EPTEuropean Politico-economics QA Mega-thread - Page 552
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6236 Posts
| ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On September 17 2016 10:04 Nyxisto wrote: The quality and life of Europeans has never been higher than it is right now, well the great recession aside. We've never had more peace or prosperity on the continent. Must be why far-right parties are on the rise in so many countries; it's of course a sign of prosperity and shared joy in the EU haven. | ||
|
a_flayer
Netherlands2826 Posts
On September 17 2016 19:55 TheDwf wrote: Must be why far-right parties are on the rise in so many countries; it's of course a sign of prosperity and shared joy in the EU haven. As the quality of life rises, so do the expectations of people. At least, personally, once we achieve world peace and eliminate scarcity and whatnot, I won't be satisfied until I find something new to complain about. | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6236 Posts
On September 17 2016 19:55 TheDwf wrote: Must be why far-right parties are on the rise in so many countries; it's of course a sign of prosperity and shared joy in the EU haven. Because of the biggest economic crisis in a century followed by the euro crisis. That doesn't mean that the overall trend isn't upwards. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
On September 17 2016 07:20 WhiteDog wrote: It's not imperialism. It's not even a polling of power. The European army idea has been around for a very long time, but all of a sudden (for the slow bureaucracy of the EU) it has gained traction precisely because of what Russia did to Ukraine.Here is my vision : the european project is the imperialist nostalgia of the european elite in institutional form. Which is why european leaders can only think about an european army to launch the european project anew. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18072 Posts
On September 17 2016 19:23 TheDwf wrote: Only if you look at the results in a superficial way. At first this seems right: ![[image loading]](http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/15372/production/_90089868_eu_ref_uk_regions_leave_remain_gra624_by_age.png) But then you have to factor in abstention, so you get this: ![[image loading]](http://img4.hostingpics.net/pics/444781Brexit.jpg) Where you can see that millenials are actually… the ones who voted the least for Bremain. If the European project was so popular among them, why didn't they bother to vote? Young people apathetic about politics. Also water is wet. That doesn't change the fact that amongst those who actually did show up to vote, the EU is popular. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Also apathy decreases because more people realize that voting actually matters. | ||
|
a_flayer
Netherlands2826 Posts
On September 17 2016 20:14 Dangermousecatdog wrote: It's not imperialism. It's not even a polling of power. The European army idea has been around for a very long time, but all of a sudden (for the slow bureaucracy of the EU) it has gained traction precisely because of what Russia did to Ukraine. A European army doesn't sound too bad if it means we can leave our "alliance" with the US, but I still think the idea is kind of ridiculous mostly on the basis that I dislike using a military with the idea of improving unity/maintaining peace. That said, I could still see it actually having some positive effect. The only way I can see countries in Europe coming together without responding to an external threat is by fostering some kind cultural unity. I can't see any reasonable ways to achieve this, though, what with the language barriers and so forth. There would have to a lot of encouragement in having kids learn various languages in school, somehow opening up the media channels between countries (like, remove/change whatever legislation is causing/allowing, for example, some German Youtube videos to not be available in other European countries) AND getting people to watch media from other countries to slowly absorb it into their own culture. This would have to last for at least 25 years before there'd be a significant effect, since the change in attitude would only come with kids who are exposed to these kinds of things. Come to think of it, maybe this is already kind of going on, although at an even slower rate than that 25 years I mentioned because we're not really actively working towards it. I guess I thought the internet would help speed up this process, but there seems to be a lot of fighting against blending together and rather it is separation that is encouraged through a lot of the recent stuff (past 10-15 years) that has been happening in the online world. Ugh, this is an incoherent mess of a thought-train. Completely and utterly pointless too, AND it doesn't contribute anything to the conversation LOL | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On September 17 2016 20:14 Dangermousecatdog wrote: It's not imperialism. It's not even a polling of power. The European army idea has been around for a very long time, but all of a sudden (for the slow bureaucracy of the EU) it has gained traction precisely because of what Russia did to Ukraine. Europe always wanted to be a military power, it was forbid to do so by the US. On September 17 2016 20:42 a_flayer wrote: A European army doesn't sound too bad if it means we can leave our "alliance" with the US, but I still think the idea is kind of ridiculous mostly on the basis that I dislike using a military with the idea of improving unity/maintaining