Salocin

Italian Commissioner Unfairly Snubbed

The EU Civil Liberties committee has delivered a (non-binding) snub to Rocco Buttiglione, the Italian choice for the college of Commissioners in Brussels. They did this on the basis that he expressed his personal beliefs in public, and they don't like his personal beliefs. Apparently, one needs to not only toe the moral line, but agree with every aspect of it in order to be a legitimate choice for a political position. Once again, petty, narrow-minded politics gets in the way of judging a person on their merits.

I'll get to my point, but let me digress a bit first...

I've never been a fan of European Politics, I think they're what stand in the way of European integration. It's a sad fact that the national politics of nation states consistently destabilises the smooth functioning of the European machinery.

It's pretty clear why this happens : France free-rides the CAP, and therefore stands in the way of its reform. England wants the benefits but none of the costs of participation, and so negotiates opt-outs to everything by threatening to bring the entire project to a grinding halt unless they get their way. The initial momentum of the Treaty of Rome (and to a certain extent Maastricht) is constantly sapped by such considerations, as everyone tries to gain from Europe in every situation.

Europe is an averaging mechanism. It can be used to transfer wealth and the burden of growth among member states as this burden becomes harder or easier to bear by specific nations. Through the common market it allows for gains to be made by exploiting the economics of comparative advantage, and all that needs to be acknowledged for this to happen is that everyone can't have everything. We will all be better off if we allow certain adjustments to happen, painful though they may be at the time. Unfortunately, the willingness to submit ones country to such changes is fading, and we are back in a world where we would like to be able to grow at the expense of our neighbour, by playing with relative interest rates, tax regimes, currency valuations and the like.

Europe is also a great peacemaker, and this was the reason for its initial creation. It has succeeded admirably in this respect, and will continue to do so as more countries are brought in and share in the growing wealth of this fantastic entity. Sure, the entry of new countries causes exogenous shocks as our economies adjust to absorb the new economic parameters, but these shocks can be smoothed, managed, predicted, and they lead to the greater good of all the nations concerned - there is no reason why a deep union cannot continue to grow, provided it does so with competent people in the leadership. Unfortunately, competent or not, our leadership is partisan. The bias is not in political orientation (though that also exists), but in terms of which nations it favours and which it does not - this turns Brussels into a big trading center where one political desire is traded in return for another. Votes and vetos as political currency - the big unsolved problem with multilateral and multiparty democracy.

So back to my point - why does this rebuttal of Mr. Buttiglione piss me off? Largely because of the political currency being made of it in Italian domestic politics. I'm no great fan of Mr. Berlusconi, but its pathetic to see his opponents descend to this level to get at him.

I'm also annoyed because of the premise under which he has been rejected. He is a devout Catholic - in a secular organization, this should mean nothing. It should be ignored. His beliefs are a function of his faith and background, and that also should be ignored, unless it is believed that he is unable to separate his beliefs from the defense of the treaties and regulations he is being sworn in to uphold.

The role of Commissioner is an administrative one - it is not a representative one. It is also supposed to be impartial when it comes to nation-states (which is why Italian gloating in this case is damaging and unwelcome). His job is to perform the duties required of him by the Parliament and Council of Ministers, to propose directives and uphold the laws and previous directives of the Commission. I cannot imagine anything better than having a deeply moral and committed man in this position. He has made it clear that his personal beliefs with regard to homosexuality, marriage and other matters of interest are exactly that: personal beliefs. These beliefs do not interfere with his duty and ability to uphold laws that may not dovetail nicely with them.

The real difference between this man and other potential candidates for the role is that he wears his internal state on his sleeve (probably because he is such a moral person). He does not hide his beliefs, but tells people that he can maintain them despite the fact that he is required to uphold processes and regulations that are sometimes in conflict with them. A more politically cynical candidate wouldn't have admitted to that, and would have been accepted, thanks to his lack of candor, with much greater ease.

I like candor, I like honesty, this man should not have been insulted in this way, certainly not as a means to get at Mr. Berlusconi. People's political careers are not a currency to be spent. Let Mr. Buttiglione prove himself, or not, but do not judge him before he has had a chance to do so.

UPDATE: Doing a technorati search for his name, I've found large steaming piles of venom written on numerous (mostly homosexual-rights) weblogs about him and his views. While I personally disagree with his views, I find that he expresses them in a moderate, polite and respectful manner, even if the views themselves offend certain parties. These same parties are not moderate, polite or respectful in return. It is also in their interests that individuals be able, in the future, to recognise that their personal views are not relevant when it comes to their duties in upholding laws that may not be completely aligned with those personal views. The gay lobby (which I generally have nothing against) seems to believe that anyone who doesn't believe exactly what they want them to believe, regardless of this aspect of their professionalism, should not be allowed to hold any position. Get a life, people. Individuals are entitled to their views, even if you believe them to be backward. Your vision of a gay-utopian world in which everyone believes what you want them to is not something you should have a right to impose. If he had said he didn't believe in sex before marriage, this wouldn't have raised the slightest whiff of disagreement, even though far more people disagree with that viewpoint that his perception of homosexuality as a religious sin, and painting people who hold this opinion as "evil" or "unfit for office", or "morally wrong" is a narrow-minded judgement based on a narrow issue that represents less than a fraction of one percent of his responsibilities. You may disagree with him on this, but accept that he is capable of doing his job - even to your standards - while holding whatever opinions.

Another BBC Article has arisen, which summarises some of the reactions to this vote. Here's a quote :

Mr Berlusconi said: "It reflects the crude propagandist nature of the personal arguments put forward by the leftist faction of Italy's parliamentary delegation.

The vote smacked of "fundamentalism if not obscurantism" because it called into "question the freedom of conscience and opinion of a Catholic commissioner, contesting the distinction he makes between morality and the law", the Italian prime minister added.

German conservative MEP Ewa Klamt said the vote against Mr Buttiglione was "discrimination against a man who has a personal religious belief".

"He made it very clear there should be no discrimination for anyone, not for homosexuality, not for race or for religion," she said.

Posted by nlvp at October 12, 2004 12:03 PM