NationStates Jolt Archive

Back when I was a student, I wrote a paper on the EU saying it would end in failure.

With the recent crisis, and the failed summit talks (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/19/international/europe/19europe.html?ei=5065&en=8c8da0e1885f418f&ex=1119758400&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print), I think I seem to have been correct.

Question: Will the EU succeed in unifying Europe or will it fall apart?

No! Don't accept it! It's all a mass conspiracy of the Illuminati and the Masons! Fear it, I tell you!

*begins to froth at the mouth*

Feeeaaar!

Back when I was a student, I wrote a paper on the EU saying it would end in failure.

With the recent crisis, and the failed summit talks (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/19/international/europe/19europe.html?ei=5065&en=8c8da0e1885f418f&ex=1119758400&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print), I think I seem to have been correct.

Question: Will the EU succeed in unifying Europe or will it fall apart?

I think every member state has a different idea about what the EU should be, which is a major problem. Until we can agree what it should be, and what our direction is, it can never work. I don't see it becoming a 'super-state' ever, and certainly not if the UK remains a member. Equally well, it's unsustainable as a protectionist market designed to shore up our flagging farming industry. I have no objection to it as a free-trade arena, and I don't even object to some pan-European initiatives be they political or military. However, I'm a big fan of decisions being taken at the right level, and the European level is the wrong one for almost every political decision.

So, whither? We'll get over this hump with a fudged budget deal that will allow both Chirac and Blair to claim partial victory and the EU will lurch along for a while longer. Eventually I see the German-French led vision of an EU "core" group moving forward with greater an greater integration and a number of other nations remaining on the periphery, but within the EU's ambit for trade purposes.

No! Don't accept it! It's all a mass conspiracy of the Illuminati and the Masons! Fear it, I tell you!

*begins to froth at the mouth*

Feeeaaar!
Dammit I thought we took care of you after you drunkenly wandered into one of our meetings!

I suspect that the EU will undergo a similar life cycle to the US, though presumably on a somewhat expanded timescale.
It began as a collection of fairly independent states, each with a strong desire to retain as much soverignty as possible. These had to work together to achieve some goals, and strengthened by the power of that unity, began a slow but steady shifting of power centreward, hindered by those at the fringes who wanted to maintain their autonymous control over the nature of internal government.
Within a decade or two of the ratification of a constitution, it will develop a national identity, and national identity will encroach on member-state identity.
As more and more political issues are resolved at the center of government, and the member-states become more and more the same, there will be at least one attempt by several states to split off from the union, which will be met with extreme violence by the central government.
Once all (or at least effectively all) military power is directly under the control of the central government, secession will be impossible. The central government will grow steadily more corrupt and conservative (in the resistant to change sense). Eventually, the system will begin to break down as the people lose all faith in their leaders. Depending on the level of resistance the populace provides (guns, rouge military elements, etc), there will either be rioting and martial law, widespread anarchy, or outright revolution. If revolution is put down, the government will likely evolve into an ever more feudal model as society becomes perpetually more stratified. If the revolution succeeds, however, the cycle will likely be restarted much faster.

I suspect that the EU will undergo a similar life cycle to the US, though presumably on a somewhat expanded timescale.
It began as a collection of fairly independent states, each with a strong desire to retain as much soverignty as possible. These had to work together to achieve some goals, and strengthened by the power of that unity, began a slow but steady shifting of power centreward, hindered by those at the fringes who wanted to maintain their autonymous control over the nature of internal government.
Within a decade or two of the ratification of a constitution, it will develop a national identity, and national identity will encroach on member-state identity.


I don't think there's the spur to develop that constitution though. Fundamentally, Europe is missing the most important factor in the formation of the United States - no large, powerful, external threat trying to limit us.

I don't think there's the spur to develop that constitution though. Fundamentally, Europe is missing the most important factor in the formation of the United States - no large, powerful, external threat trying to limit us.
But the EU is threatened economically by the U.S. and China.

Not as powerful a threat as a superpower breathing down a midget nation's neck. But still.

I don't think there's the spur to develop that constitution though. Fundamentally, Europe is missing the most important factor in the formation of the United States - no large, powerful, external threat trying to limit us.

