Is Italy the Latest Failed Euro State?

[RandBlade]

Your "point" is meaningless. What started this thread really going? Your constant pissing match with Rand. What started this latest tangent? Your constant pissing match with Rand. What do we all see every time you're that dismissive or contemptuous of something? Your constant pissing match with Rand. It always ends up tying back to that somehow as we press you for details and explanations.

Brilliant and true!

The Romans were the single most innovative society in the Ancient world. Yes the Egyptians and Greeks were incredibly innovative too - and I'm sure before them the Mesopotamians were too. But I love how that the Roman Empire was such a roaring success it can be compared to even now - yet apparently at the same time it was nothing anyway, not such a big deal, nothing to look at here.

The reality is that for 1500 years between the fall of the Roman Empire and the Industrial Revolution that was the pinacle of civilisation. Yes the British finally started to firstly catch up with and then finally innovate past the Romans with the Industrial Revolution but that was well over a thousand years in the making, with true credit going to the Italians etc for the Renaissance too (again look at the meaning behind that word). There is a reason that we use the phrase Dark Ages and it isn't a lack of physical luminosity.

[Steely Glint]

I think they most striking think about the Romans to the modern eye is how close their mentality was to ours when it came to organizing their society - they didn't invent roads, but they did take the concept and turn it into an what was essentially a kind of early mass transit system, featuring standardized widths, and a system of way stations and changing stations.

[CitizenCain]

You've got any idea how stupid this kind of comment makes you look?

I had no idea that Turkey observes a national irony day at all, let alone so soon after Republic Day.

[Hazir]

I think they most striking think about the Romans to the modern eye is how close their mentality was to ours when it came to organizing their society - they didn't invent roads, but they did take the concept and turn it into an what was essentially a kind of early mass transit system, featuring standardized widths, and a system of way stations and changing stations.

For the military.

I had no idea that Turkey observes a national irony day at all, let alone so soon after Republic Day.

Yeah, like I have to agree with the observation that I am obsessed with the EU or the euro. It's as wrong as your assumption that I am Turkish.

[Hazir]

Your "point" is meaningless. What started this thread really going? Your constant pissing match with Rand. What started this latest tangent? Your constant pissing match with Rand. What do we all see every time you're that dismissive or contemptuous of something? Your constant pissing match with Rand. It always ends up tying back to that somehow as we press you for details and explanations.

And who made it about 'me' again? Hey, that would be you, like every single time.

Just because I have more free time on my hands than anybody on this board besides CGT doesn't mean I want to spend it humouring your idiotic urge to have everything backed up three digits past the digital point. But even if I would, that is not really the point because you are not addressing my position, which is still that slavery does not benefit a society and that it was a drag on Roman society. You are merely addressing what you think I am preoccupied with.

Just another example of your generally being a twat.

[Aimless]

Out of curiosity, in which way was slavery a drag on Roman society wrt innovation? I tried google but couldn't find anything immediately useful.

[Hazir]

Out of curiosity, in which way was slavery a drag on Roman society wrt innovation? I tried google but couldn't find anything immediately useful.

Slave labour competed with free Roman citizens who were not of senatorial or equestrian rank. That is pretty much everybody in Rome but the happy few. Basically you can say that it didn't pay for a Roman citizen to work, besides which working for your money got a social stigma attached to it. People did a lot of inventing, but it simply wouldn't cross their mind to put their inventions to something as base as 'work' (not much unlike classical Greeks by the way). A rather severe disconnect between invention and innovation.

Putting their inventiveness to work in the military on the other hand was seen as honorable, which is why pretty much all innovation we see over the hundreds of years of Roman empire is seen in the realm of the military.

The first paragraph of this article sums it up nicely.

[Hazir]

Interesting day today; Germany's debt auction flopped. But it's not so clear as to why exactly.

[Hazir]

Next few months are going to be interesting; it looks like we're going to see the first example of 'enhance cooperation' as made possible by the Lisbon Treaty in the EU. At least that's what I read into the latest German/French plans about closer fiscal union for the eurozone. The interesting question that of course causes is, what does it mean for the EU members that are not using the euro yet? Will they be asked to join this enhance cooperation group before they are allowed to join the euro? I mean, that is presently not one of the requirements for entering the EMU.

If Berlin and Paris choose this route it effectively destroys every hope for the Cameron administration of 'clawing back' powers from Brussels and of course - what I really love about this procedure - is that referenda in individual countries no longer can stop progress for all other countries.

If I were Merkel I would simple exclude every country that doesn't sign up to this enhance cooperation from the eurobonds (which I think we'll see once this deal is done) .

