Empires must grow by acquisition because their rulers lack the patience or other moral characteristics necessary to foster or wait for organic growth. Every Empire grows by territorial acquisition, either overt (open conquest) or covert (corruption and subversion leading to informal integration/subjugation).
The EU has specialised in the latter form of acquistion in recent decades, having learned it from their imperial masters in DC.
But every Empire also expands until it is surrounded by enemies who are implacably opposed to its very existence, let alone its expansion.
At this point the internal contradictions of Empire (it rewards destructive behaviours and punishes productive behaviours) turn against it and its decline becomes undeniable and its end becomes unavoidable.
Unfortunately for those of us trapped in the tentacles of various imperial schemes, Empires are most dangerous to their own people in their dotage.
"Instability in the periphery" is imperial droid code for "resistance to imperial acquisition".
"it rewards destructive behaviours and punishes productive behaviours"
It's the curse of easy money by subjugation and economic occupation. No one wants to do any real work. A fortunate trait of all empires as otherwise they'd las forever in the decadence stage of it.
Empires fail not because they "they reward destructive behaviours and punish productive behaviours" (why would they?), but because other empires exist nearby. At least in our time. But at any time, the right economic policy is an even more decisive factor. If it weren’t for the US, the British Empire would still exist today.
Swallowing Ukraine, the most corrupt country in Europe and spreading gangsters all over the EU is hardly going to help. Looking starte situation already with gangs in the EU, in which he can see how the rush to integrate the Balkan countries before cleaning up their act was clearly a mistake.
War is always destabilising and the most extreme and destructive tool for territorial control. Europe is still promoting and preparing to wage war against Russia. Only fools and despots do that to Russia believing they can win or benefit from it. But the brainwashed people in Europe might go along with this madness and willingly volunteer to walk straight into the Russian meat grinder.
A new EUROPE cut in half but stable. Prosperous and Admired.
MEDITERRANEAN UNION as a NEUTRAL CULTURAL POWERHOUSE.
Structure and Purpose
Neutrality: Like Switzerland, the MU adopts a strict non-alignment policy, withdrawing from NATO (France, Greece) and avoiding military blocs. It might mediate conflicts, leveraging its geographic position between Europe, Africa, and the Middle East.
Cultural Preservation: The MU becomes a guardian of Mediterranean heritage—Roman ruins, Renaissance art, Greek philosophy, and modern multicultural identities (e.g., Catalonia, Sicily). Think UNESCO on steroids, with massive funding for archaeology, museums, and education.
Science and Creativity: Building on Italy’s design legacy, France’s scientific tradition, and Greece’s philosophical roots, the MU invests heavily in R&D, green tech (e.g., solar energy suited to the region), and creative industries (film, fashion, cuisine).
Implications
Economic Shift:
Tourism skyrockets as the MU markets itself as the “cradle of Western civilization,” free from militaristic baggage. Cities like Athens, Rome, and Barcelona become global cultural hubs.
Neutrality attracts foreign investment, much like Switzerland’s banking sector, though focused on intellectual property and innovation (e.g., biotech in Spain, AI in France).
Geopolitical Role:
The MU could broker peace in North Africa or the Middle East, using its neutrality and cultural clout. It might even host a reformed UN-like body.
Loss of military influence (e.g., France’s nuclear arsenal becomes symbolic or decommissioned) shifts power to soft diplomacy.
Post-Monarchy Tie-In:
If Spain transitions to a republic, the MU could frame itself as a democratic evolution of Mediterranean identity, shedding royal legacies for a shared cultural narrative.
Challenges:
Internal rivalries (e.g., France vs. Italy dominance) or economic disparities (Greece’s debt vs. France’s wealth) could undermine unity.
Neutrality might falter if Turkey or Russia pressures the region (e.g., via Cyprus or the Aegean).
CENTRAL EU PACT as a NEUTRAL INNOVATION HUB
Structure and Purpose
Neutrality: Germany, Poland, and Hungary exit NATO and EU military commitments, adopting a Vatican/Swiss-style neutrality. This could extend to demilitarization, focusing resources on civilian goals.
Cultural Protection: The CEP preserves Central European heritage—Gothic architecture, Slavic traditions, and Enlightenment thought—while reconciling historical tensions (e.g., German-Polish reconciliation).
Science and Innovation: Germany’s engineering prowess, Poland’s growing tech sector, and Hungary’s creative talent fuel a “Central European Renaissance” in fields like quantum computing, renewable energy, and space tech.
Implications
Economic Transformation:
Germany pivots from EU anchor to CEP leader, channeling its industrial might into neutral innovation (e.g., next-gen electric vehicles or fusion energy).
Poland and Hungary, freed from EU regulations, experiment with bold economic policies, attracting global talent like a European Silicon Valley.
