

Poland

Katarzyna Bielińska (philosopher and political scientist, Poland)

Zbigniew Marcin Kowalewski (researcher of social movements, Poland)

Stefan Zgliczyński (director of the Polish edition of Le Monde diplomatique, Poland)

Portugal

Francisco Louça (economist, Bloco de Esquerda, Portugal)

Rita Silva (Habita activist - Colectivo pelo Direito in Habitação and Cidade and university researcher, Portugal)

Alda Sousa (teacher at the University of Porto, Bloco de Esquerda, former MEP (2012-2014), Portugal)

Rui Viana Pereira (translator, sound designer, CADTM, Portugal)

Serbia

Andreja Zivkovic (sociologist, Marks21, Serbia)

Slovenia

Ana Podvrsic (sociologist, economist, Slovenia)

Spanish state

Walter Actis (member of Ecologistas en Accion, Spanish state)

Daniel Albarracin (economist, Podemos, Spanish state)

Yago Alvarez (journalist, activist in the PACD, Spanish state)

Cari Baena, Fundación Socialismo Sin Fronteras, Spanish State

Alfons Bech, union member at CCOO, Catalonia, Spanish State

Joana Bregolat (member of Desbordem, activist in Anticapitalistas, Catalonia - Spanish state)

José Cabayol Virallonga (president of SICOM (Solidaritat i Comunicació), journalist, Catalonia - Spanish state)

Laura Camargo (teacher, member of the Permanent Council of the Parliament of the Balearic Islands, activist in Anticapitalistas, Spanish State)

Laura Camargo (teacher, member of the Permanent Deputation of the Balearic Parliament, member of the Anticapitalistas, Spanish State)

Raúl Camargo (MP in the Assembly of Madrid, activist in Anticapitalistas, Spanish state)

Pablo Cotarelo (EReNSEP, Spanish state)

Sergi Cutillas (EReNSEP, CADTM, Catalonia - Spanish state)

Josu Egireun (Viento Sur journal, Spanish state)

Laia Facet (Anticapitalistas, Catalonia - Spanish state)

Sònia Farré (activist, former MP for En Comú Podem, Catalonia - Spanish state)

Ignacio Fernández del Páramo (architect-urbanist, advisor on urbanism and environment for the city council of Oviedo, member of Somos Oviedo-Uvieu, Asturias - Spanish state)

Iolanda Fresnillo (sociologist, PACD, Spanish state)

Ricardo García Zaldívar (economist, former coordinator of ATTAC Spain)

María Gómez Garrido (sociology professor, University of the Balearic Islands, Anticapitalistas, Spanish state)

Laura Gonzalez De Txabarri (ELA Emergency Liquidity Assistance

ELA Emergency funds loaned to the private banks by the Eurozone central banks. trade union, Basque country - Spanish state)

Anna Gabriel (former MP of the Parliament of Catalonia, currently exiled in Switzerland, Catalonia - Spanish state)

Joana Garcia Grenzner (journalist specialised in gender and communication, feminist activist, Catalonia - Spanish state)

Yayo Herero (anthropologist, ecofeminist, member of Ecologistas en Acción, Spanish state)

Cuca Hernández (coordinator of ATTAC Spain)

Juan Hernández Zubizarreta (university professor, member of the Observatorio de Multinacionales en América Latina (OMAL), Basque country - Spanish state)

Petxo Idoiaga (Hitz&Hitz Foundation, Viento Sur journal, Spanish state)

Joxe Iriarte “Bikila” (Social activist, writer and member of Alternativa- EHBIldu, Basque Country)

José L. Gómez del Prado (University of Barcelona, Center of international studies - diplomatic school of Barcelona, AEDIDH, Spanish state)

Janire Landaluze (ELA trade union, Basque country – Spanish state)

Monique Lermusiaux (retired trade union activist, Belgium)

Mats Lucia Bayer (CADTM, Spanish state)

Fátima Martín (journalist, CADTM, Spanish state)

Francesc Matas, La Aurora (marxist organization), Spanish State

Alex Merlo (parliamentary assistant of Miguel Urban Crespo (MEP, Podemos), Spanish state)

Anna Monjo (publisher, Catalonia - Spanish state)

Natalia Munevar (activist, PACD, parliamentary assistant of Miguel Urban Crespo (MEP, Podemos), Spanish state)

Mikel Noval (ELA, Basque country - Spanish state)

Jaime Pastor (editor of Viento Sur, Spanish state)

Laura Pérez Ruano (professor and lawyer, MP for Orain Bai-Ahora Sí, Navarre - Spanish state)

Griselda Piñero Delledonne (CADTM, Catalonia - Spanish state)

Eulalia Reguant (member of the national secretariat of the CUP, former MP and town councillor, Catalonia - Spanish state)

Jorge Riechmann (philosopher, writer, Ecologistas en Acción, Spanish state)

Rubén Rosón (doctor, advisor on economy and employment for the city council of Oviedo, member of Somos Oviedo-Uvieu, Asturias - Spanish state)

Sol Sánchez (co-speaker for Izquierda Unida Madrid, Spanish State)

Carlos Sánchez Mato (responsible for the economic policies for Izquierda Unida, Spanish state)

Ana Taboada Coma (lawyer, vice mayor of Oviedo, spokesperson of Somos Oviedo-Uvieu, Asturias - Spanish state)

Aina Tella (coordinator for the international relations for the CUP, Catalonia - Spanish state)

Mónica Vargas Collazos (anthropologist, activist, Bolivie et Catalonia - Spanish state)

Lucía Vicent (professor of economics at the University Complutense of Madrid, Spanish state)

Esther Vivas (journalist, Catalonia - Spanish state)

Switzerland

Jean Batou (professor of contemporary history, MP, solidaritéS, Switzerland)

Marianne Ebel (former MP solidaritéS, vice president of the World March of Women Switzerland)

Sébastien Guex (professor at the University of Lausanne, solidaritéS, Switzerland)

Stéfanie PREZIOSO (professor of international history at the University of Lausanne, solidaritéS, Switzerland)

Beatrice Schmid (teacher, Switzerland)

Juan Tortosa (CADTM Switzerland)

Charles-André Udry (economist, director of the website alencontre.org and of the publishing house Page 2, Switzerland)

United Kingdom

Gilbert Achcar (professor at the SOAS – University of London, United Kingdom)

Terry Conway (Resistance Books, United Kingdom)

Fanny Malinen (researcher, activist, United Kingdom)

Michael Roberts (financial economist, United Kingdom)

Grace Blakeley (New Statesman’s economics commentator, United Kingdom)

The following people directly took part in the writing of this manifesto:

Walter Actis (member of Ecologistas en Accion, Spanish state)

Daniel Albarracin (economist, Podemos, Spanish state)

Jeanne Chevalier (France insoumise, France)

Pablo Cotarelo (EReNSEP, Spanish state)

Alexis Cukier (philosopher, Ensemble!, EReNSEP, France)

Sergi Cutillas (economist, EReNSEP, CADTM, Catalonia – Spanish state)

Yayo Herero (anthropologist, eco-feminist, member of Ecologistas en Acción Spanish state)

Stathis Kouvelakis (philosopher, EReNSEP, Greece and United Kingdom)

Janire Landaluze (trade unionist, ELA, Basque country – Spanish state)

Costas Lapavitsas (economist, EReNSEP, Greece and United Kingdom)

Nathan Legrand (CADTM, Belgium)

Mikel Noval (trade unionist, ELA, Basque country – Spanish state)

Tijana Okic (philosopher, political activist, Bosnia and Herzegovina)

Catherine Samary (economist, ATTAC France, NPA, France)

Patrick Saurin (CADTM, France)

Éric Toussaint (political scientist, economist, CADTM, Belgium)

Final editing made by: Alexis Cukier, Nathan Legrand and Éric Toussaint

Foreword and introduction translated from French by: Colin Falconer (Ensemble)

Layout: Tina D’angelantonio

Table of contents

Foreword

Introduction

Chapter 1. First steps of a popular government

Chapter 2. Banks

Chapter 3. Debt

Chapter 4. Work, employment and social rights

Chapter 5. Ecosocialism and energy transition

Chapter 6. Feminisn

Chapter 7. Health and education

Chapter 8. International relations

Chapter 9. Social struggles, political confrontations and constituent processes

Foreword

This Manifesto of the ReCommonsEurope network has been drawn up by a group of researchers and activists from a dozen or so countries in Europe who wish to propose a plan to be carried out by the popular Left forces that want to create the conditions for social change in the interests of the majority of the population after coming to power in a European country with the active support of the population. It forms part of the ReCommonsEurope Project which was initiated by two international networks, the CADTM and EReNSEP, and the Basque trade union ELA, with the aim of contributing to the strategic debates taking place on the European radical left today. It was written collectively in the course of meetings which took place in 2018. It follows on from the appeal entitled “Ten Proposals to Beat the European Union”, a collective document published by more than 70 signatories in February 2017.