[GGT]

And who made it about 'me' again? Hey, that would be you, like every single time.

Just because I have more free time on my hands than anybody on this board besides CGT doesn't mean I want to spend it humouring your idiotic urge to have everything backed up three digits past the digital point. But even if I would, that is not really the point because you are not addressing my position, which is still that slavery does not benefit a society and that it was a drag on Roman society. You are merely addressing what you think I am preoccupied with.

Pssst, it's GGT.

And yes, I have a lot of "free time" on my hands, mostly because I'm semi-retired. That means I don't have to spend 40-60 hours/week in classes or at work. I have more time to surf the web for news, read trans-continental news, and follow the leads and links.

I also have more time to address those who think "we" are preoccupied with things we're really not, like this forum. Fuzzy likes to throw his comments in about forum personalities, calling a pissing match or emotive posting instead of addressing the big picture, the global picture.

It's quite frustrating, really. Hazir, you're one of the few here I can think of that's consistently been watching and reading the global picture. And seeing the pits and flaws. You've not been called a Chicken Little as I have....but you've been called a Europhile, among other things. Those labels totally miss the point.

People would have to be crack-smoking addicts to NOT see what a dire situation we're in, and only by our toes right now. And by "we", I mean all the developed nations.

[CitizenCain]

And what is the point, praytell? J00s? The sky is falling? The sky is falling because of j00s?

No, we don't all miss the "global picture," we just don't all get our rocks off panicking about every cyclical downturn and blaming all our problems on those who have it better than us.

[Hazir]

And what is the point, praytell? J00s? The sky is falling? The sky is falling because of j00s?

No, we don't all miss the "global picture," we just don't all get our rocks off panicking about every cyclical downturn and blaming all our problems on those who have it better than us.

Anybody who is not very nervous about the ongoing financial crisis is living with his head in the sand. Meltdown may happen or not, but it is a real possible outcome for the present situation. We are not dealing with a cyclical downturn. That is merely an aggravating factor as we speak. I am completely deleveraged, and even I feel bloody uncertain about what kind of a situation we will have in a year or two.

Also, demanding accountability for this financial crisis has got very little to do with 'blaming problems on those who have it better'. It has got everything to do with the fact that the 'masters of the universe' were playing a game of smoke and mirrors that all was about inflated balancesheets so that they could maximize their bonuses (or more precisely make off with the money) and let us deal with the mess. People are right to expect that these people are dealt with like any con man whose game came out. We see preciously little of that happening, either in the US or Europe.

[Draco]

To say that the greatest ancient empire never innovated anything is just such bovine manure - but fits with Hazir's hatred of the British. I guess he just hates success.

Why hate on the British? Is it such a bad thing that where ever British/English culture prevailed, a prosperous society flourished?

[RandBlade]

Are there any truly English speaking failed states in the world?

[Hazir]

yeah, you'd have to say that because only by making 'english speaking' a requirement you can avoid a long list of failed states that gained their independence from Great Britain. Mind to explain Pakistan away? Or the beneficiairy effects of British influence in Iran? (I know the latter wasn't a colony technically speaking).

[Draco]

None that I can think of. And even those that aren't English speaking, such as Hong Kong and Singapore, attest to the positive impact of the British empire and their embracement of Western/English culture/knowledge.

It's interesting actually, out of all the European colonial powers, the British/English were the only ones who left a trail of prosperity and ultimately made todays world possible. We have a lot to thank them for, but these days everyone prefers to down play their contribution and instead focus on the negative aspects, because civilisation is such a bad thing.

[Hazir]

None that I can think of. And even those that aren't English speaking, such as Hong Kong and Singapore, attest to the positive impact of the British empire and their embracement of Western/English culture/knowledge.

It's interesting actually, out of all the European colonial powers, the British/English were the only ones who left a trail of prosperity and ultimately made todays world possible. We have a lot to thank them for, but these days everyone prefers to down play their contribution and instead focus on the negative aspects, because civilisation is such a bad thing.

Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Somalia, Sudan, Iraq, Kenya, Yemen (Aden), Burma.

And even though it's not really a failed state issue; the Middle East Conflict keeping us busy right up till today, brought to you under the auspices of the British empire.

[Draco]

Zimbabwe, Nigeria.

Well I'm not familiar with these two so I don't know what to comment. But compare the British track record with any other European colonial power.

But if it makes you feel better, the Dutch were great too since they found Australia (and New Zealand) for the British and New York

[Hazir]

Well I'm not familiar with these two so I don't know what to comment. But compare the British track record with any other European colonial power.

