4 ms·

Isn't the situation that Germany wanted in WW1/2 now a reality? They are the main power in Europe and Britain is an isolated has-been. Funny how differently r

Isn't the situation that Germany wanted in WW1/2 now a reality? They are the main power in Europe and Britain is an isolated has-been. Funny how differently reality unfolds in contrast to the narratives of meaning we try to construct around it. Britain won the war.. but lost the war.

forinti 8y ago
Maybe the wars only managed to set Germany back and delay the inevitable. If only they had seen it.
dvdcxn 8y ago
I don't understand the revisionist conflation of the EU and Germany. Germany are not the main power in Europe, although they are a significant part of it.
- chosenbreed37 8y ago
  > I don't understand the revisionist conflation of the EU and Germany. Germany are not the main power in Europe, although they are a significant part of it. Who would say is the main power?
  - dvdcxn 8y ago
    If we're pretending the EU doesn't exist (which seems to be what's happening here), then it's clearly Russia.
    - simias 8y ago
      I don't understand what you're trying to say, Russia is an important diplomatic and military power but economically its GDP is barely above Spain and quite far below Germany, the UK, France and Italy. If you take the EU as a whole its GDP is more than 13 times greater than that of Russia (22 trillion vs. 1.6 trillion USD). It's definitely a significant power but I don't see how you could argue that it's "clearly" the main continental power. However it's probably the regional power with the highest nuisance potential for the EU (alongside Turkey).
  - Panoramix 8y ago
    The point is that they are a union. For instance, France, the Netherlands and Belgium together are more "powerful" than Germany. It's not like the Germans simply determines whatever they want.
  - Tsubasachan 8y ago
    There is no main power in Europe. Each country, down to Lichtenstein, has struggled for centuries to gain and maintain its independence. What you do have are blocs and factions. But if you think Germany can actually tell any country on how to vote you need a European history lesson.
- rusk 8y ago
  Yes, in fairness. The UK have always been a heavy hitter in Europe, the fact that they failed to redistribute the spoils is a domestic matter. France are a large military industrial power too. There are other strong voices such as the Dutch, the Polish and the Spanish. This whole thing about fitting up Germany to be the puppet master is just ignorance borne of envy for their social model, industrial output and success on the international export market.
- nabla9 8y ago
  Revisionist conflation is silly, but Germany definitely is the main power within EU. EU decision making for big issues: 1. Leaders of France and Germany meet to draw out a plan. 2. They negotiate with few other big countries to form a block. Valuable horse-trading happens here. 3. The European Council meets and small countries realize that the table is already made for them. They are never part of the process from the start. They are allowed to do some tweaks but that's it.
  - dvdcxn 8y ago
    > 1. Leaders of France and Germany meet to draw out a plan. So...the main power in Europe is not Germany, it's 'France and Germany'. Important distinction.
    - nabla9 8y ago
      Germany is definitely the leading force behind the two, but yes, they work closely together.
  - Certhas 8y ago
    Except that that's also a caricature that hasn't been true in a while. Germany is one of several large powers in the EU, but small countries have considerable influence, and can and do block decisions/legislation all the time. That's why there is a push to end the national vetos on various issues. Seriously, the idea that the EU, where the smallest country has a veto over virtually everything, and where Germany is the largest of several large democratic powers, and where everything that happens is a compromise negotiated carefully while balancing dozens of competing interests, is in _any_ way related to "what Germany wanted in WWII" is deeply offensive. And yet I've encountered it again and again, online and in person. This type of idiotic idea, unbound by the reality of what the EU is and does, and enabled and encouraged by opportunistic press and politicians, is exactly what brought us Brexit.
    - nabla9 8y ago
      > in _any_ way related to "what Germany wanted in WWII" i I was not arguing that and I specially said so in the beginning. Brits are just sore because they won the war but lost the peace (relative to Germany). Small countries have veto power, but using veto always creates a crisis. That's not proper way to do decisions, but Germany forces it to others. The inability to be part of the decision process from the beginning is real problem. You either vote to spoil everything or get small confessions, but you are never part of the inner circle.
zimablue 8y ago
I think one way to look at it is as an example of the positive effects of destruction. Cities bombed down => get to rebuild higher density, modern form, get a strong regulated rental sector Society destroyed => Britain still has a unique level of class-based system, unique private school=>uni system, lowest social mobility in Europe (closer to the US) Monarchy destroyed (WW1) => get to have functioning politics (proportional representation). UK has never had a proper revolution that stuck, so our politics is directly descended from monarchs arguing with nobles, that's what led to Brexit and after Brexit to our inability to negotiate coherently.
- rusk 8y ago
  > UK has never had a proper revolution that stuck Well, there was Cromwell [0] but maybe that's part of the problem ... [0] https://oll.libertyfund.org/groups/68 https://oll.libertyfund.org/groups/68
  - zimablue 8y ago
    If the dude's kid ends up as king it's not a proper revolution in my book, the French knew how to do it.