A programme that a popular left government would need to follow in order to provide immediate responses to the social and ecological emergencies We have written a coherent proposal for the commitments, initiatives and measures to be taken by the forces of the popular Left. This practical manifesto puts forward a programme that a popular left government would need to follow in its first year of office in order to provide immediate responses to the social and ecological emergencies, and defeat the inevitable resistance by conservative forces and the institutions which represent them. The propositions cover the main problems which a people’s government will have to face immediately on coming to power. The Manifesto is also intended for the social movements (trade unions, associations, citizens) fighting at local, national and international levels for fundamental human rights and equality for all, for social emancipation and democracy, and against the destruction of ecosystems. The programme also includes medium and long-term objectives for which responsibility could be shared by political organisations and social movements of the popular left.

Our objective is to submit these analyses and proposals for discussion by the social and political left, and by all those activists and citizens of Europe who are convinced that it is necessary to make a radical change of course if we want to rise to the great challenges of the period. Europe is going through a major and prolonged crisis. The European Union continues to advance in an anti-democratic manner in the service of the richest sectors of the population. Ordinary people have repeatedly demonstrated in the streets and at the polls their rejection of the policies followed by governments over the last few decades – policies which for the most part have been coordinated and supported by the European institutions –, as well as their desire for radical change. In the last few years, several opportunities have been missed, especially in 2015 in Greece.

The climate crisis, violent austerity policies, and the danger represented by a racist and xenophobic far right, only make it more urgent to define a strategy associating organisation from below, as well as social movements and political organisations, in order to make politics serve the interests of the majority.

Introduction

In the last ten years, popular anger has expressed itself without interruption against discriminatory and anti-democratic policies in favour of the rich and big companies - policies implemented by national governments and often coordinated by the European Union (EU). It has taken the form of initiatives by trade unions, but also by new movements such as ‘15M’ in Spain (also called in other countries the movement of the ‘Indignados’), the occupation of the squares in Greece and the huge demonstrations in Portugal in 2011, the movements against the “Loi Travail” (Labour law) in France and against the Water Tax in Ireland in 2016, the great demonstrations for autonomy and against political repression in Catalonia in 2017. Feminist struggles gave rise to the historic demonstrations in Poland (« Czarny Protest » against the anti-abortion law in 2017), Italy (« Non Una di Meno » movement since 2016), Spain (feminist general strike of 5 million people on the 8th March 2018), as well as a victory over the political influence of the Catholic Church in Ireland with the legalisation of abortion by referendum in May 2018, and are at last succeeding in imposing their centrality in all social struggles. The year 2018 also saw the emergence of new social movements against the dominant economic and political order, with the movement against the « slavery law » (neoliberal reform of labour laws) in Hungary, the demonstration and development of the « Indivisible » antiracist movement in Germany, the Yellow Vests movement in France and French-speaking Belgium against unjust fiscal policies and the lack of democracy in political institutions. Nor should we forget the climate demonstrations, driven mainly by young people who have gone on strike in many countries, including Sweden, Denmark, Switzerland, Belgium, France and Great Britain. All these social movements, and others, have challenged the austerity measures and authoritarianism of the policies being implemented in Europe, by posing directly or indirectly the question of a radical alternative social project to capitalism, productivism, ecological devastation, racism and patriarchy. This Manifesto sees itself as an integral part these movements and shares their objectives : the struggle against all forms of domination, for universal rights, for equality and for a democracy to be invented – a democracy which would not stop at the gates of companies and the threshold of working-class areas, and which would necessarily be radically opposed to the logic of a capitalist system (whether the latter claims to be ‘protectionist’, and so against ‘foreigners’, or ‘liberal’) which is destroying social rights and the environment.

These social movements are inseparable from the social, ecological, democratic and feminist emergencies, as well as a ‘crisis of solidarity’ These social movements are inseparable from the social, ecological, democratic and feminist emergencies, as well as a ‘crisis of solidarity’. A social emergency because the living and working conditions of the popular classes have continuously deteriorated in the last thirty years, most notably since the crisis which affected the continent in 2008-2009. An ecological emergency because the exponential consumption of fossil fuels, and more generally the destruction of ecosystems, both of which are necessary for capitalism, bring planetary climate change (whose effects are now clearly visible) ever closer to a point of no return and threaten the very existence of humanity. A democratic emergency because, faced with the challenges to the dominant classes over the last thirty years, the latter have not hesitated to adopt methods of domination which ignore democratic appearances to an ever-greater degree, and are increasingly repressive. A feminist emergency because patriarchal oppression in all its forms is increasingly being massively and loudly rejected by millions of women and men. A crisis of solidarity because the closing of frontiers and building of walls as a response to the millions of migrants fleeing war, poverty, environmental disasters and authoritarian regimes world-wide constitute nothing less than a denial of humanity. Each of these emergencies leads, in reaction, to mass civil disobedience, self-organisation and the building of alternatives, which represent possible sources of democratic alternatives in Europe.

In this Manifesto, our reflections and our determination to act are solidly rooted in these Europe-wide movements, without limiting themselves to existing frontiers and institutions: all the challenges and rights mentioned have become global. These take different forms in each country and continent, with their particularities and their own histories. The social attacks are articulated from the “local” to the “global” depending on the strategies of both multinational companies and their interest Interest An amount paid in remuneration of an investment or received by a lender. Interest is calculated on the amount of the capital invested or borrowed, the duration of the operation and the rate that has been set. groups within national states and the institutions of globalised capitalism, based on the norms of so-called “free trade”. It is this logic which defines the “general interest” that the European Commission claims to defend within the EU, as well as the profoundly unequal “partnerships” that the EU has developed with the countries of the south and east of the territory of Europe.

The European institutions organise (with others) and coordinate neoliberal policies at a transnational level, incite and sometimes constrain national governments to accelerate the processes of lowering wages and pensions, dismantling laws regulating labour relations and social rights, privatisation of public services, etc. Of course, neoliberal policies are not dictated by the European institutions alone – countries outside the EU also apply them – but the treaties and institutions are a powerful lever to encourage and impose them. Whatever diverse interpretations one might have of past phases of “the construction of Europe”, it is manifest that the EU has always been an ensemble of pro-capitalist institutions and, ever since the Treaty of Rome, has been constructed as a vast market for capital and “free and fair competition”, protected from popular and democratic intervention. Recent developments, however, have intensified the unequal and authoritarian nature of European policies.

This rise in inequality is directly linked to European policies on employment which aim to destroy employee protection and generalise precariousness The most recent period has been marked, on the one hand, by a considerable increase in economic and social inequalities within each country and also between the centre and the internal and external peripheries (to the south and east) of the EU; and on the other hand, by the increasingly dangerous character of the ecological crisis, with the disruption to the climate and so-called ‘natural’ disasters brought about by the destruction of ecosystems now visible as a significant and continuous process.

