The European Counterweight

[Erikl]

The European Counterweight

Part One: A Leaderless Superpower

With its expansion to 25 member states, the European Union is poised to become a vast federal superstate. As it seeks to be a “counterweight” to U.S. Global interests, will Europe replace America as the world’s leading superpower?

It has more people (454.7 million) than the United States—a larger consumer market—more troops (collectively, almost two million armed forces personnel)—and, with more votes on the United Nations Security Council and every other international body, stronger political muscle.

It has a president, a legislative body, a flag, a national anthem, a motto (“Unity in Diversity”), open borders between member states, a constitution (yet to be ratified), a Bill of Rights, and a court system that can overrule the highest of any member court.

It also has an emerging common culture that speaks a common language: English.

The decades-old European dream of becoming a kind of “United States of Europe” is becoming a reality. Speaking at the Carnegie Council’s “Books for Breakfast” program, T.R. Reid, bureau chief for The Washington Post and author of the book The United States of Europe: The New Superpower and the End of American Supremacy, observed, “I think it’s fair to say that Europe is more united today than at any time since the Roman Empire.”

But what does this mean for America’s future?

“Let Europe Arise!”

Within a 75-year span, the European continent was ravaged by three brutal war campaigns: the Franco-Prussian War (1870-71), World War I (1914-18) and World War II (1939-45). Together, an estimated 60 to 70 million Europeans were killed.

In the aftermath of WWII, the United States became a world-leading superpower, countered by the Soviet Union. As the Iron Curtain came down on Europe, dividing East from West, war-torn nations on both sides raced to rebuild their armed forces. Another continental war seemed to loom on the horizon. And so leaders, thinkers, idealists and religionists set out to fulfill a vision: a reorganized Europe free from nationalist strife, military competition and arms races.

On September 19, 1946, in Zurich, Switzerland, Winston Churchill gave a speech that addressed the state of Europe and its future. “If Europe were once united in the sharing of its common inheritance,” he said, “there would be no limit to the happiness, to the prosperity and the glory which its three or four hundred million people would enjoy.”

“…all the while there is a remedy which, if it were generally and spontaneously adopted by the great majority of people in many lands, would as if by a miracle transform the whole scene, and would in a few years make all Europe, or the greater part of it, as free and as happy as Switzerland is today. What is this sovereign remedy? It is to re-create the European Family, or as much of it as we can, and to provide it with a structure under which it can dwell in peace, in safety and in freedom. We must build a kind of United States of Europe.”

Churchill proposed that this unified European state be spearheaded by a partnership between France and Germany.

Continuing, he said, “The structure of the United States of Europe, if well and truly built, will be such as to make the material strength of a single state less important. Small nations will count as much as large ones and gain their honor by their contribution to the common cause.”

“…we must re-create the European Family in a regional structure called, it may be, the United States of Europe. And the first practical step would be to form a Council of Europe. If at first all the States of Europe are not willing or able to join the Union, we must nevertheless proceed to assemble and combine those who will and those who can. The salvation of the common people of every race and of every land from war or servitude must be established on solid foundations and must be guarded by the readiness of all men and women to die rather than submit to tyranny. In all this urgent work, France and Germany must take the lead together. Great Britain, the British Commonwealth of Nations, mighty America and I trust Soviet Russia—for then indeed all would be well—must be the friends and sponsors of the new Europe and must champion its right to live and shine.

“Therefore I say to you: let Europe arise!”

Churchill’s speech laid the groundwork for today’s European Union—and marked the prophetic path it will take.

The Power of Subtle Diplomacy

For centuries, Italy, Spain, France, Germany, Britain and other Western European countries ran global empires that steered or influenced the course of world events. These nations operated from a position of strength: They possessed the military might to force their will upon weaker countries—and were not afraid to use it.

But by 1945, this had changed; the age of European empires came to an end.

The conclusion of WWII ushered in the Cold War, which left Europe caught between the competing interests and politics of America and the USSR. With their economies and infrastructures in shambles—and no longer possessing the military means to impose their national will—European leaders were relegated to being minor players on the world stage. Under the far-reaching shadows of U.S. leadership and the looming threat of Soviet aggression, Europe operated from a position of weakness, and had to master the art of subtle diplomacy, using charm, stealth, guile, compromise and appeasement to secure their political interests.

Alone, no European nation had the resources to challenge the political, financial and military muscle of the two superpowers—yet Britain, Italy, Germany, France and others realized that together they could hold their own. This became a key motivator for the Europeans to unify. From the 1950s onward, the nations learned to pool their resources together, entering into treaties and setting up commissions that ultimately led to the formation of the European Union.

