Why NATO? Economically the US and the EU are deadly enemies!

The exact name of the “Holy Roaman Empire” was “Holy Roman Empire of German Nation”. So it was a German Empire. And since 1438 it had been ruled by the house of Habsburg, in the mean time, but merely for three years (1742-1745) by the house of Wittelsbach. It was dissolved after about 1000 years, in 1806, during the Napoleonic Wars. Napoleon wanted a French empire instead of the German empire. The whole Occidental history can be described as the attempts of copying the ancient Roman empire. The EU is such an attempt too. But note: The modern Europeans are especially jealous, and therefore I do not believe in the EU project as it is put into practice. The jealous neighbors of Germany are whining that “the EU is dominated by Germany”, but in reality the EU has always been dominated by Germany. So what? It is because of this jealousy and the lack of a real European solidarity that makes it so difficult to find a real political unit. It is not the Old Europe but the New Europe that lacks a real European solidarity too much. So if the economical part of the EU becomes problematic, then the total collapse will follow, because the non-economical parts of the EU will still be too weak.

And if there is no real military partnership (and that can only be a defensive alliance without an US dictatorship) between Europe and the United States anymore, then there might be one between Europe and Russia or/and between Europe and China. The best way for the Europeans is that they start protecting themselves - and by “protecting themselves” I only mean “defending themselves” (thus not attacking others - if possible). Currently I see no will to self protecting in Europe. I merely see egocentric greed, overprotected young (I mean those few who are NOT aborted) Europeans, … and so on … , thus: decadence. Okay, I also see that there is still a huge potential, but is is not activated.

Your message brings up an interesting, and yet unexplored theme, as to why, the US as a union seems to hold together, monetarily, economically and socially, and ever since the Civil War, there have not been major calls for cresses soon, except by the Lone Star Stae, Texas, which did not garner much support anyway. The Irish push for independence was much more serious.

Which, if Your prescription be taken as a basis, for unification, that selfishness and greed and jealousy be the stumbling blocks to a successful unification in thr EU, can a conclusion be reached that the USA lacks those features? Or, is there something else going on? Perhaps a very deep underlying crack in the very foundation of it? (Whereas, the foundation in the USA is a mere 250 years? Did a couple of centuries conformed the cracks, whereas in Europe ,yearning for unity based on repeated attempts, 2000+ years have not proved sufficient.

This is puzzling, and perhaps has to do with the social contract it’s self, that all knowledge really, was born there, the cradle of civilization, notwithstanding the very early Egyptians, Chinese?

Many questions abide here, and perhaps it is best to look at the big picture, of changing winds of feasible
effecting differing places in different qualitative ways?

Ahem … No. The US nation does not lack those features, but does lack them less than the EU, because an EU nation does not exist. The United States of America are an empire too, but they are also a nation or at least something like that. Yet the European Union is no nation but merely an empire. And there are no “United States of Europe”, because the European nations are not united. If they were, then each of them would be no nation anymore. I know that the rulers of the EU try to eleminate the European nations, because they want to create those “United States of Europe” (after the model of the United States of America). They try it in order to get an European nation (after the model of the US nation). But I am pretty sure that they will not be successful with that attempt. Europe is just Europe, and that means (like it or not): a bunch of many nations.

Yes. If you want to create a nation, you need (a) time enough, (b) an authoritarian state, (c) both.

Yes. But note: The premises must be given (see above).

Different cultures have different histories, different politics, thus also different philosophies of politics. Therefore I point to one of my other threads: “Occidental Philosophy versus Oriental Philosophy”.

We do not want TTIP !


I was told that as a European-American I cannot apply for citizenship in most European countries by blood or soil rights, but citizenships are available to all non-European refugees.

If it is true that European-Amercicans are not allowed to go back to Europe, then I have some questions:

  1. Are African-Americans allowed to go back to Africa?
  2. Are Aisan-Americans allowed to go back to Asia?
  3. Are Mexicans allowed to go back to Mexico?

Ghana in Africa csmonitor.com/World/2014/04 … wer-is-yes
Mexico seems fairly open to 1st generation descendents going back, but not open otherwise.
Speaking/teaching English will get your foot in the door in many Asian countries, but not too welcoming for descendants in general.

Is it really true that “Ghana has become a particularly popular destination”? :laughing:

(Are you mocking my proof? :stuck_out_tongue: ) Not popular enough, but if what the article says is true, the door towards citizenship is open in Ghana.

Also, Liberia 2.0 will perhaps be founded.

Will Ghana be “Liberia 3.0” then? :wink:

[tab]Greetings from Spain again.


The more global control, the more “Liberias”. :evilfun:

And at last the whole planet Earth will consist of about one million “Liberias”?

Unless the globalists will be stopped.


When the average economic status will shrink?

For comparison: