The EU - Idealism or Practical Imperative?

Coinsias

I have to write an essay on this. Idealism or Practical Imperatives - what factors best explain the European Union. Has anyone any ideas on this? The two seem intertwined to me and I can't seem to separate the two.

roosh

Coinsias wrote: »

I have to write an essay on this. Idealism or Practical Imperatives - what factors best explain the European Union. Has anyone any ideas on this? The two seem intertwined to me and I can't seem to separate the two.

I would presume that you don't necessarily have to separate the two; as long as you can justify anything you write, you should be good; I would have thought anyway.

SEEMagazine

You need to acknowledge the fact that the European Union didn't spring into existence overnight...it's an evolution of older organisations (EC, EEC, etc).

You should look to get decent soundbytes too. MEPs (past or present), EU delegation (if there's one near you), etc. Don't be afraid to question an overly positive position from any individual - nothing is ever perfect (though that doesn't necessarily mean it's flawed either).

My own local EU delegation are eejits if truth be told. So be wary of the same being true in your case.

plasmaguy

Stumbling would be the way I would sum it up.

Successive political leaders have just stumbled into this without any serious critical analysis of the implications.

There was a cosy concensus that closer integration was right and any body who raised a dissenting voice was the anti-christ.

There was no serious analysis of what-if scenarios, or stress testing to put it another way.

What if the Greeks went bankrupt, what if there was a recession, what if no-one could repay bank debts, and so on. This was particulary the case when there was low interest rates years ago creating a gigantic credit bubble.

The French and German banks couldn't give away money fast enough and to people in Greece and Ireland who really shouldn't have been getting it, rogue bankers, etc.

Not sure any of that is relevant to your essay.

SEEMagazine

The larger idea of the EU and its markets is sort of a by product of the original idea, which was to create an economic block of nations who would benefit in a mutual fashion, and, because of that, they wouldn't try and kill each other.

Germany had fought 3 wars with France in a 75 year period - I count Prussia (as the forefather of the German State) in 1870 as the first, and of course the two World Wars.

The European Coal and Steel Shindig was all about rebuilding the continent and simultaneously ensuring WW3 was an ever less likely scenario. You have to think about these things from THEIR perspective, not with the power of hindsight. As the EEC, EC, EU evolved it's important to realise that each institution was really being born from something that existed before, or had to be relevant to existing legislation.

The creation of a 'perfect' something can only really happen in a vacuum, and, obviously, this was not a vacuum. Yes the EU has flaws, and the checks and balances were not in place to prevent Greece from entering when they were clearly not ready. But these are the things which make an entity stronger over time. A 'Greece' will not be allowed to happen again, at least not insofar as we recognise it.

Anyway, I think we all digress here...

My opinion on the subject matter? It's not a matter of 'or'... There is clearly a huge vein of idealism running throughout the very framework of the EU. The European courts are most definitely the best on the planet right now and are doing much more than they are designed for. THIS article says as much (disagree with it if you so wish).

And, with regards the need to prevent war (now less likely) there WAS an imperative, but STILL remains an economic imperative. It's my opinion that the EU is a necessity, but that it needs reform - reform from within. Pulling out of Europe, as some parties would have us do merely isolates us from European funding, and ultimately IMF funding. Europe has been good to us and they're not forcing us to do anything which we should have done a good many years ago. The one thing we've stood firm on (12% FDI tax) is something we've kept... Water charges, household tax - these were all coming down the line. Anyone who says otherwise hasn't a clue about life outside their little hamlet in the sticks.

Two cents spent there I'd say.