With the dismantling of the Berlin Wall in 1989, and the subsequent collapse of the USSR, America was left as the lone superpower. Despite all that the United States had done to rebuild, fortify and protect Western Europe, European leaders dreaded the prospect of the U.S. pursuing its global interests unchallenged. This fear motivated the EU’s transformation into a political and economic counterweight to American power.

The European Counterweight

Today, the EU has the economic clout necessary to make many of the rules that shape and govern world commerce.

In a July 2001 decision, the European Commission voted unanimously—without even a debate—to veto a proposed merger between American aircraft giants General Electric and Honeywell. This $45 billion deal—which had been approved by the U.S. Justice Department—would have been the biggest industrial merger in history.

Four years later, the European Court of First Instance acknowledged that “the Commission’s reasoning was marred by legal errors,” and that “in the words of the court, the decision was ‘vitiated [invalidated] by illegalities.’” However, the court upheld the 2001 decision.

Honeywell and GE did not merge.

Why? Because if the merger had taken place, the new aircraft giant would have been shut out of the largest market in the world—the 25 member nations of the European Union.

Even software titan Microsoft has had to bow to Europe’s demands. For years, U.S. authorities have tried to restrain Microsoft Corporation’s domination of the computer industry, but with little success. In a March 2004 antitrust ruling, the European Commission ordered the company to pay 497 million euros ($613 million), share its software code with competitors, and offer an unbundled version of the Windows operating system.

The Seattle, Washington-based company complied—but apparently not to the EU’s satisfaction. In December 2005, taking further legal steps to ensure better compliance to the previous ruling, the commission threatened fines of up to $2.37 million per day if Microsoft did not provide its rivals with better documentation on its software programs.

If American corporations want access to the EU market, then they must be prepared to follow Europe’s rules. And this is why, as T.R. Reid explains in his book The United States of Europe, American whiskey (for example) is sold in bottles that use the metric system, which is used universally in Europe.

In March 2005, the European Commission announced it would impose a 15% increase in duty on U.S. imports of paper, agricultural, textile and machinery products. This was in retaliation for Washington failing to comply with the World Trade Organization ruling that America’s anti-dumping law (the Byrd Amendment) was illegal. The amendment was killed in the U.S. Senate nine months later.

These are just a handful of examples of the EU imposing its economic will upon American companies and blocking U.S. global interests.

One must ask: Will Europe some day summon the political will to do so by force?

A Widening Transatlantic Rift

Political commentator Robert Kagan, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, observed this about Europe’s current position in exercising its political will: “In an anarchic world, small powers always fear they will be victims. Great powers, on the other hand, often fear rules that may constrain them more than they fear the anarchy in which their power brings security and prosperity.…[Europe’s] tactics, like their goal, are the tactics of the weak. They hope to constrain American power without wielding power themselves. In what may be the ultimate feat of subtlety and indirection, they want to control the behemoth [the U.S.] by appealing to its conscience” (Policy Review, No. 113, “Power and Weakness”).

But what if the EU began to view America as unreasonable—without a “conscience”? How would it react? Would Europe, perhaps feeling justified, again embrace its former, centuries-old tactics of machtpolitik (“power politics”) and flex its military muscle?

Most Europeans resent the current White House administration. Nonetheless, they do largely favor the American people. They may see them as brash and unsophisticated, but Europeans also recognize that their American cousins are resourceful and kind-hearted, quick to help countries and peoples in dire straits, especially in the wake of sudden disasters. Europeans do not see Americans as malevolent people bent on world domination.

Nevertheless, America’s reputed “cowboy mentality,” an approach that addresses international problems with political bluntness and force, clashes with the European preference to employ diplomatic finesse and subtlety in place of military solutions. This is among the many issues and differences that are driving a wedge—a growing transatlantic rift—between Europe and America.

Other points of contention are…

• Diplomacy and bureaucracy: Americans are known for their resourcefulness and “can-do” spirit; when unanticipated problems arise, they have a reputation for solving them with unconventional thinking. This reinforces the perception of an American cowboy mentality, in which U.S. statesmen are considered impatient and seek fast results from complex international situations.

In contrast, Europe is mired in bureaucracy; out-of-the-ordinary requests usually involve a great deal of bureaucratic red tape and form-filling. This is a product of the European mindset of patient diplomacy—the opposite of U.S. methods.

There is another related issue: While most U.S. citizens tend to want government involved in its affairs as little as possible, Europeans embrace government regulation. EU citizens gladly live under a “womb to tomb” welfare state that pays for virtually everything—health care, child care, education, etc.

But with such a far-reaching system comes bureaucracy, high taxes and heavy-handed regulation. Most Americans believe that these disadvantages far outweigh the benefits.

