Berlusconi goes europe !

[ralphwiggum 6]

.....plus he made sure Piazza del popolo was opened in front by tearing down a few buildings. However, many disagree and suggest it should never have been done.

Apart from that he was a real geezer!

it's always good to have fast Pizza delivery.

anyways, I'm surprised that no one is calling for his resignition at this moment, he has a bit of *flamboyant* mind, and has caused enough stir to make Italians feel uncomfortable.

[GoOB 0]

If they ban grilled food I am going to be mad... The same with Saunas. Why on earth would you want to ban something as divine as the sauna? I have gotten only good from saunas (Except from public ones. The classical "walkbys" are very hard to deal with) If they ban the sauna they better expect some sort of new terrorist organization. Not to mention what would all the americans that come to europe eat if they ban grilled food?

[norsu 180]

If they ban grilled food I am going to be mad... The same with Saunas. Why on earth would you want to ban something as divine as the sauna? I have gotten only good from saunas (Except from public ones. The classical "walkbys" are very hard to deal with) If they ban the sauna they better expect some sort of new terrorist organization. Not to mention what would all the americans that come to europe eat if they ban grilled food?

Heh at least here in Finland no one is going to follow those rules about grilled food or saunas , it's a cultural thing and no one can change it .

[brgnorway 0]

....please explain to me why you are talking about grilled food and sauna?

Does Berlusconi have a problem with saunas?

[denoir 0]

anyways, I'm surprised that no one is calling for his resignition at this moment, he has a bit of *flamboyant* mind, and has caused enough stir to make Italians feel uncomfortable.

I think that the Italians are fairly used to having such politicians. I think however that it's entirely inappropriate that he is the head of the EU. The roatation system has to be changed. Just because a politician is suitable to represent one of the countries does not mean he is suitable to represent all of them.

Imagine if USA was organized the way that every six months the presidency was rotated between the governors of the states. How happy would conservative Texans be to get a Californian liberal in charge? And the differences between the EU countries and cultures are far greater than the difference between different states in USA.

[NurEinMensch 0]

On the other hand how to make sure it's not always the same majority of people who elect the president they want, no matter what the minority in the smaller states wants?

[Tamme 0]

If they ban grilled food I am going to be mad... The same with Saunas. Why on earth would you want to ban something as divine as the sauna? I have gotten only good from saunas (Except from public ones. The classical "walkbys" are very hard to deal with) If they ban the sauna they better expect some sort of new terrorist organization. Not to mention what would all the americans that come to europe eat if they ban grilled food?

Heh at least here in Finland no one is going to follow those rules about grilled food or saunas , it's a cultural thing and no one can change it .

Amen brother! Fight the power!

EDIT: How are they going to know if someone is using a sauna?

[denoir 0]

On the other hand how to make sure it's not always the same majority of people who elect the president they want, no matter what the minority in the smaller states wants?

That is a problem, but I'm afraid that it is an sacrifice that has to be made. You can't have a cooperation where the minority of the people dictate the terms.

The point of the cooperation is however that we work together to support the interests we share. The EU focuses on our similarities, not our differences. And from that point of view, it should not matter if a German or a Swede is elected for the job. If the population of Europe shares common goals then so will the elected politicians.

I do think however a lot of work has to be done to form a true people's EU. And we should have politicians that are European, not national. I.e if a German is elected president then his loyalty should be to the EU, not to Germany.

Basically the same principle as we have today relating regional level vs national level.

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

Denoir- But as you yourself have said the difference between different countries cultures is great. How then can there be a common european identity to be loyal to except in a very vague nebulous way? And if european identity and values have to be so vague in order to encompass all of europe then there is a danger of this 'european identity' becoming practically meaningless and widespread conflicts of interests becoming inevitable (to the extent that the Union may not be workable anymore).

In the future how will people in these small countries feel knowing that their vote is a drop in the ocean and that their national representatives are forever outnumbered and not represented at higher levels? There is an inherent danger in treating entire countries like 'regions'.

Am i to understand that the EU is proposing banning saunas and grilled food? What madness is this?

