4 ms·
The EU was born out of the EC, which was born out of the EEC, which was born out of ECSC (European Coal and Steel Community). The entire concept of the EU is t
by madaxe_again 13y ago
The EU was born out of the EC, which was born out of the EEC, which was born out of ECSC (European Coal and Steel Community).
The entire concept of the EU is that a straightforward homogenous marketplace engenders trade which in turn engenders peace, as attacking your trading partners is rarely a beneficial move.
Nuclear weapons and MAD were extant before the EEC and throughout its existence, and have not played a role in the stability of Europe beyond having a common foe on the doorstep to the east.
Colonialism/imperialism most certainly has not ended. Many European nations have territories dotted around the globe, many of which are still highly contentious, and the US continues to act on moral principals which fall squarely out of the big book of empire-building.
The EU/EC/EEC has achieved plenty - but we humans are not accustomed to understanding accomplishments or progress which occurs on a timescale beyond our own limited lives.
- M2Ys4U 13y ago>Colonialism/imperialism most certainly has not ended. Many European nations have territories dotted around the globe, many of which are still highly contentious Some of these territories are considered to be part of the European Union, resulting in the slightly amusing fact that part of South America (French Guiana) is in fact part of the EU!
- mattmanser 13y agoCome on, that's a silly thing to say, everyone's empires were significantly dismantled after WW2. It's easy not to fight when there's nothing to fight over and you've got a massive bear beating at the door. I'm not claiming the EU's done nothing, I think it's made Europe richer, increased growth, etc., I'm claiming the EU had nothing to do with peace in Europe. Europe would still be at peace today with or without a common market. Especially given that the UK didn't join for 25 years and a bunch more in the 80s and then more recently. And the UK invaded Egypt with France before they were both in the EEC. That was NATO and mutual fear and needing protection from US doing that, not the EU. It was simply being in club capitalism and being very scared of club communism. And the world changed, become smaller. Which developed nations have gone to war with each other since WW2? No European country invaded Norway for it's oil. The UK is seriously talking about letting Scotland drift away without going to war in it. Territory's not the same as it was. Again, my claim is that Europe would still be at peace today with or without a common market, there's literally been no reason to fight.
- robin_reala 13y agoWhich developed nations have gone to war with each other since WW2? Argentina / UK for one. And the Balkan conflicts for two.
- mattmanser 13y agoThe Balkans was a Yugoslavia civil war at its heart. I give you the Argentina/UK one, but that seriously almost didn't happen. And is really one of the last, thorny, vestiges of colonialism, like Israel.
- gadders 13y agoNo it isn't, it's about self-determination.
- Mvandenbergh 13y agoLuckily Argentina's attempt to impose its colonial will was thwarted.
- chad_oliver 13y agoWW1 was an Austro-hungarian civil war at its heart. It spiraled out of control because we didn't have the system we have today.
- madaxe_again 13y ago> there's literally been no reason to fight. But how does that differ to WWII? Sure, reparations, polish corridor (not a reason at all), rise of fascism - but those things happened in a Europe that had sworn it would never fight again at Versailles. LN failed impressively because it was oriented around arms control and security pacts, rather than trade agreements - it attempted to treat the symptoms, not the cause. NATO isn't dissimilar, but functions as the economic end of things is looked after by the EU. Fundamentally, it's hard to either prove or disprove, as the only reference points we have are other similar historical contexts, but my money is on trade being a great enabler. Worked for the Romans, until they switched to military dominance (because they ended up with a plutarchy due to the traders (senators) getting richer, who ended up with private armies), at which point it all fell apart. Again, many other factors, and all of history is a great big murk from which we have to try to model what happens today.
- pjc50 13y agoI think it's worth distinguishing between the implementation of the EU (which is .. buggy) and the concept (which is a great universal message of peace and brotherhood and prosperity, so powerful that you have non-EU countries and peoples begging to be admitted)