Should the EU become the United States of Europe? What do you think?

[Meshugger]

 

 

In every group of people there are people willing to conduct crimes. That applies for every single society how is it only the immigrants fault?

 

https://sputniknews.com/europe/201607181043178514-nice-terror-hollande-civil-war/

 

 

Sputnik news, really? :/

 

 

http://metro.co.uk/2016/07/12/we-are-on-the-brink-of-civil-war-warns-french-intelligence-chief-6002362/

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/09/14/plan-to-distribute-migrants-across-france-could-spark-civil-war-say-critics/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3685561/France-verge-civil-war-sparked-mass-sexual-assault-women-migrants-intelligence-chief-warns.html

 

Edit:// the original link in french: http://www.lefigaro.fr/actualite-france/2016/05/19/01016-20160519ARTFIG00173-la-france-pays-le-plus-menace-par-l-etat-islamique-selon-le-patron-de-la-dgsi.php

Edited October 10, 2016 by Meshugger

[Ben No.3]

Okay... Let's go

 

"In your "idealism" you are happy about eliminating Germany as a country and germans as a people; which is well underway too provided by my original link, but at the same time happy about creating a new nation-identity where other cultures and groups of people exist. You admit that different white ethnic groups in Europe have a culture based traditions, heritage and expressed through arts, music, philosophy, and literature, but at the same time these traits and qualities dissappear when the moment they change passports."

^

I

Close, but not exactly. I simply believe that if you behave accordingly to a society's rules, then there should be nothing to stop you being a member of that society. Obviously, in a EU nation culturally speaking, I would be a German. But I'd have a EU passport and be a EU citizen. Nethertheless I'd speak German and get drunk in Oktoberfest.

 

 

" You believe in democracy, but the people need to be re-educated until they vote right and agree with your premise of such nation."

^

I

No! I'm saying a big reason for populism (!) in my opinion is a lack of education! Throughout history, this was a huge problem, it still is today. For example, there are currently two big-ish right winged parties in Germany. If you have a certain level of education, you can easily see that Germany would not benefit from their goals. Yet through populist campaigning, they gain a lot of support, they probably would not be gaining if their supporters knew that their goals were either not in their interest. A certain fear towards anything unknown is also one of the biggest reasons Racism exist. That again could be countered with education. If an educated one decides all options considered that racism is the way to go, that's a whole different issue.

 

 

" Your idealism is a mess. It only creates misery and suffering, both for the immigrants and the native population,"

^

I

Like... What? Everybody keeps their cultural heritage, just the official state would change and over time obviously create a new culture over time. But that is a natural process that happenes in every society: culture changes

 

 

" so I suspect that there some other motives at play here than ideas of a possible "utopia".

 

....so, in other words, we're back to what i originally stated, based on your answers.

Am I only one getting a laugh out of this? Through out history the German people conquered Europe one way or the other, but now suddenly they claim to not exist and that national borders are just an organizational problem, but effectively it would still result in Germania being created, even in a crypto-state. "Wir schaffen das!", indeed."

^

I

In a EU nation were all power would lie on a Central European government with a biting system that works by percent rather than electoral colleges and winner takes it all, how should a nation be so dominant?

Also, nit picking: "Germania" refers to hitlers vision of the new world capital, not Germany itself.

 

"Go to bed, Merkel, you're drunk.

 

Yes, you have denied yourselves an identity to such a degree that you have to forge a new one of Europa instead where everyone has to join."

^

I

As I said in my original post, joining would be done out of free will. Countries which don't want to join would be part of the EU as it exists now.

 

 

"Snap out of it already as the current talisman of human rights and tolerance is a very, very weak one."

Exactly! And right populism is not exactly fixing that talisman

" Read Heinrich Heine's poem about christianity to see what i am talking about."

^

I

I have. Talented poet.

 

"I wonder what you will say to your children? "I was born a German in Germany, but i casted all that away to create a new imaginary one"? That has to be an awkward discussion."

^

I

No... "I am a German European."

Or "I am a European with German heritage"

Or "I am a European on paper and a German by culture"

Edited October 10, 2016 by Ben No.3

[Mr. Magniloquent]

 

There is no need for some hegemonic state. People need no authoritarian structure to command and bind them if their interactions are voluntary and legitimate. In trying to create such an entity, one is openly admitting that they intend to bind others to their will--that their actions for "unity" are not legitimate or voluntary. Europe has had enough leviathans in its history.

 

Sic semper evello mortem tyrannis.