    - arethuza 8y ago
      In France they soon had an Emperor then not long after that the Bourbons were restored to the throne: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_XVIII_of_France https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_XVIII_of_France
rusk 8y ago
> Britain won the war.. I think the reality of this is a little more nuanced. By virtue of geography (it's an island) Britain was the last place Germany were able to overrun. This bought time for what remained of the European forces to gather and reorganise, and provided a staging point for further counter-attacks. The fact is, that Britain has never been invaded, not in modern times anyway, and outside of bombing raids has never known the true humiliation of hearing the foreign powers' jackboot marching down the street. Just about every other nation in Europe has, and understands the value of the peace that closer union brings about. >.. but lost the war. Ultimately being able to claim "they won the war" may have done the UK more harm than good because they were never incentivised to address their deep deep social issues in any kind of a constructive way. The good that comes out of the brexit fiasco might be that this is an eventual turning point for them.
- arethuza 8y ago
  Well, the UK did attempt to address a lot of social issues at the end of WW2 by electing a socialist (but passionately anti-Soviet) government - that's how we got things like the NHS. People forget that Churchill was hated by a lot of people - my father (who was in the RAF in WW2) utterly loathed him.
  - kevin_b_er 8y ago
    And then the UK had a decade of Thatcher, who tried to kill the NHS while lying that it was safe: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/25/margaret-thatcher-pushed-for-breakup-of-welfare-state-despite-nhs-pledge https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/25/margaret-th...
- cm2187 8y ago
  Nuclear deterrence did more to ensure peace in Europe than the EU. It's not a choice between the EU or war.
  - kristiandupont 8y ago
    Has there been a cold war between European nations that I was not informed about?
lisper 8y ago
That may be true, but what does it have to do with the topic at hand? Britain and Germany are on the same side of this issue.
growlist 8y ago
It would be more precise to qualify your description of Germany as being the main economic power, because in military terms it is still effectively occupied by the US. Perhaps apparent permanent vassalage status is worth trading against economic success in your eyes..
Certhas 8y ago
In the EU everyone has a veto on everything. Nothing happens against the will of the sovereign states. To conflate that Germany is influential within such a supranational structure, in a situation where Germany also financially supports many other member states, with the imperialistic ambitions of Germany to rule Europe in WW2 is misleading, offensive and wrong.
pornel 8y ago
There's a bit of a difference between being influential through strong economy and democratic process vs dictatorship and genocidal occupation.
lqet 8y ago
Germany has little military power, and the condition of the Bundeswehr is not optimal, to say the least. So calling it the "main power" in Europe is an exaggeration, few Germans see their country as that, in a way also because there is little to no real national identity. As a German, I frequently notice a common misconception about the country: it cannot be understood as a static nation with a common narrative. Mindset, culture, wealth and history (even language) of the states ("Länder") differ quite significantly. The idea of "one" German nation is really not that old, and there are many Germans who would not describe themselves as Germans, but instead as members of the original, once independent region or city they are living in ("Swabians", "Bavarians", "Frisians", "Hamburgers", etc). Not so very long ago, the country was also sharply divided religiously into Protestants and Catholics, and a similar conflict is now emerging between Christians and Muslims. The first common experience to "Germans" was WWII and the guilt of the holocaust. I cannot think of any other integrative narrative that wouldn't be quite a stretch. Any power Germany had, has, or will have, is fragile, not only because we are quite exposed geographically, but also because the idea of "Germany" was always so dynamic. A fragile power is no power. You may argue with Taleb that this makes the country antifragile, but personally I find it extremely unrealistic for Germany to hold any status other than "economic" power for an extended period of time. It wasn't achieved in over 1250 years since Charles the Great, and not for lack of trying.
- tasuki 8y ago
  Your first paragraph was quite enlightening! In my experience as a Czech, the guilt over WWII and the holocaust is the recurrent unifying theme for Germans. On one hand I do appreciate the sentiment. On the other, I think it's a bit of an overreaction that just displaying the German flag is often seen as a form of radical nationalism. Also, this bit made me laugh: > Germany [...] quite exposed geographically Yes, squeezed between Poland and Belgium? Or perhaps Czech Republic and the Netherlands? Austria and Denmark? All these scary countries around! I can promise you the Czechs aren't planning any attacks on the exposed Germany just yet :)
  - nisa 8y ago
    > I can promise you the Czechs aren't planning any attacks on the exposed Germany just yet :) děkuju moc! And greetings from germany :) Czech is a wonderful language by the way. It's sad there is so little interest for your country in Germany. As for the flag: I doubt it's a such a big deal. It's unpopular in educated circles to some degree but I'm worried quite more about all the people using the Imperial War Flag to demonstrate their disdain for modern democracy.
imtringued 8y ago
The saying goes Britain won the battle but lost the war.