Geopolitical Stance:
The CEP becomes a buffer between Russia and the West, using neutrality to de-escalate tensions post-Ukraine. It might mediate between NATO and a resurgent Russia.
Cultural diplomacy—think Berlin’s film festivals or Warsaw’s science expos—replaces military posturing.
Post-Monarchy Context:
With no monarchies in the CEP (Germany’s ended in 1918, Poland and Hungary have none), this pact aligns with a republican ethos, potentially influencing neighbors like Belgium or the Netherlands to follow suit.
Challenges:
Hungary’s illiberal tendencies (e.g., under Orbán) might clash with Germany’s democratic norms, risking internal cohesion.
Neutrality could leave the CEP vulnerable if Russia or China exploits the power vacuum left by NATO’s retreat.
There's now 2 billion Africans who cannot feed themselves. The few African countries who were not net food importers after colonial rule have now all reverted to the African mean; they are all net food importers.
At some point, MU or no MU, those "leveraging their geographic position between Europe, Africa and the Middle East", are still going to have to sink the damn boats.
Instead of scrabbling for ways to hold on to their shaky power like a drowning person, Western Europe elites should realize that its time to get off their pedestals and get a real job
EU are only concerned with scaling up NATO to line the pockets of European arms oligarchs, the only industry Europe has thanks to their blind policy of following USA like sad little sycophants. EU are determined to become the third axis of military power but if they push to hard they will drown in their own blood.
Why does Georgia want to join the EU? The question is not only about Russia, but even more about the economic future. Georgia (like Bulgaria, Romania, etc.) would be just another brick in the economic base of the EU pyramid with the top in Berlin and nearby (Paris, etc.)
It might suit the non globalist factions of the oligarchy based in USA/City of London to destroy continental Europe PLUS the Russian Federation, leaving their oligarchs more liquid assets parked in USA based investment funds and financial instruments while reducing them to captive customers for energy, food and manufacturing of a re industrialized USA?
The British will somehow deftly sidestep some of that down side and behave as the evil butler for the USA, screwing over everyone in Eurasia & their old Commonwealth that they can profit from, just as in the last couple of world wars they helped start
Empires must grow by acquisition because their rulers lack the patience or other moral characteristics necessary to foster or wait for organic growth. Every Empire grows by territorial acquisition, either overt (open conquest) or covert (corruption and subversion leading to informal integration/subjugation).
The EU has specialised in the latter form of acquistion in recent decades, having learned it from their imperial masters in DC.
But every Empire also expands until it is surrounded by enemies who are implacably opposed to its very existence, let alone its expansion.
At this point the internal contradictions of Empire (it rewards destructive behaviours and punishes productive behaviours) turn against it and its decline becomes undeniable and its end becomes unavoidable.
Unfortunately for those of us trapped in the tentacles of various imperial schemes, Empires are most dangerous to their own people in their dotage.
"Instability in the periphery" is imperial droid code for "resistance to imperial acquisition".
Nicely put.
Just to broaden this, as I see it:
"it rewards destructive behaviours and punishes productive behaviours"
It's the curse of easy money by subjugation and economic occupation. No one wants to do any real work. A fortunate trait of all empires as otherwise they'd las forever in the decadence stage of it.
Empires fail not because they "they reward destructive behaviours and punish productive behaviours" (why would they?), but because other empires exist nearby. At least in our time. But at any time, the right economic policy is an even more decisive factor. If it weren’t for the US, the British Empire would still exist today.
Swallowing Ukraine, the most corrupt country in Europe and spreading gangsters all over the EU is hardly going to help. Looking starte situation already with gangs in the EU, in which he can see how the rush to integrate the Balkan countries before cleaning up their act was clearly a mistake.
War is always destabilising and the most extreme and destructive tool for territorial control. Europe is still promoting and preparing to wage war against Russia. Only fools and despots do that to Russia believing they can win or benefit from it. But the brainwashed people in Europe might go along with this madness and willingly volunteer to walk straight into the Russian meat grinder.
A new EUROPE cut in half but stable. Prosperous and Admired.
MEDITERRANEAN UNION as a NEUTRAL CULTURAL POWERHOUSE.
Structure and Purpose
Neutrality: Like Switzerland, the MU adopts a strict non-alignment policy, withdrawing from NATO (France, Greece) and avoiding military blocs. It might mediate conflicts, leveraging its geographic position between Europe, Africa, and the Middle East.
Cultural Preservation: The MU becomes a guardian of Mediterranean heritage—Roman ruins, Renaissance art, Greek philosophy, and modern multicultural identities (e.g., Catalonia, Sicily). Think UNESCO on steroids, with massive funding for archaeology, museums, and education.
