Posted on 12/24/2003 8:00:21 PM PST by Shermy
Hi. I pinged you two because we were involved in a similar discussion elsewhere. I was trying to make a similar point as this writer but I guess that's why he's getting paid to do it and I'm still sharpening my razor at FR ;-)
But that sentence above should just about sum it up. In the writer's opinion (and I share it) the disintegration of the EU is practically a done deal at this point. I see France as being the source of most difficulty in Europe (and with our current diplomatic troubles between France/Germany). As the EU begins to unravel, there will be no reason for a nation like Germany to continue to pander to the French. Once that relationship starts to diverge- that's pretty much it. Game over.
If Germany cuts off its funds, various EU doles that hold the union together--not least of which is the CAP--will become bankrupt.
This is another point I wish more Europeans could grok- the EU can only make Germany weaker- not stronger. Germany was and is already a strong nation and a sovereign one (and had a very strong and respected currency). Any agreement where Germany gave up its sovereignty and became the biggest payer of subsidies to the rest of the EU can only make Germany a lesser nation. Whatever perceived strength you would have gained through a stronger voice in world affairs would only be diluted by the fact that this 'new stronger voice' would probably not speak with a German tongue and for German interests but with a French one and for French interests. So Germany would not have a louder voice on the world stage at all but would effectively be giving up its voice to lesser nations just as she has done with her capital (in the form of these agri-subsidies and other hand-outs).
This is going to be a good thing in the long run but it could be a little chaotic in the short term. I'm interested though to see what happens with the currency. The Euro cannot survive without a common economic policy- this is fairly obvious. You cannot have a common economic policy without the power to enforce it (the honor system will not work). You cannot have the power to enforce it without a binding constitution or legal framework of some sort that all the members respect and that doesn't look like it's going to happen (well, unless you're one of the true believers in a unified Europe).
I don't think a lot of Europeans have realized it yet but this disagreement over the constitution was the last chance. There are too many factors involved now that have a life of their own. There are also many unknown variables that might pop up- a major terrorist attack on Continent or in the UK (for example) would throw the EU in an uproar. There are just too many things going against the EU right now. If I were the involved nations, I would be developing a contingency plan for a currency. Germany could take a leadership position right now by pushing France to the sidelines (which is the proper place for France).
I just don't see how it can survive Michael. The ability of the Euro to survive without a central gov't is highly doubtful. Once the currency starts having even more problems or the (individual economies) and there is no consensus among the different nations about how to deal with it- this will only lead to more splits within the Union itself.
We had this in the US. Civil War. Some states wanted to split with the original agreement and our nation's bloodiest war was the result. Those states that wanted to leave were compelled by force to stay within the Union. But short of that force, nothing would have accomplished that. The EU has already begun to split before it ever got started. There will be no compelling military force to make the Union hold together.
In Europe, the differing nations don't even have as much to hold them together as our differing states did; there's no common culture or language. And at any rate, as I said before, creating a Unified Europe will only make the strong nations weaker- never stronger. It would not be in any strong nation's interest to continue with the Union. And then when we look at the other side of the coin, the weak nations in many instances could gain more influence simply by a series of alliances as has always been done throughout history. No need to bind themselves to a Federal System that sees them pushed around by the bigger members. Poland, for example, has gained much from allying itself with the US. Poland stands to lose though if it cedes much power to stronger states in the EU.
I can think of almost no example why there is a good reason for the EU to exist. You don't need the EU to have an open and free market. You don't need the EU to be part of a strong military alliance. You don't need the EU to have a stable currency (The British Pound and the German Mark are two very good examples).
The only advantage there ever was in the EU was for countries like France who wish someone like Germany to help pay their bills and Ireland who sought to improve upon its infrastructure. But these examples always amount to a handout from the richer nations. Germany gains not too much from upgrading Irish roads. Germany gains nothing from subsidizing French Farmers (and I know this is a big issue and it isn't new because it was a big deal when I still lived in Germany).
When we look at the UK, they get shafted even more by completely immersing themselves in the EU. The Queen would no longer be the Head of State- although she would remain the head of state in Australia and Canada for example (or would she? would the EU eventually exert control there as well?). Their military would increasingly come under the control of Brussels. They would lose their own currency. (In the case of the military alone- their military is what makes Britain such a powerful nation on the world stage (along with their alliance with us. Britain can project power around the globe if she needs to.) And what about the Commonwealth and the UNSC veto power? Eventually that veto vote would come under the control of Brussels. Increasingly the EU would pressure the UK to deal in certain ways with its Commonwealth members. I just don't see any advantage for the UK or Germany in the EU. Plus every nation would eventually lose their UN votes.
There are many more negatives than positives. I just don't see it working out and I'm not the only one. Perhaps Europeans have difficulty seeing this from the inside of the situation? It's not going to happen. Especially now that the US has exploited some of the overt fractures in the Union.
I know Buffet is huge into Insurance and Reinsurance which is harder to touch since it insures the insurors. How's his relationship going with Arnold? Is he going to buy CA's HIGH YIELD junk bonds after the March election???
I'm not trying to be a smartalec, I really am curious as to who is most interested in getting the $15 Billion, plus the multibillion school bond measure that Arnold is NOT distancing himself from on the same March ballot.
"The context is one of irreconcilable differences between two views of the world. One view, the Anglo-American, holds that human ability to comprehend, adjudicate, and arrange the world around us is limited; that the only attainable goal is continuously to improve the conditions which enable individuals to achieve their personal best. The other view, predominantly Franco-Germanic, places human reason at the center of our existence, claiming that certain people are capable of comprehending, adjudication and arranging the world around us; and that such people are called upon to guide all others toward an increasingly perfect and just world in which all desires will have been either eliminated or satisfied."
I highly recommend this book to all FReepers by the recently deceased LEGAL IMMIGRANT and great American!!!
This really breaks my heart.
Thanks for the flag to this heartening article. Ketchup boy is really bothered by this and knows it is all Bush's fault.
I'll have to remember to get that book, SW, thanks.
Merry Christmas to both of you and your families and loved ones. This has been a good year in many ways and next year should be even better.
I have a signed copy of that book and traveled all the way to Berkeley, CA (CA Commonist HQ) to meet him on a rainy night! Great American, without question. And like you... he understands things, which is what makes both of you "dangerous!" (bigger grin)
The message I was taught was that the crazy mixed-up feet of iron and clay wouldn't adhere and represented the attempt to make Europe into a "world power" that couldn't possible work toward the end of history when the whole statue was "smitten" by a huge rolling stone (asteroid?)!!!
Anyway, I found this article intensely interesting and NO moderators, I don't want this article moved to "Religion!" (there's already too much hate & discontent on the last one to be moved there)
Thank you for reminding me of that episode. Another confirmation of my tag-line truthfulness.
A brilliant example of how it would be possible one finds in an old Soviet joke which goes like this:
An announcement on the milk shop window when 'real communism' won: Comrades! There will be no demand for milk today.
Well, I consider his appeasement of the Soviets & Co as the very step which legitimised that cannibal regimes and prolonged their survival. Thus it postponed the reunification.
The latter became possible thanks to president Reagan having balls to catch Soviets by the same and to squeese... :-))
As to the Cold War, do you really believe it's over? For the West, maybe. But certainly not for Putin.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.