forinti 8y ago

Maybe the wars only managed to set Germany back and delay the inevitable. If only they had seen it.

dvdcxn 8y ago

I don't understand the revisionist conflation of the EU and Germany. Germany are not the main power in Europe, although they are a significant part of it.

chosenbreed37 8y ago
> I don't understand the revisionist conflation of the EU and Germany. Germany are not the main power in Europe, although they are a significant part of it. Who would say is the main power?
- dvdcxn 8y ago
  If we're pretending the EU doesn't exist (which seems to be what's happening here), then it's clearly Russia.
  - simias 8y ago
    I don't understand what you're trying to say, Russia is an important diplomatic and military power but economically its GDP is barely above Spain and quite far below Germany, the UK, France and Italy. If you take the EU as a whole its GDP is more than 13 times greater than that of Russia (22 trillion vs. 1.6 trillion USD). It's definitely a significant power but I don't see how you could argue that it's "clearly" the main continental power. However it's probably the regional power with the highest nuisance potential for the EU (alongside Turkey).
- Panoramix 8y ago
  The point is that they are a union. For instance, France, the Netherlands and Belgium together are more "powerful" than Germany. It's not like the Germans simply determines whatever they want.
- Tsubasachan 8y ago
  There is no main power in Europe. Each country, down to Lichtenstein, has struggled for centuries to gain and maintain its independence. What you do have are blocs and factions. But if you think Germany can actually tell any country on how to vote you need a European history lesson.
rusk 8y ago
Yes, in fairness. The UK have always been a heavy hitter in Europe, the fact that they failed to redistribute the spoils is a domestic matter. France are a large military industrial power too. There are other strong voices such as the Dutch, the Polish and the Spanish. This whole thing about fitting up Germany to be the puppet master is just ignorance borne of envy for their social model, industrial output and success on the international export market.
nabla9 8y ago
Revisionist conflation is silly, but Germany definitely is the main power within EU. EU decision making for big issues: 1. Leaders of France and Germany meet to draw out a plan. 2. They negotiate with few other big countries to form a block. Valuable horse-trading happens here. 3. The European Council meets and small countries realize that the table is already made for them. They are never part of the process from the start. They are allowed to do some tweaks but that's it.
- dvdcxn 8y ago
  > 1. Leaders of France and Germany meet to draw out a plan. So...the main power in Europe is not Germany, it's 'France and Germany'. Important distinction.
  - nabla9 8y ago
    Germany is definitely the leading force behind the two, but yes, they work closely together.
- Certhas 8y ago
  Except that that's also a caricature that hasn't been true in a while. Germany is one of several large powers in the EU, but small countries have considerable influence, and can and do block decisions/legislation all the time. That's why there is a push to end the national vetos on various issues. Seriously, the idea that the EU, where the smallest country has a veto over virtually everything, and where Germany is the largest of several large democratic powers, and where everything that happens is a compromise negotiated carefully while balancing dozens of competing interests, is in _any_ way related to "what Germany wanted in WWII" is deeply offensive. And yet I've encountered it again and again, online and in person. This type of idiotic idea, unbound by the reality of what the EU is and does, and enabled and encouraged by opportunistic press and politicians, is exactly what brought us Brexit.
  - nabla9 8y ago
    > in _any_ way related to "what Germany wanted in WWII" i I was not arguing that and I specially said so in the beginning. Brits are just sore because they won the war but lost the peace (relative to Germany). Small countries have veto power, but using veto always creates a crisis. That's not proper way to do decisions, but Germany forces it to others. The inability to be part of the decision process from the beginning is real problem. You either vote to spoil everything or get small confessions, but you are never part of the inner circle.

zimablue 8y ago

I think one way to look at it is as an example of the positive effects of destruction. Cities bombed down => get to rebuild higher density, modern form, get a strong regulated rental sector Society destroyed => Britain still has a unique level of class-based system, unique private school=>uni system, lowest social mobility in Europe (closer to the US) Monarchy destroyed (WW1) => get to have functioning politics (proportional representation). UK has never had a proper revolution that stuck, so our politics is directly descended from monarchs arguing with nobles, that's what led to Brexit and after Brexit to our inability to negotiate coherently.