Science and Creativity: Building on Italy’s design legacy, France’s scientific tradition, and Greece’s philosophical roots, the MU invests heavily in R&D, green tech (e.g., solar energy suited to the region), and creative industries (film, fashion, cuisine).
Implications
Economic Shift:
Tourism skyrockets as the MU markets itself as the “cradle of Western civilization,” free from militaristic baggage. Cities like Athens, Rome, and Barcelona become global cultural hubs.
Neutrality attracts foreign investment, much like Switzerland’s banking sector, though focused on intellectual property and innovation (e.g., biotech in Spain, AI in France).
Geopolitical Role:
The MU could broker peace in North Africa or the Middle East, using its neutrality and cultural clout. It might even host a reformed UN-like body.
Loss of military influence (e.g., France’s nuclear arsenal becomes symbolic or decommissioned) shifts power to soft diplomacy.
Post-Monarchy Tie-In:
If Spain transitions to a republic, the MU could frame itself as a democratic evolution of Mediterranean identity, shedding royal legacies for a shared cultural narrative.
Challenges:
Internal rivalries (e.g., France vs. Italy dominance) or economic disparities (Greece’s debt vs. France’s wealth) could undermine unity.
Neutrality might falter if Turkey or Russia pressures the region (e.g., via Cyprus or the Aegean).
CENTRAL EU PACT as a NEUTRAL INNOVATION HUB
Structure and Purpose
Neutrality: Germany, Poland, and Hungary exit NATO and EU military commitments, adopting a Vatican/Swiss-style neutrality. This could extend to demilitarization, focusing resources on civilian goals.
Cultural Protection: The CEP preserves Central European heritage—Gothic architecture, Slavic traditions, and Enlightenment thought—while reconciling historical tensions (e.g., German-Polish reconciliation).
Science and Innovation: Germany’s engineering prowess, Poland’s growing tech sector, and Hungary’s creative talent fuel a “Central European Renaissance” in fields like quantum computing, renewable energy, and space tech.
Implications
Economic Transformation:
Germany pivots from EU anchor to CEP leader, channeling its industrial might into neutral innovation (e.g., next-gen electric vehicles or fusion energy).
Poland and Hungary, freed from EU regulations, experiment with bold economic policies, attracting global talent like a European Silicon Valley.
Geopolitical Stance:
The CEP becomes a buffer between Russia and the West, using neutrality to de-escalate tensions post-Ukraine. It might mediate between NATO and a resurgent Russia.
Cultural diplomacy—think Berlin’s film festivals or Warsaw’s science expos—replaces military posturing.
Post-Monarchy Context:
With no monarchies in the CEP (Germany’s ended in 1918, Poland and Hungary have none), this pact aligns with a republican ethos, potentially influencing neighbors like Belgium or the Netherlands to follow suit.
Challenges:
Hungary’s illiberal tendencies (e.g., under Orbán) might clash with Germany’s democratic norms, risking internal cohesion.
Neutrality could leave the CEP vulnerable if Russia or China exploits the power vacuum left by NATO’s retreat.
There's now 2 billion Africans who cannot feed themselves. The few African countries who were not net food importers after colonial rule have now all reverted to the African mean; they are all net food importers.
At some point, MU or no MU, those "leveraging their geographic position between Europe, Africa and the Middle East", are still going to have to sink the damn boats.
Instead of scrabbling for ways to hold on to their shaky power like a drowning person, Western Europe elites should realize that its time to get off their pedestals and get a real job
name a King that got of the pedestal by own will.
It suggest the same to happen to EU.
I try not to conflate Europe's elite with EU's "elite". Not the same.
There are pockets of limited freedom in Europe: outside of EU and inside of it.
👍
You're right, good to hear that. It is the same here in the US, those who have eyes and wish to see.
EU are only concerned with scaling up NATO to line the pockets of European arms oligarchs, the only industry Europe has thanks to their blind policy of following USA like sad little sycophants. EU are determined to become the third axis of military power but if they push to hard they will drown in their own blood.
Why does Georgia want to join the EU? The question is not only about Russia, but even more about the economic future. Georgia (like Bulgaria, Romania, etc.) would be just another brick in the economic base of the EU pyramid with the top in Berlin and nearby (Paris, etc.)
It might suit the non globalist factions of the oligarchy based in USA/City of London to destroy continental Europe PLUS the Russian Federation, leaving their oligarchs more liquid assets parked in USA based investment funds and financial instruments while reducing them to captive customers for energy, food and manufacturing of a re industrialized USA?
The British will somehow deftly sidestep some of that down side and behave as the evil butler for the USA, screwing over everyone in Eurasia & their old Commonwealth that they can profit from, just as in the last couple of world wars they helped start