peace. That said, I could still see it actually having some positive effect. The only way I can see countries in Europe coming together without responding to an external threat is by fostering some kind cultural unity. I can't see any reasonable ways to achieve this, though, what with the language barriers and so forth. There would have to a lot of encouragement in having kids learn various languages in school, somehow opening up the media channels between countries (like, remove/change whatever legislation is causing/allowing, for example, some German Youtube videos to not be available in other European countries) AND getting people to watch media from other countries to slowly absorb it into their own culture. This would have to last for at least 25 years before there'd be a significant effect, since the change in attitude would only come with kids who are exposed to these kinds of things. Come to think of it, maybe this is already kind of going on, although at an even slower rate than that 25 years I mentioned because we're not really actively working towards it. I guess I thought the internet would help speed up this process, but there seems to be a lot of fighting against blending together and rather it is separation that is encouraged through a lot of the recent stuff (past 10-15 years) that has been happening in the online world. Ugh, this is an incoherent mess of a thought-train. Completely and utterly pointless too, AND it doesn't contribute anything to the conversation LOL If you want to understand the way a european army would behave, look at the US or at the french army. It's all over the world (altho at different scale) : it's not about defending our territory (and reacting to agression) but rather defending our values (and promoting them). At least, that is how Hollande present it. Also you are absolutly right about cultural unity ; but that is promoted by a common language, a common core in education, supporting travel through out europe, a common fiscal unity. Those things should come before any kind of army. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18832 Posts
| ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On September 17 2016 22:41 farvacola wrote: "Europe" in the general sense did not always want to be a military power. Sure, some European countries have desired increased military presence, but many others were more than happy to alter their budgets in reliance on NATO You're right ; I should have said "the most important countries of europe always wanted a military power" (there have been major figure who pushed for an european army in France, Germany, Italy and Benelux since the beginning). | ||
|
farvacola
United States18832 Posts
 | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6236 Posts
On September 17 2016 20:32 LegalLord wrote: The idea of the EU is fantastic and the people who are youngest tend to be the most idealistic about it. I'm sure the people who are old now, were once young and probably more pro-EU than they became. When you live through the results of the EU and get to see both its good and bad, perspectives change, and possibly political alignment. Also apathy decreases because more people realize that voting actually matters. With the financial crisis, the euro crisis and the refugee crisis millenials have seen enough of the EU to make up their minds about it. While you're right that people often get more conservative when they're older that's also because a lot of reforms now will be adopted by conservatives in the future I.E. in 20 years nobody will probably argue about gay marriage anymore. Perhaps millenials will get less pro EU but I don't find your line of reasoning very convincing for that. | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On September 17 2016 23:03 farvacola wrote: Well sure, but it seems inaccurate to assume that prominent political figures/movements can stand in the place of an entire nation when it comes to claiming national intention. Germany and France are also full of very anti-military people too, is my point Personally I make a clear distinction between the idea of europe, which is defended by the vast majority of the european people, and the europe project as it developped itself. In France, it has always been defended as a project "in the making", flawed but fixable, by all policians, from De Gaulle (who didn't really believe in it anyway) to Hollande. | ||
|
bardtown
England2313 Posts
On September 17 2016 20:26 Acrofales wrote: Young people apathetic about politics. Also water is wet. That doesn't change the fact that amongst those who actually did show up to vote, the EU is popular. Do you mean unpopular? Because Leave won the vote, and the majority of people who voted for Remain did so because they were concerned about the economic consequences of leaving, not because they felt any attachment to the EU. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
On September 17 2016 19:55 TheDwf wrote: Must be why far-right parties are on the rise in so many countries; it's of course a sign of prosperity and shared joy in the EU haven. The renaissance of reactionary movements is something that's happening internationally, from Turkey over Russia to the US. The recession played a large part in it and was a global event. And while the EU at times has badly responded to it, it's not really the reason for all the polarisation going on. In many cases we're simply confronted with problems that you can't remove at the voting booth. The refugee crisis is a strain that we didn't have since the early 90's when the Ussr collapsed, then comes international terrorism and so on and the frustration can pile up easily. But it's really not genuine aversion to the EU, it's just really large insecurity because these people also now that there's really no way how to eliminate all of that in the short term. | ||
