Is the European union a mistake?

[Shekwan]

Nation building. I think it's that kind of thing which may help the trend towards a European mentality as Warvnos puts it. I'm not saying it's a good idea to spend so much money on it though.

It wouldn't actually be that expensive. If you compare the estimated sums of dozens of billions of euros with the cost of the bank bailouts and car scrapping schemes, you'll find it is actually perfectly affordable with only modest increase in spending.

Plus, it would be a great boost for our science, for our aerospace industry and other branches of the economy, so the money would in fact be invested, rather than wasted. And of course, there are long term benefits of establishing outposts in space.

The problem is we don't have a visionary politician who would fight for this and make it happen.

I see, good points.

But shouldn't we focus on something that would be just as prestigious but hasn't been achieved yet? I mean its been almost 50 years since NASA made it to the moon. I'm not sure what the alternative would be though, I'm completely ignorant on the topic.

 

[Virote_Considon]

To Mars?

 

[warpus]

There is no way of knowing for sure? Awesome.

The EU most definetly did not get rid of all the causes that have lead to every single European war, as it did nothing to curtail Eastern Europe and its Russian masters from bulldozing Western Europe into the Atlantic. NATO did that. And the threat of Eastern Europe and its Russian masters doing that is what prompted the creation of NATO (before the EU) or in other words unified Western Europe as allies, which then acheived detante in Europe. And that would have happened regardless of the existance of the EU (and in fact did).

Things to take into account.

Europe without NATO = War
Europe with NATO = Peace

Europe without EU = War
Europe with EU = War

Europe with NATO but not the EU = Peace
Europe with EU but not NATO = WAR



Only by people with an inflated opinion of the EU, ie unrealistic. Please explain to us what the EU contributed all those decades that had we been denied it would have caused NATO to cease to exist and Europe collapse into state warfare.

I would especially like you to focus on the decades before 1980, when the EU was pretty much an imaginary entity.

Dude, I'm talking about war between EU members only.

 

[Winner]

To Mars?

We'll need the Americans and others for that. But Moon should be doable on our own, or perhaps with the Russians.

 

[Patroklos]

Dude, I'm talking about war between EU members only.

You position still faulters. As was pointed out to you before members of the EU are usually members of NATO first, and the requirments for joining the EU means that members are always liberal democracies with no motive to engage in warfare with EU members in the first place.

In other words, the work is done long before the EU has anything to say about it. Unless you think Norway is going to go postal on someone anytime soon.

 

[innonimatu]

You can't force a culture into being. If it is to occur, it will occur naturally, and at its own pace.

You couldn't be more wrong about this. Cultures can be forced into being, and Europe is a prime example of that. During the whole 19th and early 20th century all the countries in Europe were busy inventing a national culture from scratch (including a national language, and making up "history" about some glorious ancestors) or reinforcing what they had and erasing any differences.

Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czechia and Slovakia, Hungary, Serbia/Croatia, Bulgaria, Romania, Albania, Greece, etc... none of these even had a national language! Not even Italy.
Language, literature, folklore, institutions... all these were invented, and the process continued well into the 20th century. It even continues today, as croats and serbs split into two a language originally created by a 19th century Slavic nationalist against the Austrian-hungarian/german influence in the Balkans. Ironically one who received help, in that nationalistic endeavor... from like-minded nationalist germans! In central/eastern Europe all nationalisms go back to Johann Gottfried Herder. Ironic also that it was a german philosopher who supplied the inspiration for a movement which would break the primacy of german culture in Mitteleuropa.

And the EU has been busy of late, setting up its propaganda machine with the purpose of creating "EU national feelings". The "reforms" in higher education in Europe, for example, fit into that.

 

[Yared]

I like being eurobrothers with Victor/Winner, Shekwan and the rest

In all seriousness though... Who wants to be a member of a globally insignificant country? Or, if not insignificant, at least somewhat "mediocre"? I sure as hell don't. And the European Union currently seems to be the only way for Sweden to get a chance at that.

Don't get me wrong - Sweden is a great country. But with other, previously inferior, countries getting more and more powerful, the thought of not being a part of EU (or being a part of the thing that the EU seeks to accomplish) seems more and more stupid. Even if one could argue that Sweden is loosing money to the EU, unless the money lost is really significant, I think it's worth it.

I was born 1994 - Sweden joined EU 1995 - so I haven't really experienced life without it feel free to dismiss my opinion because of that.

-

BTW, that Europe pic is from a steampunk story about a prince and some other person in WW1-era Europe, where the Darwinists (countries using biological weapons and stuff - Allies) are fighting the Clankers (countries using robots and stuff/mecha - Central Powers).

 

[Kyriakos]

I would be in favour of the EU if it really became unified. As it is it appears to be rather full of national interests and seclusion, and not much care for a european identity though.

In my view Europe could create something significant, if it ever managed to become free of US influence/overlordship. Not sure if this will ever happen as things are going.

 

[REDY]

Economic freedom and internationalism are good ideas. But the EU has been working almost exclusively against these things since its creation.

The European Union is a tool of protectionism and the "internationalism" it pretends to espouse is really just continentalism.

The Common Agricultural Policy (together with its US equivalent) is a massively destructive market distortion which bloats food prices in the EU and wastes billions of taxpayers money. Not to mention the unimaginable misery it causes in places like Ghana where desperate peasants who would be receiving foreign investment to build up their farms and livelihoods in a free market are instead having EU food mountains dumped at their doorstep.

