Why the EU will not become a superpower

The EU cannot become a superpower in the current situation. In parallel with China many centuries ago, the current perspective of further development in Europe can easily be shown. How it "helps" us European socialism?

European Union
European Union

The so-called "Lisbon Strategy" was full of big-mouthed statements that the EU should be a de facto paradise on earth this year. Zero unemployment, everyone is doing at least as well, everything is beautifully green and ecological and so on. After all, in many ways, perhaps, the North Korean Kim dynasty had (or did) have the same goals.

Why do I unite the DPRK and the EU? Because the principle of their failure, the failure to meet their goals, is the same.

Let us now move a few centuries back to the Far East. Then unified China was rich and developed. It had gunpowder long before its discovery in Europe, along with many other discoveries. She made discovery trips (or at least tried to do so), yet it was not China that began to colonize the whole world across continents, but it was this backward Europe. Why?

China developed the most at a time when was not uniform. Competition from dynasties, families, and territories drove innovation forward — those who did not innovate lagged behind and lost in battle.

At one time, China became a hegemon in its field, virtually without competition. The barbarian tribes beyond its borders were below the distinctiveness of the Chinese rulers, the nearby "lands" feared it anyway. There was no need to innovate, there was no competition.

Developments in Europe were quite different - although Europe was lagging behind China, despite many tendencies to unify it, there were always competing powers in Europe, countries that could threaten each other. There was no hegemon, with a few exceptions. Constant struggle for influence and power, constant competition.

Constant competition leads to constant innovation. And that is why it was Europe, not China, that colonized the world. Innovations in all areas - for example in military strategy - have more than richly replaced lagging behind in individual sub-spheres.

Competition is the engine of innovation, which as a result is always to the benefit of consumers. Otherwise, those innovations would not apply.

Today, China is a major player on the global stage. However, it is not the only "Cinderella" in the world that has turned into a "princess" - Japan has experienced a very similar development. Both were very closed countries with a rich tradition, which only opened up to the world, that is global competition. Thanks to that, they started to innovate, they had something - enough objects came to them from the world.

What about the EU? The quest for integration, the unification of Europe is very old. It comes from traditional Christian thought - one god, one ruler, one homeland and equality before God. From these roots of thought comes the "Holy Roman Empire" and today's Union. And it is today's variant that is the most perfect form performed so far.

The aim is to eliminate tax competition. The aim is to eliminate legislative competition, to eliminate competition in the market of goods and services (agricultural subsidies are a random example of the implementation of this). The goal is unity and unification. Unity and unification are an unnatural state - It is not right to be different, it is natural to be different.

The aim is to close (the "internal market") Europe to the world, remove it from global competition and have the same inside. It is a new form of National Socialism, where for many the "nation" is replaced by "Europeanism", ie "European socialism". The aim is to do the same for Europe as happened to China centuries ago.

Without competition and competitiveness, the EU can never become a strong global player. Competition and competitiveness will not be supported by unification.

blog.idnes.cz

0 comments

  1. "China has developed the most when it was not united. The competition from dynasties, families and individual territories drove innovations forward - those who did not innovate lagged behind and lost in the fight. "More .." The goal is to eliminate tax competition. The aim is to eliminate legislative competition, to eliminate competition in the market of goods and services (agricultural subsidies are a random example of the implementation of this). ”How is unification connected with bureaucracy? The EU has repealed several thousand national laws that restrict competition and protect their own markets. The Benelux exporting countries in particular wanted an economic union and pushed France to deal with the EEC during the Euratom negotiations. Otherwise, Euratom, which was the interest of France (or rather Jean Monnet), will not approve.

  2. Do you realize that I am not criticizing integration ("globalization" - breaking down borders and artificial barriers), but artificial (bureaucratic) unification?

  3. this logic also applies to the USA .. moreover, it is impossible to agree .. Just as in the USA you have Louisiana = PIGS and at the same time Minnesota and other northern states of the Union = Scandinavia and Germany .. I do not know why the EU should lose competitiveness by greater unification .. It's bullshit .. Examples include Germany, Scandinavia, but also some other countries that are doing very well in the global market. Germany is a perfect example par excellence doby mi In addition, in political science we characterize Germany as a corporatist state. Another example may be the Benelux .. These 3 countries began to integrate immediately after World War II and are still among the most developed economies in the world .. (Yes, the debt of Belgium , The Netherlands as a Protestant state was already the cradle of capitalism in the 16th century) .. I think the logic of comparative reasoning is correct, but it needs to be compared.

  4. Hi. Good article, he gave me some ideas for a seminar, but at times I disagree. The unification of China was a path to perdition, not in terms of losing competition, but in terms of the fragmentation of the economy and the support of weaker territories. The same thing happened with the USSR, when it separated from the rest of the world by the Iron Curtain. And the fact that China was not the first to colonize America has little to do with it either. China had huge areas on its territory that needed to be settled. Europe as such was already known and developed naturally. Moreover, the fact that Europe discovered America was a coincidence. Columbus did discover America while looking for a way to India. Were it not for this event, America could have appeared in 100 years and China could have done it. Of course, the factors are clouds and the point that the loss of competition leads to degeneration is absolutely correct .. only the examples used do not seem 100% appropriate ..

Comments are off.