• Capital Punishment: Perhaps due to the continent’s centuries-long history of barbarism, capital punishment is both illegal and unpopular across Europe. From the average citizen, to government officials, to the pope, Europeans are vehemently against the death penalty—even for the most brutal of criminals. Any nation that desires to join the ever-expanding EU must abolish capital punishment from its land.

Whenever executions take place in the U.S. (which occur less often than Europeans might think), America is seen as barbaric.

A case-in-point: When convicted murderer Stanley “Tookie” Williams was executed, the European nations were outraged, especially Austria. Its native son, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, refused to block the execution. To show their indignation, local activists of Graz, Austria, Mr. Schwarzenegger’s hometown, threatened to remove the governor’s name from a 15,300-seat sports stadium. (Turning the tables on his critics, Mr. Schwarzenegger demanded that his name be removed, and returned a ring of honor that Graz officials had given him six years earlier.)

• Controlling the Internet: From emails to web pages, Internet-based communications are enabling even the smallest of businesses to participate in the global market.

The Internet is a U.S. invention, and the vast majority of websites are still American-created and operated. Additionally, 62% of Americans have Internet access, while only 14% of the rest of the world possess this capability.

ICANN (the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers), a private, nonprofit U.S.-based organization, is responsible for assigning domain names and internet suffixes, such as “.com” and “.org.” The EU, along with China, Brazil and other critics, fear that ICANN (which has close ties to the U.S. Department of Commerce) wields far too much control over the World Wide Web.

“Though ICANN is a private organization with international board members, the Commerce Department can still veto what goes on government-approved lists of the 260 or so internet suffixes, like ‘.com.’ Theoretically, the US could simply disconnect the domains of countries, like Iran or North Korea, with which they are feuding” (“EU and US at Loggerheads Over Internet Control,” Deutsche Welle).

Also, of the 13 root servers that direct traffic and serve as the Internet’s master directories, only one is located outside the United States (in Tokyo, Japan).

Citing growing security threats, increased usage of Internet-based global communications and commerce, and its historic role in developing and expanding the World Wide Web, the U.S. says it has the right to retain control.

Europe has proposed replacing American government oversight with a technical intergovernmental body: “The 25 EU countries are unanimously demanding a new cooperation model for the Internet, where all interested countries sit at one table to discuss the core questions of the network together,” the EU Commissioner for Information Society and Media told Der Spiegel magazine.

“Such a body stokes fears of the kind of stifling bureaucracy the United States regularly criticizes the EU of” (ibid.).

To offer an alternative—a counterweight—to U.S. Internet dominance, the EU is launching its own domain-name extension: “.eu”.

Yet, perhaps the deepest issue separating Europe from America is religion.

Bonds of an Emerging Identity

A common European culture is emerging among the generation ranging from ages 15 to 40. Known as “Generation E” (or “the Nineties Generation”), it consists of college-educated young professionals who grew up in one part of Europe—Edinburgh, Madrid or Florence, for example—studied at universities in other parts of the continent—such as Oxford, Paris or Frankfurt—and are pursuing professional careers in still another section of Europe, as in Rome, Brussels or Dublin (called “the Silicon Valley of Europe”).

Increasingly, those in Generation E view themselves as Europeans first—secondarily Scots, Spaniards, Germans, Italians or otherwise. In their eyes, Europe is more than just a continent—it’s their national homeland. And English is emerging as the common language.

A prevalent bond among these and other Europeans is their belief that religion in the public forum is archaic—and at best, explosive. Their common history, which is filled with mass brutality and bloodshed, has taught them that religion in the public sphere, mixed with fervent nationalism and national self-interests, inevitably leads to war.

According to a survey by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, 59% of Americans called their faith “very important.” But only 21% of Europeans said that religion is “very important” to them; only 11% of the French, 21% of Germans and 33% of Britons feel this way (European Values Study, which tracks attitudes in 32 European countries).

The history of Europe has seen war, torture and death—all in the name of religion. Little wonder Europeans are now deeply skeptical of patriotism mixed with religious sentiment.

This is most true of Germany. Karsten Voigt, German Foreign Ministry’s coordinator on German-U.S. cooperation, explained, “The mixture of patriotism and religion is anathema and heresy in German religious life because it was misused and went too far in the past. Remember, German soldiers in World War I wore belt buckles reading ‘Gott Mitt Uns’ [God With Us]” (Christian Science Monitor).

This firm mistrust is heightened when the American president invokes religious rhetoric into his speeches, such as his 2005 inaugural address, in which he said, “America’s vital interests and our deepest beliefs are now one. From the day of our Founding, we have proclaimed that every man and woman on this earth has rights, and dignity, and matchless value, because they bear the image of the Maker of Heaven and earth” (emphasis ours).