If the EU can be reformed into a constructive part of the world political and economic system, one which is progressive and outward facing then I would indeed support it. But Fortress Europa as it currently stands is a destructive force in the world at large and we would all be better off without it.

Also, I do not appreciate the claims made by EU supporters that the EU is responsible for peace in Europe. Democracy, nuclear weapons and NATO made peace in Europe. The EU is and always has been irrelevant. If there's a problem in Europe again like there was in Kosovo, the EU will do nothing but watch while NATO steps in and gets it done.

Many good points, should someone smash them?

Maybe we should have a common european language at least, why not one of the two ancient languages that influenced euro civilization, ancient latin and ancient greek? They aren't exactly spoken by italians and greeks, although there are similarities with the ancient language. So it would be, in a sense, a language that belongs to no one, and all can learn it as equals.
Naturally at the same time the national language of the country will remain, much like people in Belgium are bilingual.

The idea that the EU has a gigantic bureaucratic staff is a myth. Sure its pretty big, but its comparable in size to a large member states bureacratic staff. I don't see how this is inordinately big.

Unebelievable is not their numbers but their cost and inutility. I read somewhere that there are about 40k bureaucrats costing milliards(!) of euros. Should anyone provide exact numbers?

 

[Traitorfish]

Language, literature, folklore, institutions... all these were invented, and the process continued well into the 20th century. It even continues today, as croats and serbs split into two a language originally created by a 19th century Slavic nationalist against the Austrian-hungarian/german influence in the Balkans.

Well, to be accurate, the split was along rather older religious lines; the political alignment simply reflects that.

 

[Lillefix]

Unebelievable is not their numbers but their cost and inutility. I read somewhere that there are about 40k bureaucrats costing milliards(!) of euros. Should anyone provide exact numbers?

The English say billion, the rest of the world say milliard. There was a discussion about this on the forum a few years back.

You better read this sooner than later:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_and_short_scales

 

[Patroklos]

I never realized that.

 

[warpus]

As was pointed out to you before members of the EU are usually members of NATO first,

Perhaps.. but what about the future? NATO is a military alliance that might not last.. the EU is a political and economic union that is meant to last for quite a while.

and the requirments for joining the EU means that members are always liberal democracies with no motive to engage in warfare with EU members in the first place.

You would think so.. but without a political and/or economic union, disagreements between states could arise... as they have for hundreds of years in the past. Could this lead to a military confrontation between states? *shrug* who knows. With an economic union there is far less of a chance for disagreements to arise (as they often arise over resources or territory), not to mention the giant cons of engaging in warfare with important trading partners. See, usually in the past you'd get several blocs of allies in Europe.. Countries would team up and trade with their partners.. Resulting in 2 or more blocs of allies.. which could easily lead to war. With full economic integration across most of the continent, incorporating all the major economic players, such a thing will never happen again.

Then there's the political union - making warfare between states even less likely.

In other words, the work is done long before the EU has anything to say about it. Unless you think Norway is going to go postal on someone anytime soon.

The other institutions that bring European countries together (NATO, etc.) help, yes. However, the EU brings them together far tighter than any other treaty.

 

[Tekee]

I never realized that.

yes difference between EU and US.
In EU you are aware that everyone uses milliard instead of billion, because you are so diverse. And being exposed to this. Unlike the homogeneous Americans.
Anyways culturally, the EU is terrible. Serbia ran a documentary and they showcased traditional Serbian culture. They took care to mention all the parts of their culture that would be banned if they joined the EU. For instance the traditional way to make some sort of beverage from fruits and berries would be illegal due to EU regulations regarding alcohol.
So some business owners were concerned that they would lose their buisness if they joined EU, and travellers to Serbia would no longer be able to enjoy authentic Serbian beverages.

 

[Millman]

I think someone invented dual-citizenship for a reason.

 

[ParkCungHee]

The English say billion, the rest of the world say milliard. There was a discussion about this on the forum a few years back.

You better read this sooner than later:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_and_short_scales

Actualy, the English used Milliard for quite some time. I still come across it sometimes.

 

[mitsho]

Short answer: No, no mistake.

Long Answer: "Well yeah, maybe later I will find time"

 

[warpus]

The whole milliard/billion thing confused the hell out of me when I moved to Canada.

Also things costing 1.99 instead of 1,99

 

[Shekwan]

I like being eurobrothers with Victor/Winner, Shekwan and the rest

Hopefully you and I can become part of the first generation that fully identifies with the ideals of European unity over stupid nation state allegiances.

You position still faulters. As was pointed out to you before members of the EU are usually members of NATO first, and the requirments for joining the EU means that members are always liberal democracies with no motive to engage in warfare with EU members in the first place.

In other words, the work is done long before the EU has anything to say about it. Unless you think Norway is going to go postal on someone anytime soon.

Firstly, I think that NATO played a larger role in ensuring that it would crazy to attack Western Europe during the Cold War.

However, the EU will ultimately be proven as the organisation that ensured long term peace in Europe. The Cold War was a passing crisis that NATO was cobbled together to deal with. The EU creates the economic interdependece and common democractic ideals that ensure that for the foreseeable future war among European will not happen. Military alliances can only ensure a temporary status quo, the EU ensures a peaceful future as well as a peaceful present.

 

[warpus]

Well said Shekwan, way better than me, above.