Leviathan, as in the monster?

See, while in theory, communism (which is an anarchy) surely is the best system. But it does not work. Any attempt to create a communist country has failed. And that is became humans are exactly that, humans. And everyone seeks advantage over the other. So some form of government needs to be put in place because otherwise chaos arises. And while "democracy is the worst system but the others" (Churchill), our system gives us 1. A system that splits up the power so no single figure can become the most powerful figure and basically be an autocrat 2. A system were the leading figures are not determined by the elite but by everyone.

 

By the way, isn't it "sic semper tyrannis"?

 

 

For someone European, you don't seem to know much about Thomas Hobbes, which I find odd. That you think Communism is a form of anarchy is even more perplexing, as it demands everyone submit and obey to the same collectivist rules. This is inherently authoritarian and centralist (rather than decentralist) and is not anarchistic in any way whatsoever. An anarchist life would not be utopian, but it would not be this orgy of violence and death that people make it out to be. Compare petty--or even organized crime to the systemic destruction of nation states, and there is no comparison. Do you associate with wild murders, thieves, and rapists? Do your friends associate with wanton murderers/thieves/rapists?

 

The best way to prevent the abuse of power is to destroy the power itself. In that way, the myth of the benevolent state needs to die. There will always be those more powerful or those who wish to do harm. The difference is that the gears The State enables these people in ways that would never be possible in its absence. "Sic semper tyrannis" is short-hand. I gave the full, less quoted, statement.

[Ben No.3]

 

 

 

There is no need for some hegemonic state. People need no authoritarian structure to command and bind them if their interactions are voluntary and legitimate. In trying to create such an entity, one is openly admitting that they intend to bind others to their will--that their actions for "unity" are not legitimate or voluntary. Europe has had enough leviathans in its history.

 

Sic semper evello mortem tyrannis.

Leviathan, as in the monster?

See, while in theory, communism (which is an anarchy) surely is the best system. But it does not work. Any attempt to create a communist country has failed. And that is became humans are exactly that, humans. And everyone seeks advantage over the other. So some form of government needs to be put in place because otherwise chaos arises. And while "democracy is the worst system but the others" (Churchill), our system gives us 1. A system that splits up the power so no single figure can become the most powerful figure and basically be an autocrat 2. A system were the leading figures are not determined by the elite but by everyone.

 

By the way, isn't it "sic semper tyrannis"?

For someone European, you don't seem to know much about Thomas Hobbes, which I find odd. That you think Communism is a form of anarchy is even more perplexing, as it demands everyone submit and obey to the same collectivist rules. This is inherently authoritarian and centralist (rather than decentralist) and is not anarchistic in any way whatsoever. An anarchist life would not be utopian, but it would not be this orgy of violence and death that people make it out to be. Compare petty--or even organized crime to the systemic destruction of nation states, and there is no comparison. Do you associate with wild murders, thieves, and rapists? Do your friends associate with wanton murderers/thieves/rapists?

 

The best way to prevent the abuse of power is to destroy the power itself. In that way, the myth of the benevolent state needs to die. There will always be those more powerful or those who wish to do harm. The difference is that the gears The State enables these people in ways that would never be possible in its absence. "Sic semper tyrannis" is short-hand. I gave the full, less quoted, statement.

No sadly I never got into Hobbes... Then again I'm only 16 years old (revelation... Isn't one, look at my profile). I did however look a bit into Marx, and I do believe that the final stage of his communism is one without a government, but do correct me if I am wrong.

 

While I do agree with you on the nature of power, I do not necessarily believe the absence of a power would be the ideal solution. But you have my attention, please explain yourself

Edited October 10, 2016 by Ben No.3

[Meshugger]

Okay... Let's go

 

"In your "idealism" you are happy about eliminating Germany as a country and germans as a people; which is well underway too provided by my original link, but at the same time happy about creating a new nation-identity where other cultures and groups of people exist. You admit that different white ethnic groups in Europe have a culture based traditions, heritage and expressed through arts, music, philosophy, and literature, but at the same time these traits and qualities dissappear when the moment they change passports."

Close, but not exactly. I simply believe that if you behave accordingly to a society's rules, then there should be nothing to stop you being a member of that society. Obviously, in a EU nation culturally speaking, I would be a German. But I'd have a EU passport and be a EU citizen. Nethertheless I'd speak German and get drunk in Oktoberfest.

" You believe in democracy, but the people need to be re-educated until they vote right and agree with your premise of such nation."

