quote: The European Union is poised to overtake America to become the premier superpower, according to an EU exhibition launched yesterday in the heart of Brussels.
The pop-art collage mounted in a tent outside the European Commission narrates 50 years of EU history and projects events into the future in an unusually frank display of European ambition.
Segments sketched across 80 yards of canvas predict that the 21st century will be the "European Century" as the EU pushes its borders deep into Eurasia, North Africa, and the Middle East and comes to dominate world affairs through its vast "legal and moral reach".
Under the heading the "Roman Empire returns", it says the EU will be renamed "The Union" once it grows to 50 states over the next three decades.
The United Nations headquarters will be moved to Gibraltar as the EU defends the international order against the "American onslaught".
The euro will break the "overbearing monopoly of the dollar" by 2010 as China and India switch their reserves to punish America for its "stratospheric deficit".
Casting the United States as the villain of modern times, it says: "The lonely superpower can bribe, bully or impose its will almost anywhere in the world, but when its back is turned, its policy is weakened."
Entitled "The Image of Europe", the display is not a formal expression of EU policy but it captures views that can be heard every day in the corridors and canteens of the Union's institutions.
The exhibit was co-ordinated by the European Commission and sponsored by the European Council. The EU's Dutch presidency said yesterday it was designed to narrow Europe's "iconographic deficit" by conjuring up forceful images.
Now, this is from the Telegraph, which is hardly the least biased source when it comes to the EU but this seems kind of wacky even for ardent EU supporters.
Does anyone outside the EU power structure itself actually want a 'new Roman Empire'?
At any rate, it's mildly amusing.
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
Well, a pop-art collage in a circus tent hardly constitutes official EU policy. This is just part of the Dutch government's plan to do something about the EU's stuffy boring image. But I doubt the effectiveness of a lone circus-tent filled with photos in Brussels.
So, uhm, basically, everything you just quoted comes from a Dutch architect and reflect his personal/artistic opinion on the future of the Union. And I'm sure the EU can use some 'forceful images', because a lot of people (especially in the UK and Scandinavia) don't think very highly of Brussels.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
You forgot the part where the EU re-names itself "COBRA" and it's president develops a hiss...
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
I have never heard of such a crap before. I think the EU is bad enough as it is. Being from Germany, a country where the EU is hated almost as much as in Britain, I hope this is just some wacky joke from some drug-crazed Dutch Eurofanatic... Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
quote: The aim of the exhibition is to show the way in which Europe is represented through words and symbols. The symposium explores contrasting perceptions by confronting �Europeans� with the views of �non Europeans�. Both events are meant to serve as an indication of the work to be done and as a demonstration of the enormous and unexplored potential of the image of Europe. The exhibition and symposium can be seen as part of the wider issue of �Communicating Europe� and are intended to further stimulate public debate.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
Pipe dreams of a slightly-off-his-rocker architect aside, there are, to my mind, only two possible futures: either the EU will collapse under its own bureaucratic weight, or it won't. And until the Union reaches that critical mass (if there even is one) the growth process and exportation of ideas will steadily continue. Not forever, obviously, but there's an overarching desire to consolidate Europe's position into one unified block among most of the EU's member states that seems to be winning out over internal bickering and anti-European sentiments.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
A third future is that the EU will survive, but that it's smaller, less fincially powerful members will have no say in anything and will eventually break away in frustration to form some counter-alliance.
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
That's unlikely though, since a number of the smaller members (like the Netherlands and Belgium) are founding members and definitely have a voice.
One of the big problems at the moment is the complete lack of a unified foreign policy. The UK is strongly pro-America (and likelier to adopt the dollar than the euro...), while the continent is overall more cautious in it's blind following of The Leader (notable exceptions being Berlusconi, and before 11 March, Aznar). And if we ever come to a European foreign policy, it'd be nice if France would give it's Security Council seat to the Union.
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
quote:Originally posted by Harry: Well, a pop-art collage in a circus tent hardly constitutes official EU policy. This is just part of the Dutch government's plan to do something about the EU's stuffy boring image. But I doubt the effectiveness of a lone circus-tent filled with photos in Brussels.
So, uhm, basically, everything you just quoted comes from a Dutch architect and reflect his personal/artistic opinion on the future of the Union. And I'm sure the EU can use some 'forceful images', because a lot of people (especially in the UK and Scandinavia) don't think very highly of Brussels.
I realised that! It was just so amusing I had to post it. Hopefully, the EU will be completely restructured soon. The present system is, frankly, crap. It's inefficient and intolerant of any opposition (Look at the whistleblowers in Eurostat and the Commission who were fired, and that Belgian journalist who was locked up and his contacts confiscated (without being charged)).
The dominace of France and Germany is particularly irritating. There are more problems than just a lack of unified foreign policy; the radical differences between the inquisitional and accusational legal systems (notably between the UK/Ireland and the Continent) is a substantial problem for federalists. As is the integration of armed forces (which will hopefully never happen), the differing attitudes to matters such as ID cards and so on and so on.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Harry: That's unlikely though, since a number of the smaller members (like the Netherlands and Belgium) are founding members and definitely have a voice.
Founding members, yeah...what about the petitioning members that were threatened by Chirac when the supported further UN resolutions against Iraq? France and Germany seem very dominant in this "union".
