General / Off-Topic Globalization Vs. Nationalism
- Thread starter Aereon Theed
- Start date
Minonian
Banned
Mhhhhmmm...
The thing is Eu as a government too weak and slow to make any use, which leaves the bureaucrats in charge, and gives em the ability to override a lot of parliament decision. And also for the same reason leaves Merkel as the de facto leader of the whole mess. How long we are arguing about the refugee problem? With a problem this big, and creates this much chaos and yet we don't see any end of it, it's safe to say EU current power structure is useless!
And also about, and because of this? To call EU dictatorial, is just as stupid it can possibly gets! Because there is one thing what you can say about dictatorships, they are not messing around problems this long.
So... As the things looks alike now in EU?
Brussel making one session after another, and nothing changes. The committees also doing their thing, and also nothing changes, and on the top of that, Merkel do something and the whole EU follows.
The thing is Eu as a government too weak and slow to make any use, which leaves the bureaucrats in charge, and gives em the ability to override a lot of parliament decision. And also for the same reason leaves Merkel as the de facto leader of the whole mess. How long we are arguing about the refugee problem? With a problem this big, and creates this much chaos and yet we don't see any end of it, it's safe to say EU current power structure is useless!
And also about, and because of this? To call EU dictatorial, is just as stupid it can possibly gets! Because there is one thing what you can say about dictatorships, they are not messing around problems this long.
So... As the things looks alike now in EU?
Brussel making one session after another, and nothing changes. The committees also doing their thing, and also nothing changes, and on the top of that, Merkel do something and the whole EU follows.
Last edited:
Why is the EU weak? Sorry but I don't understand. Could you elaborate a little?
Also I don't understand how Merkel gets to be the defacto leader of the EU? I am from Canada, so these political climates are harder for me to understand. Thank you for explaining friend.
she's not Germany is the biggest economy and the biggest country in the EU..as such it has great deal of power, both hardwired into the eu structure (for example.MEPs are on a population basis and council vote weights are partly population based) and soft power as it is a big economy)
But the UK is only just behind it in terms of EU structure, which actually means that it is almost impossible for a measure to pass without France,Germany and the UK agreeing. This is how the UK got so many opt outs,by inly agreeing to something the others wanted if it could opt out of it.
The single market is a British sponsored and mentored project. It was pushed by the UK because it benefited the Uk as a whole.
The "Germany rules the EU" thing is a tabloid myth.
Minonian
Banned
And merkel knows this, acting accordingly.
Last edited:
I think especially the "Britain first" crowd who claim that the EU is some sort of German empire in disguise are both confused and dishonest.
The EU is actually an organisation which spreads the power around, and is designed to strengthen the voice of the smaller member states. Finland, Sweden, Malta, etc. Everybody has a significant say in making decisions and policy. I honestly think that is what is so annoying about it to some in the UK.
For a long time, Britannia was the dominant power in Europe, and much of the world. Trade negotiations and international treaties worked very differently. None of this mess of seeking a compromise that works for everybody.
Russia also hates the EU. They are used to being able to do dominate their smaller neighbors, which is why the state is funding far right populist groups all over Europe to weaken it.
The EU is actually an organisation which spreads the power around, and is designed to strengthen the voice of the smaller member states. Finland, Sweden, Malta, etc. Everybody has a significant say in making decisions and policy. I honestly think that is what is so annoying about it to some in the UK.
For a long time, Britannia was the dominant power in Europe, and much of the world. Trade negotiations and international treaties worked very differently. None of this mess of seeking a compromise that works for everybody.
Russia also hates the EU. They are used to being able to do dominate their smaller neighbors, which is why the state is funding far right populist groups all over Europe to weaken it.
Germany is the most populus country in the EU: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_Union_member_states_by_population
Also the most contributing country in the EU: https://www.statista.com/statistics/316691/european-union-eu-budget-share-of-contributions/
It also profits a lot from the EU.