Sure there is ;)

Dammit I thought we took care of you after you drunkenly wandered into one of our meetings!

You can never hide the truth for long! It will get out, be it through me or others!

Fight the oppression! Fight the Man!

*staggers off, poking at the pink leprechauns running in and out of tiny portals in the walls*

You can never hide the truth for long! It will get out, be it through me or others!

Fight the oppression! Fight the Man!

*staggers off, poking at the pink leprechauns running in and out of tiny portals in the walls*

*getting poked*

Ouch! You bastard!

But the EU is threatened economically by the U.S. and China.

Not as powerful a threat as a superpower breathing down a midget nation's neck. But still.

Yes, economically. I don't think that'll be enough of a spur to overcome the national differences and push Europe into a greater political union. Bear in mind the Thirteen Colonies shared a common culture, language, religion, history, legal system, etc etc. This is simply not true of Europe.

*getting poked*

Ouch! You bastard!
Stop poking our waiters!

I think Turkey should Join the EU. It would bring us all closer together. What do you guys think?

Stop poking our waiters!

Aha! Look here! Undeniable proof that Teh M4n is oppressing us! Now we can't even poke leprechaun waiters. What's next? The restriction of *gasp* politically-strung forums?

"Violence inherent in the system! Help! Help! I'm being repressed!"

And there I am, the first and so far only one with a bit of faith in the project.

I reckon France and Germany will eventually make the first step, like they did all those years ago, and join. It won't happen one day to the next, but I reckon we already are on that road, and we won't turn around.
Others can then join. Obvious candidates are Belgium & the Netherlands and so on.
I don't think Britain will ever get over itself in such a way, and if it does, then only in many many decades.
So a European superstate? Yes, given time. But it'll probably be without Britain.

But lets get that constitution thing worked out first, hey?

I suspect that the EU will undergo a similar life cycle to the US, though presumably on a somewhat expanded timescale.
It began as a collection of fairly independent states, each with a strong desire to retain as much soverignty as possible. These had to work together to achieve some goals, and strengthened by the power of that unity, began a slow but steady shifting of power centreward, hindered by those at the fringes who wanted to maintain their autonymous control over the nature of internal government.
Within a decade or two of the ratification of a constitution, it will develop a national identity, and national identity will encroach on member-state identity.
As more and more political issues are resolved at the center of government, and the member-states become more and more the same, there will be at least one attempt by several states to split off from the union, which will be met with extreme violence by the central government.
Once all (or at least effectively all) military power is directly under the control of the central government, secession will be impossible. The central government will grow steadily more corrupt and conservative (in the resistant to change sense). Eventually, the system will begin to break down as the people lose all faith in their leaders. Depending on the level of resistance the populace provides (guns, rouge military elements, etc), there will either be rioting and martial law, widespread anarchy, or outright revolution. If revolution is put down, the government will likely evolve into an ever more feudal model as society becomes perpetually more stratified. If the revolution succeeds, however, the cycle will likely be restarted much faster.


This was something I addressed in the original paper I mentioned (it was almost 15 years ago, so don't ask for it. ;)).

Every sucessful unification has been done at the point of a gun, including the US. (which wasn't completely seen as one nation until after the civil war, at least by some - compare the pre-war usage of "the United States are" and the post-war "the United States is"). The EU would be the first unified state integrated peacefully. History isn't on the side of that. Of course, there's always the first time, but I'm not holding my breath.

Vaevictus hit the nail on the head: Europeans don't consider themselves "European" - they're German, French, Belgian, English, Swiss, Spanish, Italian, et cetera. There was an interesting article awhile back about the EU constitution and getting it passed. Naturally, the first thing that was pointed out was that, in the case of the EU, lawmakers wouldn't be dealing with states that couldn't handle their own affairs or debts (as with the some of the US colonies), they're working with nations that are fiercely independent and fully capable of existing as separate countries. Just think about the number of times the entire European continent has exploded into a giant battlezone because of national honor. Imagine someone trying to hold together these nations in agreements that would have them dealing with countries that don't have a common denominator between them, with the exception of the linguistic or cultural background - if you trace it back to maybe the Celts or Romans. I'm not sure, and I wouldn't be quite smug enough to say that "yes, they will collapse" or "no, they won't... p0l1t1c4L n00b", if the EU will collapse... but I strongly doubt that they will be expanding their operations so long as a feasible constitution fails to be recognized by an appropriate vote of constituent nations.