Mr. Bush’s convictions clash with the European belief that human rights arise from the secular humanist idea that man is the ultimate norm by which values are to be determined. It is a form of naturalistic religion that places man—his human reasoning, feelings, scientific inquiry, ethical conduct—above God.

Dominique Moisi, one of France’s most respected political analysts, said that “the combination of religion and nationalism in America is frightening. We feel betrayed by God and by nationalism, which is why we are building the European Union as a barrier to religious warfare” (ibid.).

Many call this Europe-wide aggressive attitude toward religion, particularly traditional Christianity, “secular fundamentalism”—a mindset that views religion as “lifeless.” Europe’s current climate of “Christianophobia” explains why churches that once held hundreds of attendees at a time are rapidly losing adherents.

Rocco Buttiglione, whom the European Parliament blocked from becoming the European commissioner for justice because he had described homosexuality as a sin, observed the following: “The new soft totalitarianism that is advancing on the left wants to have a state religion,” adding, “It is an atheist, nihilistic religion—but it is a religion that is obligatory for all” (ibid.).

A 2004 Gallup poll revealed that 44% of Americans said they attended a place of worship once a week. In contrast, only 15% of Europeans claimed this about their religion (on average; this number varied widely among the member states).

A California man’s attempt to remove the phrase “One Nation, Under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance brought cries of foul; a poll revealed that 90% of Americans wanted to keep the phrase. Meanwhile, in Brussels, the EU capital, officials have agreed on the final text of the EU’s new Constitution, which makes no direct mention of God, despite calls from the Vatican and other voices to recognize Europe’s “Christian roots.”

Religious convictions and practices among Europeans are fading from people’s lives, only to be replaced with increasing materialism and permissiveness. Mainstream churches—especially the Catholic Church—continue to suffer dwindling membership, church attendance and influence.

Cardinal Renato Raffaele Martino, president of the Vatican’s Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, fought a hard, but unsuccessful, battle for Christianity to be mentioned in the EU Constitution. Still troubled by Mr. Buttiglione’s treatment, and by the Spanish parliament’s moves toward legalizing homosexual marriage, he asked, “Those Roman emperors who wanted to get rid of us, where are they today? And Napoleon, he didn’t like us either. And where is Napoleon today?” (“European, Not Christian,” U.S. News & World Report).

Many recognize that there is a spiritual void—a gnawing hunger—that secularism cannot satisfy. Some are looking past today’s secular landscape and are envisioning a future when a new spiritual reawakening will arise. But how will this come to pass?

From “Military Pygmy” to “Flabby Giant”

Before the EU’s expansion to 25 members, the commander of NATO called Europe a “military pygmy.” Since then, the EU’s combined military manpower has grown to almost two million armed forces personnel—more than the United States.

Yet the same commander upgraded Europe to being only a “flabby giant,” because its troops are not united into a large, single military force. There still remains a technological gap between European forces and the U.S. military, especially in transportation, intelligence and modern weapons technology.

But the EU would rather spend funds on its burgeoning welfare programs and let the U.S. protect it from external threats. Indeed, one of the key reasons for forming the EU was to find an alternative to war. Today, European politicians and academics tend to view the use of military force as a relic held over from the era of colonialism and world-spanning empires. In their secular thinking, war is judged as a waste of time and money, and is immoral.

Yet this thinking is bound to change as the European Union grows into an economic, political and, potentially, military juggernaut. It already possesses virtually every component necessary to be a counterweight to American supremacy. Could men, when given access to such power, deny human nature and pass up the opportunity to become the global leader in all arenas?

With 25 democratic nations each having a say in EU affairs, the government is too large and unwieldy to govern efficiently and effectively. Only when the member states concentrate on countering U.S. interests are they unified and unanimous.

Just as a corporation, school system or church cannot be successfully governed by committee, neither can a government. Someone must be in charge—someone must take responsibility for when things go wrong—someone must captain the ship.

To become a federal superstate with supranational governance, capable of executing decisions with speed and precision, Europe must have a strong leader guiding the way.

Plans are already in the works.

SOURCE

A very good article IMO... I enjoyed reading it.

I'll be posting part 2 for people to read later on, but in the mean time it is accessible at the end of the page I linked to.

[Mars]

Whenever executions take place in the U.S. (which occur less often than Europeans might think), America is seen as barbaric.

I don't understand this. So Europeans would want child predators and seriel killers in jail for a while and then freed? We are not living in the Kingdom of God, this isn't a utopia it is a civilization.

and why is the EU fighting to control the internet? USA has been doing the best job at it. In some european countrys, things such as "hate speech" exist. It would be frightening for them to control the internet and drastically limit freedom of speech.