[denoir 0]

In the future how will people in these small countries feel knowing that their vote is a drop in the ocean and that their national representatives are forever outnumbered and not represented at higher levels? There is an inherent danger in treating entire countries like 'regions'.

In the past each province of just about every country had its own dialect, its own folkdances, style of clothing etc. Then came the industrial revolution and that changed. The country became one. The same is happening with today's globalization.

Now, and this I am very interested to hear from a Briton: What about Great Britain? You are just like what a future federal EU would be. You have different nationalities that live under a federal government (England, Wales, Scotland, Ireland). People speak completely different languages in the different parts of your country.

How did it work out for you? And why don't you think it would work on a European level?

Quote[/b] ]Am i to understand that the EU is proposing banning saunas and grilled food?   What madness is this?

It's bullshit. Just an urban legened - not true.

[Pukko 0]

Denoir- But as you yourself have said the difference between different countries cultures is great. How then can there be a common european identity to be loyal to except in a very vague nebulous way? And if european identity and values have to be so vague in order to encompass all of europe then there is a danger of this 'european identity' becoming practically meaningless and widespread conflicts of interests becoming inevitable (to the extent that the Union may not be workable anymore).

In the future how will people in these small countries feel knowing that their vote is a drop in the ocean and that their national representatives are forever outnumbered and not represented at higher levels? There is an inherent danger in treating entire countries like 'regions'.

As I have asid over and over earlier, the matter of European identity creation is maybe the most important question - short term and definitely long term.

I'm not really in the mood, or indeed at present time have'nt got the knowledge, to specify more concrete ways of creating a creative/positive European identity. But rest assured that an European identity is going to be created whether we want it or not. And I'm therefore also very sure that it is better to be aware of this and discuss the problem to make the best out of it - than just letting it go; developing in our unconcious and be the object of influence from people with special interests, like Berlusconi.

But remember - a strong concrete identity is quite likely to end up in nationalism and patriotism; and we dont want to end up being an arrogant clumsy gigant like USA now, do we?

Also in the matter of regional/national. You Johnwayne living in UK are probably very aware of Wales & Scotland (and the less fortunate North Ireland); do you really think that in the long run a European state would have to be so very much different from that? A unification of Europe may very well be as a natural step now as the unification of UK was some time ago... Or put it like this; back then the UK might have been interpreted by Brits as just as a big and impossible project as Europe is for us now. It probalby have something to do with how a broad perspective of the world around us we develop and feel comfortable with: the brittish islands, the European continent, the..... [i see when previwing that denoir is on the same track...] EDIT:And you even have got differnent national football teams!!!

The same regional thinking is also very present here in Sweden, once divided among regions that was fierce enemies. Its still a very regional feeeling left here, with local governance and distinct differences between people from the west and east, north and south.

Sure a unification can be very dangerous if it's made too fast. But we have no immideate hurry to become a real 'state' (if we ever becomes one in the dying time of nation states), I have really hard to imagine that happening within the closest 50 years at least. But we do have an urgent need to develop a forum and outwards face dealing with international 'stuff', since at least I recon that there have to be someone who can say NO to the USA in the closest decades. I fear that that nation for various reasons is going outwards, and will continue to be blindly violent in frustration even after Bush is gone.........

[-TU--33ker 0]

For God's sake! Please stop talking about grilled food and saunas! It's Simply NOT TRUE!

And I thought it should be clear after the discussion in the EU thread...

[NurEinMensch 0]

I agree, of course, but for many people across Europe it will probably take decades until they see it this way, if ever at all.

If you ask the average person on the street about his idea on Europe you may often hear they don't have any idea at all and don't care much about it as long as it doesn't interfere with their life.

I think we who share the idea of a united Europe should emphasise it more.

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

Whats standing in the way of european integration is not national folk dances, local dialects or cheeses. It is for instance the fundamental differences of opinion that exist on many major issues, the lack of a strong common identity, the lack of shared overarching ideas (or the perceived lack of relevance of any such ideas to peoples everyday lives), the lack of wholesale international european dialogue (a pan european media etc), the lack of a common language etc etc- i could go on and on

/\ not forgetting the mutual distrust between nations created by the above.