No! I'm saying a big reason for populism (!) in my opinion is a lack of education! Throughout history, this was a huge problem, it still is today. For example, there are currently two big-ish right winged parties in Germany. If you have a certain level of education, you can easily see that Germany would not benefit from their goals. Yet through populist campaigning, they gain a lot of support, they probably would not be gaining if their supporters knew that their goals were either not in their interest. A certain fear towards anything unknown is also one of the biggest reasons Racism exist. That again could be countered with education. If an educated one decides all options considered that racism is the way to go, that's a whole different issue.

" Your idealism is a mess. It only creates misery and suffering, both for the immigrants and the native population,"

Like... What? Everybody keeps their cultural heritage, just the official state would change and over time obviously create a new culture over time. But that is a natural process that happenes in every society: culture changes

" so I suspect that there some other motives at play here than ideas of a possible "utopia".

 

....so, in other words, we're back to what i originally stated, based on your answers.

Am I only one getting a laugh out of this? Through out history the German people conquered Europe one way or the other, but now suddenly they claim to not exist and that national borders are just an organizational problem, but effectively it would still result in Germania being created, even in a crypto-state. "Wir schaffen das!", indeed."

In a EU nation were all power would lie on a Central European government with a biting system that works by percent rather than electoral colleges and winner takes it all, how should a nation be so dominant?

Also, nit picking: "Germania" refers to hitlers vision of the new world capital, not Germany itself.

 

"Go to bed, Merkel, you're drunk.

 

Yes, you have denied yourselves an identity to such a degree that you have to forge a new one of Europa instead where everyone has to join."

As I said in my original post, joining would be done out of free will. Countries which don't want to join would be part of the EU as it exists now.

 

"Snap out of it already as the current talisman of human rights and tolerance is a very, very weak one."

Exactly! And right populism is not exactly fixing that talisman

" Read Heinrich Heine's poem about christianity to see what i am talking about."

I have. Talented poet.

 

"I wonder what you will say to your children? "I was born a German in Germany, but i casted all that away to create a new imaginary one"? That has to be an awkward discussion."

No... "I am a German European."

Or "I am a European with German heritage"

Or "I am a European on paper and a German by culture"

 

Fix your quotes, that's just impossible to read.

[Ben No.3]

I am too lazy... Sorry

Gimme a sec

 

There... Hope that helps

Edited October 10, 2016 by Ben No.3

[HoonDing]

"European spirit"

 

it must be something ingrained in all Aryan peoples

[Ben No.3]

"European spirit"

 

it must be something ingrained in all Aryan peoples

Aaaand a direct implementation of me being a nazi. Love you to man

Please never walk into my field of sight

Sadly, my hair is brown and my eyes are green

Edited October 10, 2016 by Ben No.3

[pmp10]

For someone European, you don't seem to know much about Thomas Hobbes, which I find odd. 

I find it odd that a British political philosopher should somehow be universally known in Europe.

[Ben No.3]

 

For someone European, you don't seem to know much about Thomas Hobbes, which I find odd.

 

I find it odd that a British political philosopher should somehow be universally known in Europe.

Well... I know that he was extremely important for all political philosophy to come... But that's where my small knowledge ends

[Meshugger]

I

Close, but not exactly. I simply believe that if you behave accordingly to a society's rules, then there should be nothing to stop you being a member of that society. Obviously, in a EU nation culturally speaking, I would be a German. But I'd have a EU passport and be a EU citizen. Nethertheless I'd speak German and get drunk in Oktoberfest.

 

I

No! I'm saying a big reason for populism (!) in my opinion is a lack of education! Throughout history, this was a huge problem, it still is today. For example, there are currently two big-ish right winged parties in Germany. If you have a certain level of education, you can easily see that Germany would not benefit from their goals. Yet through populist campaigning, they gain a lot of support, they probably would not be gaining if their supporters knew that their goals were either not in their interest. A certain fear towards anything unknown is also one of the biggest reasons Racism exist. That again could be countered with education. If an educated one decides all options considered that racism is the way to go, that's a whole different issue.

 

I

Like... What? Everybody keeps their cultural heritage, just the official state would change and over time obviously create a new culture over time. But that is a natural process that happenes in every society: culture changes

 

 

I

In a EU nation were all power would lie on a Central European government with a biting system that works by percent rather than electoral colleges and winner takes it all, how should a nation be so dominant?

Also, nit picking: "Germania" refers to hitlers vision of the new world capital, not Germany itself.

