|
blowfish posted:It's so adorable that us Europeans think a single random shooting is a noteworthy event. Now in America... It just has to be a big enough shooting. (I don't know why this is on the Onion. As far as I know, the article is fully accurate and not satire.)
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 10:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 02:21 |
|
|
Excuse me, I have a question. I haven't paid attention to politics for years and years and I've spent the last few weeks to play catch-up. I'm an American but European politics is fascinating. Also I like your Conservatives more than ours. Although Trump is being compared to European Conservatives so...uh...that's not a good thing. Anyhow, the Euro Right promotes the view that these ME immigrants have values and ideas that are simply antithetical and incompatible with liberal democracies. Basically, Europe is da bomb. So why are these exact same people so eager to get out of the EU? If your belief is that there is a serious threat of extremism and that Europe is better, why not combine the two and support the EU wholeheartedly? Oppose the threat with a united military and economic force and embrace Pan-Europeanism. I see this Nigel Farage guy blasted as a Right Wing nut but from what I've seen, he's been the most critical of a big military and the "erosion of sovereignty." Perhaps I'm too used to American politics but support for a greater armed forces and presence is usually a core tenet of being on the right. In summary, why are the people who want to be strong actively trying to bail out of a group that makes them stronger than they ever could be on their own? Or is that a fundamental misunderstanding and the EU actually weakens nations somehow?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 10:13
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:Excuse me, I have a question. I haven't paid attention to politics for years and years and I've spent the last few weeks to play catch-up. I'm an American but European politics is fascinating. Also I like your Conservatives more than ours. Although Trump is being compared to European Conservatives so...uh...that's not a good thing. Jesus loving christ, have you seriously never heard of the concept of nationalism? EDIT: I mean honest to god. WW1 and WW2? Those ring any bells? To make a comparison, nationalism is our version of American exceptionalism. Only difference being, that every single nation that makes up the EU believes they are gods chosen and that all the other member states are part of the B-team. MiddleOne fucked around with this message at 10:36 on May 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 10:33
|
|
|
Christian democracy is not especially militarist, and it remains influential in the post-WW2 landscape the American political landscape itself has the odd paleoconservative or two still running about. You may like to observe that paleocons likewise had interesting attitudes on the domestic civil rights movement. enumerating some set of shared individual European values runs counter to, um, European values. When one says that American culture is individualist, this is what it means: Americans view the political good as reducible to individual rights and beliefs, whereas a lot of status quo continental politics rests on relations between institutions. That's not something you can enumerate, and a lot of it rests on strategic ambiguity and meek coexistence, rather than banging the table with tablets inscribed with the Ten ronya fucked around with this message at 10:41 on May 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 10:38
|
|
|
Xoidanor posted:Jesus loving christ, have you seriously never heard of the concept of nationalism? Yes, I have heard of nationalism. It rests comfortably in my ideological garbage bin along with Creationism. Rather than fantasize over nonsense that was only dreamed up about a century ago, I would think people would focus on real matters. Europe isn't like America, you guys have a long and diverse history. American patriotism is stupid in the extreme but it does make sense given our short history and just how we came into being. But for Europe, the concept of nationalism is an infant ideology and one that was pretty much strangled in its crib along with fascism in WW2. After that the Cold War was all about power blocs and in the modern world it's all about globalization. Nationalism has no place in the modern world and it certainly has no place in Europe which should be united against real threats instead of divided because of imaginary concepts. ronya posted:Christian democracy is not especially militarist, and it remains influential in the post-WW2 landscape I'm not exactly sure what you are saying. How does the individual have any part in a discussion that the nations of Europe share ideas on free speech, democratic process, etc.?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 10:52
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:Yes, I have heard of nationalism. It rests comfortably in my ideological garbage bin along with Creationism.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 11:07
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:Yes, I have heard of nationalism. It rests comfortably in my ideological garbage bin along with Creationism. Wow, and here I felt bad for overreacting when that was apparently exactly what you deserved. You have literally no understanding of how Europe has actually developed. The reason that you cannot understand what is happening is precisely because of that narrow mindset you have set yourself into. Hint, nationalism did not die in 1945. Forgall posted:You really seem to be confusing your idea of how the world should be with how it actually is. Like really. 