This rise in inequality is directly linked to European policies on employment which aim to destroy employee protection and generalise precariousness; on finance, aiming to shield the banks and large companies from taxation and any remotely serious form of regulation; but also currency matters, i.e. touching on the very architecture of the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU), as well as the specific initiatives taken by the ECB ECB

European Central Bank The European Central Bank is a European institution based in Frankfurt, founded in 1998, to which the countries of the Eurozone have transferred their monetary powers. Its official role is to ensure price stability by combating inflation within that Zone. Its three decision-making organs (the Executive Board, the Governing Council and the General Council) are composed of governors of the central banks of the member states and/or recognized specialists. According to its statutes, it is politically ‘independent’ but it is directly influenced by the world of finance.



https://www.ecb.europa.eu/ecb/html/index.en.html and the informal Eurogroup involved in the pseudo-negotiations with Greece. On the one hand, the impossibility of devaluing the currency, which is a direct consequence of the single currency, helps to widen the disparities between different parts of the continent, to encourage the precariousness of working conditions, to increase unemployment (especially amongst young people) and to push the population of the peripheral zones of the continent – young qualified people looking for employment in particular – to emigrate towards the centre. While masking the responsibility of the dominant classes in each nation, the rules of the Eurozone push governments, especially in the countries of the periphery, to continually reduce salaries, while the central economies compete with each other at the expense of their own increasingly precarious populations (such as the 7 million German workers paid 400 euros per month) through threatening to relocate jobs and exploiting this peripheral labour force in order to increase market share Share A unit of ownership interest in a corporation or financial asset, representing one part of the total capital stock. Its owner (a shareholder) is entitled to receive an equal distribution of any profits distributed (a dividend) and to attend shareholder meetings. abroad.

On the other hand, these inequalities have been reinforced by the systematic use of quantitative easing (the flooding of markets with billions of liquidity Liquidity The facility with which a financial instrument can be bought or sold without a significant change in price. ) in order to save the European banks, at the expense of the living conditions of the population, especially in the periphery. The EMU, which lies at the heart of the construction of Europe, has functioned since the 2007-2008 crisis as an instrument of economic exploitation of workers, of social polarisation between different populations and of the political domination of certain states by others. The EU countries which are not part of the Eurozone are themselves forced to reduce wage costs, to practise fiscal dumping and to make employment contracts more precarious if they wish to continue to compete with the Eurozone heavyweights such as Germany, France and the Benelux countries. Great Britain, which is currently negotiating its exit from the EU, provides an example of precarious employment as a result, especially, of the hundreds of thousands of ‘zero hours’ contracts.

The EU institutions and the governments of the member states prefer to safeguard the existence of capitalism rather than of humanity At the same time, despite the fact that there is now a clear consensus concerning the importance of the current ecological crisis, the EU institutions and the governments of the member states (like the governments of the other main states which are responsible for global warming and the destruction of ecosystems as result of their policies in favour of large polluting companies) have not drawn any practical conclusions about the necessary transition towards decarbonised economies and the correlative transformation of the productive system. These institutions prefer to safeguard the existence of capitalism rather than of humanity, so putting in danger the lives of the young and of future generations.

The response of most governments to the growing protest movements consists in increasing the level of state repression: social and political opponents are threatened in Greece, in France and Belgium laws restricting freedoms follow one after the other and examples of police violence multiply, refugee rights activists are criminalised, etc. Far-right xenophobic and authoritarian forces have made considerable progress and even participate in European governments (as in Italy), or shape the political agenda of governments of the ‘extreme centre’ (as in France). The European institutions have never protected capitalist interests so actively and have never erected so many barriers against popular intervention or democratic choice as in the last few years. In Greece, they responded to the electoral victory of Syriza in January 2015 by a policy of monetary asphyxiation (drying up of state liquidity) then, after the success of the “No” vote in the referendum of July 2015, held negotiations behind closed doors with the same government in order to neutralise the will of the people and, with the complicity of the Greek government, impose on them a third austerity memorandum. With the signature of agreements on migration policy between the EU and third-party countries such as the agreement with Turkey of April 2016, these institutions added to the injustice of the Dublin III Regulation and the violence of Frontex (the agency organising the repression of migrants at the frontiers of the EU) the systematic violation of international law, especially the law of asylum, and direct funding of a repressive policy delegated to third-party countries. Today, the leading projects for EU « reform » are militarist (increasing the budget of Euroforce), anti-democratic (automaticity of European control of national budgets) and even more neoliberal (projects for generalised privatisation of public services). More than ever, as stated in 2015 by the then president of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, from the point of view of the European institutions, « there cannot be a democratic choice against the European treaties ».

Faced with the pro-capitalist, anti-democratic and xenophobic construction which is the EU, what is to be done? Reform through elections at the European level is not a realistic option. A (very) hypothetical majority for a radical left coalition in the European Parliament would not make it possible to impose a modification of the most important treaties and democratic control of the European Commission and the ECB, which are the two main war machines of neoliberalism in Europe. The Parliament, in reality, does not possess the necessary prerogatives for such reforms, and the ECB and the European Commission, as well as the European Court of Justice and the various European agencies, are completely independent of popular sovereignty. And the simultaneous election in the quasi totality of member states of governments committed to reforming the EU seems equally illusory, if only because of the different temporality of electoral cycles. The European Union today constitutes not only a vanguard of neoliberalism in the world but also an ensemble of unreformable institutions, which is why a left committed to social transformation can no longer be credible and realistic without placing a complete break with the treaties and institutions of the European Union at the heart of its strategy.

This Manifesto argues that it is necessary and possible to simultaneously oppose the forces and policies of inequality and reaction at national, European and international levels But what forms should this rupture take? We already know that it cannot consist in negotiating a consensus without being in a position of strength faced with the European institutions, as the experience of the first Syriza government in 2015 clearly showed. We also know that political ruptures necessarily rely on social mobilisations on a grand scale. Such mobilisations were cruelly lacking in Greece at the beginning of 2015, and they could have created the conditions for the campaign for Brexit to take a different direction from the nationalist and xenophobic one which unfortunately prevailed in Great Britain in 2016. In other words, breaking with the treaties and the institutions of the European Union must be conflictual, democratic and internationalist. This Manifesto argues that it is necessary and possible to simultaneously oppose the forces and policies of inequality and reaction (which advance under cover both of liberalism and protectionism) at national, European and international levels, relying on both the initiative of citizens and organised social movements and on the action of a people’s government committed to defending rights for all.

What is still needed, however, is for what is called in Europe the “radical Left” to raise its game in order to face up to today’s challenges. Taken as a whole, its constituent parts so far cruelly lack clarity and courage in their relationship to the European institutions, radicality and ambition in the measures they advocate, and a popular base as a result of their isolation from the social movements which are defying the existing order from below. It is time, at local, national and international levels, to discuss the measures and realistic and radical initiatives which, if implemented, would really make it possible to satisfy social needs and guarantee the fundamental rights of the men and women living in Europe or desiring to do so, improve their living and working conditions, conquer democratic power and begin the process of going beyond capitalism while starting the ecological transition.

The chapters of this Manifesto are designed as propositions to be debated The chapters of this Manifesto are designed as propositions to be debated – propositions which arise from reflections oriented towards immediate and more long-term action. They are aimed at citizens and activists of the social, trade union and political left in the different member states or within the orbit of the EU, and submit for discussion diagnostics and proposals which the social movements and left-wing forces which are candidates to join a people’s government could defend together.

Chapter 1 submits for discussion principles, strategies and tools required to realise these objectives and implement these proposals. It aims to answer this question: What should a people’s government do in the first days and months of its activity? This chapter presents measures that such a government in a member country of the EU should put into practice immediately (starting in the first hours after coming to power) and unilaterally – i.e. disregarding the European treaties and entering into conflict with the European institutions –, including an immediate increase in salaries and taxation of capital, a moratorium on the interest of the public debt, control of capital movements (in order to prevent the flight of capital organised by the capitalists), socialisation of the banks and restoring public control over the currency, etc – all measures without which no form of progressive policy is possible. Like the following chapters, it distinguishes and enumerates immediate, medium-term and more long-term measures to be taken at national or international levels.