Indeed, one of the key reasons for forming the EU was to find an alternative to war. Today, European politicians and academics tend to view the use of military force as a relic held over from the era of colonialism and world-spanning empires. In their secular thinking, war is judged as a waste of time and money, and is immoral.

An alternative to war? How is war immoral? When the americans faught the nazis in WW2 that was immoral? When USA saved iraqis from an insane dictator? A military is needed.

[Talon]

Europeans are vehemently against the death penalty—even for the most brutal of criminals.

*cough* bullsh*t *cough*

Polls in many European states show 75% of the population in favour of capital punishment. Just because our leaders are weak-willed Bleeding Hearts, does not mean all Europeans are.

So Europeans would want child predators and seriel killers in jail for a while and then freed?

I fail to see anywhere in the article where what you claim is mentioned.

and why is the EU fighting to control the internet? USA has been doing the best job at it. In some european countrys, things such as "hate speech" exist. It would be frightening for them to control the internet and drastically limit freedom of speech.

Hate you break it to you, America has the KKK, Aryan Brotherhood and Nation of Islam etc, you are in no place to complain about our "hate speech" as if its something alien to the US.

An alternative to war? How is war immoral? When the americans faught the nazis in WW2 that was immoral?

Don’t forget the US was a late entry to WW2, and was not the only nation to fight the Nazis. WW2 would never have happened if not for European internal conflict, without Europe it would have remained a Pacific affair, not a world war spanning so many continents.

You might prefer war to peace, but personally if unifying Europe under Democracy avoids World War round 3 then I'm okay with that.

[Mars]

Hate you break it to you, America has the KKK, Aryan Brotherhood and Nation of Islam etc, you are in no place to complain about our "hate speech" as if its something alien to the US.

are you even reading what I am typing? Anyways I was trying to say Hate speech was illegal. Something that it shouldn't be. You should be allowed to hate other races without getting fined or what not.

Don’t forget the US was a late entry to WW2, and was not the only nation to fight the Nazis.

and what does this have to do with me replying to how they thought "war was immoral"

The obvious point was that sometimes you need war to resolve problems.

The thing that annoys me about the EU is the anti-americanism and hatred/jealousy for the USA. They want to so bad be rivals to us.

[Talon]

are you even reading what I am typing? Anyways I was trying to say Hate speech was illegal. Something that it shouldn't be. You should be allowed to hate other races without getting fined or what not.

Yeah, you said ‘In some European countries, things such as "hate speech" exist’ as if verbal racism and xenophobia (which hate speech is) don’t exist outside their borders. Nowhere did you say anything about it being illegal in Europe or you’ve views on it being okay to be a racist.

Are you sure it isn’t yourself you didn’t read what you typed?

and what does this have to do with me replying to how they thought "war was immoral"

The obvious point was that sometimes you need war to resolve problems

Its point was you went on about the US vs the Nazis, despite the fact a dozen other countries were fighting the Nazis also, and in many cases, before the US.

And indeed, sometimes war is needed to resolve problems, but I don’t see how that means Europe was wrong to use the expansion of democracy and unity to avoid war.

The thing that annoys me about the EU is the anti-americanism and hatred/jealousy for the USA. They want to so bad be rivals to us.

‘jealousy’? You know that pretty arrogant. ‘hatred’? And that’s pretty paranoid. When we look at America we see guns, gangs, obesity and Bush, no we’re not jealous. As for hatred? We watch US movies and listen to US music… no I don’t see this widespread hatred of the US you mention. We p*** take the p*** out of your government yeah, criticise your internal and foreign policies sure, but I fail to see how that equals ‘hate’.

[__Kratos__]

‘jealousy’? You know that pretty arrogant. ‘hatred’? And that’s pretty paranoid. When we look at America we see guns, gangs, obesity and Bush, no we’re not jealous. As for hatred? We watch US movies and listen to US music… no I don’t see this widespread hatred of the US you mention. We p*** take the p*** out of your government yeah, criticise your internal and foreign policies sure, but I fail to see how that equals ‘hate’.

Gun culture warning as firearms replace knives as latest must-have - The Scotsman

Figures show that one in five children in Scotland aged 12 is clinically obese. - BBC

A UNITED Nations report has labelled Scotland the most violent country in the developed world, with people three times more likely to be assaulted than in America. - Times

I've got nothing for Bush though.

[Talon]

‘jealousy’? You know that pretty arrogant. ‘hatred’? And that’s pretty paranoid. When we look at America we see guns, gangs, obesity and Bush, no we’re not jealous. As for hatred? We watch US movies and listen to US music… no I don’t see this widespread hatred of the US you mention. We p*** take the p*** out of your government yeah, criticise your internal and foreign policies sure, but I fail to see how that equals ‘hate’.

