"European Union: ‘What do you want to be when you grow up?" Topic

"Whatever anyone's views on the enterprise, there was one question always begging to be asked of the European Union: ‘What do you want to be when you grow up?' At an early stage it wasn't clear to everyone. Then the purpose and direction of travel seemed agreed — under the stewardship of Angela Merkel. She was there to settle disputes, authorise bailouts, offer German help to struggling nations and protect the project as it led to ever-closer union. Whatever else can be said of it, with Merkel at the helm at least the EU appeared to have direction. Not anymore.

This week — after another political drubbing for the CDU in Hesse — the German Chancellor announced that she would not seek re-election as head of the party she has led for 18 years. She also announced she would be stepping down as Chancellor at the next election, in 2021, a position she has held since 2005. During that time in office she has worked with four French presidents, four British prime ministers, and seven people who tried to run Italy. Her demise is proving a drawn-out affair — but we can see, in parallel, the demise of her vision of Europe. A clear, federalist vision which once seemed inevitable and now sorely lacks a leader.

Today there is simply no one on the scene capable of acting as the queen or emperor of that project, as Merkel has done for the past decade. That is due, in no small part, to the decisions she took and the hardness and hubris with which she acted when she held the most powerful position in Europe. The Merkel project had created a EU that had unachievable ambitions, seeking to govern countries with long histories of independence, and was fundamentally un-European in that it sought to impose uniformity upon the most gloriously diverse set of countries on earth…."
Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

Merkel is a strong values-driven leader, and Merkel is trustworthy. Let's see who replaces her.

I think Macron is the same. You may recall he played the European Anthem rather than La Marseillaise first at his inauguration.

EU will continue to have Germany and France leading the way.

Looks like the Austro Hungarian empire to me. Polyglot syate with power jealousy guarded by the centre. Subject people accept a trade off between lack of democracy but better standards of living. A benevolent dictatorship essentially.

From the article:

" The Merkel project had created a EU that had unachievable ambitions, seeking to govern countries with long histories of independence, and was fundamentally un-European in that it sought to impose uniformity upon the most gloriously diverse set of countries on earth."

The present day EU is a socialist con trick – it was promoted as an economic trading union in the 70s, which was why the UK electorate signed up to it. No one in the UK voted to allow themselves to be ruled by the likes of Junker, Macron and Merkel.

And now they want their "own" army?

I cannot stop thinking about all the parallels (so far) between the Holly Roman Empire and the EU…

Nice to see some of the TMP'rs know more about European history than some of the pro-EU remainers here in the UK…

:-)

With Merkel exiting "stage left", the UK exiting "stage right", it appears Macron wants the EU and her army to be America's enemy, which I find rather interesting.

Perhaps, given that, NATO truly is no longer needed. Not sure why we'd support an enemy/fair weather ally further, in such circumstances.

With "allies" like France and Turkey, who needs enemies?

I'm not sure that you could consider Britain, Poland, the Netherlands and many other NATO members Luke warm. It is only the obsessive euro-federalists such as France and Germany who are driving the euro army agenda. It's a classic case of placing a political agenda before a sensible defence policy.

"All politics is local." (Tip O'Neill, Speaker of The House 1977-1987) Angela Merkel's problem is her immigration policy's social collapse in Germany. When the local electorate no longer supports her, she is gone. Then, everything else falls by the way, popular or not.

They have tried a "euro army" for quite some time.It has never evolved into anything. As soon as countries are expected to pay or contribute soldiers the project has died.

Who wants to fight and die for the EU? When push comes to shove people and the politicians in Europe are loyal to their own countries not the "EU". France and Germany might want a EU army but they do not want to pay for it or contribute troops. Almost all other countries do not want such an army.

"It appears Macron wants the EU and her army to be America's enemy, which I find rather interesting."

Although first I did not even want to react to this nonsense, I must say that it is of course the other way around: your president has declared us (Europe)- and a lot of other countries or groups of countries – the enemy ! I feel the Americans should clean up their own political mess with two sides wanting to kill each other instead of the governing that grown-ups would do.

I have a problem with people seeking that much vaunted freedom they love to talk about, which often turns out to be a mental attempt to impose what is essentially personal freedom on complex structures such as multi-state federations.

To put it another way, people feel the state or in this case the EU owes them some kind of personal treatment, the feeling they are getting clear and direct benefits on a platter with a huge neon sign flashing exactly how much ahead they are getting.

Personal freedom is one thing, personal responsibility is another and while people are not necessarily looking for direct handouts they do aspire to get a sense that the system is working for them and don't always see the benefits inherent to multi-state cooperation as seen with the EU.

Not having had a major armed conflict for nearly three-quarters of a century is one. Looking back to my own local history this would have been a very rare occurrence at almost any point in time in the previous 500-odd years.

I have a bit of a problem when somebody throws terms like "undemocratic" onto the table and everyone nods in agreement as if a single word and statement covers everything. We vote on various levels from local to European, get referenda, every idiot with a grudge can start an interest group and block major economic or political decisions for decades if necessary. If anything the only thing undemocratic I see is that we are drowning in too much democracy !

Democracy works best for clearly defined topics with defined implications and little or no ambiguity. Once a purely personal non-sequitur opinion of the "Eff that guy ! Or I vote against the bridge to spite the ones from the wrong side of the tracks !"