The following chapters contain propositions for:

the public debt, of which it is necessary to abolish the illegitimate, odious and unsustainable part ( chapter 2 )

) the banks, which it will be necessary to socialise within a public banking service providing funds to serve fundamental needs and not the accumulation of profit Profit The positive gain yielded from a company’s activity. Net profit is profit after tax. Distributable profit is the part of the net profit which can be distributed to the shareholders. ( chapter 3 )

( ) employment and social rights, which must be developed and reinvented to improve living conditions and secure democratic power over the means and purpose of work ( chapter 4 )

) the energy and ecological transition, which must be put into practice urgently to prevent the destruction of ecosystems and invent new forms of sustainable life ( chapter 5 )

) feminist struggles, which must be at the heart of a radical democratic project and transversal to all social and political struggles ( chapter 6 )

) education and health, which must be defended as fundamental rights, developed and extended to all as public services, as opposed to their commodification and degradation ( chapter 7 )

) international policy and migration, aiming to ensure fundamental rights for all, peace and solidarity between peoples (chapter 8)

Chapter 9 presents a strategy of disobedience, confrontation, rupture Like the first chapter, Chapter 9 proposes principles, strategies and tools making it possible to achieve the stated objectives. It proposes to answer this question: What to do in the face of the hostility and constraints imposed by the European institutions? It presents a strategy of disobedience (at all territorial levels), confrontation (including defensive and offensive measures), rupture (in different possible forms). This strategy does not propose ready-made answers, but indicates a general direction whose starting point must be the objectives to be defended and a recognition of the logic with which we are confronted. This chapter points to the need to rebuild alliances and constituent processes with a view to instituting democratic forms of international cooperation as an alternative to those of the EU.

Popular sovereignty can only be built by creating new democratic institutions through organisation from below Our side must refuse both the unrealistic projects of institutional reform of the European institutions, which in the final analysis only reinforce the status quo, and projects based on a retreat into the nation-state, which end up by merely reinforcing domestic capital. A popular left-wing force which aims at forming a people’s government and starting the process of urgent social change must commit itself to disobeying the European institutions, breaking with its normal processes, defending itself against attacks and reprisals coming from the European institutions and big capital, as well as the attempts to block the process by national institutions wedded to the existing order, and working towards new international alliances with partners inside and outside the existing EU with a view to creating new forms of cooperation and solidarity. Popular sovereignty can only be built by confronting the present forms of political institutions at national, European and international levels, and by creating new democratic institutions through organisation from below. For that to happen, we must win the argument for the necessity of a clear political break with the national, European and international institutions, which are vehicles for the policies we are fighting, as well as to consolidate the links between networks and forms of resistance and between the political, social and trade union movements which share the objectives of progressive and radical change, in particular in order to have an influence on a European level. The immediate and urgent task is to reinforce and coordinate the existing initiatives of disobedience, rupture and self-organisation, and to initiate new ones, systematically giving them an international dimension, making sure they are clearly opposed to the EU institutions and work in favour of new forms of solidarity between peoples.

By making these propositions for disobeying and breaking with the European institutions, there can be no question of looking towards a nationalist solution to the crisis and to social revolt. As much as in past periods, we need to adopt an internationalist strategy and advocate a European federation of peoples as opposed to pursuing the present course of integration which is completely dominated by the interests of big capital. It is also a question of constantly seeking to develop coordinated campaigns and actions at the continental level and beyond in the fields of debt, ecology, the right to housing, treatment of migrants and refugees, health, education and other public services, the right to work, the fight to close nuclear power stations, the drastic reduction of the use of fossil fuels, the fight against fiscal dumping and tax havens, the fight to socialise the banks, insurance companies and the energy sector, the reappropriation of the commons, action against the ever-increasing authoritarianism of governments and for democracy in every area of social life, the struggle to defend and extend the rights of women and LGBTI people, the promotion of public goods and services, the creation of constituent processes.

It will no doubt be objected that this revolutionary way is too radical or too difficult. We reply that others are an impasse, and that ours is the only one which makes it possible to start the process of breaking with the existing order, now and everywhere it may be possible, in order to rebuild local, regional, national and international spaces, and beyond that, a world which is liveable, fair and democratic.

Chapter 1 - First steps of a popular government

United Kingdom

I. DIAGNOSIS

Big business and big banks, hiring an army of lobbyists, set the political agenda both at the national and the supranational levels

In the main lines, the content and outcomes of EU neoliberal policies has been similar in all the member States. Big business and big banks, hiring an army of lobbyists, set the political agenda both at the national and the supranational levels. The correlative decline of democracy and loss of popular sovereignty in Europe reflect a historic shift in favour of capital and against labour. For labour this shift has amounted to a tremendous escalation of insecurity with regard to employment, income, medical care, pensions, and so forth. For capital it has meant the rapacious appropriation of national wealth propelling inequality to levels unprecedented in the post-war years. The policies of the EU to confront the Eurozone crisis have further favoured capital while worsening the conditions of labour. They have reinforced massive unemployment, specially for the young and in the periphery, compression of the wages, a lack of investment and the decline of the public services. They have also dramatically increased the economic ascendance and the political domination of the core of Europe over the peripheries of Southern Europe and of Central Europe. [1]

Faced with this unforgiving reality, the first requirement for the popular Left is to tackle the belief that the EU could be radically reformed from within, in other words, respecting treaties, following the channels and decision-making procedures of the European institutions.

The machinery of the EU and the authority of the ECJ ensure that the Treaties will continue to be interpreted in favour of advancing neoliberalism. Just as there is no normal politics within the EU, there is also no normal political contestation in determining the outlook of EU institutions. The EU is a transnational juggernaut geared to neoliberal and hierarchical motion. Rather, it is a hierarchical alliance of nation states that have created the institutional framework of a single market relentlessly promoting neoliberalism.

In our view, the popular sovereignty and an internationalist approach are not only compatible but also mutually necessary Therefore, the main dilemma consists of what to do whether a progressive and popular force reaches the government and sees that is not possible to apply a progressive policy without a negative and strong reaction of the economic apparatus of the EU. In our view, the popular sovereignty and an internationalist approach are not only compatible but also mutually necessary. Thus, it is necessary to defend a political roadmap which combines the national and popular political tasks with an internationalist point of view. This political roadmap consists in carrying out measures needed for breaking unilaterally the austerity measures, and thus to disobey the Treaties and neoliberal pacts, while building a cooperative framework with other countries (within or not the EU) compatible with the construction of a new solidarity and alternative economic area in Europe.

The extension of social rights and public services demands a political economy incompatible with the EU Treaties In this prospect, a radical democratic, social and labour agenda should be put in spotlight. The protection and extension of labour rights, the job creation and the extension of social rights and public services demands a political economy incompatible with the EU Treaties. The popular Left needs to propose fresh policies capable of tilting the balance Balance End of year statement of a company’s assets (what the company possesses) and liabilities (what it owes). In other words, the assets provide information about how the funds collected by the company have been used; and the liabilities, about the origins of those funds. of power toward labour, strengthening democracy, recouping sovereignty, and providing a feasible socialist perspective for the continent. For that to become a political reality, however, the popular Left must recapture its historic radicalism, reject the mechanisms of the EMU and the EU, and accept the consequences of this disobedient policy. On that basis it could in practice defend the rights of citizens and migrants, especially of the popular classes.

II. PROPOSALS

There must be a rupture with the domestic power structures that have a vested interest in the current arrangements What, then, is the European popular Left to do? [2] The lesson of Syriza is paramount in this regard. If the Left intends to implement radical anti-capitalist policies and effectively to confront the neoliberal juggernaut of the EU, it must be prepared for a rupture. There has to be a break, an upheaval, an overturning of prevailing conditions, for things to change in Europe. There must be a rupture with the domestic power structures that have a vested interest in the current arrangements. There must also be a rupture with the transnational institutions of the EU that sustain the current arrangements.

With regards to the economic and social policies of a popular government, the priority is to implement domestic programmes that directly challenge the power of capital. Each country would have to tailor its own programme according to its needs, but key elements would apply for all. In the short term these elements would consist in lifting austerity, re-extending labour and social rights, engaging in income and wealth redistribution and in public investment in order to satisfy immediate and fundamental needs and aspirations of the working class and the poor.

What should the popular Left do in the case of reaching a national government?

Immediate steps:

Boost domestic demand with the aim of reducing unemployment and raising incomes The priority is to lift austerity. Fiscal and monetary policy ought to be deployed to boost domestic demand with the aim of reducing unemployment and raising incomes. In a huge economy, such as the EU, the sources of demand ought to be sought domestically in the first instance. This holds for countries of the core and for those in the peripheries, but also for the hegemonic power. Germany ought to wean itself from its destructive neo-mercantilism by focusing on its domestic economy.

Boosting domestic demand would necessarily include redistributing income and wealth away from capital and toward labour. Inequality has to be tackled as a matter of urgency across Europe, in both core and periphery. It makes economic sense in several EU countries to raise wages as a means of supporting aggregate demand. It also makes economic sense to raise the tax burden on the corporations and the rich, including on wealth. Restoring labour rights and protecting employment as well as re-strengthening the welfare state through provision for health, housing, and education would be integral parts of reducing inequality. There is nothing infeasible about such policies in contemporary Europe. It is entirely a matter of political and social choices that reflect the balance of power between labour and capital.

