Question to Winslow and others in Europe

[Edena_of_Neith]

Is there a new proposal on the table, to modify the governmental situation in France and Germany?
What's up, there? What's new, on the table?

Winslow, you keep abreast of political tidings. Especially in your own country of France. What's new, there?

[Snatch]

I hear that ninjas trump cowboys over there.

[Edena_of_Neith]

LOL.

In any event, I heard something new was up between Germany and France, and wondered if Winslow, or anyone else, knew anything?

[Aloysius]

LOL.

In any event, I heard something new was up between Germany and France, and wondered if Winslow, or anyone else, knew anything?

Announcement about proposals of a project of a european economic government for the Eurozone. That, plus a Tobin-tax like proposal. Nothing concrete, and some french political shenanigans of Sarkozy aimed against the left.

[Edena_of_Neith]

Can you elaborate on that, Aloysius? Just curious.

It's hard to get concrete news on Europe on our television and blogs - at least for me, it is.
Our news is so full of domestic partisan talking points, you can't find European news. And when you finally do, all that news is seen through whatever partisan lens the particular TV station or blog represents.

So, some genuine news, from the French themselves, would be a welcome change (I would say from the Germans too, but we do not seem to have any posters from Germany on Kay Tastrophe. : ( )

[Aloysius]

Well, there are quite a few places to look for European news...
Euronews is one of them :
http://www.euronews.net/2011/08/17/markets-want-more-from-merkel-and-sarkozy
If you are looking for a frenchier point of view, there is France 24 : http://www.france24.com/en/20110817-sarkozy-merkel-fail-to-impress-summit-eu-debt-crisis-eurobonds
As for the Brits, the guardian, the telegraph and the independent are good reading. For Germany, Der Spiegel has an english version. http://www.spiegel.de/international/

I'm somewhat too tired to elaborate about the Merkel/Sarkozy deal, because it seems somewhat irrelevant and full of empty promises. I may be wrong of course...

[Edena_of_Neith]

A Fourth Reich? (From the Daily Mail in Great Britain.) What is this nonsense?

Germany is not going to be the capital of Europe.
The last time there was a genuine capital of Europe, was during the time of the Roman Empire, and even they could not conquer the barbarians north of the Danube and east of the Rhine (much less Scandinavia or Scythia.)

This is silly.
Even if they passed the legislation, what would they do next? Tell everyone what language to speak? That the British, could not speak English, but must speak German?
Or, maybe, the Germans must speak English (Cockney English, too, not High English) and they must do it now! Haha. Like the Germans would do that.

Europeans are not pushovers. They have a long history of fighting tooth and nail for their culture and way of life, their language, their nationalities.
If anyone needs recent examples, consider the ferocious and no-holds-barred Croatian-Serbian War, or the equally terrible Bosnian-Croatian-Serbian War.

[Cat of Ulthar]

A Fourth Reich? (From the Daily Mail in Great Britain.) What is this nonsense?
The Daily Mail. Don't read it, it's a nonsense newspaper.

The last time there was a genuine capital of Europe, was during the time of the Roman Empire, and even they could not conquer the barbarians north of the Danube and east of the Rhine (much less Scandinavia or Scythia.)
East of the Rhine?

[Edena_of_Neith]

East of the Rhine?

The Romans briefly conquered what is now western Germany, under Augustus.
The German peoples revolted, destroyed 2 Roman legions, and the Romans withdrew west of the Rhine. (Other powers that rose up against the Romans, like the Druids in Great Britain, weren't so lucky.)

The Romans never could conquer Scotland, and never attempted to conquer Ireland.
They never tried to seize Denmark (surprising, considering it's strategic value, at that time.)
They briefly colonized an area north of the Danube in southern Romania, but later evacuated.

The Romans never held the areas of Norway, Sweden, Finland, eastern German, the Czech Republic and Slovakia, Hungary, most of Austria, Moldavia, Poland, Lithuania, Lavia, Estonia, Ukraine, or Russia. (They held the lands around the Black Sea, along the coastline, for a brief time.)