Gun culture warning as firearms replace knives as latest must-have - The Scotsman

The evidence of which most of us are still see. Other than a few Neds (who should be exterminated anyway) with air guns, knives are still the weapons which are used in most muggings in both Scotland and the rest of the UK.

Hell, in the US 30,136 people where killed by a gun in 2003 alone, plus there will be heaven knows how many gun-related crimes which didn't result in death which this wont count (probably hundreds of thousands of injuries, armed robbers etc) (http://www.ichv.org/Statistics.htm), yet according to this site in 2003 there where only 970 gun related crimes in Scotland (of which 37% the weapon wasn’t actually identified, and 43% were only airguns)... but it doesn't mention any fatalities.

Remember Kratos you live in a country where owning a gun is considered normal, we live in a country where ownership of a gun is taboo (and illegal inside cities), to us what is a gun 'pandemic' is probably just a 'collection' to an American gun-fan.

So, we have gun crime the same as all countries, but it’s a drop in the ocean compared to the US.

You have your guns all you want, we don’t care, but it doesn’t mean we’re somehow ‘jealous’ that you guys have more gun-shops than you have MacDonald’s.

Figures show that one in five children in Scotland aged 12 is clinically obese. - BBC

And? According to this site "63% of Americans are overweight", that’s more than 1 in 2.

http://www.americansportsdata.com/obesitystats.asp

A UNITED Nations report has labelled Scotland the most violent country in the developed world, with people three times more likely to be assaulted than in America. - Times

I've got nothing for Bush though.

That UN report was already proved to inaccurate at the time, because the UK researchers asked people 'are you worried about being a attacked' while the researchers in every other country asked everyone 'have you been attacked'. A country being concerned about crime does not mean it has the highest crime rates, and explained why the stupid survey was so out of touch with official figures in all 4 UK countries.

Scotland may have a high level of violence, I don’t know, I lived here all my life and yet never been a victim of it at any rate… maybe its all happening around me and I’ve just never noticed. But certainly, if we are or not is not going to be proven by a study that was so incompetent it couldn’t even get its English language researchers to ask the right question.

Anyway, I fail to see how your articles on a single European country, somehow proves that the 25-country strong EU is 'jealous' of the US.

Edited June 18, 2006 by Talon

[.AKUMA.]

You should be allowed to hate other races without getting fined.

Ok its official

"Mars" is a Moran!!!

The thing that annoys me about the EU is the anti-americanism and hatred/jealousy for the USA. They want to so bad be rivals to us.

hahhahah

Jealous of America .Your country is run by fools america is the last country Europe would be jealous of.

Edited June 18, 2006 by AKUMA166

[__Kratos__]

The evidence of which most of us are still see. Other than a few Neds (who should be exterminated anyway) with air guns, knives are still the weapons which are used in most muggings in both Scotland and the rest of the UK.

Hell, in the US 30,136 people where killed by a gun in 2003 alone, plus there will be heaven knows how many gun-related crimes which didn't result in death which this wont count (probably hundreds of thousands of injuries, armed robbers etc) (http://www.ichv.org/Statistics.htm), yet according to this site in 2003 there where only 970 gun related crimes in Scotland (of which 37% the weapon wasn’t actually identified, and 43% were only airguns)... but it doesn't mention any fatalities.

US: 298,444,215 Source

Scotland: 5,062,011 Source

Population is a huge factor here in terms of numbers being thrown out. I'm sure the US is still higher though I'm sure.

Airguns can still kill.

You have your guns all you want, we don’t care, but it doesn’t mean we’re somehow ‘jealous’ that you guys have more gun-shops than you have MacDonald’s.

I'm sure you don't.

That UN report was already proved to inaccurate at the time, because the UK researchers asked people 'are you worried about being a attacked' while the researchers in every other country asked everyone 'have you been attacked'. A country being concerned about crime does not mean it has the highest crime rates, and explained why the stupid survey was so out of touch with official figures in all 4 UK countries.

Scotland may have a high level of violence, I don’t know, I lived here all my life and yet never been a victim of it at any rate… maybe its all happening around me and I’ve just never noticed. But certainly, if we are or not is not going to be proven by a study that was so incompetent it couldn’t even get its English language researchers to ask the right question.

I'll take a gander around the net then for personal knowledge then.

Anyway, I fail to see how your articles on a single European country, somehow proves that the 25-country strong EU is 'jealous' of the US.

That wasn't my goal. Just showing a skip across the pond wasn't perfect and used Scotland as a corner stone because you'd relate more to that country, while you just poked at the US.

I'd be in for a long and pointless stupid fight, if I tried to prove the EU was jealous of the US as well as the other way around.