The required policies can be divided in a social and an economic part. Concerning the social rights, a popular government should immediately:

Enhance the minimum wage and pension rights.

Extend the universal and free public services in the field of health, education, care of children and older people, collective transportation, and a housing policy with a social rent.

Create high quality public jobs for these purposes, as well as to launch an ecological transition process, including an insulation, renovation and requisition plan concerning housing.

Implement a substantial time of work reduction by law.

Draft a new progressive labour reform in order to limit the power of the entrepreneurs in the firm, and to move towards a democracy within all productive spaces.

Il should also consequently implement a series of economic measures to protect this social agenda and its development:

Halting the implementation of the Stability and Growth Pact.

Establishing a temporary control of capitals movement to prevent capital flight and to pursue fiscal evasion.

Establishing a control of prices on basic necessity goods.

Suspend the payment of the debt, on the basis of a Moratorium and a Citizen Audit of the Public Debt, while opting for a selective default, protecting social security funds, pension funds Pension Fund

Pension Funds Pension funds: investment funds that manage capitalized retirement schemes, they are funded by the employees of one or several companies paying-into the scheme which, often, is also partially funded by the employers. The objective is to pay the pensions of the employees that take part in the scheme. They manage very big amounts of money that are usually invested on the stock markets or financial markets. and small savers.

and small savers. Regulate and limit the private banking system, and create a new public banking system under democratic and social control.

Establish a Progressive Tax Reform (with more weight on profits and wealth) with the priority on the taxation of capital, big business and very high wages, in order to support a new public investment policy.

Create employment under an energetic transitional model, and protect the working classes in case of a temporary decreasing of the national income, to make the ruling classes pay for the crisis.

But these policies imply to disobey the European treaties and institutions, and the latter will necessarily try to prevent their implementation. In fact, the election of a popular government will immediately open a period of intense counter-propaganda and initiatives of the pro-capitalist economic and political forces to neutralise its progressive policies. This counter-attack of the European dominant classes can be achieved through the flight of capital and the increase of the loans’ spread for example, but also through political blackmail by the national bourgeoisie and the European institutions in order to force the popular government to abandon its pro-popular policies and to abandon its democratic mandate.

Mobilise both the population and social movements to prevent the “saboteurs” of the economy and of democracy to be successful During this period, the new elected popular government should thus mobilise both the population and social movements to support these radical policies and the workers of the strategic sectors (notably the banks) to prevent the “saboteurs” of the economy and of democracy to be successful. It should also reassure the population concerning their savings, the value of their money and their living and working conditions, and address the other peoples of Europe in order to obtain their active support.

The necessity of such a defence against the pro-capitalist counter-attack and such a strengthening of the popular support and mobilisation requires that the newly elected popular government should be prepared to promulgate decrees by the first day of its assumption of office concerning:

the securing of deposits (until a certain amount)

the control of banks, insurance companies, etc.

the Central Bank Central Bank The establishment which in a given State is in charge of issuing bank notes and controlling the volume of currency and credit. In France, it is the Banque de France which assumes this role under the auspices of the European Central Bank (see ECB) while in the UK it is the Bank of England.



ECB : http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/Pages/home.aspx , which should be put immediately under the authority of the government, and should be authorised to issue money.

, which should be put immediately under the authority of the government, and should be authorised to issue money. a moratorium on the servicing of public debt

capital control

at least one important measure to improve immediately and obviously the living conditions of the many, for example the increase of minimal wages

On this basis and at the same time, it should immediately initiate public discussions with other governments and address the other peoples of the EU in order to launch international campaigns to support these policies.

Middle-term steps at the national level:

As previously mentioned, hostility should first be expected from the domestic mechanisms of power whose interests would be directly threatened. Hostility should also be expected from the mechanisms of the EU, since an industrial policy based on public ownership and a range of economic controls would run directly against the logic of the single market. The neoliberal machine in Brussels would not tolerate a challenge to the institutional organisation of the EU and to the power of the acquis communautaire. Retaliations, be in form of sanctions, be in form of withdrawal of financing, or even the expulsion of the EU would inevitably arise.

Faced with EU hostility, therefore, the popular Left should reject the single market and its institutional and legal framework. It should argue in favour of controls on the movement of goods, services, and capital, in the absence of which it would be impossible to apply a radical programme in the direction of socialism. It should also reject the authority of the acquis and the ECJ, thus beginning to disentangle national from community legislation. Finally, it should rely on social struggles to impose achievements in the field of production relations, wealth distribution, cooperation among the peoples, and the caring of the environment as well as on constituent processes to create new democratic institutions at the national and international levels. Ultimately there is no other way to recoup popular sovereignty. This recoup has to be compatible with internationalism, as it is open to solidarity and share policies among different peoples under a democratic cooperation. If this implies being presented with an ultimatum to exit the EU, so be it.

The crucial issue is the question of monetary sovereignty: A popular government should consider two possible options The crucial issue related with how to respond to the very probable hostile reaction of the EU institutions is the question of monetary sovereignty. A popular government should consider two possible options.

Scenario 1. Exit from the EMU and creation of a new national currency.

A crucial step in the path of a popular government would be rejection of the EMU, under a neoliberal economic structure, as it is now. The monetary union is the backbone of the single market, and the most effective disciplining device for the imposition of neoliberal policy and ideology. The nations of Europe do not need a common currency to engage in free and fruitful interaction with each other, and they certainly do not need the euro. Conversely, the longer the EMU perseveres and the more rigid it becomes, the more difficult it would be to implement anti-capitalist policies in Europe.

For the peripheral nations, and especially for the Southern periphery, exiting the EMU, as it is set, is imperative. Getting out of the iron trap is the way to adopt policies that could expand the economy, absorb unemployment through the creation of well-paid jobs, reduce poverty, and place countries on the path of sustained and ecologically sustainable growth. Exit is certainly not an easy process but by now there is considerable knowledge on how it could be achieved with as little disruption as possible. [3] If it were consensual, the costs would be further reduced.

Dismantling the monetary union and putting alternative arrangements in its place For the core countries the issue of the EMU is considerably more complex, since it involves altogether dismantling the monetary union and putting alternative arrangements in its place. The EMU should certainly not be replaced by unfettered competition in the foreign exchange markets. Europe requires a system of stabilising exchange rates coupled with a means of making payments among countries. The technical knowledge to achieve these aims exists, and even some of the mechanisms of the old European Monetary System are still extant.

The EU is a huge economic entity in which most trade takes place among member states. In such as economy it is certainly feasible to stabilise exchange rates and produce far better economic results than the euro has done over the two decades of its existence. For that it would be necessary to have a proper anchor country as well as applying controls on the movement of capital across Europe. Flexibility could then return to rebalancing the external relations of EU economies. With capital controls in place it would even be plausible to devise a new joint means of payment based on principles of solidarity that would be used among European states only to facilitate international transactions and not as domestic currency.

Drastically altering the character of the ECB, the Eurogroup and the European Stability Mechanism ESM

European Stability Mechanism The European Stability Mechanism is a European entity for managing the financial crisis in the Eurozone. In 2012, it replaced the European Financial Stability Facility and the European Financial Stabilisation Mechanism, which had been implemented in response to the public-debt crisis in the Eurozone. It concerns only EU member States that are part of the Eurozone. If there is a threat to the stability of the Eurozone, this European financial institution is supposed to grant financial ‘assistance’ (loans) to a country or countries in difficulty. There are strict conditions to this assistance.



http://www.esm.europa.eu/ Dismantling the EMU would create room for broader radical change in the EU. After all, it would mean drastically altering the character of the ECB, the Eurogroup and the European Stability Mechanism. It would remove the external constraints on the operations of other EU institutions, including the policing of the fiscal activities of member states. It would loosen the grip of the acquis by removing a host of directives and regulations. It would also remove the harshest disciplining device on labour across much of Europe. If provoked by popular forces, dismantling the EMU could be an important step against the neoliberal regime of the EU.

Scenario 2. An alternative currency while remaining in the EMU.

