Could the European Union, become a continental European nation?

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I don't think Britian will become part of the US in any form, unless the EU becomes very agressive and violtile to the UK. In the near future this seems to be unlikely. In the future there will be more independent countries, but I believe large regions, even hemispheres of the world will be allied under the same ideology, religion and prodominatly free trade zones.

P.S. Welcome Red Devil, you'll enjoy Scifourms a lot. Its nice to see a European perspective to things. Britian is the US's boy, we like you guys.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I hope you enjoy your membership, thanks for replying to my post.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Re: Nice

Curly: On a lighter note, I once wrote a limerick regarding the German's economic strength in Europe and their wish to "run" things:

The Germans in both the world wars
Tried to give us British what for
We put paid to their folly
The Germans said "Golly!"
Lets try it through the back door

Which brings to mind a trueism: "Many a true word spoken in jest"

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Re: European Union - Contradiction of Terms

Kmguru (welcome!) Britains 3 Choices?

Hmmm, Interesting hypothesis! Given the choice of the 3 I personally would plumb for the Americans; our natural closest allies. However, the choice of going it alone is not quite true in our case, we could realign ourselves with the Commonwealth (which is where we should have stayed anyway). Our trade, in my own opinion, would probably have been better and our seafaring traditions (not to mention our delapidated docks) would have been preserved. Most of our dockland has now vanished into maritime museums, luxury homes/flats, and useless domes!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Can someone better explain to me the Commonwealth of Nations, and give me a bit of a personal perspective, which is lacking in an Enclopedia. Thanks a lot, I'm anxious to see Red Devil's response.

Hey if the UK wanted to join the US, that would be a welcomed alliance. None of the US citizens would mind. The Brits are the Yank's boys. We stick together in most cases.

 

Cris - if you go back to 1970 you would also find that not only your teacher was blind but so were governments. I agree with you 100%, as with the USA having miriads of different cultures so to does Europe. But the essential difference between the USA and Europe is that we actually "fight" each other every so often!! Two World Wars; Kosovo; Bosnia; Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia; East Germany (1953) need I go on? Living together, as one - not a chance! Even this economic union is a myth - each wants what is best for their own country irrespective of what is written down in this or that treaty. Stronger governments getting their way. Our current "socialist" government, in the election prior to this years, promised a referendum of the people regarding the joining of the Euro Monetary System. Since elected, public opinion being above 80% against; they are now saying, "Never mind - we will do it anyway" - whatever the people say. Some democracy? For the same reason, we will never get a referendum of Capital Punishment - the result would NOT go the way "reformists" wish.

 

Commonwealth of Nations

Phew! Now you got me Curly! What is the "Commonwealth of Nations". I may have to do some referring here. The old British Empire, which was the biggest Empire ever, spanning 25% of the populated planet, eventually dissolved into the Commonwealth. Whereby all the old empire countries, gaining self rule, stayed tied to the Motherland economically, with the Queen still a "sort of ruler". But in name only; she attends and opens the Commonwealth Conferences which are held on a regular basis. Now to go look for something in writing! Do you recall the recent failed attempt by Australia to declare itself a Republic? The populace voted against. Narrowly, but nevertheless against. OK- my source is MacMillans Encyclopedia published in 1981. Quote: "A loose association of 41 independent states once subject to the imperial government of the UK; established in 1931 promoting autonomy, equality, common allegiance to the Crown. I wont run through the member states - too long - Commonwealth Heads of State meet every 2 years. HQ is at Marlborough House, Pall Mall, London. Head of this (in 1981) was a Guyanese gent called Shridath Ramphal. A Commonwealth Institute exists in Holland Park, London, which promotes Commonwealth interests. Does that help in your question?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Intersting, yeah that helped. As for Cris, a native Brit, he's on vactation for the next two weeks, so good luck getting a reply.

Do most Europeans, Brits in particular, want capital punishment, i.e. the death penalty. It seems that when McVeigh was killed that the cable news networks reported that all europeans were against the death penality. Are we barbarians, or administers of a proper sentence?

 

Death Penalty

I rather think that this should be the subject of a new topic completely. But, in answer to your question: I think that here in the UK, the majority of people would like to see the return of the Death Penalty (probably, at a guess about 70%) but, the politicians know best!!! (oh yeah?) and the "pressure groups" get the publicity not Joe Public. These pressure groups think they speak for majorities, but in fact they do not; as is usual with most pressure groups. As for Europe in general - I would suspect that about 55% - 65% of the general european population(s) would be in favour. We are not barbarians, the perpetrator is the barbarian; we are the "cleaner-uppers"; to put a butcher/murderer into prison for life, feeding him, clothing him, giving him lifes lil comforts and of course the expense to the public - that is barbaric!
PS: How long do I remain a "junior" member in here?

 

Well, contrary to the Red Devil's opinion, I would say that attitudes to capital punishment in Europe, and the UK specifically, are more considered than in the US. While it may be true that snap polls suggest a majority in this country is in favour, there is little public clamour for the re-introduction of the death penalty - it's simply a non-issue in election campaigns. Difficult to say what opinion in Europe as a whole is, I would be reluctant to put a figure on it given the lack of any evidence, but believe that the 55% - 65% quoted in favour is rather high. Not wanting to drag a World Affairs post into the rights and wrongs of state execution, I also think that opinion in the UK is shaped to a large extent by the understanding that an imperfect legal system means that innocent citizens will, at some point, be executed - and that is inexcusable.