Although, you never know - in an age in which the French and Germans are even somewhat buddy-buddy, anything's up for grabs.

I think Turkey should Join the EU. It would bring us all closer together. What do you guys think?
Aha. Much better post.
I say: wait until later. Right now we have
a) popular opinion against it
b) Turkey being far too big a fan of US Cowboyisms, so that's no good for stability
c) That whole Cyprus thing still needs working out
d) with current agriculture policies (which need drastic overhaul) the EU would have to spend astronomic amounts of money for Anatolian goat herders, which is money better spent elsewhere.

Aha. Much better post.
I say: wait until later. Right now we have
a) popular opinion against it
b) Turkey being far too big a fan of US Cowboyisms, so that's no good for stability
c) That whole Cyprus thing still needs working out
d) with current agriculture policies (which need drastic overhaul) the EU would have to spend astronomic amounts of money for Anatolian goat herders, which is money better spent elsewhere.

Its a shame Turkey is so backwards, then the EU would let them join. What do you guys think? If we educate the muslims in Turkey and make them more like us (civilized) perhaps one day they will join.

I'm not so sure the EU should have let any of the last 10 in until some sort of sense had been brought to the system. Get it working to the satisfaction of current members before inviting others to join.

Vaevictus hit the nail on the head: Europeans don't consider themselves "European" - they're German, French, Belgian, English, Swiss, Spanish, Italian, et cetera. There was an interesting article awhile back about the EU constitution and getting it passed. Naturally, the first thing that was pointed out was that, in the case of the EU, lawmakers wouldn't be dealing with states that couldn't handle their own affairs or debts (as with the some of the US colonies), they're working with nations that are fiercely independent and fully capable of existing as separate countries. Just think about the number of times the entire European continent has exploded into a giant battlezone because of national honor. Imagine someone trying to hold together these nations in agreements that would have them dealing with countries that don't have a common denominator between them, with the exception of the linguistic or cultural background - if you trace it back to maybe the Celts or Romans. I'm not sure, and I wouldn't be quite smug enough to say that "yes, they will collapse" or "no, they won't... p0l1t1c4L n00b", if the EU will collapse... but I strongly doubt that they will be expanding their operations so long as a feasible constitution fails to be recognized by an appropriate vote of constituent nations.

Although, you never know - in an age in which the French and Germans are even somewhat buddy-buddy, anything's up for grabs.


Yep. As de Gaulle famously said "How can one conceive of a one-party system in a country that has over 200 varieties of cheeses?"
That applies even more so to Europe in general.

Personally, I think there will be some devolution, but the EU won't dissapear. It won't be a USE, either, without some sort of force being applied.

How do I report crap like this to the mods?

Crap like what? Its alright for you to laugh at poor french soldiers.
But when I try to have a serious debate you call it crap. what's you're problem?

At the time they only had big bottles of gas that they could open and hope for the wind to go towards the enemy.
Both sides ending up gassing themselves all the time, until they managed to put the gas into grenades.

People keep saying that if we wait another generation and be done with the current political figureheads of Europe, we'll stand a better chance of forming aggrements. Now personally I can't stand the EU and don't wish to give them the opportunity. All this silliness with the rebate has exposed one thing: we don't like the French and they don't like us. We knew this already. But it is now clear that such national quarrels are destroying the EU. Now Im English and living in the countryside. Our farmers are suffering madly and this highlights how unfair the system of subsidies is. The EU, if it continues to exist or even has a budget, should not spend almost half of it on agriculture. It is unacceptable.
Also, with all the mudsligning over the past few days, Britain suffered quite a bit of stick from our continental cousins. We were called "Pathetic" etc. several time by Chirac. There is only one person who is truly pathetic and that is Chirac, a man who faces criminal charges of fraud when he steps down as president. The French should move into the modern world and stop being the most selfish nation in the world, continuing their out-dated social model at everyone else's expense! Then perhaps the EU will work.
Personally I think we should leave. Now.

