polity

Der Spiegel staff writer Georg Diez has an excellent, thoughtful portrait of German sociologist and philosopher Jürgen Habermas and his perception and understanding of the economic crisis threatening the institution of Europe. Lucidly and refreshingly, and with a unique sort of serenity for the audience who would listen, Habermas describes the move into post-democracy, post-sovereignty, where governments are driven by the whims of markets and day-traders--instead of commerce carried out all levels within the framework of civics. I have been trying to attack this argument on all fronts, calling the economic situation a hoax meant to perpetuate great game for its winners and to leech away the substance of public office, but Habermas has through discourse managed to encapsulate the sum of all dangers. He commends the media for its unrelenting coverage, some of which I would have stinted as fear-mongering and unreflective, but Habermas was also able to look beyond the pedestrian problems of corruption in politics and greed and recognize (and validate) a fear for a diminished public voice and politics disengaged when the legacies of whole peoples are chained together and bound by representatives that are unelected and not vetted with authority--no more referenda, plebisites (Volksentscheid) but rather everything decided by treaty and steerage and stock-brokers--in some cases, and would abandon the European ideal for finances.