The political advantage of an alternative currency, even if it is simply complementary, is that it allows, without needing to get rid of the international currency, to respond to several challenges. While it facilitates the emergence of certain secondary activities, which otherwise would not occur with much extension or would be done informally, there would also be greater room for manœuvre for public authorities to deal with payments.

It could be an ex-ante measure, in relation to possible political conflicts caused by reprisals of the EU for discrepancies due to the economic policy adopted. For example, reprisals for the deployment of policies that do not fit in the European Treaties or the Stability and Growth Pact, and which could threat or execute withdrawals of liquidity or expulsion or exit mechanisms. In such case, it would allow to equip itself with a means that guarantees Guarantees Acts that provide a creditor with security in complement to the debtor’s commitment. A distinction is made between real guarantees (lien, pledge, mortgage, prior charge) and personal guarantees (surety, aval, letter of intent, independent guarantee). the internal transactions, avoiding or alleviating any process of disordered transition. It would offer a mean of monetary sovereignty that might replace the Euro.

A complementary currency would initially be used for the payment of public employees and services related to the public sector. It would accept the payment of taxes in that currency. To avoid a rejection of the currency, it should have, in a first period at least, parity with the dominant currency. The complementary currency only could play a role of transition and cushioning, of widening the margin of manœuvre, in an adverse context of rupture with a previous monetary zone.

The characteristics of an alternative currency, in the first instance, but that may be revisable depending on the macroeconomic and political context, could be the following:

In a first phase, the currency would be complementary.

It would invite local currencies to establish a relationship with that currency, in order to unify the complementary monetary system, and amplify its acceptability and repercussion.

That alternative currency would have parity, in principle, with the main currency.

It would be supported by future taxation.

It would have several circulation channels and payment systems: electronic cards for minor transactions, supplemented by coins and paper, and virtual digital currency that identifies transactions and agents for medium and high volumes (from 300 euros).

Its course would be required, initially, in transactions with the public and voluntary sector in the intra-private sector.

It would be an alternative currency with an expiration date from its issuance, for example, after five years, but a shorter period can be studied, in any case of a renewable nature.

The alternative currency can be designed to end the monopoly of private banking intermediation, opening the opportunity for future public banking to take precedence over private banking, coexisting with the regional cooperative bank or ethical bank.

To avoid an overweight of power of the entities dedicated to the monetary operation, it would be possible to create a central bank in charge of regulated issuance and monetary policy, under social and democratic control.

Middle-term steps at the international level:

Exiting or short-circuiting the EMU could enable concrete economic policies creating a true basis for solidarity in Europe Exiting or short-circuiting the EMU, and eventually leaving the EU, if done in order to implement policies supporting labour (irrespective of its nationality) against capital, is not a nationalist step, nor would it represent a return to competing and warring states in Europe. On the contrary, it could signal the emergence of a radical internationalism that would draw on domestic strength rejecting the dysfunctional and hegemonic structures of the EU. It could enable concrete economic policies creating a true basis for solidarity in Europe, and giving fresh content to popular sovereignty and democratic rights, within or beyond existing borders. It could also lead to new forms of inter-state alliances in Europe, or even an alternative model of supranational, democratic and solidarity-driven area based in peoples’ cooperation and internationalism, disconnected of capitalist development, that would reflect the altered balance of class forces.

A popular government requires a long term ecological, socialist and internationalist agenda at the international level. In this prospect, it should search new alliances within and outside Europe. It could be done by proposing a new solidary framework focused in the cooperation and integration of financial resources, fair trade agreements, exchange of raw materials (energy), and investment cooperation. The aim is to foster popular cooperation and solidarity while breaking with the constraints of the EU Treaties and institutions.

The actual form and content of renewed European interaction would depend on the internal social and political regime of member states. Workers’ internationalism always starts at home. If capitalism was challenged domestically, several forms of socialist federal integration would become possible in Europe. That is a feasible and worthwhile aim for the European popular Left. The sooner it began to engage in open debate and to act along these lines, the better for the people of the continent.

Chapter 2. - Banks

Greece

I. INTRODUCTION.

The financial crisis that broke out in 2007-2008 continues to produce damaging social effects through the austerity policies imposed on victim populations. Bankers, financiers, politicians and regulatory bodies have failed fundamentally in the promises they made in the wake of the crisis – to moralise the banking system, separate commercial banks from investment banks, end exorbitant salaries and bonuses, and finally finance the real economy.

Economic heterodoxy and the programmes of deliquescent social democratic parties lack a structured project for the constitution of an alternative banking system. To remedy this, this proposal attempts to move towards a shared, coherent and operational proposal for an organisational plan for the banking sector and the concrete conditions for its implementation by a popular government that would come to power in Europe.

II. DIAGNOSIS

Hundreds of billions of euros have been used by the European governments to bail out dozens of private banks In the wake of the crisis, hundreds of billions of euros have been used by the European governments to bail out dozens of private banks. [4] Public authorities have decided to pay ransom to these banks by having the citizens bear the consequences of the low dealings of their directors and shareholders. A separation or “ring-fencing” between commercial banks and investment banks remains no more than wishful thinking.

No measures designed to avoid further crises have been imposed on the private finance system. The concentration of banks has increased, as have their high-risk activities. There have been more scandals implicating the fifteen to twenty biggest private banks in Europe and the United States – involving toxic loans, fraudulent mortgage Mortgage A loan made against property collateral. There are two sorts of mortgages:

1) the most common form where the property that the loan is used to purchase is used as the collateral;

2) a broader use of property to guarantee any loan: it is sufficient that the borrower possesses and engages the property as collateral. credits, manipulation of currency exchange markets, of interest rates Interest rates When A lends money to B, B repays the amount lent by A (the capital) as well as a supplementary sum known as interest, so that A has an interest in agreeing to this financial operation. The interest is determined by the interest rate, which may be high or low. To take a very simple example: if A borrows 100 million dollars for 10 years at a fixed interest rate of 5%, the first year he will repay a tenth of the capital initially borrowed (10 million dollars) plus 5% of the capital owed, i.e. 5 million dollars, that is a total of 15 million dollars. In the second year, he will again repay 10% of the capital borrowed, but the 5% now only applies to the remaining 90 million dollars still due, i.e. 4.5 million dollars, or a total of 14.5 million dollars. And so on, until the tenth year when he will repay the last 10 million dollars, plus 5% of that remaining 10 million dollars, i.e. 0.5 million dollars, giving a total of 10.5 million dollars. Over 10 years, the total amount repaid will come to 127.5 million dollars. The repayment of the capital is not usually made in equal instalments. In the initial years, the repayment concerns mainly the interest, and the proportion of capital repaid increases over the years. In this case, if repayments are stopped, the capital still due is higher…



The nominal interest rate is the rate at which the loan is contracted. The real interest rate is the nominal rate reduced by the rate of inflation. (notably, the LIBOR LIBOR

London Interbank Offered Rate An average rate calculated daily, based on transactions made by a group of representative banks. There are several LIBORs for some ten different currencies and some fifteen duration rates, from one day to twelve months. ) and of energy markets, massive tax evasion, money-laundering for organised crime, and so on.

The authorities have merely imposed fines, usually negligible when compared to the crimes committed, which have a negative impact not only on public finance but on the living conditions of millions of people all over the world. Although obviously to blame, no bank director in the United States or Europe (with the exception of Iceland and the Spanish state where Rodrigo de Rato, ex-director of Bankia and ex general director of the IMF IMF

International Monetary Fund Along with the World Bank, the IMF was founded on the day the Bretton Woods Agreements were signed. Its first mission was to support the new system of standard exchange rates.



When the Bretton Wood fixed rates system came to an end in 1971, the main function of the IMF became that of being both policeman and fireman for global capital: it acts as policeman when it enforces its Structural Adjustment Policies and as fireman when it steps in to help out governments in risk of defaulting on debt repayments.



As for the World Bank, a weighted voting system operates: depending on the amount paid as contribution by each member state. 85% of the votes is required to modify the IMF Charter (which means that the USA with 17,68% % of the votes has a de facto veto on any change).



The institution is dominated by five countries: the United States (16,74%), Japan (6,23%), Germany (5,81%), France (4,29%) and the UK (4,29%).