Exactly why cant the people vote on membership? I doubt the UK is all for membership.... Is membership ever renewed or is it a permanant thing?
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
It's permanent, but everyone's free to leave at any moment.
The Council of the EU (I think) decides on membership of a new candidate. This means individual countries decide on a new member. It is up to these individual nations to make that decision, and some of them use referenda. I personally don't like referenda, because of the lack of insight of 'the people', and the general stupidity of large masses.
quote: I doubt the UK is all for membership....
Eh? The UK is already a member. Even if Blair seems to be more interested in becoming the 51st State.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I know they;re already amember, but was there a popular vote? It all seems out of the people's hands. How can the adverage UK citizen (Liam for example) have a say in the EU's decisions?
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"I know they;re already amember, but was there a popular vote?"
Well, I think that's the point of a representative democracy. The people elect someone to go make the decisions for them. If those representatives make a poor decision, then the general public intervenes.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
Right. But only on a national level. The general public has almost no say in EU policy, which is a point of critique for many in it.
"How can the adverage UK citizen (Liam for example) have a say in the EU's decisions?"
Well, for one, through the aforementioned referenda, except those aren't held in every state (or even legally binding). For another, through European parliamentary elections, except THOSE don't amount to much more than voting for a party and crossing your fingers its line stays straight. So, not really all that well.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Isn't that all 'end of the world' stuff? Or at the very least very '1984'.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
I still want euros.
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: I know they;re already amember, but was there a popular vote? It all seems out of the people's hands. How can the adverage UK citizen (Liam for example) have a say in the EU's decisions?
There was a referendum on membership of what was then the Common Market. However, the EU has changed dramatically since then. Also there have been questions about the way in which that referendum was held; the wording of the question and the use of the BBC in particular.
Generally, in those instances where a referendum goes against the EU, it is simply held again after an intensive propaganda campaign and possibly with a slightly different wording (as in Ireland). Most decisions are made by the (government appointed) European Commission. The accounts haven't been accepted for some years now and in 1999 the entire commission had to resign after corruption charges were made. That didn't stop several of them coming back.
The European Parliament is basically a form of benefits system for failed politicians.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Nice. Makes my own greedy congress seem not-so-corrupt. Though Congress continues to get paid forever-even after they retire.
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sol System: I still want euros.
Crap. I was going to send you some, wasn't I?
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
The Euro in my opinion is the only good thing we have gotten from the EU.
By the way - at least the German PEOPLE doesn't have a lot to say when it comes to decisions concerning the EU. While other nations like Denmark let their inhabitants decide whether they wanted the Euro - the German government just decided that we would want it. (Knowing very well that the majority of Germans was - and stil is - against the common currency). And that extends to other issues as well. The German government has a lot of power when it comes to the EU, the German people however has not.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
They "decided" what you wanted much in the same way that our Congress announced that they- and the President-not renewing the Assualt Weapoms Ban was "the will of the people". (there's not an "rolleyes" emoticon disgusted enough to insert here)
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"Right. But only on a national level. The general public has almost no say in EU policy, which is a point of critique for many in it."
Well, I was talking about why there wouldn't have been a popular vote in Britain on joining the EU. Because the government made the decision, and the people elected the government.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
...and parents raised those children who grew up to elect those officials who, in turn, decided to join the EU. So blame your parents: it's all their fault.
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
quote:Originally posted by TSN:
"Right. But only on a national level. The general public has almost no say in EU policy, which is a point of critique for many in it."
Well, I was talking about why there wouldn't have been a popular vote in Britain on joining the EU. Because the government made the decision, and the people elected the government.
There was a popular vote in the UK though, as I pointed out above. There will also be a referendum on the EU Constitution. Which is one of the most utterly crap constitutions ever produced.
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
double post!!! Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
Is God still in it? Seriously, what the hell is up with putting a fictional character in a 21st century constitution? This is not the Holy Roman Empire!
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
No, IIRC all references to Christianity were cut. Of course, it's still about 250+ pages long and covers a quite phenomonal amout of crap that really shouldn't be in a constitution (space program, etc.). It's also not terribly well written and contains sufficient ambiguities to allow considerably expansion of EU power. But that's what happens when you allow a disgraced former French president and a bunch of federalist lackeys to draft something like this.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
Well, the ulterior motive of the Union being to forge some sort of pan-European federation with broad supranational powers, that wasn't altogether evitable.
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
Not everyone agrees that that should be the purpose of the EU though. A far more loosely affiliated trading block that doesn't try to force statist economic and social policies upon all members is regarded as preferable by some.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Preferable by the countries with less influence. ...and they wont have any say in decisions anyway so.....
Posted by Wraith (Member # 779) on :
Actually, a less overbearing form of EU seems to be prefered in the UK (if you can get past the raving claims of die-hard federalists and rabid UKIP supporters).
Although we have relatively little influence because the French don't like us.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
They dont like us either.....or anyone really.
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
They fart in your general direction!
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
HAW HAW FRANCE!
Posted by Lee (Member # 393) on :
OK, now you're just trying too hard.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Well, I suppose I could go with the more reasoned: Look, isn't all this French-bashing guilty of the worst crime of all: being played out and therefore not that funny? But I am grumpy and sore, and do not choose my actions carefully.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)