Angela Merkel’s calm steadied a wounded nation — but it also put it to sleep. For sixteen years, Germany mistook caution for competence and comfort for courage. This essay dissects how the myth of …
It’s better that both are strong and fight each other than one winning and dominating the world.
While they fight there is the opportunity to find a stable arrangement for all.
The EU as a better US ignores the rest of the world.
The idea of having to be strong is toxic if that means that we treat small nations according to their size. I am worried that the way we handled Libya and other African countries will make it difficult to create alliances. We should not build our growth on that foundation.
Do you disagree with their expertise?
Do you believe promises from politicians? If wealth would be everything, India would have been the global power. Now we seek foreign investments. If they come from America or China, do you think the EU will control the outcome?
The big question is if its actual expertise you base your mistrust on or simply gut feeling.
Neither. It has to make sense to you, no matter what it is.
We are the second largest economical player on this world
India and China were the largest. Do we have the skills and culture to prevail?
It is telling how much the narrative is being pushed.
Just one of many. Even though you are right to question that narrative, it is not enough. If you just want to be strong, somebody will sell you a muscle car and only years later you will realize that the monthly payments made you weak.
Europe can decide to be as self-sufficient as any other big player, because it is one of them
The size of the economy is not enough.
If you don’t want to imagine a future that let’s Europe be more than a servant to the interests of the US and/or China, fine. But don’t put your limitations in the way of our continent.
If you can’t imagine all the things that make you a servant, some limitations will hold you back.
It’s better that both are strong and fight each other than one winning and dominating the world.
So? Then why don’t we also fight them? We don’t want either of them dominating the world - or even us.
The idea of having to be strong is toxic if that means that we treat small nations according to their size.
That’s exactly what the US and China are doing and just one sentence up, you said it is better that they are strong and fight.
Do you believe promises from politicians?
That’s not what I asked. Do you disagree with their expertise?
Neither. It has to make sense to you, no matter what it is.
There needs to be a basis for that. It can be either expertise or gut feeling. Which one is it?
Do we have the skills and culture to prevail?
Given that we come from a centuries-long period where we absolutely dominated the world, one would think so.
If you just want to be strong, somebody will sell you a muscle car and only years later you will realize that the monthly payments made you weak.
Exactly. That’s why most sensible people argue for a strategic independence of Europe. So the “monthly payments” we have to pay to countries who’re not in our favour, are as small as possible. The whole point is for us not to become someone who’s economically dependent on one of the big bullies.
The size of the economy is not enough.
It is. It is the second largest economy in the world. Why do you keep repeating this lie?
You said: It’s better that both are strong and fight each other
… each other than one winning.
Now, who do you think will carry the burden when two large ones are fighting? Hasn’t Europe been the stage for the cold fight between Washington and Moscow for too long? Why do we also need to be the stage for the fight between Washington and Beijing?
Yes.
So just to reiterate: you disagree with the expertise of the report you were citing numbers from?
If USA or China adjust, the investment is not enough.
Do you think they’re not really trying right now?
Just what I know.
You know more about this topic than the people writing this report?
Why should any country support the EU in that fight?
That’s not the question. You asked about skill and culture.
I told you about India. You already forgot by the end of the comment.
An economy isn’t measured by its inhabitants, but by its economic power. That’s why Europe is second before China and that’s why the US with only 300m is at the absolute top.
It’s either fight for dominance or being dominated.
I guess you’ll agree that we spent far to much time being dominated by the US. While you propose welcoming China as our new (co-)overlords instead, I propose a Europe that finally aspires to be independent. Yes, that will be hard, yes that will require changing a lot of things. But yes, it is worth it.
To be honest: we can keep this here up for months, becoming entangled in ever more remote topics such as apparently now discussing the East India Company, without making any progress at all. So let’s be clear: there’s a report even you cited that points out the challenges Europe’s facing when trying to become more independent. This report is written by actual experts in these fields, something no-one on this forum can claim for themselves. If you oppose the statements from that report, I expect more substance than just your intuition and a lot of noise thrown into the discussion.
Europe is the second largest economy on the world. European countries are among the most developed and wealthiest countries in the world. Independence is never given for free and starts with the desire to actually be independent. But that requires to also have an open eye for possibilities instead of solely concentrating on why something is not possible. I don’t think you want to do that, so what’s the point in keeping discussing really?
For me, it’s that somebody is wrong on the internet comic. I think I am right and I don’t understand how you can stick to your opinion, despite the knowledge that you obviously have.
One thing is that you imagine arguments. I am saying that it’s better if both countries compete instead of one winning but you write above that I want to welcome China as our new overlord. I hope that if I write it often enough that you will remember and that we can move on to discuss which options Europe realistically has.
Both countries can compete as much as they want, I couldn’t care less.
My priority is that Europe should use the opportunity to become as independent of these two as possible. They both are not interested in our benefits and every European should be determined to get these two out of our continent as fast as possible. We have the US, we have China, we have Russia all aspiring to be independent, but you somehow want to tell us that it isn’t possible for Europe? I’m sorry, but that smells of bad faith because you don’t even try to consider it a possibility but jump from “fact” to “fact” why it absolutely isn’t possible at all. You can repeat that as much as you want, but I’d rather have some substance why you think you know better than actual experts on that topic.
We have the US, we have China, we have Russia all aspiring to be independent
People usually agree that Russia is now dependent on China.
but you somehow want to tell us that it isn’t possible for Europe?
The EU is deregulating the banking sector to get the money to get the engineers. That looks desperate to me.
but jump from “fact” to “fact” why it absolutely isn’t possible at all.
