Macron names USA as one of the enemies of the european union - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

All general discussion about politics that doesn't belong in any of the other forums.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

#14964002
So being French is being like De Gaulle? :lol:

Why should Europeans feed the American defence industry rather than their own if they have to pay up anyway? The Americans should be happy with Europe willing to pay for her own defence, whereas the Russians should appreciate if Europe wants to be more independent from the US, however, Macron seems to be hated by both Trump and Putin. :lol:
#14964060
@annatar1914

If the circumstances they wish to re-create cannot be recreated, then the Reactionary is not a traditionalist as such but a Revolutionary. However, Anarchists are objectively reactionary because they cannot in any way seriously change the status quo.


1. Except that isn't the intention. Reactionaries whole hardily believe that they can go back to those time periods and everything would be magically good. My analysis only makes sense when you don't consider Reactionary-ism an ideology. If you do, then it's irrelevant.

2. To be fair, there has been several anarchist experiments throughout history and many of them failed due to no fault of their own (Republican Spain, Free Republic of Ukraine, etc.) and some still survive today (Rojava and the Zapatistas are good examples).

I do. Genuine human progress is spiritual and cultural, with the socio-economic foundations forming a kind of matrix or mold from which the higher things of human existence develop or come to attention of the human mind.


But that's not what progress is. Any kind of change or societal shift anywhere is progress. It doesn't matter what it is. Progress doesn't have to be positive or negative. It just is.

I agree, in fact I think that the East will be more capable than the West of handling this phenomena that I foresee.


I have my reservations on the far east though. India and SouthEast Asia might be well off given it's history of federalism and autonomy but China, South Korea, and Japan have designed their entire political and economic systems on an accelerated version of capitalism which destroyed the fabric of their communal societies. I think there's going to be just as much violence in Far East Asian countries as there would be in the West.
#14964669
@Oxymandias

You replied;



1. Except that isn't the intention. Reactionaries whole hardily believe that they can go back to those time periods and everything would be magically good. My analysis only makes sense when you don't consider Reactionary-ism an ideology. If you do, then it's irrelevant.


People have been know to have ideologies that have not had a significant impact in their time and place, aside from the question of it being true or not. My question has always been, even now, has been; ''can you turn back the time in any meaningful way?'' and ''is it natural or desirable to even wish it so?''

2. To be fair, there has been several anarchist experiments throughout history and many of them failed due to no fault of their own (Republican Spain, Free Republic of Ukraine, etc.) and some still survive today (Rojava and the Zapatistas are good examples).


I'd beg to differ, as at least political nature abhors a vacuum.


But that's not what progress is. Any kind of change or societal shift anywhere is progress. It doesn't matter what it is. Progress doesn't have to be positive or negative. It just is.


Well, that's your opinion anyway. The word ''progress'' to me has the connotation of meaning ''better''.


I have my reservations on the far east though. India and SouthEast Asia might be well off given it's history of federalism and autonomy but China, South Korea, and Japan have designed their entire political and economic systems on an accelerated version of capitalism which destroyed the fabric of their communal societies. I think there's going to be just as much violence in Far East Asian countries as there would be in the West.


Yes, not too far East, I'm thinking Eastern Europe/Siberia and the Middle East/North Africa regions.
#14964682
@annatar1914

People have been know to have ideologies that have not had a significant impact in their time and place, aside from the question of it being true or not. My question has always been, even now, has been; ''can you turn back the time in any meaningful way?'' and ''is it natural or desirable to even wish it so?''


Except that neo-reactionaries are becoming increasingly politically influential in the West and have made motions to achieve their own desired reality. It isn't a question anymore, it's happening and this is very bad for anyone who understands that it is impossible to go back in time. Not only would this be insulting to our current conditions and histories by discarding all of that, but it would be impossible because you can't discard it. Colonized countries cannot even discard the specter and effect of colonialism on their nations, how can you discard 700 years of history, cultural development, and perspective from existence and go back to how we understood things hundreds of years ago? You can destroy the state, implement the same exact institutions that were there in feudal Europe, and implement the same social practices that were there in feudal Europe but that doesn't mean everything is just like feudal Europe. It can never be.

I'd beg to differ, as at least political nature abhors a vacuum.


Er, have you read about any of the experiments I have listed especially current ones like Rojava, the Zapatistas, and (I forgot to mention) the FEJUVE of Bolivia? None of the above had anything resembling a power vaccum and had their own horizontal and hierarchy-less forms of organization.

Well, that's your opinion anyway. The word ''progress'' to me has the connotation of meaning ''better''.


Making the term "progress" mean "better" makes the term useless given how subjective it ends up being. The term "progress" has far more utility if we describe as any form of social change whether big or small; whether liberal or conservative.
#14969469
I strictly oppose an european army.

There isnt a single state of the EU thats under actual military thread and that is how it will stay for the forseeable future. Sure you can try to blow up the occasional terrorist attack or the old conflict greece vs turkey as such a thread, but thats an absurd hyperbole and an european army wouldnt solve either problem at all anyway.

Whats worse, even if there was any such attack, these states are already in the NATO anyway, so obviously the EU and the USA would be obliged to defend.

Thus such an european army wouldnt be used for defense, it would be offense. But why exactly would any sane member state of the european union be forced into wars decided by others ? Wars are expensive, after all, and they cost lifes. If some states what to do waste their money and youth like that, fine. Doesnt mean other states have to help them with that.
Israel-Palestinian War 2023

It is easy to tell the tunnel was made of pre fab […]

Pretty clear France will be taking a leading role […]

He is even less coherent than Alex Jones. My gu[…]

Yes, and it did not order a ceasefire. Did you ev[…]