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 27 3 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 5 22 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 23 1 comment
by Oui - May 13 65 comments
by Carrie - Apr 30 7 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 273 comments
by Oui - May 2712 comments
by Oui - May 24
by Frank Schnittger - May 231 comment
by Oui - May 1365 comments
by Oui - May 910 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 522 comments
by Oui - May 449 comments
by Oui - May 312 comments
by Oui - May 29 comments
by gmoke - May 1
by Oui - Apr 30260 comments
by Carrie - Apr 307 comments
by Oui - Apr 2644 comments
by Oui - Apr 885 comments
by Oui - Mar 19143 comments