Some sense of solidarity and resistance such as that created by a bellicose America may be helpful to an emergent EU but that alone wont be enough.

A British identity evolved slowly (and still is). It only became a solid fact in peoples minds over time (with long term trans-national stability). The people of the British Isles have centuries or millenia of intermingling (but often divisive) histories.

The dream of a united Britain was not new or unimaginable (neither is the dream of a united europe) Wales and England were unified in the 1200s and Scotland brought in in the early 1700s. Even so there are certainly those who still dislike the idea of 'Britishness' and resent (even hate) it, especially when seen as an english imposition on their Scottish, Welsh or Irish identities (films like 'Braveheart' certainly feed that sense) and thats after many hundreds of years of legal union and political entanglement.

Also its worth noting, for better or worse the UK revolves around a strong central country (England) with Scotland and Wales only recently getting national assemblies. Will the EU revolve in such a way around France and Germany or other big countries? Certainly most people in the smaller countries would prefer not.

The political systems of the various nations are really still very different (as this thread demonstrates), the same goes for national values and to some extent interests. If there is further integration then some countries and their peoples must compromise on their values, some view of europe will be imposed over the others. To raise one dream of europe high others must be trampled underfoot and individual nations must be humble.

I agree with Pukko that a true european union (if likely) is likely to take over 50 years to acheive ,who knows what the rest of the world will even look like then?

Im not saying Europe cant be united. But europe as it is today cannot be truly united (as for instance the USA). We've just been to war against most of the EUs wishes for hecks sake! Italy is led by a Mussolini lover! Even left wing, politically correct Sweden doesnt know if it wants the Euro. Is every country at this moment willing to throw its lot in with the rest at its own expense (economically and ideologically) to make the dream a reality. Hardly!

In case you hadnt looked Italy is a part of the EU, take it or leave it. If you people cant accept or take seriously the man Italy democratically elected to lead their country then what hope is there that hundreds of millions of europeans will find a common path in the future, how can we live with each other? How much foreign weirdness are we all able to tolerate?

I suppose thats really what im asking

[denoir 0]

I don't think that the EU should try to be USA either. It's a completely different kind of animal. On the other hand integration is far more easy to achieve today with global communications. For instance by talking to Britons, Germans, Frenchmen etc on this forum, I can clearly see that we are not at all that different. It would have not been possible 100 years ago.

One must also be fairly impressed by the speed the EU is progressing. In ten years the first drafts of a common currency evolved into a fully functioning system that is used in most of Europe.

Quote[/b] ]

In case you hadnt looked Italy is a part of the EU, take it or leave it. If you people cant accept or take seriously the man Italy democratically elected to lead their country then what hope is there that hundreds of millions of europeans will find a common path in the future, how can we live with each other? How much foreign weirdness are we all able to tolerate?

If we get a 1:1 vote then the wierdness will be reduced. We won't get stuck with a Berlusconi if the majority of the Europeans have a vote. And the inherent differences of opinion between the giants (Britain, France, Germany) guarantees that we won't be getting any oddballs that appeal to one country only.

Edit: Also, one can clearly see it on these forums that there are certain distinguishable European traits. You can easily differentiate what the average European thinks from what the average American thinks in issues ranging from international politics to social welfare. These are very basic fundamental issues and we seem to agree on them. And that's a very good start.

[NurEinMensch 0]

A pan european media is actually a very good idea, but also a good way to spotlight our problems. For example the language barrier. If such media existed which language would it be? And who would be reading/watching it?

What comes first, a european language (not to replace the existing ones in each country) or a european media...

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

Denoir- I dont think this board is especially good at representing the 'average european' (or indeed american) view and you know it to be a mistake to draw general conclusions from limited personal experiences (such as the discussions on this board).

Would you be willing to be ruled in the future by a european president whos ideology you didnt like at all (such as Berlusconi) even if almost noone in your country voted for them?  What if Swedens representatives kept getting overuled and outvoted for decades in the european parliament

? Its not impossible. Would you be willing to see Swedens taxes lowered to conform more closely to the european average? (+ other similar changes). There is a danger that the EU could become about nations conforming to a 'one size fits all' euro-ideal at the expense of their uniqueness.