 

I

As I said in my original post, joining would be done out of free will. Countries which don't want to join would be part of the EU as it exists now.

 

I

No... "I am a German European."

Or "I am a European with German heritage"

Or "I am a European on paper and a German by culture"

 

Everyone should join a superstate voluntarily, because reasons; and cultures should blend inorganically, because reasons; people resisting are racists because of lack of education and the answer for your question to your children asking why you casted away Germany and you being German (effectively treason) for a superstate was to become someone of german heritage in a superstate, effectively because reasons.

 

Pretty lofty there, sounds like an alt of Bruce to as someone else said in the thread.

 

Another question. Currently people are willing to die for their friends, family, loved ones and the heritage, traditions and places they are from. What would people be willing to die for in the superstate when push comes to shove? What if there is sudden armed resistance in a small region demanding self-determination? What if it happens in a region in Germany and the German army has to move in and conduct war against Germans on the bidding of Brussels?

 

P.S. Germania has been used since Tacitus. 

[Ben No.3]

 

I

Close, but not exactly. I simply believe that if you behave accordingly to a society's rules, then there should be nothing to stop you being a member of that society. Obviously, in a EU nation culturally speaking, I would be a German. But I'd have a EU passport and be a EU citizen. Nethertheless I'd speak German and get drunk in Oktoberfest.

I

No! I'm saying a big reason for populism (!) in my opinion is a lack of education! Throughout history, this was a huge problem, it still is today. For example, there are currently two big-ish right winged parties in Germany. If you have a certain level of education, you can easily see that Germany would not benefit from their goals. Yet through populist campaigning, they gain a lot of support, they probably would not be gaining if their supporters knew that their goals were either not in their interest. A certain fear towards anything unknown is also one of the biggest reasons Racism exist. That again could be countered with education. If an educated one decides all options considered that racism is the way to go, that's a whole different issue.

I

Like... What? Everybody keeps their cultural heritage, just the official state would change and over time obviously create a new culture over time. But that is a natural process that happenes in every society: culture changes

I

In a EU nation were all power would lie on a Central European government with a biting system that works by percent rather than electoral colleges and winner takes it all, how should a nation be so dominant?

Also, nit picking: "Germania" refers to hitlers vision of the new world capital, not Germany itself.

I

As I said in my original post, joining would be done out of free will. Countries which don't want to join would be part of the EU as it exists now.

I

No... "I am a German European."

Or "I am a European with German heritage"

Or "I am a European on paper and a German by culture"

 

 

Everyone should join a superstate voluntarily, because reasons; and cultures should blend inorganically, because reasons; people resisting are racists because of lack of education and the answer for your question to your children asking why you casted away Germany and you being German (effectively treason) for a superstate was to become someone of german heritage in a superstate, effectively because reasons.

 

Pretty lofty there, sounds like an alt of Bruce to as someone else said in the thread.

 

Another question. Currently people are willing to die for their friends, family, loved ones and the heritage, traditions and places they are from. What would people be willing to die for in the superstate when push comes to shove? What if there is sudden armed resistance in a small region demanding self-determination? What if it happens in a region in Germany and the German army has to move in and conduct war against Germans on the bidding of Brussels?

 

P.S. Germania has been used since Tacitus.

Germania (Latin): region inhabited by the Germaninc tribes

Germania (German): Hitlers world capital

 

Why should everyone join a super state? The EU in itself is a good thing, it has however it's problems. Most of the economical problems are created by the euro. If the entire EU would be that super state, the advantages would remain, the disadvantages would disappear. And while each country would have to give up some extend of sovereignty, I am sure that some amount of self controll will still be applied, similar to the German system. The stability of a super state is also the reasons different cultures should learn to cope with each other.

 

If there is an armed rebellion in Germany or anywhere, it should be stopped while keeping the losses at a minimum. Negotiations would be preferable, but ultimately military interventions might be needed. It is an unlikely scenario though... The super state should treat it's citizens well, as the EU and its members do already. Why should that suddenly change with the creation of a nation?

[Ben No.3]

And why would I give up being German? Because I would give it up for being European

[Meshugger]

 

 

I

Close, but not exactly. I simply believe that if you behave accordingly to a society's rules, then there should be nothing to stop you being a member of that society. Obviously, in a EU nation culturally speaking, I would be a German. But I'd have a EU passport and be a EU citizen. Nethertheless I'd speak German and get drunk in Oktoberfest.