The Parliament has a rather bad gini coefficient for "voter representation" - arguably to the advantage or disadvantage of smaller or bigger countries:
http://voxeu.org/article/inequality-european-parliament-representation
https://books.google.de/books?id=Hf...e eu parliament for smaller countries&f=false
That's some 8-9 year old stuff .. and yea .. everyone has another point of view.
The "interesting" part of nowadays is rather that a national-centric Poland was the only country trying to block it's own countrie's EU friendly candidate from being elected as European Council president: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...n-council-president-despite-polish-opposition
And while the CETA papers are fully disclosed by now on the EU website: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2016/february/tradoc_154329.pdf most sources just quote the parts that they don't like to make their point.
(carefull, it's nearly 1600 pages and 1599 of them will make you go "huh? why even bother")
Last edited:
And while the CETA papers are fully disclosed by now on the EU website: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2016/february/tradoc_154329.pdf most sources just quote the parts that they don't like to make their point.
no The CETA treaty is completely secret, nobody knows what's in it apart from those against it who know it has bad things in it....
Interesting bit about the EU parliaments' unequal representation. Such systems are always needed when you have groupings between very unequal groups. Places like Malta and Cyprus have much more representation per vote than larger countries.
The same thing happens in the UK with some of the Scottish islands. If they stuck to the average of 70k electors per MP these areas would have a third of an MP, so its either over represent those voters by giving them one MP or under represent them.by sharing their MP with another area. Arguably the first option.is best as long as only a few such areas exist.
The same goes for the EUP. It should be noted that the EUP is only half the equation. The other half, the European Council, has the power more tilted towards the bigger population . So its more important to put the discussion in the round rather than focus on just the parliament or just the council.
You have to equally important bodies who.are both tilted in different directions of representation.
Well, the bigger issue compared to representation is imo participation, which was also mentioned. If you have a small but active voter base in any country, you might be over represented.
And for the smaller countries it's a bit more complex than hard representation numbers, since they might suffer even more from not being in the EU. They'd still have to deal with the EU.
Thanks for clarifying my friend. That makes sense.
Something the anti-globalization people should probably watch.
[video=youtube;NbuUW9i-mHs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbuUW9i-mHs[/video]
[video=youtube;NbuUW9i-mHs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NbuUW9i-mHs[/video]
Yeah, voter participation is more of a problem,it makes it much easier for fringe parties with small but dedicated bases to get in.
Having MEPs then makes them more credible on the national scene which can help them there ("look we're not some joke party, we have MEPs").
But voter participation is not the EUs fault. People can't complain that the EU is undemocratic when they don't participate in the process (but they still do complain").
Last edited:
Nationalism all the way.
I'd rather have each country preserving its culture and differences than to merge it together in an homogeneous mass of sterile blandness.
Most of the stuff I enjoy from other countries (and my own) exist because they can still be themselves, despite what the globalism tries to impose on them.
Also, resources are limited, an endless stream of third world population pouring into the first world will not only destroy our culture, but our livelihood, turning our countries into the very things they fled from.
I'd rather have each country preserving its culture and differences than to merge it together in an homogeneous mass of sterile blandness.
Most of the stuff I enjoy from other countries (and my own) exist because they can still be themselves, despite what the globalism tries to impose on them.
Also, resources are limited, an endless stream of third world population pouring into the first world will not only destroy our culture, but our livelihood, turning our countries into the very things they fled from.
Last edited:
globalisation (more interconnected world) or even globalism (one world government) does not mean that cultural differences have to be wiped out.
Parts of the UK have distinctive dialects, foods, traditions and cultures despite being part of the same country and government for hundreds of years.
You can keep your culture whilst also being open to the free movement of goods, ideas and people.
Like UKIP and the German AfD?
That's so absurd. AfD has no seats in German federal parliament (and is heading towards not getting any, since they perform so badly in the state parliaments where they sit), but in the EU and ukip seems to be better represented in the EUP than in Westminster.