Because I jumped from engineers to money? You need the engineers and you get them with money.
but I’d rather have some substance why you think you know better than actual experts on that topic.
Why should I appeal to authority? If there is not enough money then there are not enough engineers then there is a technological gap and then there is a power gap.
Not my argument.
It’s better that both are strong and fight each other than one winning and dominating the world.
While they fight there is the opportunity to find a stable arrangement for all.
The idea of having to be strong is toxic if that means that we treat small nations according to their size. I am worried that the way we handled Libya and other African countries will make it difficult to create alliances. We should not build our growth on that foundation.
Do you believe promises from politicians? If wealth would be everything, India would have been the global power. Now we seek foreign investments. If they come from America or China, do you think the EU will control the outcome?
Neither. It has to make sense to you, no matter what it is.
India and China were the largest. Do we have the skills and culture to prevail?
Just one of many. Even though you are right to question that narrative, it is not enough. If you just want to be strong, somebody will sell you a muscle car and only years later you will realize that the monthly payments made you weak.
The size of the economy is not enough.
If you can’t imagine all the things that make you a servant, some limitations will hold you back.
So? Then why don’t we also fight them? We don’t want either of them dominating the world - or even us.
That’s exactly what the US and China are doing and just one sentence up, you said it is better that they are strong and fight.
That’s not what I asked. Do you disagree with their expertise?
There needs to be a basis for that. It can be either expertise or gut feeling. Which one is it?
Given that we come from a centuries-long period where we absolutely dominated the world, one would think so.
Exactly. That’s why most sensible people argue for a strategic independence of Europe. So the “monthly payments” we have to pay to countries who’re not in our favour, are as small as possible. The whole point is for us not to become someone who’s economically dependent on one of the big bullies.
It is. It is the second largest economy in the world. Why do you keep repeating this lie?
Fight, dominance, those metaphors don’t help.
What we want can only be secondary to what is possible.
… each other than one winning.
That was a very sloppy argument.
Yes. If USA or China adjust, the investment is not enough.
Expertise is too much. Just what I know.
Rape, pillage, enslave. Why should any country support the EU in that fight? That history is a burden, not an advantage.
Just be careful that that is not included in the plans of the big bullies.
I told you about India. You already forgot by the end of the comment.
You said: It’s better that both are strong and fight each other
Now, who do you think will carry the burden when two large ones are fighting? Hasn’t Europe been the stage for the cold fight between Washington and Moscow for too long? Why do we also need to be the stage for the fight between Washington and Beijing?
So just to reiterate: you disagree with the expertise of the report you were citing numbers from?
Do you think they’re not really trying right now?
You know more about this topic than the people writing this report?
That’s not the question. You asked about skill and culture.
An economy isn’t measured by its inhabitants, but by its economic power. That’s why Europe is second before China and that’s why the US with only 300m is at the absolute top.
And you say we have to fight and dominate them.
Because we don’t have the skills to avoid it. It’s 1984, we could have known.
Yes. It’s a political document. It’s a lower bound on the problems and an upper bound on the potential.
Good question. They are, but so is the EU.
They write what is necessary, not what is sufficiant.
You think those old skills will help?
I am talking about the East India Company. India was the wealthiest country in the world, next to China. Both succumbed to small European countries.
The size of the economy doesn’t help against cleverness. Are we going to be clever?
It’s either fight for dominance or being dominated.
I guess you’ll agree that we spent far to much time being dominated by the US. While you propose welcoming China as our new (co-)overlords instead, I propose a Europe that finally aspires to be independent. Yes, that will be hard, yes that will require changing a lot of things. But yes, it is worth it.
To be honest: we can keep this here up for months, becoming entangled in ever more remote topics such as apparently now discussing the East India Company, without making any progress at all. So let’s be clear: there’s a report even you cited that points out the challenges Europe’s facing when trying to become more independent. This report is written by actual experts in these fields, something no-one on this forum can claim for themselves. If you oppose the statements from that report, I expect more substance than just your intuition and a lot of noise thrown into the discussion.
Europe is the second largest economy on the world. European countries are among the most developed and wealthiest countries in the world. Independence is never given for free and starts with the desire to actually be independent. But that requires to also have an open eye for possibilities instead of solely concentrating on why something is not possible. I don’t think you want to do that, so what’s the point in keeping discussing really?
For me, it’s that somebody is wrong on the internet comic. I think I am right and I don’t understand how you can stick to your opinion, despite the knowledge that you obviously have.
One thing is that you imagine arguments. I am saying that it’s better if both countries compete instead of one winning but you write above that I want to welcome China as our new overlord. I hope that if I write it often enough that you will remember and that we can move on to discuss which options Europe realistically has.
Both countries can compete as much as they want, I couldn’t care less.
My priority is that Europe should use the opportunity to become as independent of these two as possible. They both are not interested in our benefits and every European should be determined to get these two out of our continent as fast as possible. We have the US, we have China, we have Russia all aspiring to be independent, but you somehow want to tell us that it isn’t possible for Europe? I’m sorry, but that smells of bad faith because you don’t even try to consider it a possibility but jump from “fact” to “fact” why it absolutely isn’t possible at all. You can repeat that as much as you want, but I’d rather have some substance why you think you know better than actual experts on that topic.
People usually agree that Russia is now dependent on China.
The EU is deregulating the banking sector to get the money to get the engineers. That looks desperate to me.
Because I jumped from engineers to money? You need the engineers and you get them with money.
Why should I appeal to authority? If there is not enough money then there are not enough engineers then there is a technological gap and then there is a power gap.
Why would you need somebody to confirm this?