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 11:17
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:Rather than fantasize over nonsense that was only dreamed up about a century ago, I would think people would focus on real matters. Europe isn't like America, you guys have a long and diverse history. American patriotism is stupid in the extreme but it does make sense given our short history and just how we came into being. But for Europe, the concept of nationalism is an infant ideology and one that was pretty much strangled in its crib along with fascism in WW2. After that the Cold War was all about power blocs and in the modern world it's all about globalization.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 11:19
|
|
|
Not to mention how nationalism was integral in building up the welfare states in the after-war period without having citizens jump to communism. Unity and inter-societal sharing had way less radical implications when built around the assumption of a national myth and a flag than class warfare.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 11:23
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:Yes, I have heard of nationalism. It rests comfortably in my ideological garbage bin along with Creationism. You seem to think that 10 times the history of the USA should act to discourage nationalim while in fact it works the exact opposite. And to be honest nationalism/tribalism has historically been much better at organizing society than any type of all inclusive internationalism or humanitarianism. The big trick is to go from a lower level of tribalism to a higher one (lets say family->tribe->nation->EU->world) and then keep it there, which historically usually meant forceful repression and genocide of dissenting parties, things that are not too hot on todays ideological agenda.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 11:45
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Strangled in its crib implies that nationalism was a very recent invention, which really wasn't the case. By the time WW2 ended, it had been an significant force in European politics for about a century. As for "pretty much strangled", all that happened was that Europe was (mostly) forced to put a lid on inter-European conflicts, so we directed the nationalism outward (the French doggedly attempting to maintain a stranglehold on Algeria into the sixties), or inward, and built up national myths of virtuous innocence and heroism in the face of barbarism. What we didn't do was say "Huh, the German's experiment with nationalism sure was a failure, so let's just become internationalists". Because why would we? Nazism wasn't a failure of nationalism, it was a failure of the Germans. Everyone else on the other hand used nationalism for good; defending themselves against the Germans (and/or the Russians)! There was also those other countries in the Axis, ya know, Italy and Japan which were also nationalist, not to mention the plague of fascist, ultra-nationalist parties in Europe across the 30s. This nationalism utterly ruined all of them. World War II was the direct result of nationalism and it was largely a war against nationalism, or at least jingoism. As for the current world, why would the EU exist if this nationalism over common sense was actually the popular idea in Europe? If you care so much about your country, why aren't you trying to attach it to a superstate that can make it stronger both economically and militarily? That's what I came in here to ask. If the EU does those things, I can see no reason to not want in on it. If it doesn't do those things, then I would like to know so I can revise my understanding of the situation. NikkolasKing fucked around with this message at 12:07 on May 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 12:05
|
|
|
European countries don't share exact ideas on family law, local education policy, ideal local governance, etc. which is exactly where assimilation (or lack thereof) is most concerning The window for European territorial nationalism did sputter to a close. France agglomerated first; Germany later, Italy barely in time, and Scandinavism never made it to the finish line. But you'll observe that with, e.g., Norwegian or French language issues, this renunciation of state-enforced nationbuilding was not replaced by an embrace of capitalist assimilative forces but instead regionalism and autonomism. That presumes that the entity enjoying autonomy has some pre-existing legitimacy, rather than hailing from an intolerably different culture.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 12:06
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:Yes, I have heard of nationalism. It rests comfortably in my ideological garbage bin along with Creationism. Do you agree, then, that for example India should have remained a British colony? Because it was very nationalist of the Indians to want to be their own independent and sovereign nation-state. Repeat that example for every other piece of colonial land. It's also very nationalist of the Taiwanese to not submit to China already. And these stubborn South Koreans, how nationalist of them not to reunite with their northern brethren under the wise guidance of Fat Leader? Nationalism is actually a good thing in moderation. Yes, its excesses have led to disasters, but the same can be said of any other ideology. Zudgemud posted:And to be honest nationalism/tribalism has historically been much better at organizing society than any type of all inclusive internationalism or humanitarianism. Let's just look at the massive success and all-around utopian paradise that was the internationalism of the Soviet Union... NikkolasKing posted:As for the current world, why would the EU exist if this nationalism over common sense was actually the popular idea in Europe? If