Which countries model is best? In Law (criminal and civil), in economics, in foreign policy, immigration (and asylum) policy and other aspects of a nations affairs? If there is to be integration and freedom to travel/ work then there must be an increase in standardisation (more 'directives').

It is surely not wise to have at the heart of what drives the EU and binds us an opposition to america. How unimaginative, how uninspiring, the EU can be much more than a 'counter-balance' . Besides which my country went to war with the US

and probably most people here still feel at least somewhat conciliatory towards America and there are even significant numbers who prefer the US to the EU (others in europe have similar views).

Im still not sure if global communications (and mass media)

will pull us together or drive us apart. Just look at the power of the US and European medias to drive us apart from each other and instill prejudices. Whilst forums like this can help to break down such barriers,  even here there have been plenty of americans who have left this board after having their stereotypes of europeans confirmed to their disgust (and if there were more yanks and less euros im sure the situation would be reversed)...

[SgtBarnes 0]

Quote[/b] ]Even so there are certainly those who still dislike the idea of 'Britishness' and resent (even hate) it

This is true. The UK isn't actually all that united. I myself voted for the Scottish National Party, whose main aim is secession from the Union. Unfortunately SNP support has stagnated at around 25% for years now.

Quote[/b] ](films like 'Braveheart' certainly feed that sense) and thats after many hundreds of years of legal union and political entanglement.

Ahem....Scotland is not legally entangled. Scots Law was something we managed to 'save' back in 1707

I can understand Englands natural tendency to be euro-skeptic. Scotland understands only too well the consequences of surrendering her currency and political autonomy to bigger brothers to the south  

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

Read carefully . I referred to the union as legal and to the entanglements as political.

Its interesting to note how many of the current labour leaders were born in scotland. Cant just blame the english anymore

Gordon Browns a dour scot and hes the one we english surrender our taxes to.

And yes in a way your right SgtBarnes, the sense of frustrated nationalism that exists in scotland could become more widespread throughout europe if a strong centralist EU executive is set up in which smaller nations are continually ignored or sidelined. Its a danger at least.

[denoir 0]

Denoir- I dont think this board is especially good at representing the 'average european' (or indeed american) view and you know it to be a mistake to draw general conclusions from limited personal experiences (such as the discussions on this board).

True, but the things I mentioned have a foundation both in the organization of our societies and what public polls have shown. Sure the British were more pro-war than the average European, but they were still much more sceptical than what the average American.

If you look at our social infrastructure, you'll see that our systems have a lot in common.

Quote[/b] ]Would you be willing to be ruled in the future by a european president whos ideology you didnt like at all (such as Berlusconi) even if almost noone in your country voted for them?

That's why European politicians are needed. People who would have their loyalty to the EU and not to their country of origin. And yes, I would accept it. The same way that I accept members of parliament that nobody in Stockholm voted for.

Quote[/b] ]Would you be willing to see Swedens taxes lowered to conform more closely to the european average?

You can bet your ass I would.

Quote[/b] ]There is a danger that the EU could become about nations conforming to a 'one size fits all' euro-ideal at the expense of their uniqueness.

Yes it is a danger. And we will undoubtably lose some of our uniqueness. But that's the way centralization works. You can't implement global principles while fully keeping the local features. I see this as natural evolution. Before 1873 each county in Sweden had their own brands of currency. They had more than that a unique culture of their own. Now they don't. It was a loss, but the gains of centralization were far larger.

Quote[/b] ]Which countries model is best? In Law (criminal and civil), in economics, in foreign policy, immigration (and asylum) policy and other aspects of a nations affairs? If there is to be integration and freedom to travel/ work then there must be an increase in standardisation (more 'directives').

There you go again. This is not about France and Germany dominating Britain or Britain dominating Belgium etc It's about building a common foundation that we agree on. We don't just copy the model of one country and force it on everybody. We create a new model for a new Europe.

Quote[/b] ]Im still not sure if global communications (and mass media)

will pull us together or drive us apart. Just look at the power of the US and European medias to drive us apart from each other and instill prejudices.

So you are saying that there was a clear difference between the stereotype Americans and stereotype Europeans?