The other 183 member countries are divided into groups led by one country. The most important one (6,57% of the votes) is led by Belgium. The least important group of countries (1,55% of the votes) is led by Gabon and brings together African countries.



http://imf.org , is jailed since 2018) has been convicted, while traders, who are mere underlings, are prosecuted and sentenced to between five and fourteen years behind bars.

As is the case for the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS), banks that were nationalised at great public expense to protect the interests of major private shareholders are planned to be — or have already been — sold back to the private sector for a fraction of their value. Salvaging the RBS cost £45bn of public money, while its reprivatisation will probably mean the loss of a further £14bn.

Lastly, as to whether banks are now financing the real economy, the efforts deployed by the central banks have failed to spark, as yet, even the beginnings of a real recovery of the economy.

III. PROPOSALS

The significance of popular mobilisation:

Socialisation of the banking sector is a necessary condition for a change of social model Because money, savings, credit and the payment system are useful to the general interest, they should imperatively respond to a public service logic (and therefore be used and managed as part of a public service). The financial system must not be a source of profit, detached from the financing of the real economy. Socialisation of the banking sector (i.e. the management of the banking sector by the workers together with customers, associations and elected representatives) is a necessary condition for a change of social model; popular support is a necessary condition for the socialisation of the banking sector.

The socialisation of the banking sector cannot be seen as a catchword or a demand that would be sufficient in itself and that decision-makers would apply once they had grasped its common sense. It must be conceived of as a political objective to be achieved as part of a process that is driven by citizens. Not only must existing organised social movements (including trade unions) make this a priority on their agendas and the various sectors (local authorities, small and medium-sized enterprises, consumer associations, etc.) similarly support this view, but also - and above all - employees must become aware of the role of their profession and of the interest they would have in banks being socialised and users must be informed wherever they are (e.g. occupation of bank branches everywhere on the same day) in order to participate directly in defining what the bank should be.

Only very large-scale mobilisations can ensure that the socialisation of the banking sector is actually achieved for such a measure touches the very heart of the capitalist system. Field initiatives involving the population, such as citizen audits (similar to initiatives launched, among other countries, in France, Greece and Spain since 2011), can be put in place and supported by a political force aiming at taking the government over. Generally speaking, monetary and financial issues must no longer be perceived as somehow hallowed and out of reach, so as to create the conditions for the broadest possible involvement on these struggles.

For a left-wing movement, it is fundamental to show the population the positive change resulting from the decision to no longer entrust the ownership and management of the banking system to big capital and the enormous advantages entailed by the existence of banking as a public service.

Measures to be immediately implemented:

Controlling capital is not necessarily contrary to the European treaties To have room for manoeuvring once in power and to limit the risks of financial asphyxia, a popular government must establish control on capital flow. Controlling capital is not necessarily contrary to the European treaties. Article 65 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union introduces a number of restrictions on the freedom of capital movements, justified in particular by the fight against infringements of national laws on taxation or prudential matters or on grounds relating to public policy or public security. These reasons were called upon for Cyprus in 2013 and for Greece in 2015. Yet even if control of capital flow was contrary to the treaties, a popular government should assume disobedience. Moreover, the question arises of the place of a measure aimed at regulating capital in the hierarchy of norms, and therefore of the possibility for a government to implement it at once. In several European countries, national regulations provide for measures to control capital movements, such as the regulation of the duration of investments, at the regulatory level and not at the legislative level. They could therefore be applied immediately upon the coming to power of a popular government.

Investment banks must be separated from retail banks in order to protect the latter A popular government should immediately and significantly regulate the financial sector in order to ensure financial stability. The size of banks must be reduced so that no ’systemic’ bank can jeopardise the entire system. Investment banks must be separated from retail banks in order to protect the latter; investment banks will not benefit from any state guarantee (such measures were implemented by US President F. D. Roosevelt in 1933 following the October 1929 Wall Street crash).

In addition, the new banking regulation will impose:

to significantly increase the banks’ ratio of equity Equity The capital put into an enterprise by the shareholders. Not to be confused with ’hard capital’ or ’unsecured debt’. in their balance sheets, which ought to be above 20%;

in their balance sheets, which ought to be above 20%; to implement all necessary measures to force banks to clean up their off-balance sheet commitments including all speculative transactions and all other unsafe transactions that are not in the interest of the community;

to prohibit credit relations between deposit banks and investment banks;

to prohibit securitisation – each of the banking activities will thus bear the risk it generates through appropriate regulatory requirements;

to prohibit High Frequency Trading Market activities

trading Buying and selling of financial instruments such as shares, futures, derivatives, options, and warrants conducted in the hope of making a short-term profit. ;

; to prohibit over-the-counter financial markets;

to prohibit any connection between banking institutions and shadow banking as well as tax havens;

to prohibit the socialisation of losses;

to put an end to banking secrecy;

to systematically prosecute managers responsible for financial offences and crimes and withdraw banking licenses from institutions that do not respect prohibitions and are guilty of embezzlement;

to establish a real financial responsibility of the major shareholders, in particular in case of bankruptcies. The aim is to restore the unlimited liability of major shareholders so that the cost of their hazardous activities can be recovered from their own assets;

to increase taxation on banks.

To ensure an efficient monitoring of the financial sector, an Office for Financial Security may also be set up. It would bring together monitoring bodies for banks, financial markets and insurance companies. Its mission would be to:

measure the evolution of savings and credit and see to the smooth functioning of the payments system;

check and monitor whether the banking institutions’ policies are in keeping with the roadmap defined for them, in particular the financing of the ecological transition, the financing of the operating and investment needs of major public services, the financing of the de-privatisation of major public services previously transferred to the private sector (for example, health, water, energy, etc.);

ensure that bubbles are prevented in certain sectors such as real estate.

The Office for Financial Security would implement control on capital and a financial transaction tax. An objective of the Office for Financial Security would be to subject financial innovations to a precautionary principle: the banks that develop them will have to prove their usefulness and assume full responsibility for them. Products and activities that are too complex would be prohibited. Finally, it would be possible for the supervisor to impose significant fines on banks in the event of non-compliance with the regulations and with their obligations (fines will be proportionate to the harm suffered by the community and to the amount of illegal profits). Similarly, managers would be likely to incur personal liability in the event of serious breach. The banking license will be withdrawn from any bank that contravenes the new legislation and its managers will be prosecuted and punished with imprisonment.

Recovering control of the central bank is essential to get the state out of the clutches of the financial markets to finance public services A popular government should also monitor its central bank, with a view to resuming control on its monetary policy and financing conditions. Recovering control of the central bank is essential to get the state out of the clutches of the financial markets to finance public services.

Towards a socialisation of the private banking system:

While the development of financial capitalism and deregulated finance brought down the real economy in 2008 and threatens to do so again, the socialisation of all or part of the banking sector is urgently needed. Indeed, two programmatic paths are emerging here: either socialise part of the banking sector with the creation of a public pole conceived of as a stepping stone towards the socialisation of the entire sector (scenario 1), or proceed from the outset to the socialisation of the entire banking system, including the financing and investment banks as well as the insurance sector (scenario 2).

Socialisation refers explicitly to collectivisation in which workers make decisions and exercise control, together with customers While the use of nationalisation can lead to confusion with the takeover of banks by the ruling elites within the framework of capitalism, socialisation refers more explicitly to collectivisation in which workers make decisions and exercise control, together with customers, associations and elected representatives – this decision-making instance being further monitored by representatives of national and regional public banking instances. We must favour a local, high-quality service that breaks with the outsourcing policies currently being pursued. Financial institution staff should be encouraged to provide genuine customer advisory services, while aggressive forced sales policies should be eradicated.

However, the transition towards a socialised banking system raises several questions that a popular government will have to address.

- The number of banks to be socialised:

If a government programme does not provide for the socialisation of the entire banking system, the question arises of the number of banks to be socialised and the criterion of choice. Beyond its theoretical aspect, it refers to the balance of power that a popular government can rely on, which depends on the mobilisation of the population. In almost all banking nationalisation experiments so far, investment banks have been excluded from the scope of nationalisation laws and kept in the private sector under pressure from the financial community. The establishment of a public banking service will be part of a balance of power for which it will be necessary to be well prepared.