you care so much about your country, why aren't you trying to attach it to a superstate that can make it stronger both economically and militarily? That's what I came in here to ask. If the EU does those things, I can see no reason to not want in on it. If it doesn't do those things, then I would like to know so I can revise my understanding of the situation. The reasons why the EU was created originally are massively different from the reason why the EU exists now. Before it was a dream of cooperation leading eventually to a federal superstate which would ensure European people would remain prosperous and united throughout whatever crises the future would throw at them. Nowadays, the European Union mostly exists as a competitive financial free-market with the aim of racing everything to the bottom, with the eventual result that things such as "laws" or "democracy" will be fully abolished and replaced by a return to the Ancient Regime of feudal lords (the 1%) and toiling serfs (the 99%). Cat Mattress fucked around with this message at 12:12 on May 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 12:07
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Do you agree, then, that for example India should have remained a British colony? Because it was very nationalist of the Indians to want to be their own independent and sovereign nation-state. Repeat that example for every other piece of colonial land. I think of all of that as less to do with nationalism and more to do with "please stop exploiting or killing us." You have a point, though. I was a bit too rash in my wording. Sorry. quote:Let's just look at the massive success and all-around utopian paradise that was the internationalism of the Soviet Union... Whatever its rhetoric, the USSR was nothing more than an empire with Russia square at the middle and then a bunch of puppets it used and abused. It was not anything remotely resembling reall international cooperation with equal partnerships.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 12:13
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:It was not anything remotely resembling reall international cooperation with equal partnerships. Neither is the EU. A large problem begins by trying to define what the heck an equal partnership is, actually.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 12:27
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:There was also those other countries in the Axis, ya know, Italy and Japan which were also nationalist, not to mention the plague of fascist, ultra-nationalist parties in Europe across the 30s. This nationalism utterly ruined all of them. World War II was the direct result of nationalism and it was largely a war against nationalism, or at least jingoism. Cat Mattress posted:Let's just look at the massive success and all-around utopian paradise that was the internationalism of the Soviet Union... I don't really know how you can argue that the USSR was particularly internationalist with a straight face.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 12:28
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:As for the current world, why would the EU exist if this nationalism over common sense was actually the popular idea in Europe? If you care so much about your country, why aren't you trying to attach it to a superstate that can make it stronger both economically and militarily? That's what I came in here to ask. If the EU does those things, I can see no reason to not want in on it. If it doesn't do those things, then I would like to know so I can revise my understanding of the situation. You've been wildly incorrect in lots of other things, so I'll just try to answer clean. These nationalists do not see the EU as something that strengthens the individual members. On the (far) right they see an emerging superstate that will subvert the rights and privileges of their given nation for the benefit of bad people, like communists, feminists, blacks, muslims, the rothschilds, vegetarians, the reptilians and so on. They view that kind of EU as a state that conquered their homeland through underhanded diplomacy rather a true European Union. They usually still want a united Europe, but they want a white nationalist christian Europe. And they'd be massively limited to the fringes if their rhetoric was complete made-up bullshit. The problem is that the EU is a dysfunctional piece of poo poo that actually legitimately sometimes does harm to its member states and exploits its own for the sake of plutocrats and bureaucrats that have lost all vision. It is an unhappy middle ground between nation-states and a superstate that is only still going forward due to very strong inertia rather than anything else.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 14:48
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:And they'd be massively limited to the fringes if their rhetoric was complete made-up bullshit. The problem is that the EU is a dysfunctional piece of poo poo that actually legitimately sometimes does harm to its member states and exploits its own for the sake of plutocrats and bureaucrats that have lost all vision. It is an unhappy middle ground between nation-states and a superstate that is only still going forward due to very strong inertia rather than anything else. Precisely, the core problem is that the EU is an unholy hybrid of a federal state and supranational organization. We've seen it literally every year since the economic crisis in 2011, the EU descends into cold-blooded realpolitik fast when crisis brews and there's poo poo the Commission can do to subvert it when member states ignore its directives and fights its fines. This hybrid that the EU is was the first of its kind and I suspect that it might also be the last.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 15:23
|
