0

In this opinion, I am really confused. Is the author trying to say:

(i) The eurocrats are ignorant, as they believe all their actions are correct?

(ii) If Macron wins, it makes the eurocrats even more so - so is not necessarily good?

May someone explain the main messages of the opinion?

closed as unclear what you're asking by Martin Schröder, Bradley Wilson, user9389, Alexei, Machavity May 17 '17 at 16:14

Please clarify your specific problem or add additional details to highlight exactly what you need. As it's currently written, it’s hard to tell exactly what you're asking. See the How to Ask page for help clarifying this question. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • "it makes the eurocrats even more so" What? Ignorant? – jjdb May 17 '17 at 12:54
  • 1
    Wrong and ignorant aren't quite the same thing. – origimbo May 17 '17 at 13:01
3

The author (Paul Krugman) is trying to say both:

(i) The eurocrats are ignorant, as they believe all their actions are correct.

Even though Brussels and Berlin were wrong again and again about the economics — even though the austerity they imposed was every bit as economically disastrous as critics warned — they continued to act as if they knew all the answers, that any suffering along the way was, in effect, necessary punishment for past sins.

and

(ii) If Macron wins, it makes the eurocrats even more so - so is not necessarily good.

Which brings me back to the French election. We should be terrified at the possibility of a Le Pen victory. But we should also be worried that a Macron victory will be taken by Brussels and Berlin to mean that Brexit was an aberration, that European voters can always be intimidated into going along with what their betters say is necessary.

Whereas the second is the main message, as the last paragraph shows:

So let’s be clear: Even if the worst is avoided this Sunday, all the European elite will get is a time-limited chance to mend its ways.

Krugman in his column is a long-time critic of the European economic policies which mainly take the form of austerity.

  • What makes his article a little strange is the idea that populism is on the rise because the EU bullied small countries. It's quite the opposite - if it were up to the (right wing) populists we would have nuked Greece from orbit because it's the only way to be sure. Does not really change the overall conclusion, though. – user10415 May 17 '17 at 15:23
  • @EikePierstorff I don't agree with the views of Paul Krugman either, having myself a more leftist view on economics/politics etc. However, this is not about the correctness of his assertions or propositions but about the interpretation thereof. – jjdb May 17 '17 at 15:27
  • @EikePierstorff How is that the opposite? Just a matter of degree perhaps, speculation about what far right politicians might have done does not change what happened. – Relaxed May 17 '17 at 22:01
  • @jjdb what does the author mean by "all the European elite will get is a time limited chance to mend its ways." literally? – Bryan Shih May 18 '17 at 21:12

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.