editorial" "
We need to start out from four important factors. The first is real, and its existence is impossible to avoid, at the cost of a serious economic crisis: it is globalization. During the long period from the War of Secession in the USA to the Second World War, nationalism was reinforced and the doctrine of enriching oneself at the expense of one’s neighbours gained ground. In many countries attempts were made to solve the question through restrictions on international trade, but this only gave rise to new crises of production. Today the situation has changed, and Europe must continue to make progress on the markets with the growth in productivity. It’s an objective that can only be achieved by accepting the challenge – still without a proper response – of achieving growth in the field of scientific and technological research in such a way as to compete with or surpass the USA. The second factor is the consolidation of peace inside Europe and within each country, also thanks to significant progress in the fiscal field and in the mechanisms of social protection. Europe was able to construct an affluent state which, in the view of the Council of Europe, represents one of the main characteristics of the European identity, of which one of the strongest expressions is the agricultural world: it has a need for support and protection. The third factor to be borne in mind is that miracles do not exist in daily economic events. The budget deficit is thus transformed into a weapon against the political system of civil liberties. Unfortunately a budget in difficulties reduces the possibilities of aid to the more vulnerable sections of society. The fourth factor is terrorism, linked to very aggressive non-European political and ideological movements. The 11th of September 2001 was a declaration of war not only against the USA, but against the whole Western world. The threat is particularly concentrated in the Mediterranean area and its environs. From the economic point of view, this sea links the expanding world of the Pacific with Europe. Without it, economic development would be crippled. The climate of insecurity, however, is forcing a level of military expenditure that is hampering higher levels of aid to the developing world. Bearing these four factors in mind, it is right to ask oneself whether Europe, in obedience to its own Christian tradition, can remain insensible to the poverty of millions of human beings. Clearly it cannot. The reaction must be in part at the microeconomic level: it must be similar to that adopted by the Blessed Teresa of Calcutta. It is necessary, in other words, to appeal to the opulent Europeans who, in conscience, and through well-run institutions, must divest themselves of a part of their wealth to devolve it to the poor. But the solution must also be macroeconomic. That’s why Europe must review its own political culture. It must support and bring influence to bear on the international institutions. Only once Europe has become more credible, will it oblige the rulers of the developing countries to eliminate the corruption that is rife in them. At the same time Europe should provide assistance, beginning with the training of economists and politicians. Without a sound and ambitious policy, it will be impossible to win the battle against famine. That means avoiding simplistic solutions. Europe must lead, as it were, a kind of crusade of good sense. It must re-forge its links with its Aristotelian and Thomist tradition. That is the request of John Paul II: “Europe, be yourself!”.
