The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
To a certain degree, this is true. But it has always seemed to me to be forgetful of others stability factors that maintain peace between the western Europe nations: nuclear weapons in France and Britain for a start.
The European welfare states were created at the national level (indeed you can easily see how things like universal health-provision vary radically in their models from country to country) and most of the civilizational achievements were made independently at the national level (social security, education, ...). The "European" part of these achievements was mostly through inspiration from country to country. Other then (arguably important things) like free movement there is little to associate the EU with "prosperity".
On the other hand, I do not think it is difficult to find many examples where the EU is sinking many of the good European achievements.
Jean Monnet, the french banker responsible for a lot of the EU treaties, has been a huge promotor of state-dominated economical flux during the first world war. In the WW1, he proposed and got a reorganisation of the naval transportation by ordering private companies to form convoys and to transport goods that were deemed necessary by the state war plans, against a former liberalism of the sea, which allowed merchant shipowners choose the goods to transport, including weapons, and balancing them for maximum profit.
So a banker grown up in a very liberalized world before ww1, who saw the interest in a state regulated economy. He came back to his banking (including a fair bit of murky banking) between the two wars and then again to state regulation, at an international level when drafting the European Union treaties (think Euratom and CECA).
Since then, we have lost a lot of the regulation bit (appart in a "whatever is permitted in any EU country is allowed everywhere" way), and gain a lot of liberalization. But I don't believe it to be a beforehand destiny.
Now, sometimes capture goes the right way (again some American examples come to mind). But to be quite frank, the whole notion of capture seems profoundly anti-democratic in any case.
Imposing that agenda on a pan-European scale would have been next to impossible if the power rested on individual nation states.
If you want a model for Europe without the EU, look at the relationship between the EU and Norway, then replace the EU by the US, and Norway by the envisioned gaggle of pint-sized jokes pretending to be sovereign states.
Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.
Beg your pardon!? Non-EU Europe, Latin America, Africa, Asia: the neo-liberal agenda was imposed almost everywhere quite successfully, and in not just a few instances more radically than anywhere even in the post-Lehman EU. Some hints at how it works: IMF, shock therapy, race to the bottom.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.
by Frank Schnittger - May 18 21 comments
by gmoke - May 15 3 comments
by Oui - May 20 3 comments
by Oui - May 2 8 comments
by Cat - Apr 14 8 comments
by Oui - May 9 7 comments
by Cat - May 1 15 comments
by Oui - May 241 comment
by Oui - May 23
by Oui - May 221 comment
by Oui - May 211 comment
by Oui - May 203 comments
by gmoke - May 20
by Frank Schnittger - May 1821 comments
by Oui - May 171 comment
by Oui - May 172 comments
by Oui - May 166 comments
by Oui - May 167 comments
by Oui - May 15
by gmoke - May 153 comments
by Oui - May 11
by Oui - May 91 comment
by Oui - May 97 comments
by Oui - May 83 comments
by Oui - May 72 comments
by Oui - May 61 comment