Well
Even if my statement was funny, it wouldn't excuse accusing Muslims of being uncivilised and advocationg "eradicating" them all. Advocating religious (and presumably racial) hatred to the point of genocide.

And that's too much and is worth reporting to the mods, yes.

And I will report you for being anti-French Advocating the death of French troops. presumably for racial reasons I don't know what you got against the french?

I never said (eradicating) stop making things up.

1. And I will report you for being anti-French Advocating the death of French troops. presumably for racial reasons I don't know what you got against the french?

2. I never said (eradicating) stop making things up.
1. Please do. I am one of the most pro-French people here, and me getting in trouble for anti-Frenchism would probably leave about 75% of people on this forum kicked out as well.

2. You said educating. I really should learn to read. It is kinda late, and I've been studying a long time.
I appologise. However, I still don't agree with your implication that Muslims are uncivilised, not with you calling Turkish soldiers "swine". But that's another thread.
I will delete my previous posts concerning this.

1. Please do. I am one of the most pro-French people here, and me getting in trouble for anti-Frenchism would probably leave about 75% of people on this forum kicked out as well.

2. You said educating. I really should learn to read. It is kinda late, and I've been studying a long time.
I appologise. However, I still don't agree with your implication that Muslims are uncivilised, not with you calling Turkish soldiers "swine". But that's another thread.
I will delete my previous posts concerning this.

The trouble with you is you're to quick to judge people you're appology is acepted. I know my statment was right. thank you.

I think Turkey should Join the EU. It would bring us all closer together. What do you guys think?

I don't think so. For one, Turkey is not ready yet, for two it's not exactly a European country (the bulk of it is in Asia, plus it's bordering with hot-spots like Iraq and Iran), and for three we can't effort Turkey to become member in EU. Turkey is a largely rural country and has also a large population. This would mean a large number of farming subsidies (that situation is already difficult due to the 10 new EU members). With a country like Turkey, the amount of money available for everybody would be even less. Then there's a number of other questionable things going on in Turkey (torturing, human rights situation, situation of Kurds, etc.).

Thus, I think the EU cannot affort to let Turkey into EU anytime soon because it would just destabilize the EU in it's present state. I think it's more realistic to postpone this for some 30-40 years...

The debate over Turkey is a facade for a deeper discussion: What is Europe, who is a European, and what answer to these questions can people accept?

The most successful, and stable Federations work where there is a common people, language, culture, and aspirations.

However, the entire European charade lacks the one thing that could make it work: a clear definable purpose that the people can rally around.

Back when I was a student, I wrote a paper on the EU saying it would end in failure.

With the recent crisis, and the failed summit talks (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/19/international/europe/19europe.html?ei=5065&en=8c8da0e1885f418f&ex=1119758400&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print), I think I seem to have been correct.

Question: Will the EU succeed in unifying Europe or will it fall apart?

You think this will be the end of the EU? This is a storm in a teacup. Things like this have happened before, people said That the EU would fall because of the war in Iraq and the conflicting views. People said the Euro was going to fail and be the fall of the EU. People said the accesion countries will cripple the EU. People said they were going to throw the UK out because it didn't accept the Euro.

The EU is still ok as far as I know, what makes this any different?

I dont even see why this question has come up. The constitution was never that likely to get accepted but its only one treaty really and nothing to get worked up about. While a lot of people have rejected it, I dont hear any calls to leave the EU completely apart from the usual Euro sceptics who will never be satisfied.

The EU will porbably take a step back for a few years but then start again the process of gradual integration, but will not become a superstate for a very long time to come, if ever. And as for the constitution, it will probably be reworked and simplified and presented again for a referendum and will get passed eventually.

You can never hide the truth for long! It will get out, be it through me or others!

Fight the oppression! Fight the Man!