I

No! I'm saying a big reason for populism (!) in my opinion is a lack of education! Throughout history, this was a huge problem, it still is today. For example, there are currently two big-ish right winged parties in Germany. If you have a certain level of education, you can easily see that Germany would not benefit from their goals. Yet through populist campaigning, they gain a lot of support, they probably would not be gaining if their supporters knew that their goals were either not in their interest. A certain fear towards anything unknown is also one of the biggest reasons Racism exist. That again could be countered with education. If an educated one decides all options considered that racism is the way to go, that's a whole different issue.

I

Like... What? Everybody keeps their cultural heritage, just the official state would change and over time obviously create a new culture over time. But that is a natural process that happenes in every society: culture changes

I

In a EU nation were all power would lie on a Central European government with a biting system that works by percent rather than electoral colleges and winner takes it all, how should a nation be so dominant?

Also, nit picking: "Germania" refers to hitlers vision of the new world capital, not Germany itself.

I

As I said in my original post, joining would be done out of free will. Countries which don't want to join would be part of the EU as it exists now.

I

No... "I am a German European."

Or "I am a European with German heritage"

Or "I am a European on paper and a German by culture"

 

Everyone should join a superstate voluntarily, because reasons; and cultures should blend inorganically, because reasons; people resisting are racists because of lack of education and the answer for your question to your children asking why you casted away Germany and you being German (effectively treason) for a superstate was to become someone of german heritage in a superstate, effectively because reasons.

 

Pretty lofty there, sounds like an alt of Bruce to as someone else said in the thread.

 

Another question. Currently people are willing to die for their friends, family, loved ones and the heritage, traditions and places they are from. What would people be willing to die for in the superstate when push comes to shove? What if there is sudden armed resistance in a small region demanding self-determination? What if it happens in a region in Germany and the German army has to move in and conduct war against Germans on the bidding of Brussels?

 

P.S. Germania has been used since Tacitus.

Germania (Latin): region inhabited by the Germaninc tribes

Germania (German): Hitlers world capital

 

Why should everyone join a super state? The EU in itself is a good thing, it has however it's problems. Most of the economical problems are created by the euro. If the entire EU would be that super state, the advantages would remain, the disadvantages would disappear. And while each country would have to give up some extend of sovereignty, I am sure that some amount of self controll will still be applied, similar to the German system. The stability of a super state is also the reasons different cultures should learn to cope with each other.

 

If there is an armed rebellion in Germany or anywhere, it should be stopped while keeping the losses at a minimum. Negotiations would be preferable, but ultimately military interventions might be needed. It is an unlikely scenario though... The super state should treat it's citizens well, as the EU and its members do already. Why should that suddenly change with the creation of a nation?

 

 

 

And why would I give up being German? Because I would give it up for being European

 

None of that will never work because of reasons i already mentioned. There is no foundation whatsoever for people to even believe in it.

 

Blimey, your nitpicking is of autistic proportions. Chill. 

Edited October 10, 2016 by Meshugger

[Ben No.3]

Yes it may never work. But if it works it will assure peace, prosperity, freedom and stability. And I think that is worth taking the risk. There are greater things to consider than our petty differences and small dramas. The only thing to believe in is that we all are inherent to certain unalienable rights, and that ensuring those for future generations is worth the struggle. Because one day very soon, we will all be dead, and nothing will remain but our legacy. And at least I want that legacy to be something that makes the world a slightly better place.

It is my deep hope that we can somehow assure peace. That we can somehow assure wealth. That we can somehow assure freedom. That we can somehow assure stability. That we can create a world that is worth living in in the first place. I don't known how. I do not have answers.

But I have dreams.

Nationalities, religions, cultures, races are all not actual differences, they only become that if we allow them to. But if we don't, then we can archive a society without borders, where everyone lives in peace with everyone. And that at least must be worth the struggle.

Edited October 10, 2016 by Ben No.3

[Ben No.3]

Oops... Added a bit to much with that edit

Oops... Added a bit to much with that edit

 

Dammit, again

Edited October 10, 2016 by Ben No.3

[Mr. Magniloquent]

@Ben No. 3

 

Please attempt the following thought exercise.

 

If a singular European state would be overwhelmingly beneficial, how would it differ from any individual smaller state? Why are none of the individual states utopias unto themselves? If it is possible to organize hundreds of millions of disparate people into a shining beacon of liberty and prosperity, why hasn't this yet occurred on a smaller and easier scale within a relatively tiny individual nation with a fairly homogeneous population?

[Ben No.3]

.

