Accepting a euro break-up
16/05/2012 § Leave a Comment
It would be ironic if the strongest argument against the Euro was simply the eventual need to dissolve it.
I immediately thought of Slavoj Zizek’s commentary about Jean-Pierre Dupuy on climate change: the only way to deal with climate change is to accept that it is our future. As long as it is but a potential, one future amongst many, it is a mere potentiality that we can conveniently ignore. If, however, we begin to think of it as our destiny, then we can push against it.
the way we act is determined by our anticipation of the future and our reaction to this anticipation.
He then quotes Dupuy:
The catastrophic event is inscribed into the future as destiny, for sure, but also as a contingent accident: it could not have taken place, even if, in futur anterieur, it appears as necessary.
From that perspective, it is only by accepting the certainty of a euro break-up that Eurocrats can paradoxically begin to create plans to avoid it. Thus, the ‘need’ to dissolve the euro might become the strongest argument against it, but might also motivate efforts to save it. As long as break-up was unthinkable (just a few months ago), then the parties involved were not willing to take the necessary steps to ensure its survival. Now, perhaps, they may try.