Welcome to a Europe that George Orwell himself could only have imagined

An image of George Orwell reading a book entitled 2024and seems surprised, if not terrified. Is the situation really that bad? Can Orwell Nineteen Eighty-FourCan the book, first published in 1949, serve as a guide for today? One might think that European integration is not dead since Brexit and the rise to power of sovereignist politicians such as Giorgia Meloni, Viktor Orbán and Robert Fico, in Italy, Hungary and Slovakia respectively. One might add that the recent elections to the European Parliament gave, once again, a clear majority to centre-left and centre-right parties. Some might even argue that populist politicians channel the hopes and fears of “ordinary people” better than liberals.

However, there is no denying – and this is where Orwell comes into his own – that the narrative and political practice have changed radically across Europe, regardless of who is in power in the various capitals. Liberal norms and behaviours are in decline and illiberal and nativist alternatives are on the rise.

After the fall of the Berlin Wall, the parties that won elections in Europe valued liberal values: freedom, tolerance, justice, inclusion, moderation and self-criticism. Not only democracy was valued, but also the rule of law and human rights. Open borders for capital, goods, services and people were seen as an opportunity, not a threat.

Historical and scientific facts were not widely questioned and mainstream media refused to spread scandalous opinions, even at the expense of profit and entertainment. Cultural tolerance and religious neutrality were taken for granted. Non-governmental organisations campaigning for social, humanitarian or ecological causes were seen as allies in sustaining the liberal order. Multilateralism, based on equality, inclusion, trust and cooperation, was seen as a means of ensuring peace and prosperity.

European integration was the jewel of the liberal project. The embodiment of integration, the European Union was seen as an effective instrument for dealing with globalisation, a courageous experiment in transnational democracy, a clever way to stabilise neighbours and a vehicle for strengthening Europe’s global position.

We may never have experienced the “end of history” proclaimed by Francis Fukuyama just before the fall of the Berlin Wall, but the liberal consensus united the governing centre-left and centre-right parties across Europe. Today, liberal values ​​are being questioned or even abandoned, not only by the fringe parties, but also by the mainstream parties and their voters.

The new narrative revolves mainly around the “national interest”, border security, protection of “our” producers and religious roots. Globalisation, multiculturalism, multilateralism and European integration are in the spotlight. Human rights and the rights of members of minority communities have gone out of fashion. Environmentalism, trade unionism and even feminism are now considered radical, if not militant, movements that should be ignored or even domesticated by the mainstream.

The new narrative focuses primarily on “national interest,” secure borders, protecting “our” producers, and religious roots.

The priority now is law and order, not the rule of law. Debates focus on how to prepare for war, rather than peace. Politicians compete for the prize of best negotiator, rather than best defender. Among the enemies of the state are judges and civil society activists, once lionized by liberals. Men in uniform, and sometimes in cassocks, are regaining prominence.

The new narrative is accompanied by action. The state is increasingly cracking down, not only on people on the move, but also on NGOs trying to help them. LGBT+ communities and environmentalists are monitored by security agencies and harassed in various ways. Public media outlets that try to maintain their independence are fired or marginalised.

I am not talking about China or Russia, but about EU member states, some of them governed by liberal parties. In Poland, under a government headed by the former president of the European Council, the self-proclaimed liberal Donald Tusk, a new law is being discussed that could give soldiers a “licence to kill” people trying to cross the border from Belarus. The fact that the previous Polish government was even worse does not offer much consolation.

Is this picture too stark, too black and white? After all, the liberals in the centre-left and centre-right parties ruling post-1989 Europe preached one thing and did another. Iraq was invaded in the name of “freedom” and the enthusiastic pursuit of its supposed economic variant (especially in central and eastern Europe) disempowered many ordinary workers.

Moreover, not all anti-liberal politicians are ready to shoot down potential asylum seekers these days; Meloni is a good example, despite his party’s neo-fascist roots. One could also argue that there has always been some hidden racism in the European electorate, and the main difference is that today xenophobes find their voice through the “social networks” created by the Internet. Some might even attribute resurgent nationalism and religious intolerance to the cultural amnesia of liberals.

Moreover, we cannot ignore the resurgence of imperialist Russia, because fear of war makes people close ranks and value security above all else. The hybrid war it is waging probably explains why 67 percent of Poles now support illegal pushbacks at the border. “Open borders” are not free: aren’t imports from states that do not respect labor and safety standards “killing” our own producers? Isn’t cheap migrant labor eroding the rights of domestic workers?

These are all legitimate arguments and explanations for the new rhetoric and the new politics. However, the transformation itself cannot be denied. Perceptions of what is good and bad, true and false, normal and abnormal have changed. What used to be outrageous and unacceptable a few years ago is now a new “normality.” Which brings us back to Orwell and his demons.

Orwell’s Demons

Orwell’s future dystopia is not only about the abuse of power and the effects of torture. It is also, if not primarily, about a mental journey from one coherent system of values ​​to another entirely different set. The anonymous repressive authority, “Big Brother,” in 1984 He doesn’t just want people to behave as they are told; he wants them to think that war is peace, freedom is slavery, and ignorance is strength.

In the past, we believed that all human beings should enjoy a catalogue of basic human rights. Today, it is suggested that granting these rights to “migrants” endangers well-being, security and culture. In the past, we believed that people should be free to practice their ethnic, sexual or religious traditions and habits. Today, a family model is prescribed, the death of multiculturalism is proclaimed and Islam is considered a threat. In the past, we believed that workers’ rights, the green transition and sustainable development were signs of wisdom and modernity. Today, they are presented as ideological slogans bordering on madness.

We once believed that to achieve anything in an interdependent world we needed to cooperate, if not integrate. Today the United Nations is ignored and EU member states want to take back power from “Brussels”. We once believed that disarmament, diplomacy and trade could guarantee peace. Today, a renewed arms race, economic sanctions and political threats are the order of the day, all in the name of the same “peace”.

“Doublethink”“

Of course, individuals do not necessarily adhere exclusively to one or the other of these polar opposites. However, Orwell found a word to describe this as well: “doublethink” was the power of simultaneously holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind and accepting both. Doublethink often characterizes liberals who give in to the illiberal temptation, under the pressure of events or the demands of power.

One might argue that an inconsequential liberal politician is better than a convinced illiberal politician. However, I fear that for illiberals the strategy is, as Orwell said, to “take human minds apart and put them back together in new shapes of their own choosing.”

This is what the new normal means in European politics.

This is a joint publication of Social Europe and IPS Magazine.

Original article in Social Europe