To get back to the broader political issues, I am surprised at the fear and reactionary attitudes expressed in the thread. Fear of China, fear of German domination, dislike of the French. There is a difference between appropriate vigilance and irrational fear.

 

Captain Canada

True, but isn't it often the case that irrational fears are the sole basis for political decisions? Ex. The U.S. position with regard to Cuba.

Welcome aboard. Pleasant to see a literate post.

 

Thanks for the welcome.

I agree that a number of political decisions are based on irrational fears, but would argue that the US position on Cuba is different. I don't think that the US policy of isolating Cuba is based on fear any longer - irrational or not. Initially, when Castro rose to power then, yes, you could say that the US was responding to the threat of communism spreading into their own backyard (an irrational fear in my view). But I think now the continued US isolation of Cuba is more complex. Habit, punishment for perceived defeats at the hands of the Cubans (Bay of Pigs etc.) and, perhaps most importantly, domestic issues are now in the ascendant. Pressure groups and the important Cuban vote in south Florida have a big impact on US foreign policy on Cuba.

Where irrational fears are most prominent (and closest to home) are in the debate surrounding the UK signing up to the European currency. There are economic arguments for why this shouldn't happen, but the anti-Euro argument is most prominently expressed in emotive, nationalistic terms that have little basis in fact. French domination. German domination. Splitting with the US. Loss of the queen's head on the pound.

This dream of a UK Singapore is simply not going to happen. And while the polls (never trust them myself) show an anti-Euro sentiment, importantly a large majority (70% in a recent ICM poll) view it as inevitable. I believe the growing feeling of inevitability means the arguments, when fully articulated, should off-set the knee-jerk fear response. I hope so anyway. But I'm sure you could take a look at country after country and find a foreign policy based on fear (and, consequently, ignorance). Iran, Libya, China - all qualify to one degree or other I would say. Any thoughts?

 

Member status

Red Devil asked when his Junior Member status would change. Unless things have altered it will change to member at around 30 posts.

I would also like to take this oppurtunity to welcome Captain Canada to the forums. I wish you many fine posts.

 

Captain Canada ...

Was enjoying your post and the clear enunciation of your position ... until I got to:

Would it not be the other way around? Ignorance resulting in fear?

Although I can understand the monied class trembling at the thought of Communism, or even Socialism, what bothers me most is that the 'public', the workers, equally fear them even though there may be nothing to fear. The saddest example, after Cuba, that comes to mind is Vietnam. A country that hoped to shed it's colonial status after having fought against the Japanese (when France had capitulated) only to find France attempting to re-establish it's colonial hold ... and with the support of the United States!

Ah, yes! The 'domino effect' - that ugly beast. Except that after the Japanese had surrendered, Vietnam formed a democratic government, elected Ho as it's President, and even modeled it's Constitution on the Constitution of the United States ... A county supposedly dedicated to freedom.

Vietnam, a country to 'fear'? The madness of it all.

 

Thanks Red Devil, its a 100 posts to become a senior member. That'll take you a month or two to get if your on here pretty regularly.

 

Chagur...

Apologies for the sloppiness of the fear/ignorance statement. I did mean that a policy based on fear is in essence one based on ignorance. That old cliche that we fear that which we don't understand is, I think, quite true.

We are in agreement over Vietnam - a tragic and rather wasteful example of where the US' fear of communism can lead. Of course, the complexities of Cold War politics have many strands. What drives Eisenhower to support the same policy as Nixon, Kissenger or McNamara will not always be the same - Gore Vidal puts the blame on a (semi) organised attempt to maintain the US on a constant war footing for the benefit of the (hate to use the phrase) military-industrial complex. But at base I think fear of communism is at the root of it all.

Cuba could so easily have been another Vietnam. Again, a government was initially formed under Castro that looked towards the US for aid and support in building a new country in the wake of Batista. The US turns its back on Castro, the USSR steps in...and it's bomb shelters in the afternoon in 1962.

And now, to a far lesser extent, we have Iran. The mere name raises cries of 'terrorism' and 'fanaticism' in the US, as I understand it. Yet Iran is probably the most democratic country in the middle east with a reformist government attempting to battle a conservative religious leadership and judiciary in a fight for the future of the country. The US could help Khatemi, but chooses not to. Why? Fear of Islam. Is Iran really to be feared? Could hostility towards the US be reduced by a concilliatory gesture? I understand that memories of the US Embassy hostage crisis are still strong, but I think the country has been unfairly castigated more recently.

I could go on, but I think I'm in danger of losing the thread, and probably boring the readers. A couple of interesting thoughts (that could be new threads):

Does the US have anything to fear from Islam?
Is Kyoto the first serious challenge by the EU to US moral leadership?

 

Storm clouds are rising!

Call me a pesimest if you want, we're gonna be in deep sh** the next decade. The seeds of war and hatred are being sewen now because of our super right wing President, his administration, and the lack of giving in this country.

I wrote a similiar post in World Affairs & Politics, entitled "Bush Pisses Me Off", you can guess what thats about. This next decade is going to be the equivlent of foreign policy in the 1930s. We all know what happened September 1, 1939. Six years, 50 million lives because we didn't step for nearlyTHREE years.

I HATE THIS PRESIDENT. I'm running for office next time. Screw the age limitation!

 

Captain Canada - Welcome!

Dislike of the French is nothing new - they dislike the English just as much. German "domination" is also nothing new - the Germanic person ("Teutonic") always wants to be top dog! Oh by the way - and a welcome from me too! Personally I have one or two French Friends and some German friends - I am speaking about these people as a nation.....