rusk 8y ago
> UK has never had a proper revolution that stuck Well, there was Cromwell [0] but maybe that's part of the problem ... [0] https://oll.libertyfund.org/groups/68 https://oll.libertyfund.org/groups/68
- zimablue 8y ago
  If the dude's kid ends up as king it's not a proper revolution in my book, the French knew how to do it.
  - arethuza 8y ago
    In France they soon had an Emperor then not long after that the Bourbons were restored to the throne: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_XVIII_of_France https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_XVIII_of_France

rusk 8y ago

> Britain won the war.. I think the reality of this is a little more nuanced. By virtue of geography (it's an island) Britain was the last place Germany were able to overrun. This bought time for what remained of the European forces to gather and reorganise, and provided a staging point for further counter-attacks. The fact is, that Britain has never been invaded, not in modern times anyway, and outside of bombing raids has never known the true humiliation of hearing the foreign powers' jackboot marching down the street. Just about every other nation in Europe has, and understands the value of the peace that closer union brings about. >.. but lost the war. Ultimately being able to claim "they won the war" may have done the UK more harm than good because they were never incentivised to address their deep deep social issues in any kind of a constructive way. The good that comes out of the brexit fiasco might be that this is an eventual turning point for them.

arethuza 8y ago
Well, the UK did attempt to address a lot of social issues at the end of WW2 by electing a socialist (but passionately anti-Soviet) government - that's how we got things like the NHS. People forget that Churchill was hated by a lot of people - my father (who was in the RAF in WW2) utterly loathed him.
- kevin_b_er 8y ago
  And then the UK had a decade of Thatcher, who tried to kill the NHS while lying that it was safe: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/25/margaret-thatcher-pushed-for-breakup-of-welfare-state-despite-nhs-pledge https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/25/margaret-th...
cm2187 8y ago
Nuclear deterrence did more to ensure peace in Europe than the EU. It's not a choice between the EU or war.
- kristiandupont 8y ago
  Has there been a cold war between European nations that I was not informed about?

lisper 8y ago

That may be true, but what does it have to do with the topic at hand? Britain and Germany are on the same side of this issue.

growlist 8y ago

It would be more precise to qualify your description of Germany as being the main economic power, because in military terms it is still effectively occupied by the US. Perhaps apparent permanent vassalage status is worth trading against economic success in your eyes..

Certhas 8y ago

In the EU everyone has a veto on everything. Nothing happens against the will of the sovereign states. To conflate that Germany is influential within such a supranational structure, in a situation where Germany also financially supports many other member states, with the imperialistic ambitions of Germany to rule Europe in WW2 is misleading, offensive and wrong.

pornel 8y ago

There's a bit of a difference between being influential through strong economy and democratic process vs dictatorship and genocidal occupation.

lqet 8y ago

Germany has little military power, and the condition of the Bundeswehr is not optimal, to say the least. So calling it the "main power" in Europe is an exaggeration, few Germans see their country as that, in a way also because there is little to no real national identity. As a German, I frequently notice a common misconception about the country: it cannot be understood as a static nation with a common narrative. Mindset, culture, wealth and history (even language) of the states ("Länder") differ quite significantly. The idea of "one" German nation is really not that old, and there are many Germans who would not describe themselves as Germans, but instead as members of the original, once independent region or city they are living in ("Swabians", "Bavarians", "Frisians", "Hamburgers", etc). Not so very long ago, the country was also sharply divided religiously into Protestants and Catholics, and a similar conflict is now emerging between Christians and Muslims. The first common experience to "Germans" was WWII and the guilt of the holocaust. I cannot think of any other integrative narrative that wouldn't be quite a stretch. Any power Germany had, has, or will have, is fragile, not only because we are quite exposed geographically, but also because the idea of "Germany" was always so dynamic. A fragile power is no power. You may argue with Taleb that this makes the country antifragile, but personally I find it extremely unrealistic for Germany to hold any status other than "economic" power for an extended period of time. It wasn't achieved in over 1250 years since Charles the Great, and not for lack of trying.

tasuki 8y ago
Your first paragraph was quite enlightening! In my experience as a Czech, the guilt over WWII and the holocaust is the recurrent unifying theme for Germans. On one hand I do appreciate the sentiment. On the other, I think it's a bit of an overreaction that just displaying the German flag is often seen as a form of radical nationalism. Also, this bit made me laugh: > Germany [...] quite exposed geographically Yes, squeezed between Poland and Belgium? Or perhaps Czech Republic and the Netherlands? Austria and Denmark? All these scary countries around! I can promise you the Czechs aren't planning any attacks on the exposed Germany just yet :)
- nisa 8y ago
  > I can promise you the Czechs aren't planning any attacks on the exposed Germany just yet :) děkuju moc! And greetings from germany :) Czech is a wonderful language by the way. It's sad there is so little interest for your country in Germany. As for the flag: I doubt it's a such a big deal. It's unpopular in educated circles to some degree but I'm worried quite more about all the people using the Imperial War Flag to demonstrate their disdain for modern democracy.

imtringued 8y ago

The saying goes Britain won the battle but lost the war.