[Talon]

US: 298,444,215 Source

Scotland: 5,062,011 Source

Population is a huge factor here in terms of numbers being thrown out. I'm sure the US is still higher though I'm sure.

Airguns can still kill.

Indeed, if we look at 30,000 into 300 million its roughly 0.01% of Americans are killed each year by guns. 0 into 5 million is 0% of Scots killed a year. So basically you’re gun deaths are negligible, while ours are non-existent in a good year. To emphasis how rare gun deaths are in Scotland, I have to point out, when someone is shot here, its major news which is on every news paper for days.

As for air guns, indeed, and unfortunately they are still legal. However, they are still not that widespread in Scotland, neither are guns. I honestly don’t care if the US wants guns, you can have as much guns as you want as long as they don’t cross into our border. However its any claims that Scotland’s gun crime is comparable to the US is insane.

I'm sure you don't.

Yep. In the end we Europeans as a whole just don’t get guns, we don’t want them. Our hatred of guns is probably as alien to you, as your love of them is to us.

That wasn't my goal. Just showing a skip across the pond wasn't perfect and used Scotland as a corner stone because you'd relate more to that country, while you just poked at the US.

I don’t remember poking at the US. I remember some American claiming the US was so perfect that we Europeans were all jealous of it and me pointing out that life wasn’t as sunny in the US as he seemed to think and there were several things we certainly weren’t jealous of. I also mentioned the widespread audience in Europe for US film and music if your looking for positive stuff I said about the US, because you guys do make better movies than us.

I'd be in for a long and pointless stupid fight, if I tried to prove the EU was jealous of the US as well as the other way around.

Indeed, given that there are 298 million Americans and 454 million Europeans (in the EU that is, according to wiki the entire continent has 710 million) it would be impossible to prove every citizen is jealous or not jealous… just as this article is completely stupid to claim all Europeans are against capital punishment when many surveys have shown that the death penalty would return if put to a referendum.

[Mars]

Ok its official

"Mars" is a Moran!!!

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/jan/06012609.html

and yes, there is such a thing as a "hate speech" law in europa.

Yep. In the end we Europeans as a whole just don’t get guns, we don’t want them. Our hatred of guns is probably as alien to you, as your love of them is to us.

And you are the ones that actually need guns.

I remember some American claiming the US was so perfect that we Europeans were all jealous of it and me pointing out that life wasn’t as sunny in the US

The purpose of the EU is to rival the United States "hyperpower". Europe is jealous of american's power on the world.

Your country is run by fools america is the last country Europe would be jealous of.

Our leaders aren't openly anti-european. As the european leaders blatantly say things such as, "I just look at what america is doing then do the opposite".

Europe is jealous of america's power, this is the purpose of the European Union, to try to counter the american superpower.

‘jealousy’? You know that pretty arrogant. ‘hatred’? And that’s pretty paranoid.

When we look at America we see guns, gangs, obesity and Bush, no we’re not jealous.

contradiction.

_______

Edited June 18, 2006 by Mars

[Talon]

Yep. In the end we Europeans as a whole just don’t get guns, we don’t want them. Our hatred of guns is probably as alien to you, as your love of them is to us.

And you are the ones that actually need guns.

How do you work that out?

The purpose of the EU is to rival the United States "hyperpower". Europe is jealous of american's power on the world.

Nonsense, seeking a goal does not equal jealousy of someone already there. If it does I guess you’re really jealous of China since it’s about to overtake you as the world’s dominate superpower. Personally, I’m not that jealous of the Chinese given their country’s poor human rights record and poor general standard of living despite all that wealth. But I guess if you think the EU is jealous of the US, you must be seething in envy over China.

Europe is jealous of america's power, this is the purpose of the European Union, to try to counter the american superpower.

Actually the EU was formed as a free-trade group, it was much later any ideas of forming a super state came to anyone’s mind.

‘jealousy’? You know that pretty arrogant. ‘hatred’? And that’s pretty paranoid.

When we look at America we see guns, gangs, obesity and Bush, no we’re not jealous.

contradiction.

I fail to see how. You say Europeans are jealous… so I post a couple of issues we certainly are not jealous of. Despite your rosy picture of life in the US, you guys have as many problems as the rest of the western world to somehow be a great beacon of light everyone's aiming for.

[Mars]

I fail to see how. You say Europeans are jealous… so I post a couple of issues we certainly are not jealous of. Despite your rosy picture of life in the US, you guys have as many problems as the rest of the western world to somehow be a great beacon of light everyone's aiming for.

I'm not saying at all the europeans are jealous of our culture or our way of life. They are jealous of our power and control on the world.

