In search of a common ground: How debate is bringing Europeans together
| Brussels
On the eve of the twice-a-decade European parliamentary elections, a group of Euro-optimists gathered in the continent鈥檚 capital for a speed-dating session of sorts.
Most of the 500-plus attendees have road-tripped or flown more than 500 miles to get here 鈥� and dozens traveled more than 1,000 miles 鈥� after being matched via the internet with debate partners from different countries to have in-person chats about the future of Europe.
The event, Europe Talks, is the brainchild of editors at the German newspaper Die Zeit, who hatched the plan over a pingpong table in their newsroom. Their goal: to get people to step outside their own 鈥渇ilter bubbles鈥� and connect 鈥� in person 鈥� with fellow Europeans of different political persuasions.
Why We Wrote This
In politics, debate can quickly devolve into argument. In Brussels, however, Europeans are exercising civil disagreement as a tool for understanding.
In the first, national version of the experiment, 鈥淲e expected 100 to 200 people to sign up, but 12,000 registered鈥� throughout Germany, says Editor-in-Chief Jochen Wegner. They decided to repeat the challenge internationally. 鈥淲hat is happening today,鈥� he adds, 鈥渉as never happened before in the history of Europe.鈥�
As they wait for the welcome program to begin, conversational sparring partners Juhani Tanayama from Helsinki, Finland, and Yavor Ivanov, from Sofia, Bulgaria, chat animatedly.
They have been matched based on their responses to a handful of questions including, 鈥淒oes the European Union improve the lives of its citizens?鈥� (90% said yes), 鈥淪hould the EU increase gas taxes to help save the environment?鈥� (72% said yes), and 鈥淎re there too many migrants in Europe?鈥� (76% said no).
鈥淲e tried to invent divisive questions, but it didn鈥檛 work too well,鈥� Mr. Wegner says.
Mr. Ivanov, a technology specialist who describes himself as passionate about Mars and cycling, hopped on a plane to Brussels because he wanted to speak about the common problems of Europe in person. 鈥淚鈥檓 very happy that Bulgaria is part of the European Union,鈥� he says.
Bulgaria is one of the poorest nations in the EU, and Mr. Tanayama鈥檚 home country, Finland, is one of the richest. They disagreed over the question, 鈥淪hould richer European countries support poorer ones?鈥� (88% of participants here said yes.)
Though the EU should invest some money in education and infrastructure, such funds should be conditional, Mr. Tanayama says, adding that there must be consequences if countries misuse EU money, or don鈥檛 adhere to EU values.
Mr. Ivanov would like to see more financial support for poorer EU nations, but acknowledges that EU funding has increased corruption in Bulgaria. 鈥淲e鈥檙e building infrastructure with EU money, but the quality isn鈥檛 good because half the money flows into the pockets of oligarchs.鈥�
Mr. Tanayama nods vigorously 鈥� even before the debate officially begins, they are in agreement. 鈥淭he important thing is to find common ground,鈥� he says.
At the formal welcome program, Anne Helgers, an engineer, and Anno Muhlh枚ff, a policeman, both from Cologne, Germany, discuss their first meeting at a cafe.
鈥淲e felt like neither one of us had a very distinct opinion on some of the topics, so I said, 鈥榃ell, there is one thing I have a very strong feeling about,鈥欌�� Ms. Helgers says. 鈥淚 live with a woman.鈥� Mr.聽Muhlh枚ff is not a supporter of gay marriage.
Yet the discussion 鈥渟oftened my strong opinion on it 鈥� mainly because I placed my argument in a way that hurt Anne鈥檚 feelings. She was kind enough to accept my apology,鈥� Mr.聽Muhlh枚ff says, tearing up. 鈥淚t turned the whole thing into something personal.鈥�
鈥淔or me, I think a lot more about communication now,鈥� Ms. Helgers says. 鈥淚 would like to convince the entire world that people like me, we are wonderful 鈥� but even thinking we鈥檙e not so bad is a good step.鈥�
鈥淚 never thought you were bad,鈥� Mr.聽Muhlh枚ff quickly interjects.
Outside in the hallway, debate partners are settling into the nooks and crannies of the Centre for Fine Arts, known as BOZAR and the site for these discussions. Host to a celebration of European democracy today, the center was shaped in the late 1920s by decidedly undemocratic forces: It was built mostly underground, so as not to obstruct the king鈥檚 view of the city from his palace above.
Leaning against the coat-check counter in a tailored suit and glasses that might best be described as 鈥渧ery Italian,鈥� Giulio Anichini of Rome, Italy, is talking with Anastasia Weirich, sitting cross-legged on the counter in Doc Martens.
Ms. Weirich road-tripped in from Aachen, Germany, this morning. Mr. Anichini took the train down from London, where he is working. Their professions are the same 鈥� they鈥檙e both physicians 鈥� but they disagree on what proved to be one of the conference鈥檚 most controversial questions, 鈥淪hould Europe have closer ties with Russia?鈥� (53% said yes, 46% said no.)
鈥淚 didn鈥檛 like the invasion of Crimea,鈥� Mr. Anichini says. 鈥淎nd I don鈥檛 have an objective perspective,鈥� Ms. Weirich acknowledges, noting that she comes from Russia. 鈥淢y family still lives there 鈥� I want more cooperation.鈥�
As the debate ends, participants continue their conversations, spilling out onto the streets to grab coffees and beers just outside the BOZAR Restaurant, which has earned a Michelin star for democratic fare like pork pie and its rejection of 鈥減ointlessly complicated dishes.鈥�
海角大神 Schroller from Hamburg, Germany, and Kurt Strand of Copenhagen, Denmark, who have been debating for the better part of the afternoon, have just discovered that they disagree on the question of, 鈥淲ould you give up your national passport for a European one?鈥� (80% said yes.)
鈥淚 would love to leave a German identity behind, and have a Euro citizenship,鈥� Mr. Schroller says.
Mr. Strand, pulling out his Danish passport, said he would like to hold on to it. But pointing to the Danish royal crown crest, he says agreeably, 鈥淲e could put Euro stars here, and maybe Denmark in smaller letters? When I travel to the U.S., I actually describe myself as a European.鈥�
鈥淥ur disagreements 鈥� they aren鈥檛 huge,鈥� Mr. Schroller says, adding that he was expecting, perhaps even craving, more raucous debate. 鈥淏ut I realize that in this setting, I can discuss calmly and really listen. I鈥檇 do it every week if I could.鈥�
