Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
That's an encouraging take, euro green.  I resonated with that.
As regarsd the EU in its totality, I guess it's, I've everything difficult and challenging, first you do it wrong, so that then you can do it right knowing the traps second time around.
The main tension to resolve from where I stand is between the intention behind the whole project and how it was marketed to Europeans. So many positives we saw in the 90'same, Erasmus, Schengen being the main attractors.
But were these just the honey in thee trap?
Was the secret intention all along to homogenise Europeans so their identification with the project outstripped their own nationalistic tendencies (so far, so good) to the point that with the growing sense of unity and freedom from weird anomalies that were part of national identities (and all the tariffs that slowed trade) and collaborate on a superstate that would take the best from all the individual nations and weld it together for the good of all, or was it just marketing and the intention was to yoke all national financial enterprise to the diktat of an all-powerful central bank, and thus enrich the already wealthy at the cost of austerity for the poor. A giant ruse in other words in order to suscitate unity while further driving inequality, turbo capitalism, the financialisation of everything, neoliberalism, neoconservative adventures, trickle down theory and all the toxic rest of it.
If that was the pig, now the lipstick is coming off and we are moving towards a Macronesque new Europe, less workers' rights, more plutocracy, more police state, all still dressed in fluffy, exceptionalist rhetoric.
The truth will out.  

'The history of public debt is full of irony. It rarely follows our ideas of order and justice.' Thomas Piketty
by melo (melometa4(at)gmail.com) on Tue Jul 10th, 2018 at 08:26:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:

Display:

Occasional Series