41–50 of 109 posts
"ideology of moral purpose and historical necessity" Incidentally, that sounds a lot like the ideology that sustains the existence of the EU now. Of course, the EU empire works in a different way; economic hostility towards outsiders (high tariffs and compliance cost when importing anything), access to a big common market and a lot of subventions for the insiders. It might be the first attempt to build an empire on m…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sovereign countries can exit anything they decide to, unless overpowered by force.
Now the question is: are you still a sovereign country if you pooled your currency with N other countries that exert a common decision power through a central bank over it? Having power over your own currency, in good or bad, is a typical attribute of being sovereign. There are minor exceptions (like Kosovo adopting euro unilaterally), but they are very untypical.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sovereign countries can exit anything they decide to, unless overpowered by force.
Now the question is: are you still a sovereign country if you pooled your currency with N other countries that exert a common decision power through a central bank over it? Having power over your own currency, in good or bad, is a typical attribute of being sovereign. There are minor exceptions (like Kosovo adopting euro unilaterally), but they are very untypical.
If a country wanted to move off of the euro, it would be pretty easy to create a sovereign currency pegged to the euro 1:1 by the countries central bank. Then in the future they could simply unpeg (or change the rate) if that became advantageous.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
True, but they willingly resorted to raw force if deemed necessary. I wonder if the EU is going to cross that Rubicon one day, too. There is a significant ideological penalty against it, because one of the founding ideas is that cooperation prevents wars.
As climate change affects more and more of Africa and the Middle East, we're going to see the EU drift towards more of a cohesive nation state by necessity. Just a few million refugees from Syria sparked a tide of far-right movements across Europe. Just wait 'til tens or hundreds of millions stand at the gates, representing an existential threat. It's almost an inevitability. I'm not talking about tomorrow or next ye…
German NGO ships explicitly supported by German churches and German politicians move people from the shores of Africa, while half of Italian political scene wants to lock them up.
It is now 6 years since the great migration crisis of 2015. There is no EU-wide consensus on anything substantial in the asylum and migration policy. All the proposals have proven themselves unworkable.
how the british justified their empire, in the 1930s. that last bit is important. Like most things, the justification changed over time. In the 16th century, it was all about the king trying to finance his massive spending habit. Then it was about trade. Then it was about re-enforcing that trade. Then the east india company fucked up, and india because a colonial possession. Then the missions tried to convert the hea…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I do not see the EU even close as an empire. Are you perhaps British? Or Greek? The EU don't even have a common foreign policy or a cohesive monetary policy across its member countries. The EU is imo a protective "members only club" if you're in you get good deals if you're not then tough luck.
My guess he is Czech. I have heard similar sentiments from former East Bloc's. I can't blame 'em.
how the british justified their empire, in the 1930s. that last bit is important. Like most things, the justification changed over time. In the 16th century, it was all about the king trying to finance his massive spending habit. Then it was about trade. Then it was about re-enforcing that trade. Then the east india company fucked up, and india because a colonial possession. Then the missions tried to convert the hea…
I enjoyed Paxman's book Empire for the very reason that he mocks the self-righteousness of the "heroes of Empire", their "divine mission", the way the country at home responded (or didn't care at all anymore) but doesn't shy away from giving the same critical eye to the colonised people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah? Heard of the USA, China, India, Russia and pretty much any other regional and world power ever?
What makes you think India is building an empire? I believe that they are focussed on lifting their masses out of poverty.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Times have changed, methods have changed, too. Google does not invade or colonize anyone and yet their control over spread of information is probably better than whatever former great powers could boast. In the same way, countries like Greece can be kicked around by troika without a single shot fired.
In what sense was Greece kicked around? They could do whatever they wanted. But when they asked other countries for huge loans, naturally the lenders imposed some conditions to ensure repayment.
That is not a meaningful choice in my view. That is "standing with your back to a wall".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My guess he is Czech. I have heard similar sentiments from former East Bloc's. I can't blame 'em.
I always find it surprising when people call Czech Republic or Poland "eastern block". Those two couldn't be possibly more central European if they tried. Czech Republic especially reaches only marginally more east than Germany, and I doubt you'd call Germans "eastern Europeans".
Of course there are huge differences between, say, Czechia and Moldova, but we were part of a single allied bloc controlled by a single power for two generations, so there are some similarities as well. You can see some of them until today in architecture etc.