|
Yurie
11897 Posts
On September 18 2016 00:57 Nyxisto wrote: The renaissance of reactionary movements is something that's happening internationally, from Turkey over Russia to the US. The recession played a large part in it and was a global event. And while the EU at times has badly responded to it, it's not really the reason for all the polarisation going on. In many cases we're simply confronted with problems that you can't remove at the voting booth. The refugee crisis is a strain that we didn't have since the early 90's when the Ussr collapsed, then comes international terrorism and so on and the frustration can pile up easily. But it's really not genuine aversion to the EU, it's just really large insecurity because these people also now that there's really no way how to eliminate all of that in the short term. Voting for parties that promises to fix problems you think are important is a way to impact the big parties long term policies. When the Pirate Party won EU Parliament seats the politics of several Swedish parties changed to pick up those voters. When the Environment Party got into Swedish Parliament all the parties developed an environment policy that is distinct and broadcast. I am not sure how many people actually think that way but it does have an effect in that direction. That is personally how I vote in elections, find my core issue(s) and vote for whoever has my opinion on that to influence long term direction. I usually don't care about 90%+ of the issues and thus most parties are interchangeable outside of those. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On September 17 2016 23:06 RvB wrote: With the financial crisis, the euro crisis and the refugee crisis millenials have seen enough of the EU to make up their minds about it. While you're right that people often get more conservative when they're older that's also because a lot of reforms now will be adopted by conservatives in the future I.E. in 20 years nobody will probably argue about gay marriage anymore. Perhaps millenials will get less pro EU but I don't find your line of reasoning very convincing for that. It's not one or two crises that influence people in the long term. Crises always happen and usually they don't lead to the dissolution of a union. It's more so the attitude that develops over the course of decades of seeing how the union operates. Most youth have pretty rosy and simplistic views of the world. The EU is nice because "we should have a unified Europe eventually anyways" and it's nice to be able to travel to all the countries on vacation or for school/work whenever you want. When you get older, the concerns get a lot more complex. There starts to be a wide range of views based on more divergent life circumstances. People who work in science will probably appreciate the fact that the EU is actually pretty good at funding science. People from some poorer countries like that they can go work for more money in Germany or the UK, or that they get aid from the EU. People who are from countries like Greece might be none too happy that their home country is fucked by a mix of liberal economic exploitation and incompetent refusal of the EU leadership to change a thing. If you're a poor worker, immigration of cheap labor to compete with you and work for pennies will drive your quality of life down, and the EU is responsible for a lot of that. And so many other reasons that people who are young just tend not to care about, dismiss as "stupid people with stupid opinions" without seeking to understand the issues, or just have a more optimistic view about. The reasons are complex and varied, but on the aggregate it does certainly appear that there is a negative correlation between age and pro-EU sentiment. | ||
|
maartendq
Belgium3115 Posts
On September 17 2016 19:23 TheDwf wrote: Only if you look at the results in a superficial way. At first this seems right: But then you have to factor in abstention, so you get this: Where you can see that millenials are actually… the ones who voted the least for Bremain. If the European project was so popular among them, why didn't they bother to vote? Because like many other young people around the world, they were either studying for finals or at work. Elections or referenda held on weekdays will always favour those who've got all the time in the world, i.e. those in retirement or early retirement. Additionally, 55+ is by far the largest age group, so they very easily can skew policy decisions in (what they perceive to be) their favour. | ||
|
SoSexy
Italy3725 Posts
On September 18 2016 17:48 maartendq wrote: Because like many other young people around the world, they were either studying for finals or at work. Elections or referenda held on weekdays will always favour those who've got all the time in the world, i.e. those in retirement or early retirement. Additionally, 55+ is by far the largest age group, so they very easily can skew policy decisions in (what they perceive to be) their favour. What a joke. Voting is usually open from 7 am to 11 pm or similar stuff. If you can't find time to vote, you just don't care. no excuses. I have to study for the finals so I can't find 20 minutes to go and vote for something that I believe to be crucial for my future? No, they just don't care. | ||
| ||