But if it makes you feel better, the Dutch were great too since they found Australia (and New Zealand) for the British and New York

The question was (cunningly) phrased as 'english-speaking'. I replied by simply taking the list of failed states, and check if they had been under British rule. About half of all failed states were. I didn't bother to go down to the states being on the verge of being declared a failed state.

[Draco]

Alright then.

Well it still doesn't take away from the fact that the British empire created the modern world, more or less. Anyway, you have places like Hong Kong and Singapore that did end up becoming prosperous states, so it isn't soley a question of British rule.

[Aimless]

Why hate on the British? Is it such a bad thing that where ever British/English culture prevailed, a prosperous society flourished?

[...]

It's interesting actually, out of all the European colonial powers, the British/English were the only ones who left a trail of prosperity and ultimately made todays world possible.

Hi Draco,

I'm from Bangladesh and I'm not sure if we live in the same world because the Brits certainly didn't leave a particularly noticeable "trail of prosperity" on the Indian subcontinent. I don't deny that the Brits have done a great deal of good for the world, but let' not lose sight of reality eh.

[RandBlade]

Don't forget that the world was never prosperous to begin with.

How many prosperous nations did the British leave behind? How many did the French, Spanish, Portugese or Dutch? Forgive me if there are any other former colonial powers then same question.

[Aimless]

Don't forget that the world was never prosperous to begin with.

How many prosperous nations did the British leave behind? How many did the French, Spanish, Portugese or Dutch?

Well, themselves I suppose EDIT: Possible temporary exception of Portugal

I have to admit I don't really understand the point to this particular discussion (specifically to the remarks that sparked it). Is assessing the "goodness" of colonialism particularly meaningful? In what ways, apart from national pride? As an layman I have no idea what eg. India or the ME would have looked like today if the British Empire had never been, and my personal opinion is that anyone who claims to know for sure should be viewed with some skepticism even if his analysis is both convincing and entertaining.

[Loki]

I'm from Bangladesh and I'm not sure if we live in the same world because the Brits certainly didn't leave a particularly noticeable "trail of prosperity" on the Indian subcontinent. I don't deny that the Brits have done a great deal of good for the world, but let' not lose sight of reality eh.

They did a far better job than did the Pakistanis.

[Nessus]

They did a far better job than did the Pakistanis.

Do you know whether the popular vote in Eastern Europe thinks the Germans or Soviets did a better job?

[Loki]

Do you know whether the popular vote in Eastern Europe thinks the Germans or Soviets did a better job?

Where in Eastern Europe? As far as I know, the Germans are viewed more positively only in the Baltic States. The Croats also have a semi-favorable view of the Nazi occupation, but they were never occupied by the Soviets.

[Nessus]

Where in Eastern Europe? As far as I know, the Germans are viewed more positively only in the Baltic States. The Croats also have a semi-favorable view of the Nazi occupation, but they were never occupied by the Soviets.

They're viewed fairly favourably here as well despite '44. And the Balts were kinda...Eager about the whole "let's kill Jews" business. But what I meant was, how popular/successful was the German attempt at colonializing Eastern Europe compared to the Soviet attempt that followed? I've read and seen interviews of both opinions, but I can't recall right now whether I've read of a real poll or similar study on the matter. Friedländer takes a fairly negative view on the issue but given his background we can hardly blame him.

[Loki]

They're viewed fairly favourably here as well despite '44. And the Balts were kinda...Eager about the whole "let's kill Jews" business. But what I meant was, how popular/successful was the German attempt at colonializing Eastern Europe compared to the Soviet attempt that followed? I've read and seen interviews of both opinions, but I can't recall right now whether I've read of a real poll or similar study on the matter. Friedländer takes a fairly negative view on the issue but given his background we can hardly blame him.

They never occupied Finland.

The Germans held Eastern Europe for 3-5 years, all during war time, which doesn't lend itself well toward development. The Soviets held it for half a century. Which do you think would be more successful?

[Nessus]

They never occupied Finland.

The Germans held Eastern Europe for 3-5 years, all during war time, which doesn't lend itself well toward development. The Soviets held it for half a century. Which do you think would be more successful?

Since we're already dealing with sketchy what-ifs, you don't have to do your whole faux-Socratic thing with me. Some forms of colonialism are better than others, we don't have to worry about the details, eh?

[Aimless]

They did a far better job than did the Pakistanis.

Well that's a very good point, but when you think about it, they left Pakistan a shithole, they left Bangladesh in a similar state, and, worst of all, they left Pakistan in charge of Bangladesh. I'm not sure you can put any of that in the "pro" column for the Brits from the "trail of prosperity" perspective. Not trying to play the "blame-game" here, just trying to end the praise-game.