Don't think I'm against Democracy, I love democracy because it's usually the best system for people to get the most personal freedom to achieve something or anything. Regulated societies and dictatorships are inherently inefficient and only ever give opportunities to a very select group and creates a caste of people who live on the generous handouts of the leadership because even authoritarian leaders can't run a country by themselves and need to keep their supporters happy.

Democracies work best when people have their own room to grow while the state and private sector are balanced in such a way that the state adds extra support and the private sector gets to prosper.

And despite being a fairly haphazard construct, I think the EU has achieved many of these goals. Not bad for a system where politicians will try to get every possible benefit from the EU while at the same time retire into the bunker of national interests as soon as they hit any rough edge.

One of the major issues is that the EU has gone through three political generations and times have changed. The original founders were desperately trying to reconnect the old ties that had connected Europe in the period between the Congress of Vienna and certain events in Sarajevo. The second generation were idealists who figured that they were the last of their kind and their position and power would gradually be subsumed by the EU. The third generation played on the idea that a regular citizen feels uncomfortable within big multi-state structures because we human beings are tribal creatures who can just barely manage to live in a city and state/province and have been trained to bark on command whenever the national identity is called up, but we have no reference for something like the EU full of far too many strangers for comfort.

That the EU has mutated from a mutually beneficient economic alliance into a frankenstein composite attempt to placate the wishes and satisfaction of 27-odd member while at the same time being undermined by people who have used it as political leverage, often doing more long term harm than anything else.

The EU does need a swift kick up the butt, but being a common project it's unlikely to happen. These days where our economies are given a huge boost by a common market, it's all too easy to overlook the benefits in favour of assuming that some EU regulation is nothing more than the entire system spending a few million euros to personally spite one particular citizen.

The EU is like a big dysfunctional machine that is too complex to truly understand, but somehow still generates advantages that may not be easily recognized by the average citizen. And judging by some of the usual bar talk, it's only ever perceived through the tired old platitudes, accusations and even downright conspiracy theories.

If the EU was a car, the average understanding of any random citizen would be akin to "Must be driven by voodoo magic" or "It's some kind of exclusive thing for the [insert ominous term to describe some nebulous, nefarious, but utterly ill-defined organisation]

EU love it or hate it, it's been a mixed ride at best, some good, some bad and if anything it does generate a huge amount of freedom to a lot of people, even if many are not inclined to recognize this and ought to concentrate on the real major issues rather than attempt to fight windmills.

Our President never declared EU nations the enemy, but has said they are not paying their fair share for defense – many are still not, even today, and that the trade deals are unfair.

Both of the above are facts. Uncomfortable ones perhaps, but irrefutable facts, nonetheless.

Macron said just the other day he wants an EU Army "…to defend against China, Russia, and the USA".

One would think that on/near the anniversary of the end of WWI, that he'd be a little more grateful, since we saved his nation twice in the last 100 years.

Grown ups pay their own way, and don't depend upon others to bail them out.

@foxtrotpapa Merkel and Macron are "values driven"??LOL, oh LOL!

Who's values? They certainly have no care for their own people. They are destroying Germany and France.

Victor Orban and the good people of Hungary togeather with the Poles and Checz''s care about "values".

You were joking, right? My husband and myself and 15 year old son went to France 2 years ago, as they wanted to see the Invasion beaches and I wanted to see Paris again.

I visited Paris 20 years ago, and remembered how pretty the city was.It was quite the most lovely place I had ever seen. It is now a dangerous toilet.

I have 0 doubt the US is going to war with Europe, one never knows if the US will need to invade Europe to save Europe from themselves again. But saber rattleing is a time tested way for a government to control its own population.

"The EU is like a big dysfunctional machine that is too complex to truly understand, but somehow still generates advantages that may not be easily recognized by the average citizen. And judging by some of the usual bar talk, it's only ever perceived through the tired old platitudes, accusations and even downright conspiracy theories."

Patrick, no offense, but what you just said boils down to, "If you don't agree with me it's because you're an unsophisticated rube." The EU has been reaching deeper and deeper into its citizens lives for generations telling people what they can buy, what they can sell, and even how they measure what they sell. That's not generating freedom, that's taking it away.

I'm one of those unsophisticated rubes who's glad the UK stood up and said, "Enough is enough, we're taking our country back from the bureaucrats in Brussels."

<quote>Our President never declared EU nations the enemy</quote>
The 17th of July 2018 (and if you use goolge you can even have the video):

Asked in a TV interview to name his "biggest foe globally right now", the US president started by naming the European Union, calling the body "very difficult" before ticking off other traditional rivals like Russia and China.

He meant "economic foe", not "enemy" that you have to fight militarily. Context is everything.

There is a difference, though apparently some cannot grasp that.

Macron, on the other hand, said he needed an army to fight America (not economically).

Unfortunately that's not what Macron said.

You can hear this interview here if you speak french:

link

He said that Europe needed a common army to less depend on the others and especially the USA after Trump decided to withdraw from the INF agreement. Moreover this 2 subject were not even in the same sentence as the only enemy mentioned for the European army was Russia..

Not going to happen with the EU as it currently stands – for a start they'd need the agreement of every single member state. It would take something utterly remarkable and massively improbable, like the US abandoning NATO, to give it any impetuous at all.