|
|
The EU is the Confederacy.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 15:55
|
|
|
ReagaNOMNOMicks posted:The EU is the Confederacy. That would imply that the EU has an army.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 15:57
|
|
|
Xoidanor posted:That would imply that the EU has an army. It does, though. A useless and ill-coordinated one that barely functions, but it does have one.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 16:08
|
|
|
Nah, each European nation state has some armed forces, but the European Union itself doesn't have one.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 16:11
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/734412148261195780
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
http://wahl16.bmi.gv.at/ Please don't gently caress this up Austria
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 17:03
|
|
|
Austria don't be Nazis. Please don't be Nazis, Austria.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 17:13
|
|
|
Oxxidation posted:Austria don't be Nazis. Please don't be Nazis, Austria. Hyperbole itt.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 17:20
|
|
|
Oxxidation posted:Austria don't be Nazis. Please don't be Nazis, Austria. Please don't be a commie.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 17:23
|
|
|
It's Nazis. It's Nazis all the way down. Sorry.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 17:27
|
|
|
99.8% counted in Austria and it's still 50-50. The Green/Independent candidate Van der Bellen won Vienna by 66%-33%; the populist right-wing candidate Hofer won everywhere else other than Vorarlberg.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 17:52
|
|
|
I remember people here saying Hofer would've won no contest. Even if he does win, I'm glad to see it wasn't that simple.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:99.8% counted in Austria and it's still 50-50. The Green/Independent candidate Van der Bellen won Vienna by 66%-33%; the populist right-wing candidate Hofer won everywhere else other than Vorarlberg. if it's that close i'd expect van der bellen to win. cities almost always report their results more slowly than rural areas also graz and salzburg also broke for the green, from what i've seen so it's not exclusively a vienna thing - it seems to be a fairly strong urban/rural separation
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 18:04
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:if it's that close i'd expect van der bellen to win. cities almost always report their results more slowly than rural areas The decision come down to the mail-in ballots (800k) which will not be opened until tomorrow. It's a coinflip
|
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 18:09
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:if it's that close i'd expect van der bellen to win. cities almost always report their results more slowly than rural areas
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 18:13
|
|
|
Without the mail voters, Hofer won 51.9% vs 48.1%. Mail counted tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 18:14
|
|
|
What happened in Lech?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 18:15
|
|
|
From Wikipedia quote:2010 war Lech nach ihrer Nachbargemeinde Warth die Gemeinde Österreichs mit der zweithöchsten Finanzkraft pro Kopf (6.110 €).
|
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 18:43
|
|
|
YF-23 posted:You've been wildly incorrect in lots of other things, so I'll just try to answer clean. These nationalists do not see the EU as something that strengthens the individual members. On the (far) right they see an emerging superstate that will subvert the rights and privileges of their given nation for the benefit of bad people, like communists, feminists, blacks, muslims, the rothschilds, vegetarians, the reptilians and so on. They view that kind of EU as a state that conquered their homeland through underhanded diplomacy rather a true European Union. They usually still want a united Europe, but they want a white nationalist christian Europe. So is this giant experiment and mistake here to stay or will the UK leaving be the start of a mass exodus that results in the whole EU falling apart? If it is as bad as you and some others say, and then England leaves, would this encourage everyone to abandon ship and give up any hope of fixing this?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 19:12
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:So is this giant experiment and mistake here to stay or will the UK leaving be the start of a mass exodus that results in the whole EU falling apart? If it is as bad as you and some others say, and then England leaves, would this encourage everyone to abandon ship and give up any hope of fixing this? That is what many worry.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 19:15
|
|
|
Xoidanor posted:That is what many worry. Well with the current migrant crisis and the claims I heard in this debate I watched on YT that Europe is barely growing economically at all compared to other places, is this really the right time for such a massive shock? Even the people in favor of leaving the EU in England said there will be a bit of an economic downturn afterward and I can only assume that they believe its better to suffer a bit in the short term if it helps you get stronger in the long term. But if the entire EU collapses, would this short period of "adjustment" turn into a long period of everything being hosed?
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 19:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 02:21 |
|
|
The final Austrian result including postal votes is Van der Bellen 52%, Hofer 48%: http://wahl16.bmi.gv.at/1605-bw_ov_0.html
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2016 20:04
|
|