Even where they did have control, the Romans only had complete control for about 200 years.
A massive invasion on all fronts in the late 200s, devastated the Empire and caused military takeover. Rome retook it's lost lands, but could not economically recover, or repopulate devastated lands and cities.
Then, in the early 400s, the bottom dropped out, and the barbarian peoples overran all of European Rome and most of African Rome.

Only Constantinople, behind it's great walls, and the lands behind it - protected by the Black Sea and high mountains, and the searing Sahara and Arabian Deserts southward, survived this onslaught (admittedly, the Byzantines held the eastern line, across Syria and modern Jordan, against the Persians.)

Emperor Augustus saw the beginning of a Pax Romana over a part of Europe, that lasted a brief 200 years, maintained by nearly two hundred thousand Roman legionnaires.
In the end, even the Roman Empire could not forever unite Europe (and most agree, that their approach stank, and it is a good thing they failed to conquer the rest of Europe, much less stay in control.)

[Edena_of_Neith]

Look at France.

When the Romans conquered it, it was called Gaul. The Romans enslaved the Gauls, and divided France up into various provinces.

Then a powerful barbarian people, known as the Franks, invaded in the late 200s. Initially repulsed, the Franks returned and conquered much of France, and held their own against the other barbarians and the remnants of the Roman armies (even uniting with them against Attila and the Huns.)
The area would one day be named France, after these Franks.

Although the Romans managed to crush the Gauls and imposed Latin on them, the Franks maintained their own culture, borrowed useful things from the Romans, created a new language out of the crumbling usage of Latin (the Romans in Gaul misused the original Latin anyways ...), and went on to create the Empire of Charlegmagne.

When the Vikings came and trashed Western Europe, despite colossal damage the French held out against the invaders, and they saved much of ancient literature that otherwise would have been irrevocably lost (the Norse particularly loved to burn monasteries, where books had been collected and copied.)

The Vikings calmed down, the French made an agreement with them, and Normandy was born. The Vikings settled down there.
Then they invaded and conquered England, after they won the Battle of Hastings.

Then the New English (the Middle English) came back and tried to conquer France. Joan of Arc saw that they failed, and despite Agincourt the English were summarily evicted from France.

Despite the Romans, the barbarians (like the Huns), the Vikings, the English, the Holy Roman Empire, the Mongols (who threatened France with utter destruction, in this missives), and finally the English, the French - the mixture of Franks, Gauls, and other settlers that founded France after the Romans left - somehow kept their culture and ways in spite of it all.

Not even the Black Death, which virtually wiped southern France out completely, and devastated the rest of the country, could destroy the French culture and language.

The French, and other European peoples, have proven themselves a hardy, obdurate, resilient people.
A bunch of inept beaucrats are not going to tell the European peoples what the rules are, what the culture is, what the language is, or otherwise how things are going to be.

[Aloysius]

Despite the Romans, the barbarians (like the Huns), the Vikings, the English, the Holy Roman Empire, the Mongols (who threatened France with utter destruction, in this missives), and finally the English, the French - the mixture of Franks, Gauls, and other settlers that founded France after the Romans left - somehow kept their culture and ways in spite of it all.


Huh ? France date from 987 at best. French language as it is now date from François Ier at best (and was still very different from today). As for the culture... I think I share more with a 21th century Japanese than with a 13th century French.

Is there some kind of geographical determinism that favour the existence of a political or cultural entity between the North Sea, the Alps, the Mediterranean sea and the Pyrenees ? Probably, but it's not an absolute, and the northern boundaries are particularly shifting. France as nation-state, or a proto nation-state, emerged between the 13th century and the 100 years wars. Its culture, its language, its values shifted considerably. For example, it was "the first daughter of the Church", it's now the land of rabid secularism. Culture ? Wanna know what are the 50 most sold singles of this week ? http://musique.premiere.fr/TOP-50
I warn you, Rihanna is first...