*staggers off, poking at the pink leprechauns running in and out of tiny portals in the walls*

I want to condemn the brutal oppression of the pink leprechauns, why can't you live with them in peace so we can all gang up on those little green pixie barstards.
*heats deadly poking fork over furnace and cackles*

On a serious note I agree with the view that the EU will fall apart with Britain as a member, the public opinion of the EU here is that it is too powerful, petty, and meddling; a lot of people (including me) will never back it in its current form. I personally would like to see it replaced with a Socialist collective but I doubt that'll happen in my lifetime :(

Depends on what you mean by fall apart, really. Most of these kinds of international organizations never really die, no matter how many talks fail or how ineffective they are.

Take the UN for example.

The European Union project comes from countries with Latin and German historical backgrounds.
I don't see the point of including eastern european countries with a Slavic culture, for example, as they just don't get along very well with the western cultures.
A union should be formed by people who can at least understand each other "a little bit", have some kind of historical links, territorial integrity and similar views on major questions.

Let's look at some ethno-linguistic (cultural) categories:

Latin countries: Portugal, Spain, Italy, France
Central German countries: Belgium, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Germany, Switzerland, Austria
Northern German countries: Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Iceland
Other western european countries: UK, Finland, Greece, Ireland

Please note that in Eastern Europe, most countries are Slavic (northern or southern slavic).

Northern Slavic countries: Belarus, Ukraine, Poland, Russia, Moldova
Southern Slavic countries: Czech Rep, Slovakia, ex-Yugoslavia
Baltic German countries: Latvia, Lithuania
Latin countries: Romania
Other eastern european countries: Hungary, Estonia, Bulgaria, Turkey

If you try to include too many different people, they won't be able to agree on anything except a weak commercial/border agreement. Which is far from a political union.

And by the way, the UK's economy is very strong. It is second in Europe, just behind Germany. And France is third, but 3x weaker than the UK. I can understand why the UK doesn't "feel" strongly for the EU.

Northern Slavic countries: Belarus, Ukraine, Poland, Russia, Moldova
Any Polish people here agree with that?
As far as I remember, the Poles in history always understood themselves as fending off the Slavs from the East.

And by the way, the UK's economy is very strong. It is second in Europe, just behind Germany. And France is third, but 3x weaker than the UK. I can understand why the UK doesn't "feel" strongly for the EU.

Oh good. Im glad someone understands. Thankyou so.

On a serious note I agree with the view that the EU will fall apart with Britain as a member, the public opinion of the EU here is that it is too powerful, petty, and meddling; a lot of people (including me) will never back it in its current form. I personally would like to see it replaced with a Socialist collective but I doubt that'll happen in my lifetime :(

I sincerely hope your hope for a socialist collective fails. Britian protects its hard-fought gains from the EU from a system that is unfair and wholly unacceptable. Should there be a eurostate, I shall say my goodbyes to the country of my birth and move to another continent. It will be sad, but i would not live under european rule. The EU is a joke. Lets not extend its life any longer.

An interesting question.

On the international level, they are operating more or less as a political bloc already, and they can economically challenge the United States and East Asia as it is. I do not think hegemonic concerns will make them unite much further.

The business community seems supportive, which in an increasingly neo-liberal Europe is an influential force, but as the French, the Dutch, and probably many others don't seem to be buying it, that may be countered.

I don't think there will be a reversal. The continental institutions that exist now will remain. I don't think their expansion in the near future is inevitable, though eventual further moves towards unification probably are.

I doubt the EU will fail, but unification will not succeed for a while, and it may well be in a framework rather different from what we have seen so far.

After the French and Dutch 'nay' for the Constitution, I have very little hope left for a united Europe. I don't think the EU as it is now will crumble apart, but it's clear now that Europe must focus on other problems instead of trying to unify further. First, focus on economic agreements with the new member states, and dissolving the borders. The French and Dutch referenda have made it clear that now is not the time for political unification.

I still hope one day there will be some sort of a United Europe, but I doubt it will ever work with Britain (and founding members like France and the Netherlands are beginning to worry me too).

