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 IdiotSavant - Jun 24 7 comments
by Oui - Jun 25 40 comments
by IdiotSavant - Jun 16 14 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 15 12 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 10 15 comments
by Bernard - Jun 6 23 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 6 4 comments
by Oui - Jun 8 104 comments
by Oui - Jun 271 comment
by Oui - Jun 2540 comments
by IdiotSavant - Jun 247 comments
by Oui - Jun 232 comments
by Oui - Jun 23
by gmoke - Jun 22
by Oui - Jun 20
by Oui - Jun 1916 comments
by asdf - Jun 183 comments
by Oui - Jun 184 comments
by IdiotSavant - Jun 1614 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 1512 comments
by Oui - Jun 1310 comments
by Oui - Jun 1240 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 1015 comments
by Oui - Jun 95 comments
by Oui - Jun 8104 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jun 64 comments
by Bernard - Jun 623 comments
by Oui - Jun 6