 

If a singular European state would be overwhelmingly beneficial, how would it differ from any individual smaller state?

^

I

In size and population. The political system would stay the same as it is now. That means that EU law would stay in place, while what formerly was a nation still can controll parts of its own politics, not unlike the US (different voting system though). What will change is the impact that the EU parliament has, especially in comparison to for example the French Parliament. But again that wouldn't be a big change, as the EU is already in theory above the nations.

 

Why are none of the individual states utopias unto themselves?

^

I

Utopia is a vision not a goal. It will most likely never be archived. I do believe however that a singular European state could work significantly more efficient in its attempts to archive it anyway, which, ultimately, is in one way or another every nations goal: to set up what is understood as the perfect nation for its people.

 

If it is possible to organize hundreds of millions of disparate people into a shining beacon of liberty and prosperity, why hasn't this yet occurred on a smaller and easier scale within a relatively tiny individual nation with a fairly homogeneous population?

^

I

Oh but it has... Several times. I find it odd that one coming from earth would not think of an single example Throughout history, many small countries came together to form a big single nation. I will call upon Germany in the 1860s as an example (although it had very different values). It was made from many many single nations that shared a language and a history, but understood themselves as independent from one another. Under Bismarck, Germany was unified, and it quickly became one of Europes most powerful countries. A stable and powerful country as well that benefited to a very large extent from unification.

Obviously, it had an awful political system that ultimately set the military in a very powerful position and was one of the many reasons WEI broke out. But not only does the EU share different values than Bismarkian Germany, but it can also learn from past mistakes.

Edited October 11, 2016 by Ben No.3

[pmp10]

The EU in itself is a good thing, it has however it's problems. Most of the economical problems are created by the euro. If the entire EU would be that super state, the advantages would remain, the disadvantages would disappear.

 

And what makes you say that?

You show a lot of faith but offer no practical solutions.

 

The system currently in place is an ineffective mess and creates as many problems as it solves.

Even in supposedly crucial area of economics the EUs record is mixed.

Against the growth of Germany you have to consider the debt crisis in Greece, stagnation in Italy and youth unemployment in Spain.

And we haven't even hit the demographic crisis yet.

How can you trust EU with more political power when it can't manage the one thing it's supposed to be good at? 

Edited October 11, 2016 by pmp10

[Ben No.3]

 

The EU in itself is a good thing, it has however it's problems. Most of the economical problems are created by the euro. If the entire EU would be that super state, the advantages would remain, the disadvantages would disappear.

 

And what makes you say that?

You show a lot of faith but offer no practical solutions.

 

The system currently in place is an ineffective mess and creates as many problems as it solves.

Even in supposedly crucial area of economics the EUs record is mixed.

Against the growth of Germany you have to consider the debt crisis in Greece, stagnation in Italy and youth unemployment in Spain.

And we haven't even hit the demographic crisis yet.

How can you trust EU with more political power when it can't manage the one thing it's supposed to be good at?

 

 

 

My solution is the European super state. You mentioned Greece, the Greek economic crisis would not have existed if the eu would have been a single state at the time. In that case, the economy of the entire of the EU super state could have worked to help out te region. And even if it somehow went into poverty, it is very easy for a politician to explain to his people why money needs to be send to a part of their own country, rather than sending it into an other country. Unemployment is a problem, but a problem that again could be solved more easily inside a united Europe Edited October 11, 2016 by Ben No.3

[Ben No.3]

The euro creates economic problems like in Greece because it is an international currency. If it was a national currency, that problem wouldn't have been created.

[Ben No.3]

I'm sorry I don't understand polish.... However, I don't see any sources for their claims, aside from once S&B... And Germany is one of the countries that hugely gain from euro, so why would we want to introduce the DM again? That would only cause the DM to become a very expensive currency, and would thus hurt export, which is Germanies main source of money. A Return to the DM would definitely not be a good thing for Germany.

Edited October 13, 2016 by Ben No.3

[Ben No.3]

Besides, economic crisis is a part of the economic cycle, there is always a peak, recession, trough, recovery, while overall growing.

[Ben No.3]

There is an interview from ZDF TV station, which is German.

As to why I explained in my previous post. Deutsche Bank bankruptcy will drawn EURO as a currency.

Please link me that interview

[Ben No.3]

Besides, it would be dumb not to have some DM laying around... A backup plan in case the entire EU goes down is necessary to keep Germany alive. There is nothing wrong with having a back up currency, in fact, I'd be surprised if a country didn't have one, especially Germany after the experiences from 1922