- Compensation for shareholders:

Large shareholders and small shareholders should be treated differently When banks are socialised, the question of compensation for private shareholders also arises. Large shareholders and small shareholders should be treated differently. The major shareholders are actively or passively responsible for increasing speculative and banking activities bearing high risks for savers, the Treasury and society as a whole. Small shareholders do not take part in banks’ decisions; it is normal for them to be compensated. Moreover, it goes without saying that the deposits will be protected. Unlike what was done in most of the bank nationalisations to date, where major shareholders have been compensated at taxpayers’ expense, a popular government could decide to pay only a symbolic euro to major shareholders and recover the cost of reorganising the bank [5] from these shareholders’ global assets.

Scenario 1: A public banking pole

If the choice of immediate socialisation of the entire banking sector is not shared by all the forces gathered in the setting up of a popular government, the public banking pole could represent a compromise solution and give this government the means of its policy. The socialisation of generalist banks must support the wider creation of a public banking pole (or public financial pole), whose missions would be to direct credit towards useful projects – supporting an economic, ecological and social recovery plan, strengthening the productive apparatus, directing savings towards meeting social and economic needs and ensuring financial inclusion and access to financial services for all.

With a view to the creation of this pole, a popular government will be able to rely on institutions already present in each country – public or semi-public financial institutions such as public investment banks have often been thoroughly misled into adopting a traditional banking behaviour whereas they should be among the key actors of the investment in the ecological transition. It would certainly be wise to include the major mutual banks in this public sector. This would have two advantages: it would take mutual networks out of the purely financial logic of other major banking groups, and give more strength to the public sector to weigh in the face of private banks, whose socialisation would have been deferred over time in the hypothesis of a process in successive stages.

As a rule, in terms of governance, each institution would retain its operating autonomy and its own management bodies in this public pole. However, these institutions would operate within a common framework defined by a national steering body that would ensure overall consistency. The national steering body would consist of national and local elected representatives, heads of institutions and representatives of workers’ and citizens’ associations (including trade unions). The public pole would vary according to the location, though organised along the same lines so as to ensure a sufficiently fine and balanced coverage.

If a private banking system is to be maintained, a public financial pole, including the socialised banks and other public institutions, would coexist along with the private banks and a cooperative sector If a private banking system is to be maintained, what would emerge is a tripartite banking system: a public financial pole, including the socialised banks and other public institutions, would coexist along with the private banks and a cooperative sector. Whereas the largest institutions of the current cooperative sector behave like the private banks, this new cooperative sector would re-establish real cooperative banking and once again inscribe the values of democracy, solidarity and non-profitability in their statutes.

Personnel representatives might be granted the right to information and veto rights over the projects that will be financed by the bank.

Socialisation requires a fundamental revision of boards of directors and the way in which their members are designated.

For all banks that do not belong to the public sector, a “banking law” would redefine the missions of all banks as well as the membership and the appointment process of their boards of directors, regardless of their legal structure. It would require them to take on a share of the clientele considered “unprofitable,” so that these clients are not provided services by the public banking pole alone.

A new code of professional ethics should be defined and a strict roadmap should be imposed on the entire banking sector in order to bring the banking groups and their entities back to their essential missions: holding savings and deposits without risk and financing the real economy. Especially vigilant monitoring will need to be exercised over banks left outside the field of the public pole to ensure that they adhere to the new code of ethics and properly follow the roadmap.

The question of whether a public banking pole can coexist with private banks and whether the latter, subjected to strong public regulation, can be made to serve the general interest is an essential one, and explains the aforementioned need for close monitoring. Should a private bank or banking group fail to adhere to its obligations, sanctions would be applied and the directors of the guilty groups would be held civilly and criminally liable before the courts.

Scenario 2: Full socialisation of the banking system

Banks, and more generally the financial system, are weapons in the hands of the capitalist class. The maintaining of a private banking system next to a socialised banking sector would constitute a threat to the latter, since capital will use all available means to attack the socialised sector whose politics in favour of the many contradicts the essence of a capitalist system working in the interest of a privileged few.

The full socialisation of the banking system means:

expropriating without compensating (or compensating by one symbolic euro) of large shareholders (small shareholders will be fully compensated);

granting a monopoly of banking activities to the public sector, with one single exception: the existence of a small cooperative banking sector (subject to the same fundamental rules as the public sector);

defining, with citizen participation, a charter covering the goals to be attained and the missions to be carried out and which places the public savings, credit and investment entities at the service of the priorities defined by a democratic planning process.

Socialising the banking and insurance sectors into public services will make it possible:

for citizens and public authorities to escape the influence of the financial markets;

to finance citizens’ and public authorities’ projects;

to dedicate the activity of banking to the common good, with among its missions that of facilitating the transition from a capitalist, production-intensive economy to a social, sustainable and environment-friendly economy.

No one will be denied access to the public banking service, which must be provided free of charge Imagine what socialisation of the banking sector means in concrete terms: private banks will have disappeared; that is, following their expropriation (with small shareholders being compensated), their personnel will be reassigned to the public banking and insurance service, with guarantees of their seniority and their wages (up to an authorised maximum in order to strongly limit very high salaries, and with increases in the lowest wages to reduce the wage gap) and with an improvement in working conditions (benchmarking [6] and forced sales practices would be abandoned). A system of recruiting new employees will be implemented in keeping with the recruiting standards of a public service.

The existence of a concentration of competing bank branches in large urban areas while at the same time there is a shortage or absence of banks in small towns, villages and working-class neighbourhoods will be ended. A dense network of local branches will be developed in order to strongly increase accessibility to banking and insurance services, with competent staff to respond to the needs of users in keeping with the missions of public service. No one will be denied access to the public banking service, which must be provided free of charge.

The local agencies of the public service will manage current accounts and will receive users’ savings, which will be fully guaranteed. Savings will be managed without taking risks. These savings will be used, under citizen control, for financing local projects and investments of wider scope aimed at improving living conditions, struggling against climate change, abandoning nuclear power generation, developing short supply circuits, financing territorial development with rigorous adherence to social and environmental standards, etc. Savers will be able to choose the projects they would like to see financed by their savings.

Local branches will grant credits at no risk to individuals, households, SMEs and private local entities, associations, local governmental bodies and public entities. They will be able to set aside a part of their resources for larger-scale projects than those financed at the local level – naturally within the context of a concerted policy.

The fact that local branches will manage financial resources of reasonable size for local uses or for projects of wider scope that will be presented in a precise way (with a programming calendar and monitoring tools providing clear oversight of the use of the funds and the proper implementation of the projects) will facilitate supervision of the various participants.

The local projects to be financed will be defined democratically with maximum citizen participation.

The local branches will also be in charge of insurance contracts for physical and legal persons.

Recovering control of the central bank would help support a transition towards a social sustainable and ecological economy Whatever scenario is chosen, recovering control of the central bank would help support a transition towards a social sustainable and ecological economy. The ministries in charge of public health, education, energy, public transport, retirement, the environmental transition, etc. will have financing from the State’s budget.

Specialised cross-cutting agencies will intervene in areas and activities that are beyond the competencies and spheres of action of a single ministry. Their purpose will be to conduct specific or transverse missions defined with citizen participation, such as the programme for total abandonment of nuclear power generation, including safe processing of nuclear waste over the long term.

A socialised banking sector will make it possible to reconstitute a virtuous circuit of financing the public authorities. They will be able to issue securities that will be acquired by the public service without being subject to the diktats of the financial markets.

CONCLUSION

Whereas money, credit, savings or the payment system are useful tools for the economy, the banking institutions are powerful instruments of accumulation for the capitalist class. Thus, taking measures against their private ownership would respond both to a necessity of developing public services for the many and to the need of removing power from the capitalist class, in order to achieve advances towards social equality. Such measures would threaten the core of the capitalist economy, and the private banking system will not go down without a fight — gathering strong popular support in favour of these measures will thus be vital.

The goal is to achieve a socialised banking sector, which will be run democratically by the bank workers together with customers, associations and elected representatives, and will fund local and national projects according to their common good rather than the profits which could be made out of it. At European and international levels, a popular government could try to organise cooperation between its public banking sector and similar institutions in other countries.

Chapter 3. - Debt

After the banking crisis hit Europe in 2008-2009, the massive bailouts of private banking institutions with public money and the economic sl