[lbo-talk] blog post: a nation in decline, part 2: signs of distress

123hop at comcast.net 123hop at comcast.net
Tue Sep 7 16:03:16 PDT 2010


But he didn't want to annihilate the inferior species -- well, some. But most of them he just wanted as slaves, as the cheapest labor possible. It was an economic plan.

The EU gives the ruling classes of the different countries a limited voice; but the economic program is clearly to the disadvantage of the developing countries and to the advantage of the established ones. The proof is in the pudding.

Joanna

----- Original Message ----- From: "Wojtek S" <wsoko52 at gmail.com> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org Sent: Tuesday, September 7, 2010 2:42:52 PM Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] blog post: a nation in decline, part 2: signs of distress

Joanna: "Theoretically, it's innovative. Concretely, all I can see is Hitler's plan (the enslavement of the periphery) put into action by political/economic rather than military means."

[WS:] Hitler talked more about "lebensraum" which entailed annihilation of the inferior species occupying the periphery to make room for the German master race. EU, otoh, gives them a voice in the European polity - so I do not see how these two compare, except being on the polar opposites. But if you are talking about xenophobic policies of France or Germany to keep Eastern European "gastarbeiters" out - it is the EU that opened the borders and nominally prohibited such policies. The national governments chose to ignore those policies. With the EU - those guys a least have some legal recourse against such policies. Without EU - they would be simply kicked out, end of discussion.

wojtek

On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 12:12 PM, <123hop at comcast.net> wrote:


> woj writes
>
> "IMHO, the most interesting political innovation since the creation of the
> UN
> is the creation of the EU - regardless of what one may think of certain EU
> policies. I mean, the EU is the first ever created confederacy of
> independent states - and formed by mutual consensus of all participants
> rather than by a hegemonic force. Not seeing the innovative character of
> that development smacks of British insularism and Europhobia :)."
>
> Theoretically, it's innovative. Concretely, all I can see is Hitler's plan
> (the enslavement of the periphery) put into action by political/economic
> rather than military means.
>
> J.
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list