I studied the EU as part of my degree and personally I feel that there are 3 problems with it:

1) Britain
2) France
3) the US

Britan - The EU was Churchill's idea, as I said elsewhere, he thought that the Brit Empire would last - we didn't. That is something the average English person hasn't taken on board yet, but the Irish, Scots and us colonials long ago came to grips with. Britain has a four way choice to make 1) EU and slow loss of indipendance 2) America and being degraded to a colony 3) the commonwealth (unlikely as they have burnt many bridges in the last 20 years and India in particular feels strong enough to stand alone) and 4) slowly being reduced to the status of Almenia by our inept leaders and dying economy.

France - Again an issue of history getting in the way of reality, De Gaulle and Napoleon are dead and burried and French Legions are no longer feared through out the world. French pride has been hurt by the US - English speaking - dominating the world and tacky Anglo-saxon culture surpasing what they beleive is their naturally superior culture. There is a race on between UK spreading the EU so it is more difficult to become intergrated and France pushing for greater intergration to secure power away from Britain.

The US - Scared of being surpassed and undermining either the EU, China or India will constantly seek to undermine these three and anyone else that puts its head above the parapit. Where does Le Penn get all that money, or UKIP or the far right in the Tory party?

I do think that the EU will get stronger slowly and become more and more intergrated, and Britain will always be difficult, but as the world becomes more and more unstable we will all start looking to the Union to serve a greater role.

Turkey will join when we need her army - the biggest in Europe after the Russians - and not before.

I think of the EU as the new power balance in Europe. Instead of retaining relatively equal power distribution in Europe through military means, they use political and economic means. Personally, I find the utter naivety of its supporters, thinking that you can all get along after centuries of conflict, to be quit humorous. I feel that history will repeat itself and an unforeseeable event will force another major conflict in Europe in the next one hundred years. That is the natural result of so many different cultures living in so close together.

-snip-
How are the Europeans gonna start fighting again? We no longer have to worry about land, it doesn't matter anymore anyways. Germany will never again start a war with the Russians, nor will they, because we've gotten that if we clash again, Europe gets destroyed again. No point doing it. Putin knows that attacking Europe will be the death of him and Russia, if not by European superior military technology, then by the US getting all hot and bothered.
France and Germany are getting along better than at any time since Charlemagne. The Eastern nations are picking up now, Solidarnosc is working hard to stop Polish people from working in the EU for slave wages, and even Turkey is modernising (albeit slowly).
The only weak point in the EU is Britain vs France right now.
Sooner or later Britain will decide whether to stay or to leave, and then that problem is solved too, although I say we should cut all subsidies to European farmers right now. The extra money can be spent on Universities and ESA and so on.
-----------
As I said before, I think Germany and France are going to become one eventually (just those two, no EU treaties or anything) and others will join. It's like a second EU, born out of the first.

However, the entire European charade lacks the one thing that could make it work: a clear definable purpose that the people can rally around.
Don't call it a charade, you're insulting what some have worked for for more than 50 years. It's brought us prosperity and strength and prevented Europe from falling into oblivion completely.
You have a point though. What is the purpose of the Union?
Do we have to appeal to base "Europe is better!" type nationalism? Will anyone buy that?

How are the Europeans gonna start fighting again? We no longer have to worry about land, it doesn't matter anymore anyways. Germany will never again start a war with the Russians, nor will they, because we've gotten that if we clash again, Europe gets destroyed again. No point doing it. Putin knows that attacking Europe will be the death of him and Russia, if not by European superior military technology, then by the US getting all hot and bothered.
France and Germany are getting along better than at any time since Charlemagne. The Eastern nations are picking up now, Solidarnosc is working hard to stop Polish people from working in the EU for slave wages, and even Turkey is modernising (albeit slowly).

Stuff happens. I doubt on September 10, 2001 anybody thought that the US would be declaring war on Afghanistan within the month.

although I say we should cut all subsidies to European farmers right now. The extra money can be spent on Universities and ESA and so on

Cool. Then your overeducated population won’t be able to find jobs on their skill level in order to afford the cost of food. Don’t worry about it completely running out, though. We’ll keep supplying it as long as there is a buck to make.

Stuff happens. I doubt on September 10, 2001 anybody thought that the US would be declaring war on Afghanistan within the month.
But America has been the most likely contender to start wars for some time. For various reasons. I just don't see anyone in Europe managing to get the public to revert back to hating their neighbours like that.


Cool. Then your overeducated population won’t be able to find jobs on their skill level in order to afford the cost of food. Don’t worry about it completely running out, though. We’ll keep supplying it as long as there is a buck to make.
Oh boy. The US is mighty busy subsidising their own farmers to a ridiculous level. That and the stuff the US supplies is mutant food, which is pretty much outlawed in the EU until it's proven to be safe. The EU doesn't need that. Many 3rd world countries have a competitive advantage in food production anyways, so let them do what they're good at, and let us do what we're good at.
As for our population: There is about no one actually employed by the farming sector these days. Those few people can find new jobs. Our overeducated population will be perfectly fine finding a job, considering that manufacturing is moving to Asia, Food Production moving to various other places, and only services and R&D are the things that Western countries still have a competitive advantage with. So I say: subsidise that. Universities are part of that industry.
And if that doesn't work, they can all work for ESA, and we'll build an Enterprise in about 5 years. Or a Doom Star like thing....

Cool. Then your overeducated population won’t be able to find jobs on their skill level in order to afford the cost of food. Don’t worry about it completely running out, though. We’ll keep supplying it as long as there is a buck to make.

I hadn't particularly noticed Europe straining under the wight of hordes of unemployed graduates. Quite the contrary. What would you suggest instead? We stop educating people beyond what's necessary to drive a tractor or milk a cow?

And, for the record, very little of Europe's food comes from the US, there are plenty of other places to buy it.

That and the stuff the US supplies is mutant food, which is pretty much outlawed in the EU until it's proven to be safe.

Why is it unsafe?

let them do what they're good at, and let us do what we're good at.


That’s a pretty elitist attitude you have there.

Our overeducated population will be perfectly fine finding a job, considering that manufacturing is moving to Asia, Food Production moving to various other places, and only services and R&D are the things that Western countries still have a competitive advantage with. So I say: subsidise that. Universities are part of that industry.
And if that doesn't work, they can all work for ESA, and we'll build an Enterprise in about 5 years. Or a Doom Star like thing....

The problem is that there is only a limited amount of jobs requiring the higher echelons of education. We are learning this the hard way in the US. We have far to many people graduating with degrees in law. To many to supply skill-appropriate jobs for anyway.

I think of the EU as the new power balance in Europe. Instead of retaining relatively equal power distribution in Europe through military means, they use political and economic means. Personally, I find the utter naivety of its supporters, thinking that you can all get along after centuries of conflict, to be quit humorous. I feel that history will repeat itself and an unforeseeable event will force another major conflict in Europe in the next one hundred years. That is the natural result of so many different cultures living in so close together.

Or maybe Europe will become thoroughly pissed on someone outside the EU. This will then be the driving force that forces unity in Europe.

Why is it unsafe?
It's gen-food. We don't know what it'll develop into just yet. And I'm prepared to wait until the American populace has proven its' safety by not turning into green martians with funny shaped horns.
The same goes for people in the 3rd world who don't have a choice but to eat that stuff.


That’s a pretty elitist attitude you have there.
Check out the economic concept of "Comparative Advantage". It's got nothing to do with elitism or value judgements. They can produce food cheaper than we can. Their labour costs are lower, land prices are cheaper and their weather is better (usually). That makes them better at making food.
Europe has many research institutes, educated people, is well supplied with other stuff, and can therefore more efficiently engage in research and development. The relative cost of doing an hour of meaningful research (expressed in food production) is higher in Africa than it is in Europe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage


The problem is that there is only a limited amount of jobs requiring the higher echelons of education.
But not if you have free trade, and your entire country sits in the "higher" echelons of production, and your nation specialises in for example providing lawyers, because that's what it can do best.

Or maybe Europe will become thoroughly pissed on someone outside the EU. This will then be the driving force that forces unity in Europe.

A distinct possibility. I am all but completely convinced that the major factor that has shaped human history is violent conflict, not economics, political ideology or even religion. Those these things can lead to war, but it is the war itself that leads to change.

It's gen-food. We don't know what it'll develop into just yet. And I'm prepared to wait until the American populace has proven its' safety by not turning into green martians with funny shaped horns.
The same goes for people in the 3rd world who don't have a choice but to eat that stuff.