I guess the ukip MEP will n I t be too happy about losing their not too shabbily payed positions and having to move back to nothing.
Exactly what happened in Scotland. One homogenous British mass.
Poor Scots.
(And stop importing that terrible French beer, it frenchises you)
Last edited:
Was this bit sarcasm?
Yup.
Mentioned already that I studied in northern Englad (near the scottish border) and really enjoyed the "local culture" (including local beers).
That was 20 years ago. If I look at those local beers today, they're either extinct or replaced with imported "industry" stuff. And the pubs where I used to hang out have been replaced with generic "Sports Bars" or "Irish Pubs" (<- irish apparently were pretty successful at exporting their pub culture - there's loads of irish pubs all across this planet and they're usually wonderful places - however, they don't serve local beers).
So all the large talk about "culture" and "ways of living" is imo just silly. They let their local stuff die, just to save a few penny on a pint of beer.
And there is a sort of "line" between northern england and southern scotland, so after hundreds of years of living next door to each other, it's not all "blended into one" - even though northern scotsmen and southern englishmen might feel that their respective counterparts are "too close" to the other side.
I personally support all "german culture" to the best of my ability. I played Fussball (despite being bad at it), I was a member of our "fine arts" club, playin in the orchestra and singing in the choir for over 10 years - I'm still supporting member of that - I ran my sports club for half a decade (we do japanese stuff, but we don't force anyone to join us, we just offer "cultural exchange", organize stuff with high ranking japanese teachers and so on). I'm also a supporting member of our local social association, who provides all kinds of help to sick, elderly and disabled.
All that costs me way less money than my internet bill. (I did have to cut a lot of the active time I could spend on the things, so I had more left for my family, but I just kept the "supporting member" status and pay a few euro a year and financial support in community work is always welcome)
I don't know. I get to my limits of taking those complaints seriously.
In the end, if you think something is worth preserving, be the first to preserve it.
Last edited:
I'm a big fan of humanity coming together and working together to advance our lives and cultures. However, people should be free to live how they want with the culture they want as long as how they live doesn't harm others or restrict others.
So in a way, a fan of globalization. Also not a fan of strong nationalism as that has so often in the past led to conflict, and strongly nationalisitc countries or factions have gone to war often over ideals rather than our of real need especially with the right propoganda (not that going to war over need is good either, but at least its more understandable - eg, lack of food in a region and no way of getting drives the population to seek extreme measures to get it).
The big problem with globalization is it creates a larger pyramid of power. Those at the top are more distant from those at the bottom and it creates a disconnect between those who rule and those who need the most protection and care. With each additional level of separation between the rulers and the rules it means those at the bottom are more abstract for those at the top, and even the most benevolent rulers will have an impossible task trying to take care of everyone no matter how well they delegate, and with more layers to deligate through, the greater chance there is there will be those who are less benevolent below.
I doubt there is any solution that will overall work better than any other, and all have great potential for causing problems.
So in a way, a fan of globalization. Also not a fan of strong nationalism as that has so often in the past led to conflict, and strongly nationalisitc countries or factions have gone to war often over ideals rather than our of real need especially with the right propoganda (not that going to war over need is good either, but at least its more understandable - eg, lack of food in a region and no way of getting drives the population to seek extreme measures to get it).
The big problem with globalization is it creates a larger pyramid of power. Those at the top are more distant from those at the bottom and it creates a disconnect between those who rule and those who need the most protection and care. With each additional level of separation between the rulers and the rules it means those at the bottom are more abstract for those at the top, and even the most benevolent rulers will have an impossible task trying to take care of everyone no matter how well they delegate, and with more layers to deligate through, the greater chance there is there will be those who are less benevolent below.
I doubt there is any solution that will overall work better than any other, and all have great potential for causing problems.
The less you have to buy, the cheaper it gets. Look at the U.S.
2 parties, none that is not bought.
And efficiency and effectiveness are probably the most confused methods in any thing.
A good deal of both is great, but usually doing things effectively is preferable.