Nonsense, seeking a goal does not equal jealousy of someone already there. If it does I guess you’re really jealous of China since it’s about to overtake you as the world’s dominate superpower. Personally, I’m not that jealous of the Chinese given their country’s poor human rights record and poor general standard of living despite all that wealth. But I guess if you think the EU is jealous of the US, you must be seething in envy over China.

China won't overtake the USA. They have a serious problem of overpopulations and Most of them are living in extreme poverty. They have a massive military but what good does it do when they're poorly trained. I think China is built up to fall once again

Indian however I want to see suceed since they are a democracy.

How do you work that out?

America doesn't have the infestation of muslims.

[Talon]

I'm not saying at all the europeans are jealous of our culture or our way of life. They are jealous of our power and control on the world.

You’d be surprised how little we actually think of America in our day to day lives. Rarely do I suddenly stop in the middle of the street and think “Damn those Americans for all their influence and power, I wish I could be like them”. Its plain arrogance to think we do.

To be jealous of the US, we’d actively have to want to be US. The EU might want to be a superpower, but it doesn’t want to be the US.

China won't overtake the USA. They have a serious problem of overpopulations and Most of them are living in extreme poverty. They have a massive military but what good does it do when they're poorly trained. I think China is built up to fall once again

Given that their economy is sky rocketing, and their not even fully industrialised yet its pretty clear they will be. When it is fully industrialised China’s economy is going to be insanely powerful. You mention their military, but you miss out they are not a country of farmers anymore; they have factories, industry, scientists and resources. It’s only a matter of time.

How do you work that out?

America doesn't have the infestation of muslims.

Public ownership of guns is hardly an answer to a large number of extremists in your midst. Toughening up on immigration, terrorists, and giving more power to the secret police is the key. Oh and throwing out the useless human rights laws, and multiculturalism.

Edited June 19, 2006 by Talon

[Waspie_Dwarf]

They have a massive military but what good does it do when they're poorly trained.

You will be amazed how often that is said in Europe, usual about the Americans after another "friendly fire" incident.

[Kuahji]

I'm surprised people only see the EU as a counterweight to the US. Both China & India are huge prospects for superpowers in the world. I think India esp. considering they are a democracy & their economy is on hot. Either way, I see unions as a good thing. Eventually we'll get around to uniting the world. As long as their remains seperate powers, we'll always have inequities & fighting. The only way to solve that is through education & unity.

[Talon]

I think India esp. considering they are a democracy

Democracy doesn't actually equal superpower since there are tons of democracies out there which arn't superpowers. Neither does superpower equal democracy as USSR was a superpower and it was one-party state, also at the outbreak of WW2 Germany was one of the most powerful countries in the world (we didn't have 'Superpowers' then, only 'Great Powers', the term superpower only appeared when the USSR and US got their industry out of the gutter to fight Hitler and over took all the other Great Powers) and it wasn't a democracy.

Being a superpower really just relies on resources and the ability to use them, not political ideology.

Edited June 19, 2006 by Talon

[Tommy]

Interesting article, Erikl.

There is another related issue: While most U.S. citizens tend to want government involved in its affairs as little as possible, Europeans embrace government regulation. EU citizens gladly live under a “womb to tomb” welfare state that pays for virtually everything—health care, child care, education, etc.

I think this is an interesting point to make. The regulation that the EU ‘embraces’ for the most part does so for the perceived benefit of everyone, not just for the firm or a select portion of society, which is the opposite to where the emphasis is in the States. (for example the recent estate tax reduction)

While the US citizen may want as little government involvement as possible, they are getting increasingly more of it.

The Internet is a U.S. invention, and the vast majority of websites are still American-created and operated. Additionally, 62% of Americans have Internet access, while only 14% of the rest of the world possess this capability.

I wonder why the author doesn’t compare the US to the EU, like he does throughout the rest of this piece. I would think the percentage in any western Country is likely to be higher than the ‘rest of the world’.

According to a survey by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, 59% of Americans called their faith “very important.” But only 21% of Europeans said that religion is “very important” to them...

I think trying to put Europeans in one group doesn’t accurately portray the way Europe really feels about religion. Religious significance varies massively from Country to Country, as it does from State to State in the US, not to mention that you don't need a religion to have faith in something.

To become a federal superstate with supranational governance, capable of executing decisions with speed and precision, Europe must have a strong leader guiding the way.

Who says Europe wants to be a Federal Superstate in the first place? I don't see why Europe would want to sacrifice its model of diplomacy and unanimous mandate to the control of a single strong leader.

I think Europe should be as politically flexible as possible. One size definitely does not fit all, neither economically or politically, which is why such supranational powers should be kept to an absolute minimum. Let Countries rule themselves and bring the power of decision making as close to the people it affects as is possible.

Edited June 20, 2006 by Tommy