I honestly have never understood the argument against simply accelerating the selective breeding process. After all, do you think that any vegetable or fruit that you eat originally looked or tasted the same way it did when humans first got there hands on it?


Check out the economic concept of "Comparative Advantage". It's got nothing to do with elitism or value judgements. They can produce food cheaper than we can. Their labour costs are lower, land prices are cheaper and their weather is better (usually). That makes them better at making food.
Europe has many research institutes, educated people, is well supplied with other stuff, and can therefore more efficiently engage in research and development. The relative cost of doing an hour of meaningful research (expressed in food production) is higher in Africa than it is in Europe.

Interesting. And here I had you pegged as the typical elitist European.

But not if you have free trade

I fail to understand how free trade can help. Sure you can import everything you don’t make yourself, but there simply isn’t the money or the infrastructure to support an entire nation of people doing work that doesn’t create an actual physical product.

I honestly have never understood the argument against simply accelerating the selective breeding process. After all, do you think that any vegetable or fruit that you eat originally looked or tasted the same way it did when humans first got there hands on it?
Question is, do we know enough about Genetics to reliably change a plant? The actual genome may have been uncoded, but there is a second layer that guides when a certain gene kicks in and when it doesn't. That's the reason that if you tame a wolf, it gets curled tails and floppy ears. We know next to nothing about those genes.
The genes that you do breed for (tameness etc) also trigger other genes (that change how the dog looks). I'm not convinced the same thing couldn't happen here.


I fail to understand how free trade can help. Sure you can import everything you don’t make yourself, but there simply isn’t the money or the infrastructure to support an entire nation of people doing work that doesn’t create an actual physical product.
But we already do have the infrastructure in the EU. Anything we need to buy to upgrade it further we can buy in China, or if it's very advanced, make it ourselves. Same goes for the US (if it wasn't so protectionist) or even for the 3rd world (you could just get overseas people to build necessary infrastructure for you).
The whole Free Trade thing works of course only when people can move freely as well. Ideally, market forces would then keep the wages at a fairly good level that represents the extra time a graduate has spent on getting a degree.

Question is, do we know enough about Genetics to reliably change a plant? The actual genome may have been uncoded, but there is a second layer that guides when a certain gene kicks in and when it doesn't. That's the reason that if you tame a wolf, it gets curled tails and floppy ears. We know next to nothing about those genes.
The genes that you do breed for (tameness etc) also trigger other genes (that change how the dog looks). I'm not convinced the same thing couldn't happen here.

Plants are a tad less complicated than dogs.

But we already do have the infrastructure in the EU. Anything we need to buy to upgrade it further we can buy in China, or if it's very advanced, make it ourselves. Same goes for the US (if it wasn't so protectionist) or even for the 3rd world (you could just get overseas people to build necessary infrastructure for you).

Then who makes food, clothing and basic raw materials? Not to mention, who mops the floors and cleans the toilets??

The whole Free Trade thing works of course only when people can move freely as well. Ideally, market forces would then keep the wages at a fairly good level that represents the extra time a graduate has spent on getting a degree.

Well, that’s certainly a nice, utopian society you have there. :rolleyes:

1. Plants are a tad less complicated than dogs.
2. Then who makes food, clothing and basic raw materials? Not to mention, who mops the floors and cleans the toilets??
3. Well, that’s certainly a nice, utopian society you have there. :rolleyes:
1. Not really. Modern plants have evolved over an even longer period, and have just as complex genetics as a mammal does.
2. Whoever has a competitive advantage in doing so. It's not like every country has to specialise into just one thing. They can do many things if they can do them better than other people.
3. Why? Free Trade can work, we've seen that in the EU for example. It can bring social problems as industries move, but that's a short term thing.
Free Movement of people is the same.
And Demand and Supply for educated labour is a good like any other. If there are too many people from Africa studying (for free) at an EU uni, there are too many educated people, and the wage of educated people falls. Then less people will go through three years or so of uni if they're not paid as much. So the supply falls, and wages go up again. There'll be an equilibrium somewhere, and it'll be higher than the wage of uneducated people.